So we can’t walk on the grass outside city hall?

Nancy,

I first heard of this rule last week. Apparently, there are several new rules for the park area around city hall. It includes: no “gatherings” of people; no kicking objects such as a ball, no running, sports activities, basically anything that could potentially “harm the grass.” I think it’s a bit ridiculous. I had several picnics and played soccer with my 4-year-old daughter there over the summer. I’m going to look into it.

It’s sad that I feel this way, but I have no doubt that reality is quite far from the way this has been presented. I simply don’t believe that this is the intent of the bylaw. Nancy, you’re right to question it.

Hi Nancy

You are a brave woman to move from the peace and quiet of Downtown East Side Vancouver to this crime riddled town in the north!

The name of the town itself “yellow knife” already sounds suspicious. I know that if anyone told me they were moving to “blue bayonet” or “green garrote” I would be worried for them. And now you tell us that wiener dogs are running wild, that citizens are openly using the internet to coordinate to break the law (that’s this “organized crime” phenomenon I read about in the news, right?) and (worst of all) that assembling in front of the local city hall means risking your wallet! The local thugs are obviously untouchable and just flaunting their power over the authorities if they feel safe to commit a mass mugging right on the steps of city hall.

Come home to the safety of Vancouver, Nancy, come home!

Thanks for helping draw attention to this, Nancy. Not to worry, the proposed bylaw is on death row. Thanks to the (deserving) uproar from concerned citizens, my colleagues now agree with Coun Bardak and I who originally opposed this. It will likely fall this week. So, parks will be safe for guitars!

~Paul

@Jan ROTFL! Best.Comment.Ever

@Jan yes that is the best comment ever….Nancy good for you to show this up….we knew it wouldn’t belong before you were getting things in order “up there” miss you “down here” but Yellowknifer’s you have inherited a smart, compassionate, driven and determined gem! Congrats and enjoy the grass!

It’s great to see all of the interest in this by-law and how much Yellowknifers care about their parks and green spaces. It’s evident that the proposed by-law has caused a lot of concern for people, and I can appreciate how it might be interpreted a certain way. There are clearly issues in the way the by-law was written that can lead one to misinterpret its purpose, and that was an oversight on the part of City Council when it first came forward – myself included. It’s also why Councillor Montgomery and I called for a Special Meeting to re-visit the by-law.

Part of the problem is that the prohibited activities listed could be seen to apply to all parks and recreational facilities, when that wasn’t – at least in my view – the intent. Granted, City Hall does some illogical things from time to time, but it wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense for the city to prohibit all of the things people enjoy doing at parks. As others have mentioned here, it makes sense that you wouldn’t want someone kicking a ball in the lobby of the Multiplex or swinging a golf club at the swimming pool, which is why many of these things were included in the prohibited activities within the by-law. The problem with the by-law is that it appears to apply all of the prohibited activities to all parks and recreational facilities, when that isn’t the intent of it. Someone posted on here that it ought to state which rules apply to which parks and facilities, and I think that’s a very sensible suggestion that can and should be raised at the Special Meeting scheduled for Friday. This would clearly define the authority that is currently held by the Director of Community Services, who determines which activities are prohibited in specific parks and facilities.

There are definitely parts of the by-law that require further discussion and clarification. Among others, the prohibited activities related to doing anything that’s likely to attract a crowd and entering into any undeveloped or natural area other than a designated trail need further clarification, and could potentially be removed from the by-law.

It may be helpful to look at what’s in the existing Parks and Recreation By-Law, and to get a sense of how it has been interpreted since it came into effect twelve years ago. As an example, the existing by-law includes the clause that, “No person shall: Injure any grass.” In the current debate on the proposed by-law, some have interpreted that same clause to mean they aren’t allowed to walk on grass at any city park, but clearly, given that it’s been in the existing by-law for twelve years, that’s not the intent. Similarly, there are other prohibited activities in the new by-law which already appear in the existing by-law, that would lead me to believe there has been discretion applied in the way the by-law is enforced.

So that everyone has access to the actual by-laws, I’ve posted both the existing and proposed Parks and Recreation By-Laws on my website at:

http://www.votemark.ca/parks_and_rec.html

Part of a City Councillor’s job is to help residents understand and interpret our by-laws and I would be happy to discuss the Parks and Recreation By-Law with any interested resident. You can find my contact information on my website, so please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this issue in greater detail.

Thanks,
Mark Heyck
City Councillor