[0:09] - Bonsoir. Bienvenue à la

[0:10] réunion de séance ordinaire du

[0:12] conseil municipal de

[0:14] Beaconsfield, Dieu lundi, le 18

[0:16] novembre.

[0:18] Welcome to the regular meeting

[0:19] of the municipal council among

[0:22] the, Monday November 18th. And

[0:25] now I will ask the city clerk to

[0:30] introduce the agenda. - Adoption

[0:31] de l'ordre du jour de la séance

[0:33] ordinaire du conseil de la ville

[0:34] du Beaconsfield du 18 novembre

[0:37] 2024.

[0:38] - Proposé.

[0:39] - J'appuie.

[0:41] All in favour? - Nous manquons

[0:46] deux conseillers ce soir. There

[0:49] are two councillors that are

[0:51] missing. They are both out of

[0:54] town. So there is Roger Moss

[0:56] whose district five and Robert

[0:59] Mercuri, district 3. So we have

[1:03] a very tight council tonight.

[1:09] [Laughter]

[1:10] Okay, we will go into the

[1:12] written question because the --

[1:15] is not here tonight to give us a

[1:17] report on the activities of the

[1:22] SPVM. So go straight to the

[1:28] questions we got in writing. The

[1:30] first question is from Michael,

[1:35] from plane. The subject's Park

[1:41] tax. Hi, all. Thank unit Vance

[1:43] for taking the time to address

[1:44] my question. I was wondering if

[1:47] any considerations have been

[1:49] made to amend the current Park

[1:52] tax rule. In my personal

[1:56] situation, I have lived in

[1:57] Beaconsfield for 25 plus years.

[2:00] In my current home for six. It

[2:02] was built in 1936. It has many

[2:06] issues and it has outgrown our

[2:08] growing family. We would love to

[2:10] stay in the area and for us, the

[2:12] most practical solution is to

[2:14] build. However, the additional

[2:16] fees related to the park tax

[2:20] make this unattainable. This

[2:22] said, for those not looking to

[2:24] capitalize on a quick flip,

[2:26] buying a home, tear down, build

[2:28] and sell for profit, could there

[2:30] be additional clauses or

[2:32] exemptions for citizens such as

[2:34] me? This model is contributing

[2:36] to the rising cost of homes and

[2:39] inability for families like mine

[2:41] to remain in Beaconsfield. A

[2:45] question via this example. Could

[2:46] we consider exemptions for

[2:48] residents who have lived in

[2:49] their Beaconsfield home for more

[2:50] than five years and do not plan

[2:53] to sell right after build? This

[2:55] can be done by a simple fee

[2:57] structure, reduction based on --

[3:00] a refund if the person building

[3:03] remains in this said residents

[3:05] for five years. Thanks again for

[3:09] fielding my questions. Sir, the

[3:14] rules that -- regarding park tax

[3:18] are governed by the provincial

[3:21] act respecting land use,

[3:23] planning in development. In

[3:26] other words, it's a provincial

[3:31] act. These types of measures

[3:34] that you are suggesting are not

[3:37] provided in the act. And we have

[3:40] very little latitude to act. In

[3:43] fact, we have none. So, I hear

[3:47] you and I think that you will

[3:50] make a lot of sense.

[3:57] But the act or the rules will

[3:59] not permit us to do anything

[4:02] that you are suggesting. The

[4:05] next question, and I will read

[4:08] the question. There's a very

[4:10] long preamble which I will not

[4:13] read. But the question is from

[4:16] Mr. Derek pounds. The subject is

[4:21] to reduce the speed limit on 820

[4:23] in the city sector from 100

[4:25] kilometres per hour to 70

[4:27] kilometres per hour in

[4:30] installing photo radar. First, I

[4:33] can tell you that all cities and

[4:37] that would be concerned, whether

[4:40] it be Dorval, Pointe-Claire,

[4:43] they derby, are not in agreement

[4:47] with the reduction of the speed

[4:51] of a 20. Reducing the speed only

[4:55] in a section Beaconsfield does

[4:57] not make much sense. So, you

[5:01] know, there is no agreement

[5:03] between the different cities

[5:05] that are on A20.

[5:14] As far as the photo radar is

[5:17] concerned, I indicated to you in

[5:19] October and that the City made a

[5:22] request to the MTQ in 2012 and

[5:26] again in 2019 for photo radar's.

[5:30] On May 20. And the MTQ indicated

[5:34] both times that the request did

[5:36] not meet the applicable criteria

[5:39] for the installation of photo

[5:43] radar's. And we've had

[5:46] conversations with the MTQ. And

[5:50] certainly, they are not in

[5:51] favour of reducing the speed on

[5:55] A20. In fact, they will tell you

[5:58] that the reason that they built

[6:00] that highway was to increase the

[6:03] speed 200 kilometres per hour.

[6:06] So, we do not plan on making any

[6:07] of the requests after our two

[6:10] requests. But if you wish,

[6:15] Mister Powell, to contact the

[6:17] FTQ the -- MTQ directly, to make

[6:20] it request, please go ahead and

[6:22] hopefully you will have a better

[6:25] chance than we did in trying to

[6:28] make that change. The next

[6:32] question, we have three

[6:33] questions here. And I will

[6:36] handle all three. From Nicole,

[6:40] Saint Andrew, a landscaping

[6:43] contract. In regards to the

[6:45] contract for landscaping along,

[6:47] hear the company suggested --

[6:51] uses very loud rides on mowers

[6:55] and leaf blowers. Leaf blowers

[6:57] are not allowed in a certain

[7:00] period of the year. So anybody

[7:03] using a leaf lower during that

[7:05] period of restriction should be

[7:09] reported to Montréal, to the

[7:14] municipal patrol. And they will

[7:16] go right away and will issue a

[7:19] fine if that person is still

[7:20] using a leaf blower. Is it

[7:23] possible to find a contractor

[7:24] who uses electric batteries or

[7:27] mechanical mowers that would be

[7:30] quieter and uses rigs and --

[7:33] instead of Lee floors? That

[7:35] would also cut down on fossil

[7:37] fuels. In regards to the

[7:39] demolition on Kirkwood and the

[7:41] proposed new buildings on

[7:43] Madison and many other streets,

[7:44] there are many -- far too many

[7:47] demolitions and rebuilding's in

[7:49] Beaconsfield. These last four

[7:51] months, the homes -- somewhat

[7:55] affordable price are torn down

[7:57] and replaced with houses no one

[7:58] can afford. I hope that the

[8:02] people that are putting up those

[8:03] houses can afford it because

[8:04] they did buy that property and

[8:08] had it demolished. These

[8:10] rebuilds go on for months,

[8:13] subjecting residents to a lot of

[8:15] noise and dust. It's also a

[8:16] waste of resources and puts

[8:18] trees at risk. Miss, I thank you

[8:22] very much for your suggestion

[8:24] and we will refer them to the

[8:27] administration and they will

[8:28] follow up with you. The second

[8:31] question is on mental health. 25

[8:37] Fieldfare is now friends for

[8:38] mental health. When it was -- it

[8:42] provided support services to

[8:44] everyone but now the current

[8:47] owners, friends for mental

[8:48] health deny services to anyone

[8:51] with a mental health condition

[8:54] or a neurodivergent condition,

[8:56] especially if they live on their

[8:59] own. Even though I am autistic

[9:01] and could use some help from

[9:07] Friends for Mental Health,

[9:08] Friends for Mental Health

[9:09] refuses to provide me with

[9:10] services because I am my own

[9:12] caregiver. Being my own

[9:14] caregiver is really tiring and I

[9:16] could you support. Hopefully,

[9:20] you can convince them to give

[9:22] you support in the future.

[9:25] Please consider a tax exemption

[9:27] for another organization,

[9:29] preferably Christchurch

[9:31] Beaconsfield United, Briarwood

[9:33] Presbyterian and other

[9:35] organizations that except

[9:37] everyone. Well, the churches

[9:40] that you mentioned in your

[9:43] question are all tax exemptions.

[9:47] And tax exemptions are requested

[9:49] by building owners. So the

[9:52] church is mentioned are tax

[9:56] exempt. So there is not much we

[9:58] could do to reduce their taxes,

[10:01] they don't pay any taxes.

[10:03] Question number two, winter

[10:05] power outage planning for

[10:07] animals. Please include animals

[10:09] in this plan. Animals should be

[10:12] allowed into emergency shelter

[10:14] or heating areas, or at least

[10:16] provide generators for

[10:18] vulnerable animals. Cats and

[10:20] dogs have for, but many exit

[10:23] there make animals, like

[10:26] reptiles and fish, at the pet

[10:31] stores and zoo at the St. Louis

[10:33] bus stop would die without

[10:35] power. They need to be included

[10:36] in the plan. Along with

[10:39] guardians in -- guardians of

[10:44] vulnerable animals would

[10:45] voluntarily register their

[10:46] animals with the City. Ideally,

[10:49] all animals would be registered

[10:51] with the City and window

[10:53] stickers put in similar to the

[10:57] vulnerable registry for human so

[10:58] that the city is aware of how

[11:00] many animals and who needs which

[11:03] supports during a power outage.

[11:05] Yes, the city has a lot of

[11:09] animals and a lot of dogs.

[11:12] Anytime I'm walking around the

[11:14] streets I see people walking

[11:15] their dogs. Yes, we have a

[11:21] 20,000 population and I would

[11:22] bet that altogether we have at

[11:24] least 10,000 dogs and cats in

[11:27] Beaconsfield. And Miss, we do

[11:32] have an agreement with the

[11:34] Humane Society international

[11:36] Canada to provide assistance in

[11:40] Beaconsfield in case of natural

[11:43] disasters.

[11:44] >> Mister Mayor, if I may also

[11:47] add, we also do have a byline

[11:50] Beaconsfield, as you know, that

[11:51] no animals are to be sold

[11:53] anywhere in Beaconsfield? That

[11:55] includes all animals, not just

[11:56] dogs and cats. Madame maybe can

[12:01] look into it.

[12:06] >> Thank you, Councillor.

[12:14] The next question is

[12:21] , let's see, who is it from?

[12:25] From Alan Kerry from Churchill.

[12:30] And it is --

[12:39] (---)

[12:40] Qui sont une autre rue de façon

[12:41] régulière. Monsieur Carrie, nous

[12:46] vous remercions d'avoir porté

[12:48] certains problématiques à notre

[12:50] attention. Et je vous assure que

[12:52] les travaux publics feront les

[12:55] suivis requis avec le

[12:57] fournisseur à ce sujet. And now,

[13:03] this is the question that we got

[13:05] in writing. And it is now open

[13:09] to the floor for questions. Yes,

[13:14] you have to identify yourself

[13:17] and because --

[13:24] >> Cheryl, on Sussex Drive. I've

[13:27] been speaking to Martin

[13:29] Saint-Jean about the situation,

[13:31] two incidents, three now, and I

[13:36] am bringing it to your

[13:38] attention. Sorry that the

[13:40] commandant is not here, it

[13:41] would've been fun to have this

[13:42] discussion with. I'm just so you

[13:44] know, the police station is

[13:46] aware that there's a band of

[13:50] bandits being rotated through

[13:52] Beaconsfield that are actually

[13:54] robbing our older people at

[13:57] seniors -- seniors, as they

[13:59] shop. It's happening quite

[14:00] frequently at metro. Metro has

[14:03] been very supportive to the

[14:05] people that have been affected

[14:07] by this. They've been

[14:09] pickpocket, had their purses

[14:10] have been stolen, the money has

[14:11] been drained out of their bank

[14:14] accounts. It has just been

[14:16] horrific. Identities stolen. The

[14:19] police are on, it they are

[14:20] working on it. Metro has been

[14:24] incredibly good at sharing their

[14:26] video and helping to track these

[14:29] people. But because these people

[14:30] are being flown in and out, the

[14:32] police do know this, it's a

[14:34] trafficking of thieves. It's

[14:37] hard to arrest them because

[14:38] they're not staying in town for

[14:40] anytime long. So we need to

[14:42] think of a program, and I'm

[14:44] willing to make myself available

[14:45] in any way possible to make sure

[14:46] we can educate our seniors and

[14:49] make them understand that they

[14:51] are vulnerable and that there is

[14:53] this activity going on. And we

[14:56] hope that more people would put

[14:57] video cameras around. But not

[15:00] only, that when you do put a

[15:01] sign that says you are being

[15:03] filmed so that it could kind of

[15:05] remind people to be aware in

[15:07] their surroundings and also

[15:09] maybe deter any other kind of

[15:12] thieves, that's one issue. The

[15:14] second issue is my grandchildren

[15:16] go to Sherbrooke academy senior.

[15:20] About a month or so ago,

[15:23] unfortunately, in the little

[15:24] forest that is the property of

[15:27] that school, weapons were found.

[15:31] Knives, of BB gun and another

[15:33] gun. Police were called, the

[15:36] children found it at recess,

[15:37] they were partially buried.

[15:41] Again, another thing where I

[15:43] think for us to be sensitive

[15:45] about things that are going on.

[15:48] I'm actually talking with

[15:50] parents of that school to talk

[15:51] about putting cameras in the

[15:53] trees to do video surveillance.

[15:56] So that we can maybe close the

[15:58] barn door before the horse

[16:01] actually gets out. I would hate

[16:02] to see anything happen. God

[16:04] knows what the plan was going to

[16:06] be to use those weapons. I think

[16:09] one of them was a toy. But the

[16:11] rest were real knives and BB

[16:13] guns and other things like that.

[16:15] So those are my two things to

[16:17] kind of flag and in a kind of

[16:20] security way that we can keep

[16:21] our eyes open and let's talk

[16:23] together about what we can do to

[16:25] protect the citizens.

[16:27] >> I totally agree with you. I

[16:30] think we have to create

[16:32] awareness that this happened --

[16:34] this is happening all the time.

[16:36] And we do have a vulnerable list

[16:38] of older people that we are in

[16:41] contact with all the time. So we

[16:44] certainly will make sure that

[16:46] they are aware. But also, we

[16:49] have a program now called

[16:53] connection. It's going to try to

[16:56] get people pulled in the

[16:57] neighbourhood together and work

[17:01] together. That's a program. I

[17:04] think it has just started. Now

[17:07] it's going on in Beaconsfield.

[17:10] There is no doubt. Over and

[17:12] above what you said, there are

[17:15] too many stolen cars in

[17:18] Beaconsfield as well. My own

[17:24] son, by the way, had his car

[17:26] stolen a couple weeks ago in

[17:28] Toronto. So it happens

[17:30] everywhere. But, yes we need to

[17:34] create awareness. I think we

[17:35] need to work with people that we

[17:38] know that our older people and

[17:41] make sure that they understand

[17:45] their vulnerabilities to these

[17:49] acts. And you know what?

[17:55] Everybody gets caught, no matter

[17:57] how much you do, the

[18:03] grandparents approach on the

[18:06] phone, these guys, it works. It

[18:10] works. And I can't believe

[18:11] people are not aware that when

[18:14] you are getting a call like

[18:17] this, you know, I'm just saying,

[18:20] I will get in touch with my

[18:21] grandson or my granddaughter.

[18:24] And I will make sure that I can

[18:26] help them. That will be the end

[18:29] of the call. But people will get

[18:33] caught and it will continue. So

[18:37] we have to work hard to make

[18:39] them aware of what can happen to

[18:45] them. And certainly, anything

[18:47] that does happen should be

[18:50] reported right away to the

[18:54] police because they will act on

[18:58] it. And we have our municipal

[19:02] patrol going around all the time

[19:03] to see if there is anything that

[19:04] is unusual. They will reported

[19:07] to the police as well.

[19:10] >> I just wanted to add, we also

[19:13] do provide -- we talk about it

[19:17] and we do provide conflicts with

[19:20] the police that are open to

[19:22] seniors. They do go through a

[19:23] whole list of what kind of scams

[19:25] are going on, what kinds of

[19:29] rings of that after going on and

[19:30] all that. We do try to make them

[19:32] aware. It's very user friendly.

[19:34] And we do this about every three

[19:36] months or, so the police come in

[19:37] and they do talk to them and

[19:38] they make them aware of what is

[19:40] going on. If this is going on

[19:42] and you are talking to the

[19:43] police, perhaps this is a

[19:45] subject that they can bring

[19:46] forth.

[19:47] >> I think my point here right

[19:48] now was that this is the third

[19:51] time within six months that

[19:53] people have been victim eyes at

[19:56] the Metro store. And the thing

[19:58] is, when these people go to the

[20:00] police, which is the first thing

[20:01] you have to do because you have

[20:02] been robbed but you also have to

[20:03] go through the process of

[20:05] locking down your identity, the

[20:06] police already know, oh, was

[20:09] your bank account robbed? Oh,

[20:10] did they go and pull out money

[20:12] at the Walmart on Kirkland? They

[20:15] have the target, they have a

[20:17] pathway. They can just actually

[20:18] follow the group via thieves are

[20:22] -- the route the thieves are

[20:23] taking. Time and time again, it

[20:25] seems to be a formula that works

[20:26] for them. The point is that

[20:27] we've spoken to Metro directly

[20:29] and we've said, put signs out

[20:31] but you have cameras. Just let

[20:33] our people know. But it Metro

[20:36] has been so good at letting

[20:38] people, making their video

[20:40] surveillance cameras available

[20:42] to the police. We don't want to

[20:43] do anything that would harm them

[20:46] in any way. But that day, two

[20:48] weeks ago, when this happened to

[20:51] my friends grandmother, her

[20:56] mother, while she was getting

[21:00] robbed, a car was being stolen.

[21:02] So the police showed up at here

[21:05] Metro, and I thought it was for

[21:06] them. They said, no, we've gone

[21:08] because there is a car being

[21:09] stolen in the parking lot at the

[21:11] same time. So, it's not Metro,

[21:14] it's not their fault. It's just

[21:16] that somehow they found a

[21:18] vulnerability for this area and

[21:19] I think it has to do with a lot

[21:21] of, oh, maybe the greyhaired

[21:23] people.

[21:24] [Laughter]

[21:26] >> And you think Beaconsfield

[21:28] shopping centre is bad? Fairview

[21:31] is even a lot worse. So, I agree

[21:35] with you. Surveillance cameras

[21:36] are very useful. The police will

[21:39] use them. I know that there was

[21:41] a car stolen on my street few

[21:44] months ago. And they came to my

[21:46] house because I have

[21:47] surveillance cameras on my home.

[21:51] And they wanted to see if they

[21:53] could see what happened and the

[21:56] cars that went by and all that.

[21:58] So, the police will use

[22:00] surveillance cameras, no doubt

[22:01] about it. Yes, thank you.

[22:11] >> I. I just wanted to say I

[22:15] really liked what you are saying

[22:17] about better surveillance. And

[22:19] you mentioned the vulnerable

[22:21] persons registry. I'm a self

[22:24] registered user of the

[22:25] vulnerable persons registry.

[22:26] It's not just for old people,

[22:27] it's whoever identifies

[22:29] themselves as vulnerable. But

[22:30] the vulnerable persons registry

[22:33] only with Beaconsfield. One

[22:34] thing I would suggest is that,

[22:36] yes, the SPVM maybe have the --

[22:41] and the Montréal fire expand

[22:43] vulnerable persons registry to

[22:46] across the whole island. And

[22:47] another thing I would suggest is

[22:49] that there is a program with

[22:51] police called emerge in Montréal

[22:52] where we work with different --

[22:55] >> By the, way could you

[22:56] identify yourself? We don't know

[22:57] who you are.

[22:58] >> I'm Nicole Carrasco, I live

[23:01] in Beaconsfield. 130 St. Andrews

[23:06] Avenue. One suggestion I have is

[23:09] that right now, the immersion

[23:12] Montréal program with the police

[23:15] is only in, say, special needs

[23:19] schools and. That but they are

[23:21] only learning about people at a

[23:23] certain stage of their life.

[23:28] Schools like giant steps or K

[23:32] through 12, you're only looking

[23:34] at for the 17 year olds. You're

[23:36] not looking at adults or older

[23:38] adults. What I suggested is that

[23:41] they have a program similar to

[23:45] the above his program where you

[23:47] can sign up with a vulnerable

[23:49] persons registry across the city

[23:53] and you could have an off-duty

[23:56] police officer, in their

[23:59] training, or a cadet accompany

[24:01] any person who identifies as

[24:03] vulnerable.

[24:04] >> We have a vulnerable person

[24:07] registry in Beaconsfield. And

[24:09] that is for the Beaconsfield

[24:11] residents. We can't talk for

[24:12] anybody else. If you want to

[24:15] suggested across Montréal,

[24:18] suggested to the agglomeration.

[24:20] >> I have. What you could do

[24:22] already with the vulnerable

[24:23] persons registry that you have

[24:24] in Beaconsfield, for

[24:26] Beaconsfield residents, you

[24:28] could pilot this proposal in

[24:32] Beaconsfield. Using the existing

[24:34] VP are. That actually could

[24:37] work. That would be -- that

[24:40] could be through the immersion

[24:42] program. They could learn about

[24:43] people, vulnerable persons

[24:45] throughout their lifespan and

[24:46] not just from their childhood.

[24:48] >> Thank you very much.

[24:57] >> Good evening. Martha bond. I

[25:00] live in the borough of

[25:02] Pierrefonds-Roxboro and I'm also

[25:04] a member of the Beaconsfield

[25:05] historical society. My question

[25:07] concerns item 40.3 on page three

[25:09] of tonight's agenda. Request for

[25:12] a review of the demolition

[25:14] committee, demolition permit for

[25:17] seven Kirkwood Avenue approved

[25:20] Tuesday October 1st 2024. In

[25:22] addition to my original

[25:24] opposition and nine others,

[25:27] including a detailed history of

[25:29] the building and the importance

[25:31] submitted by the Beaconsfield

[25:34] historical society, I remark

[25:35] that after reading the extract

[25:37] from the minutes of the October

[25:39] 1st meeting, that the demolition

[25:41] committee seems more interested

[25:42] in preserving the appearance of

[25:45] the neighbourhood than

[25:47] preserving the heritage building

[25:49] built by owner Thomas Kirkwood

[25:52] in about 1891. Oppositions to

[25:55] the demolition should've been

[25:56] provided to the public online

[25:58] and to everyone who submitted

[26:00] and took the time and opposition

[26:03] as to provide as much

[26:05] information as possible about

[26:06] this historic house. The City

[26:11] should have provided a full

[26:12] historic evaluation of the house

[26:16] and in this historical value and

[26:20] age, along with the request for

[26:21] the demolition in the public

[26:24] notice that was posted in July.

[26:29] This way, the public understands

[26:31] that this building and it's

[26:33] important intrinsic value as

[26:36] well as its historical

[26:40] significance. The list of

[26:43] reasons to justify a demolition,

[26:47] given by the committee, seem

[26:48] quite arbitrary.

[26:50] >> What is your question?

[26:52] Because we have to get to the

[26:53] question.

[26:54] >> I'm coming to it in a

[26:56] sentence.

[26:57] >> That is a long preamble

[26:58] already.

[26:59] >> One sentence, I'm coming to

[27:00] it. All houses need repair, all

[27:04] properties need maintenance.

[27:05] There are bylaws that address

[27:07] this and they apply to all

[27:09] renters and owners in the city.

[27:12] Will Mayor Bourelle and Council

[27:16] preserve this historic house or

[27:18] will they be remembered as the

[27:21] Council that demolished the

[27:23] oldest and best preserved house

[27:26] on Kirkwood Avenue, and its

[27:30] original location, with original

[27:32] interior architectural features

[27:34] in Beaconsfield.

[27:38] >> I will ask, we have the

[27:40] chairman of the demolition

[27:43] committee, Councillor St-Jean,

[27:47] and I will ask him to give you

[27:48] the process that is being

[27:50] followed in Beaconsfield for a

[27:53] demolition. And that process, I

[27:57] think, is fair and just. I will

[28:01] let Martin explain to.

[28:03] >> Thank you, Mayor. Good

[28:06] evening. Thank you for your

[28:07] questions and your concerns.

[28:10] First, let's start with the last

[28:12] question that you had as to

[28:13] whether or not the building will

[28:15] be preserved and the decision of

[28:17] the committee will be reversed.

[28:19] Obviously, that is not a

[28:20] question I can answer right now.

[28:22] It's on the agenda for later on

[28:24] tonight and we will see how my

[28:25] colleagues and myself vote on

[28:27] that review process. The first

[28:30] comment you made was about the

[28:33] fact that the committee seemed

[28:35] more concerned about preserving

[28:36] the look of the neighbourhood

[28:39] than to preserve the building

[28:41] itself. As you may or I'm sure

[28:44] you are aware of, we had a first

[28:47] meeting in the first week of

[28:49] August. I don't have the exact

[28:52] date. Le dix? Le six. Merci.

[28:56] On August 6th. We have members

[29:00] of your historical society in

[29:02] attendance at that point. We

[29:06] have a number of items in the

[29:08] bylaw that we need to consider

[29:10] and a number of documents

[29:12] required for us to be able to

[29:14] provide a just assessment of the

[29:17] building. A building like this

[29:18] one, built in the 18 80s, and a

[29:22] building built in the 1960s.

[29:25] When we found ourselves to deal

[29:29] with was a building at that

[29:32] point that showed some obvious

[29:35] heritage value. But on a scale

[29:38] of 1 to 10, it wasn't quite

[29:39] obvious as to where it should be

[29:43] located. It wasn't a house built

[29:46] in the last 20 years by a famous

[29:49] person, in terms of heritage,

[29:51] and that would be one criteria.

[29:54] And it wasn't the move either,

[29:57] at the other end of the

[29:59] spectrum. What we did at that

[30:00] point to be able to assess

[30:02] whether or not the building

[30:04] should be maintained or

[30:07] restored, salvaged in part or in

[30:10] whole, was to request that more

[30:14] historical or heritage value

[30:16] assessments be conducted on the

[30:18] building. And that's why we

[30:20] reconvened in the first week of

[30:24] October. With the information

[30:27] that we had received, we

[30:31] essentially, and I think those

[30:33] reports after tonight's vote can

[30:36] be made available to the public

[30:37] if they are requested. So you

[30:39] can access what we have. But we

[30:42] came to the conclusion that

[30:43] there was very little original

[30:47] components to the house. The

[30:50] house or a house had stood there

[30:52] looking the way it does for 140

[30:56] something years. But pretty much

[30:59] every component of that house

[31:01] through that period had, at some

[31:04] point, been remodelled,

[31:08] refurbished, wood taken out,

[31:10] replaced by newer materials, so

[31:13] on and so forth. We were left to

[31:16] consider the cost of restoration

[31:17] if we weren't going to salvage

[31:19] the house and turn it into a

[31:22] museum. It just got to a point

[31:25] where financially, it didn't

[31:26] make sense given the fact that

[31:28] very few original components

[31:31] were remaining in the building.

[31:34] Unfortunately, it's one of those

[31:35] buildings where had we wanted to

[31:39] salvage it and save it for years

[31:41] to come, we should have acted as

[31:44] a community. 30, 40, 50 years

[31:48] ago. And earmarked that

[31:50] building, perhaps, that -- as

[31:53] something that needs to be

[31:54] cherished and protected. But it

[31:57] wasn't. And so, we are in a

[31:59] position where it is

[32:02] unfortunate, in my opinion, at

[32:03] least, what I have, in terms of

[32:06] information, too little too

[32:08] late.

[32:10] >> And so, going forward, but of

[32:14] course, as I said, all houses

[32:16] need repair.

[32:17] >> Yes.

[32:19] >> And the current owners bought

[32:22] it as it was.

[32:24] >> Yes.

[32:25] >> I don't think citizens should

[32:27] take on the cost of repairing

[32:33] most privately owned buildings.

[32:35] They have enough to maintain

[32:38] municipal buildings and parks.

[32:45] It is the demolition permit that

[32:50] perhaps, unbeknownst to us,

[32:54] there was a meeting and this

[32:58] house for years, which is a

[33:01] problem in Beaconsfield and

[33:03] other places, including where I

[33:04] live, in Pierrefonds-Roxboro,

[33:07] houses that have not been

[33:10] identified in any -- even --

[33:14] it's not a way to restrict the

[33:20] normal use of a facility. It's

[33:23] to keep it from being

[33:25] demolished. And so, the process,

[33:29] if it's not changed and as it

[33:31] was not changed, -- you are in

[33:37] the council then. I don't blame

[33:39] you for that. But I do find you

[33:42] all responsible tonight and

[33:46] moving forward for the

[33:48] preservation of heritage

[33:51] buildings. Is there a louvre? I

[33:56] know there are some magnificent

[33:59] houses in beacon field, but I

[34:01] doubt there is a Louvre. Like in

[34:05] France.

[34:06] >> Do you have a second

[34:07] question? Again, we are carrying

[34:09] on the same conversation.

[34:13] >> And also, I didn't get to say

[34:16] this about the documents. These

[34:19] documents were not made public.

[34:23] So, this was taken out of

[34:25] context in the extract of the

[34:28] minutes.

[34:29] >> Well --

[34:31] >> There's no documents to look

[34:32] at.

[34:33] >> I respectfully disagree with

[34:36] you. That was taken out of

[34:39] context. What I will grant you,

[34:40] is that members of the committee

[34:42] have context that you don't yet

[34:45] have. And they had context that

[34:47] tonight other members of Council

[34:49] have to vote. The process, to

[34:53] some extent, cannot be open to

[34:55] the public before a decision is

[34:57] made. Those documents have a

[35:02] certain amount of

[35:04] confidentiality that cannot be

[35:09] shared until a decision by

[35:11] Council has been made. And to

[35:16] answer your question, is there a

[35:17] louvre in Beaconsfield? Yes,

[35:20] there is Thompson Point.

[35:21] >> I did see some exceptional

[35:23] houses. But I'm not sure I would

[35:25] call -- as fantastic as that

[35:27] house is, the Louvre.

[35:29] >> Beaconsfield is not Paris

[35:31] either. All things proposed --

[35:34] proportional, perhaps it is our

[35:36] move. But that is a debate to be

[35:38] had it another time.

[35:39] >> That is not a standard that

[35:41] has to be met by houses of

[35:43] heritage value.

[35:45] >> Thank you for sharing your

[35:46] views.

[35:47] >> Thank you.

[35:57] - Pauline

[35:58] (---)

[35:59] . Vous dites, on peut avoir

[36:02] accès au dossier demain? Parce

[36:04] que madame Day Berman semblait

[36:07] dire que ce serait seulement en

[36:08] janvier qu'on aurait le droit

[36:09] d'y avoir accès.

[36:12] - Écoutez, je veux pas me

[36:14] prononcer, je suis pas la

[36:15] personne responsable de l'accès

[36:16] aux documents mais ma

[36:18] compréhension, et peut-être

[36:19] qu'elle est erroné, ce que je

[36:20] peux vous dire, c'est que ma

[36:21] compréhension est qu'une fois

[36:22] que le Conseil a été en mesure

[36:25] de consulter un document pour

[36:29] prendre une décision, il y a

[36:34] quelque chose qui vous permet

[36:36] d'avoir accès au matériel que

[36:38] nous avons eue entre les mains

[36:40] pour décider.

[36:42] - Est-ce qu'il va être tout...

[36:44] comme on appelle ça, noircis?

[36:46] - Je suis pas la personne

[36:47] responsable de l'accès aux

[36:49] documents. Si jamais vous

[36:50] recevez une décision avec

[36:52] laquelle vous n'êtes pas

[36:54] d'accord, la loi vous permet un

[36:57] droit d'appel ou de révision

[36:59] auprès de la Commission d'accès

[37:00] à l'information.

[37:01] - Nathalie, est-ce que tu peux

[37:02] me confirmer, si c'est seulement

[37:04] en janvier aussi c'est

[37:05] maintenant qu'on peut avoir

[37:07] accès à la demande?

[37:08] - Puisque c'est un immeuble qui

[37:10] date d'avant 1940 et qui a un

[37:12] délai de 90 jours provinciales,

[37:15] mon interprétation, c'est qu'on

[37:17] attend la décision du

[37:18] gouvernement provincial pour

[37:21] émettre... qui fera la décision

[37:23] finale. Ils peuvent quand même

[37:24] s'opposer à la démolition, donc

[37:25] qu'il y a encore une décision à

[37:28] être prise.

[37:31] - Quels sont les documents qui

[37:32] sont envoyés à Québec par

[37:35] rapport à une demande de

[37:36] démolition? Est-ce que vous en

[37:37] voyez tout le dossier?

[37:38] - Au complet.

[37:40] - Tout ce qui a été soumis au

[37:42] comité de démolition, c'est ça?

[37:44] - C'est un dossier pas

[37:45] nécessairement aussi complet que

[37:47] celui du comité de démolition,

[37:48] il faudrait que je vérifie

[37:49] l'entièreté de documents. C'est

[37:51] assez complet pour qu'ils

[37:52] puissent comprendre pourquoi le

[37:53] comité a pris telle décision.

[37:57] Donc c'est un dossier où on a

[37:59] les arguments, les différentes

[38:01] informations par rapport à cette

[38:03] demande-là.

[38:04] - Incluant le dossier sur les

[38:06] patrimoines?

[38:07] - Les études ont certainement

[38:08] été... je pourrais valider, mais

[38:09] il me semble qu'elles ont été

[38:11] envoyées, oui.

[38:13] - O.K..

[38:15] - Ils ont besoin des outils pour

[38:17] pouvoir prendre la décision.

[38:18] S'ils n'ont pas les études, ils

[38:19] ne pourront pas avoir la même

[38:21] information que le comité.

[38:22] - C'est ça. Est-ce que vous

[38:23] envoyez aussi les lettres

[38:26] d'opposition?

[38:27] - Il faudrait que je valide mais

[38:28] c'est certainement dans le PV

[38:29] qu'il y a des lettres

[38:33] d'opposition.

[38:34] (inaudible)

[38:35] - On dit pas le contenu des

[38:36] lettres? On fait juste

[38:37] mentionner qu'il y a eu une

[38:38] opposition, deux oppositions,

[38:40] dix oppositions?

[38:41] - Mais le comité a accès au

[38:42] contenu des lettres, c'est sûr.

[38:44] - Mais Québec aussi? Ou pas?

[38:45] - Il faudrait que je vais aller

[38:46] de. Il faudrait que je regarde

[38:47] le dossier. Ça fait quand même

[38:48] un bout de temps qu'il a été

[38:49] envoyé. Il faut que je regarde.

[38:51] D'accord?

[38:55] - Merci. Alors, nous allons

[38:59] continuer la réunion. Avant

[39:05] qu'on continue la réunion,

[39:07] j'aimerais mentionner une couple

[39:08] de choses pendant que tout le

[39:10] monde est ici. C'est le 22

[39:16] novembre, à 8 heures 30, de 8

[39:19] heures 30 à 9 heures, le train

[39:21] de Noël sera à la gare de

[39:26] Beaconsfield. Alors, tout le

[39:27] monde est bienvenu à venir voir

[39:29] le train de Noël. Ça fait

[39:32] plusieurs années que le train de

[39:36] Noël arrête le train... s'arrête

[39:40] à Beaconsfield, pardon. Donc

[39:42] tout le monde est le bienvenu,

[39:45] je sais qu'il y a beaucoup de

[39:46] gens qui viennent de l'extérieur

[39:48] qui viennent voir le train parce

[39:50] qu'il y a aussi un spectacle de

[39:54] quelques minutes, quand le train

[39:56] est arrêté à Beaconsfield. Alors

[40:01] je voulais tout simplement

[40:03] mentionner ça. And on the 21st

[40:07] of November, there is a market

[40:11] which is going to be in the

[40:13] parking lot at Christmas park

[40:16] from 11 am to four PM. Is there

[40:22] anything, Dominic, that you

[40:24] would like to add to the market

[40:26] that is going to take place in

[40:29] your district?

[40:30] >> We are hoping mother nature

[40:32] cooperates. But, yeah

[40:33] everybody's welcome. 11 to 4,

[40:34] there's something for everyone.

[40:38] I am sure you will find all your

[40:40] Christmas gifts there and get

[40:41] your fill of community funds, 11

[40:45] to 4, Christmas Park, the

[40:48] Saturday.

[40:51] >> Thank you. And now we go back

[40:53] to the agenda.

[40:57] >> Approval of this -- of

[41:00] October 11th 2024 at 8:15 a.m..

[41:04] Approval of the minutes of the

[41:05] City of Beaconsfield's special

[41:06] Council meeting of October 11,

[41:07] 2024, at 8:15 a.m.

[41:08] - En faveur?

[41:09] - À l'unanimité. Approbation du

[41:11] procès-verbal de la séance

[41:12] ordinaire du Conseil de la Ville

[41:13] de Beaconsfield du 21 octobre

[41:14] 2024.

[41:19] - Proposé.

[41:20] - Secondé.

[41:21] - En faveur.

[41:23] - À l'unanimité.

[41:25] >> The wording of a contract

[41:31] GRE-COMM 2024-02 for the

[41:32] printing of the City of

[41:33] Beaconsfield's communication

[41:34] tools for 2025

[41:35] (Contact and Info-flash)

[41:36] to the lowest conforming bidder,

[41:40] Accent Impression Inc., In the

[41:42] amount of $58,321.06, all taxes

[41:46] included.

[41:47] >> Proposed.

[41:48] >> I second.

[41:49] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[41:55] Octroi du contrat TP 2024-10

[41:56] concernant la fourniture d'une

[41:57] (1)

[41:58] surfaceuse de glace électrique

[41:59] au soumissionnaire unique et

[42:00] conforme, soit Engo Equipment

[42:01] Sales inc., Pour la somme de 146

[42:02] 364,75 $, toutes taxes et

[42:06] échange inclus.

[42:10] >> Proposed.

[42:11] - Secondé.

[42:13] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[42:17] Awarding of contract

[42:21] 24-SP-206-EL for electrical

[42:22] services to hook up the new

[42:24] generator at Public Works to the

[42:25] lowest conforming bidder, Poulin

[42:26] Électrique Inc., In the amount

[42:29] of $86,001.30, all taxes

[42:32] included.

[42:34] >> I propose.

[42:35] >> I second.

[42:36] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[42:41] Renouvellement du contrat TP

[42:42] 2023-02 pour la tonte et le

[42:43] nettoyage des espaces verts de

[42:44] la Ville pour l'année 2025 avec

[42:46] Lee Ling Paysagement au coût

[42:49] approximatif de 215 000 $,

[42:50] toutes taxes incluses.

[42:53] - Proposé.

[42:54] - Secondé.

[42:55] - En faveur.

[42:57] - À l'unanimité.

[43:03] Authorization of a payment to

[43:04] the Union des municipalités du

[43:07] Québec for the sum of $64,859

[43:08] non-taxable, representing the

[43:09] City's share of the group's

[43:12] deductible for civil liability

[43:14] insurance and payment of an

[43:15] amount equivalent to 1% of the

[43:16] premium's cost

[43:22] ($2,631.62, all taxes included)

[43:25] for the responsibilities assumed

[43:27] as representative of the

[43:28] Regroupement des municipalités

[43:29] de l'Île de Montréal for the

[43:31] year 2024.

[43:32] >> Proposed.

[43:33] >> I second.

[43:34] >> In favour. -

[43:37] - À l'unanimité. Approbation de

[43:40] la liste des comptes à payer au

[43:41] 18 novembre 2024, et de la liste

[43:42] des paiements préautorisés pour

[43:43] la période du 10 octobre 2024 au

[43:44] 20 octobre 2024 et du 22 octobre

[43:45] 2024 au 6 novembre 2024, pour un

[43:50] déboursé total de 4 256 832,44

[43:53] $.

[43:58] - Voici les montants importants.

[44:07] 973665,52

[44:08] (---)

[44:09] pour un décompte trois et

[44:10] décomptes quatre concernant les

[44:11] travaux de réhabilitation de

[44:13] l'ajouter San Antonio, au parc

[44:15] San Antonio. 279134,32, travaux

[44:23] routiers, métropolitain qui pour

[44:24] des comptes numéro 1 conservant

[44:26] les travaux ponctuels sur le

[44:28] réseau d'égouts pluviales. Les

[44:35] 259898,46, construction Arcade,

[44:38] pour des comptes progressifs

[44:39] numéro 4 conservant...

[44:41] concernant la rénovation de la

[44:43] patinoire. 235289,78,

[44:47] (---)

[44:48] pour des comptes progressifs

[44:49] numéro 2 concernant la

[44:50] réhabilitation structurelle de

[44:52] conduite d'aqueduc. Et

[45:00] 141273,75,

[45:02] (---)

[45:03] pour des comptes numéro 1

[45:04] concernant le marquage de

[45:06] chaussée ponctuelle et axial. Et

[45:09] finalement, les salaires,

[45:14] 490370,19.

[45:15] - Je propose.

[45:18] >> Second.

[45:19] -

[45:20] - En faveur. >> Deposit by the

[45:26] Treasurer of two comparative

[45:27] statements as of August 31,

[45:29] 2024, of revenues and expenses

[45:30] for the year 2024 in compliance

[45:33] with Section 105.4 of the Cities

[45:36] and Towns Act. It's a deposit.

[45:43] Opinion, à la Commission

[45:44] municipale du Québec

[45:45] (CMQ)

[45:46] , de la Ville de Beaconsfield

[45:47] concernant la demande combinée

[45:48] de reconnaissance d'une

[45:49] exemption aux fins de taxes

[45:50] foncières pour un immeuble situé

[45:51] au 25, Fieldfare.

[45:56] - Proposé.

[45:57] - J'appuie.

[46:00] - En faveur.

[46:02] - À l'unanimité. Donc il y aura

[46:04] deux opinions favorables et une

[46:05] opinion défavorable.

[46:10] >> Renewal of the City of

[46:11] Beaconsfield's membership with

[46:12] the Union des municipalités du

[46:14] Québec for the year 2025, in the

[46:15] amount of $22,714.54, all taxes

[46:23] included.

[46:24] >> I propose.

[46:25] >> I second.

[46:26] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[46:31] Approbation d'une contribution

[46:32] financière de 4750 $, il

[46:35] s'agissait de 19 membres à 250

[46:36] dollars chacun,

[46:38] (19 membres à 250 $ chacun)

[46:39] à l'Association des marchands du

[46:40] Village Beaurepaire pour

[46:41] l'année.

[46:45] >> In favour. I second --

[46:51] >> Authorization to proceed with

[46:52] budgetary transfers.

[46:54] >> Proposed.

[46:55] >> Second.

[46:56] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[46:59] Modification de la source de

[47:00] financement de la résolution

[47:01] 2024-02-034 intitulée « Octroi

[47:03] du contrat 649-24-GC concernant

[47:07] la réfection des chaussées

[47:08] souples au plus bas

[47:09] soumissionnaire conforme, soit

[47:10] Roxboro Excavation inc., Pour la

[47:11] somme de 1168462,08 $, toutes

[47:14] taxes incluses ».

[47:17] - Je propose.

[47:19] >> Second.

[47:20] - En faveur.

[47:21] - À l'unanimité.

[47:30] >> Filing and notice of motion

[47:31] of Draft By-law BEAC-161

[47:32] entitled « By-law on tariffs;

[47:33] January 2025 ». - Je donne

[47:38] l'avis de motion.

[47:39] - Merci.

[47:40] - Merci. Dépôt et avis de motion

[47:44] du projet de Règlement

[47:45] BEAC-120-1 intitulé « Règlement

[47:46] modifiant le Règlement BEAC-120

[47:47] concernant les travaux et les

[47:48] aménagements dans les emprises

[47:49] municipales ».

[47:50] - Je donne l'avis de la motion.

[47:52] - Merci.

[47:57] >> Request for a review of the

[47:58] Demolition Committee's decision

[47:59] of October 1, 2024, pertaining

[48:01] to the building located at 7

[48:02] Kirkwood.

[48:03] >> Proposed.

[48:04] >> Seconded. - Il s'agit de...

[48:13] pour confirmer la décision du

[48:14] comité de démolition.

[48:15] - Confirmer la décision du

[48:17] comité de démolition. À l'heure,

[48:19] en faveur? Alors voilà.

[48:25] - À l'unanimité.

[48:27] - Oui.

[48:29] - Demande de dérogation mineure

[48:30] pour la propriété située au 109,

[48:32] Brentwood. La recommandation est

[48:34] d'approuver.

[48:39] - Proposé.

[48:40] - Secondé.

[48:41] - En faveur.

[48:44] - On a unanimité.

[48:48] >> Request for the approval of

[48:49] the Site Planning and

[48:50] Architectural Integration

[48:51] Programme relating to a building

[48:52] permit application for a new

[48:53] main building located at 10

[48:54] Madsen.

[48:55] >> Proposed.

[48:57] >> Seconded.

[48:58] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[49:03] Demande d'approbation du Plan

[49:04] d'implantation et d'intégration

[49:05] architecturale

[49:06] (PIIA)

[49:07] relatif à la demande d'un permis

[49:08] de construction pour un nouveau

[49:09] bâtiment principal situé au 114,

[49:10] Brentwood. La recommandation est

[49:12] de refuser.

[49:13] - Proposé.

[49:14] - Secondé.

[49:15] - En faveur.

[49:16] - À l'unanimité.

[49:19] Request for the approval of the

[49:20] Site Planning and Architectural

[49:21] Integration Programme relating

[49:23] to a building permit application

[49:24] for a new main building located

[49:25] at 127 Evergreen. The

[49:28] recommendation is to refuse.

[49:29] >> Proposed.

[49:31] >> Seconded.

[49:32] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[49:37] Demande d'approbation du Plan

[49:38] d'implantation et d'intégration

[49:39] architecturale

[49:40] (PIIA)

[49:41] relatif à la demande d'un permis

[49:42] de construction pour un nouveau

[49:43] bâtiment principal situé au 130,

[49:44] Jasper. Le recommandation est de

[49:46] refuser.

[49:47] - Vous posez. Opposé, pardon.

[49:50] - Je seconde.

[49:51] - En faveur.

[49:52] - À l'unanimité.

[49:57] Request for the approval of the

[49:58] Site Planning and Architectural

[49:59] Integration Programme relating

[50:00] to a building permit application

[50:01] for a new main building located

[50:02] at 535 Cedar. The recommendation

[50:04] is to refuse.

[50:05] >> Proposed.

[50:06] >> Seconded.

[50:08] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[50:14] Je vous demande d'approbation du

[50:17] Plan d'implantation et

[50:18] d'intégration architecturale

[50:19] (PIIA)

[50:20] relatif à la demande d'un permis

[50:21] de construction pour

[50:22] l'agrandissement du bâtiment

[50:23] principal situé au 233,

[50:24] Cadillac. La recommandation est

[50:25] d'approuver.

[50:26] - Proposé.

[50:30] In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[50:33] Request for the approval of the

[50:34] Site Planning and Architectural

[50:36] Integration Programme relating

[50:37] to a building permit application

[50:38] for the modification of the

[50:39] facade of a main building

[50:40] located at 29 Gables. The

[50:42] recommendation is to approve.

[50:44] >> Proposed.

[50:46] - J'appuie.

[50:47] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[50:53] Demande d'approbation du Plan

[50:54] d'implantation et d'intégration

[50:55] architecturale

[50:56] (PIIA)

[50:57] relatif à la demande d'un permis

[50:58] de construction pour la

[50:59] modification de la façade du

[51:00] bâtiment principal situé au 211,

[51:01] Westcroft. Le recommandation est

[51:02] d'approuver.

[51:03] - Opposé.

[51:04] - J'appuie.

[51:05] - En faveur.

[51:07] - À l'unanimité.

[51:08] Requests for the approval of the

[51:11] Site Planning and Architectural

[51:16] Integration Programme relating

[51:17] to a building permit application

[51:18] for the modification of the

[51:19] facade of a main building

[51:20] located at 261 Milton. The

[51:22] recommendation is to approve.

[51:24] >> Proposed.

[51:25] >> Second.

[51:26] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[51:32] Demande d'approbation du Plan

[51:33] d'implantation et d'intégration

[51:34] architecturale

[51:35] (PIIA)

[51:36] relatif à la demande d'un permis

[51:37] de construction pour la

[51:38] modification de la façade du

[51:39] bâtiment principal situé au 320,

[51:40] Westcroft. La recommandation est

[51:41] d'approuver.

[51:42] - Opposé.

[51:43] - J'appuie.

[51:44] - En faveur.

[51:45] - À l'unanimité.

[51:49] Request for the approval of the

[51:50] Site Planning and Architectural

[51:51] Integration Programme

[51:53] (SPAIP)

[51:54] relating to a building permit

[51:55] application for the modification

[51:56] of the facade of the main

[51:57] building located at 570 Church.

[51:59] The recommendation is to refuse.

[52:01] >> Proposed.

[52:02] >> Seconded.

[52:03] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[52:07] Demande d'approbation du Plan

[52:08] d'implantation et d'intégration

[52:09] architecturale

[52:10] (PIIA)

[52:11] relatif à la réalisation de

[52:12] travaux de remblai sur la

[52:13] propriété située au 211,

[52:14] Gilford. La recommandation est

[52:16] d'approuver.

[52:17] - Proposé.

[52:19] >> Second.

[52:20] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[52:25] Acceptance of an amount of

[52:27] $80,586.00 for park fees to be

[52:28] paid by the owner of lot 1 417

[52:33] 246

[52:34] (10 Madsen)

[52:35] to the City, according to By-law

[52:36] BEAC-128 concerning

[52:37] contributions for the

[52:38] establishment, maintenance and

[52:39] improvement of parks,

[52:41] playgrounds and natural areas on

[52:42] the City of Beaconsfield's

[52:44] territory.

[52:45] >> I propose. - En faveur.

[52:50] - À l'unanimité. Nomination en

[52:55] vue de permanence à titre

[52:57] d'Opérateur Annexe A-1 au poste

[52:59] 5236 au Service des travaux

[53:01] publics.

[53:04] - Proposé.

[53:06] - J'appuie.

[53:07] - En faveur.

[53:08] - À l'unanimité.

[53:11] Nomination in view of permanency

[53:13] as Préposée à la clientèle to

[53:14] position 5003.

[53:20] >> Second.

[53:21] >> In favour.

[53:23] - À l'unanimité. Nomination en

[53:26] vue de permanence à titre de

[53:27] Contremaître, Bâtiments au poste

[53:28] 5205.

[53:32] - Proposé.

[53:34] - J'appuie.

[53:35] - En faveur.

[53:36] - À l'unanimité. >> Minutes of

[53:40] the Planning Advisory Committee

[53:42] meeting of October 30, 2024.

[53:45] >> Proposed.

[53:46] >> Seconded.

[53:47] >> Comments?

[53:49] >> No comments on the specific

[53:52] -- itself, but just a reminder

[53:54] for those that have -- where

[53:55] heading towards the end of the

[53:56] year now. For those that have

[53:58] pending projects, those that

[54:01] submitted, the deadline was

[54:03] today. The next planning

[54:04] advisory meeting will be

[54:05] November 27th. That's when we

[54:07] will have the next round of

[54:08] documents before the end of the

[54:09] year. And then we will pick

[54:10] things up in January. There will

[54:12] be no meeting in December. Just

[54:13] a reminder of that.

[54:16] >> Okay.

[54:17] >> That's the only comment. So,

[54:20] I propose --

[54:24] >> I second. Je propose le

[54:26] procès-verbal.

[54:27] - À l'unanimité. Procès-verbal

[54:29] de la réunion du Comité

[54:30] consultatif culture et loisirs

[54:31] du 25 septembre 2024.

[54:34] - Madame la Présidente? De

[54:36] commenter?

[54:37] - Rien en particulier mais

[54:38] j'encouragerais nos résidents à

[54:41] participer à l'atelier de jeudi,

[54:44] mercredi, pardon. Pour la

[54:46] planification de notre transport

[54:49] actif, ici. Je propose.

[54:57] >> Second.

[54:58] - En faveur?

[55:00] - À l'unanimité.

[55:07] >> Minutes of the finance

[55:09] advisory meeting Advisory

[55:12] Committee meeting of October 22,

[55:13] 2024.

[55:14] >> Whose? Proposing

[55:15] >> I will propose.

[55:16] >> I will second that.

[55:17] >> All in favour.

[55:18] - À l'unanimité. Dépôt du

[55:21] procès-verbal de la séance du

[55:22] Comité de démolition du 1er

[55:23] octobre 2024. Il s'agit d'un

[55:24] dépôt.

[55:26] - De commentaires, Monsieur?

[55:28] - Non, merci, Monsieur le Maire.

[55:31] Rien de plus à dire que ce qui a

[55:33] été mentionné lors de la période

[55:34] de questions et voilà. Merci.

[55:36] - Parfait.

[55:40] >> Appointment of Council

[55:41] members to the Demolition

[55:42] Committee.

[55:45] >> Proposed.

[55:46] >> Seconded. - Alors,

[55:49] félicitations à tous les membres

[55:50] qui sont renouvelés pour le

[55:52] comité de démolition. Merci.

[55:58] - On va voter.

[55:59] - À l'unanimité.

[56:02] (inaudible)

[56:03] (rires)

[56:06] Il y a deux membres du comité

[56:08] qui sont ici ce soir.

[56:10] (rires)

[56:14] - Dépôt d'un Plan particulier

[56:15] d'intervention pour pannes

[56:16] électriques en période

[56:17] hivernale. Il s'agit d'un dépôt.

[56:23] Adoption of a specific directive

[56:24] relating to the use of a

[56:25] language other than French, in

[56:26] accordance with the Charter of

[56:27] the French language.

[56:28] - Je propose.

[56:29] >> Second.

[56:30] >> In favour. - À l'unanimité.

[56:35] Autorisation de signature et

[56:36] dépôt du calendrier de

[56:37] conservation 2024 de la Ville de

[56:38] Beaconsfield.

[56:42] - Secondé.

[56:46] - En faveur.

[56:47] (rires)

[56:48] - À l'unanimité.

[56:51] Mayor's report on the decisions

[56:52] made by the Agglomeration

[56:53] Council at its meeting of

[56:54] October 24, 2024.

[56:58] >> Yeah, I will not comment on

[57:00] the October 24th meeting. It was

[57:03] a normal meeting with a lot of

[57:05] money spent. But I will comment

[57:09] on the meeting that will take

[57:11] place this Thursday. And on the

[57:17] agenda is the elimination of

[57:23] fluoridation in drinking water

[57:25] for the West Island

[57:28] municipalities that now enjoy

[57:30] it.

[57:36] It is a unilateral decision that

[57:38] was made by Montréal without

[57:43] consulting any of the affected

[57:48] municipalities. They made that

[57:50] decision. It's a decision that

[57:52] did not consult any of our

[57:56] residents in the affected

[58:01] municipalities. To me, it's --

[58:05] it reflects an admission of

[58:09] democratic failure in the

[58:11] workings of municipal

[58:12] authorities and a lack of

[58:14] respect of our population and

[58:17] our residents. It's a flagrant

[58:24] abuse of power by the majority.

[58:28] And you have to understand that

[58:31] at the agglomeration meeting,

[58:33] Montréal has 83% of the vote.

[58:36] And we have 87% of the vote. And

[58:39] we have 13% as all of the merged

[58:46] municipalities. No matter what's

[58:47] on the agenda, Montréal gets its

[58:50] way all the time. In this case,

[58:52] here, it will also get their way

[58:55] without any consultation, with

[58:58] health officials. None with

[59:02] municipalities, elected

[59:03] officials. None with citizens.

[59:07] And, you know, if we let that

[59:10] go, we have tried so far to try

[59:14] and get it removed from the

[59:17] agenda on the process itself.

[59:19] Because the process is

[59:23] undemocratic. It's totally

[59:25] undemocratic of a process. So

[59:28] far, we have not succeeded. If

[59:30] it's on the agenda on Thursday,

[59:32] it will be voted in. Any

[59:39] residents of Beaconsfield or any

[59:41] of the cities affected can send

[59:44] in writing to the agglomeration

[59:48] meeting questions about why the

[59:55] decision is made the way it is

[59:57] and question the process. So,

[1:00:00] any of you or anyone who is

[1:00:04] listening to us tonight or

[1:00:07] anybody that you know and who's

[1:00:13] able to ask questions at the

[1:00:15] agglomeration meeting that will

[1:00:16] take place on Thursday -- and I

[1:00:18] highly recommend that as many

[1:00:21] questions as we can put in front

[1:00:24] of the agglomeration meeting,

[1:00:27] the better. And it will have an

[1:00:32] impact. If we let this go, it

[1:00:34] will have an impact on future

[1:00:38] decisions. Unilateral decisions

[1:00:40] made by Montréal. It doesn't

[1:00:43] stop them from making uni

[1:00:45] lateral decisions and bringing

[1:00:47] them to the agglomeration where

[1:00:48] they can abuse their majority in

[1:00:53] getting it through. At one

[1:00:56] point, where we have autonomy

[1:01:00] and we will be able to manage

[1:01:02] our cities, that's a big

[1:01:04] question mark. It's a very

[1:01:08] serious, very serious and very

[1:01:10] dangerous situation. So far, it

[1:01:15] doesn't seem to affect the

[1:01:20] residents. So we'll see what

[1:01:22] happens on Thursday. Yes?

[1:01:29] >> Denis you know about this,

[1:01:31] where we ever told about? This

[1:01:32] did the City of Montréal

[1:01:34] communicate this to us?

[1:01:37] >> You are in Pierrefonds?

[1:01:38] >> Beaconsfield.

[1:01:41] >> Beaconsfield.

[1:01:42] >> Yes.

[1:01:43] >> No, they made us a

[1:01:45] presentation on September the

[1:01:48] 4th. And the presentation was,

[1:01:50] this is our decision.

[1:01:52] >> Okay.

[1:01:53] >> This is what we are going to

[1:01:54] do.

[1:01:55] >> So, I guess what I need from

[1:01:56] you as an email address. Because

[1:01:58] this is what I like to do

[1:01:59] lately.

[1:02:02] [Laughter]

[1:02:03] Because we are living in very

[1:02:05] rough times. If anybody follows

[1:02:07] me on Facebook, they will

[1:02:08] understand what I'm going

[1:02:09] through as I'm a dual citizen,

[1:02:10] I'm not really happy with what

[1:02:12] happened two weeks ago. I'm very

[1:02:14] concerned about what can happen

[1:02:16] here. So I'm all about democracy

[1:02:18] and making democratic decisions,

[1:02:19] the right off the bat, if you

[1:02:21] take fluoride out of the water

[1:02:23] arbitrarily like this, you are

[1:02:24] going to harm underprivileged

[1:02:27] people who don't have access to

[1:02:29] good dental care.

[1:02:30] >> Absolutely.

[1:02:31] >> You will hit all the

[1:02:32] vulnerable populations and you

[1:02:33] will see an increase in dental

[1:02:37] cavities. Which leads to more

[1:02:41] sicknesses, which will lead to

[1:02:42] more hospitalizations and more

[1:02:44] expenses and health care. So,

[1:02:46] this is unacceptable right at

[1:02:49] the face of it. The democracy, I

[1:02:50] understand. But I'm absolutely

[1:02:52] going to put a letter up on

[1:02:54] Facebook in the West Island

[1:02:55] community. Just tell me who I

[1:02:56] need to tell people to write.

[1:02:58] >> Well, thank you very much.

[1:03:03] Yes, the unbelievable thing is

[1:03:09] that they made us a presentation

[1:03:11] on September 4th. They said,

[1:03:13] this is a decision. They then

[1:03:15] quoted in their presentation

[1:03:19] that health experts are in

[1:03:21] favour and recommended. But they

[1:03:25] ignored that recommendation

[1:03:27] totally. So if you want to send

[1:03:31] a question to the agglomeration,

[1:03:35] if you want to leave your email

[1:03:39] with our secretary, I will send

[1:03:42] it to you. I will send it to

[1:03:45] you. I have the whole procedure

[1:03:47] on my computer. I will send it

[1:03:49] to you. And I will send it to

[1:03:53] anyone that can give me their

[1:03:55] email and wants to raise this

[1:03:59] issue. It's a very, very

[1:04:02] dangerous situation. No, yeah. -

[1:04:11] Bonsoir, je m'appelle

[1:04:12] Jean-Charles

[1:04:13] (---)

[1:04:14] , j'habite

[1:04:15] (---)

[1:04:16] .

[1:04:17] I have a question. I got busy

[1:04:18] with all the questions. You've

[1:04:19] got the infrastructure in the

[1:04:21] city of Beaconsfield about the

[1:04:26] canal-ization. I want to know

[1:04:27] the plan to modernize or fix the

[1:04:30] issue. Each year, we get

[1:04:32] flooded. I've contacted the city

[1:04:33] of Beaconsfield. The city of

[1:04:36] Beaconsfield very kindly have

[1:04:38] answered --

[1:04:39] >> I allow you to go to the mic

[1:04:40] because I thought you were going

[1:04:41] to make a comment.

[1:04:43] >> I'm talking -- about

[1:04:44] >> But the question period --

[1:04:45] >> We are talking about some

[1:04:46] other issue --

[1:04:47] >> The question period was over

[1:04:48] a long time ago.

[1:04:49] >> Can I ask my question

[1:04:52] quickly?

[1:04:53] >> I will speak to you after, if

[1:04:55] you want.

[1:04:56] >> Yes, I will see you after.

[1:04:57] >> Yes, you are in my district.

[1:04:58] I will be happy to.

[1:04:59] >> Okay.

[1:05:01] >> This, way you will get an

[1:05:04] answer.

[1:05:05] [Laughter]

[1:05:07] As I said, anyone that wishes to

[1:05:10] send in a question or comments

[1:05:14] to the agglomeration meeting

[1:05:15] next Thursday, give our

[1:05:20] secretary your email address and

[1:05:22] I will send you in the way to go

[1:05:26] about it has to whom to ask a

[1:05:30] question to at the

[1:05:32] agglomeration. Thank, you that

[1:05:34] was a long report from the

[1:05:36] agglomeration. Thank you.

[1:05:50] - Dépôt des rapports des

[1:05:52] directeurs.

[1:05:53] - Rien à signaler en

[1:05:54] particulier, Monsieur le Maire,

[1:05:55] sinon que les équipes se

[1:05:56] préparent pour l'hiver, avec

[1:05:57] l'installation des bandes de

[1:05:58] patinoires qu'on aimerait bien

[1:05:59] voir être utilisé, on va pas de

[1:06:00] neige dans les rues mais juste

[1:06:01] dans nos patinoires. Il y a des

[1:06:03] activités de loisirs qui s'en

[1:06:04] viennent pour le temps des Fêtes

[1:06:05] et on en aura plus à dire au

[1:06:06] Conseil du mois de décembre pour

[1:06:08] les activités de Noël et le

[1:06:09] début de l'année.

[1:06:12] - Merci. Alors, est-ce qu'il y a

[1:06:18] des affaires nouvelles?

[1:06:19] - Non. Ce serait la levée de la

[1:06:23] séance.

[1:06:24] - La levée de la séance?

[1:06:25] - Proposé.

[1:06:28] - En faveur? Tout le monde en

[1:06:30] faveur? Thank you very much for

[1:06:33] those of you that are here. And

[1:06:37] for those of you who stayed here

[1:06:38] for the whole meeting, I

[1:06:40] appreciate that very much.

[1:06:41] Normally, people leave after the

[1:06:43] question period. But tonight, I

[1:06:45] see most of the people that are

[1:06:47] here stayed through the whole

[1:06:50] meeting. So thank you very much.

[1:06:52] And I really appreciate your

[1:06:55] interest and you can --

[1:06:58] Beaconsfield. Merci beaucoup de

[1:07:00] nous avoir regardés sur la

[1:07:04] webdiffusion. Encore une fois,

[1:07:06] je vous remercie de votre

[1:07:08] intérêt dans la ville de

[1:07:12] Beaconsfield. On se reverra le

[1:07:14] mois prochain. Next weeding --

[1:07:18] meeting will be next month.

2024-11-18 - Conseil municipal de Beaconsfield

Transcript