[0:07] - Bonsoir et bienvenue à la
[0:11] séance ordinaire du conseil
[0:15] municipal du lundi 24 février.
[0:18] Welcome to the regular meeting
[0:20] of the municipal council on
[0:23] February 24th. Now, I will pass
[0:27] it on to our city clerk to open
[0:30] the agenda.
[0:32] - Merci. >> Adoption de l'ordre
[0:35] du jour de la séance ordinaire
[0:36] du Conseil de la Ville de
[0:37] Beaconsfield du 24 février 2025.
[0:40] - Proposé.
[0:42] - En faveur.
[0:44] - À l'unanimité.
[0:47] - Alors, nous allons passer aux
[0:52] questions que nous avons reçues
[0:54] par écrit. La première question
[0:58] est de monsieur Pound The Sweet
[1:03] Bryer. What is the cities
[1:07] responsibility in the
[1:08] construction of a harbour
[1:09] master's office at the -- yacht
[1:12] club on the centennial marina
[1:15] property. And please justify the
[1:17] need. Mr. pounds, in the 2019
[1:24] management agreement between the
[1:25] city and the lord ready yacht
[1:28] club, the city agreed to fund
[1:30] the construction of a harbour
[1:32] master office to support
[1:35] activities appropriate for its
[1:37] size. As the existing club
[1:40] building is planned for
[1:43] demolition. Additionally, a
[1:46] small storage facility will be
[1:47] provided for equipment and
[1:49] winter storage. The plan also
[1:52] includes a public restroom
[1:55] accessible to all citizens. The
[2:00] second question from Mr. pounds
[2:02] is
[2:03] | | |
[2:04] Why has become field
[2:05] administrations and councils
[2:06] over the last 39 years failed to
[2:09] resolve the highway 20
[2:11] environmental issues affecting
[2:13] many citizens? There are photo
[2:15] radars limiting highway 20
[2:17] traffic speed on Île-Perrot and
[2:21] a sound wall from Cartier and
[2:23] Pointe-Claire. Mr. pounds, you
[2:27] have asked these questions and
[2:33] topic and they were answered
[2:35] numerous times already at
[2:38] various municipal council's.
[2:40] Over the past years. Successive
[2:43] Beaconsfield administrations and
[2:45] councils have made various
[2:47] efforts to address the highway
[2:49] 20 environmental issues
[2:52] affecting residents as well as
[2:53] the speeding on highway 20. The
[2:57] city of Beaconsfield is of the
[2:59] opinion that if the noise and
[3:02] air pollution from Highway 20
[3:03] poses a significant health risk
[3:06] to Beaconsfield residents, it is
[3:08] the government's responsibility
[3:10] to take appropriate action
[3:13] whether through speed
[3:15] reductions, noise barriers or
[3:17] other solutions to effectively
[3:19] address residents concerns.
[3:23] Also, we have contacted
[3:27] Baie-D'Urfé, Pointe-Claire and
[3:29] Dorval before by letter. Their
[3:34] answer was that they do not
[3:35] agree with the speed reduction
[3:38] on highway 20. The next question
[3:43] is from Allison smiley from
[3:45] Grosvenor. Good day, I'm
[3:49] wondering if you might be able
[3:50] to update us as to which roads
[3:53] will be undertaken in the
[3:55] capital expenditures
[3:59] improvements. As I saw a map
[4:00] communicated at 1.4 2025.
[4:03] However, I did not see Grosvenor
[4:04] on the list. I thought they
[4:09] would be here speaking with
[4:12] someone from public works and I
[4:15] thought the governor would be on
[4:17] the said list for 2025. This
[4:20] relates to a recent council
[4:22] update where by the stated
[4:25] purpose of bylaw be 163 is to
[4:29] authorize capital expenditures
[4:30] in a loan of 2,200,000 for the
[4:34] structural rehabilitation work
[4:36] of water mains and for the
[4:39] structural rehabilitation of
[4:41] sanitary sewer pipes. Mrs.
[4:46] Smiley, the lone bylaw pertains
[4:50] to the aqueduct network rehab
[4:52] work. As well as the sanitary
[4:56] wastewater network rehab. As of
[4:59] today, there are no
[5:00] interventions planned on the
[5:05] aqueduct networks on growth for
[5:06] in 2025. However, under bylaw
[5:13] b-165 which consists variance
[5:15] the improvement of storms were
[5:16] networks, an extension of the
[5:17] storm drain network on Westcroft
[5:21] as been designed. This work is
[5:23] planned for 2025. This
[5:26] intervention will relieve the
[5:28] drainage network in the
[5:30] surrounding sector by increasing
[5:32] the drainage capacity and
[5:35] encouraging surface runoff water
[5:38] to infiltrate the network and
[5:41] flow toward lake St. Louis.
[5:44] There are more interventions
[5:45] planned across the city to
[5:47] relieve the network. Residents
[5:49] can consult and download the
[5:51] city's preliminary action plan
[5:53] on the Beaconsfield website,
[5:56] which addresses the cities
[5:57] approach to finding and
[5:59] implementing innovative and
[6:01] reliable solutions to strengthen
[6:03] the resilience of the drainage
[6:06] network. The next question is
[6:11] from me gonna do on Saint
[6:13] Andrew. I will summarize your
[6:16] question. -- Next comments and
[6:19] suggestions about treating a
[6:20] preservation committee for
[6:23] creating a preservation
[6:24] committee for historic
[6:26] buildings. Item 45.2, providing
[6:30] feedback as an artistic person
[6:31] on the disability emergency
[6:33] plan, item 60.4, are we naming
[6:37] mental health day to neuro
[6:39] affirming day. Item 60.5, and
[6:42] her opposition to the rental by
[6:46] -- of the -- parking lots as
[6:49] they sell meat items. 60.6. I
[6:54] have to tell you, Madam, that
[6:57] your comments have been noted
[6:59] and have been passed on to our
[7:01] administration. Now, we are
[7:07] ready for the questions from the
[7:09] floor. Est-ce qu'il y a des
[7:12] questions du plancher?
[7:21] >> My name is Diana
[7:22] (inaudible)
[7:23] .
[7:25] >> It's not made for short
[7:26] people.
[7:28] [Laughter]
[7:29] >> Now it's working?
[7:30] >> There you go.
[7:31] >> Okay, good evening, Mister
[7:33] Mayor and councillors. My name
[7:35] is --, 205 Lakeview. On behalf
[7:39] of my husband, Steven Lloyd, and
[7:42] myself, and I'm clearly the
[7:43] better half for being here
[7:44] tonight
[7:46] (applause)
[7:47] >> I bet that he's watching the
[7:49] debate right now.
[7:50] >> No. Actually, he's already on
[7:52] the road doing something else.
[7:55] But we sincerely want to thank
[7:56] you. This is a milestone tonight
[7:58] for the concordance bylaw that
[8:00] you are adopting. I was
[8:03] remembering that it has been 27
[8:04] years for me since my daughter
[8:06] is 26 years old, since we
[8:07] started to get involved in the
[8:08] prediction of Angel woods. So my
[8:11] question is, since the public
[8:13] consultation meeting that we
[8:15] had, has there been any changes
[8:16] to what you are adopting
[8:17] tonight?
[8:18] >> I don't believe so. I don't
[8:21] believe there was
[8:22] (applause)
[8:23] There's been no change.
[8:24] >> Do I get a second question?
[8:30] >> My other question is in
[8:32] regards to the work that is
[8:34] going to be done on wood limb,
[8:36] -- and elm for $287,000. Could
[8:42] you describe what kind of work
[8:44] that entails? Mister Mayor.
[8:50] >> Yes. The idea here is to
[8:53] improve the safety of the
[8:57] overpass from elm to --. We are
[9:04] hiring a consultant to see our
[9:05] options to improve the safety
[9:07] and mobility of the traffic and
[9:09] the possibility of adding a
[9:11] sidewalk on east side which is
[9:14] probably the big item on the
[9:16] east side between the tracks.
[9:19] So, this is very important and
[9:21] there are safety issues and
[9:23] safety regulations with the
[9:25] track companies, the CN and the
[9:29] CP and Casey are. So, there's a
[9:31] lot of things to consider. It is
[9:33] not an
[9:35] (applause)
[9:36] Easy intersection. One of the
[9:37] most complicated in Canada I
[9:38] believe, so we need to look how
[9:39] we can improve that. From time
[9:42] to time, people think there are
[9:43] changes in the sequences but
[9:46] it's not the case. Often when a
[9:48] train passes, it creates a
[9:51] situation and obviously some
[9:52] people have to wait a long time
[9:55] so this will all be looked at
[9:57] considering the volume of
[9:58] traffic we have now, considering
[10:00] what are the issues we have, how
[10:01] we can improve the safety. So
[10:03] that is a mandate that we are
[10:05] giving. We have to do a study
[10:08] and prepare plans --
[10:10] >> Well that involve the sunrise
[10:12] lot?
[10:14] >> I don't think so. I do not
[10:16] see why it would at this point
[10:17] in time. We do have studies a
[10:21] few years ago if there was going
[10:22] to be a development on the north
[10:24] side of summarize, what the
[10:26] impact would be. My recollection
[10:27] was very little impact on
[10:29] traffic. It's the closing of the
[10:30] tracks that's the problem. It's
[10:31] not the traffic per se. But we
[10:33] want to improve the environment
[10:37] of that location where there is
[10:40] a fairly good number of users
[10:42] Gary. On elm --
[10:44] >> I know. I have to take it
[10:45] every day. It's my only access.
[10:47] >> People have difficulty
[10:50] respecting their own safety with
[10:55] jaywalking all over the place.
[10:56] Hopefully, we are trying to
[10:57] improve that with another
[11:00] sidewalk and better signage. New
[11:02] devices from the truck companies
[11:04] on the sidewalks to stop people
[11:06] from walking.
[11:07] >> Or dropping their kids off
[11:09] not at the departure there.
[11:11] >> I know.
[11:12] >> That would be very helpful.
[11:14] Not at the light.
[11:15] >> The solution should have been
[11:17] thought about 30 years ago with
[11:19] that underpass.
[11:20] >> No, no, no, no, Mister Mayor.
[11:22] I disagree. But thank you very
[11:24] much.
[11:25] >> By the way, we spend $307,901
[11:31] for the -- what is it called?
[11:37] They did the repairs between
[11:39] their tracks and the CP level
[11:40] and that cost $300,000. We pay
[11:44] for that. $307,000. Yes?
[11:50] >> Good evening, Council. My
[11:51] name is Kate quarter at 132
[11:53] Evergreen Drive at Beaconsfield.
[11:55] I've come to ask a question,
[11:56] first of all to congratulate you
[11:58] all in advance when you do adopt
[11:59] the bylaw that is coming up this
[12:01] evening to protect Angell Woods.
[12:05] We've been going at this for 27
[12:07] years as she said. So it's a big
[12:08] night for us. What I'm wondering
[12:11] going forward is what is the
[12:13] role of the city of Beaconsfield
[12:14] and potentially -- in the
[12:16] stewardship of the woods? As far
[12:18] as the organization of this
[12:21] park. And how much impact can we
[12:23] as citizens of Beaconsfield and
[12:25] members of -- have on the plans
[12:27] for the woods going forward?
[12:30] >> Well, most of the woods has
[12:36] now been bought is under the
[12:39] administration of the City of
[12:43] Montréal. The plan is to make a
[12:49] great western park that
[12:52] Montrealers talking about
[12:54] eventually. I think there's
[12:56] still a lot of work to be done
[12:58] by Montréal to do this. So, we
[13:03] are going to be relying on
[13:08] Montréal for whatever they need
[13:09] to do. And we want to join it
[13:13] with the great park at one
[13:15] point. To determine what kind of
[13:19] activities there would be in the
[13:21] woods itself. That is where we
[13:24] stand right now.
[13:25] >> Okay. We've been working on
[13:30] trying to save the switch for 27
[13:31] years. I'm just asking if the
[13:33] city could have a major role in
[13:35] that because it is in our
[13:37] territory and I think that we
[13:39] have a lot of experience in
[13:41] those woods. It would be nice if
[13:43] somehow the city of Beaconsfield
[13:44] could take a leadership role and
[13:47] consider the participation of
[13:48] the members of APAW going
[13:51] forward. I think it's a unique
[13:53] situation as being part of the
[13:55] Grand parc de l'Ouest. I
[13:56] understand that.
[13:57] >> We are taking note of your
[13:58] comments, but it will be hundred
[13:59] the City of Montréal.
[14:01] >> I understand. But we are city
[14:04] of Beaconsfield so I think we
[14:05] should take part in that
[14:08] process.
[14:09] >> We couldn't afford to buy all
[14:10] of the woods.
[14:11] >> I know.
[14:12] >> So it has been purchased by
[14:13] the City of Montréal. Hopefully,
[14:14] they will make it part of the
[14:17] western park from Angell Woods
[14:23] all the way up to Pierrefonds.
[14:26] >> Yeah. Okay, thank you.
[14:29] >> Thank you.
[14:31] >> Okay. I'm just talking more
[14:33] -- sorry. I'm just going to talk
[14:36] more about Angell Woods and
[14:41] 20.2. First of all, thank you
[14:45] for saving Angell Woods. I hope
[14:48] you do vote yes on the proposed
[14:50] by law to protect it. I
[14:52] understand why the City of
[14:54] Montréal would have it because
[14:55] it's not actually the City of
[14:58] Montréal running at, it's the
[14:59] agglomeration of Montréal. So
[15:00] it's the same way as how police
[15:04] services and paramedics services
[15:07] are run. It's similar to
[15:10] regional municipalities in other
[15:14] provinces.
[15:16] >> You are right. It is the
[15:19] agglomeration of Montréal.
[15:21] >> So 20.2, what I was going to
[15:24] say about the building, I think
[15:26] building an underpass or
[15:27] something?
[15:29] >> No, no, no. We are not going
[15:33] to build an underpass at
[15:37] Woodland. It would cost anywhere
[15:39] between 15 to $75 million.
[15:41] >> That's a lot.
[15:45] >> It could have been done 30 or
[15:47] 35 years ago. At that point, I
[15:51] think that basically the Council
[15:54] at the time was looking at elm
[15:57] as not being a very important in
[15:59] terms of access. They turned it
[16:03] down and it would cost probably
[16:06] the city of Beaconsfield around
[16:09] two to $300 million for
[16:12] expropriation. Right now though,
[16:14] it's out of the question. 15 to
[16:17] 75 million.
[16:18] >> I'm wondering if you could
[16:19] even have a small underpass or
[16:21] overpass for animals.
[16:23] >> There will be no underpass
[16:26] period.
[16:27] >> What about an overpass?
[16:28] >> There will not be an overpass
[16:30] at woodland either.
[16:31] >> Okay. Again, back to Angell
[16:35] Woods. I was going to say I
[16:37] absolutely love Angell Woods.
[16:38] Being a person on the autism
[16:40] spectrum, I find it very calming
[16:42] to walk in Angell Woods.
[16:43] >> Thank you very much.
[16:44] >> It's very therapeutic and
[16:45] it's one of the things I like
[16:47] about Beaconsfield.
[16:48] >> Thank you very much.
[16:49] >> Thank you for saving it.
[16:50] >> Thank you.
[16:51] >> One comment, Mister Mayor.
[16:53] Talking about overpasses. You
[16:56] know, we have an overpass
[16:58] between elm and the HST. That
[17:01] overpass is certainly, very
[17:04] important for the flow of
[17:06] traffic and students going to
[17:08] high school, North and South.
[17:09] But that overpass, to replace
[17:12] it, I think it could cost maybe
[17:14] $20 million. We have a project
[17:17] to do some work on the overpass
[17:19] because it needs it. But that is
[17:22] -- everything today is so darn
[17:25] expensive overpasses certainly,
[17:28] as much as we might not want,
[17:31] others are almost prohibitive.
[17:33] >> 20 years from now, $20
[17:36] million might look like a real
[17:37] bargain. But that is what we
[17:38] have to put up with.
[17:41] - Bonjour.
[17:43] (---)
[17:44] J'avais deux questions...
[17:46] j'avais d'autres questions, mais
[17:47] elles ont été répondues. 60,2,
[17:50] vous avez un mandat à propos de
[17:51] la propriété au 254 Ouest Coast.
[17:55] C'est quoi, les intérêts de la
[17:56] ville?
[17:57] - C'est qu'elle...?
[17:58] - 60.2.
[18:06] - Oui. C'est pour remblayée.
[18:11] C'est ça? C'est le remblai du
[18:15] terrain.
[18:16] - Les gens ont remblayé et il
[18:17] faut...
[18:18] - Oui, exactement.
[18:19] - Puis 60.9, on parle de... je
[18:23] ne sais pas si j'ai bien
[18:25] compris, on parle de diviser le
[18:26] territoire de la ville. Est-ce
[18:27] que vous allez changer les
[18:28] divisions de la ville? Division
[18:32] en secteur de territoire de la
[18:33] ville.
[18:35] - C'est la politique
[18:37] d'établissement ordinaire...
[18:38] - 60.9.
[18:39] - C'est quoi?
[18:40] (inaudible)
[18:43] Explique-lui.
[18:44] - C'est une bonne question.
[18:46] C'est très technique. C'est le
[18:49] projet de loi 39 qui a été
[18:51] adoptée le 8 décembre 2023. Il a
[18:54] donné aux municipalités une
[18:56] nouvelle approche en termes de
[18:59] fiscalité municipale. Donc, on
[19:00] est habitué avec certaines
[19:03] catégories de taxation. Par
[19:05] exemple, le tarif résiduel, qui
[19:07] pourrait présider
[19:09] (---)
[19:10] . Et on a un tarif six logements
[19:11] et plus. Cette catégorie-là
[19:13] n'existe plus. Il n'y a plus de
[19:14] catégories qui existent. Donc,
[19:15] il reste la catégorie des
[19:17] tarifications résiduelle. Donc,
[19:19] les villes, pour le prochain
[19:22] rôle, qui va être en
[19:23] mi-septembre 2025 pour 2026 -
[19:27] 2027 - 2028, on doit adopter
[19:29] quelle catégorie on aimerait
[19:32] avoir pour des fins de taxation
[19:34] pour l'année budgétaire 2026 en
[19:37] fonction du rôle qui va être
[19:38] déposé. Et on doit aviser la
[19:42] direction de l'évaluation de
[19:43] Montréal pour qu'ils puissent
[19:44] préparer leur rôle en
[19:46] conséquence ou en fonction des
[19:47] sous-catégories qu'on aimerait
[19:48] créer. On pourrait créer 72
[19:52] catégories et en utiliser quand
[19:54] même un seul taux résiduel, par
[19:56] exemple. Mais si on ne les a
[19:57] pas, on ne pourrait pas, pour la
[19:58] trois prochaines années, avoir
[20:00] des taux de taxation différente
[20:02] par catégorie. C'est l'objectif.
[20:04] Donc, c'est très technique. Ça
[20:05] découle de la loi 39, où on doit
[20:09] réinventer les catégories, par
[20:11] exemple.
[20:12] - Donc, la loi 39 n'a pas créé
[20:13] des catégories.
[20:14] - Non. Je vais vous donner un
[20:16] exemple qu'on a mis en place
[20:17] pour 2024. Pour les terrains
[20:21] en... terrains vagues desservis,
[20:23] auparavant, ont accès deux fois
[20:24] le taux résiduel. La loi a
[20:26] changé pour qu'on puisse taxer
[20:27] quatre fois le taux résiduel.
[20:28] Celle-là était facile à utiliser
[20:30] et on l'a appliqué dès 2024.
[20:33] Mais les autres catégories
[20:35] n'existeront plus. Elles sont
[20:37] toujours prévues au rôle
[20:38] d'évaluation. Elles sont encore
[20:39] là. Mais si on n'informe pas le
[20:41] service d'évaluation de
[20:43] Montréal, elle n'existeront plus
[20:44] pour Beaconsfield. Chacune des
[20:46] villes doit déterminer, décider
[20:48] quelles sont les catégories ou
[20:49] les secteurs de taxation qui
[20:52] vont prévaloir dans le prochain
[20:53] rôle d'évaluation. C'est un
[20:55] exercice qui pourrait être fait
[20:57] à tous les 3 ans. Et si la
[20:58] catégorie n'est pas créée au
[21:01] printemps, elle ne pourra pas
[21:02] être appliqué pour les trois
[21:03] prochaines années du rôle
[21:04] d'évaluation. Donc, les budgets
[21:06] 2026 - 2027 - 2028.
[21:08] - Donc, ça n'a pas rapport au
[21:10] secteur strict, des districts.
[21:12] - Non, ça n'a pas rapport
[21:14] districts. Ça aurait pu,
[21:15] effectivement, mais ça n'a pas
[21:16] rapport. Ce n'est pas des
[21:17] sous-catégories de territoire,
[21:18] mais c'est des sous-catégories
[21:19] de taxation.
[21:20] - Ma dernière question, c'est à
[21:21] propos de la neige que vous
[21:22] faites fondre ici. Ça s'en va
[21:24] dans les égouts directement au
[21:27] lac?
[21:28] - Non. C'est la tête de
[21:31] l'intercepteur de
[21:33] l'agglomération. Donc, ça s'en
[21:34] va à l'usine de
[21:37] Rivière-des-Prairies. C'est ici
[21:38] que ça commence, l'intercepteur.
[21:40] C'est la tête de l'intercepteur.
[21:42] C'est l'endroit où on peut
[21:44] l'envoyer en collaboration avec
[21:46] l'agglomération.
[21:47] - Merci.
[21:48] - Merci beaucoup. Merci
[21:51] beaucoup. Alors, nous allons
[21:53] maintenant procéder avec
[21:56] l'agenda du jour. Approval of
[22:01] the minutes of the City of
[22:02] Beaconsfield's Public
[22:03] Consultation of January 20,
[22:04] 2025, at 6:30 p.m..
[22:07] >> I propose.
[22:08] >> I second.
[22:09] >> In favour.
[22:11] >> Unanimous. - À l'unanimité.
[22:15] Approbation du procès-verbal de
[22:16] la séance ordinaire du Conseil
[22:17] de la Ville de Beaconsfield du
[22:18] 20 janvier 2025.
[22:19] - Proposé.
[22:20] - Et j'appuie.
[22:22] - En faveur.
[22:24] >> In favour.
[22:25] - À l'unanimité. >> A warning of
[22:30] contracts 666-25-GC for street
[22:31] line and sign-painting work to
[22:32] the lowest conforming bidder,
[22:33] Lignes-fit Inc. in the amount of
[22:39] $149,271.24, all taxes included.
[22:44] >> Proposed.
[22:45] >> I second.
[22:46] >> In favour.
[22:49] - À l'unanimité. Octroi du
[22:51] mandat. 25-SP-213 concernant des
[22:55] services professionnels pour la
[22:59] reconfigurationsécurisation de
[23:00] l'intersection
[23:01] Woodland-Beaurepaire-Elm à
[23:02] Beaconsfield au soumissionnaire
[23:03] ayant obtenu le meilleur
[23:04] pointage final, soit Shellex
[23:05] Groupe Conseil inc.
[23:06] , Pour la somme de 287437,50 $,
[23:10] toutes taxes incluses.
[23:16] >> Proposed.
[23:17] >> Seconded.
[23:20] - En faveur.
[23:21] - À l'unanimité. >> Awarding of
[23:25] mandate 25-SP-214 for
[23:27] professional services for the
[23:28] preparation of plans and
[23:29] specifications to replace the
[23:31] mechanical units and the
[23:33] building control system of the
[23:36] Public Works'building - City of
[23:38] Beaconsfield to the tender
[23:39] having obtained the best final
[23:40] score, Les Services EXP Inc., in
[23:42] the amount of $219,889.69, all
[23:44] taxes included.
[23:51] - Proposé. >> Second.
[23:54] - En faveur.
[23:56] - À l'unanimité. Octroi du
[24:01] contrat TP 2025-01 concernant
[24:03] l'entretien paysager du Village
[24:04] Beaurepaire pour l'année 2025
[24:06] avec quatre
[24:07] (4)
[24:08] options de renouvellement au
[24:09] plus bas soumissionnaire
[24:10] conforme, soit 7574479 Canada
[24:12] inc.
[24:13] (DLC)
[24:14] , Pour la somme de 34686,54 $,
[24:18] toutes taxes incluses.
[24:20] - Proposé.
[24:22] - Secondé.
[24:24] >> In favour. - En faveur.
[24:26] - À l'unanimité. Renewal of
[24:29] contract TP 2023-07 for bulk
[24:33] leaf pickup for the year 2025
[24:35] with GFL Environmental Inc., At
[24:37] an approximate cost of $57,000,
[24:40] all taxes included.
[24:42] >> I propose.
[24:44] >> I second.
[24:46] - En faveur.
[24:48] - À l'unanimité. Renouvellement
[24:51] du contrat FT 2021-01 pour les
[24:54] services professionnels de
[24:55] vérification de l'optimisation
[24:56] des ressources de la Ville de
[24:58] Beaconsfield pour l'année 2025
[25:00] avec Raymond Chabot Grant
[25:01] Thornton, pour la somme de 29
[25:02] 847,51 $, toutes taxes incluses.
[25:07] >> Proposed.
[25:09] >> I second.
[25:11] - En faveur.
[25:12] - À l'unanimité. Awarding of a
[25:16] contract by mutual agreement
[25:19] (RGC 2025-05)
[25:20] for professional architecture
[25:21] services with Lemay CO. For the
[25:26] preparation of detailed plans
[25:27] and specifications and the
[25:28] supervision during construction
[25:30] of a harbour master's office on
[25:32] the Centennial Marina property,
[25:34] for the amount of $87,381.00,
[25:38] all taxes included.
[25:42] >> Proposed.
[25:43] >> Seconded.
[25:44] >> In favour.
[25:46] - À l'unanimité. Approbation de
[25:48] la liste des comptes à payer au
[25:50] 24 février 2025, et de la liste
[25:52] des paiements préautorisés pour
[25:53] la période du 9 janvier 2025 au
[25:56] 19 janvier 2025 et du 21 janvier
[26:00] 2025 au 12 février 2025, pour un
[26:01] déboursé total de 4931311,91 $.
[26:09] - Voici les montants les plus
[26:12] importants. 369593 et 64 à
[26:17] consultations Arcade pour des
[26:19] comptes progressifs numéro 7
[26:22] pour la rénovation de la
[26:24] patinoire. 307900 dollars à la
[26:26] compagnie de chemins de fer
[26:28] Canadien Pacifique pour les
[26:29] travaux de passages à niveau.
[26:35] 231046 et 78, BFL Canada,
[26:37] risques et assurances pour le
[26:39] renouvellement des assurances et
[26:41] dommages 2025 - 2026. Et
[26:48] 177624,30, les entreprises
[26:49] vantait King, pour des comptes
[26:51] progressifs numéro 1 pour le
[26:54] patio et auvent à l'annexe herbe
[26:56] Lander. Et finalement, à 555065
[27:01] et 63
[27:02] (---)
[27:03] .
[27:04] - Proposé.
[27:06] - Secondé.
[27:07] - En faveur.
[27:13] >> Approval of a $2,000
[27:14] contribution to the Toope
[27:15] Memorial Scholarship for the
[27:16] year 2025.
[27:19] >> Proposed.
[27:20] >> Seconded.
[27:21] >> In favour.
[27:25] - À l'unanimité. Participation
[27:27] du maire au congrès annuel de
[27:28] l'Union des municipalités du
[27:29] Québec
[27:30] (UMQ)
[27:31] du 14 au 16 mai 2025 à Québec,
[27:32] au coût approximatif de 845 $,
[27:35] plus remboursement des frais de
[27:36] transport, de logement et
[27:37] d'autres dépenses afférentes.
[27:39] - Proposé.
[27:41] - Secondé.
[27:43] - En faveur.
[27:45] - À l'unanimité. Participation
[27:47] of the Mayor at the annual
[27:49] conference of the Fédération of
[27:50] Canadian municipalities from May
[27:54] 29 to June 1, 2025, in Ottawa
[27:56] (Ontario)
[27:57] , at an approximate cost of
[27:58] $1,195, plus reimbursement of
[28:01] travelling and lodging expenses
[28:02] and other related costs.
[28:08] - En faveur. >> Proposed.
[28:10] >> I second.
[28:13] - À l'unanimité. Participation
[28:17] du directeur général au congrès
[28:18] annuel de l'Union des
[28:19] municipalités du Québec
[28:20] (UMQ)
[28:21] du 14 au 16 mai 2025 àQuébec, au
[28:22] coût approximatif de 845 $, plus
[28:25] remboursement des frais de
[28:26] transport, de logement et
[28:27] d'autres dépenses afférentes.
[28:30] - Proposé.
[28:31] - Secondé.
[28:32] - En faveur.
[28:33] >> Participation of the Director
[28:34] General at the annual conference
[28:35] of the Canadian Association of
[28:36] Municipal Administrators from
[28:37] May 26 to 28, 2025, in Mont
[28:38] Tremblant
[28:39] (Québec)
[28:40] , at an approximate cost of
[28:41] $895, plus reimbursement of
[28:42] travelling and lodging expenses
[28:43] and other related costs.
[28:44] - À l'unanimité.
[28:53] >> Proposed.
[28:55] >> Seconded.
[28:56] >> In favour.
[28:58] - À l'unanimité. Participation
[29:01] du directeur général au congrès
[29:02] annuel de l'Association des
[29:03] directeurs généraux des
[29:04] municipalités du Québec
[29:07] (ADGMQ)
[29:08] du 4 au 6 juin 2025 à La Malbaie
[29:09] (Québec)
[29:10] , au coût approximatif de 880 $,
[29:11] plus remboursement des frais de
[29:12] transport, de logement et
[29:13] d'autres dépenses afférentes.
[29:15] - Proposé.
[29:17] - Secondé. >> In favour.
[29:20] - À l'unanimité. >> Filing and
[29:24] notice of motion of Draft By-law
[29:25] BEAC161-1 entitled « By-law
[29:26] modifying By-law BEAC-161 on
[29:28] tariffs ».
[29:30] >> I give notice of motion.
[29:32] - Merci. Pour les prochains six
[29:38] règlements, de 40.2 A 40.7, je
[29:41] vais introduire les
[29:43] modifications et après ça les
[29:44] propositions seront faits pour
[29:45] les adoptions. Donc, l'objectif
[29:47] des modifications au Règlement
[29:48] de concordance et du plan
[29:50] d'urbanisme ainsi que... est que
[29:52] la Ville de Beaconsfield procède
[29:54] à la révision de son plan
[29:55] d'urbanisme et de ces règlements
[29:56] pour en assurer la concordance
[29:57] au schéma d'aménagement et de
[30:00] développement. Le stade de la
[30:01] dernière action de Montréal, qui
[30:02] a été adoptée en 2015. Les
[30:04] modifications entre la vie de
[30:05] mesurer l'adoption des
[30:06] règlements sur notamment de
[30:07] nature cléricales. Cependant,
[30:09] plus PCP siffler comment pour
[30:10] les règlements de lotissement,
[30:12] le point 40.2, qui est des
[30:16] modifications qui ont été
[30:17] apportées à l'amendement
[30:20] BEAC-43-01 pour enlever des
[30:22] articles qui étaient déjà
[30:23] concordantes. En ce qui a trait
[30:24] au plan d'urbanisme, le
[30:27] BEAC-165, qui est au 40.5, il y
[30:29] a eu des modifications
[30:31] additionnelles qui ont été pour
[30:32] corriger une coquille au niveau
[30:36] des adresses, le 97 chemins
[30:40] Lakeshore devient le 597 chemins
[30:43] Lakeshore. C'est modifié
[30:44] aujourd'hui à même le règlement.
[30:46] Et ces règlements ne sont pas
[30:48] soumis au processus
[30:49] d'approbation référendaire,
[30:50] puisqu'ils sont modifiés
[30:52] exclusivement à des fins de
[30:54] concordance. Donc, pour le point
[30:57] 40.2, Adoption, avec
[31:01] modifications, du Règlement
[31:02] BEAC043-01 intitulé « Règlement
[31:03] modifiant le règlement de
[31:04] lotissement BEAC-043 afin de le
[31:05] rendre conforme au Schéma
[31:06] d'aménagement et de
[31:08] développement de l'agglomération
[31:09] de Montréal
[31:11] (RCG 14-029)
[31:13] et au plan d'urbanisme de la
[31:14] Ville de Beaconsfield ».
[31:15] - Je propose.
[31:18] - Appuyé.
[31:19] >> In favour.
[31:21] - À l'unanimité. >> Adoption,
[31:23] with modifications, of By-law
[31:27] BEAC-045-19 entitled « By-law
[31:28] amending By-law BEAC-045 on
[31:30] permits and certificates in
[31:31] order to render it compliantwith
[31:32] the Land-Use Planning and
[31:34] Development Plan for the
[31:35] Agglomeration of Montreal
[31:37] (RCG 14-029)
[31:39] and with the Planning Program of
[31:40] the City of Beaconsfield ».
[31:45] >> Proposed.
[31:47] >> Seconded.
[31:48] >> In favour.
[31:49] - À l'unanimité. Adoption, avec
[31:53] modifications, du Règlement
[31:56] BEAC098-04 intitulé « Règlement
[31:57] modifiant le Règlement BEAC-098
[31:59] sur les plans d'implantation et
[32:00] d'intégration architecturale
[32:01] afin de le rendre conforme au
[32:03] Schéma d'aménagement et de
[32:04] développement de l'agglomération
[32:05] de Montréal
[32:07] (RCG 14-029)
[32:08] et au plan d'urbanisme de la
[32:09] Ville de Beaconsfield ».
[32:11] - Je propose. >> Second.
[32:14] >> In favour.
[32:17] - À l'unanimité.
[32:24] Adoption, with modifications, of
[32:25] By-law BEAC-165 entitled
[32:26] « By-law regarding the Planning
[32:27] Program ».
[32:31] >> Proposed.
[32:33] >> Seconded.
[32:34] >> In favour.
[32:36] - À l'unanimité. Adoption, avec
[32:39] modifications, du Règlement
[32:41] 728-01 intitulé « Règlement
[32:43] modifiant le Règlement sur
[32:44] projets particuliers de
[32:47] construction, de modification ou
[32:48] d'occupation d'un immeuble
[32:49] (PPCMOI)
[32:50] afin de le rendre conforme au
[32:51] Schéma d'aménagement et de
[32:52] développement de l'agglomération
[32:53] de Montréal
[32:54] (RCG 14-029)
[32:55] et au plan d'urbanisme de la
[32:56] Ville de Beaconsfield ».
[32:59] - Proposé.
[33:00] - J'appuie.
[33:01] - En faveur.
[33:05] - À l'unanimité. Adoption, with
[33:08] modifications, of By-law 720-129
[33:11] entitled « By-law amending
[33:12] Zoning By-law 720 in order to
[33:13] render it compliant with the
[33:16] Land-Use Planning and
[33:17] Development Plan for the
[33:19] Agglomeration of Montreal
[33:22] (RCG 14-029)
[33:23] and the Planning Program of the
[33:24] City of Beaconsfield ».
[33:26] >> I propose.
[33:27] >> Seconded.
[33:28] >> In favour.
[33:30] - À l'unanimité. Résolution en
[33:35] vertu de l'article 59.1 de la
[33:36] Loi sur l'aménagement et
[33:37] l'urbanisme concernant les
[33:38] règlements qui n'ont pas à être
[33:39] modifiés dans le cadre du
[33:40] processus de concordance
[33:41] règlementaire. >> Proposed.
[33:46] >> Seconded.
[33:47] >> In favour.
[33:49] - À l'unanimité. Request for
[33:54] minor exemptions for the
[33:55] property located at 133
[33:56] Chartwell. The recommendation is
[33:58] to approve.
[33:59] >> Proposed.
[34:01] >> Seconded.
[34:02] - En faveur.
[34:03] - À l'unanimité. Demande
[34:06] d'approbation du Plan
[34:07] d'implantation et d'intégration
[34:08] architecturale
[34:09] (PIIA)
[34:10] relatif à la demande d'un permis
[34:11] de construction pour un nouveau
[34:12] bâtiment principal situé au 7,
[34:13] Kirkwood. La recommandation est
[34:15] de refuser.
[34:16] - Proposé.
[34:17] - Secondé.
[34:19] - En faveur de la
[34:21] recommandation.
[34:24] - À l'unanimité. Request for the
[34:28] approval of the Site Planning
[34:29] and Architectural Integration
[34:32] Programme relating to a building
[34:33] permit application for a new
[34:34] main building located at 72
[34:35] St-Louis. The recommendation is
[34:38] to refuse.
[34:39] >> Proposed.
[34:42] >> I can't -- okay. I second.
[34:46] >> In favour of the
[34:47] recommendation.
[34:49] - À l'unanimité. Demande
[34:51] d'approbation du Plan
[34:52] d'implantation et d'intégration
[34:54] architecturale
[34:55] (PIIA)
[34:56] relatif à la demande d'un permis
[34:57] de construction pour la
[34:58] modification de la façade du
[34:59] bâtiment principal situé au 168,
[35:00] Ruskin. La recommandation est
[35:03] d'approuver.
[35:04] - C'est proposé.
[35:05] - Secondé.
[35:06] - En faveur de la
[35:07] recommandation.
[35:09] - À l'unanimité. Request for the
[35:12] approval of the Site Planning
[35:13] and Architectural Integration
[35:15] Programme relating to a building
[35:16] permit application for a new
[35:17] main building located at 185
[35:19] Lakeview. The recommendation is
[35:21] to refuse.
[35:22] >> And proposed.
[35:24] >> Second.
[35:26] >> In favour of the
[35:27] recommendation.
[35:29] - À l'unanimité. Nomination en
[35:33] vue de permanence à titre
[35:35] d'Opérateur/Préposé à la
[35:37] menuiserie au poste 6400 au
[35:38] Service des travaux publics. >>
[35:43] I propose.
[35:45] >> Second.
[35:46] >> In favour.
[35:48] - À l'unanimité. Minutes of the
[35:51] Planning Advisory Committee
[35:52] meeting of February 5, 2025.
[36:01] >> Proposed.
[36:04] >> Seconded.
[36:05] >> Any comments?
[36:07] >> No specific comments, but all
[36:09] the projects we review tonight,
[36:11] you can call and approve or
[36:14] disapprove. Those people can
[36:15] call the urban planning
[36:17] department tomorrow for next
[36:18] steps, to know what to do next.
[36:19] I'm just letting you know. I
[36:20] think most people do know that,
[36:22] but just as a reminder. Tonight
[36:24] on the agenda, if you are one of
[36:25] those properties, you can call
[36:27] urban planning for the next
[36:28] steps. Thank you.
[36:32] - Proposé. I am proposing.
[36:37] >> I am seconding.
[36:38] >> In favour.
[36:41] - À l'unanimité. Procès-verbal
[36:44] de la réunion du Comité
[36:45] consultatif de l'environnement
[36:46] du 3 décembre 2024.
[36:53] - Je propose.
[36:54] - Proposé.
[36:56] (inaudible)
[36:57] Faire des commentaires. >> Are
[36:58] you proposing?
[36:59] >> Yes.
[37:00] >> Who is seconding? You are
[37:05] seconding?
[37:06] >> I will second the proposal.
[37:07] >> Okay. Any comments on your
[37:10] minutes?
[37:11] >> Yes.
[37:12] >> Mister Chairman.
[37:13] >> I will make them short. Pour
[37:15] commencer, la communauté
[37:17] d'Environnement reconnaît les
[37:18] problèmes qu'on peut avoir avec
[37:21] la respiration de la fumée de
[37:23] bois sur nos résidents sur leur
[37:27] santé, la qualité de vie et
[37:29] l'environnement. Certainly a lot
[37:31] of science and medical research
[37:33] on the health effects of wood
[37:36] burning and wood smoke on our
[37:38] residents. I want to thank the
[37:40] city for their continued efforts
[37:42] to continue to educate our
[37:47] residents and wood burners on
[37:49] the problems that smoke causes.
[37:54] Everybody breathed including
[37:55] homeowners to. At our December
[37:57] meeting, we reaffirmed the
[37:58] November recommendation for the
[38:00] City Council to modify the
[38:01] current regulations on wood
[38:03] burning appliances. The last
[38:06] thing I would mention is that,
[38:09] at our December meeting, we were
[38:11] looking and we will continue to
[38:12] discuss the priorities and
[38:13] objectives for the environment
[38:18] committee. Sorry about that. For
[38:20] the Environment committee and
[38:24] certainly what we discussed so
[38:25] far, we will continue more in
[38:27] our April meeting. The
[38:29] importance of trees here in
[38:31] Beaconsfield. You have seen with
[38:33] global warming and climate
[38:35] crisis that we are in, trees
[38:38] provide important shade but also
[38:40] in terms of air quality. They
[38:43] absorb carbon and produce
[38:45] oxygen. At the same time,
[38:47] something that my
[38:49] (applause)
[38:50] One of my neighbours had
[38:51] mentioned is a mature tree can
[38:52] actually absorb 40,000 to 50,000
[38:55] gallons of water. We are hearing
[38:59] another subject and topic at our
[39:02] environment committee, certainly
[39:03] water drainage and the flooding
[39:04] situations we've had in the last
[39:05] two years. It is interesting to
[39:07] note that a tree can absorb that
[39:10] 40 to 50,000 gallons of water.
[39:13] That is immense. It is a way to
[39:16] perhaps dry up part of the land
[39:18] on a person's property.
[39:20] Sometimes we hear that the
[39:22] ground itself is actually
[39:24] saturated. So, trees might be
[39:27] another solution for people who
[39:28] can afford to finalize some
[39:32] space to have another tree.
[39:36] Thank you, Mister Mayor.
[39:37] >> Thank you. Are you proposing?
[39:43] Yeah.
[39:44] >> I propose.
[39:47] >> All in favour?
[39:48] >> Yes.
[39:53] >> Minutes of the Finance
[39:54] Advisory Committee meeting of
[39:55] February 3, 2025.
[39:59] >> I will propose.
[40:02] >> And who is going to second?
[40:05] >> I will second.
[40:06] >> Now, any comments from the
[40:09] finance committee?
[40:10] >> Yes. Typically, I would, but
[40:13] I was sick and I did not attend
[40:14] the finance committee. So, Roger
[40:19] is co-president and the floor is
[40:21] yours, Roger.
[40:23] >> Thank you, Mister Chair.
[40:24] >> Thank you, Councillor Moss.
[40:27] [Laughter]
[40:28] >> At this committee, it was
[40:29] only six weeks into the fiscal
[40:31] year. So there was obviously
[40:33] kind of nothing to report on
[40:35] with the city's operating
[40:36] budget. But there was some good
[40:38] news that came out of that
[40:40] meeting from our city's finance
[40:44] department telling us that it
[40:45] looked like the preliminary
[40:47] figures that they were looking
[40:50] for, looking at pretty welcome
[40:52] tax, was going to end up at
[40:55] around five point $6 million.
[40:59] Ça, c'est des nouvelles
[41:01] excellentes, parce qu'en
[41:02] réalité, ça nous aide beaucoup,
[41:04] les finances de la ville. Of
[41:05] course, the five point $6
[41:08] million, as with all the
[41:10] surpluses from the welcome tax,
[41:11] part of it is used as an
[41:13] operating surplus for the city's
[41:15] finances. At the same time, we
[41:17] take a good part of that chunk
[41:19] of money and we actually
[41:21] transfer it into various
[41:23] reserves funds. Those reserve
[41:25] funds are used it anytime for
[41:27] specific projects, but they are
[41:29] very flexible. So they can
[41:31] switched from reserve fund to
[41:33] reserve fund. The other thing
[41:35] that I would mention is that the
[41:38] City municipalities are not
[41:40] allowed to go into a deficit
[41:44] situation during a fiscal year.
[41:46] And so it's very important that
[41:48] a city have reserves so that we
[41:50] can draw on it. Otherwise, it
[41:53] would mean a cash call to
[41:55] taxpayers. I think it's always
[41:57] important for people to
[41:58] understand. When we do report a
[41:59] big reserve, what do we do with
[42:01] those funds. At the same time,
[42:03] part of those funds for $5.6
[42:07] million will go into what we
[42:09] call a reserve fund called the
[42:10] balanced budget. Le équilibre
[42:14] budgétaire That is funding we
[42:15] will use for next year's tax
[42:17] increases that residents don't
[42:19] have to pay. So, what I always
[42:22] tell residence is $5.6 million
[42:26] divided by roughly 7000
[42:28] taxpayers or home owners works
[42:30] out to $800 on average per
[42:33] household. That is used to pay
[42:36] for taxes that otherwise we as
[42:39] residents might have to pay. So
[42:40] it's really important we keep
[42:42] our eye on it, but we are also
[42:44] very conservative. That was one
[42:46] thing. The second thing, and our
[42:49] DG did a good job of answering
[42:51] your question on the projet de
[42:55] loi 39. Projet de loi 39. It's a
[43:00] way of trading categories for
[43:02] each municipality so they can
[43:03] actually look at a ways to maybe
[43:07] tax businesses or residents fare
[43:10] or make sure that in certain
[43:12] cases it is used for very
[43:15] efficient purpose. In this case,
[43:18] the finance committee did
[43:20] recommend that we create a
[43:23] special category four homes in
[43:25] Beaconsfield that are
[43:26] intentionally left vacant for
[43:28] periods of like 12 months or
[43:29] longer. Generally, it could be
[43:31] offshore investments. People who
[43:33] are just letting the house stay
[43:36] empty for whatever reason. It is
[43:39] a problem. It's an eyesore in
[43:41] certain instances. We have seen
[43:43] that kind of investment up here
[43:48] across Toronto and Vancouver a
[43:51] few years ago. It rolled a bit
[43:53] into Québec. But I think the
[43:55] important thing is to have
[43:57] another category that we can
[43:59] influence any home that is left
[44:01] for vacant intentionally. If
[44:04] residents do see that. If you
[44:08] see homes that are empty in your
[44:09] own neighbourhood for a very
[44:10] long time, called municipal
[44:12] patrol. Contact the city because
[44:14] we now have a new tax category
[44:18] coming in with the 2026 real
[44:20] estate rules to be able to
[44:23] actually surcharge that empty
[44:25] property as it is a vacant home.
[44:29] Again, thank you all the time
[44:30] for taking an interest in this
[44:32] city and contacting the city or
[44:35] municipal patrol whenever there
[44:37] is something that you notice
[44:38] that is important. So that is
[44:42] it.
[44:43] >> In favour of the minutes.
[44:51] The next items are two
[44:55] nominations of the member of the
[44:56] traffic advisory committee. 53.4
[45:02] and 53.5. So could we have a
[45:04] proposal and seconded for both
[45:06] items?
[45:07] >> We did not vote on the
[45:09] minutes of the finance Advisory
[45:12] Committee.
[45:13] >> I thought we had. In favour
[45:14] of the minutes of the finance
[45:16] committee.
[45:22] >> Okay.
[45:23] >> So the next two items are the
[45:28] nomination at the traffic
[45:29] committee. 53.4 and 53.5. So
[45:33] will somebody proposes both
[45:35] items?
[45:36] >> I will propose both items.
[45:38] >> And?
[45:39] >> I will second them.
[45:41] >> And will you now talk to the
[45:44] Nominations?
[45:45] - Avec plaisir, Monsieur le
[45:46] Maire. Merci. Alors, le comité
[45:49] consultatif sur la circulation à
[45:52] quatre membres citoyens. Nous
[45:54] avions deux postes à combler et
[46:00] donc nous allons procéder, si
[46:01] tout le monde est d'accord, à la
[46:03] nomination, dans un premier
[46:05] temps, de madame Lena Zajdel, Et
[46:13] monsieur Cyril Duclos
[46:56] Alors, dans le cas présent,
[46:58] c'était d'abord la candidature
[47:00] du district du district six qui
[47:02] devraient être comblés de façon
[47:03] à ce qu'on ait, soit par
[47:05] l'entremise des membres du
[47:06] conseil des résidents, une
[47:10] personne qui habite à
[47:11] Beaconsfield dans le plus grand
[47:13] nombre des districts et de coin
[47:14] possible afin d'assurer une
[47:15] bonne représentativité. Alors,
[47:17] je remercie tout le monde de
[47:19] leur participation, de leur
[47:21] désir de participer à notre
[47:24] communauté. I welcome Madam --
[47:27] and Mr. -- to our committee.
[47:31] - En faveur des nominations.
[47:45] - Nomination d'un membre au
[47:46] Comité consultatif de
[47:47] l'environnement.
[47:48] >> Who is proposing?
[47:49] - Je propose.
[47:50] - J'appuie.
[47:53] >> Okay.
[47:54] - O.K., La nomination...
[47:55] - Je suis heureux de nommer
[47:58] mademoiselle Tiffany Lafleur.
[48:00] C'est une résidente de
[48:02] Beaconsfield depuis 6 ans elle a
[48:05] de l'expérience en travaillant
[48:10] avec une industrie qui est très
[48:12] occupé avec l'environnement.
[48:14] Alors, je pense que c'est une
[48:16] personne qu'on serait très
[48:22] heureux d'avoir avec de
[48:23] nouvelles idées sur notre
[48:24] comité.
[48:25] - En faveur.
[48:30] >> Mandate to the administration
[48:31] of the City of Beaconsfield to
[48:32] pay, under protest, the first
[48:33] payment of the quotes-parts,
[48:34] invoices and contributions for
[48:35] the year 2025 to the
[48:36] Agglomeration of Montréal.
[48:38] >> Proposed.
[48:40] >> Second.
[48:43] - En faveur.
[48:45] - À l'unanimité.
[48:46] - Alors, je souligne encore que
[48:49] le versement des quote-part est
[48:54] fait sous protêt, encore une
[48:57] fois. Et maintenant, Monsieur le
[48:59] Directeur général, on est rendu
[49:00] à combien pour la poursuite
[49:02] contre Montréal?
[49:03] - On est rendu à près de 20
[49:05] millions de dollars. Évidemment,
[49:06] ça ne calcule pas les pénalités
[49:10] et intérêts qui vont s'ajouter
[49:12] quand on va gagner notre cause.
[49:17] - Alors, 20 millions de dollars.
[49:19] C'est quand même beaucoup
[49:20] d'argent.
[49:21] - C'est beaucoup de sous.
[49:22] - Et le compteur augmente à
[49:24] chaque année. Alors, plus ça va
[49:27] prendre de temps pour régler
[49:31] cette poursuite-là, plus le
[49:32] montant va être élevé. Est-ce
[49:37] qu'on a approuvé... ces faits,
[49:41] O.K..
[49:45] - Mandat donné au cabinet
[49:46] d'avocats Bélanger Sauvé afin de
[49:47] représenter les intérêts de la
[49:48] Ville de Beaconsfield
[49:49] relativement à la propriété
[49:50] privée située au 254, Westcroft.
[49:51] - Proposé.
[49:53] - Et j'appuie.
[49:54] - En faveur.
[49:57] - À l'unanimité. Mandate given
[50:01] to Bélanger Sauvé law firm to
[50:04] represent the City of
[50:05] Beaconsfield's interests
[50:06] regarding contract 588-22-ME
[50:07] concerning the replacement of
[50:08] the rooftops and controls at
[50:09] City Hall and Library.
[50:12] >> Proposed.
[50:13] >> Second.
[50:14] >> In favour.
[50:16] - À l'unanimité. Résolution
[50:18] concernant le besoin de tenir
[50:19] compte des personnes handicapées
[50:20] dans la planification des
[50:22] mesures d'urgence de la Ville de
[50:23] Beaconsfield.
[50:25] - Proposé.
[50:26] - J'appuie.
[50:27] - En faveur.
[50:30] - À l'unanimité. Resolution in
[50:32] support of National Day for the
[50:35] Promotion of Positive Mental
[50:36] Health, March 13, 2025.
[50:40] >> Propose.
[50:41] >> Seconded.
[50:43] >> In favour.
[50:46] - À l'unanimité. Autorisation à
[50:48] la Ferme Rêveuse d'utiliser deux
[50:50] espaces de stationnement du parc
[50:52] Christmas pour la distribution
[50:53] de produits de la ferme, les
[50:54] vendredis du 28 février au 30
[50:56] mai 2025 de 15 h 30 à 19 h.
[51:01] - Proposé.
[51:02] - J'appuie.
[51:03] - En faveur.
[51:05] - À l'unanimité. Authorization
[51:09] for street closure for the event
[51:14] Beau Market, on Fridays between
[51:15] May 30 and September 12, 2025,
[51:18] from 2 p.m. to 6:30 p.m..
[51:23] >> Proposed.
[51:24] >> Seconded.
[51:26] - En faveur.
[51:28] - À l'unanimité. Autorisation
[51:30] pour Les Amis du Village
[51:32] Beaurepaire d'organiser une
[51:33] vente de garage communautaire
[51:34] (Big Beau)
[51:35] dans le secteur du Village
[51:36] Beaurepaire le samedi 10 mai
[51:37] 2025 de 10 h 30 à 19 h 30 et
[51:39] autorisation de fermeture totale
[51:40] de la rue. >> Proposed.
[51:45] >> Seconded.
[51:46] >> In favour.
[51:48] - À l'unanimité. Adoption of the
[51:53] Policy on the establishment of
[51:55] immovable subcategories and
[51:56] division of the City's territory
[51:57] into sectors.
[51:59] >> Proposed.
[52:00] >> Seconded.
[52:02] >> In favour.
[52:03] - À l'unanimité. Rapport du
[52:06] maire sur les décisions prises
[52:07] par le Conseil d'agglomération
[52:08] lors des séances du 23 janvier
[52:09] et 20 février 2025.
[52:12] - Comme le conseiller David
[52:16] Newell m'a remplacé pour cette
[52:18] réunion du conseil
[52:20] d'agglomération, je lui ai
[52:21] demandé de faire les
[52:25] commentaires qu'il a vécues avec
[52:26] ce conseil d'agglomération.
[52:27] - Merci, Monsieur le Maire.
[52:30] Indeed, I was at the last, to
[52:33] January and -- January
[52:34] agglomeration meetings. They
[52:35] were eventful ones, not without
[52:37] some controversy. So they were
[52:40] interesting to say the least.
[52:43] These were long meetings, a lot
[52:45] of points being raised, but
[52:46] there are four point I want to
[52:47] address tonight that I thought
[52:48] would be an interest to
[52:49] Beaconsfield residents in
[52:50] particular. So I would just like
[52:52] to cover what those points were.
[52:55] The first one being fluoride in
[52:57] our drinking water. I'm sure
[52:59] that you've all heard about this
[53:01] over the past few months and so
[53:03] on. The decision of the -- the
[53:06] agglomeration was announced in
[53:07] November. There has been a lot
[53:08] of discussion in and around it.
[53:10] I can say that for the past
[53:12] couple of months this has also
[53:15] been challenged and questioned
[53:17] quite a bit at the acclamation
[53:19] meeting. The questions were
[53:20] pointed at -- who is basically
[53:23] the mayor of Lachine, but who is
[53:24] also responsible for our water
[53:28] within the Agglo. So the
[53:30] questions have come up, there is
[53:33] really I would say three points
[53:34] that the mayors around
[53:37] (applause)
[53:38] From the West Island who have
[53:39] really been focusing. In
[53:41] addition to the strong
[53:42] endorsement from Health Canada,
[53:43] which is well documented out
[53:45] there I would say, the three
[53:46] points that came up were, and
[53:48] that we are trying to get
[53:49] answers to as to what
[53:51] significance or why more
[53:53] significance were placed on
[53:54] these documents, was a clear
[53:56] document that was even
[53:57] commissioned by the City of
[53:58] Montréal themselves to look at
[54:00] the value of fluoride in the
[54:02] water. And this was coming from
[54:04] the department -- essentially
[54:07] from Midland to White, the
[54:09] regional director of public
[54:10] health. Directrice régionale de
[54:11] la santé publique pour la Ville
[54:12] de Montréal. Essentially, in her
[54:16] accompanying letter, she also
[54:17] strongly supported the use of
[54:19] fluoride. So that was there. It
[54:22] was seemingly glazed over by the
[54:23] City of Montréal. To up the ante
[54:25] one more level, there was a
[54:27] letter that was provided by Dr.
[54:30] Boileau. He's basically the
[54:31] provincial government provincial
[54:33] director of Public Health right
[54:37] from our provincial Ministry of
[54:38] Health. Clearly, in his letter
[54:41] he was very straightforward and
[54:42] clear. He also supports the use
[54:44] of fluoride. He's so convinced
[54:49] that which really see in these
[54:50] types of letters, but also
[54:53] reminding them that there is
[54:55] financial support for
[54:56] infrastructure, maintenance,
[54:57] even the cost of fluoride which
[54:58] is not a lot overall. So that
[55:00] gives you a glowing endorsement
[55:01] for all of these factors. We
[55:03] have yet to receive any feedback
[55:05] of any constructive importance,
[55:09] I would say, which is very
[55:13] frustrating. Last week, when I
[55:14] decided to do at the meeting was
[55:16] actually give more of a case
[55:19] study, a situation in Calgary.
[55:20] You can read about it, I will
[55:21] summarize it very quickly.
[55:23] Basically, in 2011 Calgary, they
[55:26] basically stopped fluoride at
[55:27] that time. Within two years they
[55:31] saw quite increase in the dental
[55:33] issues whether it be
[55:35] hospitalizations for that matter
[55:36] or just a lot of potential
[55:39] problems that came up. They
[55:40] started monitoring this and
[55:41] doing studies over a ten-year
[55:43] period about. They had the
[55:44] benefit of looking before, in
[55:45] other words with fluoride and
[55:47] with no fluoride in their
[55:48] population. They were able to do
[55:49] some very, very good studies on
[55:51] this, recent studies as well. In
[55:56] fact, just recently, not that
[55:58] long ago, to make a long story
[56:00] short, they had actually
[56:01] reintroduced fluoride into their
[56:02] water based on the learnings
[56:03] they have learned from their own
[56:05] city for that matter among
[56:06] everything else. So I brought
[56:07] that up as a case study because
[56:09] at the last meeting, what had
[56:11] been mentioned by the
[56:14] acclamation responsible here,
[56:15] they were saying they looked in
[56:16] Québec and parts of Europe and I
[56:18] found it interesting why they
[56:20] would need to go that far
[56:22] examples that are in our own
[56:24] backyard. This was a glaring
[56:25] case. So I found ourselves
[56:27] sitting with basically what
[56:28] Calgary did in 2011. I was
[56:30] thinking we not learn from this
[56:31] experience and look at that a
[56:32] little closer and try to be more
[56:35] proactive in that? I did not get
[56:36] much of an answer. They just
[56:37] said we are not using fluoride
[56:38] in our water. So, unfortunately
[56:42] not much success to report with
[56:43] that. But I will say that the
[56:47] consensus around the table
[56:48] pretty much is that we continue
[56:49] to pose more questions,
[56:50] different questions, and other
[56:52] methods to try and get better
[56:53] answers to support the use of
[56:55] fluoride in the water. The
[56:57] evidence seems overwhelming as
[56:59] well as the more recent
[57:01] evidence. We are giving you an
[57:02] update on that. Le deuxième
[57:04] point, c'était plutôt... j'ai
[57:06] trouvé un point dans un rapport
[57:07] de la Ville de Montréal qui
[57:09] parle d'un plan d'action Vision
[57:13] 0. C'est un plan plutôt pour
[57:15] réduire l'objectif pour réduire
[57:18] les décès et les blessures
[57:20] graves due aux accidents qui
[57:21] arrivent sur les rues, de
[57:23] réduire de 50% d'ici 2030 et à 0
[57:26] d'ici 2020 40. Le contexte
[57:28] autour de ce plan, c'est
[57:30] vraiment pour améliorer... je
[57:34] ces Québec
[57:35] (---)
[57:36] artérielle, et particulièrement
[57:37] des zones scolaires. Nous
[57:38] autres, on a déjà fait des
[57:39] démarches depuis quelques années
[57:40] dans notre zone scolaire. Vous
[57:41] avez remarqué. Donc, pour notre
[57:44] part, on a déjà adressé une
[57:46] grande partie de ces choses-là,
[57:47] mais la Ville de Montréal a
[57:48] beaucoup de travail à faire. À
[57:50] l'intérieur de ce plan, j'ai
[57:51] noté qu'il y a aussi un plan
[57:57] pour incorporer l'usage des
[57:59] appareils de contrôle
[58:01] automatisé. Donc, autrement dit,
[58:03] les photos radar. Donc, la Ville
[58:06] de Montréal est en train de
[58:07] mettre sur point un plan pour
[58:08] regarder leur terrain, l'île de
[58:09] Montréal entière, identifier les
[58:10] endroits... qu'ils ont déjà
[58:11] fait, d'ailleurs, dans plusieurs
[58:12] parties de la ville. Photo
[58:13] radar.
[58:16] Il y a une carte qui va
[58:17] identifier les endroits. C'est
[58:19] un endroit qui nécessite l'usage
[58:21] de photos radar, incluant
[58:22] Beaconsfield aussi. Photo radar
[58:25] our minister of transport will
[58:26] decide on where and when these
[58:27] things get used. Donc, c'est un
[58:28] plan qui va continuer en 2025,
[58:29] mais j'ai signalé aussi à notre
[58:31] administration qu'il y a une
[58:32] opportunité d'identifier
[58:34] potentiellement... ce qu'on a
[58:35] déjà fait auparavant, par
[58:38] endroits, et peut-être d'autres
[58:39] pour l'utilisation de cet outil
[58:44] pour encore l'utiliser
[58:45] idéalement comme il faut. Le
[58:46] seul problème, c'est que ce
[58:47] n'est pas pour demain non plus.
[58:49] C'est le FTQ qui va décider, Ils
[58:56] vont décider de l'utilisation et
[58:58] des endroits spécifiques. En
[58:59] plus, il y 2500 appareils qui
[59:02] vont être disponibles pour
[59:04] l'entièreté de la province....
[59:07] 250, excuse. Excusez-moi, 2500.
[59:10] - Le 150.
[59:11] - 250.
[59:20] 250 pour toute la province..
[59:26] C'est une situation qui...
[59:28] finalement, aussi, les critères
[59:29] vont être de minimiser le nombre
[59:31] de décès ou d'accidents, la
[59:33] sévérité de ces accidents et le
[59:34] volume de trafic dans chaque
[59:36] endroit qui va être évalué pour
[59:38] déterminer qui mérite d'avoir ce
[59:41] genre d'appareils dans leur
[59:45] municipalité ou ailleurs.
[59:46] Néanmoins, nous sommes là. Nous
[59:49] nous sommes opposés. Donc, c'est
[59:53] une opportunité pareille. On va
[59:54] voir ce qui va arriver avec ça,
[59:56] mais on peut le temps, on verra.
[59:59] On envisage probablement...
[1:00:00] c'est un projet à moyen terme,
[1:00:01] donc 2027, probablement. Si ce
[1:00:04] n'est pas plus. On verra avec le
[1:00:07] temps. Donc, de toute façon, ça
[1:00:09] reste là. D'autres points... The
[1:00:12] other one you may also heard a
[1:00:14] little bit about in some of the
[1:00:15] media lately wasn't objection by
[1:00:21] our defused marched cities about
[1:00:23] a bylaw -- $20 million for the
[1:00:26] hype a drum number project. Just
[1:00:28] to provide a little context.
[1:00:30] Obviously, that area is not
[1:00:31] within Beaconsfield on the West
[1:00:33] Island, but why should it matter
[1:00:34] to us. In short, the project was
[1:00:37] a big project to develop the
[1:00:39] Hippodrome. It was always
[1:00:40] dedicated as a City of Montréal
[1:00:42] product, not an agglomeration
[1:00:45] project which we are part of.
[1:00:47] There was a nearby project
[1:00:49] called the Cavendish project.
[1:00:50] You've heard about this
[1:00:52] probably. It's not necessarily
[1:00:54] in our backyard again, but it
[1:00:55] becomes a competence of the
[1:00:57] glow. So we are committed to
[1:00:58] supporting that in that way.
[1:01:00] That was always a separate
[1:01:01] project which is a much smaller
[1:01:05] amount of money devoted to
[1:01:07] opening that area. With the
[1:01:08] traffic and bike paths and so
[1:01:09] on. It would seem that with the
[1:01:10] magic of the Agglo,
[1:01:12] extrapolating here with my
[1:01:13] words, but these projects have
[1:01:14] not been kind of fused together.
[1:01:17] So the Hippodrome, Charles Talon
[1:01:22] and Cavendish have been blended
[1:01:24] together and we packaged as a
[1:01:26] Agglo project for $20 million.
[1:01:28] That's only the tip of the
[1:01:30] iceberg that would be coming for
[1:01:33] the project. You maybe see where
[1:01:34] I'm going with this. Obviously,
[1:01:36] the decision of taking exception
[1:01:37] to this and we are looking for a
[1:01:38] lot more information which was
[1:01:41] not that forthcoming. The
[1:01:42] concern is what we were agreed
[1:01:44] to initially for a relatively
[1:01:46] small amount of money for
[1:01:47] Cavendish project. It has now
[1:01:49] been blended into a much larger
[1:01:51] project. That means a lot more
[1:01:53] when you consider the part we
[1:01:59] would be responsible for. This
[1:02:00] is something we take very
[1:02:02] seriously. I won't get into it
[1:02:03] too much further, but the final
[1:02:05] implications for Beaconsfield,
[1:02:06] there is the other echo cities.
[1:02:08] Because this is turning into a
[1:02:09] legal matter, I'm not going to
[1:02:10] be commenting further on that.
[1:02:11] There will be more information
[1:02:12] coming up from the ASM or what
[1:02:15] we referred to as a association
[1:02:17] of suburban municipalities. You
[1:02:19] will see more about this in the
[1:02:21] news with official statements
[1:02:23] coming from that group, above
[1:02:25] and beyond what has sort of been
[1:02:26] dropped out there.
[1:02:30] (inaudible)
[1:02:31] So we will keep our eyes on this
[1:02:32] one as well because it's
[1:02:34] important. The last point to
[1:02:35] move things along, Mr. the
[1:02:36] Mayor, is that we've heard in
[1:02:37] the news, this is not directly
[1:02:38] related to Beaconsfield, but I
[1:02:39] think it's an important issue
[1:02:41] because we hear about it a lot
[1:02:42] and we to discuss it even here
[1:02:44] in Beaconsfield to some degree.
[1:02:46] But there has been, over the
[1:02:47] past two months, there has been
[1:02:50] some significant investments in
[1:02:51] social housing. It's more of an
[1:02:53] issue downtown than here. I
[1:02:58] wanted to share that with you
[1:02:59] because it does become part of
[1:03:02] our competence is of the Agglo
[1:03:04] as we call it. There has been
[1:03:05] 100 million dollars that will be
[1:03:06] invested over ten years to
[1:03:09] further acquire new property
[1:03:11] (inaudible)
[1:03:12] not new properties, but
[1:03:13] properties that become
[1:03:14] available. Also to help maintain
[1:03:16] the current properties and
[1:03:17] renovate these properties going
[1:03:18] forward at the same time. There
[1:03:19] was another 3.2 million that
[1:03:23] came up to buy essentially
[1:03:26] prefab modular units which are
[1:03:28] actually no longer needed by
[1:03:30] Hydro-Québec up north. So the
[1:03:31] city was able to get some of
[1:03:35] those, shall we say, at a very
[1:03:37] good price overall. And that
[1:03:38] should provide -- there's a
[1:03:40] couple of modular sections to
[1:03:41] it, but overall it should
[1:03:42] provide 60 housing units, pardon
[1:03:45] me, more on a temporary basis at
[1:03:47] two sites that they have set up
[1:03:49] for that. So I think we can all
[1:03:51] take a little solace that there
[1:03:52] has been some movement forward
[1:03:55] and some concrete action. There
[1:03:56] are a lot of other details in
[1:03:57] this, but I think it's
[1:03:58] encouraging to know that social
[1:04:00] housing is being addressed also.
[1:04:01] It gives you some numbers around
[1:04:03] it and some of the actions. I
[1:04:05] thought I would share. So that's
[1:04:06] it. That is quite a bit. More
[1:04:07] than we usually get out of these
[1:04:08] Bagot meetings, Mister Mayor.
[1:04:10] But I just thought these would
[1:04:11] be pertinent points.
[1:04:12] >> Well, you were certainly busy
[1:04:14] at that meeting. All I can say
[1:04:18] is that you can kick, yell,
[1:04:22] scream, do anything you want.
[1:04:26] The merged municipal
[1:04:27] (applause)
[1:04:28] The merged municipalities are
[1:04:29] eight minority and Montréal can
[1:04:31] do whatever it wants. I think
[1:04:36] the fluoridation is a good
[1:04:39] example of exactly that.
[1:04:41] >> Yes, the fluoridation. But I
[1:04:43] think our presence is valuable
[1:04:44] and useful there. As a
[1:04:46] collective, as I said, whether
[1:04:48] it be there posing questions and
[1:04:50] looking for answers or looking
[1:04:52] for perhaps other means, legal
[1:04:54] or otherwise, that is also a way
[1:04:56] of communicating that.
[1:04:57] >> It seems that illegal action
[1:04:59] is the only way to contest
[1:05:06] anything that Montréal wants to
[1:05:07] do. Thank you very much, David,
[1:05:13] for replacing me.
[1:05:14] >> It was a pleasure. Thank you.
[1:05:15] I wish I had better news.
[1:05:23] >> Deposit of the Directors
[1:05:24] reports.
[1:05:25] - On a les rapports habituels
[1:05:26] qui ont été déposés au conseil,
[1:05:27] mais j'aimerais tout d'abord
[1:05:28] vous remercier, membres du
[1:05:29] conseil, de me permettre de
[1:05:30] participer au congrès de la
[1:05:32] vieille qui est de la Camrose.
[1:05:33] Celui de la carte c'est un peu
[1:05:35] exceptionnel. C'est quand même
[1:05:37] pancanadien. Ils ne viennent pas
[1:05:38] au Québec très souvent. Donc, je
[1:05:41] sollicite le conseil quand ils
[1:05:42] viennent au Québec, sinon je
[1:05:43] trouve que ça coûte trop cher
[1:05:45] d'aller à Banff ou Vancouver.
[1:05:49] Ensuite, juste pour être certain
[1:05:51] que notre conseiller Moss... Did
[1:05:54] not create expectations. The
[1:05:56] welcome tax was higher than we
[1:05:58] expected. I just want to make
[1:06:00] sure of what we are seeing. It's
[1:06:01] not the surplus, the welcome
[1:06:03] Texas not a surplus. We think we
[1:06:04] are going to have a surplus
[1:06:06] around two or 2.5 million. 1.2
[1:06:10] goes into the -- and that will
[1:06:13] leave us as 1 million as
[1:06:15] Councillor Moss mentioned to put
[1:06:16] into reserves further on.
[1:06:19] Et le dossier des quote-part,
[1:06:21] Monsieur le Maire, toutes les
[1:06:22] villes réunies sur 6 ans, depuis
[1:06:24] 2020 à aujourd'hui, ça 120
[1:06:26] millions de dollars d'écart,
[1:06:28] selon les calculs qu'on a
[1:06:30] présenté à la Cour pour
[1:06:32] l'ensemble des villes. Nous,
[1:06:33] c'est 20, mais il y a 120
[1:06:35] millions pour les 15 villes.
[1:06:37] - Ça n'inclut pas l'intérêt.
[1:06:39] - Non, pas encore. On garde ça
[1:06:41] pour plus tard.
[1:06:42] - Non, non. 120 millions. Moi,
[1:06:44] ce qui m'étonne énormément,
[1:06:46] c'est que les autres villes
[1:06:48] liées n'ont pas réagi. Elles
[1:06:51] n'ont pas réagi. Il y a des
[1:06:54] villes qui laisse 6 millions,
[1:06:59] même, je pense que dans un cas,
[1:07:00] c'est 12 millions, qu'elle
[1:07:02] laisse sur la table. Et les
[1:07:05] maires n'ont pas réagi. La,
[1:07:08] leurs résidents n'ont rien dit.
[1:07:11] Ce
[1:07:12] - N'est pas un dossier qui est
[1:07:13] facile. C'est quand même
[1:07:14] complexe. Mais c'est quand même
[1:07:15] une somme importante sur
[1:07:16] laquelle on doit se pencher. Et
[1:07:18] on s'en est parlé aujourd'hui,
[1:07:19] Monsieur le Maire. Je sais que
[1:07:20] vous allez faire dans votre mot
[1:07:22] citoyen, mais j'ai envoyé une
[1:07:24] missive à mes collègues des
[1:07:25] travaux publics aujourd'hui pour
[1:07:27] les remercier, les féliciter du
[1:07:30] travail réalisé. Ils ont
[1:07:33] travaillé d'innombrables heures
[1:07:35] sur le territoire de la ville
[1:07:36] pour cette tempête... en tout
[1:07:38] cas, ce cumul de tempête
[1:07:40] exceptionnelle qui ont laissé
[1:07:42] 72,4 centimètres de neige en
[1:07:45] quatre jours. Ça a été un record
[1:07:47] de 125 années. Donc, je voulais
[1:07:50] vous laisser... je voulais vous
[1:07:51] tenir au courant de ça.
[1:07:52] - Merci beaucoup, au nom du
[1:07:56] conseil, à tous les employés qui
[1:07:58] ont contribué à cette tempête-là
[1:08:01] ou à ces deux tempêtes-là. Je
[1:08:04] pense que Beaconsfield a été un
[1:08:07] bon exemple très rapidement. Les
[1:08:11] rues ont été nettoyés et même
[1:08:14] les trottoirs ont été nettoyés
[1:08:17] après un certain temps. Ça a
[1:08:19] pris presque une semaine pour
[1:08:21] être capable de tout faire, mes
[1:08:26] félicitations à l'équipe des
[1:08:27] Travaux publics pour le travail
[1:08:29] qui a été fait.
[1:08:30] - Ça devrait être complétée, le
[1:08:32] nettoyage des bornes d'incendie,
[1:08:34] ces jours-ci. On a même de la
[1:08:35] difficulté à avoir des
[1:08:36] sous-traitants pour nous aider à
[1:08:38] les faire. Mais on travaille
[1:08:40] encore à faire ça. Évidemment,
[1:08:42] il y a un peu de ramassage de
[1:08:43] neige, mais 95% est complété.
[1:08:47] - Merci.
[1:08:50] - On serait à la levée de la
[1:08:52] séance.
[1:08:53] - La levée de l'Assemblée. Qui
[1:08:55] propose?
[1:08:57] - Je propose. >> And I second.
[1:09:02] - Qui
[1:09:03] (---)
[1:09:04] ? Alors, en faveur.
[1:09:07] - À l'unanimité.
[1:09:08] - Alors, c'est unanime. Merci
[1:09:14] beaucoup. Merci beaucoup à tous
[1:09:17] les gens qui sont ici dans la
[1:09:18] salle. Thank you very much for
[1:09:20] coming to our meeting. And to
[1:09:23] those of you who are watching us
[1:09:29] on the webcast, thank you very
[1:09:31] much for the interest that you
[1:09:32] are showing to your city. And I
[1:09:36] want to read a comment because I
[1:09:38] know that some people will be
[1:09:40] interested
[1:09:45] . It is from my son who is in
[1:09:48] Toronto. He is watching the
[1:09:52] debate in French. So I am doing
[1:09:54] my best to watch the debate in
[1:09:56] French. So I may have missed a
[1:09:58] few points. Sadly, my take is
[1:10:04] that they list sounds the most
[1:10:06] competent. And his odds of
[1:10:08] winning are not so good.
[1:10:11] [Laughter]
[1:10:12] So there you go.