Public Spaces Bylaw (February 2024)

On February 14th, 2024, City Council held a Public Hearing on the new Public Spaces Bylaw. I want to acknowledge that I received some questions from residents about a post on this topic from one of my colleagues. Councillor Tim Cartmell wrote a blog post on this topic and while I agree with some points, I think there are some other points that leave out some important context. Therefore, I wanted to write a post to answer your questions and provide some additional detail.

I spoke with Councillor Cartmell in advance of posting this. While we often agree, we don’t agree on everything and that’s perfectly fine. I think it’s important to hear/read different perspectives and that is why I’ve included a link to his blog above.

At a high level, the Public Spaces Bylaw is a consolidation of three separate bylaws. Most of the changes are positive and will provide greater clarity when completing enforcement. As this was the first time we were seeing the new bylaw, there were some changes that were identified. There were also a few pieces of information that were not part of the report that I felt would allow us to make the most informed decision possible. Therefore, I supported the following referral motion:

1. That Bylaw 20700 - Public Spaces Bylaw be referred back to Administration to complete further research and analysis and to incorporate the following into the bylaw report, including any potential further recommended amendments for consideration when this report comes back:

1. comprehensive GBA+ analysis including data and research including, but not limited to, anti-racism, criminalization of poverty, LGBTQ2S+ specific considerations with public spaces and how these findings were or were not integrated into the proposed bylaw and why;

2. a climate review with options to support better environmental stewardship in public spaces, including but not limited to, the River Valley;

3. comprehensive rationale for any fine changes in the proposed bylaw;

4. a jurisdictional scan of municipal fine amounts for the same infraction where the fine is not the same as current policy or is a new offence; and

5. a detailed review of the 50 person gathering permit requirement and amplification systems to ensuring the rights to protest and gather are not infringed through this bylaw.

2. That Administration prepare the following amendments to Bylaw 20700 - Public Spaces Bylaw and return to a future Committee meeting:

1. clarify that “herbicides” are included in section section 44;

2. refine the definition of “temporary shelters” in section 46 to include for the purpose of sheltering;

3. delete section 54;

4. clarify that sidewalk chalk is not included in section 62;

5. change all minimum fine amounts to specified fines;

6. remove reference to “inappropriate use of transit spaces” throughout the bylaw;

7. remove the exception for feeding birds and feral cats in public spaces in section 16; and

8. clarify that the definition of weapon includes, but is not limited to, the listed items in section 28;

9. revise the relevant sections of Part XIV to allow bicycles, e-bicycles, e-scooters, inline skates, roller skates, and skateboards in park spaces provided the use does not cause damage; and

10. revise the relevant sections of Part XIV to allow bicycles, e-bikes, scooters, inline skates, roller skates, and skateboards in areas where protected active transportation infrastructure does not exist.

So what does this mean? The quick version is that an updated report will be provided including the items referenced in Point 1. There will also be some amendments to the bylaw as outlined in point 2. Instead of going through each item in point 2, I’ll cover a few examples.

The first one I will comment on is point 2.c which asks to delete section 54. Section 54 in the bylaw says, “A person must not spill or drop, or permit to be spilled or dropped, any food or drink in a transit vehicle or transit station.” While I agree that people shouldn’t spill or drop food, I find this to be a bit excessive. People make mistakes. We’ve all likely spilled food at one point or another. Based on the wording of this bylaw, anyone that spills food in a transit vehicle or a transit station should then be issued a $250 fine. I don’t think that’s reasonable.

We already restrict littering. Our current bylaw already states, “No person may, while on Transit Property, engage in behavior that can reasonably be expected to interfere with the safety or comfort of others, including passengers and Edmonton Transit Service employees.” It also states:

“No person may inappropriately or unlawfully use, interfere with the intended use of, or cause damage to Transit Property, including but not limited to:

(a) remaining on Transit Property while engaging in Bylaw 8353 - Page 6 behaviours or activities other than related to using Edmonton Transit Service; and

(b) visibly using a controlled substance, as defined in the Controlled Drug and Substances Act (Canada), while on Transit Property”

I use this example because I would be shocked if any person cares if someone accidentally spills something. I am confident that no one believes someone should be able to throw food or a drink or use it in a way that interferes with the safety or comfort of others. Removing the reference to spilling food is logical especially when the new bylaw will continue to have restrictions like the one in our current bylaw.

Another example from the motion is 2.f which recommends the removal of the reference to section 35 which is the inappropriate use of transit spaces. It may seem odd to remove that line but the reason I supported it is primarily because we have a separate part of the bylaw: section 32 which clearly outlines inappropriate behaviours:

“A person must not engage in behaviour or actions in a public space that would reasonably be expected to interfere with the safety or comfort of others, including City employees and other public space users, including but not limited to:

(a) standing or being in any other position so as to obstruct an entrance to a building or other structure;

(b) obstructing pedestrians or other users from using the public space for its intended purpose; or

(c) crowding, jostling, or harassing other public space users.”

Creating a separate set of rules for transit spaces does seem a bit out of place when this new section 35 captures all inappropriate behaviour in all public spaces. As mentioned at the beginning of this post, one of the goals of the bylaw is to consolidate the rules to provide clarity. Therefore, instead of continuing with one set of rules for transit and a separate set of rules for other public spaces, I believe that having a single set of rules for all public spaces is more clear for the public and for our bylaw officers who will be enforcing the rules.

These are the types of changes that are being proposed. The main parts of the new bylaw, which are clearly supported through the public survey, will continue to be in the new bylaw when it comes back for Council approval. Take something like open air drug use. This is currently illegal today and will continue to be illegal in the new bylaw. The new bylaw will provide some greater clarity but there was no proposal to make a change to open air drug use.

Any suggestion that won’t be enforced because the bylaw hasn’t been approved is not true.

In fact, we asked many times during the meeting if our bylaw officers and police officers will continue to enforce the law. The answer was yes, they will continue to enforce the laws that exist today. Edmonton Police Service held a press conference back in September to state that they were taking a zero tolerance approach to open air drug use. Here’s a quote from that press conference from Chief McFee:

“There has been a visible increase in socially unacceptable behaviours on our streets and in places like our parks, pedways, and LRT stations. The impacts of violence and social disorder, including random violence, have grown increasingly prominent,” says Police Chief Dale McFee. “We are sending a clear message that safety is the priority. No Edmontonian should be at risk of becoming a victim, and no one should feel that their right to go about their lives within these spaces is compromised.”

During questions of the public speakers, we heard that there has been a positive shift for businesses in the downtown. While there is still work to be done, clear enforcement action is taking place today and will continue on an ongoing basis. If you are interested in learning more about the actions that have been taken in the past two years to help address safety and security, you can review that here and here.

A final issue I want to address is that by not approving this bylaw on February 14th, we are avoiding making a decision. When we update or create a new bylaw, that usually doesn’t happen at a single meeting. For example, the creation of the new Zoning Bylaw took 5 years and had multiple check-ins at our committee meetings prior to coming to council for approval. While it didn’t take as long, we also had multiple check-ins on the creation of a new property tax subclass for derelict properties.

This was our first check-in but the main difference with this is that instead of going to a committee meeting first, it came to council as part of a non-statutory Public Hearing. This was a deliberate decision by our City Administration to ensure all of Council could provide feedback and I believe it made sense for them to take this approach.

This approach did seem to create unrealistic expectations as there were speakers who attended the Public Hearing who were eager to see this approved or defeated instead of seeing this as a first draft and a chance to provide feedback on possible changes.

I also found that emotions were running a bit higher as there was criticism coming from those in support and those in opposition directed to people on the other side. Why that was odd is that overall, I think there is general agreement that we need clear rules, penalties for breaking those rules, and that we don’t want to criminalize poverty. The specifics of how we do that is where people had different opinions and the feedback was another great indication of why some additional refinement is needed.

I believe the survey results are quite clear that Edmontonians want clear rules in place for important issues like open air drug use, harassment, etc. We have clear laws in place right now to address those issues and that will be the case when the new bylaw is approved. Since we aren’t in a time crunch, addressing the issues above as well as the rest of the items in the motion will ensure we have a better overall bylaw when it comes back later this year.