Good afternoon. I'd like to call this meeting to order.
I'd like to acknowledge that we are gathered today on
the traditional ancestral territory of the Selix Okanagan people. This
meeting is open to the public and all representation to
council foreign part of a public record and a live
audio video feed is being broadcasted and recorded on colonna.
ca. Council, I am looking for a mover in a
secondary from the minutes from our June 1st, 2026 meeting,
moved by Councillor Hodge, seconded by Councillor Singh. Any errors
and emissions in those minute meetings. Seeing none all in
favor, thank you, Citi Clerk, please. Thank you, your worship.
Item 3. 1 on the agenda is Council Reconsideration for
Refusal of a Business License located at 9 - 11
Bernard Avenue. Before I go to business license staff, I
will go to councillors to heart and lovegrove for some
statements. Thank you, worship. I just wanted to make it
clear that I have excused myself from this item before
because of short - term rental. But this is a
business license, and I have voted on that before. So
business license different than short - term rental, so I
will be staying for this item. Thank you, councillor. In
your show. Thank you, your worship exactly the same case
in my case. This is not a short - term
rental. I'll be staying in the room, thank you. Thank
you. Thank you. Pardon me, thank you. Worship with that.
We will turn it to staff for a presentation. Good
afternoon. Good afternoon, your worship. We are here today to
hear a request for a reconsideration of the refusal to
grant business license application number 4099899 for an accommodation services
major business license for an apartment at 9 - 11
Bernard. Under the community charter, staff has the authority to
grant refuse suspend or cancel a business license. In 2022,
it was identified that the property was divided into seven
separate living units, each with its own kitchen, and there
are no building permit records on file for those units
or kitchens. The business license application was refused as insufficient
information has been provided to the city that the existing
use or proposed use of the property complies with the
applicable zoning and building requirements for apartment housing. Additionally, the
property has not been demonstrated to meet BC building code,
requirements for apartment housing, and additional review permitting and inspections
may be required. In accordance with the business license and
regulation bylaw, compliance with all applicable bylaws, policies and enactments
would be a condition of the business license. Additionally, the
bylaw authorizes the license inspector to refuse to issue a
business license where the applicant does not comply with the
bylaw license conditions or where the applicant intends to operate
a business in a premises or building that does not
comply with city bylaws or other enactments of provincial, federal,
or other governmental authorities. There is a documented history of
noncompliance with zoning, building, and business licensing requirements at the
subject property. Before a business license may be issued, the
property must comply with all applicable city bylaws and government
regulations. This includes those governing zoning and building requirements related
to the proposed business use. Despite ongoing efforts by staff
to clearly identify the compliance issues and outline possible paths
forward, the property owner has not provided evidence that they
have taken steps to bring the property into compliance and
continue to operate a short - term rental business without
a business license, contrary to city bylaws. Also of note,
an accommodation services major apartment business license is intended for
a long - term rental use in a multi -
unit rental building and is not the appropriate license type
for the current short - term rental accommodation use operating
on the property. In conclusion, staff recommend that council uphold
the decision of the license inspector to refuse to grant
the accommodation services major business license for an apartment on
the subject property. As insufficient information has been provided to
confirm the existing or proposed use of the property complies
with zoning and building requirements for apartment housing. And the
property has not been demonstrated to meet BC building code
requirements for apartment housing, and additional review permitting and or
inspections may be required. And that concludes my comments. Thank
you. Thank you. You worship the applicant or the applicant's
agent now has the opportunity to address counsel. You have
up to 15 minutes to speak, and I ask that
you pleads begin by stating your name and address, and
you can come up to the public podium here on
your right.
Thank you, sir. Just one moment if I may, please,
we're just going to make certain your mics on and
also make certain that this is a full screen. We
just have, if we can. Uh, staff are going to
help you with that. A bit. Bigger.
With. The uptip. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Please proceed. You worship members, a council and
city clerk. Thank you. My name is Denice. Actually held
a brand. I am the owner of 911 Bernard Avenue.
I am the applicant. On business license number 4099899. Accommodation
services. Major apartment. A stabbed copy. Of a formal legal
demand notice was hand delivered to the business licensing department
and to the divisional director Ryan Smith this morning. I
am now reading into the public record to provide final
statutory notice before exhausting my immunoscipal remedies. I just want
to note that the slides that are most relevant to
my three - minute, hopefully, uh, oral submissions are the
18th slide. Which. Would be. Over.
I can't seem to get past 16. But I guess
I won't have to worry about that. That notice is
addressed to Sarah Cowker business licensing manager as the officer
whose ministerial duty to issue this license is directly engaged.
To Ryan Smith as the divisional director who appointed the
denial and to this council as the governing body. This
council is the final administrative step under section 60 subsection
five of the community charter. After this vote, there is
no further administrative remedy. And there's three points I need
counsel to here. Point one. This council has already voted
yes to this use. Twice. On December 8, 2025, this
council adopted by a law number 12848 rezoning this property
to TS1. Section 13. 3 of that bylawless apartment housing
as a permitted principal use at this property. No footnote,
no subzone, no conditions. The province approved it. January 23rd,
2026. And I applied 18 days later. Before
that. On July 22nd, 2024. City staff committed before this
council to work in with me toward apartment housing compliance.
This council voted unanimously on the basis of that commitment.
This council is not being asked to make a new
decision today. It is being asked to implement the decision
it has already made. Point number two. This is the
root, the city asked me to take. On July 18,
20, 23 Dean Straken, MCIP RPP signed a city of
Kelowna compliance agreement stating. And I'll quote. The city recognises
the seven apartment units on the subject property as legally
non - conforming. And. The owner is to apply for
a business license for a seven unit apartment building on
the subject property." End quote. I did exactly what the
city directored. I applied. The city collected the fee. Sarah
Crocker, denied it. In certified proceedings before this council on
July 22nd. 2024, Dean Stracken stated on the record, and
I'll quote. Those kitchens have been reviewed. They have been
deemed to be safe. It was offered to the applicant
to have it converted to the seven unit apartment building.
And we've accepted that as a reasonable sort of alternative.
The city directed this path. The city, accepted this outcome.
I followed their direction that denial has no lawful basis.
Point three. This property is fully compliant right now. On
July 14, 2025, city fire inspector candidance freezing classified this
property as residential apartment units. Class C Apartment buildings.
With every safety item. The denial signed by Sarah
Crocker identifies no safety deficiency. No building code violation.
No inspection finding. No law for ground for refusing by
right use. The property does not need to become compliant.
It already is. Closing. Section 60 para section subsection.
One clause A of the community charter states a business
license application must not be unreasonably. Refused. Refusing a by
- right use with no lawful ground identified is unreasonable
by definition. If this council upholds the denial today, the
section 60 subsection 5 remedy is fully exhausted. I will
have to file a petition for a writ of mendingus
in BC Supreme Court without further noticed the city. I
ask this council to do what it has already voted
to do. Grant business license application number 4099899. Thank you,
your worship. If there's no questions and I'm just going
to go home. Thank you. Worship. This would be the
opportunity for a council to ask questions of staff followed
by questions of the applicant. Council, if we can, I'm
going to ask of staff first. Is there any questions
of staff? Councillor Stack, please. Thank you, worship. Uh, I
would like staff just to respond to the applicants mentioning
that there's no legal reason. That he should not be
receiving this because he has completely compliant. And I would
like to hear staff respond to that. It is of
the opinion of staff that the property is not compliant.
There was seven units and kitchens added. There was no
permits on file for those kitchens. Um, the use of
the property is currently for short - term rental, which
is not a permitted principal use in the zone. It
is not the opinion of staff that the property is
compliant. Councillor Singh, please. Thank you, Worshiped. I also heard
staff say it's not compliant with the BC building code.
And I also heard the applicants say, no, there are
no BC building code violations. So, um, what is he
quoting and what is he using to substantiate his argument.
I can't speak directly to that. Um, what I can
say is that the property was found to have additional
kitchens in it. There is no permit record for converting
what was a rooming boarding and lodging home into an
apartment building. So the staff does not have records on
file that show that the property is compliant with BC
building code. And staff have not been inside the property
to conduct and appropriate inspection to determine what code requirements
are actually necessary. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um, Mr.
Smith, please. I believe what the applicant was referring to
was the, um, records of fire inspection. So when the
fire department, um, inspects a property like this, they will
go in and they've got, they're not inspecting against BC
building code. They're inspecting against fire code. So that's a
totally separate classification. And so even in their system, um,
the subset of boarding house, which this property, um, would
have been considered would probably fall under the apartment housing.
Um, sort of subset there. So we haven't, it hasn't
been permitted that way. It's just, um, how it fits
into, um, inspection records. And again, their inspection is not
doing a BC building code inspection. It is only doing
a fire code inspection. So the, the use going into
this property, I could describe it a little bit, uh,
when we permitted, uh, connog and spirits and burned avenue.
Brewery, distillery was a permitted use is a permitted use
in that downtown commercial zone. But for them to occupy
that space, they needed a building permit to comply with
BC building code to ensure that space was safe. And
in the process of that, um, they couldn't actually make
the space compliant with BC building code for that type
of use. So they had to alter what they actually
were doing in the distillery. Um, in order to fit
the distillery business and their operations, um, into the building
code classification. So, um, probably that's a high hazard building
code use, um, would be over and above this, um,
similar situation where all staff are trying to do in
this, in this instance isn't sure that, uh, the use
intended, um, fits with BC building code. Thank you, Councillor
Wolwood, please. Thanks for worship and thanks Mr. Smith for
that. Sorry, my back is to you. Um, just so
I'm understanding this. And I do have a question for
the applicant as well. Um, so the, the applicant did
read out a number of statements from a former staff
member in regards to kitchens being compliant and legal nonconforming.
Is that relating to the fire code then? I'm just
trying to like follow the bouncing ball on this one
and what that would have related to. You worship the
document contemplated a pathway towards compliance so that conditions associated
with that pathway. We're not fulfilled. And the city never
confirmed acceptance of that by the applicant. And so if
the applicant had said, I would like to pursue that
as part of, um, the associated processes, they would have
needed to get their business license. They would have needed
to make a building permit application and still deal with
the same issues that we're talking about today. But we'd
recommend it at that time, but that was the pathway
towards compliance that we could take. And again, staff remain
open to working towards that pathway. Um, and scheduling inspections
if the propertyner would like to schedule inspections. Okay. So
just so I'm clear, um, no building permit application was
ever made to the city. I'll pass that back to
the advice and sing inspector. Okay. There was no, there
have been a series of building permits made over the
course of years, but there was no building permit made
to convert the property from aborting and lodging home to
an apartment building. And there are not permits for all
of those kitchens that are in that building. So the
kitchens are the name point that haven't been properly. And
that it's been divided into multiple units. Thank you. So
just a question to staff with regards to it. So
since the kitchens were built, um, and put in there,
but the permit for them. There has been no inspection
with regards to how they were built the wiring and
all the rest of those particular items. Is that correct?
Thank you. Yes, the no inspections on any of the
units. Besides the kitchens, there's also additional level of life
safety for an apartment building such as fire separations, exits,
um, heating and ventilation that has not been inspected for
an apartment building. Can I ask one other question with
regards to it? And something like that with the building,
is there also sprinkling that sprinkle systems that sprinkler systems
that have to be done from a fire standpoint? I
mean, I understand that the other things we're not inspected.
I just, I'm uncertain of that answer. Not all apartment
housing small apartment housing requires sprinklers. We'd have to have
a further investigation on the full building. We haven't been
in the building for a series of time. So we'd
have to see what's actually there. And if it requires
sprinkling. So that would be one of the things, one
of the boxes that you would need to tick in
order to kind of come in to compliance. Would that
be correct? We'd have to do a full review of
the building to see that they have fire separated exit
corridors, fire separations between suites, proper ventilation, travel distances, all
of the above for BC building rule. And none of
this is different than what you would do on another
inspection. This is all just processes and protocols that you
would go through more or less standard procedures? Yes. Yes.
For any apartment building, it would be the same requirements
of BC building code. Thank you. Um, council, do we
have, I see no further questions of staff. Do we
have questions for the applicant. Councillor Cannon, please, for the
applicant police, sir, if you could stand back up. Thank
you. Thank you for your presentation. Did have a opportunity
to tour your facility in your units. Just wanted to
clarify why you haven't made an application. To the city
as requested. So staff could actually come in and inspect
the presence and make sure that everything's safe for your
guest. Okay. Just to clarify the question is why didn't
I apply to have a safety inspection. Oh, apply for
a building permit. Why didn't I have an open building
permit for outdoor work? There are several occupancy permits. I
have to respectfully disagree with the licensing department because the
licensing department is not the building department and there's 21
building permits in that list that I emailed you guys
or should have. And in that those occupancy permits, they
list specifically the locations of the suites listed as a
suite. So it's not that I haven't applied. I need
to say that the staff says the licensing staff says
the life safety, the proper ventilation, the trial distances, those
were all check marked by Mrs. Freeze and Candice freezing
the check marks, making sure the hallways, the proper checks
have been done by fire pro or the people that
I've hired to do those things. It's not that those
departments have been there. And in 2010, when I first
bought the place, there was the fire department. There was
the gas. There was the building departments. Nothing has changed
since Dean Stratch and said that the city recognises the
seven apartments units on the property as legally non -
conforming in relation to the city bylaws. And city bylaws
include the building. They also include health and safety. And
they include parking. You name it city bylaws in relation
to all the city bylaws. If I'm in trouble with
any aspect of that building, including the variances or whatever,
it's going to be a city bylaw. And nothing has
happened since this statement. And it's not like the city
staff, especially the planning, because the planning isn't in charge
of denying my license. This has to do with the
building being safe and the licensing department. Licensing department has
to have a valid reason for denying it. It can't
just be like, we prefer to have a bigger apartment
there. Somebody pulls me over for doing 450 zone. Well,
the officer could ask why you're doing that speed. Well,
I prefer to do 45, but you can't ticket me
for doing 45 under the speed limit. Just because I
have only seven units in the city would like to
have 30 units. Doesn't mean that the planning department vetos,
the licensing department says, no, it's not safe. It's all
vague. You need to be reasonable. Before you deny a
license. And that's why I'm so sure that this is
not going to stand in court. I don't want to
go there. You guys already put me through this. I
just follow directions. I want. Now I finally have the
zoning, which just makes it compliant. I had zoning that
made it compliant in 2010 when I bought it place.
I had apartment housing. I had rooming lodging. Private nursing,
which I used to do nursing. And in 2019, I
had short - term rental as a secondary use. Not
talking about any of that secondary use now. I'm just
talking about my apartment housing, which is now zoned TS1
with by right use. I couldn't do that. Before February.
Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Worch. Thanks to worship. Um,
and thanks for being here. Um, you've gone through a
few different things. Um, I understand zoning and land use.
Um, which council had approved. So understand that the use
of this land could be considered, um, but what's that
issue here is the form. And so can you tell
me when exactly did you have city staff come through
to do a building inspection and did it pass. Absolutely.
And I just want to repeat that question. So I'm
getting it right. So you're asking me is when city
staff, when did a building inspector come through and approve
the building that it meets BC building code? Absolutely. I
can answer that question. That happened the day before the
issuance of the rooming lodging business license. That was in
about June 18 2010. I missed the schedule. I had
to reschedule Debbie from the licensing said, Hey, we need
to reschedule that Mr. Hildebrandt will be there half an
hour sooner. I came there. I didn't have the keys.
So I had all the keys all stopped. I'm not
interested in 2010. I'm interested in 2020. I'm reading the
laundry list of time here in 2023. When did you
bring it to component? Okay, that was the very first
time that compliance, the last was on July 25th, 2025
when Mrs. Cadden's freezing went in there and looked through
the entire building once again. And went through the checklist
100 percent certified for the apartment Cyr. Thank you. Tight.
Uh, Councillor Hart, do you have a question? Yes. Thank
you. I just want to ask. There are no permits
for kitchens. Wrong. Okay, am I wrong? There's tons of
them. There's 21 of them. That's the lie that they're
telling you. The city, sir. Yes. You want me to
do not. I will not put up with that. I'm
just telling you they're not being honest. I will not
put that tone. You can, you can discuss it with
us, but I will not put up with that tone
with regards to what you're saying about the city, please.
You can deal with your case, but it ends up
being not in that tone. Thank you. Do you care
to answer the question just directly, but not stating anything
with regards to any accusations against city individuals. Yeah, I'll
do my best. Okay. Staff have said that all the
kitchens you put in, there are no permits for kitchens.
That you have put in to all those units. So
can you provide a permit. For all those kitchens. Okay.
So I just got to repeat that question. And I'm
sorry for my tone. I want to fix that up.
The question that I heard, uh, councillor was. Do I
have permits for the kitchens that are in there. And
the answer is yes. And I need to say that
I did not put those kitchens in. Those kitchens were
inspected. Before I came there. The BC assessment shows apartment
housing, rooming house. And seven individual units. It's a multifamily
building. It's not a single family building. It's a multifamily
building. And yes, I did ask the city clerk to
email you guys the 21 permits with about four or
five occupancy permits for suites. And those occupancy permits have
not been revoked. So those are all there. Thank you.
I can definitely provide them too personal if you want
and we don't have to make a decision today. Thank
you, sir. Appreciate that. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Um,
council seeing no further questions. Um, city clerk, if I
can, just kind of read through the recommendation one more
time to me, please. Thank you, worship. So the staff
recommendation is that council upholds the decision of the license
inspector to refuse to grant and accommodation services major business
license for an apartment on the subject property located at
911 Bernard Ave. Thank you, council. Do I have a
mover. Move by Councillor Singh, seconded by Council World? Do
we have comments? Comments, councillor sing comments. Thank you, worship.
You know, I have visited the site. And this morning
drove by, uh, to take another look at it. It
is a perfect location for what the applicant is wanting
to do. But it's simple. It's not compliant. We just
cannot approve something if he doesn't comply with the regulations.
It's simple. Um, we would be wrong. If we, um,
if we approve this, and he's not playing by the
rules. I'm not comfortable that people living there would be
in a safe situation. I'm just not comfortable with that.
And, um, so because of all this. All I'm asking
for is the applicant to comply with the regulations and
work with staff to get. The best possible outcome. We're
not being unreasonable. I cannot support it at this, uh,
thank you, councillor. Councillor Walwich, please. Thanks for worship. Um,
a compliance agreement was issued in 2023 with a laundry
list of items that could have been completed. And whether
permits have been opened or not is irrelevant to me.
The zoning allows the use. But the form has not
been approved from a life safety perspective. That is my
number one concern. And those, those standards are in place
for a reason with BC building code. And, um, you
know, this has taken an immense amount of staff time.
Which by the way, I take exception to implying that
our staff are lying. Um, I'm fully prepared to uphold
what's before us today. This is a life safety issue.
And it's something that we have to take really seriously.
The zoning allows it. And if, um, if the applicant
wants to come into compliance, three years ago, that was
an option. So I'm, I'm steadfast in supporting the recommendation
before us. Thank you. Uh, council after that all in
favor. Opposed carried. Thank you and to staff. Thank you
for the work that you have done on this. We
hope that there is a successful pathway found to come
into compliance. Um, and, uh, apologies on behalf of any
comments that drogatory comments that were made towards you. They
are not something that should be said. And they are
not correct. So thank you. Thank you, worship. That brings
us to item 4. 1 on the agenda. We have
initial consideration and first reading for an application to amend
the future land use designation and rezone a property on
Montenegro drive. And here to present to staff from the
development planning department. Good afternoon, Jamie.
Good afternoon, your worship. Today council's being asked to give
initial consideration to an official community plan and zoning by
law amendment. To facilitate a six lot subdivision. The application
was submitted to staff on May 20th, 2025. Neighbourhood notification
was received on March 25th of this year. No responses
were received. Pending consideration today, the application will be forward
to public hearing. The subject property is located within the
cursioner mountain neighbourhood and is bisected by Montenegro Drive. The
proposed OCP and zoning amendments only apply to these two
small portions within the northern section off Montenegro drive. While
the southern portion will remain its current state. Kirshner Mountain
neighbourhood park. Directly at Butts, the Eastern boundary of the
southern portion that will once again remain in its current
state. Model City Data indicates approximately 363 residential units.
Across 268 parcels within 400 metres of the subject property.
Suggesting the surrounding area is predominantly comprised of single detached
dwellings on individual lots, which is consistent with the proposed
development. Here is closer look at the subject property. The
building envelopes were graded during the earlier subdivision stages. And
the six proposed lots extend the existing pattern of development.
The future land use as nation of the subject property.
And the majority of the surrounding area is the S
res, suburban residential, which is highlighted in yellow. Kirshner mountain
neighbourhood park designated us park as shown as dark green.
Areas designated as natural areas. Are shown in light green.
The proposed OCP amendment seeks to redesnate a portion of
natural areas to SRES, suburban residential, to align with a
more suitable RU - 1 large lot housing zone. We
propose OCP amendment is illustrate here as overlapping the existing
natural areas, future land use destination. This remnant area does
not meet the city's criteria for park dedication as the
parcel is constrained, has limited functionality. And would provide minimal
public benefit while introducing ongoing maintenance requirements. As part of
the broader subdivision, a more suitable parkland education area will
be provided through the transfer lands to the city to
support linear parks network and trail connectivity. The current zoning
of the subject properties comprise of RU1, large lot housing.
MF2 townhouse housing, and P3 parks in open space. The
proposed zoning amendment is intend to align the proposed development
with the surrounding neighbourhood by maintain the same type of
built form and log configuration through the proposed six slot
subdivision. DRE1 large slot housing zone permits up to four
dwelling units. However, concurrent applications proposed a single family residence
on each slot due to cite constraints such as deep
slopes and narrow lock configuration. The proposed amendments would facilitate
development that would match the surrounding area in terms of
height and stories. The OCP and zoning amendment proposals show
strong alignment with climate resiliency objectives as the subject property
is adjacent to cursioner mountain neighbourhood park. And we'll include
an additional park area to be dedicated through the subdivision
process. Black mountain elementary school is a tenement by right
away. And the site is serviced by the number 14
bus, which provides an eight minute trip to Rutland Urban
Centre. The proposal amendments support policy 7. 2. 1 ground
- oriented housing by facilitating the development of single ground
- oriented dwellings located in close proximity to black mountain
elementary school and parks. This also aligns with policy 7.
2. 2 hillside house informed by ensuring that future residential
development reflects the natural topography and minimizes disturbance to the
sensitive rear slopes. As well as policy 7. 2. 3.
As it encourages the integration of natural parks with natural
areas. Therefore, given the alignment with the OCP policies, staff
recommend support for the OCP and zoning amendments. And that
concludes my presentation, your worship. Jamie, thank you. Uh, councillor
Weber, please. Yes, just to understand, um, the natural area
designation that he showed in the slide. It looks like
the new houses, as you said, will be built along
Montenegro drive, right? And then behind it, there is a
section there that's called natural. And it doesn't sound like
there's any plan, like that slide there. It doesn't sound
like the plan to build on that green strip. Thank
you, worship. That is correct. So that will be portion
that will be dedicated through the city, and that will
remain within the linear trail corridor to connect it. And
it will be also retained as a covenant. So there'd
still be a fair amount of space between the houses
on Montenegro and then whatever houses are above that on
the neighbouring streets. There'd still be that, it wouldn't be
a park, you said, but it would be a natural
area. Thank you, worship. That is correct. It'll remain as
a kind of a more natural feature with a linear
cord or a trail network. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Um, Councillor Cannon, questions? Yeah, just to clarify, this will
be coming to a public hearing. So I was wondering,
staff, or was there any sort of pro formated based
on what the present zoning, how many units would be
permitted to the six being proposed? That basically looks like
the applicant's down zoning his own property, from correct? I
think you worship. Sorry, just to understand, are you asking
how many units there'll be proposed through the subdivision? No,
potentially with the existing zone. Thank you, Rorschap. So technically
within the RU - 1, they will be allowed up
to four units. However, the concurrent applications that have been
received show only a single family dwelling within each lot
due to high constraints of these deep rear slopes and
the lock configuration air lock configurations. The OCP would support
townhomes. Um, if the applicant wanted to retain the MF2,
but currently rewinding to rezone the MF2 to align with
the RU - 1. That's what I was referring to
how many units could they get into MF2? Oh, sorry.
My apologies, your worship. Um, within the MF2, they could
get six. Thank you. Seeing no further questions, do I
have a mover please move by Councillor Stock, seconded by
Councillor to heart. No further comments, all in favor. Carried,
thank you. And your worship, are two bylaws associated with
this item. So item 4. 2 is to give first
reading to the official community plan amending bylaw for the
subject property. That is moved by Councillor Cannon, seconded by
Councillor D. Hart. That by the number 12, 924, be
read a first time. And that the bylaw has been
considered in conjunction with the city's financial plan and waste
management plan. All in favor. Opposed. Carried, thank you. And
item 4. 3 is the corresponding zoning bylaw. This is
Teresa owned to the RU - 1 large lot housing
zone. That is moved by Councillor Dehart, seconded by Councillor
Cannon that bylaw number 12, 925, be read a first
time. All in favor. Opposed, Carrie, thank you. Thank you.
Your wiship and those will be scheduled to the July
14th public hearing. Thank you. That brings us to item
4. 4. This is initial consideration for a rezoning application
on Glenmore Road. Here to present is staff from development
planning. Good afternoon, Carson. Hello, your worship. Good afternoon. The
purpose of this application is to seek initial consideration. To
rezone the subject property from the MF - 1 infill
housing zone, to the MF2 townhouse housing zone facilitate a
future development. The application was submitted to staff on March
20th of this year. Neighbourhood notification was received May 13th
of 2026. With 25 responses received. Today we are seeking
initial consideration. This is the subject property located on Glamour
Road, as indicated by the red boundary. The neighbourhood provides
a mix of infill and townhouse housing zoning and is
located in close proximity to the village centre along Kaynor.
Here's the subject property without zoning. Using Model City Data,
we can determine that there is an estimated population of
1060 peoples. With 689 estimated jobs within a 400 metre
buffer. Future land use is core area neighbourhood. Here's a
closer look at the property. There's an existing dwelling on
site facing Glennmore Road. Glenmore Road is designated as a
transit supportive corridor, which supports building heights up to six
stories. Vehicle access to site is provided via McTavish Road.
And there is a multi - use pathway adjacent. To
the southeast of the property. Here's some street perspectives. First
is from Glenmore Road. The second provides view from the
north side of McTavish Road. Which is currently a dead
end. The applicant is proposing to rezone to the MF2
zone, which provides a zone for townhouses up to three
stories on service urban lots. Which is the same height
permitted in the current MF1 zoning. The maximum density is
a floor area ratio of 1. 0. A maximum height
of three stories. And a maximum site coverage of 55
percent. Subject property meets criteria for climate resilience. It is
less than a 10 minute walk to retail and restaurants
in the Glenmore Village Centre. A five minute walk to
park, such as brands Creek Linear Park and Baloo Park.
And a 10 minute walk to either Watson Road Elementary,
where Dr. Knox Middle School. The proposed rezoning meets several
OCP policies for the core area, including policy 5. 3.
1, which supports larger infill projects near Community amenities, such
as Parks and Schools. And policy 5. 11. 1, which
ensures the diverse mix of low and medium density housing.
As well as policy 5. 2. 2, which encourages building
heights of up to six stories and query neighbourhoods along
transit supportive corridors. Staff recommends support for the proposed rezoning
application. As the future land uses coryary neighbourhood, it means
several OCP policies. Is located along a transit supportive corridor.
And a development permit would follow to consider housing design.
That concludes my presentation membership. Thank you. Um, questions. Councillor
Stock, please. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Yeah,
could you go back to the subject property map with
the aerial view of the site, please? This one, thank
you. So I see McTavish Road comes to a dead
end and then it appears McTavish picks up again. So
in this, um, development process, uh, is there a road
dedication and a completion of Mctavus Road. You worship. Uh,
road design and any road dedications would be attributed at
development permit. At this time, nothing, uh, spoken from the
engineering department regarding a dedication. The intent would be a
hammerhead currently, uh, at the centre of the property, as
opposed to just extending the natural flow of the road.
Yeah, it'd be addressed that development permit and not at
rezoning. Okay. It has a substantial impact on design. So
I think it's been held for that. That's what I'm
thinking of from a zoning perspective. It's not on typical
to consider the road network when we're zoning something. And
I'm surprised that there's no discussion regarding the road network.
Mr. Smith, please. You worship. As Glenn Moore is a
major arterial. We do seek to limit the number of
accesses onto those types of roads. And that's why we
wouldn't be looking at that, um, through this application. And
rather than that. Um, keep the hammerhead situation. Um, like,
like, uh, Carson was referring to in his comments. Uh,
the generally we try and by policy again, like, take,
take the driveways off of those and the access is
off and keep them at more major intersections that are
lighted. Thank you. One supplemental question then. But if McTavish
Road was extended through, would not all the properties have
access off McTavish roed. Uh, you were not need to
have the access off Glenmore. Yeah. You worship. I mean,
it could go to Glenmer. It could go right through.
But again, um, that adds traffic in another neighbourhood. And,
uh, that's another from our staff perspective. It wasn't something
that we thought from a performance perspective was a big
enough benefit to justify. Or we would have asked for
it. Thank you. Councillor Singh, please questions. Yes. Thank you.
Along the same lines, her staff actually, um, you know
of McDavish. It's a pretty narrow road to, um, provide
access to 22 units or so that are being proposed
for the site. How comfortable a staff with the, um.
Path, the road network, as Luke said, to this project.
Uh, yes, Jership. The number quoted, the 22 is just
a part of a conceptual design. And it's not addressed
today, but it'd be addressed at development permit. That number
could shrink considerably depending on factors, uh, associated to the
development permit. Currently, uh, everybody would be directed to access
and leave via McTavish Road at this time. Sorry, can
you repeat the last line, sorry? Uh, the intent would
be accessed via McTavish Road to site. Um, on the
Glenmore side, there is a corridor, a trail there. So
I assume that wouldn't be the main exit off site.
Thank you. Councillor Love Growth, please. Yeah. I was going
to say anything because Councillor Stack actually asked my question,
but those, those are pretty short cul - de -
sacs. Um, so, but I just eyeballing it. So are
we talking less than 200 metres? I think so. It's
fairly short approximately 200 metres from that. And the alternate,
even without the hammer, if you had to back up,
but the hammerhead gives me comfort. Um, I was looking
for a dedication as well, just like you, but actually
looking at it from a little higher distance. I think,
I think, uh, I think that'll work. Thank you. And
it's staff had mentioned that's a phase which is coming
up. So, um, so with that said, do I have
a mover of this motion? Please move by Councillor Weber.
Second advice councillor. Lovegrove, uh, comments. Councillor Stack, you have
comments. Yes, thank you. I appreciate staff's comments on this.
However, just from my years on council, I mean, one
of the main things we've always tried to do is
have road connectivity whenever we could when there's a dead
end road with a lot. And then another part of
the road that's dead ended. To me, it makes good
planning sense to connect those roads. Um, for access for
emergency for all the other services why we want our
road network connected. So I'm really puzzled on this one.
Why there would be no road connection through what looks
like already and established road other than perhaps the development
team doesn't want to build the road and lose the,
we're at the additional cost to extend it. But to
me, it seems, I'll be very concerned when it comes
to DP, whether I'll support that because it just doesn't
seem to make sense to me. I guess I'll need
a lot more defence or argument why we should not
connect our road system. Thank you, councillor. Seeing no further
comments. All in favor. Opposed. Councillor Singh and Councillor Stack
opposed. Thank you. Thank you, worship. Item 4. 5 is
supplemental report. This follows notice of motion. Pardon me, notice
of first reading being given for a site - specific
text amending bylaw. And three, rezoning bylaws. Uh, we have
not received any correspondence on any of those items. If
there is no questions from council, I'll move straight to
the bylaw. Council, do we have any questions? Councillor Cannon,
questions on one of. I would rather separate the first
one out. Thanks. I'm sorry. I'd rather separate the first
one. The first. I'm a favor of the two of
them. Okay. So, um, city clerk, please, if we could
just pull the first one out of the other two.
Yep. So Haldane Road will be considered, uh, separately as
that is to give first, second, and third readings and
to adopt, just to clarification here, uh, the agenda indicates
that it's only for first, second, and third readings. There
are no conditions on it. So it can actually be
given all readings and be adopted today. So council will
consider, uh, that item only right now. So this is
item 4. 6. 1 haldane road. And this is a
text amending bylaw for the I3 heavy industrial zone. And
that is moved by Councillor Canon and seconded by councillor
dehart that by the number 12, 923 be read a
first, second, and third time and be adopted. All in
favor, posed, carried. Thank you. Thank you, worship. Um, and
then if counsel has no objections, we would consider the
items under 4. 7 together. Council, anyone, your worship I
was looking at for. Councillor Cannon, which item are you
speaking of? Lawson Avenue. Loss. Okay. Okay. So, uh, thank
you, council. We will then deal with item 4. 7.
1 on its own. So this is the rezoning application
for 727 747, loss in avenue. This is Teresa on
the subject property to the TS1R transit supportive corridor rental
only zone. Uh, and so this is to give first,
second, and third readings to the rezoning bylaw, uh, by
the number 12, 915. And I'll need a mover in
secondary worship. Moved by council. Well, we're seconded by Councillor
Hodge. All in favor. Opposed. Councillor Cannon opposed their Weber
opposed also. Thank you. We will deal with, uh, items
4. 7 and two and 4. 7. 3 together then.
Uh, so this is to give first, second, and third
readings to the rezoning bylaws on Harvey Avenue and on
Appaloosa Road. And that is Moved My Councillor Dehart. Second
and by Councillor Cannon. That bylaw number is 12, 918
and 12, 922. We read a first, second, and third
time. All in favor. Opposed, Carried, thank you. Thank you,
worship. Uh, that brings us to item 4. 8 on
the agenda. This is to amend a bylaw third reading
and adopt it before we go to that item. I'll
go to Councillor Canon for a statement for this and
item 4. 9. Councillor Cannon, please. Thank you, worship. And
thanks Madam Klurk. Family have owned property two doors down.
So excuse myself the DP application as well as rezoning
things. Thank you.
Thank you. So, uh, dealing with item 4. 8. This
is the, uh, rezoning bylaw for the subject property, uh,
on crossroad. And so this is moved by councillor singed
by councillor D heart that by then number 12, 617
be amended at third reading, uh, by replacing the underlying
zone to MF1 in fill housing. And, uh, I'll need
a vote on that. Do you have it moved? Yep.
Moved by councillors singing by councillor D heart. So this
is just to amend the bylat third reading and then
we'll deal with adoption. Thank you. All in favor. Opposed.
Carried. Thank you. Thank you, worship. And then, uh, moved
by councillor singed by councillor dehart. That bylaw number 12,
617 as amended be adopted. All in favor. Opposed carried.
Thank you. Thank you. That deals with the bylaw under
item 4. 8 and brings us to item 4. 9,
where we have consideration for a foreman character development permit
for the same property on crossroad. And here to present
to staff from development planning. Good afternoon. Thank you, worship.
This afternoon we are here for councils consideration of a
development permit for the form of character of a town
host development. The rezoning and development permanent applications were submitted
to the city on March 1st of 2023. The file
went for initial consideration on February 5th, 2024. The file
received reading considerations on February 26th. And today we are
here for the final reading of MF2 Zone and council
consideration of a DP. And if approved, the file can
move to the billing permit stage. As shown on the
development process slide, the application exceeded the average development timeline.
This is primarily due to the applicant's preference to proceed
without variances, uh, which resulted in several site redesigns, as
well as following rezoning the applicant as for more time
to secure appropriate financing. The subject property is in close
proximity to North Glenmore elementary, Dr. Knox Middle School. Across
Glencross Park and the Glenmore Recreation Corridor. Uh, the surrounded
area is a mix of MF1 in fill housing. MF2
townhouse housing MF3 apartment housing. P2 education and minor institutional
and P3 parks in open space. So mix of zones.
The hosey knees break down. Uh, indicates that there are
the need for three bedroom units. So this bedroom mixed
will assist in meeting those targets. Here's a look at
the subject property on the corner of crossroad and snow
cell road. Uh, they're currently two properties. And they'll be
required to be consolidated prior to the issuance of the
development permit. Here's some neighbourhood context seeing the existing dwelling
on the corner of Snowstone cross as well as an
aerial image showing the existing property in this rounded neighbourhood.
Uh, the development permit proposes 18 three bedroom units, all
three stories. Uh, the units all have two parking stalls
as well as three visitor cells, which exceeds the minimum
required parking. There are also 10 large trees across the
property. Here's a closer look at the, uh, at the,
um, site plan showing the four main blocks with main
vehicle access off of snow cell street and all units
are ground oriented with seven of the units facing the
streets. Amendy spaces include private amenity, a private patio is
in the second third floor in rooftop as well as
common amniedady spaces programmed with green space, uh, into locations
at the centre of the site. Here is the, one
of the buildings, billing one facing north. As well as
facing south, building four years of the one facing crossroad.
And then the internal circulation joined the garage doors. Uh,
the materials that are used include a mix of white
grey and black fibre cement board wood longboard and then
concrete finishing. Here's the landscape plan, landscape plans a little
bit hard to read. So we circled some of the
trees here. Uh, there are eight trees along snowstone cross
as well as eight along the north property line, creating
privacy and a visual break. And then for along the
east property line. And the proposed location will help with
screenscape as the streetscape as well as, uh, enhancing privacy
and screen of the neighbours. So here's the site plan
showing off of snow cell. And then once again, on
the corner of, uh, snow cell and cross. The proposal
meets several policies in the official commute plan. Including designing
each unit to have individual access from the public street,
providing landscaping and strategic locations, including framing, the building, then
softening the edges and then designing all, you know, tab
access to private and semi - private amenity spaces. So
staff are recommending support for the provost development permit as
it meets the majority of the OCP former character design
guidelines does not include any variances and provides density into
an established neighbourhood. And that includes that for Mark. Thanks.
Thank you. Tyler, thank you. Uh, council questions. Seeing none,
do I have a mover, please? Move by councillor sing,
seconded by councillor to heart and comments. Council to heart,
please. Thank you, worship. And thanks to staff, you know,
um, we look around and quite often we do not
get, um, a development this size with no variances. And
I really like the clean look of it close to
schools. I think it would be really, really great for
families in this area. So I'm very happy to, to
move it forward. Thank you. Um, seeing no further comments,
counsel all in favor. Opposed, carried. Thank you both and
council. We're on to the next section. So we will
just take a five minute break, please. And thank you.
Sorry. I missed the. I thought you were pretty. No,
I know. Anyway. We got there. Jews orange. So. I
keep hearing. Back there. I know.
I could separate it.
Uh, no, that's cool. Sorry. I just want to know
whether that was that limitation. No, because we, that's been
expanded. That's why I had to land my own memory.
Anything from the sea.
Oh. I'm just here. So then I wanted to go
to people. And I wanted to see that was the
one I think was up historically.
Okay. So this is order. This is somebody. Yeah. I'm
not sure why it's not big. Why is it first
year.
Oh yeah, the subsequent build on Sprite. Go there. Yeah.
Show the second down. Okay. I know that there was
some, from going on too far. I wonder if I
thought. Yeah. But it's because that's all safe. Was weight
content? If the way to have those two talk to
each other. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yeah.
The best technique. Like. Screen.
Um, yeah, so it's not coming up there.
Uh, maybe just respond in that room. Okay.
Yeah. I haven't had any issues receiving. Them. I'm not
aware. Of what. S exploring at any. Rate.
Thank you, council. I just like to call this meeting
back to order. Citi clerk, please. Thank you, your worship.
We are now moving to item 5. 1 on the
agenda, and this is to adopt a rezoning bylaw on
Penno Road before I go to that item. I'll go
to Councillor DeHart for a statement. Thank you, worship. I
am going to excuse myself as I have on this
item in the past for several reasons. My employers own
two major golf courses in Kelowna, and I'm very involved
in those two courses. And also they online budding coloning
springs golf course. Thank you. And Councillor Dehar, I'll actually
get you to also make a statement for 5. 2.
It's a separate matter, but you have previously declared conflict
for that one as well. That's 5. 2, a short
- term rental. Yeah, so I was just looking there.
Yes, I will declare conflict on this. Also, my husband
and I own two short - term rentals, Airbnbs, that
are in effect right now as a June 1st. And
also the hotel I work for. Airbnbs can be a
conflict. Thank you. Thank you, councillor.
Thank you with councillor dehart declaring. We move to consider
adoption of the bylaw for 480 penno road. And this
is moved by Councillor Wildridge, seconded by Councillor Cannon that
bylaw number 12, 864 be adopted. All in favor, Councillor
Cannon, comments? Yeah, you worship. I just want to note
the clerk to just clarify if it's Putin for council
to a preceded this time to approve final reading the
spylaw, considering that pending litigation. Thank you, Riship. The city
is confident that our obligations have been met for this
file, and we are preparing a response to the litigation
regarding the matter. But in the meantime, the bylaw in
any associated procedures are considered valid unless a court decides
otherwise, which would be dealt within accordance. And so with
all the conditions for the rezoning having been met, council
is to consider bylaw adoption. That is the prudent course
of action. Thank you. Councillor Lovegrove, please. I just want
to thank the clerk for that answer to Councillor Cannes.
Question, but given we're still in pending litigation, I'd like
to move deferring this pending resolution of that legal challenge.
Your worship, on the floor for the bylaw itself. But
a deferral motion would need to be dealt with. There's
no debate on that. So I suggest that that'd be
addressed. Just a point of clarification with regards to it.
There's already emotion on the floor, city clerk. So would
that deferral basically. You worship the deferral would need to
be dealt with, and then we would go back to
the original motion if the deferral fails to pass. Thank
you. So there is a deferral that has been put
forward by a councillor. The question with regards to that
is all in fade. Sorry, your worship. It would need
to be seconded to be on the floor, the deferral
motion. Sorry, my apologies with regards to that. So do
I have a seconder. Seconded by Councillor Cannon. So this
has been moved by Councillove, go seconded by Councillor Cannon.
All in favor. Opposed. So that does not carry. Thank
you. Back to the original motion. Thank you, Riship. So
just for clarity, back to the original motion. This has
moved by Councillor Wildridge, seconded by Councillor Cannon. That byline
number 12, 864 be adopted. All in favor. Opposed. Councillor
Cannon, Councillor Love Grove opposed. And Councillor. Again, councillor Hodge,
thank you. Thank you, council. Thank you, worship. So just
Councillor Lovegrove, short - term rentals. Thank you, worship. That's
exactly what I was having my light on for. My
wife and I do own a short - term rental,
so I'll recuse myself from item 5. 2. Thank you.
Thank you, Riship. So we are on item 5. 2,
and this is to adopt a rezoning bylaw on Abbott
Street as Councillor Love Grove indicated is related to short
- term rentals. So that has moved by Councillor Wildredge,
seconded by Councillor Canon that by the number 12, 899
be adopted. All in favor. Post, Carrie, thank you. Thank
you, worship councillors, dehard, and lovegrove may return to the
meeting.
And that brings us to item 5. 3 on the
agenda, and this is to adopt a rezoning bylaw in
Franklin Road to the MF1R in Phil Housing Rental Only
Zone. That is moved by Councillor Love Grove, seconded by
counseloredge that by the number 12, 908 be adopted. All
in favor? Post, carried, thank you. Thank you, and item
5. 4 is a rezoning bylaw on saucier ab, to
rezone to the TS1R transit supportive corridor, rental only zone.
That is moved by Councillor Woodridge, seconded by Councillor Lovegrove
that by the number 12, 911 be adopted. All in
favor. Opposed. Carrie, thank you. Thank you. That brings us
to item 6. 1 on the agenda, and we have
a report from the audit committee regarding fringe area planning
agreement options. Uh, and here to present on behalf of
the audit committee staff from long range planning and financial
services. Good afternoon, Robert. You worship.
Okay, good afternoon, your worship members of council. This is
a follow - up to the report brought before council
this past January, regarding the fringe area planning services agreement
with the regional district of central local. Disagreement gives Coluna's
representatives on the regional district board a vote on land
use decisions like zoning and electoral areas in close proximity
to the city. The existing agreement expired at the end
of 2025 and the proposed for newer runs from January,
2026 to December 2030. In the proposed renewal agreement, no
changes are recommended to the boundaries. Or to the funding
formula. However, the formula does result in increases to the
total cost for the program year over year with the
agreement signalling an average annual cost of approximately 373, 000
dollars over the five - year term. This funding is
sourced from the RDCO tax levy, charged the cologne attack
spayers, and does not require an allocation from the city
of Columbus budget. For reference, these are the areas in
the existing and proposed agreement. The stars show the French
areas where cologne directors would vote on land use decisions.
For context, annual costs under the previous agreement rose from
approximately 177, 000 dollars in 2021 dollars in 2025 driven
primarily by staff and overhead changes. The new agreement cites
a cost of approximately 373, 000 dollars. And this would
be the anticipated average cost annual cost over the life
of the agreement. So these costs would be lower, earlier
in the agreement's life, and higher in later years. For
context, this cost is approximately double of what was in
effect in 2021. In January of this year, council deferred
council deferred of resolution on the new agreement pending additional
information from the regional district. This discussion took place, uh,
in April to the audit committee, and following these discussions,
three options emerged with the recommendation coming from the audit
committee for councils consideration today. Option one commits to the
full five - year agreement as outlined with annual cost
reviews, though this does not guarantee cost or service -
level changes during this term. This is effectively the status
quo that the agreement has proposed with more regular connections
with regional staff to discuss, anticipated, and upcoming costs. Option
two enters the agreement for 2026 only, then direct staff
to work with the regional district to negotiate, reduced fringe
area boundaries, limited to lands directly adjacent to Kelowna for
2027 through to 2030. The swap shows the reduced fringe
area contemplated under option two, so the areas with X's
would be removed. Leaving only those areas adjacent to the
Kelowna boundary. If this area was reduced, the cost would
also come down, and based on the agreements funding formula,
uh, would drop from the three approximately 373, 000 to
approximately 225, 000 dollars. What this effectively does is shrinks
the overall fringe area to reduce the overall costs. Under
the third option, Kelowna would enter into the agreement for
2026 only, opt out of electoral area planning entirely. What
this means is that colonizable directors would no longer have
a vote on land use matters within the fryjaria, but
that colonna residents would also no longer contribute financially to
the service. Under this option, we would only need to
notify the regional district of this intent by August 31st
of this year. Regardless of this approach, the regional district
is expected to continue sending land use referrals to city
staff for comment, and colonist directors would keep their vote
on broader regional planning work. Uh, including the regional growth
strategy, for example. The city would also retain direct influence
on land use through water, sewer, and road connections at
the boundary, which would often be needed to service new
development. And other partners like Florida species and the province,
would continue to set utility and other transportation requirements. The
audit committee has recommended option three, where colonna would opt
out of electoral area planning. This option is recommended because
it balances the short - term continuity, uh, by continuing
in 2026, also a clearly signalling an exit from the
service and the associated costs for cologne attackspayers. It allows
the city to maintain its current role this year while
recognising that staff referrals work on broader regional initiatives like
the regional growth strategy, and the city's role in utility
and servicing decisions remain meaningful tools to influence fry, growth,
um, after exiting the service. Thank you, worship members of
council. That concludes staff comments. Thank you. Um, questionslor Wolbridge,
please. Thanks to worship. Um, I understand why we're looking
at this today, absolutely. Um, to make sure it's effective
for the taxpayers of Kelowna. Um, I'm just wondering, a
decision has been made to exit completely. And what concerns
me are the fringe areas of north and south colognus,
specifically South Kolonia, I recount, if we go back to
the map, clone a mountain, for example, uh, was fully
supported by EA directors and not by Kelowna. And so
by opting out of this completely, um, that's an example
where I think we're opening ourselves to risk despite what's
been said about, uh, infrastructure servicing. So I'm just, I'm
just wondering, how does that decision made. And what are
the impacts going to be. So, so you worship the
decision was really focused on looking at the opportunities where
and how the city could influence decisions. Um, on what
happens in these areas. Right. Um, and balancing that with
the cost of the service. Um, so what was discussed
was the role that the city would play on something
like, um, a broader regional initiative like the regional growth
strategy, where there could be proactive direction to, um, to
determine or signal what would be appropriate and inappropriate uses.
Um, those areas. Um, and then having those opportunities for,
um, the staff referral level that if something comes to
staff from the regional district and there are concerns, staff
could provide comment on that as well. So those were
the different elements that were balanced in the discussion. Right.
So to be clear, uh, we can give comments, but
whether those are taken to account when a vote is
called. Doesn't really matter, correct? You worship, that's correct. I'm
referring to staff level comments and referrals. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
I just think it's, it's important for the public to
understand that, um, don't bother calling your elected officials because
it'll just be comments put on a report at the
regional board table decided by 2EA directors. So there are,
there are implications in this. I fully understand the direction
on that. EA West, but I think this is a
bad governance decision from EAs, but I'm not surprised this
is a administrative decision. Thanks. Um, councillor Love Grove, please.
Thanks. Um, when did staff become aware of these 2026
service costs being doubled. Your worship, uh, the request to
consider renewal of the five year agreement came to staff,
uh, last year last fall. Um, as part of the
review of that request, um, staff, uh, connected with our
regional counterparts, um, to pull the information on, um, what
the, what the finances had been for this program over
the past few years. Um, and that's when staff had
the opportunity to see how the cost had changed over
in recent years. And I think I heard you say
it was a reallocation of overhead and just staffing increases.
Your worship, yes. We did reach out to the regional
district to get some information on what was tied to
those cost increases. Uh, and it was really related to
onboarding new staff and the overhead that goes along with
that. Okay. And please remind me, you worship, if this
was out of words, okay, this, we knew about this
before we withdrew from the transportation service. Because I can't
remember the time you're not. You worship. I can't confirm.
I don't recall the timing. Okay. Um, dude, and this
is, uh, city, I guess, question your worship for city
clerk. Do we have access to the information that was
presented at the audit committee by RDCO staff. Uh, your
worship, it's, it's in general summarized in the information that
council has available to you today. And just a note
in terms of the previous question regarding the transportation service.
It was a proposed new transportation service in the council
made that decision earlier last year, uh, prior to the,
uh, renewal coming to staff. Oh, okay. Interesting. Um, so
with the audit committee, maybe I'll wait to hear from
your worship and councillor stack on your aspect at the
audit committee. If you don't mind. But I guess I'm,
I do have some comments to make your worship, but
I'm sure I'd like to understand this a bit better.
Because Councillor Wolwards last comment or in response to the
question for staff was that this is administrative decision, but
I'm, I'm a little concerned about whether this is a
short term gain and the risk involved because opening ourselves
to risk, maybe, maybe staff could clarify, um, I'm just
going to list off what I came up with being
a first dream councillor is potential risks. So we would
have no input other than just a staff comment. No
voting around the table. If suddenly in our electoral areas,
we have gravel pits. Is that correct? Your worship, what
would happen in that case is that we would in
terms of the staff referral staff would get a referral.
We'd have an opportunity to comment. Uh, where the city,
uh, would have additional influences if uses like that required
additional infrastructure at the, at the city end. Um, that's
where the city would have, had direct influence in those
cases. Um, and again, looking at, um, proactive upstream planning,
having those types of discussions at something like the regional
growth strategy level. Okay. And what about soil fill on
individual lots. Uh, your worship. Yeah, I wouldn't be able
to comment on that. Um, it would be, it would
really be determined as to whether or not additional servicing
was need for that. Okay. And then access in or
through water sources. Lakes, shoot Lake Road. I'm not sure
where our boundary. East boundary is. But I mean, I'm
just wondering about, um, well, I'm going to just list
off and you can just give a general comment down.
I don't want to believe this. But wildfire planning firefighting
emergency response search and rescue. All those aspects could be
happening. Our electoral areas. We have absolutely no influence other
than the staff comment. Your worship, to be clear when
it comes to things like emergency services, um, inserts and
rescue. Those are existing functions that are separate from this
fringe planning area discussion. Okay. All right. Fair comment. Thanks.
Um, councillor cannon, please questions. Yeah. Thanks. For regional planning.
We'll still be part of the regional planning, correct? For
the regional district. Like the, you said the regional growth
planning. I think we contribute almost 450 or 500, 000
a year to that program. That'll still be part of
the equation. So we won't have any input as far
as potential land use under regional girl strategy. So you
worship there too. Um, we're touching on two different funding
streams here. There's regional planning. Um, which is a different
funding stream and provides different services. That would include something
like the regional growth strategy. That's not the subject of
today's discussion. This falls under the electoral area plot. I
just want to over. It's still part of that program,
but it doesn't have any, uh, ability to provide some
direction for long - term planning under the, we would
have direction under that funding source. So that's what I'm
saying. We still have a bit of a lever. You
worship, yes, with the, uh, with the, uh, the funding
source that we're talking about for regional planning under the
regional growth strategy, that's retained. And so the city would
still have a role and our representatives on the board
would have an, would still be able to vote on
region white initiatives like the growth strategy. Okay. For the
flip side, then Councillor Wolverage mentioned about the south. So
of Clauna Mountain came with another proposal. It's the regional
district. If we pull out of here, then we wouldn't
have a say in that it would be up to
just the area director. There are directors. Is that correct?
You worship if a proposal like that move forward. Um,
there would be discussions on servicing. So if the influence
that through the servicing on the city side, we would
continue to have a role there. There would be a
staff level referral, but there would not be, um, a
vote from a cologne councillor on, on that one. Okay.
And, um, I think councillor Wolver lovegrove had mentioned about
the audit committee. I see it's, as council, we don't
know when the audit committee meets and we don't have
access to the meeting minutes. So maybe through the chair
as the chair are one of the committee members could
elaborate a little bit more with. It says that the
regional district staff presented, but not really sure how this,
based on the recommendation, we're going to save some money.
But maybe you can provide a little bit more clarity
of how you came up with this recommendation from the
audit committee. Thank you. I'm just going to work my
way through councillors questions first, councillor. Councillor Hodgklees. Well, most
of you may. Feel rather rushed on this one, to
be honest with you. And I'm not comfortable with it.
Part of me says, I'm wondering if we shouldn't be
looking at deferriness or delayness until we have, uh, new
council and new regional district. To do with it. I
mean, it's going to affect. And in fact, the future
governments that are running both bodies. And. I would say
to all see them, you know, make their own decision.
I'm uncomfortable with it right now. That's why I say
that. Councillor, and we'll just try to keep comments if
we can. Just kind of keep it on questions if
we can for at the moment. And then we'll make
comments afterwards once we move this. Councillor Weber, please. Actually,
I had a, I'm waiting for comments. Okay. Thank you.
So that's, that's perfect. So I'm just, and we'll go
to comments. I'm just going to kind of, um, open
this up. I'm looking for a motion to put this
on the floor. Um, move by councillor. Um, stack seconded
by councillor cannon. Um, just to kind of move it,
uh, councillor, um, stack, please. I will too also, but
I'll start with you. You've been around a little bit
longer. My copes right. There you go. There we are.
Uh, couple of questions. So let me explain, I guess,
my perspective as to why I support this going ahead
is, um, I've sat on regional district off and on
for many, many years. And when originally we went into
fry jury planning, many years ago, um, the cost was
not very much. It was fairly minimal. Uh, we decided
at that time to fringe all the areas that were
identified here because we just thought it was a reasonable
thing to do. Um, and we did. But I don't
want to quote the amount, but my recollection was with
someone in the range of 90, 000 dollars a year
at that time. But over the years, it gets larger
and larger and larger to the point last year. It
really caught my attention. We're now looking at a five
year contract for 1. 85 million dollars. So when I
look at it from that perspective, when I'm looking at
any contract that I'm going into for 1. 8 million
dollars that the citizens of our city are going to
pay, I want to know what the value is that
we're going to get from that. And when I went
and reviewed the to some of the decisions that we've
made it, even including myself as a fringe area member,
uh, I couldn't think of any substantive vote that I've
taken in the years that I've been on the regional
district that I think would have made a difference. Typically
what I've done is we've looked to our electoral area
counterparts and said, do you want to support that secondary
suite or that carriage house? And they say, yeah, we
do. And I say, good, we'll support it too. So
there was just nothing of substance. And therefore, when I
looked at the cost of, you know, getting up between
three and 400, 000 dollars a year just to offer
a vote. I just couldn't see the value. And, um,
when we go back to the colonist, or sorry, to
the, um, cologne mountain thing, it never even made it
to the regional board table. It was proposed. But the
applicant never even came through. But that was dealt with
through an OCP change. And my understanding as a regional
director, we would still be involved with the official community
plan and with a long - term range planning. So
when I look back over the years, I just can't
see the value. So I had to put my city
of Kelowna hat on and saying, should our citizens be
paying this amount of money for a very minor comment
in my opinion on some of these rezonings? And I
just couldn't see the value. So therefore, that's why I
felt we should back off. And, um, and not continue
on with this service. I just don't see the value
for our citizens, for the costs that's being proposed. Council,
and then I will open it up to yourselves afterwards,
but just to give you a little bit of insight
from. Myself. First of all, weighed in with regards to
previous individuals who have been around longer than I have
with regards to fringe area planning, uh, whether it be
the mountain item, whether it be around the airport, um,
whether it be in other areas of this community, recognising
that each municipality in each area needs to put together,
um, uh, an official community plan. That official community plan,
when it sits upon our borders, we'll give us an
indication of whether that's residential lots, whether that is, um,
industrial, whether that is agriculture or whatever it happens to
be. So when we're looking at doing that long -
term planning that Robert speaks about, um, there's awareness with
regards to those individuals, what is coming within those specific
areas. There truly isn't really any real surprises. Um, that
come about. And if they need services of potential water,
if they need services of sewer, if they need services
of, you know, and this thing even potentially electricity to
a great degree, there's an involvement that they have. So
there isn't anything that's coming in, which is, um, again,
surprising us with regards to the way that it works.
I saw that, um, the work that the team does
here in conjunction with communicating with those individuals allows for
enough awareness of what is coming within these areas without
any surprises because of the role that they play from
a communication standpoint. And I asked, um, what to what
degree, you know, the vote and how it counts and
how many times it's been used. And you know, where
it's advanced. And there wasn't, I couldn't get any concrete
information back from it. And in our meetings, we did
go through and look at it from a financial standpoint.
We also did go through and ask for the regional
district to come in and present the situation with regards
to what's being done. They did present to specific areas
that were of concern. And the mountain was one of
them. And we had discussions about it. So it was
a good discussion around, you know, the specifics of it.
Um, but it was based upon that, you know, that
information, that consensus that there was substantial backup from all
of the existing programs at all the different areas have
as they build out. And that there is communications. And
if there is, you know, as councillor stock had said,
usually if there is one or two situations that come
about it gets discussed around the table and then is,
uh, information is exchanged. And if it's appropriate, then voted
for accordingly. But so just to give you some insight
that there was discussion that was had, and the audit
committee going back to this information of kind of exchanging
with regards to the audit committee, the audit committee has
worked this way well before even I got here that
they basically went through, got the reports, made a decision,
brought that information back to council. If counsel is, you
know, at this point in time, looking at saying, well,
we need a little bit more information from the audit
committee. That's absolutely fine. I mean, there isn't any problem
there. They're just like the other committees that are established
within here to try to look at reviewing the information,
having good discussions around it and bringing a recommendation back
to council. So, um, just so you're aware of kind
of some of that process that we went through. Councillor
Weber, you were the other individual on the audit committee.
Yeah. But my, my conclusions weren't the same as yours.
Yeah. And that's fair. That's fair. I'm just, I'm saying,
but and I'm, you know, I'm trying to be respectful
of the committee and so forth. But, um, I agree
with councillor stack that over the course of time costs
are risen to the point that you really do have
to debate whether or not it's worth it to the
colonia taxpayers to continue into it. But as I've been
on council now a while, maybe in my old age,
I'll becoming more small sea conservative than I used to
be, but I'm not comfortable. Sorry, Ron. But I'm not
comfortable with, um, I'm not comfortable with big changes all
at once anymore. So I'm more like, I look at
when option two came along. I looked at that and
said, that's perfect to me that we, we reduce the
cost by reducing the area in which we're voting and
only vote on the areas that are immediately adjacent to
the boundaries of Kelowna rather than across the lake and
way inlet. And so we could do, and that would
be for one period of time from now until 2030,
four years, I guess. And then during that time, we
could watch and see whether anything came up that, um,
we needed to vote for. And at the end of
that time, if we didn't even vote for those regions,
then that might be a good reason to actually get
out of it altogether. But I think myself option too
is the preferred option. And I would vote against the
motion that's, that's in front of us today. Thank you.
Thank you. Councillor Wolverge, please. Thanks for worship. Yeah. The
part of the problem I have here is that I
think option two, uh, was a reasonable approach where, you
know, where we still weigh in from a regional perspective
on what we, what we neighbour, um, obviously electoral area
West makes no sense to be, to be voting on
things across the lake. Um, but when I think about
what South of us, if someone wants to put an
AI data centre, for example, at the top of the
mountain, um, you know, staff can give feedback. But if
residents in the upper mission in kettle valley have an
issue with that, well, don't bother calling your city councillor
because they can't vote on it. So, um, unfortunately all
we see is what's before us right now in an
afternoon meeting. We didn't get to sit in and the
presentation from the regional district. So yet again, it's debatable
if that even meets the test to be in camera
from that perspective. But I think option two offered a
decent review. Reducing cost. And, um, would still give Kelowna
the ability to weigh in on, um, issues that affect
them. Um, our airport is also right on the border
of this. So, um, from my perspective, this is taking
it in the wrong direction. And I know we're looking
at dollars and cents of a 300 and some odd,
but in our billion dollar budget that we tote so
much at the city of Kelowna. That's a fairly small
amount of money that we could have negotiated down by
just changing the boundaries. So I won't be supporting the
resolution. Councillor Singh, please. You are at first, Councillor Stack
made so much sense to me, which he always does.
And I thought that was brilliant, of course. And then
councillor Weber made an argument which actually makes. Plausible sense
to me. And, um. I will be also looking at.
Recommendation to. Counts. Done. Uh, councillor, um. Love growth, please.
You worship just reading the room here. I'm going to
let you have a side chat with the city clerk
because it sounds like a lot of us are gravitating
towards option two. Council, there is a motion on the
floor right now. So we'll deal with that one and
comment on that one. But if you, there is one
on the floor. But if we defeat this. But we'll
deal with the one that's on the floor right at
the moment. All right. Well, I guess that's my comment.
I'm, I'm, I'm a, I guess I'm getting a sense
that based on decisions over the last year, getting this
feeling we're frustrating or regional partnerships. And I'm, I'm for
working on partnerships. It makes us stronger together. And I'm,
if we're out of this, what's going to take to
get back in. If we've made a mistake. So I'm
going to side with the voice of experience to my
far right. And the colleague to my immediate right. I
think, uh, as well to my immediate left based on
your earlier comments, Charlie. And I will be not supporting
this motion, but I do hope your worship. That if
this does go down, we're able at this meeting because
we're, I think we're getting a little tight on time.
That we can have an immediate reconsideration for option two
in the next few weeks, I hope, if not a
referral to a committee. Maybe I'm wrong on that. Just
throwing it out there. Thank you. Um, councillor Cannon, please.
Thanks, your worship, good discussion. And I really appreciate staff's
feedback as well. And I look at this from a
regional planning perspective. Our value, it's not if we're going
to grow. It's going to grow. And it's how we
manage it. If we don't manage it properly, it'll take
on a life of its own. So I think if
we just remove ourself exclusively and allow the area to
develop, we're open for some very serious problems and challenges
in the future. We've had a lot of growth already
without proper infrastructure. And as we continue to grow, I
mean, focuses to ensure that proper infrastructure is in place.
And if we don't have a say at the table,
I'm really concerned with that. I think with option two,
it'll be also revisiting our other, other programs, it says
with regard to, um, it says trigger RDCO led discussions
revised agreements. So I would look at our regional planning
function. We might build a save some money there and
contribute to here. So I'm leaning more to option too.
Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Councillor Stack, please. Thanks for
the second opportunity. I just wanted to respond to Councillor
Weber. Because as we had, we had some of these
discussions. And, um, I'm quite respectful of that opinion that
option two is something that could easily be considered. Um,
but I do, I guess my response to that is
I point out, uh, like West city of West Colonia,
for instance, doesn't comment on colonia east as an example.
I mean, they're part of our regional table, but we're
only talking about things that are immediately adjacent to our
border, but it doesn't mean that we at the regional
table don't discuss the whole region and do our planning
on a regional basis. So, uh, that's why this is
called fringe area planning because it's really not our area.
We vote on city of Kelowna. We're talking about having
a vote on our neighbor's area. It's adjacent to the
city. So that's why it's called a fringe. It's really
not our, our legislation and our, in our, in our
municipality. So I did consider, um, Councillor Weber's perspective. And
the only reason I didn't go that route is that
when I weighed out the financial cost, it was still
1. 1 million dollars over five years. And I had
to go back to my original assessment saying, is the
citizen of Kelowna getting good value? Even for a 1.
1 million dollar contract versus a 1. 8 million dollar
contract. And in my mind, it couldn't justify that the
value is there. And therefore trying to keep my conservative
financial hat on. I didn't support it. But that's the
reason I went the root idea as opposed to, I
fully understand the direction councillor Weber recommended. Councillor Hodge, you
have comments. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes. I think for
the input. It's really helped me a lot. Honestly, I
know of all this until. And I am going to
be putting my support pan off from two. I think,
uh, the best of both worlds. From small worlds as
they are. And I think it's the best gamble as
far as I'm concerned. So I would be going with
option to Mr. Mayor. Thank you, kind of. Thank you.
So seeing no for the comments, there is a motion
on the floor. I'm going to look for all those
in favor. Please certainly city clerk, please. Thank you, worship.
So the motion is that council receives the report for
information. That council enters into a fringe area planning agreement
with the regional district of central Okunogan for 2026. And
that council direct staff to give notice to the regional
district board to opt out of participation in electoral area
planning services by August 31st, 2026. And that is in
accordance with option three, just for clarity. That's, sorry, that's
option three. So I'm looking for, that's option three. So
all those in favor opposed. So that does not carry.
Thank you, councillor. So there was a request to address
one of the other options. I'm going to lean into
the city clerk to look at, um, if we, uh,
can move potentially for a consideration of that other option.
And if so, could you please read that other option
out? Thank you, Riship. So should council wish to consider
option two today. You're free to do so. Um, and
so by way of actual resolution, the first two items
would be the same. So for council to receive the
report from the audit committee for information to enter into
a fringe area planning agreement for 2026. And that encompasses
all areas. Uh, that's essentially how, how it's currently operating.
And then that council direct staff to engage with the
regional district of the central Okanagan staff on an agreement
for only the Kelowna and Kelowna and lake country fringe
planning areas for 2027 onward in accordance with option two
and to report back to council. Uh, and council, just
for, for added clarity, the Kelowna and clona and lake
country fringe planning areas, I've, Robert, if you can go
back to the PowerPoint that shows those, those are the
pink and green with the yellow stars on them on
this slide. Thank you. So council, do I have a
mover of this move by Councillor Weber, seconded by Councillor
Lovegrove. Do I have comments. Um, counts their stack. Yeah.
Um, I liked the first option that was on the
floor better, but I will support this because I think
it's better than leaving nothing amended. So as a compromise,
I would support it. Uh, any other comments. Counter to
heart. Thank your worst. Thanks, your worship my light. Okay.
Yeah. Um, basically, um, option two, it says enter agreement
for 2026 only. And I, and I'm comfortable with that.
If it had said anything more, now I know that
we're going to work on a new agreement, but that
doesn't mean that we can go back on, you know,
and do different agreements. Because it's a remainder. And who
knows that that'll come up with. I think once we
know that we would like some changes regardless of what
they are, I think having a compromise on those would
be good. So I'm okay with option two right now.
But I think there's a lot, uh, we're going to
have to really do some digging for 20, you know,
after 2026 and decide what exactly we're going to do
for 27 to 30. And I think that might even
change a bit. Thank you. Councillor, Councillor Cannon. Thank you.
The fact that this is, you know, for the year,
we can look forward to Councillor Hoyt said a new
council. We'll have maybe some different perspectives. I think we
need to look at the regional planning. Other regional components,
even recreation component, transportation as we study all these. And
maybe the funding from some of those other programs we're
in were reduced. And overall, the dollar impact might be
both the same. And we get better value for the
taxpayers. Thank you. Councillor Walbridge, please. Thanks to worship. Um,
yeah, I think wherever we landed with option to give
us some, some insurance that the interests of Kelowna can
be upheld at the board table, the regional growth strategy
is great. It's a, it's a guiding document. Um, but
it's not a decision making document. It doesn't override individual
OCPs or residents or partner municipalities. So, um, that is
a great document to guide discussion and growth. Um, but
this, I think, gives us, um, we've done our due
diligence to make sure that we aren't paying for things
we don't need. Um, but also gives us insurance that,
um, if things are being built on our borders that
we do have some input around the regional board table
can actually vote on them. Thank you. Any other comments
just before we go to a vote. As I had
shown in my vote, I would have preferred to have
option three, but I completely understand with regards to council.
And the direction that they're going, I felt there was
strong enough, um, strong enough backbone behind the idea that
the official community plans are in place. The coordination of
basically discussion in between them, uh, the centre where water
comes from and all the rest of that, that we're
well aware of whether or not there's growth happening in
these particular areas. I think there needs to be even
with going into this agreement, a complete and stronger understanding
of what this agreement does for all of the communities.
Um, and going through it, it doesn't seem to have
the depth that it needs. And also the timelines with
regards to renewals and all the rest of that, which
has brought this to the forefront and was not, you
know, potentially properly addressed. Um, so I think all of
that needs to happen. And, um, in agreement that it
ends up being, we came to a consensus on this
and moving it forward. So saying that we are looking
for option number two. I am going to ask all
in favor. Opposed. And thank you, counsel for that discussion.
And Robert, thank you. Your worship that brings us to
item 6. 2 on the agenda. And we have staff
from financial services to present on an update to the
value for money program.
Good afternoon, Shelly. Good afternoon. Your warship. And members of
council. Today I'll be providing an update on the city's
value for money program, highlighting the program's progress and benefits
to date. The city transition, the value for money program
to an in - house model in November of 2022.
The intent of that change was to increase our internal
capacity, improve follow - up on recommendations, and move towards
continuous improvement model rather than relying on point - in
- time external reviews. Since the transition, the program has
produced three important outcomes. First, increased output with more engagements
completed each year. Second, improved oversight through structured follow -
up and ongoing monitoring. And third, enhanced accountability through clear
action plans and regular reporting to the audit committee and
council. A key strength of the program is that it
follows a consistent methodology across all engagements. This includes planning,
execution, reporting, and follow - up. Planning is supported by
a rolling three - year engagement plan that's based on
risk and significance, along with input from the senior leadership
and the audit committee. Engagements are then carried out or
executed through a consistent approach with results reported to the
audit committee and council. And then tracked through ongoing monitoring
and structured follow - up. To date the program has
issued 40 recommendations with 62 associated action plans. These action
plans are key. They move the work beyond identifying opportunities
and into implementation and improvement. They've addressed a range of
areas, including infrastructure delivery, infrastructure deficits, costs related to the
unsheltered community endowment fund alignment and strategy and capital project
management. Follow - up is one of the key strengths
of the in - house model. And there's two main
components. First is the follow - up tracking, which includes
semi - annual updates from management, monitoring the status of
all action plans, identifying what's complete in progress or requiring
attention. And finally, reporting the results annually to the audit
committee and council. Second are the follow - up engagements.
These are targeted reassessments of selected engagements. They validate the
action plans have been implemented. And they provide confirmation that
improvements are effective and sustained. Together, these processes improve transparency,
reinforce accountability and provide independent assurance on progress. So this
slide tries to compare a bit of the former outsourced
model with the current in - house approach. Both models
were structured to maintain independence. However, there are some differences
in how work is delivered and the level of insight
it provides. So under the legacy model, engagements were delivered
by external consultants, offering an objective perspective. Delivered an average
of one engagement per year. The engagements followed fixed timelines
and scope. Which can support predictability. But action plans were
not required and follow - up was usually not performed.
Under the current in - house model, the team maintains
independence while offering stronger organisational knowledge and cross - functional
insight. An average of three engagements have been completed per
year. Action plans are required and actively monitored. Follow -
up work is performed regularly, and the program is more
responsive to emerging priorities. So overall, the in - house
model provides continuous oversight ongoing reporting to council rather than
point in time reporting. So to wrap up the in
- house value for many program continues to strengthen the
city's governance and accountability framework through improved engagement capacity, enhanced
oversight through structured follow - up. And supports continuous improvement
across the organisation. Overall, the program provides counsel and senior
management with independent evidence - based insight. And clearer visibility
into whether improvements are being implemented and sustained. Thank you.
That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Council, do
we have any questions? Councillor Lovegrowth. Thanks, you worship. And
I really appreciate this report. Thank you very much. So
one thing I don't see in here is talking about
data quality. And so the legacy, we would have a
consultants asking, we need this, this, this, and this. Can
you get it for us? And then there'd be a
pause and staff would get what they could get. And
it went back and forth until the consultant was satisfied.
They had all the stuff they needed. Is that the
clumsiness of the process previously in the legacy. Yes, to
an extent. I think that fairly describes what the process
would look like. Right. Whereas if you've got inside staff
doing this, then it's an easier transfer. And it's also
controlled in terms of confidentiality and anything else. So it's
streamlined data transfer. Is that a fair comment? That's a
fair comment. Yeah. And the quality of data, same in
both cases. It would be the same in both cases.
Okay. And then did we add staff? Oh, sorry, did
someone want to say something? I'm sorry. Nope. I just
saw a look over somewhere. I wasn't sure. The cost
of the program, one, the legacy would be an outside
contract that would have a beginning and an end for
internal. Did we add staff to begin this process in
- house? Selling Mr. Sass, please. Thank you, your worship.
Uh, it was a combination. There's three people on the
team right now. Two of them were redeployed from internal
finance staff. Uh, when we came in and moved things
around a little bit, uh, and there's currently one, uh,
two year term. That was approved through council. Um, that
will be up, I believe after next year. So there's
one additional temporary resource that was approved as part of
this, uh, to be relitigated next year. Okay. So is
it a fair interpretation. Thank you Mr. Sass. Your worship
one net. Staff edition on a two year contract. That's
correct your worship. Okay. Thank you. And then, um. Follow
up. I'm really surprised that once a department doesn't get
whatever, whoever's audited, whether it was an internal experiment, that
somebody in - house isn't in charge or doing that
once a year follow - up. Is that something at
least theoretically that we could have done or should have
done, maybe. Mr. Sass, please. Thank your worship. It's a
good question. It's really the difference between, um, an internal
and an external model. So for, for medium and large
size organisations, uh, and internal audit function, we call it
our value for money function, uh, is actually a core
part of the governance process. Um, and with the establishment
of an internal audit function, there are professional standards that
we are required to meet, uh, and part of that
would be ongoing follow - ups and regularly reporting through
audit committee and through, um, council. And so, um, it
is unquestionably a better practice to do it. Um, but
we had historically not had that, um, as part of
our overall governance framework. And when this council came in,
uh, and I came in, we, we made that change.
Okay. Thank you for that. You're worshiping. I think it's
fair to say we're receiving this for information. But going
forward, that sounds to me like a great lesson learned,
no matter which way we do going forward. So thank
you, worship. Council Walberge, please. Thanks to worship. And thanks
to the team for this, uh, this program. It's been,
it's been helpful over the, over the course of this
term. One question when we talk about continued improvement, um,
that I've pondered, um, as we look to expand the
value for money program is how do we quantify social
capital versus monetary. Mr. Sass, please. Thank you.
Workshop. So for a value, so far we've done largely
value for, for money engagements. And so if, if we
were to look at, um, valuing social capital, I would
say it changes the nature of the engagement a little
bit from like a core value for money to what
I would call like a performance, uh, engagement. Uh, and
through that scoping of that engagement, you would identify the
criteria to audit against social capital. Uh, I don't know
that that's been our, our focus of the program to
date. But in the future, if we did, it would
be a different set of, um, standards that we would
adhere to through what would be called again, more of
a performance audit versus a financial audit. Thanks for that.
And I think it's something that we need to consider
because while we're sustained by business principles, we're not a
private corporation. Um, so we need to make sure that,
uh, when we're investing, whether that's through taxation or, or
staff time, that it does have a social impact. For
example, arts and culture, um, are never going to turn
a profit. Um, you know, supporting people in poverty are
never going to turn a prophet. Um, but we know
that an emergencies that social capital are what to actually
sustain resilience in communities. So, um, while I support value
for money, I don't want it to be lost on
us that, um, as a government organisation, as public servants
that we need to be focused on building social capital,
especially for underprivileged. Thank you. Uh, Councillor Weber, do you
have, uh, just a comment. So just comments and we
just had comments now. Um, so seeing that, I'll get
this moved, please. And seconded it, thank you. Uh, comments,
councillor Weber comment. Well, I thought we were at comments.
Yeah, just, you know, when it first, when I first
learned about the value for audit and so forth, and
the process, you know, I kind of had the feeling
when I was first on council that, no, yeah, we're
going to have the city reporting on the city and
they're going to come back saying, boy, the city's doing
great every time. And but being on the audit committee
and seeing how they burrow into the various projects and
how money could have been spent better or how the
setup could have been better or the follow - up
could have been better. And I have a great deal
more confidence about it. And I think in terms of
what, um, councillor, well Ridge was saying, you know, it's
not necessarily in my mind a matter of value for
money. Should we spend the money? It's the money that's
being spent. And are we getting the most out of
it? Which does benefit things like arts and places that
things that aren't necessarily profitable. But if we're going to
put mining in to help them, are we doing it
in the best way? Right. And so I don't think
value for money is saying not have that, not have
the department or the money necessarily. Right. That's just my
comment. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments. Just closing
up with regards to myself on this. This is, um,
an action that the audit committee has been involved in.
Um, when you look at the number of reports that
have been completed and the decisions on what should be
audited within this city. Um, it's played a key role
in understanding, um, the transparency and the accountability of the
services that we offer. Everything from potential cash at the
landfill through to cash at Parkinson recreation centre through to
all of those other monetary type of items. This council
made a choice to look at needing to make certain
that it ends up being, we did these money for
value audits. And we did these internal out. So we'd
advance them. If there is a different lens that we
need to kind of put on this, whether it be
a social or something like that, that would be something
that probably would come up at a council priority session
so that it ends up being that we have exactly
to know exactly what we're doing. But through our term
of basically the last, you know, period of time, it
has been extremely valuable to go through all of the
different areas to make sure. And I thank Mr. Sass
and his team, uh, for the work that they've done
to look at, uh, putting together these value for money
audits because they have made that accountability that much more
important on the Capitol that we're spending. So thank you,
Shelly. Marina for the work that you have done. Saying
that council, all in favor, receiving this report opposed. Thank
you. And to the both of you, thank you very
much. All three of you. Thank you very much. Now
on item 6. 3 on the agenda and we have
staff from the social development department to present on a
proposed expansion of the community care program. Good afternoon, Colleen.
In response to, uh, recent direction from council. I'm pleased
today to bring forward a report on the community care
project. Uh, the resolutions on the screen before you, uh,
provide the basis for today's short presentation. As council may
recall, the community care program was initiated in 2024 through
the city's service agreement with people lived experience society and
joining us today is Wes from people lived experience. Thank
you very much for being in attendance today. The program
began in December of 2024 down, sorry, began in 2024
in downtown Kelowna. And then later that year expanded to
the Rutland business district. This program was co - created.
By people and the city's social development. Department and provides
peer - supported work opportunities for individuals experiencing homelessness. Through
the program, participants are paired with pure navigators. For one
hour shifts focused on litter pickup and general cleanup in
assigned areas. In addition to improving neighbourhood cleanliness, the program
is designed to support social connections, confidence building, and pathways
back to employment. Funding for the current service is provided
through the social development department's based budget. You'll see on
the screen before you, what our current service delivery model
is. The program is incredibly popular with both downtown and
Rutland locations consistently having to turn folks away, uh, that
are prospective participants. Program guidelines have been altered to meet
this demand to ensure that as many people as possible
can participate. For example, we are of prioritized folks who
haven't previously been involved to make sure that we have
more and more individuals take part. Current service delivery provided
in the Rutland business district. Is three days a week,
two shifts per day. For 10 months of the year.
Shifts are approximately one hour in length and include five
team members. Of note, the shifts are not pre -
assigned. And terms of, uh, who will take part individuals
interested in working can intend this schedule locations for selection.
I'll note that the cleanup roots are typically around transit
because most of the participants rely on this mode of
transportation to and from. Your consideration today is a proposed
program expansion for Rutland. Staff are seeking budget to support
the expansion of services, specifically to five days per week
extending delivery through to the end of 2026 with an
associated budget request of 34, 000 dollars. To support this
request, I'd like to just share briefly some information regarding
the impact of this program. The stats on the screen
before you are from the first quarter of this year.
In addition to this data, however, I can share over
the course of the last 12 months, cleaning efforts in
downtown and in the rutland districts have involved nearly 2,
500 hours of participant work. Collection of roughly the volume
of 35 full - sized pickup truck beds filled to
the top with litter. And in terms of collection of
sharps and glass, the teams have collected roughly the volume
of eight water coolers full. But there's more to this
story than just the collection of waste. Feedback from our
participants, service providers, and the community reveals promising social returns
on investment. Michael, who is part of our people program,
one of the peer navigators, has shared with us that
through the project, we're seeing increasing positive connections, providing motivation,
boosting self - worth. It's also contributed to the transitions
of folks into employment and housing. He shares that numerous
participants have felt empowered to develop new friendships, build confidence,
and improve their self - worth. And the program has
contributed to individuals finding more stable employment and even finding
housing to transition out of homelessness. Couple of quick highlights.
As one peer navigator shared, and I quote, I ran
into a man who had done the program quite a
bit, but we never saw him again. Then suddenly he
approached us very excited and thanked us for helping to
remind him that even though he is struggling, he can
still work and do something with his time. He got
a job as a roofer and has been working there
ever since. Another peer navigator reported that in the first
quarter of this year, they received nine requests for job
references. And out of those four employers reached out. 17
program participants are actively seeking employment beyond the program and
approximately 20 people in the first quarter of this year
have gone on to temporary agencies. Lastly, we hear about
the pathways to recovery. In the fall of 2025, at
least six participants that we're aware of have been accessed
treatment and participants have moved into successful housing. As indicated
in the written report, council's support with council's support, staff
will advance the exploration, uh, for a 2027 expansion as
well. Um, potentially to advance this program in Rutland and
in the downtown core, uh, which align with the mayor's
task force recommendation on crime and safety. And what we
heard earlier this year at the business forum. I'd like
to reiterate a great appreciation for people and all of
their participants, their dedication to this work. And importantly, their
drive for the city and our partners to rethink service
delivery. To incorporate wherever possible the voices of lived and
living experience in the way we develop and deliver services
in our community. Your worship, that concludes my presentation. Colleen,
thank you very much for that council. Um, questions first,
if the questions more so than comments, we can go
to comments after that, councillor Hodge questions. Thank you, Mr.
Mayor. Um, great presentation. Glad to see it. Thank you.
Um, the 34, 000 tagged through the entire program. Let's
try to figure it out. That's to you your worship,
the 34, 000 would be to expand from three days
to five days of service delivery in Rutland. And, uh,
that would go instead of just till October, it would
go to the end of December. Well, so I was
going to ask, it was like, now what happens, or
are you going to go in year round. Right now,
both programs in Rotland and downtown only operate till the
end of October. Right. So it's a 10 month program.
Well, in the program, it says 10 months. So I
accustomed to you is for both foregrounds go year round.
The request before you is for only an expansion for
Rutland to the end of the year. So downtown will
only go till the 10 month to the end of
October. Okay. What too much do you not do it.
November and December. Called ones. I'm interested in why. The
current is based on service delivery is based on base
budget. So we were able to balance out what social
development had to develop those two programs. Um, and so
we were able to get it for a 10 month.
At the current service delivery. Okay. Thank you. Thank you,
Mr. Merritt. Thank you. Um, seeing no further questions, do
I have a mover, please? Move by council to heart.
Seconded by councillor sing comments. Councillor Stock, please. Thank you,
worship. And I'm so glad when this was raised a
couple of weeks ago that we had an opportunity to
have you come back with a staff report because what
it does is really remind myself and emphasize the good
work that people's doing and what a significant benefit this
is to the community. So I think we're all richer
today for hearing from you as to why this program
is being recommended. And I think the mayor for bringing
it forward because I think it is a worthwhile thing
and I'm very happy to support it. Um, I think
what it also does is give us an early heads
up for our budget for next year because clearly this
is a one - time fill the gap budget. And,
you know, if it goes today and the support from
council, it would be an indication that we may want
to look at this program in next year's budget, um,
maybe funding it beyond what we have this year. So,
but overall, very excited to see this program continue. And
thanks to all those that are behind it. Council Wolbridge,
please. Thanks for worship and thanks Ms. Cornock for turning
this report around so quickly. The work of people is
something I've supported for a long time. And I think
it's a great way of, um, addressing the social challenges
that we have in Kelowna. And, you know, when we
look at value for money, like I spoke about in
the last item, we look at the 34, 000 dollar
costs that are helping make our community more beautiful. Um,
and that's the social capital of connection that I was
referring to in the last presentation. So I think it's
important when we work in public service that we continue
to remind ourselves of that. Um, you know, when we
see how far 34, 000 reaches, I think it would
be a great budget discussion to have around how we
have a more equitable reach throughout the city. To incorporate
the people program, um, through all different neighbourhoods because that
social return on investment is really intangible. So I wholeheartedly
support this, um, look forward to, um, having that discussion
around the budget table around how we can incorporate this
into a larger base budget. Thanks for your worship. Councillor
Hart, please. Well, thank you, worship. This is actually one
of my favourite items that have come forward. And you
know, all you have to do is look at the
slide showing impact. And I think I agree with councillor
stack. I think when we see what's happening and we
see what this does that we should actually take a
real closer look at it. And I hope we can
do that in our next year's budget. Because I think
it's, there's no downside to this at all. There's so
many upsides, you know, in helping both the organisations and
the people. So there's just so many upsides. Councillor Cannon,
please. Thank you. Um, echo my colleagues comments. I did
have a chance to meet with the organiser earlier this
year. And I think one thing that really stuck on
the conversation is a lot of these people who are
trying to clean their lives around. I think everybody wants
an opportunity and hope and a sense of purpose. And
for maybe it's an hour or two a day and
it works as our, this cornucoluded to some people have
moved progressed into day jobs and, you know, they have,
um, build the skill set. So it's a transition. It's
part of a social investment. It's considerable virtual alluded to
intercommunity. I really applaud that. And I also want to
recognise other individuals in our community. There's lots that you
see them on a regular basis on clonarette and rave.
I've had people say they're, you know, the one gentleman
drives around in those little scooter and picks up every
day. And his block and another person I was in
Rutland with a revenge yesterday and a lady, she's telling
them she's almost eight years old every day. She has
her own little street and area that she cleans up.
And so everybody can help pitch in because it isn't
community. The cleaner community is against community pride is more
pelvin. So I thank you very much to Chris and
others in the community that, um, help make our community
cleaner and safer for all. Thanks. Councillor Singh, please. Thanks,
you worship. I just want to say every time our
staff member, colleague comes up, reports are so, have such
a human face to them. It just makes us feel
that though we're taking small steps forward. We're still inching
forward. In a positive way. This is very necessary. And
extending it will indicate how successful it is and want.
It looked like for next year, much needed rutland as
well. So I will be sporting this. Thank you. Thank
you. Um, end of comments, councillor. Just from myself, um,
just, did you want to, you said something, Councillor? Oh,
I originally asked a question because I wanted to make
the motion. To focus forward. It's such a fantastic. Event
that when I was a kid, if I let my
house get too messy, my dad would give me a
bag and a stick. Or it may whoop and down
the neighbour and pick up garbage off the road. And
so I've had affinity for your program ever since. Um,
but it's a wonderful, wonderful program. And thank you for
what you do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Um,
and seeing that council, I just want to say thank
you for your support. Um, this was, um, I very
much appreciate it. Um, and moving this forward, um, I
sat down with Michael, um, a series of months ago.
And, um, he had asked if this is possible and
something that can happen. And I did tell him that
I would bring it forward. So Chris also being here.
And the, um, you know, the advancement with regards to
providing more services up in Ratland. And when we're looking
at putting this into our budget, if we could also
look at our, you know, midtown area and potentially extend
it to maybe seven days from five days because I
understand the number of, um, possible applicants, our substantially larger
than, you know, the 10 that they use at this
particular point in time. So just a couple of comments
from myself on what it could, you know, what it
could turn out to be within the community and how
we're supporting this program. So thank you. And once again,
council, thank you. Saying that all in favor. Opposed carried.
Thank you. Colleen, thank you. Thank you, your worship. That
brings us to item 6. 4 on the agenda. And
we have staff from the real estate department to present
on a series of non - market lease agreements.
Good afternoon, Melissa. Good afternoon, your worship councillors. And Doug
also. Good afternoon, Doug.
We are here today to talk to you guys about
the non - market lease agreement sport. The city of
Colono recognises the importance of our local sports sector. It's
the year of sport. And the opportunity it provides for
healthy living and social engagement. The benefits of a vibrant
sports scene ripples through all ages and backgrounds, contributing to
both individual and community well - being. The non -
market sports leases presented today are intended to support strategic
partnerships foster sports development ensure responsible stewardship of city facilities
and maximize reach and impact. Each of these five.
Sorry one second. Each of these five non - market
sports lease agreements have been previous community partners. The agreements
have been slightly amended to tighten up the reporting process.
Increase oversight and responsibility. And change how the capital reserve
fund is collected and allocated. The terms have also been
amended. They allow for optimal property performance and maintenance, all
while working within the delegation authority by law parameters. I
will let Doug speak to the actual agreements. Thank you,
Melissa. Your worship. Uh, I'll just start with, uh, the
central Okanagan minor baseball association. They provide organised baseball opportunities
for youth across Kelowna and the Central Okanagan. Their primary
operations are based out of edith gay park and Lombardi
Park at, they lease a small clubhouse with offices, a
meeting room storage and concession. And at Lombardi Park, they
leased a small concession in storage space. Their programs range
from house league to competitive development, supporting both broad participation
and athlete growth. And they're a strong example of a
community supported sport driven by families, coaches and volunteers. Next,
we have the clone of minor fastball society. They provide
organised fastball opportunities for children and youth primarily female, uh,
in Kelowna. They're operating out of high noon park. And
the club helps activate a key community sport facility through
regular practices, games, and competition there. The least space includes
eight softball diamonds, washrooms, change rooms, storage space, and a
small clubhouse with an office in a meeting room. Their
program support athletes from introductory levels to competitive play, helping
develop confidence, teamwork, and skill. And the society is a
volunteer - based organisation. It also contributes to the local
sport community by hosting numerous tournaments events that I'm sure
you've seen out by the airport there. Next, the cologne
of lawn bowling club is one of Kelowna's oldest recreation
organisations established in 1909. Located in city park at his
long provided a welcoming place for residents to gather, compete.
And stay active. Their lease space consists of an eight
- lane lawn bowling green, storage space, and a small
clubhouse with washrooms and change rooms, a meeting room, and
a small kitchen. The club supports both recreational play and
community introduction to the sport. And as a low barrier
activity, lawn bowling offers social connection, active living, and broad
accessibility. Next is the clonabocce club. The bocce club has
been a valued part of Kelowna's recreation community for many
years also. A located at Cameron Park. They have helped
keep bocce active and accessible through year - round programming
and regular competitions. They're leased space includes a three -
lane indoor bocce facility and a clubhouse with washrooms, meeting
space, storage, and a small kitchen. The club provides a
welcoming low barrier space for recreation, connection, and community participation.
It also adds cultural and social value by preserving a
community - based sport with deep local routes. And finally,
the fifth sport lease we're here today is the mission
tennis club, another longstanding recreation asset with tennis played on
that site for more than 100 years. It operated by
the Okanagan Mission Community Hall Association. It is recognised as
clona's oldest and only charity run tennis facility. Their lease
space consists of three outdoor tennis courts. And they're located
at the heart park. Adjacent to those three courts are
their three additional courts and a clubhouse owned and operated
by the association, making this a fantastic facility for tennis
lessons, camps, leagues, tournaments and social play. The club serves
both members and the broader community through coaching, youth programming,
and volunteer support. And the lease terms for each of
these five organisations is for five years with an additional
five - year renewal option. You worship these nonprofits, board
organisations provide strong local leadership by planning programs supporting volunteers,
maintaining day - to - day operations and creating welcoming
environments for participants in families. Their leadership helps ensure these
facilities remain active, well - managed, and responsive to community
needs. Having these organisations operate municipal, sport, assets brings out
in value through volunteer capacity, sports - specific expertise, community
relationships and programming that would be difficult to replicate through
municipal service delivery alone. This model supports efficient use of
public facilities while strengthening access, participation, and long - term
community benefit. And that concludes our presentation today, your worship.
Thank you, Doug. Thank you, Melissa. Uh, with regards to
it, it's one of those good news stories with regards
to maybe a completely unfair question and just let it
pass if you choose to. But when we look at
these organisations collectively, when you think of youth baseball and
fastball and the rest of them, ballpark, um, for your
best guesstimate, collectively, how many individuals are we looking at
supporting with advancing these leases. I think your worship, the
cumulative membership there. Is approaches probably about 4, 000. And
then from there, it just, uh, families, events, other things.
It's significant. The social region, the economic reach that these
facilities that these board organisations connect with and have. Thank
you. Thank you very much. Councillor Lovegrove, please questions. Thanks,
your worship. And don't forget about the generations of coaches.
I think you were mentioning at lunch that you've coached
in. He's now recognising former players he coached. And I
totally, like this in the previous report, the reflection on
building us stronger and more resilient cologna and community is
not lost on me. So I'm ecstatic about what I'm
seeing here. And I have a couple of questions. Um,
the amounts and the lease agreements. I mean, some folks
having this come at them. I'm sure it's no surprise
to them, but I'm hoping we're taking us a kid
glove approach, so to speak, from a sports analogy, um,
the amount, the whole idea of a formalized agreement, uh,
that's not been sprung on them. They've been full participants
and partners in this. They support this, I hope. Yeah.
Your worship. This is a very collaborative process with them.
We've, uh, we've been taking some time to renew these,
these templates, these lease templates in general. And work closely
with the groups on, on, um, the parameters around it
and building them out. Excellent. Excellent. And I had no
idea. That the Okanagan mission community hall had been used
for over a hundred years for tennis. But it kind
of speaks to the value of Tenicilla. I mean, the
other tennis courts in and around the city. I mean,
I think of in my neighbourhood. And badminton, uh, Wally
light bodies tennis court. Is it my understanding? We're going
to keep that or what's going on with that one.
That's another discussion, councillor. Okay. So out of order, but
it's in our neighbour and it's extremely valuable. Uh, that's
my point. This creates community. So I just want to
thank you for that. And I really appreciate this report.
Thank you. Um, any other questions. Seeing none, do I
have a mover, please? Move by Councillor Hodge, seconded by
Councillor Singh. Any further comments, Councillor, please. Thank you, worship.
I just wanted to comment on this, um, so I
am very familiar with all these. But one I'd like
to comment on is the lawn bowling. Uh, honestly, I
was sort of introduced to it a few years ago.
They owned and asked if that could help them with
some advertising in the coal. And all of them have
watched. And I said, of course. And so they invite
me out all the time. And I, that photo that's
here, I cannot believe the age of lawn bowling is
going honestly really, really young. Matter of fact, the city
had a team last year, the year before. It was
great. They came all dressed up. And, you know, and
that's what they do. And it is, it is an
incredible, incredible, um, I'm so glad that I saw that
there because this group is incredible. And same like the
bocce, but this long bowling, people think, Oh, it's, you
know, like it used to be addressed in white. It
was for a more mature. It's all changed. And it
is so much fun. So I'm really glad to have
seen this. And just wanted to highlight that. Cause sometimes
the public, they don't know right because they haven't gone.
But if you ever get the chance to drop down,
uh, they're starting now all there. And they do a
lot of charity event work there. Like the one coming
up, uh, for women's heart health. And they raise a
lot of money. So just take a chance or, you
know, and go down and visit them sometimes. They're, they're
there with open arms and they, you know, they really
would like anybody to join. And I hope to see
that maybe the city and some other groups all have
a team in it again. So thank you. Thank you
seeing that. No further comments. All in favor receiving this
report. Thank you. And, uh, Doug and Melissa to the
work that you're doing with these organisations. So very much
appreciated. Mr. Gabriel also. Thank you very much with the
team. Thank you, worship. We're now on item 6. 5
on the agenda. And we have staff from the utility
planning department to present on a local area service petition
for water service on Chamberlain Road.
Good afternoon, Luke. Good afternoon. Thank you, worship. Gaffnoon council.
I'm here today to introduce the Chamberlain Water Local Areous
Service project and update to you on process. Um, what
is a locally area service? It is where, residents, uh,
petition to bring either water or sewer upgrades into their
area. And thus far, we have received an official petition
that has been certified by our city clerk's department. And
we're asking council to support the bylaws to implement that
local area service. Just an overview of the project area.
Chamberlain Road is just south of Kaelo Road and west
of Ben Vulin Road. Consists of 16 properties. Uh, that
are currently serviced by onsite water wells and septic fields
for sanitary disposal. Uh, this work is, uh, installing 580
metres of water main looped from KLO back to Ben
Vulin with two fire hydrants and services to each property.
In forthcoming, uh, weeks, we will have the official local
area service establishment bylaw coming back to council. Which we
will then be finalising construction through July and August and
in September and in the fall, we will be compiling
all of the costs, uh, as far as the project
is completed, which will then allow us to tabulate our
parcel tax bylaw, which will be implemented for 2027, uh,
tax rule. Just in conclusion, we want to highlight that
we've received a sufficient petition from these residents that represent
over 50 percent of the property owners and over 50
percent of the assessed values. And we ask counsel to
support the future bylaws to implement this local area service.
I can conclude my comments. Thank you. Um, questions please
questions of council. Council saying please questions. Does this include
the homes that are in front of the St. Charles
Garnier church that are on Ben Voland? There are about
five, six homes. The agricultural lots that are just east
of Benvolin Road are currently not included in this process.
As those are agricultural lots outside of the permanent growth
boundary. Thank you. Councillor Weber, please. Yeah, for me, this
is sort of a new process. I haven't seen it
come up too often where petition is officially filed to
get this kind of service. And when I first started
reading it, I wondered how it was going to fit
into our, our existing budget since apparently wasn't planned for
when we, there are budget last year. Uh, so I
looked at up here and it says that the, um,
expansion of 500, 264, 000 is funded by the provincial
housing accelerator fund. The fireflow upgrade program and the offsite
and oversized program. So we have money standing by various
programs. I guess my question would be if we didn't
have those, like for instance, the, um, the half program,
let's say that wasn't around anymore. What would happen if
they came to us and said, well, we're, we're willing
to spend our 316, 000 dollars. Where would we get
our money from. Previously, uh, this area has expressed interest
in water service. Uh, and, and estimates were provided back
then at well over 50, 000 dollars per property. So
without, um, housing accelerator funding or other funding sources, uh,
the project would not really be viable for servicing. Um,
the 316, 000 is, is shared amongst the residents, uh,
of which this, uh, local area service petition represents. So,
so that means they happen to apply at the right
time when we have money standing by. That's correct. From
funds. Okay. City manager, please. Yeah, I think you worship
maybe just add a little bit. The residents would always
have the option to pay the entire thing themselves. If
funding wasn't available, we have seen projects of lower value
proceed over the years. And under that premise. But we
would not typically tax other residents. Um, and use taxation
funds to supplement a program like this. It's usually grant
programs of provincial participation that supports it. Councillor Lovegrove questions?
Yes. Thank you. Um, so this is within the permanent
growth boundary. That is correct. And what density, what zoning?
Are you building the services to. Zoning is currently RR2
in this area given there on site wells and septic
fields for sanitary disposal. Correct. So, so, um, it's not
being sized for any future up zoning or anything like
that? Uh, the moment the water is proposed to loop,
uh, from KLO back to Ben Vulin to provide adequate
fire flow. So we are adding fire hydrants on this
water main. Uh, the sizes that are going to properties
will be a 50 mil service, which is standard for
any infill work that we do within the city. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no further questions. Do I
have a mover, please? Put by councillor stack, seconded by
councillor to heart, seeing no further comments, all in favor.
Thank you. And Luke, thank you very much for that
presentation. Your worship item 6. 6 as a presentation also
from utility services to present on the extension of a
waste discharge permit. Good afternoon, Rod. Good afternoon, new worship.
No presentation today. Just a quick summary. Good afternoon and
good afternoon, council. This report seeks approval to extend sander
fruit packers temporary waste discharge permit to, uh, May 31st,
2027. The permit allows agri - industrial wastewater from the
packing facility located outside our jurisdiction east of the airport
to be transported to an approved discharge site for collection
and treatment. This temporary arrangement now in its third year
was established following failures in the facilities on - site
disposal system resulting in an environmental enforcement by the province.
The owner has identified a permanent wastewater solution and is
working towards implementation by spring of 2027. The extension is
time limited cost recovered and includes city sampling and testing
at the owner's expense. We're a wastewater operations team has
confirmed their sufficient system capacity and treatment to manage the
short - term discharge. SCNMI report. Thank you. Thank you.
Um, questions with regards to it. Um, I remember when
this initially came forward and it was a concession that
we made, and this is an area which is outside
the city of Kelowna in the regional area. Um, and,
um, it was head a specific time frame on it
at that point in time. And it has been extended
beyond that, um, maybe just if you could speak to
that, uh, formula, please. The work is ongoing this issue
is not a city issue, although we are providing that
service, uh, on, uh, we are providing and by doing
the right thing in the temporary servicing, um, we do
have an expectation that they are going to finish that
off this year. We have been provided assurance from the
regional district and the ministry that has applied the permit
now or that has provided the permit. And we expect
this to be done. How this goes beyond that, should
that work not happen? Is that of our jurisdiction. Thank
you. Mr. Logan. Thank you, worship ball. I would just
got a response from the regional district on Friday and
they did confirm that a building permit has been issued,
but they don't have any specific timing on construction. Thank
you. Um, just thank you for the collaboration with regards
to the district on taking care of something that sits
outside the city. Councillor Singh. Comments. Um, any further questions.
Councillor Cannon, did you have a question? Yes, sir. We
should just, um, you mentioned in your comments, cost recovery.
This is a bit of an anomaly, right? Cause it's
outside the regional district. It's outside the city boundaries. We
don't really do this for any other type of business.
So I just wonder how you calculated the fee that
we're charging. Well, this, the fee is consistent with bylaw
3480 right now for a discharge of, uh, of wastewater.
Within the permit, the permit itself is very specific to,
uh, types of discharge and types of, uh, and, and
whether storm drainage, which cannot go in. So it's rather
specific. The permit itself we've reviewed it to see if
there was any changes required. And from what we've seen,
we, uh, we feel that's unnecessary for this particular extension.
Thank you. Thank you. Seeing that I'm looking for a
mover, please move by councillor Woolridge, seconded by councillor Singh
discussion. Councillor Singh. Thank you, Worship. Um, I did go
down to the site and speak to the applicant about
the situation. The whole thing is the province. I just
want to share this. My council colleagues, the province came
up with new legislation, new requirements for them. And the
issuance of the permits took longer than it took long,
put it that way. They have hired alpine engineering are
in the process. They've got that design works, everything in
order. They plan to have everything done and dusted by
the end of October. However, cherries will not say, all
right, we won't grow till your permits come. So the
permit, the cherries are ready to be harvested in the
next three weeks. Living, uh, the producers in a pickle
in terms of how they're going to wash the cherries
and package them. And just, um, just to share an
extra bit of, uh, pressure on the producer, according to
the CFI, which is a Canadian food inspection agency. Yes.
Yes. Even though they could be other backing houses that
could pack the fruit, their permit only allows them to
pack their fruit at that particular site. So they couldn't
ship the fruit somewhere else. To be washed and packaged
for market. So as per the CFI rules, they have
to, uh, package their own fruit at their side. So
it has to be the water has to be discharged
somewhere else. And that's the problem. But so to wrap
it all up, they've assured us showed me anyway that
they should have a facility up and running by the
end of October. Thank you, councillor, for your comments. Seeing
no further comments, all in favor. Opposed. Carried, thank you.
City clerk, please. Thank you, worship. That brings us to
item 7. 1 on the agenda. And we have a
draft resolution following a notice of motion regarding the Abbott
Street Heritage Conservation area and the transit - oriented area.
And Councillor Cannon may wish to speak to it. Thank
you. Worship, whereas the Apple Street Heritage Conservation areas is
designated heritage conservation area established under the local government act
to preserve and protect the area's historic character, cultural heritage
and unique streetscape. And whereas portions of the Heritage Conservation
Area located within the Clone of General Hospital Transit area
- oriented area, or otherwise known as the TOA. And
whereas the province of BC is confirmed in writing that
the OA legislation doesn't supersede heritage conservationry protections and guidelines
established under the local government act. And whereas the Abbott
Street Heritage Conservation Area situated within the Milk Creek and
Okinagan Lake floodplains for which provincial legislation provides exemptions from
TOA requirements in certain circumstances. And whereas council recognises that
the continued inclusion of the Avistreed Heritage Conservation area within
the transit - oriented area may undermine the long -
term preservation of the area's heritage character and integrity. They
moved that council - direct the mayor to rate to
the province of BC, including the Minister of Housing and
Municipal Affairs, as well as the Minister of Transportation in
Transit, requesting the immediate removal of the Abstraed Heritage Conservation
Area from the Klona, General Hospital Transit - Oriented Area
Designation, and further staff report back to Council with an
implementation. Timeline for council consideration. And I just wanted to
say a worship, I believe, a council truly believes that
the Administrate Heritage Conservation Area is worth protecting than we
should support this motion. It'll reinforce the message that Heritage
Conservation Areas were created to preserve the character, history, and
identity of unique neighbourhoods and supporting this motion. Demonstrates the
council's prepared to stand behind those principles and ensure that
heritage protection remains meaningful, not merely symbolic. Thank you, worship.
Thank you. Councillors, do we have any questions. Um, of
course, councillor Singh, do you have questions or comments? Councillor
Weber, do you have questions? Yeah, question. You know, the
first part of the motion, which the rest of it
would have followed if this motion was, I mean, what
he's doing is he's asking us to write a letter
to the ministries. And, uh, everything else in the rest
of the motion may or may not happen depending on
the results you get back from the ministry. So on
the surface, it seems like a fairly simple request. I
guess my question is in a pragmatic way, have we
already written that letter in the past? I mean, it's
not like we haven't sat around law being about this
over the past number of years, but are we sending
a letter that says, what we've already said so many
times? And is that, I don't know if that's a
good or bad idea if it's true. So I don't
know, I'm asking the city manager, perhaps. You know, have
we communicated this exact message that is being suggested. I'm
not sure I can give you a direct answer to
that question, but yes, there has been numerous efforts by
that both this council and by staff in the past,
um, to gain clarity on the issue. And we have
received that and tried to communicate that both to council
and to the community. Um, and there have been efforts
to determine whether or not the TOA that was designated
by the province has a likelihood of being changed by
the province. And we have received responses to that in
the past. And the answer was no. We've heard no
quite a few times. And I'll make some, I'll make
some comments to that council. Sure. So, uh, I guess,
I mean, I don't know whether it's a good thing
or a bad thing to write again. I'd like to
hear my other councillor, colleague say. Do we have any
other questions. Questions, are these questions coming up or are
these comments, questions councillor love growth. I'd just like some
clarification for the city manager on his last response, who
worship, because I'm just wondering if in the light of
the last sentence in the second paragraph under councillor cannon's
comments. Provincial correspondence has confirmed that transit oriented area legislation
does not override existing municipal heritage projections or eliminate the
city's ability to apply its heritage conservation guidelines, heritage, or
other. So is that answer given in the context of
that? Or were those letters sent before the most recent
provincial correspondence? Yeah, you worship. I'm not sure it's my
role to interpret what was submitted by Councillor Cannon. Perhaps
you worship, I'll ask that to Councillor Cannon. Let him
respond then. I think you worship. Yeah, the provincial government
has indicated that bylaws, but their density of the two
- way density supersedes a heritage. We can still have
our heritage. But the issue is it can still put
the density. So that's why we're asking to move the
TOA. And we have never written as a mayor and
council. Staff have conversations and all the rest. I'm asking
specifically for mayor and council to rate to the province.
And we have it black and white. And so we
have it clear. So it's not, he said, she said,
they said, we asked directly, we heard from the province,
if they say no, then we heard. We're advocating, we're
supporting heritage. And if not, then we know it'll happen.
Next steps. I just think it's time that we get
it in black and right. Thanks. I'm writing. Are there
any, and councillor, just as a point there on that,
that is incorrect because I have written, and I will
read my comments out because I have written the housing
minister and the province already. So, um, councillor Hodge, please.
Was there any other comments? Well, yeah, I was actually
going to ask Councillor Can, because you had it so
quick it could already hear you, to be honest with
you. Um, but I think I know what you're going,
but I want to support the idea try to get
the Trasnorance area protected. But I'm not sure where you're
questioning ends in your. Goals, your hopes for. What you
would get from it start. As a council, Weatherport know
that. It's like you only ask for half. And then
they'll know. You. And then you fill in what you
would like to see happen. I'm trying to understand clearly.
What is it that you're asking? What is your clue
to your ask for the scouts and due to the
province. To your worship? Absolutely. I'll speak louder then in
clear and slower. The fact it's simply a request for
mayor and council to direct to the mayor to write
to the province. And the two ministries as it's in
rating in the staff report presented, Ministry of Transportation and
the municipal affairs minister and minister housing asking them to
remove the transit - oriented area from the heritage conservation
area. I've never seen the letter from Mayor and Council
with this motion directing. The mayor to write to the
province. But that was your last. That's all it is.
And we get it in black and whiteing from the
province. And thank you. Once and for all. Deal with
it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Any other questions.
Seeing none, can I put a moat? Can I put
this on the floor, please? Move by councillor sing, seconded
by councillor Weber. Um, so let me comment and add
a little bit of clarity. Go back to this and
where we're at right at this particular point in time.
You know, the province determines TOA designations, not the city.
And the city has fulfilled its legislative obligations and continues
to implement the framework locally by balance provincial requirements with
community context. Heritage protection and public transparency. City council has
taken numerous steps on this matter. And I know that
staff have as well. Council considered and adopted the required
bylaws to implement provincial small - scale multi - unit
housing. And the TOA legislation back in 2024. Directing staff
to proceed with implementation. The city notified the province in
June of 2024 confirming that the city had adopted the
appropriate bylaws to ensure compliance with provincial housing legislation. Council
provided continued direction on heritage conservation area matters through multiple
resolutions. Adopted, updated HCA guidelines. And considered governance changes to
heritage decisions in February of 2026. On behalf of council,
I engaged the province with our local concerns and considerations,
including the hospital area constraints that we continue to hear
from residents. And also questioning why, when we're looking at
transit - oriented areas, Queensway was not one of those
areas that was considered. The province confirmed in November of
2025 that the TOA designations, including the KGH bus exchange,
our provincially determined and would not be reconsidered. Staff then
prepared some additional materials and brought them forward to council
to provide public clarification. This information clarified the distinction between
the provincial designation authority and the city's rule in implementation.
Staff advanced the requirement by - law changes tailored implementation
to local conditions and coordinated with interior health on operational
constraints. Staff have made maintained direct communication with the province
to ensure compliance with regulations and to aid in responding
to emerging concerns related to the heritage and TOA overlap.
The province has advised that the city of Kelowna is
in full compliance. Staff have developed and refined the HEA
guidelines prepared council reports and produced a for the record
materials to address misinformation and ensure accurate messaging. In all
saying of that councillor with regards to this, um, there
is no hesitation that I have in drafting a letter
once again and supporting what you've done. And we have
drafted letters. We have drafted them to the mall. I
think it was a little bit of a question why
it was the hospital area as opposed to the Queen's
way and where it was kind of coming into play.
And there's no reason for us not to look at
doing it again if you'd like us to do it
again. But staff and upon counsel's direction have taken this
step newer as times and have received confirmation back that
it ends up being this provincial decision will stay. So
just from a clarification standpoint so that council is aware
of the work that has been done to try to
make it all work out. Councillor Singh, you had comments.
The worship, thank you. You spoke very eloquently to this.
Um, is the heritage area worth protecting? Of course it
is. Uh, but I'm not sure. The problem is going
to budge from its position. Let's send them a letter.
Um, we did have a meeting with, uh, a few
members of the heritage society who felt those new information,
new energy, new attitude. So maybe, maybe there'll be something.
Um, let's send a letter. Let's see. But honestly, I'm
not that confident that the province will change its position.
But it's worth a try. It's worth a try. I
will support sending a letter. But I'm not super confident.
That's all I'm saying. Thank you. But I could be
proven wrong. Councillor Heart, please. Thank you, worship. Well, here's
my take. Um, I know that this is really an
emotional thing. And we all do care about heritage. Councillor
Stack and Councillor Singh and myself have met with a
variety of people and the heritage conservation. I have spoke
to many, many of them. And so here's my take.
Absolutely what you said, uh, Mayor is true. We have
gone twice. We have heard Mr. Smith speak about it.
I have no problem with supporting this motion to go
forward one more time. Uh, cause it's just the people
do not feel satisfied with what the government is telling
us. Um, so if we could, I think we could
do it one more time. Let's get it really like
right out there. We've tried this. It'll be our third
time, third time you're out. Um, I don't know how
that's going to end up, but if the, the people
are very emotional about it. And they have really been
coming forward to us to get more clarity. And I'm
not sure how much more we'll get. But I'm willing
to give it another try. And let's see what happens.
And if staff could do that or mayor and council,
I think we could give it one more try and
go for it. And then, and then we could either
way either work to the advantage or it won't. And
but we could let to rest. But I'm happy to
give it one more try. And just to clarification there,
we'll be coming from mayor and council as the, as
an outlined with regards to that councillor, do you had
comments? Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Very pleased to hear
your response to, uh, to Councillor Canna's comments. Um, I
think, who's this, uh. Protect the heritage conservation components, Marseille,
as much as I can anytime we can. And I
think it shows great leadership on the sort of councillor
cans of being a forward again and great leadership on
your part. We will to look at it again. And
so I say nothing venture, nothing gate. Let's give it
one more world. One more time from the top. After
that, no more wideness living the gold. But as far
as I concern, this is worth the fight. And it's
worth the effort. And I, uh, probably both are fighting
this one. So let's go fight the fight. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Merritt. So saying that all in favor.
Opposed carried. Thank you. Um, so, um, I will, um,
thank you all for being here. I appreciate it. Um,
it was, uh, some of you have been here since
the beginning of this at, at 1 30. So I
truly appreciate the time and energy that you put in
to make certain that that message was carry forward to
council. Thank you for being here. Um, it's just Mayor
and Councillor items. Usually they're not all that exciting. So
you don't have to stay for that if you don't
want to. Um,
and saying that I'm going to start, um, city clerk
am I correct on that. Nothing else. Councillor Wolridge, please.
Thanks, your worst, that. S your worship. Um,
uh, starting on a bit of a sad note today,
but I just wanted to draw council's attention. Um, to
the passing of Kevin Flynn, who passed away recently. He's
been a 22 year councillor in salmon arm. And he
served as the board chair of the Columbia Shushwap regional
district from 2019 through 2024. I need a short battle
with cancer here this spring. And unfortunately he passed away.
Um, so I just wanted to pass on our thoughts
to his wife, Kathy and their family. Um, I know
that they both love to dance at every event I
was at and raise money for their community. And, uh,
and all those emails he signed off that hug your
friends, love your family and live every minute. So I
just wanted to share that with council and pass on
my condolences to his family. Council, what were you, if
I may, thank you for sharing that. Kevin and I
have been in the same business and probably knowing each
other for about 40 years. Um, so, um, it's been
a, you know, yeah, sudden surprise because I just saw
him last year and seemed, you know, I know time
flies, but quick, but it seems, you know, unreal that
that kind of took place. So I truly appreciate you
bringing that up. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor.
Uh, Counciled Hart, please. Thank you worship. Um, just like
to do a few things. I know it's kind of
getting the end of the day, but being Deputy Mayor,
we had some really a lot of stuff going on.
So I just quickly want to say, and cause a
lot of councillors did attend things too. So, um, I
did attend a chamber meeting with several of the safety
ministers and the solicitor general, uh, last week on Friday.
I was, because I am the representative for the chamber
I did attend that. And, um, Minister Callen was there
too. So that was a great meeting. And we did
have some guests there. And it went very well. Uh,
we did attend the food bank, the new premises at
Pure Mac for, for their storage. I know, um, I'm
just going to remember what councillors were there, but we
did attend that. It was just great. A lot of
the farmers came and that's the whole thing about this.
We're the farmers where they give food and they needed
a storage place. So in a nutshell. So we did
that. Um, we did a lot of us did, um,
go to the fire department, the recruit for the fire
department. That was just great. It was a great day.
And we had 11 recruits. So that was really good.
Hoopfest was incredible. I enjoyed it thoroughly. Man, and I
tell you, the thing with hoop fest is young people
go like basketball young people. You see a different hockey
and other things, but basketball. And these kids and, oh
man, it was just fantastic. We had a, it was
so great to have this in our neighbourhood. And hopefully
something more will come of that. I did attend for
on behalf of mayor as deputy mayor, the genealogical society.
I did a speech there last Saturday morning. And I
did do the pride proclamation just before that. I also
did attend the tombud. And I know Councillor Cannon was
there. And I know you wrote Councillor Lovegrove in Tom
Buds in his memorial ride. He did raise 250, 000
dollars that day. And there was over 800. I thought
it was 800. It was 850 close to 900 riders
and walkers that day. So good on, on, um, on
Mr. Bud on Tombud. We did attend the chamber 120th
anniversary. Of course, our mayor has been president of the
chamber. And several of us went to that. It was
a great, great celebration. Uh, I did attend on behalf
of mayor and council, the LS walk yesterday. And Mac
Logan, our deputy city. Oh, he just left the city
manager. He attended. I got a great picture with him.
And he, he, he went in the walk. And then,
um, actually I went to the BBI event that afternoon
on behalf of Mayor and council, I just wanted to
say this week we're having our huge top 40 under
40 for the chamber and I'm seeing that with one
of my colleague, my media colleagues from 99. 9 and
also on behalf of mayor and council, I'm cutting the
ribbon for the new mech mountain interior. Um, MEC. Yeah.
That's right. Co - op. Um, on Saturday morning. And,
uh, we have some other things going on that day,
but I will be attending those on behalf of Mayor
and Council because I know Mayor has some other things
in the afternoon. He will be attending and speaking at.
Thank you. Councillor, thank you. And thank you for your,
um, great assistance and trying to make certain that I'm,
um, making it too, or at least represented at all
the functions. You're very, um, a great partner in willing
to kind of, and some councillors can speak to how
much, how much that is you have to dig in
at times. Cause it's, uh, it's pretty constant. Councillor Lovegro,
please. Thanks, your worship. Um, indeed 100 kilometers. I finished.
That was job one. Number two stayed alive. I finished
in the top three. If you count backwards. If you
count backwards. Seriously, I was very honoured. I was invited
and I attended the, uh, OKIB fourth annual PAOA. And
with thanks to Chief Dan Wilson, an amazing event. If
you haven't gone to a POW, I encourage everybody we
are in indigenous people's month, right? And I want to
wish everybody June 21st happy national indigenous day. And we've
got a turtle I'm festival happening at 1. 30 in
waterfront park. The day before Saturday is rotary day in
city park in addition to the deputy mirror launching or
relaunching mech. And looking forward to being with you tomorrow
at the Urban Call Launch program. I think it's you,
Mr. Mayor, that's for relaunching that. I'll be attending on
behalf of a council, the Silka board meeting in Peachland.
And just before our pre - budget meeting on Wednesday,
I'll be trying to sneak in to get to the
Okanagan museum AGM. Thanks, your worship. Thank you. Uh, Councillor
Singh, please. I just want to remind all my council
colleagues that on the 20th, nine o'clock yoga in the
park. And it's heartfulness. I'll see you there, Rick. I
know how much you love yoga. And to get up
first thing in the morning. And the yet ratiyastra, the
Hindu parade. So I'll see you all there. I think
it'll start about 11 o'clock. You get to sweep the
floor. Yoga starts at nine, I think. Yes, Yoga starts
at nine. But you get to sweep the streets. With
the golden broom. Putting me to work. Councillor Cannon, please.
Thank you. Worship on Saturday. I was invited to be
part of a panel with George Greenwin from SEAL from
the chamber and Dr. Lee from the UBCO. And the
economic director general from economic division from Taipei. And it
was about the Taiwan, the chip industry. I talked about
how the long - term vision took about 50 years
of planning. And it's really interesting. And it was how
we can, as a city, look at planning in the
future. And it was what can Kelowna be like in
10, 20, 30 years. And it was a very good
discussion. In the director general from Taiwan. Economic development out
of Vancouver. Asked me to present this beautiful artwork to
council and yourself, your worship as a foot on display.
Yeah. Beautiful piece of artwork. So I'd like to present
it to you and half of that Tywin second. No.
Yes. I'm going to. Give it to her. Oh, you
want to get all counsel in it? Yeah, that's good.
It all counts. Well, can we finish up in the
book? Yeah. Finish up and then we'll go down and
take it off. True to that. Anything else to say,
council. Saying not. Councillor Cannon, thank you for attending that.
And thank you for this. And I think a good
picture with all of us out front would be, uh,
work. So saying that we are adjourned.