Childcare Capacity Amendment (Klassen)

Statement Watch

Good evening, Council and Mayor. My name is Karina Talvila. I'm a resident of Vancouver, and I'm here to speak in favor of this motion. which advocates for approval of plug-in solar panels in Vancouver. For me, personally, the issue is primarily about hastening our shift to renewable energy sources to reduce the climate-changing effects of burning fossil fuels. But it's not just about shifting to hydro-generated electricity over fossil fuels, because here in BC, we're feeling the effects of climate-change-induced droughts that are lowering the level of water in the rivers, and hence... reducing our ability to generate hydroelectric power. So it's not just about electricity, it's about solar-generated electricity. The plug-in solar panels are reasonably inexpensive, easy to install, and would help to reduce energy bills. The first U.S. state to allow use of the panels was Utah, not exactly a leader in the charge against climate change, but for that very Republican state, the panels were about an opportunity to save money. an excellent argument that we just as applicable here. The panels would also be very empowering for people. Urbanites have never been able to generate our own power before, but these panels would give average people that power and some control, power to do something easy about the climate and control over their electricity bills. For these reasons, climate change adaptation and mitigation, reducing electricity bills and energy empowerment I am in support of Councillor Frye's motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Good evening. Thank you, Mayor and Council, for this opportunity to speak, and I'll be brief because you've had a long day. I've been a resident of Vancouver since 1983, and I am very excited to speak in favor of Motion 12. Thank you, Councillor Frye, for bringing this forward. Climate crisis is here now, and fossil fuels are the main cause of the climate crisis, hands down. And yet, our elected officials at all levels of government continue to keep citizens hooked on fossil fuels. And this council is no exception. Recently, they overturned a ban on gas for new bills. So with this motion, we have good news on clean energy, just as Councillor Fry outlined in presenting the motion. Earlier this year, I read articles raving about the IKEA plug-and-play solar panels. And as a renter, I look forward to taking those steps to have a solar panel on my balcony and taking control of my energy sources that reduce my emissions and match my values. This is truly a very positive initiative. And absolutely, I want to see the city get on board, look for ways to leverage this technology, form partnerships, engage with BC Hydro, get on board with this pilot project that Pete outlined, provide the staff the support they need to prepare the regulatory framework. I encourage all of you to vote in favor of this motion. It is so exciting. If you could see me, I was yelling yay after everything Pete said in his opening. So thank you very much. I look forward to the results of this motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Thank you, Chair. I am pleased to support Motion 12 because it looks ahead to how Vancouver can generate and use energy more affordably, sustainably, and reliably. Electricity demand is growing. Electric vehicles, building electrification, air conditioning during heat waves, and digital infrastructure are all placing greater pressure on the grid, while we are asking residents to move away from fossil fuels. Well, we should be. That transition requires not only more clean energy, but a more resilient and decentralized energy system. This motion recognizes that emerging plug-in solar technology could be part of that solution. Instead of relying entirely on centralized power generation, residents could produce a portion of their own electricity through small-scale balcony, patio, or backyard systems. The benefits are clear. In a cost-of-living crisis, households could reduce energy costs. Distributed generation could ease peak demand and strengthen grid resilience. When paired with batteries, it could even help residents to maintain essential cooling during heat waves or power outages. Importantly, plug-in solar could expand access beyond traditional homeowners. As mentioned in the motion, renters and people in apartments such as myself or strata buildings have largely been excluded from rooftop solar. This technology may offer a more practical and affordable way for them and me to participate in the clean energy transition. We can also look to international experience. In Australia, widespread rooftop solar adoption has reduced electricity bills and contributed back to the grid, while also requiring governments to update standards and grid management. It shows both the opportunity and the importance of planning ahead. What I appreciate about this motion is that it does not rush ahead without safeguards. Certification and testing are still underway, and the motion asks the city to work with BC Hydro and other authorities to ensure these systems can be introduced safely. It also calls for consideration of standards, permits, inspections, and equitable access. That is the right approach. Prepare early, follow the evidence, and remove barriers once safety is established. Climate action is not only about reducing emissions. It is also about affordability, resilience, and giving residents greater control over their energy future. This motion positions Vancouver to be ready rather than reactive. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Hello? Can you hear me? Yes, we can, please. Okay, perfect. Hi, Mayor and Council. This is Annette Riley. I'm a resident of Vancouver, and I'm here to speak in support of Motion 12. This motion, to me, is about the future. Don't know about you. I'm a giant nerd. I love science fiction. My biggest fandom is Star Trek. Shout out to all my fellow Trekkies here, but... I digress. One of the things, though, that I love about sci-fi is that it imagines these technologies that make everyday life so much better. And, you know, most of those times those technologies stay fiction, but sometimes they become a reality like this. This motion is the start of a plan to give the residents of our city access to technologies that benefit all of us. And that has some serious Star Trek vibes. In a world where we've had these extreme heat events, wildfire smoke, atmospheric rivers, and all these growing concerns about whether our electrical grid can actually keep up with this increasing demand, this is exactly the kind of forward thinking that we should all be doing. In a political climate where so much of our decision-making has had to be reactionary, this motion looks ahead. It says, let's understand this technology. Let's work with BC Hydro. Let's identify the barriers now so that when the technology is ready, we are too. And that, to me, is smart planning. There's nothing I like better than a good, actionable plan. I would sign up for a solar panel on my patio in a heartbeat. Let me be a test subject here. I mean, actually, we use them when we're out camping with my friends and family. We use portable solar technology to recharge our lights, our phones, even speakers so we can have some music. And then we don't have to worry about disposable batteries or any noisy generators. So this technology right now, it's not in the distant future. It's not fantasy anymore. It's already here. And this motion is simply asking Vancouver to be ready for the next generation of it. Get it? It's about exploring ways for homeowners, renters, people in apartments, and those living in multifamily buildings to participate. This is not the final frontier, but it might be the next one. So let's be proactive instead of reactive. Let's embrace innovation. Let's prepare for what's coming. And let's help build a city that's more resilient and more sustainable and a little bit closer to the future we all imagined. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Thank you. Mayor and Council, thank you for having me here today. My name is Tasha Maynard, and I am the co-founder of Hayek Arts. Before we start, I want to highlight we are speaking about NZEVs. These are already Transportation Canada approved. You can drive and park on the road just like a regular car, and you need a driver's license to drive them. We're not talking about the green mobility scooters we see on the Greenway. Those are simply illegal. So when the city of Vancouver needed shuttles for people with mobility challenges during FIFA planning, they rented our carts. This matters because it shows these vehicles are not theoretical. They're already being used by the city for exactly the kinds of short, practical, accessibility-supportive trips we're talking about. The difference is that when the city operates a shuttle service, it can do so under its own authority. To date, HAYA carts have been privately and safely used for shuttle service by the Vancouver Pride Society, Ironman Canada, the Vancouver Marathon, City of Vancouver, Oak Ridge Park, Vancouver BIAs, Destination Vancouver, and even recently the Institute of Transportation Engineers Conference that was just held in Victoria. However, if HAYA wanted to provide the same kind of shuttle service to the public with commercially licensed drivers and vehicles inspected every six months through the commercial vehicle inspection program, we currently cannot. We are not asking for a loophole. We are not asking to avoid regulation. We are asking for a clear pathway under the existing passenger transportation license framework. So normally the approval process for a general passenger transportation license is roughly six to eight weeks. We applied last year and our application has now been sitting for months with no meaningful response. To be fair, as far as we know, nobody in BC has applied before to operate neighborhood zero emission vehicles for passenger service with commercial drivers. We understand that this may be new for the Ministry of Transportation and Transit. We understand that staff may not know exactly where or how these vehicles fit. But right now, they're not asking us questions or giving us a pathway. The only answers we get is, keep waiting. Meanwhile, these vehicles are already street legal, they're registered, they're Transportation Canada approved, they're ICBC insured, and operating safely as self-drive rentals. They're fully electric, quiet, low-speed, and right-sized for short trips in busy visitor areas. Driver-guided NZEV tours and shuttles would help visitors, seniors, families, cruise passengers, and people with mobility limitations experience more of Vancouver without needing a full-sized car, taxi, van, or bus. They could support Stanley Park, Canada Place, Coal Harbour, Gastown, and our local events. Approval of this motion would send an important signal that Vancouver supports safe, insured, inspected, and properly regulated NZEV passenger services. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Thank you. Julie Struleski here, and I am in support of this motion. If you have seen the news, there are 800 active wildfires burning in Canada alone that are causing a lot of devastation right now. As we can see around the world, we are in a climate emergency. Hopefully this government will start taking this seriously as scientists have recommended. I think we have an ethical responsibility to take as much action as we can. NSAIDs have been around since the late 1990s. They're a proven solution, and it's long past time that all governments approve them for passenger services. If you are aware of the social and environmental impacts of EV battery life cycles, good news. The world's largest EV battery repurposing mega factory has opened in Surrey. and turns retired EV batteries into storage systems for hospitals, factories, and more. So I hope you will support this motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor and Council. My name is Vincent Kwan. I'm the Executive Director of the Strathcona Business Improvement Association. I support the direction of this motion because overdose prevention and harm reduction services are an important part of the broader response to the toxic drug crisis. That is also precisely why we need to get the implementation right. The motion begins to establish clear expectation around cleanliness, public order, operating plans, monitoring, and enforcement. If overdose prevention and harm reduction services are essential healthcare services, they should be managed with the same discipline, resources, and duty of care that we'd expect from every other essential public service. Success is not simply opening a service. Success is delivering quality care while maintaining confidence among clients, neighboring residents, businesses, and the surrounding community. For this framework to work, there must be a clear chain of accountability across the entire system, from the operator to the city, Vancouver Coastal Health, and the province. The community should not be left trying to determine which institution is responsible when problems arise. It should be clear when the operator must respond, when the city must monitor or enforce and when VCH or the province must become involved because additional authority funding or changes to the service model are required. That is where the good neighbor agreement becomes important. Although the agreement is between the operator and the city, it should also provide the surrounding community with a clear way to raise concerns and understand what happens next. And properly, the good neighbor agreement becomes a community-facing connection to the broader accountability framework. It should help ensure that concerns are assessed, recurring problems are recognized, unresolved issues are escalated, and outcomes are reported back. The community has an important role in providing honest and timely information as well about what is happening around the operation. While the responsibility for assessment, corrective action, and enforcement remains with the appropriate public institutions. The effective business improvement areas can also help connect those two sides. As place-based organizations working closely with both its members and the city, BIAs can help ensure that agreement reflects actual conditions on the ground, recognizes recurring patterns, and gives community a practical way to reach the institutions responsible for acting. For that reason, we ask Council to ensure that the affected BIAs are formally consulted and invited to help shape the good neighbor agreement before it is finalized. That consultation should happen early, not after the agreement has already been written, so that the BIs can help shape how concerns are raised, the processes involved, recurring problems, how recurring problems are recognized, and resolve issues brought to the right authority. Ultimately, the measure of a good neighbor agreement is not written... Sorry, Vincent, that's your time.

Statement Watch

Good evening, Chair. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Joshua Davidson. I'm the Director of Operations at the Downtown Vancouver BIA, also known as Downtown Van. I'm also a resident of Vancouver. Overall, Downtown Van is prepared to support this motion. However, we have outlined four recommendations for consideration that we believe would strengthen the framework. For many years, Downtown Ban has been advocating for greater accountability, consistency and transparency around the plans and operations of overdose prevention and harm reduction facilities. This motion moves us in the right direction. We recognise that the toxic drug crisis remains one of the most significant public health challenges facing our city. Harm reduction services save lives and are an important part of our health system. At the same time, we hear almost every day from businesses, employees, residents and visitors about the impacts that occur when facilities like these are not supported by clear operational standards and effective management of the surrounding public realm. What we appreciate about this motion is that it begins to establish expectations around licensing, operating plans, cleanliness, reporting, good neighbor agreements, and community accountability. Therefore, should staff develop this framework, we encourage council to ensure that it includes the addition of the four following elements. First, meaningful consultation before facilities are approved. Engagement needs to happen early, and it should include business improvement associations, local businesses, residents, and other affected stakeholders. Second, measurable operating standards with clear consequences when operators do not meet them. Expectations should be transparent and consistently enforced. Third, good neighbor agreements should be developed with the support of business improvement associations and the surrounding businesses, and they should include clear response times, complaint resolution processes, and ongoing communication. And finally, ensure that any locational criteria give appropriate consideration to neighborhood context, cumulative impacts, and the unique role of key commercial districts, which includes the Granville Entertainment District. Downtown Advance's position has always been that these conversations are not about choosing between compassion or accountability, they require both. When these services are properly located, appropriately resourced and well managed, they can improve health outcomes while reducing impacts on surrounding neighbourhoods. A clear regulatory framework provides greater certainty for operators, businesses, residents and the community, while helping restore confidence in how these services are planned and managed. We thank Councillor Fry for bringing this motion forward, and if Council adopts these four recommendations that I've outlined today, Downtown Barnet is pleased to support the motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Hi, good evening. I'm also calling to support this motion. It's not surprising that many Vancouverites have become opposed to any safer consumption sites or OAT services in their communities. We've had a bad run of operators opening sites that aren't structurally adequate for client needs and which aren't adequately resourced. Then when trouble happens in the community around the site, operators shrug their shoulders and say that what happens outside isn't their problem. This is a dynamic that we see taking place over and over again in Vancouver. Critical services for at-risk people are inadequately managed. There are neighborhood impacts, and everyone is left to fight with one another while the people responsible, the funders and operators of the sites, including government, either steer clear or exploit the fallout. Eliminating these services will cause people to die. Let's not avoid that. And I am worried that there's an alarming cohort mainly but not entirely of online bots and trolls that say that they want drug users to die. There are people stoking that hatred at all levels of government. But I don't think that community members who don't want to deal with crime and nuisance around safe consumption sites want people to die. I think that mainly people want folks to get help. We need better service delivery models. People need to be able to get off the street. They also need immediate access to support services, including recovery oriented services. But we also need to do our best to make sure that people don't die. This is a route forward because at its heart, it's an accountability framework for everyone involved. There's accountability for the city, which is currently on a collision course with the federal government that we can ill afford. There's accountability for the province, for the health authority, for the operators, and for folks using the sites too. I think it's past time for everyone to come to the table to ensure that folks don't die and to ensure that service delivery models respect community needs. I don't think it's impossible, and I think it's incumbent on all of us to try. Thanks.

Statement Watch

All right. Everyone can hear me? Yeah. Great. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Nick Popel, and I'm speaking today as the co-chair of the Renter Advisory Committee, and we are speaking in strong support of this motion. Renters represent more than half of the households in this city. The renter office was originally created because renters facing eviction, displacement, or unsafe housing were being sent between city departments, provincial agencies, and nonprofit organizations, often while the clock was running out on the time on their homes. The office gave renters a front door. It provided information, referrals, and coordination. Over the three years that it was running, it cost approximately $1.8 million, an average of about $600,000 per year. When it was reviewed in 2023, staff recommended that it continue. Instead, council eliminated it, setting concerns about efficiency, duplication, and which level of government should take the lead. The problem is when everyone is partly responsible, nobody is truly accountable. Council recently approved nearly $5 million to extend the Granville Street pedestrian pilot for seven weeks, including $1.25 million for programming that we're still figuring out what it's about. To be clear, I'm not arguing against pedestrian streets or public events. I'm a theater grad, and I love this stuff. It's a question of priorities. That seven weeks expenditure is roughly equal to eight years of the renter office at its previous average cost. And I'm going to be honest here. I'm not just speaking theoretically. Personally, I have fought through three arbitrations. I won them, but it was hell. But it was nothing like the nightmare I saw my apartment neighbors go through just before that. We had a new owner come in, and they issued fictitious notices claiming everyone in the building had to leave. They told us they had secured permits from this city. Their generous offer to vacate was well below what tenants were legally entitled to receive. I personally fought hard. I learned a lot about renters' rights and the RTA. Almost every single one of my neighbors was scared out of their home. Seniors, single parents, immigrants, people who had been built their lives in that building. Only three of us fought back and remained. That building had 24 homes, almost 50 people. One call to a properly resourced renter's office might have protected not just me, but dozens of other people. Across Vancouver, that one call could protect hundreds. The motion today is not to bring the renter's office back. It's to have a study come back from staff that will likely go to the next council. The cost of studying is negligible. The cost of doing nothing is measured in people's homes.

Statement Watch

Thank you, Chair. I support this motion because renters make up the majority of households in Vancouver. I'm also a renter, and they deserve accessible, coordinated support from their municipal government. Housing discussions often focus on building new homes, but we must also ensure that people already renting in our city can easily navigate the systems designed to protect them. Today, renters often have to deal with multiple agencies and organizations when facing maintenance concerns, displacement, relocation questions, or uncertainty about their rights. That can be confusing and difficult to navigate, as mentioned in the first speaker's experience. This motion proposes a practical solution. Re-establishing a centralized renter's office to improve coordination, provide clearer information, support enforcement efforts, and help renters access the services they need. Importantly, this office would not duplicate the work of the residential tenancy branch or community organizations. Instead, It will strengthen coordination, improve data collection, identify service gaps, and provide council with better information to guide future policy decisions. Good government should be easy to access. We already dedicate significant resources to working with developers, builders, and property owners. It is equally reasonable to ensure renters, the majority of Vancouver households, such as myself, have a dedicated point of contact within City Hall. Funding the office through empty homes tax revenues is also appropriate, given those revenues are intended to support housing-related priorities. Ultimately, this motion is about improving service delivery, strengthening accountability, and ensuring renters have a stronger voice within municipal government. For those reasons, I encourage Council to support the motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Hello, committee members. My name is Vincent Shi. I'm a staff lawyer at First United Legal Advocacy Clinic. I'm also a resident of Vancouver's West End, and I'm speaking in support of the motion. For over 50 years, our legal advocacy clinic has provided support for tenancy issues for low-income renters in the downtown Eastside, including for unlawful evictions. Our advocates assist over 1,000 clients per year, including hundreds of renters. seeking urgent support to avoid homelessness. Nonprofit service providers like us take on enormous caseloads. Every day we work with people facing multiple barriers, such as disability, language barriers, low income, or just simply not knowing what their legal rights are. These community members need resources to avoid displacement and homelessness, and so we continue to be troubled by the decision to close the renter's office, given its critical role for the community. The renter's office had filled an important gap in resources. It provided advocacy and direct education to renters at risk of displacement and eviction. Importantly, the renter's office was not duplicative of the services that nonprofits like us provide. The office provided support where we couldn't and vice versa. For example, the office is the only place that can give direct information and assistance on the city's own tenant protection policies. No other organization is in the position to do so. Municipal policy is also outside the scope of what the RTB can help with. This becomes even more critical given the Broadway plan and downtown Eastside rezoning make TRPPs a fundamental part of the redevelopment scheme. And also, the terms of these policies are complicated and can be confusing even for a lawyer like me. While First United welcomes the expansion of TRPP coverage, it is just as important that city give information and assistance on these policies through a renter's office to make its protections accessible and meaningful. For us, the loss of the renter's office has eliminated a critical service and important partner for homelessness prevention. It's raised barriers to help that has been devastating to both our organization and the clients we serve. So we urge council to reestablish the office to ensure that renters are protected. Thank you so much.

Statement Watch

Beautiful. Hi. Hello again. I'm Annette Riley. I'm a resident of Vancouver, and I am here to speak in support of this motion. I will keep it short. It's been a long day for all of you. I would like to actually say thank you so much for all your hard work today. You're almost there. I just have one number for you. It's 165,455. That's the number of households in Vancouver that rent. That's not the people that live in those houses. That's just the households. Voting to bring back this renewed renter's office means that you are showing each person in each of those 165,000 households that they matter to you. City Hall has an open door for almost everyone involved in housing, builders, developers, engineers, property owners. Renters deserve access, too. City Hall, I mean, I can sit here and I can extol the virtues of this new renter's office in City Hall. But honestly, I shouldn't need to because the previous version of this office was a success. The evidence is there. We saw it working. We know what it can do. And this is just a new and improved version of that. So please show the majority of Vancouver residents that you care about their needs. I would appreciate that as a renter being shown through a vote that you care about us. I urge you to support this motion. Thank you.

Statement Watch

Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Matthew Thiessen, and I'm the Managing Partner at Somerville Community Relations. Every day, my team is on the ground, working directly with residents to navigate TRPP and tenant plans. Our focus is simple, lead with empathy, prevent the loss of housing, and ensure renters are supported. Because we do this work every day, I'm here to speak in support of the intent behind Councillor Fry's motion. this motion correctly identifies a critical systemic flaw and problem, there is an unhealthy tension when the exact same department is responsible for writing policy. regulating it, and serving as the primary public-facing support for renters. Right now, that system is broken, and tenants are paying the price. Recently, I wrote to the general manager of planning, requesting urgent action on two frontline issues, greater clarity around tenant compensation, and more consistent communication on how the TRPP interacts with the Residential Tenancy Act. The response, we were told these critical issues were deferred to future review with no concrete timeline. That means 40 plus tenants were left in limbo. Instead of addressing this policy gap, the GM and the housing division chose to build a wall. They created a new unlisted city email account to communicate with our team. And quite frankly, it's completely invisible to the public. The messages sent from it are entirely anonymous, yet these anonymous emails contain official city instructions that developments must follow for approvals. Following this, we began receiving official housing division memos, documents confirming that applicants have met requirements to issue tenant notices. circulated with no signatures. Mayor and Council, anonymous emails and unsigned memos do not protect tenants. They do not resolve policy gaps. What they do do is shield public servants from accountability, create confusion, and slow down the delivery of housing and tenant supports. When the department responsible for tenant protections goes anonymous, it is a clear signal that the current system is failing. Whether the solution is a reestablished renter's office or a deep structural overhaul of the existing housing division, one thing is clear. The foundation of our housing administration must be built on transparency, accountability, and professional service. We cannot protect Vancouver renters with anonymous emails and deferred decisions. I urge council to support the spirit of the motion, acknowledge the deep operational issues within the housing division, and demand a return to accountability, transparent public service for renters and housing providers alike. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you, Matthew.

Statement Watch

Hi again.

So thank you very much. So in January, this council heard from tenants and tenant advocates about routine violations of the law in rental housing across the city. We heard tenants describe persistent threats to life and safety. We heard that there are landlords who avoid the legal consequence by outlasting an overtaxed, uncoordinated system, leaving individual tenants responsible for systemic failures. And at that time, council broadly supported doing more. This would be a really good way to do more. The reason we knew about many of the issues that council discussed in January was because of tireless organizing and reporting by tenants and allies at the Vancouver Tenants Union. Deep respect to the VTU for their work. But I would also say that the city shouldn't have to rely on crowdsourcing to get information about noncompliance with city bylaws. In my experience representing tenants, the lack of an adequate monitoring compliance and enforcement system coordinated with provincial partners and legal services has facilitated some of the routine abuses we see from exploitative landlords. I have a lot of respect for the work of city staff, but I have also represented tenants whose landlord was unlawfully emptying out a building in contravention of city bylaws under staff's notes. Staff in January thought that they were on top of serious fire safety issues in a building where tenants clearly reported the issues unresolved. Staff regularly report to council that tenant relocation and protection policies are operating as designed when tenants and advocates clearly know otherwise. We hear stories constantly of tenants who are struggling to get systems that nominally exist to support them and protect their rights to function the way that they should. We are still dealing with landlords I first dealt with many years ago who are still breaking the law in exactly the same ways over and over again. This is not a problem of individualized lack of diligence. These problems have persisted across many years of my work and practice in the field. These problems are systemic. We still owe it to Vancouver's renters not to leave them to individually fight off landlords who are well resourced and determined to break the law. We need to make better systems to give effect to the laws and policies that council already supports. The renter's office was the only entity I've ever encountered that was positioned to do that work. Please reinstate it. Thank you.