►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
B
B
Please
note
if
my
connection
is
lost
during
any
portion
of
this
meeting,
we
will
recess
the
meeting
until
my
connection
is
restored.
If
a
council
member
attending
by
electronic
means
loses
connection
during
the
voting
process,
staff
are
available
to
get
you
back
online
quickly.
While
the
voting
process
is
suspended.
B
The
staff
contact
information
has
been
circulated
to
the
members.
Video
of
council
members
speaking
and
vote
results
will
be
projected
on
the
live
stream
when
available
for
council
members
participating
by
electronic
means.
In
accordance
with
section
14.13
of
the
procedure.
Bylaw,
please
ensure
your
video
is
turned
on
and
let
the
clerks
know
if
you
leave
the
meeting
for
the
purposes
of
confirming
quorum.
Thank
you.
B
We
also
acknowledge
that
we
are
on
the
traditional
and
unseated
territories
of
the
musqueam
squamish
and
slaver
tooth
nations.
We
thank
them
for
having
cared
for
this
land
and
look
forward
to
working
with
them
in
partnership.
As
we
continue
to
build
this
great
city
together,
may
we
have
the
roll
call
please.
B
A
B
C
The
l,
a
n
c
m
litigation
council
with
the
city
also
holding
the
title
of
city
prosecutor.
Do
we
have
the
licensees
on
the
line.
C
Thank
you
is
anybody
else
appearing
for
the
licensees,
mr
mcmillan.
C
Okay,
thank
you
I'll
address
the
panel
then
we'll
get
underway.
The
hearing
before
the
panel
this
evening
is
an
appeal
by
the
licensee
of
the
chief
license
inspector's
decision
to
suspend
the
2021
business
license
issued
to
ryan
mcmillan
and
mileen
macmillan
on
that
was
issued
on
december
30th
2020
for
the
provision
of
short-term
rental
accommodation
at
the
address
of
410
inverness
street
that
license
that
is
subject
to
this
hearing
is
included
in
the
materials
at
tab.
2.
E
C
Suspension
by
the
chief
license
inspector
and
the
basis,
therefore
is
set
out
in
the
letter
of
october
13
2021,
and
that
is
two
included
in
the
materials
under
tab
10
and
there's
a
portion
of
that
letter
that
I'm
going
to
I
just
read
from
the
outset.
I
have
the
materials
tabbed,
but
they're
also
page
numbered
in
the
top
right
hand,
corner
maybe
more
helpful
if
I
refer
to
page
64,
which
is
where
I'm
going
to
take
the
panel.
C
The
synopsis
of
the
decision
is
set
out
in
the
first
and
the
third
full
paragraph
on
page
64..
This
is
the
letter
from
the
chief
licensed
inspector
sarah
hicks.
C
The
city
has
determined
that
in
consideration
of
the
totality
of
information,
including
the
documentation
submitted
prior
to
the
meeting
information
provided
at
the
meeting
and
the
inspection
with
regards
to
the
living
and
rental
arrangements,
the
non-compliance
with
the
booking
calendar
request
and
the
acknowledgement
that
you
ryan
stated
that
you
do
not
hold
a
license
for.
Nor
are
you
the
principal
resident
of
unit
number
two
4010
in
burness
street,
but
it
does
not
support
that
4010
in
burnest
street
is
your
principal
residence.
C
On
that
basis,
the
2020
license
was
suspended.
The
the
crux
of
the
decision
falls
on
the
interpretation
of
principal
residence
requirements
as
outlined
in
the
license.
Bylaw.
There
is
a
definition
of
a
principal
residential
or
principal
residence
unit,
and
I'm
going
to
read
from
that,
because
this
panel
is
going
to
need
to
take
that
into
consideration.
C
A
decision
to
suspend
what
the
panel
can
expect
to
hear
is
an
indication
that
the
decision
required
a
weighing
of
the
claim
of
principal
residency
by
the
licensee
against
a
number
of
other
factors,
namely
the
high
booking
volumes
of
the
subject,
premises
for
short-term
rental
accommodation,
the
lack
of
documents
supporting
primary
residents
with
respect
to
the
unit
that
is
being
used
for
short-term
rental
accommodation,
no
submission
of
contemporaneous
booking
records,
which
was
the
latest
request
from
the
city's
audit
admissions
of
residency
in
both
units
by
mr
mcmillan
and
further
discrepancies
with
respect
to
information
provided
during
the
audit
process.
C
This
is
what
the
chief
license
inspector
is
required
to
to
make
the
decision
for
the
chief
license
inspector
submission.
Is
that
the
conclusion
that
the
evidence
did
not
support
principal
residency?
I
was
a
reasonable
one
that
the
suspension
of
the
license
logically
flows
from
that
and
that
the
suspension
should
be
upheld.
C
Of
course,
the
licensee
has
the
opportunity
this
evening
to
convince
this
panel.
Otherwise,
before
embarking
on
the
evidence,
there
are
some
legal
and
procedural
matters
to
note.
First,
is
that
the
chief
license
inspector's
power
to
suspend
the
business
licenses
set
out
in
section
277
of
the
vancouver
charter.
C
The
granting
or
refusing
of
a
license
to
an
applicant,
therefore,
and
the
revocation
or
suspension
of
a
license
which
has
been
granted
shall
be
deemed
to
be
in
the
discretion
of
counsel
and
the
council
may
grant,
refuse
revoke
or
suspend
the
license
without
stating
reasons,
therefore,
save
in
respect
of
a
licensee
who,
by
reasonable
efforts,
cannot
be
found
at
the
council,
shall
not
revoke
a
license
without
giving
the
holder
thereof
an
opportunity
to
be
heard.
Of
course,
that's
the
purpose
of
this
evening's
procedure.
C
Under
that
section
you
have
broad
powers,
then
this
panel
does
to
revoke,
suspend
or
uphold
a
business
license.
This
is,
however,
an
administrative
proceeding.
There
are
rules
of
natural
justice
that
apply
to
that
I'd.
Ask
the
panel
to
keep
please
keep
in
mind
that
the
license
holder
is
entitled
to
hear
the
allegations
against
them.
That
includes
the
allegations
through
the
city's
sole
witness
and
the
material
in
the
evidence,
materials
that
have
been
filed.
C
C
If
this
panel
sees
fit
to
uphold
the
suspension,
overturn
it
or
or
stipulate
conditions
on
the
issuance
of
the
license,
the
the
law
of
the
supreme
court
does
state
that
you
must
give
some
reasons
as
to
why
you're
doing
so.
C
With
that
in
mind,
the
city
can
proceed
with
the
calling
of
its
of
its
only
witness
this
evening.
That
would
be
the
chief
or
the
deputy
chief
licensed
inspector
kojimaji.
E
I'm
my
name
is
koji
miaji,
I'm
the
deputy
chief
licensed
inspector
for
the
city
of
vancouver,
and
I'm
also
the
assistant
director
of
community
standards
in
that
dual
capacity.
If
you
will,
I
oversee
areas
in
this
particular
case,
the
it's
called
proactive
enforcement
and
they're
the
folks
that
oversee
the
enforcement
of
short-term
rental
licenses.
C
C
What
I'm
going
to
ask
you
to
do
is
take
us
through
one
document,
in
particular
in
the
evidence
book
that
is
located
at
tab,
three
of
the
material
starting
on
page
four
noted
in
the
upper
right
hand,
corner,
and
maybe
just
before
we
dive
into
the
information.
That's
in
that
document
you
can
just
explain
to
the
to
the
panel.
What
to
what
this
document
is.
E
Yes
through
the
chair,
this
is
a
summary
that
I've
asked
our
short-term
rental
clerks
and
they're
the
folks
that
work
with
the
the
coordinator
and
the
manager
of
that
area
to
to
essentially
review
and
conduct
audits
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
And
so
this
this
document
is
provided
is
created
to
provide
the
panel
with
the
information
chronologically
highlights
of
what
occurred
in
the
creation
of
this
case.
File
and.
E
And
so
page,
four
page,
five
page,
six
and
page
seven
and
then
to
eight
actually
will
summarize
quite
well
the
information
that
I
hope
to
cover
pertaining
to
this
case.
C
And
maybe
just
before
we
dive
into
that,
you
can
explain
to
the
panel
what
type
of
property
it
is
that's
located
at
4010
inverness.
E
Yes,
this
property,
my
understanding
is,
it
has
two
addresses
so
they're
two
separate.
E
C
Changing
a
410
inverness
street
is
the
main
address
and
a
secondary
address
of
1210
east
24th
avenue
to
two
addresses
under
410
in
for
inverness
street
one
being
a
unit
one
and
one
being
unit.
Two
is
that
right.
E
Yes,
that
is
correct,
and
that
was
something
that
we
picked
up
through
our
process
in
our
research
and
that
also
triggered
our
investigation.
If
you
will
as
well
but
the
the
the
address
request.
E
The
address
change
request,
my
understanding
came
from
the
property
owner
or
one
of
the
property
owners,
and
it
was
to
eliminate
1210
east
24th
avenue.
That
is
that's
the
the
unit,
that's
in
question
being
short-term
rental
and
to
distinguish
it
away
from
410
4010
inverness
street
to
designate
him
as
two
different
addresses,
and
it
was.
E
It
was
for
safety
reasons
in
terms
of
fire
for
301
calls
or
sorry
9-1-1
calls,
and
so
the
fire
folks
could
could
see
the
address
and
and
see
that
they're
they're,
two
distinct
distinct
locations,
and
so
that
request
was
put
in
with
the
property
owner
and
so
to
our
record.
That's
where
the
number
two
410
inverness
street
came
from.
C
I'm
actually
just
looking
at
a
property
inspection
report
that
is
at
page
34
of
the
documents.
This
is
an
inspection
report
filled
out
by
one
of
your
property
use
inspectors,
and
it
refers
to
the
approved
use
of
the
building
in
the
land
on,
on
the
first
page
of
that
report,
again
page
34
as
being
a
one
family
dwelling
plus
secondary
suite.
E
C
These
are,
these
are
two
separate
dwelling
units
within
the
the
main
address
of
4010.
Yes,
they
are
okay.
Now
you
said
that
the
distinction
between
these
addresses
came
to
your
attention
with
respect
to
the
to
the
licensing
of
a
short-term
rental
accommodation
at
that
premises.
Is
that
right.
E
Yes,
so
one
of
the
activities
that
we
do
is
we
frequently
scan
for
anomalies
in
the
address
and
and
or
its
structures,
and
so
the
clerk
or,
as
you
say,
the
clerk,
the
coordinator,
the
enforcement
coordinator
for
short,
short-term
rentals,
had
flagged
that
this,
the
410
4010
inverness
in
fact,
is
a
multi-unit
dwelling
and
so
therefore
the
license
for
those
states
one
address
or
yes,.
E
C
And
I'm
just
looking
at
a
copy
of
the
2021
license,
which
is
page
3
in
the
in
the
evidence,
materials,
and
I
do
see
that
the
address
that
is
particularized
on
the
license
is
410
in
vernestry,
with
no
distinction
between
whether
or
not
it
licenses
the
use
at
unit
1
or
unit
2..
E
That
is
correct
and,
and
that's
also
a
flag
for
us
as
well,
because
these
are
self
filled
by
the
applicant,
and
this
was
issued
in
december
30
2020,
the
the
address
change
and
the
request
occurred
in
march
2020
and
so
the
the
applicant,
who
is
the
property
owner
I
suspected,
would
have
known
about
the
address
change
at
that
time.
Okay,.
C
So
it
was
flagged
because
I
I
take
it
there's
no
such
single
dwelling
unit
as
4010.
It
has
to
be
distinguished
as
either
one
or
two,
and
so
there
was
some
further
investigation
as
to
what
was
happening.
C
E
Yeah,
so
as
our
initial
follow-up,
this
is
june
1st
in
2020.
E
Our
coordinator,
alex
alexander
holmes,
spoke
to
ryan,
I
believe
the
property
owner
and
and
wanted
to
know
that
they're
advertising,
the
the
legal,
short-term
secondary
suite
for
short,
short-term
rentals,
but
wanted
to
know
which,
which
unit
does
the
license,
apply
to
and
and
and
the
property
owner
ryan
at
the
time,
and
it
says
here
he
wanted
to
know
how
to
resolve
so
that
they
can
keep
doing
what
they're
doing,
which
alex,
of
course
had
said
that.
E
Well,
you
can't
continue
to
do
that
because
you
have
to
live
in
that
unit
that
you're
renting
they
thought
about
geo
being
so
that's
a
term
that
we
use
that's
gone
out
of
business,
and
so
they
they
talked
about.
Well,
maybe
you
want
to
cancel
your
license
essentially
and
the
conversation
continued
on
and
to
a
point
where
we
we
clearly
explain
to
them
that
you
can't
continue
to
do
that.
E
We
will
permit
you
to
continue
with,
if
you
to
honor
your
booking
for
that
immediate
time,
but
you
can't
do
that
going
forward
and
and
if
they
chose
to
do
so
that
we
would.
We
would
then
continue
our
investigation
and
audit
the
license
further
in
terms
of
their
activities.
C
Okay,
I'm
just
going
to
paraphrase,
maybe
what
you
said
and
what
my
understanding
is
in
in
terms
of
the
notes
from
that
paragraph
is
that
ms
holmes
was
was
advised
by
the
licensing
of
spring
melon
that
they
were
living
upstairs
and
using
the
secondary
suite
downstairs
for
short-term
rental
purposes.
E
E
Well,
so
we
said
that
we
would
continue,
then,
with
with
the
audit
and
in
the
enforcement
process,
is
such
that
we
would
then
request
for
the
first
phase
is
a.
We
call
it
a
mailing
audit
that
that's
that's
the
term
that
we
use,
but
it's
documentation
check
is
what
we
do
and-
and
so
we
requested
that
maybe
just.
C
Maybe
just
before
we
we
get
there
sure
it
appears
as
though,
in
the
following
paragraph,
there
was
some
follow-up
with
mr
mcmillan,
the
next
day
by
one
of
the
clerks
in
the
str
office
and
the
in
a
different
version
of
the
living
arrangements
was
was
provided.
E
Yes,
that's
correct
in
that
particular
conversation.
I
believe
it
was
sarah
that
he
was
talking
to
one
of
our
clerks.
E
He
had
said
now
that
that
they're,
using
the
downstairs
as
a
pr
or
I
believe,
ryan,
was
using
the
the
downstairs
as
the
his
primary
residence
and
his
wife
was
living
upstairs
and
then,
whenever
she
goes
out
of
town,
that's
when
he'll
go
upstairs
and
book
out
the
the
lower
suite,
and
so
he's
saying
that
he's
he's
using
the
primary
residence
claim
for
the
secondary
suite
and
then,
while
his
wife's
away.
E
He
will
book
we'll
talk
shortly
about
the
number
of
bookings
that
he's
had
to
to
sort
of
question
that
validity.
But
but
that
was
the
story
that
that
we
had
heard
the
the
next
day.
C
So
over
the
course
of
of
a
couple
of
days
there
june
1st
and
then
on
june,
2nd
2020,
we
had
two
different
clerks
in
the
short-term
rental
team
report.
Two
different
stories
received
by
mr
mcmillan
with
respect
to
the
living
arrangements
of
the
property.
C
E
C
First
day,
it
appears
as
though
there
was
an
indication
that
he
was
residing
upstairs
and,
and
he
and
the
co-licensee
were
renting
at
the
the
bottom
floor,
short-term
rental,
accommodation
and
then
the
following
day.
An
indication
that
in
fact
no
they
were
separate
living
in
separate
units,
one
of
the
licensees
upstairs
and
he
downstairs
and
he
would
rent
out
the
short
term.
C
C
So
so,
having
received
those
two
different
versions,
having
seen
a
license,
not
particularizing
either
of
the
two
units
at
4010,
you
mentioned
an
audit.
I
I
take
it
that
that
those
discrepancies
I
triggered
the
audit
process
under
the
the
regulations.
E
Yes,
they
they
checker
is
what
we
call
a
mailing
audit.
Sorry
that
that's
what
I
was
saying
before
and
and
through
the
chair,
the
the
results
of
what
we
obtained
are
also
identified
on
page
five,
which
I
can
get
into
at
this
juncture
of
the
audit.
We
look
for
documentation
that
supports
where
the
the
activities
where
the
license
is
issued
or
is
supposed
to
occur,
and
the
information
that
we
obtained
did
not
support.
Number
two:
four:
zero
one:
zero
inverness.
E
In
fact
the
the
documentation
showed
that
it
was
still
the
main
house.
Now
we
received
this
information
in
november,
so
there
was
plenty
of
time
there
to
to
see
or
for
them
to
to
reflect
the
address
change
and
for
for
some
reason
we
did
not
receive
any
information
that
reflected
the
address
of
the
secondary
suite.
C
I'm
just
reflecting
back
on
that
definition
of
principal
residency
that
I
read
from
the
license
bylaw
and
it
indicated
things
like
bills
and
insurance
and
documentation
indicating
principal
residency.
That's
why
you're
asking
for
those
documents
in
particular-
and
I
see
here
insurance
agreements
a
driver's
license.
That's
what
a
bcdl
is
correct,
correct
bc,
hydro
bills,
fortis
bills,
what
you're
looking
for
there
is
particularization
in
those
documents
indicating
that
the
licensees
are
resident
in
a
particular
unit.
Is
that
correct.
C
And
in
this
case
we
know
that
it's
occurring
in
unit
number
two
because
that's
been
a
toll
to
us
on
a
couple
of
occasions,
but
none
of
the
documentation
indicates
that
either
myleene,
mcmillan
or
ryan
mcmillan
were
permanent
residents
of
unit
number
two
at
4010
is
that
right.
C
But
the
the
4010
was
always
the
address
for
the
upper
unit,
even
though
it
was
even
though
it
was
later
changed
to
to
be
particularized
as
unit
number.
One.
Is
that
right
that.
C
So
so,
in
this
case,
you
didn't
receive
any
documents
supporting
primary
residence
of
unit
number.
Two
I
see
in
the
paragraph
that
follows
you.
You
appear
to
have
asked
for
booking
calendars.
E
Yes,
and
that
is
a
standard
process
for
us
as
well
for
license
holders
that
have
had
short-term
rental
activity.
We
we
like
to
look
at
the
the
booking
activity
and,
as
you
can
see
here,
from
what
we
received
from
april
to
october
of
2020,
these
are
extremely
high
booking
numbers,
and,
if
you,
if
you
bear
with
me
with
the
percentages,
you
know
the
the
april
bookings
equals
73
may
bookings
equal
100
percent,
65
or
60
65,
94,
90
and
77,
which
reflects
october
overall.
E
That's
that's
70
percent
of
the
total
time,
for
that
particular
secondary
suite
is
booked
for
short-term
rental
activity.
E
To
us
that
that's
a
extremely
high
and
two
it
makes
it
us.
It
makes
it
difficult
for
us
to
understand
how
a
70
completely
booked
facility
is
a
primary
resident
residence
for
somebody.
Some
of
these
places
that
are
booked
100,
94
99,
that's
three
months.
If
you
will
that's
completely
booked
and
so
for
us,
that's
another
trigger
for
us
to
to
say
that
we
we
don't
think
that
is
somebody's
principal
residence
to
the
degree
that
it's
booked.
C
Thank
you,
I'm
just
doing
my
own
math
and
I
came
up
with
different
figures,
but
maybe
you
can
just
tell
me
if
the
totals
are
correct.
I
have
over
that
period
from
april
2020
to
october
2020,
as
as
being
171
days
out
of
214
that
were
booked
for
short-term
rental
accommodation.
C
I
I
I
take
it
from
that.
You've
determined
that
over
that
period,
a
principal
resident
of
that
particular
unit
would
have
to
have
only
occupied
the
unit
for
close
to
well
less
than
50
days
over
a
period
of
214
days.
E
C
Now
then,
having
received
the
booking
information
indicating
overwhelming
number
of
days
being
used
for
short-term
rental
accommodations
and
having
not
received
any
documents
indicating
principal
residency
in
unit
number
two,
what
to
what
enforcement
action
was
was
taken
at
that
point,.
E
So,
with
that
information
on
file
for
us,
we
decided
to
further
have
an
audit
and
that's
the
interview
audit.
That's
the
the
second
phase
that
we
do.
We
started
that
conversation
with
them
in
november
5th
and
the
different
time
frames
that
you
see
there
are
conversations
that
we've
had
with
them,
or
contact
or
or
lack
of
contact
and
and
and
we
recognize
people
are
busy
as
well.
E
So
we
try
to
accommodate
as
much
as
we
can,
but
with
that
understanding,
from
november
5th
we
were
able
to
finally
nail
a
date
in
february,
2nd
of
2021
to
be
able
to
have
that
interview.
Audit.
C
E
Yes,
miss
thompson
is
the
manager
of
proactive
enforcement
and
so
and
she
and
alex
holmes.
I
used
to
do
myself
as
well.
Do
the
the
audit
interviews
and
so
miss
thompson?
Is
the
manager
and
and
andrew
menzies
is
one
of
the
clerks
that
that
works
to
to
support
the
audit
process.
C
E
Yes,
that
is
correct,
correct.
C
You've
reviewed
those
those
notes
of
the
interview.
Yes,
I
have,
can
you
relay
to
the
panel
what
what
further
information
was
was
was
discovered
with
respect
to
the
units.
E
Yes,
so
with
this
audit
I'd
like
to
maybe
take
you
to
number
page
22
and
and
and
we
we
try
to
ascertain
from
the
property
owner
or
the
license
holder,
the
circumstances
that
we
see-
and
we
certainly
wanted
to
ask
more
about
the
high
booking
numbers
and
and
how
they've
had
their
explanation
of
how
they
reside
in
terms
of
the
the
secondary
suite
and
the
main
house,
and
and
so
in,
in
different
passages
and-
and
I
won't
necessarily
go
through
all
of
them.
E
If
you
look
at
page
22
in
the
in
in
rm,
stands
for
for
ryan.
He
talks
about
when
miss
thompson.
Ct
asked
questions
about.
What
do
you
mean
using
the
entire
house
for
secondary
suite.
E
E
So
that's
one
explanation:
if
you
go
further
down
that
page
on
page
number,
five
miss
thompson
asks
about
the
conversation
that
they
had
earlier,
with
alex
holmes
and
and
also
with
sarah,
who
is
the
other
clerk
about
their
their
their
their
living.
E
If
you
will,
or
how
they're
using
the
short-term
rental
in
the
secondary
suite
and
ryan
at
the
bottom
essentially
says,
I
don't
remember
saying
that
so
where
claire
says
well,
it
says
here
that
you
live
downstairs,
but
you
have
extremely
high
bookings,
is
I'm
kind
of
paraphrasing
and
he
says
that
some
of
them
were
shared
with
guests.
Others
was
out
of
town,
others,
others
she
was
at
she
meaning
his
wife
was
out
of
town.
So
we
made
arrangements.
E
I
would
stay
upstairs
and
it
says
I
don't
remember,
staying
saying
that
to
the
first
person
which
is
alex
so
either
was
misinterpreted
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
It
continues
on
to
say
in
page
23,
where
claire
thompson
asks.
Can
you
provide
evidence
that
your
wife
is
out
of
town
was
out
of
town
during
the
bookings,
as
you
stated
that
that's
when
you
stay
upstairs
and
and
ryan
says?
Yes,
I
can
some
other
days
were.
E
We
were
in
both
space,
the
so
the
the
comment
that
we'll
come
back
to
later
is
that
he's
indicated
that
he
has
proof
that
his
wife
was
out
of
town
during
those
times
that
the
bookings
occurred
and
so
later
on.
You'll
see
that
we
were
waiting
for
that
information
to
come
forward
and
we
never
did
receive
it.
E
He
continues
on
to
say
that
you
know
claire
says
that
I'm
concerned
that
you're
not
living
downstairs
that
you're
living
upstairs
and
ryan
states
that
it's
my
house
and
she
says
the
secondary
suite-
has
a
different
address.
C
Maybe
I
can
just
sure
ask
what
you
what
you
drew
from
from
the
interview,
I'm
looking
at
some
of
these
things
in
it,
and
it
appears
as
though
the
information
that's
being
told
to
miss
thompson
is
that
essentially,
the
house
is
being
used.
Both
units
are
being
used
by
by
the
licensee.
E
Mr
mcmellon
explain
how
he's
operating
the
the
short-term
rental
in
the
sense
that
we
were
questioning
his
primary
residency
in
that
secondary
suite
and
the
the
audit
process
did
not
fully
explain
to
our
satisfaction
that
that
that
is
his
secondary.
That
is,
his
primary
residence.
C
So
we
can't
have
the
licensee
claiming
primary
residents
or
one
unit
while
simultaneously
acknowledging
that
they're
living
in
both.
E
Yes,
that's
correct
and
we
also
got
the
impression
that,
through
the
audit
process
that
mr
mcmullen.
E
Wasn't
he
indicated
a
couple
times?
It
was
his
house
and
he
didn't
come
out
and
say
that
I
could
do
whatever
I
want,
but
but
I
think
the
inferences
were
there
that
look
it's
this.
Both
these
properties
are
are
mine
and
that
you
know
I'll
stay
where
I
want
when
I
need
to
was
the
other
inference
that
we
got
and
unfortunately
for
the
definitions
of
our
bylaw
in
the
spirit
of
the
short-term
rental
activity
in
the
bylaw,
there
needs
to
be
better
clarity
there
in
terms
of
how
he
is
living.
C
And
I'll
just
get
back
to
maybe
a
comment
that
I
made
at
the
beginning,
which
was
the
other.
The
purpose
of
the
bylaw
is
to
preserve
that
long-term
rental
housing
stock
and
we
have
a
basement
unit
here,
that's
approved
for
that
purpose.
That's
not
being
used
for
that
purpose.
That's
that's!
Essentially
what
you're
saying.
E
Yes,
that
that's
exactly
true
in
in
page
30,
mr
meant
claire
notes
that
what
mr
mcmillan
says
is.
I
understand
two
legal
suites.
I
can
do
anything
I
want.
I
can
do
whatever
I
want
with
this
suite
I
own
the
suite.
My
name
is
on
it.
E
If
I
need
to
change
it
to
number
two
but
it,
but
I
I,
but
I
didn't,
is
kind
of
what
he
said
so,
but
those
were
quotes
that
were
picked
up
out
of
the
the
interview
and
so
therefore
we
we
felt
that
it
wasn't
being
complied
with
as
per
the
bylaw.
C
I
just
want
to
ask
you
about
one
passage
that
you
read,
which
was
at
the
bottom
of
page
22..
Well,
maybe
just
at
the
top
I'll
just
contrast,
two
things.
First
you'd
read
in
that
he
indicated
that
he
lived.
Most
of
the
time
I
am
living
downstairs
is
what
the
notes
reflect
yeah
at
the
bottom
of
the
page.
C
What
he
indicates
is
that
he's
talking
about
the
guests,
some
of
them
were
shared
with
guests,
he's
talking
about
the
short-term
rental
accommodations
that
were
provided,
correct,
that's
correct,
okay,
so
the
claim
that
that
was
made
by
mr
mcmillan
at
the
time
is
that
he
was
still
in
the
unit
on
some
occasions
when
it
was
being
rented
for
a
short-term
rental
purposes.
C
There's
reference
in
a
couple
of
the
documents
in
the
package
in
terms
of
how
the
how
the
unit
was
marketed.
First,
let
me
just
look
at
page
67
of
the
evidence,
materials.
E
So
this
is
a
information
that
we
get
from
host
compliance.
It
shows
briefly
what
the
what
the
booking
is
or
or
sorry
what
what
the
listing
is.
It's
pulled
from
the
actual
listing
the
information.
That's
that's
we're
interested
in
is,
if
you
go
to
the
bottom
right
hand,
corner
of
the
page,
it
talks
about
documented
stays,
it
says
time
of
activity
and
it
lists
the
number
of
documented
stays.
E
E
That's
correct
those
those
are
stays
now.
So
this
is
this.
This
doesn't
identify
exact
number
of
nights,
but
it
picks
up
from
the
listing
activities.
The
number
of
documented
states,
so
one
document
is
stay,
could
be
two
weeks
and
it
goes
to
january
22nd
and
it
goes
backwards
and
it's
got
four
documented
stays
in
october.
Four
documents
stays
in
september.
E
Four
documents
stays
in
august.
Those
could
be
a
week,
long
or
maybe
they're
single
days,
but
but
they're
indications
of
activity,
and
if
we
consider
what
was
being
done,
what
was
submitted
and
explained
to
us
in
in
the
2020
activity,
there
may
be
an
assumption
that
these
documented
states
reflect
weeks,
perhaps
meaning
that
they
could
be
high
high
stays
in
terms
of
usage.
C
The
detail
in
this
document
I
wanted
to
draw
your
attention
to
was,
in
the
lower
left
hand
corner
under
listing
details,
as
I
understand
that
the
listing
details
reflects
the
the
marketing
characteristics
with
respect
to
what's
being
offered
for
rent
under
this
particular
listing.
Is
that
right?
That's
correct,
and
this
is
information
that's
taken
from
and
and
reported
to
us
directly
from
airbnb.
C
C
E
C
Okay-
and
I
also
see
that
under
tab
5,
starting
at
page
12,
mr
mcmillan,
provided
us
with
his
booking
calendar.
C
Some
of
those
dates
we've
already
gone
over,
but
I'm
just
going
to
draw
your
attention
to
page
13
where
he's
provided
a
screenshot
of
his
of
his
booking
calendar,
and
it
appears
as
though
that
information
matches
the
information
that
was
provided
to
us
from
airbnb
being
that
it's
marketed
not
as
shared
accommodation
but
as
spacious
and
modern
two-bedroom
laptop
station
minutes
to
downtown.
C
Seen
anything
with
respect
to
this
particular
property,
any
information
on
airbnb
or
anything
submitted
by
mr
mcmillan
that
would
indicate
it
was
ever
offered
for
rent
as
shared
accommodation,.
C
So
when
we
take
a
look
at
the
numbers
that
we've
just
taken
a
look
at
170
some
odd
days
over
a
period
of
210
some
odd
days,
those
days
would
to
your
understanding,
be
for
the
entire
unit,
not
for
shared
accommodation
where
mr
mcmillan
is
resident
in
the
unit.
C
Thank
you
going
back
then,
to
the
to
the
notes
that
are
under
tab.
Three,
I
think
that
we
were
on
page
five.
C
The
audit
meeting
had
occurred
and
I'm
just
taking
a
look
there
that
there's
some
some
entry
information
towards
the
bottom
of
page
five
february,
2nd
2021,
some
information
in
terms
of
what
information
was
obtained
from
from
mr
mcmillan.
There
was
a
again
another
request
for
some
updated
booking
calendar
information
from
november
1st
2020
through
the
end
of
2021,
and
I
take
it
that
that
request
was
made,
because
this
audit
meeting
was
happening
sometime
after
the
audit
process
was
undertaken.
E
That
is
correct
and
so
yeah
go
ahead.
Oh
sorry,
my
apologies.
The
audit
triggers
a
number
of
questions,
obviously
the
interview
audit,
and
so
we
asked
mr
mcmillan,
through
the
information
that
was
provided
in
the
audit
three
three
things
as
a
follow-up,
that
he
could
that
he
would
need
to
provide
to
us
in
order
for
us
to
make
that
just
make
a
decision
and
those
three
things
are
the
the
current
bookings
which
which
he's
provided
to
date.
E
But
after
the
audit
we
we
would
like
to,
or
I
should
rephrase
out
of
the
audit,
there
were
two
things
that
were
driven
out
of
there,
but
we
also
needed
to
do
further
investigation
as
well,
and
so
we
had
asked
for
a
operation
summary
or
operation
plan
is
what
we
call
it.
E
We
also
said
that
we
were
going
to
do
an
inspection
of
your
property
and
so
out
of
the
audit,
there
was
an
inspection
that
was
drawn
and
on
the
on
the
on-site
in
inspection,
there
was
some
work
without
permit
that
was
being
looked
into
that
in
itself
triggered
some
delays
in
terms
of
concluding
the
the
information
that
we
obtained
from
the
audit
as
we
needed
to
see
if
the
work
without
permit
was
going
to
be
a
hindrance
to
our
decision
making,
and
it
turns
out
that
in
in
I
guess,
august
31st
we
had
gone
on
site
or
we
had
then
received
information
from
our
another
inspector
to
say
that
the
work
without
permit
is
okay,
that
it's
done.
E
C
Maybe
just
before
we
get
there
sure
I
just
want
to
backpedal
a
little
bit
to
the
conclusion
of
the
the
interview
out
of
that
interview.
Just
to
maybe
summarize
what
you
said.
Mr
mcmillan
indicated
that
he'd
done
some
upgrades
to
the
unit
and
you
you
wanted
to
send
one
of
the
property
use
inspectors
to
go
and
just
make
sure
that
the
scope
of
the
work
isn't
something
that
required
a
permit.
Is
that
fair
to
say.
E
Yes,
sorry,
I
should
have
included
that
part.
Yes,
in
the
audit,
there
was
some
discussions
of
some
work
that
was
done,
and
so
yes,
that
triggers
a
an
inspection
our
end,
we
would
do
a
site
inspection,
but
this
also
triggers
a
a
work
without
permit
inspection
as
well,
which
is
a
bit
more
detailed.
So.
C
That's
one
thing
that
you
wanted
to
to
follow
up
on
before
making
a
decision
through
the
audit
right.
The
other
thing
was
that
you
wanted
to
get
some
more
updates
in
terms
of
the
booking.
Yes,
you
wanted
the
operational
information.
E
Yeah
the
operational
plan
is,
is
always
something
that
we
also
ask
for
as
well,
and
so
therefore,
to
give
us
better
idea
of
how
this
person
intends
to
or
or
has
been
operating
and
intends
to
operate.
Okay.
C
E
That's
right,
and
that
was
the
third
piece
is
that
in
the
audit
he
had
explained
that
he
goes
downstairs
or
he
books
the
the
secondary
or
the
short-term
rental.
When
his
wife
is
out
of
town
and
so
and
then,
when
we
asked
him,
can
you
can
you
provide
that
information
to
to
collaborate,
what
you're
saying
and
he
he
indicated
he
could
so.
Therefore,
we
asked
for
that
information.
C
C
I'm
just
gonna
summarize,
maybe
what
what
he
submitted
so
as
of
february
16
2021.
He
indicated
that
the
bookings
he
provided
booking
details
for
november
december
and
february,
but
not
january.
C
So
maybe,
leaving
aside
the
future
bookings
by
the
looks
of
it
on
the
three
months
for
which
he
provided
booking
information,
I'm
counting
77
days
out
of
89
days
were
used
for
short-term
rental
accommodation.
C
Month
we
have
a
further
12
days
booked
and
nothing
yet
booked
through
may
through
october,
but
then
all
of
november
had
been
booked.
E
Yes
and
just
doing
a
quick,
quick
percentage
of
that,
if
we
take
out
the
the
march,
which
is
the
12
days,
which
is
39
percent
those
days
november
december
january
february
and
then
november,
they
work
out
to
97
81,
81
and
100
percent
and
then
of
course,
39
for
march.
E
C
Just
going
down
page
six,
then
I
see
that
inspection
took
place
with
a
pui,
that's
property
use
inspector,
that's
correct!
That
was
on
march
23rd
and
there
was
a
report
from
the
property
use
inspector
in
terms
of
information
that
he
received
from
mr
mcmillan.
In
the
course
of
the
of
the
inspection.
Can
you
share
that
with
the
panel
please.
E
Yes,
so
the
the
report
is
on
where's
that
tab.
My
apologies.
E
Tab,
eight,
and
in
that
report
he
talks
about
what
he
observed
and
and
what
what
he
heard
or
talked
about
I'd
like
to
note
that
he
had
spoken
to
mr
mcmillan
and
and
during
that
inspection
mr
mcmullen
was
there,
and
he
had
mr
mccoy
had
cited
that
that
he
lives
in
both
primary
in
both
the
primary
dwelling
unit
on
the
main
floor
and
the
secondary
suite
on
the
basement
floor,
and
that
the
basement
floor
is
used
as
short-term
rentals.
E
Mr
mcmillan
stated
that
he
has
had
discussion
with
our
staff
regarding
so
on
and
so
forth
about
about
doing
30-day
bookings
as
well.
Now,
once
again,
the
30-day
bookings
would
also
point
to
well,
then
then,
how
do
you
claim
that
as
your
primary
residence
and
then
in
the
booking
report
continues
to
show
various
pictures
of
the
the
facility,
and
these
these
pictures
resonate
fine
in
terms
of
what
we
consider
to
be
a
legal
secondary
suite.
E
But
the
inspection
report
does
cite
some
interesting
comments
that
was
made
by
mr
mcmullen
that
supports
some
of
the
information
that
was
stated
earlier.
Thank
you.
C
There
was
a
note
of
some
discrepancy
between
the
layout
of
the
basement
or
the
bottom
floor
unit
and
the
approved
plans,
and
so
it
was
referred
to
a
building
inspector
to
check
and
make
sure
everything
was
okay.
E
C
The
the
building
inspector,
though
followed
up
on
on
that
just
and
conducted
their
own
inspection
and
made
sure
that
there
were
no
no
issues
with
respect
to
concerns
or
permitting
issues
and
whatnot.
E
That
is
correct.
We
forward
that
to
our
our
building
inspector
friends,
colleagues
and
on,
I
believe,
august
31st.
It
was
indicated
that
the
the
work
with
the
permit
was
minor
and
that
there's
no
safety
issues
there.
So
so
it
was
passed.
C
So,
following
that
now
had
the
inspections
take
place,
satisfied
with
respect
to
the
premises,
I'm
looking
here
at
the
entry
on
page
six
september,
16
2021,
due
to
updates
and
audit
process
since
initial
meeting
email
sent
to
request
an
operational
summary
and
updated
booking
calendars,
so
we're
still
waiting
for
an
operational
summary
looking
for
another
booking
calendar
and
by
this
date
I
understand
there
had
been
no
information
shared
in
terms
of
his
wife's
travel
schedule.
C
Following
that
that
september
period
I
see
here
second
last
entry
on
page
six
october,
5th
2021
operational
summary
was
received
by
email,
but
the
updated
booking
gallery
calendar
still
wasn't
included
page
seven
entry
october,
12,
2021,
no
further
communication
and
the
and
the
booking
calendar
has
not
been
submitted.
C
So
by
that
date
I
take
it.
You
make
a
decision,
you're
missing
the
booking
calendar,
you're
missing
the
you
do
get
the
operational
report
you're
satisfied
with
that,
though
that's
we
don't
need
to
go
into
that
in
any
detail.
C
You
still
don't
have
an
updated
booking
calendar
and
you
didn't
get
any
submissions
with
respect
to
the
traveling
schedule.
No.
E
Yes,
so
based
on
the
information
that
we've
collected
to
date
and
and
then
reviewing
the
audit
information
from
both
the
document
audit
and
the
interview
on
it
and
then
once
again,
the
information
on
the
bookings
and
and
the
information
that
we
didn't
get.
E
We
based
all
that
into
the
discussion
with
the
chief
licensed
inspector
and
concluded
that
that
we
feel
what
the
information
that
we
have,
that
it
does
not
support
that.
Mr
mcmillan
lives
at
the
place
where
he
does
short-term
rentals,
and
so
the
non-primary
residence
indicator
was
strong
enough
for
us
to
go
with
that.
E
And
so
the
letter
was
sent
out
on
the
13th.
I
believe
it
was
or
no
one
was
it
sorry
or
october
forget
the
date
number
13.
C
That's
it
tab
tab
10,
starting
at
page
63,.
E
Yes,
october
13th,
the
letter
that
was
mentioned
earlier
was
sent
out
as
a
decision
of
the
chief
licensed
inspector,
and
it
really
is
the
the
totality
of
the
information
that
we
received,
and
I
want
to
appeal
to
the
panel
that
we
don't
make
these
decisions
slightly.
C
Yeah,
I
characterized
some
of
the
evidence
that
I
expected
to
come
out
through
you
and
in
the
evidence
book
in
my
opening
comments
and
I'll.
Just
ask
you
maybe
to
comment
on
that.
The
the
factors
that
I
think
come
out
in
terms
of
what
you're
telling
us
and
what
we've
read
was
that
first
there
was
extremely
high
booking
volumes
that
would
interfere
with
anybody's
ability
to
live
in
the
unit
on
a
primary
basis.
E
Yes,
yes,
we
feel
that
there
were
essentially
actually
breaches
four
breaches
of
the
of
the
sections
of
the
bylaw,
even
though
we
cite
the
primary
one.
E
The
the
extremely
high
bookings
is
an
indicator
for
us
to
say
that
it
would
be
very
difficult
for
somebody
to
claim
that
as
a
primary
residence
given
it's
booked
seventy
eighty
percent
of
the
time,
in
some
cases,
one
hundred
percent
of
the
time
in
the
month.
It
it
admires
what
we
consider
a
commercial
operation
where
a
location
is
used
primarily
to
have
short-term
rental
bookings,
and
the
bookings
are
characteristics
of
that.
E
E
E
The
other
breach
is
section
14,
subsection
g,
where,
when
we
ask
the
chief
license
inspector,
has
the
right
to
ask
for
booking
information
we
receive
some
but
the
important
ones
that
we
wanted
to
look
at
when
we
made
our
decision,
none
were
were
forthcoming
and
then
the
last
one
other
relevant
documents,
which
is
section
14,
subsection
h
and
that's
the
information
about
his
wife's
travels.
E
So,
in
totality
of
these
four
breaches
of
the
bylaw
section,
we
felt
that
unfortunately,
mr
mcmillan
appears
to
be
operating
a
commercial
type
operation
and
that
it's
not
in
the
spirit
of
the
short-term
rental
bylaw.
You
know
where
occasional
bookings
are
are
used
to
augment
where
your
primary
residence
is
being
used
as
a
secondary,
short-term
rental.
E
And
so
so,
hence
with
that
totality
of
information
which
is
referred
to
in
the
letter
from
the
which
is
licensed
inspector
to
suspend
his
license.
B
A
Thanks
chair,
I
I
just
have
a
question
to
staff
and
maybe
account
surprise
will
have
questions
as
well,
but
this
is
an
initial
question
on
the
issue
of
the
better
part
of
a
month
being
booked
out.
I
think
that
was
the
language
used,
I'm
just
scanning
the
bylaw
again.
Is
there
any
limitation
to
how
many
days
in
a
particular
month
are
allowed
to
be
booked
out.
E
Through
the
chair,
there
is
no
specific
number
that's
cited
in
the
bylaw,
and
my
belief
is
that
that
is
done
for
a
reason
to
to
determine
reasonableness
and-
and
so
therefore,
it's
not
prescribed
in
that
manner.
E
Through
the
chair,
no,
it's
not
as
well
and-
and
I
believe
for
for
similar
considerations.
It's
it's
the
degree
of
reasonableness
and
and
the
spirit
of
the
bylaw
once
again
is
for
some
rental
to
occur
and
the
primary
residence
consideration
needs
to
be
taken
into
consideration.
And
it's
not
prescribed
by
a
number
of
knights.
A
Okay,
I
do
recall
in
a
recent
situation
where
there
was
not
an
connecting
or
adjoining
door
in
a
basement
suite
that
the
short-term
rental
license
was
not
able
to
be
granted
at
all.
So
I
just
want
to
get
our
legal,
a
team
to
comment
on
that.
I
believe
it
was
ian
dixon
who
was
representing
the
city
at
that
time
in
terms
of
our
legal
team,
but
there
was
that
question
raised,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
reconcile
the
difference
between
this
situation
and
that
situation.
C
That
may
be
a
question
for
for
me.
I
don't
know
that
situation.
I
don't
know
the
facts
there.
I
I
can
say
that
my
dealings
with
secondary
suite
enforcement
are
that
if
there's
no
interconnection
and
the
city
has
approved
the
use
of
the
premises
as
being
a
single
family
dwelling
with
an
approved
secondary
suite,
that
constitutes
two
separate
dwelling
units.
A
And
so
this
short-term
rental
license
is.
There
was
a
lot
of
dates
flying
around
the
old
date.
Then
the
number
two
of
the
inverness
date
so
just
confirming
that
these,
this
short-term
rental
license
I'm
going
back
to
the
top
of
my
documents
here
is
attributed
yeah.
So
this
this
short-term
rental
license
is
attributed
to
the
address
4010
inverness
street
correct,
correct.
A
A
Where
the
accommodation
area
is
a
completely
different
suite
from
the
address
and
does
not
have
an
adjoining
door,
I
I
just.
I
think
that
we
went
through
this
process
and
it
was
once
it
was
discovered
that
there
was
no
adjoining
door.
It
became
a
pretty
black
and
white
situation
right
now.
There's
a
lot
of
nuance
to
this
one,
and-
and
I
just
want
to
be
very
clear-
that
we're
not
missing
that
piece
that
seemed
to
be
quite
defining
in
the
previous.
I
actually
think
it
was
the
last
public
hearing
a
couple
weeks
ago.
C
We're
we're
getting
we're
getting
into
sort
of
the
minutiae
of
of
submissions.
My
comments
may
be
best
left
to
the
end
for
that
purpose
in
terms
of
submissions,
because
I
I
I
maybe
I'll
take
issue,
maybe
with
the
comments.
B
Maybe
I'll
maybe
I'll
I'll
just
jump
in
as
chair
is
is
the
the
reference
councilor
bly
is
making
is
to
a
a
business
license
hearing.
I
believe
it
was
last
month
and
I'm
certain
the
clerks
could,
if
need
be,
find
that
and
that's
the
precedence
I
think
she's
referring
to,
and
so
perhaps
we
can
look
for
that
information
in
the
meantime,
because
I
do
I
I
think
I
sat
on
that
panel
with
counselor
bligh,
so
I
know
exactly
what
she's
referring
to
in
that
context,
council.
B
Yeah,
I
think
that
would
be
great.
I
also
have
some
questions,
but
before
I
go
ahead,
counselor
do
you
have
any
questions?
Okay,
I
just
have
a
a
question
to
our
staff,
and
counsel
is
just
reconfirming.
My
understanding
is
that
we
suspended
the
business
license
october.
13Th
2021.
Is
that
correct.
B
And
is
it
correct
that,
based
on
information
on
the
evidence
documents
presented
here,
I
see
that
there
was
bookings
in
november
of
2021
and
documented
stays
in
january
2022
after
the
business
license
was
suspended?
Is
that
correct.
B
Okay,
so,
just
from
from
my
understanding,
then,
is
that
the
short-term
rental
has
been
operating
without
a
business
license
in
this
at
this
location.
Technically,.
E
B
Technically,
yes,
okay,
thank
you.
If
there's
no
further
questions
from
the
panel,
then
I
believe
it
is
now
the
opportunity
of
the
licensee
ryan
mcmillan
on
the
line
to
ask
questions
of
see
a
vancouver
witness.
D
Yeah
thanks
thanks
for
taking
the
time
just
I
don't
have
too
many
questions
just
a
couple
in
regards
to
my
wife's
travel
that
was
discussed
over
the
phone,
but
then
sort
of
my
understanding
was
sort
of
left.
There
was
nothing
in
writing
that
that
I
recall
that
indicated
that
you
wanted
further
documentation
in
that
regard.
As
far
as
the
I
gave
you
the
operational
report
and
basically
tried
to
work
with
it,
this
city
is
as
much
as
I
could.
D
I
was
pretty
cooperative,
but
yeah
just
it's
as
far
as
that.
There
has
been
some
gaps
and
then
I
guess
another
question
that
your
your
last
question
there
as
far
as
operation,
without
a
license
when
I
got
the
suspension
notice
it
did.
D
It
did
also
say
that
I'm
allowed
to
appeal
in
a
certain
period
of
time,
which
I
obviously
have,
but
then,
basically
my
understanding
was
keep
the
operations
going
until
like
we
have
this
meeting
and
things
are
are
concluded
like
that,
but
so
so,
as
far
as
that
was
concerned,
I
would
you
know,
and
I
also
tried
to
reapply
and
then
I
talked
to
someone
in
the
city,
and
they
also
told
me
that
yeah
it's
under
review,
so
just
wait
for
your
your
hearing.
D
I
said
okay,
so
so
yeah
and
then,
as
far
as
the
what
was
it
the
right.
I
guess
ryan.
B
No,
no
I'm
just
gonna
interject,
really
briefly,
just
to
specifically
offer
you
the
opportunity
to
ask
questions
to
the
city
of
vancouver
witness,
because
after
that.
D
Okay,
so
I
guess
the
the
one
question
I
had
for
him
when
the
property
use
inspector-
I
guess,
was
he
was
he
sent
down
from
you
guys
to
specifically
because
my
understanding
he
was
sent
down
to
just
check
on
like,
like
you,
said
the
if
there
was
additional
work
done
without
a
permit,
but
my
understanding
he
was
just
there
to
look
at
that
and
then
also
to
check
on
fire
codes
was
what
he
told
me,
but
so
was
he
there
for
other
reasons,
because
I
guess
that's
my
question
because
my
understanding
he
was
just
there
for
those
two
things
not
to
give
feedback
to
the
city
as
far
as
how
my
operation
is
going
or
what
what
my
living
situation
is
and
and
all
that
extra
stuff.
A
E
He
certainly
wasn't
necessarily
asked
to
go
and
interview
you
or
anything
like
that,
but
the
inspectors
are
to
note
any
information
or
conversations
that
that
occur,
that
that
may
be
pertinent
to
secondary
or
or
short
term.
I
keep
calling
second
response
to
my
apologies,
short-term
rentals
and
so
the
information
that
he
provided
was
based
on
just
his
observations,
and
his
observations
are
to
be
noted
in
the
inspection
report.
D
Yeah,
sorry,
just
I
guess
I
guess
I'm
just
confused
about
when
I
was
asked
to
give.
I
understand
like
on
the
february
2nd
phone
conversation.
I
know
that
was
discussed,
but
as
far
as
the
travel
documents
were
concerned,
I'm
just
wondering
where,
if
there
was
an
email
asking
for
those
travel
documents,
I'm
maybe
I
missed
that,
but
I
I'd
never.
D
I
didn't
see
that
as
far
as
you
guys
asked
me
for
those
documentations
when
like
when
I
gave
you
the
operational
work
report
and
and
and
stuff
like
that's
so
I'm
just
I'm
just
I'm
just
looking
through
my
notes-
and
maybe
I
missed
that,
but
was
there
was
it?
Was
it
in
writing
there?
When
you,
you
were
asking
about
the
travel
doc,
documentation.
E
Through
the
chair
it
was,
it
was
clearly
stated
in
the
audit
that
you
can
provide
that
information,
and
so
I
believe,
miss
tom
said
had
asked
for
that
information.
E
I'd
have
to
check
my
notes
to
see
if
it
was
actually
asked
as
a
follow-up
afterwards,
but
I
know
it
was
clearly
stated
in
the
audit
and-
and
it
is
information
that
was
willingly
provided
so
therefore
we
followed
up
on
it.
I
believe
ms
thompson
did
ask:
can
you
prove
that-
and
you
said
yes
and
that
you
would
provide
that
information
and
I
think
she
said
well,
we
will
ask
for
that
information
as
well
or
some
somewhere
along
those
lines.
I
so
so.
E
With
that
understanding,
we
had
continued
to
ask
for
that,
and
I
believe
in
one
of
the
conversations
andrew
also
alluded
to
that
information,
because
he
states
that
he
hadn't
received
that
information.
Yet
as
well.
D
Okay,
I
mean-
I
guess
I
was
just
asking
as
far
as
in
writing
documentation
I
mean
that
you
know,
because
I
know
things
get
discussed
on
the
phone
and
I
know
that
was
a
topic
of
conversation.
But
as
far
as
you
know,
seeing
and
writing
I.
I
don't
recall
that
I
guess
the
other
question
I
had
in
regards
to
my
calendar
booking.
D
Just
I
guess.
Obviously
you
know
the
the
high
number
of
bookings
you
you're
determining
that
okay.
Well,
this
is
a
run,
for
you
know
commercial
use
or
whatnot
and
obviously
we
didn't
get
into.
You
know
my
personal
side.
That
has
also
been
well
documented
through
the
this
whole
process.
D
But
you
know
that
being
said
that,
like
I
did
express
that
it
has
been
sometimes
a
shared,
sometimes
not
just
you
know
not
getting
into
all
that
marital
personal
stuff,
but
so-
and
I
also
did
provide
some
documentation
back
in
that
from
people
who
have
visited
me
and
and
whatnot,
which
also
was
not
discussed
in
your
in
your
report
here
tonight.
But
I
like
it
like,
I
said
this
so
to
me
the
calendar
is,
I
understand
for
you,
but
to
me
I'm
just
based
on
you
know.
D
E
If
that's
a
question
to
me,
yes,
through
the
chair,
we
go
with
the
totality
of
the
information
that
we
receive
or
don't
receive.
So
in
your
particular
case.
Yes,
you
have
very
high
bookings
and,
and
then
we
didn't
get
further
information
that
would
help
us
ascertain.
Maybe
if
you
had
lower
bookings,
as
we
indicated
earlier,
the
bylaw
does
not
indicate
a
particular
number
that
determines
your
primary
residency.
D
I
think
that's
just
as
far
as
the
I
guess,
some
of
the
documentation
that
was
left
out
just
sort
of
I'm
asking
asking
him
a
question
again
just
why
was
that
not
presented?
As
far
as
saying
you
know?
Maybe
these
are
some
of
the
reasons
that
yes,
he
he
has
shared
occupancy
with
past.
Yes,
and
I
understand
the
times
some,
like
I'm,
constantly
changing
the
the
booking-
and
I
understand
sorry
the
advertisement
which
you
can
you
can
do
on
an
hourly
basis
with
with
airbnb.
D
But
so
I
guess
my
question
was:
why
did
you
leave
certain
things,
though,
that
sort
of
showed
that?
Yes,
maybe
he
actually
is
sharing
with
guests
at
certain
particular
times,
and
then
he
isn't
and
whatnot,
but
so
I'm
just
wondering
why
was
that
some
of
that
information
left
out.
E
B
Thank
you.
We're
now
moving
to
the
section
where
the
licensee
and
you
ryan
are
able
to
offer
your
opening
remarks
and
to
also
call
any
witnesses
if
you
have
a
witness
so
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
ryan.
If
you'd
like
to
speak
further.
D
Yeah,
just
just
reiterating
some
of
the
ongoing
investigation
yeah
I
mean
we've
had
obviously
numerous
so
so
going
back
to
the
start,
when
I
the
first
audit,
so
basically
why
the
reason
behind
the
short-term
rental
for
us
was
we've
had
some
some
issues
personally
and
with
keeping
the
house.
This
was
the
most
flexible
way
to
do
it.
D
So
I
understand
the
bio
what
the
bylaws
were,
but
my
feeling
was
that,
because
I
was
occupying
the
downstairs
that
I
felt
that
we
could
make
that
work
in
or
in
in
our
case,
to
supplement
income,
and
that
was
that
was
the
goal
like
it
wasn't.
It
wasn't
to
run
this
commercially,
make
a
lot
of
money
kind
of
thing
I
mean
you
know
as
like.
I
understand
the
low
vacancy
rate
in
the
city.
I
understand
the
area
I
mean
I
could.
D
I
could
have
a
lineup
of
people
to
to
rent
it
out
to
so
it
wasn't
it
wasn't
this.
I
can
make
all
this
money.
D
It
was
that
this
in
our
particular
situation
that
I
needed
to
just
if
I
could,
you
know,
rent
out
a
week,
rental
two
weeks
share
the
combination,
sometimes
just
any
kind
of
supplement
income
based
on
our
situation,
that
that
was
the
the
reason,
and
I
felt
that
I
wasn't
like
breaching
any
of
the
the
bylaws,
and
I
understand
it's
it's
two
dwellings,
even
though
you
know
it's,
you
know
it's
a
single
family
home
with
two
dwellings.
I
I
like
aware
of
it.
D
So
that's
like
there's
not
much
more
to
say
about
that,
I
mean
and
then
just
as
far
as
even
moving
forward
to
present
day,
just
in
our
situations,
just
you
know,
with
the
price
of
the
price
of
housing
and
just
moving
that
that,
if
I
go
to
a
long
term
that
it's
going
to
be
very
difficult
for,
for
you
know
one
of
us
to
say
whatever
our
situation
is
to
find
you
know
housing
so
that
that's
sort
of
the
main.
D
D
I
changed
my
story
I
and
like
I
I
did
say
I
don't
recall
that
so
I'm
not
sure
if,
when
you're
having
a
phone
conversation,
that's
why
it's
harder
because
she
said
he
said
and
and
so
I'm
not
sure
what
you
know
the
first
person
heard,
but
I
the
24
hours
later
I
mean
I'm
not
going
to
come
up
with
some
complete
bogus
story.
I
mean
this
is
from
day
one.
It's
been
like
this
and
you
know,
then
I've
tried
to
work
with
with
the
city
to
provide
the
documents.
D
There
are
certain
things
that
maybe
I
didn't
provide,
which
I
didn't
understand,
or
we
had
that
phone
call,
but
I
didn't
know
it
was
you
really
it
wasn't
anything
in
writing.
I
tried
to
provide
right
anything.
Any
emails
was
mostly
communication.
I
tried
to
provide
but
yeah
I
just
just
moving
forward
like
I
said,
I'm
not
I'm
just
asking
the
two
cities
to
look
at
my
current
situation.
I
understand
the
bookings.
Look
like
this.
You
know.
D
Yes,
they
are
like
at
a
70
percentile,
but
a
lot
of
some
of
those
bookings
were
were
shared.
Some
weren't
it
was.
It
was
communicated
with
guests
prior
to
the
bookings.
The
the
advertisement
has
changed
throughout
just
based
on
you
know
if
I
could
stay
here
for
a
week
or
stay
upstairs
or
we
just
work
it
out.
Just
to
like,
I
said,
survive,
keep
the
house
and
and
that
that
was
the
sole
purpose
from
the
gecko.
D
D
So
you
know,
and
then
I'm
jumping
all
over
the
place
a
little
bit,
but
then
I
guess
going
also
when
he
asked,
for
you
know,
documentation
for
the
four
zero
one
zero
compared
to
the
four
zero
one,
zero
two,
as
as
far
as
bills
were
concerned,
and
what's
going
to
what
address,
I
had
a
conversation
with
the
city
and
I
I
said
that
was
a
mistake
from
the
get-go
when
I
when
I
did
apply
as
far
as
I
just
had
four
zero
one
zero.
D
So
it
wasn't
unit
one
it
wasn't
unit
two
it
pro.
It
was
a
mistake,
but
it
was
just
four
zero
one
zero.
So
as
far
as
the
bills
were
concerned,
I
said
well,
I
said
I'm
not
sure
what
you
guys
want
me
to
do.
I
could
I
could
send
some
bills
down
there
where
I'm
living
and
it
seemed
like
it.
It
didn't
matter
I
mean
so
that,
as
far
as
I
was
concerned,
it
wasn't
it.
I
didn't
feel
like
I
needed
to
to
make
that
change.
I
mean
it
is.
D
I
do
grab
my
mail
where
the
front
door
is
anyways,
so
it's
not
like,
because
I
do
use
both
units
that
was
was
discussed
so,
but
I
mean,
as
far
as
proof
is
concerned,
on
your
end
I
mean
I
can.
D
I
can
see
that
but,
like
I
said,
I'm
just
asking
the
city
to
work
with
my
situation
and
just
kind
of
see
where,
where
my
situation
is
currently
you
know
with
with
the
state
of
housing
the
price,
the
housing
for
me
to
move
on
from
my
situation
from
marital
wise,
and
this
enables
us
just
to
supplement
more
income
and
because
I
it
it's
hard
for
me
to
put
the
long-term
tenant
in.
There
is
the
reason
for
the
the
shared
in
the
short
term.
D
So
yeah.
I
appreciate
your
time,
but
that's
that's
basically
what
I
want
to
touch
on.
B
B
Okay,
in
that
case,
I'll
give
an
opportunity
for
the
panel
members
to
ask
you
questions
followed
by
the
city
of
vancouver
council
panel
members.
If
you
have
questions,
please
put
yourself
on
the
queue.
B
I'm
not
seeing
anyone
on
the
queue.
Okay,
maybe
then
I'll
turn
it
over
to
robert
leblanc.
Do
you
have
any
questions
for
sorry.
B
Yes
sure.
A
B
A
Thank
you
very
much,
so
my
question
brian,
is
in
regards
to
this
missing
information
that
you
feel
has
not
been
submitted.
Is
that
something
that
you
have
with
you?
A
I
don't
know
the
process
here,
chair
I'll,
also
ask
that
you
guide
us,
but
if
there
is
a
claim
that
there's
missing
information
in
this
submission
and
and
that's
available
and
and
sounds
like
it
ought
to
be
considered
by
the
panel
according
to
ryan
ryan's
testimony,
I
wonder
if
that's
available
or
what
the
process
would
be
there.
D
Oh,
that's
a
question
for
myself.
Yes
right,
I
could
provide
some
some
of
that
information
yeah.
What
I
mean.
What
were
you
referring
to
exactly.
A
D
Sorry,
okay,
so
as
far
as
I
I
had,
I
submitted
a
couple
letters
backing
up
my
case
from
from
people
who
have
witnessed
my
situation.
Is
that
what
you
were
referring
to.
D
I
submitted
that
during
the
during
the
audit.
D
At
this
current
time,
yeah
I'd
have
to
pull
on
my
email.
D
A
D
B
So
we'll
I'm
going
to
interject
so
yeah
brian
will
so
council
blah
you've
requested
that
information.
It
sounds
like
ryan
you're
going
to
look
for
those
letters
and
that
those
it
sounds
like
they
were
witness
emails.
D
B
And
you
have
the
clerk's
contact
information.
Is
that
correct.
D
B
Okay,
well
you're
doing
that
counselor
oblige
you
have
further
questions
I'll
leave
it
there
for
the
moment.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Councillor
frye
to
the
licensee
yeah.
F
D
I
just
I
just
determined
it
based
on
because,
because
it
was
in
the
appeal
process,
so
I
just
felt
like
any
other
appeal
that
you
know
until
the
until
the
hearing
and
decision
is
final,
that
it
would.
It
was
no
different
than
when
they
were
auditing
me
to
look
to
suspend.
D
You
know
my
license,
possibly
so,
and
I
I
did
so
that
that
was.
F
F
D
Yeah,
I
think
I
mean
I
think
it's
that's
an
airbnb
question,
I
think
for
them.
I
think
if,
if
I
went
too
long,
they
might
communicate
with
me.
I
think
they
like,
because
every
cities
has
a
different
bylaw
so,
like
I
think
I
mean
they
were
allowing
me
to
to
operate
the
same
way
and
like
I
like.
D
I
did
note,
I
did
call
into
the
city
and
because
I
did
try
to
renew,
because
you
know
the
end
of
the
year
was
coming
up
and
obviously
there
was
it
wouldn't
allow
me
to
because
we
were
in
this
appeal
period
right
so
yeah
yeah.
F
D
That
that
was
my
honest
understanding.
I
just
I
thought,
and
I
actually
asked
them
I
said:
do
you
have
a
rough
timeline
when
you
know
when
I
will
hear
from
the
city
as
far
as
when
the
the
appeal
hearing
will
take
place
and
she
she
was
like?
Well,
it
should
be
soon
and
and
and
also
so.
I
just
honestly,
I
felt
like
okay,
because
it's
an
appeal
like
I
felt
like
well
it
you
know
until
the
hearing
it
it
should
be.
D
Okay,
at
this
point,
as
far
as
the
airbnb
side,
they
they
never
contacted
me
about
asking
me
about
that
at
all.
So,
okay,
so.
F
D
They
actually
know
they
do
and
they'll
they'll
just
give
you
a
notification
saying
to
show
an
updated
thing.
I
think
they
just
they.
Basically,
I
can't
remember
they'll
give
you
like
an
email
sort
of
saying:
hey,
it's
kind
of
the
year
is
expiring
and
and
whatnot,
but
is
my
understanding,
is
I
I
don't
think
they
remove
you
I
mean
they're,
I
think
they're
they're
in
the
business
of
sure.
D
I
know
you
keep
hopes,
but
as
far
as
I
was
concerned,
I
was
just
I
was
honestly
waiting
for
the
hearing
and
then
so
I
I
just
felt
that
it
was.
It
was
okay,
just
because
I
thought
when
I
got
the
suspension
notice,
it
said,
but
you
have
you
know,
14
days
to
appeal
and
I
felt
like
any
appeal.
Like
you
know,
okay,
you
can
kind
of
you
know.
If
you're
suspended,
you
can
go,
you
know
go
on
with.
D
F
That's
fair,
I
mean,
I
think,
maybe
that's
something
to
be
we.
We
need
to
work
on
articulating,
if
that's
the
case,
because
I
think
it's
a
suspension
of.
Obviously,
if
you
don't
have
a
license
to
do
business,
you
don't
have
a
license
to
do
business.
I
understand.
Okay,
thanks
thanks
ryan.
Those
are
my
questions
really
thanks.
B
B
Sorry,
I
just
it
was
hard
for
me
to
mold
no
problem.
I
just
wanted
to
flag
it
for
you,
so
the
next
next
part
of
just
this
portion
is
that
robert
leblanc
who's
representing
the
city
has
an
opportunity
to
ask
you
questions
as
a
licensee,
so
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
robert
leblanc.
C
Thank
you,
mr
mcmillan.
I'm
just
looking
at
page
66
of
the
evidence
package,
and
this
is
your
dispute
hearing
notice,
indicating
that
you
wish
to
appeal
the
chief
license
inspectors,
a
decision
to
suspend
in
in
your
last
paragraph
you
state.
C
I
am
prepared
to
provide
documents
at
the
hearing
if
I
am
provided
one
we're
at
the
doc
we're
at
the
we're
at
the
hearing
today,
I
haven't
received
any
documents.
D
Oh,
I
did
I'm
gonna
afford.
I'm
gonna
afford
you
the
the
documents
right
now
and
just
I
just
got
them
in
front
of
me
here
who,
who
did
you
submit
them
to?
I
submitted
them
to
okay
city
of
the
city
of
vancouver,
sure
short-term
rentals.
That's
sorry
short-term
rentals
at
vancouver.ca.
D
So
that
was
the
communication
I
had
so
when
they
had.
I
think
your
letter,
sorry
this.
This
was
the
email
that
sent
me
the
sorry.
Oh
sorry,
I
was
letting
them
know
about
the
appeal,
and
then
they
responded.
So
I
replied.
They
just
asked
for
further
documentation.
So
it
looks
like
this,
the
city
clerk,
but
I
just
respond
to
the
email,
so
I
mean
I
can
send
you
like.
They
sent
me
the
appeal
letter
and
then
I'm
just
looking
at
it.
D
Sorry
and
then
I
I
sent
them
further
documentation
and
I,
like
I'm,
sending
that
over
to
you
right
right
now
here.
B
B
B
A
D
C
B
Yes,
I'll
invite
koji
to
return
to
the
podium
and
maybe
address
that
question.
Thank
you.
E
Yes,
madam
chair,
we
have
not
received
or
my
knowledge
we
have
not
received
these
documents.
The
the
email
address
that
he
states
sounds
like
the
short-term
rental,
the
the
general
email
that
that
we
would
correspond
back
and
forth
with.
I
spoke
to
the
clerk
this
morning
andrew
and
had
asked
him
if
we
had
received
any
new
information
from
mr
macmillan.
Now
that
was
this
morning,
and
at
that
time
he
has
stated
no.
E
The
the
last
communication
we
got
was
what
was
cited
in
the
memos
that
we
provided
as
part
of
the
evidence.
So
to
my
knowledge,
we
we
hadn't
received
the
the
letters
that
is
indicating.
B
Thank
you
thanks
for
clarifying
that
point
and
you
have
no
further
questions
robert
leblanc,
so
in
that
case
I
believe
we
are
moving
to
closing
I'm
on
thecube.
Sorry,
sorry
counselor
go
ahead.
A
No
it's
okay!
I
just
wanted
to.
I
guess
why
this
has
come
up
is
in
the
letter,
and
this
is
just
about
tracking
how
this
information
flow
is
is
happening,
and
I
so
there
is
a
letter.
It's
not
dated
actually,
where
ryan
mcmillan
does
say
that,
given
the
opportunity,
I
am
prepared
to
provide
documents
at
the
hearing.
If
I'm
provided
one
about
people
who
have
visited
me
that
know
my
personal
situation
can
back
me
up
on
this,
so
I
don't
see
that
there's.
A
I
just
don't
see
based
on
the
documents
that
we
have
in
front
of
us,
that
we
were
expecting
these
documents
ahead
of
this
hearing,
but
we're
at
the
hearing
now-
and
it
reads
that
so
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
just
so
we're
not
talking
about
to
me
when
I
read
this,
that
there
were
documents
forthcoming
at
the
hearing
and
now
we've
received
them.
I
just
want
to
clarify
that.
B
Okay,
thank
you
is
that,
specifically
a
question
to
mr
macmillan.
Well,.
A
B
E
Yes,
madam
chair,
it
does
state
here,
in
your
package
november,
5th
ryan
sent
an
email
with
two
attachments,
one
letter
from
his
friend,
so
that's
the
one
that
we
must
have
received
here,
while
the
second
was
corrupted.
So
that's
the
one
that
that
we
cannot
open.
Andrew
responds
to
this
email,
asking
ryan
to
resend
the
file
ryan
resends,
the
fi,
the
documents
both
appeal
documents
are
available
at
van
dock,
so
it
is
cited
and
my
apologies.
E
When
I
spoke
to
andrew
this
morning,
he
said
he
hadn't
received
anything
new
because
he's
already
cited
that
in
here
so
so
we
hadn't
received
anything
outside
of
what
was
cited
in
in
the
in
the
memos
that
he
provided.
So
so
sorry,
it's
on
page
eight
that
he
did
submit
these
documents
and
some
van
docks.
B
Thank
you
for
that
clarification,
counselor
bligh.
Does
that
address
your
question.
B
Thank
you,
robert
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
for
closing
submissions
by
council
city
of
vancouver
council.
C
I'm
going
to
ask
the
panel
to
just
refer
to
the
dispute
letter
that
was
filed
by
mr
mcmillan
to
appeal
this
process.
I've
already
read
from
the
second
last
paragraph.
This
is
a
page
66
and
mr
mcmillan
says
something
in
the
the
end
of
the
third
full
paragraph
that
I
have
to
point
out
as
as
an
error
in
terms
of
this
particular
process.
C
C
C
C
C
I
don't
think
that
that's
an
incentive
that
this
panel
should
be
giving
we
shouldn't
be
re-weighing
new
evidence
or
evidence
that
was
previously
submitted.
We
need
to
constrain
this
to
the
real
questions
and
the
real
questions.
Whether
or
not
it
was
a
decision,
it
was
reasonable
or
whether
or
not
there
was
an
error
that
was
made
in
my
respectful
submission.
C
It
was
a
reasonable
decision.
No
error
was
made.
I
will
address
the
issue
with
respect
to
the
door.
I
know
the
case.
That
was
referred
to
at
the
interconnecting
door.
I
did
not
deal
with
the
with
the
business
license
hearing.
I
did,
however,
deal
with
the
prosecution
of
the
matter.
I
don't
know
exactly
what
the
submissions
were
made
in
the
in
the
course
of
of
that
hearing
that
was
before
this
panel.
C
What
I
can
say
with
most
certainty
is:
if
the
approved
state
of
a
property
is
such
that
there
are
two
dwelling
units
and
one
of
those
dwelling
units
is
being
offered
for
short
term
short-term
accommodation,
then
that
dwelling
unit
must
have
a
short-term
rental
license
that
is
held
by
the
principal
resident
of
that
unit.
C
In
this
case,
the
chief
license
inspector
has
determined
that
the
person
holding
the
license
does
not
qualify
as
the
principal
resident
of
the
unit
and
the
suspension
was
issued
on
that
basis
and
again
I'll
just
reiterate
my
first
point
that
this
all
gets
put
through
the
lens
of
the
intention
of
the
cities
to
pervert
to
preserve
these
units
for
permanent
housing
stock.
That
was
the
approved
use
of
this
of
this
particular
unit,
and
and
if
we
don't
have
a
principal
residence,
then
we
don't
have
long-term
housing
stock.
Those
are
my
missions.
B
Thank
you
for
those
closing
comments.
I'll
now
turn
it
over
to
the
licensee
ryan
mcmillan,
to
make
your
closing
submission
to
the
panel
go
ahead.
Ryan.
D
Thank
you.
No,
I
just
my
closing
statements
is
you
know,
look
at
my
particular
situation,
not
not
as
a
whole.
You
know,
based
on
my
circumstances,
I
had
I
had
two
letters
that
were
back
in
my
situation
and
the
fact
that
I'm
just
trying
to
we're
trying
to
make
ends
meet
at
this
point.
Like
I
said,
if,
if
I
could
rent
it
out
long
term,
I
would
but
my
current
situation
personally.
D
It
makes
it
very
difficult,
and
so
so
I'm
just
asking
the
panel
to
take
those
into
consideration.
I'm
not
I'm
again,
I'm
not
trying
to
you
know,
run
a
a
commercial.
You
know
business,
that's
bringing
a
lot
of
money,
it's
it's
it's
on
par,
if
not
sometimes
less.
To
be
honest,
I'm
just
trying
to
have
flexibility
for
with
my
current
situation
that
that
has
been
in
you
know,
discussed
with
the
city
this
last
this
last,
while
during
the
audit
so
yeah.
D
I
just
kind
of
asked
you
to
kind
of
take
that
in
mind
and
look
at
this
particular
situation.
It's
it's
a
little
unique
but
yeah,
and
just
thank
you
for
your
time
and
respect
your
decision.
B
Thank
you
ryan.
I
appreciate
that.
So
this
means
this
time
we're
moving
to
discussion
by
the
business
license
hearing
panel
and
so
looking
to
panel
members
for
discussion
on
this
item
and
then,
after
that,
a
decision
and
is
there
any
discussion.
A
A
chair
I'm
happy
to
I'm
just
actually
looking
for
the
wording
here,
so
we
don't
need
the
motion
just
yet.
We
could
just
discussing.
B
Oh,
we
can
discuss
it
this
time
and
then
I
understand
that
we'd
be
seeking
emotion.
I
do
see
a
motion.
That's
been
circulated
by
councillor
frye,
but
this
is
about.
E
B
Okay,
thank
you.
I
could
entertain
a
motion
then
I
believe
at
this
time
and
the
clerks
will
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
believe
it
would
be
appropriate
at
this
time.
F
And
thanks
to
the
staff
team
and
and
legal
representation
for
assisting
with
us
today
and
thanks
mr
mcmillan
for
joining
us
in
your
appeal,
I
have
submitted
a
motion
to
uphold
the
chief
license
inspector's
decision
on
the
basis
for
three
reasons:
the
operator
is
non-compliant
with
the
conditions
of
the
short-term
rental
license.
I
think
that's
been
established.
F
The
short-term
rental
accommodation
does
not
meet
the
definition
or
spirit
of
principal
residence
unit
of
the
operator,
and
the
operator
has
and
continues
to
operate
without
a
valid
short-term
rental
license.
So
on
those
grounds
I
do
think
that
upholding
the
chief
license.
Inspector's
decision
is
the
appropriate
course
of
action
here.
B
Thank
you,
councillor
frye,
so
that
motion
has
been
moved.
Can
I
get
a
seconder
for
that
second
seconded
by
counselor
bly,
so
that
is
on
the
floor
and
now
open
for
further
discussion
and
comment.
F
You
know
only
that
I
mean
I
have
obviously
looked
up
the
macmillan's
airbnb
listing
and
appreciate
that
they've
provided
a
quality
product
and
they've
been
recognized
as
a
super
host,
and-
and
so
I,
it
seems
to
me
that
it's
it
has
been
a
successful
business
venture
for
them.
F
That's
not
necessarily
germane
to
this
decision,
but
I
think
I
am
troubled
when
folks
are
operating
a
business
in
the
city
of
vancouver
without
an
appropriate
license.
I
think
that's
a
bare
minimum
requirement
and-
and
I
appreciate
that
mr
mcmillan
may
not
have
understood-
that
a
suspension
of
a
license
meant
that
he
had
no
license
and
he
was
unable
to
continue
doing
business
in
the
city
of
vancouver.
F
But
that
is
in
fact
the
case,
and
I
suppose
the
only
closing
thought
I
might
have
is
that
that
I
am
going
to
follow
up
to
make
sure,
and
I
think
it
behooves
us
to
make
sure
that
airbnb
is
following
through
with
the
mou
for
short-term
rentals
and
are
in
fact
identifying
that
licensees
who
are
are
submitting
onto
their
platform.
Do
in
fact
have
valid
city
of
vancouver
short-term
rental
licenses.
F
Because
if
the
case
is
that
they
are,
as
it
clearly
is,
the
case
that
they
have
taken
ryan,
mcmillan's,
airbnb
and
posted
the
listing,
despite
the
fact
that
he
had
his
2021
license
suspended
and
he
does
not
have
a
2022
license
and
I'm
currently
able
to
book
accommodations
at
ryan's
suite
this
month
next
month.
And
in
may.
I
do
worry
that
the
the
mou
that
we
have
between
airbnb
and
the
city
of
vancouver
is
not
being
respected
to
the
full
extent.