Transcript: Committee of the Whole - 2026/07/30

And we try always to do so, remembering the lessons that we learn from the nations, observing how much commitment they have put into their care and attention over so many centuries, and also trying to consider the challenges that face us day - to - day and consider all of that together with decisions we hope will be the best for those who are here and those who are coming. We had an opportunity just yesterday for a number of us, including a number of our staff to join with Songhees and Kosapsum as they hosted an elder's luncheon for elders from across many.

In this case, the application of three particular sections of our procedures by a lot, and I'll just remind people what they are. Under section 19 sub 1 sub B, it requires a submission of a late item to be sent in at least 48 hours before the meeting, which is to be considered. Section 19, sub 1 sub c requires that the motion include a rationale, noting that time sensitivity for its consideration. And section 15 sub 6 requires distribution to council members before the matter is considered, excuse me, all these requirements have been met, but in considering the addition of this item, another section of our procedural bioluses to be met, and that is of course sections 15 sub 5, which requires a 2 3rds majority to add the item to the agenda. We'll remind people that we're not considering the item itself, but just whether or not to consider it during today's considerations on the agenda.

So this comes from Councillor Loten, so I'm going to ask Councillor Artin first to move that this item be read to the agenda for today as what would be an item GE5, and then I will look for a secondary. I'd like to move that Councillor Loton? Yes, please. Very good, thank you for joining on your green light. Is there a seconder for adding it? Thanks, Councillor Thompson. So Councillor Loten, just very briefly, please just tell us why this requires attention today, not on the contents or the merits of the motion, but Justin White should be considered today. Thank you, good morning. And through you, Mayor.

The reason it's here today is because this is our last council meeting until September, so we're not meeting again for five weeks. And I believe that the extremity of this situation and the impact it has on our residents, merits it to be considered before we recess for August. Thank you very much. Councillor Thompson, you second it is. Do you have anything to add on the merit's batting today? Briefly at my regular monthly meetings with service providers and folks who work on the 900 block. It seems like the metatomidine crisis is quickly evolving. And so I think quick action is warranted. Thank you very much for that. It would be unusual, frosted debate, the addition. And so unless anyone has something anxious to say, I'm going to put the question. And so remember, this is simply on whether or not to add it to the agenda, not on the merits of the substance, which should it be added to the agenda we will discuss later. So

on adding this to the agenda today, all those in favor. Is anyone opposed. No one appears to be opposed, so we will add that to the agenda. It will become a new agenda item G5. Thank you very much for that. Looking therefore on to item D, this would be the approval of the now amended agenda. It's someone like to move that, please. Councillor Thompson's moving. Some of the second concert came a seconding. Any comments on the amended agenda. Seeing none all those in favor. Anybody opposed. You're opposed? You get to pull. We're not on the consent agenda, yes. We're just on the main agenda, yeah.

Now in fact, that is peer to be unanimous for the published agenda as amended. So now we are on the consent agenda. There were four items proposed for today. I'll just read them out with the information of the public. That would be item G1, the Council Member Motion for Advocacy to the Provincial Government on continued operating subsidies from a COLA housing. Idem G2, the Council Member Motion on Advocacy to improve the return of fugitives wanted on warrants, item G3, the Council Member Motion formalizing a fair wages policy. And item G4, a consultant member motion establishing a buy name list for the City of Victoria. Does anyone wish to add or remove any of these items?

Go ahead, Councillor Gardner. G4. G4. Anybody else? That's what Kim? G2. G2. Okay. Anybody else. Nope. Okay, so that would mean that as a convention, we just do remove things when people request that. So that relieves on the consented Jetta item G1, the Council Member Motion Advocacy to the Provincial Government on continued operating subsidies from a COLA housing and item G3, the Council Member Motion formalizing a fair wages policy. Someone like to move the consent agenda, please? Yes, go ahead, please. Adding G5. Well, I suppose we could. Item G5 was the one that was just added to the list today. I would look to the mover. I'm seeing people get shaking their heads. Nope. Okay.

So that would be as good as our convention of somewhat objects. Then we usually don't. So we'll leave that on as item G5. But thank you for that suggestion. Anything else anyone would like to add? I don't really think there's that qualifies. Okay. And then the consentergendo, as I mentioned, is G2 and G rather G1 and G3. Someone like to move the consent agenda, please. Thanks, Councillor Kim, seconded by Councillor Loughton. All those in favor. Anyone opposed. That is unanimous. Okay. That then takes us on to the first of our staff reports. This would be item F1. This is the review of the tenant protection bylaw compensation requirements. You can have our staff come up once they get settled. They can begin their work.

Once your subtlet, you can start us up of course by introducing yourselves to the public. We hope by this time we know who you are, but you never know. And then you can set off when you're ready. Uh, good morning, Mayor Alto and Council. I'm Andrea Hudson, Assistant Director of Citywide Planning, uh, with me is Ross Sauerd, our manager of housing. And I will turn it over to Ross to walk you through the staff report. Very good. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Howard. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Good morning. Uh, my name's Ross Sauerd, housing manager here today to present the review of compensation requirements for Victoria's tenant protection bylaw. In fall of 2025, Council adopted, uh, I knew tenant protection bylaw. And the bylaw seeks to mitigate the impacts of displacement for tenants where we see redevelopment of rental housing. In May of 2025, Council expressed an interest in understanding whether elements of the current tenant compensation framework could be enhanced and how such

enhancements might affect redevelopment feasibility. And Stafford here today to share our review of 10 compensation levels under the bylaw. For background, I wanted to quickly review the various ways the bylaws supports tenants and mitigates the impacts of displacement. It's helpful to understand the broader approach to tend support in addition to the base compensation levels, which are often what we focus on when we, when we're thinking about in discussing compensation under the bylaw. So looking at compensation package for tenants all displaced tenants receive base financial compensation that reflects the length of their tendency and the size of their home. And the bylaw also ensures tenants receive financial compensation to offset the cost of moving, sort of moving cost assistance. The landowner or developer is also required to work with impact attendance to find three alternate housing options as part of relocation support. The Cities tend to assistance planner will also review these options to make sure the developer is attempting to address the needs of the

tenants. And if the developer is not able to find a rental home with roughly the same rent rate, the developer is required to provide additional compensation in the amount of one month strength. The bylaw, um, also provides, uh, what we refer to as write of first refusal. And so this allows impact attendance with the opportunity to return to a similar unit in the new building at 20 percent below market rent rate. So currently under our bylaw, this equates to, uh, roughly 1, 700 a month for a one bedroom unit. So those are the sort of three core elements of compensation, uh, and sort of support under the bylaw. But the key part of the biolog that it's also worth highlighting when we talk about compensation support. Under the bylaw, all projects must have their impact attendance complete a household needs assessment. And. Through that needs assessment, city staff are able to identify tenants who are more vulnerable and have the ability under the bylaw to

require additional support. So staff use this infoto, then work with the developer and negotiate additional support beyond the minimum requirements of the bylaw and beyond the base compensation levels that are identified in the bylaw. So when we talk about the compensation package provided by the City's bylaw, it's important to think about how these different supports work together to help displaced hands and especially vulnerable tats. As part of the review, we undertook a high - level jurisdictional scan and several of the strongest tenant protection frameworks in BCU were reviewed to identify best practices and assess Victoria's compensation levels. Victoria's holistic approach to tenant protection remains a leading practice and our base compensation levels for tendencies between zero and ten years is generally well aligned with other leading jurisdictions. Vancouver notably provides additional compensation for tenancy's longer than 10 years. And generally when we look at our compensation levels under the current bylaw, one gap that did, that was identified compared to other communities is really looking

at the increased compensation for tenants with tendencies of 20 years or longer. So also it's notable that several communities, um, only apply their tenant protection requirements to purpose rental buildings with five or more units where there's redevelopment. Whereas Victoria's bylaw applies to all redevelopment regardless of the size if there's displacement of a renter. So overall compared to other leading municipalities, the City's compensation package remains amongst the most comprehensive in the province. As part of the review, staff worked with a land economist to assess how additional tenant compensation would impact financial viability of redevelopment. And the analysis tested various project performance for their capacity to support enhanced one - time financial compensation and a moving expense assistance. As well as enhanced write a first refusal requirements.

The financial analysis found that increases to the base compensation and moving support requirements do account for a small percentage of the overall project costs, and therefore do have relatively minor impacts on project viability. However, under our current challenging market conditions, the baseline feasibility can be marginal in many cases already. And so increased compensation requirements does shit, does risk sort of shifting marginal projects into tipping them into a, you know, being unviable in some cases. So writer first, refusal levels and the associated uptake had the most significant impact on viability based on the analysis, uh, given that those writer first refusal units could potentially be occupied at below market rates for an extended period of time and then have a longer impact on the viability of a project. Uh, so our under our analysis really underscored the high risk of increasing the ray of first refusal offering, especially under current market conditions. Also the analysis highlighted that the city should be judicious in adding any new

compensation requirements given the current challenging market conditions at this time. As we think about the compensation requirements, I wanted to share an example of how the training protection bylaw works in action to illustrate that holistic support provided by the bylaw. Uh, a larger rental redevelopment displaced three single detached homes with tenants and they were required to comply with the bylaw. Uh, as per the bylaw, the tenants completed their household needs assessment, which identified a refugee family of eight with very low income and limited English skills living in one of the three bedroom homes slated for redevelopment. The tenants completed their household needs assessment. Um, and through that work, the tense assistance planner used this information to work with the developer to secure additional financial support.

An additional 15, 000 dollars was secured above the base compensation required, bringing the families total compensation to 25, 000 based on the fact that they were a vulnerable family that was identified through that household needs assessment. And we're able to advocate on their behalf. However, the family still struggled to secure a new rental home on that private market, even with the landlord helping and the tenant relocation planner, uh, helping them due to their large household size and low income, even with some of the children having moved out by this point, a six member family is not typically accepted to a three bedroom home on the open market. And as the eviction date approached, the tenant planner reached out to property management companies in the region and explained the urgency of the situation after explaining the family situation, the CEO of Devin properties gave direction to leasing staff to waive typical policies around income verification and household size in this case. And the tendon to planner

accompanied the family to three viewings to help them understand the pros and cons of different rental homes. In the end, the family signed a lease with Devin properties for a larger three bedroom home that met their needs. And I'm sharing this story just because I think it shows that the cities tend protection bylaw remains a powerful tool to understand the needs of displaced tenants and provides a range of supports and compensation beyond just that one - time based compensation that we often talk about, um, to mitigate the impacts of displacement and especially where they're vulnerable households identified through that household needs assessment process. As per to the story and the jurisdictional review completed, the City's 10 protection by a law continues to provide high level support to displace tenants in our community. At the same time, the economic analysis completed confirms the current economic conditions are really quite challenging. Our challenging the baseline feasibility of redevelopment in many cases right now, uh, therefore targeted and

enhancements are recommended that would have limited impact on project feasibility. Increases to base compensation for longer term tendencies are recommended. And this would have limited impact on project viability as would only apply to the few instances where those long - term tendencies exist. But this additional support is valuable as we do often see tents with very long - term tendencies are some of the most vulnerable to displacement. It's also recommended to make a small increase to the moving expense compensation to align with other jurisdictions, uh, and better reflect current moving costs. These added costs would generally have a minor impact overall project costs, uh, and they are predictable one time costs for applicants as opposed to an ongoing cost like a writer first refusal, um, or something that maybe adds uncertainty to a project. In conclusion, the compensation and supports provided under the tenant protection bylaw continue to be a leading practice in the province, minor enhancements for long - term tendencies and updates to

moving costs, compensation would address and identified gap in Victorious bylaw, while minimally impacting development viability and a challenging climate. And to summarize, we're seeking direction to bring forth amendments to the tenant prediction bylaw to increase compensation for tens with long - term tendencies and increase moving cost compensation. We're also seeking direction to make one other minor housekeeping update to adjust the bylaws writer first refusal rent rate requirement just to align with the previous tenant systems policy, um, that was something that was missed when we brought the bylaw forward the first time around. Uh, thank you Mayor and Council. That concludes my presentation. Thank you very much. We'll start as usual with questions. Cons for him and Councillor Gardner and Councillor Delp. Councillor Hammond, sorry. I was just blanking on who you over. Uh, I guess we need a break. Seriously. Go ahead. Councillor Hammond. Thanks.

And thanks for the presentation. Um, through you mayor, can you tell us who you consulted regarding this and briefly tell us what was suggested from the people that you spoke to. Mr. Selward. Yeah. Oh my God. It's through the mayor. Um, yeah, so through our, our consultation in terms of supporting this review, uh, we spoke to, uh, a couple of different groups, um, so certainly recognising that the bylaw was just, just adopted in fall of last year. Um, I think generally we were seeing this as more of an opportunity to look at where are maybe the tweaks and sort of adjustments we could make. And therefore, I think we really tried to tailor and focus our consultation towards, um, sort of the folks in the development community who helped us understand the kind of current market conditions and the pro formas and how any kind of changes to the bylaw would, um, impact the viability.

So we did meet with, um, with developers and representatives of UDI. We also had, uh, made an effort to get the tenant perspective as well. Um, so we met with, um, taps, uh, who are a local nonprofit organisation that helped support tenants, especially vulnerable tenants in our community, uh, and so we met with them, uh, about the bylaw. And yeah, I guess in terms of your second point of the question, I think, you know, developers spoke to the challenges of, um. Of the, of adding more to ReadyFurst Refusal, just recognising how that impacts their Proforma and increases risk generally and that some lenders really look at that in a pretty, uh, I guess, uh, challenging way for their economic, um, kind of analysis they put together. Taps, I would say really highlighted the importance of the city continuing to look at ways to really improve that relocation support component of the, of the bylaw. Um, and I think they were, uh, excited to hear about

some of the work that's going on with the social planning council in terms of taking on more of that in a reallocation coordination, um, role and working with some developers in the community right now through some pilot projects. We also, um, as part of this review, uh, did include a, some meetings with, um, tenants who had previously participated in or had previously been impacted by displacement and therefore had been part of a 10 assistance plan in the past. And we spoke with, uh, those tenants, um, sort of through this process and sort of at the tail end of our OCP process, I would say, um, and generally they're a big takeaway from them was that, um, moving, moving support could be increased a little bit more. Um, but they generally found that the compensation was fair based on the conversations we had with those tenants.

Um, but I think we've continued to hear in terms of our tenant assistance planner talks with tenants on a daily basis. And so our tennis isn't planner, I think, you know, continues to hear some of the challenges of just understanding an awareness around, uh, the tenant protection bylaw. Um, and so I think that's another, I think area just in terms of education about the tenant protection bylaws. So people know what their rights are, I guess as they, uh, if they are in case displaced. So I would say that's, that's sort of the at a high level. Thanks, Mayor. And through you on the issue of the extra compensation for vulnerable tenants, is there a limit on that. Through the mayor, the bylaw and the way it is written is, I would say, um, written in a way that I think provides a fair bit of flexibility and discretion, uh, to staff in terms of, uh, it enables the director to request additional support. And generally

the 10 assistance planner, um, sort of work with both the tenants and the developer based on that household needs assessment to try to find something that sort of works for both parties. Thanks, Mayor. And through you, the last time around for some reason there was something stuck in my head that I thought there was a limit of maybe if it was conversation, maybe another month. But is that not the case? Sorry. Uh, through there. So in cases where there is, um, where the three, um, alternate housing options are provided, but there's a kind of not, there's a gap, I guess, between what the current rent is and what the alternate housing options are provided. And those cases an additional months rent is provided as well.

So maybe that's what you're thinking of. No, I'm aware of that. So there's no otherwise the limit for vulnerable tenants. You, you do what you can. Is that it? Read the mayor. That's correct. Okay. Thanks. Great. And, um, through you mayor on page two of the report, the staff report, it reads despite a challenging economic environment. The analysis demonstrates that the tenant protection bylaws one time compensation represents a small share of project costs and that targeted increases have limited impact on project viability. End quote. I was impressed to read that. If the staff first suggesting more generous compensation for the very long - term tenons of 20 to 40 years longer. And if you note that one time compensation will have quote, limited impact on project viability." Then why not give greater compensation for tenants who have rented in the same building for 10 to 20 years. Mr. Sard. Through the mayor. I think at this point in time, you know, in terms of our

conversations we've had with tenants, we've generally have heard that the compensation seems fair from their perspective. I think also, I think although the compensation increases, although one time compensation represents a small, a relatively small increase, um, you know, we are sensitive to the fact that it's the baseline feasibility, uh, is, can be marginal in many cases. And so really adding any additional costs, um, can be, could be something that could tip a project in towards, you know, moving away from being viable. I think a lot of projects are in that really marginal case right now. And so, you know, certainly through conversations with development community, I think they're asking for ways that we can, you know, minimize impacts in terms of increasing cost to them.

So I think we looked at generally our, you know, we felt as though our overall compensation levels for, you know, up to, up to 20 years, it seems to be generally, um, in a good place in relation to other communities, uh, and we hadn't heard a lot in consultation with TAPS or impacted tenants. And so I think we're trying to be more focused on area that was identified as a gap, uh, within the bylaw as opposed to increasing that sort of 10 to 20 years. Thanks, Mayor. And through you then, if your conclusion was that you could give substantial increases, like it's quite substantial from six months to 12 months and then 18 and 24 months. That seems like a lot more. So was the conclusion in there that there's just not that many people who would be in the 10 to 40 years category.

Is it sour? Yeah. I would say the 20 to 40 years, uh, is definitely a much smaller number of tenants. I think we did some analysis around the, um, you know, the, the sort of universe of, uh, impacted tenants that we've done taps with over like the last eight years or so. And I think it's somewhere in the neighbourhood of four percent of tenants represent those 20 plus year tenants. But that being said, they often can be some of the more vulnerable in terms of displacement based on paying lower rents. Maybe they're on fixed income. They've been in those, those units for a long time.

Maybe they, you know, they're very sort of stabilized in their current situation. And so sort of moving them when they've been there for that long is, you know, quite an impact to their overall kind of quality of life. Councillor. Thanks, Mayor, for some reason my computer just lost my spots on this. Just one second. Okay. Just a second. Okay. There we go. I'm back. Um. So did Staff following up on that. Did Staff come up with estimated costs for compensation of the 12 months, the 18 months and the 24 months. Mr. Summer. Through the mayor, sorry. Can you repeat the question? Did Staff come up with estimated costs? Um, on what would be the compensation when you included 12 months, 18 months and 24 months for people who were in 2030 and 40 years, uh, tendency. She started. Through the mayor.

Yeah, I think we've, we've, I guess we've analysed that that sort of impact, but I think generally, um. Recognising the small, this isn't a smaller number of tenants that would reflect that category of, uh, tenancy, um, and, uh, and therefore it would probably only be, you know, one or two tenants per project at the very most. I think we, we felt like that was probably worth a worth considering given, given the direction from council. Thanks, Mayor. And through you according to the CMHC, the turnover rate for the City of Victoria for October, 2025 is 16. 7 percent. However, they don't seem to have stats on how many people actually stay in an apartment. So, so that we could say that one out of, so we can't say the one out of every six apartments gets a new tenant every year. And we could extrapolate that that means the average tendon stays for six years. The difficulty with that, for example, as you got one renter

or several renters who might leave after one year while you've got others that are going to be there for 20 or 30 years or longer, what did your analysis reveal regarding how many years people tend to stay in apartments before moving? And what have you found so far for people who have been compensated under a bylaw policy in the bylaw. Mr. Howard. Uh, through the mayor, you know, I think I would just caveat this by saying, you know, we've looked at our, like some of the taps that have been approved, um, in our processes, but that's, you know, a very small sample of what the overall, um, I guess activity in the rental market. So I guess I would just, we should just take some of these numbers with a grain of salt. But I would say, um, it was interesting to find out that, you know, close to close to 70 percent of 10 years. Um, was sort of an interesting number that we

found and close to 30 percent of those were less than one year. And so I think that was quite interesting. And so even just the shift with the bylaw to moving that all tenants, uh, even if there have only been there for one year or protected under the bylaw, I think is sort of highlighted the value of that in terms of the shift from our policy to the bylaw. Um, yeah, and then, uh, yeah, I think beyond that, um, yeah, generally, I think what we're, what we find is a high percentage we're in that five years zone. And then I think, yeah, it was sort of more in the around sort of 15 percent I think were in that kind of tend to twenty. Thanks.

And mirror, and this might be my last question. Um, the recommendation has an overlap of 20, 30, and 40 years, like it goes from 20 to 30, 30 to 40 to 40 years is, um, is that deliberate or is there a chance that that might cause confusion. Through the mayor, uh, yeah, sorry for if that's, uh, unclear. I guess generally the way that the bylaw is, is sort of structured is 20 or more years, 30 or more years. Uh, so that was just sort of maybe, uh, a bit of a oversight in terms of the phrasing of the, of the motion. But I think we would be looking to do consistent with how the bylaw currently works. So it's, uh, if, um, over 30 years, uh, then you would be in the 18 months rent if you're over 40 years, you would be in the 24 month rent. Okay. I think that's probably important. Thanks, Mayor. That's all the questions when the opportunity, I might

be jumping the gun. I would certainly like to move the recommendation. Okay. Thank you. Connor Gardner. With questions. Thank you. And thank you for the present. Lift up your mic, please. Thank you. And thank you for the presentation. Um. And maybe I got to get down my computer going here. Well, we've heard of, uh, okay. And I appreciate the emphasis on the vulnerable tenants and expect that many of the 30 to 40 year old tendencies. So even though there may not be that many could well be, uh, have a high proportion of vulnerable tenants. So I quite appreciate the explanation you gave. And an example of the family too. I quite appreciate that. That adds real life. So while we've heard of evictions and renovations and understand the rule of the city's relocation planner, I'm still unsure as to the magnitude of the evictions. So what you referred to as cases. So how many tenants have been evicted that you know of in 2025 say

in 2026 to date. And do we have numbers of that? How many perhaps were evicted and how many that staff actually dealt with in the way of negotiations. Mr. Sauer, do you know that information. Through the mayor, I mean, I don't, we don't really necessarily track that the information that way. I guess I would say that when I mentioned that there was, you know, roughly 500, uh, households supported through the 10 assistants plan process over the last eight or so years. Um, probably in most cases, uh, I guess either the tenant chose to leave voluntarily recognising that the redevelopment happening and they would be paid out or they would wait until the eviction notice comes forward. Um, before leaving, but they would be still be paid out as per the tenant assistance plan, uh, kind of package that's agreed upon, um, but we don't, uh, track, uh, specifically the number of, of evictions, uh, at this point in time. Um, it may be something that

you, we would be better directed to the province given the fact that they, um, they're more involved with that from like the RTA perspective. Councillor. Great. Thank you. And the second part of the question is how many has the relocation planner actually assisted? Cause I realised that's a lot smaller number, especially what you just said. And that's understandable given what you said that the majority are less than five years. So I get that. So how many has your, has your, has our relocation planner actually assisted in a last year or this year date? Uh, through the mayor, I don't, um, I'm not sure if we have that number right away, but I would say that essentially any time there is a, uh, tenant assistance plan that's being prepared, which means, you know, essentially any time the redevelopment where there is a rental unit there where there's a tenant, it's being displaced. Our 10 assistance planner is then sort of engaged at that part in the

land use, uh, sort of application process. And they need to go through all the various steps of the bylaw. So, um, you know, it's our tenant planner is in constant communication on a daily basis with tenants who are impacted by redevelopment. And then there's also more general inquiries around, uh, kind of tendency rights and things like that, that are tenant planner helps to support through things like the rental property standards of maintenance bylaw, uh, referrals to, um, the RTA and RTP as well. Thank you. And I understand that whole process and therefore the, shall we say she monitors the system, which is excellent. But surely someone must know how many people she's actually helped relocate.

Do we, can you get that number for me in the next little while? I don't mean today. Uh, through the mayor, yeah, we can, uh, we can try to, we usually do that more toward the end of the year. And so we have kind of some numbers usually on the number of supports that are included each year within the housing strategy annual review. So we can pull up the most recent numbers we have for that. Great. So you would have 2025 already. Okay. So yes, I think that would help put the whole program into context. I think you may have explained this one already. Okay, got that one. There's a huge jump from six months compensation to 12 months compensation of the compensation. I don't mean tendency. And so was there any consideration? I realised the numbers may have been too small for other categories of splitting such as nine months compensation for 20 to 25 years instead of the 10 year gap. Mr. Sauer.

Through the mayor, um, I think we just recognising that there's generally sort of a smaller number of these longer term tenants. I think we tried to just maintain sort of the larger categories, uh, for kind of simplicity of the bylaw. Um, and, um, you know, the, yeah, through the merit, I think if council would prefer other, uh, their thresholds, uh, that could be directed. Okay. Thank you. It's all for now. Okay. Councillor Dell with questions. That's right. Um, no, those are actually asked, those were my, some of my questions. Um, I guess my question is about other municipalities really quickly. So the tenant protection planner, we have one of those. To other municipalities have this service, an actual staff person that helps with the, um, the process of moving out. Or is that only a Victoria? Mr. Sour. Through the mayor, it's a great question.

Uh, certainly I know within the City of Vancouver, they've got a very robust sort of tenant support function. Um, but within other municipalities, um, yeah, I don't, I don't have that answer as a good question in terms of, uh, whether there's a specific tenant planner or if that role kind of, that this work falls within more of a general sort of planning perspective. Um, I see our tenant assistance planner is kind of chatting to messaging something right now. So they may have some additional information I can share if anything's provided. Councillor. Sure. Uh, through the mayor continuing on other municipalities, one of the challenges we're having, um, with homelessness is folks being evicted in other municipalities in the region. There's this conception that people come from around Canada where it's actually a lot of it's from the CRD. There was a story the other day leading to my question about, uh, online of, of, of senior woman who got evicted in Oak Bay and was

living on Pandora. Do other municipalities in the CRD have anything similar to this. I know you did a jurisdictional research when you were looking at places like White Burnaby and some of those bigger, bigger places. But why do we see around the CRD particular with our neighbours and Oak Bay and a squam malt and sandwich? Do they have anything similar to this or is there big discrepancies across the region? It's just sour. Yeah. I think certainly I think the tenant protection work that the city has done, uh, in terms of being a leader on it has I think been influential and maybe inviting other municipalities to the table. Um, so I think certainly Sanich and a squam alt to my knowledge have generally kind of tried to model their, um, their 10 assistants policies off of the city's policy in some cases. Uh, and then I think even Sanich, uh, they've brought forward a bylaw protection bylaw that follows some of the similar elements to

us. But I would say ours is definitely much more, much more robust. Um, and just got another message from, um, from staff that sanitar don't have specific tensions planners. Burn to be a New West have more dedicated staff as well as Vancouver. Thank you for that. Councillor Doe. Okay. Um, maybe my last question here. One of the issues we always see, uh, perhaps the most famously with, with cigarettes and getting people to stop smoking, leading to a question is, um, it's increased a taxation on cigarettes. Tax a hell of them. So they're a hundred dollars a pack of people stop smoking. And of course what that does is just pushes, uh, supports illegal cigarettes. So there's always this balance. And my question that I want to ask is I've heard some stories about illegal evictions in the city. So perhaps a new owner of a property comes along and buys it and tells all the renters. This is actually a real story that happened. Oh,

I'm going to renovate the whole place. You know, my family's going to move in. We're going to do all these big renovations. You might as well move out now. And so people willingly move out. They don't follow the process. They don't go through it. And they move out technically willingly outside of the legal contract. And then later, you know, after the renovations, the price just goes way up and they were duped. So I think it's a balance of we're trying to set fairly strict rules, but we're trying not to make them so strict where we're pushing into like, you know, illegal, but quasi legal evictions.

Are we still seeing examples of that? Or is that something that's mostly just done through the residential tendency branch. Are you trying to balance those issues, I guess is my question. Mr. Sauerd. Um, where, where there is, um, land use applications coming in. And there's been mention of the fact that, oh, we had, we had tenants, but they're, they're not in the building anymore. Um, through our processes, we do ask for proof of legal eviction six months prior to the land use application. So just trying to gauge and monitor, you know, our people kind of following, um, sort of the proper processes for eviction. Um, and I would say just generally this is part of the part of the, I guess the importance of kind of continuing to have that sort of act of, active management, active monitoring of these bylaws and to sort of watch what are the trends and how are the sort of rental market kind of. Behaving, I guess, in terms

of like what are, what, what are maybe some of the things that are happening where people are maybe trying to find loopholes. So I think, yeah, I think it certainly, it's something that we have observed. And I think it reinforces really the importance of that education piece of making sure tenants understand that they have certain, um, their, they're entitled to certain things under the tenant protection, uh, bylaw. And so if someone's saying we're going to be redeveloping, you know, they have, they have the right to some of these supports, even if they, you know, decide to move at, you know, pretty early stage in terms of the redevelopment. Um, so I think it's an ongoing thing that we try to monitor and bow. Okay. My very last question. We often hear about Burnaby folks. They just do a Burnaby does implement the birdie style system.

Burnaby just build a 64 story building. They're building 87 story building. I believe they have quite a few over 50 and a lot over 40. And so we're trying to grapple with that folks who want very low density, but they want the benefits to come with density. Can you confirm like if we were approving denser buildings where the developers are making a lot more money up at the 40, 50, 60, 70 story buildings, does that provide an opportunity to provide more funding for tenants? Like are we trying to grapple with that balance of our approved density, which is quite low. But the benefits that come with it, or is this, are these kind of outside of those density calculations. Mr. Sauert, I'm not sure that's specifically related to what you're proposing, but you're of course always welcome to venture your thoughts. Through the mayor, I think, yeah, certainly in terms of when we did our jurisdictional review and looked at Burnaby, I think, yeah, it's,

it's, it is a very different context. And I think we, it's, it doesn't necessarily, they're the scale of development is much different in terms of, um, these large scale kind of grey field suburban mall redevelopments into like major, you know, transit oriented development, uh, high density projects. And so I think it's, it is sort of challenging to compare kind of Apples and oranges and looking at what is, you know, how does their tenant protection compared to ours? And so I think that's why, um, you know, we continue to monitor, we continue to walk, you know, look at the sort of how it's impacting viability. And I think we continue to feel like our, our 10 protection supports are in a good place. Okay. Thanks very much for entertaining those questions. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Thanks for lurting. Thanks and through you mayor. Um, Staff have kind of touched on this, but I just wanted to ask a question about the jump between five months rent, um, for over nine to 20 years. Versus 12 months rent for 20 to 30 years. So you know for, according to the letter of the law here, if you were 19 years, you'd get five months rent. But if you were 20 years, you'd get. 12 months rent. So in the comparison to other cities, North Vancouver does an additional 25 dollars a month for each month beyond five years. Now that doesn't add up to all that much. Um, but what it made me start thinking is why aren't we pro rating this? And was that a conversation that was had with, um, the consultants or something that, that staff of considered. Mr. Sauer. Uh, through the mayor, I think, yeah, there's different ways that it could be sort of adjusted and kind of adapted. I think,

um, I think generally what we've heard is, you know, when we've met with taps, when we've met with impacted tenants, uh, in the past, it seems as though people feel the compensation is fair. And we do have through the household needs assessment where we identify more vulnerable tenants in that, you know, five to 10 years, five to nine years or nine to 20 years. We do have mechanisms to pursue additional support where we think there's really a case to be made. And so I think we feel that the bylaw still supports that where we identify those sort of vulnerable households through that process. Um, but, but continue to feel like this sort of strikes a good balance. Yeah. Yeah. And it occurred to me that also that creates some uncertainty too with, with the Proformous, so was that a reason why that, um, wouldn't be the most viable way forward. Mr. Serd? Through the mayor, certainly in talking with our economic analysis consultant, you know,

they emphasized, um, where bylaw or where the tenant protection sort of requirements introduce uncertainty or sort of ambiguity that that is challenging, that makes it more challenging for the developers to, you know, communicate what the economic impacts are to the underwriters and in where there's uncertainty underwriters tend to take the more conservative view. And so I think, yeah, trying to have very clear one time, um, you know, certain, uh, certain cost impacts our desirable. Okay. That makes sense to me. And then just one more question about the support mechanisms for vulnerable people that you mentioned, like there might be some things sort of outside the box, for lack of a better word that might help some people. The tenant planner once told me that sometimes they'll actually help people getting to say non - market housing, like through BC housing or, or GVHS. Can you just talk a little bit more about how that happens and how often that happens? Um, I guess that would

really be the role of our tenant assistance planner. Um, but I'm just curious about how often those opportunities are offered to people. Mr. Seward. Through the mayor. Thanks for the question. Uh, yeah, so certainly, um, when we identify, um, vulnerable tenants or tenants who have sort of lower incomes, um, are 10 and assistants planner often tries to confirm as to whether, uh, those impact attendance have kind of signed out to be on sort of like wait lists for subsidized housing through PC housing. And then if there is actually an eviction notice, um, there is opportunities to sort of flag that to BC housing and that sort of will prioritize them, uh, in some ways through their kind of, uh, sort of selection process in terms of, of tenants. Um, but also we've had good success in terms of working, uh, also working directly with nonprofit housing providers in the region. So for example, uh, there was a redevelopment on Gourge Road East that had a

significant number of tenants that were being displaced through that broader redevelopment, uh, and there was actually success working with like Gorgeous society to find places in Qawanis, uh, to find places for a number of those tenants and sort of offering some of the more lower income tenants opportunities within, uh, non - market housing, uh, has also been, um, something that has been successful in the tenants. This planner will try to help to liaise with, you know, those social housing providers, even Ireland Health in some cases. Or if there's a 10 relocation coordinator that the developers working with, they can also play a role in liaison as well. So, uh, I wouldn't say it. It doesn't happen every time, but where we identifie sort of those lower income households where there's maybe a good, where they meet the criteria more for social housing as opposed to market housing. And I think that's, that's where we maybe make more of an effort. Okay. Um, is there a

way to somehow include some of those like metrics or even stories in the annual housing review. So Council and the public has a way of hearing about this. Because this is a part of the tenant assistance plan or the bylaw that we don't really hear about very often. Is there, I mean, would I need to formalize that or is that something we could do or is that possible to do? Maybe that's where to start. Mr. Sored. Through the mayor, I think, yeah, I think it's, it is something I think we could try to do a better job of telling some of those stories as we did today. I think we need to, we kind of have to. Tread closely because there is also sort of some privacy and sort of sensitivity around disclosing too much, I guess in terms of the details. But, uh, I think at a general level, we could probably do a better, better job of telling those stories. Yeah, I just

think it's an important piece of the puzzle. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you very much. Council Caradona. Thanks very much and through you. I wanted to ask two questions. A first going back to the conversations we had, uh, during the OCP debates, which is somehow almost a year ago already. A number of us mentioned, including myself that with the blanket upzoning that we've done in the city, developers do have more choice, quite a bit more choice. And I think I talked about the difference between upset, or sorry, redeveloping parking lot or a vacant home. Right? Where the placement versus a situation where there's 20 or 30, 40, 10 inch. And, uh, and what the difference is between those two options. Is part of the intention of this work, if we can just be explicit about it, to dissuade developers from taking on complex cases in which there is a lot of displacement. Is this supposed to be sending a kind of market signal that says, once you

look at the empty parking lot or the single family home that's vacant and developed that rather than take on the hassle and cost of displacing a bunch of people? Is that part of the intent. Mr. Seward. Through the mayor, um, thanks to the question. I think, you know, certainly in our conversations with the urban development institute and their, you know, they, they, they voiced their challenges, I guess with the writer first refusal requirements of the bylaw. And in those conversations with them, you know, we highlighted the point that you made that, you know, through our recent updates to the OCP and our zoning modernization we've created a lot more opportunities for them to redevelop, um, and create, you know, multi, multi - unit residential buildings without having to redevelop an existing apartment building. And so I think that is a, was one of our considerations of the OCP and zoning by a lot of process.

And so I think our, our tenant protection by laws were reinforces that, that, you know, certainly if we have the option of seeing a redevelopment that can have less displacement versus more displacement and our bylaw can kind of complement that in some ways, I think that's positive, but at the same time we recognise, you know, we still need to continue to, we don't want to be creating a barrier to all redevelopment per se as well. And so it's, it's trying to find that balance. So it's through the mayor. It's not meant to impede development though. Through the marriage, I wouldn't say it's not a meant to impede development, but it's, it is, I think, acknowledging that there is a, um, there is a, there's an impact that the community, um. The impact of the community where we see a lot of redevelopment of purpose built rental buildings. And I think the bylaw is highlights the challenges that that puts on sort of community and, and

tenants. And therefore has sort of a higher threshold for those who are projects, I would say. Okay. Thanks, that's fair. I just want a second question is about, uh, write a first refusal. I want to just drill down on a little bit. And I sent an email to council a few months ago about this, about, um, the writer fuse or freeze. Oh, as it exists over at the CRHC and just wanted to talk about it for a minute over at the CRGC, we do have a very robust ride of first refusal program. It's obviously different because it's dealing with non - market housing. But it's very well used program. And the two most recent redevelopments in Victoria are Michigan Square and Caledonia. And at Michigan Square. 15 of the 37 families moved back into the redeveloped Michigan square. The rest stayed in other CRHC buildings or maybe moved on in life. And at Caledonia 15 of 18 families moved back in. So all the families

except for three. Even though they had to go somewhere else for a couple of years, they ended up coming back. In fact, I've had a chance to meet a couple of them. They're back in the neighbourhood by Vikkai. So that's a pretty high rate of return. Are we seeing those kind of rates at, do we have any data on those rates in market housing? And maybe as a follow - up question, is the expectation that these tweaks, even though the development industry doesn't like it? Is there an expectation of these tweaks would actually increase the, I mean, it's a bit speculative. But what it, would you, would you envision that this would increase the likelihood that writers refusal is happening. And people are moving back into their previous locations. Mr. Sauer? Through the mayor. Uh, yeah, I think in terms of the data on Ray first refusal, I think we continue to see a pretty low, a very, very, very low uptake, to be frank.

And I think part of that is that really even some of the buildings that are recently completed are still under the old policy where it was, where it was only 10 percent below market. So I think, you know, it's, it's a, it is challenging just given the sort of lag between when, you know, when service, some of the policy and bylaws come into place. And then the time for our project to be approved and then constructed, um, in terms of being able to see things play out, um, so I think generally we have seen low uptake. I think that is part of the challenge that where, you know, where that writer first refusal is maybe it's not as attractive for a household to return. Um, in terms of having to go through the whole moving process again, if they've found something in the intervening time, um, so I think, you know, I think we're hopeful that with the way that it's sort of enshrined through

the bylaw, um, and the bit more certainty around what those rates are for tenants, um, that, uh, that perhaps that would, uh, entice a couple more households, uh, when we see projects, um, with your first refusal to return. So I think that's something we want to continue to, to monitor and, and follow along. But, um, you're correct. We have, we've had very, very limited uptake on the reverse refusal to date. Okay. Thanks. Thanks, Mayor. That's it. That's your Kim. Uh, thanks through the chair. Uh, in the presentation, there was mention of a small percentage, uh, I think it was viability of projects from the development community. Can you quantify what is the small percentage. Mr.

Sauer. Through the mayor in terms of, um, the costs of the, the tenant protection requirements, um, so when you look at the total project costs, um, you know, the total capital costs associated with the cost of purchase the land, the cost to construct the building, the soft costs of going through the approval process and pain consultants. Generally, when you're looking at, you know, uh, tenant, uh, tenant assistance plan. In comparison to all those other really larger items on a Proforma. The tenant, um, the 10 to compensation package is remains a relatively small proportion of the overall costs. Um, however, you know, it's. We are always trying to be judicious, I guess whenever we're adding any costs to, um, projects recognising that, you know, there's various different policies and bylaws across the city that all have cost impacts. And if everybody says their cost is nothing, but everyone's increasing all the time can all add up and results in more material impacts to viability. So it's

a, it's a, it's a balancing act, I think, that we're constantly trying to play, if that helps. Are there any other. Items that make up this performa among the many that you've listed that the city could control or influence in order to make. This small percentage more. Less of a factor. Mr. Sard. Through the mayor, I think, I think in some ways that's why local governments are in a challenging spot right now is that, uh, especially in cases where like the city Victoria where we've really used a lot of the levers that we have available to ourselves in terms of, you know, being the land use authority. So making our, our zoning, making our policy more permissive. We're improving the approval process, you know, stepping aside in terms of things like public hearings, you know, delegating applications to staff, all those things are really, you know, those all have impacts in terms of reducing the amount of time, providing more certainty, reducing risk, which are

all very, very valuable. But we've done a lot of those here within the context of the City of Victoria. But in some ways the most challenging thing that a lot of developers are facing is the sort of precipitous rise of hard costs in terms of construction costs over the last five years. And the City Victoria and local governments across the country don't have really impact on that kind of hard cost line item within the Proforma. And so I think in some ways that is really the challenge. And I think we've, we've done a lot in terms of on the density side of things in terms of providing zone, you know, density as of right that we feel like really aligns with our growth management structure.

You know, the opportunity certainly for rezonings in certain parts of the city, um, uh, where it aligns with our OCP and rezoning development policy. But I think, you know, we're continuing to look at opportunities to, you know, I think streamline and, and support development where it makes sense. Um, but I think we've really pulled a lot of those levers through the most recent sort of OCP zoning modernization workling. Is that why in your estimation Victoria's bylaw is so leading compared to the other municipalities. Mr. Sard. Uh, through the mayor, I think, uh, the city's by law, I think, is well placed because I think we've, we were more early on some of the tennis citizens plan. And so I think there's been opportunities for sort of learning along the way, uh, and, um, because we were also just an early community to enshrine in the bylaw. I think even just by moving to a, uh, to having a lot of these supports and protections required

via bylaw that also just I think does a lot to strengthen the certain GOR for tenants. And I think that's not to be underestimated. Um, there's reference frequently to the current challenging market conditions for the cost of construction. And I don't deny that we often talk about the municipal price index over the CPI, for example. So, um. But given that I'm led to understand that these new, these market conditions are kind of reflecting what's happening in the world and have not always been this high. What do you anticipate if and when these costs go down. Mr. Sorret, that is indeed a speculative question, but of course you're always welcome to offer your thoughts. Yeah, through the mayor. I would just say, you know, our intent is to really continue to monitor. And if things improve in terms of the development climate, I think we would always continue to look at, you know, fine tuning some of our, um, some of our supports with whether it

be tenants or looking at, you know, other, other things that, um, are important for the city. So it's, I think it's just an act of monitoring process. And the bylaw is still relatively recent and it's adoption. Um, and we see, uh, a lot of good signals that the bylaw is still continuing to sort of meet the broader goals and objectives around supporting tenants. But, uh, it's critical for all of our policies and biologists to continue to be sort of actively monitored. My next series of questions is more about, uh, in the theme of pro rating things, um, has there been discussion about right of first refusal for perhaps a handful of units in a development.

I'm thinking specifically to give context with what's inspired my question is mixed income communities. So could we have had below market write a first refusal with perhaps higher cost units in the same project. That would have made that viable. Mr. Sauerd through the mayor, I think in some ways that is part of the intent of the revitalization tax exemption. So, uh, I think part of the thought is, is that where the redevelopment, a rental redevelopment and they're developing maybe a new apartment building, uh, that would be purpose built rental, um, part of the thought is that if there's 10 percent of those units that are secured as rental for more median incomes through the revitalization tax exemption, that those 10 percent of units could be offered to some of those displaced tenants. So you get, um, maybe a level of affordability that goes beyond that, um, that twenty percent below market. So I think that's kind of how we've been trying to create a pathway,

I guess, for, um, for developers who are maybe looking to, yeah, to, to go beyond, I guess in terms of creating a pathway, I guess for more affordability for those rifles refusing units. Do you think these developers know this explicit intention. Mr. Sauer. Through the mirror, it is spelled out in the bylaw and the policy, but, um, it is perhaps something we could do a better job of communicating through the rules process. It's a second time I've heard that line today. We could do a better job of communicating. So, um, my next question about the pro rating theme is, um, it referencing a question my colleague asked earlier about pro rating, uh, the amount of time of a tendency into, uh, the compensation. And then the response was, uh. Made me question, was this even offered as an option or an item of discussion during your consultations, pro rating. Mr. Sir compensations. Through the mirror. You know, I would have to check in with some of our staff around exactly how we, how the

conversation was framed where we talked about, talked with tenants around kind of the compensation, but, um, my understanding is that the general sort of takeaways from those discussions that we had with impacted with tenants who had participated and had been, you know, subject to a past tenance plan is that, um, generally they felt like the level of compensation they were to was fair. They did highlight that the moving cost, um, sort of support was a bit low and that I was an area that they thought maybe we could do a better job of following. Cause I think some of that had sort of fallen, um, had not been kept keeping up with inflation, I would say. Can you re - answer that question, but from the perspective of consultation with the development community. Mr. Sard.

Through the mayor, um, yeah, I think. The question around the sort of pro rating, I think it's, I guess also just generally we've been trying to create sort of a, uh, the, the bylaw that has more of a simple approach for sort of administrating and implementing and just providing kind of more clarity, I guess, in certain people for both kind of tenants and developers. Um, but yeah, I think, um, yeah, more, more conversation, I guess could be, could be included in the future for sure around, um, alternative ways for compensation. But I think at this point in time, given the fact that the bylaw is so recently adopted, I think we've looked to try to maintain the more the general structure as it currently stands.

What do you need from us as counsel in terms of direction to make sure that that conversation is revisited in the future when the bylaw is sloped again? So, um, through the mayor, I think. We, I don't, I don't know if we need specific direction on that. I mean, I think we have, we have the commitment to sort of maintain sort of active, active. Monitoring and adaptive management of all of our bylaws as part of our OCP kind of process and housing strategy sort of process. And so, um, I think, I think it will just be part of that. Um, ongoing work where we, we kind of continuing to review, um, our bylaws and our policies and to make sure they're continuing to support our broader goals. And I think, yeah, I guess, um, yeah, I think I would, that's what I would say at this point in time. Okay. Um, I'm going to reframe that question. What assurances can staff offer counsel that this

will be revisited in the future, particularly pro rating compensation in discussions with the development community. Mr. Sauer.

The mayor, I think, you know, certainly Council should Council wish to provide, um, specific direction around things for staff to consider as part of any future monitoring or updates of the bylaw. I think that's, uh, that certainly is always, uh, always welcomed and always an option for, for council, for marrying council. Um, that being said, I also think it's worth highlighting as we've described through the presentation that, you know, these compensation amounts that are on the screen in front of you right now are the sort of minimum requirements of the bylaw and that the intent of having the bylaws structured the way it is and the fact that we have enshrined within the bylaw the opportunity for the director to request additional support where there's vulnerable tenants that are identified through that household needs assessment.

I think that's something we continue to use as a, as a, as a powerful tool to advocate for more vulnerable tenants. But yeah, certainly would welcome any additional direction for future efforts when we do, uh, updates in the future and continue to monitor in the future. Okay. Thanks. Last question technicality. If you look at, uh, one AI, triple I goes 2030, 3040, 40 plus. Shouldn't it be more like 2029, 30, 39, 40. I believe that question was, um, asked in a different way earlier. But yeah, through the mayor, I think, yeah, it sort of, it's sort of more, I guess, reflex kind of the way the current bylaw is written, but there's maybe a couple of words missing words. You know, 20 or more years into 30 years to 30 or more years to 40 years, um, and so certainly when we should counsel direct us to move forward when we bring forth the bile or readings, we can, we can kind of clarify that

at that point in time. But it would be looking to do the update and consistently in the same way it's done in the current pylon terms of the, you know, in an above 28 years would be in the 20 to 30 year group and above 30 years would be in the 30 to 40 year group. Okay. Um, thank you for tackling these questions. Appreciate it Councillor Thompson. With questions. Thanks Mayor and through you, thank you very much for the report and the work. Um, I just wanted to ask about the moving expenses in appendix A. Uh, in the farthest right column, it has the current bylaw, which is, um, professional movers paid by the developers or, um, and then. I think comparing that to the report, the report and the recommendations doesn't mention the developer.

Option, but I assume that all this, um, amendment would just change the numbers and we would still have that option of developer pay or this much money. Is that correct? Mr. Seward? Through the mayor, yeah, that's correct. We would still maintain that option if the developer wants to arrange for it and pay for themselves. They can. But if they're leaving it to the tenant to do, then that we'd be updating the sort of the fixed rates, I guess. Okay. Thanks. And then also in attachment A, uh, I noticed that, um, what we're contemplating here in terms of moving expenses, uh, would put us in sort of the lead position. I think with the exception of a part of what sandwiches doing, but not all of what Snach is doing, we could presumably tweak the rates for studio two and three bedroom. Would matching sandwiches amounts for moving expenses. Um, be a significant factor in making it more expensive or difficult to build housing. Mr. Sarr.

And through the mayor. Considering that you'd be going from 1500 to E5 or two bedrooms. Yeah. In isolation, probably no. Okay. I guess because these are one time expenses, right? Instead of, you know, paying it monthly. Okay. Um, I may have an amendment then. Thanks. I think all my colleagues have asked all of my other questions. Thanks, Mayor. Thank you very much. And whilst with any final questions. I suspect that they're going to be quite a few comments about this. And so I'm going to suggest that we take a break right now because we have been sitting for almost an hour and 20 minutes. And then we'll come back. We'll move for Councillor Hammond to move it. Mullicore secondary. And then we'll have our comments at that point. So let's come back at 10. 3.

Good morning and welcome back. Councillor Del just had to take a call so he will be rejoining us shortly. Just before we go to the mover of this would be Councillor Hemmend I actually realised that I did have one question that didn't get asked And it's actually about the report and I was curious given the now routine consideration of the impact on or the impact by the community safety well being planned and almost all of our policy development and Programs I'm curious why there isn't a reference in the report to the Assessment, I guess of the community safety well - being impacts of these changes and I'll tell you why It seems to me that we're talking about housing certainty and compensation for folks who are evicted or remote potentially not when they plan to be. And that to me speaks very specifically to life safety quality of life safety and both of those things are actually Protective elements they're called in the committee safety

mobile plan are quite crucial to the plan So I didn't see a section which there is now often in almost all of our reports that addresses that nor did I see a specific reference to the impact of these changes Which would be positive, I would have suggested on community safety and well - being and I'm wondering why that is. Through the mayor that's an oversight by staff and certainly your correct It's generally something we try to include as part of the The updated template for council reports and so that's that's an error on the part of the housing team to not include that because you're absolutely correct that Uh, that there's certainly a connection around the role the tenant protection bylaw plays and trying to reduce Just you know mitigate the impacts of displacement and we certainly know eviction can be sort of a. There's a relationship between eviction and potential, you know. Housing precarity and homelessness prevention and things like that So I certainly

would see this has been reinforcing some of the goals and objectives around really Improving kind of housing security and You know helping to you know just generally mitigate Impacts around displacement and and that role and that plays in homeless prevention Yes, thank you for that. Yeah, I agree and so I would hope that that will be a consideration in future comments analysis and reports With that then let's go to Councillor Helm and indicate that he wanted to move the staff recommendations Councillor Gordon wants second Councillor Hammond over you. Thanks Mayor prior to me moving to Victoria in Vancouver. I was involved in it with a group called Renters at Risk and we were supporting tenants who were being renovated as a matter of fact even helping them with legal challenges when they were being renovated Luckily John Horgan's government made important changes that substantially reduced had renovations that were legal at the time but never should have been tenants pay the mortgage expenses and profits

over time and for real estate investment trust it pays handsome dividends for the shareholders I'm a landlord myself so I know who pays these expenses and I know the value of tenants and the importance of giving them a feeling of security that they won't be evicted on a whim So when tenants are evicted for redevelopment I want to ensure we give tenants proper compensation. And knowing that staff wrote that one - time conversation will have quote limited impact on project viability I'd like to add some increased compensation in that long gap of over 10 years. I'd like us to be judicious when it comes to looking after the 60. 5 percent of Victoria households who rent In May 2025 my Council Member Motion was to give one month for every year of tenancy starting at two months and going up to a maximum of 18 months What I liked about that and I guess that perhaps is the idea pro rating I Liked about that

idea is that there aren't these big leaps However that wasn't supported by Council to be asked for staff to look into hence We have moved on and received this report which I'm pleased to see give substantial more compensation substantially more compensation for longer term tendencies With these recommendations the unfortunate situation where a tenant who rents for 19 years and 10 months will be getting the same five months compensation as the person who rents for 10 years Therefore I think it makes sense to give more compensation for people in this 10 - year period and even one below that. Therefore I've given amendment or suggestions to legislative services and it's not as neat as all this But I wonder if you can pull that up. So you're proposing an amendment Council yes Oh, sorry yes an amendment, yeah. Okay let's just wait for it to come up. Alright number four it says strike on my email I wasn't able to find the striking thing Um. So

hang on before you start motivating Let's just leave it for people to read for a minute. Then I will look for a seconder and then you are welcome to motivate I'll second it. Just hang on a second. Let's give Staff a chance to catch up here. So you're not changing the moving compensation, just the, um... Compensation based on years of tenancy Okay, just a sec. And also taking care of a little bit of that thing of the 20 to 30 and 30 to 40.

So you've essentially broken it into 5 year blocks after year 1. Again I was trying to send it over and read those parts It's really like 3 where you strike it out and then 5, 6, and 9. The other ones for 7 and 8 again is just strictly so there's less than 30 So it doesn't... You don't overlap with the 20 years and 30 years and 40 years. So what you have is struck through under what's currently the new number 3. You intend for that to be removed in its entirety. Um. That would make sense Yes, yep That's right And the other of the one and two For example Mayor really is already in there That's that doesn't change. But it's just to show it off to clarify it So it's only one piece. Just before I go for a seconder I'm just going to ask Staff if this is clear. They understand what this is doing Just before we move on I want to

make sure that it is clear. It seems clear in essence It looks to me as if it's just being broken into five - year blocks as opposed to 10 with different compensation levels. Mr. Sauered are you clear on what this is proposing Yeah I believe so Yeah, it was just confusing at first Because one and two were already what the bylaws said Correct. Would it be more clear for you since went into our simply repeating existing policy that just be deleted. It's not really part of what the staff report is proposing. Yeah that may be helpful. Council for Hemin Are you okay with it? Yes And as Mary... Yeah, sorry It was more instructive on this and not as technical So that makes complete sense Take that out. And actually. So that would make Mr.

Sauer That makes number the current or the proposed number one Strike through that's not necessary Is it. Because. Already part of policy Is that not? Because I believe what Councillor Hammond is trying to do is break it for into the 5 - 9. Can to 14 Yes 1A1 Is already in the current bylaw Yeah that's what I thought So you could in fact remove that as well. Alright so let's take out the current number one that struck through there. Because we're really just trying to replace what the staff are proposing now. So I think this is actually more clear of what I understand you're trying to attempt Yes Mayor COUR Okay So with that then that seems to be I believe Councillor Hammond that's your intention Yes So I heard Councillor Gardner wished his second the amendment So Councillor Hammond just on your amendment. Thanks.

Thanks Mayor I don't mind saying that Um... I thought about at the higher end of even making more divisions And I thought I really I really My desire is to go with something that might be palatable to the majority of council. And because the recommendation is to be more generous for people Uh... 20 years and beyond Um... I thought I would leave that alone Even though I went through an iteration of doing five - year increments on that It's just I find that it's a big gap. For the period of the 10 years to 19 years almost 20 years And that's where I threw that in also giving more compensation Uh... To the five months for the five years up to nine years So that would be in addition as well Um... You know When I hear anything around the table about Other councillors at least asking the questions about more compensation or structuring it even with... sort of more periods of let's say another

five years of the 2034 I you know I'd be supporting that But at the moment I'm just looking at this gap. I also wanted the reasons why I want to make sure that this proper compensation here is because we did hear from staff. Uh... Just now... That... There aren't that many people who are in the 20 years and higher And therefore it's not going to be that much And so it still is very very important for people that when they are moved out of their When they're moved out of their evicted from their homes That they at least be given better compensation So I'm just adding to that Um... The other thing is When it was brought up about through the CRD housing Those people left. The reason why you'd have more people going back is those people left very very affordable Unless I'm wrong very very affordable. And they went back into very very affordable. Whereas the difference with this is that why most

people wouldn't take it up I can appreciate it the Reddit first refusal Is because it's very disruptive to move as we know And so when you're only going back as a possible 20 percent below market for many people that is still more than they were paying originally And it's just not worth it for people to do that So at the very least dealing with the reality of most people are not going to take Read of 1st refusal Let's at least give them proper compensation. Thank you just before I go to Council Gardner In essence if I read this correctly. Uh... 1 sub A sub 1 2 and 3 are changing content. 1 sub A sub 4 5 and 6 are simply clarifying languages several people have pointed out during the conversation For just to be clear that that's what you're looking at Yes And Mayor also I don't mind saying that I decided to be a little bit more generous for them is saying that

it's less than 30 years and then Yeah so that they would be in there So once you get to 30 you get more Yeah for sure Councillor Gardner on the amendment Thank you and when we gave our questions That's one of the things I was looking at too was actually the split sometimes in the five years And I quite appreciate what Staffa said is that most of the Most of the people 70 percent are in shorter term They aren't up there at 30 or 40 years And even with this motion Which I quite appreciate It would certainly be better if we actually have the data of the impacts of what is happening out there And uh... I know that's what I ask for and that Staff will get me that number Uh those numbers And uh But those numbers really we should need for all of this But we don't want to go revisit this every few months So I support this But I also

emphasize that I'd like to see the data So we know how much of an issue it actually is Thank you Thank you very much Anyone else on the amendment Councillor Kim. Um Through the chair Thanks Just a question to the mover if they're open to answering is Why five months rent for five to nine years And then the next one is six months rent So the differentials one month And then the next level up is six to nine Differential of three months That's for him and your thoughts. Yeah It's actually the bigger deal for me was to break up that, um, uh, the 10 - year period of 10 years to uh... 10 years to 20 years Or let's see Yeah, 10 years to 19 years and 11 months And that was the real desire And then I thought people can probably use more compensation Um... Years to 14 years, or sorry, from the five years to nine years as well. Okay, thanks. And just

a very small semantic thing. Do we want to say. Fewer or lesser use the chromatic? Let's not get bogged down in Yes I'm just raising that you're correct But I think it's fine the way it is. Anyone else on the amendment Councillor Loude Through you may just a quick question Um How do you. Probably need time to figure this out But how will this affect performance? Can this be something that... Um... Could cause problems in terms of lenders Um... Ability to support the project. Mr. Sarah Do you have any initial thoughts on the impact of this. Through the mayor Um it is generally clear in the sense that it's a one - time cost So that is... Uh... Positive in the sense that there's clarity uncertainty for an applicant in terms of what the impacts are Um... However, as we've Staff has mentioned previously Generally baseline feasibility is challenging in different scenarios right now And so... Anytime we add additional costs to a project Um...

It may add risk And for projects that are very much marginal Um... Each additional cost is something that adds risk that that project may not move forward So it's challenging to say each project is different Each scenario is different Each applicant's risk threshold is different Each applicant's ability to secure financing is different So it's challenging to generalize But I would say This would be increasing compensation Um... And not an insignificant way for the tendencies plan But it's a... Okay. It's challenging Okay, so a follow - up to that I know that we talked about exceptions being made for cases for vulnerable people Like on the other side of this So if this was a problem for a project to be viable Could there be exceptions made. In that as well. Is there room Through the mirror, the bylaw establishes the minimum compensation requirements So that would be that Okay. So... When I read this report.

Uh When I saw five months, the five months rent for over 9 to 20 years, and then it jumped to 12 months rent. For 20 to 30 years. I knew I highlighted it, because I knew instantly that the mover was going to have an issue with this So I'm not surprised that's here in front of us And also for me too, that doesn't really. Make a lot of sense And although I understand that this could cause... This is tough, right? Like I... There's part of me that wants to refer it for some more financial analysis But what if... But I think what I am going to do is vote in favor of the amendment. And if there's issues Then we're going to have to... Look at that. Is there a way to do that? If there is a project that is getting stuck Because of this... Can they come back to Council? Can we do...

Can we have some kind of workaround in that? Mr. Sauerd If this is adopted, when you come back with the Byle itself Uh... As a result of direction... Would you buy that time be able to provide any comments on the impact of this at that time? Because you won't be back to us till the fall. I thought time should there be any issues You could certainly provide that advice at that time. Uh Through the mayor Um Yes, we could do that Uh... We could also have Council wanted We could circle back with... The representatives from UDI, who we consulted with on this. Um... But there would be time to bring back those answers to you when the bylaws prepared. That's a perfect solution Thank you Mayor. So with that I'll just... I will be voting in favor. Thank you very much Um... On the amendment Anyone else? Any moment? Plus for Caricono. C I think Somerry Is there a procedural way of potentially referring the amendment As future research so that we could

pass the bylaw as is. How might that occur? Um, not really What the way for you to do that in a proper way procedurally would simply be to defeat this Uh... Announce that your support for the Rest Hope the other one is adopted as a whole and then provides some type of emotion Rising that suggests further inquiry on this type of model C Okay I think that I'm going to do that Because I... I don't... I understand the intent here But I don't like making up policy on the fly. And I want to respect the fact that our staff are trying to strike a really challenging balance right now Having consulted with a consultant... And the 10 in advocacy groups and the development community We know right now that development is an incredibly marginal and challenging right now We also know that we need to be protecting tenants against displacement It's a really challenging balance point. I can imagine that the development industry will look

at this and be like Well, I guess Victoria City Council doesn't want us to be building housing here. That's going to be the takeaway The staff recommendation is already a pretty significant increase in compensation That was based on research and analysis. I don't like making up policy on the fly Especially on technical matters That are tricky And that is why we pay professional planners to do this work And in the past the mover and secondary have criticized efforts to make up policy on the fly and said things like Why do we have professional planners at all? Maybe we should fire our staff Well this is an exact example of that We're making up or making up policy on the fly here This is making up policy on the fly for you to be debating one another on behaviour Trust me It's this... This is making a policy on the fly. And on a very technical matter That staff have just spent months and months analysing

So I think that the staff recommendation was struck the right balance But I do think that it is worthwhile to take this information and rolled up into emotion arising and say continue to work on this and monitor it And see if there's opportunities to strengthen it even further So my preference would be to defeat the amendment. But to continue to work on it... Uh... Ongoingly Thanks Mayor COUR Thank you And Council I am really going to appeal to your better judgment and civility To stop interrupting one another... And to stop laughing out loud at your colleagues. This is not a debating club of teenagers. You are intended to make serious decisions about serious matters Please treat this matter with civility And trees please treat each other with a certain degree of respect. I know we're heading into a summer break And I know we're all in campaign mode This is not the table. For that behaviour. I am not going to recognise you Council Gardner

I'm going to proceed to ask the question about whether anyone has any further comments on this amendment. Councillor Thompson Please be brief. Very brief Um I also support the approach of giving this more analysis Uh... With a motion arising Rather than just saying... Boom! We'll make the changes after Staff have done all this work. Thank you very much Anyone else on the amendment. Councillor Lowe. Mayor I just want to note that I think that the chance to come back with some reflection on this When the bylaw comes back Like you recommended Mayor. Helps Up with this I don't see Any need to refer. And. The difference here between 14 and 19 years. Is nine months versus what it was Which is five months The six ones will just leave that out for right now But what we're talking about there Is four months rent at what Maybe 2000 dollars Like we're not talking about astronomical amounts of money here. And I think that staff can

come back and let us know when the bylaw comes back If there are any issues with this So I'm really happy to support this moving forward And I would not be in support of any kind of referral Thanksgiar You cannot refer this amendment You can defeat this and then bring a different motion rising Councillor Gardner on the amendment. Thank You just a question staff to make sure I got my notes right When we look at number one Five months went for more than five years We're not tendencies less than five years. Mr. Sored. Um. A little under 70 percent was tendencies five years or less Thank you Cause that means that This may be a split But we have 70 percent that are already on our existing bylaw. Aproximately Thank you very good.

Anyone else on the amendment Council COUR Yes sorry Um I would just Coming back from another meeting really quickly there Can the mover just explain where the first three came from Was it based on a research or it was just at the movers discretion Making these numbers up The fact that you were out of the room is unfortunate But at this time given the time I'm going to not allow that question And I suspect that you will be able to make your decision based upon the generality of the conversation. Anyone else on the amendment. Seeing none, all those in favor of the amendment. Councillor Dell Councillor Kim Councillor Loughton myself Councillor Coleman at Councillor Hammond Council Gardner in opposition Councillor Caradona and Councillor Thompson Without the amendment is adopted Staff you please make that adjustment on the screen and Councillor Hammond you still have the floor on the main motion as amended. Thanks Mayor Um You know the things that anyone has to be considerate

of is knowing that there is certainty for developers Uh, when they're going through this process Uh, just let me see about Um My thoughts on this. Um. I am very pleased actually see that Um... Council of support is stronger compensation across a broader range of tendencies Presumably this goes ahead A person doesn't need to have to live in the same apartment for 30 or 40 years for displacement to be deeply disruptive Someone who's lived in their home for 10 years 15 years or 19 years has established roots relationships and a rent That will most certainly be considerably below what they face when searching for another home Redevelopment may bring new housing But the existing tenants bear is most immediate personal and financial cost. This amendment provides more proportionate compensation while retaining the substantial protections recommended by staff for our longest - standing tenants And I'm pleased to support the motion I do also want to say, and I said this before Anytime that someone is

buying property They need to do the math when they see that they've got this part of their Pro forma, part of their research is all the cost it's going to include and they will also be saying Okay how long have the tenants been here? And how much is this going to cost me? And if it's so substantial Then they need to go back to before buying this property and say Well actually we got these extra costs that weren't considered So in fact the compensation Uh the price of this property should be PL less than that As far as I'm concerned it comes down to... Just math. Thanks very much Thank you Councillor Gardner as the secondary of the main motion Thank you The staff report begins by saying that the City's tenant protection bottle remains amongst the most comprehensive and substantial in the province Now I really appreciate that statement Because we have been discussing this for a few years. And I also appreciate that

the increase in compensation for very long tenants. The moving cost is of course will be appreciated by anyone who's moving that there's an increase But here's a key point While the increases in are described in the report as minor These increases will be major for long - term tenants And so thank you to staff for the research and recommendations And I'm pleased to support this motion as amended Thank you Thank you very much Anyone else on the main motion as mended Council Um No I'm just really happy to support this I think Uh adding tenant protections is something that we've done well this term We brought it back every year to be re - evaluating those things But I also want to note that this is really a small package of it The bigger thing that this console needs to do is approve rental housing Um... From many of my friends that I know they're moving into the new rental housing that we've approved a

previous units Um... We've approved something like at Harriscreen at starlight in the first year of a term Which allowed 1, 500 new units Uh... And many more at Bayview and some of the other project I think it's 5, 000 units this term Um... And so I'm just thankful for the councillors who did vote for those Um... Because I think that's a much larger portion of it And thanks for Staff for doing that work as well through our OCP to incentivize New units Because that's really what I'm saying It's a biggest bank for back in the city But I'm happy to support this going forward. Thank you very much Anybody else Councillor Thompson. Uh I'll be brief as well Uh... Mayor I really appreciate Staff's work on this and all the consultation that staff did with tenants representatives Um... Folks in the development community Uh... Just wanted to highlight that Staff mentioned that the tenants representative said that the staff proposal was fair That the numbers

were fair Um... I do like the fact that this puts us in a leadership position I had one more question for staff now about the moving costs Um... I had raised this before My understanding is that... Our... Proposed moving costs. Are actually based on the real cost of moving Um... And I'm not sure about Sanic Can Staff explain the sanich basis Howard Through the mayor Yeah so our proposal for the increase moving cost was based on Uh just some Uh some initial like desktop research around the cost of moving in Victoria Whereas in discussions with Santage staff It looks like they had essentially Establish those numbers to more or less align with like one month's rent Um, as opposed to the actual cost of movie.

COUR Okay Thanks In that case I you know If we're basing it on actual data I won't be making the amendment that I had implied earlier Uh... Thanks again Uh... For all your work on this Happy to support it. Thank you Anybody else Councillor Kim Through the chair Um I'd like to go back to that about desktop research. Um... Was it researching moving companies For example Was it researching the cost of disposal of old things Or in the cost of renting cars or vans? Like what can... Can you flesh that out for me? Mr. Sauerd. Um I would have to confirm But I believe it was talking to moving companies and getting Uh estimates for moving costs. Good. Okay.

Admit Admittedly I find that quite unsatisfactory Uh, because moving is so much more than just the act of moving There's disposal Um... Rental vehicles Uh... If folks are trying to Make things more affordable Or maybe they have to move far So. I rather than do this on the fly I Will. Be bringing forward emotionalizing You good? Thanks. Anybody else on the amended motion. Just before I go to call the question I will just note that I believe staff have In fact now investigated the number of tenants that were assisted under the bylaw Could you share that with us please and the public. Um Through the mayor Uh yes So as part of the consultation For this Uh... review We did Um... Meet with a number of tenants who had participate who had been impacted by displacement And therefore were... Um... sort of subject to Uh...

Attend assistance plan in the past and Staff had meetings with those tenants to sort of get some reflections and lessons learned about Uh... Kind of how the tenant protection Uh... How our tenant supports Uh... COUR - Sorry Mr. Sorry Perhaps I misspoke But it was my understanding that in response to an earlier question from a member of Council who had inquired as to How many people the City had assisted Oh sorry. You now had that number Yeah So I believe it's from Council of Thru the Mayor Uh... 27 under the New bylaw and roughly 559 under the old policy. Very good Thank you very much for that. Uh with that Any final comments or questions.

I would only add as others have that This is excellent work Very important given a city that has a predominance of renters and appreciate very much the thought that's gun to as Mr. Sauer Through the Through the mayor sort of apologies Just to add one other note Um When we are talking about household needs assessment Uh... Opportunities for additional support Often Uh tenants who've had a really longstanding tendency Um... Or maybe they have You know Issues in terms of disabilities Or they need additional support for moving That's often something that gets included through that negotiations around additional support So although we identified the moving costs based on estimates from local movers There is opportunities for that additional support Through the household needs assessment to sometimes include additional support for moving relocation And that can take different forms. Very good Thank you for that. With that then all those in favor. Does anyone opposed. That appears to be unanimous Thank you very much for that And

thank you Staff for all the work that went into preparing that. It does take us on to item f2 This is with regard to the 2027 28 Order privilege Uh motion rising. That I telegraphed You indicated that you would be bringing forward a council member motion I said motion rising. I believe you said a Council member I said Council Member Motion earlier But then I had a motion arising. Would you like to explain what that is so we can determine if it's relevant to the previous decision. It is directing staff to undertake additional research on moving costs and pro - rated compensation. That would be appropriate Is there a secondary for that. Thanks comes for Logan On your emotional rising briefly Councillor Kim. Um Yes I just sent it to staff actually. Can you pull it up please.

Uh Could you please determine Uh I'm not sure your second bullet there is relevant Given the amendments that were just adopted in the previous motion. Yeah admittedly because this was very quick I actually didn't manage to finish writing that sentence So if may I finish the text on that Yes Paraded compensation for tenants. Uh based on consultation with tenant groups. Or tenant advocacy groups You would have to include languages that includes a word such as further consultation that has been made clear that uh... staff have already consulted with various tenants and tenant groups Yep. So if you want to do something over to above that you would have to add that language in there Thank you and um Is that it. Yes there's no timeline intentionally Okay is there a seconder for that motion arising.

Councillor Lotner is seconding that Councillor Kim briefly on your motion arising please I don't feel I need to motivate for Councillor than anything to add. Anyone else. Council Ramon Just to be clear you have very little time left to Councillor Hammond But just to be clear prorated is that what does that mean? I believe the intention there would be very similar to what you've already proposed Uh in the sense of having gradations That's why I questioned whether or not it was relevant given the previous amendment But it indicates now that this is based on further consultation with tenancy groups And so it is differential Okay, so just to be clear It was what I proposed last May and was rejected Is that okay Thanks. Anyone else on the motion arising. Seeing note all those in favor. And it would opposed. That is unanimous Thank you for that. And thank you again for your work stuff That takes us on to item f2 This is with

regard to the permissive tax exemption proposal from staff. And for 2027 to 2028 and staff before you begin your work at is incumbent on me to ask the question of each Council member Uh do you have any need to recuse yourself from this discussion due to any perceived or real complex with any of the organisations recommended to receive or not to receive a tax exemption in this file If you do any of them because this is a bundle that we can't separate It is time for you to leave the room. No relationship with any of the noted organisations. Bigger pardon Other than that yes that's true That is a good point actually yes perhaps we should all be recused at that point Uh, that being said we prepared not so over to you Um... I'm not sure whether or not this is Ms. Munk or whether this is our CFO. When you're ready to go over to you.

Good morning Mayoralto and members of Council My name is Leila Monk Manager of revenue. In the fall of 2025 Council approved the full cycle of permissive tax exemptions for 2026 through 2028. Off - cycle applications are brought forward for Council's consideration each year under the current policy And this is why they're only a few applications before you today requesting an exemption for years 2027 through 2028. Staff received a six applications from non - profit organisations and four of these applications are recommended for approval As noted in table one of the report While two applications are not recommended for approval as noted in table two. As well there are two City of Victoria exemptions recommended for approval in table three. Staff have reviewed all applications and have made recommendations based on the current policy and previous Council decisions. Should Council wish to approve the applications recommended for approval The total exemptions would remain within the current cap of 1. 6 percent of the city's total tax

levy. While this concludes my brief introduction We're happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much Brief is appreciated. Any questions. Councillor Dill. Uh Thank you Yeah I'm wondering if you could provide some more explanation on the odd fellows hall. Um that was recommended for rejection I read through the staff information report on it Essentially it didn't fit into an artsy culture category and did fit into any clean category Um, although clearly it's a large knot for profit building downtown Would you rebuild explain Have they ever received a tax exemption? Is this the first year they've come forward Do they come forward every year? It just seemed to be a bit of an oddity And again Maybe just restay your emphasis irrational for rejection. Is monk. Uh Through the mayor When reviewing applications Uh staff Uh. Reviewed the application in accordance with the policy The categories that are listed in the policy And the services provided by the organisation did not align with a policy category And that is

the reason why Uh, the recommendation is to decline the application Ms. Bunka I believe part of the question was have they ever applied or received Uh... An exemption the previous To my knowledge They have not previously applied Uh... Nor received an exemption CORRI Thank you Councillor Anything else? Okay That's helpful Thank you for that Thank you. Anybody else Any other questions. Not seeing any other questions Sorry go ahead Council Secured on it Did you want to ask a question or remove the risk So moved. And moved to a secondary Councillor Gardner Secondary rather The comments Uh Just very briefly I agree with the recommendations to add in Native friendship centre. Lifetime network and BC Association Aboriginal friendship centres The rationale seems sound They own their own their own buildings And they align with one or more aspects of the PTE I also agree with the ones that were proposed to be opposed. Uh... Because they just simply don't meet the policy. Um... If I had

a chance to work with staff on one PTE that an applicant had some questions about Really appreciate the responsiveness And on the whole support this initiative import. Thank you very much Councillor Gardner is a second or anything to add. Uh thank you And I realised this takes us to Uh with this exemptions to 1. 32 percent of the tax levy and that we have a cap The city has a cap of 1. 6 percent cap How is that one point per six percent kind of standard with all the municipalities and how long has it been in effect City Victoria. And can you just tell me a bit more about it. See if I Thompson. Um Through the mayor So the uh I don't think that there is a typical permissive exemption policy from municipalities I think each Uh each handles these exemptions in a somewhat unique way depending on their individual circumstances Uh, we had a review down back in 2012 And that's where we

have had a policy in place since the 1990s Ums... But we had the latest comprehensive review That was done was back in 2012 Um, and that's where Um... We actually had a number of Uhrganations that didn't fit Uh, the existing policy at the time And uh... Recommended approval to face some of them out Um... Simply because they just did not align Uh over a 10 - year period So that did take 10 years to do Um... At that time Uh It our consultant that we had in place Uh... Recommended that we pick a cap that did not result in any reductions to exemptions So the 1. 6 percent was simply the amount that was needed in order to keep everybody the existing one's whole Uh, by phasing out some of the exemptions Uh that allowed the other applicants to come in without impacting Um... Other existing applicants So it's a little bit nuanced and unique I would say for Victoria And I would also suggest

that it is Um... Conservative value Uh... That said It does grow each year The City's taxes grow So it's not a static amount It's a static percentage. Thank you, Ryther Thank you. Any other questions. Seeing none that's been moved in second at all is in favor. Does anyone opposed. That is unanimous Thank you very much for that And thank you very much for doing that work. Oh that takes us on to items of New Business The first one Item G1 Uh is a Council Member Motion Which was placed on the consent agenda Just as a reminder This was Advocacy to the provincial government on continued operating subsidies For the Makola Housing Society And so that will actually return to us for final consideration later today As we try and wrap up all of our Business Prior to our Aedis in August That takes us in on two Item G2 This is a further Council Member Motion with regard to advocacy to improve the return of

Fugitive is wanted on warrants Uh Councillor Thompson put this forward And I seconded to this So I will assume Council Thomas is moving I'll second Councillor Thompson over to you. Thanks Mayor Um... I'll speak briefly to it Uh... There's also a published memo Uh... That members of the public can look at on the Committee website This morning Uh... This is about safety. I've moved a number of Advocacy Safety motions A wide range Including red light and speeding cameras Bail reform for chronic Repeat offenders Uh... Allowing disability scooters to use protected bike and roll infrastructure And this is just more safety. Um. To make it simple Uh... Quarts issue warrants for arrest Uh... For people... Charged with offences that require them to appear in court Some people flee those warrants to avoid trial Some who flee end up here in Victoria Uh... Where they may create risks for Victoria residents Housed and unhapsed. Uh... There does exist a fugitive return program with NBC Uh... It's not

working too well And there isn't an equivalent national level program. So the result of that is that in Victoria Uh... Just in the first six months of 2026 80 fugitives with warrants in other places were identified Of those 80. 31 met the criteria for consideration to potentially be returned Several involving serious charges like sexual assault or assaulting a police officer But to date none have been returned Showing the challenges with the existing partial system. I Want to address a few potential questions. Uh this is not adding new policing powers. Uh... This is not criminalizing homelessness or addiction And in fact I am very careful never to equate people experiencing homelessness or substance use disorder with people accused of crime I think it's very important that we never do that. Uh... There are also housed people and people with other Addictions to licit substances who commit crimes Probably the vast majority of crimes. Um... And I would also just add that... Uh... What we're talking about

is people from other cities Uh... Where most folks that are experiencing homelessness in Victoria are actually from here Or have been here for many years. And I'll just also add the Often the biggest victims of crime are actually people experiencing homelessness And we're aware of this Council is aware of assault's sexual assault and he - ingami trafficking Uh... That victimized the unhoused. So this is basically about fixing a system that isn't working Because it hasn't yet been fully built. Um... Council members don't have to be experts in criminal law and procedure to see the need here It's fairly simple. Uh... If people get charged And the issue will warrant. Um... They should face trial Rather than skipping town and hiding out in another city. Uh...

So we're not looking to design What the system is going to be here at Council Um We're not pretending to be the experts We're just pointing out to the experts in the federal and provincial governments But they need to fix a broken system. Uh... So like we do with many advocacy motions Uh... Including two that we passed today Uh... G1 and G5 on affordable housing and metatomadine response Uh... We're looking to the experts to fix this Um... And... Make the system work Thanks Mayor COUR Thank you very much Mr. Secondary The only thing I would add is that Um... My understanding is... This is something that would be seen as an additional tool for existing police services working with existing laws And as an advocacy motion Of course this is turning to the orders of government that actually have the authority to examine and potentially produce some solutions And so... I'm quite happy should Council determine it to write such a letter and advocate for

these particular changes and resources from the province and the federal governments. Other folks Councillor Kim Councillor Gardner Thank you through the chair Um the reason I asked to pull this on off of Consent is because I wanted to raise a particular Uh concern That was raised by community And I would look to the mover and or seconder to be able to address that Um There are folks who live in BC who are fugitives wanted on a Uh wanted on warrants But who are actually fleeing abusive situations from home provinces or cities Um... Could you speak to how that would be addressed in the letter. COUR Coaster Thompson Do you want to start. I would propose that the letter mentioned that and encourage the federal and provincial government to not add to the victimization of those people. And leave it to the federal government and provincial government to design the system so that it doesn't. Yes and I'll just add thank you for that Councillor Thompson

I will just add to that that both the federal and provincial governments have relatively recently in the case of the federal government's Indicated significant resources being expended to in fact protect individuals who are fleeing violence It would be entirely appropriate to reference that in the letter You don't need to an amendment to that Uh... In fact, and to potentially even laud both orders of government for that work. Certainly able, we'll absolutely do that Should this be adopted. Uh, Councillor Gardner Thank you. What is mentioned is the thing we knew from what has been in the background Et cetera various kinds of offences And also. Victimization further of those who are on Uh... Our streets in inner park So my question is this And I don't know if you know the answer Um... If anyone does And that is... 31 that meet the crust Well program City Victoria Does anyone know where they are staying right now? Are they staying in the parks on a streets?

Are they staying in the port of housing Or are they staying in rental housing Does anyone know Where they are since everyone knows who they are? Not everyone But the police Et cetera That would be a question for the police and certainly would not be within either the intention or the authority of city or this motion Yeah No I'm just... Yeah My concern is whether or not Whether or not some of these people are taking advantage of the other services that people are trying That levels of government are trying to provide to those who are vulnerable in need Certainly outside either the intent or the substance of this motion. Yeah Okay just wondering because someone seems to know the 31 Thank you. Anyone else on this motion. Not singing on other questions or comments All those in favor. Is anyone opposed. That is unanimous Thank you very much and thank you Councillor I will ensure that that reference is included in the letter COUR Going

on the item G3 This was a Council Member Motion formulating a fair wage policy This was placed on the consent agenda And so we'll return to us later today Actually as we give final consideration to a number of items Which takes us on to item G4 This is a further Council member motion Establishing a by name list for the City Victoria This was put forward by Councillor Lawton Council are presuming you're moving this. Yes And then I will look for a seconder Councillor Thompson Go ahead Councillor Lawton. I start with adding a quick amendment. Yes certain Okay I think it's just going to make things go smoother here So After so it starts with that Council Direct staff to work with Could you please add BC housing. Comma. And. Then a comma after as needed.

Sorry as needed There is as needed a little later in that main sentence So and community and government partners as needed Comma Right. And you can actually capitalize housing Billy believe you're referencing the organisation BC housing. Very good So I won't require you to make that amendment I'll just assume that that is your intention from the beginning So speaking then to your proposal Go ahead Okay Thank you. Um So. A by name list is a comprehensive list of every person in a community experiencing homelessness And it's updated in real time It uses information collected and shared with the individual's consent and each person on the list has things like It would be their name their homeless history health care and housing needs By name lists or by name data is the standard best practice in modern homelessness response systems. And they are used throughout Canada the United States and internationally. The city's making actual measurable programs against homelessness aren't working off of point in time

Count data They are using real - time by name lists and I would like to bring this modern standard to our community in Victoria. The reason being you can't solve a problem you don't truly understand And by name lists moves us from guessing how many people are experiencing once a year to knowing Every individual by name in real time so we can connect into the Xact housing and support that they need This allows better data to evaluate the performance of our systems identify bottlenecks and Al and most importantly allocate resources to where they will have the most impact. A by name list also helps ensure that housing placements and supports or supports are matched to people based on their specific needs So individuals have a best the best chance at maintaining their housing. Additionally The by name list also provide accurate data on inflow and outflow Meaning the inflow is people newly entering homelessness and the outflow are people being housed or otherwise exiting the

systems And that helps us with understanding the global number of people experiencing homelessness and why it's growing or shrinking So for me this is one of the main reasons why I'm bringing this today because We hear Council hears about numbers You know 75 people have been housed through our relocation coordinator primarily in city parks but not only downtown as well We've had 74 people moving to independent living from dollar place We have 248 net new shelter and housing units And we've had 17 people moved to their home communities Yet the numbers on the street don't seem to be changing Like it's just these pieces that come to us without knowing exactly what's going on And we need to know why those numbers aren't changing And that's what the inflow data will inform us on So most likely the reason is that there's more people or the same amount to people entering homelessness that we have Exiting homelessness So if we can have access to these

numbers We'll be able to start working on more preventative measures to stop that inflow Which will decrease the numbers of visible homeless. People on the streets. Um, the other thing And it was brought up earlier this morning Like as an example The oak bay example where a woman was evicted from Oak Bay and ended up on Pandora In a case like this We'd be able to notify Oak Bay and say You need to step up your tenant protection or set up your own services for your unhoused residents We'll know where people are coming from And that is critically important in Victoria Because we have essentially all of the services for the unhoused and the rest of the region leans on us I'm not going to I'm going to be very blunt about that That is what happens And if we have information we can actually reach out and say Hey you got to do your part too. And also the really most important thing I

think here is that we are able to bring all of Victoria's outreach efforts together So that is why I did that Uh bit of a change in the motion because the first step is to reach out to BC Housing because the best way to do this is to do it in collaboration with BC housing And then also pull in all the community outreach partners that are doing outreach work in the city so that we can centralize this and not have people working with the same individuals so that we can make sure we're working as efficiently and as effectively as possible to get people indoors So one way I sort of like to think of it is without a by name list It's like we're driving a car in the windshield is dirty And with a we can't really see where we're going We're moving somewhere But we don't really know where And with a by name list we'll be able to tell We'll be able

to clean that windshield and be able to tell exactly where we're going what we need to do to be the most Um, effective with the services that are out there to help people And again that that translates back to saving taxpayer dollars on trying to alleviate homelessness on our streets Thanks. Thank you very much Councillor Thompson is a secondary and my apologies I should have checked with you to ensure that you were okay with the addition of BC housing I presumed you would be Thank you for that And so over to you Thank you Mayor Um And thanks to the mover for her initiative on this This is the top issue Uh... For people downtown and in many neighbourhoods Uh... That I've spoken with Uh...

Over the last few years Uh... We need to know who these folks are that are on our streets And what they need in order to help get them into the right kind of housing And moreover To have them succeed in that housing and move towards independent living Um More importantly Uh this data can help us with homelessness prevention As noted by my colleague. Um... I've been discussing this idea with Councillor Lauten and with service providers since the beginning of the term And I'm informed that... There has been work on coordinated access Uh... For many years... At the coalition and homelessness at the CRD. And it's still not done And it was many years when we started this term. Uh... I understand that it's more complex than it might appear from the outside Uh... Partly because of privacy regulations But it has been years and other cities have already accomplished this Uh... So it's something that can be done. Um... I just wondered if I could

get a comment from staff on The viability of this in any concerns about privacy And whether they can be addressed properly. I suspect I would go to either Mr. Rentier Ms. Webb. But either of you like to make a comment on that. Uh Through the mirror. You know One of the comments I would make is How does this work with the provinces work on a high - fist system. Um... Because what we don't want to do is... Is being a situation that we're creating more separate... Uh... By name lists And a by name list on its own is just that Um... For it to be really effective It has to be able to allow Uh...

Considerable access by other parties that are actually service providers Out there Um... As well as have a means of how do you match people their needs to the resources that are there And so... That's the intent of the HIFAS system Uh... I think we're all waiting for its implementation. Um... So maybe... That's one question I'd have is how would this work. Um... In parallel with that Uh... The second is... Yes, security is a major concern that we'd have to review Before going into Uh... And creating such a list If... You know, HIFAS relies on the provincial Uh... Government and its work around confidentially access and security of data Um... So if the City was looking at something itself We would need to... Uh... Spend some time on the issues of security access. Thank you Mr.

Ruan Tucci Okay Thanks follow - up question from that Um... Then I assume But please correct me if I'm wrong I assume that if this were to pass today Uh... Staff would look into those points that you've raised Uh... And thanks for raising those. And when coming back to Council Report on those And if there are solutions I assume staff would explain the solutions If there are no solutions And it's a serious barrier I assume Staff would also say that Is that correct? Mr. Rannucci Would that be your intention when you're reporting back. Through the mayor Our intention would be to come back with identifying What some of the issues are if the solutions Um...

I think it'd be good to come back with an update on HIFES. Because in the end what Council is wanting to achieve all of us They're wanting to achieve is what HIFAS is supposed to do. Um... So I think that any pressure that we can put Uh... Expedite that further. Um... Also comes out of a motion like this. Johnson Anything else? No Thank you very much for that Thanksgiving Councillor Gardner. Thank you first of all What was the name of the list you had that you're creating? Or not? Hisis. Hyphas H - I - F - I - S H - I - F - I - S Thank you. Okay. Just through the mayor If I could clarify Yes go ahead. HIFUS is a Program that the federal government has rolled out made available through licensing Uh... It's not A City - drived Um...

And different provinces are rolling that out Uh... And... And in British Columbia that rollout is the responsibility of BC housing. I have something else to add to that at the end of the Yeah Thank you That's very very useful because my question was going to be We've been hearing about this for years Uh And what have you saw I was going to ask you Why we don't have a list yet Since we have so many groups that are doing outreach And I understand Over the last three years at least Uh you and others have been somewhat explaining the Not breaks communication But that we have so many involved in it But yet we don't have a real centralized thing So that's what this new list will do. You're hoping. Through the mirror The high - fist system once implemented Yes and other components to it.

And what is a timeline for that. Perhaps I will take you off of the short edge of the knife and say Uhus has been on the agenda of the capital regional district since 2014. Uh - huh And certainly I will say that I have repeatedly made that point at the CRD table. So I would be impossible for staff to venture any type of a gas And when that might be concluded. Well I appreciate that Thank you very much That clarification Um Okay during the last community safety and well - being plan a few weeks ago And actually going back three or three years or longer In other words since we've been here Uh There's staff have identified several But not organisations involved in the work of relationships and making lists We've been hearing about lists for quite a while from different groups. And so can we have when you come back If this goes through A list of organisations involved with relationship aspect of identifying

those on the streets in our parks And the organisations which over the last few years have been Well, last three at least from 2024 2025 and 2026 Organisations charge with attempting to get people on the streets Enter park support or housing So the list of them and the organisations Which the city Perhaps has funded to monitor Even those organisations Uh... I think that it's time that we had a full list of those organisations Again You mentioned several staff mentioned Several a couple weeks ago But we actually I think it's time that the public wants to see a list of how many groups and organisations have been involved in this And then mount and I realised we don't have numbers Uh... Dollar numbers for the provincial Uh... efforts that they've been doing But for the ones the City has been funding I'd really like to see a list of organisations And then for the City ones I want to see how much in the way of

grants Or in the way of contracts have been led to them since 2024 And 2025 in part of this year Is that would that be possible in a report that you come back on this. I see stuff Nodding at various times So I suspect that's possible. Sorry I couldn't hear you. Okay So do I have to amend this motion Or will that be part of it? No You don't need to amend it Thank you very much And I know it's been a real challenge I mean even For everybody in the city But for staff to try and get Uh... A handle on this As so many of the organisations seem to be like... Well What's up line about Corral and cats? And in the way That's what you have been doing or trying to do And I quite appreciate that the work that Staff has been doing on trying to get everybody Actually Accountable. And Doing their bit Thank you. Thank you very much Councillor

Kim. Uh Thank you Mayor Will you give me a heads up if my time hits 5 minutes You bet Thanks Um I am going to run through a list of concerns about this That community have raised Because I think Um... This is an opportunity Uh... To set the record straight on some things As well as clear some potential Um... Information That's incomplete Uh... Could the mover speak to Why there is a need for standalone data to be owned by the City of Victoria. Alright That would be to Council Loughton C Through you mayor Um. Clearly I'm not involved in operations But I don't see this as being owned by the City of Victoria I see this as... Working in partnership with BC Housing And that BC Housing would most likely Maintain that information But I would have to ask Like that's a really a question for staff and not through me But that's how I see this working That we would reach out to BC

Housing to see if they'll collaborate with us. But. It's their data and their system that we would be using. C I think just to be clear Anticipating some of your other questions Councillor That the reporting back function of this is likely to be able to answer some of the questions that you will pose today. Okay Thanks There is a criticism that this list is. It's... Shuffling duck chairs around the Titanic I go back to the metaphor of the Dirty Windshid Um... And yes You can clean up the windshield But the rest of the road isn't built. What do we say to that? Well that's why we need a by name list. But the rest of the road isn't built The housing isn't there But then...

Caution both of you Okay Not the venue for you to have a conversation Okay So asking questions is entirely appropriate trying to answer them as much as you can as appropriate COVID If the answers are not relevant Then or possible or available That's a question that is to be determined Okay So through you Mayor That enables us to advocate for exactly what's needed So I'll give an example If we know Um... How many people are entering homelessness Because they've been evicted over financial reasons only. We would have that information And we could advocate for more support from the rent bank Or more rent supplements or more ways to get those people back into housing as quickly as possible Conversely If there was significant number of people who needed For example Complex CARE, the same thing would happen There we can advocate for that... Number of complex CAREBEDS and try to figure out creative solutions to create those COMPEX. CARE BEDS. So It helps with knowing

exactly what's needed And I think it's important also for BC Housing and for... Community partners that are doing outreach to have this information too So that we're really clear on what we need to create. Um Thank you That does answer the question Um... And I will further that Uh There's also criticism that... Um... Having this data about what's upstream as well as what's needed downstream Actually is just allows the City to point the finger to other actors Who up until now have been recalcitrant to do anything So how do you see this operating to change that, if at all? How's your load? Um. Well I think we do need to know Where people are coming from... I mean we've talked about this a lot at this table That we... that Victoria Essentially has all of the services in the region And it's untenable So we need to know that information So again It's an advocacy piece to try to encourage... Um... Other municipalities in the

region to do their part or to take This work more to the CRD board To push things forward that are needed So that we can... Um... Distribute... The load, for lack of a better way to describe that across the region rather than... It being all placed in Victoria It is very... That's really hard on everybody And it... It ultimately... makes it more difficult for... To provide what Unhouse people need... When... Residents and businesses are complaining And there's because the many services and too many people here We do need to distribute it There does need to be services all over the region And it might be up Island too Like there We don't know That's the thing And that's why I want this We could say Oh really people aren't coming from across Canada They're coming from the CRD Or maybe they're coming from Campbell River or Nanaimo Or we don't know And that's what a by name list That's the information It will tell us.

Um... There are also Uh... Concerns not just of the privacy of the data But also who gets to access that data So there are concerns about Um... Potentially police or law enforcement Axissing this data. Um... Can that be addressed. Through you Mayor? I will also urge some caution And that is definitely a question of determination Once this begin The process begins to have some engagement The fact that this says work with BC housing and community and government partners Uh creates a venue for exactly that conversation Uh... And for an answer is to be had before anything happens. I find that's acceptable Unless the more to add. Again I mean that's not The intention here is that it would work through BC housing So my. I Mean I think this needs to come back to us But my thought on is that No the police or bylaw or what have you would not have access to this list This is a housing list Um... Thank you

another query that comes from community is... Allowing anonymity for those who require that sense of security Of anonymity to access services Um... How would that be handled? Or not necessarily how But... What are the ideas here? That's a really Through you mayor That's a really good question And I did do... Of course I've done quite a bit of reading and research on this And I think there was that was brought up in the Some of the documents that I read Where you could have a name or an alias Or some other kind of way of identifying that person For a variety of different reasons Why that might be important So I think that would be something that we could bring up When probably when the first report comes back to us. But that's really important I'm glad that that question is here Um Thank you Further to that then Um Do you feel like this address is concerns from community and outreach Uh... Organisations about

how this could jeopardize trust with clients who are... reluctant to engage. Yeah Through you Mayor. Trust is such an important thing There's... We don't have anything unless those If we have for outreach workers to have those really firm and solid Relationships working with people And it's... It's such an important thing Um... What I would say about that is It would... Working with people... And they have the opportunity to opt in It has to happen with their consent So I don't see this as they're a bunch of pressure being Put on people to participate But there is going to be... I think that the outreach workers would need They'll probably They're asking questions right now But there might also be need for more time for them to ask questions about this so that they First of all have trust in the system so that they can pass that on to the people that they're working with I think that again It's something that is going That

is going to have to be brought up when the report comes back. To figure out how to do that And how to make people feel like they can trust the system So when in the motion where it says Community partners Are those outreach groups also part of what's being envisioned? Yes Okay. Yeah Um There's also criticism that Even if it is meant to allow clients or individuals to opt out Because it's meant to be done by consent That then you're actually building an incomplete set of data. ThroU Mayor We're going to have to try to do our best to make sure people know that this is to try to help them get placed into the most suitable. Um... Place for them. And I think we could also go and look at other communities that are doing this Because as I've mentioned This isn't This isn't some sort of novel idea There are more than 35 communities representing over 60 municipalities across Canada that are actively

using by name Lists or by name data as part of... Um... The BULT for Xero campaign And the federal reaching home homelessness strategy This isn't Um... This is being done all over the country. And it is the most effective way to connect people with services So. As has been mentioned We've been waiting for 12 years for HIFAS It's not here yet. I see this as in interim solution Until HEFAS finally does come online. But we can't wait. It's too dangerous out there right now We need to get people indoors For our whole community. Everyone and the systems are suffering from it So perhaps it's going to take some more communication or more work with building that trust Which I get I get why this question is here But we're going to need to do that work It's... We have to try. Councillor Kim just before YOUGON I believe Mr. Rantucci wants to offer a comment Which might be relevant. Through the mayor. You know The

direction we're getting is to come with a report back Right now the motion isn't... It actually established us into what looks like a monthly. A monthly report So I'd ask for some clarity and the motion That you are looking for a report back. Um... There seems to be... A direction coming that the City would not be the possessor of the data I think that is a major piece that we should determine Because if the city is... That does have... Fundamental differences in terms of security Access... Um... So if there could be some clarity In the motion on that as well I believe that's what we're wanting to go But it'd be good if we could have those two parts Just in the motion COURE C We'll take that under advisement Thank you Mr. Artushee I'm going to suggest that Councillor Kim complete her questions I do have one other person who's indicated They wish to speak to this And before we do vote on this

We'll consider whether or not there needs to be any amendments based upon your commentary Mayor I'm actually going to pause my line of questioning Um just to regroup my thoughts here If I may? Thank you Councillor Caridona. Okay Thanks so I'm hearing from staff that they want this to be clarified as a report back And what was the other thing. That would appear to be the comment Yes. Okay. Should I move that or someone else want to? You may do that if you like? Okay Um Then I will move that. The Council Direct staff to report back on. Working with dot dot dot. So adding ING. Does that make sense? If that were the case I think you likely would want to delete Everything after Victoria. Unless you wanted to at that point Perhaps us and report back and then give a date. Perhaps Councillor Gardner might be more I don't know I'm just trying to respond to what staff has said here So I'll

take your advice on what staff I've said though I think there's some confusion over the monthly reporting. As opposed to reporting back in general about how this would work Okay, seriously Perhaps if you're going to say report back Then you might want to just say and report back to Council on Pick a date. Or perhaps to say report back by a date. On working Etc. Etc. Whatever you prefer Okay. And what do we want this to come soon rather than later? Therefore maybe be a verbal report back Yes. I would think so How about we say that then? The Council Direct staff to Verbally report back so that it can come sooner rather than a written report. On work we see how to do it in population in the City of Victoria and then just a period after Victoria. COUR Okay. That's certainly in order.

Was there a sector for that amendment. Councillor Kim is second Amendment Councillor Caradona Just on the amendment I'm trying to respond to what staff saying It sounds like they feel like they need some time to look into this Look into privacy Look into feasibility Et cetera Um... Whether this passes as a report back or not Either way it looks like it's coming as a report back So might as well clarify that direction. Um verbally means it could come back sooner Rather than later So maybe this is something that could come in September. And we could get a kind of high level understanding of what the possibilities are What the challenges are and then make a decision at that time. Thank you Councillor Kim on the amendment Uh thank you Thank you to staff and the mover for this Uh already getting way more accountability than we are with BC housing and the CRD And arguably the feds on this So let's go. Thank you on

the amendment Anyone else That's for Loton. Oh my mic was still on Through you Mayor This is not my intention This is not what I want. We have a crisis within a crisis on our street right now. We need to start working on this right away September is too long And what I would like to see here And if this fails Which I hope it does. The first step is just for staff to reach out to BC Housing to see if this is possible And then if it is Go ahead and start the work If it's not Then come back and talk to us That's how I would like the direction to go forward And can I ask that that would be Agreeable to staff?

Does that give you clear enough direction on what to do here? Because really the first step is Will BC housing do this with us. I might paraphrase what I think I heard Councillor say If this were if this amendment were to be adopted Would their first step be doing exactly what Councillor Lawton just described so that you could report back on feasibility. Or do you need that specific direction. It would be the first step That would be the first logical step I would think So it was just Councillor not to interrupt in your flow But it would be I was intending to propose an amendment to the amendment Which would actually put a date on this And that would be September 3rd for our next Council meeting. Which would I think imply that exactly what Mr. Rentucci said what happened in the next four weeks and that they would come back and then tell us that Okay Through you that the only issue I have

with that is let's say for instance You send an email to BC housing after this is ratified And they come back and they say yes Some of this work potentially might be able to start before September the 3rd And that may not be possible because it's summer and I get that But I would like that possibility to be there just in consideration of what's happening out there right now So I just would like I get what you're saying We need to we need to give this some time And I understand that But if there is a way that we can word this where if BC housing says Hey yes Um great idea Let's do this work together Let's you know bring all of our outreach services together under one roof And get after this that some of that work could start in August Mm - hmm. Let me just see here I'm not going to put stuff on the spot to ask the question which

would be illogical outcome Which we do you think there's a chance at all that that would happen in August with busy housing But let me see if I can Suggest something here. You could do an amendment to the amendment which and so staff work with me here because I'm going to try and think this out loud If you then said that Council direct staff two reach out to BC housing. To BC housing. To explore. The possibility. Of working together. Comma. Hang on. I'm going to just keep talking here so bear with me. Um take out that comma. And say working together and then copy to set up a by name list for the unsheltered homeless population at City Victoria So copy that second part of the sentence Don't delete it just copy it. And stick it in after together. Right there, you're right.

And then leave in verbally report back. So leave that and then after back put in on September at the September 3rd. Committee of the whole. Thank You very much for that. On it's on September 3rd. Sure. And then. Delete the rest of it. Now Councillor Loughton my reading of that is that Empowers Staff to begin the conversation. As much as they can in the next four weeks. And report back on the progress of that and the issues inherent in the work. At our next Committee of the whole meeting Sure The only through you mayor. The only thing is I just wanted it to be clear that if BC housing is open to this that some of the work could start that We don't you don't need council You don't need to come back to council start the work Council, but I think that the staff that are working currently on the community safety well - being a partnerships division would be very able to make

that determination Okay. If there was an opportunity that arose before September I can't imagine they're not going to take it Okay. Then that works for me And if I may if I could just add a let's just clarify so we know what we're discussing So yes the underlined pieces would be the amendment to the amendment. The not underlined bold pieces are the original amendment. And everything after the word committee of the whole is actually deleted. Just so we're clear. So we don't just understand what we're doing Very good So that would be struck through I believe is the way you do that. You're going to strike it through not underline it There you go Perfect So what we're now discussing is the amendment to the amendment. That is to strike out all that you can see struck through and to replace it with a bolded language That's underlined. On that Councillor Latin. I'll make that amendment to the amendment actually Is there a second here

for that? Yeah Councillor Lowell second that And so I think I've explained in trying to Word Smith at why I think that addresses the issues that you raised Uh as the secondary. Through you mayor Yeah I just think that makes it more clear for staff It gives them direction that makes a lot more sense What the next step is. I had. The report back monthly isn't that important That I just wanted to see numbers every month Like what's happening But we can leave that for now I think we need to just get the nuts and bolts of this Figured Out and again This just gives staff clear direction on what their next step is So I'm happy to support it So just on the amendment to the amendment That is deleting what struck through and replacing it essentially with the bold language as underlined Anything else on that Councillor Kim. Um Thank you Does this still leave open the door even if it's not stated

explicitly to have conversations with community and government partners as needed? Yes. Yeah I believe it does yes. Is that staff's understanding. Mr. Renticci Do you understand the intent of this amendment to the amendment. Which is essentially to give you the authority to discuss the preliminary issues with BC housing. And to proceed as you think the opportunity presents. Sorry I'm just to... Absolutely No, it's complex Yes take your time. Actually you know what I'm going to suggest It is 12 noon. And this is complex And I would like to give staff the opportunity to muse on this Because I think they've heard the intention behind this conversation Uh... And I think it would be helpful to allow them at least a little time to think about What they understand is to mean and whether or not this is the correct direction for that. So I'm going to suggest we leave this here and pause and that we break for lunch And that we come back at

1 o'clock to continue this particular item And then to deal with the one other item that's on our Committee agenda before we proceed on to Council. So let's break for lunch now and we'll come back at 2 minutes after 1 since it's 2 minutes after 12. Thank you very much for your patience.

E July 30th Victoria City Council Committee of the whole meeting Before we broke for lunch we were considering multiple amendments to item G4, a Council member motion establishing a by name list for the City of Victoria It is my understanding that over the lunch break as we had hoped that there has been some discussion with staff and with members of Council to propose what is likely to be a more applicable, more apt amendment To enable that amendment procedurally, we need to consider the first two amendments before us the amendment to the amendment and the amendment in order to make room for a further amendment and thus I'm going to suggest to people that without further ado I call the question on both the amendment to the amendment will vote and then the amendment will vote I would urge all of us to vote against both of those amendments to make room for a further amendment Which I believe will explain many of the issues that

we discussed before lunch. That is my suggestion Councillor Loten technically you still have the floor and so do you wish to say anything else before they call the question on the amendment to the amendment. No, you don't. Hope no one else does either and so I'm now going to call the question on the bolded underlined language not the language that's been struck through just the bolded underlined language Which actually does include the structural language because we deleted Please vote no all those in favor. In opposition. No, no in opposition. That is unanimous. So thank you, staff, please delete the amendment to the amendment. I'm going to do the same thing with the original amendment which we'll take us right back to the beginning. As soon as you hatch up to us Thank you very much for your yeoman's work there. Very good. So now on the original amendment, which is that one. All those in favor. All those opposed that is unanimous. Thank you so

much So now we are back on the original motion the original Council member motion just what Staff catch up with us again. Thank you very much stuff for following along. Once you get that cleaned up. And I think you need to unbold everything and also take out the strike through at the last bit as well. There you go one more thing. Thank goodness we have able staff. One more thing perfect now Councillor Loughton I believe you have an amendment. Part of me through you mayor. Yes, I do and I'm just sending it over to ledge services I I had sent one in and I just had to make another little tweak So the one you're gonna use is coming right now. If I recall correctly you're gonna delete everything after the word two Yes So that Council rocks F2 everything after that goes. Which can be struck through yes, and then replaced with whatever it is you just said And the language is coming right

now. There we go. And then magic new words. Very good. Is that what you intend Councillor Yes, it is Mayor. Very good Is there a seconder for that? Thank you Councillor Cardona Councillor Loughton, please now motivate on your amendment Okay, thanks So we had started this conversation before the lunch break and then I had a chance to talk to staff over lunch and there is an issue with being able to do this work without it going through the HIFA system So it just makes a lot more sense for us to have BC housing and the CRD Let us know What's happening with HIFAS? Why it's taking so long? What and what can be done to accelerate its implementation so we can do the work that we need to do around By name data And then just to have staff Uh, bring this back to us at the September 3rd Committee of the whole. Thank you very much for that Councillor Caridoni were seconding the amendment on the amendment Yes I'm happy to support the

amendment and I'll just maybe because I haven't had a chance to speak to it globally yet I maybe I'll just say a couple things Which is that this HIFIS has been stuck for forever. For like decades since before I was around. And partly it's been stuck due to bureaucratic ineptitude But partly it's been stuck because it is complex and the data privacy and the servers and all that is a major major barrier To my mind The issue has been stuck with BC housing I don't think it's fair to say that it's on CRD or The coalition and homelessness actually was one of the community partners that was supposed to be working on this as well But they didn't get very far either It really has to come from BC housing It is worth noting that BC housing does have very well relatively complete data as part of CAA They have databases They just don't share that information And as a result It's chaos out there

So at the CRD when we're trying to tenant a deep subsidy unit of which we now have hundreds Trying to figure out who should go into those units is complicated because there's not one database And so QUOLLADE has its own database and solid has its own database And Aboriginal coalition has it And it's just a total mess out there So I think it would not only be useful for the City of Victoria to have access to this data And maybe even be able to upload data to it I don't know Um, but also it'd be very helpful for the CRD. Because It's impeding our ability to flow people up through the system. This data blockage So it's beyond time for this to get moving And I would love to hear Some information eventually from staff about what is going on and what we need to do to get BC housing to finalise this work. Thank you very much Anyone else on the amendment Councillor Kim.

Um Thank you through the chair Uh really like where this new language has landed Just want to ask staff a question to address an earlier concern I had which is around Privacy and who gets to access this data Um... Could somebody speak to that please. Mr. Rennucci Do you have any comments on that at this point. Through the data on the Hypha system is restricted to those service providers that have been provided to access through licensing agreements. That's it Anyone else on the amendment. Not seeing anyone further on the amendment All those in favor of the amendment. Anyone opposed That is unanimous Thank you very much Steph You can just clean it up And then we will have an opportunity for anyone to make any last comments on the main motion as amended. Oh lovely picture. Councillor Coleman appears to be our photographer There you go. Great So finally on the amended motion Any final comments Councillor Gardner. Thank you I pulled this from the

consent file on purpose And that was because it needed a lot of clarity. So I'm glad we've settled on this one Thank you. Thank you very much Anybody else Council Coleman. Thank you Ivrolpined in the past about how much I don't like Council Member Motions. It's because I don't think we understand them properly This is an acceptable one It direct staff to get information and bring it back to us. The previous motion Uh... Directed Staff to set up a program. Um... And that was done without any other workshop COM. Conversation What I saw over lunch time was a workshop A mini workshop But I think that it will force us Um... In the next term of counsel To think about how we need standing committees or workshops to front - end load Council member motions Because I don't think we understand them properly But I support this going forward Because I think it now actually works. Thank you very much Anybody else. Yep Councillor COUR

Thanks and through you Mayor I just want to clarify that the original motion was actually to work with BC housing to see what was possible And this may very well Have come back to us But we have a crisis within a crisis happening on our streets right now with The toxic drugs in like the metatomedine Which is also coming as a motion right after this one. Um What it's doing out there on our streets We don't have time to wait for this This kind of work needs to be happened Need needs to happen And because this council member motion was brought forward Now it's been turned into this And that's the kind of immediacy and urgency That we owe to our residents and our constituents in this city to work on the issue that is the number one issue in our city And that is the unsheltered homeless population Someone needs to do this work and Council member motions absolutely have a place in that

So I too am happy where this landed because it'll put some pressure on The hypha system to be delivered And at least we'll have some updated information about what's happening with it It is definitely The next step But I won't stop working until my last day in this chair To try to make a difference on what's going on out there on our streets for everyone For the homeless and addicted for the business owner that's pulling their hair out over street disorder for residents specifically downtown who are also having their mental health affected by this issue This is for all of us And I believe it's my job. And I'm again I'm happy we're at Landed But I think that we owe it to our residents to make sure that we're doing everything we possibly can to make a difference. Thank you Thank you very much Anybody else. Sounds a game Uh thank you through the chair I would just like to state for the record

that this has landed where I think it needed to Um Particularly around some of the concerns and criticisms that were raised by the communities and touch with I really appreciate that this has been re - scoped in a way that I believe addresses those concerns And um, I think it also speaks to the Democratic process we engaged in and really grateful to the mover for keeping Attention on this and I look forward to seeing what BC housing and CRD. Might have to say. Thank you very much anybody else. This might have been a bit of a clunky process But it is the process that we have And I thank everyone for being willing to work through that Uh and to adhere as much as possible to the procedures that we set in place that this council has set in place Uh, building on previous many years of building that procedures Uh, I think this is the right place to land It advances the issue which

is critical as others have said Uh... But it also places the responsibility and a shared capacity among various players Which is exactly as it should be as well So I'm happy to support this. Anybody else? Okay, all those in paper. Anybody opposed. That appears to be unanimous Thank you very much for that That does take us on to our last item Uh... On the committee Agenda That is as you will recall an item that was added as a late item this morning G5 And this is another Council Member Motion Also Pro - Councillor Loughton with regard to an emergency response Uh... To the metatomadine crisis Over you Councillor Loton to move the motion. Sure Thanks a second And I'll look for a seconder. No it was not on consent Uh it was proposed for consent But it was in fact not agreed to for consent Yeah I believe Councillor Hemmend I believe you were part of this originally So we'll take you as a seconder

So Councillor Loughton Over to you. Okay Um I'm gonna move it and I'll just note that I do also have an amendment for it as well But to start with The reason this is here today is because we are off for five weeks And the situation on the streets. Is Incredibly concerning with the amount of metatomidine in the fentanyl drug supply. And the first responders police Um... Relearned You know addictions doctors outreach workers It's affecting everyone in our community Because of the sedation component of it So we've been told this before from our staff That... The Narcan works on the fentanyl component But it doesn't work on the metatomadine component Which is a tranquilizer for large animals It's not meant for human consumption So first respondles will bring people back from overdose But the sedated for many hours after that And they can be left on the street In the heat and other things that are dangerous for them... You know it can lead to

heat stroke Um... Nerve injuries They can make people more vulnerable to being robbed or assaulted And that is not good And on the flip side of it It is... It is... Overtaxing our systems in a major way in that... The amount of time it takes to get people breathing properly again So our first responders and the police department And bylaw or anyone who's out there... Working on the street is also incredibly affected by this And it's hard to get people into shelters It's hard to keep people into housing And a member of the homeless community I heard them say yesterday That it's just ripping their community Apart So we don't have time to not react to this So what this is is It's not meant to be prescriptive Those two words such as Um... are just ideas of what could possibly be done But what the request is is for the mayor to reach out to the premier Uh... Josie Osborne, the Minister of Health,

the Medical Health Officer and the Board and CEO of Ireland Health... To request an emergency street - level response And this three things listed there. Are What could possibly happen, but it's not Um... The intention of this motion to be... Prescriptive, because I'm sure the premier and the Minister of Health and everyone else is already working on this It's just to say We want to be part of this And we want... Um... To move this forward And again As I noted in the last motion It's because it's affecting everyone And we need to take everyone into consideration It's the people who are suffering on the street But it's also... I mean we all know in our inboxes There are certain hotspots You know Emilia and Pandora That business owner is at their wits end 84 - 800 block of Johnson Millie's Lane Some more Uh things around in the North Park Village in Cook Street and the Business is There So we do... We have

to care for everyone in this And I also think that we all need to come together around this They you know Put down our differences around this issue And recognise that this is a crisis within a crisis It's not going to change. Something else is going to be next after metatomidine And this is never going to move in a better direction. And we all need to come together and work on this together And that's why I was very happy that... My colleague over there to the right is the seconder of this Because he and I have come out this issue from different points of view almost all - term But now we're coming together to say Hey You know what? Let's just get people... The healthcare... And the support they need and the indoor spaces so we can help make this better For everyone And I think... That's an important thing And I hope that people out there in the community See that and that

we can all sort of put our differences down and come together and do the right thing For everybody involved So we'll see what happens But that's my hope for today And... I hope that... You know that Council will move this forward And we can try to really make a difference out there Thanks very much Councillor Hammond is the sector. Thanks Mayor This all stemmed from discussions and motivations from a few weeks ago In which my colleague Um... Who was the initiator on this... had said at the time Maybe we can come up with something together And thanks to her She did all the lay work on it Um... I'm not always as knowledgeable as she is in this area But I remember during that discussion There was not one person around this table Regardless of where they came from or what they felt about that particular vote Who didn't recognise the things that were already said by the mover And that is that this is

a horrible situation that's happening people It has a horrible effect on them It has a horrible effect on the communities around them You know when... Just as you were talking about And I've read about this You know this animal tranquilizer You have to think who in their right mind would take these things And of course the answer is people aren't in the right mind When they take these things There is clearly all kinds of issues that are going on And when I've talked to people Across the country. You know good parent or you are a good parent You think you have stable upbringing for your kids And in my extended family You know One of the members of the family got into drugs Luckily He's out of drugs There's other people that I know who they're You know They can't pinpoint Why it is that their kids ended up doing this I remember going door to door or a couple elections ago Not for here

But for a federal election Meeting this doctor and this really nice home And he talked about how he was 16 - year - old Um, died from drug overdose And so you can imagine all the privileges that have been given to him And it just doesn't matter Well It matters somewhat But it's just so horrendous Where people get to the state So when people are saying to us You got to do something And the's outside of our jurisdiction At the very least What is it we can do? And if in this particular case We can be advocating For more supports And also to help people remove themselves Um... From the horrors that are going on.

I was happy to support this. Thank you very much. Anybody else. Closer Kim. Um. Thank you Uh If I may question to the mover Um... There's no mention of safe supply here Is there a way that... I don't want to take over this motion Is that something you'd be comfortable with moving as your amendment? Through you Mayor I actually just sent an amendment over to ledge services So that's coming. Um... Hang on Let's just let give her a minute. Councillor Kim Do you wish to seed your speaking order to the mover. Yes. Very good. Councillor Do you intend to provide a minimum? I do I've sent it over to legislative service It's a new number two. Just let people have a minute to read that.

I Presume when you use the phrase Long - term care You don't necessarily Imply the more conventional expectation or stereotype of CARE for older people. You just mean longer - term care. Mm - hmm Karen The longer term That's fine Just as long as it's clear. Alright that seems on its face self - evident Uh... There's a secondary I believe Councillor Kim So Councillor Kim is very graciously seated to floor to Councillor Lowton I did not have another speaker before you So Councillor Lowton You may move your... Yes, you've moved your amendment And the Councillor Kimbass Iconed So over to you to motivate on your amendment Thank you through you Mayor And I think part of This was This should absolutely be in here And I Again I did not want to be prescriptive Because I don't I don't actually know the best way to deal with the meatomedian crisis on the street That is...

Up to health care professionals So that's such as is just These are just suggestions And Mayor You'll be the one that's going to write the letter It should this pass So You can put in it The information that you feel is important And these will be those and maybe the other things you add too I'm not I'm not sure about that But this is a really important piece of the puzzle Um... To be able to provide alternatives to the toxic drug supply through safe supply It does save lives And to get people connected with safer supply. Will Very much help with toxic drugs Period No matter what's next or What if metatomidines in it or not This is just a way to help people Um...

Be safe. So yeah, that's it I just wanted to add it And the reason I didn't have it in to begin with is this is a late motion It came kind of late I just wanted to make sure that we were doing something around Advocacy for this before we recess for August So that's My apologies for not having something like this Into Begin with the motion now Okay Councillor Kim on the amendment Council Council COUR Uh Thank you through the chair Uh so pleased to see this amendment here Uh particularly given that I just had some conversations with some folks who do front line Um...

Work. And I heard a story Uh where this individual shared If some of these The clients If they were given a choice between heroin and heroin plus fentanyl They would choose to get dope sick for two weeks in order to get off heroin plus fentanyl and go back to the lower impact Um, heroin alone So whatever's more manageable really is what I took away from that And so I think that Uh That there really trying to do is offer folks another option For cleaner drugs Knowing just as my colleagues have said that Um... Folks cannot control These cravings, the substance use disorder And so... If we can provide cleaner drugs It's the first step towards Um... Whatever other forms of recovery Individuals might need... Uh...

Moreover I think it's worth highlighting that when we talk about Um... The... The drug supply Um... When we offer safe supply It's a bit of a misnomer to call it Just safe supply It's also regulated And what this motion is actually trying to do is address the problem That has emerged from an unregulated drug market Um... And so to have the government and the state Intervene Um... In order to regulate... Substances that folks are ingesting is Truly not unlike Um... What... Uh... Canada food... Um... Association does to like make sure our food is safe or any other Uh pharmaceuticals And so Um... I do think that this is a very reasonable Um... Step forward Um, and I would also like to point out that This is something that... Bonnie Henry has been Bang in the drama about for years And... I mean that's a medical expert We all relied on to get through a pandemic.

So why not continue relying on a medical expert? Thanks. Thank you very much On the amendment Count your gardener. Thank you As you know a couple weeks ago I suggested that the Harbour transform And you prescribed drugs only rather than illicit drugs So when I look at this motion Uh There's any definition of included prescribes safer supply I'm interpreting that to be Um... As I've just been mentioned drugs that Uh... Approved by health Canada. And the prescription Um... I would hope was just not mean going back to what we had When the BC government ruled out their safer supplies Prescriptions that could be used anywhere So I'm going to support this assuming Hopefully That it means the prescribed CFA supply But at supervised locations such as a transformed Harbour COUR Thank you very much Anybody else on the amendment. Just on the amendment Um... I would presume Uh... The inclusion of the word prescribed... Provides...

A significant number of guardrails That would require Uh... The... The existing regulations established by the province to be. The guidelines of the application of number two. I'm not sure that isn't Counterintuitive to what I understand to be the intent behind this Nevertheless I appreciate the effort at providing a middle ground. Uh... So that it has the capacity to receive I think I hope... Uh... Complete support. So on that Uh... Number two The amendment any further comments. All those in favor. Anybody opposed. The amendment is adopted Uh now comes by the grace of your colleague Councillor Colloten You still have the floor. COUR I'm finished I'll let other people comment or ask questions Thank you very much On the now amended motion Any other coster Kim Thanks. Well I think you spoke to soon Mayer Because my amendment is to remove the word prescribed That's okay.

So there's an amendment to remove the word prescribed Uh... Is her secondary for that. Councillor Dell is seconding that I suspect for discussion Go ahead Councillor Kim. Uh Thank you And thank you to my colleague for Seconding This Again In my conversations with organisations who do this work It was apparent that part of the bottleneck Is that... Well actually we do actually allow for the prescription of regulated For drugs Um a real bottleneck here is actually in the ability to prescribe enough Um... And four enough people And so for me removing the word prescribe Is actually what helps the positive flow of a safer supply to the population that needs it So that we can do the public health piece on mass with this population in need Um... Moreover Uh I would point to... The ongoing trial with the drug use Liberation front in Vancouver Where it is becoming Um... Scrutinized that by not offering Uh... SAFA Supply without prescription We are in deep Potentially

violating Uh human rights, charter rights for people Um... Maintain... Life, liberty, health and all these things So I would rather we err on the side of Um... What truly does serve. The most people. Thank you very much Councillor Dell is the seconder. Anything to add Anyone else Cluster Garder. Toff or to anyone So what is safer supply If it's not prescribed. I Don't know that staff would necessarily be the ones to have a particular material expertise on that But I would suspect that it is by the explanation of the mover of the amendment It would be drugs that were safer That were not necessarily prescribed So available through a non - prescription means Whatever that might be. I don't understand that. So what would make it safer than illicit drugs? Is this include illicit drugs.

I suspect that would be the case From the mover's perspective It would be any drug that could be considered Quote safer That wasn't necessarily bound by a prescription. It's like - Okay So if it's not If it's illicit drugs How does one determine if it's a saper supply? And it's a very lengthy conversation Councillor Gardner And would require some hours I suspect a debate. COVID Maybe that's what this motion is. This amended I believe from the mover's perspective That there is a way to have a CAFER drug supply Which doesn't necessarily require a prescription from a medical professional. So this... The definition I'm hearing right now SIS means Continuation of and support of illicit drugs Is that correct? It could, yes C Thank you Yes.

Anybody else Councillor Kim. Sorry Councillor Kimme You have spoken was I'll come back to you Councillor Thompson You haven't spoken on this one Yeah. Um Yeah I was just going to offer that Um... We're not making any definitions here That that would be entirely up to all the people that were writing to Um... And if they chose to say Oh, it's only prescribed That's up to them If they wanted to say It could include retail drugs like cannabis and alcohol I'd be up to them. If they have any other drugs in mind That'd be up to them. Thanks. Anyone else who hasn't yet spoken on this No concert came back to you Uh Thank you through the chair Um Yeah the other piece around safer supply That gets not talked about enough is that Um...

Part of regulating it and making it the safe supplie Is that there would be government oversight of the production of this Uh... The drug Um... So to me The question of what is Ilicit or licit Uh... In other words What is legal or not legal Um... Is admittedly kind of moot Uh... In the sense that it is the government, i. e. the lawmaking Uh... of our society Um... Understanding that That there is a broader need here And so to provide and work with manufacturers In order to create this. What we have encountered thus far again As we're seeing with the DULF case Is that folks who wanted to offer a CAFR supply up until now?

Have had to go to illicit means in the black market Again, because the government was not stepping in to provide the clean Regulated supply And so... Um... This discussion of moving the word prescribed is more so about The quality of the product And whether or not it's illicit or illicit is again moot Um... There are so many examples of governments who suspend their own rules and laws To make things happen for people Um... And states of exception And frankly If we were going to engage in a conversation about What is legal or not? Um... I Would I welcome that conversation in the correct time and place So that we can discuss the merits of public health. As a superseding need Thank you. Thank you very much Anybody else on the amendment Councillor Coleman. Thank you And through you a question to staff I think. Um...

We are writing a letter to a group of people who have already made some specifics about safer supply or safe supply Um... Two staff Does the pulling out of the word prescribed... Would you expect that this might. Get the... The receivers of the Notion to just drop it as an issue that they want to respond to. Notre It's fair to put that to staff given that the recommendation is for the mayor to write But I'm certainly always open to staff providing comment If should they choose to do so? I suspect that we'd turn first to Mr. Rennucci And then perhaps to Ms. Webb. Perhaps even to Ms. Jones If she wins her way in But None of you should feel compelled to do so. Not asserting a particular expertise in any of these factors. Do any of you wish to comment. And trust me I truly believe that you do not have an obligation to do so. Okay I'm gonna move on. That's... That's fine

I mean The problem is we are writing... A letter to a group of people and saying You we would like a response. And he respond to things such as And we added number two in And now we're carving away from what number two was I think... If we want those different Members of provincial government and medical health officers to respond The more we start narrowing it The more they may just choose to ignore it And not respond to it at all. So I'm not sure that I agree with taking prescribed out Because I think that that gives some safety to them. Thank you very much Anybody else on the amendment. Just gonna check if anyone who's not yet spoken needs to do so. Go ahead Council Kim. Um. Mayor I look to you Uh... Is there a way to do an amendment to the amendment Where we would delete that Uh... Dependent clause Including prescribed safer supply In order to maintain a reasonable scope of

this letter Um... But also in some way Mention safe supply. If you're asking my opinion I think that from a drafting perspective You're asking for virtually impossible If you wanted to actually... What you could do if you wanted to have it more general and appeal to the broadest audience You'd simply Uh... Sentence after methods. And rely on evidence - based health care methods Which would by all experts account include all of the four things that you've included as examples. But not necessarily be limited to those Um... You know I think I will then do an amendment to the amendment And just scrap everything after the word methods Alright That's perfectly in order So an amendment to the amendment would be to delete Uh... Everything from including Right to the end of that sentence And number two. There you go. So that would be in a minute to the amendment Is your second year for that? Constar Thompson is seconding that Councillor Kim on your amendment to the amendment. Um... Yeah Thanks Thank

you to my colleague for raising a good point Um... And... You know as much as I would love to see the language about say for supply in here Um... I would also really like a response from the government Um... That gives us more to work with moving forward Including potentially pushing for safest supply Um, I Seed ground where it needs to be so We can lift a fight another day Literally and figuratively. Thank you Councillor Kim Councillor Thompson You second day that anything to add? Um Just that I think that You know listing evidence - based healthcare methods is a really important part of this whole motion Um... And... More specifically about the deletion They're the amendment to the amendment Uh... This kind of more highlights that language. Thanks very much. Anybody else on the amendment to the amendment That's to delete everything after the word methods. Councillor Lot CRU Mayor I appreciate the mover Um... Offering this amendment Because I do think The intention

here is to have the province Act... And the other piece of this is that I want as many Victorians as possible to get behind This And by making things a little bit more general and balanced I think that we will get the outcome That is intended here Thanks. Thank you very much Anybody else on the amendment to the amendment. Let's delete everything after the word's methods. Uh... I will just briefly say I do appreciate the movers willingness to. Fairly loaded word to dilute to the original amendment. Uh... By... By allowing there to be latitude in whatever the recipient of this letter may determine is an evidence - based health care method. That being said An earlier comment was made that the proposal to include CAFER supply in a variety A menu of different ways of responding to the over - to - Oyst crisis Uh...

Would have included reference to CAFRE supply by the Eminent Dr. Henry and others including our previous corner British Columbia Corner And so I would have supported the removal prescribed But having said that Uh, I do appreciate that this is perhaps Uh... A more acceptable proposal and certainly does allow the provincial government to respond as it sees fit And perhaps we'll encourage them to give a more thoughtful and substantive response Uh... Then they might otherwise have done. So I will support this. With that then all those in favor of the amendment Unto the amendment. C And when you posed That would be unanimous Okay, so we'll just let staff clean that up. And see where we're based there. Facebook I believe we've actually dealt with the amendment by doing that amendment to the amendment. Or maybe not We'll see what they do. Very good Excellent Thank you. Uh - oh Prescribed in there Okay there you go There you go Uh So no We are back

on Uh actually I'm sorry I'm just lost the track of that The amendment that's there Which is number two Uh I believe we've already dealt with number two No we haven't We were amending it So we still have dealer with number two is an amendment Uh And that was originally I believe done by Um... Anything else to add. Oh Anybody else on number two. Is it was her... Whoa Wait. Hang on. Let's get back to there. There you go Thank you very much So now we're just dealing with what was the original amendment Which is the addition of number two As it has now been amended So everybody Okay with number two. This is just adding evidence - based health care methods That's all it is. That's it. Okay All those in favor of number two. Anybody opposed. That is unanimous So now back on the main motion Uh... Which I now have Uh... Lacking anything further from Council Loot And I don't think so

Up next is Councillor Thompson. And then we'll come back to Council Call Councillor Thompson On the main motion. COURU Yeah. Thanks Mayor Yeah I've been hearing updates on Metatomedine since 2025 And it's in the Drug Supply It's very unpredictable It can kill It doesn't respond to Narcan Naloxone Um... It's part of a very fast evolving drug mix And it's not the only one Uh... We're hearing about Uh... Benzos Nitizens Uh... And in other places Chlorophine another Orphines Um... And many others who that I probably can't pronounce. Um... Just wondering if Mayor When you're writing the letter You see a reason to limit yourself to only mentioning Metatomadine Or if you might also mention other things.

I think that would actually be a question Posed more properly to the mover Uh... If you're asking my opinion Um... I heard the Bubers motivation to be very specific to this for very specific reasons Grant your comments are absolutely true Uh... But whether or not that is something that the mover wants to add in would be up to the mover I think. It does It does... Again Operating opinion It does change the possibilities of a response Insofar as it broadens it quite substantially for all of the reasons that you've identified If the movers intent originally was to deal specifically with this particular disaster. Then I think I would leave it alone I'm I'm interested in hearing the movers And I probably won't push it I mean there's always time for other motions as well. Councillor Loten You again this conversation Through you Mayor I think that the issue that we're dealing with right now on the street is metatomedine And I'd prefer not to water

this down I'd rather have it That it's watered down is not the right term Actually I understand where The question is coming from and I agree with it But for this particular point in time I think we need to focus on this If we need to bring another motion in September I almost said New Year in September Um so be it But for right now That's what's causing all of the trauma and just Chaos on the street right now As I've mentioned It's like a crisis inside of a crisis And you know it's affecting the systems And I think we just need to focus on that Um Because this is asking for a response Specifically to that right now. Thank you Council Nothing further Councillor Kim. Um Thank you Uh. Through the chair Uh question to The mover if they're willing to answer Um. What is meant by Um... Medical Information Interventions That do not negatively impact neighbourhoods. Council Logan. COUR Through you Mayor It's just. To Make sure that there is some

kind of. System in place Whether that be Um... Extra funding for outreach or for street ambassadors Or that kind of thing To make sure that around the perimeter of these locations Um... The public isn't complaining And I know that for some people That might seem like. Another in my backyard approach But the reality is these things are always considered When new services go in So it is to preempt. Um... Try to put some sort of. Resources towards making sure that the area around the location. Is taken care of And you know I've talked about this a lot at this table I'll term And it was one thing with the village in Duncan When they did that kind of work within 150 metre radius of their site It's that kind of thing And we did And as the cosigner of this motion mentioned Like this did come out of the discussion with the motion. To Potentially Advocate to close the harbour. And what my point of view on that is is It's not what happens

inside the harbour It's what happens outside the harbour So let's think of about that Before we move into creating other spaces where this is going to happen so that we don't have those problems And it doesn't Um prohibit creating the services that are required for people. In many ways In my opinion Public backlash is a deterrent to services It's the biggest thing I personally face at this table Council Loaten You are viewing far off the mark Okay well I'm just trying to explain why it's in there Oh for my time or no I'm just trying to explain why that's in there Um, why they do not negatively impact neighbourhood comment is in there. So I appreciate that Councillor Kim. Uh Thank you for that intervention Um to me that Uh. Understand why this language that I hope the mover understands why it can be seen as stigmatizing Um, is could be interpreted that way But I understand The intention And so I ask you mayor

If do you also similarly understand the intention of that as this letter gets written Um, similarly try to avoid stigmatize and language while also doing that sort of community groundwork Um, for the soft landing of these services Thank you Yes, I do Just to clarify Uh Councillor Lowden I didn't intervene because you'd run out of time Your answers do not count towards your time. You were very much clearly almost out of time in your commentary But given the time and the length of time of your response That's why intervene. Just because you'd been going on for some time. Uh, that being said Any other comments on this now amended motion. Councillor Gardner. Thank you. Although I had nothing to do with a with the Control Substances Act I was a gauge editored officer under the Food and Drug Act for many years It was my first career And of course when we look at Uh, some of what's been discussed today Kind of going to

manufacturers Et cetera drug approvals take anywhere from 5 to 30 years. And so I think and way beyond the reach Of course of this council I think we have to deal with the realities where we are today And the problems we have today. Now again I Will approve this as soon as I vote for this And again I'm looking at not illicit drug use And this in my mind So far does not look like an expansion of that. So supported under that understanding. Thank you very much Anyone else How's your Coleman. Thank you Having opined earlier about How Council Member Motions can be used inappropriately I think this is inappropriate An appropriate use It is an advocacy piece for the mayor to right to a number of different people. And share the extreme trauma that we're sealing on our streets And is being felt by the full spectrum of our population So I think that this is absolutely the correct way to go forward. Thank

you so much. Anyone else. Not saying anyone else Uh this is indeed entirely appropriate to bring this to the attention of those folks who have the most direct ability and authority to respond And so I think the mover and seconder and all the commentators on this for bringing us to this point. That being said all those in favor. Does anyone opposed. That is unanimous Thank you very much for that colleagues We do know to have that does retire actually all of the Council Member motions and new business that we had at a committee We do not have any need for a closed aspect of our Committee Agenda today So I would look for motion to adjourn. Thanks Councillor Coleman Second Black Council Cam All those in favor Any would opposed as unanimous Folks We have mid - sitting that long So I'm going to suggest that we just take the time that stuff needs to break us and move us into our Dayton Council meeting

And we'll resume immediately when they are ready.