As the final city council meetings wrapped before the summer break, a theme emerged — council members are divided on Vancouver’s technological future.
Even though the council will not reconvene until the fall, questions about the role technology will play in the city will be centre stage during the municipal elections.
Just before the break, two motions introduced on the same day highlighted this deepening divide.
One motion, introduced by OneCity Coun. Lucy Maloney sought to implement certain guardrails for the controversial, looming Telus AI data centres. The other motion, introduced by ABC Party Coun. Mike Klassen sought to reaffirm Vancouver’s goal of becoming a tech and innovation hub, in part by building a physical “hub.”
“It’s not anti-business or anti-tech to ask for staff to make recommendations about a regulatory framework that will protect people, jobs, and make decisions aimed at outcomes that have transparency,” Maloney told Vancity Lookout of her unsuccessful motion.
Klassen’s motion entitled “Reviving and Accelerating the Vision for a Central Tech Innovation Hub in Vancouver” outlines plans to develop a strategy to create a physical tech and innovation hub in the city to attract tech talent.
The motion highlights that Vancouver’s tech sector needs to do more to commercialize ideas, attract and scale up investment.
Modelled after sites like Newlab in New York and Centech in Montreal, the motion asked council to evaluate ways to establish an innovation hub, including looking for provincial and federal funding to support the project, including B.C.’s $400 million Strategic Investment Special Account by the second quarter of 2027.
The motion passed with only Maloney and COPE Coun. Sean Orr opposed.
When asked why Maloney voted against the project, she said, “tech is one of the most highly financed and leveraged sectors… and we’re currently operating under a really tight budget,” adding that “I felt like that motion presented a business case rather than advancing a vision that secures meaningful public benefits or truly serves Vancouver’s residents’ needs.”
Maloney’s motion asked council to direct staff to develop requirements that would use a third party to assess water usage, greenhouse gas emissions, potential air contaminants as well as noise and heat impacts of AI data centres.
It asked council to review existing data centre uses in Vancouver and report back with noise complaints and other measurable community impacts. It also asked staff to explore options for “enhanced Community Amenity Contribution,” a form of cash or in-kind contributions by developers so that “residents should not be left to deal with impacts, infrastructure pressures and opportunity costs.”
Finally, it asked that these measures be implemented prior to the rezoning of 111 East 5th Avenue for the Telus AI data centre in Mount Pleasant.
However, that motion was struck down by the ABC majority.
While Maloney said she thinks it's important to attract more business to Vancouver’s local economy, she added that “it’s not our role as a municipal government to be unquestioning cheerleaders for AI or any tech advance, nor immovable naysayers.”
Vancouver faces a common existential question
Urban planning expert Andy Yan said that the debates playing out in council capture a much broader set of important “existential questions” facing the city.
Vancouver is not unique in grappling with issues around advancing technology within its limits, he added. The role for regulation and preservation of the public good in the midst of rapid technological advancements “are some of the key existential questions for where we are in 2026,” Yan said.
Just this week, Ontario introduced an “AI data centre playbook” that will prioritize companies and facilities that will pay the full cost of electricity and minimize negative community impact. A new nationwide poll revealed that the majority of Canadians oppose government support for data centre construction.
While much of the controversy emerging around the world right now involves the construction of data centres, the tech-related decisions that cities are grappling with extend beyond the erection of these buildings.
Vancouver just joined Quebec City in signing on to a pilot program using Google software called Project Green Light that uses AI to recommend changes to "optimize" its traffic light cycles. Cities are also grappling with the role that AI should play (or not) in schools.
Even just a single decision around technology and innovation can have multiple impacts that the public then needs to weigh, said Yan. For example, earlier this year, council was asked to decide whether to allow delivery robots onto city sidewalks.
“[It was argued] that [delivery robots] would reduce congestion on roads caused by delivery vehicles,” said Maloney. “But all that does is transfer that congestion to the sidewalks.”
When it comes to technology and innovation, Yan said we have to weigh individual interests against the public interest, especially when a given innovation will have public consequences. For example, Maloney and Yan both flagged that in addition to the impacts on the labour market, delivery robots could pose a problem for blind pedestrians or those using wheelchairs and other larger mobility devices.
“You can see where the winners and losers are in this,” said Maloney of the robot delivery motion that ultimately passed.
For Maloney, witnessing some of the recent tech-related motions approved by the ABC majority council, she said there is a “theme across all of them.”
“[They tend to] launch us headfirst into the coolest, trendiest AI or tech innovations without any desire to look at how to best…guard against negative consequences for the city,” she said, adding the example of Mayor Ken Sim’s (unsuccessful) push to convert some of the city’s financial reserves to Bitcoin.
“People are more and more recognizing that the reputation of Silicon Valleyers is to move fast and break things, and that has to be tempered by good governance,” said Maloney.
Tension between innovation and regulation in the upcoming election
Whether to make moves to stimulate a growing tech market, something that studies have demonstrated that Vancouver has historically failed to do competitively despite many efforts, or to approve the controversial Mount Pleasant AI data centre, parties are steadily revealing their positions on these key issues.
While there are some limits to the city’s power in this area, there are a few mechanisms of control it can exert regarding the construction of AI data centres, such as the pending rezoning application for the Mount Pleasant data centre and through monitoring compliance with noise by-laws.
“The issue before us is so complex and difficult to regulate that government regulation isn’t keeping up with it,” said Maloney of the growth of AI. “We see people’s frustrations expressed at a municipal level, even when it doesn’t exactly fit within our jurisdiction.”
The public hearing for the rezoning of the Mount Pleasant data centre will be held after the Oct. 17 election.
Maloney was unable to comment on whether she thought the council would exercise its authority to curb the development of these data centres in the fall.
However, she said that once the election has been held, it clears the slate for her to reintroduce a similar motion to establish guardrails for the AI data centres, should they be approved. The success of that motion, she added, will largely depend on the composition of city council at that time.
Despite multiple attempts over the phone and email, Ken Sim and Mike Klassen did not respond to Vancity Lookout’s requests for comment.
