Vancouver’s ruling party votes to cut council meeting to avoid convening in August, on weekends

A Vancouver councillor’s proposed change to the meeting schedule was met with indignation from members of the opposition who decried the move as “egregious,” “anti-democratic” and “shameful” in the lead up to this year’s election.

A Vancouver councillor’s proposed change to the meeting schedule was met with indignation from members of the opposition who decried the move as “egregious,” “anti-democratic” and “shameful” in the lead up to this year’s election. A memo from the city clerk noted that there are an “extraordinarily” high number of agenda items slated for meetings in July. The recommendation was to adjust the schedule to add reserve dates to prepare for the likelihood there would not be enough time to attend to all agenda items within the time allotted before council takes the month of August off from public meetings.

ABC Coun. Brian Montague tabled an amendment asking for a committee meeting on July 29 to be cancelled. “There just isn’t enough time left in the current meeting schedule to deal with all of council business,” he said.

“This report actually starts to include meeting reserves on Saturdays and without sufficient meeting reserves, we will likely be required to do either more weekends or push council business into August.” On its face, as Coun. Sean Orr noted, the issue of meeting dates is likely of little concern to constituents.

But he, along with all of the non-ABC councillors, said calling off this specific meeting—which would have been the last time councillors would be able to table motions before the election—would have the effect of stalling or completely halting work already in progress. Orr said he has already put hours of work into crafting his final set of motions for the term, spending a significant amount of time and taxpayer dollars to do so. “I’m shocked, honestly, that that we’re doing this.

The public probably doesn’t pay too much mind to procedural things like this, but hopefully, they do because this this is egregious in my mind,” he said. OneCity Coun. Lucy Maloney said the meeting has been on the books for months, and took issue with what she described as a last-minute move to cancel it—claiming it would unfairly disadvantage opposition councillors.

“It is political, and it’s unfair. It’s a waste of taxpayers’ money, and really shameful,” she said. Montague, along with ABC Coun.

Sarah Kirby-Yung, countered by saying they both had plans to provide notice of motion for the meeting—rejecting Maloney’s claim and maintaining the schedule change would be necessary to finish items already on the docket. “No agendas have been published for the public, so there are no expectations from the public’s perspective of anything that happens at this meeting,” Kirby-Yung said. “I’ve been on councils that have also been very busy and logged an extraordinary number of hours.

But we are really facing the clock down here, and we have a responsibility to finish the primary business of council,” she added. Vote Vancouver Coun. Rebecca Bligh and Green Coun.

Pete Fry, both of whom are running against Mayor Ken Sim for the city’s top job also slammed the move—arguing that it was out of order and a violation of both the Vancouver Charter and the oath of office for elected municipal officials. “I would be curious if this has ever happened before. I would probably bet, based on decades going back, that this is an unprecedented move,” Bligh said.

“I am vehemently opposed to this. I think it breaks all the rules of good governance.” Fry argued in favour of sticking to the schedule that has been published and allowing for additional meeting reserve dates to be added in August so councillor motions could be tabled, debated and decided before the election.

“Sometimes we get extraordinary schedules, and that’s our job, and we have to do the work,” he said. “I think this is an incredibly poor form, and it really does eliminate our democratic process. And it’s very unfortunate that it would be coming down to such a partisan approach.”

The amendment passes along party lines, with the mayor and his ABC councillors voting in favour.