Community Safety Committee Meeting Minutes - November 14, 2001
Community Safety Committee
|
Date: |
Wednesday, November 14th, 2001 |
|
Place: |
Anderson Room |
|
Present: |
Councillor Linda Barnes, Chair |
|
Absent: |
Councillor Bill McNulty, Vice-Chair |
|
Also Present: |
Councillor Lyn Greenhill |
|
Call to Order: |
The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.. Cllr. Barnes welcomed the new Committee members and advised that she was now the Chair. |
|
MINUTES |
|
1. |
It was moved and seconded |
||
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Community Safety Committee held on Wednesday, October 10th, 2001, and on Tuesday, October 16th, 2001, be adopted as circulated. |
||
|
CARRIED |
|||
| |
COMMUNITY SAFETY DIVISION |
|
|
2. |
JUNE 17-21, 2001 TORONTO INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICES EXCHANGE |
|
|
The Environmental Coordinator, Margo Dayken, reviewed the report with the Committee. In response to questions which arose during the discussion on this matter, she advised that: |
|||
|
|
approval of the statements contained in the Communiqué would extend the City's commitment to ensuring the provision of acceptable air quality and the reduction of greenhouse emissions, to the international level |
||
|
|
by participating in the partnership, the City had agreed to take on specific activities, including working with the Greater Vancouver Regional District on the undertaking of a study of greenhouse emissions. |
||
|
It was moved and seconded |
|||
|
(1) |
That the Communiqué contained in the Toronto Declaration be approved (as outlined in Attachment 2 to the report dated November 5, 2001, from the Manager, Emergency & Environmental Programs). |
||
|
(2) |
That a letter be written to the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD), the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and the Toronto Atmospheric Fund advising them of the City's support of the Communiqué. |
||
|
CARRIED |
|||
|
|
3. |
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM RECOMMENDED LEVEL OF SERVICE |
|
|
The General Manager, Community Safety, Chuck Gale, spoke briefly on the rationale for presenting the report to the Committee at this time, advising that the direction of the Committee was needed before staff could proceed further. He stressed that approval of the recommendations being put forward would not commit Council to including this item in the 2002 budget. |
|||
|
Mr. Gale then spoke about the assigning of the project to the Manager, Environmental Programs, Suzanne Bycraft and the work which she had assumed which was once undertaken by the former Environmental Coordinator. He advised that even though the position of Environment Coordinator had not been filled, the position still funded and that the funds for this position had been used by Ms. Bycraft to complete the various project components of the proposed Emergency Plan. |
|||
|
Ms. Bycraft, then reviewed her report in detail with the Committee. Discussion ensued among Councillors and staff on the rationale for including specific projects within basic, medium or high levels of service. Referred to in the discussion were such projects as: |
|||
|
|
Emergency Public Information Plan questions were raised about the rationale for proposing pre-recorded messages in different languages as a high rather than a basic level of service it was felt that because of the City's diverse culture, the provision of pre-recorded messages was of greater importance than providing a media centre |
||
|
|
Departmental Emergency Plans the comment was made that it was important that every department had a comprehensive and recovery plan |
||
|
|
Emergency Social Services Plan- because of the size of Richmond, the Emergency Coordinator should be a paid staff member; if a decision was made that such a position was required, staff would be submitting a report to Council through Committee on that matter. |
||
|
Discussion ensued on the Emergency Coordinator position, with advice being given that the basic level of service would provide an Emergency Coordinator and an Emergency Social Services Coordinator. The higher levels of service would require decisions on the creation of managerial positions and providing clerical assistance. Advice was given that once the key projects had been completed, staff would undertake an assessment to determine what would be required. |
|||
|
Questions were raised about possible ramifications if an emergency was to occur today and the City did not meet the basic level of service required, i.e. would the City be denied funding because of its lack of preparedness. Advice was given that in all likelihood, the City would not be denied funding, however, could receive a reduced amount, as funding would be based on how well prepared the City was and on the program in place. |
|||
|
|
Community Awareness and Business Continuity Plan questions were raised about whether any consideration had been given to (i) having corporate/company partnerships to reduce capital costs, and (ii) selling the City's completed Business Continuity Plan to other municipalities in response, information was provided on the volunteer system which was in place to raise public awareness and provide training, and a brief discussion ensued on the feasibility of selling the Business Continuity Plan to other cities and municipalities |
||
|
|
Resource Management staff were cautioned about the information placed into the proposed Internet-based database program (high level of service). |
||
|
|
Emergency Plan concern was expressed that inter-agency plan coordination working with the school district. had not been checked off, and a brief discussion ensued on this issue, advice being given that infrastructure was already in place with the School District, and that this project dealt more with working with other agencies to ensure that those agencies had emergency plans in place |
||
|
During the discussion, questions were raised about the implementation of a basis level of service for Hazard & Risk Analysis, with certain components of the Emergency Plan being either a medium or high level of service. In response, advice was given that the staff expertise was available to maintain either a medium or high level of service without additional cost. |
|||
|
Questions were raised about the proposal to establish a call centre when City Hall had the capability to deal with any disaster which might arise. In response, information was provided on the flood of telephone calls to City Hall which occurred as a result of the September 11th terrorist attack in New York City, and how two dedicated line systems would allow staff to handle calls relating to an emergency without disruptions being caused to the day-to-day business of the City. |
|||
|
Reference was made during the discussion to the telephone lists created as part of the Blockwatch program, and staff indicated that that system could be reviewed. Also being reviewed was the system in place at E-Comm. |
|||
|
The Emergency Management Program and the proposed levels of service were discussed, during which advice was given that these proposed levels would allow the City to become more pro-active, and to recover as quickly as possible from any disaster which might occur. Further advice was given that the basic level of service would be provided, however staff would be as creative as possible to provide the level of service within existing funding which was available for the program. |
|||
|
Information was also provided, in response to questions, on (i) the input of the Emergency Planning Committee into the preparation of the report now being discussed, (ii) whether the report had been reviewed by the Richmond Detachment of the RCMP and the Fire-Rescue Department, and (iii) the composition of the Emergency Planning Committee. |
|||
|
Discussion ensued among Committee members and staff on the question of whether the provision of pre-recorded messages in different languages should be included as a basic or high level of service. As a result of the discussion, the Chair directed staff to make the appropriate amendments to the report prior to it being presented to Council, to include the provision of pre-recorded messages in different languages as a basic level of service. |
|||
|
It was moved and seconded |
|||
|
(1) |
That the Emergency Management Program be developed to the basic level of service, (as outlined in the report dated November 7th, 2001, from the Manager, Emergency & Environmental Programs), as amended to include pre-recorded messages in different languages as a basic level of service. |
||
|
(2) |
That the funding identified to meet the basic level of service be approved, in principle, and that staff be directed to include the necessary funding as part of the 2002 budget submission for consideration by Council. |
||
|
(3) |
That staff be directed to modify the programs and implementation timeframe to correspond with the basic level of service. |
||
|
CARRIED |
|||
|
|
4. |
APPOINTMENT TO THE RCMP MAYORS CONSULTATIVE FORUM |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|||
|
(1) |
That Resolution R01/14-6 (adopted by Council on July 23rd, 2001), which states, "the Chair of the Community Safety Committee be appointed to the RCMP/Mayors Consultative Forum", be rescinded; and |
||
|
(2) |
That Council appoint the Mayor (or Mayors designate), to the RCMP/Mayors Consultative Forum. |
||
|
CARRIED |
|||
|
5. |
MANAGERS REPORT |
||
|
(a) |
The Manager, Zoning, Alan Clark, provided information to the Committee on a rave event being planned for New Years Eve at the site of the former Bridgepoint Market. He advised that there were two problems relating to the application which was yet to be received, the first being that the site was not on the list of approved locations for rave events and would require a bylaw amendment; and secondly, rave events were only permitted on the first 3 Saturdays of each month, and this year, December 31st fell on a Monday. Mr. Clark added that the RCMP were also concerned because the promoter was anticipating that 3,000 people would be in attendance. |
||
|
|
Discussion then ensued among staff and Committee members on the proposed event, during which it was noted that the event would only become a rave after 2:00 a.m., and that the problem would be trying to close the party down after that time, especially if there were 3,000 youth at the event. Advice was given during the discussion that the owner of the Bridgepoint Market building had indicated that if the location was not approved as a rave site and the promoter did not have the required permit, he (the owner) would not allow the function to be held as a rave event. During the discussion, the importance of having a plan in place to deal with the function in the event that it became a rave was stressed, as well as the fact that the City had chosen to regulate rave events rather than preventing them from being held. |
||
|
(b) |
The General Manager, Community Safety, Chuck Gale advised that staff intended to present a report to the December 11th, 2001 closed meeting of the Committee regarding various options for community safety buildings. |
||
| |
(c) |
The Chair referred to the memorandum circulated by Fire Chief Jim Hancock regarding the re-establishment of the Ride Along Program, and suggested that if Committee members had any questions they could contact him directly. |
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
|
It was moved and seconded |
|||
|
That the meeting adjourn (4:52 p.m.). |
|||
|
CARRIED |
|||
|
Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Community Safety Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Wednesday, November 14th, 2001. |
|
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Councillor Bill McNulty |
Fran J. Ashton |