Summary#

On May 26, 2026, Council adopted Councillor Johnston’s motion directing City staff to bring forward an amendment to Procedure Bylaw 42M2025. The goal is to make access to the three Council question-period slots fairer; the motion does not itself change the bylaw.

• City staff must bring the required amending bylaw to the earliest practicable Council meeting, and no later than the end of the second quarter of 2026.
• The proposed rules would let Council members request a slot from the meeting’s posted start time until the Chair calls question period. Requests made earlier would be invalid, and submitting earlier within the valid window would not give priority.
• If more than three members request a slot, the City Clerk would assign the three slots by a transparent random draw. The Chair would announce the results and choose the order of the questions.
• Council carried the motion 11 to 4. Councillors Clark, Dhaliwal, Chabot and Schmidt voted against.

What it means for you#

• Council members: The motion directs City staff to prepare a bylaw amendment with the rules above. Those rules are not in force just because Council adopted this direction.
• Residents: The motion does not directly change residents’ rights or services. It concerns how Council members get and use question-period slots.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The motion directs City staff to prepare an amending bylaw, but gives no staffing or cost estimate.

What is unclear#

• The motion sets a deadline for City staff to bring forward the amendment, but the available material does not say when Council would pass it or when any new rules would start.
• It does not set out how the random draw would be run or documented beyond requiring it to be transparent and conducted by the City Clerk.

Case for#

• The motion’s stated concern is that the current request queue opens when the Chair strikes the gavel, often after the posted meeting start time. The motion says this leaves the Chair knowing the exact opening moment.
• Using the posted start time and electronic timestamps would give members a stated time window for requests, rather than making priority depend on who knows when the gavel will fall.
• A random draw when more than three members request a slot would avoid giving priority to whoever submits first within the window.

Case against#

• A random draw means a member’s chance of getting a slot would not depend on how early they request it, but on the draw; some members who request in time may not get to ask a question.
• The Chair would still choose the order of the three questions, so the motion does not remove the Chair’s role in sequencing them.
• Councillors Clark, Dhaliwal, Chabot and Schmidt voted against. The available material does not give their reasons.