MINUTES

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on Monday, January 4, 2010, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

BUSINESS & FINANCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT

1.

Temporary Request for Extended Hours of Service for Liquor Primary Licence – Lansdowne Lumber Marketing Ltd., doing business as JP Malones Neighbourhood Pub

(File Ref. No.:  12-8275-30-001/2009-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2790044)

In response to queries from Committee, Glenn McLaughlin, Chief Licence Inspector & Risk Manager, provided background information.  Mr. McLaughlin also commented that no other local liquor primary businesses have applied for extended hours.

It was moved and seconded

That the City provide an “objection” comment to LCLB on the Temporary Change to a Liquor Licence from JP Malones Neighbourhood Pub.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding the rationale to provide a ‘no objection’ comment to the LCBL on JP Malones Neighbourhood Pub’s request for extended hours of liquor service during the 2010 Olympic Winter Games.

The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Dang, McNulty, and Steves opposed.

COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

2.

2010 City Grant Program

(File Ref. No.:) (REDMS No. 2786251, 2695047)

In reply to queries and concerns from Committee, Lesley Sherlock, Social Planner, advised that (i) the Community Art Council of Richmond (CACR) did not receive a grant as they currently run a deficit; and (ii) it appears that their primary services of exhibiting local artists’ work is a duplication of services as local artists have many other opportunities to showcase their work in Richmond.

Linda Shirley, speaking on behalf of the CACR, believed that it was wrong that Richmond is the only lower mainland municipality that does not support its own Arts Council.  Ms. Shirley spoke of staff’s rationale for deeming the Arts Council’s services as a duplication and stated that the Arts Council’s services are unique.  The CACR provides a retail outlet for local artists to not only showcase their work but also to sell it.  Also, the CACR provides display space to other groups, such as those with developmental disabilities and Richmond students that would otherwise not have the opportunity to display their art in a professional gallery setting.  Ms. Shirley concluded by emphasizing that if the CACR were not to get any funds from the City, it would not meet the criteria to apply for funding from various federal or provincial bodies.

Margaret Stephens, Treasurer and Primary Administrator of the CACR, spoke of the Arts Council’s deficit and advised that in the six months since the Council’s last fiscal year end, non-sales revenue has increased by $19,882, which is almost half of what the deficit was.  Ms. Stephens commented that the CACR hopes to increase exhibitions and in turn generate more revenue to address the remaining deficit.

Susan Match, President of the City Centre Community Association, accompanied by John Thornburg, Boys and Girls Club of Delta/Richmond, spoke of her Association’s grant application and advised that any funds received from this application would go towards continuing and expanding the Association’s current Early Dismissal Program for inner-city schools.  She commented on the City’s rapid population growth and noted that this program supports the community as it keeps kids off the streets and out of malls.  Also, the program teaches kids good habits and helps parents.

In reply to queries from Committee, Ms. Match advised that (i) parents pay a nominal monthly fee;  (ii) the program currently has a waitlist; and (iii) the program is currently offered at Cook and Anderson Elementary schools and the Association would like to expand it to the General Currie Elementary school catchment.

De Whalen, Richmond Women’s Resource Centre, was pleased to see the City support the Centre’s unique services and noted that the proposed grant funds will help pay for their office lease and Grandmothers Support program.  Ms. Whalen distributed copies of ‘Hot Ink’, a publication funded through last year’s grant program.

It was moved and seconded

That, as per the staff report from the General Manager, Community Services, dated January 6, 2009, the 2010 City Grants be allocated as follows (see Attachment 2):

(a)

The organizations in the Health, Social and Safety Services category be awarded the recommended grant amounts and cheques disbursed for a total of $433,550; and

(b)

The organizations in the Cultural and Community Events category be awarded the recommended grant amounts and cheques disbursed for a total of $82,450.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding the Richmond Community Arts Council.  As a result of the discussion, the following amendment was introduced.

It was moved and seconded

That the following words be added to Part (b):

“and that the Community Arts Council be awarded $2,000 from the 2010 City Grant Program”.

CARRIED

Committee commented on the Grant Program’s base funding and its tie to the annual cost of living factor as determined by the Vancouver Consumer Price Index’ (CPI) annual average change.  It was noted that an analysis on the program’s base funding in relation to CPI or some other index should be conducted prior to the next program review to determine whether the incremental base increases are keeping up with the community need.

The question on the main motion, which reads as follows:

“That, as per the staff report from the General Manager, Community Services, dated January 6, 2009, the 2010 City Grants be allocated as follows (see Attachment 2):

(a)

The organizations in the Health, Social and Safety Services category be awarded the recommended grant amounts and cheques disbursed for a total of $433,550; and

(b)

The organizations in the Cultural and Community Events category be awarded the recommended grant amounts and cheques disbursed for a total of $82,450, and that the Community Arts Council be awarded $2,000 from the 2010 City Grant Program.”

was then called and it was CARRIED.

3.

Enhanced Sustainability Initiative – Proposed Corporate Sustainability Framework

(File Ref. No.:  01-0370-01/2009-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2794511)

Margot Daykin, Sustainability Manager, Community Services, provided background information and in reply to queries from Committee advised that (i) staff are looking at targeted community consultations; (ii) once available on the City website, the framework would allow for the general public to provide input; and (iii) City operations are targeted to be carbon neural by 2012, not 2010 as stated in the staff report.

It was moved and seconded

That the Corporate Sustainability Framework as presented in the staff report dated January 4, 2010 from the General Manager, Community Services, be adopted.

CARRIED

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

4.

FINAL REPORT OF THE RICHMOND AIRPORT NOISE CITIZENS ADVISORY TASK FORCE – ENHANCING AERONAUTICAL NOISE MANAGEMENT AT YVR

(File Ref. No.:  01-0100-20-RANC1-01/2009-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2778055)

Victor Wei, Director, Transportation, provided background information and thanked the members of the Richmond Airport Noise Citizens Advisory Task Force.

In response to queries from Committee, Mr. Wei noted that (i) the Vancouver Airport Authority (VAA), NAV CANADA, and Transport Canada have all responded well to the proposed recommendations; and (ii) as the airport is located in Richmond, Richmond’s issues with airport noise are different than those of non-neighbouring municipalities.

Howard Jampolsky, Chair of the Task Force, spoke of the creation of the task force and its membership, and was of the opinion that the Task Force has met its objections with the recommendations before Committee.  Mr. Jampolsky commented on Richmond’s key areas of concern and in particular night operations. 

The Task Force recommends that the VAA (i) implement curfew periods based on aircraft models; (ii) develop a program to eliminate the number of curfew exemptions granted;  (iii) publish a quarterly list of all curfew exemptions granted, including a reason for each exemption granted; and (iv) require aircraft to use idle-only reverse thrust at all times on all runways.

Doug Louth, east Richmond resident, voiced his concerns with the Task Forces’ conclusions, in particular regarding their recommendations on night operations.  Mr. Louth read from his submission that is attached to and form part of these minutes (Schedule 1).

Heather Richards, east Richmond resident, noted that although she agreed with many of the Task Forces’ recommendations, she was disappointed to hear that overnight flights would continue.  Ms. Richards stated that evening flights are very loud and continually disrupt her sleep.  She listed several airports worldwide that do not allow takeoffs or landings overnight.  Also, speaking from past experience as a former flight attendant, Ms. Richards indicated that airlines do amend their flight schedules when airports impose monetary penalties for evening flights.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the final report of the Richmond Airport Noise Citizens Advisory Task Force, as described in the attached report, be endorsed for purposes of further consultation, except for Recommendation 21, and forwarded to the relevant federal agencies including Vancouver Airport Authority, Transport Canada and NAV CANADA with a request to meet to discuss its implementation or the development of mutually acceptable alternative solutions that meet the intended objectives of each of the report recommendations;

(2)

That Recommendation 21 of the Task Force report be deferred at this time and in lieu that:

(a)

staff be directed to bring forward as soon as possible revised Terms of Reference for the Advisory Committee on the Environment to establish the direct reporting to General Purposes Committee of the City’s representatives to the YVR Aeronautical Noise Management Committee at least twice per year;

(b)

Vancouver Airport Authority be requested to modify the YVR Aeronautical Noise Management Committee meeting procedures and regularly report back to the YVR Aeronautical Noise Management Committee regarding how the deliberations of the Committee are considered by the VAA Board and/or senior VAA management as described in Sections 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 of the attached report; and

(c)

the Richmond Airport Noise Citizens Advisory Task Force be retained through to Summer 2010 to allow for the opportunity to provide comment on discussions of the Task Force report with the relevant federal agencies as per Recommendation 1;

(3)

That Council reiterate its request to Vancouver Airport Authority to incorporate the comments previously submitted by the City on the YVR 2009-2013 Noise Management Plan, along with the above Task Force recommendations or alternatives to achieve their intended objectives, into its forthcoming aeronautical noise management action plan; and

(4)

Per Recommendation 1, that the relevant federal agencies be requested to provide formal responses by May 31, 2010 as to how each of the Task Force recommendations was or will be addressed and that staff be directed to report back in Summer 2010 on the status of the implementation of the recommendations of the Task Force.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding the possibility of monetary penalties for evening flights and the possibility of a permanent Task Force or Committee.  As a result of the discussion, the following referral was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the Richmond Airport Noise Citizens Advisory Task Force final report be referred back to staff to investigate and report back on:

(a)

more information on restrictions or bans on night flights and whether further restrictions should be recommended;

(b)

the viability and possibility for extra fees for night flights; and

(c)

alternative structures for a permanent City of Richmond Airport Noise Advisory Committee.

CARRIED

CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

5.

RESOLUTION ON COMMUNITY CABLE CHANNEL

(File Ref. No.:) (REDMS No. 2797368)

Staff were directed to include a letter detailing the services Richmond has lost that were once offered by the community channel.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the submission by Metro Vancouver to the Canadian Radio-Television Commission (CRTC) on the community channel hearing be endorsed through the following resolution:

“THAT WHEREAS the community channel is of vital importance to local government for communicating with residents:

AND WHEREAS, the community channel fosters public discourse and helps build a civil society;

AND WHEREAS, engaging citizens is a part of forming a sustainable community;

AND WHEREAS, the Community Channel is not just a cornerstone of the Canadian broadcasting system; the community channels adds to the fabric of a democratic society;

AND WHEREAS, the principles laid out in the Broadcast Act and subsequent policies which envision a community channel that involves the community in the community channel production with citizen participation supported by training programs, and community advisory boards that encourage a balance of different views and reflect the cross-cultural expression of the community and provides opportunities for feedback from viewers, should continue to stand as the foundation of the community channel;

THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of Richmond, British Columbia endorses Metro Vancouver’s submission to the Canadian Radio-Television Commission (CRTC) on the community channel hearing.”

(2)

That the resolution be forwarded to the Metro Vancouver for inclusion in its submission to the CRTC.

CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (6:00 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Monday, January 18, 2010.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie

Chair

Hanieh Floujeh

Acting Executive Assistant

City Clerk’s Office