MINUTES

STRATEGIC MEETING OF COUNCIL

Meeting #:
Date:
-
Location:
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER
PRESENT:
  • Mayor N. Nenshi
  • Councillor G-C. Carra
  • Councillor G. Chahal
  • Councillor S. Chu
  • Councillor D. Colley-Urquhart
  • Councillor J. Davison
  • Councillor P. Demong
  • Councillor J. Farkas
  • Councillor D. Farrell
  • Councillor J. Gondek
  • Councillor R. Jones
  • Councillor S. Keating
  • Councillor W. Sutherland
  • Councillor E. Woolley
ABSENT:
  • Councillor J. Magliocca, (Personal)
ALSO PRESENT:
  • City Solicitor and General Counsel G. Cole
  • Deputy City Manager B. Stevens
  • A/ General Manager K. Black
  • A/ General Manager D. Limacher
  • General Manager S. Dalgleish
  • City Manager D. Duckworth
  • A/ Chief Financial Officer C. Male
  • A/ General Manager D. Morgan
  • A/ City Clerk K. Martin
  • Recorder J. Palaschuk

Mayor Nenshi called today's Meeting to order at 9:31 a.m.

Mayor Nenshi provided opening remarks and called for a moment of quiet contemplation.

1. Councillor Sutherland

Topic: Jaipur Bridge design cost and criteria.

2. Councillor Keating

Topic: River Watch Program and river access strategy.

3. Councillor Chahal

Topic: Fair Entry process and wait times.

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Farrell
    Seconded byCouncillor Davison

    That the Agenda for today's meeting be amended by adding an item of Confidential Urgent Business, 6.1 Legal Briefing (Verbal), C2019-1320.

    MOTION CARRIED
  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Jones
    Seconded byCouncillor Farrell

    That the Agenda for the 2019 October 07 Strategic Meeting of Council be confirmed, as amended.

    MOTION CARRIED

A presentation entitled "Moving Forward, My Vision as City Manager", dated 2019 October 07, was distributed with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1287.

Councillor Chu introduced a group of students from West Dalhousie School in Ward 4, along with their teacher Lisa Meagher.

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Colley-Urquhart
    Seconded byCouncillor Demong

    That with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1287, the following be adopted:

    That Council receive the verbal report and presentation for the Corporate Record.

    MOTION CARRIED

A presentation entitled "Calgary's Comeback", dated 2019 October 07, was distributed with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1302.

Administration in attendance during the Closed Meeting discussions with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1302:

Clerks: K. Martin. Law: G. Cole. Advice: D. Duckworth. Observing: H. Domzal and K. Cote.

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Gondek
    Seconded byCouncillor Sutherland

    That with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1302, the following be adopted:

    That Council:

    1. Receive the verbal report and presentation for the Corporate Record;
    2. Direct the Mayor and Councillors Farkas, Gondek, and Sutherland to work with the City Manager on establishing performance management measures; and
    3. Direct that the Closed Meeting discussions remain confidential pursuant to Section 24 (Advice from officials) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

    Against: Councillor Farkas

    MOTION CARRIED

Council, by general consent, suspended Section 78 (1) (a) of the Procedure Bylaw 35M2017, as amended, in order to complete the remainder of the Agenda prior to the scheduled lunch recess.

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Farrell
    Seconded byCouncillor Colley-Urquhart

    That pursuant to Sections 24 (Advice from officials) and 27 (Privileged information) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, Council now move into Closed Meeting, at 11:44 a.m. in the Council Lounge to discuss confidential matters with respect to the following Items:

    • 5.2 Calgary's Comeback (Verbal), C2019-1302
    • 6.1 Legal Briefing (Verbal), C2019-1320

    ROLL CALL VOTE:

    For: (13)Councillor Carra, Councillor Chahal, Councillor Chu, Councillor Colley-Urquhart, Councillor Davison, Councillor Demong, Councillor Farrell, Councillor Gondek, Councillor Jones, Councillor Keating, Councillor Sutherland, Councillor Woolley, and Mayor Nenshi
    Against: (1)Councillor Farkas
    MOTION CARRIED

    Council reconvened in Public Meeting at 12:08 p.m. with Mayor Nenshi in the Chair.


  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Farrell
    Seconded byCouncillor Davison

    That Council rise and report.

    MOTION CARRIED

Administration in attendance during the Closed Meeting discussions with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1320:

Clerks: K. Martin. Advice: D. Duckworth, G. Cole, B. Stevens, M. Thompson, and S. Aspinall.

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Keating
    Seconded byCouncillor Davison

    That with respect to Verbal Report C2019-1320, the following be adopted:

    That Council:

    1. Receive the verbal update for the Corporate Record; and
    2. Direct that the Closed Meeting discussions remain confidential pursuant to Section 27 (Privileged information) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
    MOTION CARRIED
  1. Was the back alley maintenance program significantly impacted by our emergency budget reduction in July?
  2. How has the back alley maintenance program been impacted by this summer’s weather?
  3. Will Administration, in general, be providing an assessment of the impact of this summer’s $60 million cuts on frontline services?
  4. In light of the cuts being more cross the board percentage based rather than strategic, is administration undertaking to review more strategic budget reductions that will result in less harm to residents than what has been experienced to date?
  5. If conducted, will this strategic review of budget reductions have the potential to reallocate budget space to front line business units with more direct impact on residents’ daily lives?
  6. Will alternative solutions be provided to Council to ensure that the least-harm approach is implemented, limiting budget reduction impacts on residents and businesses?
  1. Has the City undertaken any analysis to evaluate whether the hiring process indirectly discriminates against foreign-educated applicants?
  2. Do City screening processes account for the potential non-linear professional progression immigrants to Alberta may experience navigating the immigration system?
  3. Does the City recognize university degrees from accredited institutions within the Commonwealth, notably institutions located in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, as equivalent to a degree from a Canadian institution?
    • Does the City recognize a university degree from an accredited American school as equivalent to a degree from a Canadian institution?
  4. Does the City account for the time it may take to obtain educational equivalencies for foreign-educated applicants and is this process required for positions not requiring a specialized certification/degree?
  5. Does the City require an International Qualifications Assessment Service recognition if a credential is deemed equivalent in the International Education Guide for the Assessment of Education, notably from Commonwealth countries and the United States?
  6. Does the City see a risk in moving its hiring process to a more competency-based system for jobs that do not require stringent professional certifications (i.e. P.eng, CPA, etc.)?
  7. As an example, the British Government has a competency-based recruiting system that is open to members of the Commonwealth. Has the City evaluated the recruitment structure of other civil service organizations in order to attract the best possible talent?
  8. How does the screening and hiring process account for positions that may request knowledge and experience in City-specific software programs where that training/experience may not be readily available outside of the City of Calgary?
  1. How many non-profits are receiving property tax exemptions?
  2. What types of non-profits receive these exemptions (e.g. community groups, religious institutions, charitable organizations, recreation groups, etc.)?
  3. Are non-profits eligible for City grants on top of property tax exemption?
  4. Are private businesses providing similar services eligible for similar grants?
  5. How are we ensuring that the City is not doing a disservice to private businesses by offering tax exemptions and grant opportunities to non-profits providing similar services?
  6. How are we ensuring the viability of both private businesses and non-profits providing similar services, while ensuring access to services that some Calgarians may not be able to access privately?
    • Are there measures in place to ensure a non-profit does not erode a private business’s existing opportunities to conduct itself?
  1. FROM ADMINISTRATION:
    1. Are there City of Calgary corporate land and lease-holdings in the Centre City which may be strategically deployed in order to assist the Calgary Police Service in the cost-effective reinstatement of a “brick and mortar” Downtown Police Station?
    2. Are there opportunities for Civic Partners or Wholly Owned Subsidiaries to assist?
    3. Is the City of Calgary incurring costs as a result of the closure of the Victoria Park Police Station Closure?
    4. What are the forecasted policing needs to ensure the success of the Rivers District, considering the approved public investment (Green Line, Event Centre, BMO Expansion) and the anticipated growth of the area?
    5. How much tax revenue does the Beltline and Central Business District generate for the City budget?
    6. Would the reinstatement of a Downtown Police Station assist in Council’s strategic priorities and other work, such as execution of Community Action on Mental Health and Addiction?
    7. Are there any other opportunities available, such as through funding sources or in-kind contributions, to assist with the reinstatement of a Downtown Police Station?

  2. FROM COUNCILLORS JYOTI GONDEK AND WARD SUTHERLAND, CALGARY POLICE COMMISSIONERS:
    1. Why was the Victoria Park Police Station closed?
    2. Will a retrospective review of this closure be conducted and provided for the public?
    3. What are the merits, advantages, disadvantages, challenges, and financial requirements of reinstating a “brick and mortar” Downtown Police Station?
    4. Will the on-going Service Optimization Review consider the reinstatement of a Downtown Police Station? If so, when will this consideration occur and decision be made?
    5. How can City Council help reinstate a Downtown Police Station? Would further assistance from Council, either through in-kind contributions such as land or lease holdings, or budget decisions, assist the business case and meet community needs?
    6. How can the community, educational institutions, charitable and private sectors, help reinstate a Downtown Police Station? Would alternative delivery models for a Downtown Police Station, such as collaboration with local educational institutions, the Urban Alliance, Joint Use Coordinating Committee, Neighbourhood Associations and Business Improvement Areas, and volunteer assistance in staffing, address community needs, meet operational requirements, and be financially viable?

Would advocacy from Council on potential Provincial legislative changes assist in this endeavor?

  • MOTION
    Moved byCouncillor Jones
    Seconded byCouncillor Colley-Urquhart

    That this Council adjourn at 12:13 p.m.

    ROLL CALL VOTE:

     

    For: (14)Mayor Nenshi, Councillor Carra, Councillor Chahal, Councillor Chu, Councillor Colley-Urquhart, Councillor Davison, Councillor Demong, Councillor Farkas, Councillor Farrell, Councillor Gondek, Councillor Jones, Councillor Keating, Councillor Sutherland, and Councillor Woolley
    MOTION CARRIED
No Item Selected