Question & Answer Period
Question and Answer (QA) period is held at Regular Council meetings and is an opportunity for the public to ask Council questions and receive answers (if available). QA is noted in the record and once the minutes are adopted, the questions and answers will be available on the table below.
There may be instances where the City is unable to provide an answer at the meeting; however, the question will be forwarded to staff and the response will be updated in this table when available.
If there are any questions, please contact Corporate Administration at 604 541 2212 or email@example.com
2019 Questions and Answers (Regular Council)
|2019-09-30||Stated that racoons broke into his home, and made a mess. He called the city and the RCMP and no one would help. These raccoons are aggressive and have been an ongoing issue. When these animals are aggressive I want the city to trap them and take them away. What is the city going to do about this problem?||Council noted concern for the matter but stated wild animals are not the responsibility of the City, there are other places to contact such as the province where they are equipped and have the expertise to help. Information on who to contact is available on the city website.|
|2019-09-30||Concern noted regarding safety on Finlay Street during the construction of the Altus development, where there is a significant drop off the sidewalk area. There is a thin mesh fence but that is all to stop someone from driving / falling. Noted that there are cement barriers but the rest of the street up to the power station has nothing. How can the developer get away with this?||Council stated that staff would review the site October 1st and look for a way to resolve this.|
|2019-09-30||Question regarding the dogs on the promenade trial to start on October 1: Do you agree that having parameters set to determine success or failure of this trial is important - parameters with numbers?||
The City formed a task force and it is their responsibility to bring recommendations on what the pilot project would look like and how to judge success or otherwise. A number of recommendations have been brought forward and decided by Council.
Council noted that metrics will be done and the task force will recommend what is important, the work is continuing to ensure by the end of the trial period there is a set of metrics and rec to Council going forward.
|2019-09-30||Commented that at the September 9th regular meeting a presentation was provided by Westmar Advisors, summarizing the options for the southwest floating facility as well as a reconstruction update for the White Rock Pier.
Concern was noted the minutes did not include comments made by Councillor Chesney following a statement the presenters made that prior to 2011 boats were not moored on the floating facility year round.
|Staff advised that meeting minutes are not verbatim they are action based, significant points are noted but not all|
|2019-09-09||Expressed concerns regarding the balance of members / opinions on the Dogs on the Promenade Task Force, and questioned why members have resigned from the group.||Council advised that those positions will be filled with new members.|
|2019-09-09||Stated there is a need for basketball courts in the community, adding that having this amenity provides opportunity for people to teach and play the sport.||Staff advised that there aren't any basketball courts in the community at this time; however, there is a corporate report coming to Council in the near future regarding the subject of pickleball / tennis courts, and will consider including details regarding basketball as well.|
|2019-09-09||Spoke to the trial period for Dogs on the Promenade, and requested clarification that there would be no financial impact to taxpayers for the trial period.||Staff advised that there are operational costs for items such as signage and materials. It was clarified that Task Forces do not have budgets, and that funding comes from Departmental budgets.|
|2019-09-09||Expressed concerns regarding the corporate report regarding Totem Plaza, and suggested that there is further information / media to be considered with respect to the matter. Noted a ceremony was held in 2009, and questioned why it cannot be officially named as noted at this event.||N/A|
|2019-09-09||Requested that Council consider adopting a motion requesting UBCM to oppose the ride sharing policies proposed by the Public Transportation Board.||N/A|
|2019-07-22||Expressed concerns regarding TransLink’s plans to replace the full-size bus services (outside of rush hour) to shuttle sized vehicles. Requested Council send a letter to those involved with the responsibilities / decisions regarding this change and to request that they hold a public input session in the peninsula.||Council advised that the City is working on hosting a public forum regarding transit, adding that the City of Surrey and Translink representatives will be included. It was also reported that the type of bus may be changing to a double decker (Fall 2020).|
|2019-07-22||Spoke to the condition of the Maple Street neighbourhood between North Bluff Road and Russell Avenue. Also advised that the shipping containers are unsightly, and stated that they are on City property.||Staff advised that Bylaw Enforcement Officers will be dispatched to ensure that the fencing for this issue is located on the property lines. It was noted that the owners have been requested to secure the homes to ensure they are not unsightly. Staff will follow-up with the owners again.|
|2019-07-22||Spoke to the history of the development and naming of Totem Plaza and expressed concerns regarding Council’s recent decision to rename it.||N/A|
|2019-07-22||Asked the following questions:
o When the City last used section 131 of the Community Charter?
o What is the current state of the City Hall Annex? Noted that expenditures are high and would like to see City staff prolong the ability for staff to work there as long as possible.
|Staff advised that a corporate report regarding the status of the City Hall renovations would be brought forward in September, noting that the intent is to do renovations to the downstairs so that some of the staff located in the Annex can return to City Hall.
It was also noted that the City is looking for space for the RCMP / community police volunteers.
|2019-07-08||Commented on proposed fencing expected to be placed around the water treatment plant site lands (Oxford Street to Everall Street). Stated that the fence is not for security as there are no structures on the site. The residents use the site and have done so for decades. Stated there was no consultation on this matter. Inquired how can we balance security and the resident’s wishes to utilize the area in a respectful manner?||Staff noted the issue, as they understand it, is how can the fencing be adjusted so more area can be permitted for use by the citizens. A further report will be brought forward to a future meeting.
|2019-07-08||stated he walks the promenade almost daily and since March has not had a day that he has not seen at least one dog on the promenade and dogs on the beach off leash.
Suggests a volunteer citizen group be established to monitor the promenade in relation to dogs not being permitted there.
Stated concern with the Council’s selection of members to the Dogs on the Promenade Task Force (5 out of the 7 are supporters of permitting dogs on the promenade).
|the City has Bylaw Enforcement Officers / staff to monitor the bylaws. The City does not enforce dogs on the beach; it is not in the City’s jurisdiction.
The Task Force appointments are made by Council as a whole and will remain as it stands.
|2019-07-08||Inquired on the actual figures, not percentages, in regard to Council remuneration increases.
Would like to have the gross and net figures for the Mayor and Council remuneration for December 2018, January 2019, and the figures with the proposed 15% plus 2.9% increase; and what they would be originally proposed 26%
How do the salaries compare on a per capita bases with the comparable cities noted in the remuneration and expense policy as follows: City of Pitt Meadows, City of Port Moody, City of Langley.
What is the remuneration on a per area size for each of the areas noted as comparable cities within the Remuneration and Expense policy as follows: City of Pitt Meadows, City of Port Moody, City of Langley?
|The following gross amount of indemnification and noted further information will be brought forward on the website as part of the Question and Answer Period process:
- Mayor annual indemnification currently: $86,080 with the proposed increase of 18.3% the indemnification will increase to $101,860
- Council annual indemnification currently: $34,430 with the proposed increase of 18.3% the indemnification will increase to $40,740
- In addition the Deputy Mayor monthly indemnification currently $1,430 per month and with the proposed increase of 18.3% the indemnification will increase to $1,700
|2019-06-24||Concerns regarding homes along the west side of Maple Street. Noted the houses are unsightly with tall grass and garbage. It was noted these homes were once occupied and are now empty as the tenants have been evicted. Asked the City to address issues / develop a policy that addresses renovictions.||Staff advised that the Residential Tenancy Act holds the authority to address the protection rights and provisions of tenants. It was noted that permits must be in place prior to demolition, adding that tenants can appeal if they feel they have been wrongfully evicted.|
|2019-06-24||Spoke to TransLink’s plans to cancel full-size bus services (with the exception of Monday to Friday rush hour traffic). Asked Council to express concerns regarding the cuts to TransLink, and to ask that they host an open forum to receive input from the public.||Mayor Walker advised he will meet with the CEO and Senior Operations Officers of TransLink to address the concerns and impact to the Community.|
|2019-06-24||In regards to Whistle Cessation and asked if it is necessary to wait for the Coldicutt ravine barriers to be in place prior to asking Transport Canada for relief. Can White Rock ask for whistle cessation now, and can these matters be looked at on a case by case basis such as Coldicutt?||The City advised that they have met with Transport Canada who advised that the Coldicutt Ravine fence needs to be completed, and that the City will continue to work with them on achieving whistle cessation. The City will send an additional letter to Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) requesting if whistle cessation can be addressed more urgently.|
|2019-06-10||Expressed concerns regarding the use of straws, and would like to see the City look into banning single use plastic products.||Staff advised that while there is no policy currently in place with regard to single-use plastics, the Federal Government has just announced that they are looking towards a ban by 2021. How this ban will be implemented is currently being worked on by the upper levels of government.|
|2019-06-10||Expressed concerns with regard to patrons loitering when they leave the lat night restaurant establishment. Asked that the City erect a “No Loitering” sign.||Council noted that the City is aware of the situation and are working with the establishment to address the neighbourhood concerns. Staff advised that there have been a number of complaints received and that the City’s Bylaw Officers are working with the RCMP on this matter.|
|2019-06-10||Concerns with the City’s practice in regard to the maintenance of hillside parks. Stated that the City is in contravention of their Unsightly Premises and Graffiti Abatement Bylaw.
Suggested that if the City move towards naturalization of hillside parks, that a plan with policies and procedures be developed to ensure the program is a success. Would like to see an increase to the City’s maintenance levels on all City parks.
Asked that the City remediate the area that the playground was once standing and has since been removed.
|Council noted that road ends are something the City will be reviewing to address the frustrations expressed by the community with respect to this matter.|
|2019-05-27||When are the washrooms at Memorial Park going to be opened for use? Inquired if local businesses could be kept apprised of the progress / schedule of this work being completed.||Staff stated they now anticipate they will be open by the end of the week (May 31st). With respect to notifying local businesses, staff stated they reach out through the Business Improvement Association in this regard.|
|2019-05-27||When will the railway safety crossings will be completed?
Suggested as an option for railing/fencing at the top of the washrooms at Memorial Park that they be done in wire cable instead of the current design, stating this will allow for protection and the view and that other municipalities has utilized this method.
|Staff stated they anticipated the railway safety crossings will be completed by mid/end of June, 2019.|
|2019-05-27||Stated frustration with the railing/fencing that has been installed at the top of the washrooms at Memorial Park. Noted that the design blocks the ocean view. Further stated that they've waited through the construction process and is now disappointed and frustrated with the fencing that has been erected – there are other materials that could be used.||Staff stated that they have been looking for resolution for this and have the consulting team considering other options that would provide a more permeable opportunity but noted they still needed to work within the building code guidelines. Staff anticipate having some options during the month of June.|
|2019-05-27||Inquired if the rail safety crossings will be completed
soon and when can whistle cessation begin, understanding that completion of the rail crossings are required prior to this being considered.
||Staff stated that they anticipate the rail crossings to be completed mid/end of June 2019. It is the Ministry of Transportation who make the decision in regard to whistle cessation. Once the rail crossings are complete, the City will be in the position to submit their application into the Ministry. This will be done directly following completion of the crossing project.|
|2019-05-27||With respect to the City’s water billing system, inquired if the next billing cycle could have an extra line to note how much the cost is in per cubic metre so a comparison can be done with other municipalities.||Staff will see if the current invoicing system will allow for this to be shown.|
|2019-05-13||Inquired on the process in regard to previous questions being asked at this time.||Staff noted that questions from the meeting are recorded along with answers given at the meeting and if there is not an answer at the meeting one will be requested and placed on the City website at the following link: Question and Answer Period webpage.|
|2019-05-13||Inquired in regard to the parks, particularly small parks, around White Rock, stating that in some cases they don't appear to serve a purpose.||Staff noted that the largest parks are the Waterfront and Centennial Park and there are a number of neighbourhood parks.
The City will be reviewing the use of City lands and parks including road ends.
|2019-04-29||Will the City be able to address concerns regarding accessibility of the benches/steps at Memorial Park, noting that they are high and can be difficult to sit and navigate. It was suggested that a step be installed in between each current step so people can access any of the seating with more ease.||Staff advised they will investigate the concerns.|
|2019-04-29||When will backs be installed at the public benches along Johnston Road?||The seating design for those benches did not include backs.|
|2019-04-08||Reported that there is a new hydro-pole in the middle of the sidewalk at the corner of Finlay and Russell. The placement poses an access issue, and questioned how long it will take the City to correct / adjust the location. Also asked if there is an approval process when applications for the hydro poles come to the City.
Staff advised that they would investigate to see if the City has the ability to review (and monitor) the installation of Hydro poles, and will contact Hydro with respect to this particular scenario.
On April 29 it was suggested that all poles that are improperly installed/impacting sidewalk accessibility should be investigated.
|Staff advised that BC Hydro places the poles. The Utility Act allows the installation of the poles without consultation with the City.
The hydro pole at the corner of Finlay and Russell, previously located in the sidewalk, was recently replaced. Unfortunately, the replacement pole is also in the sidewalk and the new support wire encroaches further into the sidewalk than the previous support wire.
The City has contacted Hydro, and the City awaits response regarding a solution to the issue.
|2019-04-08||It was reported that a building application was submitted to the City, and at the time staff advised it wasn’t complete. When it was submitted, it was reported that there was a significant delay. Questioned why there was a hold-up on completing the process. Also expressed concerns regarding the fees associated with the process.||Staff advised that incomplete applications are taken out of the queue pending receipt of the missing information. At that time, the application is placed in the regular queue, and is not returned to the “head of the line”. It was noted that the application process and the scheduling of services is not the same.|
|2019-03-11||Inquired how much the City of White Rock paid in legal fees in regard to the file pertaining to Section 463?||This answer was not available at the meeting and would be noted through the City’s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy process and placed on the FOI page once it is complete.|
|2019-02-25||Inquired if there was information in regard to riparian rights and how he can learn more about it.||Staff will follow-up in regard to the inquiry.|
|2019-02-11||Suggested that the needs parkland and greenspace, the road ends in the City have never been designated as park. Would urge Council to establish the road ends as park and open the opportunity for the community to landscape them, along with the City’s efforts. Inquired when the Council would make a decision be protect all of the road ends and not make them available for sale to any persons as they are City assets and should remain under the City.||There has been a corporate report to Council requested already in regard to road ends, it is anticipated to come back March 11, 2019.
|2019-02-11||In regard to the December 20, 2018 storm: Did the City have enough insurance on the harbor board managed west float to repair it and compensate the owners who lost their boats?||The City does have the Pier Insurance at the appraised value of $7M. The City’s insurers are reviewing the documentation regarding the damage and repair work necessary and is also working with the White Rock Harbour Board insurance company to help resolve the issues. In regard to the west float and boats that were lost – the City is waiting final confirmation.|
|2019-01-28||Commented that January 23, 2019 it was the highest tide of the month and it was half a meter higher than it was on December 20, 2018 (without any storm surges), does the City know what the geodetic height of the breakwater is now and how does it compare to what it was twenty (20) years ago?||Following the meeting staff confirmed that the City does not have this information.|
|2019-01-28||Noted concern with the new permit parking decal regulations / costs. She does not think it is fair she has to pay for a decal to park.||The City has recently announced the establishment of a Parking Task Force. The Parking Task Force’s work plan will include a review of the parking decal program.|
|2019-01-28||As a result of the December 2018 storm the City will be re-doing the “riprap” on East Beach, would like staff to review the use a soft berm approach instead; and further requested Council to assess the Marina Concept with the question what is the expense to re-build vs. the revenue.||The City in its' best effort to have the repairs completed as soon as possible will be again using the riprap approach; however, future considerations or works may include consideration of a soft berm approach.|
|2019-01-28||Commented their home was built in 1947 and has no driveway, with the new parking decal regulations it is unfair that there is now a $12 annual decal fee.||The City has recently announced the establishment of a Parking Task Force. The Parking Task Force’s work plan will include a review of the parking decal program.|
|2019-01-28||It would be helpful for the public if the City were to live stream the meetings.||The City offers live streaming of all Council and Standing Committee meetings held in the Council Chamber at City Hall on its website.|