PENTICTON — The governing ABC Vancouver party is asking council to put two advisory questions on the October 17 municipal election ballot: whether Vancouver should strengthen bylaws against open-air hard-drug use, and whether it should formally request the province to convert portions of the old St. Paul’s Hospital — or another site — into a secure facility offering more than 100 involuntary care beds..A special council meeting is scheduled for Friday morning to consider the motion. ABC holds a majority, meaning the motion is likely to pass.However, the questions are non-binding. A majority “yes” would only give the next city council limited political cover to pursue bylaws and intergovernmental advocacy rather than creating new legal authority.Municipalities can regulate behaviour on streets, sidewalks, parks and other city property through bylaws. Strengthening them to target open use of heroin, methamphetamine, fentanyl and crack is within the city’s existing jurisdiction in many public spaces.However, simple possession and use of controlled substances remain primarily governed by the federal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.British Columbia’s three-year decriminalization pilot ended earlier this year.Any municipal bylaw that effectively recreates or expands a de facto ban must still operate within federal and provincial criminal and health frameworks.A strong plebiscite result would strengthen the city’s hand in pressing the province and Ottawa for clearer authority or supporting legislation, but it would not unilaterally rewrite the Criminal Code..The second question is more constrained. Health care, including the Mental Health Act and involuntary treatment, is provincial jurisdiction. The city can only “formally ask.”The old St. Paul’s Hospital campus on Burrard Street was sold by Providence Health Care to Concord Pacific in 2020. The new hospital is scheduled to open in the False Creek Flats in spring 2027. Concord has indicated full redevelopment is still up to a decade away and has said it is open to discussing interim uses, but no formal agreement for a secure treatment facility exists. Any conversion would require provincial funding and operational control, Concord’s consent, city zoning approvals, and compliance with provincial facility standards.Staffing is a further practical limit. The province has previously cited shortages of specialized psychiatric and addiction physicians and nurses as a barrier to expanding involuntary capacity. Recent BC Supreme Court rulings examining aspects of non-consensual treatment under the Mental Health Act have also introduced legal uncertainty that the provincial government is still assessing.Premier David Eby’s government has announced or advanced involuntary care beds in Surrey and Prince George while placing none in Vancouver itself, a point Mayor Ken Sim has repeatedly criticized in public letters..Those practical and jurisdictional limits are one reason opponents are already framing the proposal as shrewd political opportunism timed for the election.COPE Coun. Sean Orr, known in some circles as "the belly button guy," called it “just more cynical electioneering” and “a glorified opinion poll attached to the ballot,” noting that open-air drug use is already illegal and that the city lacks broader authority over drug laws..Political commentator Mo Amir described the move as “a very shrewd ‘GOTV’ election tactic by ABC Vancouver and Mayor Ken Sim to drive their base to the polls on October 17.”.'Harm reduction' and recovery advocate Guy Felicella agreed, writing that the non-binding questions and the already-sold hospital site show the city is “playing us all for fools” after four years in office. “They keep talking about ‘strengthening drug laws.’ Strengthen WHAT? Drugs are already illegal,” Felicella posted. “Let’s call this what it is: more enforcement, more criminalization, and another push toward forcing people into treatment. … You cannot arrest, criminalize or force your way out of a toxic drug and addictions crisis.”.The special meeting on Friday will determine whether the questions reach the ballot. Even if they do, and even if Vancouverites vote in favour of the proposals, the real tests will come long after the votes are counted.
