Good morning. It's 9. 30.
When we have a quorum.
Good morning. We are live streaming and recording the February
3rd, 2026 Community of the Whole Meeting. Our rebuilding has
a single - stage fire alarm in the event of
an emergency or activation of the fire alarm, please exit
the building through the near safe exit. Assemble in the
East parking area by the Georgian Trail and the Beaver
Valley Reach and await further instructions for individuals requiring special
assistants. Please let us staff member know. Good morning, Madam
Clerk and members in the chamber. Thank you and welcome.
We are now moving on to A2, the approval of
the agenda. Madam Chair, we'll just start with the traditional
territory acknowledgement. Why don't we, okay. Shall I have you
do that, please? Thank you. Thank you. We would like
to begin our meeting by recognizing the First Nations, May
T, and anyone Peoples of Canada as traditional stewards of
the land. The municipalities located within the boundary of Treaty
18, Region of 1818, which is the traditional land of
the Anishinaabe on a Shonay, and Wendatwyne. Peoples. Thank you.
Now we are going on to A2. My apologies to
the approval of the agenda. It's recommended that the agenda
of February 3rd, 2026, we proved us circulated, including any
items added to the agenda. So what any of my
colleagues like to add any items to the agenda. Seeing
none, could I remove her in a secondary, please, for
the motion. So moved. Thank you, Councillor Del Move, seconded
by Councillor Porter. Seeing no further hands. Let's call the
vote, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. The vote is open.
Is closed. Thank you. The motion is carried five. Nothing
with the mayor and the deputy mayor absent today. Mother,
I'll just confirm the council member attendance before we go
on. I confirm that all members of council are present
in the council chamber this morning with the exception of
counselor Ardell, who is attending virtually. Mayor Mattrosovs is absent
today. Deputy Mayor Bourdigno is absent today, but is expected
to join the meeting in a little bit. Thank you.
Thank you. Moving on to A3, Declaration of Pecuniary Interest,
note in accordance with municipal conflict of interest act, and
the town procedural bylaw 2023 - 62. Council members must
file a written statement of the interest and its general
nature with the clerk for inclusion on the registry. Do
we have any declarations of pecuniary interest. We just check
my other screen. All right, seeing none, we'll move on
then. To the next item, which is previous minutes. So
it's recommended that the committee of the whole minutes of
January 13th, 2026, we adopted a circulated, including any revisions
to be made. Are there any revisions that need to
be made. Seeing none could have a mover in a
secondary, please. On my option, moved by Councillor Porter, seconded
by. Myself, Councillor Hope. Seeing no further comment, shall we
put the vote. Thank you, Madam Chair. What is open?
Thank you.
Madam Chair, I'm having an issue with my vote. Oh,
there we go. Great, thank you. The boat is closed.
Thank you. That motion is carried. 5 - 0 with
the mayor and the deputy mayor absent today. So, moving
on to a statement that Madam Clerk is going to
read out. Thank you very much. Go ahead, Madam Clerk.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Before we begin, I would like
to remind everyone that the town of the Blue Mountains
is committed to maintaining a safe, respectful, and professional environment
for all meetings and interactions involving council, the public, and
town staff. In accordance with the town's respectful public interactions
policy, policy number POLCOR 2207. Courteous and respectful communication is
required at all times. Behavior that is disruptive, inappropriate, or
disrespectful, will not be tolerated. This includes any comments or
conduct that is threatening, harassing, discriminatory, or abusive. All speakers
are expected to address council and staff respectfully, and keep
comments focused on the matter before council. If these expectations
are not met, the chair may issue a warning direct
the speaker to stop, or take further steps to maintain
order and ensure the meeting can proceed. Thank you. Thank
you, Madam Clerk. Now, moving on to item B, staff
reports deputations and correspondence. We're in the committee of the
whole, and operations is coming up now, and it's to
be chaired by Councillor McKinley. Councillor Kinley. I give you
the chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay, we have no
deputation, so item B2, public comment period regarding matters included
in operations portion of the meeting. Each speaker is a
lot of three minutes. Note and accordance with the town
procedural bylaw 2023 - 62. 10 minutes is a lotted
at the beginning and end of each section of the
committee of the whole meeting to receive public comments regarding
matters, included on the agenda. Each person shall provide their
name and addresses and is required to address their comments
to the chair. Comments shall not refer to personal litigation
or potential litigation matters. Or be in response to matters
that have already been the subject of a public meeting.
It being noted that the verbal commenting period has ended
written correspondence may still be received in response to matters
that have been the subject of a public meeting. If
a person is unable to personally attend the meeting or
during any period, we're an emergency has been declared to
exist in the municipality. They shall provide their public comments
in writing to the clerk in advance of the meeting
for the clerk to read on behalf of the author
during the public comment period. Now, item B 3. 1.
We have correspondence from Mr. Jim Torrance. Blue mountain. Mr.
Chair? Yes. Oh, sorry. Yes. Sorry, just start kept reading.
My apologies. We have members of the public that would
like to make public comment as prescribed. Yeah, but I
have a short hands. I have one. Please come ahead.
John Milm, Thornbury Ontario. Good morning. I'm here on behalf
of Community Matters to continue our conversation about the town's
19 million dollar problem. The lengthy and twice delayed investigative
report prepared by CAO Smith at the direction of council.
He's a number of questions unanswered while raising a number
of concerns. The report has not answered the following questions
as it was directed to. One, will the report show
when members of the senior management team be carecaware of
the escalation. Two, what roles did the CAO and director
of finance play an overseeing the escalation and the reporting
process. Three. When was the mayor briefed on the escalation
and by whom. Four. Was the deputy mayor. Who sits
as a finance chair, briefed on the escalation, before it
became public. If so, when and by whom. Mr. Smith
owes us an explanation as to why these questions weren't
addressed. His report simply tells us that responsibility lies with
staff. Didn't we already know that? The report lacks any
mention of the roles are elected officials played in this
affair. And this latter point is especially serious. If we
don't know what they were doing in the face of
this financial crisis, how can they work with our confidence.
This is not accountability in action. Similarly, Mr. Pacheco's report
fails to break out the 19 million dollar surprise. While
that may not have specifically been called for by council.
That lack is very disappointing. Both reports. Like the clarity
that begets the transparency that has been called for. What
does come through, however, is the gravity of this situation.
We have learned from the outset, the project's budgets were
based on an adequate estimate. As a magnitude of the
shortfalls became known, they were not reported. We've known this
since last December. Our failures are both reporting and oversight,
and they are shared by staff and council. Now their
herald is as learnings, but that's not encouraging. At no
point are we told the efficiencies are savings expected from
the bundling of the three projects into one. But we
are told that a great deal of work is now
required to quote, ensure the town remains financially sustainable. Close
quote. Sobering words. So too is the warning that this
fiscal fiasco, quote, may result in the need to pause
defer or reprioritize other capital projects. In other words, years
of planning and expectation may be in jeopardy. At the
end of the day, and to respect my three -
minute times allotment. If the sorely needed clarity around the
cultural behavioral and procedural changes, demanded by this 19 million
dollar blender are not spelled out in the February 24th
report. Council should be ready to engage in independent third
party to get to the bottom of this mess. Thank
you. Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else from the
public from the gallery that was going to make a
comment. Second call. Mr. Chair, I would like to speak
on behalf of a colleague, who like many members of
council couldn't make it today. Um, and I'd like to
speak on behalf of John Greer. A resident of Thornbury
on high bluff lane. Just a second. Madam Clerk, is
that something that we practice before. I have not received
an email, I don't believe from Mr. Greer noting that
this would occur. So if Mr. Greer wishes, he's more
than welcome to send his comments in, and I can
circulate those to counsel. This is committee of the whole
today. So if Mr. Greer wishes to provide his comments,
either at the next meeting or provide me something to
indicate that you, Mr. Millen, would read his comments on
his behalf. We can certainly do that. The recommendations from
today's meeting will be considered at the February 17th Council
meeting. So Mr. Chair, your discretion. So have you got
a pre - it's been in front of you? Yes,
I do. Okay. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair, and
good morning to all members elected to this town's council,
and two, to the town senior staff. I am speaking
on behalf of John Greer from High Bluff Lane Thornbury.
It's my hope that these few comments today will invoke
a further reflection of the responsibility you have to be
the voice of your constituents, because after all, you are
our voices in the decision - making process, regardless of
some perceived notions that discussion must take place behind closed
doors. Reflections too, on your need to remain silent and
unengaging during the public comment section of the Council's agenda.
Several months ago, I stood at this lectern and made
note of the deputy mayor's advisement and warning to counsel
staff in the public that this town is operating on
quote, razor thin margins, close quote, especially in reserve funds.
When the chair of the finance committee makes that comment
to taxpayers that sticks with you. Now we receive an
advisement that we are going to have more than a
19 million dollar shortfall. On pro - text undertaken by
the town and the staff were aware of funding issues
in August. Well before budget approval discussions for 2026. Further,
the increased cost of the capital program will require according
to the town CAO, a quote, careful review of cashflow,
reserve strategies, debt projections, and prioritization of other capital projects
to ensure that the town remains financially sustainable. Close quote.
Through you, Mr. Chair, will the deputy mayor please make
another comment today on this latest financial position we find
ourselves in. I believe if there is any desire to
allow a responsible a response, the chair has the latitude
to allow it. Having read the report ADM. 26. 015.
I'm extremely disappointed by its content, lack of responsiveness to
council's clear direction for the preliminary report. And the fact
that it cited as being the template for further reporting.
It fails to address the issues at hand, accountability and
transparency. The guardrails suggest sign - offs at the half
a million dollar threshold. That cannot be considered acceptable by
taxpayers after the almost 20 million dollar miscalculation in this
project, especially given the massive contingencies involved. Mr. Chair, will
you please provide your, will you please provide a response
today respectfully? Thank you, John Greer. Okay, thank you. So
I'll do the second coal. Third and final call. Okay,
thank you. I will close the public comment period for
the beginning of this. Now, we will move to item
B 3. 1 correspondence from Mr. Jim Torrance. Blue Mountain
Rate Paris Association regarding agenda item B 4. 1 Craig
Leith SLS, Mill Street SPS and Bay Gray Street Linear
Works. I would have a committee like to proceed. I
like to pull up, please. Through the chair. Then go
ahead. Yes, I didn't, given the, and through the chair,
given the enormity of a 19 million dollar overspend. And
I would say the way council was informed. I felt,
and I do feel that every piece of correspondence and
comments needs to be taken, um, seriously. And the Blue
Mountain Ray pairs are, um, are respected organization within the
town. Um, and I think it's really important. They're wondering
about the current and future financial health of our town.
Um, which we've just heard in a public comment. And
I really just like to, um, address the three questions,
three key questions they have to counsel. And they, they
really want to know what are the critical learnings regarding
financial oversight, project management, discipline, timely communications and reporting. And
how and when these will be implemented. And these are
really, I think, very common sense questions to ask at
this time. Echo what I think. Do council and staff
leadership have confidence in the current asset management plan, how
the town will prioritize upgrades and replacements of other major
infrastructure and have a clear picture of what this means
for our long - term finances. I actually think this
is a very important question, particularly with the notice of
motion that I had brought forward at council because there
was another big project on the books for Q2 with
a six million dollar engineering budget. And we are still
awaiting for an update from finances to how our longer
term pitcher from a financial perspective will look. So I
think this is equally a very reasonable question. Will an
external audit also be conducted so that we can get
an unvarnished evaluation and further recommendations for the future. That
remains a question in my mind. We'll have to see
how the reports go today. And they also ask a
question, can it town the size of the Blue Mountains
responsibly and effectively manage these kinds of large infrastructure projects.
Again, I think that's a question and answer me unfold
as we go through this process because the number of
reports included in the motion from December 15th. So the
problems they mentioned is also raised this question and considered
a model for having such projects managed by a broader
regional authority, a municipal service corporation working across multiple municipalities.
The BMRA has already, as they said, stated indicated this
would be worthy of consideration for our region with the
municipalities of Southern Georgian Bay, seeming to be a logical
geographic area to test this concept. Having recently attended Roma,
I would say this didn't get talked about, gets talked
about at that conference. It was talked about by members
of the ministries. So, um, I just didn't feel this
should just solely be received for information. I thought it
deserved a due course. I don't know if many of
my other colleagues would like to comment, but certainly, um,
I'm happy to move that we received this. But, um,
it was worthy of, um, noting more than just being
a piece of paper. Thank you. Thank you, Council supporter.
Um, like I said, to add to that, since I've
noted that you're putting forward to move, to receipt, but
would you also like to do the, uh, addition of,
uh, follow - up report as well to any other
unanswered questions. Yes. And thank you for asking, cause I
would. And I think we'll take the approach that we
took the other, um, which was in the investigation report
that each and every question be answered. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Porter. Um, I'm going to go to,
um, counselor Maxwell. And I'm not sure if you want
to do put that in writing to the clerk for
the additional, uh, paragraph to that motion. Um, I will
look up the wording that was used with respect to,
um, the investigation report from Councillor Maxwell. Thank you, Chair.
And could we have the correspondence up again, please? So
when I was reading, uh, the correspondence, I thought, well,
I'll take an opportunity to have a look at something
else. So you started looking at, you know, private firms,
they can. Deliver infrastructure projects and whatever. Then I came
across, um. Infrastructure material. Which is interesting with in the
event, you know, that a municipality is struggling. You can
reach out to infrastructure interior and lean on their expertise.
Uh, for delivery of water and wastewater projects. And I'm
just wondering if during the course of this whole exercise,
if our municipal staff actually reached out to infrastructure material
to seek advice. Because when you do not, if you
are concerned about with your abilities or with the delivery
or project, I would think you should reach out outside
expertise in order to, um, make sure that, uh, things
move forward smoothly. And, um, anyway, I just thought I'd
comment on that. Okay. Thank you. Kate. Thank you, Councillor
Maxwell. Counselor Hope, I thought I saw your hand. Yes,
go ahead. Yes. Thank you. Um, and, uh, first of
all, as always, the BMRA have always come forward with
very thoughtful input and what they have to say is,
is, uh, most appropriate and requires a full answer just
as the public comments that we heard earlier require an
answer to every single one of their questions. So for
sure, uh, as Councillor Porter Krafts her motion, I do
want to support that, that, uh, that answers to all
of these questions would be anticipated in, uh, the final
report on February 24th. So, um, really appreciate the public
BMRA and the public's interest in this 19 million dollar
debacle, which deserves the attention and care of all of
us. Um, I do want to, um, respond to a
natural question that would come up about when, when did
anyone know when? And so there's a question that I
would love to answer about when did counsel know. But
unfortunately, I can't speak for council. The mayor speaks for
council and she's not here today. So, um, but I'm
very anxious to, uh, answer that. And I want you
to know that, um, that was a surprise, certainly to
all of us, but the exact date and so on
has to rest in her hands, not, not in ours.
Um, so, um, this is a matter of grave concern,
as has been identified. And I believe my colleagues and
I are going to do everything we can to make
sure that, uh, we get to the bottom of everything.
And, um, I look forward to working with the community
and with staff to make sure that we do that.
Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hope. Uh, Councillor Ardell, I
can see you on the big screen, but you're not
on my small one, but did you have anything you
wanted to, uh, add and compliment to the correspondence before
we get emotional on the floor. Uh, thank you, Mr.
Chair. No, I think it's been covered by everybody. I'd
just be, be repeating my colleagues questions. Um, yes, definitely
there, you know, we can take it further. And yeah,
I think we're just going to have to wait to
see what comes out of the follow - up staff
report. And if we don't get our answers, and we
can go further afield, I know of some outlets that
we could go further afield with. And I think, but
I will give the CAO the opportunity to produce, um,
wholesome report that will answer, hopefully all of our questions,
because, um, I believe that, you know, the five of
us here. And we were all informed the same day.
So that's all I can say is I know because
we talked singly amongst ourselves, not in a quorum. And
we were all very surprised. And, uh, we just want
to get to the bottom of it. And, uh, you
know, I've seen other municipalities around the province, get themselves
in trouble. And there's been a lot of follow -
ups. So I think I will give the CAO the
opportunity to have that report. And then we will go
from there. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor Odell.
Councillor Porter. Go ahead. Um, yes, thank you. And through
the chair, I have sent some semblance of emotion to
Madam Clerk trying to locate and copy and paste the
exact wording. She's providing, kindly providing me assistance with. Where
I'm looking at the motion right now, um, provide a
follow up staff report to answer, I would like each
and every question. I think, um, CEO Smith him responding
to Mr. Milne really set a good framework for that.
Each question is followed by an answer. Okay. Madam Clerk.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, uh, when Mr. Milne came
to council on the 26, 27th of January, just forget
the date. It was a similar motion. If you'd like
the questions, um, itemized, I can certainly do that. Yes,
please. Thank you. Okay. I'll just be a moment. Thank
you. Do we want to take a few moments, Madam
Clerk. It'll just take me a minute. Oh, okay. Just
a moment. Okay. Through the chair, Madam Clerk, I did
cut and piss up for you in an email. Thank
you. Thank you.
I'd like to second that motion. I need my microphone
to stop turning off on me. That would be first.
Um, okay. So the motion reads move by council reporter
and seconded by counselor hope that council, the talent blue
mountains received for information, the January 29th, 2026 correspondence of
Jim Torrance, Lu Mount Ray Pairs Association regarding agenda item
B 4. 1 Craig Leaf SLS Mill Street SPS and
Bay Gray Street linear works. And that council directs I
have to provide a follow - up staff report to
answer all questions, post in the January 29th, 2026 correspondence
of Jim Torrance. Blue Mountain Raper Association as follows. One,
what are the critical learnings regarding financial oversight project management
discipline and timely communications and reporting. How and when will
these be implemented. Number two, do counsel and staff leadership
have confidence in our current asset management plan, how do,
how the town will prioritize upgrades and replacements of other
major infrastructure and have a clear picture of what this
means for our long - term finances. Three, will an
external audit also be conducted. So that we get an
unvarnished evaluation and further recommendations for the future. Four. But
the biggest question maybe can a town this size of
Blue Mountains responsibly and effectively manage these kinds of large
infrastructure projects. Okay. Set the motion you are moving counselor
porter. Uh, yes. Through the chair, yes. However, um, when
you see it up here, uh, what I'm thinking is
we have a number of report deadlines in the, in
the emotion that was passed on December 15th, that these
questions would nicely fit into. So I would like some
wording in the fact that these questions be answered. Some
of them should come in the February 24th reports. Others
will come in finance so that they reference back to
the appropriate report out of future date from the December
15th motion. I'm not sure. If. Do you need any
more information, Madam Clerk? It's just really tying it back.
As I think it's important that these questions be embedded
in the appropriate reports as opposed to being a standalone.
Back. There. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Just looking at
the timeline. So the recommendations from today's meeting will be
considered at the February 17th Council meeting. The February 23rd
meeting is 23rd and 24th committee. The whole meetings. That's
when the next reports are due. Um, so by the
time this motion is confirmed by council, the February 23rd
and 24th reports will have been written and posted to
the website. So a staff have this information. I'm not
certain that it'll be available and included in those February
23rd, 24th committee of the whole reports. But staff are
provided staffer here and are watching and are listening. So
if you want to embed it into the motion, we
can. But I don't want to speak for staff as
to whether, um, they will have the time to embed
this into, uh, that report. I believe CAO has something
here. Thank you, Madam Clerk. I'm going to lean on
CAO Smith. Yes, through the chair, what we can do,
and, uh, maybe keeping the resolution as written right now,
we could take it away to see how that may
fit in terms of a follow - up report or
which report that would, uh, ideally fit within the context
of the previous resolution that was put forward regarding the
affected projects. So, uh, and then we can see whether
we need some more additional time, uh, these questions I
anticipate to be, um, too difficult in terms of providing
response back at a, at a, uh, council meeting at
an early point of time. So thank you. Thank you
CEO Smith. Follow up. Yes. Uh, through the chair. So
the would appear from the original motion back in December,
the latest report dates are March 16th and 17th. So
I think if we put that these are all done
by March 16th and it would make sure that everything
comes together at one end point because you don't want
it coming in dribbles and drops. Does that work CEO
Smith. Yes. That would work. Okay. Madam Clerk. Thank you
for that information. My apologies. I was thinking that was
coming to the next committee of the whole cycle. So
I can certainly add that. Okay. We'll just wait a
moment. I'll add a line at the very, very end.
Did you have something to follow up CEO Smith? I
just see your hand. No. Okay. And. I, so Councillor
Porter, was that. Once we get the last of the
dates in there, I did see Councillor Ardell. I did
see your hand. So did you have something to add
cancer reporter? Um, it's my hand still. Yes. You're here.
Okay. No, that's all right. Councillor, thank you. Council reporter.
Councillor Odell. Go ahead. Uh, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And yes, I was going to say the date, um,
and I had recalled a date in March, but I
couldn't remember that date. And the clerk is correct. This
will be coming to February 17th meeting. And then there
is another report. And I hope that all staff involved
in this will have something a little bit different by
March. And that, and that's what I wanted to say
that we did have a march state. And I, and
I still can't remember what it was the next meeting
in March. And I think then we should have a
very wholesome discussion because everything will hopefully have, um, opened
up some doorways. And if there's some, uh, legal issues
that can't be told and they need to seek out
what that is or getting in touch with other avenues
and hopefully at that time March 16th, yeah, um, I
think everything will be answered. That's all I have to
say. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Adele. Okay. So I've
read the motion out loud and then the last, uh,
paragraph says, and that the above information be included in
the staff report to be provided at the March 16,
2026 committee of the whole meeting. It's that appropriate to
the mover. Yeah. Since through the chair, since one of
the motions said in the December 15th motion one, um,
meeting date was the 17th. Say slash because there may
be an appropriateness. So just look steam slash 17. So
cause it's important. I think it's really important that the
relevant information fits in the relevant report. Correct. So I
believe Madam Clerk is just going to adjust that to
say. 16 slash 17. This is secondary. Oh yeah. Yes.
But I do want to add that, um, there's some
questions that I think could be answered as expeditiously as
possible on the 24th. We look forward to that. There's
an opportunity to answer some of these questions or start
to. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councillor Hope. Okay. I
don't see any further hands from any of the other
members of the committee. So, uh, Madam Clerk, you may
call that vote, please. I'll
just be a moment here, Mr. Chair. The vote is
open. I would like to vote in the affirmative. It
has not come up on my screen, Madam Clerk. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. The vote is closed. That vote is
carried with all five members present voting in the affirmative.
So now we will move to item B 4. 1
Craig Leith SLS Mill Street SPS. And it should say
bay gray, not by gray. Street linear works. Financial reporting
and project cost update OPS. 26. 008, unless I've got
an incorrect version. You're correct. Titan. I should say bay.
Yes. I'm going to turn it over to. Director Pacheco.
You have the floor.
So good morning through the chair. Oh, I got some
feedback.
Okay. Thank you. So I threw the chair. My name
is Al Pacheco. I'm the director of operations here at
the town of the Blue Mountains with me. I have
proofread desire and manager of capital projects. And I have
Michael Campbell, who is our senior engineer coordinator who's online.
Uh, this report really is about closing loop on council's
direction to bring financial updates. Uh, for the Craig Leithation
Bay Street, Gray Street linear works. And the military pumping
station. So this is the first of, uh, many quarterly
updates as it relates to the project. Although these projects
were bundled for construction efficiency. Council asked that we, uh,
clearly separate the report. The reports financials for each component.
This report does not exactly that. It provides a clear
snapshot of where we are today, how much we've spent,
what's been committed, and what remains available across engineering construction.
And the utility relocating costs. The overall project, um, budget
was 53. 5 million dollar given where we are in
construction. The engineering where we are in construction. The engine
work is well underwear. All construction spending, um, of the
lift station and bay street are still near your leaf
phases with military pulmonization. Not yet having been tendered. So
those costs are still based on pretender estimates. This report
sets out a framework of how, uh, staff will be
also providing quarterly reports through each quarter at the end
of each quarter. Um, again, this, um, this will be
for the life of this project starting to get an
idea of quarter, the first quarter of 2026. As well
as finalizing the year end accounting, um, there are some
numbers in 2025 that may slip slightly, uh, but the
report gets counsel solid baseline of where we are at.
So if I could slowly go through the engineering and
maybe go through some of the costing or where we're
at with the project. So for engineering, the two tables.
The first table here represents the engineering budget where the
engineering budget is a budget is the proved budget where
the, the second line there is the committed funds which
are what the commitments are with the engineering and consulting
firm for this project as Councilman Public will see that
the, uh, amount spent is where we're at with, with
current spend on engineering, uh, the number below that is
what's remaining within the, within the, uh, that, um, that
PO. So we've to date, um, we've spent 47 percent
of the committed values and we have 52 percent, uh,
remaining. Frequent scroll down for the next table. This table
here represents sort of, well, the engineering budget was consolidated
into one budget, uh, here we're showing where the costs
are for the engineering costs for the specific projects. So
if we look at the Craig Lee Cliff station, uh,
we've spent, uh, spent 14 percent of the budget or
361, we've spent 330, 000 non engineering. And, um, the
Bay Street, Gray Street 484. 1. 176 of money
spent or 47 percent of the budget. While the engineering
budget, um, consists of both the design. It also, uh,
it also includes the site inspection. And the site inspection
of contract administration come on. So that the 54 or
53 percent will be used likely for, for that amount.
If you can scroll down, uh, as it relates to
the Craig leaf station separated the contract value. So if
we look at the contracted amount, we have, um, 8.
477 million dollars to date we spent 363, 000 dollars
on the project, leaving us, um, 8. 1 million dollars
of 96 percentiles that has been, that has not been
spent. Um, leaving the interval project that.
We scroll down to the basement mil street. Again, the
committed, the committed funds for this contract, uh, with the
construction contractor is 17. 927 million dollars. We've spent, uh,
not to date, but to December 31st or the last
draw was 1. 3 million dollars leaving us with 60
million dollars left or roughly 93 percent of the project
budget. There is a contingency on that, uh, on that,
um, contract of 2. 4 million dollars and haven't spent,
uh, contingency. So with that remaining, uh, there's a remaining
budget of 19. 19. 03 million dollars or 94 million
dollars or 94 percent. Of the projects still unspent are
available. So again, with Mail Street, we have intended the
work. The 19. 4, 19 point, I think 94 million
is the pretender, um, pretender estimates. So once, once we
tender the work, we can provide some updates as to
what they committed amounts were, um, provide some updates as
the contract is issued. In reference to the December, I
think it was 15th report. Part of the unsculpt work
in the original budget was the utility relocation. So again,
here what I've done is I've tried to demonstrate what
we've spent as far as, uh, our utility relocation miscellaneous
items throughout this project while they're not tied to the
any of the contract amounts with the contractors. They're part
of the overall budget. So, uh, going through here, we
can see that there are some, uh, utility work that
has been completed. We have some agreements in place. There's
still some outstanding, um, simultaning utility work underway and throughout
the project and throughout the quarters will provide updates as
it relates to the overall budget spent. If you scroll
down, um, currently the pre - HST funding amount for
this was 900, 000 dollars You see the 915. This
represents, uh, with the non - refundable HST. So if
we scroll down and what I aim to do here
at this, uh, on this, um, table here below is
trying to consolidate all the works here. So it provides,
um, provides some clarity as to what's been spent, what
the, uh, committed amounts are what's available. And the overall
budget. So if we go through the, um, if we
go through the stable, the first line here, engineering committed
amounts, this is, this is the contract value with our
consultant, not the budget. So not to confuse it to.
So this is what we've spent, uh, we have 47
percent spent leaving us with 53, uh, remaining. Next is
a utility in miscellaneous relocation. As mentioned, we have 900,
000 dollars budget for this amount with the HS non
refundable HST or non - recoverable HSD. Brings this value
to 915, 840. To date, we spent 84, 000 and
change. The Craig Leith sewage lift station. Again, the cost,
the PO mount is 8. 977 million dollars. If we
look at the non - recoverable HST brings that total
up to 9. 1 million dollars to date, we've spent,
um, three, uh, 363, 000 dollars. Similar with a Bay
Street. The numbers here are represented on the above tables.
So this just summarizes where we, we have 20 million
dollars. Of the cost excluded in HST. We've spent to
date 1. 3 million dollars roughly six percent. And as
you'll note here with the Mill Street, Sushliv Station, uh,
the numbers that representing here are the pretender estimates. So
we have an issue that tender and we have an
award of the contract. Well, this is just based on
the current, um, issue for tender estimates. With that, the
overall budget of the, again, rounding this up, the overall,
um, budget for this, for this project is 53. 563
million dollars. Again, these numbers are, representative of the figures
that were shown on the December 15th committee of the
whole meeting. So with that, if there is any other
questions, um, we'll leave it to the chair. Thank you,
director. For we go to the committee, did director of
finance when I had anything along those lines for the
financial aspects. No, we're good. Okay. So I will look
to members of the committee for the questions retaining to
this update. Councillor reporter. Go ahead. Yes.
Thank you. And through the chair. So since. I spent
a lot of time crafting the motion that has resulted
along with others and others in the community, which is
resulted in the report today, um, I do have a
number of questions. So I hope we either I can
say them all or I get a few rounds at
this. So my questions are to staff. So I'm really
not sure why this was called a fulsome report. That
is due February 24th. So I'm hoping this is an
it. The motion did not ask for a snapshot. It
asked for throughout the project. That's what it was. I
have found, um, discrepancies. In the budget. This report goes
back to it. It was first, the first element of
this bundled report was approved in the 2021 budget. And
they came with, um. And while it was before your
time, Mr. Pachenko, um. This is project resides in your
area. In May 22, 2023 was the first escalation. Then
we had another one in April 2023, August, 2023, um,
where there was two. And I have a difference of
374, 000 dollars. So I will be asking for that
to be accounted for. Cause when I've done, um, the
math, I just don't understand that. So and. The financials
here really don't address. There isn't how we got to
where we are. It doesn't address the cost escalation. It
gives, as you have said, a couple of times in
the report, a clear snapshot. The purpose of the motion
in its entirety was to figure out how we ended
up 19 million in the whole. So I have some
concerns. I also have some concerns that we have no
idea with the financials associated with this project, which this
report was to do. The financial reporting and project cost
update. Where the Hughes funding fits in. And there was
a report in October. While it was prepared by finance,
I mean finance, you know, it was there. But the
Hughes funding supports some of the project funds. And I
don't see how that fits in. Because when you factor
in the amounts, the fuse funding was to provide based
on percentage of completion of the project. The town has
spent less. Because they're two separate funding streams and they're
not identified. Okay. Just we've got, I've heard two questions
so far. I've heard your three, your discrepancy of 300
and something thousand. And then I've heard about the hues
funding. And Council supporter. Of course, let's have you have
your ask your questions, but just so we can keep
up. I would like to refer over to either director
Pacheco or finance for, as that description that discrepancy been
forwarded. I'm not sure what it is. Go ahead. So
food chair to Council Podry. I believe on the August
23rd report. There is an escalation of 600, 000 dollars,
but that 600, 000 dollars is for a different project.
It's for the outfall project and not for the engineering
for this project. So I believe that I think the
discrepancy you're looking at is that that project is a
separate project. So, um, again, I think there's, there's a
discrepancy there. Um, again, as it relates, go ahead. I'd
just like to have a follow up then. So if
that is true and you deduct the 600 and the
275 is the 2. 775 million is still incorrect. And
through the chair, if we look at the report here,
so the actual budget amount, it accounts for the 2.
275, from the engineering budget and the committed value. So
while the engineer, the contract value is 2. 49. The
actual budget. If you look at the 2. 77500, 000.
If you look at that report, we were at 2.
5, 2. 5 thousand. And then we asked for an
additional, I believe it was 160, 000. So again, I
can come back. I can provide a clear explanation, but
again, I think there was, um, an error on that
component of the engineering. So it's, it was actually, uh,
what you're referencing is, is for the LFR project, not
for the, uh, the engineering of the mill street foreigner.
Okay. Through the chair, I can accept that. Um, but
if you take then the 3. 15, 3. 1 million
minus 600. You don't get 2. 7. So I think
I would like that clarified because it's not clear. And
if I may just continue with that theme, the report
required the financials to be reported out on the project
as a whole and individually. Therefore, it wasn't, I think
it's a reasonable expectation that the tables are the same.
And they have different lines. There's holes. There's places where
if the blank, is that because it's not applicable or
the number, like it just bakes the question, why is
it blank? So I'd like to see the tables identical.
I think they should mirror each other. Okay. And then
we go ahead. I see Mr. DeSai as well. Yeah.
Go ahead. So again, I welcome any, any feedback as
far as, uh, the layout and council would want to
see this report again. The intent today was provided, I
guess snapshot or a summary, we're with a project where
we spent the money. Again, um, if they're, if there's
anything else that council would like to see in these
report, again, originally had contemplating putting the huge funding in
and as it relates to the financial spending. But the
overall, the focus of this report was more, more outlining
where we're at with the project and the project spent.
And looking at the huge funding would be more of
a financial update as to where the budgets, where the
funds are coming from, how much of that will be
through the reserves. Um, the financial reserves, the asset replacement
reserves, uh, that's where I was looking at providing some
more of that, um, the huge funding and correlation with,
with the spending. Mr. Desai, yeah. To the chair.
Sorry my la. Through the chair. My apologies, my laptop
just went off on me, but I have the answer
for that question. I have the trail from 2023 to
2025 how the two point, the two million dollars vended
to 2. 7250 million dollars. So I just, once it
gets on, I can ask that question. My apologies. Okay.
Thank you. I'll look for your hand. Continue. Is around
the motion asked for, um, the financial, report out throughout
the project delivery time period. So I'm still, I don't
understand why we received a snapshot because it doesn't really
outline how we ended up 19 million in the hole.
So I can just leave that. And it would be
appreciated to have the hues funding because it is part
of the finance. It's funding a law for law. And
repeatedly, we've been told that the project needed to go
because we would lose the huge funding. So the hues
funding, um, I believe, you know, should have been included.
And then the other thing I'd like to talk about
is the reporting framework, which is being put forward as
this is how it will be reported in the future.
And I find that from a project management perspective, it
really misses the mark. I think there needs to be
a lot more fulsome reporting. I would expect it. I
have, um, I did actually with my comments on this
report to CAO include a sample. I had put together.
I think when you have a 19 million dollar overspent
on a project report going forward, it is important to
tell the taxpayers and counsel. But more importantly, the taxpayers.
What did their money do in the last three months.
And what is the money going to do in the
next three months that they can measure it again? Because
they want to know because this money, we only have
one taxpayer, whether it comes in a grant, whether it
comes from user fees for water, the same person, they're
always paying the bill. And I think they owed more
than what this proposed framework is providing. And I would
like to see a more fulsome. I want to see
a comprehensive project reporting template, which a project manager, um,
should be able to do on all about the money.
And it's not just about the money. If you think
about it, when our finance department brings forward a budget,
an annual budget, the numbers form a very small part
relative to the size. There's a lot of verbiage around
what's going to happen and what's going to, what has
been done, et cetera, et cetera. You can't just rely
on the numbers. You're going to have to provide some
explanation. Thank you. Okay. Councillor Maxwell. Or was Councillor Hope's
hand, did your hand go up and down. It keeps
doing that. I was the next after cancer reporter. Then
that's all right with Councillor Maxwell. Take me turn now.
Thank you. Um, so yes, I absolutely support what Councillor
Porter is saying in terms of this report does not
meet the moment. You know, we're in a crisis here.
And we've got very rightfully angry public, uh, rightfully angry,
council, a lot of disappointment here. And to have this
report come up, um, I just don't see where it
answers the need. And the first thing that council reporter
said, certainly I was expecting this as well. You know,
how did we get here. You know, how do these
estimates, which is what it seems to be, we've depended
on estimates all along. That's my reading of this. You
know, how did we continue to do this over years
to read these faulty estimates all the way along and
to, um, go buy all the gates that are supposed
to be there for project management purposes and for the
management of any situation. So it doesn't do what it
needs to do. Um, in terms of the template itself,
that's sort of something that is really a little concerned
at the moment. We need to put out the, not
the fire, but we need to be able to, um,
give full answers to the public, which they deserve. And
this report did nothing. And in fact, I'm worried. Further,
sorry to make everyone even more worried. But I'm worried
about the fact that the Mill Street section has not
been tendered yet. So and also I thought I heard.
I took a note that we were still working with
pretender estimates. So, um, I'd like to find out more
through you, Mr. Chair about sort of three things. And
the Mill Street, it's not tendered yet. So we don't
actually know the final cost till we hear from, from
the trade really. And then secondly, what estimates are we
working on now? Because that's not clear to me. Thirdly,
how is this affecting the timing? I mean, we've been
told again, and we certainly saw what happened in the
harbor. I'm not questioning for a moment that this isn't
an emergency from the point of view that we need
Real Street. But how is this affecting further costs? Because
we haven't tendered yet. And what are the implications in
the long run? So we, what I'm hearing is as
bad as the 19 million was, we still don't seem
to have a handle on things. So I'm wondering if
you can give me some comfort. Thank you. So CAO
Smiths, I see your hand. Go ahead, Sir Gail Smith.
Through the chair, I can speak to a few different
pieces based on both council reporters, comments and with respect
to Councillor Hopes as well. So firstly, I think in
relation to the report that's presented, uh, currently, and being
that nature of interim report, I think what I'm hearing
is well is that certainly that there is a great
level of detail that is, uh, still expected from, from
members of council. I will know based on the timing
as well, uh, that we did have, uh, unfortunately director
Quinlan did have a personal emergency to which was unable
to, uh, to, to work with staff and providing that
deeper dive with respect to the, the interim report. So
it may benefit from that further review at a later
point for that, uh, for that Folsom report. Uh, I
also know, and maybe I would all tackle as well
as relation to the status of the Mill Street works.
And while this is absolutely, I think there's also a
fear, at least a concern, uh, from my perspective, I
know between, uh, for OP staff as well as for
finance staff is to your point around what that number
may be. And while we're at the point where we
have the highest level of confidence we likely can based
on the class assessments that have been provided. There is
still a risk that say if Mill Street does or
whatever does come end up coming back, that it may
be higher than, than what was initially forecasted. So I
know I speak a little bit in my report, but
essentially is the basis for why we're doing this value
engineering exercise is a risk management exercise. Yes, the risk
to say the longer you wait in terms of tendering,
there may be those higher costs to which a town
may withstand. But my hope is that through this exercise,
it does achieve two objectives and one in which is
looking at taking deeper dives, say from even a design
element too, if there are still significant savings that can
be afforded to the town and undertaking this work. Uh,
but further, uh, is also looking at from a change
management exercise to understand just at a high level from
a process standpoint in reflecting on this exercise, uh, what
else can be done? Not holistically be it for the
projects I've already been tendered or those even just other
capital projects as well to find, you know, are there
ways we could do things differently from a process angle
and to use those, those lessons learned as a, as
a big piece moving forward. So, uh, once again, I
think there is to be a further report that will
benefit from, I think, some level detail. And certainly we'll
appreciate it. I think some council feedback via that resolution
in terms of what those expectations will be. But at
the same time, uh, we've heard loud and clear in
terms of that, that, uh, that risk portrait that still
exists related to the untended works. And that's why we're
looking at, uh, we've, we've embarked on this, this value
engineering exercise. Okay. Thank you CEO Smith director. Did you
have a follow up as well? Thank you. So through
the chair, I think, um, Salesmith hadn't mentioned it. I
think the one thing that, uh, again, as far as
the issue for the, the issue for tender estimates, again,
the, the mill street, uh, the mill street is the
only untenred work. Uh, so again, with a level of,
of, um, I guess level of risk there when we
all issue the tender and see what, what results from
that. But as far as the, the Mill Street project
and the Craig leaf lift station, those projects have been
rewarded. We are under contract outside of anything major happening
in the construction work. Those are, those are the level
of comps that we have with as far as the
work that's being completed there. Um, there isn't any risk.
Again, not, not knowing what Mill Street will come in
at. We do have a level of confidence now that
we are at a class A estimate. And again, as
the again, when we started with projections were very, the
projections were very, very, um, very, very broad. And as
we go through the design elements, as you go through
the 30, 60, 90 percent design with the construction estimates.
And that's, we're at 100 percentage line where the level
of confidence, the amounts that we're estimating are substantiated through
the design. So, um, just to provide some sort of
relief to counselor hope. Please. Follow up. Thank you. Councillor
King. Chair. Okay. So. I understand answers are on the
way. And as I said, I hope Ms. Councillor Porter
and I have indicated their answers more to the point
coming along the way. But I want to know at
this point. Where are we with working with estimates. In
terms of, uh, we estimates were the reason why we
got into this problem from what I understand correct me
if I'm wrong. But how much of what percentage right
now are we working on estimates and how accurate are
they? Thank you. Director. So for the chair again, as
it relates to estimates, the only estimate that we're working
on right now is with Mill Street. Until that contract
is awarded, uh, we won't know concretely what those, those
costs are. As far as the other due projects, we,
we have, we have, uh, they're, they're, um, they've been
tender, meaning that there's, there's an agreement between the town
and the contractor with the Mill Street pumping station. We
are the class A estimate, meaning that there is through
the design, there's been a lot of rigor put towards
the design and the cost estimations as it relates to
as to relates to costs of pumps and certain, certain,
um, construction material. However, it's still up to, um, the
market to, to, to bid on this work. But as
far as, uh, confidence level, we're confident, we're very confident
with the value of the 19 million dollars. And what
I would say is again, just, um, uh, anecdotally, uh,
with our outfall project, uh, issue for tender for 18
million dollars. So we had budget 18 million dollars We
awarded the contract, uh, I believe it was, uh, eight
million dollars. So there was, there was a 10 million
dollar difference. Again, so there is a level of, of,
of uncertainty when it comes to tendering work. Uh, and
we've seen it with some of the projects, some of
the submissions we had in our projects. We had a
17 million dollar bid and we had a 25 million
dollar bit. We can't dictate what the market's going to
come to us, but we can do is be able
to, uh, through the engineering estimates go through and evaluate
what those costumes cost estimates are. Okay. Director Klingland. Uh,
thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to answer a
couple of questions around the timing as well and with
respect to the Hughes funding. So we have elevated this
to the province. We've been speaking to the province, um,
there is an application process to request an extension. We
are aware of two other extensions that have occurred in
the province so far. So we're hoping to be, um,
assessed for that as well. But again, we'll, we'll go
through the application process. We have raised the flag to
MPP Saunderson as well. Um, and also addressing the fact
that the tenders have come in so much higher or
let me rephrase that the estimates at this point for
Mail Street and whether there would be any funding remaining.
Now, of course, that's a real shot in the dark,
but we're going to do our best to continue to
go after that. With respect to the risks of being
even more than the 19 million, I think one thing
that maybe I just wanted to add is that there
are some risks. And we brought the risks up about
around the value engineering assignment. And the fact that, to
be fair, that it may delay the tender even further.
The tender was, um, ready. Uh, sometime in January, but
we have put a pause on it based on the
value engineering exercise. Because if that exercise does, um, raise
questions or provide us with alternative methods. We may want
to change the design or it may even impact those
earlier projects such as Bay Street and the Craig Leaf
main live station. Now in addition to that, what, um,
staff, and I would say that, um, the, uh, project
coordinator, my comfrey has brought up is that the further
we delay the project, the increase in bypass pumping as
well. Because of course we have to have somewhere to
pump, um, this, uh, sewage and there will be additional
costs from that perspective. There is contingency already in the,
in the, um, breakdown of the budget to cover that.
But we do need to be aware that once we
go through, um, value engineering exercise, which will occur the
last week of February, um, with an expectation that the,
um, the final report or a final draft, I will
say will be available to staff, um, before the second
week of March. So, um, we'll have much better information
at that point as to whether there really are some
changes that can be had and maybe some savings. Um,
but also whether what the additional cost may be. Thank
you, Director Quinlan. If I could, you're looking at me.
So I couldn't take advantage of that. Appreciate all of
this detail. I don't know why it couldn't have been
in the report. Why couldn't it have been in writing,
uh, why are we hearing it this way? Um, the
day has gone. When we just hear it casually. We
need to have very clear. Um, information public can share
it at the same time. Um, you know, I understand
how we might want to manage a crisis and try
to get people to calm down, which of course is
important, but at the same time, we need to share
that we are still in muddy water right now. I
mean, these are not real answers. These, these are, this
is direction. This is where we're going. But these are
not answers. So we are still in, I think everyone
should be clear on this. We're still in on shaky
ground. We don't really have all the information. And we
may be looking at new costs. That's what I've heard.
I don't, you know, that the possibility that there might
be additional costs. And I think it's important that that
needs to be enshrined and made very clear from now
on. That could be at least one of the lessons.
Thank you. Okay. CEO Smith. Through the chair, I think
just to the point around, um, and looking at, you
know, the documenting risks, identifying that, you know, forthright with
counselor early point in time. And I think that's where,
you know, I know in January, there was that report
regarding the value engineering exercise that was brought forward for
exactly this point. And I think it's also for, you
know, for awareness, I think generally publicly or otherwise is
to know, yeah, there is still that. And this is
where I think, you know, further to my report as
well is to say, you know, class estimates, while they,
yes, they're still estimates. They also have to be treated
in which, Hey, we know there's these, these foundations or
assumptions with respect to what those variations are going to
be moving forward. So if we have a sense at
an early point in time in which you know what
we might be in, in waters to which there might
not be available budget or, you know, there may not
be these, these savings that we can accrue, uh, let's,
uh, let's really bring that for transparently to, to, to
counsel, to address that, um, because there might be things
from a design standpoint that we, we do know are
easier to do when you're at either engineering design or,
um, and, uh, opposed to when you're actually ready to
get the tender release. So that's the challenge we have
with this value engineering is to which, um, is when
you look at those anticipate costs, be it some of
the anticipated bypass pumping, but also looking at if there
is something significant that will be changed via the engineering.
That's, that's, that's costly. So, um, I think 100 percent,
you know, I think the earlier, the better and certainly
the, the necessity of doing so with council is a
commitment on my end moving forward to, to address some
of the issues that we've seen. Thank you, Smith. Councillor
Maxwell. Go ahead. Thank you, Chair. So and I'm certainly
glad that, uh, Drecker Quinlan weighed in. The only department
we're missing is planning, I think, for my next, where
I'm going. Anyway, okay, I do not believe that, you
know, one department is solely responsible. Nor are they individual
or anybody exempt. Um, I think we're looking at an
overall. Deep systemless failure. Now, I guess what I'm going
to ask director Pachenko this question. Uh, what department provided,
uh, the housing unit numbers beyond what was required for
the huge funding. Of 13, 000 plus unit. I'm not
sure what this has to do with the financial. It
has a lot to do with it. So for the
chair, again, the, the additional Helsinias as it relates to
the Hughes funding application. I believe that number was, was
a number that, that we looked at the full build
out, um, would have been an exercise in coordination with
planning, I believe, as far as the increased values. Follow
up. Yeah, I do. Two, actually. So. The additional housing
units. Could that have led to cost overruns other projecting.
Through the chair, no, I don't think so. I think
when we're planning, uh, the design of this work is
trying to build some resiliency over the next 20 years.
Again, while they're, there may have been some pressure in
some of some developments waiting for this to, um, to,
um, for this project to be completed. Again, the, the
overall 13, 000 units, um, didn't put pressure. There were
some pressure from the Dublin community in trying to get
some, but again, not, not the full amount, uh, not
the follow - on. This was just more of a
building, some resiliency in our system. So to be a
little more particular, we do have some units that are
still on hold, uh, as far as developments that are
waiting for this work to be completed. Again, I believe
the number don't call me as around 400 units. So
roughly that are, that are on hold. Um, so that
are tied to this work as well. Okay. Councillor Maxwell.
Okay. So the 13, 000, I got to go back
to this 13, 000 plus units have been mentioned in
a number of reports. These housing units, I do believe
will be indirectly tied to the finance department. At some
point in time to shore up recent shortfalls. So I'm
just wondering if this whole project is geared. To. Facilitate
more housing units in order to also shore up the
shortfalls. Cape director, I see manager Kershaw is on the
line. Are you okay for her to take this? I'll
bounce back to you. Magic Kershaw. Hi, good morning. Uh,
so when we looked at sizing of the Mill Street
pumping station and the forest main and the outfall. Additionally,
uh, we were also doing the wastewater master plan. And
the wastewater master plan, we were in communications with the
planning department and we, we had the growth numbers. We
looked at every piece of development property that, that's in
our primary settlement area. And using our official plan and
the densities, uh, so we looked at the full build
out of our primary settlement area plus a little extra
because we always go a little, we always error on
the side of a little extra. We want a little
extra capacity, uh, and we also take into consideration our
INI rate, uh, peaking factor, or sorry, INI stands for
influention into our sanitary collection system. And additionally, we looked
at the peaking factors of, of the pumping station. And
the pumping station mill street pumping station is rather high.
I believe it's 5. 4 is the peaking factor. So
during a heavy rain event, the flows will, we'll multiply
5. 4 times what they, they normally are on a
dry day event. And the sizing for the Mill Street
pumping station, uh, was based on the outcomes from our,
our wastewater master plan. These projects, we knew right from
the get go that our wastewater master plan was going
to take two years to complete. As we did one
full years worth of flow monitoring throughout the system. And
we, we knew that from the get go. That was
always the planet would take two years to finish the
wastewater master plan. And it was on schedule and on
time. And once we got the final answers from our
wastewater master plan, which was in 2025, we knew the
final size of the pumps that were required or the
infrastructure that was required at the Mill Street Pumping Station
and the conveyance all the way to the treatment plant.
So there were some adjustments made, uh, to the sizing
of the pumps kind of at the last minute to
the Mill Street pumping station. Once we had the final
outcome from our wastewater master plan, I hope that answers
your question on how did we size? So initially the
wastewater master plan was done with data that was provided
from the planning department and looking at our official plan.
Thank you manager Kershaw. CAO Smith. Yes, you're just further
to that point. I do see director Quinlan's hand. So
I didn't want to maybe steal the thunder as a
relay just in terms of how, you know, looking at
those future projections or future growth may impact financially. But
certainly I think that's where, you know, we, we do
look at our fiscal future, at least from a, from
a growth standpoint and how to which, you know, moving
forward on these projects, projects, maybe that, that net benefit
to the town, particularly in the ability to crew further
DC revenues. And I think that number that director Pacheco
noted earlier around say we do have an effect, a
development freeze within the Thornberry area of around just over
400 units that are impacted by the inability to, uh,
to connect via the capacity constraints at the, at the
pumping station. So it is critical just to realize, I
think some of those, those projects that in the media
term are unable to proceed to which in turn not
being able to proceed means less assessment value as well
as in terms of less revenue from a DC standpoint.
And this is not for getting the numbers that counselor
Maxwell has noted in terms of the future and looking
at that, that growth period as well, uh, to ensure
that when these projects move ahead that they have the
capacity or at least they're built to a point in
which there's minimal cost to accommodate any future, uh, significant
growth changes that may, may occur. And that's, I think
what we've known in this community since, um, looking at,
if say, you know, your projection's back in say it
would have been 2016 or were very different from what
they were, say, uh, post COVID. So that's what we,
these systems are designed in a way to be, to
be nimble and to be responsive, uh, what are often
just fluid growth projections. But what we do know is
that we still continue to grow and we still have
a significant, uh, amount of development within our pipeline that
we need to accommodate alongside the asset management perspective, which
is a lot of these assets, particularly between the lift
station and ban gray. They're at their end of life.
And they do need to be replaced. Ensure that we
minimized a risk and liability to the town moving forward.
Thank you, C. M. Smith. Director Krinlin. Go ahead. I
think C. A. Smith covered it just well. I was
just wanting to raise that, of course, DCs cannot be
collected. If the growth can't happen. So certainly that would
be, um, just exactly what CO Smith said. So I
won't add anymore. Okay. Thank you. So. Counselor Maxwell, does
that suit your, uh, I think. Yeah. I've been answered.
Okay. Thank you. Councillor Ardell. Go ahead. Thank you Mr.
Chair. And I think today is been very, very informative.
And I think we're still getting information out. And I
don't know why we couldn't have had this information before,
you know, um, and I think there's where the problem
lives. I guess we want to ensure that all the
taxpayers are well informed. And today we're hearing all of
this because we've got, um, Ms. Kershaw. We've got, uh,
Mr Desai, we've got the director of Mr. Pacheco. And
we've got our CAO. We are getting, and sorry, Ms.
Quinn, uh, we are getting all of everybody speaking together.
And I'm learning some more information as well and how
things, when we don't, um, have up to date information
and that where things can go, um, at a raise.
And sort of, you know, I remember a couple of
years ago, I can't remember which department it was and
came back to us and said, Oh, we did some
estimates. And we have an overrun. So now we need
to fund it again, but they were using costing figures
from 20 either 16 or 17. And it was like,
why? And I think this was back in 23. And
like that is so old that information, we need to
keep updating this information constantly so that we are, um,
learning where things are, our growth is going to be
happening. And where we, we should be expecting our numbers
to be going. So, um, I just wanted to make
those comments. Everybody else has made a lot of comments
and I'm not going to dwell on that because as
the time goes, it's almost 11 o'clock. So I just
think that, uh, we're getting to where I, the answers
are and anybody listening online. Hopefully they get the updates
as well. And I think that's, uh, we're getting somewhere.
And thank you for all the information today to all
staff for that. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Adele. Okay.
Councilor Porter, are you bringing forward a motion or you
have another question. Not yet. Chair, um, through you, I
have some more questions. So on page two of the
report under engineering with the table, which is the first
table in the report. It has about summarizing engineering budget
for all projects combined showing the revised budget. This is
a revised budget after council approved. The funding, which was
the December 15th report. So again, we need to figure
out, I guess it sums it up. The words that'll
sum it up is we need to be able to
follow the money for the project. And we haven't, I
can't do that. And I just want to make a
note. I may have made a comment in my last,
um, maybe staff need to do better. And it wasn't
intended to be directive. So I just want to make
sure if it was interpreted that way, that, um, it
wasn't intended that way. When we go on to, um.
A table with the engineering expenditures, um, I just want
to, the funding in the amount of 150, 000 will
be drawn from this budget line. So I'd like in
a future report so we know where, what budget line
it is. And then I just want to be clear
about when it says any required budget adjustments, will we
report it to counsel for consideration as appropriate? I just
want to remind staff, the motion clearly states counsel direct
staff to report on any variance to this project. Not
a budget adjustment of variance. And, uh, any project manager
knows what a variance is. When we go on to
further, which just talks about the Craig Nate lift station,
we now see something called an additional contingency. Um, I
would like to see what the original contingency is and
broken down. In contingency seeing an additional contingency was an
interesting label for it. So if you have an original
contingency and you get an additional one, I think it's
rightly that it's broken down. Um, and that appears again
with respect to two Bay Street. So I just think
there's a lot more questions to be answered. And really
being able to, um, follow the money. And I just
like to add, when it comes down to what Councillor
Maxwell was saying, if you go back and read the
May 2022 report, it clearly states that the Mills Street
pumping station lack capacity for the build out of the
campus of care. Which was a concept at best at
any given time pointing time. Um, while it was mentioned
about the one in 100 storms and it was mentioned
about other things, um, the campus of care was the
driver at that time. I would also like to know,
um, the financials with respect to the budget on the
awarding of the tenders. In a follow - up report.
So I may want to put that in what was
the budget when the tenders were awarded because the director
Pachenko has mentioned about the awarding of the attenders. So
those are critical milestones in a project financials as just
checks and balances. You know, you ward, you only have
so much. So I think it would be. It would
be responsible for that to be outlined. So how does
the budget go when you start allocating money out? What
is when did you know what the amounts would be?
Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Porter. Mr. Desai, I see
your hand. Go ahead. Uh, thank you, Chair. Uh, through
the chair, I'd like to first answer the first question
of counselor porters on the engineering budget, the number itself
where did we got the 2. 75 200 million dollars.
So in 2022, uh, town staff through a staff report
got approval of 2 million dollars. And further after
that, there was a, uh, through 2023 budget cycle as
well. They're 2 million dollars was presented in the budget
cycle. And in 2023, August of 2023, there was additional
ask for additional 200, 000. Plus. Past that.
In, let me just pull up my screen over here
real quick. So through the staff report CSOPS
dot 23 dot 019, that was this additional 200, 000
dollars of engineering increase, so which gave 2. 2 million
dollars in engineering further in the same year, uh, CSOPS
dot 23. 044 in August on August 28, 2023, the
engineering budget was increased to 2. 5 million dollars. Adding
the force main to the project scope as well. Further,
and this was also reflected in 2024 approved budget cycle.
And in 2025, uh, the number was for their increased
to 2. 775 200 million to reflect the huge grant
application as well. So that 2, 775, 200 dollars is
directly from the 2025 budget cycle. Approved budget book. And
that was done to reflect the huge grant application. Further
coming on the second question related to the. Engineering contingency
within engineering budget itself. So we had 473, 886 dollars
and 10 cents of engineering contingency and whole as the
engineering budget because this was a whole club to one
project, one engineering exercise. And the current remaining contingency for
engineering itself is dollar 98, 788 dollar, 69 cents. And
through the chair, I will make sure that we reflect
this on the, uh, next quarterly report to have it
well presented. Uh, further, moving to the next question on
contingencies on Craiglit main sewage. Cherry, may I ask a
question. Uh, well. So through the chair, I don't understand
why you indicated that would come on the next quarterly
report. I'm hoping that we are able to follow the
money on February 24th report. Thank you. Sure, it'll be
captured. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So without further
ado, please continue Mr. Desai. You had further answers. Thank
you, Chair. Uh, in terms of the contingencies for Craig
Leith, main sewage lift station, uh, to answer counselor porters
question. So, uh, the awarded. Agreement for the works was
dollar 7. 9 million dollars plus the original contact. And
within the award letter itself, but that was way kind
of close to five percent of the award value. So
due to that reason that additional contingency was added, which
is 500, 000 additional. And that 500, 000 honestly, it's
way less to capture. It's just around five percent to
be captured. So that additional contingency was added there. And
further, I think so, uh. To answer the last question
on what was the budget when we awarded the tender.
So the 2025 budget book, whatever the budget, whatever the
approved budget was in 2025, approved budget book. That was
the original budget. What we had when we awarded the
tenders. Or if the question is what was the remaining
budget or what was the remaining budget when we were
awarding this jobs. That's something we can bring it back
to the council. Do you want to clarify Councillor Porter?
Um, yes. So with respect to, cause I wasn't able
to follow, it would be useful to have in the,
in the 20th February 24th report is. What are the
contingencies? Because we seem to have different contingency. So it's
itemizing it so you can literally follow the money to
get to the total. And yes, I am looking for.
Um, for the amount of the budget that was remaining
on the budget that was in the Hughes funding application,
the 34, I believe it is rounding it up. Upon
a warning of the tenders, I want to know how
much money was left on the budget. Balance sheet. So
to speak. Yes, I do. At that point in time.
When the tenders were awarded. Thank you. Kate, thank you
Council supporter. Thank Mr. DeSize. Making notation of that. Well,
he's doing that. Uh, CAO Smith. Inadvertently put your hand
up. No, through the chair. It's going to note just
in terms of, uh, looking at that fall report and
perhaps just in terms of recognizing some of these questions
have been, or at least some of the responses of
being staff have been more so looking on the fly.
I think that's where we certainly benefit from that morph,
fulsome report coming in and later in February. Okay. Thank
you, Mr. Smith. So seeing no further, uh, I'm just
going to put it out there. If there was anyone
that wanted to make, wanted to move the receipt of
this or if they had further, uh, further thoughts on
the motion. Yes. Council reporter. I'm typing away. Maybe given
the time might be a good time to have a
break. Yes. That's what I was going to say. So
whilst you're doing that, um, Madam Clerk, uh, is 11,
10 inappropriate time to reconvene. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe
even 11, 15. Thank you. All right. We'll reconvene. Turn
your, please turn your cameras and microphones off.
Okay. It's 11 15. Thank you for that break. Just
a reminder to please tune your cameras on. Take a
Madam Clerk. Yep. Take a moment.
So we need a few. More.
We don't have a. Quorum anyway. So we can, we'll
wait.
Okay. Mr. Chair, we have a quorum now. Okay. Unfortunately
our, uh, our member that was writing the motion is
not present yet. So we'll have to wait await for
her return.
Thank. You.
It's been sent. Okay. Thank you, uh, Councillor Porter. Sure.
Madam Clerk will be receiving it virtually. Um, did you
want to read what you have counselor porter. Well, happy
to do so. Thank you. I'll just be a moment,
Mr. Chair. We can get it up on the screen
so people can follow along. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. So we have that counsel receive stat report OPS
dot two six dot zero zero eight entitled Craig Leith
SLS Mill Street SBS. And Bay Gray Street linear works
financial reporting and project cost update, which constitutes the Folsom
report requested by council. And that council direct staff to
provide financial updates for the duration of the project. Starting
in May 2022 in order that all escalation and increases
our transparent and understandable. Oh, and. That council direct staff
to itemize the original and additional contingency with dates of
request and approval. And that council direct staff to provide
the detailed financial reporting and project costs information starting with
the CSLS and bay gray at linear works.
Up to the award of the tenders, which were awarded
on October 21 and 2023, 2025. That council direct staff
to provide the amount remaining in the bundled project total
of budget of, yeah, total, total budget of. Three, 34.
I think this was supposed to be 34 million, 791,
129. Dollar is huge funding in brackets. When the tenders
were awarded on October 21st and 2020 23rd, 2025. That
council direct staff to provide detailed information regarding the estimates
on the Mill Street pumping station, which underpins the 19
million. That's all of it. Yes. Okay. I may have
mistaken, you know, I've seen, um, through the chair, Madam
Kirk's grammatically correct with some of it. I was, we
were typing as fast as we could. Okay. So I
will move this. Okay. And Councillor Mack. Turned off again.
Are you seconding it Council Maxwell? I just want to
ask a question to the mover before. I'm going to
get a second or first. Seconded by Councillor Hope. Now
go ahead, Councillor Maxwell. Thank you. Before your support, this,
I just want to know what you mean by. Understandable.
Like, are you saying plain language. What do we say?
It would be, so through the chair in response to
Councillor Maxwell, it would be nice to be able to
follow the money, as they say. To see how it
goes from one to the other, tells the story of,
you started out with a 1. 2 million dollar budget
for Craig Leith in the 2021 approved budget. And now
we have a budget of 50 some odd million. How
did we get there? And when you have a project
and you manage a project. I think it's reasonable to
expect that you would be able to articulate how it
grew that big. Councillor Maxwell, do you have a follow
- up to that? So you're just saying an understandable
timeline. Basically. Okay. Thank you. It's through the chair as
well. What I mean by understandable is that it can
be understood by the audience. The audience is counsel, the
audience is the public. It's not providing to a fellow
engineer. I just want to make sure that it makes,
it's in plain English. It's easy to understand. Okay. Um.
I would also add, I know this is coming from
OBS. It's coming from capital project management, but repeatedly on
the project page. It always has a quarterly update of
within budget. So it is assumed that the operations in
the capital management office knows exactly where their finances are
at any given time. So I'm as, you know, I'm
not releasing that this should be too owner is to
do because they reported on a quarterly basis anyway. So
those numbers come, those statements arise from numbers. Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Porter. I don't see any further questions
from members of committee. No, I see Councillor Adult. Councilor
Adel's on my screen. Now I can see her. So
I don't see any virtual hands. So Madam Clerk, please
call that boat. Thank you. The vote is open.
Any affirmative, please. Thank you. The vote is closed. And
that vote is carried with all members present voting in
the affirmative. Thank you. So we'll now move on to
item B 4. 2 investigative report. Craig Leith SLS Mill
Street SPS and Bay, gray, street, linear works, ADM. 26.
015. I'll turn it over to director Pacheco. Sorry.
CAO Smith. Do they show this is my report? Sorry.
CEO Smith. My apologies. Go ahead, CO Smith. No, sorry.
Uh, through the chair, though, just for Claire, you generally
an administrative matter would be more so on the committee
of the hole on the Monday, but based on the
tie between, uh, the, uh, the other financial report with
respect to, uh, this issue that we figured it was
appropriate to put on, on the Tuesday. So no fault
of your own chair. Um, anyway, just to start. So
through the chair, as I noted that, uh, I will
be taking this report. And I think among the reasons
in terms of, uh, taking this investigate report is ultimately
when dubs come to initiatives such as, uh, the scale
and the significance of these is that, you know, I
bear that as for the CEO for the town, that
ultimate responsibility with respect to ensuring that, you know, they
are, they are done in a fiscally responsible way and
in a manner that's also going to be, going to
be operationally sound. So that's where I think certainly is,
is my, my position to step in here and provide
that insight and to understand and to have that, uh,
sense. And I think for any project as well, regardless
is to say we're, you know, where could there be
those lessons learned and look in that, that culture of,
of continuous improvement. Um, but what I will say, and
I think some general themes as council and members of
public may note from this, uh, from the staff report
is that, um, in, in how these, these projects came
to be is that there's been, you know, I think
the issues we're associated with, you know, looking at gaps
in relation internal communication, looking at implementation of existing policy
and practice as well as the lack of timely reporting.
So those are likely the three to which, um, if
I could sum it up in terms of internally where
there was, there was some challenges. I think that's, that's
certainly where they do reside. Uh, I will note that,
you know, in the focus for this, this report is
exclusively looking at the tendering. These projects by themselves certainly
have a bit of a long history in terms of
their inception, be it from engineering or concept to where
they are today. Uh, but essentially when we go into
the issue of them being buddled together, this occurred collectively
back in 2023. And in doing so, we use the
estimates known as the class C estimates, which then understanding
that there's going to still be a potential significant variation
from the class C to when you get to those
issue for tender, uh, related cause. So there is going
to be that variation. And at the time, that's generally
common practice to have that when you're in that more
of that engineering favorite, early engineering stage in that conceptual
stage as well. Uh, these numbers, we're used as part
of that hues grant or the housing enabling water systems
grant in 2024. So as many would note, this is
a provincial program that has significant dollars associated with infrastructure
projects that were essentially going to drive, uh, the housing
supply, uh, across the province to meet that, uh, that
provincial priority. Uh, so as part of that grant application
going into 2024 and as noted within that, that submission
released the intention of that program is that is to
be aggressive with relation to meeting certain timelines and milestones.
And I think that was one of the challenges that
staff did grapple with in terms of completing that application
was sticking or aligning with those, uh, ensuring that we
could meet those timelines, which also served to affect even
the numbers that were put in. So looking at some
of the requirements under the program is to note that
some of those numbers could have been also further adjusted
to potentially allow for additional dollars that may come from
that, that program. Um, I would be, I would be
remiss to say that that would be any guarantee given
the amount of demand on the program. But I still,
I do believe that we were tremendously lucky to even
get the provincial funding that we did receive, recognizing the
criticality of these, these projects in the community. Uh, now
going into the summer of 2025, there began to be
further confidence with respect to the, uh, the cost escalations
that were primarily with the Craig leafless station as well
as for the Brie and Grey street linear work. So
that's when we start to move forward from your class
C to more that class A range, reducing the variation
or what that expectation of those, those ultimately, uh, ultimate
tender costs, uh, may be. But this is where there
was that, you know, when I know that gap, it
relates to, to communication and to affect a reporting is
what did not occur was an effective escalation of these
costs, uh, to finance staff to be included within the
context of the, uh, going into that 2026 budget. So
the budget was ongoing at this point in time, but,
uh, based on, uh, us not proceeding and based on
the fact that also as a bundle, when you look
at the costs as a whole as well, that generally
we would still be able to lined. So for example,
within that, that lump sum that when you think of
a Craig Weef lift station project and based on the
size of the portion of that project, when you're over,
say by even a million or two million, you may
still be able to find cost adjustments or maybe able
to find ways in which other, um, projects or costs
may still be lower when you look at those, those
subsequent, uh, bundle projects moving forward. Um, having said that,
if these were unbundled, the process would still be that
we proceed with a report to counsel to request additional
budget when we know the reasonable certainty in which we're,
we're to over. Um, so that, that, that was a
gap and that was certainly a miss from, from our
end with respect to, to, to the reporting there. Now
once again, going back to the grant itself and proceeding
in this manner, it would be, there were those intense
timelines and milestones. So I will say that I wasn't
to say that it was an intentional mess. It relates
to, uh, ensuring be it the public or council did
not have that touch point. Uh, I think there has
been an intense pressure from the province with respect to
ensuring that we can meet those timelines within the grant.
So I think that's certainly affected some of the decision
making that it ultimately affect the bundled nature of these
projects. But regardless, a checkpoint would counsel and it would
have been an appropriate point or an appropriate thing to
do from both an operational and from a governance perspective.
Now moving forward. And I think, um, I once again,
I don't want to go into great detail and I'll
leave it with members of council post any questions within
the body of the report. But I think moving forward,
I think in reflecting on this experience with respect to
these projects, I think there have been a number of
controls that were instituted as part of the, uh, earlier
report on the overage and to which they've been noted
as being looking at discontinuing the practice of bundling the
projects. So that would be, that is one effort in
which there is now those clear lines to say in
which there isn't over dissociated with a project that we
would automatically trigger that request for a budgetary amendment. Now
the additional one or the next piece that has already
been noted was for additional sign - offs for expenses
in excess of 500, 000 prior to the board of
attenders. So that's been another control that's been instituted to
reflect upon the experience of for these bundled projects. Now
some other ads certainly in reviewing the practices and how
this process did unfold for the respective projects include looking
at more, and I think the Tomley as it relates
to review of the staff template going to, going to
counsel at a later point, particularly in alignment with the
new strategic plan is ensuring that there is more of
a onus or at least a more an ability to
effectively document and address risks pertaining to projects, particularly of
those that are the scale and magnitude that we are
currently dealing with here today. So for example, it's looking
at when a report is coming forward and over a
G expectation, I think, which is fair that, you know,
it's not as if council is going to grant the
additional dollars is to say, what from a staff angle
did we do to look at being pressure in terms
of working with the consolidance that we have retained for
the project or even internally to understand, could they redesign
shifts? Could they remodifications? Or there could be, uh, other
ways in which some of this cost burned and, uh,
that, uh, when it comes to an overage can be
reduced. So when we look at being fiscally sustainable in
the future, that certainly is something that can be, uh,
that is front and center to any decision making. The
next piece, and I think is, is an important one
as well is that, uh, is exploring the, the, the
ability to have triggers with respect to value engineering exercises.
So when, uh, there was that exploration of, or at
least identifying the value engineering exercise for this project or
for these bundled projects, uh, the thinking and when we
engage, the consultant was at another municipalities depending on the
scale of the project, uh, that there are those triggers
and those thresholds which you automatically do a value engineering
exercise. So I think ingraining that practice within the town
is I think a sound practice to do. And we'll
ultimately also, um, allow for a fresh set of eyes
to identify things to which, um, be it for staff
or the consultant set often we, we may use on
a regular basis. May not be so apparent. So I
think it's always good to have that, that type of
third party, Matt may be able to challenge the assumptions
that may be going into these different designs. And depending
on the value engineering exercise that is to unfold with
particularly with a focus on the Mill Street pumping station,
there may be the opportunities to find those efficiencies or
really to see where that, uh, that this exercise is
one that, uh, certainly will have value moving forward. Uh,
and then lastly, and I think that's within the contents
of the staff report as well is ensuring that when
there are award forms to be signed, uh, by senior
staff, you know, you do look at in having that
once again, a clear picture of what that risk is
to be. And I think when you look at that,
the timeline or at least the timing between the bane
gray street linear works being awarded and understanding that once
these works are awarded, there's an inevitable. There is this
tie over to the Mill Street pumping station based on
some of the design and based on some of the,
uh, the, uh, the works that would be carried out
within that scope to which we now have minimal ability
to, to make any further or significant engineering shifts or
looking at, uh, how we affect the timing. So I
think that's another area in which there could be some,
some improvement and with respect to controls. But generally speaking,
I think one of the big pieces, at least on
from, from my end and certainly something that, uh, you
know, I need to be responsible for moving forward is
ensuring that we are carrying out the existing practices and
processes in which that includes timely and early reporting to
council and work in collectively to find solutions to these
projects that ultimately are going to drive our goals, whether
it be for an asset management perspective or looking at,
uh, driving or ensuring, we're accommodating the growth patterns in
the community and ensuring we're doing that in a, in
a responsible way. So, uh, with that, I might conclude
my presentation and comments with respect to the staff report
and happy to take any comments or questions for members
of council. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Smith, or CAO
Smith. I'm going to, I see Madam Clerk has raised
that the deputy mayor has joined the meeting. That's correct,
Mr. Chair. I did not, uh, want to interrupt. Um,
the deputy mayor joined the meeting at 1125. Thank you.
Okay. Thank you. So we'll go to Councillor Maxwell first.
Councillor Maxwell. I think that's you. Jeremy. So I have
a comment and then I have a question to the
CAL. Go ahead. So the role of like any organization
is to protect its membership. And in this case, it's
a taxpayer. So how will we be shifting risk and
liability away from the taxpayer in the future. Will we
be using a collaborative risk. Sharing between consultants and the
contractors in the near future here. Because you said you
were going to implement. Larger degree of control mechanisms. CAO
Smith. Yeah. Strew the chair in relation to, I think,
uh, and this is where, you know, obviously as we
still do that deeper dive in terms of funding these
projects, moving forward, I think I'd paramount is ensuring that
we are responsible with the responsible in terms of taxpayer
dollars and ensuring that the revenue sources that, uh, generally,
can support these projects are in a, in a good
state. So for example, DC revenue is, is, is certainly
very significant. These projects are DC eligible to which we
want to ensure that we have reserves. They're driven by
those projects or those developments to which, uh, have, uh,
we, we are creating quite a significant level of demand
on those different types of assets. So that's one piece.
We also have to look at it with relation to,
uh, keeping ensuring be a utter wastewater reserves or other
reserves are well in a sustainable and a state in
which we're continually ensuring that, uh, over the long term,
um, that they are put in a place in which
when we have these types of projects that come online,
we're prepared to, to use those, uh, those reserves without
collapsing them in their entirety. So those are from a
financial angle. I think that's where I think we look
to prepare, or at least protect those, uh, those, uh,
those taxpayer dollars. But when it comes to contractual performance
and, and sharing of that risk with the consonance and
absolutely, I think when it comes to these projects and
to say, I wouldn't, I think it would be remiss
to say that staff don't challenge consoles in terms of
assumptions with respect to design or with respect to how,
you know, things are being calculated for prospective costs on
different things. I think that does happen. Uh, but I
think we are, we are and will continue to be
looking at ways, whether it be for the contracts at
the town, have in terms of retaining different console contractors
is ensuring that, uh, there are appropriate performance mechanisms in
there. And that we're ensuring that, um, there are elements
such as value engineering that is included within these scopes,
uh, we, we, we, uh, we can once again make
sure that we're getting bang for a dollar while at
the same time still being able to realize outcomes for
the town and for the community that, uh, are going
to ensure that we don't have to say tear up
that pipe or we don't have to rebuild that pumping
station, say in five years time that these, these, these
assets are built and they're maintained in a way that's
going to sustain us for over the longterm. Follow up
Councillor Maxwell. No, that's fine for now. Okay. Thank you,
Councillor Maxwell. Uh, Mr. Deputy Mayor, go ahead. Uh, thank
you, Councillor McKinley, as the chair, uh, through you to
the CAO. Thank you for the report. There's a few
aspects in here. Which I question. I'm just looking at
number one is we keep going back to the fact
that saying, well, we did a class C. I wasn't
sure about class A. Shouldn't that have been on a
project this large? Wouldn't that have shouldn't that be the
norm? Um, other than the exception on a go forward
basis, um, with I would assume I'm not an engineer,
but I'm assuming project in tens of millions of dollars
would normally be a class A. Now from what I've
learned over the past few months, uh, once we learned
about this project. So that would have been, that would
be my first question. Um, to the CAO. CO Smith?
Uh, yes, truly chair. I would say it's a fairly
and certainly operatious staff can, can also jump in here
or certainly that, uh, that, uh, it is fairly standard
practice with respect to that, that, uh, triage or that,
uh, moving through those different class estimates because on the
basis in which a lot of these infrastructure projects, they're
not done in say, uh, designed and constructed in a
given year that they are going to be, especially when
we look at capturing that within our, our, our municipal
budgets that these are often multi - year endeavors. And
then we start with the class C based on the
fact that, you know, market conditions, cost of materials, the,
the, the other further design elements that may come to
be, those are all a big, uh, big things that
change once you actually get into more of that, that
90 percent engineering design versus when you're a more of
the conceptual stage or in that 30 percent piece So
it is fairly standard with respect to, I think, um,
the, the sequencing of this ideally, I think certainly you
would have the moment you embark on engineering. You would
have a very much a clear portrait of what those
costs are going to be. But the reality is, is
that they do take time to, uh, to fully materialize.
But I think that's where I go to my point
around ensuring that we as staff are keep that, that
risk analysis or at risk management philosophy top in center
to say, even when we have class C estimates in
place and when we know there is still that variation
or that understanding that this could actually be, and maybe
there's some assumptions that maybe other costs could be lower.
There's still enough of a variability here that we should
flag and we should escalate this further, uh, to, uh,
to make sure council's aware and make sure the general
public is aware that, uh, we can accommodate, uh, this,
uh, in, in a mean or within the means of
the municipality. Follow up, uh, Mr. Epidemir? Yes. Yes. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. Through you again to the CEO. Thank
you for that. Um, having checkpoints red flags along the
way. Then something simple like, and I say simple in
a project that's large. I'll have 150, 000 dollars of
value engineering That to me, the project should have included
that from the beginning. Because then if at the time
at 40 million dollar project, if it could find, you
know, 800, 000 million, million, five worth of efficiencies, that
should be, again, the norm, not the exception. And if
we did have those touch points, um, along the way,
then council would be able to, you know, and, and
staff together, I wouldn't be able to, number one, notify
the public. But number two, be able to look for
opportunities such as value engineering, things like that on a
go forward basis. So when we do projects like this,
in the future, they know this project needs to be
done. So, um, regardless of the huge funding or not,
the use funding is a huge aspect of it. But
to blame the huge funding portion, uh, the huge funding
receipt of monies based on the chronological events that happened,
you know, that doesn't sit the best with me because
only because we know we had to do the work
anyways. And I would have really liked to have known
that, you know, at the end of the day, like
I said in the beginning, if it was just a
class, we were going to end up at a class
A, then let me know that because the class C
only have 20 to 25 percent escalation costs, you know,
where, you know, we're seeing 19 million dollars, which is
35 on percent. So again, I'm not looking for blame.
I'm just looking to say, if we include value engineering,
we should do for the beginning. We should have further
touch points, um, at the, at the any sniff of
anything that's, that's going sideways, we should be able to
get on board with that. So I guess my, you
know, after halt my question, as you answer the one
about the, um, uh, but the assessment from the classes,
will value engineering, um, along a sign offsetting like this
all be part and parcel of major infrastructure projects like
this as we go forward to help mitigate this type
of, um, major project efficiency or differential in the future.
CEO Smith. Yeah. Through the chair, certainly I think internally
we've been having conversations of embedding those, those, uh, those
thresholds. I will say that it's not as if for
operation staff or otherwise, which value engineering or optimization studies
have not been done in the past. But I will
say yes. I think it is important. I think what
is, um, not apparent at this present time is that
clear line is to when you do one. Right. It's
to understand that there is that, uh, that, that trigger
we can't have instituted. And that is something I think
on my mind or my end too is to make
that commitment to, uh, to further ingrain and go from
the, but I will also maybe make to Deputy Mary
to your point. I should have, um, maybe reframed at
least my comments with respect to the, to the Hughes
grant because I certainly do not want to blame, I
think to say that the grant is a basis to
which this is a situation we find ourselves in. I
think the grant has been a tremendous opportunity into which
given the work needs to happen in the absence of
this grant, we be a much more difficult situation. I
think currently. So I think that's certainly I should provide
some, some clarity with in that regard. And I think
to your point is that, um, even when we experience
those timelines and those pressures is to ensure and work
with the province at an early point in time to
know that, Hey, these are these, these risks here. And
these are the, the, the, uh, cost overruns that were
perspectively may potentially face. And I think it was director
Quinlan made the comment earlier when there is that engagement
with the province, some of the feedback is, well, that
is something that, you know, when it comes to extensions,
there might be a little more accommodation for opposed to
you didn't move on a project in a timely way.
So that creates a bit of a, uh, more of
a concern. So, uh, I just wanted to probably maybe
some, some clary with respect to that, uh, some of
my comments. I might have not framed in the best
of, uh, best of ways. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Councillor Porter, go ahead. Uh, yes. And through the chair.
So I just want to, before I go into my
comments, I'd just like to build on, um, talk about
the Hughes funding. Cause that was at Roma. It was
announced in one of the workshops. And I was sitting
there at the time. And just to, not to make
any excuses, just to set the context. Is the competition
for that money was extremely fierce? Because I remember having,
listened to the presentation when it came to the Q
and A section asking the ministry representative. So in effect,
when you have this envelope of money, if you awarded
each project to the maximum, you wouldn't even award a
project in a province that has over 400 municipalities. So
the competition was fierce. Just that is, and he didn't
really like my comment because it was referenced in a
subsequent delegation that he remembered me, but that was the
fact. So the competition was fierce. Uh, I just want
to make that clear. Um, my take on the report.
And I thank you, CO Smith, for, um, for doing
this, um, it's not a report. I'm sure you welcome
the opportunity to do. I see that there was really,
um, several three, what I would describe as critical failures
in communication and transparency. There were three specific points. If
you have a process map and a process map, there
are diamonds. Diamonds are decision points where people decide to
do something. And there's three. Cause we have heard earlier
today with the previous report about the confidence in class
A estimates. This is what we're at to Mill Street
that's going forward. So they, the hundred percent estimates, we
know from the consultants report, we're going to come back
to the town. That's in the public information sessions. And
I've also clarified at an earlier meeting that coming back
to the town, man, coming back to staff, not counsel.
So those would have been done and they would have
had a dollar value. So I ask at that point,
when you looked at the three tenders that had to
go out, the three projects that had to go out
in the bundle were the estimates. Would they leave you
sufficient money. To finish the rest of the bundle project?
So that was one. The second decision point was when
the tenders came back. You're looking at the price that
the contractors are asking, asking for that it's another decision
point. And then finally you make a decision. The third
decision as I see was the actual awarding of the
contract. And I would just, um, really look for some
reassurance that the, um, the purchasing Goods and Services policy
was adhered to. Through Chair, and yes, that's
where I think when we go back to that practice
of the bundle projects is that technically from when you
looked at that whole budget in itself that with those
between the Craiglie Sewer Lift Station and the Bay and
Gray Street Linear Works, at that point in time when
those were tendered, there was available budget. However, there was
recognition, I think, at the time after Baying Gray was
that were awarded to which we were not going to
have enough budget for Mill Street to which, and this
is where the challenge becomes, is that with Mill Street
and some of the scope of work connected to Bay
and Gray creates a pressing situation with respect to time
and with respect to design given that now you're going
to back to council when there's elements of that scope
of work for mill that you no longer can change
because you started the Baying Grey Works. But having said
that, once again, it is, yes, to the point in
which there should have been between one's we understood, even
around the Craig Leaf Station, despite the fact that we
still had available budget even after that singular project being
awarded, that we still should have had that checkpoint with
council. Yeah, go ahead. Yes, through the chair. So thank
you for saying that, because at the end of the
day, you have a pot of money of 34. 7
million dollars. You award attender that money comes off that
budget line. And you know this is what you have
left, and you're looking at, if you have an awarded,
you know the class A engineering, you put out, I
could just speak for myself. I've never ever been associated
with a tender that didn't go out that I didn't
have a number in my head based on a reasonable
expectation. Then the attender come back, you have a number.
You know the bottom line on the spreadsheet. This is
what you have to play with. So I'm just saying
there were, as I read the report, there were decision
points where people decided to move forward where I think
a detour or two council would have been appropriate. Thank
you. See Osman. I know through the chair. I think
Nano Director Quinlan has her hand up. It might be
a provision comment with respect to procurement. Director. Kremlin. Go
ahead. Thank you, C. O. Smith, and through the chair.
I do just want to add that what C. O.
Smith has shared is that the timing of the information
flow is what's really important. The procurement process was followed.
It was identified upon the award of the Bay and
Gray Street that, in fact, there would not be enough
funds to do the next project, which would be the
Mill Street project. So the expectation there is that we
would have staff come forward, make the presentation and explain
why. The problem that, you know, sort of came out
of this is also that no one knew, or meaning
finance staff recognizing we were both fairly new at the
time, did not know what the next portion of that
project would be. So, um, at the time when the
Deputy Treasurer reviewed the Bit Award farm, it said he
very clearly states there will not be sufficient funding for
the next project. But not recognizing what value that was
or how much, um, the Mill Street Project would have
been budgeted for caused a problem too. And that's why
we're saying as part of the 2025 budget, we don't
bundle. We can't bundle because it's, it, it, it, it
eliminates the line of sight from a finance staff perspective
or anybody that's not directly involved in the project to
be totally fair. So I think a gain, it's really
just about the escalation of that information. One staff is
aware that the project or the updated tender, or pardon
me, the updated estimates are greater than what was previously
known. That's the point. That's when we need to understand
it and it needs to be escalated. Follow it. Through
the chair, I guess, I mean, we did hear on
December 15th. Some verbiage around that staff looked for savings.
I recall at that time saying, what amount of savings
would make it easier, more palatable to come at us
for more money. I guess I. M, what I was
trying to point out, and it has been fed back
is decisions were made. With full knowledge. There wasn't enough
money to complete the project. And I can't, I just
find that really hard. Thanks. Okay. Um, I don't see
any staff able to add comment to that. So I'm
going to go to counselor Hope. Go ahead. Yes. Thank
you. And I hope, uh, it's enshrined in the next
motion. Some of the comments the council reporter has made.
I'd like to go to page three of the report.
By the way, thank you for the report. I think
it was a good beginning. And it was an interim
report. Uh, the details that allows us to, uh, at
least consider where we might want to go. But on
page three, um, the paragraph two, three is as cost
pressures or scope changes start to emerge that information should
be escalated as early as possible. So later on, I'm
going to ask about how you intend to do that
through you, the chair, uh, to CO Smith. But beyond
that, I want to think about our friends on Bay
Street. And to think about how the origins of this
project, because the real tragedy here is going way back
is that council didn't have an opportunity to define where
the force mean was to go. And now as I
look at what has happened as a result of where
the placement of the force mean, I would have loved
the opportunity. To have, uh, had a go at the
location of that porous main. Um, and I'm really sorry
that that was that decision was not made available to
myself or to my council members. So basically all council
was told is that there was a forcemain. And apparently
according to Council Reporters figures is something like eight times.
There was a reference to force Maine, but we were
never told the location. Uh, that's way back when long
before many of the people are in this room. But
certainly council members, um, are, of course, have been affected
by that. And the whole problem, I think starts with
that. So when you talk about as cost pressures or
scope changes start to emerge that information should be escalated
as early as possible. A force main decision is not
a council decision. I understand that. Um, but then should
we be looking at that? I mean, in other words,
operations, as I understand it, it was what I was
told at the time. Operations can make that decision about
the force main. But as it's turned out, it's very
much a community decision that I think has had devastating
results. So, um. Through Mr. Chair, to the CAO, um,
I'm sure you're working on strategies on how to, what
is early as possible? Are we going to be considering,
um, some decisions that may in the past have been
under operations that become, um, community decisions. Thank you. And
I have a follow - up afternoon. CEO Smith. Yeah.
Through the chair and certainly I know, um, you know,
thinking about the force main project. As we're called to,
and I think actually that, that is where, you know,
you look at elements say earlier in design where there
may be flags or things to which, uh, you know,
Hey, we're, we realize there may be a variance. Anything
that at that point in time is a great time
to actually engage with council just to even at a,
at a point which may there or may not, you
know, may not have that certainty, but certainly at least,
um, it gives assurances that there is at level transparency
and ability to work with council and finding different solutions.
But I will say in the context of the force
man location, I do know that the piece to which
or the one of the biggest variables there was a
piece around cost. And we should relocation would have been
the location that did end up going forward was on
the basis of it represented the most efficient route to
which, uh, to realize, I think that those project outcomes.
Now I think moving forward and, you know, looking at
how we do our public information sessions or how we,
uh, when we are at the engineering design stage, which
there may be counsel direction to say we understand, say,
the engineering, we understand that there was other options proposed
into which there might be direction to say is that
we understand that this may be more costly, but we
think this might be more of a viable route or
anything like that. There is oftentimes there might be that
ability for council to provide that perspective relation to a
engineering design depending on what the project is. But also
I will say there are certain projects, for example, pumping
stations being case in point where oftentimes there is no
real, um, either have to go with this pump size
or you don't. Right. And I think there's, there's certain
pieces of certain projects which I don't think have that
means or that ability to, uh, to, to do those
types of designs that might, uh, that might, uh, result
in some significant pivots. It's just, it's barely black and
white. But as much as possible, I like to further
work with, you know, certainly our teams as they work
on different projects to, to see where there could be
that engagement to understand the risks that council may see
that might be different from what staff do. Fundamentally, it's
about ensuring we're doing, we're putting forward recommendations that our
sustainable fiscally sustainable. But the other side of it is
to ensure that council has an ability to know all
the different variables might be, uh, that might be impacting
design. And they may be the ones to say, we
think this option B might be more constantly, but it's,
it's the one in which from a community impact standpoint
might be from our end, uh, something that could be
lessened. So, uh, there is that flexibility, but ultimately does
depend on the project that is being put forward. Follow
up, Councillor Hope. Thank you. On this issue, and then
I have another question. So I'm not talking about the
relocation. I would like your report to go back to
the original decision. Which is where counsel was told a
force mane was being placed. But we were never told
the exact location. So that's long before your time. And
I'm not sure of the exact date, but early in
the early 2000s. If council had been able to have
a chance to have a look at what the different
locations could be, I think it would have just changed
so much. And the trust in the community would not
have been eroded the way it has been. It just,
there's just so many reasons why we needed another crack
at that. There's nothing that can be done now. I'm
not crying over spilled milk, but in future, uh, I
would like to make sure that council gets first crack
at everything. And so in your final report, I'd like
you to go back that far. The original choice. For
the forcemain and the lack of community involvement. With that
choice. That is, I think, fundamental. And I hope that
it helps in terms of building trust. So I will,
whoever, you know, I will be enshrining that in the
motion. How can you get as early as possible? How
do you see doing that? CAO Smith. Uh, through the
chair. Yeah. I'll have to put some thought with respect
to exploring it. I think the, uh, as you noted,
there's some, some history in terms of say the force,
Spain itself. It might be more of, and this is
where I think to the scope of this report and
investigating, say, the tendering of the works opposed to some
of the more of the design elements with respect to,
uh, the, the, the force main itself. Maybe there's some
value in separating them out. But certainly there's a, uh,
you could put forward that in the via resolution. And
I'll look further into it. And then, uh, come back
to council, uh, just for some, some information. And you
had another question. Go ahead. Thank you. Thank you. I
do. Um, I want. It to. Discuss when did finance
know about the overage at this point. And from what
I hear, because I think it's important that there's been
assumptions made that have not been fair is what I
can, what I can tease out. So I think in
this, um, at this point, I think we need to
start thinking about that. Obviously the public is asking for
that. Uh, and the concern would be. So I want
to give an opportunity to staff to explain, um, what
happened in terms of, uh, this project not being included
in the budget, uh, and what they had to work
with. Because from what I can see in the report
here. Information appropriate information was not shared.
That I can read that on the sentence. And I
see nod from you, the CAO. So, um, I, I
would like to open that discussion. And if, if, if
we can't talk about it a lot today, I would
certainly like to see, um, all of the questions that
were raised at the public comment to be included in
our emotions. So I'll just put war you about that
coming. But if there's any comments that you want to
make at this point about, uh. When did the CAO
level SMT level understand that we had a 19 million
dollar over So I'm going to go to CEO Smith
and director Quinlan. Uh, Julie Chair, I could certainly start.
And I think what I can definitely say with respective
for, for finance staff, it was in until in terms
of understand the scale into which we were dealing with
really in that November, uh, 2025 timeline, which we realized
that this is, uh, this is the, uh, the scale
to which we're, we're facing these, these pressures related to
the, to the project. So and I think that's where,
you know, it's once again, go into that theme of
internal communications and how collectively we all work together and
then escalate things appropriately. Because with budget, when we look
at through budget and when we do look at every
department providing their divisional sheets into and understanding and meeting
that these types of issues, this is where that's the
time in which they are further divised. That's the way
they are strategies are formulated. A lot of these inputs
are further considered. Um, and then that kind of forms
into where our budget process is. So to the point
that I think has emphasized previously and within this report
when this was raised in terms of that, that november
timeline, it would have been, uh, it would not have
been appropriate to fit that with in the context of,
uh, the overall budget. Because even now we're still investigating
means in which, how does this affect our debt projections
moving forward? How does it affect in terms of, uh,
our reserves moving forward. This is a significant overage that
was not reflect or at least was not considered at
an earlier point in time in which we could figure
out those strategies. So that would be, uh, that would
be just some of my comments with respect to, uh,
internal escalation. Thank you, CO Smith, director clean one. Go
ahead. Thank you. Um, Mr. Chair and through you, I
would agree with what I CEO Smith has shared. I'll
also say, um, following once we were notified that the
increase was so severe. And I mean on the mill
street specifically moving from the value on the application of
9. 4 to a class C estimate of 10. 8.
You're an issue for tender estimate at 19. 9. Um,
there was no indication or escalation to us prior to
that November discussion. Following that, we took immediate action. We
started to review the costs. We looked at, um, where
the engineers could provide us some information in terms of
what the differences were from, let's say, the application, um,
amount to the actual issued for tender estimate. We reviewed
the project file in detail. We spoke directly with staff
involved. Um, and met with our external engineering consultants to
walk us through all of those assumptions as well as
exploring where there might be some reasonable options to reduce
the costs without jeopardizing. He was funding as we've talked
about earlier or the long - term system, uh, capacity.
I appreciate CO Smith's words around the budget. The truth
is, is that, um, when it comes to capital planning,
the capital planning does not directly drive the annual levy.
At the point that we were at, and again, we
are still trying to discern where we will end up
once we go through the value engineering estimate. It does
not change the tax rate. The tax rate is highly
tied or completely tied for that matter to the operating
budget. But what it does do is change our projections.
And of course, the projections that we provided as part
of the budget documents will have to be updated. We
will have to change that. We're reviewing what our debt
servicing requirements will be, whether or not we should be,
um, looking at debt and what it means to the
overall capital plan just in general. What projects maybe we
could delay or look at delaying. That could help us,
um, manage the cash flow around this. I will say
that having the hues funding is we're very fortunate to
have that. Um, we, we of course have received quite
a bit of the funding in advance, which means we
can keep it in, you know, our accounts and provide,
uh, the cashflow as we need it. So that is
a very, you know, important part of this. But I
cannot stress enough the fact that we are working on
the update of the capital program as you're aware. We're
bringing the final asset management plan forward. And that will
come on the February 23rd deadline. That tells us what
we're going to need to do from an asset management
perspective. And we'll also tell us what, um, how we
move forward with these types of projects, recognizing that we're
also finalizing or hoping to finalize, um, a DC appeal
that's been in, um, been out there now for almost
two years. So all of these pieces of the puzzle
will help us determine where we go forward and what
we can do in terms of a long - term
plan. Thank you, follow. Just last one. Follow up. Yep.
Yeah. Thank you very much. First of all, thank you
for your honesty. Really appreciate it. UCAO Smith has done
by indicating when the CAO and that had a finance
learned, which was November 2025. And there was a council
meeting, December 2025. So you can understand exactly when council
would probably have come to learn this. So, um, the
gap is what was noted by the CAO is the
summer of 2025 when there seems to be some other
information. But I look forward to hearing more about that
one. Um, but, um, as you can see from, from
a public perspective, I'm very happy that this has come
out that, that the CAO and our director of finance
did not know till November of 2025 and then council's
meeting was December 15th. So there was certain good diligence
done in terms of as soon as our senior staff
knew pretty close to when council learned as well. So
I think that information and hopefully that answers some of
the questions that have come from up today. Um, I
have more questions, but, uh, I know that, uh, my
colleagues are looking to speak as well. Thank you. Thank
you, Councillor Hope. CEO Smith. Is that an old hand.
To the chair? No, it is not old. And I
think just, you know, I think the important messaging within
the scope of this, this report too is not to
say, to sign blame. And it's, you know, really looking
at how we move forward with respect to certain controls.
I think it is important to be transparent where to
note that we do have existing controls and practices to
which communication is always the, you know, it's may not
be or might be a term to which is very
commonly understood as to be something that, uh, is well
known and is an important aspect of any of any
project management. But I think it is something that is
also can be difficult to practice. So, and I just,
um, I think once again to reinforce, it's not really
so much to sign blame. It's, it's really to look
at objectively how the events unfolded and just being honest
and transparent with respect to how things could be done
differently and using these as lessons learned moving forward and
understanding that even looking at what, what's unfolded things like
such as value engineering axis to ensure we're, we're controlling
some of those costs. So, um, I do want to
make that clear. Thank you CEO Smith. So, and I'm
sorry. Did you say you're going to, you're leading to
a motion counselor hope or was in conjunction with council
reporter. I'm sorry. I thought I caught, I thought I
caught something about emotion. Yes. I, I think it has
to be a collaborative one. Uh, but yes, we're going
to need some time, but I know that my colleagues
would like to speak as well. Okay. So just while
I would make note of that, I'll try to work
on one now. Thanks. Thank you. So, uh, Councillor Ardell,
I don't see a virtual hand, but, uh, I thought
I might just ask if you wanted to add anything
while we're going around the first round. No, I'd just
be repeating everything everybody else said. There's no point in
hearing myself speak. So thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councillor
Adele. Councillor Maxwell, did you have another quick question you
wanted to get in or before we get to a
motion? I'm going to add a question here. Go ahead.
Uh, just building on counselor hopes, uh, comment that. Certain
departments weren't aware of things. So that almost speaks the
fact that we're working in silos and, uh. From a
nest poll, uh, perspective, that's probably not where we want
to be. Um, I don't think everybody's supposed to be
in lockstep on a project, I would think. So I'm
just wondering about that. And I'm also want to talk
to this about the bundling of, um, projects. So I'm
having a hard time. Taking that as a negative. Uh,
because if you look at economies to scale, normally if
you're bundled a project, yours cost savings. So, I mean,
if I go into buy a car, it's this much
of, I say the dealer, how about by five. Hopefully
it's less. Okay. Um. So I'm just wondering under the
risk management, uh, scenario moving forward. And, um, I don't
want to dwelt much in the past, but you know,
years ago we would have had an engineering firm design
and managed anti - air project. And all the risk
and liability basically rested with the engineering firm. And the
taxpayer's role was just to pay for the project. So
now in the past recently we moved away from that
model. And I'm just wondering if there's any potential to
revisit that model. For the future, because the whole job
is to. For us at counselors, is to move all
risk and liability away from the municipality. And I'm just
wondering if we should have a, another look at that.
And I'm just going to mention that the CEO sled
to see what he thinks. Okay. Thank you, Councillor Maxwell.
I see Director Quinlan had her hand up first. Do
you want to just hold on for a second? Councillor,
or sorry, counselor director Quinlan, please go ahead. I think.
I can just speak with respect to bundling of projects.
When we talk about bundling, we mean from a budgetary
perspective. That doesn't mean when we go out to the
marketplace or reapply to a grant that we can't continue
to bundle up. It was the right thing as part
of the Hughes funding application to bring these projects together.
But once you have the information budgeting it should be
very, um, should be single. And the reason we say
that is because it reduces the vision of what we
can see in terms of our packages. So let me
just give you a, for example, if you have a
project that overall is 30 million dollars, but your advancing
three different, you know, very distinct projects on their own.
And you start with say a five million dollar tender,
well then you still have 25 million dollars left But
if you have a, if you don't know what the
rest of the projects are. So for example, you have
25 million dollars left, but if the second project was
a 20 million or 25 million dollar project says in
fairness that you still have an remaining amount in budget
to assign that tender. But that again doesn't mean from
a, from a, you know, a procurement standpoint or a
grant application standpoint that it's the wrong thing to do.
In fact, it was the right thing to do to
apply for this huge funding with all three of these
projects because you needed all three of these projects to
meet the housing units that were being put forth. So
no one's saying that, you know, it's bad to save
money or bad to look at bundling. What we're saying
is, is when we budget though, we keep it very
separate and distinct so that it's clear to everybody, including
council, that this is, these are the amounts that are
remaining in that budget. As you know, we do quarterly
reporting. We explain what the actual and the and the
budgets are. And then we provide a projection beginning in
the second and third quarters to see where we're going
to end up. Um, that is the point is that
we would be able to see at that point that
our projections are now different, but you can't see that
when you put them all together. Okay. CAO. Thank you,
Director Quinlan, CAO Smith. Yes, uh, through the chair, maybe
to the couple pieces related to operating silos at Councillor
Maxwell noted as well as just the other piece around,
I think for third party engineering support, I think that's
the other component of this. So I will say, and
I don't think it's, uh, reflection of the reality that,
you know, for cross different departments, we're operating in silos.
I think going back to communication too, it's often comes
down to how you do it as well. Is it,
you know, in terms of verbal versus written, documenting, you
know, when certain decision points need to be made, especially
given the, the degree of complexity, I think involved with
these three different projects and especially when you look at
the connectivity between bay and gray as well as for,
for Mill Street and the history there as well. Um,
I think that's what, you know, certainly as, as created
a challenge for, for staff and effectively having some of
those, uh, internal communications. But, um, but nonetheless, I wouldn't
say that. That's a serious issue in which we, we
have this, uh, siloed approach and certainly not something that,
uh, I would, uh, would say, uh, part of my
own, my own philosophy, uh, in regards to engineering support
in third party engineering support. We do know there are
other municipalities that will deploy as it relates to more
so on the regulatory side is to say, we will
have a, a procured, say, third party to manage the
contracts bound with other contractors or consultants that would be
doing, uh, various capital projects on behalf of the, uh,
on behalf of the municipality. Now I will say that
where there is, I think the thinking in terms of
the capacity we have from an engineering or capital projects
management or even from a development management side of things
is that the value that goes in there is that
I think is exactly to that in terms of minimizing
risk because we have, we're constantly monitoring those works. You're
not having that, uh, that risk exposure that may relate
to having a consound come in that may not have
that, uh, municipal contacts or may not have that prior
experience working with the town or say our relevant engineering
standards. So oftentimes it can be good to have that
internal capacity, recognizing that that internal capacity is very familiarized
with, uh, standards and practices within the town. But, uh,
it is something I think to further explore when it
comes to certain projects in which, you know, understanding the
number that we have on the, uh, on the, uh,
in the docket coming forward is to say, where could
there be some additional support to ensure that, uh, you
know, we can move forward on these projects in a
timely way. And to consider things are further considered things
like risk. Thank you, CO Swift. Did you have a
follow up, Councillor Maxwell? Or does that answer your question?
No, I could ask questions all day. No, I'm. Okay.
Thank you, Councillor Maxwell. That's all for now. Councillor Porter,
please go ahead. Yes. And thank you through the chair.
So page three, um, the, it is mentioned in August
25 with the release of the tender became clear and
sufficient budget would remain. I wouldn't say with the release,
I would say prior to the release. And what I've
been hearing is. Because counsel wasn't aware and no one
else because to Councillor Maxwell's point, it seemed to be
managed in the silo. There was a real big missed
opportunity for our value engineering on the entire bundle. Cause
we lost valuable time that we can't get back. Because,
um, and that to me, I haven't hear that that's
a big question is to why. Um, and I still
struggle with, um. Awarding a contract knowing you don't have
enough money to complete the bundle. Maybe it goes against
my financial framework, but I still struggle with that. Um,
but we missed an opportunity to value engineer the entire
project because no one knew. Um, there wasn't other things.
Things are often best discussed in a wider audience to
ask the necessary questions. Because with respect to this project,
there isn't one area of the town. This doesn't touch.
It even touched parks given all the trees that have
gone down on B Street. There isn't an area of
the town. It doesn't touch. So the other thing is
I want to go back to, um, it's actually not
clear. Whether or not the Bay Street Force mean was
more cost effective. It's not clear. You look at the
PIC presentation. It's not clear. And, um, because some people
say I don't have a life. I took all of
the verbiage off every slide and tried to make sense
of it in a matrix. And it doesn't make sense.
Um, in fact, there is, the Georgian Trail didn't even
have a cost. Yet this was deemed the most accosive.
Um, we have mixed messaging in the community about who
and when the decision was made. And because yes, in
the April report, it was mentioned eight times. And it
was referred to as anything bought a force main on
Bay Street. But we understand from what we've been told
and the public have been told the decision had been
made. When you look at the PIC that these people
on Bay Street listen to and other people in the
town saw and heard, it was talked about preferred alternative,
but the decision had been made. The consultant told residents,
these were preferred. Um, alternatives. Uh, was preferred. And they,
they listed four alternatives. Then they give rationale why it
was preferred. And the next day the Hughes funding went
in. When it was Bay Street. So this still, that
eroded so much trust that I don't know when it
will come back. But this would have been involved. The
consultant. And what I don't see in this investigation report
is the role of the consultant either. Um, and the
part they may or may not have played. I don't
know because they're not mentioned. We don't know in fact,
and I go back to not just a strategic plan,
which accountability and transparency came larger than life. It was
back in the residential survey of 2024, the public have
been asking for accountability transparency and evidence - based decisions.
And when we come to the force main, we've never
seen the evidence. The hard evidence. And I did say
council did not support a motion to direct staff, but
I also have said nothing stopped staff from making that
transparent. So a lot of things still bother me about
this. I would ask in the report because I'm a
great believer in processes. I worked in an industry where
also things did get escalated from the front line up
to significant people and how important that is. That on
page three, when information should be escalated as early as
possible, I think it's beneficial to have a, um, a
decision matrix, a flow chart. Like where do the decisions
when something happens? Where's the next point? Where does it
escalate it too before a decision is made? It's like
you sort of have our decision chart. You have yes,
no. And where you go. Because I don't know what
the information should be escalated as early as possible. And
I realized this is, um. Uh, an interim report. I
think we need to be more, um, specific of how
the flow of information would go and the criteria for
when. It's, it's unfortunate. It sounds like it would be
very prescriptive, but we do have an enormous issue that
has evolved as perhaps of maybe not being as prescriptive
as, um, would have been warranted. Thank you. Okay. Thank
you, Councillor Porter. CEO Smith, I'm not sure. Yeah. That's
okay. Um, so I see no further virtual hands. I
was, it was indicated that there would be a motion
come forward. Uh, yes, I prepared part of one. And
so I think if we could have five minutes or
10 minutes. Yeah. If we could have 10 minutes to
have a look at to complete the motion, it would
be much appreciated. Calm. Um, so before we get to
that, Madam Clerk, how was our timeline for today? So
we'll take a few minutes for this motion to be
crafted and we're going to need a suitable break for
staff and everyone involved before we get to the next
section. Right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So yeah, so we'll
take a 10 minute break now. We'll come back. I'll
consider the motion. Um, we will do the follow up
public comment period. And then we'll have lunch for maybe
half hour 45 minutes and then come back and finish
the planning section of the reconvene at 1235. Please turn
your cameras in your microphones off. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Okay, Mr. Chair, it's 1235. Thank you for that break.
We do have a quorum of council at the table.
Thank you, Madam Clerk. Have you been afforded a motion.
Direct. CO.
Okay, Mr. Chair, I've been provided with the, uh, draft
motion. I'll just put it up on the screen. Okay.
Thank you, Madam Clerk. Just wait a moment to see
that. Excuse me. All right. So we have a motion
that moved by Councillor Hope and seconded by second. By
Councillor Porter. Thank you. That council received staff report ADM
dot 26. 015 entitled investigative report. Ash Craig Leith SLS
Mill Street SPS and gray street linear works for information.
And that council directs the CAO to address the following
points in his February investigative report. Number one, what escalation
processes will the CIO be considering to ensure that all
information financial, engineering, and construction, uh, and bracket regarding, uh,
capital projects is reported on, uh, quote, as early as
possible. End quote to council. Number two, further to these
processes, how would the CAO incorporate consultation with council and
the public at the real beginning, uh, bracket or yeah,
bracket. The thought or identified need and bracket. And throughout
the projects, as per the example offered about the decision
to place the force main on Bay Street. Number three,
please provide the details of the evidence - based decision
- making process leading to the choice of Bay Street
for the force main, including, but not limited to how
they met the bullet points on side 14 of the
April 18 2024 at a minimum, number four to answer
all questions put forward by the community matters group in
their public comments. Made today. Number five, please explain why
the gap occurred between the awareness of the overridge in
the summer of 2025 and went SMT became aware in
November, 2025. I'm going to go to CAO Smith. Since
this is directed towards yourself as of all. Court. So
to chair, I have one comment. Inside when it says
onside, it should be slide 14 of the April 18th,
PIC. Slide for, okay. Thank you for that, uh, clarification
on slide 14. Sorry, I threw Mr. Chair. So it
should read to how they met the bullet points on
slide 14 of April 18th, 2024. PIC. Thank you. PIC.
Okay. We'll correct that. Thank you. Smith, is there anything
in here that's not already under your follow - up
reports. Or just looking to you. Uh, yes, through the
chair, I will have to take a review after this
is put forward on the, what will fit within the
context of a follow - up report versus, uh, what
might, uh, might not be practical here for, for open
session, but I will be able to follow up the
council at a layer point. Okay. Thank you CEO Smith.
That being said. Okay. Councilor Hope this did become a
collaborative motion. And I know that there was one about
risk management that Councillor Maxwell had wanted to be put
forward. And we didn't include it because we needed to
get it off the way we did. But perhaps Councillor
Maxwell, would you want to put forward what you'd like
and maybe. The mover in the secondary can agree to
adding it? What would be your preference? Well, I mentioned
it to you earlier, but I mean, if it isn't
reflected in your report, then we won't do it. Okay.
About risk management that we're thinking that that will come
through in the next report. But how we intend to
manage risk in the future. So directed to CAO Smith,
I believe we heard from a couple of staff members
about risk management, but CAO Smith. Yeah. Through the chair,
I think just within the current report, I noted a
couple measures tied to that risk piece, but I can
certainly maybe provide some further detail of what that means.
So for example, looking at, you know, as part of
the review of the staff templates, I know I won't
have that ready for the next meeting of council, but
that's an example where something that I think there could
be some further prompts or further structural changes to deepen
at least the details associate in different staff reports. Um,
same with in terms of our, our bid award forms,
different pieces in that regard. So I can provide a
little more information on that if that's, if that's what,
uh, council would like to see, uh, but I just
would abrean force your RA pieces, I think, within the
existing report I've touched on in relation to that matter.
Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So I think that we
don't need to enshrine it in the motion. There's an
understanding that we'd like to see that. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Council reporter. Uh, yes. Thank
you through the chair. Um, for indulginess, I'm just wondering,
um, if we could go back to number one in
the motion, and if there is a way of incorporating,
uh, considering to show all information, we could also put
risk management. We could also put that. Have engineering hyphen
construction and risk management. It's the secondary, I'm comfortable with
that. In. Regard that as it can be as it
can be included. Okay. So. Yes, so the brackets now
is, yeah, reads construction and risk management. Okay. Um, any
other anything from anybody else attending virtually. Seeing none. Um,
Madam Clerk, please call that vote. Thank you. The vote
is open.
That phone was carried with all present voting. Councillor Adele.
Yeah. Um, I, I'm having a hard time seeing everybody.
And I don't know who's on camera and who's not
on camera. And I was wondering if we had a
full quorum for, for voting. So we do. Okay. Because
yeah. Okay. Now Councillor Maximum Councillor Hopes were gone. And
so I, I, I didn't know what was happening. So.
No problem cancelor. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Now we will
move to item B5. Public comment period regarding matters included
in the operations portion of the meeting in response to
what has been conducted this morning today. Mr. Chair, I
do have one comment to read. We have one on
behalf of something when you're ready. I don't know if
someone from the public wants to go ahead first or
well. Well, I'll have the member that's in person come
first and then we'll, we'll work in tandem. Thank you.
It's a battery. Oh, okay. We'll. Do a mic. We'll
do a microphone exchange. Good morning. Our good afternoon, whatever
it is, uh, Julie Chipping Thornbury. After listening for the
morning to all of this, um, it becomes very apparent.
To a taxpayer. That all of this money that's being
discussed is actually from the community, whether it be provincial,
federal or municipal. We are all on the hook for
this. I find it disturbing that, um, there is lack
of, um, sort of accountability. Considering, um, everything that's going
on. And I also struggle with the comment, uh, from
previously about the condot tax. And it's only 40 dollars,
which makes it all. Sorry, I don't know. Financial. Okay.
Okay. Then, uh, I, we're just blown away by the
lack of insight from staff, counselors and this whole municipality.
Thank you. Okay. Madam Clerk, you have one to read.
Please go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This comment is
from Paul Reali. Thornbury resident. He was unable to stay
to provide this comment. So he's written it for me
to read. Reed just follows. After listening to this morning's
meeting, I'd like to thank Council for the work they
are doing on behalf of our community. The discussion and
questions have been excellent. Thank you for taking this issue
with the utmost gravity it deserves. Paul Reali. Okay. Thank
you, Madam Clerk. Second call for members in the public.
Please come forward, stick your name. And address. Oh, you
got to push the button. There you go. Good morning.
Um, chair and counselor. So random cloud RR2 Clarksburg. It
was, um, it certainly perked my ears when this morning
when, um, the chair used the word disaster. To describe
this. What I'm asking. Which one are we talking about.
Because there's two in player. There's a current disaster and
the impending disaster that's going to happen. In the previous
term, the mayor of that council said that we had
a terrible tax ratio. And who I memory serves me
correctly. It was 9010. So the target ratio amongst most
municipalities is 6040. So with the explanation is that 90
percent of our tax revenues are generated from a residential.
And that is what is used to buffer the residential
taxes. This is a housing enabling project. That we're undertaking
here. This is only going to further a road. The
terrible tax ratio that we have here. So anything and
everything that is that requires funding from this building. Is
going to be falling upon the residential tax base. It
brings me to wonder. Who in the future is going
to buy a home. Live here. With continually escalating residential
taxes. So I would request a console to do a
serious consideration as to the long - term implications. Of
continuing down this road. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else
from the public. Third and final call. And I will
close that section of the agenda and I will hand
it back to, I will hand the chair back to
Councillor Hope. Yes. Thank you. Um, so Madam Clerk, uh,
at this point you have, I suggest we need 45
minutes. So or almost, how about we get back together
at 1 30? We have a short agenda at that
time. That sounds great, Madam Chair. Thank you. So just
a reminder to mute your microphones and turn your cameras
off. And we will return at 1 30. Thank you.
Thank you.
So thank you for that break, Madam Chair. We have
returned from our lunch break. It's 1 30. We are
now at agenda item. B6, which is the planning and
building portion of the meeting. We do have a quorum
of council just a reminder, please to turn your cameras
on. Yes. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh, we are now
moving into planning and building. And I have the pleasure
of chairing that section. Um, and we are at. We
don't have any correspondence. Staff reports at B9. So B
point 9. 3 chair. Yes. Um, just the public comment
period. But I do confirm that I do not have
any public comments to read. Right. Okay. For this. Yes.
So no public comments. And no one in the room.
The press will have it say no matter what we
do. So no. Thank you very much. Thank you. We
don't ever want to forget public comment. All right. Moving
on to B point eight correspondence. There is no correspondence.
Then moving on to B nine staff reports. And B
point nine point one report in response to the deputation
of Andrew Simon. We're allowing backyard chickens in the urban
area. And that is PBS 0. 26. 006. Take it
away. Thank you. Who from planning is going to handle
that. Thank you. If I can, um, introduce this Nicholas
Kloet sustainability coordinator for the town. Um, yeah, happy to
introduce this report and the associated proposed draft urban hens
bylaw. Um, so last year, sustainability and planning staff were
directed to collaborate on bold action seven in the blue
mountains future story, which focuses on expanding production of local
food. More recently in October, planning staff were directed to
respond to a deputation on the subject of backyard chickens.
Brought forward by a Mr. Andrew Simon. So we're proposing
that a bylaw that would apply to the town's urban
areas, enabling urban hens would help to increase urban agricultural
opportunities in a fair and even way. Um, preparing the
draft bylaw involved review of other Ontario municipalities, their respective
animal control or zoning bylaws. We drew out relevant clauses
for the town that we felt would be applicable and
important. Um, and a first draft was reviewed and contributed
to by sustainability, planning and bylaw staff. Uh, some quick
highlights from that. This would apply to residential zones and
does not change anything for agricultural or rural zones, uh,
were proposing a maximum of six hens per residential property
with no roosters. Uh, the bylaw includes requirements around minimum
setbacks from neighboring properties, minimum floor area and heights for
the coup and run requirements around manure management, maintenance of
a cleanly environment and other requirements to maximize bird health,
and minimize risks to neighbors, uh, we're also requiring that
urban hen owners register with the chicken farmers of Ontario,
uh, family food program. Uh, that program ensures that, uh,
owners are notified if the disease outbreak within a certain
distance and it provides owners with up to date information
on best practices to ensure their chickens are healthy and
safe. Um, and the town can contact the CFO at
any time to verify a specific address is registered for
that program or not. Uh, also administrative monetary penalties to
encourage compliance with the bylaw and to compensate staff time
associated with responding to any valid complaints. Um, there is
a, um, public consultation process would begin in mid -
February with release of information on the town's website, followed
by a public meeting at the end of March. I
think March 31st is the date. And so, um, that's
the process we would follow to receive input from members
of the public. I'll also note that, um, Mr. Simon,
uh, has been notified of this report and provided with
the information and the, um, the schedule for, um, the
public information. Thank you. Thank you. And, um, anything further
from the planning department. That's the introduction. Okay. Thank you.
Uh, so I see that, uh, we have counselor Adele's
hand up. She's ready to make a comment. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Um, an excellent report and very
thorough. And, um, I noticed that you even did some
research on other municipalities. And yes, down in Niagara region,
they're probably allowed for a maximum. And, uh, so allowing
six in our urban Blue Mountains. I think that's a
great idea. You know, having lots of rooms to have
a chicken coop, which helps, uh, with the airing them
out, I will say, when we do chickens, we do
40 to 50 to 60 at a time, but we
do have a barn and an indoor enclosure for them.
So yeah, I think this is excellent, but those are
for outdoor use. And, uh, I would say if anybody
else being a farmer as I am, we do have
chickens. So, um, I know what I'm talking about here.
So, um, yeah, I, when the time comes, I will
move the report. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Dell. I
see Councillor McKinley would like to speak. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Through you, uh, thank you for the report. And
I think it's wonderful news to see us making this
progressive step for the urban, uh, for the urban feature.
But I do have a question through you, Madam Chair,
to, uh, to probably planning, not necessarily excluding Mr. Cluette.
But when it comes to the urban nature of it,
we just, uh, how can we make sure it's very
well defined in here that it's, or very well spelt
out that there are, as Councillor Adele said, like in
my area, for the last couple of hundred years, people
have kept hens, chickens, in the barns or in their
farms, right? These are not, this, this bylaw and this
and this structure is not applicable to those of us
in the rural parts. Through you, Madam Chair, the bylaw
is not applicable to the rural area. And we had
that on mine only termed it, the urban hens bylaw
to acknowledge and respect the different types of practices that
are permitted in the agricultural community and the rural area.
There's a very clear distinction. Excellent. Thank you through you,
Madam Chair, just to follow up. Of course. Go ahead.
Thank you. Yes. So I appreciate your answer, Mr. Farr.
That's, that's, that's great. And as long as we just
keep, uh, keep that very front of focus, uh, this
is for the urban areas only, uh, but I do
have a question as a follow up though. Uh, as
it may as it may be, uh, so barring the,
uh, ability for, uh, registration and registering said, uh, backyard
hens, um, like we've, I think it's great. The beginning
stage with the parameters for the, uh, the coupe sizes
and everything like that. What is it that we expected?
Oh, maybe I should be looking to where it's more
building. Mr Morowski, because what is it we're expecting to
cross here whenever there's already pre - established backyard hand
pens? Like we don't, like we don't want to get
step, we don't want to step in it. No pun
intended for they're already being pre - existing backyard pens
with hens and how we're going to assimilate them into
this program. Go ahead. Thank you. Through you, Madam Chair,
just to understand the question correctly with regards to the
building department, you're asking about like the size of pins,
the number of pence and how that would be implemented.
Correct. And from a henceforth nature because we've just, I'm
not trying to be funny. Sorry. I do get the
humor so I didn't even, I wasn't even trying for
that one, Madam Chair. But, uh, moving in a more,
in a moving forward fashion because there already will be,
some that will be preexisting. So how can we conform
them to what we've just, uh, come up with, sorry.
Go ahead, anybody. Go ahead, Mr. Farrha. Perhaps that far
could go ahead. So through the proposed bylaw, we expect
to hear from the dream, Adam Chair, we expect to
hear from the public. We don't have a full understanding
of the scale of how many existing properties would have
chicken coops and own hens right now. But we're hoping
to hear from these folks through the public engagement process.
And, uh, as those issues come forward, we're going to
deal with them in the context of the review of
the bylaw. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That's an
important to note that in the report that there is
a public engagement process after today. So thank you. Go
ahead director Morowski. Yes, thank you Madam Chair. If I
could add just due to the size of these buildings,
the structures and buildings that are not regulated by the
building code because of the size of that. So again,
when we have these public meetings and we'll have to
discuss some of these issues. Right. Thank you. Councillor Maxwell,
go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. And, uh. Definitely, uh,
support this. Um, I just kind of wondering, I have
a question here. Given that all chickens are not created
equal. So we got, it says six hands, but I
mean, you know, can they, are we talking about banties?
Are we talking about rural island reds? What are we
doing? Are there you being that specific on what people
can have and not have. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam
Chair, through you. Um, we're not really getting specific as
long as it's a female hen. So at least, you
know, four months old so they can be properly sexed.
But, um, we've also considered for the minimum space requirements
for hens. I mean, there's different sizes, but, um, the
minimum floor area per hand is being considered in terms
of if it's larger or smaller, it should be sufficient.
Go ahead. Yeah. I just have a follow up. So
actually when I was like counselor Ardell, I was looking
up some different municipalities. A clear view. You know, they
have support backyard hands. Definitely a rural community. Municipality. And
Kingston. They also support it, but they. Also qualify foul.
Like chicken at our foul, I assume. And so what
happens if somebody wants to put ducks in their chicken
coop? Is that permitted. Go ahead. Through you, Madam Chair,
the way the bylaws currently written, um, know they would,
they would not be permitted. Um, they may pose a
different consideration from noise perspective, uh, compared to hens, but,
um, we would need to do some, some extra digging
to find some, some examples of, of docs. If that
comes through the public consultation that people really want ducks,
we can, we can look into that. Thank you. So
it will be somewhat of a restrictive bylaw then. It
enables something new, but yeah, it's, it's specific to, uh,
to hence. Thank you. Councillor Adel. Yes. Thank you very
much. And, uh, yeah, I think we would have to
do that. We had Guinea that were most disruptive. We
started off with three and four. And they are very
loud. And you definitely don't want those in the urban
area, but they are considered a hand still. So I
think we'd have to really limit it to chickens. And
also I would like to say, and I forgot to
do this with my follow - up. Um, I think
the strategic initiatives communication team needs to put this out,
um, after a public meeting, um, we need to quantify
and qualify all of what this chicken, um, backyard is
all about, um, because we still have questions coming through
as the chair of the agricultural that we didn't get
enough communication out to the urban, uh, to the rural
individuals. And they are still upset because they feel that
communication was not adequate enough for our rural areas. So
what I would like to see once we have our
public meeting or even before the public meeting that the
rule individuals, if we can put it on our website,
if we at the next Blue Mountain review that something
is mentioned about chickens and that we don't want people
phoning property standards, you know, we just, this is something
that needs to be communicated out. Um, and some individuals
in our egg meeting thought that, uh, there wasn't enough.
So I'm just expressing concern from the rural people, um,
it needs to be open and transparent. Thank you. Any
comments from planning. You can go ahead. If I may,
thank you, Madam Chair. We'll certainly make sure that our
communications across multiple platforms put front and center that this
is for the urban settlement areas and does not affect
rural or agricultural residents. Um, I'd also be willing to,
um, bring this to the agricultural advisory committee if there
was an opportunity to speak with them. Um, also just,
um, just, um, just on an earlier note, I was
looking at the definition of, uh, of urban hens, which
specifies the keeping of female chickens or pellets. And I
wonder if that might be specific enough to exclude, um,
guinea fowl or other types of hen. But thank you.
Thank you. Um, I don't see any other hands. I
just have a, excuse me. I just have a question
one. I looked at the fines. It seemed to me
that thinking about the fact that this residential. That 200
bucks basically for possessing a rooster, it's kind of low.
And it would be sort of the sin of sins
really, because that would be, you know, highly disruptive to
have a rooster there. Plus, um, any other follows that
happened with roosters that I don't know about, um, but,
um, does that make sense? I mean, through me too.
Whoever can handle that one. Go ahead, Mr. Tuer. Thank
you, Madam Chair. Um, I think what we can do
is look to a draft copy of the bylaw. And,
uh, we're using that as the base for a public
meeting, for people to comment on this and how we
can make any changes, if necessary on here. So that
if everybody could kind of look to the draft by
law and then we can work with that. Perfect. Thank
you very much. Appreciate it. Now Councillor Maxwell, second pass.
I just wanted to comment on your, your, the rooster
at the 200 bucks. Yeah. Uh, the, uh, the people
who own the hens may need a rooster to visit.
In order to maintain the flock. So I'm just, uh,
we'd have to be very careful on that one, I
think. I think we're anyway, we'll talk about it. Thank
you. I see Councillor McKinley. I'm wondering if, are we
on to our way to a motion? Yes. Um, well,
Council, sir, Madam Chair, counselor Ardell had indicated she was
moving. I was going to second it. Yes. Um, but
I know she's the mover. And if you'll allow me,
Madam Chair, uh, counselor Ardell, if there's enough time that
we could circulate this, this bylaw and this discussion to
the advisory committee. Is there another meeting for the eggvisory
in the near future? Yes. So, uh, if the mover
would be allowed to be okay with it, I would
like to add an end that council direct staff to
circulate this, uh, bylaw or this information to the egg
advisory committee for their review and comment. Are you meneral
to that counselor? Dell. I'm thinking back to our ag
meeting. We didn't have any motions, but I think I
did mention this. Councillor Maxwell, do you recall that I
mentioned about a hen bylaw coming in and it wouldn't
affect the rural areas. But, um, nobody made any comments.
So that's why I'm pretty sure I mentioned it, but,
uh, I could be wrong. Councillor Maxwell. That conversation escapes
me. I don't remember that one. Okay. Well then chair
and the words of my uncle one more time won't
hurt. Go right ahead. If you could give us the
words or perhaps we are getting. Madam Clerk is putting
that together. And we would want to include in the
information and an invitation to the public meeting. Thank you,
Madam Clerk, for that. Do you want to read it
out too, please? Certainly, Madam Chair. Emotion reads as follows.
The council received staff report PBS 26006 entitled report in
response to the deputation of Andrew Simon re - allowing
backyard. Backyard chickens in the urban area. And that council
direct staff to advance the draft urban hens bylaw being
attachment to for public consultation generally in accordance with the
schedule contained within this report PBS 26006. And the council
direct staff to circulate staff report PBS 26006 to the
agricultural advisory committee for review and comment. And Madam Chair,
just to note the next, um, egg advisory committee meeting
is March the 19th. All right. Thank you very much.
Um, Councillor Maxwell, is that an old hand. It is.
Okay. Um, so I think at this point I see
no other hands. Shall we please call the vote. Thank
you. Thank you Madam Chair. The vote is open.
The vote is closed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. And the
motion has carried six nothing with Mayor Way today. Thank
you. Moving on to the next item for the planning
section. B 0. 9. 2 removal of holding symbol. 12
side road bed and breakfast, Lawson, PBS 0. 26. 016.
And who will be taking the lead on that one?
Okay. Go ahead. When you're ready. Cu.
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Councillors. My name is Manuel
Rivera. I'm a planner one with a town Blue Mountains.
And I'm here to discuss the following staff report with
respects to removing holding symbol H34 from 12 side road.
To allow the approval of bed and breakfast use to
proceed in 2019 council approved a zoning bylaw amendment to
permit a Ben breakfast on the property subject to a
holding provision requiring confirmation that the owner resides on the
property as their primary residence in December of 2025. The
owner applied for a Ben breakfast license and requested the
holding to be lifted. And as proof of prime residents
was submitted such as a change of address confirmation letter
from the ministry of transportation, which is an acceptable proof
of interim proof until the updated identifications issued. And this
change of address confirmation letter demonstrates that the owner will
be residing on site, meeting the requirements of section 4.
8D of the zoning bylaw as a result, the holding
provision has been satisfied. And with council approval, planning staff
has prepared by law to lift the holding provision from
the property. And that concludes the report. Thank you very
much. Now, uh, any comments from members of council are
questions. Depp Mayor, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair, through
you. Thank you, Manuel. Um, are the proponents aware of,
um, changing your driver's license is one thing, but aware
that in the class licensing system, the provisions for Ben
Breakfast and the consequences, if it's operated with them, not
on site as an STA. We've had, I'm not saying
these people are going to do that, but just is
that part of the process from the, from the planning
department and as my law been involved as well, um,
because we have very stringent STA laws and class systems
within our amps. So I was just wondering, part of
the education process to that to the applicants. Is that,
has that been done? Through you, Madam Chair. With in
terms of laws aspect in the Benton breakfast licensing, as
noted in the report, usually they will request primary proof
of residency, which is usually in a form of their
driver's license, which indicates that they are residing in the
subject property as their primary resident. It can't be, let's
say a mailing address whatsoever. So therefore in that respect,
they would have to reside. If not. I would hate
to think that somebody would pull them over from the
police in that respect and request the drivers identification in
that regard. Could I just follow them? Yes, go ahead.
Thank you. Yeah. I think we're going to have a
different road. I do appreciate that and that they're satisfied
it, but just again, I've been have evolved with STA
for the longer that I can remember. As long as
the applicants know, and I'm not saying that they're not
doing this, as long as they know the true provisions
of a bed and breakfast, um, is, is very prescriptive
compared to a regular STA or a nonconforming SDA. So
I want to know if part of the process that
all that was explained, um, not just showing your proof
of a driver's license. Is that part of the application
process or the planning process. Um, because it's a two
- part contingent planning as well to do the bylaw
as well as our regular SDA bylaws and our AMPS
penalties, which have, uh, which have been rewritten a couple
of times over the past eight years. Go ahead, Mr.
Rivera. Through you, Madam Chair, that part of the, our
review of the bylaw would be included reviewing the use
that's permitted as of right, which abandoned breakfast is permitted
due to the previous zoning bylaw amendment. And we do
issue planning clearance letters in this particular case, we could
update the letter to reflect that that request noting that
they are to comply with the revisions in section 4.
8 breakfast, which includes that they are to reside in
that use permitted as of right. If they were to
continue to operate as a bed and breakfast and not
as an STA. Maybe that's something you want to enshrine
in the motion. Thank you, Madam Chair. If I could
just indulge me for one quick second through you. Is
that part and parcel? Like not, we shouldn't have to
enshrine it in this motion. Like it should be regular
course of business. Um, to let people know, um, again,
I helped write that bylaws and those, and those categories.
So I know them. But the people that are applying,
do they, well that, is that done normal course of
business, I guess, is the crux of my main question.
If somebody's looking for a BNB, don't just show me
driver's license. Do you know the circumstances what you have
to reside with property? Is that enshrined in all the,
in the agreements and in the, in the, um, for
the applicants. And I'm not saying the applicants are doing
anything wrong. And we've probably great operators. I'm just saying
whoever it is, when they're applying for a bed and
breakfast license, are they aware of what categories they need
to be in, what contingencies they need to have resideful
time in the property. And what circumstances, uh, will come
if that is being a circumvented. I'm just asking if
that's a normal part of the process. Mr. Postma has
his hand up. So he'll let us know. Thank you,
Madam Chair. To the Deputy Mayor, these applicants are well
aware of the bed and breakfast rules and requirements for
the town of Blue Mountains. Uh, they've been at this,
uh, process now for a couple of years, first obtaining,
uh, zoning approval, uh, it was a couple of years
ago now. Um, but they were still. They understood at
that time that they had to be living permanently at
that residence in order to obtain a bed and breakfast
license and being able to operate because they were not
living there at the time council at the time said,
okay, we're going to put a holding H34 symbol on
there to make sure that first we get confirmation that
you have moved there, um, you know, as you're permanent
location, which is what's been completed now, uh, so they're
well aware of the requirements, uh, bylaw has a very
strict and robust licensing program that Ben and Breakfast also
apply to. So there's still some additional requirements that these
owners will have to do. And part of that process
includes that education on how, uh, Ben and Breakfasts are
to be run. Great. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thanks
for that clarification, Mr. Posma. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Councillor
Maxwell, you're next. I just have a comment what the
deputy mayor was saying there. So the bed and breakfast,
this particular bed and breakfast. Has went through significant hurdles.
To get to where they are. But, you know, you
can have other organizations, you know, who are in the
rental business circumvent all zoning and bylaws. So, um, I
just, I kind of wonder why even people would even
go through the bed and breakfast process where you can
just, you know, vacation homes by rentals, all that. They're
just circumventing everything. So, um, I think these people have
done the due diligence for sure. In my mind, they,
they went over and above what these other people are
doing currently right now circumventing everything. So anyway, any comment
on that to Mr. Postman. Uh, yeah, just a brief
comment, um, you know, the town does have quite a
strong and robust short term accommodation, hotel motel, bed and
breakfast, uh, program for the town. So whether they're vacation
homes or whatnot, they do need to operate within the
bylaws of the town. And if they aren't, we do
have an active bylaw enforcement that will go after those
ones that, uh, that aren't abiding by the rules. Um,
so I just want to be clear that, uh, for
the most part, operators are operating within their prescribed requirements.
And those who aren't, uh, are actively, uh, track down
and, uh, and dealt with. Thank you very much. Uh,
Council, sorry, Dell. You're next. Uh, yes. Thank you very
much, Madam Chair. Uh, same along the lines of the
Deputy Mayor. I've been at STA more than anybody. And,
uh, I don't know how many times we rewrote this.
And, uh, we had a lot of bed and breakfast
back in the day. And they were all very successful.
We all knew that they lived there full time. Um,
and my question then to Mr. Rivera is do both,
uh, owners who are on title, uh, have to prove
their residency or just one so that for tax, um,
purposes as well, um, if you're living there full time,
then both owners should have their license at the same
residence, not just one. So I'm not sure if that
was followed through, um, but, um, in the past, we
probably, and the signs at the bottom of Blue Mountain,
uh, Blue Mountain Resorts pointing to, uh, see BNBs, uh,
those people I know them, uh, they, they live there
full time 24 seven. So not saying that these people
are not. I just wondering if we have other safeguards,
um, in that as well, who's ever on title should
have to have permanent residents in the town of the
Blue Mountains. Go ahead, Mr. Postma or? Right. Yeah. I'll
tackle that one. So the way that the bylaw reads
is yes, the owner has to be living there permanently,
uh, while the bed and breakfast is being operated. Uh,
if the multiple owners on title, um, you know, which
does happen in a lot of cases, um, it's only
the operator that's required to have their permanent residence there.
So if it's being operated by one of the property
owners or two or multiple property owners, then yes, they
would have to have their permanent residents there, but it's
tied to the operator and the operator must have their
permanent address at that location. Well, thank you for clarifying
that. Um, but if it's a husband and wife team
and it's being advertised as that, I would think that
that's, um, a case in point where it should be
both operators on there, not just one operator. Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Porter. Yes. Um. Thank you. And through
the chair and yes, I sort of share concerns because
just because something says something on a piece of paper
doesn't always make it true. And while I certainly believe
these proprietors are extremely well intentioned, it's nothing personal with
them is I just want to know what is the
penalty for this. And I know the STA amps have
been ongoing for some time now, but maybe what's the
current one. Does anybody know? And what is the penalty?
Because this is, you're removing the H, you're allowing them
to run, um, their business, which is fair. But what
if there isn't compliance. What happens? For you, Madam Chair.
That if that's the case, if they're not a compliance,
then they would have to answer to buy law enforcement
and whatever penalties there may be, they would have to
abide by them. If not, I would assume that they'd
be stricter actions involved, which may include removal of the
license in general. So I think has been mentioned earlier,
if I have just have a follow - up through
the chair, is it probably would be prudent to advise
them yet again, what the consequences would be if they
do not abide by it to be under percent sure
that they are fully informed. Um, so people can't come
back and say, Oh, I didn't know. Um, so just
do, it's really always a good reminder for them. And
equally reduce the risk of the town of not being,
uh, in a position to say, Oh, well, we weren't
informed. Thank you. And yes, we'll, uh, we'll do that.
We'll undertake that. Thank you, Mr. Postma. I have two
more hands up. Second pass. Three hands up. Councilor Maxwell.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Now this, I don't know. Maybe
this question doesn't matter or not, but it can a
corporation own a bed and breakfast or a numbered company.
Corporation is individual. So I just didn't know how that
works. Uh, no. The way the licensing bylaw works is
you have to be the owner. So corporations would not
qualify. Follow up. Thank you. Uh, Deputy Mary, go ahead.
Thank you very quickly through the chair just to answer
the question from Councillor Porter. It's 4, 000 for the
first offense 8, 000 for the second offense to operate
without a natural license or being within contradiction of that
license. So we council did this council did set those
amps rather. Aggressive level, just, just, just, just to make
sure that everybody does follow the rules. So just wanted
to let the council know that. Thank you very much,
Depumir. Council Sardell. Yes. Just quickly as well. Um, I,
you know, I've read the, um, the bylaw and the
zoning bylaw, but it doesn't state anything. And people will
come back and say, I didn't know I had to
live there. Um, and we did have that, uh, from
prices subdivision. That would be going back two years, two
and a half years. We remember they stated they lived
there. And then they didn't and they had other residents.
Um, as well. So, and they were using it as
they said it was a B and B and it
wasn't a B and B and it was an STA.
So I think we need to make the bylaw very
clear and concise and maybe have an appendix to it
stating that this you will be on site. Um, and
I don't think it's only us to draft something up
like that. I just think it should be in black
and white. So they can't come back like this other
individual. I didn't know that. So that's all I'll say.
Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Cancer. Dell at this point
we have a motion on the floor. And if we
want to propose motion. So if we want to make
any changes, we can. So ask Madam Clerk. Please put
the motion up as it stands. Removal of the holding
symbol. 12 side road bed and breakfast lawson. PBS 0.
2 6. 016. The council received staff report PBS 0.
26. 016 entitled removal of holding symbol 12 side row
bed and breakfast. Lawson. Nick Council and act a biology.
Remove the holding H34 symbol in its entirety from these
lands municipally known as 609 375 12 side road and
legally described was concession four SEPT lot 13 RP 16R
255 parts four and five RP 16R 3058 part two.
I'll move that madam chair. Thank you. We mover in
Kelsey and we'll have a second in the deputy mayor.
Any further comments. Seeing none shall we call the boat.
Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. The vote is open.
Chair. Madam Chair, can I assist you on voting. Oh.
Did you get it? Oh, no. Okay. Deformative. Thank you.
Vote is closed. Motion is carried. Six nothing with Mayor
absent today. Thank you. Moving on to the last item
under planning. B. 9. 3 information report. Community design guidelines
PBS 0. 2 6. 003. I suspect Mr. Postma is
the one that's going to carry this photo. Oh no,
that's right. Go ahead. The Ms. Marwaha. Yes. Good afternoon.
Um, Council Members. So this is a brief information report
to provide an update on the community design guidelines. Um,
this project will update the existing guidelines. To give them
a refreshed look and bring it in alignment with the
town's policy updates. So this project was initiated in 2023.
Um, the towns official plan review was still underway at
that time. And now the official plan has been adopted
and those policies are confirmed. So we are able to
proceed with updating the community design guidelines. So, um, plan
is that we expect to have draft guidelines ready by
spring 2026 followed by a public engagement. And the final
guidelines and checklists are planned for summer 2026 and council
adoption anticipated in fall 2026. So that's, um, that's the
overview. And I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank
you very much. Um, any questions. Councillor Maxwell. Thank you,
Madam Chair. Thank you, Tisha, for the report. Um, so
these community guidelines. Are they tied to. The potential
use of secondary plans. Go ahead. Yeah. Through you, Madam
Chair, to Councillor Maxwell. So the community design guidelines, um,
build upon official plan and they express their vision and
intent of the official plan. And secondary plans, they are
the second step of the official plan, but community design
guidelines basically, they reflect official plans vision. Follow
up. Yeah, I do. Yeah. Okay. So. Okay. So this,
the secondary plans have no influence on these on the
community design guidelines. I just want to see if my
AI program was actually truthful to me or not because
they said it was. So okay. I can rule that
out then. Thank you. Thank you. Cancer Porter. Yes. Thank
you. And, um, through the chair, the most certainly, um,
this is something the community has been looking for, Ritu.
It's been asked for, um, quite some time. I guess
what I, I would ask is, um, I get a
bit nervous when it just sort of like, I hear
words like a refresh or update. I mean, we are
14 years. Down the road. And repeatedly, as long as
I know people have talked about character, charm, et cetera.
Small town feel. It comes out in the strategic plan
yet again. Came out in the official plan. I don't
know what plant. It doesn't come out in. And I
guess. STL, I have some confidence in. However, I would
really appreciate it. If this could be taken into consideration.
Sogging shores has some really good community designs. And they're
a bit of a mixed bag of a town. Cause
sogging chores is poor Elgin and, um, Southampton put together.
Southampton is more Thormbery like Port Elgin. Well, it's just
my opinion. I don't think it suffered from excessive planning
because it's got big bulk stores and accumulation of here,
there and everywhere, which I have seen evolve over the
last 24 years. But they're very, very different. So therefore
they actually have some more specific. And we have seen
some interesting developments. No one's fond of the one across
from the peaks. And we've had some other interesting ones.
Um, interesting home designs, et cetera, which people haven't been,
they really sort of don't keep in the ambiance of
the town. Um, I'm not saying it's, and this got
talked about when the apartment building on the corner of
Clark and Marsh. Was brought forward. About in keeping with
the ambiance of Marsh Street, which is Artsburg is very
special. So I'm just really asking, um, I would like
the opportunity. I will send you what Sogging Shores has.
But really just to be mindful that we have something
very special here. And the idea of keeping the character
and the charm is. Because a lot of, a lot
of places people come into when they drive by and
they don't want to stop walk around. And I'm seeing
Thornberry has that and other aspects do. Because the community
design guidelines, if you think about, we have the strategic
plan. We now have a tourist destination strategy. And if
we begin to erode about a way at the charm
in the small town field, et cetera, while just my
opinion, I feel that's a contradiction. To trying to encourage
and enhance tourism, the tourist experience, which is why people
come. And equally has an impact on the economy. So
I would just ask that the broader perspective of the
town be viewed with respect to the community guidelines. Cause
we're in a very different place than we were when
they were produced in 2012. Thank you. Comments. Okay. Thank
you. Um, I don't see any other hints. So I'd
like to, uh, have a go. This. First of all,
it is a long time coming as, uh, counselor Porter
has identified. We've been waiting for this for a long
time with the official plan. So I'd like to know
the impact is at this point. Because right now the
official plan is sitting at county waiting for approval. And
where does the community design guidelines sit. County approve over
the next year, which one would hope. And when would
they adopt the community design guidelines.
Um, Community Design guidelines. They do not need to be
adopted by counties. So it's just the municipality. So when
they'll be finalized, they'll be ready. As an implementation tool.
But in the meantime, a developer could come along and
use the 2012 community design guidelines. Which should displawning department
have a plan for that. I mean, I don't know
how many developments we've got on the books right now,
but, um. Go ahead. Yeah. So we're currently still operate
under the 2016 official plan, uh, in the policy direction
that's there. Uh, and one of the primary reasons why
we, we kind of put the community design guidelines project
on hold was we were still waiting for what the
outcomes were going to be with the new official plan
policy direction. So things like building height, uh, and, um,
uh, density were the two biggest components that really influenced
community design and how do we actually develop the sites
that, uh, that are available for future development. Um, we've
got that direction now, uh, from council through the adopted
plan. And yes, we're working with the county to get
that, uh, approved. Um, hopefully less than a year. We're
looking to try to get that done over the next
few months. Um, still a few hurdles to go through,
but, uh, yeah, it's still a priority. But then in
terms of the community design guidelines, we felt it was
now appropriate to restart this, this program again. Um, and
we will continue to apply the 2012 guidelines. Um, they
are still good. Um, they don't reflect the changes and
the policy changes that have come into, uh, effect with
the adopted official plan. Um, but they do still give
strong consideration in terms of house sites should be designed.
Uh, we've picked up on, you know, the comments from
Councillor Porter in terms of wanting to make sure we
recognize that small town feel, you know, there are a
lot of good notes that we've taken down here in
terms of, um, the perspective that, that should be applied
to these community design guidelines. And those are already being
built in. So in the meantime, we continue to work
with developers in terms of designing their sites to something
that's going to fit with the character and the style
and the, uh, brand, uh, Thornberry or Clarksburg or wherever
the development is to occur. Um, but really it's this
next step to get the community design guidelines in place.
So we have a nice firm document that we can
share early in development processes to say, okay, this is
what the expectations are when developing a site and bringing
planning applications forward. You're pardoned me. I've been waiting for
this for a long time. So I'm, um. Certainly welcome
the community design guidelines when they finally decide to appear
because it has been throughout the, uh, the plan. So,
um, maybe we'll just put this on the agenda when
we, when we meet the planning department. So I am
disappointed. But one last point. Hopefully there's no additional budget.
Because the design guidelines are so late. Is that still
part of the 400, 000 dollars that we put toward
the official plan? We'd watch it. Yeah. It's still part
of the approved budget. I'm not sure of the number,
but whatever the budget was approved, it is still within
that. All right. Thank you. Well, I certainly look forward
to the community design guidelines. Thank you. Any physical? Yes.
Councillor Maxwell Oldham knew him. Yeah, I just have one
quick question. So you mentioned something about Gray County approving
the official plan. What happens if they don't approve it?
Has that ever happened. Oh, that's a good question. Um,
so it does need to go to county council for
a decision. Uh, so if it's county council generally could
approve the official plan as it was adopted by council,
uh, they could approve it with modifications, uh, so they
can require the municipality to make changes to their official
plan. Um, generally things that may be in conformity with
the county plan or with provincial direction, um, they can,
they can make those changes themselves and approve that version.
Or they could refuse it and essentially, you know, send
the whole project back to the municipality for, uh, for
further review. But not likely. But anyway, yeah, go ahead,
Councillor Maxwell. Okay. So let's say that ideally that doesn't
happen. But if it did, would that influence the community
improvement or the community plan. Go. Ahead. Yeah. Uh, well,
I should note. I mean, the town staff are working
diligently and alongside county staff to ensure that, you know,
any changes that may be proposed to the plan or
any, uh. Changes that may be considered. Our being reviewed
with municipal staff, uh, we have made the commitment as
well that if there are substantial changes to that plan,
we would bring them back to this council, uh, for
information, whether it's, you know, an approval decision or a
set of modifications that are being considered, uh, so those
would come back before the county would issue their decision.
Um, with regards to the impact on the timeline for
the community design guidelines, um, county staff don't have any
concerns or objections in terms of those major components. The
building height and the density components that really influence those
community design guidelines. So we're confident that those pieces are
set. And from there, we can develop the guidelines based
on those, that policy direction. So, um, these design guidelines
can still move forward. Uh, ideally to be approved, you
know, soon after that the official plan is received its
final approval. Uh, but they can definitely go concurrent together.
Okay. Uh, all right. Councillor Dell. Go ahead. Uh, yes.
Thank you. Um, Madam Chair. And just to answer counsel
Maxwell, uh, yes, great county and another municipality during my
time there, uh, from 2014 to 2018 did not approve.
A municipality's official plan, uh, there was lots of discussion.
Um, but it wasn't regarding the community improvement plan, but
it has happened. Um, regarding an official plan, but I
just, other than that, when I dated back to 203
to 206, all official plants have been approved and never
been rejected by Grey County. So I just want to
add that point in there. Um, and, um, you know,
great county has a good report still with us. And,
and I remember in 2016, uh, there was a lot
of, um, it was slow trying to get our official
plan to prove because there was, uh, the dialogue with
the public and having to get back from the public,
all the dialogue and answer questions. So, um, I think
they are definitely trying to work with, um, all municipalities,
but that just answered, uh, Councillor Maxwell's, uh, they didn't,
um, it wasn't approved by Grey County at the time
and eventually had to be approved by the province overriding
the great county. So, um, that's just a side note.
Thank you. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Go ahead. Thank you,
Madam Chair very quickly through you with what Mr. Paulsterman,
Councillor Adele said, great county is, you know, they'll look
at if it falls within their, within their planning has
to mirror up together because the bylaw is stocked together
or the planning documents that stacked together plan of Southerners
and things like that. Or if it follows the PPS
provincial policy statement. So those are more administrative in nature
than they would be, um, you know, the one I
know the research to want to an example. Our counselor
Adele said when she was at county council, but predominantly
it's keeping in line with the provincial policy statements and
the Greg Pandemic planning objectives. It's usually just a tweak
and it's, um, administrators for nature more than likely because
they know the work that's done at the lower tier
will affect the lower tier. And then the, that's where
the member municipalities who sit at the Great County Council,
that horseshoe will make those decisions. But it's usually within,
within the parameters of, um, as long as it mirrors
up with the provincial policyment and the, and the county
documents as well. So thank you. Thank you very much.
I think the matter has been fully discussed at this
point. I don't see any other hands. Could I, uh,
Madam Klerkowski to put the motion up. And it is
that council receives staff report PBS 0. 26. 003 entitled
Information Report Community Design Guidelines. Could ask for a mover
in this. I'll second it. Dog moved. I think Councillor
Maxwell then Councillor McKinley is what I heard. Sorry Councillor
Dell. Is there any further discussion. If not, let's call
the vote, please. Thank you. The vote is open.
The vote is closed. Thank you, Madam Clerk. That motion
has carried 6 - 0 with the mayor absent today.
And that completes the section on planning and building services
with the exception of the public comment. Item B 10.
Now, Madam Clerk, there is no one in the building.
And I have no comments to read. Oh, thank you.
So that finishes my section. Did he mirror? Do you
want me to continue. Or did you want to go?
Yes, Great. Please pull it off and meeting. Thank you.
Okay. So going to item C, new and unfinished business,
uh, we don't have any committees of council reports. We,
oh, notice of motion. Is there, are there any notice
emotions to be offered. At this point. Seeing none, I'll
move forward. Uh, C3, there were no additions to the
agenda. D is notice of meeting dates. So we have
a council public meeting on February the 10th. Then on
council meeting February 17th, then committee of the whole meeting,
uh, admin corporate and financial services strategic initiatives and committee
services on February 23rd. Town Hall Council Chambers and Virtual.
Another committee of the whole meeting operations and planning and
building services February 24th, 2026 town hall council chambers and
virtual. And that takes us to the last item adjournment.
And if we could please have the motion put forward
on the screen and the motion is that this committee,
the hole does now adjourn it 225. P. m. to
meet again on February 24th, 2026 town hall, council chambers
and virtually or at the call of the chair. Moved.
Thank you. But moved by Councillor Porter and Second Admi.
Second by Council from Kinley. Thank you very much. I
don't see any objections. So let's call the vote. Thank
you Madam Chair. The vote is open.
What is closed? Thank you. The motion is carried six
nothing with the mayor absent today. Please turn off your
cameras and we'll see you again. Soon. Thank you.