ready here just some little housekeeping
are these reports that we have to sign
as counselors tonight any of
these yes I do have two decisions from
the committee of adjustment so there are
I see three of us in this room so don't
let us leave without signing thank you
all right we're live now may
clop okay welcome everyone to uh our
December 7th meetings uh we're going to
start with our committee of adjustment
and I'll ask uh a call to order and uh
Chandra to do roll call
please member klopp present member
Ferguson present member Becker present
member Harris
present uh member Irvin sends his
regrets as does member leaport member
Vandenberg present member Walden present
and wetstone
present okay we have Quorum thank you uh
counselors deputy mayor uh hope you had
a good couple weeks uh we now uh I need
a motion to approve the agenda as
printed so moved Mr Mayor
Walden
seconded
fenberg all those in favor of the agenda
as printed say I I I
any opposed hearing none opposed motion
carries is there any disclosure
pecuniary interest for tonight's meeting
or the previous
meeting hearing none we are now at uh
point four which is adoption of the
minutes from the previous
meeting of November the 2nd 2020
Committee of adjustment do I have a move
or a second for that so moved it's a
deputy thank you Deputy second
wal Walden
seconded any discussion on the uh on the
minutes hearing no discussion I'm going
to call the motion all those in favor of
adopting the minutes as printed i i i
any opposed hearing none motion carries
thank you we're now at uh five 5.1 mv12
D20 and planner Hallman you're there
somewhere there you are Hannah good
evening and this is uh the 3398 King
Street lot 38 plan plan 531 hey West
Ward take it away Hanah all right thank
you chair um I will just share uh my
presentation all right uh so as stated
by the chair the next application is
number mv1
1220 um the subject property is located
on the corner of King Street and
Princess Street uh the the subject
property is designated residential and
is zoned residential low density R1 the
property is a corner lot um and the
portion along King Street so that
southern lot line there um is recognized
as the front property line with the
exterior property line um along Princess
Street uh just for committee's um
understanding uh here are site photos of
um the subject application tooken
earlier in November um the subject appli
is seeking to add an extension to their
existing dwelling on the Northern side
um so right about located right about
here uh the elevations are provided of
the existing dwelling um including um
the proposed um extension to the
dwelling um so showing the front and
rear elevations there and the right and
left
elevation and here's the uh site plan
that's provided uh the applicants
specifically are seeking uh variants uh
to reduce the RIS yard setback from 8 m
to 2.1 M um so in this case it is uh it
is along the left side of the screen um
so it would be along the northern lot
line that they're seeking to reduce from
8 meters to 2.1
Metter um the application was considered
against the four tests of the minor
variance um the proposed minor variance
represents a reduction of 5.9 MERS um it
is worth noting that the rear yard um in
this case if it were to be considered
the interior side yard um which might
you
know to the to someone um looking at the
property it might appear to be the
interior side yard just because of the
orientation of the house as well as
other adjacent Lots if it were to them
be the interior side yard the required
setback would be 1.5 M so that's worth
noting um just to the UN just due to the
unique configuration of the lot the
proposed construction otherwise comp uh
follows the requirements of the R1 one
zone uh including lot coverage uh as
well there is proposed that the septic
system would be located on the exterior
sidey yard uh further limiting uh the
available space on the property for this
um extension as such the minor variance
is considered uh minor and
desirable uh as well the minor variance
maintains the intent of the zoning Bon
the official plan Amendment uh to
support uh residential development uh
within the residential designation in
terms of comments there was one neighbor
comment received um from the property
owner to the north um so this is the
property owner that's AB budding uh the
yard that is seeking the variants um
expressing no concerns with the proposed
build uh but they did have concerns
about the potential for uh the trimming
of branches on their tree um so if I
just go back to the site photos there is
a tree uh located on the neighbor's
property that does have branches that
overhang onto the neighbor's property um
and they just had some questions about
whether they they were considering
trimming these trees um so as such I
have provided that neighbor um with the
contact or the contact information with
the owner so that they can discuss this
uh between themselves uh blue water
staff did provide comment on the
application indicating no
concern um they have made two specific
comments noting that the water meter for
the a build must be located where all
water consumption including water for
the dishing can be captured uh this
comment is reflected in recommending
addition number four uh as well um
building staff have provided comment
with uh respect to the proposed septic
layout noting that the layout may need
to be uh amended as there was some
discrepancy between the site plan um and
the septic layout provided um as such
there is a condition that the sewage
system shall comply with the Ontario
building code AS reflected by condition
number five uh but this is something
that would um be expected otherwise um
it is recommended that the application
for the minor variant be approved to the
conditions included in the report um
three of which are standard so that it
be um constructed to the foot print
contained in the site plan that it
follows the elevations and it's valid
for a period of 18 months as well
condition four and five are recognizing
those two unique um staff comments so
I'm happy to answer any questions that
the committee may have well thank you uh
is there any questions to Hannah at this
time
counselors hearing none as this is a
public meeting um I'm going to ask uh
first the applicant do they um wish to
make any comments or do they agree with
the planner's recommendations or have
other thoughts is there someone here
this evening either representing the
applicant or the owner I believe Joe and
Angela are
here okay oh Angela I think I see you
and someone behind you I gather that
might be Joe that's Joe pleased to meet
you
uh no problem um so go ahead
you are you comfortable with what you
have uh understood and heard from the
planner and the staff of Blue
Water yep I have no problem okay thank
you council is there any questions to
the
owners hearing none and again as this is
a public meeting uh I'm going to ask is
there anyone um in our viewing audience
this evening that wishes to comment on
this application has a concern or or
wants to support it Ang uh Chandra sorry
I have no one else registered to speak
on this issue okay let the record show
there was no one uh on for this public
meeting thank
you um council is there I'm looking for
a motion then is there anyone prepared
to make a motion with regards to this
application councilor vanen Burke and
you're making the motion to approve with
the conditions yes I am with with the conditions with the five conditions
councelor Waldman second councelor
Walden second councilors is there any
discussion or you ready to for me to
call the
question I'm going to call the question
all those in favor of the recommendation
mv12 D20 to be approved with the five
conditions say I any
Nays it's carried thank you um now uh
Hannah do you have some instructions for
the uh Angela and uh Joel yes thank you
chair just before I get to that I'm just
going to uh bring up the table for the
motion yeah thank
you um so in terms of the effect of
public and agency comments I recommend
that the committee uh select option 3A
that public comments were received in
support of the application the effect of
which result in a decision to approve
the application and option uh B for that
comment were received from agencies on
the issues of the water meter and the
septic system layout the comments were
addressed through
conditions okay do we have a mover for
those 3A and B4 please councelor Walden
would move councelor Walden and uh
councelor vandenbberg
second any discussion hearing none all in favor of uh 3A and B4 is the
motion say I I I I any opposed hearing
none the motion carries thank
you Hannah all right uh yep Joe and
Angela so you will soon uh receive a
decision um a notice of decision
outlining uh the appeal rights which is
there's appeal period for 20 days after
which uh your minor variance decision
will be final um and then as I as stated
by the condition it's valid for a period
of 18 months so that's the time that you
have to get a building
permit okay thank you thank you good
luck
all right uh we're now going to move to
application mv1
13-20 plan 67 lot 11 part Lot 12
Bayfield Ward Municipality of blue
waterer and uh Hannah please go ahead
thank you
chair all right uh as stated the next
application is MV
1320 um the subject property is at 10
Harbor Court in Bayfield the subject
property is designated residential in
the Blue Water ficial plan and is zoned
residential low density R1 uh as well as
a portion of the property is Zone
natural environment 2 the property is
located along uh the Bayfield River um
so the portion of the property that's
closer to the river um is the portion
that is zoned uh ne2 the property
contains an existing single detached
dwelling along the Bayfield River
um here's just a aerial imagery of the
subject property um so it is lot along
the Bayfield River um this is from 2015
um so the single detached dwelling has
since been fully constructed uh the
elevations are provided of the proposed
detach
garage um and the application is seeking
to increase the maximum accessory
Building height from 6 M to 7.6 M and
the minimum top of Bank set back from 30
m to 3.9 M um so this top of Bank
setback is with respect um to the
Bayfield River um and they're seeking to
go again from 30 MERS to 3.9 meters to
facilitate the construction of um that
um detach garage the application was
considered against the four tests of the
minor variants um first I'll speak to
the minor variant in terms of the
building height uh the applicant did
provide um as included in the report the
approximate sight line to the adjacent
property owner is part of the survey
sketch showing that the proposed
detached garage is out of um the line of
sight of the Jason property owner with
respect to the river and the harbor um
with the intent of Min minimizing the
visual impact of the detach garage it is
also worth noting that the elevation of
the property does decrease from the
front property line when you go
downwards of the existing driveway uh
further reducing the appearance of the
height from that street level in terms
of the SE minor variance to um reduce
the top of Bank setback uh we primarily
uh rely on the advice of the ABCA to
advise on this um and they have stated
that they have no natural Hazard
concerns with this reduced top of Bank
um they do note however that um a permit
will be required from the ABCA as that
is a separate process um as such in this
case both of the variances are
considered minor and desirable as well
uh as well both of the minor variances
maintain the intent of the zoning bylaw
and the official plan Amendment as this
is supporting residential development
and they otherwise meet um all of the
zoning Provisions there were comments
provided uh by the ab budding neighbor
uh to the east um inquiring about the
minor nature of the topa bank variants
uh as well as they did express some
concern with the increased Building
height um due to their experience with
high winds in the area noting that they
had experienced themselves with having
to replace material on the roof um so
that's something that they just uh
cautiously made me aware of um and then
there was another comment provided from
a neighbor inquiring about the status of
the ABCA permit um and as such that
neighbor was referred to the ABCA as
that as a separate process blue water
staff did provide comment on the
application with no concerns uh their
comments note that their current
utilities records indicate that either a
water meter has not been installed on
the property or that the water meter has
been installed but the transmitter has
not uh as they are currently being buil
at a flat rate uh as such they have
recommended condition number four be
included to address
this um as well uh as I spoke to a
little bit before ABCA did provide
comment on the application uh noting
that they have no concerns from a
natural Hazard perspective in terms of
the recommendation it is recommended
that the application be approved subject
to the condition uh three of which are
the standard conditions as well as um
number four that a water meter and
transmitter uh be installed on the
property or that it um or confirmation
uh be received that it already has been
installed and that the transmitter uh be
connected I'm happy to answer any
questions that the committee may
have okay counselors any questions to
Hannah at this
time hearing none I'm going to go here
to the owner I see also Mr Johnson Brian
hello um is some anyone wish to comment
Peter um you agree with the
with what you've heard so
far I do uh we we've resided in the
Bayfield area for 15 years five in this
particular residence um having spent
February and March this year in Bayfield
with no garage and moving my car every
time a snowplow came
through I recognized how important uh it
was to try and get this going um I want
to also on on take a moment and thank
the the staff of the municipality ABA
Bluewater Council uh for keeping the
wheels of progress in in motion during
these unprecedented times it's uh it's
been a tough year for everyone so thanks
for your time and consideration on this
well thank you for those uh words Peter
um okay is there any questions to the uh
to the owner here
counselors okay um as this is a public
meeting Peter going to ask is there
anyone in um in our viewing audience
wishes to uh raise any concerns or
support for this uh for this
permit chander is there anyone the only
other person in attendance as you
mentioned is Brian
Johnson okay I see some others in the in
the back watching in but that's uh
there's anyone that there wishing to
comment okay thank you uh let the record
show that there was no one in the public
gallery that um had any
concerns uh at this uh for this public
meeting okay I'm looking counselors is
there anyone uh wishing to make a
motion I'll move the recommendation
councelor wetstone thank you councelor
wetstone and that's to approve and that
was the deputy I believe that's correct
thank you deputy and that is for to
approve uh the recommendations with the
four recommendations correct thank you
councilors is there any questions before
I call the
question hearing none I'm going to call
the question to uh to approve this uh
application all those in favor say I I I
any opposed hearing none the motion
carries and now we have to do one more
motion yes thank you chair I will just
share the
table um so I recommend um that the
committee uh select option 5A uh that
public comments received on the issue of
high winds uh with regard to the
proposed increased Building height
comments were thoroughly considered but
the effect did not influence the
decision to approve the application uh
and in terms of agency comments uh
option B4 that comments were received
from agencies on the issue of the water
meter these comments were addressed
through
conditions hey is there person ready to
make that motion for 5A and
B4 councelor venberg councelor Becker
second
all those in favor of that motion 5A and
B4 please say I I I any opposed hearing
none the motion carries Anna back to you
all right thank you chair um so Peter
and Brian um your next steps will be
that you will receive um a notice of
decision that outlines uh the appeal
rights which is a 20-day appeal period
uh after which assuming there's no
appeals the decision will be final and
valid for a period of 18
months okay he Hannah great thank you
stay stay safe everybody for sure thank
you very much good luck in your uh in
your project there sir thanks thanks
Council thank you okay I'm G to call a
motion to adjourn our U Committee of
adjustment is there a motion to adjourn
so move councelor Walden seconded by
councelor
venburg all those in favor say
I I any opposed hearing none motion
carries we now move into our regular
council meeting of December the
7th and I'm going to call the meeting to
order and uh chander to confirm that we
have uh no new additions and we still
can consider the members that were here
to be the same yes attendance reflects
the same as the committee of adjustments
okay a disclosure of prary interests at
this time for this meeting or for
previous meeting if
absent hearing none and again if
something comes up please um get my
attention I'm going to ask for the
approval of the agenda but we have one
issue pulled Chandra and that was yes
Council um
[Music]
item
7.6.4 being the Wildwood Municipal drain
tender award has been um moved to the
December 21st
okay so that's one is there anything
someone wishes to add or or uh Council
amendments to
anything hearing none I'm G to ask for a
mover to approve the agenda as amended
with
7.64 removed for this
meeting councelor Walden seconded
by Deputy Deputy Mayor thank you Deputy
Mayor
Ferguson okay all those in favor of the
agenda as amended please say
I any opposed motion carries we're now
at number four delegations and
presentations the asabo Bayfield
conservation Authority has a report here
uh miss vz's hand I see her in the
corner somewhere there she is um it's uh
take it
away go ahead
[Music]
Mary were you able to share your
screen I I don't know if she can hear us
I I think
she's H technical difficulties here Mary
are you able to hear
us
okay oh that's unfortunate I can reach
out to her by email if we wanted to move
forward with um our next item
okay I think we can do that is that okay
with Council if we go to 4.2 and then
we'll come back to
4.1 yeah I see everyone okay with that
uh slight change okay we're going to now
do 4.2 which is the uh KPMG Service
delivery review
update and uh there's anah and uh go
ahead who's going to do
this thank you your worship it's
pleasure to be here tonight my name is
Bruce pever I'm a partner with
KPMG and with me tonight is my colleague
SAA Malik and we will be presenting on
our final report on the municipality
Bluewater Service delivery review SAA
can you is it possible to present our
presentation yes uh give me a second I'm
just fing it up
[Music]
great thank you
SAA if we can go to the project overview
page that's great so your worship
Council
staff again I'm here tonight to present
the final report
and before we get into our key findings
uh what I want to do with you is just
review our project objectives and the
scope of work so KPMG was engaged by the
municipality of Blue Water to undertake
a service delivery review the overall
goal of the review was to better
understand your current Municipal
services and identify opportunities for
improvements cost reductions and greater
efficiency next page sign
we started the engagement in
August and when we kicked it off and
then we proceeded into what we call the
environmental scan where we collected
information on your current Service
delivery methods and we conducted
stakeholder engagement exercises and
surveyed five comparator
municipalities in August and September
we reviewed and conducted an inventory
of your current service services and
then in the fall we identified a series
of
opportunities that you had and we've
concluded the engagement with a analysis
of your financial position so tonight we
are here to present the final
report on our next
page and SAA perhaps you can take
Council through
the top 10 opportunities for the
municipality sure good evening everybody
my name is an Malik and I was part of
this um project um what we did just to
before we get into the actual
opportunities just want to give a brief
background on how we came up with these
opportunities we had brainstorming
sessions with staff and management uh
where we came up with 62
opportunities um we at KPMG took those
opportunities away we combined them and
we had 35
opportunities remaining with those
opportunities uh we had to prioritize
them to come up with the top 10 and we
did that using certain criteria
including the operating impact the
capital impact barriers to
implementation uh if there were any
recent reviews completed on those
opportunities we did looked at
comparative analysis uh strategic
program alignment and client customer
impact based on the Strategic criteria
we put those opportunities the 35
opportunities that we had identified
into various Pockets today we're going
to be presenting you the top 10 that we
identified along with
management so the first opportunity is
to explore possibility of sharing
services and purchasing with a county
and or lower tear the rationale was that
the municipality recognizes the
potential for increased Effectiveness
and cost savings through alternative
delivery models across various
departments specific opportunities exist
within shared services and shared
purchasing and if you were to implement
this opportunity the estimated impact
would be a benefit of between 90 to
$450,000 the second opportunity we
identified was to develop Financial
modeling including borrowing and debt
financing of capital projects and also
develop Financial policies to guide the
municipality's financial management
these policies will review reserves and
Reserve funds debt policies and
financial principles to develop a
financial framework in corporating
leading practices in financial
policies this financial framework will
drive administrative efficiencies
through improved documented processes
and policies that provide direction to
staff thereby reducing the need to
consult and seek out direction for
specific activities and subsequent
Council
approvals and the rationale was that the
municipality recognized the need for
enhanced policies relating to Capital
debt management reserves and
Investments and the estimated impact
would be less than $990,000
and which is considered
minor number three the third opportunity
we identified was to improve integration
of remaining strategic plan goals as per
existing strategic plan within
Department objectives in an effort to in
assist Municipal staff with Direction
goals motivation and sust sustainability
of
growth the rationale is that the
municipality recognizes the need to
align Department objectives to remaining
strategic plan
goals departmental mandates and kpis for
each department should be established in
line with the Strategic plan staff
identify the inconsistency and lack of
understanding of these mandates and
kpis and there was there would be no
estimated impact for this
opportunity number four the opportunity
was to conduct a review of the cost
recovery model for Planning and
Development fees to determine
feasibility of increasing building
permit fees to ensure cost
recovery and the rationale was that
there was has been no increases to the
building permit schedule over the last 5
years which has impacted the
Department's ability to recover
operating cost and the tax benefit of
this would be between 90 to 450
$50,000 number five the opportunity is
to redesign the municipal website to
improve usability so that the
municipality can Implement customer
service software improvements in the
future and the municipality recognizes
the opportunity to improve its customer
service level through updating its
website and improving the accessibility
of
information and there will be no
estimated impact for this
change number six the opportuni is to
develop Parks and Recreation master plan
to coordinate the service delivery model
and the capital program for Parks and
Recreation the rationale is that the
municipality recognizes the opportunity
to improve the guidance to council staff
and Community stakeholders on key
objectives and the service delivery
model for Parks and
Recreation and there would be no change
to net
Levy number seven the opportunities to
conduct a review of the current it
service provider analyze value for
dollar and identify potential
alternative alternate providers or an
in-house
resource and the rationale is that the
municipality recognizes the need to
ensure that appropriate controls are in
place for third party risk management
specifically for IT
services and there would be no net
estimate
impact number eight the opportuni is to
review cemet Cemetery user fees in order
to move the cemetery to a more
cost-effective business model and
consider other opportunities to improve
Cemetery management such as Contracting
Services leveraging internal systems
columbariums and the rationale is the
municipality recognizes the opportunity
to improve the overall service level of
cemetery services and its cost recovery
through increased fees and alternative
Service delivery
models and the impact would be minor at
less than $90,000 a
year number nine There's an opportunity
to update Facilities Review and bring
recommendations to council with the goal
of either selling Municipal facilities
no longer in use or where it is not
financially viable to restore which
would have the effect of reducing the
cost of facility mendance or providing a
financial plan to upgrade or restore the
facility the rationale is that the
municipality currently operates
underutilized and aging facilities and
recognizes the opportunity to reduce
costs through the of these facilities or
restoring facilities to improve
operations and there would be less than
$90,000 impact of this
opportunity number 10 the opportunity is
to investigate the digitization of the
application review and permitting
process for building sewage and plumbing
applications and the rationale is that
the municipality recognizes the benefits
of digitizing services and activities to
assist in optimizing business processes
and meeting customer demand and the
estimated impact is less than
$90,000 those were our top 10
opportunities that we identified with
management what you're seeing here um on
this screen is that we took those 10
opportunities which are again listed
here and we plotted them on a map based
on the impact of implementation and the
effort required to implement them based
on the scores that we had given
and we can see the top two which is to
explore the possibility of sharing
resources and developing a financial
model is towards the top which is where
the impact of implementation is high and
the effort is between low to
medium
okay from this point we'll take you
through the service profiles Bruce do
you want to walk them through the
service profile thank you SAA
so if you remember uh part of our
engagement was to inventory your
services and we did that by creating
what we call service profiles so you can
see there is a column on the
left which
identifies principally the budgetary
information
associated with the delivery of this
specific service which is in this case
development services
and then the remainder of the page is
broken into four quadrants the upper
left quadrant describes the
service the lower left quadrant provides
some benchmarking and performance
information so you can see how the cost
of a building inspection per household
compares to your
peers on the top right we include a
graph which looks at the service level
standard for each of the services within
development so you can see there's
building inspection there's planning and
there's blue
flag and what we do is we map the level
of service against the service type so
the service type is broken into four
groups the first one is
mandatory which means that there is a
piece of provincial legislation that
says the municipality shall deliver that
service there's also essential Services
which are like mandatory except there's
no piece of legislation legislation
dictating the municipality deliver the
service so a common example in a larger
municipality would be public
transit third type of service is
traditional and that's uh class of
service which as the name suggests
municipalities traditionally deliver for
example Arenas and finally there is the
other discretionary type service which
makes that particular service unique and
special in comparison to its peers and
mpal blue water has one of those
Services here and it's the blue flag
service
below the graph you can see the
rationale and the rationale explains the reason for the service level
assessment and the service type so we
have completed a number of service
profiles for all the different Services
the municipality delivers and they're
included within this final
report so do you want to take us now to
the final section of the report which is
the
budget EXC
oh sorry we have the financial operating
model perhaps you can explain the the
model we developed for the
municipality sure so as part of our
deliverable what KPMG did was we created
a predictive model for for for the
municipality of blue water and what this
is it's an Excel spreadsheet where we
can predict the 10-year Capital forecast
for the
municipality we took in data historical
data the fin from the financial
information returns and we created key
inputs um which which the work was
already done so we created through
taxation reserves your grants we
incorporate all that information we
created a tool which can be used to
predict what your Capital Financial
requirements would be in the next 10
years so and what would the impact on of
on Levy would be if you were to choose
certain Capital expenditures so it's an
interactive tool we developed this we
Shar it with staff and management uh we
received good feedback from them um
suggested a few changes which have been
incorporated as well so we hope that
this will be a a great help to the
municipality in the coming
years Bruce and the final piece of the
final report is the budgeting
process so son if you want to take us
there yes thank you so we understand
through staff that Council has been at
the Forefront of thinking about how to
redo the budget process and you
recognize the importance of completing
your Budget prior to the end of the
calendar year in order that the
municipality can get out into the
marketplace and Achieve Optimum pricing
on its Capital Construction tend
ERS and I think the council and the
municipality are to be congratulated for
thinking that way because it's a
Innovative approach to Service
delivery so you can see here that we
have proposed a budget process that will
allow you to achieve a approved budget
before the end of December
31st and it's a
six meeting process so it starts the
week of November 1st with what we call
the cap first capital budget meeting and
we start with the capital budget because
as I'm sure council's aware the capital
budget drives your operational budget
the decisions you make around what
Capital Equipment you might purchase or
what capital projects you might tender
will impact the cost of service delivery
so that's why we start with the capital
budget and we suggest you start a the
first week of November and in that
meeting that your CIO will lay out a a
small presentation on the financial
state of the municipality and review
some of the key capital projects for the
coming
year it's important here for Council to
also know that the capital budget that
is presented is balanced financed and
sustainable
the second capital budget meeting occurs
the following week and this gives
Council a chance to think about the
draft capital budget presentation and to
ask questions and debate and the goal
for this second meeting should be that
by the end of the meeting you have
provisionally adopted the capital
budget once the capital budget has been
approved on a provisional basis you move into the first meeting for the
operational
budget and that in that meeting you'll
review your expenditures and revenues
and the proposed tax levy increase and
possible drivers behind the changes to
these
numbers the operational budget should
also incorporate any changes that may
come about from the capital budget and
reflect council's Direction on tax levy
increases the following week so the
fourth meeting there will be a second
operational budget well and that will
provide Council a chance to really roll
up his sleeves and ask tough questions
on the
proposed operational expenditures and
revenues for the coming
year and the goal here as like the
second capital budget meeting is to
provisionally adopt the operational
budget and this will allow staff then to
take the draft capital and operational
budgets out vot to the public and
present them to the public in a public
meeting and that usually occurs in the
first week of
December following that public meeting
the feedback of the public is
incorporated into the budget and so that
at the council meeting in the second
week of December Council formally adopts
the capital and operational budget by
bylaw
so this is a
proven and
successful process for achieving a uh
operational and capital budget by
December
31st so your worship that completes our
presentation of the final report and we
would be pleased to take any questions
or answer any questions that you might
have or Council might have tonight
sorry about that everyone um yes uh uh
thank you for that uh report uh before
we go to council um I'm going to open it
up to the staff who have worked with you
um My Hope Is I guess if they have some
comments it may have less questions for
us tonight or or new questions as
counselors so um uh Lori well I'll I'll
let you do the chairing of of of our
senior staff I'll be
that okay well um just overall I'd like
to thank uh Bruce pever SAA Malik Jal
Francis Hassan John um all we all of
whom managers have worked with to
provide this Service delivery review
that you're seeing this evening um the
final report we have includes analysis
with comparators and recommendations to
us for future opportunities to be
considered over time to improve
operations the addition of the
predictive capital budget model is a key
tool that Council has requested and
which we are very pleased to have as we
move into the budget season for
20121 um this report has shown that blue
water is doing well and that Council the
treasurer and managers have provided
Good Financial oversight and stewardship
to ensure that we are providing good
service and value to Residents property
owners and Blue
Water um as you can see theyve provided
a road map for us to take away and use
and again we thank them you can see it's
a living these are living tools that
will uh continue to incorporate and uh
for example the service profiles will be
able to use every budget season to
compare uh what we're doing um against
previous years and and um so that's very
worthwhile as of course as I said is the
compar the predictive modeling Financial
tool that they've
produced um I don't think we will um
have um managers speak to the service
profiles this evening and but we can
carry them forward into our budgeting
process and um they can uh each manager
can respond in their uh particular area
to uh what the profiles say so um I I
think um that would be the best in terms
of time time management this
evening unless counselors have questions
specifically councelor wetstone I
actually do have a couple questions if I
could and I guess this is uh relating to
and I just want to make sure to
understand it thank you for the top 10
opportunities some of them are uh uh
ones that I'm not surprised in so that's fantastic it's sort of uh
reiterates the point of of some of the
thinking that some of the counselors
have had so for example on number one
when you talk about the shared
purchasing um and it has between 90k to
450k in potential
savings so when you look at things like
that do you look at um for example man
hours so if we were to be teaming up
with here in County now all of a sudden
we would there would have to be some
sort of shared Arrangement where we
would be paying them for their employee
to do some of that work are those those
labor hours included uh within those
cost
savings your worship to the counselor
actually the approach we are thinking
for shared services around purchasing or
procurement was for the county and the
municipality to issue similar uh tenders
together so basically be joint tenders
okay so there wouldn't be a cost there
should not be a cost to the municipality
of Blue Water you know both the county
and the municipality for example
purchased salt and other common
Municipal materials and there's no
reason why the two municipalities
couldn't work together on that type of
joint procurement to achieve greater
economies of
scale understood okay thank you that
clears that up for me a little better I
want to understand that um the budgeting
process um you know we don't week meet
weekly on a normal basis but what I can
tell you is anybody that's been sitting
on Council since I've been on I've been
pushing for an early budget since day
one uh fi our finance people can uh
attest to that as well so hopefully this
will be something something that we can
look at and maybe we can adopt it uh I
know this year we're getting we're we're
getting closer uh it looks like we might
uh might be it's never early enough for
me I'd I'd love to have it done and set
December 1st and tenders out for next
year within the month of December and
everything else too but uh I have to
understand workload and how we get
through everything as well too but this
is a good start I appreciate uh the bit
of a road map for that as well thank
you that's all the questions or comments
I had for now
sorry there any other counselor's
comments at this time um I will be
looking for a motion that we receive
this for information as so as uh then we
can uh start working on it and uh but
this point is there any other questions
or comments to our presenters
hello hello everybody can hear me okay
uh yes we're uh how are you doing now uh
we're we're just doing we're just
finishing up uh the second committee
report and then we'll get to you how's
that
okay thank
you I'm looking for a motion then uh
councils that if we want to move forward
with this report we need a motion to
accept it for information this evening
counselor is anyone prepared prepared
councelor wal sorry sorry mayor can I
just ask one question please oh for sure
even if we get it seconded we'll still
have question okay is there a second
just I'll get that out of the way if
there is councelor Harris Council Harris
thank you okay councelor venberg go
ahead y thank you mayor just going back
to uh to Bruce then in the weeks um I
think it was let's say week number five
where the public can ask question s and then the following week
is basically the the budget gets passed
or so but does that give everyone enough
time from the public to ask questions
and if there are any little hiccups or
so or or something pops up that the
staff can still implement the changes
for Council to review and and pass at
the end of week number six I think it
was week number six cor right
uh your worship to the counselor yes uh
we have found that it does provide
enough
time the amount of work
though should not be
underestimated by staff and counsel in
actually engaging the public so there
you know before week or before the
public meeting in week one of
December there has to be some work in
setting up the public meeting ensuring
that you have the right staff there and
they proper advertisement is undertaken
to get a turnout if I could provide some
advice at least in your greater Toronto
area don't try and hold a public meeting
on the budget the same night the mle are
playing for example so uh that's the
kind of you have to think it through but
generally we have found that you do get
good feedback and there is enough time
to incorporate that feedback from the
public
okay any other questions at this time
and we have our uh two people SAA and
Bruce here that worked on this well and their team of
course if not uh if I'm sure if there is
questions down the road our staff will
help fill in and also Lori and I'm I'm
sure they could probably uh if there's
questions that stump them they could
probably talk to Bruce or someone and get it clarified I I see a nod thank
you okay well um on behalf of council I thank you uh for your work um you uh
you did entertain the public uh you had
lots of feedback from our community of
blue water which uh I uh I hope was a
wasn't a surprise I hope it was pleasant
it U I think it's been a pretty good
process so so um at this time if there's
no questions yet at this point I'm going
to call the question on that we accept
this for information and start working
towards our goals as I think uh Lori
said it's a living
document are we prepared to uh call the
question hearing no uh nays I'm going to
call the question all in favor of
receiving this report for information hi hi any opposed hearing none the
motion carries thank thank you and and
thank everyone look forward to working
with this uh with this report now and in
the future thank you thank you your
worship it's been a pleasure serving the
municipality of blue water it's been a
really enjoyable experience and I wish
yourself and Council a very Merry
Christmas and and same to you take care
by bye bye head out
bye okay uh Chandra
have we uh got our ABCA on uh on track
here I think we have Mary
now can you hear us
Mary she did get in she did get
in Mary can you hear
us I can't hear you if I'm supposed to
talk we can hear you you can hear me
okay great oh go ahead
then um I won't know if everybody can
see my slides can people see my slides
if I put them up no okay share
screen okay can people see my slides now
okay
great and I'm going to go
slideshow
beginning okay so thank you very much uh
for inviting me to speak to uh Council
and the mayor tonight I uh just wanted
to provide a quick update about some of
the reports that we did for the March
2020 fiscal uh year end in March uh of
this earlier this year we at the healthy
watersheds Department um work with h the
communities and agencies to um uh work
on local
Watershed interests and issues and we
often get try to get some funding and we
have reports due in March of the year so
this particular March uh when we were in
lockdown uh we were quite busy with a
number of reports I shared those reports
with the with the board of directors at
the asso Bayfield and July and they
asked me to speak to some of the reports
with your all the councils so tonight um
in here Blue Water just a little
reminder of the healthy Watershed
program at the asso Bayfield um it
started in 2000 and it really was in
response to local um Community interest
in uh environmental issues and a need to
engage the community with uh local
actions and then monitor how effective
those those actions are um so that
program has been running since the year
2000 this is just an overview of the
asabo Bayfield jurisdiction so we're
2400 kilm square with the Bayfield River
500 kilm square going in at Bayfield of
course and the asao river starting up in
Stafa and going out um at Port Frank's
um
the municipality of Blue Water I have
overlin here on this map showing that
for the most part the area of your
jurisdiction is uh mostly Shoreline
tributaries smaller tributaries that
flow directly to the lake but there's
also a part of the Bayfield River and
actually some of the headwaters of the
asabo so on to the reports uh for 2020
um these reports really are uh reporting
on some of the biology and water quality
and land use issues that are in our
jurisdiction um as I mentioned we do try
to get uh funding from other levels of
government so that every dollar that is
provided to the assab we can try to
raise it three times or more depending
on whether or not we're able to uh
leverage uh landowner uh projects and
stewardship support landowner projects
and stewardship with additional funds um
of course we are continuously working
with the different communities so the
community of Bayfield gr bent down in
Port Franks but also some of the Inland
communities in lukan Elsa Craig Nar um
and Rural Farm rural non-farm issues and
also um agricultural issues so I'm just
going to talk on a three um of these 12
different reports I'm just going to
speak to three of them this evening uh
one on Wetlands one on Shoreline
education and one on uh an unique
project that we have um in Clinton
so the first is the first topic is uh is
Wetlands um and this report we did for
the asao river but this the same
findings could be true for different
parts of our jurisdiction and we know
that in wetlands and developed
Landscapes are hard to maintain we have
a very low amount of wetlands wetlands
in our Watershed at about probably 2%
where originally the Watershed might
have had 20%
um we know there are different
approaches to try to get more Wetlands
on the landscape some of them are
related to policy and some of them are
related to stewardship um what we know
from a policy perspective is because the
definitions of wetlands are are
extremely um variable um the policy
interpretation of those definitions make
it very hard uh in some cases to
maintain those very small Wetlands on
the landscape uh sometimes we don't even
notice when they're Disturbed so it's
very important to maintain uh the
existing Wetlands because we know that
they have wet uh water quality benefits
they have flooding benefits and they
have um biodiversity benefits however uh
one other tool some other tools that we
found to have some success with is
supporting uh land owners with their own
interests in um enhancing some of the
wet areas on their fields or in their
wood lot so this particular picture I
have here shows a redeveloped wetland in
a very small corner of uh somebody's
field that wasn't wasn't very productive
and so they've taken it out and now they
have this place that they can enjoy and
this was near narn we also know that
when we support um stewardship and
helping folks with their Wetlands that can have a multiplier effect by
engaging adjacent or neighboring land
owners and this example is in the near
um Southwest part of our Watershed where
we did undertook a fairly large Wetland
restoration project um and then
corresponding neighbors or adjacent
neighbors engaged with us to um employ
some other further best management
practices and also get support and
recognition from a tax perspective on
their on their
Wetlands the next report that I just
want to update the council about is uh
this um encouraging more natural
shorelines along the luron coast this
was more of a understanding of some of
the communication gaps that exist along
our Shoreline um I'll preface this by
saying I'm not a coastal engineer or a
coastal um uh expert I'm a I'm a
watershed biologist but we did work with
our local communities to better
understand some of the um uh gaps in
Communications that could be filled um
so what we found was that um some of the
factors that would contribute to uh a
less than ideal natural storeline conss
are that there's obviously a significant
level of existing development along our
Shoreline there's um a limited
understanding of the cumulative effects
of uh certain kinds of practices along
the shoreline and there's uh lack of the
kinds of technical information that
would help with certain policies that
would be based on cumulative effects
that would able enable us to better
understand some of the costs of
different activities on our Shoreline
and be able to discuss the discuss those
with um people that that live on the
shoreline with respect to what are the
costs to the natural processes what are
the costs to um adjacent neighbors and
what are the costs even to themselves of
certain
practices the final project I just want
to provide an update to council about is
uh the Heron view demonstration farm
this um demonstration Farm is behind the
here on Perth public health unit and um
working in 2008 we worked with various
Partners to make um restoration of the
flood plane uh we put in some grass
waterways we put in a Terrace um there
was some restoration of some additional
um near a small Creek that went in and
at just after um 2008 the hon County
Soil and crop Improvement Association
and um approached the county and there
was a agreement to rent that land for a
dollar a year and the the soil and crop
um Farmers started to use cover crops
reduce tillage and nutrient management
practices um in they did find however
they were still having um issues with
erosion and felt that tile drainage
would help to uh support the kinds of
activities they wanted to undertake
there so in
2018 um a a proposal was submitted to
support an Innovative child drainage
project that project went in the ground
um in June 2019 and you can see here
some of the different aspects of that
design where we're looking at a
different kind of uh innovative drainage
Contour control drainage versus
systematic drainage and uh no tile area
uh so we're looking at um that over the
more short term and of course also
looking at the the impact of um or the
effect that the wetlands also have on
Downstream water quality I encourage
folks to visit the the her on view site
it's in a lovely location right on the
Bayfield River and um there's lots of
interesting things happening there
uh I just would like to close by um
going through a couple
little pieces of how this community
supported monitoring enhances our local
environment we have noticed over the
last 20 years a great deal of people um
very interested in nature certainly we
saw that at the beginning in March when
people were really making quite a bit of
use of our conservation areas we have
also learned a lot more about best
management practices on both
Agricultural and urban best management
practices and we've been doing some
monitoring to demonstrate the
effectiveness of some of these uh
practices to better understand how
effective they are and to also figure
out where the best places for these
practices would be of course um ongoing
discussion and Outreach and Community um
involvement helps to have uh informed
Community about some of the different um
biology and water quality issues that
are in their local environment and we do
summarize some of this information on an
ongoing basis in our uh Watershed report
cards which I provided a link here for
the different um smaller watersheds
within the Asawa Bayfield
area so just uh thank you very much to
counil for um having me speak tonight
and uh encourage you to if you're
interested to follow up about some of
the reports I'd be more than glad to
provide with any answer any answers to
your questions tonight
Mr
Mayor about that I should add my little
mouse here sorry um any questions to uh
ABCA tonight counselors on this
report I think it's pretty
straightforward thank you for uh for uh
reminding us what work uh you've done
not only this year but obviously over
the years we appreciate that I need a
motion uh to accept this report for
information is there anyone prepared to
do
that councelor
venberg
seconder councelor Becker councelor
Becker before I call the question is
there anyone wish to make any
comments okay I'm going to call the
question all those in favor accept this
report for
information hi I any opposed motion
carries thank you and I gather you can't
hear us but uh job well done thumbs up
thank you
okay uh that concludes our delegations
and presentations we're now on consent
agenda which is a number of them
5.1
to 5.25
is there anyone wish to pull any out for
discussion
counselors not hearing any I'd like to
pull out 5.11 for some comments and
that's the
ABCA approved budget for
2021 is there any others at this
time okay um and what I uh the budget of
course is we're all uh we've got the
report from Bayfield con from
ABCA and um it says that uh we had a a
slight decrease of approximately
1% in the um in the budget and and
that's a fact the numbers are there but
I am taken back a little bit um when you
look at the uh the breakout uh project
Levy and general Levy and you refer it
back to the 2020 budget and I noticed
that Trend last year so I I the numbers
were pretty close but when you look back
at last year the general Levy which to
me is your operating I I I write that as
sort of the operating there's obviously
issues that are deal with great things
that we do in the conservation Authority
there's no question but last year it was
$237,000
$451 this year it's it's
24555 which is an increase of 70
$600 and a little over $7,600 which is
about a 3%
increase and that is that's going to be
there next year embedded in in the in
the program when you look at the gr uh
look at what we call Project Levy and
I'm working on the assumption that those
are the real nuts and bolts of what a
lot of us think when we think of
conservation it's making sure the dams
are working it's making sure that
there's a flow of water can be U happen
moning monitoring things and doing those
type of projects but it's actually
decreased from last year uh it was $
61,63 last year so when you look at that
that's an 18%
decrease and my sense is that projects
seem to go up and
down uh I think uh probably ansur not
asking her to comment but I but from a
standpoint us as Council if we uh and
you could see from the kmg report KPMG
report we've had years of very high what
I call capital projects so I could
probably say to people hey we we
decreased your taxes a lot this year uh
but then when they find out that well
the snow plowing isn't done on every
other Thursday I think a lot of people
would be calling me and saying I was a
little bit uh uh you know that was a bad
decision uh
they they expect that we do spend money
so just on the principle of it I really
think this is not the way I would do it
to the taxpayers of of the municipality
of Blue Water i w I would wish that the
my wish is that we be a bit more
upfront uh operating which is they
called General Levy it's gone up by
3% and the only reason we see a decrease
is because there the actual projects
have dropped 18% this year and I want I
just want to be assured that residents I
am looking at these budgets carefully I
am totally support that we uh
conservation Authority is a good thing
to have back in 49 the government made a good
decision uh but it also said that the
local lower tiers are to be very much
part of the process and be in charge and clearly this is one area of budgets
that uh that you know I think we need to
reflect that so so I just wanted the
rate payers to uh to to see this that
it's um that really it was increaseed by
3% the operating and that's what I
wanted to get on the record uh obviously
um Council has not
officially passed a motion to support
the budget uh that's a process that uh I
guess we're supposed to do I don't know
if we want to do that tonight but I
wanted to get that on the record I
appreciate council's time if there's any
other comments on it that's fine too I
open the floor thank
you so if I could if I could just
comment on that uh mayor Klo with
regards to the increase in the general
Levy um there's no significant increase
to the ongoing operations and stuff like
that a lot of that has just got to do
with the general increase in costs from
year to year because there'll be an
increase in wages and benefits just
because of the change in CPP EI and
those kind of things and also um similar
to what happens here if people are
eligible for red movements for years of
service and stuff like that that that
also ends up reflecting in the operating
budget and and I think that makes my
point uh how we do things here when we
tell people in the public oh we
decreased the the cost to run the
government you you point out and we have
it right in the reports there's a
distinction between operating and and
capital projects and that's as I think
needs to be happening also at ABCA it
it's deceiving to me to the general
public when they read oh we had a
decrease in the in the operation of ABCA
well we did but it was basically that
there's less projects being done which again most people think it's
projects it's the road getting paved
it's it's those things uh in our case so
I I I do appreciate that and that drives
my point home further that I think it
needs to be stated a little clear to the
public okay if there's nothing else I'll
uh I'll look for a motion if there's
nothing else wishes to be pulled at this
time from the budget I'm looking for a
motion to accept the consent
agenda so moved councelor Walden
seconded
by councelor
vanenburg Mr Mayor yes go ahead
um a question and this is to you
probably for your input um what about
that letter from hock Township regarding
the tile drain loans did do you have any
comment on
that I I don't I don't know you know I I
okay I see what it says but what what
are your what's your thoughts on that
well we actually headed up at the county
I don't know if you were in on on that
at that moment that's in trouble we're
not in the same room sometimes you you
miss things so well I I I have no
trouble supporting that um the
tile the tile Lane loans are really
relatively high in fact I I think if the
government is doing it at this point
they're they're probably making money at
it uh because I'm I'm sure the
government of Ontario going from my past
experiences on actually in this ministry
we could get money a whole lot even at
that time we were getting money about 1%
less and that was back in the in the the
old days the 1990s well I know that we
as farmers and and and the general
public you can get well a young fellow
told me other day rid his loan for his
house and it's
1% uh now uh obviously it's for two or
three years but point taken so yeah I
have no trouble with that if someone
wishes I mean at any time the counselors
want to bring it out and vote on it I
don't I did ask the question I didn't
bring it up but I appreciate yourself
sir so if you wish to have it pulled and
voted on that's fine I'm the motion
hasn't passed yet
okay well um you know if it's still in
order um yeah I think I would like to
support it okay and I would move to
support that thank you so we're pulling
out
5.24 for a separate motion and it's been
uh requested by our Deputy Mayor is
there a seconder can I deal with that
right now Chandra is that how we can do
it I would just pull it um take care of
the consent agenda and then we'll deal
with uh 5.24 well then that's what we'll
do I'm looking for the flow we haven't
had one of these for a while so thank
you okay if that's the deputy mayor nods
he understands that we're not ignoring
them okay uh we have a motion then for
the rest of the consent agenda councelor
Walden made the motion is there a
seconder councelor
venberg all those in favor of all the uh
consent agenda except
5.24 say
I I any Nays hearing none motion carries
we're looking at 5.24 resolution
Township of ho tile Loan program is
there a mover and a second we have a
mover Deputy Mayor is there a
second councelor Becker will
second everyone uh read the motion or
read the the letter the
request seeing I think everyone's
nodding their they have I'm going to
call the question all those in favor say
I I
any
opposed none the motion carries thank
you very much for that we are now on six
correspondence for Action Blue Water
Area Family Health Team funding request
councilors you have read this I'm
sure is there
any direction comments and then
Direction I'm looking
for Mr Mayor may I make a comment yes
you can Mr Mayor uh I appreciate and
really respect blue waterer uh Area
Health family
team it's an asset in our
community um I just have a question we
seem to be getting options to uh get
Federal and provincial assistance with
our covid extra efforts and my question
would be uh with blue waterer Family
Health Team have they reached out and
requested for some of that assistance is
there some available at this stage I
wouldn't want to vote positive or
negative on this I would like to find
out if there's something available for
them at that level because we didn't get
extra funding as a municipality to fund
them but perhaps there's something
provincially I don't I don't know I'd
like to find that out okay is
um I know that that staff had been
talking to
them uh uh is there anything can add to
his question or do we need to have uh
this brought forward to them through you
your worship um there is nothing that
they have received to date that they
were able to tell us about
okay um any other counselor's comments
that's councelor wetstone here
um I do know that uh um I did connect
them with Bruce power as well to for
potential of PPE because Bruce Power has
a program in place I'm not sure what the
results were of that at this point in
time um so maybe there was some success
there from a PPE perspective I am I am
quite surprised that the provincial or
federal government hasn't provided money
to these type of services I guess you
might want to call it
um and as councilor Walden stated you
know we haven't been and receed of
additional Monies to help support
locally as well too so maybe they're
treated something differently compared
to hospitals compared to everything else
I'm not sure but yeah I'm surprised that
there hasn't been anything that's put in
there on that it's worth
exploring yeah um we're listening to our
you know the federal government had a uh
I'm gonna call it an interm budget
update I'm probably using the wrong word
but it was last week um I did take a a
point I made a point to listen to it uh
again probably affected us a bit and the billions and it is billions that
they're um that they're spending and and
they causing a deficit and one of the
questions was what
about Co costs and they said we're not
worried about the deficit we're going to
be getting all the bills paid words to
that effect I'm paraphrasing obviously
so
I'm not
sure you know maybe to obviously today
they haven't got funding but um the
federal government says that help is on
the way and so I I have a I really do
have
a I do have a problem with tonight
making a a supporting a motion to spend
money public money when we also have our our cost too and and I'm hoping that
you know it isn't
our we're not in the healthcare business
The Province and the provincial
government so and federal government
mayor clot may I add to that yes okay go
ahead thank you um I have been
corresponding with Paula croll the
executive director there who has in an
email to me told me that the Ministry of
Health does not provide additional
funded for covid protective equipment or
additional Staffing costs due to the P
pandemic and we did reach out to the
local MP's office who corroborated that
as well um
so um Paula croll also provided a
breakdown of costs and uh I know that
the contact that councelor wetstone
provided and a representative of the uh
of Blue Water Health have been in
contact with each other about the
specifics of of the PPE which does not
speak to some of the um Staffing time
that they're requesting which is uh for
screeners at the door but um they are
working with um with a person at Bruce
power to get some of the PPE right
now yeah and Mr Mayor go ahead uh thank
you and I I find that um you know
unacceptable for a provincially funded
Medical Clinic not to be covered for for
their cost related to co and I'm just
going to give you a little anecdotal
information here from uh from the here
in Perth public health unit as you know
I sit on that board and and um at at
this point we have not received any
extra money out of out of the budgetary
money that was already approved for Co
but in fact the uh the health unit or
here per health unit is keeping track of
that uh of that extra cost they're
funding it currently out of the current
Year's budget because they're not able
to deliver all of the other programs
that they would normally deliver so they
are covering the cost but there is an
expectation from the Ministry of Health
and it has been informally communicated
that uh they are going to receive any of
those extra costs so you
know I the health unit could say right
now no they haven't received it but
there is an expectation that they're
going to so I find that if if there
isn't any expectation from this uh this
health ha on in this in this health
clinic if there isn't any expectation to
receive that extra funding we need to do
some lobbying for them um because it
should be funded as you have mentioned
it should be funded from the higher
levels of
government yeah and this surely won't be
the only family health Team we we also
have the CHC we have like as you know
we're we have what what about even
private do so yeah I think there's got
to be some momentum there I'd like to
believe them I think I believe the
minister not I'd like to I think I think
she was very clear that they're they're
spending billions and and that yes it
takes a while to get things done and
they all that so um are we I would
entertain I'll I'll throw this out to
staff to to to counselors would you uh
defer this for till a later date or or
another decision um Mr Mayor go ahead I
would make a motion to defer this uh to
a later date to uh further investigation
if funding is available because there
are uh screeners and at every single
medical facility we don't have the funds
to support all these facilities but we really owe it to the Bluewater Health
Team to try to Lobby or whatever you
said to find something so I make a
motion to defer decision on
this to defer decision to a later date
to we find out uh more details about uh
go higher levels of government
funding okay chander is that um um a
good
motion not a good motion you got to vote
Yes or no just the
process um yes I think that that's it it has a date it gives sort of an it
doesn't have a date but the referral
doesn't have to have an actual date does
it
I if if I could councelor
wetstone we're about to get into budget
deliberations why don't we defer it to
our budget deliberations because that's
where it's going to come out of anyways
if we do anything is one of our
budgets yeah he does have a that part we and counselor I think we picked up on
Deputy Mayor saying that we should be
lobbying because it isn't just them
they're not the only family health Team
this is a big issue
so uh which
is that what you're also gonna what I
take from your motion councelor
wal that that would be fine uh but not
just that like I would like just to find
out if we can Lobby if there's a letter
we get sent as support or something to a
provincial uh Member of Parliament as
well but definitely if we put a date on
it until budget or or it gives a bit of
a an hand on it I would agree to that
yes all right we we'll say budget that
covers is that thank you councelor
wetstone and councelor walon for working
that out and um and then further twoo
we'll we'll do some lobbying that's
still part of your motion yes sir okay
everyone clear on the
motion do we have a seconder oh sorry we
need a seconder yes thank you I didn't
write that down is there a seconder for
his
motion Deputy Mayor second thank you all
right um are we clear on the motion any
dis further discussion on the
motion hearing none I'm going to call
the question all those in favor say
I any any
opposed hearing none the motion
carries uh
7.1 uh we're at 7.11 zoning bylaw
amendments Hannah is she back on there
she is how are
you okay Hannah um and this is uh file
Zed
09-20 part Lot 25 Bayfield Road
concession Stanley
East all right thank you mayor um I will
just share my
presentation so as stated um the next
application is for uh a zoning bylaw
Amendment um the subject lands uh were
previously severed uh as a result of
consent application
c4020 uh which was seen uh in late
summer going into fall the property
contains an existing grain elevator
operation on it which is proposed to
expand uh during the initial um consent
uh the property that's highlighted um in
blue here uh was severed um for the rest
of the lands that were zoned at General
agriculture uh so ag1 um and the
rezoning that's before you tonight uh
was required as a condition of consent
and it's seeking um to take it out of
the ag1 zone and put into the
ag3 agricultural commercial industrial
Zone uh with a special Zone added onto
that um to
recognize um reduced minimum yard
Provisions for the existing structures
as well as the proposed uh Silo and
elevator uh uh leg which are proposed to
be part of the expansion of the
operation the reduced yard Provisions uh
proposed are seven meters for the
existing structures that are present in
2020 um so the was written this way just
to recognize the structures at time of
application uh a reduction to 7.8 meters
for proposed B uh B Silo and 18 meters
for the proposed elevator leg um and
currently under the ag3 Zone um the
interior sidey yard setback is uh 15 M
or half of the height of the subject
structure whichever one um is
larger um so I'll just provide a site
sketch um that was provided by the app
showing the existing structures uh as
well as the proposed Silo as well as um
the elevator showing where the leg would
be extending out to support the
elevator um so the PPS um and the county
and Blue Water official plans permit
Farm related Industrial and Commercial
operations such as this uh in Prime
agricultural areas uh as well as
official plan policy speak to
compatibility between industrial and
sensitive land uses um so just going
back to the previous photo the uh as
counselors may recall from uh the
consent application there is a dwelling
uh located on a separate property right
uh here um just to the west of the uh
grain elevator um as the ex as the
operation is expanding a noise study was
required to be completed with respect to
the sensitive dwelling uh the study was
deemed to be within the limits of the
MPC 300 limits uh which is set out by
thee guidelines uh for their D6
guidelines uh such there are no adverse
impacts anticipated uh the proposed
resoning rezoning conforms to the county
and hereon official plans in terms of
the reduction for the interior sidey
guard setbacks there's no anti
anticipated adverse impacts um from this
um the reductions represent a reduction
of approximately uh 7 uh to 10.5 meters
for each of those structures um just
because again going back to that
original provision is based on the
height of the structures
um there are no um structures that are
currently contained on the abiding
property that shares this interior sidey
yard uh as well any structures would
need to um or sensitive structures would
need to be placed um adequately far away
from this um operation in terms of noise
levels um so it is not expected that
there would be any sensitive land uses
um in which the reduction of the sidey
yard would have a negative impact on uh
I'll just provide some site photos of
the current operation as it exists uh
today Municipal staff have provided
comment on the application uh citing no
concerns and there were no comments
received from Neighbors or members of
the public uh so it is recommended that
zoning bylaw Amendment application uh
z920 be approved and I'm happy to answer
any questions that Council may have okay
thank you an is any questions to uh
councelor Walden yes Mr Mayor Hannah um
I understand that there's a dwelling
probably zoned west of there but I
believe currently there's not a dwelling
there that I think the house has been
down for a few months um but having said
that the noise studies were done and
they were acceptable so Mr Mayor I'd
like to make a motion to to accept this
application for this okay is there a
second there backer okay thank you um
but we do have to go through a little
bit more of a process correct Anna is
this is a public meeting uh yes I
believe um the applicant and the
potential buyer are present in the
meeting if they I think so I see some
people who wants to go first Peter
or yeah I'm just here if there's any
questions you know concerns if I can
need to address them so okay you're
satisfied with uh with what the report
from Hannah has said oh yes okay is
there anyone else wish to comment
I already have a motion but go ahead
Mike if I your worship yes M clarify on
councelor Walden's uh comment he is
correct the house has been removed
however there has been a building permit
issued for another residents to go on
that basically same spot so there will
be a residence going back there thank
you but but they they will know that
there's a elevator beside them they are
aware yes okay it's the same same
owners yeah they they were you know it
obviously had to be done and and and the owners the new owners and all
that have worked through it but it it is
a bit frustrating from an from a
business point of view in the country an
elevator that's been there for it's been
there a long time I grant you it's
gotten bigger smaller whatever but it's
still been an elevator dryers Etc and
especially maybe knowing the area
knowing the owners that that were beside
each other it seems a little frustrating
that someone has to go through that step
but that's done fair enough I'm I'm glad
it I'm glad that the ministry said it's
okay uh that's I guess the most
important part so is there anyone in the
public wish to comment uh on this
process as it is a public meeting and
we're changing the zoning
bylaw I have I have no members of the
public here tonight to comment okay I
see some faces on my screen but I
appreciate they're there to listen in or
whatever so fair enough thank you um
then are we prepared then can I call for
that motion to come forward if there's
no other questions of counselors to
uh to the uh
owners I'm going to then assume that we
can call the uh the question it was
first it was there is a motion on from
councelor Walton second by councel
Becker that we do approve as per the
recommendation of the zoning bylaw
Amendment
I'm going to call the question all those
in favor of the amendment please say I I any opposed hearing none the motion
carries Hannah what's is there anything
we need to do next or comments y um we
just have the second motion with respect
Publican agency
comments um so I do recommend um that
Council select option 2A that no public
comments were received on this
application so there was no effect on
the decision um and that um option 3 be
selected that agency comments were
received in support of the application
the effect of which results in the
decision to approve the
application okay I need a mover for the
for 2 a and three I believe she said so moved councelor Walen seconded by
councelor
venberg all those in favor of the motion
please say I I all any opposed hearing
none the motion carries is there any
comments you need to talk uh process
here uh yep um so Peter and Wayne um
your next step is you'll soon receive a
notice of decision uh that outlines
appeal rights so there is a 20-day
appeal period um after which the zoning
bylaw will be enforced in effect um and
then you will have another condition
fulfilled on your original consent
application thank you thank you uh both
for your uh working through this with
staff we appreciate it um it is a it is
the process I guess
okay Merry Christmas to you take care
right out
bye okay consent application file c81
D20 lot 178 plan 265
Hensel go
ahead um so as stated uh the next is for
consent Opti C
8120 uh the subject lands are located at
176 King Street in Hensel the ls are
designated residential in the Blue Water
official plan and are zoned residential
medium density Zone R2 in the Blue Water
zoning
bylaw um so this is a current site photo
of the property um Council should be
aware that um the property is currently
under construction in support of a semi
detached dwelling um the semi detached
dwelling has already been granted a
building permit on the subject lands um
as this is already um permitted as a
right in the
zone um so this was done prior to the
consent application um the consent
application is not necessarily needed to
facilitate the construction of the semi
uh but the applicant does have desire to
have each unit of the semi be separately
conveyable in the future and they would
also like to facilitate having separate
utilities uh for each unit um so just so
that council is aware uh that'll help to
provide some context to some of the
um so in terms of the actual um
Severance so the uh Severance
application is seeking um to split the
lot uh directly in half um so along uh
what'll eventually be the common wall
between the semidetached dwelling um so
each a lot both severed and retained
will have an area of approximately 400
square meters uh which is around
4,370 sare feet each and the frontage of
each um lot will be uh approximately 9 M
or just under 30 ft um and that'll be
for a total of just under 18 meters uh
for the entire building in terms of the
analysis for the severance um in terms
of looking at the provincial policy
statement the hon County official plan
and the Blue Water official plan uh they
both direct developments such as this uh
towards designated areas with um within
settlement areas uh such as Hensel um
the subject lands are located within the
residential designation um the intended
Severance is promoting infill
development and mixed dwelling types and
does permit um severances to support
residential development uh specifically
section 9.1 of the Bluewater official
plan addresses uh General land division
policies um one of which includes that
development shall be in accordance with
provision of the zoning bylaw um so the
proposed uh Severance as well as the
existing um uh uh structure that is
under construction on the um property uh
does comply uh with the requirements of
the zoning bylaw I'll just go into
further detail about that um so the R2
Zone um also permits the uses within the
residential low density Zone uh which
includes um a semidetached dwelling uh
the units are proposed to be identical
in terms of their placement on the lot
and dimensions um within um um so the
Zone area
minimum um in this uh for semidetached
dwellings is 270 square m for each unit
um with a lot size of 406 square meters
which in this case is equivalent um to
the Zone area um the proposed Severance
is exceeding uh the required lot area uh
as well the maximum Zone coverage is 40%
for each unit uh the proposed Severance
will result in a Zone coverage of
approximately
29.6% for each proposed lot uh so it is
meeting um The Zone coverage provision
ision uh so the zoning bylaw also
provides for a minimum Frontage um this
is expressed in terms of the context of
the entire semidetached dwelling uh so
the entire building for both units which
is a minimum of 15 meters the current
Frontage is 18 meters for the entire
building um and is not proposed to
change as a result of the severance so
this part of the zoning provision is met
uh there are other relevant Zone
Provisions for the proposed development
that will not change as a result of the
severance um so this is things like um
interior yards interior yard setback uh
front yard setback um rear yard setback
all of which um are met and comply with
the blue water uh zoning bylaw uh
furthermore uh all properties must AB
but um a public road uh the proposed
severed and retained Lots will both have
access to King Street um and the hon
County Public Works has already provided
entrance permits uh for both Lots uh
given the or sorry for both units uh
under the understanding that they will
eventually the intent is to sever them
to create two new laws um in terms of
Municipal comments I have summarized
them here um as there were uh some
important key uh key points that
influence the conditions um the first
one being that there will be two water
meters and transmitters installed uh for
each unit or each separate lot uh
reflected by condition number eight and
as built surveyor real report is
required as condition number six um so
this is to confirm um that the proposed
interior lot line follows along um the
common wall between the units and that is accurate uh a drywall is
required to be installed in both of the
rear yards for the proposed lot um to
deal with drainage reflected by
condition number nine uh as well uh
outstanding taxes and condition number
three 911 addressing is provided as per
condition number four um staff also note
that there are no Municipal drains on
the subject lands and the fire
department has no concerns uh as well as I spoke to earlier here on County
Public Works has no concerns and has
already granted uh entrance permits for
each
unit in terms of public um comments
there were public comments received from
four different households uh these full
comments uh were all received by email
and are included um in council's package
I have summarized um the concerns in
this table as well as um the applicants
response uh as he did provide some
response to some of the main concerns
that were raised uh these have been
conveyed to the neighbors and they are
summarized as followed uh as well um the
planner's comments have also been
inserted so I'm just going to go over
those um the first concern was just uh
in terms of privacy for the adjacent
land owners um the owner has advised
that he plans to install a privacy fence
um this has been reflected by uh the
planner's recommendation for condition
number 10 to require the privacy fence
be constructed um the second concern was
particular due to that um the severance
may result in separate ownership of each
unit uh which may result in separate
maintenance and they did have some
concerns with the look of this the owner
has advised that the design is to be
consistent between both units and the
products on the exterior will have a
30-year warranty uh there was concerns
about the movement of the existing
hydrop pole I will just go back to the
site photo um so the hydrop pole in
question is located here uh the
applicant has advised um that they
intend to move it 1.5 met to the east um
and that this will be maintained at 0.5
meter setb from um their adjacent uh the
adjacent property so the hydrop pole
will remain uh on the subject lands uh
as well there was a concern um from an
existing neighbor uh due to as a result
of the construction there was some
excavation of soil that was piling up
near the back of the lot um and they
just had some concerns about runoff the
owner has advised that they they intend
to use this as backfill and it will be
leveled out um a dryw will be required
to be installed in the RAR yard of each
unit uh to reduce the potential for
runoff as
well um one of the other particular
concerns was from the northern property
owner um just in terms of their access
to their backyard gate and fence um so I
did speak to both um the neighbor and
the owner about this and I asked them to
advise if there were any existing
easement on the subject lands that gave
access to um the backyard to the
northern neighbor um just because he
said it was a bit easier to um go
through his neighbor's property to
access his backyard and I did put them
in uh I did ask if they if the northern
owner would like to be put in contact
with um the property owner of the
proposed semi- detached dwelling so that
they could initiate a conversation about
this and potentially of a mutual
agreement um and the owner has advised
that he doesn't have any knowledge of an
easan on title and as well um it is
worth noting for council's clarification
that the proposed development is to be
contained within his own property um and
that a survey will be required as a
condition of consent to confirm that um
there was also a public comment about
the lot sizing patibility with
neighboring properties um as noted in my
report the proposed construction
complies with the provisions of the Blue
Water zoning bylaw uh and particularly
as it um relates to setbacks of
neighboring properties those are all met
uh and as well they are not proposed to
change as a result of the proposed
Severance uh there was also other
concerns about the construction noise um
Municipal staff have been made aware of
this and the owner has been advised of
applicable bylaws concerning noise or
other nuisances um what I will say to
summarize public comments a a lot of
them were uh in regards to the
construction of the semi detached
dwelling not
necessarily um the severance or the
splitting of the lot into two uh two
separately conveyable Lots um however I
think during this process it is good to
um address some of uh the neighbor
comments um so as such you know the
privacy fence will be required as a
condition of consent and uh these
responses have been conveyed um to the
neighbors uh but there are still
existing outstanding
concerns um so in terms of
recommendation uh my planner report is
recommending approval subject to the
following conditions uh most of these
conditions are standard um I will note
ones that are um that may not be a
standard uh for council's purposes um so
number six providing an ebuilt surveyor
real report to the satisfaction of the
municipality um the intent of that is
just to ensure that the proposed uh Pro
interior property line uh does fall
along uh the common wall of the
semi-detached dwelling um as well
servicing to water meters um and that a
drywall be installed in the rear yard of
each proposed lot so that's condition 8
n in terms of other conditions number 10
is that a privacy fence be constructed
along the um existing interior side
property lines um and the owner has um
expressed that he does intend um to
construct a privacy fence I am happy to
answer any questions that uh Council may
have
oh sorry mayor I think you're
muted thank you um yeah a question I
have as pointed out this building was G
ahead because under our rules and
regulations they could build the
building what they're asking for is to
sever it with the drywall uh dry well
was that would that have been uh already
recommended to them regardless of the
severance Mike maybe you can answer that
yeah sure through you your worship yeah
there's was currently a drywall on the
North portion of that property uh that
was permitted through the uh plans
review process but as they're splitting
the property in two it was felt that a
drywall on each portion of that property
would be required to ensure that no
surface dra AG
um discharges onto neighboring
property okay thank
you any other questions right now to
Hannah or to Mike if not as this is a
public meeting is the uh is the owner or
applicant in this evening yes I do have
Peter here so I I I see Peter H there is
are you there yes I am uh pleasure to
meet sir uh you're um are you um you've
heard the recommendations are you
satisfied with these recommendations yes
I am okay any comments you wish to make
to council not at this time no thank you
counselors any questions to the uh to
the
applicant any
questions thank you as this is a public
meeting sir uh and I'm going to ask is
there anyone in the Gallery wishes to
comment uh with concerns or or support
on this
application I have no other members of
the public registered to speak to this
application okay uh note that there was
no uh one came forward at the public
meeting this evening thank
you counselors is there any other
general questions you have with this
application to Mr Mayor go ahead coun
yes I was waiting I was sorry I was
waiting to hear uh the owner or if any
public were to comment before uh I had
any questions good go ahead um so just
uh to start off with uh I am against
this uh
Severance um I have many questions
and to start off with I find that it
seems like a loophole to me to apply for
a building permit for a semidetached
home and once the foundation is in then
apply for a sence after um if given um
two lots in Hensel uh that have 30 feet
of front 30 feet of Frontage uh I
understand it's a very deep lot but 30
feet of Frontage um you would not
typically be able to uh build two
properties on there um and still abide
by the side lot um
clearances
um it's just
I didn't have enough time to do a lot of
research I'm not sure if those uh you
know the condos and exter and stuff I
think they're on owned land and leased
property and how they and how those
people buy those houses that are
attached um maybe somebody can confirm
that for me but it seems to me that 30
foot Frontage is is really tiny
considering so if that is two separate
Lots 40 years down the road or let
pretend or heaven forbid that the uh one
place where to catch fire I'm not sure
um how you would rebuild on that um
giving that it's two separate laws um I
know it was
purchased um to have as a rental
property
um and and then once once the building
started the severance was applied
for I I don't understand how a builder
can give 30-year
warranty uh on Building Products um
shingles siding whatever
um and I'm concerned about two different
owners owning the same house not having
the same ideas on how is upkept
um I have many opinions on this I I
don't know how to explain them all but
uh I understand Hannah's argument that
it all falls in line with the blue water
zoning
bylaw but to me this just doesn't seem
right okay well that's it's our that's
why we have the the public meeting and
the discussion as counselors uh
reflecting U what what we think
collectively in the in the community so
that's counselor you you made your
points uh at this time and I think In
fairness like did a pretty good job uh
so is is there other counselors um with
another opinion or or whatever or or
agreen it's counselors looking for
discussion here
clarification Mr Mayor yes go ahead um
Mr Mayor I respect uh counselor from
hensel's comments and I was listening to
Hannah's
input and I think I believe she said
that the application is within
compliance of our planning and uh the
provincial planning um to for this sort
of Housing and whether we don't like two
owners or not we have duplexes and I
believe they're allowed so that was just
one of my concerns I'm not saying that
it should say yes or no for it but
because we don't like duplexes I don't
know if we can do that or or we can we
could say that but but if it's in
compliance with the planning act we may
want to think about that that's
all uh Mike can I on some clarification
here on some of these technical points
can you help out or I don't want to try
to put you at the spot but GNA put you
on the
spot no worries through you your worship
um I think a good example of this style
of of um Severance would be the Bayfield
medals
So within that subdivision they do semis
they do triplexes and quads and their
process is more of a lot part lot
control um process but it's the same
general idea so either way they're
building a building and then they're
sessioning it off when the foundation is
in the ground um so it's not something
new definitely to the municipality um
but that that's a good example for you
as for warranties and stuff like that
yeah I have no comment on that Mike can
I ask you a question through you Mr
Mayor go ahead yes uh but in in Bayfield
Meadows uh does the person that owns the
house actually own the property the
land
yes okay yes I do now Bayfield Muse is
different again right but this is more
comparable to The Meadows
okay um it is rather I it is rather
strange but I guess it's it was uh it's
there's always the technical things it's
a long narrow property so they were in
their right to start a building
project and then coming and asking for
this consent
application I guess I would have been my
sense would have been they would have
started right off the bat I guess maybe
how I would do it
I would come to the municipality and say
I have this lot I can build two lots but
I'm I'm going to have them separed up
front would councelor Harris would that
have been maybe a little more for the
neighbors and that to have the
discussion a little more up
front uh through you Mr Mayor uh
definitely I just I think the Builder
himself had the intention of selling
them individually uh but would not been
have been able to build the building
that he is building now if the Lots were
severed due to side
setbacks um so he went ahead and got the
permit to build a semi detached with the
intent to sever uh
after counselors any any questions to uh
to the applicant or to Mike Hannah go ahead I see your hand up thank
you yeah sure I will I'll just speak to
the process again um I can't speak for
the owners intent um but uh we did
contemplate um after the building permit
was granted with uh the owner two
different options so Mike did speak to
part lot control uh which is another way
that you can uh split a lot and that's
typically done again for these types of
multi-unit uh structures the only caveat
with that is at time of part lot control
at time of application we require uh
professional survey so the the builder
needs to know exactly where um that lot
line is going to be and exactly where
their Foundation is poured um the owner
was not at that point yet however they
wish to uh proceed with getting separate
utilities um moving forward with having
two separate entrances so as such uh the
consent process was posed um to Peter um
with the intent that the survey is
required as a condition of consent
within one year of it being granted so
it would provide him the time to uh
provisionally be granted the consent and
the for separate entrances and utilities
uh with the intent that the exact survey
and the surveyor's real report would
follow within a year um so Peter was
posed with those two options he decided
to proceed um with um a consent um again
I will note the one benefit of the
consent process um to the public is that
they are notified about it and I think
this way you know Council was able to
hear the neighbor concerns about this um
with part lack control uh it's not as
public as a process so no notice is
given with that respect um in terms of
the setback so the setbacks with the two
um other existing properties as as they
exist so the other two existing
dwellings those setbacks are not
proposed to change as a result of the
severance and as well the new new
interior uh lot line uh only doesn't
require an interior yard setback so
that's zero meters um so again it's
going to follow along that built lot
line um so as a result to the severance
the setbacks are not required to change
um so I will say um the building was as
proposed complied with the zoning at
time of building permit as well as uh
time as consent
application um and again you know in
terms of what application the applicant
chose to apply to first um you know
that's up to them there's no set process
that you need to do one ahead of the
other um the building could have been
granted without the consent uh and there
just would have been lot
there councelor Harris h thank you Mr
Mayor if I may comment um yes Hannah I
do understand that the interior lot line
in the center uh is at zero meters my
point is if that was two separate Lots
you would have 30 feet to build two
separate houses on and you would not be
able to comply uh to a side Lot setback
if it was two separate buildings on two
separate lots that was my point on the
centered on the center lot side back or
Center Line set back um and to follow up
with utilities um I'm I'm absolutely
sure without having two separate
properties you can have uh um uh
separate utilities water and sewer I
mean apartment buildings and uh three
story walk-ups do it all the time um and
they're owned by one person um so
putting the reasoning for having
separate utility and Sewer uh as for to
separate the Lots uh I don't believe uh
is a good
excuse all right um counselors we uh we
have I guess uh two options here uh Mike
I guess is that correct or Hannah I
guess uh it's either uh a motion
to I guess there's three to defer or to
approve or not approv um councilor there
is anyone prepared to make a motion at
this
time I make a motion that we do not
approve the severance okay is there a
seconder for that
motion is there a seconder for the
motion third time is there a seconder
for the
motion I I'll second it just for further
discussions councelor wetstone thank you
counc
um so I have a a question then if I
could too yes I think you're gonna ask
the question go ahead that's the reason
why I second it so so and again I second
it just for further discussion more than
anything else so I'm looking at
councelor Harris as
to um he made the motion I did second it
again for discussion as to why the
motion if I may
go ahead um I'm concerned excuse me I'm
concerned about the condition of the
property of what it may entail um we
have some properties in around Hensel uh
that uh uh were rentals and then got
sold off um and this being on uh blue
waterer Highway not on a side street I'm
concerned that uh in 10 to 15 years um
there's going to be blue siding on one
side and yellow siding on the other um
there's going to be uh one homeowner
that likes to cut his grass and the
other that doesn't I mean you get that
from property to property I understand
that but on a semi- detached home that
can be uh right on 84 uh that could be
possibly
um uh just ugly I guess you could say um
and I think if it had one owner that was
rental which was his first
intention
um I think that person would have more
control on on the condition and look the
physical look of what that property uh
is up
kept thank you C is there any other
comments to this
motion
counselors uh Mr Mayor yes go ahead go
ahead Deputy uh thank you uh uh yeah I I
mean I I I understand uh the concern and
the points that have been raised but I
don't understand those as far as the
planning Act is concerned or this
Severance and how it affects the
severance and I think uh if we do not
recommend and we're only recommending
approval for this consent uh then uh
we'll be going down we'll be going to
alpat we'll be going through another
hearing and and we'll be going through
extra costs on that it does conform it
is it took me some thinking to get
through it but it is very similar to the
uh Bayfield Meadows and we do that all
the time and uh you know it's up to the
owners to get together and we can't
legislate good taste and color or
shingles or anything like that so I
think that I cannot support a letter a
motion to deny
okay um if I make uh if Council allows
me just to maybe fed a little more where
the deputy was coming from when when he
said he's not sure about the legal
process I I Look to Hannah and to Mike
and you can bounce it off but okay the
motion is to deny and it's denied what steps have what could steps be
taken uh with the owner guess
hypothetically or where you say could go
goes to the county well I really goes
the county but at this step here um yep
um so blue water council's ability to
approve recommend deferral in the case
of a deferral it would be to get more
information or to provide more time to
resolve neighbor comments and then it
could come back to Blue Water Council uh
for further
consideration um if you were to approve
or deny uh or recommend approval of
denial sorry uh as the deputy was
stating it would go to the County
Council for DEC ision um in theory if
that were to be um approved uh the
neighbors would H uh would also receive
a notice and they would have a right of
appeal to elpat uh alternatively if the
application were to be Deni um the
neighbors as well as owners would still
have appeal rights um and in theory you
know the owner could appeal this um to
the alpad so that could be considered a
process or alternatively um the
applicant may choose to withdraw their
application okay thank you
um for the
clarification uh all right so Council we
have a a motion on
table are we prepared to call a
vote I'm going to call the vote the
motion is to
deny all those in favor say I okay all those in uh for um against
the denial
say
n
he hey there I heard two eyes for the uh
for the denial and I heard more than
four or five I think uh I heard
definitely more Nays so U the the motion
is defeated is there another
recommendation Mr Mr Mayor I'll move
that uh we approve uh we recommend
approval of the uh of the consent and uh
bearing in mind that there's always an
appeal by any party all the way along
the process thank you is there a
second Mr Mayor I would second it
seconded by councelor
Walden is there any comments anyone
wishes to make and I appreciate we've
had great discussion but I as a chair
I'll I need to ask again thank
you any other
comments hearing none I'm going to call
the question all those in favor of
approval of this uh consent to uh make
it two
lots all those favor say I I any any
opposed
Nate hearing the eyes and nay I declare
that the motion
carries and that's been approved
um Hannah what's the next step here
again uh yep um Peter um so your next
step will be uh going to County Council
um for decision um at the next available
meeting will likely be um at the
beginning of January so we will be in
contact okay thank you okay thank
you okay we're now at
7.2 good night Hannah uh take
care uh we're now at
7.2 uh Mike Ross reports uh blue flag is
the first one
7.21 blue flag application I can take
that mayor okay thank you thank you so
um Council it won't uh come as a
surprise to you that uh staff is
recommending not to input an application
for a blue flag award at Bayfield Main
Beach uh Bayfield Pier Beach uh for
2021 the um the beach is uh under great
stress and in fact there is no parking
and no basic amenities left uh that can
would allow us to even qualify so I'm
suggesting that the program be uh put on
Hiatus for a year till we can see what
happens the water levels but uh so staff
is recommending uh that uh
Blue Water apply for a blue flag
application for the marina in
2021 uh I'm estimating the cost for the
delivery of the program to be
$642 and uh this year because of covid
gathering restrictions Etc the uh
programs were not delivered uh which
then uh so that creates a uh Savings in
2020 that can be carried forward uh to
2021 that will result in a zero uh
request for Zer for 2021 budget uh if we
can roll over
$642 from
2020 so Council my recommendation is
that uh three recommendations one that
Council approve the pro proposed budget
for implementation of the blue flag
program and the amount of
6,425 and refer to the budget process
for information number two that Council
approve rolling over
$642 from the 2020 budget balance uh to
the 2021 budget and number three that
Council approved the submission of
application for a 2021 blue flag award
at Blue Water Marina in Bayfield to swim
drink fish who is the Canadian operator
of the international blue flag
program okay counselors you've uh read
this report I'm sure is there anyone um
ready to speak on this or make a Rec
make a a motion on
recommendations councelor is looking for
direction here councelor wetstone here
yes go ahead so my comments on this is
that you know yeah it's been definitely
a struggle as as our leene is attest to
for our beach here there's no doubt
we're in serious trouble when it comes
to that and actually our infrastructure
that's associated with it um so this is
the marina itself I mean I I I I do
struggle even with it a little bit as
well too as far as the blue flag um and
the uh the impact that blue flag may
have on on
um having more impact a better impact
you know those type things however when
I'm looking at the budgetary
issue that we have here um it's netting
out at zero so I don't have an issue
moving forward the uh I don't know if we
have do we have to do three separate
recommendations obviously I suspect but
I have don't have an issue with at least
uh you know moving forward the first one
if that's the case if we how we want to
do this so we're we're looking at a zero
proposed budget so it's worth exploring
and see what we can come up with this
year again to help us out okay um I'm
looking at Chandra for please I figured
as
much okay um all right is there someone
willing to make the first motion then
for discussion and vote I'll move the
first recommendation councelor wetstone
thank you second it councelor venberg
discussion hearing none all those in
favor of the first
recommendation say I
SEC nay hearing none motion
carries uh recommendation number two
that it be a a move to the uh
20 21
budget is there a mover for
that mover councelor venberg is seconded
by councelor Harris councelor
Harris
discussion G to call the question all
those in favor say I I any oppos
hearing none motion carries we're now at
number three Council approve the
submission for application for the 21
blue flag award for the
marina is there a motion for
that this time councelor wetstone your second councelor
Walden councelor Walden
discussion hearing none I'm going to
call the question all in favor of the
motion say i i i any opposed hearing
none motion carries thank you all right
thank you Marlene uh 7.22 erosion
control shoreline protection
policy and Council I believe Mike will
be any questions or
comments yeah through year year worship
um I have four reports involving
Shoreline protection the first one is um
an erosion control shoreline protection
policy so staff is asking Council to
direct staff to prepare an Euros control
policy a basically a comprehensive Co
policy to be as transparent as we can um
as we know we're or as we are getting uh
more and more calls for shortland
protection of Municipal property uh
staff feels its best to be um
transparent and and try to get this the
process down pat and everybody knows
what's going on uh moving forward what
would be required from Council from
staff uh to make this as easy as
possible for everybody um within that
report there's a bunch of bullets that
are questions
that questions that come to mind um when
we when we need to look at this policy
these won't be all the questions but
these are definitely some of them um the
first one being the biggest is what type
of agreement uh does council wish to
proceed whether it's a license of
occupation agreement like we did with uh
Mr McDonald on T Street and Bayfield or
is it an agreement where the
municipality undertakes uh the
installation of these proposed Shoreline
protection with the full cost going back
to
um to the requester basically uh this
type two in my report is the preferred
method from our legal council so just
giving you a heads up on that rather
than that throw out those bullets if you
have any question questions regarding
that um feel free to reach out okay
thank you counselors comments councelor
wetone here I do have a question for
Mike if I could yep so item number two
or Point number two under the
agreement
um this if I'm not mistaken Mike and it
might be in the report something says I
did read it if I'm not mistaken this
would entail a lot of Staff time
obviously a pilot St time and to the
point with all the erosion as you
mentioned happening and requests coming
in I'm thinking we would probably be
looking for additional Staffing would
you not suggest
that I don't think we current our
current headcount could bear what we
currently have that's my own opinion by
the way but because these are not
short-term type projects either right
but it would just be staff like we would
still have to review the propos OS
drawings we would still have to draft
the agreement all that would stay the
same it would basically staffed on site
not 100% of the time but making sure
that the installation is done as per as
per the drawing So currently the way it
is with the license of occupation um
staff doesn't get involved so basically
they sign the agreement these are the
drawings okay Carry On um but if if we
were to undertake it then we would be on
site ensuring that it's installed as per
the design and confirming such during
the process
there will be more staff time but I
don't think it's as
orous as you're thinking it is fair
enough and one further question or
comment reading it in there is that with
that one the municipality Bears the
responsibility for the risk and the LI
liability
um that makes me nervous to be honest so
you know there there's a whole reason
why we uh we were doing the license of
occupation previously that was to get
away from liability was part of it
anyways yes
and you're correct the license of
occupation does um have the
requestor um provide insurance coverage
um for the life of the wall as well as
for maintenance and for security if that
wall ever is removed now this other
agreement definitely has not been
drafted yet so it could be amended any
way shape or form Council feel spit
councelor
venberg thank you mayor uh and to Mike
how would full cost recovery how would
that
happen What would be the steps the way I
foresee it happening again um this
agreement has not been drafted and it
has not been presented in front of any
legal um but the way I see it happening
is we get um an estimate of how it's
going to um how much the cost would be
and then um basically there' be a
financial agreement between the
requestor and the municipality they pay
all
cost um for the recovery of the
installation and there would probably be
Securities involved in that
um so how would it be done um would have
to be hammered out in the
agreement okay I'm just I'm just going
with bad thoughts and saying okay now
it's time to pay up and people are going
know we've got issues you know we don't
have the ability to pay now we need time
to pay um and maybe other lawyers
getting involved in that so uh I'm
thinking like that in regards to the
number one bullet point license of
occupation if we were to do that could
we still ensure that
staff um oversees it somewhat if if if
it's going to be on Municipal property
wouldn't we want staff to make sure that
it is being done properly just like any
other um build on any other property I
guess yeah and that's what that's what
our our lawyer advice was is that staff
would be on site um and take you know
undertake the entire installation um
rather than just
having the requester ensure that is done
appropriately right um the previous
license of occupation that was done I do
not believe has a provision in there for
any kind of a staff sign enough at the
end
um that's my understanding Lori if I'm
incorrect please reach out um and
furthermore back to your um question
regarding how we receive payment of fall
obviously the municipality would take a
substantial security prior to entering
into any kind of an agreement to make
sure um that will be covered up to a
certain point anyway and then there will
be drafts or payments along the
way okay thank you um any other
questions of counselors Deputy Mayor Mr
Mayor uh a couple questions or comment
to Mike um if if this is going to be
done on mici property obviously we want
to have control of it or the
municipality wants to have control of it
and to ensure that it's done correctly I
mean would you not have the engineer
inspected as it was built and certify
that it was built as per engineered why
would we get into it we're not you know
we don't know that everything was done
why wouldn't we have just have the
engineer certify it was done that's one
question and the other question was we
talked about liability you know what
with joint and several liability in the
municipal world uh all these claims go
to whoever has the biggest pockets in
the end and that would be the
municipality there too so I mean we're
always going to be on the hook somewhere
so I mean I think that's we have to
accept that as part of the risk and
cover ourselves with the best agreements
possible yeah I definitely agree with
your with your second comment Deputy
Mayor um as for your first regarding an
engineered sign off um definitely I
would I would like to see that and I
will make sure that it is in whatever
kind of an agreement that we uh that
Council wishes to move forward
on okay
um if I'm chime in I've uh enjoyed the
uh the comments of counselors you've uh
you've helped me a little bit uh because
I've been given a lot of thought uh
there's Arguments for both yeah the
solicitor says that they like the the
second method however the we we've gone
through one we've had a couple of other
people I think since we've been elected
asking to try to uh work with us and and
for whatever reasons that didn't proceed
they did their own thing which is fine
too too um but uh on the McDonald one
the the I know the lawyers uh agreed
that it was a good deal they said sign
it I I I think that the part about
significant staff time the part about we
are going to be a bit more responsible
for the risk and liability in option two
and at the uh uh that does scare me um
the option
one I think we got it pretty well as
much as we can cornered when it says
well they they had to agree and they and
they paid for it well you know if they
as pointed out I think the deputy mayor
they're gonna have some engineer or
unless they were an engineer but they're
gonna have some engineer kind of giving
them some backup because they're
spending serious dollars and at the end
if we've got the documents that that
says they're responsible if it falls
down well it's to their best it's to
their benefit to make sure it's proper
um yes we can always go and look and
make sure that they're following what
the drawings look like but that's more
to protect them because why wouldn't
they be following the documents so my
gut feeling on this would
be that that I think the license of
occupation's been
working it's worked
once uh uh and it's it puts a lot of
onus on the owner that's supposed to be
doing the work we obviously make sure
that they follow the lot lines and don't
get into anything more we obviously have
all the stuff that they have to agree
with ABCA or whatever
Ministries um the bullet points which I
think are the main uh main thing to me
th this is the outline at the top
license of occupation that's where I'm
leaning on and then of course the making
sure we get as many of the
concerns and that are covered or ticked
off as we go through the process so that
everybody's fair and that's on your
second page but on on this point that's
where I'm leaning on the license of
occupation and and keep it as buttoned
up as possible like we've been doing or
have been doing but anyway that's my
thoughts uh are do we want to think
about this a bit more this evening on
this these two here do you want to move
on to the
other to the points of uh the bullets I
guess of uh what the staff kind of want
to make sure we hit if we if we go
forward then on this process well we are
been kind of going through for it what
what's uh what's your view councilors
it's a little awkward when we're kind of
in Zoom
here do anyone want to approve the uh
the recommendation that we will have to
cover those other points so they know
how to what to develop a a policy from
won't they yeah I I just I just wondered
if if they're kind of almost a do we
agree with the one or two there and then we work around these others
that's all I'm just deputy just for
process uh uh I'm I'm I'm open to carry
on and go through the go through those
other bullet points and if we agree that
they're good points that's fine but uh
it's generally kind of which direction
we go to on
the on on the uh on the overall vehicle
can I call it that
what's your thoughts
counselors I Deputy Mayor and yourself
on the license of occupation and the
owners have their Engineers that do the
oversight I'm sure the building
department will still have a hand in it
somewhere and move forward on that
aspect I'd like to hear other
counselor's concerns
also okay and the all
right I'm
can I for process I guess that's why the
ministry or that's why the the process
is there from I I'll ask to we have a
motion on on what type here a license of
occupation or or an agreement of
municipality can I have someone make a
motion for
discussion is anyone prepared to at this
time councelor
benberg sorry I just uh trying to hit
the mute button know I know that problem
Mr Mr Mayor can I have a qu like is is
counc Vandenberg if he's going to make a
motion or has a comment there I'll I'll
wait for him but uh if not
um you know the the
report that we looked at here was ju
July the 29th
so and it said no erosion control so
that's that's an that is a an option
here too is it not
yeah
right that's
right I thank you
okay that's if we don't come up with one
of these I guess that's one yeah well no
actually we made a motion of council
that we weren't going to spend any
money taxpayers money on our properties
however then that either that night or a
couple days later we we I don't know if
it was a motion but it was it was and it
clearly did happen because two I think
we did have two uh Property Owners
approach us and we said we're not in
tuned to trying to make a deal with you
to help you but we're not paying for it
and and then they didn't come back for
whatever reasons they did their own
thing or didn't do anything uh and then
we finally had I guess the one was Mr
McDonald that that came forward and we
uh we basically did the well we did the
license of occupation and we had we had
a a a we tried to cover everything and
the staff we asked the staff though we
should have a a better better policy and
a and and a sheet for people to see so
it doesn't look like uh I'm paying a fa
favored by not adding something there's
a checklist so there's a checklist but
there's also which kind of vehicle do we
run here on uh and that's sort of where
it's at but you are are right at at any
time even even the option of license of
occupation or an agreement and these
bullet points the one bullet point is
the very end Council May for whatever
reason say we're not going to agree to
this particular one happening on a
property by by by order of motion so so
that that is that is in there and I'm
hoping we keep that in there myself as
one of the I should always be in there
but um anyway is there um getting back
uh if I can just
unprocess move things along is there
anyone wishing to make a a a what type
of agreement well it's councelor
wetstone here I actually I have a I have
a hard time making a motion on the
simple reasons when we look at all these
points that we're talking about in the
on the next page okay I'm not the expert
in these I need more information on
those so what are what are our options
how is pre-existing infrastructure
managed okay what does that mean what are our options well we can let's
go through it then okay well I I don't
know if that's a today thing that could
be a report that comes back there could
be multiple things what documents there
could be like what documents are
required to be provided prior to
accepting consideration there could be
50 different ones that we may have to
choose from I just don't know that's the
whole point right so well I I don't I
think that that I think the bullet
points and help me out uh staff but my
sense of what these bullet points are is
we make sure that they're asked and
covered when someone comes if they ask
us to do a property like the one that we
did it didn't have a walkway way well of
course we didn't ask for it either but but was pointed out by staff they're
thinking of what ifs so do you wanna
when someone comes into the office we're
gonna they can hand them a sheet and
says this is the basic C this is the
minimum that the council's expecting you
to take care of I think we even have one
coming up uh laort there's an issue of
uh of the um of our of a drain so
clearly we're going to I hope if we
agree to that if we agree to it we're
going to agree they pay for the drain
going back to that motion that Council
made I'm still think a majority of
council agrees it's going to be if they
we're helping someone it's not going to
be on the backs of the of the whole
municipality so this just this just gets
it these points are made sure everybody
knows that they're got to be ticked off
to to council not ticked off in the term
that they're that they're that they're
made sure they're covered and of course
there's going to be other ones this is a
lied document like a lot of things so I
think that is where they're coming from
but counselor or Mike is that is that
what your intent was here I don't want
to yeah do your worship um I agree with what you're trying to or what
you're saying um okay the intent wasn't
to go through Bullet by Bullet um the
intent was just trying to make Council
aware that it would be best for
residences to as transparent as possible
that if we had a policy in place moving
forward and what they would need and
what would be expected um it's
definitely understood that everything
would have to come to C to
council individually with each specific
property it's just best if we uh made
everybody aware of what would be needed
and and to move
forward okay well to get the ball
rolling in thank you for the
clarification uh I'll propose that a
motion that we uh go with the license of
occupation as an agreement to move
forward
with okay is there a second or for that
motion Council coun W second of course
uh this is a like all our motions
they're they're all important so I know
we've had discussion but I'm gonna
please councilor is anyone wishing to
have more
discussion councelor venberg or anything
um yeah it's just in regards to those uh
those bullet points and I
guess um
we're going to have to see the the
document the policy and what bullet
points
are are going to be there let's say for
us to to pass a whole policy I I know
there's we we've done uh stairs in the
past where associations have approached
the municipality in regards to to stairs
so we we've kind of done that as well um
you know there's one bullet point in
regards to do we sell off
uh lands I'm not I can't see it right
now because it's going to be scrolled
down a little further but anyways it's
those uh yeah I guess it's the last one
disposing of the lands I don't think we
want to see something uh in regards to
that in the policy but I know it's it's
there a bullet
point through you your worship yes could
I just make a clarification on the
motion um if the Mover and the seconder
could just conf firm is the intent that
what you're asking for is that the
policy or the draft proposed policy that
staff come back with is centered around
a license of occupation
um yes that is correct yes yes thank
you that was my intention that you would
be bringing back a a draft
proposal yeah well was called draft good
point Thank you and to and to councelor
uh vandenberg's point if we uh if we
also but this is specifically on the on
the I'm going to call it the main
vehicle which is the license of
occupation and they'll come back with
the with the the details um fair enough
and and the councelor Walden I believe
you that's your intent the motion yes Mr
Mayor if I may that's why I second also
behind my second of it is the our staff
has already done a lot of work on this
and I would like to support them moving
forward they're trying to be clear and
try to be transparent and I would like
to support that going forward not
jumping into it but I think that we need
to make this make this uh procedure
carry
on good point okay if if it's okay now
on the bullet points we're we're going
to make a separate motion if there's
something that they want pulled out for
sure right now we're gonna kind of go
through it tonight or or you're willing
to make but that'll be a separate motion
on the on the on those points okay just
to be clear with everyone so
can I call the question on the license
of occupation we understand the intent
and they'll come back with a little more
detail and we can always have that sober
second look at it is that okay then I'm
going to call the
question all those in favor of the
motion license of occupation is a
process say I
[Music]
I any opposed hearing none opposed
motion carries now with regards to the points that I referred to as the
bullet points is there any on there that
you wish that we don't have further
discussion on as part of the process or
you have have some you want added at
this
time okay I think these are all points
for consideration there may be some more
as they come up but I think these are
the minimum probably yeah U I think
though this will be a document that will
be added to I'm sure I I don't think you
have any trouble adding things to cover
off uh when it comes to some of these
things especially when it comes which
will be along the lake we hope that
water goes down and just subsides the
issue if we're there is a guy someone
that likes us up there as counselors
councelor venberg I think I saw you had
your hand up yeah thank you mayor I was
just gonna say if we could see something
come back um I know staff would be
working hard on it and we may have to
pick it apart a little bit maybe or or
add a little bit or maybe in the
meantime we can make suggestions to them
okay um but I I think if we were to go
through it all tonight and uh I don't
think it would do us any any justice to
do it all tonight y well as pointed out
these are you know Case by case that we
that's when hey the bullet point is
there's pre-existing infrastructure so
that owner has to know that they have to
work and satisfy coun before they can go
ahead it's not a surprise to them that's
kind of how the how I think these things
work and so it did what what do you
suggest that council do you want to just
make a note to staff that we accept
these as in principle and look for it in
the final report or I'm looking for
suggestions Mr Mayor do we maybe did I
miss something here did we agree to the
recommendation I don't remember voting
on the recommendation to develop a
policy and if we do then we could
include those all with it did we well
then then write it up then write it up
that way sir okay well I don't maybe I
missed it I might have you know I have a
little nap here sometimes but well
I I think we were we we kind of got into
policy yeah no I I agree we've started
down the road but I didn't know if we
said yes we're going to develop a policy
so that's that's all well
I
iation I think I think we sort of did
but but u i i know I'm I can't say it
was a different way we did it but I
think we were all above board put it
that way um nobody was trying to pull
anything not with these uh n not with us
nine on this crowd I think um okay so on
these pullet points are we are we
satisfied that they should be a minimum
that are in for tonight and and we want
to see it in the final report as you say
we can fed out the discussions at that
point when we see the final draft is
that something of that words
moving to get this I'm hearing generally
we don't mind that these things are
written up
but counsel maybe uh staff could you
help us
out Lori I'm kind of looking for your uh
maybe your helping the magic wand here
as go
between okay so um I understand um mayor
Klo and Council that that um you do want
to pass you do want to um say the
recommendation and and uh see where
people stand on it because it sounds as
though you are wanting a
policy which includes all those items to
be considered so so I think Deputy Mayor
Ferguson is correct that you have to
read someone has to make a
recommendation make the recommendation
that's there okay could someone make a
recommend so so moved okay thank you
Deputy Mayor thank you is there a second
uh for the motion councilor
venberg I just wanted to say I thought
that was all the intent when we were
discussing this all so well but now but
now it's in black and white so that's
good well well no it's still it it's I think how did our our CEO put it
these are these are points that we make
sure that are definitely part of the
discussion if they're there if there
stairs there the the person would have
to know that we're not we want the
stairs to be talked about that you're
paying for as as we've done historically
it just it just that it's on a paper for
people to see so we may but we may say
like the one about there's nothing in
here about there's kind of just about
maybe more armor Stone and not talking
about the other well we we'll have that
discussion when we see the final draft
so we'll still have time to have uh
explain things out but just to keep
moving things on you're not against
these ideas being on a paper that's no
that was that wasn't what I was talking
about I I think with the deputy mayor I
guess I'm agreeing with him that we
didn't say the word policy or go back to
the recommendation I think it was all in
the back of our minds that hey we were
discussing the policy so that that's
good that's what I mean it's in black
and white I'm good with the with this
and what the uh the deputy mayor has
said
okay can I it's been first and seconded
correct can I can I call the question
then is everyone
satisfied is okay I'm going to call the
question all those in favor of the
motion with these bullet points to see
um what is the marual motion uh Chandra
just to be fair my understanding is that
the motion is the recommendation that's
there in front of you that Council
direct staff to prepare an erosion
control shoreline protection policy for
council's consideration and
implementation okay thank you
I'm going to call the question all those
in favor say
I any opposed hearing none the motion
carries okay thank you
staff is there a timeline is there a
timeline for
that I know know not I'm not because
we're kind of doing the
mess well I know but we have a number of
applications here that that are that
would relate to this and uh if this can
be done in some kind of uh expedient
timeline I'm going to suggest a
moratorium on all those applications
until after the policy is developed I
would agree with that Deputy Mayor okay
so we're so that is H and that that
sounds very logical to myself also that
they've obviously been working on it so
I what what um it sounds like there's
going to be a motion well we passed this
right so or we haven't called the
question yes we did call the question so
it's passed so can you when can you come
back and have it a little more
formalized as you pointed out there's a
little bit of the criteria you need to
word Smith even even in the uh even in
the first document the the license of
occupation uh what What's your sense
through you your worship um I completely
understand that there are people in line
and wanting to a response on their
requests for Shoreline protection on
Municipal property and I do not want to
hold them up as much as much as we can
um my goal is to have this to you as
soon as possible I don't want to
guarantee next meeting um for sure um
but it will be as soon as possible this
will go on the top of my list uh for
things to get
done okay well it is it is important
because not not from about speed but we
want to make sure that the document is
as airtight as it can be and is and as
clear for everyone down the road so we
don't have to make major changes to it
that would be that would not look good
on anyone correct so is that fair enough
with everyone at this point um well
because he's going Mr Mayor because he's
going to uh put a a rush on it on the
top of his list uh I think that uh
formally we should deal with all those
other applications right now and say
that I'm going to I'm going to propose
we put a moratorium on them until the
policy is developed which I have heard
is going to be as quickly as
possible okay will move that you move
that I'll second it is there a there's a
seconder okay so may CL can I just
repeat the motion back Mo in the
seconder um so what I'm hearing is that
Council Place a moratorium on all
Shoreline protection requests until a
policy may be
developed is that
essentially have I captured everything I
think that captures my intent yes well
maybe we this just word Smith a little
bit till we get a report back from Mike
on what uh I I just it just sounds like
we haven't made any decision we we get
we gave some direction it maybe it's the
same thing it's getting late in the
night
I I refer back to the clerk if she's
happy with it and Mike understands it I
what how should why should I say
anything think there was two words in
there that might change and I think it
said may be developed could change that
to will be developed yeah that's maybe
the word I think that's yeah will be
developed yeah so that Council Place a
moratorium on all Shoreline protection
requests until a
policy is developed thank you yeah
thanks
Chandra okay you okay with that I'm good
with that okay and clearly the direction
was from what we passed on our motions
correct Mike and and counselors yes yes
okay based on that then I'm I'm that's I
guess just I know it sounds a little
just want to be clear because the people
are going to be asking us tomorrow
including all of us as we go forward
here so um the uh I we can say if this
motion passes we can say that you saw
the report with those pullet points and
the direction of uh of what I call the the vehicle the which is uh the
motion number one and and uh and then
that these will be the minimum points
that are going to be feted out some may
be on or on some may be off but they
will be definitely part of it okay I'm I
can live with that and know fellow
counselors when you get the calls too so
I think we're all on the same page if
this motion passes is everyone clear
with the
motion see no one asking
clarification uh I'm going to call the
motion but oh just before I do that to
be fair with everyone I realize every
one of these is important for the people
and they want to know but I I just uh
the one that just kind of came up at the
last was leport street but clearly that
goes under the same thing we want to
know the we want it so it's all written
so everybody knows fair enough just
wanted just in case someone well I I can
answer that if I get a call I I'm good
with that too so just as long as
everyone hopefully says the same thing
if they get a
call okay I'm G to call the question
then and can I it read over one more
time because for the public that are out
there uh listening it's there I'm sure
they want to make sure they've got the
right motion too so chander could you re
read it please moved by Deputy Mayor
Ferguson seconded by councelor wetstone
that Council Place a moratorium on all
Shoreline protection requests until a
policy is
developed okay thank you and of course
we have a verbal that it's going to be
coming back as soon as possible we won't
have that on the motion we all take that
as good good word of Mike and staff they
understand okay I'm going to call the
question all those in favor say I I any
opposed hearing not oppose the motion
carries unanimously thank you okay um
with that
motion
Chandra my understanding is that then
our other three that we're on tonight
will be a motion to table until we have
our policy in place is that is that a
fair
motion yes that the next the items
7.2.3
7.2.4 and
7.2.5 okay will come back in front of
council following the adoption of a
shoreline protection policy does that is
that correct Mike that would be uh I
agree I think that's to me is very clear
uh and it's and it's deferred but to a
Time the public then
knows is there any councelor wish to
make that a
motion councelor venberg seconded by
councelor Harris councelor
Harris any questions on the motion
clarification hearing none I'm going to
call the question all those in favor of
deferral of the three applications we
have now until this policy is uh in
place all those in favor say I I I any
opposed hearing none the motion carries
unanimously thank
you okay we are now at uh
7.41 uh Mr nle uh Fleet Surplus is that
correct sorry we've got more to do here
I'm sorry
uh we're at uh 7.31 Mr Kester ah he
thought he was getting off early thank
you counil water and wastewater Reserve
capacity so included and thank you your
worship included in the uh package
tonight uh this is something that I had
developed this year and wanted to just
share with Council simply uh to help
with the awareness to some of the
reserve capacities for our systems that
we have or for our water and waste
systems that we have in place um it's
simply an awareness and so I would just
ask that Council receive this report for
uh for
information okay uh do I have a motion
to receive this for information and of
course entertain so moved councelor W to
move is there a
seconder councelor venberg is okay with
a second thank you um just a real quick
question um back when we had our Aqua
report and about uh the volumes of
what I call drinking water from the
plant to Bayfield uh could you just just
a friendly reminder to you I don't
recall getting that or is this in here I
quite frankly I I no it's it's not and
it is something that Aqua is still
working on to get that information
pulled together um I will just make a
note of that well I I appreciate that
thank you it's not a burning issue but I
just I got it on my mind there I didn't
want to forget thank you okay um any
other questions with regards to these
numbers of course we're all know that
those are right because we've all been
watching it
closely okay I'm going to call the
question and this is for information by
the way thank you for taking the time to
do this I'm sure it uh you probably need
to do it anyway and this is a good uh
little picture for us to look at too so
appreciate the the
report all those in favor of the motion
received for
information I any opposed none opposed
motion carries your uh 7.32 alternate
water supply design yes so uh thank you
your warship um so this is just a report
to appoint the consultant
for um the design for the Zurich
alternative water supply um as you can
see there was uh three three Consultants
that submitted proposals for that um and
uh and and so evaluations were done on
them and it was determined to be uh the
BM Ross was uh was the most appropriate
consultant for this position or for this
um project rather thank you that's your
recommendation is there a motion to
receive the recommendation DM Ross to do
the uh proposal proceed with Engineering
Services move Mr Mayor councelor and
councelor Becker seconds councelor
Walden made the motion Chandra
uh it's pretty well self-explanatory I'm
going to call the question all those in
favor say I I any opposed hearing none
the motion carries thank you uh the
environmental committee status update
there's some recommendation here yes so
um you'll recall mayor and Council that
earlier in the year there was a request
to develop a environmental committee so
this is the follow up to that um and uh
so so staff have worked to developing
the terms of
reference for that which are included
within there's a recommendation and then
additionally as part of that
conversation um which I believe was uh
through which had taken place at budget
um there was a conversation with respect
to the communities in bloom committee um
and so there's some information on the
backgrounds to the communities in bloom
committee
uh there for the purposes of discussion
as
well
okay Council we can you know I guess Co
was a prime example of all the things
kind of got uh um slowed up a little bit
but um on the
recommendations uh is Council still
feeling the the direction from back in
our budget days I guess we'll uh we'll
see here uh so on the first
recommendation
is there a mover for that motion
councelor Harris councelor Harris is
there a
seconder councelor
vanenburg yes and if I can then ask a
question in regards to the terms of ref
I know it's not uh in writing but I'm
thinking then Mr ker that it's
encompassing all aspects of blue water
when it comes to the environment if it's
the true trees if it's the waterways
like a river or stream or the lake shore
it's all encompassing
that that's correct yes okay yeah it's the intent is to um for lack of a a
better word or to to simplify it a
little bit is to do better by the to the
environments um and just do uh better
efforts towards uh environmentally
conscientious projects
there was a a real one of the main
pushes was about getting rid of plastics
uh clearly that was kind of on the top
of the list but yeah it is it isn't just
about Plastics that's for sure is that
but that I think has been one of the
main focuses on uh at least on the on
some people's
minds
okay are you satisfied any other
questions are we can we call the
question on the first
one satisfied with the draft and
direction I guess we'll see by the
motion all those in favor of the rec
first recommendation please say I I hi
any opposed hearing none motion carries
with regards to give
direction we is that still the the
intent of uh of the council yeah so um
the so it contained within the uh the
report there was again there's some
information with respect to Communities
In Bloom um I know that there was
discussion with uh at the during budget
about um looking at the ability to
incorporate the two components together
the communities and Bloom committee is
still active and they are still
participating uh in in their efforts um
and uh and as such uh it is something
that um I feel that the the the
committee members still obviously see
value in um however uh um there there
may be
Al the appetite of council to look at as
discussed previously uh seeing the
seeing a committee where where both are
formed or or some other
um uh some other iteration of that uh
discussion as
well hey Council um I I guess when we
went looked at the budget that time if I'm remembering right a majority of
the like all their flower and stuff are
done by
staff or part-time staff so is the issue
of our of the flowers and the main
streets that that will continue in the
budget I know we talked about that it
was about more the fact of getting of
working the two together they're both
about Community betterment tying in with
what you said there and and also can we
if we're going to put some money into a
new committee which we did on that this
would maybe help that portion of the
community In Bloom so I'm in favor of it
I was in favor of then um the motion
said feasibility integration but I think
the intent that I did when I motioned
that that but let let's let's have them
mold together they they're both the same
thing so but I'm looking for Council
Direction here councilor
venberg thank you then a question um was
any discussion
uh made with the committee members of
community In Bloom as to what we are
thinking of doing to their committee
like what was their feedback did we have
that
discussion so uh we unfortunately did
not have an opportunity to uh have that
conversation with them yet um we did
make uh we did reach out to them uh but
at this time comments have not been uh
we we have
not uh um we haven't had a chance to
actually engage with the committee
because they have had uh difficulties
actually getting to having their uh
timelines coordinate on their end to
actually have their next uh meeting so
it just it hasn't worked in uh time from when we've developed this terms of
reference to uh when they've had their next subsequent
meeting Mr Mar if I can add add to that
also
um as youve identified and you can
respect uh the Mandate of communities in
bloom was to celebrate various aspects
of the community not it wasn't just the
flower committee and it wasn't just
flowers on the Main Street
beautification of your main street is
one of the objectives the environment is
another one uh celebrating community
volunteers is another one and and there
are eight objetives within the Mandate
of Communities In Bloom and you can
understand that celebrating volunteers
and and uh you know doing environmental
initiatives and everything else in the
last year has been pretty hard to do
because uh there hasn't been any
committees that have been able to work
and work together to physically go out
in the community and you know carry on
some of the good work that they do so
it's it's been a difficult year to uh to
get everything together for sure
um and and uh you know the the members
on the community In Bloom committee are
you know they're still Keen uh we have a
meeting this Thursday and right now
they're all uh have indicated that
they'll all be there so uh you know
there may be some more chance to discuss
it with them on
Thursday just okay and with so we so the
motion that we made back in back at
budget the council uh investigate the
feasibility we're we're with that having
that discussion uh for Deputy Mayor to
have that discussion with them then on
this meeting that's that's kind of where
we're at tonight just to confirm that
can we leave it at that way then sure
I'd be happy to we were going to have it
last meeting and then you know hour
before the meeting somebody got sick and
then we we didn't have Quorum so well so
we'll have it this meeting okay well
then let's uh leave it for information
then that uh provide Direction well
we're just leaving it as it is the
motion I don't see a motion
resending the motion of the budget
meeting or I guess we did it back in
budget so we're going to leave it as is that fair enough for tonight for
councel I'm G to take some leeway as as
I'm looking I'm hearing someone say no
so on bullet point two we're we're we're giving no New Direction it's they
will discuss it about working with a
with an Amalgamated group or whatever
see what they say very good is that okay
that's what we're going to do that's
fine so noted by I hopefully our clerk
can get that in the notes thank
you all
right uh we're going to move on then to
um
seage disposal wastewater treatment
plants is that correct yes that's
correct thank you for your
uh stepping in there
sir um you you've read the re everyone's
read the report
have we I am assuming and this has come
about actually there was uh a at least
one or two people actually uh called uh
I think was counselor Irvin and then I
know I got a call from him and wanting
to know uh so I got a hold of a staff
and uh and this is how this report uh
came about U go ahead um fill in any
details you wish there Mr ker yeah I was
just going to make mention to the report
that um or just as a highlight to the
report um is that uh So currently right
now we do have included in our byon it's
the very last piece of uh in the in the
background information that we do
currently have um a fee for the Hol um
and so as such we also have uh at that
time or um up until recently have
accepted uh septage waste um now that
being said with Bayfield being at
capacity and not having the ability to
um to accept septage through the ea uh
through the ECA for both Hensel and
Zurich that it's it's been a a difficult
process for for residents at this time
and and during the summer months it's
not as critical um because most uh
septage that's hauled for uh or from our residents is actually land
applied but now we're getting into the
months where land app cannot happen um
and and so as such this is uh part of
where uh this the the generation of this
report is is important at this time as
well um so with that I would uh if
there's any questions i''d be happy to answer
them is there any questions I'm gonna
ask that the recommendations do you need
all three of them separate again
Chandra or can they be all one all
separate please thank you very much
Mr Mayor have question go ahead
councelor Harris um I'm I'm curious um
the Hensel
residents uh just been handed not too
long ago uh uh a bill for debenture on
Lagoon improvements in Hensel um I'm
curious as to how I respond to them uh
when they ask me um
why there is um septic waste put being
put into the hens
lagoons so what the intent would be
behind that would be that any additional
revenues generated would go back into
reserves so is that any
future um uh any future improvements or
any future maintenance would actually
help uh that that those costs would
actually be helped by this offsetting
component there so it would actually uh
go towards uh assisting in any future uh
maintenance and and and operational um
costs for that for those
Works true you Mr May it's gonna be a
tough sell
um to to have to respond to that
considering this what what they're going
to say to me is um so there's going to
be money put into
Reserve uh for the chance that dumping
septic
waste uh into the heads of lagoons is
going to cost cost the Hensel residents
more money no no it sorry it will not
cost the residents more money um it so
there is currently available capacity to
treat at the Hensel Lagoon and it
actually there was that available
capacity there I'm sorry we paid for it
there was available capacity there prior
to that debenture being in place what
was paid for was the um was was there
was just work that needed to be done at
that facility um and so the costs that
would be generated now or sorry the the fees that would be generated or the
funds that would be generated now would
go towards offsetting any future Capital
works for that
facility and if also I think it's
important and it's proven by the
Bayfield if for some reason there's and
which is a good thing I I guess should
be there's increase in how closing
businesses in Hensel then this doesn't
supersede them regardless if there was
over say five years there was 120 there
was 10 loads there was 1,250 bucks or
whatever if at that point the rules kick
in that you can't use it it doesn't
matter that there's a motion that it can
be there just like what's happened now
at B at the Bayfield so to the residents
it's a good question and I that the
residents it isn't that they will be
excluded down the road because of of of
fee of dumping this is only if there's
capacity and room and there's a whole
lot of rules that he has to follow and
uh that're that they're
mandated so I think that needs to be
pointed out too yeah may I make a
question Mr Mayor yeah um I I I believe
I read that the
$125 is uh does not cover the
cost did I read that correctly down
lower so the fee is
$125
um I there's I would believe that we
should insist on total cost recovery if
they're going to use any of the lagoons
so it's $ 150 bucks or
$175 that blue water should charge the
cost at
least so also if I may through you your
warship also if I may um that is
something that uh we are actually
looking to to have um identified as part
of our um as part of our water
Wastewater uh financial review if
Council wishes for that information to
be brought forward sooner than that uh I
can do that I I believe councel Walden
and I'm sure councilor Harris that agree
that yeah we if we're gonna uh allow
dumping to help people out only it's
only for winter time and and that yes it does show a a cost because that is
one of the benefits
for our community however it does need
to 125 you're you point out it's got to
increase so yeah if this motion passes
tonight these recommendations I I really
you're on the record that that those
fees have to go up
ASAP uh um is that uh if we need to make
a motion on that or Direction but uh
let's be clear about that thank you
councelor Walden and councelor Harris on
that is mayor from
yep um in your report David mentions
that uh quote portapotty waste is not
acceptable um how do you justify between
uh gr B sanitation stopping cleaning out
four five Porta poies and then stopping
at Jim Smith to dump peptic tank um how
do we know that that actually isn't in
the same
truck so and and that's a good question
and so what um we so so we actually do
sampling and we would be able to uh to
identify that through uh through
sampling as well that the that some of
the
chemicals um that are used in Porta
parties so we would actually be able to
identify that and then we would actually
um take steps to to Banning that
individual uh for not adhering to our
policy um it is detrimental to our
treatment process um and so as such we do want to make sure that we're not
um that we're not doing something that
is detrimental to our treatment process
um and and so we would we would um
ultimately if we had a sense we would
definitely um look into uh into whatever
we could to ensure that that's not the
case okay sorry Mr and what at what
point is it tested sorry Dave I would be
tested when it's dis like when when
they're when they're
discharging and that would be every time
somebody goes to we typically do staff
it every time that somebody is
discharging that's
correctol which it should be to to
follow the rules I guess yes that's
correct so um I'm gonna ask here because
it's been brought up and I know but uh
if I may I'd like to add a bullet number
four to this recommendations and so it's
clear for direction for you and for me
um that uh the that further the septic
fee
um whatever it's called officially also
be
um a report coming back with the with a
updated
U charges also be uh the fourth
recommendation so everyone's clear on
that is that okay with everyone Mr Mayor
yes I might I would be more inclined to
specifically say that uh when they're
report comes back our septic fees uh
discharge fees
must cover our costs must be set to
cover our cost whatever the report says
but the intent I believe is my my
comment was that it has to cover the
cost so whatever the report says that I
would make the bullet that our septic
fees septic discharge fees must cover
the cost of the
discharge I just saying that saying the
same thing a different way maybe I don't
know yeah no I think that's close enough
yeah c
just when we get to number three when
you say $4,000 included in the budget
that's is that like 4,000 has to be
spent whether there's one dump or or 50
or is that just if there
Isa that that's to amend the ECA so so
yes that's correct if if if there was
one usage or if there were 50 usage the ECA would be reflective of that uh
of that regardless of the total
usage so just to be clear then covered
costs you won't have a one person 4,000
I guess well that'll stop them coming
for to us I guess but that keep in mind
this is all also only for residents of
blue
water and that also we didn't I don't
know if that's been clarified in this
report but I think it was um and sure
needs to be and this was again because
of the odd we have a few people
that uh came forward in municipality
Blue Water and they could even be in and
around our our hamlets too this isn't
just Lakeshore uh that the owner their
the trucking is they have to go where
Dave Uh Oh So currently right now uh
there's facilities in listol London and
sarna um that uh that can accept
additional
seage um are are are the ones that I
know
um are
available that our private companies
told the owners they'd be going to I
believe that sorry that the hauling
companies have have identified to the to our residents that that's where they
uh where they're hauling to that's
correct so our rates can go up
considerably more than 125 just to be
fair to everyone but I guess if they go
to 4,000 well then the 500 or whatever
they'll go to L will so it it it really
is about a little bit about our service
for our community but I totally we all
totally agree that the 25's got to
increase it's uh that's clear but just I just want to be upfront with everyone
cover Mr Mayor by me yeah um if this
gets passed and when this Go's public
I'm gonna have some absolute I rate uh
Hensel residents with the amount of
money that they have just spent on this
Lagoon and now we're asking them for for
all Municipal taxpayers to pay $4,000
for an EA so that we can have septic
waste pumped into our Lagoon so $4,000
is to get permission to put septic waste
into our Lagoon and that would be all
blue water taxpayers paying that four
grand is that that's correct I believe
right
so as it relates to the uh and this may
be detrimental to the conversation as it
relates to sewer it would actually be uh
any individuals who are paying in who
pay sewer fees so it would not be all
blue water residents it would be anybody
that pays oh that's all needs to be
clarified
here so so and and please understand as
part of the conversation that there is
the available capacity now so so
actually to to create a more viable
system to have addition additional
usership and that's where it's important
to have that fee uh increased to to
recognize full cost
recovery is that to actually have a a
system become more viable it's to get uh
basically to get you to as close to your
operating threshold as what you can uh
to achieve that efficiency of that
system um so ultimately like if you
could operate around 95% capacity and
know that no growth or anything like
that was going to happen um that would
be the best or or or optimal operating
scenario from a financial standpoint um
I mean if you could do it at 100% that
would be great but then you're not
really giving yourself any uh any
latitude one way or the other um but but
to have your system operate uh
financially as uh as as optimally as
possible that would that would give you
that best scenario so that this actually
affords us an opportunity here to have
our systems operate um uh at a more
functional capacity than what they are
right
now councelor wetstone and then uh uh
whoever was there there I'll let in for
sure councelor
wetstone so the $4,000 we have to we
have to spend up front in order to do
the ECA to be amended in order for the
for for this process to happen so how
does
one get full cost recovery of the $4,000
if we don't know do we have any
indication on how many times this is
going to be done I have a general
indication based on past practices of
what um of what we have received um
previous in previous years okay so
you're when with that full cost recovery
you have a pretty good idea what that
number would be then as far I would look
to have it spread over a period of time
appropriate period of time based on um
what what typically we look at for from
a financial cost recovery like
principles um that that would be
appropriate I mean to to the to the
mayor's point of having it go to one
individual the first individual um it's that's obviously not appropriate
but um we would we would look to spread
that over uh over the appropriate time
my comment was more I agree my comment
was more on okay we're gonna do this is
anybody gonna come it's one of those if
you build it they will come will they
really
come you're saying that there is a need within the municipality
yes and and and um the other piece to
that is that uh it does become
financially detrimental uh to to haul it
to uh let's say list Orna just simply
from the the hauling standpoint that the cost of of actually discharging the
septage at those facilities is not that
significant it's it's just the drive
time uh that makes it um less
financially viable and and as such gets
uh downloaded to those specific
residents with with that need Mr Mayor
if I may yeah go ahead no it's to
councelor wetstone uh it was clarified
that it's actually um the Zur enhan
residents that will be paying
$4,000 no it was sorry uh if I was not
clear it's it's so we operate our system
so it would be the septics anybody sorry
the sewer system so anybody who pays
onto the sewer bills for these systems
that includes Bayfield correct
right and prior to this they were
basically going to Bayfield that's
correct and and now we can't use that
4,000 from that one because of way the
system works each each plan has to have
its own license each each facility has
its own ECA to allow it to operate
that's correct and and bayfield's ECA
last time it was incorporated or last
time it was open the amendment was made
to allow to accept
septage but this time you couldn't do
that so we we've been allowing it over
the years it's only been at Bayfield
correct all right maybe that maybe
that's why we're maxed out in our uh
lagoons I can assure you it's not I was
being cynical Dave I
know Mr Mayor yes go ahead make a com um
going forward should this pass uh we
might look at making it our objective to
uh include in the fees if uh if Dave has
an idea you know an estimate of how much
we're going to be using to Pro rate that
so that the $4,000 for sure is not
eventually does not come out of the
pockets of the three villages that have
sewage systems so that that somehow we
incorporate so it's cost really 150
bucks a discharge but we charge another
30 bucks on top of that to make sure
that that $4,000 eventually gets paid
for I believe we should try to make take
steps that residents don't get charged
for that EA to let somebody else dump
sewage
there yeah
um that's that's why it's a
little it's it's it's pointed out the
fees are going to go up uh we've had
that discussion but you're right it the
intent is that 4,000 should be it isn't
just as simple as some of the other fees
that we have that allow a little more
time frame I think this one is we're
doing people a bit of a
favor you know so I would hope that that
uh fee I you picked a number it would be
a little higher to be paid a little
faster but we're still doing people a
favor and it's getting this four or
5,000 paid back as fast as possible and
maybe some money left in the
kitty um okay is that
uh do you want to wait till we have the
fee structure colleagues to see it if
that would help I'm throwing out options
here I mean I don't personally I don't
need to see the fee structure as long as
I know that it's going to be 100%
reimbursed is kind of if you want to
call that or charge back to cover our
cost whatever that is it is what it is
whatever the Fe structure is I've got
I'm listening to Dave he's going to
figure that out and charge
accordingly in my mind
okay will be in the 2021 budget it will
be visible to the public in the 2021
budget that that's true we're spending
$4,000 on it yes and I and I appreciate
you did did not go unheard what you said
I totally agree I that's why I want
that's why it' make it a little easier
if we'd see the we've told the intent
today to Dave that we want it to be not
just that normal fairness but it has to
be a bit more than fair no above Fair
because the benefit they're getting to
get the 4,000 back so I can say to
resent from the three
municipalities that this 4,000 isn't get
stuck that it's taking 8 years to pay
back that's for sure it's got to be paid
back fairly
soon again we don't want a lot of people
using it in a way but uh it's about if
there's a need there and we can use it
and get the money back and we're assured
that it's not screwing the system
up there's the issue uh Mr Bear yeah
that that that is the issue and I guess
you know I'll I'll support this because
I believe that our residents on septic
systems need it and they but they only
need it in an emergency situation only
when this cannot be applied and it's too
muddy to get into the fields with a
truck otherwise I don't want to see it
to go into the uh into the lagoons and
the reason is not because of the fees or
the cost or anything else this is
entirely different biological processes
you're talking anerobic and aerobic
processes and you'll flip that Lagoon if
you put enough of that stuff in there so
these lagoons do not are not made to
take septage they will take it on a
limited basis and you can spread it out
over time so I'm concerned about the
operation of the Lagoon more than the
fee and uh only be done on an emergency
basis and I think that needs to be
written up clearly too and it's only for
blue waterer residents it's only a
certain times pointed out and and that
they're told up front regardless of
whatever the fee is if they get to a
point there's too many we give the power
to Dave to say sorry you can't come here
and don't and yeah phone Paul clo the
mayor
there I'll say listen the rules are the
rules and and I'm sorry you're going to
have to go to somewhere else including
yeah can I speak finally
yes well I can't see sorry uh counselor
Becker I can't see you so don't don't
say finally to me I appreciate we're all
trying to get along here it's a long
night but in I accept I accept it but in but don't say I didn't try
to I can try to speak for the last 10
minutes but oh I apologize I agree with
our Deputy Mayor and we've been told by
BM Ross that we're not supposed to
accept this septage into our lagoons
because it is a different component
affluence and we uh in the past they
allowed a bit to get into the Bayfield
Lagoon over the years but they've
frowned on it immensely and I don't
think we're we're going to open up the
doors here to a wrong idea and
the idea should be be on the residents
to have their tanks pumped out on an Ann
or threeyear basis and do it in the
months that are allotted to them and if
we start spending $4,000 of taxpayers
money I agree with coun Harris there's
going to be
upgrades so just if I may uh your
warship um
the uh the larger issue here is is
actually not the septic systems it's
people with holding tanks which we do
have a few of them
are there's a handful of them um so uh
in the municipality and so um the the
majority of issues to to the deputy
mayor's Point um that in an emergency
situation let's say they have a system
failure whatever something like that um
that we would look to to having that um
the larger issue becomes with holding
tanks uh for the residents within our
municipality who um they just don't have
the capacity to to to to go through the
entire um through the entire winter
season let's say uh to to wait for land
application to actually take place th
those are the ones that that end up
being a little bit more critical to the
conversation and just the points to the
conversation I am working with BM Ross
uh on this to actually come to the
determination on what the max value of
septage to be able to be
accepted um at at any of our facilities
is actually um just so we know what that
volume is so we're not uh we're not
providing a detriment to our treatment
process um because yes to to the whole
point I don't want to end up seeing that
uh that that our treatment process
actually ends up failing because of
accepting septage
waste another question uh Mr Mar if I
may uh since you brought it up uh the uh
Bayfield Lagoon was also accepting lee8
from the landfill at one point is that
still accepting that or not so we have
so also included in the ECA for the
Bayfield Lagoon is uh the ability to
haul leech eight we have not done that
in I believe two years actually okay
because that throws your do way B way
out yep that's correct and and so we're
actually um so we're actually making use
of that on site actually the lee8 we're doing better um in uh in in in our
lee8 handling on site um so I I took
active steps to seeing that that would
take place uh when I started in the
municipality and then we're also any
additional materials that we are or any
additional Lee that is being generated
we're actually broadcasting it on our
site uh in an effort actually to Aid in
compaction uh actually it just through the additional fluid um
migrating through the system it actually
uh it actually AIDS in compaction of our
uh of our um of our Mound at our Stanley
facility that was good information it
got saved a b report for later so that's
good um just to I don't want to belabor
this but I'm going to set I guess I'm
going to septic is also different than
holding tank material holding M material
from what I understand is a little more
easy I to take for the system yes or no
answer it it's all still septage okay
all right just want to know for
clarification so colleagues we're we've
had good discussion and it needed to
happen uh councelor Harris was right it
sounds nice but oh boy you you you know
you're these can catch you so I'm I'm I
would like Council though to make some
decisions here if they can
tonight if you want more information or
think about it that's fine too so
there's the options we vote one two or
three see where they go or or a motion
you want to think about it and have it
come back I I I'm looking for
direction I have conf Mr Mayor I have
confidence that uh our Public's Works
manager has it uh under control and uh
has given it proper consideration and
will uh will be aware of all of the
issues so I think we should move forward
first one or as many as we have to move
okay well the first recommendation is
that uh that Council direct staff to
allow hold septage generated in the
municipality to be discharged in Hensel
and Zurich lagoons is there a
mover can we add on an emergency basis
there um or something there emergency
yeah then it's clear then it's clear for
sure he's to have some other rules in
there to fine detail but they they like
to get the the main stuff written on the
front line that's for sure I agree
emergency
use uh there'll be dates and all that entails right like only okay
yeah but so it's good to have that word
yeah I I I I'm fine with that I don't
think it I don't think it wrecks the
intent of the motion that's that's only
I'm looking at right from and of course
chander is still the last word on that
but if that if she can sees that isn't a change in the intent then uh we're
going to leave it
there so the motion reads Z lagoons and
includes emergency use
only is that clear enough for
everyone I'm gonna call the question is
there a seconder sorry I don't have a
seconder yet sorry you're right
Vandenberg will councelor Vandenberg
second
I'm going to call the question all those
in favor of the motion say I I any
opposed
Nate I hear I believe the eyes have it
I'm going to say that one as pin p
pass on number two that Council direct
staff to make the appropriate amendments
to the Zurich and Hensel wastewater
treatment facility ECA to formally
identify the ability to accept called
septage Mr May I'll move
that Harris Harris if I can add to it I
feel that that maybe should have been
the first recommendation so that we can
find out whether or not BM Ross uh
actually will allow the septic to be put
into the lagoons duly noted sir thank
you is there a
seconder councelor Walden with second
councelor
Walden your worship councelor Harris did
you add verbage to two number two uh I
just thought it should have been the
first recommendation is all my was my
opinion okay thank you for that
clarification so the there was nothing
added uh for the
record good comment though there was
good comment I'll say all right uh is
what's been moved and seconded I'm going
to call the question all those in favor
say I I I and any opposed
hearing none motion carries and number
three that Council direct staff to
include the $4,000 in the
21 2021 sewer budget to have Zurich and
Hansel water treat Wastewater Treatment
Facility in the ECA amended is there a
mover so all mve Deputy Mayor Deputy
Mayor thank
you Secor
sorry I wasn't hit he didn't hit the
mute button fast enough wetstone okay
thank you councelor wetstone it's been
moved and
seconded uh I think it's clear fairly
clear I'm going to call the question all
those in favor I I those
opposed hearing none motion carries I
did add a fourth bullet point that the
uh septage fee be updated to uh better
cover the cost now what's the word that
you asked for sir uh councelor cost
recovery full cost
recovery that that that be the fourth
motion is that okay with chander because
it wasn't in the public is it close
enough for the intent though of the
discussion if I could just repeat it was
um that septic discharge fees must cover
the cost of discharge be be updated to
cover to have full cost
recovery mayor yes would you uh
considering that bullet including the
4,000 specify including the
$4,000 uh for the
ecas like just make it specific full
cost recovery in in this is including
you know what I
mean you don't have to but that that
would specify that we're not planning to bill the sewage people that have
sewers for this you know what I'm saying
yeah Dave is that okay with
that yeah okay I think the intent is
there yeah I would have it would have
been included anyways but I'm I'm okay
with the verbage being added you miss
thank you I I didn't real I didn't totally grasp that thank you but
it's a good point we're we're driving
the point home we don't we want this
paid back as soon as possible and and uh
and and actually make some money for the
Kitty uh for sure okay so is that clear
enough updated to cover to full cost
recovery is that close enough you can
work with the
yes okay and and Council understands the
intent okay I'm going to is there a move
or secutive for that Council Walden
would
move Walden councelor Harris you
seconding why not thank you Mr Mayor for
discussion yes um I'd just like to say
thank you very much uh Mr ker for your
work on this we're not trying to give
you a hard time we're just trying to
make it work no that's not a problem at
all I don't I don't take it as you
giving me a hard time I take it as
valuable input so not a problem at all
thank you okay thank you I'm going to
call the question all those in favor say
I I I any opposed hearing none motion
carries uh is that all for your tonight
Mr I think that's it for me you don't
want to add anything yet I'm I'm good
right now okay thank you thank you um
Fleet Surplus Zurich
Olympia Jeff are you there hi am good
evening Council um Council we we've read
the report is there anything you wish to
add to it because there's a
recommendation here that we uh make it a
surplus um in the essence of time are
you I hope you're not
insulted not at all there's nothing you
needed to add here nope I'm gonna I'm
gonna ask is there a the recommendation
is there a moving or a second for this
moved councelor Walden seconded by
councelor vanenburg any
discussion all those in favor of the
recommendation please say I I any
opposed motion carries council chambers
update um is there anything you wish to
add to the report I know Council spent a
lot of time reading this stuff like they
always do but is there anything
uh yeah um so we had just had made um a
recommendation that we would not move
forward with the painting and carpeting
of council chambers but we've identified
money in the budget this year from an
operational standpoint which means that
we could uh in fact get painting done of
the council chambers gallery and kitchen
area and it would be uh underneath a
$7,000 limit that we've
got okay now keep in mind that last
year's budget we we said you know we're
there was recommended to do all of it
but the council and keeping in mind that
the taxpayers said let's do it uh one at
a time so we put in the budget to do the
offices in Zurich yeah and as and as as
pointed out because Co I guess maybe in
one way uh had a positive for this
because the staff if I if I understand
this right we're able to do a lot of the
work and of course but the people not
being in the office they probably even
made some time and this time has
reflected in some savings and
so rightfully we were figuring on doing
it in this coming budget
uh it looks like we're going able to do
this and and um get a lot of it done and
not and not we'll have free up some
money for this upcoming budget for other
things is that a fair statement that's
correct thank you is there a motion for
this recommendation Council W would move
councelor Walden is there a
second councelor
vanenburg is everyone clear on the
motion and the
intent I'm going to call the question
all those in favor of the recommendation
any
opposed hearing none motion carries and
I just want to say also to the staff
thank you for for uh you know doing the
job but also and taking the initiative
and make and bringing forth this
recommendation to council I think that
bodess well on all of us and uh it does
not go unnoticed thank
you uh the second Point uh is the uh
resilience infrastructure correct
and
that's our
CEO well is she still there yes yes I am
thank you and uh it must be a sign of a
great Council that managers compete to
do Council reports to present before you
it was originally going to be mine but
the treasure beat me to it so I'd like
to defer to her since she did write it
so okay thank you uh I appreciate all
the staff sticking around by the
way okay um I get answorth is this who's
going to be yep I can I can uh feel the
report um basically we've set out in
front of you the options uh staff were
directed to come up with a A list of
projects and Council gets to make the
tough decision as to which one uh you
want us to select and fully cost and
enter into the system by December 21st
to be for the
funding okay
counselors there's
uh people brought in some ideas and a
combination of things is there anyone to
get things moving along is there anyone
wish to make a a motion or or anything
councelor
Walden yes please Mr Mayor yes if we
could rule rule it down to number four
more
Court um and the just that says
77,000 but total of
93 that one there uh also we also
discussed it could be some Bridge work
or some extra drain work done possibly
with some of this money I don't know if
that's
possible but uh I'd like to make a
motion for more Court oh okay so we have
a motion to do more Court then if I may
Mr Mayor my logic is that uh I believe
we we passed it on budget this year and
then when we allocated
our Bridge uh reserve and Road funds to
a different project $419,000 went work
Court also was bypassed again so this is
the the third time that I'm just trying
to make a an acknowledgement that this
needs to be done and we have potential
funds okay uh since there's been a
motion I need someone to Second it for
discussion uh is there someone wishing
to make it councelor venberg are you
second it yes I'll second it if I can
make comment too on it okay thank you uh
for those are you getting background
noise out that that aren't at the
meeting here because the fan came on so
if I'm I I'm not trying to ignore anyone
it's a little harder to hear so so bear
with me okay uh it's been moved and
seconded councelor venberg you wish to
speak yep thank you mayor
and we're we're caught we're we're all
caught in a hard place I mean there
there's nine items here we've got a
tight deadline
uh to to make these choices and and
they're all valid uh um selections as
well but um just to add in I I did put
in the request for Mo Court uh it did
come
before council at budget time and uh at
that time it was uh defeated and and
that's that's the way it is and it was
also to do with the it would put I
believe an ex
levy on the uh the residents as well but
shortly
after uh our our budget had passed and
Mr kuster could maybe correctly uh maybe
two weeks later three weeks later we had
the road uh asset uh management report
that came out and uh for more Court it
was
rated the worst paved Road and I say
paved Road in the municipalities so
there is an urgency to get that repaired
it is a an asset and uh I hate to see it being uh Ro not being maintained
properly so that's why I put it back um
into this uh request or into this fund
for your
consideration okay thank you further
comments questions counc Mr Mars
councelor Harris councel Harris yeah and
I agree with ccer vanderberg everybody's
stuck between a rock and a hard place
when there's nine selections and I was
when I first read it I was concerned on
how this was going to be approached to
be honest with you uh because there's
multiple things here that I think the
money should go towards and I'm not sure
how you just pick one of nine um if you
want to talk assets number nine being
the HV HC units in h both Arenas in
Zurich and Hensel Zurich being three and
one in Hensel um that's an asset that I
mean if you could get paid for that's
something that could last another 10 to
15 years I mean how do we pick one like
I don't understand like I understand
there's a motion out there and if I say
Nate then it goes to the next counselor
and he picks his and then it gets
seconded and then it gets denied like
how does this work well yeah
um the government came forth I guess the
good news was the government through
covid
uh and if I I understand there wasn't
every municipality got this maybe some
got more I don't know they they threw
this special they threw it I shouldn't
say Throw they put forth this
$100,000 that a number of municipalities
got it it's 100,000 it wasn't you know
300,000 or whatever it's still a chunk
of change H the criteria was as you see
they wanted it sort of spent on
something and that was tangible
not engineering they didn't want a lot
of engineering fees they were pretty
clear about that and a few things so
you're right we we we it's a lot of
money but it isn't a lot of money to do
some things
so we we threw it out people did make uh
ideas that came around this the staff
had some ideas too and uh and this is
what we ended up with at some point
though we do have to make a decision and the only way we do it is through
motion and there's a motion here right
now um and U we'll see where it goes uh
so I don't know where it'll go but we'll we'll just this is how it works so
Mr counselor yeah if I
could yes go
ahead councelor wetstone I think yeah if
I can and I think and I'm I'm not sure
if if I'm listening to councelor Harris
differently I'm I'm looking at it as
who put their hand up first to make the
motion
first that's not the way this should
have been done this should have been we
should have talked about ones and not
just made a motion and now we're now
we're just going to keep defeating
everything until somebody gets what they
want you know at the end of the day it
seems like we're just rushing into it to
get it done more than anything else
because to be honest we have a Paving
policy I'm not supporting Mo Court not
because I think the one in Bayfield is
the right one
I believe there's another one that's
more
important Mr Mayor may make a comment Y
uh Mr may my Logic for supporting more
court is that it was in uh dire shape
this year at budget time and it was
defeated at budget and we had other
Reserve funds and we didn't look at work
court at that time and this is a road
that really does need work it's
something that has been identified in
the past it's not just a new idea and uh
it's something that we could complete as
a as municipality and and say hey we did
that and that's that was my logic in and
nominating that particular
project
okay any
what the motion's out there we have to
vote on it one way or the other now
right
so well from my understanding of how how
it works
yes uh but
I I uh I I don't want also all of us as
counselors to
get um feeling that we're going to get
uh at each other if I can say it that
way as a chair no no that is that is
that that was almost I almost wanted
this 100,000 we didn't get it quite
frankly about it if you want to know
when I seen why why is the government
doing this but at the same time I think
you'd all want to kick somebody if if I
would have said to the to to the to the
um Member of Parliament here which she
uh emailed me and phoned me to say this
just was announced please get it on your
table because they're gonna pull it and
I I could have I almost said you know
Jeepers so let's just keep that in mind
I I I accept the responsibility put it
on me that I accepted a motion of a
counselor Okay I accept that all right
but don't I don't want you guys all get
mad at each other no no that's not the
case that's not the case I I appreciate
but I needed to say it
for my own news yes can I just make a
note procedurally um so yes the motion
has been moved and seconded and it's in
the possession of council right now but
if the Mover and the seconder agree um
it can be withdrawn if there are no
objections of any other members that's
always an option oh thank thank you for that clarification
appreciate that and Mr Mayor if I can on
celer Weston's comments he's absolutely
right like I mean there's roads and
Hensel that one in particular that has
been in I hear about every day yeah but
I mean it's that that that's the the pro
we have a Paving policy a Paving process
the other road that got turned down in
budget was babyon line and I'm not sure
how many times you driven down it but
it's in dialect too I mean no B Babylon
we actually did what we did with our p
with our
housing with our U we did the same thing
we put enough in so that this year the
other half comes in and then the road
will be that that will be paved that's
how we did that and one of the reasons
we did that was because in Hensel when
we had to do pipe work we all agreed
that you know what that road when you're
ripping up the pipe to put a little bit
of cement we might as well fix that and
we put the money towards that the road
that you're referring to uh which is in
front of the uh if it's what I think it
is the post office um I've already uh
double checked with well is you know
part of the discussion when when the
Hensel Co-op came up with the idea of
wanting to take over part of the road uh
part of it for me I think probably for
most of you that had the discussion or
at least with the back of your mind if
they get it as is we've just saved the
ability for the rest of that road to
help in the budget process to get paved
because we're we're missing how many
feet at the other end um and I did
double check as part of this
discussion with and Dave uh might
remember I was why I called about about
when is the main street of Hensel which
is part of the county which will be
count of your county budget uh is going
to be up for Renewal and ripped up and
redone it sure makes sense at that point
to have it in the budget and and no
matter where we are in the priority list
it sure makes sense to have it that in
there now the the good news is I agreed
now of course Council would still have
to vote but I'd like to think that the
council with the same comment sense of
working together as a team that it makes
sense at those times uh but that won't
be till
2023 that that's happening and again
this 100,000 I'm not sure if the 100,000
would do the road properly again it's it
ashalt costs so dang much uh so um
anyway uh but that just to be fair and
yeah Mr may all I was saying was is not
that I wanted that money towards I was
saying that we have a PID process you
said it many times that was a process we
have a process right we also have a
process and then this came up and and I
I'm hearing some of the argument of my
two colleagues that you're hearing and
that's was their I take him at their
word was their intent of why they they
thought of it anyway
um go ahead here yeah and and I'll I'll
go to uh Mr Walden if he wants to uh
take it off the floor I'm okay with that
know and we can go go through them all
uh I'm okay with that too so okay it
might be a a matter where we're g to
have to pick one out of the Hat then or
two out of the hat with a further
discussion on
matters I look to the direction of the
two counselors Mr Mayor uh as I said
before my my Logic on the motion I would
support a motion on any of these
projects this is the project that I
thought was most important that we could
achieve and uh the $100,000 is outside
of our policies if somebody handed us
$100,000 said here what can you do with
it this is why I made that motion so I'm
GNA leave the motion if it gets defeated I understand it's not
about being first I think it's just the
recommendation that I had okay thank
you counselors um that uh is there any
further
discussion I will comment that uh with
regards to uh in know a valid point I
looked at they I looked at all of them I
thought they all for the most part well
Shoreline protection the Lakes up and
this is supposed to be sent within a
year I'm I appreciate I'm glad it got
ticked off to think about but yeah that
one I I got to admit that one I was not
on the idea that it's not a great idea
but I don't to fit they want this money
they would like this money that was part
of the criteria that it's be spent in
the coming year and be spent majority of
it on on hiring people to do labor um
Engineers are important but I guess they
thought they didn't want to be up all in
engineering fees at least that's what I
got the impression of when I look at U
so I will look at uh at the hvacs that
really got my attention too but as as
was pointed out we're talking a a maybe
10year life cycle when I'm looking at
something that I thought about this
100,000 it's something cander ashal
that's going to be 20 or 30 year
lifespan
and and get it off our table I was quite
frankly that the sidewalks I thought
might have been uh something that we put
20,000 in the budget for the first time
in a long time we we put that in the
budget but I thought well there you go
maybe that could help out some of them
but at the same
time a lot of these places like quite
frankly brucefield I think the residents
quite frankly and I agree with them I
think they would appreciate that we
start putting money away to pave the
lane so again the 100,000
um but uh so as I as I go through u i
there's a motion here is there any
further comments we'll call the question
and we'll and I appreciate the Mover and
the seconder in their uh in their
comments but we'll see what
happens Mr Mayor and I I if I'm not
going to support a motion I have to I
have to make it clear to the public and
Council why I'm not going to support it
because it is part of our asset
management plan uh if it's in that bad a
shape it should show up in the Ash
management replacement plan so I think
it'll get done when it's
appropriate okay that's why I just had
to make that clear no no very good uh is
there any other comments or
questions so the motion is uh to repay
more Court I'm going to call the
question all those in favor say I I I
all those against say
Nay n n
nay oh boy you guys are making it it's
hard to pick up here raise your hand
instead if it's easier right yeah that's
thank you counselor all those in favor
raise your hand now I I got a hit I'm
gonna have to have our because it's on
the book here uh where is our clerk can
you see everyone perhaps I can just um
go through the list of names and just do
an informal or not informal but just
respond when I say your name sure okay
so mayor yes you're in support of yep
Deputy Mayor
Ferguson
opposed opposed thank you councelor
Becker I didn't get that counselor
Becker I support the motion thank you
John uh councel Harris
opposed councelor uh vandenbberg
yes councelor Walden yes and councelor
wetstone
oppose it carries oh it does I thought
there's like four I was thinking there
was mayor CL councelor Becker councelor
venburg and councelor Walden in support
but there's two there's two counselors
not here right okay I I thought there
was only one beside me right okay
right so that motion carries that's
correct
okay so forward with filling in the
application and getting it submitted
before the 21st for the deadline okay
thank
you okay where are we at
now we're
at corporate
services corporate services 7.61
right Council the report is in front of
you um the recommendation is the council
approve the replacement of windows in
the front deck and painting oh was there
any
questions of 16 the square Sor I need a motion for the
recommendation councelor
wetstone is there a
seconder
backer any discussion I'm going to call
the question all those favor of the
recommendation I
iOS hearing none motion carries uh mayor
Klo I did just want to note that we need
a um a motion to move past four
hours we need a motion how far have we
got to go here um past four hours
okay walked into that one Deputy are you
making the motion or uh I guess are you
the motion so we can finish tonight I
try to redeem myself there is there a
Secor for the
motion
Secor councelor
Becker all those in favor I any opposed
none opposed we carry on till we get
done I hope all right thank you
um
7.61 we did 2021 draft budget
recommendation number one and there's
two recommendations that's
correct Council has read the report is
there any uh one prepared to make a
motion on the first
recommendation
anyone councelor
wetstone okay is there a
seconder wal second councelor Walden
any uh any questions on the budget draft
budget hearing none I'm going to call
the question all those in favor of the
recommendation I any
opposed I hearing none motion carries on
recommendation two the council
authorized staff to apply for a summer
student wage subsidy National
Trust so moved so moved so moved by
councelor
Walden
seconder councilor
vanenburg questions on the
recommendation
subsidy hearing none I'm going to call
the question all those in favor of
recommendation number two say I I any
opposed hearing none motion
carries proposed 20 21 meeting budget
schedule approve the 21 budget meeting
schedule
I'll move the
recommendation
okay is there a
seconder councelor bannenberg
discussion any discussion the dates are
there we'll try to all best we can
attend
them um I gather most of them will be
Zoom unless something changes
drastically so I'm assuming we're all
going to work from home just for the
record I don't see much point
[Music]
in Mr mayor council Becker why can't we
start in the morning and everybody's
fresh instead of starting at noon and
dragging out till 7 o' at night that's a
long day to sit there and look at
numbers some of us have to
work in the afternoon or in the evening
I know some people have to work during
the day too
but over the years I found that we do
our best
discussion in the mornings and up till
3:00 well I I guess if someone that been
is in the same business as you I I have
to juggle the chores at some point so
and distant
fairness but um
anyway uh this is the motion that's here
is uh it has been first and second it we
can have a if it's defeated we can or a
friendly Amendment I'm open to
suggestion just just my suggestion is
that I found that Council does a better
job getting things done by a 9 9:30
start in the morning till 3 in the
afternoon get more accomplished and
going late into an evening when
everybody's
tired and we got to respect your staff
too the second meeting is on a council
night you'll be leaving the zoom and
then going right into to a council
meeting within an hour and a
half the second meeting which one I'm
sorry I didn't catch that January the
18th oh I didn't real I didn't quite
sorry thank well I guess that's why are
there's nine of us to read these things
okay so we got to be wary wary of our
staff too that's what I'm
saying but if we start at 9: in the
morning with both meetings and get done
at 3 gives everybody time to unwind
and move forward to the next because we
got toble to absorb what's on the
council agenda
also if I may yes th this is staff's
recommendation if they were if they were
concerned about that they would come up
with a different recommendation it says
staff are
proposing okay
any well is there any other comments and
if not I'm going to call the question
and the question would be these are the
dates that we would be working with and
the times
so it's been first and second it so I
have to I'm gonna have to call the
question it's uh unless they
withdrawing I'm not hearing their
withdrawing so this I'm going to call
the question these are the meeting dates
for our U proposed meeting dates and
then and if we need more there going to
be more so don't keep that in mind too
but anyway these are the ones that we're
trying to work with G to call the
question all those in favor of these
dates say I I I any opposed
the eyes have
it and this is uh so these are the
carries
okay Community safety uh uh Wildwood has
been pulled for tonight 7.65 Community
safety and wellbeing Plan update there's
uh two
recommendations uh for
this uh the background you see but uh is
there any further comment
that
uh that uh need to be uh brought up by
staff with regards to
this uh through you your worship to
council I would just like to note that
this has been an excellent opportunity
for the lower tiers to partner in um a
plan that's
legislated um so we're working together
and
um the the social research and planning
Council are perfectly posed to carry out
the engagement and research aspects of
the required
plan okay so the first recommendation is
bylaw
292020 has pointed out it's been uh we
sort of have to do this it's been
mandated by our big brother so here's
the process is there a mover and a
second or for this
motion Council W moves councelor walon
is there a
seconder councelor
venberg
okay um all those in favor of the
motion say I hi any opposed hearing none
motion carries the second one is that we
need to put five approve
$5,000 the 2020
budget for in the reserve is there a
mover for this motion councelor Harris seconded by
councelor W Walden thank
you mayor klopp I'll just clarify that
it is to roll over the 5,000 as well as
an additional 5,000 in the 20121 budget
sorry I didn't read it all I apologize
there the uh the faces of us of you uh
great counselors are in half way across
my sheet so I just thank you for doing
that
okay everyone's clear on the motion as
stated by the clerk I have a question if
I could go ahead and and I think I know
the answer but I did for um just for
making sure that I do this community
Well Community safety and wellbe plan is
a requirement correct yes it's a
legislated requirement okay and comes
with a cost
obviously
Grand sorry go ahead coun go ahead you
were about to answer my question I think
so I was just going to note that it is
um the fact that it's being shared
amongst all the lower tiers in here in
county is um helping significantly with
the cost um it's certainly not something
that staff have time to do individually
and partnering
is it's I think it's a the right way to
go because many of the issues that many
of our vulnerable individuals or groups
are facing are similar across the county
um so if we can come up with a plan to
assist assist those groups
um and and share the cost I think that
we're coming out ahead yeah and don't
get me wrong I think it's an excellent
plan exactly for what you stated uh I
just don't like when something's
mandated and then the cost is downloaded
onto the municipalities from The
Province yes and um I I will note that
there are many other counties who have
got together who um are paying much more
to have another consultant do the plan
for them great and thank you for
attending by the
way yes thank you uh I'm glad you got
those questions asked I didn't realize
that others were having to hire
consultants and we've been trying to
work without that so that's good to know
for the public thank you for asking that
question okay so the it's cost it about
5,000 a year that's why you need to roll
it and roll in more obviously you try to
okay all are we clear with the question
I'm going to call the question no more
all right I'm going to call the question
all those in favor of the 5,000 Levy
plus the rooll over of the additional
five all those in favor I I I any
opposed hearing none motion carries
thank you thank you councilor's
announcements tonight
anything Mr Mayor yes councelor Harris
go I just want to make note that the
Hensel fireman with the Hensel kets and
the Hensel Kinsman are having a drive
through Santa greeting this Friday night
from 5:30 to 7 at the fire hall oh
okay very good thank you that's at five
o'clock 5:30 to
7 and I didn't catch the date I was
sorry this Friday evening this Friday night
yeah thank
you any other
announcements councelor
venberg thank you mayor I'll try to be
uh quick on this one so I'm sitting on
the advisory committee for here on
sh's Transit uh we had meeting on Friday
and it's going real quick as to what
they're going to do so these roots were
kind of like predetermined before we
actually set on on the committee
so the transit will be operating on
December the 14th that's what the start
date is be free rides from December the
14th to January the
10th nothing things can change down the
road to but initially uh there'll be two
runs from Bayfield to Grand van on
Friday sorry Wednesday and
Friday uh there'll also be runs or for
that run in Bayfield the stop will be at
the Bayfield Town Hall one also at
Cameron and Highway 21 so we'll be on
Cameron Street because we don't want
to I'm not picking up on my mic so just
wonder everybody else is doing sorry
counselor okay I'll try again so
there'll be a
stop at the Bayfield Town Hall one at
Cameron in Highway 21 on Cameron Street
there'll be a stop at the St Joseph park
by the mailboxes then it'll work its way
down to the soes in Grand Ben there'll
also be a daily stop or daily route from
uh Grand Ben through dashwood down to
exitor and further down to London so
then there'll be
connecting buses that go down to sarna
but if you can uh here on shores areat
transit.com Dia Blitz through the papers
through radio uh they had mentioned
Bayfield Breeze as well to uh to launch
it and uh and nothing's set in stone so
down the road if it's three or four
months and we say we need to tweak the
schedules or the stops or whatever then
we will try to do that as
well okay thank you and and they'll be
uh getting that on our website I'm sure
too yes the
okay any other uh
announcements hearing none there was no
new business this evening on the um on
our agenda
okay we're at questions from the
gallery com your worship I did have one
registrant for questions from the
gallery but they have since felt that
their question was answered and they
have let me know that they no longer
will be
speaking okay thank you uh we're at
number 11 confirmatory bylaw
209-2020 Council Harris councelor
Harris seconded
by councelor
vanenburg all those in favor of the
confirmatory bylaw say I I I any opposed
hearing none motion carries I need a
motion to
adjourn
councelor councelor wetone thank you
seconder
counselor beer
Becker thank you all those in
favor hi say say good night right good
night all right thank you everyone it's
been a we had a lot of stuff to discuss
tonight I appreciate your time and your
patience thank you