City of Richmond, BC - City Council - July 10, 2023 - Minutes

R 23 /13-5 It was moved and seconded ( 1 ) That Liquor Consumption in Parks Pilot Program Bylaw No. 10483 be introduced and given first, second and third reading; ( 2 ) That Notice of Bylaw Violation Dispute Adjudication Bylaw No. 8122, Amendment Bylaw No. 10482, be introduced and given first, second and third reading; (3) That Municipal Ticket Information Authorization Bylaw No. 7321, Amendment Bylaw No. 10481, be introduced and given first, second and third reading; and (4) That staff report back to Council upon completion of the pilot program to provide a status update regarding the implementation of the Liquor Consumption in Parks Pilot Program. The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding liquor consumption in parks and the associated bylaw and signage. As a result of the discussion, an amendment motion to add “(e) provide human health effects of alcohol consumption” and “(f) provide environmental pollution effects of consuming alcohol” to the sign specifications outlined in the Liquor Consumption in Parks Pilot Program Bylaw No. 10483 was introduced, but failed to receive a seconder. In response to queries from Council, staff noted that (i) public intoxication is a criminal code offence enforced by Richmond RCMP and the public can report this by calling 911, (ii) the enforcement regime is a combination of call response and proactive patrol, (iii) they have drafted signage that is consistent with other City parks signage that references the bylaw, includes a map clearly indicating the location of the Liquor Permitted Consumption Zones within the host park site, provides information on where to find out more about the Liquor Consumption in Parks Pilot Program, and promotes responsible consumption, and (iv) there is a more immediate response time when it comes to priority calls when dealing with public intoxication when routed through 911. The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Councillors Au, Gillanders, McNulty, and Wolfe opposed.

非商业公共资料研究与事实报道；仅展示核对事实所需的已评估摘录及本站中文说明。版权归原作者或发布机构；不表示来源机构认可本站。原文、来源及使用条款见链接。 来源使用条款 ↗