Committee of the Whole - 14 Nov 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: DELEGATIONS/PETITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
3.i: Vehicle Residents of Squamish
3: TIME 12:30 P.M. - 1:00 P.M.
4: STAFF REPORTS
4.i: Water Metering Program
4: TIME 1:05 P.M. - 1:35 P.M.
4.ii: 38123 Cleveland Avenue - District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011 Amendment Bylaw No. 2757, 2023 - For Feedback
4: TIME 1:40 P.M. - 2:40 P.M.
5: TERMINATION
1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
0:00:00 (0:02:00)

The extract from the District of Squamish council meeting begins with Councillor Jenna Stoner, who is acting as mayor for the month, calling the meeting to order. She welcomes everyone to the meeting, which is taking place on the traditional territory of the Squamish Nation. She informs the attendees that the meeting is being live-streamed and recorded, and will be available for public viewing on the District of Squamish website. She also points out the presence of the corporate officer, Robin Arthurs, who can be approached if anyone has concerns.

Before proceeding with the meeting, Councillor Stoner acknowledges that the transgender flag was raised above City Hall just before the meeting started. This act was in recognition of Transgender Awareness Week. She mentions Katherine Truman from See the Sky Allies, who spoke eloquently and called for action from the community.

Councillor Stoner emphasizes the importance of standing against misinformation, hate, and violence directed towards the transgender, queer, and 2S LGBTQI community. She calls on the community to ensure that everyone feels safe and belongs. This sets the tone for the meeting, highlighting the council's commitment to inclusivity and respect for all community members.

Jenna Stoner
0:00:22 (0:01:37)

all right we have think we're good to go any echoes not hearing any all right with that I will call this meeting to order welcome to the district of squames committee the whole meeting for November 14th my name is councelor Jenna Stoner is acting mayor this month I'll be chairing this meeting hot squalen quish welcome to the Squamish Nation traditional territory please be advised that this council meeting is being live streamed recorded and will be available to the public to view on the District of Squamish website following the meeting if you have concerns please notify the corporate officer present at the meeting Robin Arthurs over here to the right or my right I guess I'd also like to recognize that just before this meeting started we did raise the transgender flag above City Hall it is transgender aware week of awareness and Katherine Truman from see the sky allies thank you I was gonna say Squamish Pride see the guy allies I spoke really eloquently and had a call to action for our community in terms of really showing up and speaking truth to power in terms of starting to see more misinformation and more unfortunate actions of hate and violence against folks who are transgendered queer or of the 2s lgbtqi community and so I just wanted to speak to that a little bit again and call on our community to really recognize the importance of making sure that we have a community where everybody belongs where everybody feels safe with that I will ask

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
0:02:00 (0:00:14)


Jenna Stoner
0:02:00 (0:00:13)

Council colleagues for a motion to adopt the agenda moved by mayor Herford seconded by councelor Hamilton any opposed motion carries thank you the first item on our agenda this afternoon everybody is a delegation

Vehicle Residents of Squamish
0:02:14 (0:45:01)

The presentation was given by Thomasina Pigeon and Rufio West, members of the Vehicle Residence of Squamish (VRS), a group formed in 2019 in response to a bylaw that forbids people from sleeping in their vehicles on public land. Pigeon, who has lived in her vehicle for 25 years, explained that the bylaw impacts her and many others in the audience directly. She returned to school to study political science and geography, specializing in property law, to better fight against the bylaw. West, a co-founder of VRS, had stepped back from the group due to burnout from working with the district but was present to support the presentation.

The presenters discussed the drivers of the bylaw, including stigma, lack of facilities, lack of affordable housing and campgrounds, gentrification, and settlement bias. They argued that vehicles are often considered an inappropriate form of housing due to colonial property law, which deems vehicle residents homeless and criminalizes them. They also highlighted the diverse reasons why people live in vehicles, including as an affordable housing solution, a cultural choice, a response to housing insecurity, and a means of escaping domestic violence. They emphasized that vehicles offer choice, autonomy, and control over one's living situation.

The presenters proposed solutions to address the issues faced by vehicle residents. They suggested a permit system that would legally allow people to sleep in their vehicles on public and private land. To get a permit, residents would need to pass a Leave No Trace certification and follow a code of conduct. They would also have to relocate every two to three days and pay the equivalent of a property tax. The presenters also proposed the establishment of safe lots, where vehicles could park on vacant or underutilized public and private land, providing more stability and community access for residents. They argued that these solutions would be more cost-effective than punitive enforcement and would align with Squamish's outdoor culture. They concluded by emphasizing the importance of inclusive policies and the need for political courage to change the bylaw.

Jenna Stoner
0:02:14 (0:00:37)

from the vehicle residence of Squamish and we have Thomasina pigeon here to speak to us we'll have 10 minutes for the presentation any questions Thomasina and then we'll have about 20 minutes discussion amongst council members to figure out where we want to go from here so we'll just give them a minute to set up and then we'll pass it over to you think Russell will bring up your present oh yeah Russell will bring up your presentation for you so no need to touch anything you're good you do need to turn the microphone on and you'll be able to advance the slides on your own like with

SPEAKER_05
0:02:51 (0:00:44)

this yeah okay cool okay hi I'm Thomasina pigeon I'm a member of the vehicle residence of Squam we formed in 2019 19 in response to the baa which forbids people from sleeping in their vehicles on public land and just for the record we have worked with the district before which ruia will speak to but the B impacts me very closely I live in my vehicle and have so for a long time 25 years as have many the people in this audience and I returned to school specifically for the bot I just finished my degree in political science last year for the baa to learn how to better fight it basically and I'm currently doing my masters in geography which specializes in property law and the

SPEAKER_07
0:03:35 (0:00:18)

bylaw and I'm Rufio West one of the co-founders of the vrs as well I was involved until a couple years ago where I took a step back because working with this District actually led to a lot of burnout for me but I'm happy to be here today to hopefully move

SPEAKER_05
0:03:54 (0:10:53)

forward okay so to start we're just going to talk really quickly about what drives the bylaw so with the District of gmer says garbage complaints and health and safety concerns however the vehicle residents as well as this is supported by research so just for the record everything in the slideshow I do have references for that is documented with academic research that I can provide at the end so basically stigma othering nimbe Islam which is basically not in my backyard some examples of stigma are on this website which we found on Squamish Facebook pages as well as in District documents some of the people in this room have used these words just for the record so it's something that we stigma is very important to be aware about and to address because it is a driver of the BW as well also lack of facilities toilets garbage cans which we're all familiar with lack of affordable housing and shelter space lack of affordable campgrounds and actually just so you know there is a guy here from the campground who is willing to speak later gentrification in real estate which is one thing that does not get addressed but that is definitely address driver of the marginalization of lower income people as well and settlement bias so this is academic term but it basically means like legally and culturally vehicles are considered an inappropriate form of housing it comes from prop like Colonial property law it deems vehicle residents homeless and therefore they criminalized in attempt to keep social control it basically protects one way of living at the expense of another in terms of property owners and non-property owners so van life or precariously house this is something that mayor Elliott former May Elliott has definitely said so we try to be careful to using this binary view because it can fail to address the importance of beagles as housing as well as the property rights the human rights and also the infrastructure needs that vehle residents need and the public I mean we all need more garbage and toilets but so what is why do people live in vehicles there's a bunch of different reasons this list is not full but it's a housing alternative it's an affordable housing solution it's a culture it's a Minimus life as we're familiar with in Squamish especially it's a semi has sematic benefits it's a retirement life there's a lot of RVs as well it's a redefinition of homeless so a lot of homeless people actually prefer vehicles to the shelter because they find them more private they're safer they can have their belongings with them as well as their family it's a result of housing insecurity rent evictions not wanting to live with a, roommates in affordability it's also can be domestic violence women fleeing from something moving into their vehicles and moreover Vehicles just offer Choice autonomy and control over the living situation economically physically and socially so I the basis of this whole idea is like what is a home I think that's something that the vehicle it gets discussed a lot like it's deemed an inappropriate form of housing but a home goes beyond a fixed wall it's a place where one can create feelings of exclusion or belonging and it's yeah it's a community I mean it's I belong to scage I live in scrummage this is my community and I want to feel like I legally belong here like everyone else and this is interesting fact 35% of vehle wrs actually consider their vles home which contests the social construction of homelessness as well as a settlement bias which I talked about earlier and in order to address all these things we need Solutions but in order to have a solution we need to rethink property basically and kind of challenge kind of more dominant narratives that we hear in society and for the solutions so this is we want to focus most of our attention here but a permit system which we've been we've had proposed before it legally allows people to sleep in their vehicles on public and private land because vehicle runs are a diverse group of individuals we need inclusive policies for everybody short and long term to get a permit you would require to pass leave no Trace certification and follow a code of conduct you'd have to relocate every two three days you would pay the equivalent of a property tax which kind of addresses the idea that we are tax evaders you would get a sticker kind of like a park pass or a permit pass it would be for tourists and locals alike because tourists are definitely impacted by the bylaw and as well as the shortage of campgrounds one month minimum just to kind of make better profit encompasses safe lots which we'll talk about shortly and it saves on punitive enforcements as well as its income for the district so it's also aligned with the outdoor culture of Squamish which I kind of flew past so a safe lot there's a lot of examples of safe lots in the states it's for those who want more stability and Community and access to resources basically Vehicles could park on vacant or Public underutilized public and private land it connects them to the community to resources social services and such it's cheaper than affordable housing it operates at little to no cost to cities it eases Community attention because it legitimizes that we to belong here and it manages seasonal pressure because it would provide garbage cans and such there are criteria like you'd have to have a Lo licensed motor vehicle it has to be driving and abide by leave no trace and an example is from Eugene it costs the city $90,000 a year for their various safe lots but they saved 300,000 a year in placing like due to the decrease in police calls as well as by specifically for campers possible locations the Bluffs the adventure parking lot the brenon park dog park former recycling we think that all of these locations and there's obviously more would help address the tensions in the community the perceptions that were freeloaders and minimize problematic practice is like garbage budget considerations a permit sticker would cost roughly two bucks signage for leave no Trace signage information pamphlets which are similar to The no camping pamphlets that already exist infrastructure to pay Could Happen online that's how a lot of the ones in the states work as well as through Municipal Hall additional porta potties a week two units 300 bucks a week I'm not sure if that's completely accurate it came from someone else compost recycling waste bins which I guess House people pay 400 bucks a year so I don't and I actually don't know how much this would cost for the city in a location in the city but these items would be offset by the income from permits and safe lots so why the vehicle why it needs changing so studies show that vehicle residency is only increasing anti vehicle residen laws are also increasing as a result the 20 23 Squam onh house count counted 56% of our onh housee population actually live in vehicles and this is vastly undercounted and as well people accounting people in vehicles is difficult the BW perpetuates and legitimizes the stigma and segregation that is voiced against vehical residents and we've had some violent Encounters this summer which I'm sure some of you are aware about the district between 2019 and 21 has received over 300 letters of support for a permit system as well as against the bylaw so we have support in the community and there's also a House resident here in the audience to show that bylaw is expensive it's 135 to 150 year just in 2021 for the specific camper bylaw courts say that these bylaws these the anti Vehicle resid Laws they're over Brad vague exclusionary prone to arbitrary discriminatory and have it hugely disproportionate impact on vehicle residents which we can contest to and moreover it may raise constit tional challenges which would be better avoided studies show that vehicle resident bylaws are ineffective and their exclusion they do not reduce vehicle residency they do not address the health and safety concerns they perpetuate the cycle of criminality poverty and homelessness especially for those less fortunate they dimin due to diminishing legal spaces that pushes the problem elsewhere displacement tactics are often it's termed a violent form of on homing which we can all account for having a bot officer wake you up shine these light in your car while you're sleeping can really have physical effects and it's very stressful which is why I'm in school so I can just account for like how impactful it is it pushes people fur further from the community it's against the will and it underwrites their right to dwell ways to change the B pretty simple low cost changing a few words removing certain phrases adding in m ments that allow for safe parking removing the language that blocks Creative Solutions such as a permit system it takes political courage which I believe I have to believe in it costs little money and it saves money on enforcement and also prevents money it prevents economic problems for those vehicle residents who really can't afford to have a ticket it legally dis stigmatizes them and allows them to sleep like house residents free of police harassment we should include us why should you include us in inclusive policy it's in line with the BC Human Rights Code it would be in line with the Canadian Charter it's in line with the distri of Squamish values which we've went over in that open letter IT addresses the worker shortage seasonal and long-term it helps with the housing crisis it saves squamous reputation squamous reputation in terms of campers is very negative at the moment just so you know and there's benefits it's inclusive it's diverse it's Progressive it's to me it's a it's a win-win and more over we matter like vles resence matter we're members of this community we don't deserve to be treated like we do and we really think that U we belong to and we should be legally allowed to belong these are just best practices that we kind of gave to vehle Residents throughout the summer or M is familiar with them and some links to permit systems and safe lots in other parts of the world and resources so that concludes that that's it thank you oh I think there's a thank you slide there's a thank you slide oh no there isn't there was I erased it by accident yeah but oh no it's right there it says thank you

Jenna Stoner
0:14:47 (0:00:21)

that's all good thank you very much for your presentation Miss pigeon I'll just go to council and see if there's any questions at this time for Thomasina or Rufio that we can have them address and then we'll ask them to step back to the audience and we can have a discussion among Council once we have clarifi any clarifying questions cleared so go to counselor French first

John French
0:15:09 (0:00:11)

thanks chair there was a reference to lnt certification I'm not familiar with that so I'm wondering if you could explain what that is

SPEAKER_05
0:15:21 (0:00:24)

yeah that's leave no Trace leave no Trace guidelines there's actually online training for it that's free online all you have to do is fill out the quiz and then I in my imagination you would fill out the quiz you bring your certification to the district office and here's my thing here's my money for my permit sticker and it's leave Trace is kind of a international it's

SPEAKER_07
0:15:45 (0:00:15)

yeah and you there are different organizations that become can become partners with the leave no Trace program so the District of Squamish or the vs or both could become a partner of L&T

John French
0:16:01 (0:00:16)

okay and the presentation also made reference to some sort of system where property tax could be paid and there was a percentage wondering how that long string of number percentage was arrived

SPEAKER_05
0:16:17 (0:00:09)

at that was actually came from one of our other directors who's not here but it came from the website I'd have to ask

John French
0:16:27 (0:00:16)

him okay and final question the in the presentation there was reference to $2 for permit sticker would that be a onetime $2 fee and you get a lifetime sticker or a month per quarter per

SPEAKER_05
0:16:44 (0:00:15)

year I think it would basically if you're if you have a one Monon permit it would be a one time it would be wor that month but the permit would yeah I mean if you're buying multiple then you would have more stickers

SPEAKER_07
0:16:59 (0:00:07)

sorry I think where your question is coming from is that was the cost of printing a sticker yes the actual permit cost would be

Jenna Stoner
0:17:07 (0:00:06)

different that's a helpful clarification thank you councelor green laww and then mayor

Lauren Greenlaw
0:17:14 (0:00:12)

Herford yeah thanks for the presentation it was it's very enlightening I was just wondering if you had an estimate of how many vehicle residents currently reside in

SPEAKER_05
0:17:26 (0:00:48)

Squamish are last count was in 2020 and it was roughly about 300 but I mean the study show that FAL resins are very hard to count because they try to do they do live a life of hiding to evade baot and to evade being punished for being home for being homeless so it's hard to count them they're moving they're always changing locations but yeah the current homeless count we try to get people to respond and call in but not everyone did and it was only within like one day so it's not inclusive but I would estimate I mean I have a lot of members of my gym that are living vehicles and it's I would estimate two to 300 people that are actual it's but that's under I'm assuming that's

SPEAKER_07
0:18:15 (0:00:46)

underestimating and the numbers vary through the year as I'm sure you're aware it's a very seasonal town but a lot of those folks who are in the summer many of them are tourists but many of them are also people who consider Squamish home so there's a lot of workers there's a member of the audience here today who said their partner worked with some rope access groups that are based in Squamish and there were dozens of people living in their vehicles here in Squamish that are based here with companies so the number while in the hundreds in the summertime it's even more hidden because a lot of people see them as tourists when they are there are actually a lot of residents there

Jenna Stoner
0:19:02 (0:00:03)

too any further questions councelor green law

Lauren Greenlaw
0:19:05 (0:00:10)

yeah I guess I have one more so I mean I don't want you to give anything up but where are you all

SPEAKER_05
0:19:16 (0:00:42)

then there's quite a few people staying in private like the Walmart parking lot which obviously we've seen the summer is not successful okay I just stay down the road I stay on what it was formerly crownland it kind of borders private and crownland I was when I stayed on the private side the owner came up to me and kicked me out well he actually didn't kick me out he let me stay for the night and he said we talk about in the morning but so I stay around downtown just as easier Cedar has school she can walk to school driving or driving out of town just does not make sense to me also environmentally I don't think anyone else would want to say where they stay but

Lauren Greenlaw
0:19:59 (0:00:03)

but they're all places that are they're not supposed to be staying essentially

SPEAKER_05
0:20:03 (0:00:02)

everywhere that we stay is legal

SPEAKER_07
0:20:05 (0:00:26)

yes I stay in I stay in illegal places or I stay like I had surgery this summer so I had to be very stationary and I stayed way over time trying to evade the Rangers at the Chief Campground which so I was forc in to in order to evade bylaw I had to go and be illegal somewhere else and that was the nature of

SPEAKER_05
0:20:31 (0:00:28)

it I will add one thing about the campground I should have brought it I do have an eviction notice that I got from the campground this summer for overstaying the 14-day Max limit and he works at the campground he can attest to it the campground is crazy it's a survival fit like it's a fight to get a spot there and moreover we just cannot stay there more than 14 days per the year it's the it's a huge problem

Jenna Stoner
0:21:00 (0:00:01)

mayor

Armand Hurford
0:21:01 (0:00:29)

Herford thank you thank you for the Pres for the presentation and I'm sorry for my poor coffee drinking skills it almost took me out earlier but I was curious the col the Colorado safe parking initiative seemed interesting is that the is there sort of is that the one that is the you would consider the gold standard if we were to look I saw you had lots of resources there and I look forward to exploring those but is there one that you hold in the highest

SPEAKER_05
0:21:31 (0:00:51)

regard I would say the one that I hold in the highest regard is the permit system because it accommodates because again like vehicle RS are very diverse not everyone wants to be put in one parking lot and have to stay there I personally I really like the freedom of movement it's one of the reasons why I live in a vehicle so for me the permit system is the best because it allows me to move my location regularly to stay in different areas but the safe lot the Colorado safe lot system there's they actually have quite a few there there's a bunch in Washington and in California they're successful they seem to work really well they're they work really well for people that kind of want more a of a spot like more of a place where they can have they know they can get water they know there's bathrooms they can access housing in the future if they need it they can access work like it's more of a community

Armand Hurford
0:22:23 (0:00:21)

Hub okay thank you and do you see the permit a permit system and a safe lot system are those choices or is it or in your mind is it a yes and like both together given that you just said there's sort of like two separate sort of categories of folks maybe or interests

SPEAKER_05
0:22:44 (0:01:10)

yeah I mean I think they're kind of they're very related but the difference would be the safe lot we actually on one of the slides we went through some locations and we were talking about this earlier that not all of those locations would work for a safe lot because people use this the parking lots in the daytime like Brennan Park Brennan Park would be a great place for a permit system so permit system you could stay on the road in the parking lots you could basically could stay on public and private land with respect to like I mean I think in the original permit system we sent there it's like you have to stay a certain distance from a house but I mean there's people that also have friends that live in vehicles that stay in front of their house so I think that we need to recognize that too that people live also in driveways and vehicles in Squamish yeah so the permit system would work in for example the smoke Bluffs but a safe lot would not because a safe lot would have more of a permanency to it so the place that would work would be the Westway former recycling unit that is really underutilized you know what I'm talking about that's like that would be a really great kind of safe lot there's definitely yeah does that answer your question

Armand Hurford
0:23:54 (0:00:53)

it does you and you led me into my last question if it's okay chair it was wondering about the given the number say around 300 which does change I can imagine changes seasonally and the impact the pressures we do have from a tourism in that presents similar with folks coming with vehicles to for their stays in Squamish like that spot that you identified there I think you said was it 30 spots or something maybe or how many parking spots you but like how big would it would do you see a safe lot needing to be to be actually impactful and not and not be another to avoid some of the challenges you're seeing at sort of the overc capacity of campsites and overstay challenges like yeah does 20 or 30 mean anything

SPEAKER_05
0:24:48 (0:00:46)

well actually so the Colorado one it's 10 Vehicles Max for some of them and but the thing is that they have many of them like some of them just work in community like church parking lots like a lot of them are in church parking lots in Colorado and but there's like not just one so there would be more than one and I think we would need more than one because we have so many people here and especially in the summertime yeah I mean there's a lot of empty church parking lots in Squamish and I think they would be a good partner as well as like just the industrial area that I mean there's so many places that are empty at night like the smoke block parking lot has a barricade on it to keep V resins out which to me is kind of insane because there are toilets there and I just there's yeah it's underutilized or not used at all

SPEAKER_07
0:25:35 (0:00:24)

spaces and I think that speaks to the diversity that's required for addressing this issue is because 10 or 20 Spa spots may not make an impact on its own but when you have more options for more people then you can appropriately manage the population so or manage is not the right word but

Jenna Stoner
0:25:59 (0:00:03)

councelor Hamilton go

Andrew Hamilton
0:26:03 (0:00:59)

ahead thanks very much and thanks for the great presentation vehicle residency I see it as a very viable form of housing it's a viable form of housing that like every form of housing has potential challenges and some of the potential challenges just that I'm that we've seen come up one of them is in as you pointed out day and night use yeah there's a lot of I could see an argument for vehicle residency where you need a spot to park at night yeah versus a spot to park and then at night and then H and sort of live during the day if a solution were to be found where only nighttime parking was allowed would that be a sufficient solution or is that an insufficient

SPEAKER_05
0:27:02 (0:00:45)

solution I think it comes back to who the vehicle resents are because we are so diverse I know some if we speak of the more marginalized people that maybe their vehicles are not running or they just cannot afford gas to drive everywhere I think that there definitely needs to be an opening for them so that they can have more access to services and support that said I think that what like a nighttime proposal would be I mean for me that would work because I just go to an area and I sleep and usually I wake up and I go back to work like most like most vehicle residents but we're it's a diverse group so I think that Solutions need to be really creative to help accommodate the people that may even need more

Andrew Hamilton
0:27:47 (0:00:48)

help and I think you've highlighted what I see if I if I may highlighted what I see as another big one of the challenges is the diversity it's a very diverse group of folks and one solution to meet all their needs may not may not be immediately viable or may take a long time to implement as opposed to solutions that can accommodate some of the needs of the residents whereas those needing more support may need another solution so I I'm right now I'm torn to understand a solution that meets the broad diversity of needs that you're that you're putting forward

SPEAKER_05
0:28:35 (0:00:35)

yeah the safe lots would the safe lots would definitely help with the people that need more support they're very I mean as the demonstration said they're really cheap they have low they're very low cost they're mostly run by volunteers church or organizations and such and in Colorado specifically they definitely help address the people that have are having are having like just like low wages or just can't find affordable housing the permit system is inclusive to everything

SPEAKER_07
0:29:11 (0:00:44)

so and I'm not too sure for the newer council members whether they're aware that there was a consultant hired specifically by the District of Squamish and that was working with us as well as other community members to work on a program and we had heard some of some of the ideas that he had that were unique to us there some of them seem more in line of what's been implemented in the states more recently about having a community Hub and more social resources however his work was discontinued I believe two and a half years ago and so I'm not too sure what the last piece of his work that was made available to the district

Jenna Stoner
0:29:56 (0:00:33)

was yeah just on that work was never completed and even previous Council never saw it so that's yeah the work was never completed I'm not sure why but there just isn't a follow through on that I did have just a few questions of my own the majority of the safe lot programs or all the safe lot programs that you did link to in your resources none of them are within Canada can you provide any examples of any that in Canada or and BC

SPEAKER_05
0:30:29 (0:00:50)

there's none in Canada no yeah no the Canmore one failed they it's basically due to nism not in my backyard attitude which to me is a it's a huge problem like I think the bar the biggest barrier here is stigma and I think that's the one thing that people need to address is the fact that people see vehicle residents as lower than and tax evaders and also the camera lot was also in a safe Safeway parking lot not ideal like it just wasn't a very good plan in the beginning the they had security there it was I think it was 10 bucks a night which I mean to stay in a safe W parking lot for 10 bucks a night to me is it's not what it's not going to sell like it's not going to be it's not going to help

Jenna Stoner
0:31:20 (0:00:22)

yeah and then also the majority of the programs that you did link to very few of them are actually run by local government or by governments at all most of them are done maybe in conjunction with the local government but are run by a third party a nonprofit as you mentioned lots of churches so I'm just wondering if you can clearly Identify some of the examples that are not covid specific that have been run by local governments

SPEAKER_05
0:31:42 (0:00:17)

yeah there's one in E the Eugene one is government run the one in Vancouver Washington is government run and the ones in seatt are kind of a mixture the ones in Colorado are a mixture so it's both government and local

Jenna Stoner
0:31:59 (0:00:11)

groups okay that's helpful thank you Council we are at time so are there any further questions for our delegation yeah councelor pill and then councelor Hamilton

Chris Pettingill
0:32:11 (0:01:34)

yeah thanks one thing that I struggle with a bit and I'm just sort of wondering is how big and the question was sort of asked but I want to ask it in a different question but how big does this does the program need to be or how big should it be and I guess one of the tensions is I think a fear when I speak to a number of people who live in their vehicle it's not a First Choice it's sort of the best choice given the reality of the situation and so I guess I have some hesitation or caution that we given the limitations of our ability to like we can't force a business to provide worker housing and that sort of thing and so if that just sort of you know are we creating a system where the expectation is that all your Workforce has to live in vehicles and we are creating we are actually increasing the division in the second group of society because people are building their business models around the expectation that everyone lives in a vehicle and if we in theory constrain the amount of permits or the size of the program so much does that not force more businesses to come up with models that support people being in the some housing more than they want like how do we work around that sort of tension and not becoming a this is just employee housing this is our employee housing solution we're fine if every business has other people in vehicles because I don't I'm not sure that's where anyone's advocating for we go but we also have an existing situation we have to deal with somehow so just wondering how we navigate that tension

SPEAKER_05
0:33:45 (0:00:27)

well I don't see it as an employ I don't see it like that I don't see it as an employer responsibility and the dut shop they have housing for their people yeah I don't really know how to answer that because I don't see I don't see that as like if as a business owner myself like I'm not going to tell my employee that oh no you can't I can't afford you you're gonna have to go live in a van because I'm not going to I just I don't really understand what you what you

Chris Pettingill
0:34:13 (0:00:42)

mean well I guess I guess in theory if vehicle residency was and I'm not advocating for this necessarily but if it was you know we crack down even harder on vehicle residency so no one could live in a vehicle does that not force employees to develop Employment Solutions where their employees can actually find housing whereas if we make unlimited vehicle residency very easy what's to stop more and more businesses from building business models that really only function if people live in vehicles and doesn't that push more people to have to live in a vehicle if they want to live and work here and is there a tension there that we have to worry about somehow and how do we navigate that

SPEAKER_05
0:34:56 (0:00:06)

I don't see that tension I don't see that tension

SPEAKER_07
0:35:02 (0:00:21)

like I also feel like there's a lot of businesses here that are sort of forced into that position already so there's a lot of businesses that know that people will live in vehicles even though it is completely illegal and it's not stopping it and so people are doing it anyways whether it's legal or not and yeah that's the

Jenna Stoner
0:35:24 (0:00:12)

reality sorry we can't have folks talking from the gallery in part because the folks who are online wouldn't be able to hear you we need microphones go ahead councelor

Andrew Hamilton
0:35:36 (0:00:32)

Hamilton thanks very much Thomas you mentioned $10 a night was not viable so that's like $300 a month to provide 400 square feet 500 square feet of parking space plus water and sewer how much water sewer and garbage how much do you think would be a reasonable amount for somebody to have a parking space with water sewer and garbage service

SPEAKER_05
0:36:09 (0:01:18)

in I mean currently all none of the campgrounds have sewer so it's not necessarily something that is needed we do live very minimal lives like I have a toilet in my vehicle so I don't think it should be assumed that we need sewer because there's a lot of places to find water where we fill up our buckets or our bottle sorry but the $10 like I was referring to the Safeway for me like I think if you want people if you want to help address the problem of campers being everywhere but a solution like what they had in camore like staying in the Safeway parking lot for $10 a night is not appealing at all if you look to Bishop California they have it's called the pit it's a campground that's on BLM land so it's on Crown Land it's $2 a night they don't have running water but you also again you don't need it they have do have toilets and they do not have garbage or do they have garbage yes they have garbage it's volunteer run by a climber that kind of stays through the whole season I think that's more reasonable if we look at the campground the mamam one he originally proposed it as a $5 Campground tonight and lo and behold it's 20 bucks a night now I don't know how it got to that but that's also not affordable and this also it's very full there's no space and they don't have running water

Jenna Stoner
0:37:27 (0:00:03)

one more quick question councelor green law and then we're gonna have to wrap it up

Lauren Greenlaw
0:37:31 (0:00:08)

okay well you just Peak my interest do you think there would be members within your community who'd be willing to take on that role of being the volunteer kind of Steward of an area for a

SPEAKER_05
0:37:39 (0:00:05)

season I think yeah for sure

Jenna Stoner
0:37:45 (0:00:21)

yeah okay Council not seeing any more hands and looking at the time we are looking to move on in our agenda but just wondering if there's anybody who would like to move anything in particular from this conversation or we can move receipt councelor green

Lauren Greenlaw
0:38:07 (0:00:16)

law well I'm not really sure how to phrase this but I'd like to find out what happened with that consultant I don't know if we can make a motion to per staff to get some information from that consultant back it'd be nice to see what their findings

Jenna Stoner
0:38:23 (0:00:26)

were oh it's a cont that was multiple years ago that is no longer viable so we can follow up with staff and see what happened but I don't think we necessarily need a motion to do that they can report back to us at some point I don't know if they want to speak to it right now but they can look into it and the staff member who is leading that contract is no longer with us so they can do some due diligence and come back to us on that particular item

Lauren Greenlaw
0:38:50 (0:00:06)

and could they reach out to the to the consultant and get whatever work that they had completed at the time

Jenna Stoner
0:38:57 (0:00:00)

go ahead Miss

SPEAKER_04
0:38:58 (0:00:15)

glund thank you at this point given the contract no longer exists what we can do is provide council with the information that we had up until the contract ended and provide the history there if that's what council seeks but no we don't we no longer have a working relationship with the consultant

Jenna Stoner
0:39:13 (0:00:01)

thank you go ahead mayor

Armand Hurford
0:39:15 (0:00:21)

Herford thank you I'd like to refer this topic to the upcoming strategic plan review which I think is q1 2024 so we can give it a more some discussion and have information like Miss Glend just oh sorry that I'm trying to stick just to the motion to the 2012 to the upcoming strategic plan

Jenna Stoner
0:39:37 (0:00:04)

review I'll second that I'll speak to it go ahead May Harper

Armand Hurford
0:39:41 (0:00:53)

thank you I think thank you so much for the Pres for the presentation today I think there's some great ideas in there that deserve more consideration I also would like to see how far we got with that consultant and see if there's any anything there and also all of these anything we do takes time energy resources and I think that the appropriate place to have this discussion is when we review our strategic plan and if we're and that's where we decide if we're if we're changing direction if we're adding something if we're taking something away where those trade-offs are where that tension and sort of try to solve those tension points so I think that's the appropriate next step with this to keep this conversation moving

Jenna Stoner
0:40:34 (0:01:52)

forward thank you a second or I'll speak to the motion as well I think that this is an appropriate next step in terms of being able to identify what we can effectively do I think our presenters today really did speak to the diversity that exists within this topic and I don't think that there is a perfect solution I think that there are multiple Solutions on the table I don't think I fully understand the pros and cons to each of them and I think actually doing our due diligence and making sure we find something that's going to be functional for our community as a whole in the long term takes time I do want to recognize that there are investments in this current 20124 budget in terms of toilets garbage cans across our community and while I do appreciate the personal comments and the stories that have come forward about some of the physical and online stigma that you folks have experienced and I don't think that is something that any of us feel like is appropriate within our community I also want to recognize that our enforcement priority and the policies that we have around the visitor camping and management bylaw are complaint driven and they are behavioral focused there's policy that outlines that and our staff will be coming forward in the next few months with a report on the experience that we've had from a staff perspective on implementing the tourism and vehicle I always forget the name of it Miss ladimer visitor management round table thank you very much so I think those are all pieces that this group and this the folks around this table need to pull into consideration and be able to have a more informed discussion about how we might actually be able to look at this going forward so I think referring this to our upcoming strategic plan review is an important piece of the puzzle and I will go to councelor Anderson and then councelor Pettingill

Eric Andersen
0:42:27 (0:01:20)

thank you I think that the vehicle residents of squames have brought some clarity to the discussion but I think we need even more and I could point to some elements of the brief and elaborate further but I think we need to strive for clarity there's diverse worlds involved in this topic there are obvious practical benefits it would appear from permitting and the safe lots program with respect to the links and examples we would like I think that we would be interested in more the examples from Colorado and Vancouver Washington do have some limitations also for the client tells that they serve which may not be exactly what we're looking at here maybe not finally on the links to the Every Man's right in the Nordic countries my family has generations of experience with that legislation and I would like to caution that it does not apply to the current discussion it is not oriented to Camping Beyond recre camping and it is there's a hundreds of years of dialogue on that point the finally I would have preferred a targeted focused discussion on the matter before us rather than a strategic plan review agenda item that review might be busy with other broad themes but I will support the motion thank you

Jenna Stoner
0:43:48 (0:00:01)

councelor pill go ahead

Chris Pettingill
0:43:50 (0:00:51)

yeah I'm going to support this I think in my mind things have changed a fair bit since the last time we had these discussions the you know the cost of living here renting or owning was already high but there's just broad inflation and I think across North America everything is so much more expensive and we are seeing incredible population growth and many things happening so I think it's really worth another look at where we are and postco but I think there is also a fair number of things to consider and look at and dig into so I believe the Strategic plan discussion and figuring out what sort of you know budgets and focus we might want to assign to that to do that work make

Jenna Stoner
0:44:41 (0:00:02)

sense thank you councelor French go ahead

John French
0:44:44 (0:00:55)

thanks chair I'm speaking in favor of the motion and in doing so want to point out that we recently learned that a new camp facility is proposed for the Porto area which will bring some relief by adding 86 new campsites to our region or at least that's what they're proposing at this point and bring our total number of campsites in the region to nearly 800 in the Squamish vicinity and while that's happening a Lobby effort continues with the provincial government to potentially bring even more provincial sites the camping management program in place I believe is transparent and it provides options open to a discussion around changes and if we do bring in changes I want to make sure that those are made Based on data and research thanks

Jenna Stoner
0:45:40 (0:00:00)

thank you councelor

Lauren Greenlaw
0:45:41 (0:01:21)

green law thanks I'll be speaking in support of the motion as well and I'd like to emphasize that I think it's in everyone's best interest that we expedite this conversation my biggest concern about our current vehicle residency approach or lack thereof is people being treated inequitably in our community but my next biggest concern is that we have not yet seen the full impact that our inflation rates have will have on our housing markets not only is vehicle residency a viable affordable housing option but it's also part of a solution for the volatility of our housing market I hear about local Engineers now living in their cars because they can't find houses one of the kids at my school his grandfather lives in a car and it's because they just simply do not have access to housing in our community and I fear that the volume of people who will be forced into their vehicles because they want to stay in our community will increase a lot over the next couple years po you know potentially drastically over the next couple years and even you know we've seen some discussion about Bill 45 provincially putting the onus of shelters onto municipalities from The Province and I think that it's imperative that we work quickly on this because we need a work solution moving forward and what we have right now is simply not workable yeah

Jenna Stoner
0:47:03 (0:00:11)

thanks all right I will call the question any opposed motion carries thank you very much thank you for being here thanks everybody who joined us in the gallery today we'll

Water Metering Program
0:47:15 (1:00:40)

Jesse Morwood, the Capital Projects Manager at the District of Squamish, presented a report on the water metering program. The program began in 2005 when the council directed staff to investigate water meter programming due to low precipitation in that year's winter season. The water meter master plan was adopted in 2015 with the primary goals of addressing water supply and consumption concerns, ensuring equitable billing among ratepayers, and preparing for future growth. The plan also aimed to defer capital-related upgrades through leakage identification and consumer demand management. The focus was on Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional (ICI) buildings and multifamily properties, which accounted for 40% of Squamish's water usage but only 10% of the buildings.

The water metering program involves the installation of two main types of meters: internal and external. Internal water meters are preferred due to their lower cost and longer lifespan, but they require a mechanical room for installation. The program aims to have all internal water meters installed by early 2024. External water meters are only installed when internal meters cannot be used. They are significantly more expensive due to their size and the need for a large chamber located outside of the building.

The original plan estimated the total cost of installing all the water meters at $3. 7 million. However, the current projection is $8. 5 million due to cost escalation, inflation, and the higher cost of external meters. By the end of the current phase in early 2024, 209 meters will have been installed on 293 properties at a cost of approximately $4. 7 million. There are 46 remaining properties to be metered, estimated to cost $3. 8 million. To stay within the budget, staff recommends installing meters on properties that cost $10,000 or less, resulting in 28 properties being metered and 18 properties being deferred, saving the district approximately $1. 3 million.

Jenna Stoner
0:47:15 (0:01:14)

move on to our next item 41 which is a me report on the water metering program with Mr morwood we'll give him a minute to get set up hi Mr Wilston thanks for joining us you ready to go there Mr morwood I'll pass over to you let you introduce

SPEAKER_06
0:48:29 (0:10:46)

yourself great good afternoon my name is Jesse morwood I'm the capital projects manager here at the district joining me today is Mr Rolston he's the senior manager of infrastructure planning the recommendation today is that staff complete 28 of the remaining 46 water meter installations and a fur installation for the remaining 18 MERS so a quick bit of background this started in 2005 when Council directed staff to investigate water meter programming in light of low precipitation in that current Year's winter season there were a number of resolutions over the next 10 years notably in 2008 was when residential meter boxes were required to be installed as part of any new develop M as and then it culminated in 2015 with the water meter master plan adoption so the master plan laid out the foundation for the water meter implementation and was developed with a primary goals of addressing water supply and consumption concerns ensure Equitable billing among straight payers and prepare for future growth there was also some other specifics which included deferral of capital related upgrades through leakage identification consumer demand management there was also as a mentioned Equitable basis for utility be billing from property to property and there was also a public health protection by utilizing metering technology equipped with backflow prevention the resolution that was passed that the water master plan focused on Industrial commercial and institutional buildings ICI for short and multifam properties these were chosen because there's a very large amount of squishes water were being used by them 40% and but it was a relatively small number of buildings only 10% of the community these represented 359 properties which included internal and external meters for clarification a single meter has the ability to service many individual commercial or residential units so for example think of a residential building that may have 80 residential units in it the intent was to only install a meter the tent is to install a meter just one meter that would service all of those units so 359 properties actually equates to 300 sorry 3,200 individual units so as I mentioned before there's two main types of meters that we're installing first of all there's internal water meters and this program started in 2019 and also include some external meters internal water meters are our preferred water meter to install the reason being is they're significantly less expensive than the externals the catch is that you need a mechanical room in order to install them and there's not mechanical rooms in every buildings but this certainly is our preferred way to install them they're also not exposed to the elements which is so they last longer so we're currently just we're in the last phase of this installation of internal water meters we have a contractor right now that's just preparing to install a series of more meters and we intend to have all internal water meters so all the water meters that can and go into building mechanical rooms will be installed by early 2024 the second type is the external water meters and again we only install these when we can't do internal water meters they're effectively a large chamber located somewhere outside of the building for scale context if you look at the top of the picture it's hard to see but there's a person with a hard hat there so the chamber is almost as tall as them and certainly much longer them and this isn't the largest chambers that we have there are larger chambers that need to be installed so there's significant Financial outlay to install these so an update on where we're at our original of the original 359 properties at the end of this current phase so the end of early 2024 when we finished all the internal meters we will have installed 209 meters on 293 properties and this will have cost us approximately $4.7 million there are some developers so through resoning or through new buildings some developers have been installing meters so we haven't had to install those there are 46 remaining properties that are on our list to be installed the estimate is $3.8 million for the remaining water meter so originally the 2015 water master plan estimated the total cost of installing all the water meters was $3.7 Million so significantly less obviously than the 8.5 million that's currently projected so there are a few reasons why there has been a why there's a significant increase first of all is cost escalation construction escalation so materials are more expensive labor is more expensive there has been inflation when we did the original the original master plan it was a very highlevel concept plan it didn't really drill into the details and one of the details is internal meters versus external meters so again internal meters are much cheaper to install than external meters and that there wasn't really that detail in the original estimate that wasn't done so now we know there's significantly higher costs in our current budget after this current phase that we're doing right now as I mentioned the internal we estimate having 1.3 1.35 million left over in 2023 budget in the current budget for 2024 is 1.75 million this is $3.1 million total so I just show the previous slide articulated that there was $3.8 Million worth of meters to be installed so we're we certainly have a shortfall there of approximately $700,000 as I mentioned this is significantly higher than was originally envisioned and certainly as the cost of the metering goes up the cost benefit ratio decreases so staff took this into consideration about looking at the remaining meters that have to be installed and as a result of the high cost we are suggesting that those meters that are $10,000 less are installed and anything above that is not installed this would result in 28 properties having meters installed and represent 631 units so by far the largest majority of the individual units would be metered the average cost per unit would be about $4,000 and this would cost about 2 .5 million the $2.5 million would obviously be within our budget left unmetered or defer metering would be 18 properties which represents only 27 units the majority of those individual properties only have one unit one business they're all businesses actually they're not residential the average cost of those would be 50 $48,000 to install and by deferring that they would save the district approximately $1.3 million so why have our staff recommending $10,000 we've used our professional judgment really with the aim is to install is the majority of the meters which was the original intent of this program but it was also certainly to stay within our budget that's in the existing 5-year plan unfortunately we don't have a financial breakdown of the cost savings per meter so when we install a meter we don't know what the exact cost savings will be the original plan was really to focus on water consumption rather than savings and as well it's very difficult to project because the cost savings or the water reduction will depend on the rates that are determined and that is going to be done as part of the updated water master plan and brought to Council next year another point is some of the individual meters that we're suggesting deferring are can be extremely expensive they generally range from about $20,000 to $100,000 for a single water meter installation servicing a single property the question is how would we address add those unmetered properties so we are like I mentioned working on a new water rate strategy as part of the water master plan which will be brought by Mr Rolston to Council in the new year further we do recognize that metering every single property is the most Equitable option from a billing perspective however we have spoken with our consultant who has experience with us and has said that we can develop a reasonable water rate structure for those properties and this will be based on consumption that we've projection collected from the similar properties in the area or types of businesses this brings us back to the recommendation thank

Jenna Stoner
0:59:15 (0:00:11)

you thank you for the presentation and the report Council questions for Mr morwood go ahead councelor Hamilton then counc

Andrew Hamilton
0:59:27 (0:01:17)

ping thanks very much Mr morward I think water metering I've lived many places several places that have water metering and I know that when I see how much I've used it motivates me to use less as opposed to having an infinite amount I understand that connection for the 28 meters that are being proposed that you're proposing to install at $2.5 million for those 28 M that's an average of $90,000 per water meter I'm struggling to understand so how a water meter installation can cost $90,000 I'm not questioning it I'm just struggling to understand it and then my second piece of that is that a sensible use of $90,000 for the potential gain in water the reduction in water consumption yeah so could you tell me H how can a water meter cost an average of $90,000 for these 28 meters that are to be

SPEAKER_06
1:00:44 (0:00:58)

installed through the chair thank you for the question again as these are all external water meters external water meters are very expensive and as I the photo I showed earlier they can be quite large and they require a lot of silver work they can acquire you know pavement disruption ashalt disruption materials are very expensive labor is very expensive so they that's been our experience is that how much they cost as far as is it good use of funding again what we've done is we've broken it into cost per unit rather than cost per proper so some of those properties may have 100 individual units so may cost $100,000 to install a chamber but they also may have 900 units so the C the average cost again for all those units is around

Andrew Hamilton
1:01:43 (0:00:33)

$4,000 yeah and while I Al yeah in my mind that also says that the as we distribute the metering across more people it reduces the impact of viewing my individual consumption driving my use patterns because that's a 100 people sharing in a strata and their strata fees just pay the water meter so it's not clear to me that that's going to give as much benefit as the individual

Jenna Stoner
1:02:17 (0:00:02)

thanks H Council pingel

Chris Pettingill
1:02:20 (0:00:33)

yeah thanks and I saw unless I missed it we've sort of looked at diced up the numbers in terms of number of properties number of units do we have a sense of what percentage of water consumption these numbers represent like this is the remaining 10% of ICI water or it's 20% of all district Waters represented by the 28 or the 18 or I'm just wondering if you can speak to that at

SPEAKER_08
1:02:53 (0:00:39)

all of each individual property and how much their consumption is relatively but we're talking about 27 out of out of 3200 so maybe one or two% of the total water consumption of that subset of customers for ICI and multif family so it would be a relatively small portion of water that would be consumed by those remaining consumers

Chris Pettingill
1:03:32 (0:00:08)

so we don't have like our three biggest water customers by far in this 27

SPEAKER_06
1:03:41 (0:00:10)

then through the chair I'm not sure we know that again this is what the meters will help us determine right so once we install the meters we'll know but I'm not sure if we know that off hand

Jenna Stoner
1:03:52 (0:00:05)

yeah we don't currently meter properties so we don't know how much each individual property uses

Chris Pettingill
1:03:57 (0:00:21)

I thought but haven't we metered a lot of the ICI so we would know sort of what's left and so we know our total amount we know we meter this amount so then there's a remainder so how big is that remainder and is that a giant remainder or it's actually fairly small and so we can't splice it individually to the 27 but we have a ballpark of like yeah this is in the one two 2%

SPEAKER_08
1:04:19 (0:00:12)

range through the chair we don't know with certainty but there I don't think there's any particular user that jumps out in that subset that would be we would anticipate to be a major water

Chris Pettingill
1:04:31 (0:00:30)

consumer okay thanks and then the other question and it's a bit of a two- part so one can you remind me why we elected not to and maybe it wasn't a choice but to sort of say to people look by 2025 you have to have a meter that meets these specs installed it's up to you to get it if you want if you want water you got to do it as opposed to us doing that and then that ties into well I'll ask my second question

SPEAKER_08
1:05:02 (0:00:26)

after through the chair that was never contemplated as part of the 2015 water master plan it is something that council could choose to do I think it would be a financial hardship for some customers and so challenging to pay the cost of a water meter installation but I think it is technically something that could be done if Council desired to do

Chris Pettingill
1:05:28 (0:00:14)

that okay thanks and just I guess the second part is can you remind me our plans for residential does do we eventually plan to meet or all residential or we were for now planning to just stop at

SPEAKER_08
1:05:43 (0:00:46)

ICI here the chair so the approach with the water the 2015 waterm plan was to start off with ICI and multif family to gain experience through that program of operating water meters learning about how much the capital costs are to install and probably operate for a period of time and then to for that to inform our longer term approach to water metering so there are with the single family Residential Properties that would be the remaining 60% of consumption but it represents so under this program sorry what are the total number of meters that we've installed with multif family and ICI

SPEAKER_06
1:06:29 (0:00:02)

3 29

SPEAKER_08
1:06:31 (0:00:00)

was it

SPEAKER_04
1:06:32 (0:00:00)

okay

SPEAKER_08
1:06:33 (0:00:40)

and we we've got roughly 4,000 plus single family residentials so there's scale more than 10 times the number of meters that would need to be installed through that program and therefore the cost would be much higher and so because of that Capital cost and basically they're not really being a business case per se to do that it would be more from a water consumption or water conservation Equitable billing standpoint that would rationalize making a move in that direction but yeah so the just the approach was let's start with this see how it goes see how the consumption drops understand the capital cost and then that would inform our longer term decision making

Jenna Stoner
1:07:13 (0:00:01)

go ahead Mr marwood if you'd like to add to that

SPEAKER_06
1:07:15 (0:00:17)

yeah if I would thank you as I mentioned any new any new buildings residential otherwise have meter boxes installed as well anytime we do a new capital water project we also install the boxes so we are preparing for in the future as we're

Jenna Stoner
1:07:32 (0:00:12)

able just on that point can you clarify a meter box is not a meter though so do all new buildings have water meters or just the ability to put in a meter over

SPEAKER_08
1:07:45 (0:00:17)

time through the chairs so our subdivision development control BYO requires that single family residential install just the meter chamber so that it would facilitate that future meter for ICI and multif family they would be required to actually install the meter

Jenna Stoner
1:08:03 (0:00:05)

thank you for the clarification okay I'm mayor Herford then councelor French and myself and I'll go back to councelor

Armand Hurford
1:08:08 (0:00:48)

Hamilton thank you thank you for the presentation and seems to have some solid logic there one of the things that jumped out at me was our requirements on the new development and potential for red development of some of these properties I don't want to get into the specific properties that's not what we're here to do but was the age of the property and the Redevelopment potential something that was one of the decision points for you considering what was going to be Meed or not given that maybe in the in the not so distant future one of these could potentially re redevelop and then the onus for the install would then go to that Redevelopment and is that a reasonable piece and was that something you

SPEAKER_06
1:08:57 (0:00:14)

considered thank you for the chair yes certainly as what information we have anything that's currently going through the system that we anticipate coming forward we're not installing meters there that's the intention

Jenna Stoner
1:09:11 (0:00:02)

yep councelor

John French
1:09:13 (0:00:19)

French thank you I only have one question because all my others have successfully been answered from The Meters that are currently installed do we have useful data like have we been accumulating data from those already installed

SPEAKER_08
1:09:33 (0:00:13)

meters through the chair we have been collecting that data we haven't been analyzing it or evaluating it at any level to date but we have been collecting that information okay thanks

Jenna Stoner
1:09:47 (0:01:00)

CH just a question of my own so picking up on councelor Hamilton's question I'm just wondering if staff can clarify the value proposition of spending 2.5 million on the remaining 28 proposed meters to install so if I do the per unit calculation on the ones that we've already done that's less than 1500 per unit and now we've set a threshold of up to 10,000 with I appreciate the criteria of trying to install the majority of the meters based on the 2015 Direction but we are already going to have to establish a hybrid meter rate or sorry a hybrid rate for our water rates going forward and so I'm just curious about really pinning this down of like 2.5 million is a lot of money for the 28 remaining and so do we just leave the 40 whatever that are out there un metered what's the risk of doing

SPEAKER_08
1:10:48 (0:01:03)

that through the chair so it is professional judgment ultimately that's leading to that $10,000 per unit it is 28 M but again it represents 631 units so that's a consideration if we left that entire all the remaining to be metered properties unmetered then that would be 650 think it 659 so that's roughly you know 15 to 20% of the entire number of properties that would that Council originally directed to meter so we had to draw a line somewhere in terms of what's the dollar per unit we felt that this made the most sense that it accomplished council's original directive to meter all ICI and multif Family Properties but recognizing that as we go further down this program and it's the hardest meters that are left to install that we probably should draw the line somewhere and it was just professional judgment and looking at trying to accomplish council's original directive in helping how we set that

Jenna Stoner
1:11:51 (0:00:33)

line appreciate that and do very much appreciate your professional Jud judgment I guess I'm curious on what is the risk if we were to like lower that threshold to 5,000 or if we were to direct staff to go back and look at like getting to a certain percentage of properties I'm just I'm curious what the risk is there for us if we don't fully try and we're not going to fulfill council's original 2015 direction we're not going to get there and so where is that risk tradeoff and how do we get further Insight on that

SPEAKER_08
1:12:24 (0:00:35)

through the Sher so I think the impacts of not metering that would be reduced water conservation so there'd be less properties that would be metered and would therefore probably be more mindful of their water consumption so it may not achieve the water conservation goals that we've set out and there could also be some upset customers who feel that they have meters and other similar properties have not been metered and so it could be contentious from a consumer standpoint that there is inequitable billing taking

Jenna Stoner
1:13:00 (0:00:10)

place yeah thank you okay I'll go to councelor Hamilton then councelor Pettingill and then councelor green law but I see Mr morwood Hand first so we'll go to you and then we'll

SPEAKER_06
1:13:10 (0:00:29)

thank you just through you chair just add to that question did a very quick kind of cost analysis of $5,000 so if we did use $5,000 per meter as the limit you would save the district would save $700,000 in the capital installation but you would reduce the number of units measured by sorry metered by about 100 so you would you would save 7 $700,000 but you would meter 100 less

Jenna Stoner
1:13:40 (0:00:07)

units that was very helpful quick of back of the envelope calculation Thank You councelor Hamilton then councelor pangel and councelor green

Andrew Hamilton
1:13:48 (0:01:13)

law thanks very much I too am leaning very much towards struggling to see the real value in continuing to install meters even any meters into the 2024 budget and what I'm what I'd really like to understand is what is the additional so one of one of the objectives of council was to install meters in