City of Powell River councillors wrestled for about three hours to put forward amendments to the city's draft procedure bylaw.
At the July 9 committee of the whole meeting, several councillors had lists of changes they wanted to make to various components of the draft bylaw, which the Community Charter requires to provide general procedures followed by council and council committees in conducting business. According to a staff report, councillors participated in two facilitated workshops on May 17 and 30, at which time councillors, staff and the city’s consultant discussed and reviewed a new proposed procedure bylaw.
Councillor Jim Palm said now that the document is public, council has received a lot of comments from the public that have shed new light on developments in terms of the new procedure bylaw. He asked staff to outline the process council was following, the timeline and where the public input comes into effect.
Deputy corporate officer Jessica Lefort said at this time, councillors were discussing edit changes to the document. She said once it is referred to the bylaw adoption process, it will go to a meeting for first and second reading, and at that time, public notice is put out in the newspaper and on all of the city’s resources, such as social media and the website. She said after a two-week period, the bylaw would come to council for a third reading and at that point, council can still make changes to the bylaw. Once the bylaw is where council wants it to be, they can give it third reading and finally adopt it.
Lefort said residents, to express their thoughts, can come to city hall in person, they can email, phone and mail in their comments.
“They are welcome to get in touch with staff or council,” said Lefort.
Palm asked if a public forum is part of the process.
Lefort said there is not a public hearing, but any time the item is on the agenda, people can ask questions during question period.
Councillor George Doubt said the bylaw council had in the agenda package highlighted changes from a previous draft. He said it doesn’t show highlighted changes from the original 2015 procedure bylaw.
“That is causing some consternation to people because they were asking to have more information on what has actually been changed,” said Doubt. “If we do decide to move it to first reading, I would like to see when that information comes out to the public that the meeting minutes and the meeting agenda have included a redline document that shows all the changes from the existing 2015 bylaw, to the new proposed bylaw.”
Palm pointed out what he perceived to be restrictions in what members of the public could make oral comment on during public input periods, which includes legislative matters, committee recommendations and new business.
“I don’t think there should be limits on the public in order to ask questions at any particular meeting,” said Palm.
Councillor Earl Almeida said the public input period is at the beginning of the meeting, so there is still a question period at the end of the meeting that has no limitations.
Palm then pointed out that the proposed bylaw limits the number of delegations at a council meeting to two.
“We should increase the number of delegations from the two in this document to at least three from the public and one from organizations, per meeting, so everyone gets a fair shot to have their voices heard,” said Palm.
Doubt then made a motion to refer the draft procedure bylaw to a future council meeting as amended by the July 9 committee of the whole meeting.
“The public will have all kinds of opportunities to be involved,” said Doubt.
The motion carried, with mayor Ron Woznow and Palm opposed.
Doubt made a motion to ensure council and committee of the whole agendas are available by the Friday afternoon prior to the meeting. The motion carried.
Councillor Trina Isakson said she wanted public input periods and delegations specifically on the committee of the whole agenda, because that is where that information is often most useful, to explore issues and get to a recommendation to send to council. She said council meetings are meant for councillors to decide on council business, and they are not public forums.
“There are better venues for broader public input, for example, having a quarterly public forum or open house of some kind,” said Isakson. “I would like to focus public input and delegations where they are most useful to us. They are most useful to us at the committee of the whole stage.”
Doubt said he didn’t have a problem with public input and delegations being on both agendas.
“We’ve had a lot of discussions about trying to eliminate committee of the whole meetings and bring some business directly to council,” said Doubt. “If we were to have business come directly to council, but not have public input at council meetings, then we would be going in a backwards direction.”
Woznow said he supports having delegations at council and committee of the whole because it provides residents an opportunity to voice their thoughts.
Lefort said her suggestion was for three delegations at committee of the whole and one at council, with a provision that the presiding member has discretion to limit or extend those numbers with staff in advance.
The committee moved and seconded Lefort’s suggestion and carried the motion.
Doubt made a motion that when the draft procedure amendment bylaw comes to council, it includes a redline section that shows all the changes from the previous 2015 procedure bylaw.
“I’m looking at a way that we can explain to the public how we have changed the bylaw from the 2015 bylaw,” said Doubt. “If we want the public to accept it, we are going to have to explain what the difference is between the old bylaw and the new bylaw.”
Isakson made an amendment that involved scratching reference to a redline document and inserting a table with description of changes with each item. The amendment carried unanimously.
The amended motion also carried unanimously, so staff will come up with a comparative document.
Join the Peak's email list for the top headlines right in your inbox Monday to Friday.
