All right. Good morning, everyone. Sorry about that little delay there. We had some last minute changes to the script here. So good morning and welcome to the Vancouver City Council meeting of Tuesday, June the 2nd, 2026. This meeting is being held in person and by electronic means. Council members and the public may participate by either method. Any members joining? We're all good there. The meeting is being live streamed on the city's website and YouTube. Meeting progress will be updated on X and threads at Van City Clerk. Though due to new posting limits, updates will only cover essential items such as vote results. Speakers are encouraged to monitor the live stream to track meeting progress, but please note it is slightly delayed. Call in or arrive soon after receiving your reminder email so you are ready when your name is called. Now, in case of an emergency where we need to evacuate this chamber, please direct your attention to the glass door. They will open and then hang a left just after the post and walk down the stairs. If that exit is obstructed for any reason whatsoever, please note the four exits on the side of the chambers and you'll get more instructions accordingly. Finally, if you do need some kind of mobility assistance, please stay in place and one of our super friendly team members will come get you and get you out safely. Finally, there is the defibrillator available at the end of the hallway here. And so if you need it, please, well, I don't know if you'll be able to put up your hand, but let us know and we'll help you out. I do want to acknowledge that we're hosting today's council meeting on the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and TTsleil-Waututh First Nations. And I do want to thank them for their generosity, hospitality and love and care. They show this great land that we get to live, work and play on. I also want to recognize our incredible team members who work throughout the city of Vancouver. every single day and i can tell you they do it with purpose and they really care about making the city a better place so it's uh it's great just standing uh side by side with them and finally i know this is a little off script but i do want to uh acknowledge uh former councillor melissa diginova uh see you in the audience there we'll be referring to you again but it's great to see you back in this chamber so with that uh clerk can we get a roll call please

Present.

Great. Thank you very much. And so... I love this next part. It comes up once a year, and the reason I love it is I get to work on my Italian, and hopefully it improves every single year. So my council colleagues and I want to welcome to this chamber all the incredibly special individuals that represent the Italian community. First, I'd like to acknowledge our special guests, the Honourable Christian Di Sanzo, Italian Member of Parliament for North and Central America, Consul General Paolo Moralia de Giudice. I've known you for a long time. I always struggle pronouncing your name. I'm going to practice this for a month next year. Consulate of Italy, Vancouver, and members of the Italian community. So in the spring of 2018, a motion was passed by Mayor and Council to include Italian Heritage Month on its official celebrations and observances calendar. Italian Heritage Month is an opportunity to honour the history, the culture, and the contributions... of Italian Canadians to the city of Vancouver through a month-long series of events that showcase food, performances, exhibitions, language and cultural initiatives, community festivals, and other events. So today we acknowledge Vancouver's vibrant Italian community who continue to celebrate and generously share their cultural heritage. putting Vancouver on the world map as a destination to celebrate Italian Day. So please join me in thanking the community leaders, representatives, and members of organizing committees, many of whom we will hear from after the proclamation reading. So like I mentioned, the Honourable Christian de Sanzo, Consul General Paulo... Miralia Del Giudice, Melissa DeGenova, VP Italian Day Festival Society, Randy Rinaldo, President of Il Centro, Carmen Donofrio, President of the Commercial Drive Business Society, and Brunella Gaddillo, Executive Director, Italian Day Festival Society. And finally, Mario Michelli, Executive Director of Ill Central. So if I can get all of our council members to come up front.

And before we get started with reading the proclamation, I do want to re-emphasize it. It really is an honor and a privilege to be able to celebrate Italian Heritage Month here today. As we know, the Italian community has been huge in building our city, our province, and our country. And having grown up on the drive, living on McSpadden Street in the early 70s, it resonated with me back when I was a little kid and just growing up as a proud Vancouverite. it's always a blast hitting the drive as an example and celebrating Italian culture. So with that, what we're going to do is we're going to read the proclamation together.

And whereas this year's theme, wow.

Now, therefore, I, Ken Sim, the Mayor of the City of Vancouver, on behalf of all of the elected officials and everyone who chooses to work at the City of Vancouver, do very humbly and proudly proclaim the month of June 2026 as Italian Heritage Month in the City of Vancouver.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right. Well, we're going to get started again.

So the plan for today is we're going to break at noon for lunch, followed by the in-camera meeting.

All those opposed say nay. Great. The motion carries unanimously. Minutes four are from the council meeting on May the 19th, 2026. Are there any corrections to the minutes? Would someone like to move adoption? Councillor Klassen, thank you. Seconded by Councillor Zhou. Thank you very much. All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great.

Okay, council will now consider matters adopted on consent. And please bear with me, there are a lot of moving parts here. We have reports four, six to eight and 12 through 25

Thanks, Mayor. I'd like to hold Report 7, Theater Rental Grant Allocations.

Yes. Thank you.

One sec here.

Thank you. Councillor Meiszner.

I need to declare conflict on referral report five out of an abundance of caution due to a personal relationship with an individual employed by the applicant.

We'll get there, but so noted.

Councillor Orr. Thanks.

Okay. Please bear with me for two seconds here.

Okay. Great. No, sorry. Sorry, regular report. Sorry.

Sorry, do you want to, Councillor Fry? Yeah, sorry, apologies, Mayor.

I didn't realize we were doing referral reports as well, but I do need to declare a conflict on Referral Report 7 as my wife's firm is working on the project.

Okay.

Bear with me for one minute here.

Like I said, there are a lot of reports here.

Okay. SO, UM...

Okay, clerks, if you could just make sure I get this right.

Oh, actually, that's not on the consent.

Sorry, can we just take one moment here?

All right, sorry for the delay there.

Move it up. Sorry, clerk, do we have to move adoption for like the vote we just did as well? So do we have to redo that vote?

We have to reverse what we did as well. Or is it null and void?

Okay. So with that...

Okay.

moment there we have a further presentation no okay no I was just being I'm just present to answer questions about the report which should be self-explanatory thanks thank you very much so council you have five minutes to ask questions please put yourselves on the queue councillor Montague I'll advance you go ahead

Yeah, thanks, Chair. I've got a number of questions, so I'd like to move for a second round.

That's moved, been seconded. All in favor? And that, I think that carried. Can I just get, Councillor, a show of hands again? One, two, three, four, five. Yes, that carries. Thank you. Okay, go ahead, Councillor Montague.

Thanks. I guess a question to Ms. Patel. First of all, do you have any experience or expertise in the recurring protests and rallies that occur

No. Are you familiar with specific people or groups who regularly attend or organize those rallies like the one on October 4th related to this complaint?

You've got a list of organizers of the October 4th rally in your report. I think it's on page 27.

So not being familiar with them, which organizations or groups did you research?

Okay. So you didn't look into the past or present members of any of those groups, their board of directors, or the connections they have with other groups, either organizing groups with this specific protest or... or generally their affiliation with other groups related to similar protests in the city?

Okay.

Okay.

Did you speak with any witnesses?

Okay, right. Because you actually state on, I think it's line 17, quite early on the report, you say, and I quote, it was unnecessary to interview witnesses. Is that correct?

Okay. So in my experience, if you don't interview witnesses, that can lead to potential investigative bias or what we used to call investigative tunnel vision. Would you have comments on that?

Okay, thanks. I see I'm coming close to my time, Chair. I'll come back on.

Thank you, Councillor Montague. Councillor Frye, go ahead. You have five minutes.

Yeah, thank you. And I just want to bring this back to the substance of this investigation because as I understand it, reading this report, the issue is not ascertaining who organized rallies or who didn't attend rallies, but really it's specifically the allegations contained herein relative to our code of conduct. Is that correct, basically?

And so your findings substantiate that there was, and just for the record here, that Mayor Simm first and foremost violated Section 4.1A of the Code of Conduct when he held a press conference. Can you elaborate on why that was substantiated?

Okay, thank you for that. And then further into your investigation, you substantiate that there is sufficient information that Mayor Sim objectively harassed Councillor Orr, and contrary to Sections 2.A.E. and 3.4.C. of the Code. Can you elaborate on what those specifically referenced? And again, recognizing that your job here is to ascertain how this relates to the Code of Conduct.

I'm just going to interject. Councillor Frye, just for a moment, I'm going to stop your timer. Your timer wasn't put on when you started to speak. I'm going to consult with the clerks just to confirm. They were... I know we're pretty close to five minutes, but if they...

I'll come back after.

Thank you. Thank you for that. Okay, go ahead, Councillor Montague.

Thanks, Chair. And I'm not sure I'll quite get through these, so if I may move for a third round.

Sorry, I couldn't hear that.

Third round, please.

I think we have to suspend the bylaws in order to do that, so we'll need a motion to do that first.

A motion to suspend the bylaws.

We need a seconder. Seconded by Councillor Zhou. All in favour of suspending the bylaws in order to do a third round? And that is carried. Now we'll need a motion.

Motion for a third round, please.

Okay, moved, a third round. Seconder, Councillor Meiszner. Can I again see hands up, just because it's really hard to count. Thank you, that carries. Go ahead, Councillor Montague.

Thank you, Chair. Ms. Patel, did you speak with EOPs at the Vancouver Police or anyone at the Vancouver Police in relation to the rally referred to in the Mayor's post on social media?

Are you familiar with what EOPS is or what they do?

So they're a section within the VPD. They have specialized officers who are involved in and responsible for the safety plans for events and protests in the city. They complete a thorough risk assessment, make determinations of policing needs based on that risk assessment and public safety. There are about 1,000 protests in the city of Vancouver every year. And they have experts who would be very familiar with the very groups and people who would have been directly and indirectly involved in that rally on October 4th. So my next question is, do you believe it's important to and appropriate to speak with subject matter experts?

One of the aspects of the complaint was a social media post making a pretty substantial claim about the groups that are involved. And you decided that that was irrelevant to get subject matter expert opinions on the potential for those connections?

Okay. Other than counsel, or did you talk to any of the other scheduled speakers at the October 4th rally?

Right. Because that was unnecessary to speak with witnesses. Correct. What local Jewish organizations related to either the press conference or the social media posts did you speak with?

Okay. Did you watch any video recordings of the rally on October 4th?

That's not mentioned in the report at all.

What video did you review? You said you reviewed video to verify Councillor Zara's comments. What video was that? Was that video that Councillor Orr provided?

Where did that come from?

Thank you. What would have been an appropriate way of dealing with any concerns about Councillor Orr's social media posts? Do you think that raising those issues during the by-election campaign would have been a more appropriate time to raise them than immediately after Councillor Orr's election?

Can you elaborate on why... You don't think that details of the event or the composition of the structure of the VPD departments are outside the scope of your investigation, please?

What effects on counsellor or did you take into account in deciding whether this was behaviour by Mayor Sim outside the code of conduct? I know that I was in training with counsellor or onboarding training during... during the unfolding of this incident and personally witnessed the distraction and distress it caused. But how much of the effect on counsellor or did you take into account in making the decision?

Thanks very much. I'll come back on.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you for answering these various questions. And I very much appreciate it. I'm very familiar with the Code of Conduct and Integrity Commissioner investigations for a few reasons, but I appreciate the findings in here and the diligence that went in and the specificity in that you're dealing with Code of Conduct complaints. So I'm just wondering if we could touch quickly on D and E, which are...

Great. Thank you. And then the last of your summary here, Article F, talks about the determination of defamation. that is really something that's probably outside of the jurisdiction of the code and you recommend a better dealt with in a different form, such as the courts. And I would assume that extends to a lot of the kind of line of questioning we've heard about around specificity of who was at what rally and that kind of thing. Can you elaborate on why defamation was not captured in your, in your summary of the investigation?

I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Do you think it's part of the role as mayor to stand up for and support the various different communities represented in the city, especially during difficult and challenging times?

Okay. Do you feel that elected officials have some sort of due diligence about events that they attend, do their due diligence prior to attending an event or speaking at it?

There's a quote, part of Councillor Orr's statement at the rally. He says, while some will criticize me for speaking here today. So it's confusing because he expects backlash, but then seems surprised and offended by the criticism that he actually predicted and then files a complaint. Are you able to comment on that?

Okay. Line 40 of your report, it says that the mayor should have called police instead of holding a press conference. What did you mean by that?

Do you know if the mayor has had conversations with the police department about these safety issues?

Okay. Well, I can tell you that the mayor has regular conversations with the chief of police and his executive, many frontline officers, and he raises this concern regularly with them. So I was surprised to see that comment in the report. And I know that because I hear about them. I'm often present for those conversations. But at this point, that's it for my questions, Chair.

Thanks very much. I appreciate you answering the questions and being here virtually to do so. One of the parts that stood out to me in the report is an inconsistency around the response to the allegation by Mayor Sim, and this is my interpretation of how I read your summary in the report. that the mayor said he was acting in sort of the best interest of what he thought was the community, not his personal opinion, but then in the framing said that he was rocked to his core on what he heard. Could you just elaborate on that part of the report?

So that's helpful. And you actually brought up the second part, which was around the counselor direction, that the use of that platform by Marisim is, and sort of using it for... for a method to express personal feelings or opinions versus the direction of counsel. Can you also clarify what you mean there in terms of how it relates to the code of conduct and the expectation of the mayor at City Hall using a press conference for one reason or another?

So is it fair to say that when the mayor is asked to attend in his capacity as mayor of the city, and as you said, an ambassador of the city of Vancouver, is it fair to say that any partisan comments towards one group of councillors, separate from, let's say, ABC elected councillors, is not appropriate and would actually be in contravention of the Code of Conduct?

Okay, thank you. And in your analysis of the sanctions, do you feel like the sanctions are appropriate in terms of your recommendations outlined?

Go ahead, Councillor Montague. Is this for questions? Because you've done three rounds of questions.

Yeah, I noticed I'm just finishing up my last round. I see no other speakers, so I've sent a motion.

Okay, before we get some motions, just procedurally, just noting that Recommendation A resolves to not hear speakers on this item. I'm advised that the speaker that was registered has withdrawn, so we have no speakers for this item. So this Recommendation A is no longer applicable. So with that, it is a moment in time where a motion can be moved arising from the findings and recommendations. And so I understand, Councillor Montague, you've circulated?

Yes, I've circulated the motion.

Clerks, before I seek a seconder, could I please have that? Oh, it's been seconded. I haven't seen it yet, but if we get it up on screen, please.

Okay. Have we got that up? Okay, so this has been moved by...

Councillor Montague, seconded by Councillor Claassen. Councillor Montague, go ahead. Yeah, thanks. I'll put you on the main queue. Sorry, just add yourself to the main queue.

Thank you, and I'll advance you. There you go.

Yeah, thanks. As you can tell from my questions, I have some serious concerns about the investigation itself. I'm not sure I should even use that word anymore. It took almost seven months for this, seven months for an integrity commissioner None of us have actually even met to identify no witnesses, speak with no witnesses, locate, watch, and source a total of zero minutes of independent video from the October rally, speak with no one who organized the October rally, speak with none of the identified Jewish groups who expressed being targeted, did zero research of the organizers, identified no one who attended the event in October rally, identified no one working the rally, spoke with no one from our local police department, consulted with no experts, and then wrote a 28-page report. A quality investigation should be thorough, complete. It should exhaust all avenues before coming to a final conclusion. I was with the VPD for 28 years and spent many of those in various investigative spots. In my experience, investigations should be peer-reviewed. to avoid what I mentioned earlier as investigative bias or tunnel vision.

If one of my fellow investigators brought a report like this to me, I would have a laundry list of suggestions, suggested investigative follow-ups, and tasks for them before I would consider it complete in my mind. These reports should be peer-reviewed. They should be independent. There should be an independent assessment, and there should be an appeal process, multiple checks and balances, and they should exhaust all investigative avenues to be considered an investigative report. In my professional opinion, I don't believe that this came remotely close to meeting the level of being an investigative report. I also have some deep concerns about the continued weaponization of the integrity commissioner's office. I find it highly unusual that Councillor Orr is actually here participating and will be voting for his own complaint.

It concerns the lack of quality investigations leading to what I believe can result in a perceived unbalanced and biased decision continues. I know this isn't a criminal investigation. There is a lower threshold, what they call a balance of probabilities, but that doesn't mean that the consequences for those involved don't have lasting impacts. I think the integrity commissioners really missed the mark on this one and continues to fail in gaining the confidence of council. So hence the rationale for receiving the report for information. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Montague. Councillor Bligh to the motion.

Thank you very much. So the motion on the floor is imposing no sanctions and receives a report for information. And I think that what we've heard quite clearly from the line of questioning is that it's not simply receiving the report for information. It's in there has been public. disagreement with the findings of the integrity commissioner from Marisim and others. And obviously, you know, the framing of the many questions to the lawyer who is representing this process, who's not the integrity commissioner herself, just to be very clear, right? This person who's calling in today is not the integrity commissioner, as has been sort of framed by my colleague. is the lawyer. And the reason that that set up is to insulate the integrity commissioner from being able to do the job of integrity commissioner and hiring legal counsel to investigate individual cases. And that actually came in based on the changes that were made in this counsel's term. because of the unhappiness with the previous process. And now it sounds like there's unhappiness with this process. Unconscious bias is a real thing. And what I'm hearing here is that there is very strong bias towards not understanding both sides of what's being found here. And the issue, and how I read that, is making an issue of the actual protest itself versus... what the complaint was about, which was the use of a city hall press conference and the comments that were made by somebody who's been characterized, the mayor of Vancouver has been characterized as the ambassador of the city, doing the work of the city. And the city work is directed by this council, not partisan political agendas. And we are a level of government that is to be nonpartisan and to deal with those matters while in City Hall, while using City of Vancouver, you know, media, room, pulpit, the whole thing. So I think that what I've heard from the Integrity Commissioner is that there was a breach, and the breach also was demonstrated through inconsistencies in the mayor's testimony through this process. I think one thing that seems to be missed, despite changing the mandate of the Integrity Commissioner over the last few years in an attempt to... get rid of the integrity commissioner's office, to disagree with any finding that finds any person related to ABC having broken the code of conduct is just this refusal to acknowledge responsibility. And I think that we are held to a much higher standard in this chamber, and we ought to be by the public. And I find it just actually quite alarming, but also just a bit of a head shake as to why that kind of leadership can't exist here. Where if somebody says, you know what, I've now learned about the Code of Conduct and how I am supposed to be, and I'll take responsibility for that. You can disagree with Council Orr being at that protest or not. That's actually not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is... the code of conduct that basically creates the framing by which the mayor is to conduct himself, and he has broken it here, and that is clear. So... All I would say in this particular, with this motion on the floor is, of course, I'm not going to support it because I think the public needs to know that their elected leaders are going to take responsibility when they need to. I think it's a sign of good leadership to know when to acknowledge that a mistake was made and simply respond to that. This is not about picking winners and losers, as I often say, and was interested to hear that the legal counsel also framed it the same way. That's not what this is about. This is about upholding a code of conduct. And I've said it before and I'll say it again. And I've used the integrity commissioner's office in a way that it's designed to be used. A simple phone call. by the chief of staff, from the mayor's office, could have said, we're going to hold a press conference. It's probably pretty close to the line. Are we breaking the code of conduct if we do this and say this? And I'm pretty sure the integrity commissioner would have said, yes, you would be. You need to reframe it or do it a different way. In which case, we would have saved taxpayers all of the seven months of an investigation, all of the time. an hour and a half of council time right now where we've got city staff. So I'll leave it there. I'm obviously not going to support it, but I think we should really be taking an internal.

Yeah, thanks.

And I appreciate Councillor Bligh's comments. I do have to concur, you know, this, and first and foremost, I do want to thank the investigator, Jamie Patel, for the work putting this together. And I think it is fairly reasoned and reasonable investigation and conclusion and summary of recommendations. that don't actually impose anything far too onerous on Mayor Sim. Really, it's asking to apologize and recognizing that we do have a code of conduct And, you know, it's very unfortunate that we find ourselves in this situation yet again with this council that repeatedly refused to abide by things like the Code of Conduct and Integrity Commissioner investigation and summary recommendations. And in fact, it has now, in no small part, led to significant changes that are coming from the province of British Columbia to impose Code of Conduct and better processes on local governments. And we are... This council is the poster child for why the province is going to now step into that role. And I think it's important to reflect that. And again, thanks to the investigator for taking on these series of questions that had absolutely nothing to do with the thrust of what this investigation and recommendations are about. And that is very specifically... Our code of conduct at the city of Vancouver on how we are supposed to act as councillors and mayor. And that's a very specific set of parameters, very clearly laid out that the mayor's actions were inconsistent with that. And that's, I think, a reasonable response. And the reasonable response would be not to dismiss. the Code of Conduct investigation and the Integrity Commissioner's findings altogether, but rather say, you know what, let's do better. And I think Councillor Bligh did a good job of articulating how, yes, this was a teachable moment and this should never have happened. We have wasted a ton of time and resources to investigate this. So, Clerks, I have submitted an amendment to... Move you to an amendment.

Cue Councillor Fry. Please add yourself and Councillor Bligh seconding that.

I'll advance you.

Thank you. Yes, and it's a strike and replace to suggest that there's no sanctions, and rather that we receive the Integrity Commissioner's investigation report, and per the sanctions that are articulated in this report, direct that Mayor Sim issue a letter of apology to Councillor Orr for, and I need to read this out because, again, this has been conflated with all sorts of deeper investigation into rally organizers and that kind of thing. The request is that Mayor Sim, and this comes from the Integrity Commissioner herself, that Mayor Sim issue a letter of apology to Councillor Orr for misusing the influence of his office and for his comments on the April 8th, 2025 press conference, which were harassing Councillor Orr. as they suggested he would incite violence and was anti-Semitic. And secondly, for posting the October 4th, 2025 social media post, which was the continuation of that harassment by suggesting counselor or supported terrorism and anti-Semitism. Those are indeed serious allegations that might otherwise be constituted defamation and get into a much deeper legal discussion. But at the very essence, folks, at the very essence, it is a violation of our code of conduct. It is the rules by which we're supposed to do the business of the city in our council chambers and uh i think it's a reasonable request that the mayor uh self-correct his his as errant behaviors in this particular matter and issue an apology and let's move on with the business of running the city so that is counselor fry uh so strike and replace is on the floor i'll advance counselor bligh followed by counselor maloney

Thank you very much and appreciate Councillor Fry's motion as an amendment to the motion that was put forward to do nothing. I think this is fitting. I think that, you know, I... Appreciate all the work Councillor Fry put into this. I'm not sure that it will pass, but I think it's worth having on record that this is a reasonable response to what I think was a very focused and fair investigation. And I will just highlight that, you know, there were public comments made, you know, by... organizations and advocacy groups that are specifically representing the Jewish community that disagree with the integrity commissioner report. And I actually think that's fine. You know, I think it's fair. I think it's actually appropriate. If CJ, you know, it was one organization that came out speaking against it or others. They are, they are, this is a, this has been an incredibly difficult time for our city and the residents that live here. And, you know, I didn't choose to go to the rally or protest. I haven't been to any. And I get that this is a difficult situation for people outside of City Hall. But what they look to in us as a council and a mayor is to listen to all sides and to also recognize if there's criminal activity or there's risk to personal safety that the police are called and that the police are involved in that. I think that there's been a lack of judgment and I actually think it's not nefarious. I think it's just, it was a lack of judgment, good judgment by the mayor to use his role as mayor of the city in making a determination of Councillor Orr's choice to be there. That was just wholly inappropriate. And I support this because I think that we all make mistakes in these roles. It's difficult to balance the demands, and it's difficult to balance... the emotional pleas from folks in the community that need us to take their side on an issue to help sort of, you know, reinforce their solidarity. And we've all done that in terms of showing up at events and being in places to show that level of community support. But it's a fine line and it was crossed here. And it's very clear that it was crossed here. And so I support this motion because I think taking responsibility is an act of leadership, and that's what we all signed up for when we ran for office. And a response of that completes this. It closes it, and it upholds the office of the mayor. It upholds us as mayor and council as a body, and it upholds the code of conduct.

Thank you, Councillor Bligh. Councillor Maloney.

Thanks. I'm a very new politician and have previously only interacted with the political system as an advocate and a citizen rather than having any direct involvement in any political party. But I understand that it's common practice to look through opposition candidates' social media posts and ventilate their contents during an election campaign. And it's inappropriate for me to speculate as to why the mayor failed to avail himself of this opportunity during the by-election campaign when it could have affected the outcome and instead raise it immediately following the election results. I had all kinds of aspects of my background and family and work history examined and debated and criticised in public during the by-election campaign. And I think it's useful to reflect on the reality of the numbers of people who are in this chamber and the parties that they come from. Because the media briefing wasn't just attended by the mayor, it was attended by a number of councillors from the majority on council who stood behind the mayor. And for a new councillor, who's the only representative of my political party, It's intimidating facing up to the weight of numbers of members on council when you're the only councillor from your political party. And I think that there is a weight... a power imbalance, and I think that for me it was very clearly used in a particular way by choice on that day. So I think that it is appropriate to ask the Mayor to apologise to Councillor Orr, who was a new Councillor, trying to grapple with learning the job. And...

I'm confused as to why, if this was such an important issue for the mayor, why it wasn't raised during the election campaign. Thanks.

Thank you. Councillor Kirby Young, go ahead.

Yeah, thank you. Sorry, my voice is fading out today. I am... I'm trying to find a way to sort of succinctly express some thoughts. I actually think that this is extraordinary in terms of the specific situation and the situation that we all find ourselves in. In listening very intently to the comments and responses to questions from the integrity commissioner, it appears to distill down to the essence that we're debating where the comments were made and the use, for example, of city hall facilities, which to me provides a logical inference that if this press conference was held elsewhere, for example, for example, say the Jewish community center or any other venue, then the inference being that this would not necessarily have been an issue in all members that have the ability for freedom of speech. It's very clear that there's no characterization of the comments. I'll leave it to members of community to debate on that and sort of ongoing and enduring comments that have been made. But I will also say in my eight years on council now and going through a couple of different models with respects and different individuals with respects to integrity commissioners, I cannot recall a time when an individual that was involved with a complaint was voting on a complaint either. And it just seems extraordinary to me that this dynamic is taking place. I think that the public honestly loses confidence when

and I'm choosing these words very carefully, so-called procedure appears to override their elected officials standing up for something. And if we are having a debate simply on a location and not on the substance of what actually transpired, I don't think that that necessarily meets the test of people wanting their elected officials to stand for something. And it seems to be that it's just simply about where comments were made, not... those comments or the veracity of those comments. And I can recall other instances that given past confidentiality, I'm not at liberty to speak to, but this council has had the opportunity to apply sanctions when there were actual real material breaches of very significant natures and chose not to apply any sanctions. And I also find that extraordinary that that memory appears to be short. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Kribeung. Seeing no one else on the queue, I'll call the vote. It'll be a recorded vote. Please use the press rod. And again, this is to the strike and replace, moved by Councillor Frye, of Councillor Montague's motion.

Clerks, I'll take a vote.

And that amendment fails. With myself, Councillor Kirby-Young, Councillor Montague, Councillor Claassen, Councillor Meiszner, and Councillor Zhou in opposition. We'll move back to the main queue. Councillor Fry, you have the floor.

Well, I will just close on, I do think this is disappointing that the substance of the recommendations are effectively being ignored. And whereas this might be received from information, the failure to... to impose even the lightest of sanction, which is a letter of apology, a request for the mayor to write a letter of apology for violating our very code of conduct that allows us to hopefully do business is disappointing. And it's mostly disappointing because I suspect that there may be a double standard at play should this have been in a different context with a different... Councillor under investigation with sanctions imposed that it might the support of the integrity commissioner might be otherwise more forthcoming from the majority that have voted this way but in any event I don't support this approach that's being taken and I do want to thank the investigator Jamie Patel once again for the work on putting this together and And holding up the essence of the job under, I guess, what we could only characterize as cross-examination, which really delved into something that was completely irrelevant and, frankly, should have been called out as a point of order under 8.7F as being frivolous and really not relevant to the conversation at hand.

But I think it's on the whole disappointing, so I'll leave it at that.

Thank you, Councillor Fry. Councillor Orr, go ahead.

Thanks. My only comments here are just to address the sort of comments around whether I should be present for this and if this is being sort of weaponized. I did have a phone call with the integrity commissioner and it deemed that it was appropriate for me to be here. And you'll notice that I haven't commented on the report or sort of used this as an opportunity to make further comments. My comments are in the report and I'll leave it at that. But that I have done my my due diligence and that I I hope that council had done their due diligence as well But that that's not the case so that's that's all my comments Okay, Thank You councillor or so we are back to the main Motion moved we can just bring that back up on screen.

I see no one else on the queue So we're gonna call the vote, but I'm just gonna wait Let's give it a minute so we can get that up for everyone

That passes with Councillor Bligh, Frye, Orr, and Maloney in opposition. Thank you. And that concludes this item. Thank you very much.

Just checking with Council, does anyone need a brief bio break just because we've been going strong? Or do you want to just a two-minute, maybe a two-minute recess? We're still going to take these washrooms, facilities. Okay, well, two minutes. Thank you.

Welcome back, everyone. So the next item on the docket is report number two, building seismic risk reduction action plan. So before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to disclose it. Any conflicts? Okay. This item has a presentation.

Great. Thank you very much. And thank you for the detailed presentation. Okay. So, Council, you will have up to five minutes to ask questions. And, Councillor Meiszner, you're up. Thanks for the...

Folsom presentation on an important topic. I had a few questions. On seismic upgrades that you're discussing in existing buildings, and I'm thinking in particular rental buildings, say some of the older towers in the West End from the 60s, 70s, Are there seismic upgrades that would improve the safety of those buildings that wouldn't require people to move out?

Okay. And because I'm not... obviously an engineer or expert or architect. I mean, what are the costs like for doing something like that? Is it in the millions? Is it, I just have no concept of like how expensive these upgrades are.

Okay. How do we prevent, I guess, building owners from not... doing other building upgrades because now it's folded in with seismic requirements that might be triggered. Are we concerned that some building owners may forego, say, doing other upgrades to the building because they're worried that they're going to have to now do a seismic upgrade as well?

Okay. My other question was around the, you talked about a public database. Am I understanding that correct? Of a seismic rating for each building? Yes. Okay. And is that like all public and privately owned buildings across the city?

Okay. Yeah. And that's based on an external review only.

Yeah. Okay. Do we have any, I guess, like, are we concerned about people, sounds silly, but like, I don't want to say like stigmatizing a certain building, but I mean, there will be buildings that people are living in that could perhaps have a really low rating, for example. Right. Do we have any concerns around that information being public?

Okay. And then my last question was, is the city exposed to any liability, I guess, putting a rating out there publicly when we've only done an external review of the building and maybe perhaps there's information that we just aren't aware of, you know, upgrades that have happened internally. Like, could the city be held liable by the property owner saying, well, you gave my building a bad rating, but actually we've done all this work and, you know, you're defaming... I guess, you know, like residents who may want to move in or something. Do you know what I mean?

Thank you. Thanks. Councillor Frye. Yeah, thanks, and thanks, Micah, for the presentation. Always a bit sobering. But I did go down the rabbit hole, and I did look at, and I think the thing that jumped out at me most is, and there's sort of a clear tension here when we look at the context of sort of older affordable housing and heritage architecture and urban built form, and then jump to action item number four, explore redevelopment as a risk reduction approach, and I totally get that. where you're going with that but I started looking at some of the stuff that they're doing and I know San Francisco and you're California native and like they've led the way in a lot of balancing the needs of retaining a lot of this affordable housing and like through voluntary and mandatory retrofits and the PACE program and the PASS program and can you speak to a little bit of like where we might try and look to some of those kind of innovative solutions because I do look at the neighborhoods you identified the most at risk are also the most popular neighborhoods in the city and that's what part of the charm of our city, and I would hate to lose those.

But as I also look at the San Francisco model, and just to single that one out, but also, you know, Seattle's got similar, as you've alluded to. Yeah. Those targeted interventions that fast-track permitting, that give toolkits and even financing options to do those retrofits on the – I mean, San Francisco arguably has a lot more history of seismic risk and angst and pain and actual disasters, yet have managed to kind of really prioritize this sort of preservation approach while still balancing growth and all the other needs.

I probably have more questions about San Francisco's culture. Can you just tease that out a little bit? So where is the difference? Because, I mean, there's similar size cities, similar affordability issues, yet they managed to retain and still managed to maintain their population to some degree.

Great.

council just looking at the time uh we do have six or five and a half minutes left and we have one two three more counselors on the queue would someone like to move a motion to at least finish the questions from council complete theater okay um yeah well we do we do have one speaker as well so with uh

Hey, Councillor Meiszner, thank you. Seconded by anyone? Great. Councillor Maloney, any discussion? And I actually, there's a whole bunch of people here, so maybe we'll go to the amendment queue to track people if they have any comments on this. No? Okay. Oh, Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, thanks, Chair. I just thought if we're going to answer all these questions, should we hear from the one speaker we have?

There's two speakers? Yeah, there's two speakers.

Sorry, oh, I just saw one.

So, clerk, do we have to amend that motion, or can we just... Yeah, so I'll move that as an amendment, Mayor. Okay. Great. So, any... Sorry, can we get a seconder for Councillor Blase? Thank you. Councillor Maloney, any discussion? No? Sorry, Councillor Domenato, I saw your hand. Okay. Okay, so the amended motion is to hear the councillor's questions and then the two speakers. All those in favor say, yay. All those opposed say, nay.

Thanks. The inventory of at-risk buildings is a central part of this report to

raise awareness and bring transparency for renters on seismic risks of their buildings. What's the timeframe anticipated to develop this inventory and make it publicly accessible?

And what are the resources necessary to do that work? Would it be part of the capital budget? What are the costs around the inventory staffing technical studies?

Okay. And you don't have any details of that? that will be developed as part of it?

And how long was that piece of work just establishing the...

Yeah, because obviously we've got a capital budgeting process coming up and it would be a shame to miss out on... on that opportunity to incorporate seismic preparedness?

Yeah, I'm just interested in knowing whether sort of a rough estimate could be available in time to incorporate into our capital plan, which is in July.

All right.

In terms of housing affordability, obviously it's a very, it's a major concern about displacing people from housing by imposing funding requirement for seismic upgrades. Yeah. But at the same time, we've got to balance that with the impact on people who are in both the physical health impact and possible risk to life of people that are in these buildings. So does that... put more of an imposition onto government rather than private building owners to fund and initiate these kind of upgrades to make sure that the most vulnerable people in our city aren't displaced?

Okay, so it sounds as though if we see the Federal Minister for Housing and Infrastructure, we should bring this to his attention.

Thanks. Councillor Claussen. Yeah, thanks very much for noting time. I'll try and keep it pretty quick here. I just kind of have burned into me the notion around seismic stability of our school district buildings. My daughter attended a school that was built in 1912. The report references the success of the provincial school seismic mitigation program. So I'm just kind of curious if it has... Is there an understanding of the remaining seismic risk within Vancouver school facilities and whether that risk has been incorporated into our broader resilience planning?

Okay. I know that many school buildings have the big containers with emergency provisions within them. So it's a reminder that that's there, but it's also how important the schools themselves remain as potentially life-saving facilities in an earthquake emergency. So do we have an understanding of what role schools might play as emergency or recovery assets? and how the city is coordinating with the province on the BSB. I still believe there are quite a few schools that are at seismic risk, but I'm not exactly sure. It's part of my question, my earlier question. I'm going to pass that over to my VMA. Thanks very much.

Okay, thanks very much. That generally answers my questions on that one. Thank you. Great, thank you. Thank you very much. Counselor Kirby Young.

Thank you. Yeah, thanks, Mayor. There's a reference in your presentation to potential regulatory changes, I think. Can you talk to us a little bit about that and how that intersects with the B.C. ? building code, what is currently required and what you're looking at there. I'm just thinking about council's recent direction in terms of looking for better alignment.

But for the larger point... What does that mean in simple English?

Like, does that mean new regulations? Does that mean different regulations in Vancouver than the BC Building Code? What does it mean advocacy to the province? Right. Is it adopting the provinces? Like, what does that actually mean?

Will you be looking, in terms of improving the regulations, will you be given the recent direction to align the Vancouver, the VBBL, the Vancouver Building By-law and the provincial? Will you be asking them about both the provincial regulations and the City of Vancouver's regulations?

So if I may, you referenced new buildings. A lot of the issues are with older and existing buildings. Would you like to comment on that and answer my question in that context?

Okay, so you sort of said Section 11 as long as we have it, but will staff be taking a sort of a broad view that if, for example, the national codes are being updated and if we think there's pain points, we have an opportunity to feed into advocacy, for example, so we can have consistent... life safety standards at different levels of government as opposed to Vancouver having its own? I'm really trying to get to the crux of this question.

To be consistent. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. Counselor Zhou. Yeah, thanks, Mayor. So I think most of my questions were asked already. So just two very quick questions. So, you know, I saw other, I see other municipalities on this in the world. They are using a different standard to evaluate the systemic risks. I've seen other municipalities use the, like, Earthquake 7 safe. Earthquake 8 safe. Why are we not using that standard?

Yeah, like that building is like earthquake magnitude 7 safe. And I think that's the building standard that some other municipalities, they are using.

I'm not talking about in Canada. Like in Japan, I think they are using magnitude 7 safe building, magnitude 8 safe building, something like that, while we are not using that standard.

Yeah, that's easier for people, for the regular people to understand because they are associated to the level of the magnitude. Yes. Yeah, okay.

Okay, so I would encourage probably we consider easy communicating language to our population.

Okay, yeah, so the last question is, I saw there's some very good things in this report, but one thing I would like to more highlight is about education, especially educate to our builders in the construction industry. So I didn't see that mentioned in this report. Yeah, can you explain more how we're going to communicate to the industry?

Okay, good. As long as it's part of the consideration.

Thank you. Yeah, thanks, man. That's all my question.

Thank you, Councillor. Okay, we're now going to hear from registered speakers for this report. Public speakers should state whether they are in support or opposition of the recommendations and may only speak once. I'm also going to ask speakers if they're residents of Vancouver, if it's not noted. on the list. Okay. So our first public speaker is Michelle Travis.

Okay. Speaker number two is Stephanie Smith.

We can hear you great. Please go ahead.

Okay, so that is the end of the speaker's list. I do want to thank everyone for coming out and speaking to council, and I want to thank the team for... Oh, I have to go through the list again.

Sorry. I apologize. We're going to go back to speaker number one, Michelle Travis. Is Michelle on the line?

No, not on the line.

Great. So now that is the end of our speakers list. So thanks everyone for speaking to council and like to thank our team for the incredible presentation and the hard work with that. We are going to now recess and we will be back here at. 315.

Okay, welcome back, everyone. We're going to get started again. Would someone like to move a motion? Thanks, Councillor Claassen. Is there a seconder?

We are on report number two. So, Councillor, we just finished the speaker's list, if you guys recall. And so, Councillor Klassen just moved the motion. Great, thank you very much. Council, is there any discussion?

Okay. Council, is there any discussion?

Seeing no one in the queue. Clerk, do we have anyone online?

Are there gremlins in the technology, or is the queue empty? Because I saw a queue that was full of... Yep, sorry. If we can please get the councillors to add their names back to the queue.

Yeah, I appreciate all the work that's gone into this. As I mentioned, I'd sort of gone down the rabbit hole and looking at some of what San Francisco has done, specifically in the context of seismic retrofits to preserve affordable housing and heritage assets. San Francisco showed that if you don't align seismic upgrades with housing policy, you risk losing your most affordable homes as you're actually trying to protect people. And if you don't align seismic upgrades with character retention, you risk losing what makes our city special for so many locals and visitors alike. And when that map kind of identifies... some of the most affordable and most character neighborhoods that are important for tourists and locals alike. I'd like to see us take a little bit more in this plan work, a bit more of a look at some of the retention tools that we specifically see out of San Francisco. They have a few. There's PACE, which is Financing for Risk Medication, that's assessed and added to the property taxes and backed by municipal bond. There's the PASS program, which is the... preservation and seismic safety program, which is low-cost financing for affordable multi-unit buildings. And they have permissive tax exemptions for retrofitting heritage properties. And I think these are all things that could be appropriately looked at in this work as well, because I think that actually Recommendation 4 really stuck with me as the worst-case scenario for a lot of this. So the amendment is... And I guess if we want to jump to an amendment cure while we do that.

Yeah. So it's just adding to asking to add to this work plan. So the amendment reads further that staff in implementing and reporting back on the plan, look to examples in other West coast cities, including, but not limited to San Francisco's pass pace and soft story retrofit programs. and consider opportunities to more robustly integrate affordable housing retention and heritage conservation objectives through targeted preservation tools like financing, permitting, and bylaws, including measures to minimize displacement and support the preservation of existing rental character buildings and built form while advancing seismic safety.

Thank you.

So we'll go back to the main queue. Councillor Fry, anything else?

Thanks, Mayor. Just in closing on this one, I do think that I appreciate how charming and happy-go-lucky Micah is, despite the doom-laden kind of prognocations that he makes and where his brain must go at night when he tries to sleep. But obviously, we do live in

seismically risky zone and I think it behooves us to look at all the solutions and be proactive in addressing it. So I appreciate the work that's gone into this and I appreciate the work going forward on this. Thank you Mayor. Thank you. Councillor Maloney.

Thanks. I have an amendment so if I could go to an amendment queue please.

I've just emailed it around. It's simply to reflect in the report recommendations the urgency that we should be attributing to this very important work. I'm aware that we are making decisions about the capital plan in July and I think that this is so important because at the moment we've got a plan to make a plan and, I mean, it's all very good work and very thoroughly thought through, but I'd like to resource it in the capital plan. And so I think that it would be great to have the information that council needs to properly consider how much money needs to be put into it. And this is a great opportunity that we won't have again for a while. So I've just added and on the resources necessary to fast track the development of the inventory of at-risk buildings as part of the next capital plan. So I'd like council to join with me in giving direction to staff to allocate resources just to work out how much capital funding we need to move just this part of it forward in the capital plan. Thanks.

Councillor Dominato. I'm sorry. Councillor Orr seconded. Thank you very much. Councillor Dominato.

Thank you, Chair. Mayor, sorry. Point of information through you to staff. Just reading this, this strikes me as just talking about the resources related to the development of the inventory, that those would be really operational dollars, not capital dollars. If we're talking about an inventory, it's a different thing if it's about well, in the case of private buildings at the owner's expenses there, but this seems to be operational dollars that are being referred to in the context of developing an inventory. Could staff comment on that?

Developing the inventory.

And what have you allocated for the draft capital plan?

Okay. So you're seeking a different amount to cover the inventory?

Yeah. And what was in the current capital plan?

Other than, okay.

Yeah. Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Kirby-Young.

Yeah, if I may ask a point of clarification, Chair, through you to staff. And it's around interpreting this amendment, because I know your presentation focused a lot on Vancouver's existing private buildings. The City of Vancouver's capital plan relates predominantly to the city's own assets, so city-owned and not private buildings. So... I guess we can have policy and enabling tools such as financing, et cetera, that could be explored pursuant to Councillor Frye's previous amendment. But I'm just a bit confused on the focus of this one, and I'm wondering how staff would interpret this in our capital plan. A lot of your report was around seismic risk in Vancouver's existing private buildings. Right.

Well, ideally, is that sort of staff's desire, or is that how you interpret this amendment? Because the amendment specifically says the inventory of at-risk buildings.

The inventory of private buildings? Yes. I'm asking how staff interpret this in terms of how it's written. Because you also just referenced in your answer about advancing or fast-tracking city buildings, which is not sort of the focus of the report.

Just maybe through you, Chair, does staff want to consult and take a break on that? Because you're now answering a question that I didn't ask, which is about the broader capital plan. And the item that is in front of Council right now is this specific report and the focus of this report, which is separate and distinct, I think, from the city's inventory, the overall capital plan, et cetera. I realize there's some interconnection here, but I don't feel like that was a broader answer than my question was actually asking.

Okay. Five-minute recess?

Thank you. Appreciate it. So if I can, through you, Chair, if I can ask you to follow up on that. Do you have funding set aside already to complete the inventory?

So the funding is already included?

Okay. Then I don't see the need for this amendment, Chair. It's already there. It's already being done. Thank you.

Thank you. Councillor Maloney?

Thank you. I think there is actually a need for this amendment because what I'm asking for is for the resources necessary to fast track the development of the inventory of at-risk buildings to be specified so that we can decide whether there's sufficient funding for both this and the rest of the body of work in the capital plan. And it's absolutely the right place for this work because capital plans are not only about pouring concrete They're also about planning, design, studies, asset condition assessments, technology systems and risk inventories that are necessary before a city can make major capital or regulatory decisions. The inventory of at-risk buildings is a minimum we need to achieve to have a plan of action to give tenants basic information about the seismic risk of their buildings and to leverage senior government funding. I think that I want this information because... $1.2 million for the city of Vancouver, which is so behind in seismic preparedness that doesn't even yet have a plan for a plan, and yet the potential risk of loss of life and incredible damage and disaster to our city from its status as a seismic risk zone city. I feel as though the sense of urgency just isn't there and I'm very sad that so much effort is being put into, not into amending this to reflect the sense of urgency in a more acceptable way, but to argue it down. That's a really sad thing. I mean, I've lived in a seismically active city, Santiago, Chile, for five years, and I'm also brutally aware of what happened in Christchurch in New Zealand and the level of disruption and death and tragedy. And to spend $1.2 million on our city's seismic preparedness only in the capital plan without even agreeing to ask for any... extra information about this one aspect of it, I think just shows a level of complacency that I find extremely worrying. So I'm really hoping that council will vote in favour of my amendment. Thanks.

Thank you. Councillor Kirby-Young.

Well, I have to say, and I'm not saying a lot today, obviously, because of my voice, but I think the fact that we are wholeheartedly having a robust, I have my report right in front of me, earthquake preparedness strategy coming forward, this has been a subject of discussion at several councils, to suggest its complacency is... to be honest. And honestly, we have a strategy, which I believe my census council is about to wholeheartedly endorse. We have funding set aside in the capital plan coming forward to council, which I expect everybody will support. And we already heard that affirmation from council. So, I mean, I would say, honestly, since we're using characterizing words, that's a lot of drama for something that is already happening. And I think that we should just vote and move on and get this strategy underway instead of having, I'm not going to call it out of order, subject to 8.7. F of being frivolous, which in the definition of frivolous is not the colloquial term. It is that it is something that is already being done. Honestly, I'm not sure why we're debating something that's already happening. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Seeing no one else in the queue, we'll put this one to a vote. If you can please go to the voting panel. And we are voting on Councillor Maloney's amendment.

Great. And one, two, three. That fails with myself, Councillors Kirby Young, Don Minato, Klaassen, Meisner, and Joe in opposition.

Councillor Maloney, anything else?

Thank you. Councillor Claassen? Very quick comments to wrap things up here, Mayor. First of all, I just want to thank staff for this work and this report. I think it does give us some comfort as somebody who was born and raised in the city, the ever-present notion that we would potentially... fall prey to a large seismic event has always been in the back of our minds. I remember specifically in February 2001 working for my home office when the building started to sway and I thought I had some vertigo. I tried to get a hold of my wife who was at that point eight months pregnant with our daughter and she was in a tower downtown and the building was swaying and this cell phone signal eventually died. So it was a moment in time that I remember very distinctly about the the bit of fear and uncertainty about what to do at that point in time. So I think as a city, we have to be very vigilant about this one. So just, again, thanks very much for this work and I look forward to supporting it.

Thank you very much. Seeing no one else in the queue, we will put the main motion to a vote.

Okay, moving along. Item number three, Vision Zero Safe Mobility Plan. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes that they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to disclose it.

I do have a point of information, just given the time, if we could get a sense if we have to move to reserves when the next reserves are, given I think we have quite a number of speakers to this item and other speakers on other items, if we could get some indication from the clerks of...

Thank you very much. Okay. This item does have a presentation, and we do have our team members here to present it.

Thank you very much. Very thorough presentation. Thank you. Okay, Council, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of our team members. And, Councillor Zhouhn Monato, you are up.

I don't think I put myself on the queue. Nope.

Sorry, that was a leftover.

Great, thank you. Councillor Meiszner. I did put myself on the queue. Thanks for the presentation. Thanks for all the data and work on this. I had a few questions. You talked about, it sounded like an intention to move to 30 kilometres an hour citywide in the future. Is that where we're going a few decades from now? Or what is the timeline on that?

5 to 10-year timeline?

And you talked about Hastings Street, and I'm aware of the high incidence of injuries and fatalities in some cases along Hastings. That 30-kilometer zone has been in place for, I'm not sure, quite a while to my recollection. What do you think the challenges are there in terms of why we're still seeing high rates of injuries and fatalities?

So when we are contemplating those changes, we are also looking at... other changes that have happened. Like I'm thinking about Cordova is now two way. So it's, you know, it's has a slower speed I've observed in terms of traffic on that aspect. I guess my question is, are we looking at the impacts to say TransLink or, you know, businesses, you know, people, trades, people, commuters, are we taking that into consideration or are we potentially creating like a new traffic jam in the future?

Okay, thanks. You mentioned, actually one of the slides was around sustainable mode share. I didn't see scooters on there, and I'm wondering if it's something you're tracking. I mean, it's very popular. I use them quite a bit, and I see lots of people on the Lime scooters. probably for going, say, transit trips or even driving in some cases. So I'm wondering if we're tracking that.

My watch also thinks it's cycling when I get on a scooter. And then the other question I had was 40 kilometers an hour on three-lane roads downtown. but not outside of downtown. Can you explain the rationale there? I think at a Berard, Smythe, Nelson downtown, you're suggesting that the speed on those would be reduced to 40 kilometers. Is that correct?

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you very much. Councillor Kirby Young.

Yeah, thank you. I have a few questions. The first one is around looking at the strategies at the glance and sort of the chart that's been laid out. Can you speak in a bit more detail around 1.4, adjusting traffic signal timing to encourage safe travel speeds? And there's just sort of an implement a slower green wave signal progression where possible to encourage slower speeds when speed limits are reduced. And yet I hear a lot of people talk about optimizing traffic signals to move people through. So can you describe that to us? What does that actually mean?

So I'm sorry, my brain is not at its best today, but I will admit, but you're not talking about synchronization, you're talking about the speed at which the synchronization changes?

Okay. Have you analyzed the impact of congestion? Because it's pretty difficult to go more than 30 or 40 anywhere downtown right now, particularly with the new road design and the amount of construction. Have you factored in the impact of congestion and the importance of keeping people and goods moving throughout the city?

I guess my question is more around where in the strategies that talk about is there anything around alleviating congestion might be a better way of framing the question, which is one of the biggest concerns I hear from people right now.

Again, I'm not necessarily just hearing it on speed. I'm talking about the writ large bigger issue of congestion that people are having a hard time getting around the city, period, at all.

So nothing else beyond that. Okay, I'm going to keep going for time. I just want to delve into following up on Councillor Meiszner's questions in the appendix on sort of around pages 67, 68, and so on. So there's some charts around specific hot spots for accidents. And I know that the report references, generally speaking, that speed limits would be reduced around hot spot areas. So if I read things like Boundary Road, Cassiar Connector, Oat Street Bridge, Clark Drive, Main Street, Granville, Rupert, et cetera, those streets that we would see you bringing forward reductions on, because that's the general principle to reduce speeds where there's accidents?

Because I'm running out of time. So types of streets versus how many lanes they have, because it's not clear to me. Mayor, can I move for a second round, please?

Second. Thank you very much. Any discussion? All in favor say yay. All those opposed say nay. Thanks.

I'll come back on. Thanks, Mayor.

Great.

So, Councillor Orr. Thanks for the report. I'm very, very happy to see. I only have a few questions. I want to get to speakers, but just around sort of the 30 kilometer streets and sort of some of the challenges around that and around enforcement, but also I did ask... I haven't had an answer back on this, but just sort of the problem with shortcuts, like with Google, and whether or not does the city of Vancouver use Google's standard API? Do you know if that's kind of a technical question? Thanks for the question.

Yeah. Just, I've had a number of emails from people just saying there's sort of just to get around it. They're just, yeah. Or Google is telling them that's okay. And we saw that around like the closures with. Oh yeah.

Thank you for that. And then just a little, can I get a little bit more from Paul? Sorry. A little bit more color around the quick build on Hastings. I mean, you mentioned the horizontal thing. What are some of the more challenges? Because it is a provincial route. I know there's, you know, you mentioned the first responders and things like that. So we can't, basically we can't do like speed humps, things like that. Is that correct?

Oh, I see. So you just sort of use that as a pilot, knowing that coming you'll be, okay, that's interesting. I didn't quite clock that. Yeah, and just around, I know there's tons of signs and there's markings on the road. The markings are a bit faded because it is such a well-worn route. Some of the signs, I don't know if you've noticed, are being maybe damaged or angled. And there are those signs that say how fast you're going. But there's a bunch that are broken. I just walked down there the other day and there's some that are broken. That's just more of a note than a question. But how are we sort of keeping up with that, like the road markings and those signage issues?

So more like the road diet is the actual physical design of the road would be the best?

Thank you so much.

Thanks, Councillor Fry. Yeah, well, actually, just following up on Councillor Orr's question there, I mean, as you will recall, back in November 2023, this council unanimously approved a motion to support better maintenance of road markings. And I think I recall it coming forward in the budget that year, or maybe the next year, and it was an optional expenditure that council wasn't willing to spend on. Can you tell me specifically where that's at? Because it was council direction to... to regularize road painting maintenance.

Lon remembers.

I thought we gave specific direction, but I'll have to go back and look. Because as I recall, we gave the direction, but we didn't approve it in the budget.

Okay, I'm going to go back and look. On that similar vein, though, where does road maintenance fall into this? I mean, I'm sure many of us have taken tumbles on active transportation vehicles on hitting a pothole.

Where does that fall into this matrix of road safety?

I mean, I've definitely had some near misses where I felt like I would have fallen into traffic if I hadn't fallen the other way, but okay. The other big thing that jumps out at me in this report, and thank you, I appreciate all the work, and this is excellent moving forward, but the top three, speed, distraction, and impairment, those all seem like policing-type issues. Where does policing come into this, and how do we... improve that partnership with the Vancouver Police to focus on some of those really egregious kind of impacts on Vision Zero.

Have we identified any kind of path forward to give... request to the vpd to maybe focus a little bit more on when we have a record budget vpd it's highest budget line item next to only engineering have we identified an opportunity to say hey vpd we would love to see this as part of your public safety um council could ask vpd to do that okay yeah okay oh the mirror's gone oh i'm good over to you counselor joe

Okay, thanks, Mayor. Thanks, Pete. Okay, so my question, thanks. I think I read this report on the website. It says 17 out of 25 neighborhoods already installed the traffic calming measures. What are the plans for the remaining eight neighborhoods?

Well, it's just in general the traffic calming measurement. It didn't specify what exactly the measurements are. Yeah, but only 17 out of 25. What are the plans for the other remaining eight neighborhoods? And what are the timelines?

30 kilometer per hour?

So there is intensive communication with the community, also the engagement with them before implementing that?

Okay, so it takes one to two per year. So that's about another four to eight years to finish all those 25 neighborhoods. Can I say that? Probably, yeah. Okay. All right. So other questions. I read in the appendix that at least three commercial high streets and three residential areas outside of downtown will be implementing the 30 to 40 kilometers per hour. Do we know where exactly or just what a general target?

Okay, so if we shortlisted all those potential streaks, does this need council approval or engineering department has a dedicated authority to do it?

Thanks. Another question is, have we considered some impact on the income of certain professions? Because, for instance, the taxi drivers, the food delivery drivers, by reducing the speed limit, that reduces the number of trips they can make in their working days. Have we considered the impact to their income?

How about the street outside of downtown?

Thanks, Paul.

Thanks, Mayor.

And so I just had a conversation. the clerks and it looks like there are some things uh that we need to cover before five o'clock um that cannot wait till the next uh meeting reserve meeting and so uh clerk please correct me um if i get this um If I'm not correct in this, but one, we need to have a motion move to put item three on hold till the meeting reserve date on June, on the Tuesday, next Tuesday, June the 9th at 3 p.m. And then we're going to need a second motion to vary the agenda to then jump to the business, starting with bylaws and covering everything until adjournment. Is that correct?

So just as a matter of procedure, is there any discussion on this, or do we just, does someone submit a motion to put this?

Okay, so Councillor Kirby-Young is moving it. Councillor Klassen has seconded, and that's the motion to put this on hold, and I think the language is going to be put up on the screen.

And I'm going to move everyone... Won't we use the main queue as a way of going through any counselor questions if they come up?

Sure. Councillor Maloney.

Thank you. I'm aware that there are people in chambers that have been waiting in council all day for their chance to speak. Can you just clarify that what this means is that they will... not have any opportunity to speak today but will be given an opportunity to speak on Tuesday when we resolve, when we come back at 3 o'clock on Tuesday and that we will then have more debate, public speakers, I mean more questions, finished council questions, have public speakers and then there'll be debate and decision on it. Is that right?

Thanks very much for clarifying that. Thank you.

Thank you. Everyone's looking. It's all good. Thank you very much.

We still had councillors in the queue.

Yeah. All right. So I think that was moved in. It was seconded as well, right? Yeah. Great. Thank you very much. Any other discussion? Councillor Maloney, you're good? Yep. Okay, great. Okay. So I'm going to put this, sorry, Councillor Kirby-Young.

I have one question, and that is that I wonder if it would be beneficial to us since we only have 24 minutes and a lot of bylaws to get for it to say and complete where it says to complete on June 2nd and extend past 5 o'clock to do so if necessary in that piece so we don't have to deal with if we're a few minutes past 5 that we don't get that finished. So adding after June 2nd, including extending past 5 if necessary.

You know, my understanding of this is we are literally putting item three on pause. We're coming back.

No, I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the second paragraph, Mayor, including completing bylaws, administrative motions, notice of council member motions, and new business on June 2nd.

Sure. I think if let's cross that bridge when we get there, we do have 22 minutes still. So, okay. Any other conversation or discussion? I don't see anyone in the queue. And so all in favor, say yay. All those opposed say nay. Okay. That passes unanimously. Great. So now we're going to need a motion to vary the agenda. That's pretty much it. Okay. And so that's putting it on hold. So we covered. Oh, perfect. Awesome. Great. Thank you very much.

Questions to team members? Seeing no one in the queue, would someone like to move a motion? Councillor Dominato, seconded by Councillor Klassen. Council, is there any discussion? All those in favour, say yay. All those opposed, say nay. Great, the motion carries unanimously. Notice of council member motions. So are there any notices of council member motions for the upcoming standing committee meetings? Reminder to please state the title of the motion and the date of the standing committee meeting. on which you intend to move the motion and be sure to send the title and date of the standing community meeting via email to the city clerk. Councillor Kirby Young.

Yes, thanks, Mayor. I do have some notices of motion. The first one is entitled Sustaining Summer 2026 Festivals, submitted by myself and Councillor Dominato for the July 15th Standing Committee. The second notice of motion is entitled Securing Space for the Interim Filipino Community Center, submitted by myself and Councillor Zhou for the July 15th Standing Committee. The next notice of motion is entitled Supporting Prioritized Solutions for the Arts and Culture Sector Working Group, submitted by myself and Councillor Frye the July 15th Standing Committee. And finally, the last one is entitled Investigating Traffic and Safety Mitigations and Solutions at Vancouver Fire Halls, submitted by myself and also for the July 15th Standing Committee. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Councillor Klassen.

Can you flag me if you don't receive it? Thank you. Councillor Klassen. Thanks, Mayor. Motion is titled Reviving and Accelerating the Vision for Essential Tech Innovation Hub in Vancouver. Submitted by myself for the Standing Committee on July 15th. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Maloney.

I've got three notices of motion. The first is addressing the risks of digital infrastructure. The second is enabling community-led installation of of temporary shade for heat protection. And the third is equipping the city to expand childcare capacity. And they're all for the Standing Committee meeting on 15th of July.

Thank you, Councillor Orr.

Thank you. Notices of motion for the Standing Committee on July 15th. Four motions. One motion entitled Prepping for the Relocation of St. Paul's, Creating a Prep Distribution Center out of Community. Another motion titled Protecting and Planning for Vancouver's Waterfront Precinct. Another motion titled Keep the Artists In, Creating a Cultural Land Trust for Vancouver. And lastly, a motion titled Rising Tides, Governance Reform and Stewardship of Falls Creek.

Thank you very much. Councillor Frye.

Yeah. Four notices of motion for July 15th Standing Committee. Number one, renewed renter's office for Vancouver residents. Number two, energy sovereignty and grid resilience. Number three, passenger licensing for electric micro vehicles. And number four, policy framework for overdose prevention and harm reduction facilities.

Okay. Thank you very much. Seems like July 15th is going to be a very short day.

And Councillor Kirby-Young, yours have been received. Is there anyone else that we're waiting for? We're good. Can you just please flag me if you don't receive Councillor Orr's before the meeting so we don't end the meeting? Thank you. Okay, new business. We have one item of new business on the agenda today, and it's requests for leaves of absence. This motion has been circulated to council. at the beginning of the meeting and is available on the screen.

Has everyone had a chance to review it? Would someone like to move the motion?

Councillor Klassen, thank you. Seconded by Councillor Zhou. Council, is there any discussion?

Okay.

Okay, all those in favor say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great, the motion carries unanimously. Council, are there any items of new business? Councillor Kirby Young.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. I also emailed in another one, which was a change of assignment for a business license panel that the clerks have if they want to bring it up. It was emailed in earlier today along with LOA requests, and it reads that Councillor Montague replaced Councillor Kirby Young as panel member of the business license hearing meeting to be held on June 10, 2026.

Okay, and do you have a seconder? Great, thank you. Councillor Zhou? Actually, I should have said meeting. Anyways. Council, any discussion? All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great. The motion carries. Councillor Maloney.

Sorry. I've just realised that Councillor Bligh would like to swap with me for a business licensing hearing so that... she is the reserve instead of me, and I'm very happy to do that. But I can't – could I have two minutes to find the email? Because I'm afraid I forgot about it and Councillor Bligh is not here to ask. I'm just searching around for an email.

Actually, the clerk said – You've got it?

Ah, great. Well, I would like to move that motion. If you've already got the wording, marvellous.

Great. And can we please get a seconder? Great, Councillor Meiszner. Any discussion? Okay, all those in favor say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great, the motion carries. Councillor Orr.

Yeah, just a point of personal privilege. For the LOAs, I believe I had one for June 10th from 7 p.m. on. Did the clerks receive that?

And if not, can I get that added?

Counselor, if we can please get you to put it on the floor. Move a motion. I have to move a motion? Yeah. How do I do that? Is there a seconder? Great. Counselor Meisner, thank you very much. Tuck it up and set it in. Okay. Did everyone verbally hear Councillor Oren? Can we put this to a vote or do you need to see it on the screen? All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great.

That was for, I believe, June the 10th at 7 p.m. thereafter. Is that correct? Yeah. Great. Thank you. Okay. Councillor Dominato.

Yes. Yes, Mayor. Just circulated an LOA request for July 15th and 16th for civic business.

That's a laugh.

It's going to be a quiet day. Why would you want to miss that one? Okay. So can we please get a seconder? Second. Great. And since it's not on the screen, that's for July 15th, Wednesday, all day, was that? Yes. For civic business?

Yes. And 16th.

And 16th.

Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great, that motion carries as well. Okay, so I see no one else in the queue for items of new business. So we are now in inquiries and other matters. Are there any inquiries to other matters? Councillor Dominato.

Yes, thanks, Mayor. I just want to take a couple of minutes to honor the passing of Mel Zajac, who passed away in the last week at the age of 98. And I just wanted to reflect a couple of pieces of his biographical history. And I'm studying from John Mackey's article, if you haven't seen it already. But I thought it would be nice to honor him. We had intended to, had been working towards having him in and to have a proclamation in his honor. And unfortunately, the timing didn't work out because he went into the hospital quite urgently. And But I did want to just reflect his long history. In the upcoming weekend, swimmers from around the world will be competing at an event that's a Zajac-sponsored event, the Mel Zajac Jr. International Swim Meet at the UBC Aquatic Center. It was named after Zajac's son, a swimmer who was on the 1976 Olympic team in Montreal. Unfortunately and very sadly, Mel Jr. drowned on July 13, 1986, when he was caught in a tidal pool while kayaking on Chilliwack River. Eight months later, another son, Marty, was killed in an avalanche near Blue River in the Caribou. In their memory, Mel Sr. started the Mel Jr. and Marty Zajac Foundation in 1987, which became the focus of his philanthropy. It sponsors the swim meet and the ranch that many of you know. Melvin Nicholas Zajac was born on May 15, 1928, in Winnipeg. His parents were immigrants from Ukraine, and Mel didn't learn English until he went to school because the family spoke Ukrainian at home. His father died when he was six, and the family of eight struggled through the Great Depression, and this was key to his empathy for others and to his philanthropy.

Mel Zajac moved to Vancouver in 1949 and flourished in the construction business. He started off building homes before switching to small apartment blocks. In 1958, he built one of the first high-rises in the West End. He also was known for his very high-profile project, the Pacific Palisades Block on Alberni, where he partnered with North American Life. In 1972, he had to sell his share after he lost $20 million on some bad investments, but he stayed on as the manager of the hotel in the Pacific Palisades for years and lived in the penthouse so many people thought he still owned it. He had two sons and three daughters with his first wife, Irene. When his sons died, he focused on his philanthropy. I think those who had the opportunity to meet him and his wife know that he cared deeply about this city. He was very proud of the work he did to provide homes We had quite a lengthy discussion over lunch about what he did to support the community. But I know very near and dear to his heart was the philanthropic work in the Zajac Ranch. And so I just wanted to honor him, offer our condolences to his family, and to recognize him here in this council. Thank you.

Councillor, thank you very much. And Mel Sajak was just an incredible human being and he will be missed. Okay. Council, any other inquiries or other matters to bring up? Seeing none, can we please have a motion to adjourn? Councillor Klassen? Oh, sorry. Sorry. Thank you.

What would happen if we actually... No, okay, awesome. Can we please have, or we actually don't need a motion, do we? We're just going to, we are just going to say June the 9th, 2026 at 3 p.m.