Speaking Municipally

Mack Male:
Where do we global from here? This week, municipalities weigh in on new strategic and business plans from Edmonton Global. Gibbons and Beaumont are out, but Edmonton is in.

Colin Gallant:
Plus, Council pushes forward with the active transportation network expansion, and we get an update on the Edmonton Research Park.

Mack:
Hi, I'm Mack.

Colin:
I'm Colin.

Mack:
And we're...

Both:
Speaking Municipally.

Mack:
Welcome back to Speaking Municipally, episode three hundred and sixty-nine. That is not Stephanie you were hearing. That is Colin. Welcome back to the show, Colin, and thank you for co-hosting this week.

Colin:
It's my pleasure, Mack. Feels weird to be taking her spot, but we know she needs some time.

Mack:
Yes, as Stephanie mentioned, she's getting ready for a big trip abroad. And so we're shuffling around some responsibilities at Taproot to help make that possible. And so we're glad to have you this week, Colin. We're gonna talk about Edmonton Global. We had the CEO and one of the board members from the shareholders group on the show recently, but then you did some follow-up reporting, which I think is really interesting. So we'll get into that. Of course, there was a big discussion about bike lanes this week at City Hall. We've got to touch on that. But before we get into all of that, we're going to do an ad for you. And we don't have a third-party ad this week, so we're going to do a Taproot ad. And we thought it would be fun to have Colin read the ad for you. So Colin, over to you.

Colin:
Yeah, this one's close to the heart. Taproot publishes an Events Roundup newsletter on Thursdays at 4 PM almost every week to provide intelligence on where to go out in the region. That's not just Edmonton; that's the region. Think of it as a going-out guide edited by me but written by our exquisite Debbi Serafinchon, who runs the calendar. We have an entire site dedicated to event listings that we draw from for this roundup. Each edition features an event pick from one of our staff, and this week it was me. I recommend the 20th-anniversary celebration of Music for Mavericks at the Old Strathcona Performing Arts Centre on August 28, which, if you're listening today, is today. That group is led by Arlo Maverick, and it's also gonna feature other musical acts from that crew, such as CanCon icon Kreesha Turner. Staff picks for the Events Roundup kind of give you this look into what makes Taproot tick, and for me, it's live music, hence this event. But I have a couple more I'm gonna rattle off real quick. Wheelchair Sports Camp has been added to the Peaches show that's happening at Midway on September 2. They're an incredible band who are right at the intersection of punk and hip-hop musically, but they also do all this amazing activism for people with disabilities and all other kinds of people. Then there's Homofonik, which is a local act. They're playing the Aviary on September 3. There will be more to come on that. And then, of course, Purple City is coming up. That runs September 11 to 13 with headliners such as Desire—you may know them from the movie Drive—and Shannon Shaw, who you may know from Shannon and the Clams. I volunteer at this festival every year, just in my personal civilian life, not as part of my Taproot work, so I hope to see you there. You can sign up for the Events Roundup at edmonton.taproot.news.

Mack:
Amazing. I love the Events Roundup because it kind of does two things. Like you said, it gives us that breadth of, wow, there's a lot going on in this city. You know, when folks say there's nothing to do in Edmonton, it's like, hang on, there's a lot. And then the other thing is, as you say, we get to know the Taproot staff a little bit better and the things that they like, enjoy, and attend in the city. So definitely get the Events Roundup if you don't already. Thank you, Colin. Okay, first up this week, we're gonna talk about Edmonton Global. As I mentioned, we had a big interview with the CEO of Edmonton Global and one of the shareholders here recently. We learned that they have a new strategic and business plan. They've done a lot of work to try to improve relationships between the organization and shareholders, and that's because they've had a bunch of organizations leave. Mayor Jeff Acker from Spruce Grove said in that interview that the shareholders were relieved. We dug into that a little bit, but we wanted to hear from some more municipalities—some other shareholders, maybe former and current. And so, Colin, you've been out doing what you do, interviewing folks and trying to find out new stuff. Who have you talked to, what have you learned, and what can you share with us?

Colin:
Well, I didn't talk to as many people as I wanted to because I got turned down by several of the mayors and municipalities who are shareholders and have voted to leave, whether or not they have completed their exit. That was a little bit disappointing because I wanted to hear their thoughts. But the main takeaway I got was from our own mayor, Edmonton's Andrew Knack, and that he is, like, all the way in—ten toes down—on Edmonton Global. He thinks this is a great thing. One thing he said to me was that, of course, he has to take in the points of view of his fellow council members. One thing that came up during the previous episode of Speaking Municipally about Edmonton Global was that they basically said the only thing that would stop Edmonton Global from existing is if Edmonton was not part of it. And so I wanted to ask the mayor: Well, if Edmonton Global was the only shareholder, would you stay? His personal opinion is yes. That is contingent on a council vote, of course. But he said—I'm gonna read a quote—"I'm seeing the impact they're having, and assuming they can continue to deliver on economic development opportunities for us, that's worth it. We are investing in an agency that is meant to help deliver additional investment to Edmonton. And assuming that investment outpaces the amount you're putting in, that is a net gain to our city. That is a net gain to Edmontonians on the financial side. It's a net gain on the job side." So he continues to believe in this organization quite strongly.

Mack:
Yeah, I think that's really interesting. It was one of the things that caught my ear when we were talking to Daryn Edgar, the CEO, when she said essentially, if Edmonton's out, then we're in trouble. So it's good to have the mayor confirm where he stands on that. I think part of his answer might just be practical, right? If Edmonton Global goes away, the City of Edmonton is essentially left without an economic development agency. They would either have to spin one up or turn one of the other agencies back into an economic development agency again. And so it's probably simpler and cheaper to just keep Edmonton Global going, doing what it's doing. You mentioned that you got declines from some of the mayors. Do you think that's just because of this two-year period, and maybe they're just uncomfortable commenting on it while they're in this exit process? Or did you get the sense there was something else behind those declines?

Colin:
Well, I don't want to speculate too much because I don't want to put words in people's mouths, but I got the sense that they just didn't want to have to give me an answer today that they would have to answer for later if it came to council: Should we rejoin? Should we reverse our decision to leave? Et cetera. If that were me, that's probably how I would approach it, frankly, if I wasn't a journalist and I was a municipal politician. So that's kind of my hunch. I was, however, very disappointed to hear noes from Leduc County and Beaumont because they both play a very key role, in my opinion—maybe the former more so—in the region's economy.

Mack:
And so what is the status of Leduc County and Beaumont in terms of Edmonton Global?

Colin:
So they're on their way out, but they have to wait two years from when they voted, which was, I think, the end of 2024 for Leduc County and the end of 2025 for Beaumont. That's when our regional municipalities make one-year budget decisions, not four-year decisions as Edmonton does, so that's typically when these conversations arise. If I'm not mistaken, those are the dates, and that means two years from then. Leduc County would be the end of this year, which is not too far away. And, like, you know, that includes Nisku and the Edmonton International Airport, major food-processing centres—things that bring a lot of jobs to our region. To not have them pick up their part of the tab for Edmonton Global, to me, is worth noticing.

Mack:
I think it's worth noticing too. And, you know, the Edmonton International Airport is going to be a key part of any pitch to any site selector or investor who's going to come to the Edmonton region. They're going to come for the assets that we have—the University of Alberta, of course—but the connectivity that the airport provides is gonna be a key part of that, whether or not they're part of Edmonton Global.

Colin:
Just louder for people in the back: it's called the Edmonton International Airport, it's in Nisku, and that is in Leduc County. They don't pay to be part of a regional economic development agency that represents the Edmonton region.

Mack:
Anymore.

Colin:
Or, sorry, they are heading towards not being part of it. They are still contractually obligated to pay their dues until enough time has passed that they can exit.

Mack:
Right. Well, and I know Edmonton Global is open to the possibility that they change their minds here. You did get some yeses, though. You spoke to, I believe, the mayor of Gibbons, Rick Henderson.

Colin:
Yeah. I've been fascinated by Gibbons, largely because of a lot of the reporting that Stephanie has done, including on Speaking Municipally. I phrased it as financial ruin in the draft of my story, which was probably responsibly toned down a smidge to say crisis, because the council that was elected in 2025 inherited a town in deep debt. They were then given a provincial review of their viability to even exist as a municipality. Ultimately, they ended up remaining a town instead of joining Sturgeon County. But their reason for not being part of Edmonton Global—which is not yet finalized; it's gonna take two more years—is that it really has nothing to do with Edmonton Global. It's about Gibbons. They don't have the money to pay those dues, and they don't have the right land or assets within their jurisdiction to court foreign direct investment. There just isn't space for it, or not the right assets. This came up as they went under that review, which may have put them under Sturgeon County's jurisdiction. They said, "Hey, you guys have the Industrial Heartland and we don't, and we're right next to it and we get nothing from it. So if you want us to be absorbed, then we'll need to see some benefit from that." That was kind of the tenor of the conversation.

Mack:
Which is really interesting because if you did get absorbed by the county, the county would be responsible for a larger chunk of, you know, infrastructure and services and other things than the town would have been on its own. So they would have indirectly benefited from joining the county. But I understand this sort of from an economic point of view, it's like what are they bringing to the table? What are the assets they have that would allow an investor to say, Gibbons is where we wanna be? And I mean when the mayor of this of the town says we don't really have anything, you can't really blame, I guess, third party investors from looking at it and saying, I guess they don't have anything. So that's interesting. You did get a comment from Sturgeon County too, I understand.

Colin:
Yes. This actually came in after the story was published, and basically their tenor is: We think Edmonton Global is going in the right direction. We are encouraged to see Edmonton Global moving forward under new leadership and with a renewed vision. They are strengthening the region's profile. They cannot comment at this time on whether these new plans—the strategic and business plans that you covered in the previous Edmonton Global episode—would lead them to rejoin. That's a council decision, once again. They also have to wait a while. I believe it's five years between exit and re-entry, if re-entry happens. You were curious about the data centre and how Edmonton Global may or may not have had a role in that. Ultimately, they were not among the list of names on the deal. But I think Daryn Edgar implied that creating the Edmonton region as a brand is just good for business, so that could have potentially been an influence. Sturgeon said kind of the same: "You would have to ask Meta," is what they said to me.

Mack:
We'll find out, I guess, in the future if they decide they want to try to pursue some way back in. Though I have to imagine, when you're winning multibillion-dollar deals like the data centre, lower on the priority list is, "Hey, how do we attract outside investment?" And then the argument comes back to what you were saying around, well, if you're benefiting from this regional thing, shouldn't y'all be paying for it? Shouldn't y'all be contributing to the thing that is making the metro region so attractive?

Colin:
Yeah. And I do think that there's some follow-up required here on Edgar's comments that we will continue to collaborate around the region. Well, why should somebody who's not paying dues be able to collaborate with you? If I don't buy the ticket to the concert, I don't get to see the concert. You know what I mean?

Mack:
Yeah, I think I saw in your story, though, that the mayor essentially was like, you know, we've had some regional meetings and everybody's on board. We're all trying to work together. It almost sounds like they're trying to find the right venues to collaborate and just haven't been able to formalize it yet. But there are these informal meetings happening, right? Okay. Well, thank you for following up on that story and finding out some new stuff from some of the other municipalities. Where do we global from here? As the title says, what's next?

Colin:
Leduc County's deadline is coming up to get out or reverse its decision. They refused to provide either an interview or a written statement, so I have no idea where they're at with that, although Edgar indicated in your previous interview that it seems like they're committed to getting out. That will be, I think, one of the big ones. As much as Beaumont is the fastest-growing regional municipality, Leduc County is an economic powerhouse that we should have in the conversation about regional economic development, considering people have to enter the region through Leduc County via the airport.

Mack:
Indeed. Okay. Well, we'll pay attention to all of that. You can find out more about what's happening every week, of course, in the Regional Roundup, and as it warrants, we'll bring updates here to Speaking Municipally as well. Okay, next up we're gonna transition into some council stuff—a couple of council things and then some other stuff. The first thing I wanted to talk about was bike lanes. This was up at infrastructure committee this week. Are you a cyclist, Colin?

Colin:
An occasional one, more so when I don't live in between two hills.

Mack:
Yes, going up hills is not fun unless you've got an e-bike or something like that, I guess. As we reported previously, and as Stephanie wrote in On the Agenda, infrastructure committee this week was considering a proposal from administration that would have dropped 14 of the 27 routes still to be built as part of the $100-million bike-lane plan—the active transportation network expansion. This was, of course, approved as part of this budget cycle. We haven't got all the way there yet. There's been some progress, but I think not as much as advocates would like to see. And then administration comes forward with this report saying maybe we shouldn't keep building it. The argument, I think, was twofold. One is that there was some data about the number of comments or pieces of input they've received from Edmontonians over the last number of years and how overwhelmingly negative it is when it comes to bike lanes. Colour me shocked, Colin. And then the other was this sort of pre-emptive approach to what the province is doing. In the last episode, Stephanie talked about how Minister Devin Dreeshen is, as we know, opposed to bike lanes and seems to be readying provincial legislation that would in some way hamper or restrict the city's ability to continue building bike lanes as we had planned in this $100-million bike plan. So that's the context. It went to infrastructure committee. Colin, do you have any guesses about what happened?

Colin:
A lot of people signed up to speak. I think I know that is true from Stephanie.

Mack:
A lot of people signed up to speak at committee. Yes, that's true, and overwhelmingly in favour of, I think, maintaining the plans to keep going here. This was infrastructure committee, so it's four members, plus the mayor was there—or was participating remotely, at least. Ultimately, they decided not to endorse or move administration's recommendation, which means the bike-lane plan will continue as planned. So what ultimately happens in a committee meeting like this is administration brings forward their report. They've got a recommendation in there. Their recommendation was, let's not do these 14 routes. It comes to the committee, and the committee can say, let's move the recommendation from administration, or let's move a different motion. In this case, Councillor Ashley Salvador, who's on the committee, put forward a different motion that basically said we reaffirm our approach to building out the bike-lane—the active transportation—network, and we want to accelerate it. She had some language around wanting to maximize the remaining construction season in 2026. Administration basically said, yeah, it's not going to happen. It's not realistic. Councillor Rutherford then put forward a motion to delete that part of her motion. That failed two to two. So Salvador's motion went forward, and that failed two to two. It was really interesting because Councillor Rutherford, who was chairing the meeting, then explained to everyone—because, as you pointed out, there were a lot of bike advocates and others following this conversation who maybe aren't as attuned to council normally—that this council has tried to avoid "receive this for information" types of motions, which they used to do all the time. A report would come forward; they'd just receive it for information. In this case, they did not move and pass a motion that someone on the committee brought forward. Nobody on the committee wanted to move administration's recommendation. And so nothing happens, which means what was already happening is just going to continue. The good news for bike advocates is that the $100-million plan, as originally envisioned, will continue to proceed, even if it doesn't proceed as quickly as Councillor Salvador and many advocates would like to see. What's annoying to me about this one, Colin, is that it was almost administration putting their cards on the table to say they don't want to build this. They don't want to deal with the fallout of more angry people who are upset about bike lanes. It's the only conclusion I can come to because there is no provincial legislation. They're not reacting to, "Hey, guys, in the legislature they passed this order. This is now the law. We have to update our plan to comply with it." That is typically what administration would do when the province makes a decision. In this case, you've just got Minister Dreeshen threatening stuff, and administration is reacting to the threat. During the meeting, Councillor Janz was pointing out how kind of silly this is, and he called it governance by soundbite. That seems to be the approach Minister Dreeshen is taking on the bike-lane file. And so it's really shocking to me that administration was reacting to that and trying to be proactive, putting something into place that may or may not come to pass. We don't know if the province is going to change the approach. The minister has said he would like to, and they've certainly celebrated what's happened in Ontario, but will they? We'll find out. Until they do, we shouldn't change our plans in Edmonton, is the way I feel about it. So I think that committee made the right decision here. And I think by bringing this forward and having it fail, we've also learned an important thing about where administration stands when it comes to bike lanes and the active transportation network.

Colin:
Just to throw a curveball at you, speaking of hypothetical provincial legislation, the provincial government was reviewing the MGA, the Municipal Government Act, to specifically consider policies around BIA funding, wherein in Alberta businesses pay levies, but property owners don't—unless the property owner is a business, I guess. I find it a little bit confusing. And so we did a story quite a few months back, in the fall, I believe. They said, we're looking into this; we might change it. They didn't. So the province can always not do something that they say, "We might do." And that's an example.

Mack:
Yeah. I mean, trying to play this guessing game of what the province might do is not the way we should be legislating in Edmonton, right?

Colin:
Governance by soundbite.

Mack:
Yeah, wasn't that a great quote? Okay. A great soundbite, actually.

Colin:
He's got a great way with words.

Mack:
So bike lanes will continue, although maybe on this glacial pace they seem to be progressing. I could not bike, unfortunately, all the way down to the Edmonton Research Park today. I didn't have time for that, but I did drive down there. They had the big summer barbecue, which is an annual event they do out at the research park. I know you were invited, Colin, as were other members of Taproot. I got to be the lucky person to go and wave the flag. There were about 60 organizations there and 150 people. It was a beautiful day, nice and sunny, and it was great to get the opportunity to talk to some people out at the park and find out a little bit more about what's going on. Colin, I know you've been reporting on this in the past, and you've done some stories about the research park and some of the things happening with API and all of that. What's your update on the park? What's interesting to you? What's caught your eye lately?

Colin:
Well, if I can start from the beginning, I will say that the first tech story I ever wrote for Taproot, to my memory, was about the Edmonton Research Park, wherein I attended their Pi Day event on March 14. Gail Powley was such a welcoming host. She is the head of Technology Alberta, which administers the ASTech Awards. She has continued to be a valuable source to me as the years have gone by—I think three and a half or something—and always puts me in touch with the people I need to talk to without any hesitation and incredibly quickly. She's an incredible source. But what's more recent at the park, which I haven't been to since that visit because it is simply so far away from anywhere that's convenient to get to, is that Applied Pharmaceutical Innovation, which mostly goes by API, is getting really close to finishing its Critical Medicines Production Centre. They've got 2027 as the sort of benchmark of when that should be done. That would give us the ability to produce things like vaccines and medication here in Canada, where we have limited capacity to do so. In fact, one of the first deals that's been struck is to make a generic version of an Ozempic-type drug—a GLP-1, one of those weight-loss drugs, or a diabetes treatment as well. They're getting really close to that. And they're coming up on Life Sciences Week pretty soon, when people can actually tour the park. Mack, I'm sure you spent some time there—in fact, I know you did. So that opportunity is coming up in mid-to-late September.

Mack:
Yes, September 21 to 25 is Life Sciences Week. Taproot Edmonton is really happy to once again be a media sponsor for the event. And so we're going to be doing some coverage of what's happening there, and you're going to see some ads and things in our various publications to remind you about what's coming up. Of course, the calendar we talked about off the top is gonna have lots of details on the things you can attend. I was down at the park today. I got to see a little bit more of it. The CMPC, as everyone calls it—the Critical Medicines Production Centre, as you pointed out—is really coming along. We've seen some updates from API about new hardware and facilities getting fitted out inside that building. So when you're working on the inside like that and on the equipment, that's a good sign of progress. There's also the Biotechnology Business Development Centre there that API manages. The barbecue today, of course, took place at the Advanced Technology Centre, which is among the oldest buildings in the research park and is where a lot of the startups and companies, and even Technology Alberta, are based. Gail was there today. She was doing her Gail thing, celebrating everyone, connecting folks, and talking about the role that the park plays and the contributions that Technology Alberta makes too. So yeah, it was really fun to get down there. One of the people I talked to was Ahmad Jawad, who runs a company called DOCEO AI. He's also on the board of the Edmonton Research Park Business Consortium, and he's been a real advocate for the park and for the ATC. We reported in the past about how council was considering selling that building and what was gonna happen to the businesses. He's been pretty steadfast in arguing for this part of our innovation ecosystem in Edmonton to continue and to be strong. He's really stepped up, as have several other folks. I'm thinking of John from BioStream Diagnostics as well. They put in a lot of time to put on things like the barbecue and make that happen. I figured, Colin, since I was there, I might as well interview him. So I asked Ahmad if he'd talk to me, and he said yes. I pointed the camera in his face and asked him about a few things. One of the things I thought was pretty interesting is IASP, the International Association of Science Parks and Areas of Innovation. There are things like the research park all over the world. I think there are about 367 members in this organization, and Ahmad has been working really hard to make Edmonton a part of it—so much so that Edmonton is gonna host the North American event next year, May 20 to 21, out at the research park. So here's what Ahmad had to say about IASP.

Ahmad Jawad:
About two years ago, I was asked to represent the park to bring the international conference to Edmonton. We were not able to, but through that process I went to Nairobi, Kenya, and a year later I went to Beijing for IASP—people from all over the world. We didn't win; there were three cities, but we learned a lot as a group that went there about the innovation that's happening abroad, but also the success that we're having here. So people could learn from us, but we could also learn from others. We need to be open. Next year, as Andrea Eriksson from API mentioned, there is the IASP North American Conference happening in Edmonton in May. But as a company ourselves, we were chosen by IASP—basically, we were the only company in Canada to submit a paper and actually have a paper selected—on AI and responsible AI. So I'm presenting it in October in Cannes, France. And really, again, representing my company for sure, but saying I'm from the Edmonton Research Park, and that's important. We need to market. We need to tell our stories to the world, right? And to ourselves internally here too.

Mack:
Yeah, so that was really cool, to talk to Ahmad. My thanks to him for taking a few minutes to give me some more information on the park. And congratulations to him on getting to present that paper. We're looking forward to that event next year. But before that, we've got the ASTech Awards coming up, right?

Colin:
Yeah. So the actual finale, where we get to see who the award winners are, will be in Edmonton on November 6 at the Westin.

Mack:
Awesome. Yeah. It's such an interesting event every year. They celebrate a lot of people. You folks did a great job in the Tech Roundup this week of putting together all of the finalists and the shortlist. So if you want to go and see who's up for an ASTech Award, definitely go check out the Tech Roundup this week, and we'll put that in the show notes as well. Okay, Colin, one other sort of city council thing I wanted to bring up on the show this week. I know you have thoughts on this. I never turn down an opportunity to talk about public washrooms—or, more specifically, toilets. CBC did a big, long story this week about whether Edmonton has enough public washrooms. They talked to a bunch of people, cited some research, and pointed out that the city's washroom strategy from 2024 found that 72% of respondents think we don't have enough public washrooms, and 53% of respondents said they rarely use them because of cleanliness and safety concerns. CBC says the city manages about 160 public washrooms, but most of them are downtown or near the river valley. Some neighbourhoods don't have any or have very few. I've said repeatedly on this show that we don't have enough public toilets. I'm very happy about the two new ones that we have downtown. In the pavilion at O-day'min Park, there are public washrooms that are just beautiful. They're open nine to nine, I believe. There's staff in there all the time. My kids have used them quite a bit, actually. They're quite handy to have. And then there are a couple of public washrooms in the redeveloped Beaver Hills House Park at 105 Street and Jasper Avenue, which also have an attendant. I don't know their hours, but it's great to have public washrooms right downtown in these brand-new, really nicely developed parks. One thing I took from the CBC story that's pretty interesting was that they say some more new permanent public washrooms are coming: Mary Burlie Park, which is expected to open later this year and is just at the edge of Chinatown; Lauderdale Dog Park in 2027; and then the Lewis Farms facility and park in 2028. That's only three. That's not that many, but I guess we should celebrate any new public toilets. What's your take, Colin? What's your feeling about the state of public washrooms in Edmonton?

Colin:
Well, I don't know if I see the city and the stakeholders who are involved doing a bad job. I think, yes: more, more, more. How do you like it? How do you like it? But there's that great spot on Whyte Avenue near the Fringe grounds, and there's a beautiful place to use public restrooms with art inside of it. I think the work is happening. Is it enough? I don't know the answer to that, frankly. I do recall that during the mid-pandemic, it may have been EPCOR or some other type of energy company that had all these sponsored temporary porta-potties, which are not the most dignified places to conduct one's business. But I remember seeing tons of those around 118 Avenue, 97 Street, things like that. I don't know. I'm somewhat encouraged by the progress that we've made with public restrooms in the last few years. I think it's encouraging to see this new stuff.

Mack:
I just wish there was more of it, essentially, right? And I also think that it doesn't need to be so expensive. The toilets that have been built in the two new downtown parks are beautiful. They must have cost a pretty penny, and they're staffed. I don't know that we need to pay staff to be at these public washrooms all the time. I know the concern is always that people are gonna use drugs, or it's gonna be unsafe, or whatever it is. But the bathroom isn't the reason for that, right? The root causes that lead to that are something different. Everyone's gotta use the bathroom. Having a place to go and do that, I think, is really, really important. And there are cheaper ways. In the CBC story, they pointed out that there's a program where the city will fund, I think, up to $5,000 for private businesses to make their public washrooms available to the public. You know how lots of businesses say, "Washrooms are only for customers." I guess they've spent maybe $175,000 or something on making it so that other washrooms in private facilities can be opened up to the public. I think that's really interesting, and we should do more of that. I think that's really unclear. It's not clear where those are, and you might not always feel comfortable going into a private business like that in order to access a public washroom, but it's a step in the right direction. We don't need to build gold-plated, fully staffed toilets all the time. And more is always going to be better, I think. One of the people CBC spoke to had this phrase—what was it? "Bladder leash," I think it is. How far away the public washroom is will sometimes determine how far someone's willing to go from their house. And, you know, that might sound funny, but I had little kids who were just learning to use the toilet, and that was a real concern. You want to go to the park? You're thinking about where the bathroom is. How long can we stay there until someone's gonna need to go pee and then we gotta get out of here, right?

Colin:
Yeah. And people can have incontinence for all sorts of reasons related to disability and disease. It's not something to laugh at; it's just a funny combination of words, "bladder leash."

Mack:
Exactly. Well, hopefully we get more public toilets here in the near future.

Colin:
If I may chime in on one more element of that, I went to the ones at Taste of Edmonton at Churchill Square. Rancid. Absolutely disgusting.

Mack:
Like the porta potties, you mean.

Colin:
No, the indoor facilities. They have public restrooms at Churchill, and they were absolutely disgusting. It was a busy event with tons of people, and they can't clean it every 10 seconds. I get that. But it dissuaded me from wanting to use those facilities again. So I think if you're going to do this, then do it all the way. Don't just neglect things if you're gonna do it.

Mack:
I mean, that is the argument for having that staff, right? Because after every use, they're in there cleaning. They're wiping down the counter and everything, making sure that it stays clean for everyone.

Colin:
I think they are in practice really more there to discourage people from using intravenous drugs, but maybe you're right.

Mack:
No, I think that is why they're there too. I agree with you. But the side effect of them being there and sitting there all day is that they also help keep the thing clean on a more regular basis, right? Okay, well, thank you so much, Colin, for joining this week as the co-host of Speaking Municipally. This has been fun. We'll have you back again in the future, I'm sure. And thanks for your reporting as well on this Edmonton Global story and for following the threads there for us. Okay. We'll be back with another episode next week. Until then, I'm Mack.

Colin:
I'm Colin.

Mack:
And we're...

Both:
Speaking Municipally.