Central Tech Innovation Hub

Okay, we'll stop fixing that. Councillor Klaas, you have two minutes to introduce your motion. Please go ahead.

Thanks very much, Chair. So I'm pleased to introduce this motion because I believe Vancouver has a tremendous opportunity before us. We often describe Vancouver as one of North America's leading technology centers. We have world-class universities, exceptional entrepreneurs, growing companies, and now we host major international technology events that put our city right on the global stage. But there's one thing that we continue to hear from the innovation sector. While Vancouver has the talent, the ideas, and the ambition, we lack a flagship innovation hub that brings entrepreneurs, researchers, investors, and industry together to accelerate collaboration, commercialization, and business growth. Around the world, leading innovation cities have recognized that talent alone isn't enough. Cities like Paris, New York, Montreal, and Calgary have invested in flagship innovation hubs because they understand that ideas flourish when people work together in close proximity. At the same time, competition for talent, investment, and high-growth companies has never been greater. Talent is mobile. Capital is mobile. Increasingly, companies are mobile too. If Vancouver wants to remain competitive, we can't simply rely on our many strengths. We need to continue strengthening our ecosystem that helps companies start here, scale here, and stay here. And that's why this motion is deliberately measured. It doesn't ask Council to build anything today. It simply asks staff to do the homework, work with partners, examine successful models, identify funding opportunities, and come back to Council with options. Vancouver already has the ingredients for success. This motion simply asks whether we can bring those strengths together more effectively. If we're serious about growing Vancouver's economy, we need to be just as intentional about growing our innovation system. I hope my colleagues here will support this motion. Thank you.

Thanks, Councillor. Okay, second by Councillor Kerbion. We will now hear from the registered speaker for this motion. Public speakers should state whether they are in support or in opposition of the recommendations and may only speak once. I will also ask speakers if they are residents of Vancouver, if it is not noted on the speakers list. Our first speaker, Adam Mitchell, has withdrawn. So second speaker is Dan Berger.

Okay. Speaker number three is Barinder Rosald.

Please go ahead.

Thank you. Speaker number four is Thuja Jeffery.

Perfect. Thank you. Please go ahead whenever you're ready.

Thank you. All right. Thank you for speaking to council. I'm going to go back to speaker number two, Dan Berger.

Okay, thank you. So that concludes the speaker's list for this motion. Thanks, everyone, for speaking to the standing committee. Committee members, is there any discussion?

Yeah, thanks.

I was going to sort of list some questions through the mover of the motion, but I have too many, and I think I would probably take up all my time, but these would have been them. What level of municipal financial contribution is envisioned? Would city-owned land or facilities be required? How would this avoid becoming a subsidy for large private technology firms? Will jobs created be accessible to Vancouver's existing working-class residents or mainly benefit already high-income tech workers moving into the city? Has staff considered the infrastructure implications of expanding AI-related industry, including electricity demand and data centers? Given Clause 9 references the province's strategic investment special account tied partly to defense technology, do we believe residents of the city are comfortable pursuing funding connected to military defense applications, especially considering the geopolitically volatile time we find ourselves in? How would success be measured beyond private investment attracted? What community benefits would accompany any city investment? How would this affect existing industrial and creative employment spaces? So, yeah, lots of questions.

Obviously not enough time. Staff's position was that there's currently not enough staff capacity to complete this work. in the timeframe outlined. And the city has previously supported innovation and community development by providing space and capital funding for the hub. at 312 Main, a mission-driven co-working space for nonprofits, innovators, organizations, and artists. So, yeah, innovation isn't a problem. I think Vancouver should support good jobs and research, but public investment should come with clear public benefits. Any innovation hub should deliver affordable space, quality union jobs, community access, transparency around public funding. and protections against displacement rather than serving primarily as a vehicle for attracting venture capital and high-growth tech firms. Thank you. Thanks. Are you asking this question? Just comment. No, I don't think I will have time for that.

Okay. Councillor Clausen?

Thanks very much. Certainly in the preamble for this motion, we've addressed a number of the questions. The resolution actually suggests that staff certainly resource this appropriately, whether it's involving a government relations or a... funding somebody who would do funding requests those are the kinds of things that I'll leave city staff to do clearly our economy is really dependent upon the strength of the companies and the individuals that work here and we're in a very competitive world right now and you Anecdotally, we continue to hear about the number of young people that are looking at getting their working visas to go to the United States because they don't see the kinds of big opportunities that might otherwise exist here if we had the kind of community support around the founding of companies, creating investment capital, and essentially mentorship and strengthening our innovation sector. So I know from talking to stakeholders over quite a few months that I heard a uniform agreement that this is – way that we should go we have attempted things in the past such as the initiative in the last decade around the hub which was not ultimately successful and did not achieve really what the the sector was looking for so right now I think we have a fantastic opportunity and And just judging by some of the correspondence we received against this, there is a real enthusiasm to try and move forward. And so this essentially directs staff to do the work to see what we can do to try and create this cornerstone of our innovation economy. So, again, I'm incredibly appreciative of everybody taking the time to consider this. I think we just have to see what comes back and use these opportunities to create high-quality jobs here in the City of Vancouver. Thanks very much.

Thank you. I feel like this motion presents a business case rather than advancing a vision that secures meaningful public benefits or truly serves Vancouver residents' needs. We are operating under a very tight budget, but this project is being selected without an overarching strategy in place. I think our focus should be on supporting small businesses, facilitating access to funding, reducing barriers to entry and doing business in our city, not allocating large sums of public money to the most well-capitalised sector in our economy, give or take. And if we're talking... about strategy, what we need is social innovation, progress on the clean economy, more benefits corporations, which will generate a positive impact on society and the environment. And we need to come back to the fact that we lack a coherent economic strategy. So before committing significant public funds to potentially unsustainable projects, we should clearly define our objectives and ensure that Municipal support is conditioned on the development and prioritisation of innovation initiatives that are both sustainable and deliver high public returns. So for me, simply creating an innovation hub doesn't mean having a comprehensive development strategy. So I'd point out that... This motion references Station F in Paris, which was entirely funded by a billionaire to create his own incubator, and this example actually betrays the purpose of the motion because it asks the city to step in and do work that would normally be funded by industry, serving private interests at public expense. So, as I said, this is a business case rather than public policy, but it's public that gets the bill, so I can't support this. Thanks.

Councillor Corbett.

Yeah, thanks. Listening to the conversation with interest, and I'm reading the motion, my take on it is that it's not asking for a large-scale investment from the City of Vancouver. What it's asking for is for the city to play a leadership role in advancing the conversation and convening various stakeholders to look at the potential for what is possible. I will note that this council collectively together set priorities at the beginning of term, and one of those included a vibrant Vancouver. And a vibrant Vancouver includes creating infrastructure good economic opportunities for people. Tech jobs are good jobs. They are well-paying jobs. and those individuals that can secure them are able to stay in the city of Vancouver with a high cost of housing, and then they have discretionary income to spend at small businesses and support them when we have individuals like that. I think that Vancouver has a lot to build on with respects to homegrown tech innovation. We've got success stories like Hootsuite and Clio, a great landscape, and tech is a very encompassing term and does not preclude, in fact, includes, I think clean tech. So you look at some of the firms here that we have, Sfonte, low-cost, low-energy emission systems that sequester carbon dioxide and emissions from industrial sites. Companies like Mangrove Lithium that create modular platforms that reduce the cost and environmental impact of producing battery-grade lithium. There's such a lot of opportunity here, I think, in terms of shaping what that looks like. And I'm actually interested to hear back on the potential to cite something like this. I think that this is exploratory. It does ask for a report back to council in terms of looking at possible operating models or partnership opportunities to bring funding and what some of the benefits would actually look like. So I think that this would be an ongoing piece of work. I think there'll be a chance for council to weigh in. But it is an important signal, just like we just finished hosting FIFA and showed that we can do this. I think having a sort of a can-do mindset and welcoming investment is very similar to welcoming the world for FIFA and showing what we can do. And so I think that continuing to build on our successes and the pride and also honestly taking away some of our reliance from resource sector and other industries and diversification is a worthy goal. So I'm very open to the exploration and getting some information back. Thank you.

Thanks, Counselor. All right, seeing no one else on the queue, so I'm going to call the vote. Counselor, please register your vote on the voting panel.

Counselor Bly, Fry, Meissner may be absent.