Summary#
The motion, Motion pour souligner les 10 ans de l'organisme Piétons Québec et réaffirmer l'importance d'assurer la sécurité de tous les usagers et les usagères de la route, was withdrawn at the December 15, 2025 meeting. The council therefore adopted no commitments under it. Its stated goal was to recognize Piétons Québec and support road safety.
- The motion originally proposed protecting budget amounts for safer travel and reducing space for cars to create pedestrian areas.
- An amendment was proposed that would instead have the city reserve the budget credits needed for safety actions, continue working with Piétons Québec, and improve road-user coexistence while creating pedestrian areas.
- The amendment and motion were not adopted. The proposed text does not change current rules or require the city to take these actions.
What it means for you#
- Pedestrians and other road users: This motion creates no new right, service, or safety measure because it was withdrawn.
- The city: It has no new duty under this motion to set aside funds, change street designs, or work with Piétons Québec.
- Residents and taxpayers: The motion does not authorize a specific project or spending amount.
Money#
No cost information is in the available material.
- The proposed amended text called for the city to reserve budget credits for road-safety actions, but gave no amount.
- No spending commitment was adopted.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say whether the motion will be brought back.
- They do not give a cost, identify specific projects, or set timelines or measures for the proposed safety actions.
- The proposed amendment did not specify how the city would work with Piétons Québec or apply its recommendations.
Case for#
- A case for the proposed commitments is that the motion cited road deaths and serious injuries, the city’s Vision Zéro goals, and recommendations from the Québec coroner.
- Setting aside budget credits and creating pedestrian areas could support safer streets, while continued work with Piétons Québec could bring its expertise into street design.
Case against#
- The proposed text did not name projects, deadlines, or ways to measure whether safety improved.
- It called for budget credits without stating how much money would be needed or what would be funded.
- The proposed amendment removed the original wording about reducing space for cars and replaced it with a broader commitment to improve coexistence among road users. Neither wording was adopted.