After significant public outcry, including a protest by parents and babies at City Hall Tuesday morning, council has voted to reverse course on removing change tables from some of Vancouver’s public washrooms. The plan came to light earlier this month during a staff presentation on the controversial 2026 budget when the head of Real Estate Environment and Facilities Management was asked about how the department would cut its $39.3 million budget by 13 per cent, reducing spending by $4.9 million. “We’re looking at things like removing change tables for babies in high-vandalism areas, which, believe it or not, actually take a lot of time and money to actually replace,” Armin Amrolia had responded. A memo shed more light on the details of that plan, which would have seen change tables in 30 “high vandalism” locations removed instead of replaced. It also included photos of a change table that had been set ablaze. Since 2023, the cost of replacing these fixtures worked out to $56,000—roughly one tenth of what the city spent on repairs to vandalized “assets” at city facilities. Cost-cutting or safety measure? ABC Coun. Lisa Dominato addressed the change table issue by tabling an amendment to the city’s $2.34 billion operating budget directing staff to “prioritize the prompt replacement” of change tables in the 30 “high vandalism” locations and to look into installing fixtures that could be less easily destroyed. “Addressing the identified issue of vandalism to baby change tables in the city is not about cost-cutting but rather due it is about preventing harm to children,” the amendment said. The sentiment was echoed by her ABC colleagues. “This is not about the budget, and it’s unfortunate that it’s been spun as being part of the budget for political reasons, because, again, it’s about safety,” Coun. Peter Meiszner said. “There is nothing more important than public safety, and there’s nothing more important than child safety, and there’s nothing more important than infant safety,” said Coun. Sarah Kirby-Yung. “If a compromised table was there and a baby in their most vulnerable state crashed the floor, I shudder to think what that would look like.” Opposition councillors disagreed, saying the fact the plan only came to light when a question was asked is indicative of a budget that lacks overall clarity on where—exactly—roughly $120 million in costs will be cut. Coun. Rebecca Bligh said the amendment itself did little to address wider concerns about how a zero per cent property tax increase will be achieved “without taking away the very important amenities that citizens in our city require, depend on, expect, and that we have a mandate to deliver.” “While I appreciate very specific yet reactive response to a short-sighted budget, I’ll support it. But I think that if this has anybody feel like they’ve resolved the issue, they’ve missed the point,” Bligh said. Coun. Lucy Maloney also voted in favour of the amendment, similarly questioning the claim that the plan to stop replacing change tables was driven solely by safety concerns. “I don’t think that a parent is going to try and change a baby on a change table that’s been set on fire,” she said. “I will be voting in favor of this amendment. I appreciate it being brought forward, but I don’t think it’s just about the danger of babies falling off change tables. I think the discussion is wider, and about discomfort with the effects of this budget.” Babies, toddlers part of protest The protest ahead of Tuesday’s meeting was dubbed a “change-in” and organized by Women Transforming Cities, drawing a crowd of about 80 parents with their babies and toddlers in tow. “Parents already struggling with oversubscribed city services are frustrated and anxious about the lack of transparency into proposed cuts and fee increases,” a statement from the organization earlier this week said. One of the parents who attended did not mince words when telling CTV News why she and her baby were at City Hall to oppose the plan to remove change tables. “It just seems stupid to take them away,” Margie Sanderson said, adding that she uses change tables in city washrooms regularly. But she also stressed that the protest was meant to demonstrate opposition to the budget as a whole. “I’m mad about this budget. I think this is a budget that hurts families, it hurts working people. It hurts most people across the city,” she said. After the amendment passed unanimously, Women Transforming Cities issued a statement responding to councillors’ claims the move was never about cost cutting. “I’d like to respectfully push back that removal of change tables wasn’t about the budget—it was brought up in staff’s budget presentation,” civic engagement manager Clara Prager wrote. “It’s counterproductive at best to say this is ‘spin’ when it’s one of the few details the public actually had access to in a budget process that was obfuscated. We’re glad we got council’s attention, but the amendment does not address these concerns.”
