Fact or Fiction?

Share Fact or Fiction? on Facebook Share Fact or Fiction? on Twitter Share Fact or Fiction? on Linkedin Email Fact or Fiction? link

In today’s fast-paced world, information can spread rapidly, making it difficult to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Have you heard something about the City that made you do a double-take? Does it seem too good—or too strange—to be true? You’re not alone, and we’re here to help clear things up.

As information moves through the community, it can sometimes take unexpected detours. Like the game of telephone, messages can shift, grow, or shrink along the way. Whether it’s an honest misunderstanding or a rumor that’s taken on a life of its own, we are committed to ensuring that you have access to accurate, reliable information.

If you’ve got questions, heard something that doesn’t quite add up, or have suggestions on how we can communicate more effectively, this is the place for you. Let’s work together to untangle the truth and keep the conversation clear, accurate, and informed.

Because when it comes to our City, the facts matter.

In today’s fast-paced world, information can spread rapidly, making it difficult to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Have you heard something about the City that made you do a double-take? Does it seem too good—or too strange—to be true? You’re not alone, and we’re here to help clear things up.

As information moves through the community, it can sometimes take unexpected detours. Like the game of telephone, messages can shift, grow, or shrink along the way. Whether it’s an honest misunderstanding or a rumor that’s taken on a life of its own, we are committed to ensuring that you have access to accurate, reliable information.

If you’ve got questions, heard something that doesn’t quite add up, or have suggestions on how we can communicate more effectively, this is the place for you. Let’s work together to untangle the truth and keep the conversation clear, accurate, and informed.

Because when it comes to our City, the facts matter.

Ask us your question!

loader image
Didn't receive confirmation?
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share Will the keeping of hens bylaw 7.3(9) be updated as part of the 4 Units Dwelling proposal? Currently these hens are restricted to single family homes. There is concern that the hens may get squeezed out as a result of the up-zoning. Furthermore which will take priority the existing hens on lots with Single Family Dwellings or permits requesting the building of new secondary dwelling units, on adjacent lots should there be less than 10 meters of distance between them? on Facebook Share Will the keeping of hens bylaw 7.3(9) be updated as part of the 4 Units Dwelling proposal? Currently these hens are restricted to single family homes. There is concern that the hens may get squeezed out as a result of the up-zoning. Furthermore which will take priority the existing hens on lots with Single Family Dwellings or permits requesting the building of new secondary dwelling units, on adjacent lots should there be less than 10 meters of distance between them? on Twitter Share Will the keeping of hens bylaw 7.3(9) be updated as part of the 4 Units Dwelling proposal? Currently these hens are restricted to single family homes. There is concern that the hens may get squeezed out as a result of the up-zoning. Furthermore which will take priority the existing hens on lots with Single Family Dwellings or permits requesting the building of new secondary dwelling units, on adjacent lots should there be less than 10 meters of distance between them? on Linkedin Email Will the keeping of hens bylaw 7.3(9) be updated as part of the 4 Units Dwelling proposal? Currently these hens are restricted to single family homes. There is concern that the hens may get squeezed out as a result of the up-zoning. Furthermore which will take priority the existing hens on lots with Single Family Dwellings or permits requesting the building of new secondary dwelling units, on adjacent lots should there be less than 10 meters of distance between them? link

    Will the keeping of hens bylaw 7.3(9) be updated as part of the 4 Units Dwelling proposal? Currently these hens are restricted to single family homes. There is concern that the hens may get squeezed out as a result of the up-zoning. Furthermore which will take priority the existing hens on lots with Single Family Dwellings or permits requesting the building of new secondary dwelling units, on adjacent lots should there be less than 10 meters of distance between them?

    Andrew P Scott asked 4 days ago

    Hi Andrew! Thanks for submitting your question to this project. 

    The 4-Unit Dwelling proposal does not currently include updates to the Keeping of Hens bylaw (Bylaw 7.3(9)). At this time, the keeping of hens remains restricted to single detached homes, and there are no planned changes to expand this allowance to additional dwelling types. Regarding priority between existing hens on lots with single detached homes and new secondary dwelling unit permits, this will depend on specific zoning and bylaw enforcement considerations.

  • Share I've been wondering about some of the data on properties affected by the new zoning bylaw, and how many properties will be prevented adding units because of the conditions set out in the bylaw. Given the intent of the change is to enable housing increases I'm curious on how many units are not even allowed to be built. Since the city would have the data on hand or ready access to it here are my specific questions: 1. How many individual properties are being rezoned? How many units are being theoretically added? 2. How many properties do not meet the minimum frontage requirements, and how many units does these prevent? 3. How many properties do not meet minimum lot size requirements, and how many units does this prevent? 4. How many properties are not considered "owner occupied," and how many units does this prevent? 5. As well, are there particular areas of the city are are more prone to having these factors? Thanks! on Facebook Share I've been wondering about some of the data on properties affected by the new zoning bylaw, and how many properties will be prevented adding units because of the conditions set out in the bylaw. Given the intent of the change is to enable housing increases I'm curious on how many units are not even allowed to be built. Since the city would have the data on hand or ready access to it here are my specific questions: 1. How many individual properties are being rezoned? How many units are being theoretically added? 2. How many properties do not meet the minimum frontage requirements, and how many units does these prevent? 3. How many properties do not meet minimum lot size requirements, and how many units does this prevent? 4. How many properties are not considered "owner occupied," and how many units does this prevent? 5. As well, are there particular areas of the city are are more prone to having these factors? Thanks! on Twitter Share I've been wondering about some of the data on properties affected by the new zoning bylaw, and how many properties will be prevented adding units because of the conditions set out in the bylaw. Given the intent of the change is to enable housing increases I'm curious on how many units are not even allowed to be built. Since the city would have the data on hand or ready access to it here are my specific questions: 1. How many individual properties are being rezoned? How many units are being theoretically added? 2. How many properties do not meet the minimum frontage requirements, and how many units does these prevent? 3. How many properties do not meet minimum lot size requirements, and how many units does this prevent? 4. How many properties are not considered "owner occupied," and how many units does this prevent? 5. As well, are there particular areas of the city are are more prone to having these factors? Thanks! on Linkedin Email I've been wondering about some of the data on properties affected by the new zoning bylaw, and how many properties will be prevented adding units because of the conditions set out in the bylaw. Given the intent of the change is to enable housing increases I'm curious on how many units are not even allowed to be built. Since the city would have the data on hand or ready access to it here are my specific questions: 1. How many individual properties are being rezoned? How many units are being theoretically added? 2. How many properties do not meet the minimum frontage requirements, and how many units does these prevent? 3. How many properties do not meet minimum lot size requirements, and how many units does this prevent? 4. How many properties are not considered "owner occupied," and how many units does this prevent? 5. As well, are there particular areas of the city are are more prone to having these factors? Thanks! link

    I've been wondering about some of the data on properties affected by the new zoning bylaw, and how many properties will be prevented adding units because of the conditions set out in the bylaw. Given the intent of the change is to enable housing increases I'm curious on how many units are not even allowed to be built. Since the city would have the data on hand or ready access to it here are my specific questions: 1. How many individual properties are being rezoned? How many units are being theoretically added? 2. How many properties do not meet the minimum frontage requirements, and how many units does these prevent? 3. How many properties do not meet minimum lot size requirements, and how many units does this prevent? 4. How many properties are not considered "owner occupied," and how many units does this prevent? 5. As well, are there particular areas of the city are are more prone to having these factors? Thanks!

    Gracey asked 6 days ago

    Thank you for your question Gracey! 

    The intent of the new zoning bylaw amendment is to enable increased housing options while meeting federal funding commitments. The City is not mandating property owners to increase density on their property. Projecting the exact number of potential new units would not be practical as individual landowners would ultimately decide how to approach this type of gentle density opportunity. There are also a number of different variables that could affect density (i.e. lot standards, lot coverage, parking standards and unit size). Based on this, it is not considered to be reasonable for the City to try and speculate the number of units that may ultimately be created City wide.

  • Share The benefits the city claims with 4 unit dwellings are multi-generational living, mortgage helper and increased affordable housing. Would you agree that the current ability to build a "granny suite" already does that? Also is there anything that requires owner-occupancy after units have been added and the property is sold? on Facebook Share The benefits the city claims with 4 unit dwellings are multi-generational living, mortgage helper and increased affordable housing. Would you agree that the current ability to build a "granny suite" already does that? Also is there anything that requires owner-occupancy after units have been added and the property is sold? on Twitter Share The benefits the city claims with 4 unit dwellings are multi-generational living, mortgage helper and increased affordable housing. Would you agree that the current ability to build a "granny suite" already does that? Also is there anything that requires owner-occupancy after units have been added and the property is sold? on Linkedin Email The benefits the city claims with 4 unit dwellings are multi-generational living, mortgage helper and increased affordable housing. Would you agree that the current ability to build a "granny suite" already does that? Also is there anything that requires owner-occupancy after units have been added and the property is sold? link

    The benefits the city claims with 4 unit dwellings are multi-generational living, mortgage helper and increased affordable housing. Would you agree that the current ability to build a "granny suite" already does that? Also is there anything that requires owner-occupancy after units have been added and the property is sold?

    Marion asked 6 days ago

    Hi Marion! Thank you for submitting this question! 

    SDUs (secondary dwelling units) are a great option for multi-generational living and 4 dwellings offer additional flexibility and housing options. Here's how they differ:

    1.    Multi-Generational Living – While granny suites are a good option for aging parents or extended family, 4 dwellings allow for more diverse living arrangements. This includes independent living spaces for multiple generations or even more flexibility for families with multiple needs.

    2.    Mortgage Helper – Secondary dwelling units can provide rental income, but up to 4 dwellings expand this opportunity by creating more units, potentially increasing the rental income and affordability of owner-occupied homeownership even further. More units mean more flexibility in how space can be utilized.

    3.    Increased Affordable Housing – Smaller secondary units do contribute to affordable housing, but up to 4 units can help create more affordable living options in areas where housing demand is high, helping to address broader community needs. Housing diversity in the types of units available is crucial to supporting a growing population and ensuring there are a variety of options to meet the needs of different residents.

    As for owner-occupancy, the requirement is only in place at the time of permit issuance. After the units are created and the property is sold, there is no ongoing requirement for the property to remain owner-occupied.

    If you’re interested, you can read more about our rental registry and by-law enforcement impacts in the staff reports for additional context.

  • Share A question on 4 Units as a Right around owner-occupancy requirements was posted on Engage and part of your response, In your reply, your staff states that “newly created units must be owner-occupied at the time of creation,” implying that the units must be created by a homeowner. However, my understanding from both the Planning Report and the Zoning By-Law Amendments (4 Units) document is that owner-occupancy is only required at the time of permit issuance. My interpretation of the amendment means that while the initial issuance of the permit requires the applicant to be the homeowner, the amendment does not mandate that the property remain owner-occupied after issuance. Or during creation of the units. Therefore, it does not prevent an investor or landlord from purchasing a permitted property, unless there are restrictions on transfer of issued permits. If there aren’t, will regular inspections during construction and the final inspection required to close the permit have a mechanism to ensure continued owner-occupancy? on Facebook Share A question on 4 Units as a Right around owner-occupancy requirements was posted on Engage and part of your response, In your reply, your staff states that “newly created units must be owner-occupied at the time of creation,” implying that the units must be created by a homeowner. However, my understanding from both the Planning Report and the Zoning By-Law Amendments (4 Units) document is that owner-occupancy is only required at the time of permit issuance. My interpretation of the amendment means that while the initial issuance of the permit requires the applicant to be the homeowner, the amendment does not mandate that the property remain owner-occupied after issuance. Or during creation of the units. Therefore, it does not prevent an investor or landlord from purchasing a permitted property, unless there are restrictions on transfer of issued permits. If there aren’t, will regular inspections during construction and the final inspection required to close the permit have a mechanism to ensure continued owner-occupancy? on Twitter Share A question on 4 Units as a Right around owner-occupancy requirements was posted on Engage and part of your response, In your reply, your staff states that “newly created units must be owner-occupied at the time of creation,” implying that the units must be created by a homeowner. However, my understanding from both the Planning Report and the Zoning By-Law Amendments (4 Units) document is that owner-occupancy is only required at the time of permit issuance. My interpretation of the amendment means that while the initial issuance of the permit requires the applicant to be the homeowner, the amendment does not mandate that the property remain owner-occupied after issuance. Or during creation of the units. Therefore, it does not prevent an investor or landlord from purchasing a permitted property, unless there are restrictions on transfer of issued permits. If there aren’t, will regular inspections during construction and the final inspection required to close the permit have a mechanism to ensure continued owner-occupancy? on Linkedin Email A question on 4 Units as a Right around owner-occupancy requirements was posted on Engage and part of your response, In your reply, your staff states that “newly created units must be owner-occupied at the time of creation,” implying that the units must be created by a homeowner. However, my understanding from both the Planning Report and the Zoning By-Law Amendments (4 Units) document is that owner-occupancy is only required at the time of permit issuance. My interpretation of the amendment means that while the initial issuance of the permit requires the applicant to be the homeowner, the amendment does not mandate that the property remain owner-occupied after issuance. Or during creation of the units. Therefore, it does not prevent an investor or landlord from purchasing a permitted property, unless there are restrictions on transfer of issued permits. If there aren’t, will regular inspections during construction and the final inspection required to close the permit have a mechanism to ensure continued owner-occupancy? link

    A question on 4 Units as a Right around owner-occupancy requirements was posted on Engage and part of your response, In your reply, your staff states that “newly created units must be owner-occupied at the time of creation,” implying that the units must be created by a homeowner. However, my understanding from both the Planning Report and the Zoning By-Law Amendments (4 Units) document is that owner-occupancy is only required at the time of permit issuance. My interpretation of the amendment means that while the initial issuance of the permit requires the applicant to be the homeowner, the amendment does not mandate that the property remain owner-occupied after issuance. Or during creation of the units. Therefore, it does not prevent an investor or landlord from purchasing a permitted property, unless there are restrictions on transfer of issued permits. If there aren’t, will regular inspections during construction and the final inspection required to close the permit have a mechanism to ensure continued owner-occupancy?

    jthompson asked 10 days ago

    Thanks for submitting your question to this project! 

    To clarify, owner-occupancy is required at the time of permit issuance, meaning the applicant must be the homeowner when applying for the permit. However, there is no current requirement for the property to remain owner-occupied after the permit is issued or during the construction of the units. 

    As for inspections, the regular inspections conducted during construction and the final inspection to close the permit focus on ensuring compliance with building codes and zoning requirements. 

  • Share There has been a lot of discussion recently with regards to the population growth within the city of Fredericton. Could you please provide clarification as to: - what points in time are being used to compare population when the city talks about growth in the context of current decision making -what the data source is - an explanation as to whether inclusion of recently annexed areas has been adjusted for and/or clearly disclosed in the comparisons, to ensure consistency in what is is being compared across time Thanks for helping to ensure residents have a transparent view on how our city growth has evolved over time. on Facebook Share There has been a lot of discussion recently with regards to the population growth within the city of Fredericton. Could you please provide clarification as to: - what points in time are being used to compare population when the city talks about growth in the context of current decision making -what the data source is - an explanation as to whether inclusion of recently annexed areas has been adjusted for and/or clearly disclosed in the comparisons, to ensure consistency in what is is being compared across time Thanks for helping to ensure residents have a transparent view on how our city growth has evolved over time. on Twitter Share There has been a lot of discussion recently with regards to the population growth within the city of Fredericton. Could you please provide clarification as to: - what points in time are being used to compare population when the city talks about growth in the context of current decision making -what the data source is - an explanation as to whether inclusion of recently annexed areas has been adjusted for and/or clearly disclosed in the comparisons, to ensure consistency in what is is being compared across time Thanks for helping to ensure residents have a transparent view on how our city growth has evolved over time. on Linkedin Email There has been a lot of discussion recently with regards to the population growth within the city of Fredericton. Could you please provide clarification as to: - what points in time are being used to compare population when the city talks about growth in the context of current decision making -what the data source is - an explanation as to whether inclusion of recently annexed areas has been adjusted for and/or clearly disclosed in the comparisons, to ensure consistency in what is is being compared across time Thanks for helping to ensure residents have a transparent view on how our city growth has evolved over time. link

    There has been a lot of discussion recently with regards to the population growth within the city of Fredericton. Could you please provide clarification as to: - what points in time are being used to compare population when the city talks about growth in the context of current decision making -what the data source is - an explanation as to whether inclusion of recently annexed areas has been adjusted for and/or clearly disclosed in the comparisons, to ensure consistency in what is is being compared across time Thanks for helping to ensure residents have a transparent view on how our city growth has evolved over time.

    Andrew P Scott asked 9 days ago

    Thanks for your question! Here’s a bit more clarity on the numbers:

    •    The 72,700 population figure comes from Statistics Canada’s annual population estimate, released each January (most recent number from 2024). This estimate does not include recently annexed areas, as Statistics Canada is still using the previous census boundaries, which will be updated in 2026.

    •    The 3,100 new residents reflect Fredericton’s population growth from 2023-2024 alone. You can explore more details on Fredericton’s population data here from Statistic Canada

    •    3,800 new homes refer to total unit starts, including single detached homes and multi-unit buildings. These figures are tracked through building permit data and reported to the Economic Prosperity and Growth Planning Committee. This total reflects permits issued over the last five years.

    Additionally, we’re in the final stages of updating our housing needs assessment, which will provide a more detailed picture of housing demand. A sneak peek of those numbers was presented yesterday at Economic Prosperity and Growth Planning Committee is available here : https://www.fredericton.ca/en/your-government/mayor-council/council-meetings. The full report is expected to be published this spring.

  • Share What is the current By law regarding "rooming" or boarding houses? on Facebook Share What is the current By law regarding "rooming" or boarding houses? on Twitter Share What is the current By law regarding "rooming" or boarding houses? on Linkedin Email What is the current By law regarding "rooming" or boarding houses? link

    What is the current By law regarding "rooming" or boarding houses?

    DiP asked 6 days ago

    Hi there! Thanks so much for submitting your question to this project. 

    In Fredericton, the regulation of rooming or boarding houses has evolved over recent years. The terms "rooming house" and "boarding house" were previously used in the city's zoning bylaws but have been updated to the term "Single Room Occupancy" (SRO). This change reflects a modernization of terminology and regulatory approach.

    An SRO is defined as a residential building where individual rooms are rented out, typically with shared common areas such as kitchens and bathrooms. The City of Fredericton has undertaken studies to understand and facilitate the development of SROs, aiming to address housing needs within the community. 

    To obtain the most current and detailed information regarding the operation and regulation of SROs, including zoning requirements and any licensing obligations, it is advisable to consult the latest version of Fredericton's Zoning By-law or contact the city's Planning & Development Department directly at planning@fredericton.ca. They can provide guidance tailored to specific situations and ensure compliance with all local regulations.

  • Share Will the current snowshoe/hiking trails through the woods at Killarney Lake Park be affected by the planned addition of mountain bike trails? on Facebook Share Will the current snowshoe/hiking trails through the woods at Killarney Lake Park be affected by the planned addition of mountain bike trails? on Twitter Share Will the current snowshoe/hiking trails through the woods at Killarney Lake Park be affected by the planned addition of mountain bike trails? on Linkedin Email Will the current snowshoe/hiking trails through the woods at Killarney Lake Park be affected by the planned addition of mountain bike trails? link

    Will the current snowshoe/hiking trails through the woods at Killarney Lake Park be affected by the planned addition of mountain bike trails?

    Jodie Byron asked 6 days ago

    Thanks for your interest the recreation projects planned for Killarney Lake Park.  The City has been working closely with key stakeholders and project consultants to ensure the variety of current and planned uses enjoyed by park visitors, including snowshoeing, biking, skiing, and disc golf, continue to be available. This has included ensuring that where some of these uses come together closer to the lodge that they can be aligned to allow for continued use.  More specifically, this may mean realigning and signing snowshoe trails where they cross the disc golf fairways or mountain bike trails to ensure crossing points have good visibility and are safely located.   

    While we anticipate that some mountain bike trails will be groomed for winter fat biking, those not used for winter biking may actually allow for an expanded network of signed trails that can be used for snowshoeing, allowing for signed trail access and winter snowshoe exploring farther into the park.  The disc golf plans include an 18 hole competition-quality course for summer, with only some holes staying in use year-round. The objective for disc golf players is to use trees as obstacles and to play around and through them, so it will not create wide open spaces like a traditional golf course. 

    More complete details and location maps will be shared on April 3rd, at the meeting of the Livable Community Committee. You will be able to view this meeting on the City’s website here. Our social media channels will also share more information following that meeting.

    You may already be familiar with the overall Killarney Lake Park Management Plan, but if not you will find it here https://www.fredericton.ca/en/your-government/plans-strategies. General public consultation was held throughout the plan development, and as we implement specific elements we are working closely with various stakeholders and user groups.

    New uses are being added to the Park as part of the Park Plan’s vision for Killarney to become an outdoor recreational hub.  However, with more nearly 1,600 acres/645 hectares, the majority of Killarney Lake Park will remain naturalized and fits the City’s objective to operate the park as a balanced ecological and recreational destination.

  • Share Thanks for creating this forum and for advocating for a city where facts matter! My question relates to the 4 unit dwelling proposal, which looks to re-zone as an example the current R1 zone (single family homes) to enable a maximum of 4 units to exist on the property. If approved, city staff confirmed at PAC the FACT that 13 unrelated individuals could occupy the combined 4 dwellings. However I am unclear if MORE than 13 people could actually occupy the property. Could you please explain the scenarios where this would be possible and share the facts around how related persons are accounted for in the occupancy bylaws. Specifically is it myth or a fact that total number of people permitted to live in the combined 4 units could be above 13, and if so is there a maximum number? Thank you for ensuring there is no misinformation regarding this issue. on Facebook Share Thanks for creating this forum and for advocating for a city where facts matter! My question relates to the 4 unit dwelling proposal, which looks to re-zone as an example the current R1 zone (single family homes) to enable a maximum of 4 units to exist on the property. If approved, city staff confirmed at PAC the FACT that 13 unrelated individuals could occupy the combined 4 dwellings. However I am unclear if MORE than 13 people could actually occupy the property. Could you please explain the scenarios where this would be possible and share the facts around how related persons are accounted for in the occupancy bylaws. Specifically is it myth or a fact that total number of people permitted to live in the combined 4 units could be above 13, and if so is there a maximum number? Thank you for ensuring there is no misinformation regarding this issue. on Twitter Share Thanks for creating this forum and for advocating for a city where facts matter! My question relates to the 4 unit dwelling proposal, which looks to re-zone as an example the current R1 zone (single family homes) to enable a maximum of 4 units to exist on the property. If approved, city staff confirmed at PAC the FACT that 13 unrelated individuals could occupy the combined 4 dwellings. However I am unclear if MORE than 13 people could actually occupy the property. Could you please explain the scenarios where this would be possible and share the facts around how related persons are accounted for in the occupancy bylaws. Specifically is it myth or a fact that total number of people permitted to live in the combined 4 units could be above 13, and if so is there a maximum number? Thank you for ensuring there is no misinformation regarding this issue. on Linkedin Email Thanks for creating this forum and for advocating for a city where facts matter! My question relates to the 4 unit dwelling proposal, which looks to re-zone as an example the current R1 zone (single family homes) to enable a maximum of 4 units to exist on the property. If approved, city staff confirmed at PAC the FACT that 13 unrelated individuals could occupy the combined 4 dwellings. However I am unclear if MORE than 13 people could actually occupy the property. Could you please explain the scenarios where this would be possible and share the facts around how related persons are accounted for in the occupancy bylaws. Specifically is it myth or a fact that total number of people permitted to live in the combined 4 units could be above 13, and if so is there a maximum number? Thank you for ensuring there is no misinformation regarding this issue. link

    Thanks for creating this forum and for advocating for a city where facts matter! My question relates to the 4 unit dwelling proposal, which looks to re-zone as an example the current R1 zone (single family homes) to enable a maximum of 4 units to exist on the property. If approved, city staff confirmed at PAC the FACT that 13 unrelated individuals could occupy the combined 4 dwellings. However I am unclear if MORE than 13 people could actually occupy the property. Could you please explain the scenarios where this would be possible and share the facts around how related persons are accounted for in the occupancy bylaws. Specifically is it myth or a fact that total number of people permitted to live in the combined 4 units could be above 13, and if so is there a maximum number? Thank you for ensuring there is no misinformation regarding this issue.

    Ward 9 Resident asked 11 days ago

    Hi there! Thanks so much for your question. 

    The City of Fredericton does not regulate, nor can it regulate, the maximum number of people in a family, as families come in all shapes and sizes. The restriction can only be imposed on the number of unrelated persons which is a maximum of 4 in the main dwelling and a maximum of 3 in a secondary dwelling unit.

  • Share Why do you use pale green in your script. It is very difficult to read. on Facebook Share Why do you use pale green in your script. It is very difficult to read. on Twitter Share Why do you use pale green in your script. It is very difficult to read. on Linkedin Email Why do you use pale green in your script. It is very difficult to read. link

    Why do you use pale green in your script. It is very difficult to read.

    EBS asked 6 days ago

    Thank you for providing this feedback! On our screens, the colour appeared dark green. We've since changed it to black, to make sure it's accessible to all. Thank you for taking the time to let us know! 

  • Share Ièll give it a shot....Is the Drug rehad clinic beside the Victory Meat Market closing itès close at the end of MarchÉÉÉ on Facebook Share Ièll give it a shot....Is the Drug rehad clinic beside the Victory Meat Market closing itès close at the end of MarchÉÉÉ on Twitter Share Ièll give it a shot....Is the Drug rehad clinic beside the Victory Meat Market closing itès close at the end of MarchÉÉÉ on Linkedin Email Ièll give it a shot....Is the Drug rehad clinic beside the Victory Meat Market closing itès close at the end of MarchÉÉÉ link

    Ièll give it a shot....Is the Drug rehad clinic beside the Victory Meat Market closing itès close at the end of MarchÉÉÉ

    Charles LeBlanc asked 10 days ago

    Thank you for your question Charles! The City cannot comment on the status of a business or speculate on their endeavors. We suggest reaching out directly to them. Their contact information is available on their Facebook page : https://www.facebook.com/riverstonerecoverycentre/ 

    Thanks for submitting your question!

Page last updated: 19 Mar 2025, 12:10 PM