Speaking Municipally

Mack Male:
Is Whyte Ave chopped and unc? This week we learn about a coalition that wants to see more investment in Whyte Avenue.

Stephanie Swensrude:
Plus, the Lewis Farms Rec Center needs more money despite being scaled down.

Mack:
Hi, I'm Mack.

Stephanie:
I'm Stephanie.

Mack:
And we're…

Both:
Speaking Municipally.

Mack:
Welcome back to Speaking Municipally, episode 348. I see you smirking and smiling Stephanie. Maybe some of our listeners are as old as I am and have no idea what our title means, so enlighten us. What did I just say?

Stephanie:
Well, listeners, I have to tell you that when Mack looked at the proposed title, he was like, "U-N-C. What is unc?" And I was like, "It means old." And he's like, "Oh, okay."

Mack:
There you go. Appropriate.

Stephanie:
So chopped is, like, ugly and terrible, and unc is old. Which we will get to it later, but that is part of our episode today is we're talking to a group that does think that Whyte Ave is chopped and unc and needs some investment. And also, we are aware that this slang is really old, and I just thought it'd be really funny to force my boss to say "chopped and unc."

Mack:
I learn so many things. It's kind of nice to have something other than six-seven so I'll see…

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
If my kid knows what this means. Okay.

Stephanie:
Exactly. You'you can go to your kid today and say, "Hey, am I unc?" And she will love it.

Mack:
Okay. Got it. Thank you for that. Educational here on Speaking Municipally.

Stephanie:
Exactly.

Mack:
We love hearing from listeners. Sometimes you folk send us emails. Listeners and viewers, I should say. Sometimes you folk send us emails, and, we love getting that. We got one from Carson the other day.

Stephanie:
Yeah, so after we talked about reusable bags last week, Carson said, "H&M has a program where they repurpose or recycle any donated textile. I don't love fast fashion, but I'm a fan of this program and have taken in many a takeout bag full of goods that I would have previously thrown in the garbage. Bonus, if you do shop at H&M, they offer a discount code for every donation." Now, when I'm just realizing, when I put this in, I thought they were saying H&W Produce. But this is great. H&M…

Mack:
H&M. Yeah.

Stephanie:
Like the clothing store, so love that. And thank you, Carson, for enlightening us.

Mack:
This was prompted by our conversation, of course in the recent episode about what do you do with all those fabric reusable bags?

Stephanie:
Bring 'em to H&M.

Mack:
All right, we're gonna get to interview, promised interview for this episode. But first, we have a little ad to share with you.

Stephanie:
Yes, this episode is brought to you by Edmonton Opera. Taproot co-founder Karen Unland spoke with artistic director Joel Ivany about Edmonton Opera's upcoming season. One of the shows they're putting on is Rossini's The Barber of Seville. Here's Karen talking with Joel Ivany.

Karen Unland:
I would like to hear more about the first main stage show that you're bringing to the Jubilee this, fall. Tell me more about that show.

Joel Ivany:
Yeah, thanks, Karen. We're really excited to bring an opera that hasn't been done here in over a decade, and that's Rossini's The Barber of Seville, Il Barbier di Siviglia. And it's a great Italian opera. The legend has it that he wrote this in just under three weeks, which is kind of a wild thing to think of for how Rossini put this together. We're really excited to feature some great singers, who have Some have sung these roles before, and so we have John Tessier, who is a local tenor, but he sings all over the world. And this is one of the roles that he's most known for internationally. So, we're really excited to, have him here and then we also have Corin Thomas-Scott who is a recent Rumbled Vocal Prize winner of ours, who, just made his debut at Dallas Opera. So, we have some incredible young Canadian singers who are just taking off internationally who we'we're able to feature right here at the Jubilee which is a really exciting thing. But this opera is If you grew up watching the Looney Tunes and you if you hear The Barber or The Rabbit of Seville and that…

Karen:
Yeah.

Joel:
That music that's associated with Bugs Bunny massaging Elmer Fudd's head Like this is the one. I think even subconsciously people say, "I know that opera," even if they don't. And so, that's not the reason why we're doing it, but again, it's just to show you how opera and this music has embedded our culture for years and years and how it's so important now to celebrate joy and hope and love. The story is about love and just, you know, identity in terms of people dressed up as other people and trying to trick people and, it'it's just, going to be a fun night at the opera to enjoy something with your friends and family.

Karen:
Yeah. Sometimes, when we're recommending art we say, "If you like this, you'll like that." Is there anything in popular culture right now that would make somebody say, " Barber of Seville, that's for you"?

Joel:
I'm not sure if people still are regularly watching, like, Saturday Night Live, but like that sketch comedy, the physical comedy, that's what this opera is all about.

Karen:
Yeah.

Joel:
If you just love putting on great music that you don't need to think too much about in terms of, like, it's just joyful and bubbly and effervescent, this is kind of it for you. So, if you love to smile and laugh and, just breathe easy, this is Yes, this is for you.

Karen:
Awesome. And when is it coming?

Joel:
It is November 5th and 7th.

Karen:
Wonderful. Well, I can't wait to hear it. Thank you.

Joel:
You're welcome.

Mack:
Thank you, Karen. Okay, so we promised you a guest for this week. Prioritize Whyte Ave is made up of the Old Strathcona Business Association and the French Quarter Business Association, as well as Paths for People and Edmonton Transit Riders. They say they're looking to raise awareness, unite common interests, and push city council to invest in renewing the public spaces along Whyte Avenue and improve transit access along the corridor. So today, in this episode, we're joined by Andrea Donini, interim executive director of the Old Strathcona Business Association. Welcome to Speaking Municipally.

Andrea Donini:
Thanks for having me.

Stephanie:
All right. So, I wanted to ask first, like, how and why did these groups come together? Especially, I think that a lot of people view Whyte Ave as between 109th Street and 99th Street, maybe even 109th Street to Gateway. And, you know, you've got the French Quarter involved in there as well, and it's not just business. There's also active transportation advocacy groups. So, how and why did these groups come together?

Andrea:
So, I think the how is kind of we always talk to each other just to know what each other's up to and what's going on, and in that conversation, we kind of all understood that there were things that we were looking to see happen in the next little while, but we weren't sure how that was gonna go. And, so that's the why of it, is we didn't none of us knew how that was gonna go, and we were all identifying that there were things in the, you know, near-term future that should be undertaken or that had been previously scheduled, but we didn't know what was happening with budget on that. Obviously, we know there's changes in budget process happening at the city. You know, are those things, any of that, gonna be prioritized? And we couldn't… (sighs) The answers we started getting were, "Well, no, maybe not." And that's a little bit alarming for all of us. And so, in addition to the groups that you mentioned off the top there, we've also started including, like, the community leagues in the surrounding areas because the corridor is so, important to them. And, while you're right, like, Whyte is often considered to be a very specific portion of 82nd Ave, the bus transit and really the issues that we're talking about and the renewal that's required runs the gamut, so all the way from, you know, major transit at Bonnie Doon all the way up, and into Garneau, so…

Mack:
I imagine, like you said, you folks talk regularly. Like, it's not like this is the first time you've met these other groups, and you all have…

Andrea:
Well, for me personally it was, but certainly the…

Mack:
Maybe for you, sure.

Andrea:
The organization is not, yeah.

Mack:
Yeah. And you all have, you know, existing relationships, I'm guessing, or at least the organizations do with each other, but also…

Andrea:
Yeah.

Mack:
With the city. So…

Andrea:
Exactly.

Mack:
Why was it important to make a new brand almost, like this Prioritize Whyte Ave brand? Like, what's significant about that?

Andrea:
I'd rather say Prioritize Whyte Ave as kind of a campaign, right? Like, this is our approach, this is what we're asking for. We're asking for, like, the priority understanding and some, for Whyte to be shown some love essentially, for Whyte Ave to get some love, 'cause it's we've all got needs. We've all got concerns about it. We just thought if we could demonstrate that everybody around the area and that uses the area is in agreement on it, that would be a much stronger message.

Stephanie:
Mm-hmm. Yeah, I So, I was looking at some of your posts online, and I thought this was really interesting. I'd never thought about this before, but, your organization says, "It's tough to list substantive investments in the Whyte Area, and they're not at the scale of other areas, like West Edmonton Mall is getting an LRT station, Wu's Farms is getting a rec center," which we will be talking about later in this episode. And, of course, downtown gets so much attention, and, I wrote down this quote. "Maybe we've planned this corridor enough, and it's time we did something." Did you wanna expand? What are your thoughts on that?

Andrea:
There's a lot of different, planning that's gone into the area, transit priority measures, the idea of putting bus rapid transit coming through. Obviously, the Old Strathcona Public Realm Strategy was developed a few years ago. There's been a lot of attention given to what the potential for the area could be, but there's not been a lot of rubber meets the road on making that happen, pun intended, I guess. Nothing actually seems to materialize, and we think it needs to.

Mack:
Why do you think it hasn't materialized? Is there obvious things that are in the way? Is it just that there hasn't been this cohesive ask?

Andrea:
I think some of it is, like, there are, you know, natural policies, and the city is trying to make sure that it's, you know, being careful with its money and understanding that, you know, they only want to renew when they really need to, need to. But then they're also trying to put, you know, mass transit and making sure the accessibility is there and all th-… And so you're doing these patch jobs to try and fix different things up along the way. And in doing that, we're kind of coming back in, and we're redoing work, and we're ripping out work that isn't as old as some other portions in order to do another upgrade. And it's just not well-coordinated so it doesn't really feel like it's a terribly efficient way to do it. But it also causes more disruptions, and it makes for a real piecemeal and patchwork approach to what's going on instead of, you know, a concerted effort to make sure that this space, which is so important to so many people in the city I mean, I regularly hear how much people have a special place in their heart for, you know, the area. And certainly, I do, too. So it'd be really nice to see if we could do that in a coordinated way.

Stephanie:
Mm-hmm. So, it What exact, like, what exactly does the coalition want to be done on Whyte? What particular projects are you looking for that investment?

Andrea:
So, there's the French Quarter, BIA and the Old Strathcona BIA, both areas, are meant to be prioritized in the neighborhood renewal process. And they were intended, if they were in a bad enough state of repair, to have been done before 2030. But what we're hearing now is that they're not actually even on the docket for that to be happening. But then there's also things like the transit priority measures that are being undertaken, and there's the bus rapid transit that's being undertaken, and there's this strategy that we had about how it would be really good to have better pedestrianization and better accessibility on the ave. So all of those things are kind of at play and being thought about. They were all really intended to be something that would be happening in the next four years, at least according to, you know, published schedules. But, what we've seen is that there's no guarantee that there's actually any funding, and there's no sense that, there's even going to be an ask for funding on some of those.

Stephanie:
Mm-hmm. Yeah. I wanted to touch You go back a little bit. You talked about, you know, putting in a project and then ripping it up to do another updated thing, and I could see that happening with transit priority measures and then also bus rapid transit. Like, for example, right? 'Cause they could put all those things in and then a few years later rip it all up to do the dedicated bus lanes, just for an example. Can you talk a little bit more about, like, you know, coordinating all of this stuff along the whole corridor to be done all at once?

Andrea:
Yeah. So, I mean, the idea being, of course, if you're gonna put in bus rapid transit, if you need a dedicated lane, you're talking about making changes on the curb, but you're making changes at the curb, but you're not gonna repair the sidewalk while you're there. Then you have to go in to repair the sidewalk or to replace it as it gets to the end of its lifetime, and you're gonna rip up the work that was done for bus rapid transit because you need to get access and put in the proper substrate, you know, whatever the case may be. So we can kind of envision that's the way things would go with the different projects that we've been talking about, and none of which would guarantee that, in fact, we're paying attention to the strategy that was developed about what pedestrianization needs to be and what it means to create space for all modes of transit and everything else in the area.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
One of the challenges, I think, that is more unique to Whyte Ave than most areas is the diversity of uses and users, right? So there are obviously the businesses whom you represent, but just a block off, there's a whole bunch of residents. There's transit that uses that. There's two major freeways, or at least, maybe three if you count 109, that intersect Whyte Avenue. There are visitors, the sort of tourist economy, visitor economy that comes down. They've got all the festivals, major festivals that take place in the area. So how do how are you thinking about balancing all of that? 'Cause even if you could get all the businesses to say, "Yes, let's shut the whole thing down for a month instead of three years," would all of those other users also be on board with that? That seems like a challenge. How are you thinking about that?

Andrea:
So I think that's really a design and coordination, consideration, and so that's exactly what we're asking for, is not how would we undertake that, but that we have a coordinated effort so we could figure out how to undertake that and make it good for the greatest number of people that are using the corridor on a regular basis, and to make sure that the disruption would be minimized so that we're not, you know, working on it for three months this year and then working on it for four months a couple years from now and then working on it, you know, for another couple months a year after that and so on and so forth so that you get consistent disruptions year after year, and instead you get, you know, maybe one more major disruption that's well planned so that access for all of the different uses still gets maintained at some level throughout the process.

Mack:
You mentioned that one of the concerns isn't so much maybe the amount of money but just the timing of it, that it hasn't been, look, doesn't look like it's on the books for the next four years. So, I guess our kinda, our question related to that is how confident are you that this campaign can change that? 'Cause the rhetoric we hear is that there is no money and council's really gotta prioritize existing things rather than new things. So, how are you thinking about that?

Andrea:
Well, I mean, I guess that's kinda the reason why we're all working on it together, right? It's not just one group. It's many, that really do wanna see something move here, and if we're all in alignment and we're all willing to work together on it, I think that's a really good sign, for the city to see that it should be, prioritized in the budget however it can be, whatever that may end up looking like, but that, you know, everybody be involved and that we coordinate in some way. How confident am I that we can do that? Mm. We know that this next budget's gonna be a challenge, so it would be unrealistic of me to say that, "Oh, yeah, absolutely. With all of us speaking together, we're absolutely certain we're getting everything we're asking for." I'd love that. I don't know that's a reality. We're not we do understand the concern, and we certainly don't wanna make, you know, a priority growth area more difficult to grow in because property taxes have to go up or something like that, right? But we do definitely need to consider the fact that this is, a heritage district. It's got a specific kind of cultural, and economic value to the city. It is a, you know, it lives in the hearts of so many Edmontonians in a way that it is so sad for them right now, because I get called on a weekly basis saying, "What is going on with Whyte Av? It looks terrible," kind of thing, which is really heartbreaking to hear. So it's just, it will be important that city council understands how much we care and that it, they should be very seriously considering, doing some work here.

Mack:
Well, the good news is you guys seem like you're out ahead of this. You're starting early as we get into this four-year budget year. Have you talked to council yet? What's the sort of initial reaction been?

Andrea:
Mostly we've just been having conversations to see what kind of, information and understanding we can get in terms of where things are at. But everybody's been very receptive to, you know, having a conversation. Nobody's making any promises.

Mack:
Of course.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Andrea:
And so of course, this is part of the reason for, the effort, is to really demonstrate, the value and the public value to what we're asking for.

Stephanie:
Mm-hmm. So one kind of call to action that I've noticed is that on Monday, March 23rd, there is set to be presented to city council's Urban Planning Committee two reports about, kind of tangentially related to this. So tell me about those two reports and what you want people to do with the, with those reports.

Andrea:
Yeah. So it's, transit priority measures updates and mass transit and mobility updates that are going in front of council, committee, and those all involve portions, the portions of the work involved in those reports is within the Whyte Avenue, public realm space. And so it gives us an opportunity to say, "Hey, you're considering this work. Remember that there's also all of this other work," and to have the conversation about can we coordinate what we're talking about here with the other work that we'd like to see done. And one of the things that we'll be, hopefully we'll see is a motion to develop a profile, to understand what that would look like, a coordinated effort, so that we can actually have a further budget conversation. So this is kind of step one in a multi-step process to trying to get something into budget.

Stephanie:
Yeah, I saw in the Bus Rapid Transit and Transit Priority Measures report that there's an option that Urban Planning Committee could recommend that council asks admin to prepare an unfunded composite capital profile for the next stages of design and construction for BRT, which in English that means in the fall when they're discussing the 2027 to 2030 budget, they might be able to add the next phase of design and construction to that four-year budget cycle.

Andrea:
Correct.

Mack:
It'll be more officially in the long list of asks.

Stephanie:
Yeah, exactly.

Andrea:
Exactly. Yeah.

Andrea:
And they'll be fairly confident in the amount that they're asking for, that it would be doable within that, hence the work beforehand.

Stephanie:
Yeah, totally. So, what is next for this project? So after Monday, what is, what are you gonna be focusing your efforts on next?

Andrea:
Probably trying to get more people in the area, more community leads to be sharing. Actually any Edmontonian, or anybody that uses Whyte Ave in any way could complete the survey just so that we understand how the public feels about the state of repair of the avenue. So the road, the sidewalks, any of the light standards, like any of the public infrastructure. Because at this point we're hearing that it should be in good condition for potentially even up to another 8 to 12 years. But I don't know about you, but when I walk down Whyte Ave, I have to make sure I don't trip on our fractured cobblestones.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Andrea:
So I'm not thinking that looks like we have another 12 years on that. And I think a lot of people would probably agree with me, so we really wanna kind of gather those responses and understand, which sections are really in bad repair. What is it that needs to be done? How and what needs to be looked at as we go forward, and how people are stomaching the idea of what that might mean. So what's next is for us to look at that, make sure that we have that kind of gathered together, and help try and keep advancing the conversation in terms of what should be done by using some of that information from the public.

Stephanie:
Have you been including the, like, arts associations, the performing arts folks? So there's lots of theaters in the area.

Andrea:
Yeah, so that'll be our next step as well.

Stephanie:
Right.

Andrea:
Like, as we start to keep coalition-building so we've got residents, businesses, the major transit groups that operate in the area, and then try and, you know, expand out further. So definitely it's on the list. Of course, we're only a certain number of people trying to pull this together all the time.

Stephanie:
Yeah. Yeah.

Andrea:
So it'll It takes us a moment, but anybody that is interested in joining in, like, we'd love to hear from them and, certainly they can send us a note.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
Well, what is your call to action? Where can people go to learn more? What do you wanna plug for anyone who's listening to this?

Andrea:
I'd love it for people to visit prioritizewhyteav.ca and click the button to take the survey. Let us know how you feel about the different sections of Whyte Ave. That'd be a great help to us.

Mack:
And presumably, at some point, you folks will publish what you've heard from that survey.

Andrea:
Absolutely, yeah.

Mack:
Well, we look forward to that, and maybe we can have you back to dive into, to what you've heard a little bit.

Andrea:
I would love to do that. Thank you.

Mack:
Thank you so much for joining us. Okay, the next item we wanted to talk about today is one that we've had on the show many times in the past. Our current mayor has been working long and hard to bring this to life, and now it looks like maybe it won't be coming to life, at least not in the way that we were promised, and that is, of course, the Lewis Farms Rec Center. So I am I understand council discussed this project this week, Stephanie. Tell us what happened.

Stephanie:
So this week, council voted to increase the budget for the Lewis Farms Community Recreation Center and Library by undisclosed amount because the project is facing significant financial pressures despite several scope reductions. So a little bit of history. The center was initially approved in 2018. It was delayed in 2019, and then kinda restarted in 2021. In 2022, council rejected a proposal that would cut the budget from $311 million to $185 million. You know, at the time… (sighs) Wait. No, I'll get to that later. (clears throat) So since that proposed cut that was not carried forward, the universe kind of said, "No, you're gonna have to cut the budget." Because, the project has faced 46% inflation when admin was only expecting 24%. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean that the budget is, you know, increased by 46%. Like I said, it's private. But in the last year or so, administration has gone back to the drawing board and made a bunch of, reductions. To name a few, they've decreased the overall size of the facility by about one-third which includes a 20% reduction of the aquatic facility, a 32% reduction in fitness space, and the removal of the dry land training space. And several components have been deferred, which means that the city is saying that they will build them in the future and that they're building kind of like the, I The word foundation is coming to mind when that's not exactly right, but, like, they're prepping it for these components, but they're not going to build them yet. So that will be a skate park, spray park, and ice rink outside of the facility. So they've done all of these reductions, but the project is still forecast to exceed the current budget. So they're pulling it back, pulling it back, and the money is just still running out. This is the quote. "Although significant cost reductions have been achieved during the initial stages of construction, the project is now currently at a pivotal stage where there are diminishing returns to continuing value engineering efforts as the project continues to chase inflationary pressures."

Mack:
Okay, so this is not a good situation to be in for the rec center, and I think there's probably lots of reasons that we are where we are. The world is just, you know, hand wave general stuff going on in the world has caused costs to go up.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
But there's also all those delays you mentioned. The longer that it takes to make a project reality, the more likely it is that costs are going to go up. And this really sucks. Like, what is the point of having the rec center if we can't have all the things it's supposed to have? And it kinda makes me think back to the complaints I've made in the past and conversations that have been had about whether we should be building these mega rec centers instead of smaller, more community-sized ones that maybe are a little less complicated, have a little bit less complexity to them, could be easier to build. That's obviously not the direction we've gone, so…

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
But we're forging ahead, and it sounds like what you said is Council has reaffirmed they're gonna forge ahead, and they're gonna increase the budget. So do we know by how much? How much more is it gonna cost?

Stephanie:
So we don't know. This is included in a private attachment because, you know, contracts are under way, and you know, one member of administration said, "I know that there are contractors watching this and trying to scheme to, like, so that they can bid and get the highest, contract," if that makes sense. So they're like, "We have to keep it really locked in." They said basically as soon as humanly possible the amount will be disclosed, likely in a borrowing bylaw that will, like, go to city council eventually.

Mack:
The currently approved budget is $309.3 million, and we're hearing they've reduced it by a third, the size of the facility by a third, so maybe there's, like, a 30% increase in the budget. We don't know.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
That's speculation. We will find out what that amount looks like, as you say, probably when the borrowing bylaw comes back. So even with that increased budget, do we have a sense of whether that means everything's back on the table, or is administration still forging ahead with this reduced-size facility?

Stephanie:
So it's still gonna be reduced. They're still gonna have all of these, it's gonna be smaller, and it's going to be So administration made a really big point in their presentation of saying, "We are focusing more now on community daily use rather than hosting big sporting events," which I thought was super interesting 'cause I remember back in, like, 2021, 2022 when this was kind of being debated, that was kind of the whole point of the facility was to be able to host these big, these big events. And there was, there, I will put a link in the show notes. There was, this group of, like a the swimming community came out to City Hall to say, " we need future Olympians." They're holding these signs that say, "Future Olympians. We need swimming space," and I'm not 100% sure if the reductions to the aquatic facility are those components that, like, the swimming community needed, but that must suck for them.

Mack:
Absolutely.

Stephanie:
They fought so hard to get them. They got them, and then now they're saying, "Actually, no, we can't have them." Yeah.

Mack:
This is like the worst of all worlds, right?

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
Like, everybody doesn't get what they want. We get a shadow of what we actually want, and we have to pay more to get it.

Stephanie:
It seriously sucks. It's like the most 2026 thing ever, you know what I mean?

Mack:
What was the conversation like at Council? I imagine none of them were thrilled about this.

Stephanie:
No. No one was really happy about it, but everyone was like, "We kinda have to do…" I, so the project is a bit of an albatross. It's been in the works for such a long time. Like, everything of this scale in city government, it doesn't get decided and then built in a year. It's, like I said, it's been kind of under way for at least 10 years or so, and, you know, yeah, the discussion was a lot of just, "This sucks, and we, have learned a lot of lessons from this." One thing that they've learned that has already been implemented is that, like, Council approves projects differently now. So back then when this was approved, they approved the entire budget for the whole thing without even seeing designs.

Mack:
Right.

Stephanie:
And now they have these Council check-in points where they fund the planning and design, and then after that, they fund construction. I'm oversimplifying it, but that's basically what it is that they don't approve, like, the full entire cost before even seeing, the designs, which maybe could have helped in this situation. And then the other thing is that they don't think there's ever gonna be another, you know, never say never, but another mega rec center like this, and it's gonna be more on the small scale.

Mack:
I'm glad to hear they're kind of moving back to that. This decision that Council made to increase the budget is not just a decision about this project, right? It has implications.

Stephanie:
However much that increase is, it's gonna take away from other, from other areas, that they won't be able to fund in the four-year budget.

Mack:
This is a sunk-cost fallacy thing, right?

Stephanie:
Ah, yeah.

Mack:
That, you know, council typically runs into, and it's understandable. It's sort of human nature, but we've started down this road. We've been working so long on this project. We have to get it over the finish line is the way that everybody is thinking about it. You know, not, "Maybe we should stop."

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
"Maybe we can't stop it." You know, we never really seem to explore those other paths. It's always the, like, "How do we just get to the goal line and, you know, all the other options be damned?" almost, right?

Stephanie:
Yeah. Well, the facility is most of the way under construction, and the way the, administration was talking about why this was so urgent to make the decision right now and why they needed to stop, you know, making cuts is it seemed like to me almost as if, you know, for example, in two weeks, they're supposed to be getting certain concrete poured, so they need to know that they're cutting the budget before they pay that person to pour the concrete.

Mack:
Right.

Stephanie:
If that makes sense 'cause it's like, "Yeah, guys. We…" Like, "What? Are we using the cheap concrete or the expensive…" Do you know what I mean? Like, it felt like, it felt like it was very urgent because it's under construction currently. They're kind of building the plane while flying it and, trying to put together this reduced budget while it's being built.

Mack:
So they've approved the budget. We'll find out at some point how much. Is that What is next here? Did they give us a sense of what's next? You mentioned there was a Councillor check-in points. Like, when is the next update we're expecting to have? Did they talk about that at all?

Stephanie:
So the next thing will be borrowing bylaws will be, presented to Council. Anytime the city has to borrow money for a large project like this Council has to approve it through a bylaw, and then you can check on the agenda for, more information about that. But I don't know when it's gonna be because I'm assuming they'll have to go and, like, sign the contracts, get everything approved. But I'm assuming it'll be in the next couple months.

Mack:
Soon if they have that concrete getting poured, it sounds like.

Stephanie:
Well, exactly, yeah. I mean, I'm not there at the construction site, but that was the impression that I was getting, that they were like, "We gotta Like, are we building a second pool?" You know?

Mack:
Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you for that update, Stephanie.

Stephanie:
Of course.

Mack:
Another thing council talked about this week, is something that And maybe it's just 'cause I'm downtown, but it comes up again and again. I keep hearing people talk about this. Everyone's got an opinion. Patio fees. Businesses are unhappy.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
Lots of, lots of regular people seem to be unhappy 'cause they think, I assume, that this means there will be no patios to enjoy. And so, I understand council talked about this.

Stephanie:
Yeah. So I think we talked about this on the podcast a few weeks ago, that the city had made changes to its patio fee, structure. During the pandemic, the city waived fees for, to set up and take down patios that the And specifically, you know, ones that take over public space, so the sidewalk. So, you know, if you're going to the, Canadian Brewhouse over, in the suburbs that, you know, has the rooftop patio built in, obviously that's not going to be an issue. So it's just on public space, on sidewalks and stuff, like you said, tons downtown, tons on Whyte Ave., and in other areas. But starting in April, businesses are going to have to pay $6,900 to operate a large year-round patio and $3,700 for large seasonal patios. So, this was made known to the general public a couple weeks ago, and, you know, people were upset. If you've had something for free before, you don't really wanna start paying for it again. So, Coun. Karen Principe introduced a motion, this week at council. The main thrust of it was that, administration immediately pauses increased patio fees. And then she also asked for a memo including some financial analysis of, like, cost recovery options for the patio expansion permits, examining a tiered fee structure, et cetera.

Mack:
And how was that motion received?

Stephanie:
You know, I was really surprised that it was defeated. I totally thought that, council was going to support the pausing of the, patio fees. I kinda, I kinda only looked at the decision, and I was like, "Oh my God, defeated? That's so weird." So I went back and listened, and then I found out why. Now, there was a couple of reasons that councillors cited for their reasons why. First of all, the admin kind of confirmed that if you do the math, for a seasonal patio, it works out to about $20 per calendar day to run the patio. Now, Mack, you saw something online that had a bit of a different perspective on that.

Mack:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was a post by Puneeta McBryan, the former executive director of the Downtown Business Association, who pointed out that it doesn't make sense to divide it by the calendar number of days, because not all 365 days of the year are patio days. Like, really, there's only certain days of the year that you can operate the patio because of weather and those kinds of concerns. So it's maybe a more true accounting if you divide that $7,000 by, say, 100, 115, you know, good patio days a year. Still, like we talked about on the show before, Stephanie, it's not a huge amount of money, but every increase does add you know, another expense for those businesses.

Stephanie:
Yeah. So, another factor that I think influenced a lot of people was, I mean, I saw several business owners online saying, "We're, we have to cancel our patio. We cannot afford this. We have to-"…

Mack:
Right.

Stephanie:
"… We have to cancel." And it was confirmed at, by administration that out of the 115 restaurants that used this program last year, only seven have canceled their patios. And they weren't necessarily, concentrated in any area; it was pretty widely spread across the city, so yeah, it seems like those couple that, like, talked to the media were the loud. You know what I mean?

Mack:
Yeah.

Stephanie:
Like, the loudest voices are You hear them the most.

Mack:
That's always the case, isn't it? And so, seven out of 115, that's gotta be a big factor, for council making a decision about this, that shows, I think, that a lot of these businesses see this as the cost of doing business. And they might not be happy about another fee or another expense, but the alternative here, and I think I saw the mayor talking about this, is increased property taxes, right?

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
Like, either we get the money to cover the costs for the way that we operate the city in this way or that way, and there's a mix of property taxes and user fees, and this is one of those fees. It feels like council basically this week just said, "No. We're not gonna change our minds on this."

Stephanie:
Yeah. And, a couple more factors is that, it is a cost-share model, so it's 50/50. So the city is still subsidizing it by 50%. That was another reason why councillors said they supported it. And then, an interesting thing that I don't think I knew, but Coun. Erin Rutherford brought up that this program used to be funded by photo radar fees from the TASER reserve, which is the Traffic Safety Automated Enforcement Reserve, I think. And so, Coun. Rutherford was like, "We should be telling those businesses to complain to the province because" "… we're not allowed to do photo radar anymore."

Mack:
Fascinating. I did not know that's where that funding came from, but, it brings an interesting dimension to it. I look forward to hearing more about this program in the future. Maybe we'll get a report back, you know, after the first year, the review of the, of the program.

Stephanie:
And I look forward to drinking a beer on a patio…

Mack:
Yes.

Stephanie:
Very soon, because it's been so warm out recently.

Mack:
Absolutely. Bring on the patio season.

Stephanie:
Yep.

Mack:
Well, there's no good transition to this next story But we did wanna talk again about, Police Chief Warren Driechel's recent trip to Israel. We talked about this on the last show. We just touched on it, and I think you said at the time even, Stephanie, there's gonna be more to come on this.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
And then sure enough, there was a ton. So Friday afternoon, late afternoon, I felt like there was a bit of a coordinated release. You know, Coun. Rutherford, Salvador, Mayor Knack, they all put out statements, social media posts, talking about how they disagreed with this trip. The mayor said that he was disappointed and frustrated by the decision to join this international delegation in Israel, and then we heard from some other councillors. And I just thought it was interesting to share some of the things we heard here. So that initial group was all really opposed to this. How could the police chief make this trip? All of the local communities feel like they've been disrespected. They're not being consulted. This is really bad for the relationship. And then we heard from a couple of councillors saying, "Hold on a minute." So Coun. Karen Principe basically saying that, you know, she's disappointed in how the conversation has unfolded publicly, and that she believes the chief deserves more respect in the conversation. She said our leaders, we expect our leaders to work together to maintain a professional relationship, and doesn't seem like that's happening in this case. And then also Coun. Jon Morgan posted on social media saying that it was undoubtedly a controversial choice that divides more than it unites, but again, also reiterated the significance, the importance of that relationship building with the chief. So that was from council, and then we did finally also hear from the police chief himself. So a statement was put out saying that they reaffirmed the decision, to have the chief take the trip, and here's a little bit of what Chief Driechel's statement said. Quote, "As police, we focus on behavior, not beliefs. Where I have felt challenged this week is in the implication that any community group should have the right to direct where we can learn. I stand by my decision to take the trip to Israel and continue to view it as valuable." End quote. So it seems like the police chief and the police don't care that a few council were upset about this decision. What's your take on all of this, Stephanie?

Stephanie:
Yeah, it's, it, I It doesn't surprise me that the chief stood by his choice. I did notice also that the Edmonton Police Association put out I don't even know if I would call it a statement. It was more like fuel on a fire, because while everyone is using quite diplomatic language, the EPA said, "Edmonton's Police Chief Warren Driechel's under attack by radical activists who want to tear down the leader keeping Edmonton safe. It's time to push back." And then it has a call to support, like, tell city council you support the chief. And that was, like, aggressive. You know, so And what I think about, the where I felt challenged this week is the implication that any community groups have the right to direct where we can learn, this comes back to my belief in, like, free speech and freedom generally, is that you can do what you want. You can act like a jerk, for example. You can make decisions. You can say rude things. That's your freedom, and then on the other side, my freedom is to say, "I hate that you did that. You're rude, and I oppose that." And I'm not necessarily taking a stand on this. I'm just using it as an example. Like, yes, the chief has the right to go to Israel to learn from the police there, and that's the his freedom, and then the Muslim and Palestinian associations in Edmonton 100% have the right to say, "You are a jerk for doing that."

Mack:
Yeah, I think what you're saying is that they're not implying that they should have the right to direct…

Stephanie:
Exactly.

Mack:
Where his learning happens. They're just saying they're unhappy about it, and they would…

Stephanie:
And they have the right to be unhappy.

Mack:
And they would rather have a police chief who prioritizes those local relationships and has a conversation with them rather than travels to an active war zone for his professional development. Yeah. I think that's a good point. I've been thinking about this a lot all week, and it's kinda gray, and multiple things can be true at the same time. So I think it's a problem that our police chief went to Israel. Not just now, just in general. I don't think there's a ton of value there. I understand he's saying there is. I disagree. I don't think our chief needed to go to Israel for any kind of learning or training or community development. That said, I also don't see the value of what some on council, including the mayor, have done to call him out so publicly. You know, I feel like this has to be about something more than just the trip to Israel. I don't know what it is. Maybe there's something else that has happened, but if we're to believe that this council and this police chief had such a good working relationship, you know, that's what we've been hearing for a while now. It is surprising to me that, you know, this trip, even if you disagree with it, would cause that relationship to so completely unravel, and that's what it seems like has happened here. So I don't know what that's about. Maybe we'll hear more about, you know, what's underneath this consternation between some members of council, at least, and the police chief in the weeks and months ahead. But, like, it feels like there's gotta be something else. If you're gonna publicly call the chief out in such strong terms, you gotta have a reason, and I don't think just your views on Israel is a strong enough reason. You know?

Stephanie:
Yes, I see what you're saying, and the councillors and the mayor that put out statements, you know, really against this, they I would assume that they weighed the importance of the relationship between council, the police, and the commission, and they weighed showing public support for the Muslim and Palestinian and racialized community, and they chose to show the support for that community over, maintaining a better relationship. I don't know. I am not in their heads, but that is what I would assume, is that they wanted to show their support for that community more than maintain the relationship.

Mack:
And you need both. You need to have a relationship with the chief, you need to have a relationship with those communities.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
I don't know where they go from here, Stephanie. I don't, you know, the council's got to do something to repair this relationship if they actually truly believe that there needs to be a good relationship with the chief. Unless there's something else going on here like I suggested, maybe they're quite happy for the relationship to start to deteriorate. But it seems like this is not a healthy place to be, and it doesn't seem like there's any sort of, movement on the part of the chief or the commission to say, "We didn't, we won't do this again. We were wrong." Nothing like that, right? So everybody's kind of made their positions known and it's like, "Now what?"

Stephanie:
Yeah. The heels have been dug in. I don't think that we're gonna see much movement on any side. It'll probably just go into the, like, the metaphorical Edmonton history books where everyone will go, "Remember when the police chief went to Israel? That was crazy. And then nothing happened."

Mack:
As it happens in 2026, we'll just move on to the next crisis or conversation or debate.

Stephanie:
The next insane thing that makes you wonder if you're hallucinating.

Mack:
Mm-hmm. Absolutely.

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
Well, I don't think we should end the show on such a sour note, Stephanie. So there was a few other things that council decided this week that seem a little more positive. Why don't you share those with us as a way to close out this episode?

Stephanie:
Yeah. We'll do a little rapid fire of, like, relatively good news. So, we've been talking about this for it feels like months. The Winspear Centre face a funding shortfall that kinda had to do with that new district energy system that they're building as part of their expansion. We covered it on another episode, and, more information about this will be on the agenda on Monday. So you can go look at that, but the council did approve, granting about $30 million to the Winspear Centre so they can finish that and we can all go, you know, watch the, watch the symphony. And something that I thought was so nice is that Council Ann Stevenson, who of course represents downtown, she asked the representatives from the Winspear, she said, "Has there been any thought about naming something in the new facility after the citizens of Edmonton to recognize their contribution through taxpayer dollars? Like something like Citizens Hall?" And the folks from Winspear were like, "Oh, that's such a good idea. We'll I'll definitely talk to the board about that." So that's nice. We might have our own, Citizens Hall coming to Edmonton.

Mack:
Love it.

Stephanie:
And then two other housing things. I talked about the Downtown Attainable Housing Incentive on the podcast a few weeks ago. They carried that, recommendation, so, you know, applications for that should likely be opening soon. And another thing to do with housing, is that by the time this episode comes out, so Friday the, at 10:00 AM, they will be making an announcement of who is going to receive the Student Housing Incentive. This was announced, like, months and months ago. It's part of the Housing Accelerator Fund, which is like federal, funding to, yeah, incentivize student housing around, like, the Norquest-MacEwan area, downtown, right around Warehouse Park. And so we'll see who's going to be getting money for that. So there should be tons more housing coming to downtown, which of course everyone thinks that more people should live downtown.

Mack:
Oh, this is good news to end the show on.

Stephanie:
Yes.

Mack:
I love any discussion about more housing downtown. So thank you…

Stephanie:
Yeah.

Mack:
For bringing those updates. Our thanks to Andrea for joining us in this episode as well. It's good to have, a guest to help us understand Prioritize Whyte Ave a little bit. If you enjoyed this episode, thank you for listening, thank you for watching. We'd love a rating, a quick thumbs up on YouTube, a rating in your podcast app of choice, a comment. Share it with a friend. Help spread the word about Speaking Municipally, and we'll be back again next week with another episode. Until next week, I'm Mack.

Stephanie:
I'm Stephanie.

Andrea:
I'm Andrea.

Mack:
And we're…

All:
Speaking Municipally.