A PROPOSED REGIONAL MUNICIPAL PARTY · BUILDING TOWARD 2030

Greater Vancouver needs citizen directed government.

The public should direct its city government between elections. Our plan puts Agora at the centre of the council agenda, makes delivery visible through Civitas, and brings a shared democratic structure to local teams across Greater Vancouver—starting with Vancouver.

Meet Agora See how it works

A plan by Scott “Great Scott” Gilbert · Updated 8 November 2026

THE IDEA

Residents set the direction. Council puts its decisions on the record. Everyone can follow delivery.

GREATER VANCOUVER · LOCAL DEMOCRACY

One shared method. Each city’s own priorities.

Agora Party is designed to grow across Greater Vancouver through local municipal teams. Every team would use the same public voting, staff review and delivery structure, while each city’s eligible electorate decides its own priorities, budgets and final policies. Vancouver’s proposals are the founding starting point; another city can reach different decisions through the same process.

How the party can grow across municipalities

Each municipality would have its own verified electorate, participation count, staff reports, council decisions and Civitas delivery record. Apply the more-than-1% participation rule to that city’s published population, with the approval rule stated separately. People may participate only where they meet the applicable elector rules; a regional party does not create a region-wide municipal ballot. Shared services and cross-boundary projects require agreements between the responsible councils and agencies.

The proposed route is a registered municipal elector organization operating in the jurisdictions where it meets the requirements. Elections BC’s current registration guidance requires at least 50 elector members in each jurisdiction, an acceptable name and the required filings; campaign finances and candidate endorsements also have formal rules. Party membership does not itself qualify someone to vote or stand for office. Registration, ballot-name approval and local candidate nominations remain to be confirmed.

Registration rules →

01 / AGORA · THE PUBLIC VOICE

Vote between elections.

A continuing say in the decisions that shape your city.

Every registered Vancouver elector would be offered one verified account in the Agora mobile app, with voluntary activation, to propose, debate and approve the council agenda. The Agora Party would commit its councillors to carry out that lawful public direction, speak on the record about the motions and cast the legally binding council votes.

  • One verified account per participating registered Vancouver elector, with voluntary activation.
  • Public proposals, evidence, discussion and votes on the council agenda.
  • A participation threshold above 1% of the city’s population, counted separately from approval.
  • Public review of staff reports, revised motions and the final implementation plan.
  • Accessible ways to participate alongside the mobile app.
The participation model

Agora is where the public sets the direction. A qualifying proposal proceeds to an implementation report in Civitas, then returns to Agora so people can assess the costs, legal considerations and recommended revisions before approving the final motion and delivery strategy. Councillors would publicly explain the motion and their vote, and honour the party’s commitment to follow lawful public direction while fulfilling the duties of office.

Agora is an independent project with restricted demo access. Verified elector accounts, public voting and official City integration are proposed features; a public app release is not announced here. Elector eligibility →

02 / CIVITAS · FROM DECISION TO DELIVERY

Show the work.
Make it happen.

A public view of the report, the decision and what happens next.

Civitas is the proposed workspace where authorised city staff turn an Agora-approved proposal into a practical implementation report. After the public reviews the report and council gives the necessary legal approvals, its dashboard would track delivery, costs and results.

  • A staff report covering legal authority, costs, funding and service impacts.
  • Review of compatibility with existing policies, objectives and other City commitments.
  • Recommendations, alternatives and revisions returned to Agora for public consideration.
  • A visible delivery record with milestones, responsible teams, budgets and progress.
A second stage of scrutiny

Think of the exchange as two stages of scrutiny: an idea passes in Agora, is examined for implementation in Civitas, and returns to Agora with a report. The House-and-Senate comparison describes this review and return only; Civitas would be a staff workflow and dashboard, with no separate legislative authority or veto. Council would commission staff work through lawful municipal procedures. Spending and delivery would follow the necessary legal and budget approvals.

Civitas is a proposed workflow and dashboard. City staff participation and access would require lawful authorization and an agreed operating model.

ONE IDEA. A VISIBLE PUBLIC PROCESS.

From your idea to a city decision.

The public sees the proposal, the staff report and the final version before council decides. Implementation follows the necessary legal and budget approvals.

  1. 01 AGORA

    Approve the idea

    Propose, debate and approve a motion under published voting rules, with participation above 1% of the city’s population.

  2. 02 CIVITAS

    Prepare the report

    Authorised staff assess costs, funding, legal authority and policy fit, and publish implementation options and recommended revisions.

  3. 03 AGORA

    Approve the final plan

    The public examines the report and votes on the final wording and delivery strategy. Revisions return for review.

  4. 04 COUNCIL

    Vote on the record

    Councillors debate publicly and cast the required legal votes, respecting statutory duties and any required hearings or approvals.

  5. 05 CIVITAS

    Track delivery

    After approval, the dashboard shows responsibilities, milestones, budgets, delays and results as staff carry out the decision.

If the report changes the proposal, it returns to Agora for public review. Material changes after approval return for a new vote.

This is our proposed political decision process. Agora participation is advisory in law today; council retains the powers and duties given to it by law. Required public hearings, consultation, financial approvals and conflict-of-interest rules still apply. Read the legal foundation →

03–13 / PUTTING THE PRINCIPLES TO WORK

The commitments we bring to the public.

Founding proposals for staff review and local decisions through Agora.

03

IDENTITY & CITY SERVICES

Civic Pass

A civic identity that opens doors.

Develop a city-backed Civic Pass for Agora, municipal services and parking payments through one city account, with optional biometric unlock. A separate, consent-based check could help verify physical presence in the city when a service needs it. We will seek a police-assisted identity-verification route for people without conventional ID, and agreements with banks and businesses to accept appropriately verified credentials. Identity, presence, residency and voter eligibility would each be checked for their own purpose.

How identity, inclusion and privacy would work

A fingerprint or face match can help unlock an account; it does not by itself establish a person’s name, address, citizenship or right to vote. Use device-local biometric authentication where feasible, with PIN, assisted and non-digital alternatives. Confirm elector eligibility separately. An eligible voter travelling outside the city should not lose participation solely because a phone reports another location.

Ask police and qualified community identity services to help establish and document identity when a person lacks standard papers, using a lawful evidence and review process. Police participation would require an agreed protocol; an officer’s assurance cannot make an uncertain identity infallible or waive another institution’s legal requirements. Provide correction, appeal, expiry and lost-device recovery.

Seek banking and business acceptance through agreements that satisfy their identification and anti-money-laundering obligations. FINTRAC excludes municipal photo ID from its government-issued photo-identification method; other permitted methods can use different reliable evidence. Work with banks on existing basic-account pathways for people without conventional ID, combining reliable identity evidence and community confirmation where permitted, and help people obtain standard documents. A police approval alone cannot override the bank’s duties. City services must remain separate from party membership and political preferences.

Complete privacy, security and accessibility assessments before a pilot. Collect only necessary evidence; keep service records, voter eligibility and secret ballot choices separate. Avoid a central biometric database and continuous location tracking. City accounts, credential issuance and live payments are proposed integrations, not services available on this site.

Source notes: B.C.: privacy impact assessments for public bodies · FINTRAC: permitted identity-verification methods · FCAC: access to basic banking with non-standard ID

04

PAID WORK & OPPORTUNITY

Get Vancouver working

Useful work. Fair pay. A route forward.

Create a supervised scrap, repair and reuse yard where people experiencing homelessness can earn money through useful, fairly paid work. Pair it with AutoJobSeeker to find suitable jobs, prepare applications and record real employment efforts. We will ask B.C.’s Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction to make use of an accessible, approved version a requirement for continued income assistance for recipients who can work and are subject to employment obligations, with disability, health, caregiving and access exceptions and human review.

The work offer and the provincial request

Start with a safe site, an operator, contracted lawful scrap and demolition materials, committed buyers and a wage budget. Verify material ownership and reject suspicious goods. Offer paid training, protective equipment, injury coverage and applicable minimum-wage protection, including when piece rates are used. Access to hazardous equipment depends on functional safety; support should remain available while someone prepares for safe work.

AutoJobSeeker would help with matching, applications, follow-up and transparent activity records. The participant must approve applications before they are sent. Provide a supported desk and equivalent phone or in-person routes for people without devices, reliable internet or digital skills. Employers must offer lawful, suitable work, and disability accommodations must be meaningful.

Benefit eligibility is a provincial decision. Our proposal is to request a lawful, independently evaluated change for recipients subject to employment obligations, not to claim the City can impose it now. Publish costs, evidence of effectiveness, privacy limits, reasonable exemptions, notice and appeal rights before a pilot. App activity alone must not automatically decide whether someone keeps essential benefits, and unavailable jobs must not be treated as a refusal to work. Current provincial rules exempt disability-assistance recipients from employability obligations and also recognize other exemptions, including homelessness, certain caregiving duties and treatment participation. Preserve applicable exemptions and provide supported access before considering any new requirement.

Measure actual earnings, sustained employment, injuries, participant experience and the full public subsidy. Scrap sales may offset costs; they are not assumed to fund the whole program.

Source notes: B.C.: employment planning for income assistance · B.C.: recipients without employability-related obligations

05

SAFETY, SERVICE & ACCOUNTABILITY

Police in the public interest

Reward service. Focus on serious harm.

Seek a phased reduction of at least 20% in sworn officers through retirement and other departures, while maintaining the overall police budget and paying the retained workforce significantly better from verified net savings. Focus specialist effort on serious financial wrongdoing that harms public health or taxpayers and high-volume drug trafficking. Build a friendly, reliable 24/7 presence at Main and Hastings, with officers helping people reach housing and care. Annual end-of-year merit awards would recognize documented public service, with transparent allocations.

Staffing, priorities and the annual service award

Ask the Police Board and chief for a costed staffing and service plan, with council’s lawful budget role and collective agreements respected. The 20% figure is a target to test, not an instruction to leave unsafe vacancies. Publish the baseline, timeline, emergency response, workload, coverage and investigation standards; pause or reverse reductions if those standards deteriorate. Staffing and hiring decisions must follow the lawful governance process, including in municipalities served by contracted police.

Keep the overall funding envelope, subject to annual approval, and redirect actual recurring savings after overtime, benefits, training, civilian support and other costs. Negotiate better compensation and an annual end-of-year merit pool. The pool can grow only when sustainable savings grow; reducing headcount does not automatically release 20% of the budget. Publish award criteria, allocations and reasons, including recipients where lawful, while protecting operational safety and protected personal information.

Prioritize evidence of large-scale trafficking and financial harm, including procurement fraud, corporate misconduct and other suspected crimes affecting taxpayers or public health. The ambition to focus on the top 10% of dealers by volume describes high-level targets; it is not a verified ranking or immunity for smaller dealers who use violence or exploit others. Police retain independence over individual investigations, and regulators and prosecutors retain their responsibilities.

The Busters towing evidence project is a case study in the contract-and-receipt scrutiny we want applied to City contractors: compare disputed charges and access practices with the actual agreement, hear the contractor’s response, and refer evidence to independent authorities where justified. The project’s published notice describes an effort to develop a proposed class action, says allegations are unproven and reports that Busters denies wrongdoing. It states that no proceeding has been filed or certified; we have not independently established a later court status. This is not a finding of fraud or criminal guilt. Scott Gilbert’s involvement must be disclosed, with conflict rules and independent handling of any related City decision.

Evaluate documented help with housing, lawful problem-solving, victim follow-up, de-escalation and dependable community service. Seek continuous, approachable coverage at Main and Hastings without harassment or arrest and ticket quotas. Where medically appropriate, lawful and safe, officers should help arrange transport or take someone to hospital when their needs are otherwise unmet; a police vehicle cannot replace necessary paramedic care.

Footage that appears to show officers socializing for more than a minute or two while needed work is neglected should enter a documented performance-review process. Check assignments, lawful breaks, safety coordination and the full context before reaching a finding or changing an award. Give officers a fair opportunity to respond. Community reports should identify service failures without exposing vulnerable people’s medical or housing information.

Source notes: B.C. Police Act: boards, police and municipal funding · Busters Class Action: the organizer’s published project notice

06

RECOVERY WITH PRACTICAL INCENTIVES

Walk-in detox & a path to ownership

A door open today. A home to work towards.

Seek city funding and health partnerships for walk-in, clinically supervised withdrawal care, followed by treatment, housing and paid-work support. Test a voluntary RV ownership pathway: priority for better refurbished homes after a proposed 10-day treatment milestone, then a 100-day recovery milestone and a year of verified work averaging 25 hours a week, with payments around $500 a month. The goal is a safe home people can earn and eventually own, with routes back into recovery after setbacks.

The proposed milestones and what must be costed

Ten and 100 days are proposed incentive milestones, not prescribed detox lengths or a claim that withdrawal care cures addiction. Clinical teams would set safe, individualized treatment plans and determine how progress is recognized. Evidence-based prescribed medication, including opioid agonist treatment, must not disqualify someone. Seek same-day assessment and actual treatment capacity, with emergency transfer when needed and continuing care after withdrawal.

The working design is a 100-day recovery milestone followed by 12 months of suitable verified employment averaging at least 25 hours a week and approximately $500 monthly payments toward the RV. Provide paid-work options, supported employment and equivalent pathways where disability, illness or caregiving prevents those hours. City staff must specify the start date, title-transfer conditions, missed-payment rules and what each payment covers before anyone enrols.

Twelve payments of $500 total $6,000. That does not establish the cost of an RV, land, repairs, utilities, insurance, staffing or a pad. Publish the purchase price, repair reserve, public subsidy and continuing costs after ownership; an owner would still need a lawful place to keep the vehicle. Any use of income assistance for eligible shelter costs depends on provincial rules and individual eligibility, not a promised payment by the City.

Buy suitable used motorhomes with sound, functional living spaces, including mechanically impaired vehicles only where inspection shows that repair or an approved stationary use is safe and economical. Require fire, electrical, propane, sanitation and accessibility checks. A pleasant interior does not establish that a vehicle is safe to live in.

Keep a safe, functional housing option when someone returns to substance use. Any change from a higher-amenity unit to another unit must follow the occupancy agreement, tenancy and human-rights duties, clinical advice and a fair review; relapse alone must not trigger automatic eviction or an unsafe move. Offer regular opportunities to restart, including a monthly review of readiness. Measure housing stability, health, work and participants’ own progress, not just abstinence counts.

Source notes: HealthLink BC: withdrawal management services · BCCSU: clinical guidance for opioid use disorder · B.C. Residential Tenancy Branch: jurisdiction guidance · BC Human Rights Tribunal: tenancy and accommodation

07

A PRACTICAL STEP TOWARD ENDING HOMELESSNESS

Safe RV communities

A safe place to live, starting now.

Use serviced, managed RV sites as a practical part of the plan to end homelessness. Start with a costed 40–60-space pilot offering safe power, drinking water, toilets, waste and sewage services, fire access, security, storage and links to treatment and work. Assess refurbished City-supplied vehicles and spaces for suitable existing vehicles, alongside carefully regulated hosted RVs on private lots. Participation would be voluntary, with accessible alternatives and continuing routes into permanent housing.

A housing program with real sites and services

Bring sites, bylaw changes, servicing, an operator and full capital and operating costs to council. The earlier proposal also explored up to 200 hosted-RV permits over two years; any scale must follow site, owner-consent, safety and service review. Industrial-edge land is not automatically suitable: screen for contamination, hazardous operations, freight conflicts, safe walking access and public transport.

Set affordable charges only after publishing the service and subsidy model. Provide disability access, pets and secure belongings where feasible, clear occupancy terms, complaints and independent review. Essential shelter and care must remain available without party membership, biometric enrolment or participation in the ownership incentive.

Track safe nights, people moved out of unsheltered homelessness, repeat homelessness, safety incidents and voluntary transitions to lasting housing. The objective is to end homelessness; this pilot’s capacity and effectiveness must be demonstrated before claiming that it can do so alone.

Source notes: Vancouver: Trailer Court By-law 3644 · B.C. Residential Tenancy Branch: jurisdiction guidance

08

OWNERSHIP THAT STAYS WITHIN REACH

First Homes Fund

Build equity. Keep the next home affordable.

Revive the First Homes Fund for people and households earning roughly $60,000–$120,000 a year, with final eligibility based on household circumstances and real costs. The City or a community land trust keeps the land; eligible residents buy a home or long leasehold at a reduced price. When they sell, they recover their eligible equity under a published formula, while a resale cap keeps the public subsidy in the program for the next buyer.

The recovered proposal and the resale rule

The September housing proposal called for a capped $25-million revolving pilot using separately valued City land, eligible housing funds and partner capital. Restore that as a proposal for review, not committed spending. Publish the land appraisal, cash requirement, construction costs, financing and subsidy per home before promising a unit count or a price affordable at a given income.

Target owner-occupiers with transparent income and asset limits and no other residential property. The $60,000–$120,000 range is the initial affordability target, not a guarantee of mortgage approval or the final eligibility schedule. Test different household sizes, down payments, borrowing rates, taxes, service charges, insurance, maintenance and accessibility needs.

The original design returns the buyer’s down payment and principal repaid, plus a defined limited share of appreciation, subject to the resale formula and costs. A principal-only option should also be costed for public review. Interest, taxes, maintenance and ordinary occupancy expenses are not automatically refunded. Explain outstanding debt, transaction costs, permitted improvements and the risk of a lower resale value before purchase.

Use enforceable lease and resale terms to preserve affordability for future eligible buyers. The public stake stays in the program. No promise of unlimited appreciation, guaranteed repayment or an unrestricted market resale should be made.

Source notes: B.C.: housing partnerships and resale price restrictions

09

SIGNALS, ACCESS & SHARED INFRASTRUCTURE

Streets that work

Less waiting. Safer movement.

Improve traffic-light timing and detection so people spend less time waiting unnecessarily. Test adaptive signals against good conventional retiming, with transit priority, reliable pedestrian crossings, cycling detection and emergency access. Retain the existing proposals for staggered commuting, fairer parking, affordable shared bikes and coordinated public Wi-Fi investment. Publish real journey, safety and cost results before expanding, and keep traffic sensing separate from identity and political participation.

The traffic-light plan and existing proposals

Start with an asset audit and a 20–30-intersection pilot, informed by the earlier campaign proposal. Measure person-delay, pedestrian waits, transit reliability, collisions and total cost against a baseline and comparison locations. Provide safe local operation through communications failures and assess winter power, maintenance and whole-life costs.

The detailed transport, camera, employer-commuting and public Wi-Fi proposals remain below. Automated ticketing requires the appropriate legal authority and evidence controls; an ordinary monitoring camera cannot simply be treated as an enforcement system. Community support does not waive privacy rights.

Source notes: Vancouver: existing traffic cameras · B.C.: how intersection tickets are issued · FHWA: adaptive signals and transit signal priority · B.C.: public-sector privacy impact assessments

Read the existing smart-street policy →All seven earlier proposals →
10

AN EASIER WAY TO GET THINGS DONE

City Servant

Ask for help. Leave with a clear next step.

Develop City Servant as a helpful front door to municipal services through text, voice and an optional live presenter. It would explain services, guide people through forms, show proposed answers and ask permission before submitting anything. In Agora, the same tool could explain evidence and help residents write their own proposals. A human handoff and accessible non-digital service would remain available; the app would never cast a vote for anyone.

From a useful answer to a completed task

Begin with a small set of common services alongside existing municipal channels. Keep forms and rules current, link factual answers to sources and make uncertainty visible. Show the final submission for approval, then obtain a genuine acknowledgment from the receiving system before saying something has been filed. An application draft is not a completed City transaction.

Keep personal service conversations separate from public Agora posts and party records. Publishing a proposal requires a separate, explicit decision. Protect confidential information and provide human review of consequential decisions. Test completion, errors, repeat visits, accessibility and full cost per correctly resolved task before claiming savings.

City Servant is a proposed service design. Official integrations and live transactions would require approval and security review. It is not an emergency-dispatch service.

Source notes: Vancouver: existing Van311 services

11

GOOD FOOD, ANY TIME

The 24/7 soup kitchen

A fantastic bowl of soup. For anyone.

Create a welcoming kitchen open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, where anyone can get excellent soup and bread for free without an income test. Aim to offer at least five delicious soups, with only one meat option and the others vegetarian, including a vegan choice. Publish ingredients and allergens, provide safe food handling and accessible service, and connect people who want it with other help. Eating well should be a reliable part of city life.

A service that can stay open

Commission a site and operating plan covering food premises approval, trained staff, overnight coverage, supply contracts, nutritious recipes, refrigeration, sanitation, security and total cost per meal. Volunteers and donated ingredients can help, but a 24/7 service needs dependable paid staffing and funding.

Offer meals without a party, app, ID, sobriety or employment requirement. Label vegetarian, vegan and meat ingredients accurately and explain allergen controls; do not promise an allergen-free kitchen. Assess medically appropriate alternatives with qualified providers. Measure meal availability, nutrition, user feedback, waste and costs.

Source notes: B.C.: food safety and sanitation plans

12

FOLLOW THE MONEY. MEASURE THE RESULT.

Drain the spending swamp in the Downtown Eastside

Fund progress people can feel.

Review City-funded Downtown Eastside spending, publish where the money goes and redirect resources toward stable housing, recovery, paid work and greater independence. Compare administration and staffing costs with the help people actually receive. Combine practical incentives with treatment and meaningful activity to reduce harmful, persistent drug use, and study which approaches work. Keep essential care and disability supports available. The aim is fewer people trapped in crisis and more people able to meet their own needs.

What changes, what gets measured and who decides

Audit City grants and contracts, map overlapping services, disclose administration and frontline costs, and require clear outcomes and independent evaluation. Ask provincial, federal, health and charitable funders to publish comparable information; council cannot redirect budgets it does not control. Financial criticism must identify evidence and the responsible program rather than presume wrongdoing from a high wage bill.

Where a service is ineffective or duplicated, restructure procurement and staffing through lawful contracts and labour processes. Some roles may change or end; plan transitions and protect necessary clinical, disability, home-care and cleaning support. Disability, serious illness and trauma can limit independence and work. Assess needs individually rather than assume everyone can manage without assistance.

Judge substance use by harm, impairment and the person’s circumstances, rather than treating every pattern of use as identical. Offer realistic recovery incentives, treatment choices, recreation, community connection and suitable work. Do not claim that providing food or housing causes addiction or that removing basic support cures it. Test changes against evidence of health, safety, wellbeing and sustained progress.

Publish a baseline, costs and changes in stable housing, deaths and emergencies, voluntary treatment engagement, lawful earnings, quality of life and unmet need. Adjust measures for the needs of the people served so providers are not rewarded for selecting only easy cases. Return major changes and the evidence to Agora; track delivery in Civitas.

Source notes: Vancouver Charter: council decisions, staff and public proceedings

13

SMALL BUSINESS TRANSITION · DTES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

A cigarette-sales transition

A temporary retail zone. A lasting income goal.

We will seek a two-year transition that bans in-person cigarette sales outside a defined Downtown Eastside zone, while preserving lawful, age-verified mail-order access. Small businesses that depend on cigarette income would receive proposed transition compensation and help to develop other revenue, funded through lawful DTES tobacco licence charges or a dedicated sales levy if the Province authorizes one. The DTES licences would end after ten years, or earlier when published resident-income targets show a sustained, substantial narrowing of the gap with the rest of Vancouver.

The two-year transition, funding and income-based sunset

At the first lawful council opportunity, refer the proposal to staff to define the zone, assess a citywide retail restriction, design the licence system and cost a two-year small-business transition. Obtain legal advice on municipal authority, business compensation, taxation and interaction with provincial and federal tobacco rules. Seek provincial enabling legislation or agreements where required. The platform is not a current ban, an issued licence or an approved compensation entitlement.

Propose capped, evidence-based transition payments for small businesses with documented dependence on cigarette revenue, alongside assistance to replace that income with other lawful products and services. Publish eligibility, loss calculations, payment caps, an appeal route and the total budget before opening applications. Model licence or levy revenue conservatively, including enforcement and administration, declining demand, mail orders and purchases outside Vancouver; do not assume the scheme fully funds itself.

Use the temporary DTES retail opportunity to support local jobs, locally rooted businesses and higher resident incomes. Staff would propose transparent licence allocation and renewal rules, limits on the number of outlets and measures to prevent an exclusive benefit for outside owners. Licence charges may have a tax character under the Vancouver Charter, but that does not automatically authorize a separate cigarette sales tax or this specific geographic arrangement.

The entire DTES licence program would have a maximum ten-year life measured from its launch; a renewal would not restart that clock. Before licences are issued, publish the geographic boundary, income baseline, data source, target and early-closure rules for public approval in Agora. Propose median resident income as the main measure, with mean income reported alongside it, compared consistently with the rest of Vancouver over a defined sustained period. Track the position of existing low-income residents so displacement or an influx of wealthier residents does not falsely count as success. The exact target, measurement interval and closure notice period still require a staff report and public decision.

Redirecting existing adult purchases is an economic proposal, not a claim that more smoking improves health or that tobacco sales are proven to raise DTES incomes. Concentrating outlets could also concentrate harm and conflict with recovery goals. Require an independent health and equity assessment, meaningful input from DTES residents, cessation support, youth-access enforcement and options for a declining licence cap before implementation.

Mail order would remain subject to lawful retail authorization, age verification, tax, delivery and advertising requirements. Federal law restricts paid interprovincial tobacco shipments and offers to make them; this proposal does not promise unrestricted shipping or override those rules. After the two-year transition, in-person sales would be confined to the temporary DTES zone; the DTES licences would expire at the program’s sunset. The rules that will apply after that sunset, including any replacement retail arrangements, must be defined before launch and approved through Agora and council. No automatic licence renewal is promised.

Source notes: Vancouver Charter: business licensing and fees · B.C.: Tobacco and Vapour Retailer Resource · Tobacco and Vaping Products Act, section 9.1: interprovincial delivery

THE AGORA PARTY PLEDGE

A mandate that
stays with you.

Our party commits to implement the will of the people within the bounds of existing law. Agora Party councillors would follow the public direction established through qualifying Agora votes, explain motions on the public record and cast the legally binding votes required to put that direction into effect. When a legal obligation, conflict of interest, public hearing requirement or other statutory duty prevents a particular action, they would explain the reason as fully as the law permits and return lawful alternatives to the public.

Scott “Great Scott” Gilbert intends to seek the mayoralty of Vancouver with ten council candidates under the proposed Agora Party banner in 2030. We invite local teams in other Greater Vancouver municipalities to build slates around the same founding commitments. Each city keeps its own electorate, priorities, council powers and budget. Candidates and nominations will be announced when confirmed; every seat remains the voters’ decision.

Founding membership

Founding membership requires endorsement of Agora, Civitas and every initiative in this founding platform as proposals to develop and put through public and staff review. Members commit to citizen directed government, lawful implementation and transparent results. After election, each local electorate can retain, revise or reject individual policy proposals through the published Agora process.

The 2030 candidate commitment

To seek a place on an Agora Party slate for 2030, candidates must support every founding initiative sufficiently to vote at their first council meeting to refer the proposals to city staff for a full report on how best to implement them. That commitment is subject to lawful notice, agenda and conflict rules: where the inaugural meeting cannot conduct that business, it means the first lawful opportunity. The reports then return to Agora for public discussion and decisions about what to keep, revise or stop.

Agora Party is the proposed name for this municipal organization. Registration in the intended jurisdictions, ballot-name approval and candidate nominations remain to be confirmed. Registration framework →

Answer the candidate call

THE 100,000-SUPPORTER GOAL

Make support visible.
Keep every choice free.

We want to demonstrate broad support before election day: 100,000 verified, voluntary pledges from eligible City of Vancouver electors for Scott Gilbert’s proposed 2030 mayoral campaign and the Agora Party’s citizen directed government plan. That would be a political milestone. The official election decides who takes office.

Downloads, active accounts, completed tutorials and notification responses are different measures. None becomes a support pledge automatically. Support for a particular councillor must be recorded separately; support for the platform cannot be claimed as a promise to elect an entire slate. Supporters in other municipalities would have separate local counts.

How a credible support count would work

Before counting begins, publish the exact pledge, verification method, eligibility date, duplicate controls, withdrawal process and independent audit arrangements. Each person must make a separate, informed choice to be counted, with no reward conditional on political support. A download, completed five-screen tutorial or five-question learning check is not consent to receive campaign messages or an endorsement.

Report a dated aggregate, with the number currently verified and the counting limitations. Keep named political preferences private by default, allow people to withdraw or change their pledge, and separate campaign records from civic-service access. Verification must preserve lawful elector categories rather than treating presence in the city as proof of eligibility. Nobody would be required to disclose or prove their eventual secret ballot.

Public enrolment and pledge verification are not open on this website. We are inviting people to help review and test the model; no paid-download or gift-card offer is announced here. Election-law source · Privacy framework

OPEN CALL · THE PROPOSED 2030 SLATE

Run with the Agora Party.

Shared principles. Local priorities. A continuing public mandate.

Scott Gilbert wearing a red campaign cap, from his existing campaign artwork

Scott “Great Scott” Gilbert

Self-declared “acting mayor of the DTES”

An informal campaign title, not an elected or appointed public office.

Seeking election as Vancouver mayor in 2030.

We are inviting people willing to seek election under the Agora Party ticket — beginning with a Vancouver team of up to ten council candidates alongside Scott’s proposed mayoral candidacy.

We also welcome prospective mayoral and council candidates and local organizers in other Greater Vancouver municipalities. Each local team would share the Agora and Civitas structure while its own electorate determines local priorities.

The commitment comes first.

Prospective candidates must endorse the founding package and commit to voting at the first lawful council opportunity to send every initiative to staff for a full implementation review. Costs, legal authority, alternatives and recommendations then return to the public through Agora. Required procedures and conflict-of-interest duties still apply.

Tell us your municipality, the office you are interested in, what experience you would bring and why you support citizen directed government. We are looking for people prepared to speak on the record, explain the evidence and implement lawful public decisions.

Express candidate interest

This email is an expression of interest. Selection, eligibility, nomination, party registration and ballot endorsement remain subject to the applicable processes. No place on a slate is guaranteed. Please send an introduction, not identity documents. Registration requirements →

A PUBLIC MANDATE NEEDS PUBLIC TRUST

The rules belong in the open.

A clear public mandate

Publish the exact motion, participation count, approval rule, voting period and treatment of abstentions before asking people to vote. A revised motion returns for public review.

One person, one account

Verify elector eligibility and prevent duplicate participation before launch. Make activation voluntary, protect individual ballot choices and publish auditable totals. Verification information must be handled under a lawful privacy framework.

Access beyond a smartphone

Develop accessible participation routes so disability, device ownership or internet access does not decide who can take part.

Lawful decisions, visible reasons

Council retains its legally binding decision making and statutory duties. If the public’s preferred action cannot lawfully proceed, publish the specific obstacle and put lawful alternatives back to the public.

Costs before commitments

Put the staff assessment and funding requirements in front of the public before the final motion. Spending and delivery require the applicable legal approvals.

A public delivery record

Track who is responsible, what was approved, what it will cost, when it is due and what changed. Explain delays, revisions and outcomes in Civitas.

THE EARLIER POLICY DETAIL

A more liveable Vancouver.

Seven earlier proposals remain part of the founding package. Open each for the full policy and delivery plan.

These seven proposals complement the thirteen founding items above. The same staff review, public decision and lawful approval process applies.

01TRANSPORTATION & OPPORTUNITY

PROPOSAL 01

Public streets. Public access.

A bike can be the difference between getting to work and being shut out. I want shared bikes and scooters to work for the people who depend on them, including residents without a vehicle, a driver's licence, a credit card or a fixed address.

Read the full proposal
THE PROPOSED ACCESS STANDARDAnnual membership · CAD
Proposed annual membership by individual annual income
Personal annual incomeAnnual membership
Below $20,000Free
$20,000 to below $40,000$20 / year
$40,000 to below $80,00030% off standard membership
$80,000 and aboveMarket rate

Working policy design: individual annual income; included rides and any extra fees must be costed and published. Premium products can remain available.

A business can make a healthy profit and still serve the whole city. Where Vancouver controls street space, contracts or permits for shared transportation, I will seek lawful public-access conditions and funded agreements that make affordability part of the service. Operators can charge market rates and offer premium products, while a practical basic service remains within reach. Existing contracts would be reviewed and changes negotiated or introduced at renewal.

My proposed annual membership schedule is free for people with personal annual income below $20,000; $20 for income from $20,000 to below $40,000; a 30% discount from the standard annual membership for income from $40,000 to below $80,000; and market rates at $80,000 or more. These are proposed individual income bands, not current operator prices. The basic tier must include useful everyday rides: a free membership that leaves essential trips unaffordable does not meet the goal.

I will seek a basic access option without a credit card or a large deposit, assisted enrolment through community locations, and alternatives for people without a smartphone or conventional proof of address. Eligibility checks should use the least personal information necessary. E-bike support for disability-related needs, accessible options, service coverage, included ride times and any extra charges must be designed and priced openly. Residents should be able to enrol throughout the year, with enough capacity to serve eligible demand rather than a small annual intake.

Alongside shared fleets, I will propose free, legally sourced refurbished bikes for homeless and low-income residents, with locks, helmets, repair support and routes into paid repair work. Bike registration and recovery can remain useful, but access to a working bike deserves its own investment. My hypothesis is that meeting transportation needs can reduce some demand for stolen bikes. We will measure that effect rather than promise that this removes most bike theft.

What I would bring to council

Bring forward a costed access standard and community-bike pilot; identify the necessary contract, permit and budget decisions; publish coverage and enrolment targets before rollout.

02REPLACEMENT & PREVENTION

PROPOSAL 02

Replace the loss. Break the cycle.

If someone's bike, tools or other essential property is stolen, replacing it should be a priority. I want a response that helps the person who suffered the loss and addresses the conditions behind the offending.

Read the full proposal

I will bring forward an Under $5,000 theft-loss proposal: a costed pilot to compensate eligible theft losses below $5,000, starting with essential belongings and tools people need for daily life and work. Before launch, the City would need to establish its legal authority, a funding source, independent claims administration, fair evidence requirements, appeals, fraud controls and rules against duplicate payment. If delivered as insurance, it would require an appropriately authorised insurer and applicable provincial approvals. It is a proposed program, not coverage currently available.

My aim is to replace routine prosecution and incarceration for non-violent, poverty-related theft under $5,000 with lawful diversion, repair of harm and access to food, a dry bed, transportation, treatment when needed and realistic paid opportunities. I will advocate provincial and federal reforms and fund suitable local support and restorative programs within City authority. Theft under $5,000 remains a criminal offence; a mayor cannot repeal it, direct individual police investigations or order Crown counsel to abandon charges. Until laws change, diversion depends on the applicable legal rules and independent decisions.

A dollar threshold alone cannot tell us why someone stole or how much harm was done. A stolen $1,000 bike may be another low-income resident's only transportation. The proposal must protect people from violence, coercion and repeated victimisation, including organised theft and resale. The test is whether compensation and support produce fewer losses, less repeat offending and better lives at an acceptable public cost. Any savings must be demonstrated against a baseline, including the full cost of the replacement and support programs.

What I would bring to council

Commission legal and actuarial options, publish eligibility and funding choices, and seek partners for a limited pilot with independent evaluation. Advocate criminal-law reform separately from municipal delivery.

03HUMAN DIGNITY & COMMUNITY SAFETY

PROPOSAL 03

Support people to stop causing harm.

Public safety should mean fewer people harmed and more people able to live safely together. Accountability should include a credible route back into the community.

Read the full proposal

I want secure housing, practical support, treatment when clinically appropriate, and incentives for constructive participation to be central to reducing repeat harm. We should fund independent research into approaches that help people manage harmful behaviour, including people with complex needs, and reward programs that demonstrate better outcomes. Neither poverty nor mental illness is proof that someone is violent, and criminal behaviour is not automatically a medical diagnosis.

Where someone poses a serious risk, community protection still matters. My priority is the least restrictive lawful response that can actually manage that risk, with due process, individual assessment and regular review. I will advocate properly supported alternatives to custody where safe and lawful. Electronic monitoring or movement restrictions would require the appropriate legal authority and safeguards; a mayor cannot create confinement zones. Services should support recovery and safety without publicly branding neighbourhoods or residents by an offence or diagnosis.

What I would bring to council

Develop support and prevention partnerships; assess outcomes through victim safety, repeat harm, housing stability and participation in work or education. Provincial health and justice partners would be essential.

04FAIR DEALING & PUBLIC MONEY

PROPOSAL 04

Follow the money, at every level.

Vancouver should apply the same seriousness to powerful institutions and repeated financial exploitation that it applies to visible street-level wrongdoing.

Read the full proposal

I will seek clearer fees, accessible complaints, independent scrutiny of City contracts and remedies for unlawful overcharging. Repeated small losses deserve attention because the total harm can be substantial. A hypothetical $8 fee to withdraw $20 consumes 40% of the money accessed. That is a strong case for affordable cash access and fee transparency; a high or unfair fee is not, by itself, proof of criminal theft. Financial regulation often requires provincial or federal action, while the City can review its own contracts, facilities and purchasing choices.

Evidence of fraud, corruption, unlawful fees or misuse of public funds should be documented and referred to the proper independent authorities, regardless of the person's wealth or connections. I will advocate recovery of losses and meaningful accountability for serious and repeated misconduct. Allegations must be tested against records and the law, with findings clearly distinguished from suspicions.

What I would bring to council

Publish contract and fee information where lawfully available, build routes to challenge improper charges, and report financial recoveries and unresolved complaints.

05SMART SIGNALS & SAFER STREETS

PROPOSAL 05

Green lights. Safer streets.

Connect traffic sensors and suitable cameras to traffic lights so signals respond to the street in front of them. Aim for fewer unnecessary stops, more dependable bus journeys and consistent enforcement of dangerous driving.

Read the full proposal

Responsive signals

I will propose a coordinated signal pilot on selected corridors, developed with traffic engineers, TransLink and emergency services. Use real-time detection to adjust timings, give buses appropriate priority and reduce waiting at empty intersections at night. Protect pedestrian crossing times, accessibility and cycling safety, with safe fallback operation if equipment fails. Count people moved and reliable journeys, alongside vehicle delay. Cameras cannot remove every bottleneck, and better timing must be tested against properly maintained conventional signals.

Reliable enforcement

I want speeding and red-light running to carry a predictable consequence. I will seek expanded, legally authorised automated enforcement at locations selected for risk, using equipment approved for that purpose, verified measurements, published rules and a fair route to dispute a ticket. Vancouver's ordinary traffic-monitoring cameras are a different system: the City says their images are not recorded or stored. B.C.'s published ticketing process includes review by two officers. Expanding enforcement requires provincial and enforcement partners; connecting an existing camera to a light does not turn it into a lawful speed camera or guarantee a ticket for every violation.

Neighbourhood choice

For optional neighbourhood camera pilots, I will propose a clear resident opt-in and opt-out process, with periodic review and coordination across adjoining streets. Local preferences must fit legal duties and the wider road network. Every neighbourhood deserves safe crossings and effective signals. Where residents prefer fewer cameras, assess alternatives such as loop or radar detection. Publish comparative results; there is no established basis here for claiming that a neighbourhood choosing fewer cameras will be less safe.

Privacy and policing

Build privacy into the design: process traffic counts locally where feasible, minimise identifiable images, define lawful retention and access rules, and complete the required privacy assessment before launch. My proposal excludes facial recognition and general tracking of residents' journeys. Neighbourhood support cannot waive the rights of other people using a public road. Publish camera purposes, audit access and investigate misuse. The policing goal is to release officer time for work that needs people; actual staffing or budget savings must be demonstrated through the proper oversight and budget process.

What I would bring to council

Bring a costed corridor pilot to council with a baseline, comparison corridors, safety and privacy assessments, equipment standards, provincial enforcement requirements and public reporting. Measure serious crashes, speeds, walking and cycling delay, bus journey reliability, displaced traffic, errors and appeals, and officer hours. Expand only where the evidence supports it.

Source notes: Vancouver: existing traffic cameras · B.C.: how intersection tickets are issued · FHWA: adaptive signals and transit signal priority · B.C.: public-sector privacy impact assessments

06COMMUTING & EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITY

PROPOSAL 06

Spread out the rush hour.

A city should question why so many jobs require everyone to travel at the same time. Give employers a reason to stagger arrivals, support flexible work and reduce the pressure they put on peak-hour roads and transit.

Read the full proposal

Stagger the working day

Start with the City's own suitable workplaces, then build agreements with major employers for staggered starts, flexible shifts, remote work where practical and off-peak deliveries. Work with TransLink so earlier or later journeys have useful transit service. Employees need a voice in changes that affect childcare, disability accommodation, pay, safety and collective agreements.

An employer contribution

I will commission a public options paper on employer responsibility for peak commuting, including an employer peak-demand levy with credits for verified reductions in peak car trips, alongside voluntary agreements and other lawful incentives. Assess measured contribution to congestion, rather than treating every business open at nine as equally responsible. Publish who would pay, the proposed rate, administration costs, expected effects and the risk of costs being passed to workers or customers. No rate or charge is adopted in this platform.

Authority and fairness

Vancouver's Charter provides business-licensing and fee powers, but that does not settle whether this particular levy or credit structure would be lawful. Obtain municipal legal advice and seek provincial enabling legislation where needed before bringing forward a charge. Design fair treatment for essential services, small employers and workers whose hours cannot move. Test whether travel shifts out of the peak, whether total trips change, and whether congestion simply moves to another time or street.

What I would bring to council

Bring forward an employer and worker consultation, a suitable-workplace pilot and a published legal and economic assessment of peak-demand options. Coordinate service hours with TransLink. Return any proposed levy, credits, exemptions and funding uses to council for an open decision before implementation.

Source notes: Vancouver Charter: business licensing and fees

07PUBLIC INTERNET & SHARED INVESTMENT

PROPOSAL 07

Citywide Wi-Fi. A smaller bill.

Treat useful internet access as public infrastructure. Plan street technology and a wider public Wi-Fi network together, with the goal of dependable basic access across Vancouver and lower household internet costs.

Read the full proposal

One build, several benefits

Build on the existing #VanWiFi service and assess shared poles, conduit, maintenance visits and network connections when upgrading streets. A Wi-Fi camera does not itself provide public internet: the system also needs access points, purchased internet capacity, connections back to the wider network and ongoing support. Keep public internet and traffic-control systems securely separated, with traffic signals able to operate safely through an internet outage.

Solar where it works

Test solar-powered camera and Wi-Fi locations where practical, with batteries sized for Vancouver's winter conditions, shade and equipment loads. Compare them with existing wired power and network connections. Choose the lowest sustainable whole-life cost that meets reliability requirements. A citywide service needs field-tested coverage and capacity, including crowded locations, weather, outages, repair response and accessible support.

A useful public option

My aim is a free basic public-access tier that can meet everyday needs and, where coverage and reliability allow, help some households avoid a separate internet bill. A household replacing a $100-a-month plan would save $1,200 a year before any remaining costs; that is an illustrative scenario, not a verified TELUS price or a promised saving for every home. Outdoor Wi-Fi is not automatically a substitute for an indoor home connection. Publish indoor and outdoor test results, usable speeds, capacity limits, security arrangements and operating costs before anyone is asked to rely on it. Residents deserve open competition and an affordable public option.

The investment test

Bring the street and internet proposals together in one public investment case, while allowing each part to succeed or fail on its own evidence. Include installation, power, internet capacity, maintenance, batteries, cybersecurity, evidence review, appeals and replacement costs. Report household savings, travel-time benefits, officer time and any actual City cash savings separately. Seek evidence from ICBC on crash-claim savings and the potential for lower insurance costs; the City cannot promise an insurance-rate reduction. Ticket revenue depends on provincial arrangements and may decline as driving improves, so essential operating costs must remain affordable with low or no fine revenue.

What I would bring to council

Publish a map of existing access and gaps, then propose a funded pilot with stated service standards, a privacy assessment, procurement options and independent evaluation. Protect users' information, minimise connection logs, prohibit selling browsing data, and avoid linking Wi-Fi use to traffic-enforcement records. Publish the capital and operating budget, funding source and results before wider rollout.

Source notes: Vancouver: existing #VanWiFi service · Cisco: wireless mesh network architecture · ICBC: intersection camera program and fine revenue

ANOTHER TOOL WITH A PUBLIC PURPOSE

Fairer everyday parking.

The parking project remains part of the platform. Its current demonstration uses sample data.

Synthetic demo · restricted access

Vancouver Parking Beta

Parking that makes sense.

A demonstration of a fairer parking experience: understand the rule, see the price and explore protections against avoidable payment and enforcement problems.

Concepts explored in the beta

  • Actual-minute pricing, clear rates and visible caps.
  • District passes, plate-based rules and adjacent-curb protection concepts.
  • Location uncertainty flags and ticket-evidence preparation.
  • Pre-tow warning simulations, emergency balance and hardship review.
What the parking beta demonstrates

The beta uses sample data to explore pricing, rule explanations, payment-failure evidence and fair review. Its warnings, balances and protections are simulations. Live rates, payments, enforcement protections and notifications would require validated data, approved rules, operator agreements and tested integrations before launch.

This demo does not take payments, create a valid parking session, send live tow warnings, stop a tow or submit an appeal. It is independent of the City and parking operators.

BUILD THE AGORA PARTY

Bring your ideas.
Help build Agora.

Interested in forming a local Agora Party team, volunteering to test the participation model or improving a proposal? Read the founding commitment, then contact Scott with your municipality and the role you would like to play. Prospective candidates can also answer the open call for the 2030 slate.

Email Scott

This opens your email app. It does not register you as a voter, party member, app user or candidate. Please send an introduction, not identity documents.

BUILT IN PUBLIC

The founding platform is a package for public and staff review, with local implementation through Agora and Civitas. The 2030 candidate commitment is to bring every proposal forward for a full implementation report at the first lawful council opportunity. Publish the voting rules, draft motions, costs, funding sources, legal requirements and measures of success before final decisions. Test app security, accessibility and identity verification before any real public enrolment. Staff work and City integrations require lawful authorization.

Version 5 · 8 November 2026 — Added the cigarette-sales transition and income-based sunset; the 100,000 voluntary-support goal; an open call for 2030 candidates; and Scott’s existing campaign portrait with his informal, self-declared DTES title.

Version 4 · 8 November 2026 — Added the regional model and 2030 founding commitment; Civic Pass; paid work and AutoJobSeeker; police restructuring; recovery and RV housing; First Homes Fund; City Servant; a 24/7 soup kitchen; and Downtown Eastside spending reform. Retained the seven earlier policies.

Version 3 · 8 November 2026 — Introduced the Agora Party name and citizen directed government pledge; moved Agora to the centre; added Civitas, the public decision diagram, the population-based participation rule and source notes.

Versions 1–2 · 7 November 2026 — Added seven policies covering transport access, theft-loss recovery, community safety, financial accountability, smart streets, commuting and public Wi-Fi, with Agora and parking project highlights.

Evidence, sources and the limits of the proposals
  1. Mobi's published 2027 Community Pass rules →

    Operator's stated membership cap, intake and card requirements; these do not establish actual uptake or outcomes.

  2. City Leisure Access page →

    The City page describes the separate 2026 adult intake closure. It should not be read as a guarantee about 2027 applications.

  3. Criminal Code, section 334 →

    Current theft offences, including theft at or below $5,000.

  4. Police board conduct regulation, section 8 →

    Limits on interference with law-enforcement discretion.

  5. BC Prosecution Service: adult court process →

    Independent Crown charge assessment and alternatives to prosecution.

  6. Vancouver: existing traffic cameras →

    The City describes a traffic-monitoring system whose images are not recorded or stored. This is its published description, not an independent technical audit.

  7. B.C.: how intersection tickets are issued →

    The Province describes purpose-built red-light and speed enforcement, review by two officers and tickets to registered vehicle owners. An ordinary monitoring camera is not interchangeable with this system.

  8. FHWA: adaptive signals and transit signal priority →

    Describes responsive signal timing and transit priority. These are engineering options, not evidence of a particular benefit on Vancouver streets.

  9. B.C.: public-sector privacy impact assessments →

    Explains required privacy assessments for public bodies and review under FIPPA. Community support alone does not establish legal authority for surveillance; collection, use, retention and access need a lawful basis.

  10. Vancouver Charter: business licensing and fees →

    Sections 272–273 describe licensing, fees and licence conditions. Their existence does not establish that the proposed employer levy or credits are authorised.

  11. Vancouver: existing #VanWiFi service →

    The City lists public Wi-Fi at civic facilities and other locations, with provider support. This is not evidence of universal coverage or a reliable replacement for home internet.

  12. Cisco: wireless mesh network architecture →

    Technical background on access points, network connections and traffic separation. An older architecture reference, not a product recommendation, current price or Vancouver design.

  13. ICBC: intersection camera program and fine revenue →

    ICBC describes its existing camera program and provincial transfers of net traffic-violation revenue to eligible municipalities. This does not establish revenue or savings from this proposal.

  14. Statistics Canada: City of Vancouver population estimate →

    Table 17-10-0155-01, released 14 January 2026, lists a preliminary July 2025 City of Vancouver population estimate of 740,454. More than 1% means at least 7,405 participants. This is all residents, not the electoral register or Metro Vancouver. The source and threshold would be published before voting and updated transparently as estimates change.

  15. Vancouver: declaration of the 2026 election results →

    The Chief Election Officer's 21 October 2026 declaration lists ten winning councillor totals from 57,922 to 83,247. Their calculated average is 66,215.1. The proposed 7,405 participants are approximately 11.2% of that average; this comparison gives scale and is not an election threshold or evidence that participants represent all voters.

  16. Vancouver Charter: council decisions, staff and public proceedings →

    Sections 145 and 151 locate municipal decision-making in council's lawful powers, bylaws and resolutions; sections 161–162 address administration and staff, and sections 164.1–165.2 cover procedure and open or closed meetings. Conflict rules apply. An Agora vote or party pledge does not itself transfer these legal powers or authorise spending.

  17. Vancouver: who qualifies to vote →

    The City guide distinguishes eligible resident electors from qualifying nonresident property electors. Our proposed verified participation follows City of Vancouver elector eligibility, rather than treating every regional resident as a registered voter. No access to a government voter register has been established here.

  18. Elections BC: elector organizations →

    Elections BC sets the registration and endorsement framework for municipal elector organizations. Publishing this proposed party platform does not establish registration or approval of the Agora Party ballot name.

  19. Elections BC: elector organization registration guide →

    Pages 4–5 set out registration, officials, financial-agent and account requirements, at least 50 elector members in each jurisdiction, and an application identifying each intended jurisdiction. A regional proposal is not an announcement of registration, accepted ballot names or confirmed candidates. Requirements must be checked again for the 2030 election.

  20. B.C.: privacy impact assessments for public bodies →

    Explains the FIPPA section 69(5) assessment requirement and directions for ministry and non-ministry public bodies. Lawful collection, security, purpose limits and access require review before a civic identity pilot. Device-local biometrics and minimal location checks are proposed safeguards, not certifications of an existing system.

  21. FINTRAC: permitted identity-verification methods →

    The government-issued photo-ID method expressly excludes municipal photo identification. Other methods, including dual-process evidence and the basic retail-account provisions, have different requirements. A civic credential or police endorsement is not a universal substitute for the institution’s verification duties.

  22. FCAC: access to basic banking with non-standard ID →

    Describes reliable-source documents and an alternative involving a document showing name and birth date plus confirmation by a bank customer or community member in good standing. Banks still need to meet identification obligations. This supports exploring an assisted pathway, not a claim of an existing Civic Pass agreement.

  23. B.C.: employment planning for income assistance →

    Describes personalized employability plans developed with ministry staff. The AutoJobSeeker requirement is a proposed request to the Province, not a current rule or a power municipal council can exercise on its own. No app effectiveness or ministry integration is established.

  24. B.C.: recipients without employability-related obligations →

    Current policy states that disability assistance has no employability-related obligations and identifies other exemptions, including homelessness, treatment participation and specified caregiving circumstances. Individual circumstances, ministry reconsideration and applicable review routes matter. A future policy request must preserve legal protections and genuine access.

  25. B.C. Police Act: boards, police and municipal funding →

    The Act allocates governance, employment, operations and funding responsibilities; police boards, chiefs, councils and provincial oversight have distinct roles. The party cannot unilaterally set staffing, individual investigations, pay or bonuses. The 20% target and savings model require a lawful, costed plan and applicable bargaining.

  26. HealthLink BC: withdrawal management services →

    The service directory describes clinical withdrawal, stabilization and recovery support through Vancouver Coastal Health. It does not establish that a new city-supported walk-in program has funding, available places or a fixed treatment duration.

  27. BCCSU: clinical guidance for opioid use disorder →

    Clinical guidance covers ongoing treatment, withdrawal management, psychosocial care and harm reduction. The proposed ten- and 100-day incentives are program milestones, not universal medical prescriptions. Prescribed treatment must remain compatible with participation; withdrawal care alone is not a complete recovery plan.

  28. B.C. Residential Tenancy Branch: jurisdiction guidance →

    The guidance discusses rental RVs, travel trailers, manufactured-home sites and statutory exclusions. The applicable tenancy framework depends on the actual arrangement. A recovery-program label does not itself authorize eviction, a compulsory move or removal of existing rights.

  29. BC Human Rights Tribunal: tenancy and accommodation →

    Explains protected characteristics, including physical and mental disability and lawful source of income, adverse effects in tenancy and the duty to accommodate. Work and recovery incentives need individual review and accessible pathways.

  30. Vancouver: Trailer Court By-law 3644 →

    The published consolidation restricts occupied trailers and house-cars and sets site and sanitary requirements. Hosted individual RVs and managed sites need specific legal, health, fire, servicing and planning review; the platform does not itself make a site lawful.

  31. B.C.: housing partnerships and resale price restrictions →

    Describes mechanisms that can preserve housing affordability, including resale formulas and restrictions. The First Homes Fund’s specific $25-million pilot and $60,000–$120,000 target are campaign proposals; this source does not validate their financing, prices or unit count. The original model comes from Scott Gilbert’s September 2026 housing policy.

  32. Vancouver: existing Van311 services →

    The City describes its existing reporting and service-request channels. City Servant is a separate proposed assisted-service design recovered from the September 2026 City Servant and Agora report, not an announcement of an official integration or measured savings.

  33. B.C.: food safety and sanitation plans →

    Explains written food-safety and sanitation plans and local health-authority approval. A 24/7 soup kitchen also needs a suitable site, dependable staffing, supplies and an approved operating budget. No opening date or available service is announced.

  34. Busters Class Action: the organizer’s published project notice →

    Scott Gilbert’s own evidence-collection project, not an independent court record. Its indexed public notice describes unproven allegations, reports Busters’ denial and says no proceeding has been filed or certified. No later filing or certification has been independently verified here. A civil dispute is not proof of a criminal offence, and any official handling requires conflict safeguards.

  35. B.C.: Tobacco and Vapour Retailer Resource →

    The July 2025 resource describes provincial age, sale, display and retailer-compliance requirements; retailers must check current law, including subsequent amendments. A local retail-zone proposal cannot replace provincial authorization or federal obligations. The transition payments, geographic ban, revenue model and ten-year sunset require specific legal, financial and public-health review; no income benefit is established by this source.

  36. Tobacco and Vaping Products Act, section 9.1: interprovincial delivery →

    Restricts paid tobacco shipments between provinces to specified manufacturer/retailer transactions or regulatory exemptions, and prohibits advertising an offer to send or deliver tobacco from one province to another. The mail-order exception in this proposal means only sales and deliveries that are lawful under all applicable requirements.

  37. Vancouver Charter, section 123: vote buying →

    Covers gifts and other benefits offered or provided for specified electoral purposes, including indirect arrangements. No small-gift or election-year-only exemption is stated in this section. The 100,000-supporter goal is a proposed voluntary campaign measure, not an official ballot, a reported verified total or an offer of payment for support.

  38. Elections BC: campaign financing for elector organizations and financial agents →

    June 2026 guide explaining registration, contributions, accounts, expenses, approvals and reporting. Outreach, software and assets used for an election require appropriate classification and records. The candidate invitation is an expression-of-interest route, not registration, nomination or a donation solicitation.

  39. B.C. Personal Information Protection Act →

    Sets requirements for organizational collection, consent, use, disclosure, access, security and retention. Proposed campaign support records would need a clear purpose, meaningful separate consent and a secure process. City-service access must not depend on political support, and tutorial participation must not be treated as endorsement.

Governance and numerical sources checked on 8 November 2026; earlier policy sources checked on 7 November 2026. Government, operator and vendor descriptions identify their stated rules and figures; they are not independent proof that a proposal will work. Population estimates can be revised. The 1% threshold is a proposed party rule, not a statutory election threshold. The apps and new programs described here are proposals or independent demonstrations, with no official City integration, police or banking agreement, approved program funding or public enrolment announced. Policy targets and pilot figures are not measured results. The 100,000 figure is a campaign goal, not a current support count or an election result. The earlier First Homes Fund and City Servant designs were recovered from the author’s September 2026 policy documents; their assumptions still require current costing.

Privacy and contacting the author

This site has no account signup, live ballot, advertising tracker or document-upload form. The hosting service may process ordinary connection logs. Contact links open your email app; comments are not automatically published. Do not send identity, voter-registration, health, financial or case records. A future voter-verification or campaign-support service would need its own published privacy rules, separate consent and a secure process before enrolment. Testing or using a civic app must not automatically enrol anyone in a political campaign.