Frances Bula header image 2
← →

New bylaw allows protest huts in front of consulates

April 14th, 2011 · 16 Comments

This just out

Revised bylaw for structures for political expression
on public streets
A proposed bylaw for permitting and regulating structures on city streets for political expression has been redrafted and will come before City Council on April 19.
The bylaw includes a number of revisions to address concerns raised by the public and members of Council at its meeting April 7, 2011. The amended report and the accompanying proposed bylaw is designed to enable and facilitate the use of structures on city streets for the purpose of political expression, following direction as set out by the BC Court of Appeal.
Revisions in the proposed bylaw include:
Allowing for street structures for political expression to be permitted outside consulates which are conducting business in residential areas
The elimination of a $200 registration fee and $1000 refundable deposit
The removal of the requirement for a transportation plan
Modifying the need for a structure to have continuous attendance.
The provisions being proposed would legally enable opportunities to use structures on city streets for political expression. Staff have reviewed the relevant by-laws of many other jurisdictions in Canada and the United States including Victoria, Surrey, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Halifax, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, and Washington D. C. None of their bylaws permit structures for the purpose of political expression on public streets. The proposed bylaw will be unprecedented in North America.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • rf

    huh? So last week that went to far….wake up and do a full 180?

    The way I read this, a homeless protest can build a shed in the middle of Broadway and Granville!

    Any suggestions on where I can set up a protest against clowns?

  • rf

    “so last week they went too far”

  • spartikus

    Rf,

    The full-text of the proposed bylaw has this:

    A person must not build, construct, place, maintain, occupy, or cause to be built, constructed, placed, maintained or occupied in any street, any structure, object, or substance which is an obstruction to the free use of such street, or which may encroach thereon, without having first obtained a permit issued by the City Engineer, in accordance with this By-law, except that this section does not apply to a person:

  • Max

    Seems this was missed:

    Other Proposed By-law Changes

    The requirement for an indemnity will be dealt with as part of the permit application process, which is within the authority of the City Engineer. Applicants will be required to indemnify the City.

    A breach of the requirements of the proposed by-law will be subject to a minimum of $1,000 and a maximum fine of $5,000.

  • Max

    and this:

    (e) The City of Vancouver is not precluded from prohibiting the kind of structures placed by the Falun Gong if it sees fit to do so, but it must do so in a manner that is constitutionally sound.

  • The Fourth Horseman

    @max #5

    Sounds like we can expect that there will be further court cases in the future…

  • Mira

    It is an election year. And Vision train have already left the station, with many of them councilors and mayor running like hell to catch it. It’s going to be a long walk for many of them, regardless.

  • Gerry McGuire

    Here’s what all the fuss is about.

  • Michelle

    Exactly. It’s an election year. Be nice, kids!

  • Jason King

    Actually I applaud this new bylaw…funny how its now pretty much exactly in keeping with the argument myself and others were making a couple posts ago….Too bad the pro vision regulars couldn’t admit it was wrong before their own party did an about face

    Glad to see council gave in to public pressure

  • F.H.Leghorn

    “The proposed bylaw will be unprecedented in North America.”

    Just like the first one. We’re #1!

  • George

    Sometimes I think there are times when being first isn’t always a good thing..

  • Creek’er

    I’m building a Protest Palace! The right to protest requires a pimped out hut with a lazy-boy and flat screen. Placards and marching is for chumps!

  • Bobbie Bees

    I say shut the Chinese consulate down and send ’em packing. Let them come back when they don’t have any dirty laundry that needs to be aired in public.

  • Bill McCreery

    Frances, your: “New bylaw allows protest huts in front of consulates” doesn’t tell the whole storey. The revised 2nd draft is even more insulting than the 1st Machiavellian attempt. We mere citizens are now to be allowed “huts”, however, their size is limited to 4′-4″ high x 5′-4″ wide x 3’3″‘ deep. This is not a “hut” because a “hut” is intended for human habitation. This is better described as a “dog house” or perhaps a “chicken coop”.

    This is only 1 of another series of troubling, but now beginning to be farcical attempts at limiting Canadians’ freedom of expression in this latest draft.

  • spartikus

    It is, however, large enough for someone to sit on a chair in, protected from the elements. Which is, in my understanding, the purpose of the Falun Gong hut.

    But fair enough, it’s too small, says Bill. My natural inclination in such matters is to ask for a counter number from those who dispute them.

    So…what do you suggest is the appropriate maximum size?

    Acceptable answer include: An actual number or “no restrictions on size”.

    Unacceptable answers include “I don’t know”.