[0:00] on this lovely evening. Um, I'd like to call the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

[0:05] Um, I would also like to mention that councelor Murray is not able to attend

[0:09] this meeting. Um, so she will be absent. I will start things off with the land

[0:15] acknowledgement. So, as we gather here in Bulmont, we pause to acknowledge the

[0:19] land we're blessed to live and work on and to honor those who came before us.

[0:23] We value the enduring relationships with the French pioneers and indigenous

[0:27] peoples who continue to share their history, knowledge, and culture with our

[0:31] community. [clears throat] We're also thankful for the generations

[0:35] whose dedication and faith helped shape this community into the vibrant city

[0:39] that it is today.

[0:44] Moving on to the next item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Uh do I

[0:49] have a member of council willing to make the motion to

[1:00] Councelor Van Newkerk. >> Thank you.

[1:05] Yeah. Thank you. I'll move that the July 21st, 2026 committee of the whole

[1:09] meeting agenda be adopted as presented. >> Thank you, counselor.

[1:14] [sighs] If everyone could put forward their

[1:17] vote, please.

[1:23] So that carries unanimously at 6 to nil.

[1:29] [snorts] The next portion of the agenda is the

[1:33] adoption of minutes. Uh do I have a member of council willing to make the

[1:37] motion to adopt the minutes as presented?

[1:42] Councelor Penrod. >> Thank you, Chair. I move that the June

[1:47] 16, 2026 committee, the whole meeting minutes be adopted as presented.

[1:54] Thank you. I ask that everyone vote

[2:02] and that also carries unanimously. Have any presenters for open forum?

[2:08] » Thank you, Deputy Mayor. We do have three open forum registrations this

[2:11] evening. If Surrender could please take his seat.

[2:15] » Perfect. Thank you.

[2:19] » Surrender. >> Yes, please.

[2:22] » Please take your seat. >> Thank you.

[2:38] » Thank you. I just one second. I will just uh get your mic set up here.

[2:45] [panting]

[2:55] » Click it. >> Can you press Did you press the button?

[3:01] » Just once more. Sorry. There are we >> Yeah,

[3:06] » just once. Thank you. That That's perfect.

[3:09] » There you go. There we go. So, uh, just to start off, I will just, uh, have you

[3:13] introduce yourself, please. And if you're a resident of Bowmont, uh, please

[3:16] state your address. Uh, you'll be given 5 minutes to present your topic.

[3:21] » Thank you. My name is, uh, Surender Sinclair. I'm the resident of Bowmont

[3:25] living at 530461st Street. And um, good evening, Mayor

[3:30] Lisa, members of council, and the city administration. First of all, thank you

[3:36] for giving us the opportunity to speak in front of you all

[3:41] to express our sincere appreciation for everything you do for the city of

[3:44] Bulmont. As residents, we recognize that managing

[3:49] a growing community comes with many priorities and challenges. We appreciate

[3:55] the effort that goes into making Bulmont a safe, welcoming, and vibrant place to

[4:00] live. We also want to thank the city for supporting the support of cricket by

[4:07] installing the practice nets and pitch at the four season park. We really

[4:12] appreciate that. Thank you. It shows that the city recognizes the

[4:17] growing interest in the support and we are truly grateful for the that

[4:21] investment. Today however we are here to share a challenge that has become

[4:28] increasingly difficult for our specific community.

[4:33] We represent a group of approximately 100 Bmont residents who regularly play

[4:38] cricket mainly in the summer. Most of us are young professionals, homeowners,

[4:44] families and long-term residents of who have chosen Bulmont because we believe

[4:48] in this community and want to build a future here. The biggest issue we face

[4:53] is the lack of a dedicated field where we can actually play matches. Every

[4:59] weekend and often on weekend e weekday evenings, we spend valuable time driving

[5:04] from one park to the another hoping to find an available open field to play.

[5:10] Many parks are already occupied by the other sports or reserved for the

[5:14] organized events. On several occasions, we have even started playing only to

[5:19] discover the field had already been booked. Sometime it was only two people

[5:24] that came to play. But because they had it reserved, we had to leave and we were

[5:29] 20 plus people playing already. Even when we do find an open space, there is

[5:34] no cricket pitch. So we play directly on the grass. While we make the best of the

[5:38] situation, it limits the quality of the game and makes it difficult for the

[5:42] support to grow within our own city. Because of these challenges, we are

[5:47] often forced to travel to Edmonton just to play. Unfortunately, Edmonton faces

[5:52] the same problem. Cricket participation has grown tremendously there and

[5:56] dedicated grounds are almost always fully booked. What should be a simple

[6:01] evening or weekend game often turns into hours of driving, searching, waiting, or

[6:07] not being able to play at all. It has happened with us several times already

[6:12] just this summer. We believe Bowmont has an opportunity to become a leader in

[6:17] supporting one of Canada's fastest growing support. Our requesters, our

[6:22] request is very straightforward forward and practical. We respectfully ask the

[6:26] city to designate one of existing fields as dedicated cricket field in the future

[6:32] as resources allow. We hope that field could include a proper pitch as well.

[6:38] This would provide a permanent home for a growing support in the city, encourage

[6:42] healthy and active lifestyle, strengthen community connections, and allow Bowmont

[6:46] residents to enjoy recreation within the city that they proudly call home. Our

[6:53] cricket community is committed to being a positive partner

[6:57] with the city. We are always ready to volunteer. As I mentioned, we are all

[7:02] young professionals, help organize activities, promote respectful use of

[7:06] the facility, and support community events whenever possible. We don't

[7:11] simply want to use a field. We want to contribute to Bowman's culture,

[7:15] diversity, and sense of community. On behalf of everyone in our cricket

[7:19] community specifically, we respectfully urge council to consider our request and

[7:26] work with us to find the best possible solution.

[7:30] A dedicated cricket field would have a meaningful impact on the lives of many

[7:34] current residents while also serving the growing number of families who

[7:38] contribute to choose Bowmont as their home. Thank you again for your time,

[7:43] your leadership, and for listening to our concern. We sincerely appreciate

[7:47] your consideration and look forward to working together to make Bowmont an ever

[7:51] even stronger and more inclusive community. Thank you so much.

[7:56] » Perfect. Thank you very much for that presentation. Uh you're welcome to stay

[8:00] as we see if any counselors have any questions for sure.

[8:03] » Um it does appear that councelor Penrod has [clears throat] a question. So uh

[8:07] councelor Penrod go ahead. >> Thank you Deputy Mayor Natalus. Um thank

[8:12] you for the presentation surrender. Uh just two quick questions for you. First,

[8:16] have you and your or your group had the opportunity to present this request to

[8:21] the recreation and culture advisory committee as of yet?

[8:26] » This is the first time we're making any official request.

[8:28] » Okay, great. So, that would be something that I would suggest to you as um a good

[8:33] next step uh to help you to understand some of what's involved in in your

[8:39] request. uh this is something that other community organizations have have done

[8:44] and we're having some good good success I think getting people channeled through

[8:48] there and then you have uh you're in touch with administration and you can

[8:52] kind of understand everything that is required in a request like this. So um

[8:59] maybe the clerk who helped you register for tonight could help steer you in the

[9:03] direction to get registered with that committee. So that would be a

[9:06] suggestion. >> It was Stacy. So we'll be in touch with

[9:08] her. >> Perfect. Uh and then second question is

[9:11] what types of fields are you currently using when you describe driving around

[9:15] and looking for an open space? >> 100%. So we're mainly using uh one of

[9:20] the soccer field that is close to the Anytime Fitness just across the city.

[9:24] Yeah. >> And uh the other field that if if it is

[9:28] available then in Four Season Park any of the baseball grounds.

[9:31] » Okay. And are you ever I mean you mentioned having to yield because

[9:35] somebody came that had the field booked. Um, have you tried to book fields for

[9:41] the purpose of playing cricket? >> Not yet.

[9:44] » Okay. So, that' be another thing that could be discussed at the um the culture

[9:49] wreck and culture advisory committee. >> Sure.

[9:52] » Thank you again. Great presentation. >> It's a pleasure.

[9:56] » Thank you, uh, councelor Penrod. Uh, it appears, uh, Mayor, uh, Vanderqu is up

[10:03] next. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I just want to

[10:07] have a question. So you mentioned there's a hundred residents in Bulmont

[10:11] that play cricket right now. Do you have like an organized club? Have you

[10:15] formulated a organized cricket club? >> Yes. So uh it's not official like we

[10:20] haven't registered it anywhere but if needed then we can definitely get their

[10:25] address names and uh their contact information that they are the residents

[10:29] of Bulmont. However, we do have an Instagram page where our club is growing

[10:33] and uh we're regularly posting our content there.

[10:36] » That would be a recommendation I would have as well is to because when you have

[10:40] an organized club, there's a commitment. There's, you know, moving forward in

[10:44] terms of organized games and everything like that. So, I would suggest that you

[10:48] reach out to the people that you know of and formulate something like that that

[10:52] will give you a stronger position as well in terms of uh moving forward.

[10:56] » For sure. >> Yeah. However, we do participate in all

[10:59] like different tournaments across Edmonton and closer cities and we do

[11:03] represent Bulmont. Our club name is Bowmont Kings.

[11:07] » Cool. Yeah. Thank you so much for coming tonight.

[11:10] » Thanks.

[11:13] » Perfect. Thank you. Um it does not appear that there's any other counselors

[11:17] with any questions. So, I thank you again for your presentation.

[11:23] That being said, uh, moving along the agenda here. Uh, Madame Clerk, I my

[11:28] understanding that there are some other presenters.

[11:31] » That's correct. If we could please have Sarah take her seat at the presentation

[11:33] table.

[11:38] » Perfect. Thank you. Uh, welcome Sarah. I actually don't need you to state your

[11:41] address. That's just for a public hearing. But I will, uh, have you state

[11:44] your name. And again, you'll be given five minutes to present. And if you

[11:48] could just confirm if you're a Bumont resident.

[11:50] » I am. >> Perfect. Thank you.

[11:52] » Right. My name is Sarah and I hold a master of education. My research has

[11:56] centered on public policy and its health and safety effects on young children,

[11:58] but most importantly, I am Robin's mom. Today, I'm going to take you through our

[12:02] current strategic plan to prove that the city daycare is not a problem, but in

[12:05] fact a solution to many issues faced in our community. First, let's talk clear,

[12:09] responsible, and reliable public services. In the first childare funding

[12:13] model, over 80% of daycare costs are now covered by provincial and federal

[12:16] grants. This is public money that is specifically earmarked for Bumont

[12:20] families. But once it hits a private cent's profit margins, we cannot control

[12:23] where that money goes and if it actually contributes to making Bowmont a better

[12:26] place to live. Conversely, when considering the city daycare, we know

[12:29] that every penny that was meant for Bowmont families went to Bowmont

[12:33] families. 100% of the money stayed here and helped to strengthen the community

[12:36] through a passionate and engaged team of educators. That is clear, responsible,

[12:40] and reliable public service. On the topic of money, we have heard from

[12:43] council that cost is the main barrier to keeping the daycare open. Many

[12:47] reasonable solutions to this exist, such as changing the fees at SAS, leveraging

[12:50] economies of scale by expanding through the new building that has already been

[12:53] budgeted for, or raising the cost recovery benchmark. Alternatively, you

[12:57] could continue letting the daycare do its outstanding work and proudly state

[13:00] that you think our kids are worth the $145 a month we are asking you for.

[13:05] However, in discussing these issues with parents, you have heard from us that our

[13:08] main concern is health and safety. This should be one of council's main concerns

[13:12] also as keeping Bowmont a safe place to live and raise a family is a second

[13:15] strategic goal. The money provided to the daycare has produced a standard of

[13:19] excellence that acts as a market anchor and exerts a positive competitive force

[13:22] on the local childare market, thus working to raise the standard of care

[13:25] for all kids in Bowmont. User fees are capped by the province. So, the only way

[13:29] private centers can make profit is by reducing the quality of programming or

[13:32] hiring less staff at lower wages. Because the only way to make profit is

[13:36] to cut costs, nonprofit and municipally operated centers are usually in higher

[13:40] demand due to better staffing, quality programming, and superior health and

[13:43] safety metrics. The town daycare far exceeds the minimum licensing

[13:47] requirements for things like first aid and educator qualifications. Private

[13:50] centers use surplus dollars for whatever they want, but nonprofit or municipally

[13:54] operated centers are mandated to use all dollars available to increase the

[13:57] quality of their programming, thus driving the overall market towards a

[14:00] better product. However, outside of the city daycare, there's a shortage of

[14:04] nonprofit centers here. Therefore, the city daycare feels a dire social

[14:07] infrastructure need. Bowmont hovers very close to being classified as a childare

[14:12] desert. But even with new centers opening, the number of viable options

[14:15] from a health and safety perspective has remained critically low. Some of the vi

[14:19] uh in the past 18 months, 40% of our daycarees have recorded serious health

[14:23] and safety violations. If you include centers that have also undergone

[14:26] complaint investigations, that number rises to 53%.

[14:30] Some of the violations in the last 18 months, staff not having criminal

[14:33] records checks, harmful substances stored in reach of children, failure to

[14:38] supervise children at all times, and threat for child guidance, which means

[14:41] kids were physically punished, verbally degraded, isolated, or denied basic

[14:45] necessities like food or water as a form of punishment. If the town doesn't

[14:49] provide social infrastructure where it is needed, it means parents need to

[14:52] sacrifice their jobs, move, or take their money to different communities.

[14:56] Safe, quality childcare is as necessary for parents to be able to work as the

[15:00] road they drive on to get there. The parents behind me and on the live stream

[15:04] agree it takes a village to raise a child. Our village up to this point has

[15:08] been Bowmont, a place where kids have traditionally meant more than a budget

[15:11] line. Bowmont is growing rapidly, but still maintains the heart of a small

[15:15] town, the pulse of which are the unique, long-standing community services you

[15:19] simply can't find elsewhere. The spirit of Bowmont is here in this room. a

[15:23] community coming together to say that thoughtful growth cannot come from cuts.

[15:27] This leads to the third section of the strategic plan supporting thoughtful

[15:30] growth that makes sense for the community. So where is the common sense

[15:34] in closing the highest quality most in demand care in our city? When we talk

[15:38] thoughtful growth, we must also consider the equitable access and stability of

[15:42] that growth. Private daycarees are 97% more likely to close in their first four

[15:46] years, leading to major disruption for families and major headaches for

[15:49] developers. Private centers are also statistically less likely to provide

[15:53] specialized care for kids with diverse needs. They can claim that they can't

[15:56] afford to accommodate these children and so the refusal isn't viewed as

[15:58] discrimination. My own child is nearly rejected at a center for having an

[16:02] epipen. The city daycare is the only childcare in Bulma that is unable to

[16:06] pick and choose from their applicant list. Yes, child care is critical to

[16:10] families, but ELCC and SAS are critical to our sense of community. Our town mo

[16:15] motto is life is better in Bowmont. Not BMont means minimum licensing

[16:19] requirements. We are trying to help you. We want you to understand that if you

[16:24] close the daycare, you will be seen as going out of your way to champion

[16:27] inferior conditions for our children. But to keep the daycare open would be to

[16:31] breathe life into every section of your strategic plan. A success for the

[16:35] council and a success for the community. It plainly comes down to this. A good

[16:39] deal for kids is a good deal for Bulmont. Thank you for your time.

[16:47] Perfect. Thank you. Uh thank you for that presentation. I am looking around

[16:52] to counselors and I do not see anyone with any questions. So appreciate you

[16:58] coming forward. Appreciate the presentation. Thank you very much.

[17:00] » Thank you for

[17:04] » moving along on the agenda. Madame clerk, I believe there's one last uh

[17:08] correct open forum. >> If we could have Erica take her seat,

[17:11] please. >> Thank you.

[17:19] Welcome, Erica. Um, I know we already said your name, but I'll have you uh

[17:23] repeat it as well and just confirm if you're a resident of Bowmont and uh

[17:27] you'll have 5 minutes to present. >> Yes, I am a resident of Bumont. My name

[17:30] is Erica Campbell. >> Thank you.

[17:32] » Okay. Good evening, Madame Mayor and Council. Today, I will be speaking in

[17:38] response to the 2026 review of the municipal run daycare. My name is

[17:42] Erikica Campbell, as I said, and I've been a resident of Bowmont for four

[17:46] years. I currently have two children attending ELCC, one of which will be

[17:51] moving to SAS shortly. When I heard about the review, I had many questions.

[17:56] I quickly realized that although I have experience with the financial side as an

[18:00] accountant, I do not have expertise in child care, municipal run programs, and

[18:06] understanding these specific benefits to communities. So, I reached out to those

[18:10] who did. I've been in communication with researchers, daycare directors,

[18:15] childcare advocates, charity directors, and advisory council members. I began

[18:20] asking questions and gathering relevant information so that I could ensure I had

[18:24] a thorough understanding. I must add that I was met with such support and

[18:29] kindness, and this daycare's excellent reputation was brought up again and

[18:32] again throughout this process. I am very proud to be where I am.

[18:38] The executive director of the Drayton Valley Municipal Run Daycare, Bernice

[18:41] Taylor, was very helpful in highlighting key benefits to the community, such as

[18:46] the fact that childcare is what draws workforce to our communities. It is what

[18:50] stabilizes our service industry and is needed to attract professionals who wish

[18:54] to serve the community. In addition, she has provided the following quote to be

[18:58] shared. The early childhood development center has provided a safe, nurturing

[19:03] environment to Drayton Valley families so they could maintain their businesses.

[19:07] Childcare is a critical role in our econ economic development and has been

[19:12] pivotal in retention of employees in our community.

[19:15] This is not special to Drayton Valley and in these economic challenging times,

[19:19] we have been counted on for quality care. Families shouldn't need to worry

[19:23] about child care and we know municipal care are some of the longestrun programs

[19:27] in the province.

[19:30] Work that well-known policy researcher Martha Friendley has done has been very

[19:34] helpful in understanding the municipal daycare model and the many benefits. For

[19:39] example, publicly operated childcare programs have been effective in meeting

[19:43] service gaps, piloting innovative practices, and addressing emerging

[19:47] issues. There are also benefits to our staff such as opportunities for learning

[19:52] and career growth. These factors feed into the high employee retention and low

[19:56] turnover. In my personal experience with daycarees, low turnover and high quality

[20:01] go hand in hand. I had the pleasure of speaking with Dr.

[20:05] Susan Cake who serves as a chair for Childare Now Alberta. She has very

[20:10] eloquently stated that during difficult economic times like these that families

[20:15] really look to all levels of government to do what they can to make life more

[20:19] affordable and just a little less hard. Particularly young families. I hope that

[20:25] keep being a government that these families and more can turn to for things

[20:28] they need to be supported and successful in our cities and towns. Excuse me.

[20:38] One of my most memorable conversations was with a member of the National

[20:42] Advisory Council on Early Learning and Child Care. They reminded me that

[20:47] Bowmont is actually in a fantastic position right now as a wellestablished

[20:51] successful municipal run daycare. The trending of the public funding from the

[20:55] federal government has been increasing since 2021. And even just on June 19th,

[21:01] there was an announcement of an additional 5.4 billion over 2 years. As

[21:06] 80% publicly funded, childcare is now thought of as a public good. Public

[21:11] funds deliver public value. Bulmont is in a fantastic position to celebrate

[21:16] their successes and expand the reach where we can. In my opinion, having a

[21:21] municipal rent daycare says the following. We as a city understand the

[21:25] needs of our citizens and want to ensure that we provide consistent highquality

[21:29] standards where we can. When Urban Systems did their presentation, they

[21:34] stated that it really comes down to, do you want to run a municipal daycare? And

[21:38] my question to council is, why wouldn't you?

[21:42] Thank you.

[21:46] » Thank you uh Erica for your presentation. and I really appreciate

[21:49] it. Um, that being said, I'll open up the floor to council members to see if

[21:53] anyone has any questions and it does not appear that there are

[21:58] any additional questions. So, thanks again.

[22:00] » Thank you.

[22:07] » So, thanks again for the open forum. Um, really appreciate the presence of all

[22:12] participants. Would like to see the chambers full this time all the or this

[22:16] much all the time. So, um, that being said, uh, we are slated to go into close

[22:22] session. Um, but I would encourage everyone to stay because there's

[22:25] additional presentations after the fact. But, uh, I am going to ask for a motion

[22:29] to go into closed session and ask that.

[22:38] Uh, Mayor Vanderquac,

[22:43] » the council move into close session at 523 pursuant to the Access to

[22:48] Information Act, sections 26 and 29. >> Thank you, mayor. I ask uh that we vote

[22:54] on that, please.

[23:01] And that carries unanimously. So, as mentioned, unfortunately, everyone will

[23:05] have to leave for the closed session, but I do encourage folks to stay for the

[23:09] uh presentations that come later. Thank you so much.

[23:48] Welcome back to our regular session. We just finished up with close session. Uh

[23:53] on our agenda we have a 6.1 presentation from Alberta Capitable Airhed and I

[24:00] believe this presenter is going to be presenting virtually for us.

[24:07] » Hello. Are you able to hear me? >> We sure are. Yes. Thank you.

[24:11] » All right. Well, thank you so much for having me today. I'm just going to share

[24:15] a presentation here.

[24:19] There we are. If you're able, please confirm that you're able to see that.

[24:25] » As we're just running through that to get it set up here, um, are you able to

[24:28] just quickly introduce yourself uh before you present?

[24:32] » Yes, certainly. My name is Colton Arabeski. I'm the engagement and

[24:36] membership coordinator uh for Alberta Capital Shed.

[24:40] » Perfect. Thank you. And I do believe uh we have the visual here.

[24:45] » Okay. Excellent. Thank you so much.

[24:49] Okay, let's see.

[24:53] Uh, sorry about that.

[24:58] » My apologies. Give me one moment here. Everything went far too fast.

[25:20] All right. Thank you. Sorry um about that. Thank you for your patience. So

[25:26] why does air quality matter? We all breathe the same air. Air quality

[25:29] affects everyone every day uh regardless of your age or background. There are

[25:33] significant health impacts associated with poor air quality. uh this can

[25:36] include respiratory and cardiovascular effects, effects on neurological and

[25:40] brain health and links to depression and anxiety disorders and more. We also see

[25:44] vulnerable populations at higher risk. Not everyone is impacted equally. Uh

[25:48] children and infants, seniors, outdoor workers, people with pre-existing

[25:52] conditions, pregnant people and unborn children, uh people exercising outdoors

[25:57] are all impacted more by poor air quality. And air quality can impact our

[26:02] daily life. uh yesterday and today for example during poor air quality events

[26:06] uh people may have to limit outdoor activities and sports uh school and work

[26:09] attendance can be impacted and it also increases healthcare visits and costs.

[26:14] Uh we're seeing an increase of course of poor air quality days due to wildfires

[26:17] and climate change in recent years and so this is very top of mind for a lot of

[26:22] uh residents of the Alberta Capital airship region.

[26:26] So who is Alberta Capital airship? Uh we're responsible for monitoring,

[26:30] evaluating and reporting the outdoor air quality including the air quality health

[26:33] index or AQHI. Our boundaries expand north to Aabaska and south to Camero's

[26:38] Motasin area with a lot of our monitoring concentrated in and around

[26:41] the capital region as shown in the map. As a nonprofit, ACA receives funding

[26:46] from three primary streams uh including monitoring agreements, grants, and

[26:50] membership fees which include emitters and others such as municipalities like

[26:53] Bowmont. At ACA, we actively engage with communities to raise air quality

[26:57] awareness, share data through knowledge translation, and provide education. AC

[27:02] is one of 10 airsheds within Alberta, and the 10 airheds formed the Alberta

[27:05] Airheds Council. Together, aired operate over 85 continuous monitoring stations

[27:10] and hundreds of other monitoring sites that measure a variety of air quality

[27:13] parameters. Over 85% of Alberta's population lives within an airhed.

[27:21] ACA uses several different methods to monitor air quality, including

[27:25] continuous monitoring stations, uh, integrated sampling, sensor based, and

[27:28] micro sensor technology. Together, this allows us to collect and provide broad,

[27:32] accurate data to support public reporting and community health.

[27:36] Continuous monitoring stations provide near instantaneous measurements of

[27:39] ambient concentrations of many pollutants, including sulfur dioxide,

[27:43] nitrogen monoxides, ground level ozone, fine particulate matter, carbon

[27:47] monoxide, and more. All monitoring stations are also equipped with

[27:50] meteorological equipment to assess the impact of local conditions on ambient

[27:54] air. The data collected at many of our continuous monitoring stations is used

[27:58] to count air quality health index. ACA also has a growing network of fine

[28:03] particulate matter or PM2.5 micro sensors and they're affordable, easy to

[28:07] use and they allow for community level air quality monitoring. uh by placing

[28:12] those in different locations, we can see more detailed variations in air quality,

[28:16] identify hotspots, and understand local sources. Involving the community in

[28:20] setting up sensors also builds awareness and ownership around air quality issues.

[28:24] Uh and they're a great source of air quality data during wildfire smoke

[28:26] events.

[28:30] Our monitoring network collects a lot of data. So most parameters are collecting

[28:34] data every minute of the day, 24/7, 365 days of the year. Uh what do we do with

[28:39] all this data? Wide real-time data is available on our website and it's also

[28:43] used by the provincial and federal governments to provide communities with

[28:45] the AQI. Uh beyond that, the data is collated for reporting to regulators and

[28:50] stakeholders and it's analyzed for insights and trends in air quality. The

[28:53] data also goes through a rigorous quality assurance and validation program

[28:57] where all data and reports are scrutinized to ensure accuracy. Uh so we

[29:00] have two streams of data available on our website. the public facing live data

[29:04] map on the left side of the red line uh which shows real time air quality data

[29:08] from our stations and micro sensors and then we also have our members portal

[29:12] where members like the city of Bmont can access historical data, comparison

[29:16] tools, calendar plots, exceedence reports and more. Uh so as members uh

[29:21] city of Bowmont has access to monthly and annual reports that highlight and

[29:24] analyze local air quality monitoring data.

[29:28] What else do we do at ACA? Uh we have robust education and outreach program.

[29:32] We engage with the community and our members in a variety of ways. We attend

[29:36] uh many of our members events throughout the year and share information about ACA

[29:38] and air quality. We have free air quality educational resources available

[29:42] for teachers. Uh we host clean air webinars throughout the year touching on

[29:46] various air quality talk topics of interest with recordings available

[29:49] online. And we're active on social media. Um you can find us on Instagram,

[29:54] X, Facebook, and LinkedIn uh @ Yank Airshed. Uh we also have a monthly

[30:00] newsletter that goes out and our community guide to wildfire smoke is a

[30:03] members only resource that we recently developed designed to support Alberta's

[30:07] municipalities and other organizations in planning for and responding to

[30:11] wildfire smoke events. So at the beginning of November uh we held our

[30:14] fourth clean air forum which is a conference that we host providing the

[30:17] opportunity for information exchange and dialogue amongst air quality

[30:21] stakeholders. Uh we work with our partners in ways just like this

[30:24] providing air quality information to the public and interested organizations.

[30:28] Uh we're also alongside the uh wildfire guide to or so the guide to wildfire

[30:33] smoke uh launched our Aaware wildfire smoke and health workshop and the

[30:38] workshop was developed based off the content in a guide to uh help

[30:42] individuals and organizations better understand the connection between

[30:45] wildfire smoke and health. So at ACA we offer a full suite of air

[30:51] quality services designed to support industry, government and community

[30:54] partners across our operations uh including assessment and public

[30:58] engagement. And these cost recovery services are available at competitive

[31:02] prices for both members and non-members. Uh we offer air quality operations and

[31:06] monitoring service services. We're able to design, deploy and maintain air

[31:10] monitoring systems for air quality measurement along with meteorological

[31:14] monitoring and data transmission solutions. Our data team can provide air

[31:18] quality assessment and modeling providing expert guidance and defensible

[31:22] sources. Sorry, dispensable signs for permitting, planning and emergency

[31:25] response. Uh and our communications and engagement team can help make air

[31:29] quality understandable, actionable, and meaningful to your stakeholders from

[31:33] outdoor event planning to public education and internal training. Uh we

[31:36] try to help bridge the gap between technical air data and real real world

[31:40] decisions. Uh on the screen you'll see a photo of one of our AQHI cloud lights

[31:44] which is a tool we use to share uh information on air quality in public

[31:48] settings. The city of Bulmont has been a member of

[31:52] ACA since 2021 and we absolutely appreciate your continued support. Our

[31:57] municipal members are valued partners and participate as ACA members

[32:01] voluntarily. Uh by working closely with communities, ACA can play an integral

[32:05] role in addressing local air quality concerns. As an ACA member, the city of

[32:09] Bmont has access to support for effective public engagement on air

[32:14] quality and odor concerns and membership also provides a cost-effective way to

[32:18] meet environmental responsibilities. The city is also access is also has access

[32:23] rather to our data portal and local air quality monitoring data uh which can

[32:27] support informed evidence-based decision-m

[32:30] uh being part of AC ensures consistent regionwide messaging about air quality

[32:34] so residents receive the same information across neighboring

[32:36] communities through ACA Bulmont can collaborate with neighboring

[32:40] municipalities and other stakeholders on shared air quality issues and maintain

[32:44] strong connections with regulatory and legislative bodies. Uh other municipal

[32:48] members include city of Edmonton, Sturgeon County, Leuk, Spruce Grove,

[32:51] Camros, St. Albert, Westwalk County, Strath Kone County, and the town of

[32:55] Devon. Right now, Bulmont has one purple air

[32:59] micro sensor located on city hall operated by ACA. And on our live air

[33:03] data map, you can see the AQHI plus or AQHI equivalent cover reported for this

[33:07] micro sensor calculated using climate particulate matter only. Uh,

[33:11] Environments and Climate Change Canada does uh report the an AQI for the

[33:16] community in the weather app website. Uh, but it reports actually the city of

[33:19] Edmonson AQHI. So, uh, more accurate data is available on our website for uh,

[33:24] residents of the communities in Bulmont. The closest AQI station would be Lendum

[33:29] or uh, Sherwood Park. Um, and there's an aerrow qual.

[33:36] This is a quick summary of the micro sensor data for the city hall site since

[33:40] 2025. Uh it is a daily or 24-hour average of fine particulate matter or

[33:45] PM2.5 which is the the the very fine dust especially you'll find in uh

[33:50] wildfire smoke. And we can see some peaks in June and September that

[33:53] correlate with wildfire smoke in the region.

[33:57] And that's it. I just wanted to take today's today as an opportunity to uh

[34:02] reintroduce ACA to council and mayor and uh fence any questions and and hopefully

[34:08] just establish a a dialogue and relationship going forward.

[34:12] » Perfect. Uh thank you Colton. Appreciate that presentation. I will open up the

[34:16] floor to council members if they have any questions. I see uh councelor Van

[34:20] Newkerk. I'll pass the floor to you. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, you mentioned the

[34:24] Alberta Quality Health Index a lot in that presentation. Um, can you just

[34:29] definitively speak to how the data from Bulmont feeds into the rating uh that is

[34:36] put out there cuz a lot of sports fields, sports teams, you know, every

[34:40] that's I think that's still the go-to, is it Nathan? Even for soccer like the

[34:43] AQHI, um, how does that how does that integrate in?

[34:49] » Yes, thank you for the question. Um, the mayor to councelor, please. The um,

[34:55] AQI number that Bowmont has access to is of course generated by continuous

[34:59] monitoring stations located within city of Edmonton boundaries. Uh, so it

[35:04] frankly is an imperfect uh, system right now where the AQHI number is not

[35:08] generated from data directly connected within or collected within the community

[35:12] of the city of Bmont. And that's that's why we have the purple air micro sensor

[35:15] on city hall. Um the issue that we run into is the cost to a place a station uh

[35:22] continuous monitoring station within a geography but also the availability

[35:26] availability of land space to put that station on um can be really challenging

[35:32] to make that happen. And so the the micro sensors allow us to kind of fill

[35:36] those gaps in monitoring and provide local data to local communities. Um, but

[35:41] you're correct. The AQHI uh that the city of Bmont is receiving uh is not

[35:47] calculated using any continuous monitoring data for the actual city

[35:51] itself. It's the neighboring region. Thank you. And uh you touched on my

[35:56] second question. How much like in there the Edmonton Lendum station is there and

[36:00] it's got a mural on it and it's got a razor wire fence around it to keep

[36:04] everybody out which I'm sure you need. Um what is that worth? uh forget the

[36:09] land to install it, but what does it cost and who pays for it when another

[36:12] one of them comes online? >> Certainly. Um the station itself ranges

[36:18] in cost frankly depending on the sensors inside, but typically is going to be

[36:21] somewhere between say $350,000 to $500,000 uh just for the station and the

[36:26] equipment. Uh and that's not counting the monthly calibrations and the

[36:30] technician labor uh needed on a yearly basis to support set station. Um every

[36:35] station is slightly unique in terms of how it comes online and how it ends up

[36:39] being deployed. Uh in some cases their operating contracts uh based on

[36:44] regulatory requirements for example with an industry member that may uh need a

[36:48] continuous monitoring station next to their operating site uh in which case

[36:52] the that member will pay the bulk of the cost for that type of station. In other

[36:57] cases, there are gap communities where the government of Alberta has mandated

[37:01] placement of a station in which case I'll be funded through grants and other

[37:04] times um just through the natural evolution of private companies perhaps

[37:09] abandoning uh stations that they once used uh we were able to come in and take

[37:14] those over and uh rehabilitate them and and make them into fully operational

[37:18] stations once again and maybe find better placement for them.

[37:22] » Thank you.

[37:26] Thank you, counselor. Um, that being said, I do not see any other counselors

[37:30] with questions. So, again, I thank you for your presentation.

[37:34] » Thank you very much.

[37:42] » Uh, continuing on with our agenda here, we do have three other presentations.

[37:46] However, a member of council has requested a quick recess. Uh if there's

[37:50] no objection, I would uh like to put forward uh the proposal for a recess for

[37:55] 5 minutes. Uh return here at 6:40.

[38:41] online.

[38:53] » All right, it is uh 6:41. Uh we are finished our recess here. Returning back

[38:57] to our presentations, next item the on the agenda is 6.2 which is off-site levy

[39:03] program. Um I believe Miss Raymond and team will present.

[39:12] » Perfect.

[39:23] Oh, it's hiding on my screen. Just one sec here.

[39:30] Seven. Press it right there. Seven.

[39:36] » There we go. >> Perfect. Uh, thank you. Uh, good

[39:40] evening, chair and members of committee. I'm Trevor Monica, manager of long range

[39:44] engineering. Uh the purpose of the report tonight is to provide committee

[39:47] with an overview of the city's new off-site levy program guide which

[39:52] administration has prepared to support consistent implementation of the

[39:55] off-site levy bylaw 1086-25. The requested committee action from

[40:01] tonight is a recommendation to council that the existing council policy C2

[40:05] off-site levy policy be repealed and with that recommendation intended to be

[40:09] considered at the upcoming September 8th, 2026 council meeting.

[40:15] Council adopted the current off-site levy bylaw in August of 2025.

[40:19] That bylaw established the city's updated off-site levy framework,

[40:24] including infrastructure categories, projects, calculation methodologies,

[40:28] benefit allocations, levy rates, and annual reporting.

[40:32] At the time the bylaw was adopted, administration advised that additional

[40:36] implementation and guidance was still being developed and that the existing

[40:40] council policy C2 would remain in effect in the interim. Administration has now

[40:44] completed that implementation work through the new external facing off-site

[40:48] levy program guide included as attachment one in the report.

[40:53] This report is intended to close that loop on the implementation of the

[40:56] updated OSL program for the bylaw adopted in 2025.

[41:01] Uh, the program guide helps developers, applicants, and administration

[41:05] understand in greater detail how the city's off-site levy bylaw is applied

[41:10] and administered. It explains what an off-site levy is, when it applies, how

[41:15] it is assessed and collected, and how frontending, credits, securities,

[41:19] grants, and repayments are administered. The guide is clear in that it must be

[41:23] read together with the off-site levy bylaw, and that if there's any

[41:26] inconsistencies, the city's off-site levy bylaw and the MGA prevail.

[41:31] An important point to note is the guide does not replace the bylaw, amend it in

[41:35] any way, or create new levy obligations. It supports the implementation of the

[41:39] already approved bylaw.

[41:44] The existing off-site levy uh council policy C2 was approved back in 2014 when

[41:50] Bulmont was operating under the previous offsite levy framework. Policy C2

[41:55] established administrative processes for levy assessment and collection

[41:59] deferrals, front-ending, offsets, reimbursement, annual reporting. The

[42:02] city now has its updated uh bylaw supported framework through 1086-25

[42:08] and the program guide is now uh written specifically to support implementation

[42:12] of the new framework.

[42:15] As I noted, the program guide is not intended to be the policy authority for

[42:18] the OSL program. Rather, it's an administrative implementation document.

[42:23] It explains how again how admin will apply the bylaw on day-to-day

[42:27] subdivision development permit development agreement

[42:31] uh and the repayment processes. Council's role remains intact through

[42:36] the bylaw, annual reporting, annual budgeting and capital planning approval

[42:40] and any future bylaw amendments. The guide reinforces council role by noting

[42:45] that certain offset levy projects, including those that require city

[42:49] funding, debt financing, or inclusion in the capital line and annual budget, must

[42:53] first be approved by council before any approval is granted to execute these

[42:57] projects. Maintaining policy C2 in parallel with

[43:01] the new program guide would create some overlap and potential confusion about

[43:04] which document would guide implementation.

[43:07] Repealing policy C2 reduces the risk of duplicate or outdated administrative

[43:11] direction.

[43:15] Uh, as mentioned, the program guide does not establish new levy rates and does

[43:18] not amend the methodology that was approved through the offsite levy bylaw.

[43:22] The levy rates themselves are are still governed through schedule B of the

[43:26] bylaw. And the broader levy framework continues to be governed through the

[43:30] bylaw and the uh background report.

[43:36] Uh just on the transparency and engagement piece, the updated offset

[43:39] levy program was developed through substantial engagement uh with the

[43:43] development community uh throughout the course of that project including uh six

[43:47] engagement sessions and the program guide is building on that work by

[43:51] translating the the OSL framework into a clearer guide for applicants and

[43:55] developers. This guide has been distributed to the development committee

[43:58] and been made available on Bulmont's website for reference.

[44:04] Again, administration is recommending that the committee of the whole

[44:07] recommend to council that council policy C2 offsite levy policy be repealed and

[44:12] the program guide will then be kept up to date as future amendments to offsite

[44:16] levy bylaw are approved. Uh thank you for your time and with that

[44:20] I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Perfect. Uh thank you uh Mr. Manika for

[44:26] that presentation. Councelor Van Newkerk go ahead. Yeah,

[44:32] just a question on where you actually left off there around the uh

[44:36] recommendations. Is there any reason that we can't or

[44:40] shouldn't call a special council meeting to get it done before September?

[44:46] » Uh thank you for that question through to councelor Vanukk. Um there's there's

[44:52] no reason the the like I mentioned the uh the program guide is now published

[44:57] available to the community. It's in place and in effect. So um the policy

[45:02] can be repealed at uh at any time. >> Okay. Maybe just looking for further

[45:07] comment from Ledge um around the timing of this. Um, and what I'm left wondering

[45:14] is what projects are being contemplated between now and September that might,

[45:24] I don't know, benefit Bulmont from being from this policy being repealed and, you

[45:30] know, this process being gone through. Is that clear or not clear?

[45:37] between now and September, what could happen in Bulmont for projects that that

[45:41] would be under the old levy system that aren't captured under the new levy

[45:46] system. Is that a thing? Just help me understand that,

[45:51] » Miss Winter. I >> thank you. Through the deputy mayor to

[45:54] councelor Vanukkirk, [laughter] I couldn't speak to any of those projects.

[45:57] And with the policy not being repealed until September, I wouldn't be able to

[46:02] speak with what that that would look like. I'd have to refer to planning and

[46:07] development on that. >> Okay. Is planning and development

[46:09] prepared to comment on that?

[46:17] » Policy. >> Yeah. Yes. Uh thank you for that. I I

[46:23] don't believe there are any projects that are currently occurring that would

[46:25] be impacted by this. um any projects that are happening right now would still

[46:32] fall under the all sale levy bylaw as it currently exists which is the guiding

[46:36] document or bylaw in this case. So um there's no concerns from that regard.

[46:42] » Okay. I still have concerns but I'm hearing no concerns from aden. So yeah

[46:46] thank you. >> Thank you counselor. Uh that being Oh,

[46:52] uh Mayor Vanderquac, >> just

[46:57] » it's coming. >> Just to follow up with that. So,

[47:01] uh the question is whether or not there's

[47:05] any benefit to this passing sooner rather than later.

[47:14] And if this is just this is to implement the actual policy change, right, or the

[47:19] bylaw change, right? the terms of the off-site levies.

[47:25] » So, thank you for the question uh through the mayor or through to the

[47:28] mayor Vanderquac. U the the current so the current bylaw is not being amended

[47:32] through the the program guide. Um the guide is just a clarification on on

[47:36] administrative procedures and the policy um is largely the same in that uh

[47:44] respect. Um but it it has a few inconsistencies with the the new bylaw.

[47:49] So the the recommendation to repeal that is to eliminate that the confusion

[47:54] between uh the the 2014 policy and the 2025 bylaw. Uh the program guide takes

[48:00] that place but outside of a council policy

[48:04] » and so there's been uh sufficient time communicated to those who would be

[48:10] affected by this to know that there is changes happening.

[48:15] Yes, there's that's correct and there there is largely no change that like

[48:19] materially is is occurring. Um the the current bylaw as adopted in 2025 is the

[48:25] governing bylaw. Um so any inconsistency would be referred back to that bylaw. So

[48:31] in effect there is no change. >> Okay. So there's no detriment to wait

[48:35] until September is what you're saying. >> Correct.

[48:37] » Okay. Thank you. >> And I guess I I'll just repeat that. I I

[48:41] think my understanding of it obviously bylaw is in effect that takes precedence

[48:44] along with MGA. Um so this is more an administrative change than it is a

[48:50] change that'll take effect to anyone developing or making any changes in that

[48:54] sense. >> Yes, that is correct.

[48:56] » Perfect. Thank you. Uh quick question uh for administration or the clerk just uh

[49:01] am I required to put a motion forward to take this uh report as information or am

[49:05] I able to proceed to the next presentation?

[49:07] » We have a motion ready to go if you just give me a moment.

[49:09] » Perfect. Thank you.

[49:13] And councelor Penrod, are you speaking to the motion?

[49:16] » Uh, just a question on this. >> Okay, perfect. All right. Uh, go ahead.

[49:21] » Thank you. Uh, before I get to my question, I just want to note in the

[49:25] bylaw uh, as published, there is a small typo under the WAT-30

[49:32] project, the Watt 30 project. Um, it looks like it's just a simple error. the

[49:36] start year and end year look like they're reversed there, but since it's

[49:39] in the bylaw that should probably address that. Uh, and I think because

[49:43] it's just um kind of a correction of a typo, it wouldn't require a a motion or

[49:51] a resolution or anything like that, but just wanted to raise that. um in the

[49:56] background report from urban systems page 56 through 152 of the package

[50:05] tonight. Um they talk about the modeling >> [snorts]

[50:09] » uh for how the osite levy rates were calculated and they specifically

[50:14] reference um some of the density targets uh for administration. If in future

[50:19] statutory plans, Bowman embraces lower density targets, what's the likelihood

[50:24] our off-site levy rates would need to be adjusted downward

[50:29] as a result.

[50:34] Uh through to councelor Penrod. Thank you for that question. Um it is

[50:38] difficult to to speak to exactly what would happen to

[50:43] the levy rates if uh the density targets were adjusted. Um likely though um you

[50:50] would find through the modeling is that because land consumption would increase

[50:55] uh corresponding to a reduced density target um

[51:00] there there would be a change to levy rates. Uh it again I would it would

[51:05] depend on all other factors staying exactly the same which they would not um

[51:10] in any sort of future scenario. Um, so beyond that, it's hard to speak to

[51:16] whether they would go up or down.

[51:20] » Okay. And I think that's all that I had on this item. Thank you, chair.

[51:26] » Thank you, councelor. Uh, is there a member of council willing

[51:31] to put forward this motion?

[51:35] » Thank you, chair. I'll make the mo Thank you, chair.

[51:39] I'll make the motion that committee of the whole recommend to council to be

[51:42] considered at the September 8th, 2026 council meeting that the coun that

[51:46] council policy C2 offsite levy policy be repealed.

[51:52] » Thank you. UN counselors if we could put our votes forward

[52:01] and that carries unanimously at 6 to0.

[52:09] Perfect. Uh next uh matter of Perfect. Uh next uh matter of business uh is uh

[52:16] presentation on facility rental policy. Uh correct me if I'm wrong here. My

[52:22] apologies. Mr. Pival and Mr. Sudter, I believe, are presenting.

[52:28] » Yeah, I will be. It's personal. Close. You got it. Yeah. My apologies.

[52:32] » Good enough. Yeah.

[52:40] » Yeah. Good evening, chair, committee members. Paul Scooter, director of

[52:43] community services. Administration is here this evening with committee to have

[52:47] a conversation on a draft facility rental policy. And this was something

[52:51] administration committed to council to bring back this year. Uh basically

[52:56] stemming from a couple more than a couple inquiries on some uh decisions

[52:59] made on some rentals in the past. So with that, I'm going to turn over for

[53:03] presentation to Sean Persal, the manager of rec facilities. Uh facility rentals

[53:08] falls within his portfolio. So I'll turn over to Sean. Thank you.

[53:12] » Thank you and good evening everyone. As Paul mentioned, my name is Sean Persal.

[53:16] I'm the manager of recreation facilities. I'd like to thank the

[53:19] committee for allowing me the opportunity to present a proposed

[53:23] facility rental policy for the city of Bumont.

[53:28] We'll start this evening off just by discussing some background of how we got

[53:31] here. We'll show a regional scan we completed and looking at what other

[53:35] municipalities are doing for rental policies,

[53:38] some rationale around why we believe this policy is needed, and finally we

[53:42] will address next steps beyond this meeting.

[53:47] So back in January 2026, in response to both community and administrative needs,

[53:52] administration began looking into establishing parameters and principles

[53:56] that would govern how we rent our spaces to the public. While many of our areas

[54:01] have operational procedures for how they rent space, these procedures do not have

[54:06] any strategic alignment with guiding principles from either a city directive

[54:10] or a city policy. Our goals in this proposed policy

[54:14] include consistency in how the city rents its spaces, alignment of all

[54:19] procedures with the set of guiding principles, and direction in how the

[54:22] city's bookable spaces are governed.

[54:27] So, a bit about why we feel we need this policy or believe we need this policy.

[54:31] The establishment of a facility rental policy would provide strategic direction

[54:35] in how we manage and govern the rentals of our spaces, support the development

[54:39] and review of all of our current procedures to ensure alignment with each

[54:43] other and those guiding principles, and ensure a fair and unbiased approach to

[54:48] the rental of bookable spaces across the city. Additionally, it would provide

[54:53] clarity and transparency in our decision-making processes for rentals,

[54:57] both approvals and denials, as well as acting as a risk mitigation tool as

[55:02] staff can refer back to the policy in the operational decisions that are made

[55:05] for rentals. In the absence of a policy,

[55:09] administration will continue to work on better overall alignment of the

[55:12] procedures we have in place, as well as continuing to work collaboratively

[55:16] between branches and departments in our decision-m around facility rentals.

[55:21] However, without that connection to a larger set of guiding principles, it may

[55:25] result in a more subjective approach and outcomes to how we close gaps and find

[55:30] alignments.

[55:33] So, part of the approach that was taken was to conduct a regional scan

[55:39] uh to see what other municipalities are doing or what they have in place to help

[55:43] guide facility rentals. As you can see, some of the communities on the slide in

[55:47] front of you have some form of guiding principles such as cost allocate or

[55:51] excuse me, allocation or cost recovery targets. However, many have no guiding

[55:56] principles that provide staff direction or support on operational procedure

[56:01] development and only two of the community's policy policies speak to any

[56:05] specific or unique subject matter. This policy being proposed would itself

[56:10] provide guiding principles for staff to use in their operational development and

[56:15] would reference applicable city policies and bylaws as well as provincial and

[56:18] federal legislation to support the types of rentals we allow in our facilities.

[56:26] So beyond this, if the committee recommends this proposed policy to

[56:29] council and council approves the policy, this will initiate work in bringing

[56:32] department stakeholders to the table to complete a full review of all existing

[56:36] procedures to ensure alignment with the policy, which we anticipate would begin

[56:40] in Q4 of 2026.

[56:45] Thank you for your time and we're happy to answer any questions the committee

[56:48] may have.

[56:52] » Perfect. Thank you for the presentation. Uh Councelor Penrod, you are up first.

[57:00] » Thank you, Chair. Appreciate you bringing this forward. I know uh we've

[57:04] had some conversation in the past year or so um just around that kind of

[57:09] scattershot approach on decisions and appreciate the effort here that's gone

[57:13] into creating a process that's a bit more robust and transparent for folks to

[57:17] know where they they stand in this regard.

[57:21] Um, I appreciated the I had some questions

[57:25] that were answered just by the the inclusion of the definition. So, I I

[57:30] just wanted to highlight that kind of continuous improvement element as we're

[57:34] developing these policies and and renewing them um into that kind of

[57:40] template for how Bulmont does all of this work. I think that's wellreceived

[57:45] and it it makes it easier to read these documents um for the public, too. So

[57:49] just wanted to highlight and give thanks for that. Uh questions in 3.2 under

[57:57] exclusions uh page 143 of the package

[58:04] excluded are any other groups activities or uses as deemed necessary to carry out

[58:09] the administrative duties of the city. That feels like a pretty broad exclusion

[58:14] point. I wonder if you could speak to the necessity to have it. So uh so

[58:19] broad. >> Sure. I'll get off I'll kick it off to

[58:22] the through the chair to councelor Penrod. Um that bullet is

[58:28] by its design intended to be somewhat overarching and subjective. um if the

[58:34] city or the CEO's office or council were to determine a certain activity to be of

[58:40] necessity to the city's operations that that could be excluded from the guiding

[58:47] principles within the policy. Um it's list it might be more applicable to

[58:52] emergency management use, but if the city had to activate a facility for an

[58:57] emergency evacuation center on a whim, that might be something that could fit

[59:01] into that bullet. Um but again it was sort of by design to allow that

[59:05] flexibility for the city manager or council to make those types of decisions

[59:10] if if they deem necessary. >> Yeah, I appreciate it. So the way it

[59:14] comes through is it's actually an exclusion that um helps the city slot in

[59:20] things that are in the city's best interest. It's not an exclusion that

[59:23] would be used against the group that's trying to secure space from the broader

[59:27] community. >> That's correct. Yeah.

[59:28] » Thank you. Uh and item 5.4 four under rental refusal.

[59:34] Uh it says administration may deny a request and it goes on um but it lists

[59:41] uh for grounds for potentially denying a request. Uh I activities that are

[59:48] prohibited under provincial or federal legislation. Uh, I wonder if if May is

[59:54] the right word there, if it's strong enough, would we would we as council

[59:58] want administration to grant or a request that's prohibited under

[1:00:01] provincial legislation? Um, I just wondered if stronger language might be

[1:00:06] used there. That would be my feedback. >> Okay. Appreciate that. Yeah,

[1:00:13] » perfect. Thank you, uh, Mayor Vanderquac.

[1:00:18] » Uh, thank you, Chair. All right. So, I have a few things. First of all, I think

[1:00:22] the policy is very concise what you've written here. Principalbased

[1:00:27] deliberately avoids uh listing controversial groups

[1:00:32] or viewpoints. But there are some things that I do have some questions about that

[1:00:36] I think uh from a governance perspective. And one of them is that

[1:00:43] there seems to be some broad allowance for subjectivity and

[1:00:49] discretion. Uh for example, in the word public interest, you know, the phrase

[1:00:55] that is in the statement says rentals must be fair, equitable, and safe, which

[1:01:00] is great. Then it adds in the public interest. And this kind of dubtales into

[1:01:04] my second point, but uh who who defines what public interest is? You know, um

[1:01:10] I'm wondering if there's something else we could use here that could be a little

[1:01:14] bit more objective because public interest means different things to

[1:01:18] different people. Um so can administration explain that to

[1:01:25] someone? Can that be objectively measured so that

[1:01:29] different staff members for example who are making that decision consistently

[1:01:33] reach the same decision? That's kind of where it comes down to a little bit more

[1:01:38] of a problem. And the other one is it goes into the

[1:01:42] second was um it contravenes the principles of this policy referring to

[1:01:47] same one councelor Penrod was talking about there whereas

[1:01:52] this being part of that principle of the policy uh whether it's within the public

[1:01:56] interest then it becomes a problematic becomes now like a circular test. So

[1:02:02] those things really jumped out at me there as far as there's a lot of

[1:02:06] discretion in that and I think we need to have a little bit more less sorry

[1:02:11] more less discretion and things that are a little bit more objectively defined so

[1:02:16] that anybody who's in that position can make the same decision and it's going to

[1:02:22] be consistent. So those are a few and I'll come back

[1:02:26] around when I have more time.

[1:02:32] Perfect. Thank you. Any response from administration or just noted? Okay. Um

[1:02:38] so through the chair to Mayor Vanderquac. Um appreciate the comments.

[1:02:42] Um certainly something that can be taken into consideration for frontline staff

[1:02:47] that take the rental requests that review them that contact the prospective

[1:02:52] renters. The idea is that the it would be an application of the

[1:02:58] guiding principles of this policy that would be used to measure whether to

[1:03:03] approve or deny a rental which would include

[1:03:07] all listed and applicable city policies, bylaws, federal and provincial

[1:03:12] legislation. So to circle back to the potential subjectivity around public

[1:03:17] interest, um I can appreciate that comment given the fact that frontline

[1:03:21] staff would should this policy be approved and operational documents were

[1:03:26] to be reviewed and created etc. It would be a pretty specific list of questions

[1:03:31] that staff would likely get um that would be applicable only to those

[1:03:36] guiding principles and the um relevant uh documents that I listed before. So it

[1:03:41] uh something to take back for for us is to potentially consider changing the

[1:03:47] word public interest and having it be more defined as the public interest is

[1:03:52] that we are ensuring that we are only using this policy and applicable

[1:03:56] legislation and other bylaws to approve or deny a rental request. That action

[1:04:01] itself would be in the best public interest.

[1:04:07] » Thank you for the response. Councelor Vanukkirk.

[1:04:13] » Yeah, thank you to Mayor for raising that cuz one of the questions I brought

[1:04:16] forward tonight to ask was does this policy lend itself to different staff

[1:04:21] members all coming to the same decision using the policy. So I think that's been

[1:04:26] covered now. Um I wanted to focus on 5.4 a second if you wouldn't mind scrolling

[1:04:32] to that. Um I'm going to propose adding a bullet

[1:04:38] point. Um, now one of the criteria that I wondered about is

[1:04:44] a review of previous rental stewardship to an applicant or an applicant group.

[1:04:51] As in last time, what happened? You know, last time your group or you rented

[1:04:58] bylaw came three times, we had to call the cops and there was all this stuff,

[1:05:01] right? Um I don't know that there it I'm confident there would be some you know

[1:05:08] knowledge of that within administration but documented relative to that group's

[1:05:12] rental of the facility. I don't know how that would work internally. So, one of

[1:05:16] the things I contemplated was adding a bullet point that would say something

[1:05:20] like um so it says administration may deny a

[1:05:25] request if administration determines that the intended rental use um

[1:05:30] documented prior [clears throat] non-compliance with rental terms or city

[1:05:34] policies as in property damage non-payline non-payment bylaw

[1:05:40] contraventions you know within the last 24 months like within some kind of

[1:05:44] period. So just trying to [snorts] add the contemplation of what happened last

[1:05:50] time you rented our facility. Does that sound reasonable?

[1:05:56] It does. Yeah. So through the chair, councelor venue Kirk, I would

[1:06:02] I would maybe recommend to your recommendation that this type of

[1:06:08] to to use your term non-compliance in previous rentals might find itself maybe

[1:06:14] better served in the operational processes that administration takes. So

[1:06:18] rather than council um identifying specifically

[1:06:24] um anecdotal examples of non-compliance in

[1:06:28] rentals that occur in our facilities that we instead look at ensuring that

[1:06:33] the way that we operate the administration of rentals includes

[1:06:39] um some penalty or some kind of acknowledgement

[1:06:44] that uh we may look at previous rentals as far as whether to deny them or not

[1:06:50] based on previous experiences. And I I I suppose to be to be blunt, there's a

[1:06:55] number of different reasons why a group may be denied rental opportunities,

[1:07:01] including things like previous damage to the facility or otherwise. So, I'm

[1:07:07] I I may have to defer over to Paul, but I would say my my initial response is

[1:07:12] it's it's the right idea. I just wonder if it may better fit into the the way we

[1:07:18] operationalize the policy as opposed to the policy itself, if that makes sense.

[1:07:22] » Yeah, I think my overall goal would be um in the process of reviewing a policy

[1:07:27] or going to rent a facility that it be clear to the user group that that

[1:07:32] consideration would pop up somewhere. That that that's my goal. Right.

[1:07:36] » Right. Yeah. Understood. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.

[1:07:41] Thank you, councelor. Uh, councelor Cole Smith.

[1:07:45] » Thank you. Um, yeah, I had similar concerns just about the um

[1:07:50] [clears throat] consistency of the application given the broad authority to

[1:07:54] determine appropriate use. So, some of the things discussed already to to

[1:07:58] tighten that up. Um, the other one was I think it was 5.3.

[1:08:04] Um the city may request risk mitigation measure me measures to be instituted by

[1:08:09] the user. Um I'm wondering if we could include something where um that those

[1:08:16] risk mitigation requirements be based on like a documented objective for evidence

[1:08:21] um base policy and maybe like a checklist of of things that were

[1:08:25] validated or evaluated.

[1:08:33] And if at all possible, I know it's that tall ask some definitions around like

[1:08:37] the safety risk, operational risk, and community risk.

[1:08:44] So through the chair to council colemith. Um so the intention behind uh

[1:08:49] behind this particular section is to provide

[1:08:55] prospective rental users with an understanding that if we believe that

[1:08:59] based on the unique nature of their rental request, there may be additional

[1:09:04] measures that CIC has to take to ensure that we can make their rental safe for

[1:09:08] themselves, other public in the facility and staff. Um that that cost may fall

[1:09:13] onto them. Um, certainly to take away a definition around safety, I would

[1:09:20] caution that because there are, especially at the community center,

[1:09:24] there are so many different types of unique rentals that come through here,

[1:09:28] it would be fairly daunting to include that level of specificity. However, um

[1:09:35] in to borrow a phrase to tighten up that definition of safety just to give a even

[1:09:40] a higher statement to say safety is what you know we determine based on the

[1:09:45] unique nature of the rental requests that we receive. There may be dot dot

[1:09:49] dot. So certainly that that that is one thing that I think we could probably

[1:09:53] look to do in in the definition section. >> Thank you.

[1:10:00] » Thank you. the councelor uh councelor Penrod go ahead.

[1:10:05] » Thank you chair. Um so just kind of continuing the the thread of

[1:10:11] uh possible additions rather than go

[1:10:16] forward with that. I just want to ask kind of following your response to some

[1:10:19] of the other questions. How how will this policy help um you to do the work

[1:10:27] to operationalize how you think about how an individual rental proposed rental

[1:10:32] group impacts the use of other user groups that are also in the building?

[1:10:38] Most of these buildings are multiuse, right? Um

[1:10:43] do you want to speak to that? Is that something that belongs more in the

[1:10:46] policy, more in the operational guide?

[1:10:51] through the chair to councelor Penrod. I would my initial response to that would

[1:10:56] be it it is more it likely fits better into the operationalization of the

[1:11:00] policy. So if for example um we would be able from this policy and

[1:11:08] the associated documents that I've referred to a few times um already we

[1:11:13] would be able to better equip our staff to understand where to place certain

[1:11:19] requests that come in. So a cultural event that wants to take place at the

[1:11:25] rec center but they are expecting 300 people. Well we know they can't go

[1:11:29] there. So, we would be able to fit them into a very specific space at a

[1:11:32] different facility. Um, in terms of groups that may conflict with one

[1:11:37] another within the same structure, um, I would see that as something that would

[1:11:43] be a part of a review of when staff take requests. They currently they already

[1:11:50] look at what else is occurring in the building and it's unlikely to to change

[1:11:55] through a review provided this policy were to be approved by council. Um but I

[1:12:00] would see that falling actually under the 5.3 bullet for safety is that would

[1:12:03] be a part of what our staff would do to determine the safety of the rental for

[1:12:08] the sake of the renters, the staff and other individuals that are in the

[1:12:12] facility. If that answers your question. >> Yeah, I think so. And just to follow on

[1:12:16] in that conversation, I guess part of how I interpret some of the questions

[1:12:20] that are coming your way is I think um we want the policy to do the policy

[1:12:26] things and the administrative operational guides to do what they do.

[1:12:30] The tension in the community though, the reason that we're here is because we've

[1:12:34] had some rental groups kind of question on what basis have we been denied or

[1:12:41] given certain um qualifications to follow or whatever. And so I just wonder

[1:12:47] how transparent those operational guides are

[1:12:53] to potential renters and are we doing you any favors by having them kind of on

[1:12:58] the administrative side of things? Would there be benefit in having some of that

[1:13:03] outlined in the policy so that as a person is preparing their uh documents

[1:13:09] to propose a rental, they're able to see the criteria that this is based on.

[1:13:15] Sure. Uh so through the chair to council penrod I would say I'll try to answer

[1:13:20] your second question first. I provided the policy is approved and we

[1:13:26] move forward with the full comprehensive review of our operational documentation

[1:13:29] and procedures.

[1:13:33] One consideration that we can take in during that review

[1:13:38] would be to include the policy in any rental request documentation that we put

[1:13:45] out. [sighs and gasps] So rather than having the operational documents

[1:13:49] referred to in the principal or or attached, we'd try to flip it and

[1:13:53] actually have the policy referenced in any rental applications that a

[1:13:56] prospective renter would fill out. and we can ensure to highlight that so it's

[1:14:01] not buried in some footnote or um secondary attachment and that way a

[1:14:06] person who is interested in renting a space in one of our facilities could be

[1:14:10] driven right to the policy to see exactly what the city is setting out as

[1:14:15] its guiding principles and its its sort of approval process in that regard. Um

[1:14:20] would you mind repeating your first question? I'm not sure if I remember it.

[1:14:22] » Sure. I guess what it comes back to is would it be helpful to have as part of

[1:14:26] the guiding principles just an acknowledgement that these are multi-use

[1:14:29] spaces and that part of the metric for deciding if your rental can go forward

[1:14:33] or not is who else is there and how compatible your uses are. I'm not sure

[1:14:39] what you call that exactly, but that's feedback I'm giving you today. Okay, I

[1:14:43] appreciate that and I think that's good feedback to take into consideration

[1:14:48] pro well actually quite frankly regardless of whether this policy is

[1:14:51] approved, it's still something we can take back and and put into

[1:14:54] consideration. Um, and remembering a piece of your first

[1:15:00] question from the first time you asked it, yes, you are doing us a favor. In my

[1:15:03] opinion, and I I suppose I'm speaking on behalf of the city in this this rule,

[1:15:07] this is something that is favorable to administration. And this is, you know,

[1:15:10] the the short answer is that's why why we did it, right? The long answer is um

[1:15:15] this provides so much less subjectivity around approvals and denials. The

[1:15:21] challenges that have been faced in the previous few years and in particular

[1:15:26] this year as well is that certain decisions were made using subjective

[1:15:32] approaches to approvals or denials. This provides us a risk mitigation tool in

[1:15:39] approaching the uh the the rationale behind whether we reject a a rental or

[1:15:44] we approve it. If in its current form, if we reject it, we base it on this is

[1:15:49] what we've been doing the last few years. Whereas now, if we were to have

[1:15:53] to reject a renter, it would be something we would lean back on in this

[1:15:57] policy as well as applicable documentation. And again, just to be

[1:16:01] very very blunt as well, our goal is to rent to as many people as possible and

[1:16:06] at all costs to have every space we have available to be rented to be rented. Um

[1:16:12] we're not looking to put a lot of boundaries or barriers or red tape in

[1:16:16] place for prospective renters. We just want to ensure that we have um

[1:16:20] applicable guiding principles that will protect the city, protect the staff,

[1:16:25] etc. Um, and again it's it's to try to drive in as many renters as possible.

[1:16:29] So,

[1:16:32] » thank you. I I just have a quick question. You had mentioned that we've

[1:16:35] experienced quite a few challenges. We being obviously uh the city. Um, are you

[1:16:40] able to speak to some of those challenges because obviously we're not

[1:16:43] privy to to necessarily some of the details. It doesn't need to be super

[1:16:47] specific, but just so we have a general understanding.

[1:16:52] » Sure. Uh so to through the chair to the chair um I would say to be a little bit

[1:16:57] high level and not to excuse myself completely but I've I've been in the

[1:17:02] role for 6 months. So, the what I've seen so far is that

[1:17:07] there are in some cases there are decisions made

[1:17:12] to say refuse a rental based on a similar rental that may have been

[1:17:16] refused 18 months ago, but we don't have maybe any documentation to support the

[1:17:23] rationale from 18 months ago. It's just someone remembered that 18 months ago we

[1:17:27] we refused a similar rental. >> [snorts]

[1:17:29] » Um we also uh have again challenges with you know people that may feel like a

[1:17:39] similar rental to the one that they were refused was allowed access and so that

[1:17:44] seems unfair and that very very well may be. Um, however, at this point, the way

[1:17:51] that we approach rentals is is a bit too administrative and without without

[1:17:57] guiding principles to really kind of help guide us to that end result of

[1:18:02] whether to approve or or deny rentals. So, if that answers your question,

[1:18:07] » perfect. Thank you. Uh, Mayor Vanderwack,

[1:18:11] » thank you. Just get my reset here.

[1:18:16] Uh, thank you so much. So I am going to just circle back around to

[1:18:21] the fact that the draft policy there seems to be a bit of a contradiction

[1:18:25] between the report and the draft policy. The draft policy never mentions

[1:18:29] petitions but the report spends considerable time discussing petitions

[1:18:34] and previous practices. So my question is are are you asking council to approve

[1:18:39] a policy that removes petition restriction or is administration

[1:18:44] intending to continue that practice through this operating procedures?

[1:18:48] » So through the chair to Mayor Vanderquac. So petitions are listed in

[1:18:53] the report as an example of kind of what brought us here today. It wasn't to

[1:18:57] explicitly um request support to reject or deny

[1:19:03] petitions. The policy doesn't list any specific subject matter because well,

[1:19:08] frankly, the policy might be 150 pages long if we listed every single potential

[1:19:12] subject matter in a rental that was being requested. Um, we are not asking

[1:19:17] for council specifically to allow or to deny petitions. If a person

[1:19:22] hypothetically wanted to book a space in a facility to run a petition, provided

[1:19:27] they meet all the guiding principle checkboxes in the policy as well as

[1:19:31] applicable other city policies, bylaws, and federal provincial legislation,

[1:19:35] they're in. [clears throat] As far as we're concerned, that would be fine with

[1:19:37] us. Um, if that answers your question about that.

[1:19:41] » Yeah, it does. So, I would want to know what those other regulations are that

[1:19:44] might restrict them because my concern is, sorry, I got to get my timer going

[1:19:48] here. My concern is this whole thing of fairness. How is fairness measured? And

[1:19:52] I actually like some of the descriptions that are in the jurisdictional scan that

[1:19:56] you provided. Bruce Grove and Edmonton for example had a really good

[1:20:00] description which I think personally that it would be really great for our

[1:20:04] princ our policy to have as a principal and specifically

[1:20:08] supports democratic values freedom of choice fair treatment and I don't

[1:20:12] believe you know as a municipality that we can uh dictate the content of which

[1:20:19] someone is putting on an event as long as it doesn't violate certain things you

[1:20:25] know but at the same time. Uh if we could have it more conduct related

[1:20:31] in terms of they are abiding, they're peaceful, they're safe, all those

[1:20:35] things, then I think that would create a more fair and equitable

[1:20:41] because it comes down to why was one denied and why was one allowed. If it

[1:20:46] was cont conductbased as opposed to contentbased

[1:20:50] that to me would be more along the lines of pro promoting free and open access

[1:20:55] and process. So maybe you can speak to that.

[1:21:00] » Yeah. Through the chair to Mayor Vanderquac. Um,

[1:21:06] there is nothing within this policy that would dictate to staff building

[1:21:12] operational documents to scrutinize any of the subject matter that a renter is

[1:21:17] bringing forward with the exception of any operational

[1:21:23] processes that we bring in to ensure that they're not violating another city

[1:21:28] policy, bylaw, federal, provincial legislation. So

[1:21:33] I can't speak to the specific nature of a rental request until we receive it.

[1:21:38] That that is just the honest answer. So if someone were to want to carry out a

[1:21:42] rental and again they met the guiding principles as they're written in the

[1:21:46] policy, they don't violate any bylaw or policy already in place and they don't

[1:21:52] violate on paper at least through the request any provincial or federal

[1:21:55] legislation. As I mentioned before, we would approve their rental. So, the goal

[1:22:00] of this is by no means to have staff get into the business of scrutinizing the

[1:22:05] subject matter. It would simply be, do they violate any of these documents? Yes

[1:22:10] or no. If it's a no, then we carry forward with the request 100%. Um,

[1:22:14] [snorts] we would, and again, I don't want to put

[1:22:18] the cart before the horse because we haven't operationalized this, but we

[1:22:20] would always, in my experience, we we would build in safeguards to ensure

[1:22:24] there's an escalation process at any time that a staff member who's taking a

[1:22:28] request may have questions or may not be certain. And it's possible that when we

[1:22:33] get to the opera operationalization of this policy and its principles, etc.,

[1:22:37] that there may be opportunity for us to review denials before the denial is sent

[1:22:42] back to the renter. uh the prospective renter, excuse me. So again, I guess to

[1:22:47] summarize that, it would be we're we're simply looking to see if they violate

[1:22:52] one of the principles or any of the applicable documents within the policy.

[1:22:56] That's it. >> Uh thank you for that. So I would I

[1:23:01] would like to propose that we have something in there like a principle like

[1:23:04] as is in Spruce Grove or Edmonton where the city recognizes the public

[1:23:08] facilities are uh exist to serve a diverse

[1:23:12] community with different beliefs, values, viewpoints and that rental

[1:23:16] decisions can be administered in a lawful viewpoint neutral politically

[1:23:22] neutral manner and shall not be based on agreement or disagreement with ideas,

[1:23:25] opinions or beliefs of a user. That's by recommendation.

[1:23:31] » Appreciate that. And I see no reason why we can't include something like that.

[1:23:34] For sure. >> Thank you.

[1:23:36] » Perfect. Thank you. Uh looks like we have one last request here. Councelor

[1:23:40] Van Newer, go ahead. >> Yeah, thanks. I thought I was done, but

[1:23:44] then uh Mayor brought something up that made me think about

[1:23:49] uh rentals underway. So the questions I asked to begin with is um like

[1:23:56] looking for criteria to potentially refuse a rental upfront, right? With the

[1:24:00] suggestion I made at a policy level, how can we in this policy also address the

[1:24:08] fact that conditions can change after a rental has begun? As in you rent to do a

[1:24:15] thing, everybody shows up to do that thing. It's way more people than you

[1:24:20] expected. It's disrupting active users. It's disrupting the community. It's

[1:24:24] disrupting everyone around. Does the city have how can this policy

[1:24:30] protect the users around that facility? Uh, you know, is do we need to put a

[1:24:35] statement in here? We can cancel a rental at any time. Like operationally,

[1:24:38] I know you're going to have that, but does this policy need to have that as

[1:24:41] well? So through the chair to councelor

[1:24:44] vanukkirk I would say to address the examples that you brought forward I

[1:24:52] would refer back to the 5.3 section around safety of the rental that would

[1:24:57] be applicable on a preventative measure and it would also be something to be

[1:25:02] incorporated into the oper operationalization of the the rental

[1:25:06] itself. So, for example, in the current form, we have staff that work at the

[1:25:11] facilities that monitor the rentals. And in doing so, if staff believe or feel as

[1:25:20] though a rental has, I'll just say, gotten out of hand, for a lack of a

[1:25:24] better term, there are processes in place right now that staff take to to

[1:25:29] address that. Whether it's calling um our CMP, whether it's contacting the

[1:25:34] supervisor, whatever the case may be. Um, so I would say that this policy and

[1:25:40] specifically the guiding principle around safety would help

[1:25:44] I'll say beef up the operationalization of how staff can address rentals that

[1:25:49] have already started as opposed to it just being before they start. If that

[1:25:53] makes sense. >> Makes sense for sure. It's just it's

[1:25:56] easier to add this language now than when something's in once than then than

[1:26:00] when something or someone is in front of us. and fire code definitely is, you

[1:26:04] know, the safety piece that governs the people inside the building. But I'm

[1:26:07] thinking more about who shows up outside, how many vehicles, huge lineups

[1:26:10] of people, and we've seen a lot of examples in that lately. And I don't

[1:26:13] know when it'll pop up next, but it will. And at some point, we're going to

[1:26:17] be dealing with that. And then it'll be disrupting members of the community, you

[1:26:21] know, other facility users as you've said before, right? So anyways, if

[1:26:25] there's an opportunity to at a policy level um strengthen anything, you know,

[1:26:31] I think you should take that opportunity. So thank you. Thank you.

[1:26:38] » Thank you for that, counselor. Uh I echo my uh fellow counselor's comments there,

[1:26:42] especially on uh things such as uh previous behavior and and some of the

[1:26:47] things that we've seen as councelor Van Newkerk had mentioned uh too many folks

[1:26:52] potentially too loud uh not controlling the original agreement. So something

[1:26:56] along those lines and just you never want to go to the enforcement side, but

[1:27:00] just knowing that there's an out uh should you need it if it's disruptive to

[1:27:04] uh general users within uh the facility.

[1:27:09] Perfect. I will go to administration just to see if we are needing a motion

[1:27:14] for this one. No. Perfect. Um, that being said, we will proceed on to

[1:27:18] business item 6.4, level of service, roads and parks policy. And I believe

[1:27:23] Bryce, you're going to be presenting that. Thank you.

[1:27:39] Okay. [snorts and clears throat] Good evening, members of council. This policy

[1:27:43] update translates your 2026 2030 strategic plan into everyday action on

[1:27:49] our roads and in our parks. It gives residents full transparency into what we

[1:27:54] do, how we do it, and how we manage growth together. To set context, this

[1:27:59] update directly supports council's 26 to30 strategic plan, specifically our

[1:28:04] commitment to delivering resident centered services.

[1:28:09] It's important to emphasize that this policy update doesn't reinvent the

[1:28:12] wheel. It is a new and improved method of communicating our existing service

[1:28:16] levels clearly to both council and the public. By expanding from a narrow

[1:28:21] winter focus to a comprehensive year-round model in both parks and

[1:28:25] roads, we're establishing realistic operational targets while setting clear

[1:28:29] expectations.

[1:28:36] One moment. Okay. [snorts]

[1:28:50] Technical difficulties. Can you go to two?

[1:28:56] Um, scope definitions and foundation principles. So, structural improvements

[1:29:01] have been made to improve clarity and accountability. A new scope and

[1:29:06] application section confirms that the policy applies to both city staff and

[1:29:10] external contractors. Definitions have been moved to schedule

[1:29:15] one with new terms added for parks and outdoor amenities such as sports fields,

[1:29:20] playgrounds, and outdoor rinks. [snorts]

[1:29:25] Under the strategic plan pillar of growth that makes sense for Bowmont, our

[1:29:29] foundational principles now explicitly address how operational demands scale as

[1:29:34] our community grows. We are grounding our standard operations in a 40-hour

[1:29:38] service week with emergency response triggers, ensuring that we remain

[1:29:42] fiscally responsible and tied to annual budget approvals.

[1:29:47] Winter maintenance remains a core focus with road priorities streamlined from

[1:29:51] five categories down to four. Local roads are now more clearly distinguished

[1:29:55] between connecting residential roads and lower volume local streets, culde-sacs,

[1:29:59] alleys, and gravel roads. Quadrant-based service delivery has been clarified.

[1:30:04] Once priority one and two areas are addressed, clues will be deployed by

[1:30:08] Quadrant. The policy now explains how service timelines reset during

[1:30:13] back-to-back snow events, making expectations clearer during extended

[1:30:17] weather events. [sighs]

[1:30:20] Sidewalk and trail maintenance is scheduled Monday to Friday with after

[1:30:24] hours or weekend snowfall addressed on the next business day. City building

[1:30:28] entrances, the language has been cleared up. The city city building entrances

[1:30:32] must be cleared within 2 hours of openings. Parking lot clearing

[1:30:35] thresholds have been tightened from the previous 5 to 10 cm range down to a flat

[1:30:39] and hard 5cm target. Snow storage lang language will allow temporary storage

[1:30:45] during extreme weather and parking ban enforcements now refer to the traffic

[1:30:49] safety bylaw. Clear service levels have been

[1:30:53] established for year- round maintenance tasks in both parks and roads. This

[1:30:57] includes sweeping of streets, sidewalks and trails, grass cutting, trimming,

[1:31:03] storm water facility mowing and upkeep of sports fields, sports fields and ball

[1:31:07] diamonds. The policy formalizes service frequencies for garbage collection,

[1:31:11] porter potties, border potties and bathroom maintenance, playground

[1:31:15] inspections, hard surface maintenance, and outdoor rink inspections.

[1:31:21] A new section formalizes the use of contractors for specialized seasonal or

[1:31:25] surge capacity work, including support during winters with above average

[1:31:29] snowfall. Annual policy reviews will occur during budget delimmerations to

[1:31:34] ensure service levels remain aligned with available funding.

[1:31:39] This slide represents the biggest win for our residents and aligns directly

[1:31:42] with council's strategic commitment about modern communication. Uh again,

[1:31:47] this policy is not about improving. This policy is ultimately about how we

[1:31:52] communicate. Um instead of residents guessing when a

[1:31:56] trail is swept or a road is cleared, everything will be hosted in one clear

[1:32:00] central location on the city's website. Residents will have access to current

[1:32:04] service levels, interactive maps, property owner responsibilities, and

[1:32:08] real-time seasonal updates for outdoor spaces.

[1:32:12] Finally, as Bowmont continues to expand, this policy ensures that our growth is

[1:32:17] deliberate and transparent. Every year during budget deliberations, council

[1:32:20] will receive supporting documents and clear cost service implications for any

[1:32:24] proposed service level increases or new developments coming online. This will

[1:32:28] ensure full strategic oversight before new operational commitments are made.

[1:32:34] Uh to wrap up, me members of council, when you introduced the new strategic

[1:32:38] plan, you set a clear mandate for resident centered services and growth

[1:32:42] that makes sense for Bmont makes sense for Bowmont. What we've brought you

[1:32:46] today isn't just an administrative update. It's an operational translation

[1:32:49] of your vision vision by replacing outdated single season

[1:32:54] policies with comprehensive year round framework. administration is carrying

[1:32:58] out the direction that you sent you set for PL public transparent communication,

[1:33:03] clear accountability and prudent financial oversight. We are excited to

[1:33:07] get this modernized communication live on our website so our residents can see

[1:33:11] the full value of the services that council fund every day. Uh thank you for

[1:33:15] your time and I would be happy to answer any of your questions and listen to your

[1:33:19] feedback.

[1:33:22] » Perfect. Uh thank you Bryce for that presentation. uh if this policy is a

[1:33:26] representation of some of the efforts we've seen put forward uh so far. I I'm

[1:33:31] impressed with this policy. I I don't know if we uh hit the lotto in terms of

[1:33:35] some good employees uh because we've definitely seen a lot of hard work and

[1:33:39] and effort put into a department that uh always has to show what they can do and

[1:33:44] and make the citizens happy. So great work to you and the team. I I just want

[1:33:48] to note that. Um, in terms of questions, I do see uh, councelor Klemith, so we

[1:33:53] will start with you. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Um, yeah, no, I

[1:33:57] really like the policy. Just had a couple of questions. Um, in C grass

[1:34:01] cutting, it talks about um, the naturalization below the one in year one

[1:34:06] and 5year flood line. Can you just explain what that means? I just want to

[1:34:10] make sure I got it right. >> Yep. Through the chair to councelor Cole

[1:34:14] Smith. uh natural naturalization below the one in fiveyear flood line relates

[1:34:18] specifically to the storm water management facilities. Uh the one in

[1:34:22] 5year flood line says that uh in any given year there's 20% chance that

[1:34:26] through the recent rains that's where the water level will get to. So I'm sure

[1:34:30] we've seen recently that the storm water facilities they the water level can rise

[1:34:35] and the naturalization within that boundary helps with soil retention soil

[1:34:40] erosion. uh we plant some wet tolerant species within that area and with

[1:34:45] naturalization uh it's a clear message to the residents

[1:34:50] of where the water level can get to uh 20% of the time when it rains.

[1:34:55] » So after this most recent rain that line is now higher. Okay. Um

[1:35:02] I noticed the outdoor uh outdoor facilities would be their status would

[1:35:08] be updated on the website. Does that include the time stamp like each day?

[1:35:13] That that's excellent. >> Through the chair to councelor Cole

[1:35:16] Smith. Yes. Uh we heard that from the residents and council loud and clear

[1:35:19] this year that our messaging behind when sports fields are open and uh the

[1:35:23] posting on the website could be improved and that is a part of it. timestamps,

[1:35:28] daystamps, uh as well as providing that information to the guest services

[1:35:31] representatives at the BSRC. So any user groups can call and get confirmation

[1:35:35] after hours when uh say we're not in the office, they can get confirmation of

[1:35:39] what fields are open, what are user discretion, and what are closed.

[1:35:43] » That's really good. Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you, counselor. Counselor

[1:35:48] Vanu Kirk. >> Yeah, thank you. [clears throat] Um two

[1:35:52] things. I guess I'll I'll stay on the naturalization piece. I caught that as

[1:35:55] well. Um I'll say before that in our documentation naturalization has

[1:36:01] actually never been defined before. So that is something that you know will

[1:36:04] need to be contemplated as we move back. Um I would also say that naturalization

[1:36:09] has become the enemy because naturalization was all the way up to the

[1:36:13] edge of the sidewalk. Right? So this is right here saying naturalization is to

[1:36:18] the one and 5year flood line. It isn't to the edge of the sidewalk. Right? So

[1:36:21] there's some definition on that. So I think that's important and good and we

[1:36:26] can watch to see how that is working. Um I would challenge that naturalization of

[1:36:32] vegetation um does benefit from periodic mowing as well uh to elongate widen root

[1:36:39] structures. So blindly seeding and growing and then not managing that

[1:36:43] naturalized vegetation from time to time actually isn't the way to go. So there's

[1:36:48] an operational piece there that should be considered. Um, secondarily,

[1:36:54] this will be my annual plug. Uh, can you go to page 183 of 216? It was the

[1:37:00] presentation on the map there, uh, around communication.

[1:37:06] And while you're going there, being mindful of my time, I'll just say that

[1:37:10] annually concerns come into the city where in areas where servicing is yet to

[1:37:15] be turned over to the city or the city isn't responsible. Um this is my annual

[1:37:19] plug for some mapping to show that um that that top bullet point there. Um I

[1:37:24] think there's an opportunity to have a map layer that says the city is

[1:37:29] responsible for all this and it's in a color and the city isn't responsible for

[1:37:34] this and it's in a color as in commercial nodes, condominium complexes,

[1:37:40] um areas that the developer is responsible for still and hasn't been

[1:37:44] turned over the city. I think there should be a visual representation of

[1:37:48] that um that folks can be directed to as part of the SEO responses to people.

[1:37:55] That visual aid is going to help a lot. So, thank you.

[1:38:01] » Thank you, counselor. Appreciate it. Uh Mayor Vanderclack,

[1:38:05] » thank you. Thank you, Bryce, for this. And yes, u really happy with um what's

[1:38:12] going on in our parks right now. So, one thing that stuck out to me is

[1:38:16] I'm going to talk about it from again a governance document that um what you

[1:38:20] said earlier I think would be a great piece to put in here as far as the

[1:38:23] purpose of this policy is to establish clear, measurable, transparent

[1:38:29] service level expectations for residents uh guide administration delivery of

[1:38:35] roads park services and provide council with a framework for oversight, resource

[1:38:39] allocation and continuous improvement. I think they're having a Y statement is

[1:38:43] really important in that document as a governance. Um the other thing I wanted

[1:38:47] to mention is the word and I understand it from a

[1:38:51] legal perspective but I'm wondering how we how we measure it when in the

[1:38:56] document talks about the city will make reasonable efforts.

[1:39:01] So how will council know whether administration is consistently achieving

[1:39:06] their targets if they described as reasonable efforts?

[1:39:12] through the chair to Mayor Vanderquac. Um, reasonable efforts is something

[1:39:17] that's pulled directly out of the MGA uh with a lot of infrastructure

[1:39:20] maintenance. >> So that that's a very set standard that

[1:39:24] the the city will make reasonable efforts to keep infrastructure in in

[1:39:28] appropriate m maintainable condition. So um reasonable efforts

[1:39:34] is a vague statement that is allows the city to be

[1:39:40] in alignment with what's operationally possible cuz you know we can repair

[1:39:45] anything given uh appropriate amount of money. But when budget is set and we're

[1:39:50] working with uh a set uh funding timeline that it may not be reasonable

[1:39:55] to repair a sports field that someone drove a tractor through and and ripped

[1:39:59] up a big trench in it. So we will make reasonable efforts to maintain and

[1:40:03] repair everything within our operational boundaries.

[1:40:08] » Maybe uh maybe a kind of an explainer like that might be helpful.

[1:40:11] » Yeah, >> that just I'm just thinking of someone

[1:40:14] reading this policy the question will be well what does that look like? But what

[1:40:19] you just said there brings it into scope right within context of that. So that's

[1:40:23] something um just go back over here. Got to go back.

[1:40:29] The other thing I love the quadrant. I love the fact that you're doing a

[1:40:32] rotational in terms of the services. I think that's really great. Will that be

[1:40:36] communicated as to year by year which quadrant is beginning and which

[1:40:40] » which you're starting at >> through week whatever timing is. Yeah.

[1:40:44] » Yep. Through the chair to Mayor Vander. Yes. So that um that's something we've

[1:40:48] already done and we already do it. We've been doing it for nearly a decade. It's

[1:40:52] just we haven't been good at communicating that to the public.

[1:40:54] » Okay. So for example, street sweeping uh we sweep by quadrants and we change

[1:40:59] which quadrant starts uh the process every year. So the northwest quadrant

[1:41:04] one year, then northeast and south southeast and southwest. So uh the

[1:41:09] intent is to give each and every resident equal service. So uh street

[1:41:14] sweeping, uh pothole patching, snow removal. We work on a quadrantbased

[1:41:19] system with alternating quadrants every year. So it's a at the moment it's a

[1:41:23] four-ear cycle. as we continue to build out that will change. Uh but yes, we

[1:41:28] will communicate that and that is one of the things that will be on this

[1:41:30] centralized location on the website. >> Awesome. Yeah. Well, I I think yeah,

[1:41:35] communication is really key for that. So, uh people understand kind of the

[1:41:40] rotation of that. The other thing is I don't have it in my notes here, but

[1:41:43] about the reporting back, I think there was an annual report. Will will that

[1:41:47] also report include maybe stats? I know I just v visited the

[1:41:52] SEO center today. Was quite impressed with all that's going on there. But will

[1:41:57] that include data collection in terms of maybe improvements in certain area or

[1:42:02] less complaints in a certain area >> through the chair? Mayor Vanderqu uh we

[1:42:08] provide a quarterly report corporately to council and we're looking to fill

[1:42:12] that out with as much stats as possible. So recently uh GPS has been installed in

[1:42:17] most of our vehicles which gives us increased data and reporting. Uh our

[1:42:22] goal is that quarterly reporting that you receive to build out as much as

[1:42:25] humanly possible. >> Awesome. Yeah, just for continuous

[1:42:28] improvement. I think that's really important. Thank you so much. I'm done.

[1:42:32] » Perfect. Thank you, Mayor Councelor Penrod.

[1:42:36] » Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Um appreciate this policy coming forward. Um, one of

[1:42:41] the things I zeroed in on right away was the proposed annual review. Uh, and then

[1:42:46] meshing that in with the budgeting process. I think that's excellent and

[1:42:50] and gives us a chance to really have those conversations about

[1:42:56] service tweaks very intentionally as opposed to sometimes it can feel like

[1:43:00] it's a throwin at the end of a a budget um, session.

[1:43:06] I just wonder if you could speak more to when that would come up. So that because

[1:43:12] the way I would imagine this happening is there'll be some questions about

[1:43:15] current service levels that will require some reporting or a bit of preparation

[1:43:19] to come back to the budget workshop in the fall. So, have you done some

[1:43:23] thinking around when this would be calendarized so that we can have those

[1:43:28] preliminary conversations or or does it tie into your earlier

[1:43:32] point to those quarterly reporting through the chair to councelor Penrod?

[1:43:37] It would tie into the quarterly reporting. Um there is nothing stopping

[1:43:40] council at any point from letting us know what you would like to see in

[1:43:44] service levels. Uh especially when it comes to this policy. Before this

[1:43:48] policy, uh it's been service maps at the end of a budget. So service level has

[1:43:52] been tied to the budgetary approval. Budgetary approval has been tied to

[1:43:55] service. This gives you a chance throughout the year to look at what

[1:44:00] we're doing, see how we're performing, and make recommendations on what you

[1:44:03] would like to see the following year. Okay. Uh just a couple quick hit pieces.

[1:44:09] Um we talked about the quadrants already. Um and that's been a piece

[1:44:14] that's in practice. Something that's been unclear to me is there's a couple

[1:44:18] different services that run on the quadrant system. Are they staggered or

[1:44:22] does all the services start in quadrant 1 in year one or are we saying like snow

[1:44:29] removal starts quadrant 1 and street sweeping starts in quadrant 3 so that

[1:44:35] over the so that one community isn't last on everything in a given year. Does

[1:44:40] that make sense? >> Through the chair to councelor Penrod.

[1:44:44] Yes, we alternate every single service. So snow removal, uh, pothole patching,

[1:44:48] crack sealing, and street sweeping, they alternate. So not one community or not

[1:44:52] one section of the city is last every single year, as well as every four

[1:44:56] years, you're not first every year. So for equitable treatment, we alternate

[1:45:00] every single service. Yeah, sorry, I might not have been clear. What I'm

[1:45:03] trying to ask is, are they staggered? So does does every is everything on one

[1:45:08] beginning in one this year and then 2 3 4

[1:45:11] » or are some services in starting in one while others are starting in three

[1:45:16] » through the chair to councelor Penrod maybe I wasn't clear

[1:45:21] » for example this year 2026 um snow removal will be northwest

[1:45:26] quadrant but then street sweeping will be northeast quadrant then it'll be

[1:45:29] pothole patching southeast quadrant yep we make every effort to make sure

[1:45:33] there's equitable treatment across Ross every single community uh every single

[1:45:37] residential area within our community. Thank you.

[1:45:43] » Thank you, councelor. Uh next on the list is councelor Hyde.

[1:45:47] » Yeah, thank you. Uh Bryce, just uh looking at the naturalization areas and

[1:45:52] such like that. Um I'm wondering there's nothing in here that talks about noxious

[1:45:57] weeds within that as well. I'm talking about like cat thistle, foxtail,

[1:46:02] um leafy spurs, uh blue weed, hounds tongue, all that kind of stuff that it

[1:46:06] must be controlled within Alberta. It's not in here at all. Is is there some

[1:46:11] other place where this would be for noxious weeds

[1:46:15] » through the chair to councelor Hyde? Uh yes, that's in the Alberta Weed Act. So

[1:46:20] that's a provincial legislation. Um we have to abide by that. uh Canada thistle

[1:46:25] tanzy if it's noticed on our property we have 48 hours to control so in an effort

[1:46:30] not to double up what the province is already doing it's very explicitly

[1:46:34] covered under the ability to weed act >> okay so is there anywhere that can refer

[1:46:39] to that within this documentation >> uh through the chair to councelor hyde I

[1:46:45] can take that away and see if we can add it in um again we didn't see I didn't

[1:46:51] see the need to double up when the province specifically states what the

[1:46:55] requirements are. Yeah, we we uh as a city are held to the exact same standard

[1:47:00] as res residents are held for their own properties.

[1:47:03] » Yeah, understandable and and I appreciate that. Um but we do get a lot

[1:47:07] of people that send in complaints saying about some noxious weeds that are around

[1:47:10] some of the naturalization areas and in the ditches and those type of places as

[1:47:14] well which are in our jurisdiction. So, if it was somehow there that they can

[1:47:19] take a look at it, that just makes it easier for us to say, "Well, don't go to

[1:47:22] a different spot. It's right there." That's all I'm referring to. Thank you.

[1:47:30] » Thank you, councelor. Hi, uh, Councelor Vanu Kirk.

[1:47:33] » Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to go back to um [clears throat]

[1:47:37] 5A if you wouldn't mind scrolling down. Just wondering if you could speak to 5A.

[1:47:44] So basic um some of the feedback that council get gets is um you know very

[1:47:51] black and white. You know everybody goes home on the weekend and doesn't care

[1:47:54] about the trails, right? Not true. Um so can you speak to how a 40-hour week

[1:48:00] might look at different times of the year? You know is everyone Monday to

[1:48:03] Friday or is there people that are you know Thursday to whatever you know that

[1:48:08] different 5day periods? Are there shifts in schedules? How is some of that

[1:48:11] managed? Uh, I know with bylaw for instance, you know, shifts are managed

[1:48:16] and worked around events and times of year and all those kinds of things. Can

[1:48:20] you speak to some of the parks and recck staff and what that scheduling looks

[1:48:24] like? I think the public should hear some of that

[1:48:29] » through the chair to council venue. The parks and roads teams are grounded in a

[1:48:35] 40-hour work week. So, from 8 to 4:30 Monday to Friday. The reason that is um

[1:48:42] the roads team they have six staff uh we need six staff for snow removal. We need

[1:48:47] six staff for adequate pothole patching and and traffic control. So there is a

[1:48:51] need of the whole team to be together. Um historically we have considered what

[1:48:57] it would look like for 7-day coverage and what that looks like is suboptimal

[1:49:00] crew numbers and resourcing to get the job done during the week and we weren't

[1:49:05] able to achieve the same amount of work. This does allow us to get the most

[1:49:09] amount of work done during the 40-hour work week. However, we do have an on

[1:49:13] call system. Uh there is an individual on call from both parks and roads and

[1:49:17] they are available 24/7 and that nothing will be allowed to go outside of that

[1:49:22] service level. Uh for example, in the winter, if we have a big snow on the

[1:49:26] Saturday morning, does this 40-hour work week does not mean that the plows and

[1:49:30] the sanders are not out Saturday morning at 5:00 a.m.? We have on call staff

[1:49:34] appropriate for the season. say at Christmas there's more than one and that

[1:49:38] if we see conditions where we need to respond we will respond 24/7 uh but the

[1:49:45] grounding of the team is within the 40-hour work week with our current

[1:49:48] complement of staff that is our limitation however we have set out the

[1:49:55] pathway to get to say 7-day coverage but that does involve a increased level of

[1:50:00] service which involves uh personnel and resourcing

[1:50:03] » yeah that's good um [clears throat] I think clarity there is that the on call

[1:50:08] system is what um the tool is right now to make sure that if there are large

[1:50:14] concerns mostly on trail snow clearing that's a lot of the feedback we get back

[1:50:18] on on weekends some of the key areas are are looked after so I know that I've

[1:50:23] definitely saw some of the trail machines clearing trails on weekends and

[1:50:27] um you know it's not that they're pulling in full shifts on that but you

[1:50:31] know some of the key areas are looked after so thank

[1:50:36] Thank you, councelor Councelor Penrod. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Um,

[1:50:44] so on page 159, the document says the snow and ice

[1:50:49] control program will reset when continuous snow events are experienced.

[1:50:54] This is the single biggest pinch in the current system. I wonder if you could

[1:50:57] take the opportunity given your response to the last question. And I think this

[1:51:01] is a great opportunity to just hear um why this is the best of the worst

[1:51:09] options if that makes sense. Um if you could speak to how this helps us to

[1:51:16] achieve that community safety and well-being in the

[1:51:20] resident centered services through the chair to councelor Penrod.

[1:51:26] Thank you for that question. Uh that's probably the most misunderstood part of

[1:51:30] our service levels is the roads operational in winter. Uh the quadrant

[1:51:35] policy is specifically around the sentence of if snow uh comes again that

[1:51:40] we reset the service levels until they can be brought back into align. So

[1:51:44] realistically what does that mean? So we do priority ones and two roads five

[1:51:48] times a month. Um we do residential once a year guaranteed maybe twice and that's

[1:51:53] just by the time we get to that trigger. That's the accumulation that we would

[1:51:57] see. We would do priority ones and twos as much as we need to and then we would

[1:52:01] move into residential clearing. We would start for example at the colonial uh

[1:52:05] neighborhood and we will work all the way through to the southeast. If it

[1:52:09] snows again to the point where we need to re-trigger priority ones and twos, we

[1:52:13] will finish let's say 30% of the city. we would go back, clear the priority

[1:52:17] ones, the priority two roads, and go right back to where we started. Uh the

[1:52:21] misconception that we've seen with resident responses is that when we see

[1:52:26] enough snow to go back to priority ones and twos, we're doing all the ones and

[1:52:29] twos, then we starting Colonial again. So some streets are getting two services

[1:52:33] while others are only getting one. That's not the case. Uh reality is that

[1:52:38] we would do the priority ones and twos, the arterial roads, the range roads, uh

[1:52:42] the arterial roads, range roads are priority one. Then priority two is the

[1:52:46] ring roads. We'll go right back to where we left off in the residential clearing

[1:52:51] program and continue to clear those priority in four and five roads until we

[1:52:56] until every single street in Bowmont has had one service and then that would be

[1:52:59] the totality of our first clear. So the misconception often lies that we will

[1:53:05] clear the pro the quadrant one of that year's roads three or four times before

[1:53:10] we get to the pro the last quadrant. Uh that's not the case. We do everything

[1:53:14] once before we start everything twice. >> Just uh before you continue, uh Miss

[1:53:20] Winter has a comment.

[1:53:26] » Um I just wanted to respond um back to Councelor Hyde's question with regards

[1:53:30] to the noxious weeds. That's actually under our um community standards bylaw

[1:53:35] where we have that and it's enforced through municipal enforcement as our

[1:53:39] weed inspectors.

[1:53:47] Yeah, >> thank thank you. So, it's through the

[1:53:50] bylaw through that that portion of it. Um, of course, it has to do with

[1:53:55] residential um uh yards as well then as well as public.

[1:54:03] » Community standards by law. >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:54:05] » Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you for that. We'll

[1:54:09] return back to councelor Ben Ryan. Thank you. Um, appreciate the explanation. If

[1:54:15] you could just um, maybe explain for us and for our

[1:54:20] residents why it's essential that we double back

[1:54:24] on that snow reset to the ones and twos. What what is the

[1:54:29] what are the data points or the considerations that bring us back to

[1:54:32] those service level or the priority ones and twos? And what benefit does the city

[1:54:39] receive by making sure that those priority ones and twos are are cleared

[1:54:45] » through the chair to councelor Penrod? Uh priority ones and twos as I uh

[1:54:49] alluded to earlier we can maintain between three and five times a month.

[1:54:53] The data suggests that at that service level level trigger that's how often we

[1:54:58] would need to be there to complete one full residential clear will take 6

[1:55:01] weeks. So if we were to not revert back to the priority ones and twos, 6 weeks,

[1:55:08] month and a half, we're potentially missing seven services on priority ones

[1:55:12] and twos. The ones and two roads are 50th Street, 50th A, uh, and all the

[1:55:17] range roads. So the streets that likely every resident uses every day to leave

[1:55:22] the city, uh, enter commercial space. All the all the schools are on priority

[1:55:26] ones and twos. Um, this is just an effort to keep our highest traffic

[1:55:32] areas, um, the ones where there's no room for error in top maintainable

[1:55:37] condition all winter long. Thank you. Uh, and just one more point

[1:55:42] on the ice control, sanding, and rock chip rock chips. Um, maybe it's maybe I

[1:55:48] misunderstood, but is there a service level change here? Um

[1:55:55] it I remember a map that showed where rock chips were being applied, but this

[1:56:01] makes it sound like it will be done um kind of

[1:56:07] under the judgment of the operators and that I remember that being a

[1:56:11] recommendation that came from the uh consultants report. So I just wanted to

[1:56:16] check that and also the may on the rock chips being available at designated

[1:56:20] areas through the city. previously that has been for sure available. Are we

[1:56:25] looking at pulling that back >> through the chair to councelor Penrod?

[1:56:29] Uh you've actually identified one of the improvements that we've made to our

[1:56:32] service level. So the original service level was a map which clearly clearly

[1:56:37] identified which intersections would have rock chip and and ice control. What

[1:56:42] this policy says is that we will manage every single intersection on an as

[1:56:46] needed basis. So just because the intersection is not marked on the map

[1:56:50] does not mean the operators won't maintain it. Uh we heard that from that

[1:56:53] conversation in budget two two years ago and we went about fixing that. So uh

[1:56:59] what you've identified is actually an improvement. We will rock chip ice

[1:57:02] control every single intersection on an as neededs basis through the inspection

[1:57:06] program within our team. Uh secondly the may in rock chip gives us the ability to

[1:57:12] increase the rockchip locations. It's not something that we've planned just

[1:57:16] yet. Uh but under Bowmont growing we know that there might be an opportunity

[1:57:23] in the future to offer rock chip at additional locations and that's why we

[1:57:28] included that there. So it gives us the ability to scale up.

[1:57:32] Appreciate the continuous improvement. >> Thank you councelor uh Mayor Vanderwak.

[1:57:39] Go ahead. >> Um okay got to get my thing here. Thank

[1:57:45] you. Uh Bryce, just a quick question. Actually, one question myself, then I

[1:57:49] have a question from a resident that sent us an email. Are the trails also on

[1:57:54] a priority system in terms of snow clarity in the winter

[1:57:58] » through the chair to Mayor Vanderquac? Yeah, the trails are on a priority

[1:58:02] system. Uh there's only two priorities. Priority one, priority two. Uh the

[1:58:05] priority one is the main thoroughare for all the trails to allow uh hight traffic

[1:58:10] areas. So such as around schools or commercial plazas and then priority two

[1:58:14] would be the the connections from residential areas. So priority one will

[1:58:17] allow us to clear that first uh lot of trails immediately after snow clearing

[1:58:21] and then when there's time we'll go back and and hit those priority twos. Yep.

[1:58:25] » Okay. Good. And then uh um there's a question regarding attachment one item 6

[1:58:32] C page three talking about the removal and disposal of snow. And there was some

[1:58:37] indication that um it had changed to instead of being

[1:58:44] plowed to the middle and hauled away, it was plowed to the side and then come

[1:58:47] back later. Is that correct?

[1:58:53] » What What is the current practice right now?

[1:58:54] » Okay. Through the chair to Mayor Vanderqu. Our current practice is plow

[1:58:59] to the middle and remove. However, in extreme situations where we have a

[1:59:03] inundation of snow or a large accumulation, we will plow to the side

[1:59:07] to allow traffic to freely flow. We will come back as soon as we can to plow to

[1:59:12] the middle and remove. >> Um, as I said to councelor Penrod

[1:59:16] earlier, it takes us 6 weeks to get around residential neighborhoods. Uh,

[1:59:19] this January was a perfect example. We were forced to plow to the side in

[1:59:23] residential neighborhoods to allow residents to leave and come and go as

[1:59:27] they need to as well as for emergency standards, emergency vehicle standards.

[1:59:31] And it just gives us that operational flexibility to handle a large storm

[1:59:35] event. Uh however, the practice that we will do every day is plow to the middle

[1:59:39] and remove. That's that's option one and preferable.

[1:59:42] » Okay, good. Thanks for clarifying that. >> Thank you. Uh just one quick question uh

[1:59:49] that sparked a a question after you had mentioned the priorities for the

[1:59:52] pathways. Um does that follow similar suit to the roads where if we get

[1:59:56] another snowfall we're starting back on one and then eventually getting to two?

[2:00:03] » Uh to the chair. Uh yes, that would be the case. So priority one is our

[2:00:07] priority one. So if we have consecutive rain event uh snow events uh back to

[2:00:11] back to back and we're not able to stay on top of it, we'll be continuously

[2:00:15] doing the ones before we can get to twos. uh the ones are identified as

[2:00:19] around the schools around the commercial uh high use pathways um and that's why

[2:00:24] they're prioritized one over two. >> Perfect. Thank you. Um I think no need

[2:00:29] to beat a dead horse, but you uh you hit the nail on the head when you said

[2:00:33] communication was maybe a gap that previously exists. So appreciate that

[2:00:36] there's a system going forward where we better communicate and let uh residents

[2:00:40] know what's going on because uh I think there's a lot of value that and I know

[2:00:43] residents appreciate it. So thank you so much.

[2:00:50] All right. Well, that being said, that is the end of our presentations.

[2:00:55] Um, Madame Clerk, do we have any new counselor inquiries?

[2:00:59] » No, we do not have any new counselor inquiries.

[2:01:04] » Perfect. Well, unless I am missing something, I believe that brings us to

[2:01:10] adjournment. Um, so that being said, I would like to

[2:01:15] adjourn this meeting at 8:03 p.m.

Committee of the Whole Meeting

Transcript