[0:00] ready here just some little housekeeping
[0:02] are these reports that we have to sign
[0:05] as counselors tonight any of
[0:08] these yes I do have two decisions from
[0:11] the committee of adjustment so there are
[0:14] I see three of us in this room so don't
[0:16] let us leave without signing thank you
[0:19] all right we're live now may
[0:23] clop okay welcome everyone to uh our
[0:27] December 7th meetings uh we're going to
[0:30] start with our committee of adjustment
[0:32] and I'll ask uh a call to order and uh
[0:36] Chandra to do roll call
[0:39] please member klopp present member
[0:42] Ferguson present member Becker present
[0:47] member Harris
[0:49] present uh member Irvin sends his
[0:52] regrets as does member leaport member
[0:55] Vandenberg present member Walden present
[0:59] and wetstone
[1:02] present okay we have Quorum thank you uh
[1:06] counselors deputy mayor uh hope you had
[1:08] a good couple weeks uh we now uh I need
[1:12] a motion to approve the agenda as
[1:15] printed so moved Mr Mayor
[1:20] Walden
[1:21] seconded
[1:24] fenberg all those in favor of the agenda
[1:27] as printed say I I I
[1:31] any opposed hearing none opposed motion
[1:33] carries is there any disclosure
[1:35] pecuniary interest for tonight's meeting
[1:37] or the previous
[1:40] meeting hearing none we are now at uh
[1:43] point four which is adoption of the
[1:46] minutes from the previous
[1:49] meeting of November the 2nd 2020
[1:52] Committee of adjustment do I have a move
[1:53] or a second for that so moved it's a
[1:57] deputy thank you Deputy second
[2:00] wal Walden
[2:04] seconded any discussion on the uh on the
[2:08] minutes hearing no discussion I'm going
[2:10] to call the motion all those in favor of
[2:12] adopting the minutes as printed i i i
[2:17] any opposed hearing none motion carries
[2:20] thank you we're now at uh five 5.1 mv12
[2:25] D20 and planner Hallman you're there
[2:29] somewhere there you are Hannah good
[2:31] evening and this is uh the 3398 King
[2:35] Street lot 38 plan plan 531 hey West
[2:40] Ward take it away Hanah all right thank
[2:43] you chair um I will just share uh my
[2:46] presentation all right uh so as stated
[2:49] by the chair the next application is
[2:50] number mv1
[2:52] 1220 um the subject property is located
[2:56] on the corner of King Street and
[2:58] Princess Street uh the the subject
[3:00] property is designated residential and
[3:02] is zoned residential low density R1 the
[3:06] property is a corner lot um and the
[3:08] portion along King Street so that
[3:10] southern lot line there um is recognized
[3:13] as the front property line with the
[3:14] exterior property line um along Princess
[3:18] Street uh just for committee's um
[3:22] understanding uh here are site photos of
[3:25] um the subject application tooken
[3:27] earlier in November um the subject appli
[3:30] is seeking to add an extension to their
[3:32] existing dwelling on the Northern side
[3:34] um so right about located right about
[3:37] here uh the elevations are provided of
[3:40] the existing dwelling um including um
[3:43] the proposed um extension to the
[3:46] dwelling um so showing the front and
[3:48] rear elevations there and the right and
[3:50] left
[3:51] elevation and here's the uh site plan
[3:54] that's provided uh the applicants
[3:56] specifically are seeking uh variants uh
[3:58] to reduce the RIS yard setback from 8 m
[4:01] to 2.1 M um so in this case it is uh it
[4:05] is along the left side of the screen um
[4:08] so it would be along the northern lot
[4:10] line that they're seeking to reduce from
[4:11] 8 meters to 2.1
[4:14] Metter um the application was considered
[4:16] against the four tests of the minor
[4:18] variance um the proposed minor variance
[4:20] represents a reduction of 5.9 MERS um it
[4:24] is worth noting that the rear yard um in
[4:27] this case if it were to be considered
[4:29] the interior side yard um which might
[4:31] you
[4:32] know to the to someone um looking at the
[4:37] property it might appear to be the
[4:38] interior side yard just because of the
[4:40] orientation of the house as well as
[4:42] other adjacent Lots if it were to them
[4:44] be the interior side yard the required
[4:46] setback would be 1.5 M so that's worth
[4:49] noting um just to the UN just due to the
[4:52] unique configuration of the lot the
[4:54] proposed construction otherwise comp uh
[4:57] follows the requirements of the R1 one
[4:59] zone uh including lot coverage uh as
[5:03] well there is proposed that the septic
[5:05] system would be located on the exterior
[5:07] sidey yard uh further limiting uh the
[5:10] available space on the property for this
[5:12] um extension as such the minor variance
[5:15] is considered uh minor and
[5:18] desirable uh as well the minor variance
[5:20] maintains the intent of the zoning Bon
[5:22] the official plan Amendment uh to
[5:24] support uh residential development uh
[5:26] within the residential designation in
[5:29] terms of comments there was one neighbor
[5:31] comment received um from the property
[5:33] owner to the north um so this is the
[5:35] property owner that's AB budding uh the
[5:37] yard that is seeking the variants um
[5:40] expressing no concerns with the proposed
[5:41] build uh but they did have concerns
[5:43] about the potential for uh the trimming
[5:46] of branches on their tree um so if I
[5:48] just go back to the site photos there is
[5:50] a tree uh located on the neighbor's
[5:52] property that does have branches that
[5:54] overhang onto the neighbor's property um
[5:57] and they just had some questions about
[5:59] whether they they were considering
[6:00] trimming these trees um so as such I
[6:03] have provided that neighbor um with the
[6:06] contact or the contact information with
[6:08] the owner so that they can discuss this
[6:10] uh between themselves uh blue water
[6:13] staff did provide comment on the
[6:14] application indicating no
[6:16] concern um they have made two specific
[6:19] comments noting that the water meter for
[6:21] the a build must be located where all
[6:23] water consumption including water for
[6:25] the dishing can be captured uh this
[6:27] comment is reflected in recommending
[6:29] addition number four uh as well um
[6:32] building staff have provided comment
[6:34] with uh respect to the proposed septic
[6:36] layout noting that the layout may need
[6:38] to be uh amended as there was some
[6:41] discrepancy between the site plan um and
[6:43] the septic layout provided um as such
[6:46] there is a condition that the sewage
[6:47] system shall comply with the Ontario
[6:49] building code AS reflected by condition
[6:51] number five uh but this is something
[6:53] that would um be expected otherwise um
[6:57] it is recommended that the application
[6:59] for the minor variant be approved to the
[7:01] conditions included in the report um
[7:03] three of which are standard so that it
[7:05] be um constructed to the foot print
[7:07] contained in the site plan that it
[7:09] follows the elevations and it's valid
[7:11] for a period of 18 months as well
[7:13] condition four and five are recognizing
[7:16] those two unique um staff comments so
[7:18] I'm happy to answer any questions that
[7:20] the committee may have well thank you uh
[7:23] is there any questions to Hannah at this
[7:24] time
[7:26] counselors hearing none as this is a
[7:29] public meeting um I'm going to ask uh
[7:32] first the applicant do they um wish to
[7:34] make any comments or do they agree with
[7:36] the planner's recommendations or have
[7:38] other thoughts is there someone here
[7:40] this evening either representing the
[7:42] applicant or the owner I believe Joe and
[7:45] Angela are
[7:47] here okay oh Angela I think I see you
[7:51] and someone behind you I gather that
[7:52] might be Joe that's Joe pleased to meet
[7:54] you
[7:55] uh no problem um so go ahead
[8:00] you are you comfortable with what you
[8:02] have uh understood and heard from the
[8:04] planner and the staff of Blue
[8:07] Water yep I have no problem okay thank
[8:11] you council is there any questions to
[8:13] the
[8:16] owners hearing none and again as this is
[8:19] a public meeting uh I'm going to ask is
[8:22] there anyone um in our viewing audience
[8:25] this evening that wishes to comment on
[8:27] this application has a concern or or
[8:31] wants to support it Ang uh Chandra sorry
[8:35] I have no one else registered to speak
[8:36] on this issue okay let the record show
[8:39] there was no one uh on for this public
[8:42] meeting thank
[8:44] you um council is there I'm looking for
[8:47] a motion then is there anyone prepared
[8:48] to make a motion with regards to this
[8:52] application councilor vanen Burke and
[8:54] you're making the motion to approve with
[8:56] the conditions yes I am with with the conditions with the five conditions
[9:02] councelor Waldman second councelor
[9:04] Walden second councilors is there any
[9:06] discussion or you ready to for me to
[9:08] call the
[9:10] question I'm going to call the question
[9:12] all those in favor of the recommendation
[9:14] mv12 D20 to be approved with the five
[9:18] conditions say I any
[9:24] Nays it's carried thank you um now uh
[9:29] Hannah do you have some instructions for
[9:31] the uh Angela and uh Joel yes thank you
[9:35] chair just before I get to that I'm just
[9:37] going to uh bring up the table for the
[9:39] motion yeah thank
[9:42] you um so in terms of the effect of
[9:45] public and agency comments I recommend
[9:47] that the committee uh select option 3A
[9:50] that public comments were received in
[9:52] support of the application the effect of
[9:54] which result in a decision to approve
[9:55] the application and option uh B for that
[9:58] comment were received from agencies on
[10:00] the issues of the water meter and the
[10:02] septic system layout the comments were
[10:04] addressed through
[10:06] conditions okay do we have a mover for
[10:08] those 3A and B4 please councelor Walden
[10:11] would move councelor Walden and uh
[10:14] councelor vandenbberg
[10:16] second any discussion hearing none all in favor of uh 3A and B4 is the
[10:23] motion say I I I I any opposed hearing
[10:28] none the motion carries thank
[10:31] you Hannah all right uh yep Joe and
[10:34] Angela so you will soon uh receive a
[10:37] decision um a notice of decision
[10:39] outlining uh the appeal rights which is
[10:42] there's appeal period for 20 days after
[10:44] which uh your minor variance decision
[10:46] will be final um and then as I as stated
[10:49] by the condition it's valid for a period
[10:50] of 18 months so that's the time that you
[10:52] have to get a building
[10:54] permit okay thank you thank you good
[10:57] luck
[10:59] all right uh we're now going to move to
[11:02] application mv1
[11:05] 13-20 plan 67 lot 11 part Lot 12
[11:09] Bayfield Ward Municipality of blue
[11:12] waterer and uh Hannah please go ahead
[11:16] thank you
[11:21] chair all right uh as stated the next
[11:24] application is MV
[11:26] 1320 um the subject property is at 10
[11:29] Harbor Court in Bayfield the subject
[11:32] property is designated residential in
[11:34] the Blue Water ficial plan and is zoned
[11:36] residential low density R1 uh as well as
[11:39] a portion of the property is Zone
[11:41] natural environment 2 the property is
[11:43] located along uh the Bayfield River um
[11:46] so the portion of the property that's
[11:48] closer to the river um is the portion
[11:50] that is zoned uh ne2 the property
[11:53] contains an existing single detached
[11:55] dwelling along the Bayfield River
[11:59] um here's just a aerial imagery of the
[12:02] subject property um so it is lot along
[12:05] the Bayfield River um this is from 2015
[12:08] um so the single detached dwelling has
[12:10] since been fully constructed uh the
[12:13] elevations are provided of the proposed
[12:16] detach
[12:17] garage um and the application is seeking
[12:19] to increase the maximum accessory
[12:22] Building height from 6 M to 7.6 M and
[12:26] the minimum top of Bank set back from 30
[12:28] m to 3.9 M um so this top of Bank
[12:32] setback is with respect um to the
[12:34] Bayfield River um and they're seeking to
[12:37] go again from 30 MERS to 3.9 meters to
[12:40] facilitate the construction of um that
[12:44] um detach garage the application was
[12:47] considered against the four tests of the
[12:48] minor variants um first I'll speak to
[12:51] the minor variant in terms of the
[12:52] building height uh the applicant did
[12:55] provide um as included in the report the
[12:57] approximate sight line to the adjacent
[12:59] property owner is part of the survey
[13:01] sketch showing that the proposed
[13:02] detached garage is out of um the line of
[13:05] sight of the Jason property owner with
[13:07] respect to the river and the harbor um
[13:10] with the intent of Min minimizing the
[13:12] visual impact of the detach garage it is
[13:15] also worth noting that the elevation of
[13:16] the property does decrease from the
[13:19] front property line when you go
[13:20] downwards of the existing driveway uh
[13:23] further reducing the appearance of the
[13:25] height from that street level in terms
[13:28] of the SE minor variance to um reduce
[13:31] the top of Bank setback uh we primarily
[13:35] uh rely on the advice of the ABCA to
[13:37] advise on this um and they have stated
[13:39] that they have no natural Hazard
[13:41] concerns with this reduced top of Bank
[13:43] um they do note however that um a permit
[13:46] will be required from the ABCA as that
[13:48] is a separate process um as such in this
[13:51] case both of the variances are
[13:53] considered minor and desirable as well
[13:55] uh as well both of the minor variances
[13:57] maintain the intent of the zoning bylaw
[13:59] and the official plan Amendment as this
[14:01] is supporting residential development
[14:03] and they otherwise meet um all of the
[14:05] zoning Provisions there were comments
[14:07] provided uh by the ab budding neighbor
[14:10] uh to the east um inquiring about the
[14:13] minor nature of the topa bank variants
[14:15] uh as well as they did express some
[14:17] concern with the increased Building
[14:19] height um due to their experience with
[14:21] high winds in the area noting that they
[14:23] had experienced themselves with having
[14:25] to replace material on the roof um so
[14:27] that's something that they just uh
[14:29] cautiously made me aware of um and then
[14:32] there was another comment provided from
[14:33] a neighbor inquiring about the status of
[14:35] the ABCA permit um and as such that
[14:38] neighbor was referred to the ABCA as
[14:40] that as a separate process blue water
[14:43] staff did provide comment on the
[14:44] application with no concerns uh their
[14:47] comments note that their current
[14:48] utilities records indicate that either a
[14:51] water meter has not been installed on
[14:53] the property or that the water meter has
[14:54] been installed but the transmitter has
[14:56] not uh as they are currently being buil
[14:59] at a flat rate uh as such they have
[15:01] recommended condition number four be
[15:03] included to address
[15:04] this um as well uh as I spoke to a
[15:07] little bit before ABCA did provide
[15:09] comment on the application uh noting
[15:11] that they have no concerns from a
[15:13] natural Hazard perspective in terms of
[15:15] the recommendation it is recommended
[15:17] that the application be approved subject
[15:19] to the condition uh three of which are
[15:21] the standard conditions as well as um
[15:23] number four that a water meter and
[15:25] transmitter uh be installed on the
[15:27] property or that it um or confirmation
[15:32] uh be received that it already has been
[15:34] installed and that the transmitter uh be
[15:37] connected I'm happy to answer any
[15:39] questions that the committee may
[15:41] have okay counselors any questions to
[15:45] Hannah at this
[15:47] time hearing none I'm going to go here
[15:49] to the owner I see also Mr Johnson Brian
[15:52] hello um is some anyone wish to comment
[15:56] Peter um you agree with the
[15:59] with what you've heard so
[16:01] far I do uh we we've resided in the
[16:05] Bayfield area for 15 years five in this
[16:08] particular residence um having spent
[16:11] February and March this year in Bayfield
[16:14] with no garage and moving my car every
[16:16] time a snowplow came
[16:18] through I recognized how important uh it
[16:21] was to try and get this going um I want
[16:25] to also on on take a moment and thank
[16:29] the the staff of the municipality ABA
[16:32] Bluewater Council uh for keeping the
[16:35] wheels of progress in in motion during
[16:37] these unprecedented times it's uh it's
[16:40] been a tough year for everyone so thanks
[16:42] for your time and consideration on this
[16:45] well thank you for those uh words Peter
[16:47] um okay is there any questions to the uh
[16:51] to the owner here
[16:54] counselors okay um as this is a public
[16:58] meeting Peter going to ask is there
[16:59] anyone in um in our viewing audience
[17:03] wishes to uh raise any concerns or
[17:05] support for this uh for this
[17:08] permit chander is there anyone the only
[17:11] other person in attendance as you
[17:12] mentioned is Brian
[17:14] Johnson okay I see some others in the in
[17:17] the back watching in but that's uh
[17:20] there's anyone that there wishing to
[17:22] comment okay thank you uh let the record
[17:25] show that there was no one in the public
[17:27] gallery that um had any
[17:29] concerns uh at this uh for this public
[17:32] meeting okay I'm looking counselors is
[17:35] there anyone uh wishing to make a
[17:38] motion I'll move the recommendation
[17:40] councelor wetstone thank you councelor
[17:42] wetstone and that's to approve and that
[17:45] was the deputy I believe that's correct
[17:48] thank you deputy and that is for to
[17:51] approve uh the recommendations with the
[17:54] four recommendations correct thank you
[17:58] councilors is there any questions before
[18:00] I call the
[18:01] question hearing none I'm going to call
[18:03] the question to uh to approve this uh
[18:07] application all those in favor say I I I
[18:11] any opposed hearing none the motion
[18:14] carries and now we have to do one more
[18:17] motion yes thank you chair I will just
[18:20] share the
[18:21] table um so I recommend um that the
[18:24] committee uh select option 5A uh that
[18:28] public comments received on the issue of
[18:30] high winds uh with regard to the
[18:32] proposed increased Building height
[18:34] comments were thoroughly considered but
[18:35] the effect did not influence the
[18:37] decision to approve the application uh
[18:39] and in terms of agency comments uh
[18:41] option B4 that comments were received
[18:44] from agencies on the issue of the water
[18:46] meter these comments were addressed
[18:47] through
[18:48] conditions hey is there person ready to
[18:51] make that motion for 5A and
[18:53] B4 councelor venberg councelor Becker
[18:57] second
[18:59] all those in favor of that motion 5A and
[19:02] B4 please say I I I any opposed hearing
[19:07] none the motion carries Anna back to you
[19:11] all right thank you chair um so Peter
[19:13] and Brian um your next steps will be
[19:15] that you will receive um a notice of
[19:17] decision that outlines uh the appeal
[19:19] rights which is a 20-day appeal period
[19:21] uh after which assuming there's no
[19:23] appeals the decision will be final and
[19:25] valid for a period of 18
[19:27] months okay he Hannah great thank you
[19:30] stay stay safe everybody for sure thank
[19:34] you very much good luck in your uh in
[19:36] your project there sir thanks thanks
[19:38] Council thank you okay I'm G to call a
[19:41] motion to adjourn our U Committee of
[19:44] adjustment is there a motion to adjourn
[19:47] so move councelor Walden seconded by
[19:49] councelor
[19:51] venburg all those in favor say
[19:53] I I any opposed hearing none motion
[19:58] carries we now move into our regular
[20:01] council meeting of December the
[20:04] 7th and I'm going to call the meeting to
[20:07] order and uh chander to confirm that we
[20:12] have uh no new additions and we still
[20:14] can consider the members that were here
[20:16] to be the same yes attendance reflects
[20:19] the same as the committee of adjustments
[20:23] okay a disclosure of prary interests at
[20:26] this time for this meeting or for
[20:28] previous meeting if
[20:31] absent hearing none and again if
[20:33] something comes up please um get my
[20:36] attention I'm going to ask for the
[20:39] approval of the agenda but we have one
[20:41] issue pulled Chandra and that was yes
[20:46] Council um
[20:49] [Music]
[20:50] item
[20:51] 7.6.4 being the Wildwood Municipal drain
[20:54] tender award has been um moved to the
[20:57] December 21st
[21:01] okay so that's one is there anything
[21:04] someone wishes to add or or uh Council
[21:08] amendments to
[21:10] anything hearing none I'm G to ask for a
[21:13] mover to approve the agenda as amended
[21:15] with
[21:16] 7.64 removed for this
[21:19] meeting councelor Walden seconded
[21:24] by Deputy Deputy Mayor thank you Deputy
[21:29] Mayor
[21:30] Ferguson okay all those in favor of the
[21:33] agenda as amended please say
[21:36] I any opposed motion carries we're now
[21:40] at number four delegations and
[21:43] presentations the asabo Bayfield
[21:45] conservation Authority has a report here
[21:49] uh miss vz's hand I see her in the
[21:51] corner somewhere there she is um it's uh
[21:55] take it
[21:56] away go ahead
[22:07] [Music]
[22:22] Mary were you able to share your
[22:25] screen I I don't know if she can hear us
[22:28] I I think
[22:35] she's H technical difficulties here Mary
[22:39] are you able to hear
[22:49] us
[22:51] okay oh that's unfortunate I can reach
[22:54] out to her by email if we wanted to move
[22:56] forward with um our next item
[22:59] okay I think we can do that is that okay
[23:01] with Council if we go to 4.2 and then
[23:03] we'll come back to
[23:05] 4.1 yeah I see everyone okay with that
[23:09] uh slight change okay we're going to now
[23:11] do 4.2 which is the uh KPMG Service
[23:14] delivery review
[23:16] update and uh there's anah and uh go
[23:21] ahead who's going to do
[23:26] this thank you your worship it's
[23:28] pleasure to be here tonight my name is
[23:31] Bruce pever I'm a partner with
[23:33] KPMG and with me tonight is my colleague
[23:37] SAA Malik and we will be presenting on
[23:40] our final report on the municipality
[23:43] Bluewater Service delivery review SAA
[23:47] can you is it possible to present our
[23:52] presentation yes uh give me a second I'm
[23:54] just fing it up
[24:00] [Music]
[24:12] great thank you
[24:15] SAA if we can go to the project overview
[24:18] page that's great so your worship
[24:21] Council
[24:22] staff again I'm here tonight to present
[24:26] the final report
[24:29] and before we get into our key findings
[24:31] uh what I want to do with you is just
[24:34] review our project objectives and the
[24:36] scope of work so KPMG was engaged by the
[24:39] municipality of Blue Water to undertake
[24:42] a service delivery review the overall
[24:45] goal of the review was to better
[24:48] understand your current Municipal
[24:50] services and identify opportunities for
[24:52] improvements cost reductions and greater
[24:56] efficiency next page sign
[25:02] we started the engagement in
[25:04] August and when we kicked it off and
[25:08] then we proceeded into what we call the
[25:10] environmental scan where we collected
[25:12] information on your current Service
[25:14] delivery methods and we conducted
[25:17] stakeholder engagement exercises and
[25:19] surveyed five comparator
[25:22] municipalities in August and September
[25:24] we reviewed and conducted an inventory
[25:27] of your current service services and
[25:29] then in the fall we identified a series
[25:33] of
[25:35] opportunities that you had and we've
[25:39] concluded the engagement with a analysis
[25:43] of your financial position so tonight we
[25:46] are here to present the final
[25:49] report on our next
[25:53] page and SAA perhaps you can take
[25:56] Council through
[25:58] the top 10 opportunities for the
[26:02] municipality sure good evening everybody
[26:05] my name is an Malik and I was part of
[26:07] this um project um what we did just to
[26:10] before we get into the actual
[26:12] opportunities just want to give a brief
[26:13] background on how we came up with these
[26:15] opportunities we had brainstorming
[26:18] sessions with staff and management uh
[26:20] where we came up with 62
[26:23] opportunities um we at KPMG took those
[26:26] opportunities away we combined them and
[26:28] we had 35
[26:30] opportunities remaining with those
[26:33] opportunities uh we had to prioritize
[26:35] them to come up with the top 10 and we
[26:37] did that using certain criteria
[26:39] including the operating impact the
[26:41] capital impact barriers to
[26:43] implementation uh if there were any
[26:45] recent reviews completed on those
[26:47] opportunities we did looked at
[26:49] comparative analysis uh strategic
[26:51] program alignment and client customer
[26:53] impact based on the Strategic criteria
[26:56] we put those opportunities the 35
[26:58] opportunities that we had identified
[27:00] into various Pockets today we're going
[27:02] to be presenting you the top 10 that we
[27:04] identified along with
[27:09] management so the first opportunity is
[27:13] to explore possibility of sharing
[27:15] services and purchasing with a county
[27:17] and or lower tear the rationale was that
[27:20] the municipality recognizes the
[27:22] potential for increased Effectiveness
[27:24] and cost savings through alternative
[27:26] delivery models across various
[27:28] departments specific opportunities exist
[27:31] within shared services and shared
[27:33] purchasing and if you were to implement
[27:35] this opportunity the estimated impact
[27:37] would be a benefit of between 90 to
[27:43] $450,000 the second opportunity we
[27:45] identified was to develop Financial
[27:48] modeling including borrowing and debt
[27:50] financing of capital projects and also
[27:53] develop Financial policies to guide the
[27:55] municipality's financial management
[27:58] these policies will review reserves and
[28:00] Reserve funds debt policies and
[28:02] financial principles to develop a
[28:04] financial framework in corporating
[28:06] leading practices in financial
[28:09] policies this financial framework will
[28:11] drive administrative efficiencies
[28:13] through improved documented processes
[28:14] and policies that provide direction to
[28:17] staff thereby reducing the need to
[28:19] consult and seek out direction for
[28:21] specific activities and subsequent
[28:23] Council
[28:24] approvals and the rationale was that the
[28:27] municipality recognized the need for
[28:28] enhanced policies relating to Capital
[28:31] debt management reserves and
[28:33] Investments and the estimated impact
[28:36] would be less than $990,000
[28:39] and which is considered
[28:44] minor number three the third opportunity
[28:47] we identified was to improve integration
[28:49] of remaining strategic plan goals as per
[28:51] existing strategic plan within
[28:53] Department objectives in an effort to in
[28:56] assist Municipal staff with Direction
[28:59] goals motivation and sust sustainability
[29:02] of
[29:03] growth the rationale is that the
[29:06] municipality recognizes the need to
[29:08] align Department objectives to remaining
[29:10] strategic plan
[29:12] goals departmental mandates and kpis for
[29:15] each department should be established in
[29:17] line with the Strategic plan staff
[29:19] identify the inconsistency and lack of
[29:21] understanding of these mandates and
[29:24] kpis and there was there would be no
[29:27] estimated impact for this
[29:30] opportunity number four the opportunity
[29:33] was to conduct a review of the cost
[29:34] recovery model for Planning and
[29:36] Development fees to determine
[29:37] feasibility of increasing building
[29:39] permit fees to ensure cost
[29:41] recovery and the rationale was that
[29:44] there was has been no increases to the
[29:46] building permit schedule over the last 5
[29:48] years which has impacted the
[29:50] Department's ability to recover
[29:52] operating cost and the tax benefit of
[29:55] this would be between 90 to 450
[30:00] $50,000 number five the opportunity is
[30:03] to redesign the municipal website to
[30:05] improve usability so that the
[30:06] municipality can Implement customer
[30:08] service software improvements in the
[30:11] future and the municipality recognizes
[30:13] the opportunity to improve its customer
[30:15] service level through updating its
[30:17] website and improving the accessibility
[30:19] of
[30:20] information and there will be no
[30:22] estimated impact for this
[30:25] change number six the opportuni is to
[30:28] develop Parks and Recreation master plan
[30:30] to coordinate the service delivery model
[30:33] and the capital program for Parks and
[30:35] Recreation the rationale is that the
[30:37] municipality recognizes the opportunity
[30:39] to improve the guidance to council staff
[30:42] and Community stakeholders on key
[30:44] objectives and the service delivery
[30:46] model for Parks and
[30:47] Recreation and there would be no change
[30:50] to net
[30:53] Levy number seven the opportunities to
[30:56] conduct a review of the current it
[30:58] service provider analyze value for
[31:00] dollar and identify potential
[31:02] alternative alternate providers or an
[31:04] in-house
[31:05] resource and the rationale is that the
[31:08] municipality recognizes the need to
[31:10] ensure that appropriate controls are in
[31:12] place for third party risk management
[31:14] specifically for IT
[31:16] services and there would be no net
[31:19] estimate
[31:21] impact number eight the opportuni is to
[31:23] review cemet Cemetery user fees in order
[31:26] to move the cemetery to a more
[31:28] cost-effective business model and
[31:30] consider other opportunities to improve
[31:32] Cemetery management such as Contracting
[31:36] Services leveraging internal systems
[31:39] columbariums and the rationale is the
[31:41] municipality recognizes the opportunity
[31:43] to improve the overall service level of
[31:45] cemetery services and its cost recovery
[31:48] through increased fees and alternative
[31:50] Service delivery
[31:51] models and the impact would be minor at
[31:54] less than $90,000 a
[31:56] year number nine There's an opportunity
[31:59] to update Facilities Review and bring
[32:01] recommendations to council with the goal
[32:04] of either selling Municipal facilities
[32:07] no longer in use or where it is not
[32:09] financially viable to restore which
[32:11] would have the effect of reducing the
[32:13] cost of facility mendance or providing a
[32:16] financial plan to upgrade or restore the
[32:19] facility the rationale is that the
[32:21] municipality currently operates
[32:22] underutilized and aging facilities and
[32:25] recognizes the opportunity to reduce
[32:27] costs through the of these facilities or
[32:29] restoring facilities to improve
[32:32] operations and there would be less than
[32:35] $90,000 impact of this
[32:38] opportunity number 10 the opportunity is
[32:42] to investigate the digitization of the
[32:44] application review and permitting
[32:45] process for building sewage and plumbing
[32:48] applications and the rationale is that
[32:50] the municipality recognizes the benefits
[32:52] of digitizing services and activities to
[32:55] assist in optimizing business processes
[32:57] and meeting customer demand and the
[32:59] estimated impact is less than
[33:02] $90,000 those were our top 10
[33:04] opportunities that we identified with
[33:07] management what you're seeing here um on
[33:10] this screen is that we took those 10
[33:13] opportunities which are again listed
[33:15] here and we plotted them on a map based
[33:19] on the impact of implementation and the
[33:22] effort required to implement them based
[33:25] on the scores that we had given
[33:28] and we can see the top two which is to
[33:30] explore the possibility of sharing
[33:32] resources and developing a financial
[33:34] model is towards the top which is where
[33:37] the impact of implementation is high and
[33:40] the effort is between low to
[33:46] medium
[33:48] okay from this point we'll take you
[33:50] through the service profiles Bruce do
[33:53] you want to walk them through the
[33:54] service profile thank you SAA
[33:58] so if you remember uh part of our
[34:01] engagement was to inventory your
[34:03] services and we did that by creating
[34:06] what we call service profiles so you can
[34:10] see there is a column on the
[34:12] left which
[34:14] identifies principally the budgetary
[34:18] information
[34:20] associated with the delivery of this
[34:22] specific service which is in this case
[34:25] development services
[34:27] and then the remainder of the page is
[34:30] broken into four quadrants the upper
[34:33] left quadrant describes the
[34:35] service the lower left quadrant provides
[34:39] some benchmarking and performance
[34:41] information so you can see how the cost
[34:45] of a building inspection per household
[34:48] compares to your
[34:51] peers on the top right we include a
[34:55] graph which looks at the service level
[35:00] standard for each of the services within
[35:03] development so you can see there's
[35:05] building inspection there's planning and
[35:08] there's blue
[35:09] flag and what we do is we map the level
[35:13] of service against the service type so
[35:16] the service type is broken into four
[35:19] groups the first one is
[35:21] mandatory which means that there is a
[35:24] piece of provincial legislation that
[35:26] says the municipality shall deliver that
[35:29] service there's also essential Services
[35:33] which are like mandatory except there's
[35:36] no piece of legislation legislation
[35:39] dictating the municipality deliver the
[35:41] service so a common example in a larger
[35:44] municipality would be public
[35:47] transit third type of service is
[35:49] traditional and that's uh class of
[35:53] service which as the name suggests
[35:56] municipalities traditionally deliver for
[35:58] example Arenas and finally there is the
[36:02] other discretionary type service which
[36:04] makes that particular service unique and
[36:09] special in comparison to its peers and
[36:13] mpal blue water has one of those
[36:15] Services here and it's the blue flag
[36:19] service
[36:20] below the graph you can see the
[36:23] rationale and the rationale explains the reason for the service level
[36:29] assessment and the service type so we
[36:33] have completed a number of service
[36:35] profiles for all the different Services
[36:37] the municipality delivers and they're
[36:40] included within this final
[36:43] report so do you want to take us now to
[36:47] the final section of the report which is
[36:49] the
[36:53] budget EXC
[36:59] oh sorry we have the financial operating
[37:01] model perhaps you can explain the the
[37:04] model we developed for the
[37:06] municipality sure so as part of our
[37:08] deliverable what KPMG did was we created
[37:12] a predictive model for for for the
[37:15] municipality of blue water and what this
[37:17] is it's an Excel spreadsheet where we
[37:21] can predict the 10-year Capital forecast
[37:24] for the
[37:25] municipality we took in data historical
[37:28] data the fin from the financial
[37:30] information returns and we created key
[37:32] inputs um which which the work was
[37:34] already done so we created through
[37:36] taxation reserves your grants we
[37:38] incorporate all that information we
[37:41] created a tool which can be used to
[37:43] predict what your Capital Financial
[37:46] requirements would be in the next 10
[37:48] years so and what would the impact on of
[37:53] on Levy would be if you were to choose
[37:55] certain Capital expenditures so it's an
[37:57] interactive tool we developed this we
[38:00] Shar it with staff and management uh we
[38:02] received good feedback from them um
[38:04] suggested a few changes which have been
[38:06] incorporated as well so we hope that
[38:09] this will be a a great help to the
[38:11] municipality in the coming
[38:18] years Bruce and the final piece of the
[38:21] final report is the budgeting
[38:25] process so son if you want to take us
[38:28] there yes thank you so we understand
[38:31] through staff that Council has been at
[38:34] the Forefront of thinking about how to
[38:37] redo the budget process and you
[38:40] recognize the importance of completing
[38:43] your Budget prior to the end of the
[38:46] calendar year in order that the
[38:48] municipality can get out into the
[38:51] marketplace and Achieve Optimum pricing
[38:54] on its Capital Construction tend
[38:58] ERS and I think the council and the
[39:01] municipality are to be congratulated for
[39:04] thinking that way because it's a
[39:07] Innovative approach to Service
[39:12] delivery so you can see here that we
[39:15] have proposed a budget process that will
[39:18] allow you to achieve a approved budget
[39:22] before the end of December
[39:25] 31st and it's a
[39:28] six meeting process so it starts the
[39:32] week of November 1st with what we call
[39:36] the cap first capital budget meeting and
[39:38] we start with the capital budget because
[39:41] as I'm sure council's aware the capital
[39:44] budget drives your operational budget
[39:46] the decisions you make around what
[39:49] Capital Equipment you might purchase or
[39:51] what capital projects you might tender
[39:54] will impact the cost of service delivery
[39:57] so that's why we start with the capital
[39:59] budget and we suggest you start a the
[40:03] first week of November and in that
[40:06] meeting that your CIO will lay out a a
[40:09] small presentation on the financial
[40:11] state of the municipality and review
[40:14] some of the key capital projects for the
[40:16] coming
[40:18] year it's important here for Council to
[40:21] also know that the capital budget that
[40:23] is presented is balanced financed and
[40:26] sustainable
[40:28] the second capital budget meeting occurs
[40:31] the following week and this gives
[40:33] Council a chance to think about the
[40:36] draft capital budget presentation and to
[40:39] ask questions and debate and the goal
[40:42] for this second meeting should be that
[40:45] by the end of the meeting you have
[40:47] provisionally adopted the capital
[40:51] budget once the capital budget has been
[40:54] approved on a provisional basis you move into the first meeting for the
[40:59] operational
[41:01] budget and that in that meeting you'll
[41:04] review your expenditures and revenues
[41:06] and the proposed tax levy increase and
[41:09] possible drivers behind the changes to
[41:12] these
[41:13] numbers the operational budget should
[41:16] also incorporate any changes that may
[41:18] come about from the capital budget and
[41:20] reflect council's Direction on tax levy
[41:24] increases the following week so the
[41:26] fourth meeting there will be a second
[41:28] operational budget well and that will
[41:31] provide Council a chance to really roll
[41:33] up his sleeves and ask tough questions
[41:36] on the
[41:37] proposed operational expenditures and
[41:40] revenues for the coming
[41:42] year and the goal here as like the
[41:45] second capital budget meeting is to
[41:47] provisionally adopt the operational
[41:49] budget and this will allow staff then to
[41:52] take the draft capital and operational
[41:56] budgets out vot to the public and
[42:00] present them to the public in a public
[42:03] meeting and that usually occurs in the
[42:06] first week of
[42:08] December following that public meeting
[42:11] the feedback of the public is
[42:12] incorporated into the budget and so that
[42:17] at the council meeting in the second
[42:20] week of December Council formally adopts
[42:24] the capital and operational budget by
[42:26] bylaw
[42:29] so this is a
[42:30] proven and
[42:32] successful process for achieving a uh
[42:37] operational and capital budget by
[42:40] December
[42:42] 31st so your worship that completes our
[42:46] presentation of the final report and we
[42:49] would be pleased to take any questions
[42:51] or answer any questions that you might
[42:53] have or Council might have tonight
[43:07] sorry about that everyone um yes uh uh
[43:10] thank you for that uh report uh before
[43:14] we go to council um I'm going to open it
[43:16] up to the staff who have worked with you
[43:18] um My Hope Is I guess if they have some
[43:20] comments it may have less questions for
[43:22] us tonight or or new questions as
[43:24] counselors so um uh Lori well I'll I'll
[43:28] let you do the chairing of of of our
[43:30] senior staff I'll be
[43:32] that okay well um just overall I'd like
[43:36] to thank uh Bruce pever SAA Malik Jal
[43:40] Francis Hassan John um all we all of
[43:44] whom managers have worked with to
[43:46] provide this Service delivery review
[43:48] that you're seeing this evening um the
[43:51] final report we have includes analysis
[43:54] with comparators and recommendations to
[43:56] us for future opportunities to be
[43:58] considered over time to improve
[44:01] operations the addition of the
[44:03] predictive capital budget model is a key
[44:06] tool that Council has requested and
[44:09] which we are very pleased to have as we
[44:11] move into the budget season for
[44:14] 20121 um this report has shown that blue
[44:17] water is doing well and that Council the
[44:20] treasurer and managers have provided
[44:21] Good Financial oversight and stewardship
[44:24] to ensure that we are providing good
[44:27] service and value to Residents property
[44:29] owners and Blue
[44:30] Water um as you can see theyve provided
[44:34] a road map for us to take away and use
[44:37] and again we thank them you can see it's
[44:40] a living these are living tools that
[44:43] will uh continue to incorporate and uh
[44:47] for example the service profiles will be
[44:49] able to use every budget season to
[44:52] compare uh what we're doing um against
[44:55] previous years and and um so that's very
[45:00] worthwhile as of course as I said is the
[45:03] compar the predictive modeling Financial
[45:06] tool that they've
[45:07] produced um I don't think we will um
[45:11] have um managers speak to the service
[45:15] profiles this evening and but we can
[45:17] carry them forward into our budgeting
[45:19] process and um they can uh each manager
[45:23] can respond in their uh particular area
[45:26] to uh what the profiles say so um I I
[45:31] think um that would be the best in terms
[45:33] of time time management this
[45:40] evening unless counselors have questions
[45:45] specifically councelor wetstone I
[45:47] actually do have a couple questions if I
[45:51] could and I guess this is uh relating to
[45:54] and I just want to make sure to
[45:56] understand it thank you for the top 10
[45:57] opportunities some of them are uh uh
[46:00] ones that I'm not surprised in so that's fantastic it's sort of uh
[46:05] reiterates the point of of some of the
[46:07] thinking that some of the counselors
[46:08] have had so for example on number one
[46:11] when you talk about the shared
[46:13] purchasing um and it has between 90k to
[46:17] 450k in potential
[46:19] savings so when you look at things like
[46:23] that do you look at um for example man
[46:28] hours so if we were to be teaming up
[46:31] with here in County now all of a sudden
[46:33] we would there would have to be some
[46:34] sort of shared Arrangement where we
[46:35] would be paying them for their employee
[46:38] to do some of that work are those those
[46:41] labor hours included uh within those
[46:44] cost
[46:46] savings your worship to the counselor
[46:50] actually the approach we are thinking
[46:52] for shared services around purchasing or
[46:55] procurement was for the county and the
[47:00] municipality to issue similar uh tenders
[47:05] together so basically be joint tenders
[47:08] okay so there wouldn't be a cost there
[47:10] should not be a cost to the municipality
[47:12] of Blue Water you know both the county
[47:16] and the municipality for example
[47:18] purchased salt and other common
[47:22] Municipal materials and there's no
[47:25] reason why the two municipalities
[47:28] couldn't work together on that type of
[47:30] joint procurement to achieve greater
[47:32] economies of
[47:34] scale understood okay thank you that
[47:37] clears that up for me a little better I
[47:38] want to understand that um the budgeting
[47:41] process um you know we don't week meet
[47:44] weekly on a normal basis but what I can
[47:46] tell you is anybody that's been sitting
[47:48] on Council since I've been on I've been
[47:49] pushing for an early budget since day
[47:51] one uh fi our finance people can uh
[47:54] attest to that as well so hopefully this
[47:56] will be something something that we can
[47:57] look at and maybe we can adopt it uh I
[48:00] know this year we're getting we're we're
[48:01] getting closer uh it looks like we might
[48:03] uh might be it's never early enough for
[48:06] me I'd I'd love to have it done and set
[48:08] December 1st and tenders out for next
[48:10] year within the month of December and
[48:12] everything else too but uh I have to
[48:14] understand workload and how we get
[48:15] through everything as well too but this
[48:16] is a good start I appreciate uh the bit
[48:18] of a road map for that as well thank
[48:23] you that's all the questions or comments
[48:25] I had for now
[48:36] sorry there any other counselor's
[48:38] comments at this time um I will be
[48:40] looking for a motion that we receive
[48:42] this for information as so as uh then we
[48:46] can uh start working on it and uh but
[48:50] this point is there any other questions
[48:52] or comments to our presenters
[48:58] hello hello everybody can hear me okay
[49:01] uh yes we're uh how are you doing now uh
[49:04] we're we're just doing we're just
[49:05] finishing up uh the second committee
[49:08] report and then we'll get to you how's
[49:13] that
[49:15] okay thank
[49:17] you I'm looking for a motion then uh
[49:20] councils that if we want to move forward
[49:21] with this report we need a motion to
[49:23] accept it for information this evening
[49:25] counselor is anyone prepared prepared
[49:27] councelor wal sorry sorry mayor can I
[49:30] just ask one question please oh for sure
[49:33] even if we get it seconded we'll still
[49:35] have question okay is there a second
[49:38] just I'll get that out of the way if
[49:39] there is councelor Harris Council Harris
[49:41] thank you okay councelor venberg go
[49:43] ahead y thank you mayor just going back
[49:46] to uh to Bruce then in the weeks um I
[49:51] think it was let's say week number five
[49:54] where the public can ask question s and then the following week
[49:59] is basically the the budget gets passed
[50:01] or so but does that give everyone enough
[50:04] time from the public to ask questions
[50:08] and if there are any little hiccups or
[50:12] so or or something pops up that the
[50:15] staff can still implement the changes
[50:18] for Council to review and and pass at
[50:21] the end of week number six I think it
[50:23] was week number six cor right
[50:28] uh your worship to the counselor yes uh
[50:31] we have found that it does provide
[50:34] enough
[50:36] time the amount of work
[50:39] though should not be
[50:41] underestimated by staff and counsel in
[50:44] actually engaging the public so there
[50:48] you know before week or before the
[50:52] public meeting in week one of
[50:54] December there has to be some work in
[50:57] setting up the public meeting ensuring
[51:00] that you have the right staff there and
[51:04] they proper advertisement is undertaken
[51:07] to get a turnout if I could provide some
[51:10] advice at least in your greater Toronto
[51:12] area don't try and hold a public meeting
[51:15] on the budget the same night the mle are
[51:17] playing for example so uh that's the
[51:21] kind of you have to think it through but
[51:24] generally we have found that you do get
[51:27] good feedback and there is enough time
[51:29] to incorporate that feedback from the
[51:33] public
[51:36] okay any other questions at this time
[51:39] and we have our uh two people SAA and
[51:42] Bruce here that worked on this well and their team of
[51:47] course if not uh if I'm sure if there is
[51:49] questions down the road our staff will
[51:52] help fill in and also Lori and I'm I'm
[51:54] sure they could probably uh if there's
[51:57] questions that stump them they could
[51:58] probably talk to Bruce or someone and get it clarified I I see a nod thank
[52:03] you okay well um on behalf of council I thank you uh for your work um you uh
[52:11] you did entertain the public uh you had
[52:14] lots of feedback from our community of
[52:16] blue water which uh I uh I hope was a
[52:19] wasn't a surprise I hope it was pleasant
[52:22] it U I think it's been a pretty good
[52:25] process so so um at this time if there's
[52:28] no questions yet at this point I'm going
[52:31] to call the question on that we accept
[52:33] this for information and start working
[52:35] towards our goals as I think uh Lori
[52:39] said it's a living
[52:41] document are we prepared to uh call the
[52:45] question hearing no uh nays I'm going to
[52:48] call the question all in favor of
[52:50] receiving this report for information hi hi any opposed hearing none the
[52:57] motion carries thank thank you and and
[53:00] thank everyone look forward to working
[53:02] with this uh with this report now and in
[53:04] the future thank you thank you your
[53:07] worship it's been a pleasure serving the
[53:08] municipality of blue water it's been a
[53:10] really enjoyable experience and I wish
[53:12] yourself and Council a very Merry
[53:15] Christmas and and same to you take care
[53:19] by bye bye head out
[53:22] bye okay uh Chandra
[53:26] have we uh got our ABCA on uh on track
[53:31] here I think we have Mary
[53:33] now can you hear us
[53:36] Mary she did get in she did get
[53:41] in Mary can you hear
[53:45] us I can't hear you if I'm supposed to
[53:48] talk we can hear you you can hear me
[53:51] okay great oh go ahead
[53:54] then um I won't know if everybody can
[53:58] see my slides can people see my slides
[54:01] if I put them up no okay share
[54:07] screen okay can people see my slides now
[54:09] okay
[54:12] great and I'm going to go
[54:14] slideshow
[54:16] beginning okay so thank you very much uh
[54:19] for inviting me to speak to uh Council
[54:22] and the mayor tonight I uh just wanted
[54:25] to provide a quick update about some of
[54:27] the reports that we did for the March
[54:30] 2020 fiscal uh year end in March uh of
[54:34] this earlier this year we at the healthy
[54:37] watersheds Department um work with h the
[54:40] communities and agencies to um uh work
[54:44] on local
[54:46] Watershed interests and issues and we
[54:49] often get try to get some funding and we
[54:51] have reports due in March of the year so
[54:54] this particular March uh when we were in
[54:56] lockdown uh we were quite busy with a
[54:58] number of reports I shared those reports
[55:01] with the with the board of directors at
[55:03] the asso Bayfield and July and they
[55:04] asked me to speak to some of the reports
[55:08] with your all the councils so tonight um
[55:11] in here Blue Water just a little
[55:14] reminder of the healthy Watershed
[55:16] program at the asso Bayfield um it
[55:18] started in 2000 and it really was in
[55:22] response to local um Community interest
[55:25] in uh environmental issues and a need to
[55:28] engage the community with uh local
[55:31] actions and then monitor how effective
[55:33] those those actions are um so that
[55:36] program has been running since the year
[55:39] 2000 this is just an overview of the
[55:42] asabo Bayfield jurisdiction so we're
[55:44] 2400 kilm square with the Bayfield River
[55:48] 500 kilm square going in at Bayfield of
[55:50] course and the asao river starting up in
[55:52] Stafa and going out um at Port Frank's
[55:56] um
[55:57] the municipality of Blue Water I have
[55:59] overlin here on this map showing that
[56:01] for the most part the area of your
[56:04] jurisdiction is uh mostly Shoreline
[56:07] tributaries smaller tributaries that
[56:09] flow directly to the lake but there's
[56:11] also a part of the Bayfield River and
[56:13] actually some of the headwaters of the
[56:17] asabo so on to the reports uh for 2020
[56:22] um these reports really are uh reporting
[56:25] on some of the biology and water quality
[56:27] and land use issues that are in our
[56:29] jurisdiction um as I mentioned we do try
[56:33] to get uh funding from other levels of
[56:35] government so that every dollar that is
[56:38] provided to the assab we can try to
[56:39] raise it three times or more depending
[56:41] on whether or not we're able to uh
[56:44] leverage uh landowner uh projects and
[56:47] stewardship support landowner projects
[56:48] and stewardship with additional funds um
[56:51] of course we are continuously working
[56:54] with the different communities so the
[56:55] community of Bayfield gr bent down in
[56:58] Port Franks but also some of the Inland
[57:01] communities in lukan Elsa Craig Nar um
[57:04] and Rural Farm rural non-farm issues and
[57:07] also um agricultural issues so I'm just
[57:10] going to talk on a three um of these 12
[57:13] different reports I'm just going to
[57:14] speak to three of them this evening uh
[57:17] one on Wetlands one on Shoreline
[57:20] education and one on uh an unique
[57:23] project that we have um in Clinton
[57:29] so the first is the first topic is uh is
[57:32] Wetlands um and this report we did for
[57:35] the asao river but this the same
[57:38] findings could be true for different
[57:40] parts of our jurisdiction and we know
[57:43] that in wetlands and developed
[57:44] Landscapes are hard to maintain we have
[57:47] a very low amount of wetlands wetlands
[57:50] in our Watershed at about probably 2%
[57:52] where originally the Watershed might
[57:54] have had 20%
[57:56] um we know there are different
[57:57] approaches to try to get more Wetlands
[57:59] on the landscape some of them are
[58:01] related to policy and some of them are
[58:03] related to stewardship um what we know
[58:06] from a policy perspective is because the
[58:08] definitions of wetlands are are
[58:11] extremely um variable um the policy
[58:15] interpretation of those definitions make
[58:17] it very hard uh in some cases to
[58:20] maintain those very small Wetlands on
[58:22] the landscape uh sometimes we don't even
[58:25] notice when they're Disturbed so it's
[58:29] very important to maintain uh the
[58:33] existing Wetlands because we know that
[58:35] they have wet uh water quality benefits
[58:38] they have flooding benefits and they
[58:39] have um biodiversity benefits however uh
[58:43] one other tool some other tools that we
[58:46] found to have some success with is
[58:48] supporting uh land owners with their own
[58:51] interests in um enhancing some of the
[58:53] wet areas on their fields or in their
[58:56] wood lot so this particular picture I
[58:58] have here shows a redeveloped wetland in
[59:01] a very small corner of uh somebody's
[59:03] field that wasn't wasn't very productive
[59:06] and so they've taken it out and now they
[59:07] have this place that they can enjoy and
[59:09] this was near narn we also know that
[59:12] when we support um stewardship and
[59:15] helping folks with their Wetlands that can have a multiplier effect by
[59:20] engaging adjacent or neighboring land
[59:23] owners and this example is in the near
[59:25] um Southwest part of our Watershed where
[59:28] we did undertook a fairly large Wetland
[59:30] restoration project um and then
[59:34] corresponding neighbors or adjacent
[59:36] neighbors engaged with us to um employ
[59:40] some other further best management
[59:41] practices and also get support and
[59:44] recognition from a tax perspective on
[59:47] their on their
[59:49] Wetlands the next report that I just
[59:51] want to update the council about is uh
[59:55] this um encouraging more natural
[59:56] shorelines along the luron coast this
[59:59] was more of a understanding of some of
[1:00:02] the communication gaps that exist along
[1:00:04] our Shoreline um I'll preface this by
[1:00:07] saying I'm not a coastal engineer or a
[1:00:10] coastal um uh expert I'm a I'm a
[1:00:13] watershed biologist but we did work with
[1:00:16] our local communities to better
[1:00:18] understand some of the um uh gaps in
[1:00:21] Communications that could be filled um
[1:00:24] so what we found was that um some of the
[1:00:28] factors that would contribute to uh a
[1:00:31] less than ideal natural storeline conss
[1:00:34] are that there's obviously a significant
[1:00:36] level of existing development along our
[1:00:38] Shoreline there's um a limited
[1:00:42] understanding of the cumulative effects
[1:00:45] of uh certain kinds of practices along
[1:00:47] the shoreline and there's uh lack of the
[1:00:51] kinds of technical information that
[1:00:52] would help with certain policies that
[1:00:55] would be based on cumulative effects
[1:00:57] that would able enable us to better
[1:01:00] understand some of the costs of
[1:01:01] different activities on our Shoreline
[1:01:03] and be able to discuss the discuss those
[1:01:07] with um people that that live on the
[1:01:09] shoreline with respect to what are the
[1:01:12] costs to the natural processes what are
[1:01:14] the costs to um adjacent neighbors and
[1:01:17] what are the costs even to themselves of
[1:01:19] certain
[1:01:22] practices the final project I just want
[1:01:25] to provide an update to council about is
[1:01:28] uh the Heron view demonstration farm
[1:01:31] this um demonstration Farm is behind the
[1:01:34] here on Perth public health unit and um
[1:01:38] working in 2008 we worked with various
[1:01:43] Partners to make um restoration of the
[1:01:46] flood plane uh we put in some grass
[1:01:49] waterways we put in a Terrace um there
[1:01:52] was some restoration of some additional
[1:01:55] um near a small Creek that went in and
[1:01:59] at just after um 2008 the hon County
[1:02:02] Soil and crop Improvement Association
[1:02:05] and um approached the county and there
[1:02:08] was a agreement to rent that land for a
[1:02:11] dollar a year and the the soil and crop
[1:02:14] um Farmers started to use cover crops
[1:02:18] reduce tillage and nutrient management
[1:02:21] practices um in they did find however
[1:02:24] they were still having um issues with
[1:02:26] erosion and felt that tile drainage
[1:02:28] would help to uh support the kinds of
[1:02:31] activities they wanted to undertake
[1:02:33] there so in
[1:02:35] 2018 um a a proposal was submitted to
[1:02:40] support an Innovative child drainage
[1:02:42] project that project went in the ground
[1:02:46] um in June 2019 and you can see here
[1:02:49] some of the different aspects of that
[1:02:51] design where we're looking at a
[1:02:53] different kind of uh innovative drainage
[1:02:56] Contour control drainage versus
[1:02:58] systematic drainage and uh no tile area
[1:03:02] uh so we're looking at um that over the
[1:03:04] more short term and of course also
[1:03:07] looking at the the impact of um or the
[1:03:10] effect that the wetlands also have on
[1:03:12] Downstream water quality I encourage
[1:03:14] folks to visit the the her on view site
[1:03:17] it's in a lovely location right on the
[1:03:19] Bayfield River and um there's lots of
[1:03:22] interesting things happening there
[1:03:26] uh I just would like to close by um
[1:03:29] going through a couple
[1:03:31] little pieces of how this community
[1:03:34] supported monitoring enhances our local
[1:03:36] environment we have noticed over the
[1:03:38] last 20 years a great deal of people um
[1:03:41] very interested in nature certainly we
[1:03:42] saw that at the beginning in March when
[1:03:44] people were really making quite a bit of
[1:03:46] use of our conservation areas we have
[1:03:49] also learned a lot more about best
[1:03:51] management practices on both
[1:03:52] Agricultural and urban best management
[1:03:54] practices and we've been doing some
[1:03:56] monitoring to demonstrate the
[1:03:58] effectiveness of some of these uh
[1:04:00] practices to better understand how
[1:04:03] effective they are and to also figure
[1:04:05] out where the best places for these
[1:04:07] practices would be of course um ongoing
[1:04:10] discussion and Outreach and Community um
[1:04:14] involvement helps to have uh informed
[1:04:18] Community about some of the different um
[1:04:21] biology and water quality issues that
[1:04:23] are in their local environment and we do
[1:04:25] summarize some of this information on an
[1:04:27] ongoing basis in our uh Watershed report
[1:04:30] cards which I provided a link here for
[1:04:33] the different um smaller watersheds
[1:04:35] within the Asawa Bayfield
[1:04:37] area so just uh thank you very much to
[1:04:41] counil for um having me speak tonight
[1:04:44] and uh encourage you to if you're
[1:04:47] interested to follow up about some of
[1:04:49] the reports I'd be more than glad to
[1:04:51] provide with any answer any answers to
[1:04:54] your questions tonight
[1:05:01] Mr
[1:05:06] Mayor about that I should add my little
[1:05:09] mouse here sorry um any questions to uh
[1:05:14] ABCA tonight counselors on this
[1:05:19] report I think it's pretty
[1:05:21] straightforward thank you for uh for uh
[1:05:24] reminding us what work uh you've done
[1:05:27] not only this year but obviously over
[1:05:29] the years we appreciate that I need a
[1:05:32] motion uh to accept this report for
[1:05:34] information is there anyone prepared to
[1:05:36] do
[1:05:37] that councelor
[1:05:40] venberg
[1:05:41] seconder councelor Becker councelor
[1:05:44] Becker before I call the question is
[1:05:46] there anyone wish to make any
[1:05:51] comments okay I'm going to call the
[1:05:53] question all those in favor accept this
[1:05:55] report for
[1:05:56] information hi I any opposed motion
[1:06:01] carries thank you and I gather you can't
[1:06:03] hear us but uh job well done thumbs up
[1:06:08] thank you
[1:06:10] okay uh that concludes our delegations
[1:06:13] and presentations we're now on consent
[1:06:16] agenda which is a number of them
[1:06:19] 5.1
[1:06:21] to 5.25
[1:06:25] is there anyone wish to pull any out for
[1:06:29] discussion
[1:06:33] counselors not hearing any I'd like to
[1:06:35] pull out 5.11 for some comments and
[1:06:38] that's the
[1:06:39] ABCA approved budget for
[1:06:44] 2021 is there any others at this
[1:06:49] time okay um and what I uh the budget of
[1:06:54] course is we're all uh we've got the
[1:06:56] report from Bayfield con from
[1:06:59] ABCA and um it says that uh we had a a
[1:07:04] slight decrease of approximately
[1:07:07] 1% in the um in the budget and and
[1:07:11] that's a fact the numbers are there but
[1:07:14] I am taken back a little bit um when you
[1:07:18] look at the uh the breakout uh project
[1:07:21] Levy and general Levy and you refer it
[1:07:23] back to the 2020 budget and I noticed
[1:07:26] that Trend last year so I I the numbers
[1:07:29] were pretty close but when you look back
[1:07:31] at last year the general Levy which to
[1:07:33] me is your operating I I I write that as
[1:07:36] sort of the operating there's obviously
[1:07:38] issues that are deal with great things
[1:07:40] that we do in the conservation Authority
[1:07:42] there's no question but last year it was
[1:07:46] $237,000
[1:07:48] $451 this year it's it's
[1:07:52] 24555 which is an increase of 70
[1:07:56] $600 and a little over $7,600 which is
[1:08:01] about a 3%
[1:08:03] increase and that is that's going to be
[1:08:05] there next year embedded in in the in
[1:08:07] the program when you look at the gr uh
[1:08:10] look at what we call Project Levy and
[1:08:12] I'm working on the assumption that those
[1:08:14] are the real nuts and bolts of what a
[1:08:16] lot of us think when we think of
[1:08:18] conservation it's making sure the dams
[1:08:20] are working it's making sure that
[1:08:22] there's a flow of water can be U happen
[1:08:26] moning monitoring things and doing those
[1:08:29] type of projects but it's actually
[1:08:31] decreased from last year uh it was $
[1:08:35] 61,63 last year so when you look at that
[1:08:39] that's an 18%
[1:08:41] decrease and my sense is that projects
[1:08:44] seem to go up and
[1:08:46] down uh I think uh probably ansur not
[1:08:50] asking her to comment but I but from a
[1:08:52] standpoint us as Council if we uh and
[1:08:55] you could see from the kmg report KPMG
[1:08:59] report we've had years of very high what
[1:09:03] I call capital projects so I could
[1:09:06] probably say to people hey we we
[1:09:09] decreased your taxes a lot this year uh
[1:09:12] but then when they find out that well
[1:09:14] the snow plowing isn't done on every
[1:09:16] other Thursday I think a lot of people
[1:09:19] would be calling me and saying I was a
[1:09:21] little bit uh uh you know that was a bad
[1:09:24] decision uh
[1:09:26] they they expect that we do spend money
[1:09:28] so just on the principle of it I really
[1:09:32] think this is not the way I would do it
[1:09:35] to the taxpayers of of the municipality
[1:09:38] of Blue Water i w I would wish that the
[1:09:41] my wish is that we be a bit more
[1:09:43] upfront uh operating which is they
[1:09:46] called General Levy it's gone up by
[1:09:49] 3% and the only reason we see a decrease
[1:09:52] is because there the actual projects
[1:09:54] have dropped 18% this year and I want I
[1:09:58] just want to be assured that residents I
[1:10:00] am looking at these budgets carefully I
[1:10:03] am totally support that we uh
[1:10:05] conservation Authority is a good thing
[1:10:06] to have back in 49 the government made a good
[1:10:11] decision uh but it also said that the
[1:10:14] local lower tiers are to be very much
[1:10:17] part of the process and be in charge and clearly this is one area of budgets
[1:10:22] that uh that you know I think we need to
[1:10:24] reflect that so so I just wanted the
[1:10:26] rate payers to uh to to see this that
[1:10:30] it's um that really it was increaseed by
[1:10:33] 3% the operating and that's what I
[1:10:35] wanted to get on the record uh obviously
[1:10:38] um Council has not
[1:10:41] officially passed a motion to support
[1:10:44] the budget uh that's a process that uh I
[1:10:47] guess we're supposed to do I don't know
[1:10:49] if we want to do that tonight but I
[1:10:50] wanted to get that on the record I
[1:10:52] appreciate council's time if there's any
[1:10:55] other comments on it that's fine too I
[1:10:57] open the floor thank
[1:11:02] you so if I could if I could just
[1:11:04] comment on that uh mayor Klo with
[1:11:08] regards to the increase in the general
[1:11:10] Levy um there's no significant increase
[1:11:13] to the ongoing operations and stuff like
[1:11:15] that a lot of that has just got to do
[1:11:17] with the general increase in costs from
[1:11:19] year to year because there'll be an
[1:11:21] increase in wages and benefits just
[1:11:23] because of the change in CPP EI and
[1:11:25] those kind of things and also um similar
[1:11:29] to what happens here if people are
[1:11:30] eligible for red movements for years of
[1:11:33] service and stuff like that that that
[1:11:35] also ends up reflecting in the operating
[1:11:37] budget and and I think that makes my
[1:11:40] point uh how we do things here when we
[1:11:43] tell people in the public oh we
[1:11:45] decreased the the cost to run the
[1:11:47] government you you point out and we have
[1:11:50] it right in the reports there's a
[1:11:52] distinction between operating and and
[1:11:54] capital projects and that's as I think
[1:11:57] needs to be happening also at ABCA it
[1:12:00] it's deceiving to me to the general
[1:12:03] public when they read oh we had a
[1:12:05] decrease in the in the operation of ABCA
[1:12:09] well we did but it was basically that
[1:12:11] there's less projects being done which again most people think it's
[1:12:15] projects it's the road getting paved
[1:12:17] it's it's those things uh in our case so
[1:12:21] I I I do appreciate that and that drives
[1:12:23] my point home further that I think it
[1:12:25] needs to be stated a little clear to the
[1:12:30] public okay if there's nothing else I'll
[1:12:33] uh I'll look for a motion if there's
[1:12:35] nothing else wishes to be pulled at this
[1:12:37] time from the budget I'm looking for a
[1:12:39] motion to accept the consent
[1:12:42] agenda so moved councelor Walden
[1:12:46] seconded
[1:12:48] by councelor
[1:12:52] vanenburg Mr Mayor yes go ahead
[1:12:55] um a question and this is to you
[1:12:58] probably for your input um what about
[1:13:01] that letter from hock Township regarding
[1:13:04] the tile drain loans did do you have any
[1:13:06] comment on
[1:13:07] that I I don't I don't know you know I I
[1:13:10] okay I see what it says but what what
[1:13:13] are your what's your thoughts on that
[1:13:15] well we actually headed up at the county
[1:13:17] I don't know if you were in on on that
[1:13:19] at that moment that's in trouble we're
[1:13:20] not in the same room sometimes you you
[1:13:22] miss things so well I I I have no
[1:13:24] trouble supporting that um the
[1:13:27] tile the tile Lane loans are really
[1:13:31] relatively high in fact I I think if the
[1:13:32] government is doing it at this point
[1:13:34] they're they're probably making money at
[1:13:36] it uh because I'm I'm sure the
[1:13:39] government of Ontario going from my past
[1:13:41] experiences on actually in this ministry
[1:13:45] we could get money a whole lot even at
[1:13:47] that time we were getting money about 1%
[1:13:50] less and that was back in the in the the
[1:13:52] old days the 1990s well I know that we
[1:13:56] as farmers and and and the general
[1:13:58] public you can get well a young fellow
[1:14:00] told me other day rid his loan for his
[1:14:02] house and it's
[1:14:03] 1% uh now uh obviously it's for two or
[1:14:08] three years but point taken so yeah I
[1:14:11] have no trouble with that if someone
[1:14:12] wishes I mean at any time the counselors
[1:14:14] want to bring it out and vote on it I
[1:14:16] don't I did ask the question I didn't
[1:14:18] bring it up but I appreciate yourself
[1:14:19] sir so if you wish to have it pulled and
[1:14:21] voted on that's fine I'm the motion
[1:14:24] hasn't passed yet
[1:14:26] okay well um you know if it's still in
[1:14:28] order um yeah I think I would like to
[1:14:30] support it okay and I would move to
[1:14:33] support that thank you so we're pulling
[1:14:35] out
[1:14:36] 5.24 for a separate motion and it's been
[1:14:40] uh requested by our Deputy Mayor is
[1:14:43] there a seconder can I deal with that
[1:14:44] right now Chandra is that how we can do
[1:14:46] it I would just pull it um take care of
[1:14:50] the consent agenda and then we'll deal
[1:14:52] with uh 5.24 well then that's what we'll
[1:14:54] do I'm looking for the flow we haven't
[1:14:56] had one of these for a while so thank
[1:14:58] you okay if that's the deputy mayor nods
[1:15:01] he understands that we're not ignoring
[1:15:03] them okay uh we have a motion then for
[1:15:06] the rest of the consent agenda councelor
[1:15:09] Walden made the motion is there a
[1:15:11] seconder councelor
[1:15:13] venberg all those in favor of all the uh
[1:15:17] consent agenda except
[1:15:19] 5.24 say
[1:15:21] I I any Nays hearing none motion carries
[1:15:26] we're looking at 5.24 resolution
[1:15:28] Township of ho tile Loan program is
[1:15:32] there a mover and a second we have a
[1:15:34] mover Deputy Mayor is there a
[1:15:37] second councelor Becker will
[1:15:41] second everyone uh read the motion or
[1:15:44] read the the letter the
[1:15:47] request seeing I think everyone's
[1:15:49] nodding their they have I'm going to
[1:15:51] call the question all those in favor say
[1:15:53] I I
[1:15:55] any
[1:15:56] opposed none the motion carries thank
[1:15:59] you very much for that we are now on six
[1:16:03] correspondence for Action Blue Water
[1:16:05] Area Family Health Team funding request
[1:16:08] councilors you have read this I'm
[1:16:14] sure is there
[1:16:16] any direction comments and then
[1:16:20] Direction I'm looking
[1:16:23] for Mr Mayor may I make a comment yes
[1:16:26] you can Mr Mayor uh I appreciate and
[1:16:29] really respect blue waterer uh Area
[1:16:32] Health family
[1:16:33] team it's an asset in our
[1:16:36] community um I just have a question we
[1:16:40] seem to be getting options to uh get
[1:16:44] Federal and provincial assistance with
[1:16:46] our covid extra efforts and my question
[1:16:50] would be uh with blue waterer Family
[1:16:52] Health Team have they reached out and
[1:16:55] requested for some of that assistance is
[1:16:56] there some available at this stage I
[1:16:59] wouldn't want to vote positive or
[1:17:01] negative on this I would like to find
[1:17:03] out if there's something available for
[1:17:04] them at that level because we didn't get
[1:17:06] extra funding as a municipality to fund
[1:17:09] them but perhaps there's something
[1:17:11] provincially I don't I don't know I'd
[1:17:12] like to find that out okay is
[1:17:17] um I know that that staff had been
[1:17:20] talking to
[1:17:21] them uh uh is there anything can add to
[1:17:25] his question or do we need to have uh
[1:17:29] this brought forward to them through you
[1:17:32] your worship um there is nothing that
[1:17:34] they have received to date that they
[1:17:36] were able to tell us about
[1:17:40] okay um any other counselor's comments
[1:17:44] that's councelor wetstone here
[1:17:47] um I do know that uh um I did connect
[1:17:53] them with Bruce power as well to for
[1:17:55] potential of PPE because Bruce Power has
[1:17:58] a program in place I'm not sure what the
[1:17:59] results were of that at this point in
[1:18:02] time um so maybe there was some success
[1:18:05] there from a PPE perspective I am I am
[1:18:08] quite surprised that the provincial or
[1:18:10] federal government hasn't provided money
[1:18:13] to these type of services I guess you
[1:18:17] might want to call it
[1:18:20] um and as councilor Walden stated you
[1:18:23] know we haven't been and receed of
[1:18:25] additional Monies to help support
[1:18:27] locally as well too so maybe they're
[1:18:29] treated something differently compared
[1:18:31] to hospitals compared to everything else
[1:18:33] I'm not sure but yeah I'm surprised that
[1:18:35] there hasn't been anything that's put in
[1:18:36] there on that it's worth
[1:18:40] exploring yeah um we're listening to our
[1:18:45] you know the federal government had a uh
[1:18:47] I'm gonna call it an interm budget
[1:18:50] update I'm probably using the wrong word
[1:18:52] but it was last week um I did take a a
[1:18:56] point I made a point to listen to it uh
[1:18:59] again probably affected us a bit and the billions and it is billions that
[1:19:07] they're um that they're spending and and
[1:19:09] they causing a deficit and one of the
[1:19:11] questions was what
[1:19:13] about Co costs and they said we're not
[1:19:16] worried about the deficit we're going to
[1:19:17] be getting all the bills paid words to
[1:19:21] that effect I'm paraphrasing obviously
[1:19:24] so
[1:19:25] I'm not
[1:19:26] sure you know maybe to obviously today
[1:19:29] they haven't got funding but um the
[1:19:32] federal government says that help is on
[1:19:33] the way and so I I have a I really do
[1:19:36] have
[1:19:37] a I do have a problem with tonight
[1:19:41] making a a supporting a motion to spend
[1:19:43] money public money when we also have our our cost too and and I'm hoping that
[1:19:50] you know it isn't
[1:19:52] our we're not in the healthcare business
[1:19:54] The Province and the provincial
[1:19:56] government so and federal government
[1:19:59] mayor clot may I add to that yes okay go
[1:20:03] ahead thank you um I have been
[1:20:05] corresponding with Paula croll the
[1:20:06] executive director there who has in an
[1:20:08] email to me told me that the Ministry of
[1:20:11] Health does not provide additional
[1:20:13] funded for covid protective equipment or
[1:20:15] additional Staffing costs due to the P
[1:20:18] pandemic and we did reach out to the
[1:20:20] local MP's office who corroborated that
[1:20:23] as well um
[1:20:25] so um Paula croll also provided a
[1:20:28] breakdown of costs and uh I know that
[1:20:32] the contact that councelor wetstone
[1:20:34] provided and a representative of the uh
[1:20:39] of Blue Water Health have been in
[1:20:41] contact with each other about the
[1:20:43] specifics of of the PPE which does not
[1:20:47] speak to some of the um Staffing time
[1:20:50] that they're requesting which is uh for
[1:20:52] screeners at the door but um they are
[1:20:56] working with um with a person at Bruce
[1:21:00] power to get some of the PPE right
[1:21:06] now yeah and Mr Mayor go ahead uh thank
[1:21:11] you and I I find that um you know
[1:21:15] unacceptable for a provincially funded
[1:21:17] Medical Clinic not to be covered for for
[1:21:20] their cost related to co and I'm just
[1:21:22] going to give you a little anecdotal
[1:21:24] information here from uh from the here
[1:21:27] in Perth public health unit as you know
[1:21:30] I sit on that board and and um at at
[1:21:33] this point we have not received any
[1:21:36] extra money out of out of the budgetary
[1:21:39] money that was already approved for Co
[1:21:43] but in fact the uh the health unit or
[1:21:48] here per health unit is keeping track of
[1:21:50] that uh of that extra cost they're
[1:21:53] funding it currently out of the current
[1:21:55] Year's budget because they're not able
[1:21:57] to deliver all of the other programs
[1:21:59] that they would normally deliver so they
[1:22:01] are covering the cost but there is an
[1:22:03] expectation from the Ministry of Health
[1:22:05] and it has been informally communicated
[1:22:08] that uh they are going to receive any of
[1:22:11] those extra costs so you
[1:22:15] know I the health unit could say right
[1:22:18] now no they haven't received it but
[1:22:20] there is an expectation that they're
[1:22:22] going to so I find that if if there
[1:22:24] isn't any expectation from this uh this
[1:22:28] health ha on in this in this health
[1:22:30] clinic if there isn't any expectation to
[1:22:32] receive that extra funding we need to do
[1:22:34] some lobbying for them um because it
[1:22:37] should be funded as you have mentioned
[1:22:39] it should be funded from the higher
[1:22:40] levels of
[1:22:43] government yeah and this surely won't be
[1:22:46] the only family health Team we we also
[1:22:49] have the CHC we have like as you know
[1:22:51] we're we have what what about even
[1:22:53] private do so yeah I think there's got
[1:22:56] to be some momentum there I'd like to
[1:22:59] believe them I think I believe the
[1:23:00] minister not I'd like to I think I think
[1:23:02] she was very clear that they're they're
[1:23:04] spending billions and and that yes it
[1:23:06] takes a while to get things done and
[1:23:08] they all that so um are we I would
[1:23:12] entertain I'll I'll throw this out to
[1:23:14] staff to to to counselors would you uh
[1:23:17] defer this for till a later date or or
[1:23:21] another decision um Mr Mayor go ahead I
[1:23:25] would make a motion to defer this uh to
[1:23:28] a later date to uh further investigation
[1:23:31] if funding is available because there
[1:23:34] are uh screeners and at every single
[1:23:37] medical facility we don't have the funds
[1:23:40] to support all these facilities but we really owe it to the Bluewater Health
[1:23:45] Team to try to Lobby or whatever you
[1:23:48] said to find something so I make a
[1:23:49] motion to defer decision on
[1:23:52] this to defer decision to a later date
[1:23:56] to we find out uh more details about uh
[1:23:59] go higher levels of government
[1:24:01] funding okay chander is that um um a
[1:24:06] good
[1:24:08] motion not a good motion you got to vote
[1:24:10] Yes or no just the
[1:24:13] process um yes I think that that's it it has a date it gives sort of an it
[1:24:19] doesn't have a date but the referral
[1:24:20] doesn't have to have an actual date does
[1:24:23] it
[1:24:25] I if if I could councelor
[1:24:27] wetstone we're about to get into budget
[1:24:31] deliberations why don't we defer it to
[1:24:34] our budget deliberations because that's
[1:24:35] where it's going to come out of anyways
[1:24:36] if we do anything is one of our
[1:24:38] budgets yeah he does have a that part we and counselor I think we picked up on
[1:24:43] Deputy Mayor saying that we should be
[1:24:45] lobbying because it isn't just them
[1:24:47] they're not the only family health Team
[1:24:49] this is a big issue
[1:24:51] so uh which
[1:24:54] is that what you're also gonna what I
[1:24:56] take from your motion councelor
[1:24:58] wal that that would be fine uh but not
[1:25:03] just that like I would like just to find
[1:25:05] out if we can Lobby if there's a letter
[1:25:08] we get sent as support or something to a
[1:25:11] provincial uh Member of Parliament as
[1:25:13] well but definitely if we put a date on
[1:25:15] it until budget or or it gives a bit of
[1:25:18] a an hand on it I would agree to that
[1:25:20] yes all right we we'll say budget that
[1:25:24] covers is that thank you councelor
[1:25:25] wetstone and councelor walon for working
[1:25:28] that out and um and then further twoo
[1:25:31] we'll we'll do some lobbying that's
[1:25:32] still part of your motion yes sir okay
[1:25:36] everyone clear on the
[1:25:37] motion do we have a seconder oh sorry we
[1:25:40] need a seconder yes thank you I didn't
[1:25:43] write that down is there a seconder for
[1:25:45] his
[1:25:48] motion Deputy Mayor second thank you all
[1:25:52] right um are we clear on the motion any
[1:25:56] dis further discussion on the
[1:25:58] motion hearing none I'm going to call
[1:26:00] the question all those in favor say
[1:26:03] I any any
[1:26:06] opposed hearing none the motion
[1:26:08] carries uh
[1:26:11] 7.1 uh we're at 7.11 zoning bylaw
[1:26:16] amendments Hannah is she back on there
[1:26:19] she is how are
[1:26:22] you okay Hannah um and this is uh file
[1:26:27] Zed
[1:26:29] 09-20 part Lot 25 Bayfield Road
[1:26:31] concession Stanley
[1:26:33] East all right thank you mayor um I will
[1:26:36] just share my
[1:26:39] presentation so as stated um the next
[1:26:42] application is for uh a zoning bylaw
[1:26:45] Amendment um the subject lands uh were
[1:26:48] previously severed uh as a result of
[1:26:50] consent application
[1:26:52] c4020 uh which was seen uh in late
[1:26:54] summer going into fall the property
[1:26:57] contains an existing grain elevator
[1:26:59] operation on it which is proposed to
[1:27:01] expand uh during the initial um consent
[1:27:05] uh the property that's highlighted um in
[1:27:08] blue here uh was severed um for the rest
[1:27:10] of the lands that were zoned at General
[1:27:13] agriculture uh so ag1 um and the
[1:27:16] rezoning that's before you tonight uh
[1:27:18] was required as a condition of consent
[1:27:20] and it's seeking um to take it out of
[1:27:22] the ag1 zone and put into the
[1:27:25] ag3 agricultural commercial industrial
[1:27:27] Zone uh with a special Zone added onto
[1:27:30] that um to
[1:27:31] recognize um reduced minimum yard
[1:27:34] Provisions for the existing structures
[1:27:37] as well as the proposed uh Silo and
[1:27:39] elevator uh uh leg which are proposed to
[1:27:42] be part of the expansion of the
[1:27:44] operation the reduced yard Provisions uh
[1:27:48] proposed are seven meters for the
[1:27:50] existing structures that are present in
[1:27:52] 2020 um so the was written this way just
[1:27:55] to recognize the structures at time of
[1:27:57] application uh a reduction to 7.8 meters
[1:28:00] for proposed B uh B Silo and 18 meters
[1:28:04] for the proposed elevator leg um and
[1:28:07] currently under the ag3 Zone um the
[1:28:09] interior sidey yard setback is uh 15 M
[1:28:13] or half of the height of the subject
[1:28:15] structure whichever one um is
[1:28:19] larger um so I'll just provide a site
[1:28:22] sketch um that was provided by the app
[1:28:24] showing the existing structures uh as
[1:28:26] well as the proposed Silo as well as um
[1:28:30] the elevator showing where the leg would
[1:28:32] be extending out to support the
[1:28:34] elevator um so the PPS um and the county
[1:28:38] and Blue Water official plans permit
[1:28:40] Farm related Industrial and Commercial
[1:28:42] operations such as this uh in Prime
[1:28:45] agricultural areas uh as well as
[1:28:47] official plan policy speak to
[1:28:49] compatibility between industrial and
[1:28:51] sensitive land uses um so just going
[1:28:53] back to the previous photo the uh as
[1:28:55] counselors may recall from uh the
[1:28:57] consent application there is a dwelling
[1:29:00] uh located on a separate property right
[1:29:02] uh here um just to the west of the uh
[1:29:05] grain elevator um as the ex as the
[1:29:08] operation is expanding a noise study was
[1:29:10] required to be completed with respect to
[1:29:12] the sensitive dwelling uh the study was
[1:29:15] deemed to be within the limits of the
[1:29:16] MPC 300 limits uh which is set out by
[1:29:19] thee guidelines uh for their D6
[1:29:22] guidelines uh such there are no adverse
[1:29:25] impacts anticipated uh the proposed
[1:29:28] resoning rezoning conforms to the county
[1:29:30] and hereon official plans in terms of
[1:29:33] the reduction for the interior sidey
[1:29:35] guard setbacks there's no anti
[1:29:36] anticipated adverse impacts um from this
[1:29:40] um the reductions represent a reduction
[1:29:42] of approximately uh 7 uh to 10.5 meters
[1:29:46] for each of those structures um just
[1:29:49] because again going back to that
[1:29:51] original provision is based on the
[1:29:52] height of the structures
[1:29:54] um there are no um structures that are
[1:29:57] currently contained on the abiding
[1:29:59] property that shares this interior sidey
[1:30:01] yard uh as well any structures would
[1:30:03] need to um or sensitive structures would
[1:30:05] need to be placed um adequately far away
[1:30:09] from this um operation in terms of noise
[1:30:13] levels um so it is not expected that
[1:30:16] there would be any sensitive land uses
[1:30:18] um in which the reduction of the sidey
[1:30:21] yard would have a negative impact on uh
[1:30:24] I'll just provide some site photos of
[1:30:25] the current operation as it exists uh
[1:30:28] today Municipal staff have provided
[1:30:30] comment on the application uh citing no
[1:30:32] concerns and there were no comments
[1:30:34] received from Neighbors or members of
[1:30:36] the public uh so it is recommended that
[1:30:38] zoning bylaw Amendment application uh
[1:30:41] z920 be approved and I'm happy to answer
[1:30:44] any questions that Council may have okay
[1:30:47] thank you an is any questions to uh
[1:30:50] councelor Walden yes Mr Mayor Hannah um
[1:30:55] I understand that there's a dwelling
[1:30:57] probably zoned west of there but I
[1:30:59] believe currently there's not a dwelling
[1:31:01] there that I think the house has been
[1:31:03] down for a few months um but having said
[1:31:07] that the noise studies were done and
[1:31:09] they were acceptable so Mr Mayor I'd
[1:31:11] like to make a motion to to accept this
[1:31:13] application for this okay is there a
[1:31:15] second there backer okay thank you um
[1:31:19] but we do have to go through a little
[1:31:21] bit more of a process correct Anna is
[1:31:23] this is a public meeting uh yes I
[1:31:26] believe um the applicant and the
[1:31:28] potential buyer are present in the
[1:31:31] meeting if they I think so I see some
[1:31:33] people who wants to go first Peter
[1:31:35] or yeah I'm just here if there's any
[1:31:38] questions you know concerns if I can
[1:31:41] need to address them so okay you're
[1:31:43] satisfied with uh with what the report
[1:31:46] from Hannah has said oh yes okay is
[1:31:50] there anyone else wish to comment
[1:31:54] I already have a motion but go ahead
[1:31:56] Mike if I your worship yes M clarify on
[1:31:59] councelor Walden's uh comment he is
[1:32:02] correct the house has been removed
[1:32:03] however there has been a building permit
[1:32:05] issued for another residents to go on
[1:32:07] that basically same spot so there will
[1:32:10] be a residence going back there thank
[1:32:12] you but but they they will know that
[1:32:15] there's a elevator beside them they are
[1:32:18] aware yes okay it's the same same
[1:32:21] owners yeah they they were you know it
[1:32:25] obviously had to be done and and and the owners the new owners and all
[1:32:30] that have worked through it but it it is
[1:32:31] a bit frustrating from an from a
[1:32:34] business point of view in the country an
[1:32:37] elevator that's been there for it's been
[1:32:40] there a long time I grant you it's
[1:32:42] gotten bigger smaller whatever but it's
[1:32:44] still been an elevator dryers Etc and
[1:32:48] especially maybe knowing the area
[1:32:50] knowing the owners that that were beside
[1:32:53] each other it seems a little frustrating
[1:32:55] that someone has to go through that step
[1:32:57] but that's done fair enough I'm I'm glad
[1:33:00] it I'm glad that the ministry said it's
[1:33:03] okay uh that's I guess the most
[1:33:05] important part so is there anyone in the
[1:33:09] public wish to comment uh on this
[1:33:11] process as it is a public meeting and
[1:33:13] we're changing the zoning
[1:33:15] bylaw I have I have no members of the
[1:33:18] public here tonight to comment okay I
[1:33:21] see some faces on my screen but I
[1:33:23] appreciate they're there to listen in or
[1:33:25] whatever so fair enough thank you um
[1:33:28] then are we prepared then can I call for
[1:33:30] that motion to come forward if there's
[1:33:32] no other questions of counselors to
[1:33:35] uh to the uh
[1:33:38] owners I'm going to then assume that we
[1:33:41] can call the uh the question it was
[1:33:43] first it was there is a motion on from
[1:33:46] councelor Walton second by councel
[1:33:47] Becker that we do approve as per the
[1:33:50] recommendation of the zoning bylaw
[1:33:52] Amendment
[1:33:54] I'm going to call the question all those
[1:33:55] in favor of the amendment please say I I any opposed hearing none the motion
[1:34:03] carries Hannah what's is there anything
[1:34:06] we need to do next or comments y um we
[1:34:09] just have the second motion with respect
[1:34:11] Publican agency
[1:34:13] comments um so I do recommend um that
[1:34:16] Council select option 2A that no public
[1:34:19] comments were received on this
[1:34:20] application so there was no effect on
[1:34:22] the decision um and that um option 3 be
[1:34:26] selected that agency comments were
[1:34:28] received in support of the application
[1:34:30] the effect of which results in the
[1:34:31] decision to approve the
[1:34:34] application okay I need a mover for the
[1:34:36] for 2 a and three I believe she said so moved councelor Walen seconded by
[1:34:41] councelor
[1:34:43] venberg all those in favor of the motion
[1:34:46] please say I I all any opposed hearing
[1:34:51] none the motion carries is there any
[1:34:53] comments you need to talk uh process
[1:34:56] here uh yep um so Peter and Wayne um
[1:34:58] your next step is you'll soon receive a
[1:35:00] notice of decision uh that outlines
[1:35:03] appeal rights so there is a 20-day
[1:35:04] appeal period um after which the zoning
[1:35:07] bylaw will be enforced in effect um and
[1:35:09] then you will have another condition
[1:35:11] fulfilled on your original consent
[1:35:14] application thank you thank you uh both
[1:35:18] for your uh working through this with
[1:35:19] staff we appreciate it um it is a it is
[1:35:22] the process I guess
[1:35:25] okay Merry Christmas to you take care
[1:35:29] right out
[1:35:30] bye okay consent application file c81
[1:35:35] D20 lot 178 plan 265
[1:35:41] Hensel go
[1:35:43] ahead um so as stated uh the next is for
[1:35:47] consent Opti C
[1:35:49] 8120 uh the subject lands are located at
[1:35:52] 176 King Street in Hensel the ls are
[1:35:56] designated residential in the Blue Water
[1:35:58] official plan and are zoned residential
[1:36:00] medium density Zone R2 in the Blue Water
[1:36:03] zoning
[1:36:06] bylaw um so this is a current site photo
[1:36:08] of the property um Council should be
[1:36:11] aware that um the property is currently
[1:36:13] under construction in support of a semi
[1:36:15] detached dwelling um the semi detached
[1:36:18] dwelling has already been granted a
[1:36:19] building permit on the subject lands um
[1:36:22] as this is already um permitted as a
[1:36:25] right in the
[1:36:26] zone um so this was done prior to the
[1:36:29] consent application um the consent
[1:36:32] application is not necessarily needed to
[1:36:34] facilitate the construction of the semi
[1:36:36] uh but the applicant does have desire to
[1:36:39] have each unit of the semi be separately
[1:36:41] conveyable in the future and they would
[1:36:43] also like to facilitate having separate
[1:36:46] utilities uh for each unit um so just so
[1:36:49] that council is aware uh that'll help to
[1:36:51] provide some context to some of the
[1:36:58] um so in terms of the actual um
[1:37:00] Severance so the uh Severance
[1:37:02] application is seeking um to split the
[1:37:04] lot uh directly in half um so along uh
[1:37:08] what'll eventually be the common wall
[1:37:09] between the semidetached dwelling um so
[1:37:12] each a lot both severed and retained
[1:37:14] will have an area of approximately 400
[1:37:16] square meters uh which is around
[1:37:19] 4,370 sare feet each and the frontage of
[1:37:22] each um lot will be uh approximately 9 M
[1:37:26] or just under 30 ft um and that'll be
[1:37:29] for a total of just under 18 meters uh
[1:37:33] for the entire building in terms of the
[1:37:35] analysis for the severance um in terms
[1:37:38] of looking at the provincial policy
[1:37:40] statement the hon County official plan
[1:37:41] and the Blue Water official plan uh they
[1:37:44] both direct developments such as this uh
[1:37:46] towards designated areas with um within
[1:37:48] settlement areas uh such as Hensel um
[1:37:51] the subject lands are located within the
[1:37:53] residential designation um the intended
[1:37:56] Severance is promoting infill
[1:37:58] development and mixed dwelling types and
[1:38:00] does permit um severances to support
[1:38:02] residential development uh specifically
[1:38:05] section 9.1 of the Bluewater official
[1:38:07] plan addresses uh General land division
[1:38:10] policies um one of which includes that
[1:38:12] development shall be in accordance with
[1:38:14] provision of the zoning bylaw um so the
[1:38:18] proposed uh Severance as well as the
[1:38:20] existing um uh uh structure that is
[1:38:24] under construction on the um property uh
[1:38:27] does comply uh with the requirements of
[1:38:29] the zoning bylaw I'll just go into
[1:38:31] further detail about that um so the R2
[1:38:33] Zone um also permits the uses within the
[1:38:36] residential low density Zone uh which
[1:38:39] includes um a semidetached dwelling uh
[1:38:42] the units are proposed to be identical
[1:38:44] in terms of their placement on the lot
[1:38:45] and dimensions um within um um so the
[1:38:49] Zone area
[1:38:51] minimum um in this uh for semidetached
[1:38:53] dwellings is 270 square m for each unit
[1:38:57] um with a lot size of 406 square meters
[1:39:00] which in this case is equivalent um to
[1:39:03] the Zone area um the proposed Severance
[1:39:06] is exceeding uh the required lot area uh
[1:39:10] as well the maximum Zone coverage is 40%
[1:39:12] for each unit uh the proposed Severance
[1:39:15] will result in a Zone coverage of
[1:39:16] approximately
[1:39:18] 29.6% for each proposed lot uh so it is
[1:39:21] meeting um The Zone coverage provision
[1:39:23] ision uh so the zoning bylaw also
[1:39:25] provides for a minimum Frontage um this
[1:39:28] is expressed in terms of the context of
[1:39:30] the entire semidetached dwelling uh so
[1:39:33] the entire building for both units which
[1:39:35] is a minimum of 15 meters the current
[1:39:38] Frontage is 18 meters for the entire
[1:39:40] building um and is not proposed to
[1:39:42] change as a result of the severance so
[1:39:44] this part of the zoning provision is met
[1:39:46] uh there are other relevant Zone
[1:39:48] Provisions for the proposed development
[1:39:50] that will not change as a result of the
[1:39:52] severance um so this is things like um
[1:39:55] interior yards interior yard setback uh
[1:39:59] front yard setback um rear yard setback
[1:40:02] all of which um are met and comply with
[1:40:05] the blue water uh zoning bylaw uh
[1:40:08] furthermore uh all properties must AB
[1:40:10] but um a public road uh the proposed
[1:40:12] severed and retained Lots will both have
[1:40:14] access to King Street um and the hon
[1:40:17] County Public Works has already provided
[1:40:19] entrance permits uh for both Lots uh
[1:40:23] given the or sorry for both units uh
[1:40:25] under the understanding that they will
[1:40:27] eventually the intent is to sever them
[1:40:30] to create two new laws um in terms of
[1:40:33] Municipal comments I have summarized
[1:40:35] them here um as there were uh some
[1:40:37] important key uh key points that
[1:40:39] influence the conditions um the first
[1:40:42] one being that there will be two water
[1:40:44] meters and transmitters installed uh for
[1:40:46] each unit or each separate lot uh
[1:40:49] reflected by condition number eight and
[1:40:51] as built surveyor real report is
[1:40:53] required as condition number six um so
[1:40:55] this is to confirm um that the proposed
[1:40:58] interior lot line follows along um the
[1:41:00] common wall between the units and that is accurate uh a drywall is
[1:41:05] required to be installed in both of the
[1:41:07] rear yards for the proposed lot um to
[1:41:09] deal with drainage reflected by
[1:41:10] condition number nine uh as well uh
[1:41:13] outstanding taxes and condition number
[1:41:15] three 911 addressing is provided as per
[1:41:19] condition number four um staff also note
[1:41:21] that there are no Municipal drains on
[1:41:22] the subject lands and the fire
[1:41:24] department has no concerns uh as well as I spoke to earlier here on County
[1:41:29] Public Works has no concerns and has
[1:41:31] already granted uh entrance permits for
[1:41:33] each
[1:41:34] unit in terms of public um comments
[1:41:37] there were public comments received from
[1:41:38] four different households uh these full
[1:41:40] comments uh were all received by email
[1:41:43] and are included um in council's package
[1:41:45] I have summarized um the concerns in
[1:41:48] this table as well as um the applicants
[1:41:52] response uh as he did provide some
[1:41:54] response to some of the main concerns
[1:41:56] that were raised uh these have been
[1:41:58] conveyed to the neighbors and they are
[1:41:59] summarized as followed uh as well um the
[1:42:02] planner's comments have also been
[1:42:04] inserted so I'm just going to go over
[1:42:05] those um the first concern was just uh
[1:42:08] in terms of privacy for the adjacent
[1:42:10] land owners um the owner has advised
[1:42:12] that he plans to install a privacy fence
[1:42:15] um this has been reflected by uh the
[1:42:17] planner's recommendation for condition
[1:42:19] number 10 to require the privacy fence
[1:42:21] be constructed um the second concern was
[1:42:25] particular due to that um the severance
[1:42:28] may result in separate ownership of each
[1:42:30] unit uh which may result in separate
[1:42:33] maintenance and they did have some
[1:42:34] concerns with the look of this the owner
[1:42:37] has advised that the design is to be
[1:42:39] consistent between both units and the
[1:42:41] products on the exterior will have a
[1:42:43] 30-year warranty uh there was concerns
[1:42:46] about the movement of the existing
[1:42:47] hydrop pole I will just go back to the
[1:42:50] site photo um so the hydrop pole in
[1:42:52] question is located here uh the
[1:42:54] applicant has advised um that they
[1:42:57] intend to move it 1.5 met to the east um
[1:43:01] and that this will be maintained at 0.5
[1:43:03] meter setb from um their adjacent uh the
[1:43:06] adjacent property so the hydrop pole
[1:43:08] will remain uh on the subject lands uh
[1:43:11] as well there was a concern um from an
[1:43:14] existing neighbor uh due to as a result
[1:43:16] of the construction there was some
[1:43:18] excavation of soil that was piling up
[1:43:21] near the back of the lot um and they
[1:43:23] just had some concerns about runoff the
[1:43:25] owner has advised that they they intend
[1:43:27] to use this as backfill and it will be
[1:43:28] leveled out um a dryw will be required
[1:43:31] to be installed in the RAR yard of each
[1:43:33] unit uh to reduce the potential for
[1:43:35] runoff as
[1:43:37] well um one of the other particular
[1:43:39] concerns was from the northern property
[1:43:41] owner um just in terms of their access
[1:43:43] to their backyard gate and fence um so I
[1:43:47] did speak to both um the neighbor and
[1:43:49] the owner about this and I asked them to
[1:43:51] advise if there were any existing
[1:43:52] easement on the subject lands that gave
[1:43:55] access to um the backyard to the
[1:43:56] northern neighbor um just because he
[1:43:59] said it was a bit easier to um go
[1:44:01] through his neighbor's property to
[1:44:03] access his backyard and I did put them
[1:44:05] in uh I did ask if they if the northern
[1:44:09] owner would like to be put in contact
[1:44:10] with um the property owner of the
[1:44:13] proposed semi- detached dwelling so that
[1:44:15] they could initiate a conversation about
[1:44:16] this and potentially of a mutual
[1:44:18] agreement um and the owner has advised
[1:44:20] that he doesn't have any knowledge of an
[1:44:21] easan on title and as well um it is
[1:44:24] worth noting for council's clarification
[1:44:26] that the proposed development is to be
[1:44:28] contained within his own property um and
[1:44:31] that a survey will be required as a
[1:44:33] condition of consent to confirm that um
[1:44:36] there was also a public comment about
[1:44:37] the lot sizing patibility with
[1:44:39] neighboring properties um as noted in my
[1:44:43] report the proposed construction
[1:44:45] complies with the provisions of the Blue
[1:44:46] Water zoning bylaw uh and particularly
[1:44:49] as it um relates to setbacks of
[1:44:51] neighboring properties those are all met
[1:44:54] uh and as well they are not proposed to
[1:44:55] change as a result of the proposed
[1:44:58] Severance uh there was also other
[1:45:00] concerns about the construction noise um
[1:45:02] Municipal staff have been made aware of
[1:45:04] this and the owner has been advised of
[1:45:05] applicable bylaws concerning noise or
[1:45:07] other nuisances um what I will say to
[1:45:10] summarize public comments a a lot of
[1:45:13] them were uh in regards to the
[1:45:15] construction of the semi detached
[1:45:16] dwelling not
[1:45:18] necessarily um the severance or the
[1:45:20] splitting of the lot into two uh two
[1:45:23] separately conveyable Lots um however I
[1:45:27] think during this process it is good to
[1:45:29] um address some of uh the neighbor
[1:45:31] comments um so as such you know the
[1:45:33] privacy fence will be required as a
[1:45:36] condition of consent and uh these
[1:45:37] responses have been conveyed um to the
[1:45:39] neighbors uh but there are still
[1:45:41] existing outstanding
[1:45:44] concerns um so in terms of
[1:45:46] recommendation uh my planner report is
[1:45:48] recommending approval subject to the
[1:45:50] following conditions uh most of these
[1:45:53] conditions are standard um I will note
[1:45:56] ones that are um that may not be a
[1:45:59] standard uh for council's purposes um so
[1:46:02] number six providing an ebuilt surveyor
[1:46:04] real report to the satisfaction of the
[1:46:06] municipality um the intent of that is
[1:46:08] just to ensure that the proposed uh Pro
[1:46:11] interior property line uh does fall
[1:46:14] along uh the common wall of the
[1:46:15] semi-detached dwelling um as well
[1:46:18] servicing to water meters um and that a
[1:46:21] drywall be installed in the rear yard of
[1:46:23] each proposed lot so that's condition 8
[1:46:25] n in terms of other conditions number 10
[1:46:27] is that a privacy fence be constructed
[1:46:30] along the um existing interior side
[1:46:32] property lines um and the owner has um
[1:46:36] expressed that he does intend um to
[1:46:39] construct a privacy fence I am happy to
[1:46:41] answer any questions that uh Council may
[1:46:44] have
[1:46:59] oh sorry mayor I think you're
[1:47:09] muted thank you um yeah a question I
[1:47:13] have as pointed out this building was G
[1:47:15] ahead because under our rules and
[1:47:18] regulations they could build the
[1:47:19] building what they're asking for is to
[1:47:21] sever it with the drywall uh dry well
[1:47:24] was that would that have been uh already
[1:47:27] recommended to them regardless of the
[1:47:30] severance Mike maybe you can answer that
[1:47:32] yeah sure through you your worship yeah
[1:47:34] there's was currently a drywall on the
[1:47:37] North portion of that property uh that
[1:47:41] was permitted through the uh plans
[1:47:43] review process but as they're splitting
[1:47:45] the property in two it was felt that a
[1:47:48] drywall on each portion of that property
[1:47:50] would be required to ensure that no
[1:47:52] surface dra AG
[1:47:55] um discharges onto neighboring
[1:47:59] property okay thank
[1:48:01] you any other questions right now to
[1:48:04] Hannah or to Mike if not as this is a
[1:48:06] public meeting is the uh is the owner or
[1:48:10] applicant in this evening yes I do have
[1:48:14] Peter here so I I I see Peter H there is
[1:48:19] are you there yes I am uh pleasure to
[1:48:22] meet sir uh you're um are you um you've
[1:48:26] heard the recommendations are you
[1:48:29] satisfied with these recommendations yes
[1:48:31] I am okay any comments you wish to make
[1:48:35] to council not at this time no thank you
[1:48:38] counselors any questions to the uh to
[1:48:42] the
[1:48:43] applicant any
[1:48:45] questions thank you as this is a public
[1:48:48] meeting sir uh and I'm going to ask is
[1:48:51] there anyone in the Gallery wishes to
[1:48:54] comment uh with concerns or or support
[1:48:57] on this
[1:48:58] application I have no other members of
[1:49:00] the public registered to speak to this
[1:49:02] application okay uh note that there was
[1:49:05] no uh one came forward at the public
[1:49:08] meeting this evening thank
[1:49:10] you counselors is there any other
[1:49:13] general questions you have with this
[1:49:14] application to Mr Mayor go ahead coun
[1:49:18] yes I was waiting I was sorry I was
[1:49:20] waiting to hear uh the owner or if any
[1:49:23] public were to comment before uh I had
[1:49:26] any questions good go ahead um so just
[1:49:31] uh to start off with uh I am against
[1:49:35] this uh
[1:49:37] Severance um I have many questions
[1:49:41] and to start off with I find that it
[1:49:45] seems like a loophole to me to apply for
[1:49:48] a building permit for a semidetached
[1:49:50] home and once the foundation is in then
[1:49:53] apply for a sence after um if given um
[1:49:58] two lots in Hensel uh that have 30 feet
[1:50:02] of front 30 feet of Frontage uh I
[1:50:04] understand it's a very deep lot but 30
[1:50:06] feet of Frontage um you would not
[1:50:09] typically be able to uh build two
[1:50:12] properties on there um and still abide
[1:50:16] by the side lot um
[1:50:19] clearances
[1:50:21] um it's just
[1:50:24] I didn't have enough time to do a lot of
[1:50:25] research I'm not sure if those uh you
[1:50:28] know the condos and exter and stuff I
[1:50:30] think they're on owned land and leased
[1:50:33] property and how they and how those
[1:50:35] people buy those houses that are
[1:50:36] attached um maybe somebody can confirm
[1:50:39] that for me but it seems to me that 30
[1:50:44] foot Frontage is is really tiny
[1:50:47] considering so if that is two separate
[1:50:49] Lots 40 years down the road or let
[1:50:52] pretend or heaven forbid that the uh one
[1:50:56] place where to catch fire I'm not sure
[1:50:59] um how you would rebuild on that um
[1:51:04] giving that it's two separate laws um I
[1:51:06] know it was
[1:51:08] purchased um to have as a rental
[1:51:12] property
[1:51:13] um and and then once once the building
[1:51:18] started the severance was applied
[1:51:21] for I I don't understand how a builder
[1:51:23] can give 30-year
[1:51:25] warranty uh on Building Products um
[1:51:28] shingles siding whatever
[1:51:32] um and I'm concerned about two different
[1:51:36] owners owning the same house not having
[1:51:39] the same ideas on how is upkept
[1:51:42] um I have many opinions on this I I
[1:51:45] don't know how to explain them all but
[1:51:48] uh I understand Hannah's argument that
[1:51:52] it all falls in line with the blue water
[1:51:55] zoning
[1:51:57] bylaw but to me this just doesn't seem
[1:52:01] right okay well that's it's our that's
[1:52:04] why we have the the public meeting and
[1:52:05] the discussion as counselors uh
[1:52:08] reflecting U what what we think
[1:52:11] collectively in the in the community so
[1:52:13] that's counselor you you made your
[1:52:16] points uh at this time and I think In
[1:52:19] fairness like did a pretty good job uh
[1:52:22] so is is there other counselors um with
[1:52:25] another opinion or or whatever or or
[1:52:28] agreen it's counselors looking for
[1:52:31] discussion here
[1:52:37] clarification Mr Mayor yes go ahead um
[1:52:41] Mr Mayor I respect uh counselor from
[1:52:44] hensel's comments and I was listening to
[1:52:46] Hannah's
[1:52:48] input and I think I believe she said
[1:52:53] that the application is within
[1:52:55] compliance of our planning and uh the
[1:52:59] provincial planning um to for this sort
[1:53:03] of Housing and whether we don't like two
[1:53:08] owners or not we have duplexes and I
[1:53:10] believe they're allowed so that was just
[1:53:12] one of my concerns I'm not saying that
[1:53:14] it should say yes or no for it but
[1:53:18] because we don't like duplexes I don't
[1:53:19] know if we can do that or or we can we
[1:53:21] could say that but but if it's in
[1:53:23] compliance with the planning act we may
[1:53:26] want to think about that that's
[1:53:28] all uh Mike can I on some clarification
[1:53:32] here on some of these technical points
[1:53:34] can you help out or I don't want to try
[1:53:36] to put you at the spot but GNA put you
[1:53:38] on the
[1:53:39] spot no worries through you your worship
[1:53:44] um I think a good example of this style
[1:53:48] of of um Severance would be the Bayfield
[1:53:51] medals
[1:53:53] So within that subdivision they do semis
[1:53:57] they do triplexes and quads and their
[1:54:01] process is more of a lot part lot
[1:54:04] control um process but it's the same
[1:54:07] general idea so either way they're
[1:54:09] building a building and then they're
[1:54:11] sessioning it off when the foundation is
[1:54:14] in the ground um so it's not something
[1:54:17] new definitely to the municipality um
[1:54:20] but that that's a good example for you
[1:54:23] as for warranties and stuff like that
[1:54:25] yeah I have no comment on that Mike can
[1:54:28] I ask you a question through you Mr
[1:54:29] Mayor go ahead yes uh but in in Bayfield
[1:54:33] Meadows uh does the person that owns the
[1:54:35] house actually own the property the
[1:54:39] land
[1:54:41] yes okay yes I do now Bayfield Muse is
[1:54:46] different again right but this is more
[1:54:50] comparable to The Meadows
[1:54:54] okay um it is rather I it is rather
[1:54:59] strange but I guess it's it was uh it's
[1:55:02] there's always the technical things it's
[1:55:04] a long narrow property so they were in
[1:55:07] their right to start a building
[1:55:10] project and then coming and asking for
[1:55:14] this consent
[1:55:15] application I guess I would have been my
[1:55:18] sense would have been they would have
[1:55:19] started right off the bat I guess maybe
[1:55:21] how I would do it
[1:55:22] I would come to the municipality and say
[1:55:25] I have this lot I can build two lots but
[1:55:28] I'm I'm going to have them separed up
[1:55:29] front would councelor Harris would that
[1:55:31] have been maybe a little more for the
[1:55:34] neighbors and that to have the
[1:55:35] discussion a little more up
[1:55:37] front uh through you Mr Mayor uh
[1:55:41] definitely I just I think the Builder
[1:55:44] himself had the intention of selling
[1:55:46] them individually uh but would not been
[1:55:49] have been able to build the building
[1:55:52] that he is building now if the Lots were
[1:55:56] severed due to side
[1:55:58] setbacks um so he went ahead and got the
[1:56:00] permit to build a semi detached with the
[1:56:03] intent to sever uh
[1:56:08] after counselors any any questions to uh
[1:56:13] to the applicant or to Mike Hannah go ahead I see your hand up thank
[1:56:16] you yeah sure I will I'll just speak to
[1:56:19] the process again um I can't speak for
[1:56:21] the owners intent um but uh we did
[1:56:24] contemplate um after the building permit
[1:56:27] was granted with uh the owner two
[1:56:29] different options so Mike did speak to
[1:56:31] part lot control uh which is another way
[1:56:34] that you can uh split a lot and that's
[1:56:36] typically done again for these types of
[1:56:39] multi-unit uh structures the only caveat
[1:56:42] with that is at time of part lot control
[1:56:44] at time of application we require uh
[1:56:47] professional survey so the the builder
[1:56:49] needs to know exactly where um that lot
[1:56:51] line is going to be and exactly where
[1:56:53] their Foundation is poured um the owner
[1:56:55] was not at that point yet however they
[1:56:58] wish to uh proceed with getting separate
[1:57:01] utilities um moving forward with having
[1:57:04] two separate entrances so as such uh the
[1:57:07] consent process was posed um to Peter um
[1:57:11] with the intent that the survey is
[1:57:13] required as a condition of consent
[1:57:15] within one year of it being granted so
[1:57:17] it would provide him the time to uh
[1:57:20] provisionally be granted the consent and
[1:57:21] the for separate entrances and utilities
[1:57:25] uh with the intent that the exact survey
[1:57:27] and the surveyor's real report would
[1:57:29] follow within a year um so Peter was
[1:57:32] posed with those two options he decided
[1:57:34] to proceed um with um a consent um again
[1:57:38] I will note the one benefit of the
[1:57:40] consent process um to the public is that
[1:57:42] they are notified about it and I think
[1:57:45] this way you know Council was able to
[1:57:46] hear the neighbor concerns about this um
[1:57:49] with part lack control uh it's not as
[1:57:51] public as a process so no notice is
[1:57:54] given with that respect um in terms of
[1:57:56] the setback so the setbacks with the two
[1:58:00] um other existing properties as as they
[1:58:03] exist so the other two existing
[1:58:05] dwellings those setbacks are not
[1:58:07] proposed to change as a result of the
[1:58:09] severance and as well the new new
[1:58:11] interior uh lot line uh only doesn't
[1:58:15] require an interior yard setback so
[1:58:16] that's zero meters um so again it's
[1:58:18] going to follow along that built lot
[1:58:20] line um so as a result to the severance
[1:58:23] the setbacks are not required to change
[1:58:26] um so I will say um the building was as
[1:58:29] proposed complied with the zoning at
[1:58:31] time of building permit as well as uh
[1:58:33] time as consent
[1:58:34] application um and again you know in
[1:58:37] terms of what application the applicant
[1:58:39] chose to apply to first um you know
[1:58:42] that's up to them there's no set process
[1:58:44] that you need to do one ahead of the
[1:58:45] other um the building could have been
[1:58:48] granted without the consent uh and there
[1:58:51] just would have been lot
[1:58:55] there councelor Harris h thank you Mr
[1:58:58] Mayor if I may comment um yes Hannah I
[1:59:00] do understand that the interior lot line
[1:59:02] in the center uh is at zero meters my
[1:59:05] point is if that was two separate Lots
[1:59:08] you would have 30 feet to build two
[1:59:10] separate houses on and you would not be
[1:59:13] able to comply uh to a side Lot setback
[1:59:17] if it was two separate buildings on two
[1:59:19] separate lots that was my point on the
[1:59:22] centered on the center lot side back or
[1:59:24] Center Line set back um and to follow up
[1:59:27] with utilities um I'm I'm absolutely
[1:59:31] sure without having two separate
[1:59:33] properties you can have uh um uh
[1:59:37] separate utilities water and sewer I
[1:59:39] mean apartment buildings and uh three
[1:59:41] story walk-ups do it all the time um and
[1:59:45] they're owned by one person um so
[1:59:49] putting the reasoning for having
[1:59:51] separate utility and Sewer uh as for to
[1:59:54] separate the Lots uh I don't believe uh
[1:59:57] is a good
[2:00:01] excuse all right um counselors we uh we
[2:00:07] have I guess uh two options here uh Mike
[2:00:10] I guess is that correct or Hannah I
[2:00:13] guess uh it's either uh a motion
[2:00:17] to I guess there's three to defer or to
[2:00:21] approve or not approv um councilor there
[2:00:24] is anyone prepared to make a motion at
[2:00:26] this
[2:00:27] time I make a motion that we do not
[2:00:31] approve the severance okay is there a
[2:00:34] seconder for that
[2:00:38] motion is there a seconder for the
[2:00:42] motion third time is there a seconder
[2:00:45] for the
[2:00:46] motion I I'll second it just for further
[2:00:49] discussions councelor wetstone thank you
[2:00:51] counc
[2:00:53] um so I have a a question then if I
[2:00:55] could too yes I think you're gonna ask
[2:00:57] the question go ahead that's the reason
[2:01:00] why I second it so so and again I second
[2:01:04] it just for further discussion more than
[2:01:05] anything else so I'm looking at
[2:01:08] councelor Harris as
[2:01:11] to um he made the motion I did second it
[2:01:14] again for discussion as to why the
[2:01:20] motion if I may
[2:01:22] go ahead um I'm concerned excuse me I'm
[2:01:25] concerned about the condition of the
[2:01:28] property of what it may entail um we
[2:01:32] have some properties in around Hensel uh
[2:01:36] that uh uh were rentals and then got
[2:01:39] sold off um and this being on uh blue
[2:01:44] waterer Highway not on a side street I'm
[2:01:47] concerned that uh in 10 to 15 years um
[2:01:51] there's going to be blue siding on one
[2:01:52] side and yellow siding on the other um
[2:01:56] there's going to be uh one homeowner
[2:01:58] that likes to cut his grass and the
[2:02:00] other that doesn't I mean you get that
[2:02:02] from property to property I understand
[2:02:04] that but on a semi- detached home that
[2:02:07] can be uh right on 84 uh that could be
[2:02:12] possibly
[2:02:14] um uh just ugly I guess you could say um
[2:02:19] and I think if it had one owner that was
[2:02:21] rental which was his first
[2:02:24] intention
[2:02:25] um I think that person would have more
[2:02:29] control on on the condition and look the
[2:02:32] physical look of what that property uh
[2:02:36] is up
[2:02:40] kept thank you C is there any other
[2:02:45] comments to this
[2:02:47] motion
[2:02:49] counselors uh Mr Mayor yes go ahead go
[2:02:51] ahead Deputy uh thank you uh uh yeah I I
[2:02:55] mean I I I understand uh the concern and
[2:02:58] the points that have been raised but I
[2:03:01] don't understand those as far as the
[2:03:04] planning Act is concerned or this
[2:03:06] Severance and how it affects the
[2:03:08] severance and I think uh if we do not
[2:03:12] recommend and we're only recommending
[2:03:14] approval for this consent uh then uh
[2:03:19] we'll be going down we'll be going to
[2:03:21] alpat we'll be going through another
[2:03:23] hearing and and we'll be going through
[2:03:25] extra costs on that it does conform it
[2:03:29] is it took me some thinking to get
[2:03:31] through it but it is very similar to the
[2:03:34] uh Bayfield Meadows and we do that all
[2:03:37] the time and uh you know it's up to the
[2:03:39] owners to get together and we can't
[2:03:41] legislate good taste and color or
[2:03:43] shingles or anything like that so I
[2:03:46] think that I cannot support a letter a
[2:03:50] motion to deny
[2:03:52] okay um if I make uh if Council allows
[2:03:56] me just to maybe fed a little more where
[2:03:58] the deputy was coming from when when he
[2:04:00] said he's not sure about the legal
[2:04:03] process I I Look to Hannah and to Mike
[2:04:06] and you can bounce it off but okay the
[2:04:10] motion is to deny and it's denied what steps have what could steps be
[2:04:15] taken uh with the owner guess
[2:04:19] hypothetically or where you say could go
[2:04:21] goes to the county well I really goes
[2:04:24] the county but at this step here um yep
[2:04:27] um so blue water council's ability to
[2:04:30] approve recommend deferral in the case
[2:04:33] of a deferral it would be to get more
[2:04:34] information or to provide more time to
[2:04:36] resolve neighbor comments and then it
[2:04:38] could come back to Blue Water Council uh
[2:04:40] for further
[2:04:41] consideration um if you were to approve
[2:04:43] or deny uh or recommend approval of
[2:04:46] denial sorry uh as the deputy was
[2:04:49] stating it would go to the County
[2:04:50] Council for DEC ision um in theory if
[2:04:53] that were to be um approved uh the
[2:04:57] neighbors would H uh would also receive
[2:04:59] a notice and they would have a right of
[2:05:01] appeal to elpat uh alternatively if the
[2:05:04] application were to be Deni um the
[2:05:06] neighbors as well as owners would still
[2:05:08] have appeal rights um and in theory you
[2:05:10] know the owner could appeal this um to
[2:05:12] the alpad so that could be considered a
[2:05:14] process or alternatively um the
[2:05:16] applicant may choose to withdraw their
[2:05:19] application okay thank you
[2:05:22] um for the
[2:05:24] clarification uh all right so Council we
[2:05:29] have a a motion on
[2:05:32] table are we prepared to call a
[2:05:37] vote I'm going to call the vote the
[2:05:40] motion is to
[2:05:42] deny all those in favor say I okay all those in uh for um against
[2:05:54] the denial
[2:05:55] say
[2:05:57] n
[2:05:59] he hey there I heard two eyes for the uh
[2:06:05] for the denial and I heard more than
[2:06:07] four or five I think uh I heard
[2:06:09] definitely more Nays so U the the motion
[2:06:13] is defeated is there another
[2:06:20] recommendation Mr Mr Mayor I'll move
[2:06:22] that uh we approve uh we recommend
[2:06:25] approval of the uh of the consent and uh
[2:06:29] bearing in mind that there's always an
[2:06:30] appeal by any party all the way along
[2:06:33] the process thank you is there a
[2:06:36] second Mr Mayor I would second it
[2:06:38] seconded by councelor
[2:06:41] Walden is there any comments anyone
[2:06:44] wishes to make and I appreciate we've
[2:06:45] had great discussion but I as a chair
[2:06:48] I'll I need to ask again thank
[2:06:52] you any other
[2:06:55] comments hearing none I'm going to call
[2:06:57] the question all those in favor of
[2:06:59] approval of this uh consent to uh make
[2:07:05] it two
[2:07:05] lots all those favor say I I any any
[2:07:11] opposed
[2:07:13] Nate hearing the eyes and nay I declare
[2:07:16] that the motion
[2:07:18] carries and that's been approved
[2:07:23] um Hannah what's the next step here
[2:07:25] again uh yep um Peter um so your next
[2:07:28] step will be uh going to County Council
[2:07:31] um for decision um at the next available
[2:07:33] meeting will likely be um at the
[2:07:36] beginning of January so we will be in
[2:07:38] contact okay thank you okay thank
[2:07:42] you okay we're now at
[2:07:46] 7.2 good night Hannah uh take
[2:07:50] care uh we're now at
[2:07:53] 7.2 uh Mike Ross reports uh blue flag is
[2:07:58] the first one
[2:07:59] 7.21 blue flag application I can take
[2:08:03] that mayor okay thank you thank you so
[2:08:07] um Council it won't uh come as a
[2:08:10] surprise to you that uh staff is
[2:08:12] recommending not to input an application
[2:08:15] for a blue flag award at Bayfield Main
[2:08:18] Beach uh Bayfield Pier Beach uh for
[2:08:22] 2021 the um the beach is uh under great
[2:08:27] stress and in fact there is no parking
[2:08:31] and no basic amenities left uh that can
[2:08:34] would allow us to even qualify so I'm
[2:08:37] suggesting that the program be uh put on
[2:08:41] Hiatus for a year till we can see what
[2:08:44] happens the water levels but uh so staff
[2:08:48] is recommending uh that uh
[2:08:51] Blue Water apply for a blue flag
[2:08:55] application for the marina in
[2:08:58] 2021 uh I'm estimating the cost for the
[2:09:01] delivery of the program to be
[2:09:05] $642 and uh this year because of covid
[2:09:09] gathering restrictions Etc the uh
[2:09:13] programs were not delivered uh which
[2:09:16] then uh so that creates a uh Savings in
[2:09:20] 2020 that can be carried forward uh to
[2:09:24] 2021 that will result in a zero uh
[2:09:28] request for Zer for 2021 budget uh if we
[2:09:32] can roll over
[2:09:35] $642 from
[2:09:37] 2020 so Council my recommendation is
[2:09:41] that uh three recommendations one that
[2:09:44] Council approve the pro proposed budget
[2:09:48] for implementation of the blue flag
[2:09:50] program and the amount of
[2:09:52] 6,425 and refer to the budget process
[2:09:55] for information number two that Council
[2:09:59] approve rolling over
[2:10:02] $642 from the 2020 budget balance uh to
[2:10:06] the 2021 budget and number three that
[2:10:10] Council approved the submission of
[2:10:12] application for a 2021 blue flag award
[2:10:15] at Blue Water Marina in Bayfield to swim
[2:10:18] drink fish who is the Canadian operator
[2:10:21] of the international blue flag
[2:10:24] program okay counselors you've uh read
[2:10:27] this report I'm sure is there anyone um
[2:10:31] ready to speak on this or make a Rec
[2:10:33] make a a motion on
[2:10:38] recommendations councelor is looking for
[2:10:40] direction here councelor wetstone here
[2:10:43] yes go ahead so my comments on this is
[2:10:45] that you know yeah it's been definitely
[2:10:47] a struggle as as our leene is attest to
[2:10:49] for our beach here there's no doubt
[2:10:51] we're in serious trouble when it comes
[2:10:52] to that and actually our infrastructure
[2:10:55] that's associated with it um so this is
[2:10:58] the marina itself I mean I I I I do
[2:11:01] struggle even with it a little bit as
[2:11:03] well too as far as the blue flag um and
[2:11:07] the uh the impact that blue flag may
[2:11:10] have on on
[2:11:13] um having more impact a better impact
[2:11:16] you know those type things however when
[2:11:18] I'm looking at the budgetary
[2:11:21] issue that we have here um it's netting
[2:11:25] out at zero so I don't have an issue
[2:11:28] moving forward the uh I don't know if we
[2:11:30] have do we have to do three separate
[2:11:31] recommendations obviously I suspect but
[2:11:33] I have don't have an issue with at least
[2:11:35] uh you know moving forward the first one
[2:11:37] if that's the case if we how we want to
[2:11:39] do this so we're we're looking at a zero
[2:11:42] proposed budget so it's worth exploring
[2:11:43] and see what we can come up with this
[2:11:45] year again to help us out okay um I'm
[2:11:50] looking at Chandra for please I figured
[2:11:53] as
[2:11:55] much okay um all right is there someone
[2:11:57] willing to make the first motion then
[2:11:59] for discussion and vote I'll move the
[2:12:03] first recommendation councelor wetstone
[2:12:05] thank you second it councelor venberg
[2:12:10] discussion hearing none all those in
[2:12:12] favor of the first
[2:12:15] recommendation say I
[2:12:18] SEC nay hearing none motion
[2:12:22] carries uh recommendation number two
[2:12:24] that it be a a move to the uh
[2:12:28] 20 21
[2:12:30] budget is there a mover for
[2:12:35] that mover councelor venberg is seconded
[2:12:39] by councelor Harris councelor
[2:12:43] Harris
[2:12:45] discussion G to call the question all
[2:12:47] those in favor say I I any oppos
[2:12:52] hearing none motion carries we're now at
[2:12:54] number three Council approve the
[2:12:55] submission for application for the 21
[2:12:58] blue flag award for the
[2:13:01] marina is there a motion for
[2:13:06] that this time councelor wetstone your second councelor
[2:13:11] Walden councelor Walden
[2:13:15] discussion hearing none I'm going to
[2:13:17] call the question all in favor of the
[2:13:19] motion say i i i any opposed hearing
[2:13:26] none motion carries thank you all right
[2:13:30] thank you Marlene uh 7.22 erosion
[2:13:34] control shoreline protection
[2:13:37] policy and Council I believe Mike will
[2:13:42] be any questions or
[2:13:46] comments yeah through year year worship
[2:13:49] um I have four reports involving
[2:13:51] Shoreline protection the first one is um
[2:13:55] an erosion control shoreline protection
[2:13:57] policy so staff is asking Council to
[2:14:00] direct staff to prepare an Euros control
[2:14:02] policy a basically a comprehensive Co
[2:14:05] policy to be as transparent as we can um
[2:14:08] as we know we're or as we are getting uh
[2:14:11] more and more calls for shortland
[2:14:13] protection of Municipal property uh
[2:14:15] staff feels its best to be um
[2:14:17] transparent and and try to get this the
[2:14:20] process down pat and everybody knows
[2:14:22] what's going on uh moving forward what
[2:14:24] would be required from Council from
[2:14:26] staff uh to make this as easy as
[2:14:29] possible for everybody um within that
[2:14:31] report there's a bunch of bullets that
[2:14:33] are questions
[2:14:35] that questions that come to mind um when
[2:14:38] we when we need to look at this policy
[2:14:40] these won't be all the questions but
[2:14:41] these are definitely some of them um the
[2:14:43] first one being the biggest is what type
[2:14:45] of agreement uh does council wish to
[2:14:48] proceed whether it's a license of
[2:14:49] occupation agreement like we did with uh
[2:14:52] Mr McDonald on T Street and Bayfield or
[2:14:54] is it an agreement where the
[2:14:56] municipality undertakes uh the
[2:14:58] installation of these proposed Shoreline
[2:15:02] protection with the full cost going back
[2:15:04] to
[2:15:06] um to the requester basically uh this
[2:15:10] type two in my report is the preferred
[2:15:14] method from our legal council so just
[2:15:17] giving you a heads up on that rather
[2:15:19] than that throw out those bullets if you
[2:15:20] have any question questions regarding
[2:15:22] that um feel free to reach out okay
[2:15:27] thank you counselors comments councelor
[2:15:30] wetone here I do have a question for
[2:15:32] Mike if I could yep so item number two
[2:15:36] or Point number two under the
[2:15:38] agreement
[2:15:40] um this if I'm not mistaken Mike and it
[2:15:43] might be in the report something says I
[2:15:44] did read it if I'm not mistaken this
[2:15:47] would entail a lot of Staff time
[2:15:49] obviously a pilot St time and to the
[2:15:52] point with all the erosion as you
[2:15:54] mentioned happening and requests coming
[2:15:58] in I'm thinking we would probably be
[2:16:00] looking for additional Staffing would
[2:16:03] you not suggest
[2:16:05] that I don't think we current our
[2:16:07] current headcount could bear what we
[2:16:10] currently have that's my own opinion by
[2:16:11] the way but because these are not
[2:16:13] short-term type projects either right
[2:16:16] but it would just be staff like we would
[2:16:18] still have to review the propos OS
[2:16:21] drawings we would still have to draft
[2:16:22] the agreement all that would stay the
[2:16:24] same it would basically staffed on site
[2:16:26] not 100% of the time but making sure
[2:16:29] that the installation is done as per as
[2:16:32] per the drawing So currently the way it
[2:16:33] is with the license of occupation um
[2:16:37] staff doesn't get involved so basically
[2:16:38] they sign the agreement these are the
[2:16:40] drawings okay Carry On um but if if we
[2:16:43] were to undertake it then we would be on
[2:16:46] site ensuring that it's installed as per
[2:16:48] the design and confirming such during
[2:16:50] the process
[2:16:51] there will be more staff time but I
[2:16:53] don't think it's as
[2:16:54] orous as you're thinking it is fair
[2:16:58] enough and one further question or
[2:17:00] comment reading it in there is that with
[2:17:03] that one the municipality Bears the
[2:17:04] responsibility for the risk and the LI
[2:17:08] liability
[2:17:10] um that makes me nervous to be honest so
[2:17:15] you know there there's a whole reason
[2:17:17] why we uh we were doing the license of
[2:17:19] occupation previously that was to get
[2:17:21] away from liability was part of it
[2:17:25] anyways yes
[2:17:28] and you're correct the license of
[2:17:30] occupation does um have the
[2:17:33] requestor um provide insurance coverage
[2:17:36] um for the life of the wall as well as
[2:17:39] for maintenance and for security if that
[2:17:40] wall ever is removed now this other
[2:17:43] agreement definitely has not been
[2:17:44] drafted yet so it could be amended any
[2:17:48] way shape or form Council feel spit
[2:17:52] councelor
[2:17:55] venberg thank you mayor uh and to Mike
[2:17:58] how would full cost recovery how would
[2:18:02] that
[2:18:04] happen What would be the steps the way I
[2:18:06] foresee it happening again um this
[2:18:08] agreement has not been drafted and it
[2:18:10] has not been presented in front of any
[2:18:12] legal um but the way I see it happening
[2:18:14] is we get um an estimate of how it's
[2:18:17] going to um how much the cost would be
[2:18:21] and then um basically there' be a
[2:18:23] financial agreement between the
[2:18:24] requestor and the municipality they pay
[2:18:26] all
[2:18:28] cost um for the recovery of the
[2:18:31] installation and there would probably be
[2:18:33] Securities involved in that
[2:18:35] um so how would it be done um would have
[2:18:38] to be hammered out in the
[2:18:41] agreement okay I'm just I'm just going
[2:18:45] with bad thoughts and saying okay now
[2:18:47] it's time to pay up and people are going
[2:18:51] know we've got issues you know we don't
[2:18:55] have the ability to pay now we need time
[2:18:57] to pay um and maybe other lawyers
[2:19:01] getting involved in that so uh I'm
[2:19:05] thinking like that in regards to the
[2:19:07] number one bullet point license of
[2:19:10] occupation if we were to do that could
[2:19:14] we still ensure that
[2:19:16] staff um oversees it somewhat if if if
[2:19:21] it's going to be on Municipal property
[2:19:23] wouldn't we want staff to make sure that
[2:19:26] it is being done properly just like any
[2:19:30] other um build on any other property I
[2:19:35] guess yeah and that's what that's what
[2:19:37] our our lawyer advice was is that staff
[2:19:40] would be on site um and take you know
[2:19:43] undertake the entire installation um
[2:19:45] rather than just
[2:19:47] having the requester ensure that is done
[2:19:51] appropriately right um the previous
[2:19:53] license of occupation that was done I do
[2:19:54] not believe has a provision in there for
[2:19:57] any kind of a staff sign enough at the
[2:19:59] end
[2:20:01] um that's my understanding Lori if I'm
[2:20:03] incorrect please reach out um and
[2:20:06] furthermore back to your um question
[2:20:10] regarding how we receive payment of fall
[2:20:13] obviously the municipality would take a
[2:20:16] substantial security prior to entering
[2:20:18] into any kind of an agreement to make
[2:20:19] sure um that will be covered up to a
[2:20:23] certain point anyway and then there will
[2:20:25] be drafts or payments along the
[2:20:30] way okay thank you um any other
[2:20:34] questions of counselors Deputy Mayor Mr
[2:20:36] Mayor uh a couple questions or comment
[2:20:39] to Mike um if if this is going to be
[2:20:42] done on mici property obviously we want
[2:20:45] to have control of it or the
[2:20:47] municipality wants to have control of it
[2:20:48] and to ensure that it's done correctly I
[2:20:51] mean would you not have the engineer
[2:20:53] inspected as it was built and certify
[2:20:55] that it was built as per engineered why
[2:20:58] would we get into it we're not you know
[2:21:00] we don't know that everything was done
[2:21:01] why wouldn't we have just have the
[2:21:02] engineer certify it was done that's one
[2:21:05] question and the other question was we
[2:21:08] talked about liability you know what
[2:21:10] with joint and several liability in the
[2:21:13] municipal world uh all these claims go
[2:21:16] to whoever has the biggest pockets in
[2:21:18] the end and that would be the
[2:21:19] municipality there too so I mean we're
[2:21:21] always going to be on the hook somewhere
[2:21:23] so I mean I think that's we have to
[2:21:25] accept that as part of the risk and
[2:21:26] cover ourselves with the best agreements
[2:21:30] possible yeah I definitely agree with
[2:21:32] your with your second comment Deputy
[2:21:34] Mayor um as for your first regarding an
[2:21:36] engineered sign off um definitely I
[2:21:38] would I would like to see that and I
[2:21:40] will make sure that it is in whatever
[2:21:41] kind of an agreement that we uh that
[2:21:44] Council wishes to move forward
[2:21:46] on okay
[2:21:48] um if I'm chime in I've uh enjoyed the
[2:21:53] uh the comments of counselors you've uh
[2:21:55] you've helped me a little bit uh because
[2:21:58] I've been given a lot of thought uh
[2:22:00] there's Arguments for both yeah the
[2:22:01] solicitor says that they like the the
[2:22:04] second method however the we we've gone
[2:22:08] through one we've had a couple of other
[2:22:11] people I think since we've been elected
[2:22:13] asking to try to uh work with us and and
[2:22:15] for whatever reasons that didn't proceed
[2:22:18] they did their own thing which is fine
[2:22:20] too too um but uh on the McDonald one
[2:22:24] the the I know the lawyers uh agreed
[2:22:27] that it was a good deal they said sign
[2:22:29] it I I I think that the part about
[2:22:33] significant staff time the part about we
[2:22:37] are going to be a bit more responsible
[2:22:39] for the risk and liability in option two
[2:22:42] and at the uh uh that does scare me um
[2:22:47] the option
[2:22:49] one I think we got it pretty well as
[2:22:51] much as we can cornered when it says
[2:22:55] well they they had to agree and they and
[2:22:57] they paid for it well you know if they
[2:23:00] as pointed out I think the deputy mayor
[2:23:03] they're gonna have some engineer or
[2:23:05] unless they were an engineer but they're
[2:23:06] gonna have some engineer kind of giving
[2:23:08] them some backup because they're
[2:23:09] spending serious dollars and at the end
[2:23:11] if we've got the documents that that
[2:23:15] says they're responsible if it falls
[2:23:17] down well it's to their best it's to
[2:23:20] their benefit to make sure it's proper
[2:23:23] um yes we can always go and look and
[2:23:25] make sure that they're following what
[2:23:27] the drawings look like but that's more
[2:23:28] to protect them because why wouldn't
[2:23:30] they be following the documents so my
[2:23:33] gut feeling on this would
[2:23:34] be that that I think the license of
[2:23:37] occupation's been
[2:23:39] working it's worked
[2:23:41] once uh uh and it's it puts a lot of
[2:23:45] onus on the owner that's supposed to be
[2:23:47] doing the work we obviously make sure
[2:23:50] that they follow the lot lines and don't
[2:23:52] get into anything more we obviously have
[2:23:54] all the stuff that they have to agree
[2:23:55] with ABCA or whatever
[2:23:58] Ministries um the bullet points which I
[2:24:00] think are the main uh main thing to me
[2:24:04] th this is the outline at the top
[2:24:06] license of occupation that's where I'm
[2:24:07] leaning on and then of course the making
[2:24:10] sure we get as many of the
[2:24:12] concerns and that are covered or ticked
[2:24:14] off as we go through the process so that
[2:24:16] everybody's fair and that's on your
[2:24:18] second page but on on this point that's
[2:24:20] where I'm leaning on the license of
[2:24:22] occupation and and keep it as buttoned
[2:24:24] up as possible like we've been doing or
[2:24:27] have been doing but anyway that's my
[2:24:30] thoughts uh are do we want to think
[2:24:34] about this a bit more this evening on
[2:24:39] this these two here do you want to move
[2:24:41] on to the
[2:24:42] other to the points of uh the bullets I
[2:24:46] guess of uh what the staff kind of want
[2:24:49] to make sure we hit if we if we go
[2:24:50] forward then on this process well we are
[2:24:54] been kind of going through for it what
[2:24:56] what's uh what's your view councilors
[2:24:58] it's a little awkward when we're kind of
[2:25:00] in Zoom
[2:25:04] here do anyone want to approve the uh
[2:25:08] the recommendation that we will have to
[2:25:10] cover those other points so they know
[2:25:11] how to what to develop a a policy from
[2:25:14] won't they yeah I I just I just wondered
[2:25:18] if if they're kind of almost a do we
[2:25:20] agree with the one or two there and then we work around these others
[2:25:25] that's all I'm just deputy just for
[2:25:26] process uh uh I'm I'm I'm open to carry
[2:25:30] on and go through the go through those
[2:25:32] other bullet points and if we agree that
[2:25:34] they're good points that's fine but uh
[2:25:38] it's generally kind of which direction
[2:25:40] we go to on
[2:25:42] the on on the uh on the overall vehicle
[2:25:47] can I call it that
[2:25:50] what's your thoughts
[2:25:53] counselors I Deputy Mayor and yourself
[2:25:57] on the license of occupation and the
[2:26:00] owners have their Engineers that do the
[2:26:02] oversight I'm sure the building
[2:26:04] department will still have a hand in it
[2:26:08] somewhere and move forward on that
[2:26:10] aspect I'd like to hear other
[2:26:12] counselor's concerns
[2:26:15] also okay and the all
[2:26:18] right I'm
[2:26:20] can I for process I guess that's why the
[2:26:23] ministry or that's why the the process
[2:26:25] is there from I I'll ask to we have a
[2:26:28] motion on on what type here a license of
[2:26:30] occupation or or an agreement of
[2:26:32] municipality can I have someone make a
[2:26:34] motion for
[2:26:38] discussion is anyone prepared to at this
[2:26:40] time councelor
[2:26:48] benberg sorry I just uh trying to hit
[2:26:50] the mute button know I know that problem
[2:26:53] Mr Mr Mayor can I have a qu like is is
[2:26:57] counc Vandenberg if he's going to make a
[2:26:59] motion or has a comment there I'll I'll
[2:27:01] wait for him but uh if not
[2:27:04] um you know the the
[2:27:07] report that we looked at here was ju
[2:27:10] July the 29th
[2:27:11] so and it said no erosion control so
[2:27:14] that's that's an that is a an option
[2:27:18] here too is it not
[2:27:22] yeah
[2:27:24] right that's
[2:27:26] right I thank you
[2:27:29] okay that's if we don't come up with one
[2:27:32] of these I guess that's one yeah well no
[2:27:35] actually we made a motion of council
[2:27:37] that we weren't going to spend any
[2:27:39] money taxpayers money on our properties
[2:27:43] however then that either that night or a
[2:27:45] couple days later we we I don't know if
[2:27:48] it was a motion but it was it was and it
[2:27:50] clearly did happen because two I think
[2:27:52] we did have two uh Property Owners
[2:27:55] approach us and we said we're not in
[2:27:57] tuned to trying to make a deal with you
[2:27:59] to help you but we're not paying for it
[2:28:02] and and then they didn't come back for
[2:28:05] whatever reasons they did their own
[2:28:07] thing or didn't do anything uh and then
[2:28:09] we finally had I guess the one was Mr
[2:28:11] McDonald that that came forward and we
[2:28:14] uh we basically did the well we did the
[2:28:16] license of occupation and we had we had
[2:28:19] a a a we tried to cover everything and
[2:28:21] the staff we asked the staff though we
[2:28:23] should have a a better better policy and
[2:28:26] a and and a sheet for people to see so
[2:28:28] it doesn't look like uh I'm paying a fa
[2:28:30] favored by not adding something there's
[2:28:33] a checklist so there's a checklist but
[2:28:36] there's also which kind of vehicle do we
[2:28:38] run here on uh and that's sort of where
[2:28:41] it's at but you are are right at at any
[2:28:44] time even even the option of license of
[2:28:46] occupation or an agreement and these
[2:28:48] bullet points the one bullet point is
[2:28:50] the very end Council May for whatever
[2:28:52] reason say we're not going to agree to
[2:28:54] this particular one happening on a
[2:28:57] property by by by order of motion so so
[2:29:01] that that is that is in there and I'm
[2:29:04] hoping we keep that in there myself as
[2:29:07] one of the I should always be in there
[2:29:10] but um anyway is there um getting back
[2:29:13] uh if I can just
[2:29:15] unprocess move things along is there
[2:29:18] anyone wishing to make a a a what type
[2:29:20] of agreement well it's councelor
[2:29:22] wetstone here I actually I have a I have
[2:29:24] a hard time making a motion on the
[2:29:27] simple reasons when we look at all these
[2:29:29] points that we're talking about in the
[2:29:30] on the next page okay I'm not the expert
[2:29:33] in these I need more information on
[2:29:35] those so what are what are our options
[2:29:38] how is pre-existing infrastructure
[2:29:39] managed okay what does that mean what are our options well we can let's
[2:29:43] go through it then okay well I I don't
[2:29:45] know if that's a today thing that could
[2:29:47] be a report that comes back there could
[2:29:49] be multiple things what documents there
[2:29:51] could be like what documents are
[2:29:53] required to be provided prior to
[2:29:54] accepting consideration there could be
[2:29:57] 50 different ones that we may have to
[2:29:59] choose from I just don't know that's the
[2:30:00] whole point right so well I I don't I
[2:30:03] think that that I think the bullet
[2:30:05] points and help me out uh staff but my
[2:30:08] sense of what these bullet points are is
[2:30:09] we make sure that they're asked and
[2:30:11] covered when someone comes if they ask
[2:30:14] us to do a property like the one that we
[2:30:18] did it didn't have a walkway way well of
[2:30:21] course we didn't ask for it either but but was pointed out by staff they're
[2:30:26] thinking of what ifs so do you wanna
[2:30:29] when someone comes into the office we're
[2:30:32] gonna they can hand them a sheet and
[2:30:34] says this is the basic C this is the
[2:30:37] minimum that the council's expecting you
[2:30:39] to take care of I think we even have one
[2:30:42] coming up uh laort there's an issue of
[2:30:46] uh of the um of our of a drain so
[2:30:51] clearly we're going to I hope if we
[2:30:53] agree to that if we agree to it we're
[2:30:55] going to agree they pay for the drain
[2:30:56] going back to that motion that Council
[2:30:58] made I'm still think a majority of
[2:31:00] council agrees it's going to be if they
[2:31:02] we're helping someone it's not going to
[2:31:04] be on the backs of the of the whole
[2:31:06] municipality so this just this just gets
[2:31:10] it these points are made sure everybody
[2:31:13] knows that they're got to be ticked off
[2:31:15] to to council not ticked off in the term
[2:31:18] that they're that they're that they're
[2:31:20] made sure they're covered and of course
[2:31:21] there's going to be other ones this is a
[2:31:23] lied document like a lot of things so I
[2:31:25] think that is where they're coming from
[2:31:27] but counselor or Mike is that is that
[2:31:31] what your intent was here I don't want
[2:31:32] to yeah do your worship um I agree with what you're trying to or what
[2:31:37] you're saying um okay the intent wasn't
[2:31:40] to go through Bullet by Bullet um the
[2:31:43] intent was just trying to make Council
[2:31:45] aware that it would be best for
[2:31:49] residences to as transparent as possible
[2:31:51] that if we had a policy in place moving
[2:31:53] forward and what they would need and
[2:31:55] what would be expected um it's
[2:31:57] definitely understood that everything
[2:31:58] would have to come to C to
[2:32:01] council individually with each specific
[2:32:04] property it's just best if we uh made
[2:32:06] everybody aware of what would be needed
[2:32:08] and and to move
[2:32:11] forward okay well to get the ball
[2:32:13] rolling in thank you for the
[2:32:14] clarification uh I'll propose that a
[2:32:16] motion that we uh go with the license of
[2:32:18] occupation as an agreement to move
[2:32:20] forward
[2:32:21] with okay is there a second or for that
[2:32:24] motion Council coun W second of course
[2:32:28] uh this is a like all our motions
[2:32:30] they're they're all important so I know
[2:32:32] we've had discussion but I'm gonna
[2:32:34] please councilor is anyone wishing to
[2:32:37] have more
[2:32:38] discussion councelor venberg or anything
[2:32:42] um yeah it's just in regards to those uh
[2:32:46] those bullet points and I
[2:32:48] guess um
[2:32:50] we're going to have to see the the
[2:32:52] document the policy and what bullet
[2:32:55] points
[2:32:56] are are going to be there let's say for
[2:32:59] us to to pass a whole policy I I know
[2:33:02] there's we we've done uh stairs in the
[2:33:05] past where associations have approached
[2:33:07] the municipality in regards to to stairs
[2:33:10] so we we've kind of done that as well um
[2:33:14] you know there's one bullet point in
[2:33:16] regards to do we sell off
[2:33:20] uh lands I'm not I can't see it right
[2:33:23] now because it's going to be scrolled
[2:33:26] down a little further but anyways it's
[2:33:28] those uh yeah I guess it's the last one
[2:33:31] disposing of the lands I don't think we
[2:33:33] want to see something uh in regards to
[2:33:35] that in the policy but I know it's it's
[2:33:38] there a bullet
[2:33:40] point through you your worship yes could
[2:33:43] I just make a clarification on the
[2:33:45] motion um if the Mover and the seconder
[2:33:48] could just conf firm is the intent that
[2:33:51] what you're asking for is that the
[2:33:53] policy or the draft proposed policy that
[2:33:56] staff come back with is centered around
[2:33:59] a license of occupation
[2:34:01] um yes that is correct yes yes thank
[2:34:06] you that was my intention that you would
[2:34:08] be bringing back a a draft
[2:34:12] proposal yeah well was called draft good
[2:34:14] point Thank you and to and to councelor
[2:34:17] uh vandenberg's point if we uh if we
[2:34:21] also but this is specifically on the on
[2:34:23] the I'm going to call it the main
[2:34:24] vehicle which is the license of
[2:34:26] occupation and they'll come back with
[2:34:28] the with the the details um fair enough
[2:34:32] and and the councelor Walden I believe
[2:34:34] you that's your intent the motion yes Mr
[2:34:37] Mayor if I may that's why I second also
[2:34:41] behind my second of it is the our staff
[2:34:44] has already done a lot of work on this
[2:34:46] and I would like to support them moving
[2:34:47] forward they're trying to be clear and
[2:34:50] try to be transparent and I would like
[2:34:52] to support that going forward not
[2:34:54] jumping into it but I think that we need
[2:34:56] to make this make this uh procedure
[2:34:59] carry
[2:35:00] on good point okay if if it's okay now
[2:35:04] on the bullet points we're we're going
[2:35:05] to make a separate motion if there's
[2:35:07] something that they want pulled out for
[2:35:08] sure right now we're gonna kind of go
[2:35:10] through it tonight or or you're willing
[2:35:12] to make but that'll be a separate motion
[2:35:15] on the on the on those points okay just
[2:35:17] to be clear with everyone so
[2:35:20] can I call the question on the license
[2:35:22] of occupation we understand the intent
[2:35:24] and they'll come back with a little more
[2:35:26] detail and we can always have that sober
[2:35:28] second look at it is that okay then I'm
[2:35:31] going to call the
[2:35:32] question all those in favor of the
[2:35:36] motion license of occupation is a
[2:35:38] process say I
[2:35:42] [Music]
[2:35:43] I any opposed hearing none opposed
[2:35:47] motion carries now with regards to the points that I referred to as the
[2:35:52] bullet points is there any on there that
[2:35:55] you wish that we don't have further
[2:35:56] discussion on as part of the process or
[2:35:58] you have have some you want added at
[2:36:01] this
[2:36:06] time okay I think these are all points
[2:36:09] for consideration there may be some more
[2:36:11] as they come up but I think these are
[2:36:13] the minimum probably yeah U I think
[2:36:16] though this will be a document that will
[2:36:18] be added to I'm sure I I don't think you
[2:36:20] have any trouble adding things to cover
[2:36:22] off uh when it comes to some of these
[2:36:25] things especially when it comes which
[2:36:26] will be along the lake we hope that
[2:36:28] water goes down and just subsides the
[2:36:30] issue if we're there is a guy someone
[2:36:33] that likes us up there as counselors
[2:36:36] councelor venberg I think I saw you had
[2:36:37] your hand up yeah thank you mayor I was
[2:36:41] just gonna say if we could see something
[2:36:43] come back um I know staff would be
[2:36:46] working hard on it and we may have to
[2:36:49] pick it apart a little bit maybe or or
[2:36:52] add a little bit or maybe in the
[2:36:53] meantime we can make suggestions to them
[2:36:56] okay um but I I think if we were to go
[2:37:01] through it all tonight and uh I don't
[2:37:03] think it would do us any any justice to
[2:37:06] do it all tonight y well as pointed out
[2:37:08] these are you know Case by case that we
[2:37:11] that's when hey the bullet point is
[2:37:13] there's pre-existing infrastructure so
[2:37:15] that owner has to know that they have to
[2:37:17] work and satisfy coun before they can go
[2:37:20] ahead it's not a surprise to them that's
[2:37:22] kind of how the how I think these things
[2:37:24] work and so it did what what do you
[2:37:28] suggest that council do you want to just
[2:37:30] make a note to staff that we accept
[2:37:31] these as in principle and look for it in
[2:37:34] the final report or I'm looking for
[2:37:36] suggestions Mr Mayor do we maybe did I
[2:37:39] miss something here did we agree to the
[2:37:42] recommendation I don't remember voting
[2:37:43] on the recommendation to develop a
[2:37:45] policy and if we do then we could
[2:37:47] include those all with it did we well
[2:37:50] then then write it up then write it up
[2:37:51] that way sir okay well I don't maybe I
[2:37:54] missed it I might have you know I have a
[2:37:56] little nap here sometimes but well
[2:37:59] I I think we were we we kind of got into
[2:38:02] policy yeah no I I agree we've started
[2:38:05] down the road but I didn't know if we
[2:38:08] said yes we're going to develop a policy
[2:38:09] so that's that's all well
[2:38:12] I
[2:38:15] iation I think I think we sort of did
[2:38:18] but but u i i know I'm I can't say it
[2:38:22] was a different way we did it but I
[2:38:23] think we were all above board put it
[2:38:25] that way um nobody was trying to pull
[2:38:27] anything not with these uh n not with us
[2:38:29] nine on this crowd I think um okay so on
[2:38:33] these pullet points are we are we
[2:38:35] satisfied that they should be a minimum
[2:38:36] that are in for tonight and and we want
[2:38:39] to see it in the final report as you say
[2:38:41] we can fed out the discussions at that
[2:38:44] point when we see the final draft is
[2:38:46] that something of that words
[2:38:51] moving to get this I'm hearing generally
[2:38:54] we don't mind that these things are
[2:38:55] written up
[2:38:57] but counsel maybe uh staff could you
[2:39:01] help us
[2:39:03] out Lori I'm kind of looking for your uh
[2:39:06] maybe your helping the magic wand here
[2:39:09] as go
[2:39:13] between okay so um I understand um mayor
[2:39:18] Klo and Council that that um you do want
[2:39:21] to pass you do want to um say the
[2:39:25] recommendation and and uh see where
[2:39:28] people stand on it because it sounds as
[2:39:30] though you are wanting a
[2:39:33] policy which includes all those items to
[2:39:36] be considered so so I think Deputy Mayor
[2:39:40] Ferguson is correct that you have to
[2:39:41] read someone has to make a
[2:39:43] recommendation make the recommendation
[2:39:46] that's there okay could someone make a
[2:39:48] recommend so so moved okay thank you
[2:39:51] Deputy Mayor thank you is there a second
[2:39:54] uh for the motion councilor
[2:39:57] venberg I just wanted to say I thought
[2:39:59] that was all the intent when we were
[2:40:02] discussing this all so well but now but
[2:40:05] now it's in black and white so that's
[2:40:06] good well well no it's still it it's I think how did our our CEO put it
[2:40:12] these are these are points that we make
[2:40:14] sure that are definitely part of the
[2:40:16] discussion if they're there if there
[2:40:18] stairs there the the person would have
[2:40:19] to know that we're not we want the
[2:40:21] stairs to be talked about that you're
[2:40:23] paying for as as we've done historically
[2:40:25] it just it just that it's on a paper for
[2:40:27] people to see so we may but we may say
[2:40:30] like the one about there's nothing in
[2:40:31] here about there's kind of just about
[2:40:33] maybe more armor Stone and not talking
[2:40:35] about the other well we we'll have that
[2:40:37] discussion when we see the final draft
[2:40:39] so we'll still have time to have uh
[2:40:41] explain things out but just to keep
[2:40:43] moving things on you're not against
[2:40:45] these ideas being on a paper that's no
[2:40:48] that was that wasn't what I was talking
[2:40:50] about I I think with the deputy mayor I
[2:40:53] guess I'm agreeing with him that we
[2:40:55] didn't say the word policy or go back to
[2:40:58] the recommendation I think it was all in
[2:41:00] the back of our minds that hey we were
[2:41:02] discussing the policy so that that's
[2:41:04] good that's what I mean it's in black
[2:41:06] and white I'm good with the with this
[2:41:09] and what the uh the deputy mayor has
[2:41:12] said
[2:41:14] okay can I it's been first and seconded
[2:41:17] correct can I can I call the question
[2:41:20] then is everyone
[2:41:22] satisfied is okay I'm going to call the
[2:41:25] question all those in favor of the
[2:41:28] motion with these bullet points to see
[2:41:32] um what is the marual motion uh Chandra
[2:41:35] just to be fair my understanding is that
[2:41:37] the motion is the recommendation that's
[2:41:39] there in front of you that Council
[2:41:40] direct staff to prepare an erosion
[2:41:42] control shoreline protection policy for
[2:41:44] council's consideration and
[2:41:46] implementation okay thank you
[2:41:50] I'm going to call the question all those
[2:41:51] in favor say
[2:41:54] I any opposed hearing none the motion
[2:41:58] carries okay thank you
[2:42:01] staff is there a timeline is there a
[2:42:03] timeline for
[2:42:06] that I know know not I'm not because
[2:42:09] we're kind of doing the
[2:42:11] mess well I know but we have a number of
[2:42:14] applications here that that are that
[2:42:17] would relate to this and uh if this can
[2:42:20] be done in some kind of uh expedient
[2:42:24] timeline I'm going to suggest a
[2:42:26] moratorium on all those applications
[2:42:28] until after the policy is developed I
[2:42:32] would agree with that Deputy Mayor okay
[2:42:34] so we're so that is H and that that
[2:42:37] sounds very logical to myself also that
[2:42:40] they've obviously been working on it so
[2:42:42] I what what um it sounds like there's
[2:42:46] going to be a motion well we passed this
[2:42:48] right so or we haven't called the
[2:42:51] question yes we did call the question so
[2:42:52] it's passed so can you when can you come
[2:42:55] back and have it a little more
[2:42:57] formalized as you pointed out there's a
[2:43:00] little bit of the criteria you need to
[2:43:01] word Smith even even in the uh even in
[2:43:04] the first document the the license of
[2:43:07] occupation uh what What's your sense
[2:43:10] through you your worship um I completely
[2:43:13] understand that there are people in line
[2:43:15] and wanting to a response on their
[2:43:18] requests for Shoreline protection on
[2:43:20] Municipal property and I do not want to
[2:43:22] hold them up as much as much as we can
[2:43:24] um my goal is to have this to you as
[2:43:27] soon as possible I don't want to
[2:43:30] guarantee next meeting um for sure um
[2:43:34] but it will be as soon as possible this
[2:43:36] will go on the top of my list uh for
[2:43:38] things to get
[2:43:40] done okay well it is it is important
[2:43:42] because not not from about speed but we
[2:43:45] want to make sure that the document is
[2:43:47] as airtight as it can be and is and as
[2:43:50] clear for everyone down the road so we
[2:43:52] don't have to make major changes to it
[2:43:54] that would be that would not look good
[2:43:55] on anyone correct so is that fair enough
[2:43:58] with everyone at this point um well
[2:44:01] because he's going Mr Mayor because he's
[2:44:03] going to uh put a a rush on it on the
[2:44:07] top of his list uh I think that uh
[2:44:10] formally we should deal with all those
[2:44:12] other applications right now and say
[2:44:14] that I'm going to I'm going to propose
[2:44:16] we put a moratorium on them until the
[2:44:18] policy is developed which I have heard
[2:44:21] is going to be as quickly as
[2:44:24] possible okay will move that you move
[2:44:27] that I'll second it is there a there's a
[2:44:30] seconder okay so may CL can I just
[2:44:33] repeat the motion back Mo in the
[2:44:36] seconder um so what I'm hearing is that
[2:44:39] Council Place a moratorium on all
[2:44:41] Shoreline protection requests until a
[2:44:43] policy may be
[2:44:45] developed is that
[2:44:47] essentially have I captured everything I
[2:44:50] think that captures my intent yes well
[2:44:53] maybe we this just word Smith a little
[2:44:56] bit till we get a report back from Mike
[2:45:01] on what uh I I just it just sounds like
[2:45:04] we haven't made any decision we we get
[2:45:07] we gave some direction it maybe it's the
[2:45:09] same thing it's getting late in the
[2:45:10] night
[2:45:11] I I refer back to the clerk if she's
[2:45:14] happy with it and Mike understands it I
[2:45:16] what how should why should I say
[2:45:18] anything think there was two words in
[2:45:20] there that might change and I think it
[2:45:22] said may be developed could change that
[2:45:25] to will be developed yeah that's maybe
[2:45:27] the word I think that's yeah will be
[2:45:30] developed yeah so that Council Place a
[2:45:32] moratorium on all Shoreline protection
[2:45:34] requests until a
[2:45:36] policy is developed thank you yeah
[2:45:39] thanks
[2:45:41] Chandra okay you okay with that I'm good
[2:45:44] with that okay and clearly the direction
[2:45:47] was from what we passed on our motions
[2:45:49] correct Mike and and counselors yes yes
[2:45:52] okay based on that then I'm I'm that's I
[2:45:54] guess just I know it sounds a little
[2:45:56] just want to be clear because the people
[2:45:58] are going to be asking us tomorrow
[2:45:59] including all of us as we go forward
[2:46:01] here so um the uh I we can say if this
[2:46:05] motion passes we can say that you saw
[2:46:07] the report with those pullet points and
[2:46:09] the direction of uh of what I call the the vehicle the which is uh the
[2:46:16] motion number one and and uh and then
[2:46:20] that these will be the minimum points
[2:46:22] that are going to be feted out some may
[2:46:23] be on or on some may be off but they
[2:46:25] will be definitely part of it okay I'm I
[2:46:28] can live with that and know fellow
[2:46:29] counselors when you get the calls too so
[2:46:32] I think we're all on the same page if
[2:46:33] this motion passes is everyone clear
[2:46:36] with the
[2:46:38] motion see no one asking
[2:46:42] clarification uh I'm going to call the
[2:46:46] motion but oh just before I do that to
[2:46:48] be fair with everyone I realize every
[2:46:50] one of these is important for the people
[2:46:52] and they want to know but I I just uh
[2:46:55] the one that just kind of came up at the
[2:46:56] last was leport street but clearly that
[2:46:59] goes under the same thing we want to
[2:47:00] know the we want it so it's all written
[2:47:02] so everybody knows fair enough just
[2:47:04] wanted just in case someone well I I can
[2:47:08] answer that if I get a call I I'm good
[2:47:10] with that too so just as long as
[2:47:11] everyone hopefully says the same thing
[2:47:14] if they get a
[2:47:15] call okay I'm G to call the question
[2:47:18] then and can I it read over one more
[2:47:19] time because for the public that are out
[2:47:21] there uh listening it's there I'm sure
[2:47:23] they want to make sure they've got the
[2:47:25] right motion too so chander could you re
[2:47:29] read it please moved by Deputy Mayor
[2:47:31] Ferguson seconded by councelor wetstone
[2:47:34] that Council Place a moratorium on all
[2:47:36] Shoreline protection requests until a
[2:47:38] policy is
[2:47:40] developed okay thank you and of course
[2:47:43] we have a verbal that it's going to be
[2:47:44] coming back as soon as possible we won't
[2:47:46] have that on the motion we all take that
[2:47:48] as good good word of Mike and staff they
[2:47:51] understand okay I'm going to call the
[2:47:53] question all those in favor say I I any
[2:47:58] opposed hearing not oppose the motion
[2:48:00] carries unanimously thank you okay um
[2:48:06] with that
[2:48:07] motion
[2:48:09] Chandra my understanding is that then
[2:48:13] our other three that we're on tonight
[2:48:16] will be a motion to table until we have
[2:48:19] our policy in place is that is that a
[2:48:23] fair
[2:48:25] motion yes that the next the items
[2:48:29] 7.2.3
[2:48:31] 7.2.4 and
[2:48:34] 7.2.5 okay will come back in front of
[2:48:37] council following the adoption of a
[2:48:39] shoreline protection policy does that is
[2:48:42] that correct Mike that would be uh I
[2:48:45] agree I think that's to me is very clear
[2:48:48] uh and it's and it's deferred but to a
[2:48:50] Time the public then
[2:48:52] knows is there any councelor wish to
[2:48:55] make that a
[2:48:58] motion councelor venberg seconded by
[2:49:02] councelor Harris councelor
[2:49:05] Harris any questions on the motion
[2:49:10] clarification hearing none I'm going to
[2:49:12] call the question all those in favor of
[2:49:14] deferral of the three applications we
[2:49:16] have now until this policy is uh in
[2:49:20] place all those in favor say I I I any
[2:49:25] opposed hearing none the motion carries
[2:49:28] unanimously thank
[2:49:30] you okay we are now at uh
[2:49:37] 7.41 uh Mr nle uh Fleet Surplus is that
[2:49:42] correct sorry we've got more to do here
[2:49:45] I'm sorry
[2:49:51] uh we're at uh 7.31 Mr Kester ah he
[2:49:54] thought he was getting off early thank
[2:49:56] you counil water and wastewater Reserve
[2:50:01] capacity so included and thank you your
[2:50:03] worship included in the uh package
[2:50:06] tonight uh this is something that I had
[2:50:08] developed this year and wanted to just
[2:50:10] share with Council simply uh to help
[2:50:13] with the awareness to some of the
[2:50:15] reserve capacities for our systems that
[2:50:17] we have or for our water and waste
[2:50:18] systems that we have in place um it's
[2:50:20] simply an awareness and so I would just
[2:50:22] ask that Council receive this report for
[2:50:25] uh for
[2:50:26] information okay uh do I have a motion
[2:50:29] to receive this for information and of
[2:50:30] course entertain so moved councelor W to
[2:50:33] move is there a
[2:50:36] seconder councelor venberg is okay with
[2:50:39] a second thank you um just a real quick
[2:50:43] question um back when we had our Aqua
[2:50:46] report and about uh the volumes of
[2:50:49] what I call drinking water from the
[2:50:50] plant to Bayfield uh could you just just
[2:50:53] a friendly reminder to you I don't
[2:50:54] recall getting that or is this in here I
[2:50:56] quite frankly I I no it's it's not and
[2:51:00] it is something that Aqua is still
[2:51:01] working on to get that information
[2:51:03] pulled together um I will just make a
[2:51:04] note of that well I I appreciate that
[2:51:08] thank you it's not a burning issue but I
[2:51:10] just I got it on my mind there I didn't
[2:51:12] want to forget thank you okay um any
[2:51:15] other questions with regards to these
[2:51:17] numbers of course we're all know that
[2:51:18] those are right because we've all been
[2:51:21] watching it
[2:51:23] closely okay I'm going to call the
[2:51:25] question and this is for information by
[2:51:27] the way thank you for taking the time to
[2:51:29] do this I'm sure it uh you probably need
[2:51:32] to do it anyway and this is a good uh
[2:51:34] little picture for us to look at too so
[2:51:38] appreciate the the
[2:51:40] report all those in favor of the motion
[2:51:42] received for
[2:51:44] information I any opposed none opposed
[2:51:48] motion carries your uh 7.32 alternate
[2:51:53] water supply design yes so uh thank you
[2:51:58] your warship um so this is just a report
[2:52:00] to appoint the consultant
[2:52:04] for um the design for the Zurich
[2:52:08] alternative water supply um as you can
[2:52:11] see there was uh three three Consultants
[2:52:14] that submitted proposals for that um and
[2:52:19] uh and and so evaluations were done on
[2:52:21] them and it was determined to be uh the
[2:52:23] BM Ross was uh was the most appropriate
[2:52:27] consultant for this position or for this
[2:52:29] um project rather thank you that's your
[2:52:32] recommendation is there a motion to
[2:52:34] receive the recommendation DM Ross to do
[2:52:36] the uh proposal proceed with Engineering
[2:52:39] Services move Mr Mayor councelor and
[2:52:42] councelor Becker seconds councelor
[2:52:44] Walden made the motion Chandra
[2:52:48] uh it's pretty well self-explanatory I'm
[2:52:50] going to call the question all those in
[2:52:52] favor say I I any opposed hearing none
[2:52:57] the motion carries thank you uh the
[2:53:00] environmental committee status update
[2:53:03] there's some recommendation here yes so
[2:53:07] um you'll recall mayor and Council that
[2:53:10] earlier in the year there was a request
[2:53:14] to develop a environmental committee so
[2:53:17] this is the follow up to that um and uh
[2:53:21] so so staff have worked to developing
[2:53:24] the terms of
[2:53:25] reference for that which are included
[2:53:28] within there's a recommendation and then
[2:53:30] additionally as part of that
[2:53:32] conversation um which I believe was uh
[2:53:35] through which had taken place at budget
[2:53:38] um there was a conversation with respect
[2:53:41] to the communities in bloom committee um
[2:53:44] and so there's some information on the
[2:53:45] backgrounds to the communities in bloom
[2:53:48] committee
[2:53:49] uh there for the purposes of discussion
[2:53:51] as
[2:53:53] well
[2:53:55] okay Council we can you know I guess Co
[2:53:58] was a prime example of all the things
[2:54:01] kind of got uh um slowed up a little bit
[2:54:05] but um on the
[2:54:07] recommendations uh is Council still
[2:54:10] feeling the the direction from back in
[2:54:12] our budget days I guess we'll uh we'll
[2:54:15] see here uh so on the first
[2:54:17] recommendation
[2:54:18] is there a mover for that motion
[2:54:20] councelor Harris councelor Harris is
[2:54:23] there a
[2:54:26] seconder councelor
[2:54:29] vanenburg yes and if I can then ask a
[2:54:32] question in regards to the terms of ref
[2:54:35] I know it's not uh in writing but I'm
[2:54:38] thinking then Mr ker that it's
[2:54:41] encompassing all aspects of blue water
[2:54:44] when it comes to the environment if it's
[2:54:47] the true trees if it's the waterways
[2:54:50] like a river or stream or the lake shore
[2:54:52] it's all encompassing
[2:54:55] that that's correct yes okay yeah it's the intent is to um for lack of a a
[2:55:05] better word or to to simplify it a
[2:55:07] little bit is to do better by the to the
[2:55:08] environments um and just do uh better
[2:55:11] efforts towards uh environmentally
[2:55:14] conscientious projects
[2:55:18] there was a a real one of the main
[2:55:20] pushes was about getting rid of plastics
[2:55:24] uh clearly that was kind of on the top
[2:55:26] of the list but yeah it is it isn't just
[2:55:28] about Plastics that's for sure is that
[2:55:31] but that I think has been one of the
[2:55:33] main focuses on uh at least on the on
[2:55:38] some people's
[2:55:39] minds
[2:55:40] okay are you satisfied any other
[2:55:43] questions are we can we call the
[2:55:44] question on the first
[2:55:46] one satisfied with the draft and
[2:55:48] direction I guess we'll see by the
[2:55:50] motion all those in favor of the rec
[2:55:52] first recommendation please say I I hi
[2:55:57] any opposed hearing none motion carries
[2:56:01] with regards to give
[2:56:03] direction we is that still the the
[2:56:06] intent of uh of the council yeah so um
[2:56:12] the so it contained within the uh the
[2:56:15] report there was again there's some
[2:56:17] information with respect to Communities
[2:56:19] In Bloom um I know that there was
[2:56:21] discussion with uh at the during budget
[2:56:25] about um looking at the ability to
[2:56:28] incorporate the two components together
[2:56:30] the communities and Bloom committee is
[2:56:32] still active and they are still
[2:56:34] participating uh in in their efforts um
[2:56:37] and uh and as such uh it is something
[2:56:40] that um I feel that the the the
[2:56:43] committee members still obviously see
[2:56:45] value in um however uh um there there
[2:56:49] may be
[2:56:50] Al the appetite of council to look at as
[2:56:54] discussed previously uh seeing the
[2:56:58] seeing a committee where where both are
[2:56:59] formed or or some other
[2:57:02] um uh some other iteration of that uh
[2:57:06] discussion as
[2:57:07] well hey Council um I I guess when we
[2:57:10] went looked at the budget that time if I'm remembering right a majority of
[2:57:16] the like all their flower and stuff are
[2:57:18] done by
[2:57:19] staff or part-time staff so is the issue
[2:57:24] of our of the flowers and the main
[2:57:27] streets that that will continue in the
[2:57:30] budget I know we talked about that it
[2:57:32] was about more the fact of getting of
[2:57:35] working the two together they're both
[2:57:37] about Community betterment tying in with
[2:57:41] what you said there and and also can we
[2:57:44] if we're going to put some money into a
[2:57:46] new committee which we did on that this
[2:57:49] would maybe help that portion of the
[2:57:53] community In Bloom so I'm in favor of it
[2:57:56] I was in favor of then um the motion
[2:57:59] said feasibility integration but I think
[2:58:02] the intent that I did when I motioned
[2:58:04] that that but let let's let's have them
[2:58:06] mold together they they're both the same
[2:58:08] thing so but I'm looking for Council
[2:58:10] Direction here councilor
[2:58:13] venberg thank you then a question um was
[2:58:17] any discussion
[2:58:18] uh made with the committee members of
[2:58:22] community In Bloom as to what we are
[2:58:25] thinking of doing to their committee
[2:58:28] like what was their feedback did we have
[2:58:30] that
[2:58:31] discussion so uh we unfortunately did
[2:58:34] not have an opportunity to uh have that
[2:58:37] conversation with them yet um we did
[2:58:40] make uh we did reach out to them uh but
[2:58:43] at this time comments have not been uh
[2:58:45] we we have
[2:58:46] not uh um we haven't had a chance to
[2:58:49] actually engage with the committee
[2:58:51] because they have had uh difficulties
[2:58:53] actually getting to having their uh
[2:58:56] timelines coordinate on their end to
[2:58:59] actually have their next uh meeting so
[2:59:01] it just it hasn't worked in uh time from when we've developed this terms of
[2:59:06] reference to uh when they've had their next subsequent
[2:59:11] meeting Mr Mar if I can add add to that
[2:59:14] also
[2:59:16] um as youve identified and you can
[2:59:19] respect uh the Mandate of communities in
[2:59:22] bloom was to celebrate various aspects
[2:59:26] of the community not it wasn't just the
[2:59:28] flower committee and it wasn't just
[2:59:30] flowers on the Main Street
[2:59:31] beautification of your main street is
[2:59:33] one of the objectives the environment is
[2:59:35] another one uh celebrating community
[2:59:38] volunteers is another one and and there
[2:59:41] are eight objetives within the Mandate
[2:59:43] of Communities In Bloom and you can
[2:59:47] understand that celebrating volunteers
[2:59:50] and and uh you know doing environmental
[2:59:52] initiatives and everything else in the
[2:59:54] last year has been pretty hard to do
[2:59:56] because uh there hasn't been any
[2:59:58] committees that have been able to work
[3:00:00] and work together to physically go out
[3:00:04] in the community and you know carry on
[3:00:07] some of the good work that they do so
[3:00:09] it's it's been a difficult year to uh to
[3:00:12] get everything together for sure
[3:00:15] um and and uh you know the the members
[3:00:19] on the community In Bloom committee are
[3:00:22] you know they're still Keen uh we have a
[3:00:24] meeting this Thursday and right now
[3:00:27] they're all uh have indicated that
[3:00:29] they'll all be there so uh you know
[3:00:31] there may be some more chance to discuss
[3:00:33] it with them on
[3:00:37] Thursday just okay and with so we so the
[3:00:40] motion that we made back in back at
[3:00:43] budget the council uh investigate the
[3:00:46] feasibility we're we're with that having
[3:00:48] that discussion uh for Deputy Mayor to
[3:00:52] have that discussion with them then on
[3:00:54] this meeting that's that's kind of where
[3:00:55] we're at tonight just to confirm that
[3:00:57] can we leave it at that way then sure
[3:00:59] I'd be happy to we were going to have it
[3:01:00] last meeting and then you know hour
[3:01:04] before the meeting somebody got sick and
[3:01:05] then we we didn't have Quorum so well so
[3:01:08] we'll have it this meeting okay well
[3:01:10] then let's uh leave it for information
[3:01:12] then that uh provide Direction well
[3:01:15] we're just leaving it as it is the
[3:01:16] motion I don't see a motion
[3:01:18] resending the motion of the budget
[3:01:20] meeting or I guess we did it back in
[3:01:22] budget so we're going to leave it as is that fair enough for tonight for
[3:01:26] councel I'm G to take some leeway as as
[3:01:30] I'm looking I'm hearing someone say no
[3:01:32] so on bullet point two we're we're we're giving no New Direction it's they
[3:01:38] will discuss it about working with a
[3:01:40] with an Amalgamated group or whatever
[3:01:42] see what they say very good is that okay
[3:01:44] that's what we're going to do that's
[3:01:46] fine so noted by I hopefully our clerk
[3:01:49] can get that in the notes thank
[3:01:52] you all
[3:01:55] right uh we're going to move on then to
[3:01:59] um
[3:02:01] seage disposal wastewater treatment
[3:02:04] plants is that correct yes that's
[3:02:07] correct thank you for your
[3:02:10] uh stepping in there
[3:02:13] sir um you you've read the re everyone's
[3:02:16] read the report
[3:02:18] have we I am assuming and this has come
[3:02:21] about actually there was uh a at least
[3:02:24] one or two people actually uh called uh
[3:02:28] I think was counselor Irvin and then I
[3:02:31] know I got a call from him and wanting
[3:02:33] to know uh so I got a hold of a staff
[3:02:36] and uh and this is how this report uh
[3:02:40] came about U go ahead um fill in any
[3:02:44] details you wish there Mr ker yeah I was
[3:02:47] just going to make mention to the report
[3:02:49] that um or just as a highlight to the
[3:02:52] report um is that uh So currently right
[3:02:55] now we do have included in our byon it's
[3:02:57] the very last piece of uh in the in the
[3:03:00] background information that we do
[3:03:01] currently have um a fee for the Hol um
[3:03:06] and so as such we also have uh at that
[3:03:09] time or um up until recently have
[3:03:13] accepted uh septage waste um now that
[3:03:16] being said with Bayfield being at
[3:03:18] capacity and not having the ability to
[3:03:21] um to accept septage through the ea uh
[3:03:26] through the ECA for both Hensel and
[3:03:29] Zurich that it's it's been a a difficult
[3:03:32] process for for residents at this time
[3:03:35] and and during the summer months it's
[3:03:37] not as critical um because most uh
[3:03:40] septage that's hauled for uh or from our residents is actually land
[3:03:45] applied but now we're getting into the
[3:03:46] months where land app cannot happen um
[3:03:50] and and so as such this is uh part of
[3:03:52] where uh this the the generation of this
[3:03:55] report is is important at this time as
[3:03:57] well um so with that I would uh if
[3:04:01] there's any questions i''d be happy to answer
[3:04:04] them is there any questions I'm gonna
[3:04:07] ask that the recommendations do you need
[3:04:08] all three of them separate again
[3:04:12] Chandra or can they be all one all
[3:04:15] separate please thank you very much
[3:04:18] Mr Mayor have question go ahead
[3:04:20] councelor Harris um I'm I'm curious um
[3:04:24] the Hensel
[3:04:25] residents uh just been handed not too
[3:04:28] long ago uh uh a bill for debenture on
[3:04:32] Lagoon improvements in Hensel um I'm
[3:04:36] curious as to how I respond to them uh
[3:04:40] when they ask me um
[3:04:43] why there is um septic waste put being
[3:04:47] put into the hens
[3:04:50] lagoons so what the intent would be
[3:04:53] behind that would be that any additional
[3:04:55] revenues generated would go back into
[3:04:58] reserves so is that any
[3:05:00] future um uh any future improvements or
[3:05:05] any future maintenance would actually
[3:05:07] help uh that that those costs would
[3:05:09] actually be helped by this offsetting
[3:05:12] component there so it would actually uh
[3:05:14] go towards uh assisting in any future uh
[3:05:18] maintenance and and and operational um
[3:05:21] costs for that for those
[3:05:24] Works true you Mr May it's gonna be a
[3:05:27] tough sell
[3:05:29] um to to have to respond to that
[3:05:32] considering this what what they're going
[3:05:34] to say to me is um so there's going to
[3:05:38] be money put into
[3:05:39] Reserve uh for the chance that dumping
[3:05:43] septic
[3:05:44] waste uh into the heads of lagoons is
[3:05:47] going to cost cost the Hensel residents
[3:05:48] more money no no it sorry it will not
[3:05:52] cost the residents more money um it so
[3:05:56] there is currently available capacity to
[3:05:59] treat at the Hensel Lagoon and it
[3:06:02] actually there was that available
[3:06:03] capacity there I'm sorry we paid for it
[3:06:08] there was available capacity there prior
[3:06:11] to that debenture being in place what
[3:06:13] was paid for was the um was was there
[3:06:17] was just work that needed to be done at
[3:06:19] that facility um and so the costs that
[3:06:22] would be generated now or sorry the the fees that would be generated or the
[3:06:27] funds that would be generated now would
[3:06:29] go towards offsetting any future Capital
[3:06:32] works for that
[3:06:35] facility and if also I think it's
[3:06:37] important and it's proven by the
[3:06:39] Bayfield if for some reason there's and
[3:06:42] which is a good thing I I guess should
[3:06:45] be there's increase in how closing
[3:06:48] businesses in Hensel then this doesn't
[3:06:52] supersede them regardless if there was
[3:06:55] over say five years there was 120 there
[3:06:58] was 10 loads there was 1,250 bucks or
[3:07:00] whatever if at that point the rules kick
[3:07:04] in that you can't use it it doesn't
[3:07:06] matter that there's a motion that it can
[3:07:08] be there just like what's happened now
[3:07:09] at B at the Bayfield so to the residents
[3:07:12] it's a good question and I that the
[3:07:15] residents it isn't that they will be
[3:07:16] excluded down the road because of of of
[3:07:18] fee of dumping this is only if there's
[3:07:22] capacity and room and there's a whole
[3:07:25] lot of rules that he has to follow and
[3:07:28] uh that're that they're
[3:07:30] mandated so I think that needs to be
[3:07:33] pointed out too yeah may I make a
[3:07:35] question Mr Mayor yeah um I I I believe
[3:07:39] I read that the
[3:07:41] $125 is uh does not cover the
[3:07:44] cost did I read that correctly down
[3:07:47] lower so the fee is
[3:07:50] $125
[3:07:51] um I there's I would believe that we
[3:07:56] should insist on total cost recovery if
[3:07:59] they're going to use any of the lagoons
[3:08:01] so it's $ 150 bucks or
[3:08:03] $175 that blue water should charge the
[3:08:06] cost at
[3:08:08] least so also if I may through you your
[3:08:12] warship also if I may um that is
[3:08:14] something that uh we are actually
[3:08:16] looking to to have um identified as part
[3:08:20] of our um as part of our water
[3:08:24] Wastewater uh financial review if
[3:08:27] Council wishes for that information to
[3:08:28] be brought forward sooner than that uh I
[3:08:31] can do that I I believe councel Walden
[3:08:33] and I'm sure councilor Harris that agree
[3:08:36] that yeah we if we're gonna uh allow
[3:08:39] dumping to help people out only it's
[3:08:40] only for winter time and and that yes it does show a a cost because that is
[3:08:46] one of the benefits
[3:08:48] for our community however it does need
[3:08:50] to 125 you're you point out it's got to
[3:08:53] increase so yeah if this motion passes
[3:08:56] tonight these recommendations I I really
[3:09:00] you're on the record that that those
[3:09:02] fees have to go up
[3:09:04] ASAP uh um is that uh if we need to make
[3:09:08] a motion on that or Direction but uh
[3:09:12] let's be clear about that thank you
[3:09:13] councelor Walden and councelor Harris on
[3:09:15] that is mayor from
[3:09:18] yep um in your report David mentions
[3:09:21] that uh quote portapotty waste is not
[3:09:25] acceptable um how do you justify between
[3:09:29] uh gr B sanitation stopping cleaning out
[3:09:32] four five Porta poies and then stopping
[3:09:34] at Jim Smith to dump peptic tank um how
[3:09:37] do we know that that actually isn't in
[3:09:39] the same
[3:09:40] truck so and and that's a good question
[3:09:44] and so what um we so so we actually do
[3:09:49] sampling and we would be able to uh to
[3:09:51] identify that through uh through
[3:09:53] sampling as well that the that some of
[3:09:55] the
[3:09:56] chemicals um that are used in Porta
[3:10:00] parties so we would actually be able to
[3:10:01] identify that and then we would actually
[3:10:04] um take steps to to Banning that
[3:10:06] individual uh for not adhering to our
[3:10:09] policy um it is detrimental to our
[3:10:11] treatment process um and so as such we do want to make sure that we're not
[3:10:17] um that we're not doing something that
[3:10:19] is detrimental to our treatment process
[3:10:22] um and and so we would we would um
[3:10:25] ultimately if we had a sense we would
[3:10:27] definitely um look into uh into whatever
[3:10:31] we could to ensure that that's not the
[3:10:35] case okay sorry Mr and what at what
[3:10:39] point is it tested sorry Dave I would be
[3:10:41] tested when it's dis like when when
[3:10:44] they're when they're
[3:10:45] discharging and that would be every time
[3:10:48] somebody goes to we typically do staff
[3:10:50] it every time that somebody is
[3:10:52] discharging that's
[3:10:56] correctol which it should be to to
[3:10:59] follow the rules I guess yes that's
[3:11:01] correct so um I'm gonna ask here because
[3:11:05] it's been brought up and I know but uh
[3:11:08] if I may I'd like to add a bullet number
[3:11:10] four to this recommendations and so it's
[3:11:14] clear for direction for you and for me
[3:11:17] um that uh the that further the septic
[3:11:19] fee
[3:11:21] um whatever it's called officially also
[3:11:24] be
[3:11:25] um a report coming back with the with a
[3:11:29] updated
[3:11:31] U charges also be uh the fourth
[3:11:35] recommendation so everyone's clear on
[3:11:37] that is that okay with everyone Mr Mayor
[3:11:40] yes I might I would be more inclined to
[3:11:44] specifically say that uh when they're
[3:11:47] report comes back our septic fees uh
[3:11:49] discharge fees
[3:11:51] must cover our costs must be set to
[3:11:54] cover our cost whatever the report says
[3:11:56] but the intent I believe is my my
[3:11:59] comment was that it has to cover the
[3:12:01] cost so whatever the report says that I
[3:12:03] would make the bullet that our septic
[3:12:04] fees septic discharge fees must cover
[3:12:07] the cost of the
[3:12:09] discharge I just saying that saying the
[3:12:12] same thing a different way maybe I don't
[3:12:13] know yeah no I think that's close enough
[3:12:15] yeah c
[3:12:17] just when we get to number three when
[3:12:19] you say $4,000 included in the budget
[3:12:23] that's is that like 4,000 has to be
[3:12:25] spent whether there's one dump or or 50
[3:12:29] or is that just if there
[3:12:31] Isa that that's to amend the ECA so so
[3:12:35] yes that's correct if if if there was
[3:12:37] one usage or if there were 50 usage the ECA would be reflective of that uh
[3:12:45] of that regardless of the total
[3:12:48] usage so just to be clear then covered
[3:12:52] costs you won't have a one person 4,000
[3:12:56] I guess well that'll stop them coming
[3:12:57] for to us I guess but that keep in mind
[3:13:00] this is all also only for residents of
[3:13:02] blue
[3:13:03] water and that also we didn't I don't
[3:13:06] know if that's been clarified in this
[3:13:07] report but I think it was um and sure
[3:13:11] needs to be and this was again because
[3:13:14] of the odd we have a few people
[3:13:18] that uh came forward in municipality
[3:13:20] Blue Water and they could even be in and
[3:13:22] around our our hamlets too this isn't
[3:13:25] just Lakeshore uh that the owner their
[3:13:29] the trucking is they have to go where
[3:13:31] Dave Uh Oh So currently right now uh
[3:13:35] there's facilities in listol London and
[3:13:38] sarna um that uh that can accept
[3:13:42] additional
[3:13:44] seage um are are are the ones that I
[3:13:46] know
[3:13:47] um are
[3:13:48] available that our private companies
[3:13:51] told the owners they'd be going to I
[3:13:54] believe that sorry that the hauling
[3:13:58] companies have have identified to the to our residents that that's where they
[3:14:03] uh where they're hauling to that's
[3:14:04] correct so our rates can go up
[3:14:07] considerably more than 125 just to be
[3:14:10] fair to everyone but I guess if they go
[3:14:13] to 4,000 well then the 500 or whatever
[3:14:15] they'll go to L will so it it it really
[3:14:19] is about a little bit about our service
[3:14:21] for our community but I totally we all
[3:14:23] totally agree that the 25's got to
[3:14:25] increase it's uh that's clear but just I just want to be upfront with everyone
[3:14:32] cover Mr Mayor by me yeah um if this
[3:14:36] gets passed and when this Go's public
[3:14:40] I'm gonna have some absolute I rate uh
[3:14:43] Hensel residents with the amount of
[3:14:45] money that they have just spent on this
[3:14:47] Lagoon and now we're asking them for for
[3:14:51] all Municipal taxpayers to pay $4,000
[3:14:55] for an EA so that we can have septic
[3:14:58] waste pumped into our Lagoon so $4,000
[3:15:03] is to get permission to put septic waste
[3:15:07] into our Lagoon and that would be all
[3:15:09] blue water taxpayers paying that four
[3:15:13] grand is that that's correct I believe
[3:15:16] right
[3:15:18] so as it relates to the uh and this may
[3:15:22] be detrimental to the conversation as it
[3:15:24] relates to sewer it would actually be uh
[3:15:27] any individuals who are paying in who
[3:15:30] pay sewer fees so it would not be all
[3:15:35] blue water residents it would be anybody
[3:15:37] that pays oh that's all needs to be
[3:15:38] clarified
[3:15:40] here so so and and please understand as
[3:15:43] part of the conversation that there is
[3:15:45] the available capacity now so so
[3:15:49] actually to to create a more viable
[3:15:51] system to have addition additional
[3:15:54] usership and that's where it's important
[3:15:55] to have that fee uh increased to to
[3:15:58] recognize full cost
[3:16:00] recovery is that to actually have a a
[3:16:03] system become more viable it's to get uh
[3:16:06] basically to get you to as close to your
[3:16:09] operating threshold as what you can uh
[3:16:12] to achieve that efficiency of that
[3:16:14] system um so ultimately like if you
[3:16:17] could operate around 95% capacity and
[3:16:20] know that no growth or anything like
[3:16:21] that was going to happen um that would
[3:16:24] be the best or or or optimal operating
[3:16:27] scenario from a financial standpoint um
[3:16:30] I mean if you could do it at 100% that
[3:16:32] would be great but then you're not
[3:16:33] really giving yourself any uh any
[3:16:35] latitude one way or the other um but but
[3:16:38] to have your system operate uh
[3:16:40] financially as uh as as optimally as
[3:16:43] possible that would that would give you
[3:16:45] that best scenario so that this actually
[3:16:47] affords us an opportunity here to have
[3:16:49] our systems operate um uh at a more
[3:16:54] functional capacity than what they are
[3:16:55] right
[3:17:02] now councelor wetstone and then uh uh
[3:17:05] whoever was there there I'll let in for
[3:17:07] sure councelor
[3:17:09] wetstone so the $4,000 we have to we
[3:17:12] have to spend up front in order to do
[3:17:14] the ECA to be amended in order for the
[3:17:17] for for this process to happen so how
[3:17:22] does
[3:17:24] one get full cost recovery of the $4,000
[3:17:27] if we don't know do we have any
[3:17:29] indication on how many times this is
[3:17:31] going to be done I have a general
[3:17:33] indication based on past practices of
[3:17:36] what um of what we have received um
[3:17:41] previous in previous years okay so
[3:17:43] you're when with that full cost recovery
[3:17:46] you have a pretty good idea what that
[3:17:47] number would be then as far I would look
[3:17:50] to have it spread over a period of time
[3:17:52] appropriate period of time based on um
[3:17:55] what what typically we look at for from
[3:17:57] a financial cost recovery like
[3:18:00] principles um that that would be
[3:18:02] appropriate I mean to to the to the
[3:18:05] mayor's point of having it go to one
[3:18:07] individual the first individual um it's that's obviously not appropriate
[3:18:12] but um we would we would look to spread
[3:18:15] that over uh over the appropriate time
[3:18:19] my comment was more I agree my comment
[3:18:21] was more on okay we're gonna do this is
[3:18:22] anybody gonna come it's one of those if
[3:18:24] you build it they will come will they
[3:18:26] really
[3:18:27] come you're saying that there is a need within the municipality
[3:18:32] yes and and and um the other piece to
[3:18:36] that is that uh it does become
[3:18:38] financially detrimental uh to to haul it
[3:18:42] to uh let's say list Orna just simply
[3:18:46] from the the hauling standpoint that the cost of of actually discharging the
[3:18:52] septage at those facilities is not that
[3:18:54] significant it's it's just the drive
[3:18:56] time uh that makes it um less
[3:18:59] financially viable and and as such gets
[3:19:02] uh downloaded to those specific
[3:19:04] residents with with that need Mr Mayor
[3:19:07] if I may yeah go ahead no it's to
[3:19:10] councelor wetstone uh it was clarified
[3:19:13] that it's actually um the Zur enhan
[3:19:16] residents that will be paying
[3:19:19] $4,000 no it was sorry uh if I was not
[3:19:22] clear it's it's so we operate our system
[3:19:25] so it would be the septics anybody sorry
[3:19:28] the sewer system so anybody who pays
[3:19:30] onto the sewer bills for these systems
[3:19:33] that includes Bayfield correct
[3:19:36] right and prior to this they were
[3:19:38] basically going to Bayfield that's
[3:19:41] correct and and now we can't use that
[3:19:44] 4,000 from that one because of way the
[3:19:47] system works each each plan has to have
[3:19:49] its own license each each facility has
[3:19:52] its own ECA to allow it to operate
[3:19:56] that's correct and and bayfield's ECA
[3:19:59] last time it was incorporated or last
[3:20:00] time it was open the amendment was made
[3:20:03] to allow to accept
[3:20:06] septage but this time you couldn't do
[3:20:08] that so we we've been allowing it over
[3:20:11] the years it's only been at Bayfield
[3:20:15] correct all right maybe that maybe
[3:20:17] that's why we're maxed out in our uh
[3:20:19] lagoons I can assure you it's not I was
[3:20:22] being cynical Dave I
[3:20:25] know Mr Mayor yes go ahead make a com um
[3:20:30] going forward should this pass uh we
[3:20:34] might look at making it our objective to
[3:20:37] uh include in the fees if uh if Dave has
[3:20:41] an idea you know an estimate of how much
[3:20:45] we're going to be using to Pro rate that
[3:20:48] so that the $4,000 for sure is not
[3:20:52] eventually does not come out of the
[3:20:54] pockets of the three villages that have
[3:20:57] sewage systems so that that somehow we
[3:21:00] incorporate so it's cost really 150
[3:21:02] bucks a discharge but we charge another
[3:21:04] 30 bucks on top of that to make sure
[3:21:06] that that $4,000 eventually gets paid
[3:21:08] for I believe we should try to make take
[3:21:10] steps that residents don't get charged
[3:21:12] for that EA to let somebody else dump
[3:21:13] sewage
[3:21:15] there yeah
[3:21:17] um that's that's why it's a
[3:21:20] little it's it's it's pointed out the
[3:21:22] fees are going to go up uh we've had
[3:21:24] that discussion but you're right it the
[3:21:26] intent is that 4,000 should be it isn't
[3:21:29] just as simple as some of the other fees
[3:21:31] that we have that allow a little more
[3:21:32] time frame I think this one is we're
[3:21:34] doing people a bit of a
[3:21:35] favor you know so I would hope that that
[3:21:39] uh fee I you picked a number it would be
[3:21:42] a little higher to be paid a little
[3:21:43] faster but we're still doing people a
[3:21:45] favor and it's getting this four or
[3:21:47] 5,000 paid back as fast as possible and
[3:21:50] maybe some money left in the
[3:21:53] kitty um okay is that
[3:21:56] uh do you want to wait till we have the
[3:21:59] fee structure colleagues to see it if
[3:22:02] that would help I'm throwing out options
[3:22:06] here I mean I don't personally I don't
[3:22:09] need to see the fee structure as long as
[3:22:10] I know that it's going to be 100%
[3:22:13] reimbursed is kind of if you want to
[3:22:14] call that or charge back to cover our
[3:22:17] cost whatever that is it is what it is
[3:22:20] whatever the Fe structure is I've got
[3:22:22] I'm listening to Dave he's going to
[3:22:24] figure that out and charge
[3:22:26] accordingly in my mind
[3:22:30] okay will be in the 2021 budget it will
[3:22:33] be visible to the public in the 2021
[3:22:36] budget that that's true we're spending
[3:22:38] $4,000 on it yes and I and I appreciate
[3:22:43] you did did not go unheard what you said
[3:22:45] I totally agree I that's why I want
[3:22:48] that's why it' make it a little easier
[3:22:49] if we'd see the we've told the intent
[3:22:52] today to Dave that we want it to be not
[3:22:55] just that normal fairness but it has to
[3:22:57] be a bit more than fair no above Fair
[3:23:00] because the benefit they're getting to
[3:23:02] get the 4,000 back so I can say to
[3:23:04] resent from the three
[3:23:07] municipalities that this 4,000 isn't get
[3:23:09] stuck that it's taking 8 years to pay
[3:23:11] back that's for sure it's got to be paid
[3:23:13] back fairly
[3:23:15] soon again we don't want a lot of people
[3:23:17] using it in a way but uh it's about if
[3:23:22] there's a need there and we can use it
[3:23:23] and get the money back and we're assured
[3:23:26] that it's not screwing the system
[3:23:28] up there's the issue uh Mr Bear yeah
[3:23:32] that that that is the issue and I guess
[3:23:35] you know I'll I'll support this because
[3:23:37] I believe that our residents on septic
[3:23:40] systems need it and they but they only
[3:23:43] need it in an emergency situation only
[3:23:47] when this cannot be applied and it's too
[3:23:50] muddy to get into the fields with a
[3:23:51] truck otherwise I don't want to see it
[3:23:54] to go into the uh into the lagoons and
[3:23:56] the reason is not because of the fees or
[3:23:59] the cost or anything else this is
[3:24:01] entirely different biological processes
[3:24:03] you're talking anerobic and aerobic
[3:24:05] processes and you'll flip that Lagoon if
[3:24:08] you put enough of that stuff in there so
[3:24:10] these lagoons do not are not made to
[3:24:12] take septage they will take it on a
[3:24:15] limited basis and you can spread it out
[3:24:18] over time so I'm concerned about the
[3:24:20] operation of the Lagoon more than the
[3:24:23] fee and uh only be done on an emergency
[3:24:26] basis and I think that needs to be
[3:24:29] written up clearly too and it's only for
[3:24:31] blue waterer residents it's only a
[3:24:33] certain times pointed out and and that
[3:24:36] they're told up front regardless of
[3:24:38] whatever the fee is if they get to a
[3:24:40] point there's too many we give the power
[3:24:41] to Dave to say sorry you can't come here
[3:24:44] and don't and yeah phone Paul clo the
[3:24:46] mayor
[3:24:46] there I'll say listen the rules are the
[3:24:48] rules and and I'm sorry you're going to
[3:24:51] have to go to somewhere else including
[3:24:54] yeah can I speak finally
[3:24:57] yes well I can't see sorry uh counselor
[3:25:00] Becker I can't see you so don't don't
[3:25:03] say finally to me I appreciate we're all
[3:25:05] trying to get along here it's a long
[3:25:06] night but in I accept I accept it but in but don't say I didn't try
[3:25:11] to I can try to speak for the last 10
[3:25:14] minutes but oh I apologize I agree with
[3:25:17] our Deputy Mayor and we've been told by
[3:25:19] BM Ross that we're not supposed to
[3:25:21] accept this septage into our lagoons
[3:25:23] because it is a different component
[3:25:25] affluence and we uh in the past they
[3:25:29] allowed a bit to get into the Bayfield
[3:25:31] Lagoon over the years but they've
[3:25:33] frowned on it immensely and I don't
[3:25:37] think we're we're going to open up the
[3:25:39] doors here to a wrong idea and
[3:25:44] the idea should be be on the residents
[3:25:48] to have their tanks pumped out on an Ann
[3:25:51] or threeyear basis and do it in the
[3:25:54] months that are allotted to them and if
[3:25:57] we start spending $4,000 of taxpayers
[3:26:00] money I agree with coun Harris there's
[3:26:03] going to be
[3:26:04] upgrades so just if I may uh your
[3:26:08] warship um
[3:26:11] the uh the larger issue here is is
[3:26:16] actually not the septic systems it's
[3:26:19] people with holding tanks which we do
[3:26:21] have a few of them
[3:26:22] are there's a handful of them um so uh
[3:26:27] in the municipality and so um the the
[3:26:30] majority of issues to to the deputy
[3:26:32] mayor's Point um that in an emergency
[3:26:35] situation let's say they have a system
[3:26:37] failure whatever something like that um
[3:26:39] that we would look to to having that um
[3:26:42] the larger issue becomes with holding
[3:26:44] tanks uh for the residents within our
[3:26:47] municipality who um they just don't have
[3:26:50] the capacity to to to to go through the
[3:26:53] entire um through the entire winter
[3:26:56] season let's say uh to to wait for land
[3:26:59] application to actually take place th
[3:27:01] those are the ones that that end up
[3:27:03] being a little bit more critical to the
[3:27:04] conversation and just the points to the
[3:27:06] conversation I am working with BM Ross
[3:27:09] uh on this to actually come to the
[3:27:11] determination on what the max value of
[3:27:14] septage to be able to be
[3:27:16] accepted um at at any of our facilities
[3:27:20] is actually um just so we know what that
[3:27:23] volume is so we're not uh we're not
[3:27:26] providing a detriment to our treatment
[3:27:29] process um because yes to to the whole
[3:27:31] point I don't want to end up seeing that
[3:27:35] uh that that our treatment process
[3:27:37] actually ends up failing because of
[3:27:39] accepting septage
[3:27:41] waste another question uh Mr Mar if I
[3:27:44] may uh since you brought it up uh the uh
[3:27:48] Bayfield Lagoon was also accepting lee8
[3:27:51] from the landfill at one point is that
[3:27:53] still accepting that or not so we have
[3:27:57] so also included in the ECA for the
[3:27:59] Bayfield Lagoon is uh the ability to
[3:28:03] haul leech eight we have not done that
[3:28:04] in I believe two years actually okay
[3:28:08] because that throws your do way B way
[3:28:11] out yep that's correct and and so we're
[3:28:14] actually um so we're actually making use
[3:28:18] of that on site actually the lee8 we're doing better um in uh in in in our
[3:28:25] lee8 handling on site um so I I took
[3:28:29] active steps to seeing that that would
[3:28:31] take place uh when I started in the
[3:28:33] municipality and then we're also any
[3:28:35] additional materials that we are or any
[3:28:37] additional Lee that is being generated
[3:28:39] we're actually broadcasting it on our
[3:28:41] site uh in an effort actually to Aid in
[3:28:44] compaction uh actually it just through the additional fluid um
[3:28:49] migrating through the system it actually
[3:28:52] uh it actually AIDS in compaction of our
[3:28:54] uh of our um of our Mound at our Stanley
[3:28:59] facility that was good information it
[3:29:02] got saved a b report for later so that's
[3:29:04] good um just to I don't want to belabor
[3:29:07] this but I'm going to set I guess I'm
[3:29:08] going to septic is also different than
[3:29:11] holding tank material holding M material
[3:29:14] from what I understand is a little more
[3:29:15] easy I to take for the system yes or no
[3:29:18] answer it it's all still septage okay
[3:29:22] all right just want to know for
[3:29:23] clarification so colleagues we're we've
[3:29:26] had good discussion and it needed to
[3:29:28] happen uh councelor Harris was right it
[3:29:30] sounds nice but oh boy you you you know
[3:29:35] you're these can catch you so I'm I'm I
[3:29:39] would like Council though to make some
[3:29:40] decisions here if they can
[3:29:43] tonight if you want more information or
[3:29:45] think about it that's fine too so
[3:29:48] there's the options we vote one two or
[3:29:50] three see where they go or or a motion
[3:29:53] you want to think about it and have it
[3:29:54] come back I I I'm looking for
[3:29:57] direction I have conf Mr Mayor I have
[3:30:00] confidence that uh our Public's Works
[3:30:03] manager has it uh under control and uh
[3:30:06] has given it proper consideration and
[3:30:08] will uh will be aware of all of the
[3:30:11] issues so I think we should move forward
[3:30:16] first one or as many as we have to move
[3:30:18] okay well the first recommendation is
[3:30:20] that uh that Council direct staff to
[3:30:22] allow hold septage generated in the
[3:30:26] municipality to be discharged in Hensel
[3:30:28] and Zurich lagoons is there a
[3:30:32] mover can we add on an emergency basis
[3:30:38] there um or something there emergency
[3:30:42] yeah then it's clear then it's clear for
[3:30:45] sure he's to have some other rules in
[3:30:47] there to fine detail but they they like
[3:30:49] to get the the main stuff written on the
[3:30:51] front line that's for sure I agree
[3:30:53] emergency
[3:30:54] use uh there'll be dates and all that entails right like only okay
[3:31:01] yeah but so it's good to have that word
[3:31:02] yeah I I I I'm fine with that I don't
[3:31:05] think it I don't think it wrecks the
[3:31:06] intent of the motion that's that's only
[3:31:08] I'm looking at right from and of course
[3:31:10] chander is still the last word on that
[3:31:13] but if that if she can sees that isn't a change in the intent then uh we're
[3:31:19] going to leave it
[3:31:20] there so the motion reads Z lagoons and
[3:31:24] includes emergency use
[3:31:29] only is that clear enough for
[3:31:34] everyone I'm gonna call the question is
[3:31:36] there a seconder sorry I don't have a
[3:31:38] seconder yet sorry you're right
[3:31:40] Vandenberg will councelor Vandenberg
[3:31:43] second
[3:31:46] I'm going to call the question all those
[3:31:48] in favor of the motion say I I any
[3:31:52] opposed
[3:31:54] Nate I hear I believe the eyes have it
[3:31:58] I'm going to say that one as pin p
[3:32:01] pass on number two that Council direct
[3:32:05] staff to make the appropriate amendments
[3:32:07] to the Zurich and Hensel wastewater
[3:32:09] treatment facility ECA to formally
[3:32:11] identify the ability to accept called
[3:32:14] septage Mr May I'll move
[3:32:17] that Harris Harris if I can add to it I
[3:32:22] feel that that maybe should have been
[3:32:23] the first recommendation so that we can
[3:32:25] find out whether or not BM Ross uh
[3:32:28] actually will allow the septic to be put
[3:32:30] into the lagoons duly noted sir thank
[3:32:34] you is there a
[3:32:36] seconder councelor Walden with second
[3:32:38] councelor
[3:32:40] Walden your worship councelor Harris did
[3:32:43] you add verbage to two number two uh I
[3:32:48] just thought it should have been the
[3:32:49] first recommendation is all my was my
[3:32:53] opinion okay thank you for that
[3:32:58] clarification so the there was nothing
[3:33:00] added uh for the
[3:33:02] record good comment though there was
[3:33:04] good comment I'll say all right uh is
[3:33:09] what's been moved and seconded I'm going
[3:33:10] to call the question all those in favor
[3:33:12] say I I I and any opposed
[3:33:16] hearing none motion carries and number
[3:33:19] three that Council direct staff to
[3:33:21] include the $4,000 in the
[3:33:24] 21 2021 sewer budget to have Zurich and
[3:33:27] Hansel water treat Wastewater Treatment
[3:33:30] Facility in the ECA amended is there a
[3:33:38] mover so all mve Deputy Mayor Deputy
[3:33:42] Mayor thank
[3:33:43] you Secor
[3:33:46] sorry I wasn't hit he didn't hit the
[3:33:48] mute button fast enough wetstone okay
[3:33:50] thank you councelor wetstone it's been
[3:33:52] moved and
[3:33:54] seconded uh I think it's clear fairly
[3:33:57] clear I'm going to call the question all
[3:33:58] those in favor I I those
[3:34:02] opposed hearing none motion carries I
[3:34:06] did add a fourth bullet point that the
[3:34:08] uh septage fee be updated to uh better
[3:34:13] cover the cost now what's the word that
[3:34:15] you asked for sir uh councelor cost
[3:34:18] recovery full cost
[3:34:21] recovery that that that be the fourth
[3:34:23] motion is that okay with chander because
[3:34:25] it wasn't in the public is it close
[3:34:27] enough for the intent though of the
[3:34:30] discussion if I could just repeat it was
[3:34:33] um that septic discharge fees must cover
[3:34:36] the cost of discharge be be updated to
[3:34:39] cover to have full cost
[3:34:41] recovery mayor yes would you uh
[3:34:44] considering that bullet including the
[3:34:46] 4,000 specify including the
[3:34:49] $4,000 uh for the
[3:34:52] ecas like just make it specific full
[3:34:56] cost recovery in in this is including
[3:34:58] you know what I
[3:34:59] mean you don't have to but that that
[3:35:01] would specify that we're not planning to bill the sewage people that have
[3:35:07] sewers for this you know what I'm saying
[3:35:11] yeah Dave is that okay with
[3:35:14] that yeah okay I think the intent is
[3:35:17] there yeah I would have it would have
[3:35:19] been included anyways but I'm I'm okay
[3:35:21] with the verbage being added you miss
[3:35:23] thank you I I didn't real I didn't totally grasp that thank you but
[3:35:28] it's a good point we're we're driving
[3:35:29] the point home we don't we want this
[3:35:31] paid back as soon as possible and and uh
[3:35:33] and and actually make some money for the
[3:35:35] Kitty uh for sure okay so is that clear
[3:35:39] enough updated to cover to full cost
[3:35:43] recovery is that close enough you can
[3:35:45] work with the
[3:35:46] yes okay and and Council understands the
[3:35:49] intent okay I'm going to is there a move
[3:35:51] or secutive for that Council Walden
[3:35:53] would
[3:35:54] move Walden councelor Harris you
[3:35:57] seconding why not thank you Mr Mayor for
[3:36:01] discussion yes um I'd just like to say
[3:36:03] thank you very much uh Mr ker for your
[3:36:06] work on this we're not trying to give
[3:36:07] you a hard time we're just trying to
[3:36:08] make it work no that's not a problem at
[3:36:11] all I don't I don't take it as you
[3:36:12] giving me a hard time I take it as
[3:36:14] valuable input so not a problem at all
[3:36:16] thank you okay thank you I'm going to
[3:36:19] call the question all those in favor say
[3:36:21] I I I any opposed hearing none motion
[3:36:28] carries uh is that all for your tonight
[3:36:32] Mr I think that's it for me you don't
[3:36:34] want to add anything yet I'm I'm good
[3:36:36] right now okay thank you thank you um
[3:36:40] Fleet Surplus Zurich
[3:36:43] Olympia Jeff are you there hi am good
[3:36:46] evening Council um Council we we've read
[3:36:50] the report is there anything you wish to
[3:36:52] add to it because there's a
[3:36:53] recommendation here that we uh make it a
[3:36:56] surplus um in the essence of time are
[3:36:59] you I hope you're not
[3:37:00] insulted not at all there's nothing you
[3:37:02] needed to add here nope I'm gonna I'm
[3:37:05] gonna ask is there a the recommendation
[3:37:07] is there a moving or a second for this
[3:37:09] moved councelor Walden seconded by
[3:37:11] councelor vanenburg any
[3:37:14] discussion all those in favor of the
[3:37:16] recommendation please say I I any
[3:37:20] opposed motion carries council chambers
[3:37:25] update um is there anything you wish to
[3:37:28] add to the report I know Council spent a
[3:37:30] lot of time reading this stuff like they
[3:37:32] always do but is there anything
[3:37:35] uh yeah um so we had just had made um a
[3:37:40] recommendation that we would not move
[3:37:41] forward with the painting and carpeting
[3:37:43] of council chambers but we've identified
[3:37:45] money in the budget this year from an
[3:37:47] operational standpoint which means that
[3:37:49] we could uh in fact get painting done of
[3:37:53] the council chambers gallery and kitchen
[3:37:56] area and it would be uh underneath a
[3:37:59] $7,000 limit that we've
[3:38:02] got okay now keep in mind that last
[3:38:06] year's budget we we said you know we're
[3:38:09] there was recommended to do all of it
[3:38:11] but the council and keeping in mind that
[3:38:13] the taxpayers said let's do it uh one at
[3:38:17] a time so we put in the budget to do the
[3:38:20] offices in Zurich yeah and as and as as
[3:38:23] pointed out because Co I guess maybe in
[3:38:26] one way uh had a positive for this
[3:38:29] because the staff if I if I understand
[3:38:31] this right we're able to do a lot of the
[3:38:33] work and of course but the people not
[3:38:34] being in the office they probably even
[3:38:36] made some time and this time has
[3:38:38] reflected in some savings and
[3:38:41] so rightfully we were figuring on doing
[3:38:43] it in this coming budget
[3:38:45] uh it looks like we're going able to do
[3:38:47] this and and um get a lot of it done and
[3:38:50] not and not we'll have free up some
[3:38:52] money for this upcoming budget for other
[3:38:54] things is that a fair statement that's
[3:38:56] correct thank you is there a motion for
[3:38:59] this recommendation Council W would move
[3:39:01] councelor Walden is there a
[3:39:04] second councelor
[3:39:06] vanenburg is everyone clear on the
[3:39:09] motion and the
[3:39:10] intent I'm going to call the question
[3:39:13] all those in favor of the recommendation
[3:39:17] any
[3:39:18] opposed hearing none motion carries and
[3:39:21] I just want to say also to the staff
[3:39:22] thank you for for uh you know doing the
[3:39:25] job but also and taking the initiative
[3:39:28] and make and bringing forth this
[3:39:29] recommendation to council I think that
[3:39:32] bodess well on all of us and uh it does
[3:39:34] not go unnoticed thank
[3:39:36] you uh the second Point uh is the uh
[3:39:42] resilience infrastructure correct
[3:39:45] and
[3:39:46] that's our
[3:39:49] CEO well is she still there yes yes I am
[3:39:54] thank you and uh it must be a sign of a
[3:39:55] great Council that managers compete to
[3:39:58] do Council reports to present before you
[3:40:00] it was originally going to be mine but
[3:40:02] the treasure beat me to it so I'd like
[3:40:04] to defer to her since she did write it
[3:40:06] so okay thank you uh I appreciate all
[3:40:10] the staff sticking around by the
[3:40:13] way okay um I get answorth is this who's
[3:40:16] going to be yep I can I can uh feel the
[3:40:20] report um basically we've set out in
[3:40:22] front of you the options uh staff were
[3:40:25] directed to come up with a A list of
[3:40:28] projects and Council gets to make the
[3:40:31] tough decision as to which one uh you
[3:40:34] want us to select and fully cost and
[3:40:36] enter into the system by December 21st
[3:40:39] to be for the
[3:40:42] funding okay
[3:40:45] counselors there's
[3:40:48] uh people brought in some ideas and a
[3:40:51] combination of things is there anyone to
[3:40:55] get things moving along is there anyone
[3:40:56] wish to make a a motion or or anything
[3:40:59] councelor
[3:41:00] Walden yes please Mr Mayor yes if we
[3:41:03] could rule rule it down to number four
[3:41:05] more
[3:41:06] Court um and the just that says
[3:41:10] 77,000 but total of
[3:41:12] 93 that one there uh also we also
[3:41:16] discussed it could be some Bridge work
[3:41:17] or some extra drain work done possibly
[3:41:19] with some of this money I don't know if
[3:41:22] that's
[3:41:23] possible but uh I'd like to make a
[3:41:25] motion for more Court oh okay so we have
[3:41:30] a motion to do more Court then if I may
[3:41:33] Mr Mayor my logic is that uh I believe
[3:41:36] we we passed it on budget this year and
[3:41:41] then when we allocated
[3:41:43] our Bridge uh reserve and Road funds to
[3:41:47] a different project $419,000 went work
[3:41:50] Court also was bypassed again so this is
[3:41:52] the the third time that I'm just trying
[3:41:54] to make a an acknowledgement that this
[3:41:57] needs to be done and we have potential
[3:42:00] funds okay uh since there's been a
[3:42:03] motion I need someone to Second it for
[3:42:05] discussion uh is there someone wishing
[3:42:08] to make it councelor venberg are you
[3:42:10] second it yes I'll second it if I can
[3:42:13] make comment too on it okay thank you uh
[3:42:16] for those are you getting background
[3:42:18] noise out that that aren't at the
[3:42:20] meeting here because the fan came on so
[3:42:22] if I'm I I'm not trying to ignore anyone
[3:42:25] it's a little harder to hear so so bear
[3:42:28] with me okay uh it's been moved and
[3:42:31] seconded councelor venberg you wish to
[3:42:34] speak yep thank you mayor
[3:42:38] and we're we're caught we're we're all
[3:42:40] caught in a hard place I mean there
[3:42:42] there's nine items here we've got a
[3:42:44] tight deadline
[3:42:46] uh to to make these choices and and
[3:42:49] they're all valid uh um selections as
[3:42:53] well but um just to add in I I did put
[3:42:57] in the request for Mo Court uh it did
[3:43:00] come
[3:43:01] before council at budget time and uh at
[3:43:06] that time it was uh defeated and and
[3:43:09] that's that's the way it is and it was
[3:43:11] also to do with the it would put I
[3:43:14] believe an ex
[3:43:16] levy on the uh the residents as well but
[3:43:19] shortly
[3:43:20] after uh our our budget had passed and
[3:43:24] Mr kuster could maybe correctly uh maybe
[3:43:29] two weeks later three weeks later we had
[3:43:31] the road uh asset uh management report
[3:43:35] that came out and uh for more Court it
[3:43:39] was
[3:43:40] rated the worst paved Road and I say
[3:43:43] paved Road in the municipalities so
[3:43:47] there is an urgency to get that repaired
[3:43:49] it is a an asset and uh I hate to see it being uh Ro not being maintained
[3:43:57] properly so that's why I put it back um
[3:44:02] into this uh request or into this fund
[3:44:05] for your
[3:44:06] consideration okay thank you further
[3:44:10] comments questions counc Mr Mars
[3:44:13] councelor Harris councel Harris yeah and
[3:44:15] I agree with ccer vanderberg everybody's
[3:44:17] stuck between a rock and a hard place
[3:44:19] when there's nine selections and I was
[3:44:22] when I first read it I was concerned on
[3:44:24] how this was going to be approached to
[3:44:26] be honest with you uh because there's
[3:44:28] multiple things here that I think the
[3:44:30] money should go towards and I'm not sure
[3:44:32] how you just pick one of nine um if you
[3:44:35] want to talk assets number nine being
[3:44:38] the HV HC units in h both Arenas in
[3:44:42] Zurich and Hensel Zurich being three and
[3:44:43] one in Hensel um that's an asset that I
[3:44:46] mean if you could get paid for that's
[3:44:48] something that could last another 10 to
[3:44:50] 15 years I mean how do we pick one like
[3:44:55] I don't understand like I understand
[3:44:56] there's a motion out there and if I say
[3:44:59] Nate then it goes to the next counselor
[3:45:01] and he picks his and then it gets
[3:45:03] seconded and then it gets denied like
[3:45:05] how does this work well yeah
[3:45:09] um the government came forth I guess the
[3:45:12] good news was the government through
[3:45:14] covid
[3:45:15] uh and if I I understand there wasn't
[3:45:18] every municipality got this maybe some
[3:45:20] got more I don't know they they threw
[3:45:22] this special they threw it I shouldn't
[3:45:24] say Throw they put forth this
[3:45:27] $100,000 that a number of municipalities
[3:45:30] got it it's 100,000 it wasn't you know
[3:45:34] 300,000 or whatever it's still a chunk
[3:45:36] of change H the criteria was as you see
[3:45:40] they wanted it sort of spent on
[3:45:42] something and that was tangible
[3:45:45] not engineering they didn't want a lot
[3:45:47] of engineering fees they were pretty
[3:45:49] clear about that and a few things so
[3:45:51] you're right we we we it's a lot of
[3:45:54] money but it isn't a lot of money to do
[3:45:56] some things
[3:45:58] so we we threw it out people did make uh
[3:46:03] ideas that came around this the staff
[3:46:05] had some ideas too and uh and this is
[3:46:08] what we ended up with at some point
[3:46:10] though we do have to make a decision and the only way we do it is through
[3:46:14] motion and there's a motion here right
[3:46:17] now um and U we'll see where it goes uh
[3:46:22] so I don't know where it'll go but we'll we'll just this is how it works so
[3:46:27] Mr counselor yeah if I
[3:46:30] could yes go
[3:46:32] ahead councelor wetstone I think yeah if
[3:46:35] I can and I think and I'm I'm not sure
[3:46:37] if if I'm listening to councelor Harris
[3:46:41] differently I'm I'm looking at it as
[3:46:45] who put their hand up first to make the
[3:46:47] motion
[3:46:48] first that's not the way this should
[3:46:50] have been done this should have been we
[3:46:52] should have talked about ones and not
[3:46:55] just made a motion and now we're now
[3:46:57] we're just going to keep defeating
[3:46:58] everything until somebody gets what they
[3:47:00] want you know at the end of the day it
[3:47:02] seems like we're just rushing into it to
[3:47:03] get it done more than anything else
[3:47:06] because to be honest we have a Paving
[3:47:08] policy I'm not supporting Mo Court not
[3:47:11] because I think the one in Bayfield is
[3:47:14] the right one
[3:47:15] I believe there's another one that's
[3:47:16] more
[3:47:18] important Mr Mayor may make a comment Y
[3:47:22] uh Mr may my Logic for supporting more
[3:47:24] court is that it was in uh dire shape
[3:47:29] this year at budget time and it was
[3:47:31] defeated at budget and we had other
[3:47:34] Reserve funds and we didn't look at work
[3:47:37] court at that time and this is a road
[3:47:39] that really does need work it's
[3:47:41] something that has been identified in
[3:47:43] the past it's not just a new idea and uh
[3:47:46] it's something that we could complete as
[3:47:48] a as municipality and and say hey we did
[3:47:51] that and that's that was my logic in and
[3:47:53] nominating that particular
[3:47:59] project
[3:48:01] okay any
[3:48:04] what the motion's out there we have to
[3:48:06] vote on it one way or the other now
[3:48:07] right
[3:48:10] so well from my understanding of how how
[3:48:13] it works
[3:48:16] yes uh but
[3:48:18] I I uh I I don't want also all of us as
[3:48:22] counselors to
[3:48:24] get um feeling that we're going to get
[3:48:27] uh at each other if I can say it that
[3:48:29] way as a chair no no that is that is
[3:48:32] that that was almost I almost wanted
[3:48:34] this 100,000 we didn't get it quite
[3:48:36] frankly about it if you want to know
[3:48:38] when I seen why why is the government
[3:48:39] doing this but at the same time I think
[3:48:41] you'd all want to kick somebody if if I
[3:48:43] would have said to the to to the to the
[3:48:45] um Member of Parliament here which she
[3:48:48] uh emailed me and phoned me to say this
[3:48:50] just was announced please get it on your
[3:48:52] table because they're gonna pull it and
[3:48:53] I I could have I almost said you know
[3:48:56] Jeepers so let's just keep that in mind
[3:48:59] I I I accept the responsibility put it
[3:49:02] on me that I accepted a motion of a
[3:49:04] counselor Okay I accept that all right
[3:49:08] but don't I don't want you guys all get
[3:49:09] mad at each other no no that's not the
[3:49:11] case that's not the case I I appreciate
[3:49:13] but I needed to say it
[3:49:15] for my own news yes can I just make a
[3:49:18] note procedurally um so yes the motion
[3:49:20] has been moved and seconded and it's in
[3:49:22] the possession of council right now but
[3:49:24] if the Mover and the seconder agree um
[3:49:26] it can be withdrawn if there are no
[3:49:28] objections of any other members that's
[3:49:30] always an option oh thank thank you for that clarification
[3:49:35] appreciate that and Mr Mayor if I can on
[3:49:39] celer Weston's comments he's absolutely
[3:49:41] right like I mean there's roads and
[3:49:43] Hensel that one in particular that has
[3:49:46] been in I hear about every day yeah but
[3:49:48] I mean it's that that that's the the pro
[3:49:50] we have a Paving policy a Paving process
[3:49:53] the other road that got turned down in
[3:49:55] budget was babyon line and I'm not sure
[3:49:57] how many times you driven down it but
[3:49:59] it's in dialect too I mean no B Babylon
[3:50:03] we actually did what we did with our p
[3:50:05] with our
[3:50:06] housing with our U we did the same thing
[3:50:09] we put enough in so that this year the
[3:50:12] other half comes in and then the road
[3:50:14] will be that that will be paved that's
[3:50:17] how we did that and one of the reasons
[3:50:19] we did that was because in Hensel when
[3:50:22] we had to do pipe work we all agreed
[3:50:25] that you know what that road when you're
[3:50:28] ripping up the pipe to put a little bit
[3:50:29] of cement we might as well fix that and
[3:50:32] we put the money towards that the road
[3:50:34] that you're referring to uh which is in
[3:50:37] front of the uh if it's what I think it
[3:50:39] is the post office um I've already uh
[3:50:42] double checked with well is you know
[3:50:45] part of the discussion when when the
[3:50:46] Hensel Co-op came up with the idea of
[3:50:49] wanting to take over part of the road uh
[3:50:51] part of it for me I think probably for
[3:50:53] most of you that had the discussion or
[3:50:55] at least with the back of your mind if
[3:50:57] they get it as is we've just saved the
[3:50:59] ability for the rest of that road to
[3:51:01] help in the budget process to get paved
[3:51:03] because we're we're missing how many
[3:51:05] feet at the other end um and I did
[3:51:08] double check as part of this
[3:51:10] discussion with and Dave uh might
[3:51:13] remember I was why I called about about
[3:51:16] when is the main street of Hensel which
[3:51:20] is part of the county which will be
[3:51:22] count of your county budget uh is going
[3:51:24] to be up for Renewal and ripped up and
[3:51:27] redone it sure makes sense at that point
[3:51:30] to have it in the budget and and no
[3:51:32] matter where we are in the priority list
[3:51:34] it sure makes sense to have it that in
[3:51:36] there now the the good news is I agreed
[3:51:40] now of course Council would still have
[3:51:41] to vote but I'd like to think that the
[3:51:42] council with the same comment sense of
[3:51:45] working together as a team that it makes
[3:51:47] sense at those times uh but that won't
[3:51:49] be till
[3:51:50] 2023 that that's happening and again
[3:51:53] this 100,000 I'm not sure if the 100,000
[3:51:56] would do the road properly again it's it
[3:51:58] ashalt costs so dang much uh so um
[3:52:03] anyway uh but that just to be fair and
[3:52:06] yeah Mr may all I was saying was is not
[3:52:09] that I wanted that money towards I was
[3:52:11] saying that we have a PID process you
[3:52:13] said it many times that was a process we
[3:52:15] have a process right we also have a
[3:52:18] process and then this came up and and I
[3:52:21] I'm hearing some of the argument of my
[3:52:23] two colleagues that you're hearing and
[3:52:26] that's was their I take him at their
[3:52:28] word was their intent of why they they
[3:52:30] thought of it anyway
[3:52:32] um go ahead here yeah and and I'll I'll
[3:52:37] go to uh Mr Walden if he wants to uh
[3:52:41] take it off the floor I'm okay with that
[3:52:43] know and we can go go through them all
[3:52:47] uh I'm okay with that too so okay it
[3:52:50] might be a a matter where we're g to
[3:52:52] have to pick one out of the Hat then or
[3:52:54] two out of the hat with a further
[3:52:57] discussion on
[3:52:59] matters I look to the direction of the
[3:53:02] two counselors Mr Mayor uh as I said
[3:53:05] before my my Logic on the motion I would
[3:53:08] support a motion on any of these
[3:53:10] projects this is the project that I
[3:53:12] thought was most important that we could
[3:53:15] achieve and uh the $100,000 is outside
[3:53:19] of our policies if somebody handed us
[3:53:21] $100,000 said here what can you do with
[3:53:23] it this is why I made that motion so I'm
[3:53:25] GNA leave the motion if it gets defeated I understand it's not
[3:53:28] about being first I think it's just the
[3:53:30] recommendation that I had okay thank
[3:53:34] you counselors um that uh is there any
[3:53:39] further
[3:53:42] discussion I will comment that uh with
[3:53:45] regards to uh in know a valid point I
[3:53:47] looked at they I looked at all of them I
[3:53:49] thought they all for the most part well
[3:53:52] Shoreline protection the Lakes up and
[3:53:54] this is supposed to be sent within a
[3:53:55] year I'm I appreciate I'm glad it got
[3:53:58] ticked off to think about but yeah that
[3:54:00] one I I got to admit that one I was not
[3:54:02] on the idea that it's not a great idea
[3:54:04] but I don't to fit they want this money
[3:54:08] they would like this money that was part
[3:54:09] of the criteria that it's be spent in
[3:54:11] the coming year and be spent majority of
[3:54:14] it on on hiring people to do labor um
[3:54:18] Engineers are important but I guess they
[3:54:20] thought they didn't want to be up all in
[3:54:22] engineering fees at least that's what I
[3:54:24] got the impression of when I look at U
[3:54:27] so I will look at uh at the hvacs that
[3:54:29] really got my attention too but as as
[3:54:32] was pointed out we're talking a a maybe
[3:54:34] 10year life cycle when I'm looking at
[3:54:37] something that I thought about this
[3:54:38] 100,000 it's something cander ashal
[3:54:41] that's going to be 20 or 30 year
[3:54:43] lifespan
[3:54:44] and and get it off our table I was quite
[3:54:47] frankly that the sidewalks I thought
[3:54:49] might have been uh something that we put
[3:54:51] 20,000 in the budget for the first time
[3:54:53] in a long time we we put that in the
[3:54:56] budget but I thought well there you go
[3:54:57] maybe that could help out some of them
[3:54:59] but at the same
[3:55:02] time a lot of these places like quite
[3:55:04] frankly brucefield I think the residents
[3:55:07] quite frankly and I agree with them I
[3:55:08] think they would appreciate that we
[3:55:10] start putting money away to pave the
[3:55:12] lane so again the 100,000
[3:55:15] um but uh so as I as I go through u i
[3:55:19] there's a motion here is there any
[3:55:21] further comments we'll call the question
[3:55:23] and we'll and I appreciate the Mover and
[3:55:25] the seconder in their uh in their
[3:55:27] comments but we'll see what
[3:55:29] happens Mr Mayor and I I if I'm not
[3:55:32] going to support a motion I have to I
[3:55:34] have to make it clear to the public and
[3:55:36] Council why I'm not going to support it
[3:55:38] because it is part of our asset
[3:55:40] management plan uh if it's in that bad a
[3:55:42] shape it should show up in the Ash
[3:55:45] management replacement plan so I think
[3:55:47] it'll get done when it's
[3:55:52] appropriate okay that's why I just had
[3:55:54] to make that clear no no very good uh is
[3:55:58] there any other comments or
[3:56:01] questions so the motion is uh to repay
[3:56:05] more Court I'm going to call the
[3:56:07] question all those in favor say I I I
[3:56:12] all those against say
[3:56:15] Nay n n
[3:56:19] nay oh boy you guys are making it it's
[3:56:22] hard to pick up here raise your hand
[3:56:24] instead if it's easier right yeah that's
[3:56:26] thank you counselor all those in favor
[3:56:29] raise your hand now I I got a hit I'm
[3:56:31] gonna have to have our because it's on
[3:56:32] the book here uh where is our clerk can
[3:56:35] you see everyone perhaps I can just um
[3:56:38] go through the list of names and just do
[3:56:40] an informal or not informal but just
[3:56:44] respond when I say your name sure okay
[3:56:47] so mayor yes you're in support of yep
[3:56:52] Deputy Mayor
[3:56:54] Ferguson
[3:56:56] opposed opposed thank you councelor
[3:57:02] Becker I didn't get that counselor
[3:57:09] Becker I support the motion thank you
[3:57:12] John uh councel Harris
[3:57:16] opposed councelor uh vandenbberg
[3:57:20] yes councelor Walden yes and councelor
[3:57:25] wetstone
[3:57:26] oppose it carries oh it does I thought
[3:57:30] there's like four I was thinking there
[3:57:31] was mayor CL councelor Becker councelor
[3:57:34] venburg and councelor Walden in support
[3:57:37] but there's two there's two counselors
[3:57:39] not here right okay I I thought there
[3:57:41] was only one beside me right okay
[3:57:45] right so that motion carries that's
[3:57:47] correct
[3:57:49] okay so forward with filling in the
[3:57:52] application and getting it submitted
[3:57:54] before the 21st for the deadline okay
[3:57:57] thank
[3:58:00] you okay where are we at
[3:58:04] now we're
[3:58:07] at corporate
[3:58:10] services corporate services 7.61
[3:58:15] right Council the report is in front of
[3:58:17] you um the recommendation is the council
[3:58:20] approve the replacement of windows in
[3:58:22] the front deck and painting oh was there
[3:58:24] any
[3:58:25] questions of 16 the square Sor I need a motion for the
[3:58:32] recommendation councelor
[3:58:34] wetstone is there a
[3:58:37] seconder
[3:58:40] backer any discussion I'm going to call
[3:58:43] the question all those favor of the
[3:58:45] recommendation I
[3:58:48] iOS hearing none motion carries uh mayor
[3:58:52] Klo I did just want to note that we need
[3:58:54] a um a motion to move past four
[3:58:59] hours we need a motion how far have we
[3:59:01] got to go here um past four hours
[3:59:08] okay walked into that one Deputy are you
[3:59:10] making the motion or uh I guess are you
[3:59:14] the motion so we can finish tonight I
[3:59:17] try to redeem myself there is there a
[3:59:19] Secor for the
[3:59:21] motion
[3:59:24] Secor councelor
[3:59:26] Becker all those in favor I any opposed
[3:59:31] none opposed we carry on till we get
[3:59:33] done I hope all right thank you
[3:59:37] um
[3:59:39] 7.61 we did 2021 draft budget
[3:59:44] recommendation number one and there's
[3:59:45] two recommendations that's
[3:59:48] correct Council has read the report is
[3:59:51] there any uh one prepared to make a
[3:59:53] motion on the first
[4:00:01] recommendation
[4:00:04] anyone councelor
[4:00:07] wetstone okay is there a
[4:00:11] seconder wal second councelor Walden
[4:00:16] any uh any questions on the budget draft
[4:00:20] budget hearing none I'm going to call
[4:00:22] the question all those in favor of the
[4:00:24] recommendation I any
[4:00:28] opposed I hearing none motion carries on
[4:00:31] recommendation two the council
[4:00:33] authorized staff to apply for a summer
[4:00:35] student wage subsidy National
[4:00:37] Trust so moved so moved so moved by
[4:00:41] councelor
[4:00:42] Walden
[4:00:45] seconder councilor
[4:00:47] vanenburg questions on the
[4:00:51] recommendation
[4:00:52] subsidy hearing none I'm going to call
[4:00:55] the question all those in favor of
[4:00:56] recommendation number two say I I any
[4:01:01] opposed hearing none motion
[4:01:05] carries proposed 20 21 meeting budget
[4:01:10] schedule approve the 21 budget meeting
[4:01:13] schedule
[4:01:14] I'll move the
[4:01:20] recommendation
[4:01:25] okay is there a
[4:01:29] seconder councelor bannenberg
[4:01:35] discussion any discussion the dates are
[4:01:38] there we'll try to all best we can
[4:01:40] attend
[4:01:41] them um I gather most of them will be
[4:01:44] Zoom unless something changes
[4:01:45] drastically so I'm assuming we're all
[4:01:48] going to work from home just for the
[4:01:49] record I don't see much point
[4:01:52] [Music]
[4:01:53] in Mr mayor council Becker why can't we
[4:01:57] start in the morning and everybody's
[4:02:00] fresh instead of starting at noon and
[4:02:04] dragging out till 7 o' at night that's a
[4:02:07] long day to sit there and look at
[4:02:10] numbers some of us have to
[4:02:14] work in the afternoon or in the evening
[4:02:17] I know some people have to work during
[4:02:19] the day too
[4:02:20] but over the years I found that we do
[4:02:23] our best
[4:02:25] discussion in the mornings and up till
[4:02:32] 3:00 well I I guess if someone that been
[4:02:35] is in the same business as you I I have
[4:02:37] to juggle the chores at some point so
[4:02:40] and distant
[4:02:41] fairness but um
[4:02:44] anyway uh this is the motion that's here
[4:02:48] is uh it has been first and second it we
[4:02:51] can have a if it's defeated we can or a
[4:02:54] friendly Amendment I'm open to
[4:02:58] suggestion just just my suggestion is
[4:03:01] that I found that Council does a better
[4:03:04] job getting things done by a 9 9:30
[4:03:08] start in the morning till 3 in the
[4:03:10] afternoon get more accomplished and
[4:03:12] going late into an evening when
[4:03:14] everybody's
[4:03:15] tired and we got to respect your staff
[4:03:19] too the second meeting is on a council
[4:03:22] night you'll be leaving the zoom and
[4:03:25] then going right into to a council
[4:03:27] meeting within an hour and a
[4:03:30] half the second meeting which one I'm
[4:03:33] sorry I didn't catch that January the
[4:03:39] 18th oh I didn't real I didn't quite
[4:03:42] sorry thank well I guess that's why are
[4:03:43] there's nine of us to read these things
[4:03:47] okay so we got to be wary wary of our
[4:03:50] staff too that's what I'm
[4:03:53] saying but if we start at 9: in the
[4:03:56] morning with both meetings and get done
[4:03:58] at 3 gives everybody time to unwind
[4:04:03] and move forward to the next because we
[4:04:06] got toble to absorb what's on the
[4:04:08] council agenda
[4:04:11] also if I may yes th this is staff's
[4:04:15] recommendation if they were if they were
[4:04:17] concerned about that they would come up
[4:04:19] with a different recommendation it says
[4:04:20] staff are
[4:04:27] proposing okay
[4:04:30] any well is there any other comments and
[4:04:34] if not I'm going to call the question
[4:04:36] and the question would be these are the
[4:04:37] dates that we would be working with and
[4:04:39] the times
[4:04:42] so it's been first and second it so I
[4:04:45] have to I'm gonna have to call the
[4:04:46] question it's uh unless they
[4:04:50] withdrawing I'm not hearing their
[4:04:51] withdrawing so this I'm going to call
[4:04:53] the question these are the meeting dates
[4:04:56] for our U proposed meeting dates and
[4:04:58] then and if we need more there going to
[4:05:00] be more so don't keep that in mind too
[4:05:02] but anyway these are the ones that we're
[4:05:04] trying to work with G to call the
[4:05:07] question all those in favor of these
[4:05:08] dates say I I I any opposed
[4:05:16] the eyes have
[4:05:17] it and this is uh so these are the
[4:05:21] carries
[4:05:22] okay Community safety uh uh Wildwood has
[4:05:26] been pulled for tonight 7.65 Community
[4:05:29] safety and wellbeing Plan update there's
[4:05:32] uh two
[4:05:35] recommendations uh for
[4:05:38] this uh the background you see but uh is
[4:05:42] there any further comment
[4:05:44] that
[4:05:45] uh that uh need to be uh brought up by
[4:05:48] staff with regards to
[4:05:50] this uh through you your worship to
[4:05:52] council I would just like to note that
[4:05:54] this has been an excellent opportunity
[4:05:57] for the lower tiers to partner in um a
[4:06:00] plan that's
[4:06:01] legislated um so we're working together
[4:06:04] and
[4:06:06] um the the social research and planning
[4:06:09] Council are perfectly posed to carry out
[4:06:13] the engagement and research aspects of
[4:06:15] the required
[4:06:18] plan okay so the first recommendation is
[4:06:21] bylaw
[4:06:23] 292020 has pointed out it's been uh we
[4:06:26] sort of have to do this it's been
[4:06:29] mandated by our big brother so here's
[4:06:32] the process is there a mover and a
[4:06:34] second or for this
[4:06:35] motion Council W moves councelor walon
[4:06:39] is there a
[4:06:42] seconder councelor
[4:06:45] venberg
[4:06:46] okay um all those in favor of the
[4:06:50] motion say I hi any opposed hearing none
[4:06:55] motion carries the second one is that we
[4:06:57] need to put five approve
[4:07:00] $5,000 the 2020
[4:07:04] budget for in the reserve is there a
[4:07:08] mover for this motion councelor Harris seconded by
[4:07:18] councelor W Walden thank
[4:07:21] you mayor klopp I'll just clarify that
[4:07:24] it is to roll over the 5,000 as well as
[4:07:27] an additional 5,000 in the 20121 budget
[4:07:31] sorry I didn't read it all I apologize
[4:07:33] there the uh the faces of us of you uh
[4:07:38] great counselors are in half way across
[4:07:40] my sheet so I just thank you for doing
[4:07:42] that
[4:07:44] okay everyone's clear on the motion as
[4:07:46] stated by the clerk I have a question if
[4:07:49] I could go ahead and and I think I know
[4:07:51] the answer but I did for um just for
[4:07:55] making sure that I do this community
[4:07:58] Well Community safety and wellbe plan is
[4:08:00] a requirement correct yes it's a
[4:08:02] legislated requirement okay and comes
[4:08:05] with a cost
[4:08:07] obviously
[4:08:11] Grand sorry go ahead coun go ahead you
[4:08:13] were about to answer my question I think
[4:08:15] so I was just going to note that it is
[4:08:19] um the fact that it's being shared
[4:08:21] amongst all the lower tiers in here in
[4:08:23] county is um helping significantly with
[4:08:25] the cost um it's certainly not something
[4:08:29] that staff have time to do individually
[4:08:31] and partnering
[4:08:33] is it's I think it's a the right way to
[4:08:37] go because many of the issues that many
[4:08:39] of our vulnerable individuals or groups
[4:08:43] are facing are similar across the county
[4:08:46] um so if we can come up with a plan to
[4:08:48] assist assist those groups
[4:08:51] um and and share the cost I think that
[4:08:54] we're coming out ahead yeah and don't
[4:08:56] get me wrong I think it's an excellent
[4:08:58] plan exactly for what you stated uh I
[4:09:01] just don't like when something's
[4:09:02] mandated and then the cost is downloaded
[4:09:04] onto the municipalities from The
[4:09:06] Province yes and um I I will note that
[4:09:09] there are many other counties who have
[4:09:11] got together who um are paying much more
[4:09:14] to have another consultant do the plan
[4:09:16] for them great and thank you for
[4:09:19] attending by the
[4:09:21] way yes thank you uh I'm glad you got
[4:09:24] those questions asked I didn't realize
[4:09:26] that others were having to hire
[4:09:27] consultants and we've been trying to
[4:09:29] work without that so that's good to know
[4:09:32] for the public thank you for asking that
[4:09:34] question okay so the it's cost it about
[4:09:37] 5,000 a year that's why you need to roll
[4:09:39] it and roll in more obviously you try to
[4:09:42] okay all are we clear with the question
[4:09:44] I'm going to call the question no more
[4:09:47] all right I'm going to call the question
[4:09:48] all those in favor of the 5,000 Levy
[4:09:50] plus the rooll over of the additional
[4:09:53] five all those in favor I I I any
[4:09:57] opposed hearing none motion carries
[4:10:01] thank you thank you councilor's
[4:10:03] announcements tonight
[4:10:06] anything Mr Mayor yes councelor Harris
[4:10:10] go I just want to make note that the
[4:10:13] Hensel fireman with the Hensel kets and
[4:10:17] the Hensel Kinsman are having a drive
[4:10:21] through Santa greeting this Friday night
[4:10:24] from 5:30 to 7 at the fire hall oh
[4:10:30] okay very good thank you that's at five
[4:10:34] o'clock 5:30 to
[4:10:37] 7 and I didn't catch the date I was
[4:10:39] sorry this Friday evening this Friday night
[4:10:43] yeah thank
[4:10:47] you any other
[4:10:50] announcements councelor
[4:10:52] venberg thank you mayor I'll try to be
[4:10:55] uh quick on this one so I'm sitting on
[4:10:59] the advisory committee for here on
[4:11:02] sh's Transit uh we had meeting on Friday
[4:11:07] and it's going real quick as to what
[4:11:10] they're going to do so these roots were
[4:11:12] kind of like predetermined before we
[4:11:14] actually set on on the committee
[4:11:17] so the transit will be operating on
[4:11:21] December the 14th that's what the start
[4:11:24] date is be free rides from December the
[4:11:28] 14th to January the
[4:11:31] 10th nothing things can change down the
[4:11:35] road to but initially uh there'll be two
[4:11:38] runs from Bayfield to Grand van on
[4:11:42] Friday sorry Wednesday and
[4:11:45] Friday uh there'll also be runs or for
[4:11:49] that run in Bayfield the stop will be at
[4:11:52] the Bayfield Town Hall one also at
[4:11:55] Cameron and Highway 21 so we'll be on
[4:11:58] Cameron Street because we don't want
[4:12:05] to I'm not picking up on my mic so just
[4:12:08] wonder everybody else is doing sorry
[4:12:11] counselor okay I'll try again so
[4:12:13] there'll be a
[4:12:15] stop at the Bayfield Town Hall one at
[4:12:19] Cameron in Highway 21 on Cameron Street
[4:12:23] there'll be a stop at the St Joseph park
[4:12:26] by the mailboxes then it'll work its way
[4:12:28] down to the soes in Grand Ben there'll
[4:12:32] also be a daily stop or daily route from
[4:12:36] uh Grand Ben through dashwood down to
[4:12:39] exitor and further down to London so
[4:12:42] then there'll be
[4:12:44] connecting buses that go down to sarna
[4:12:47] but if you can uh here on shores areat
[4:12:56] transit.com Dia Blitz through the papers
[4:12:59] through radio uh they had mentioned
[4:13:01] Bayfield Breeze as well to uh to launch
[4:13:05] it and uh and nothing's set in stone so
[4:13:09] down the road if it's three or four
[4:13:10] months and we say we need to tweak the
[4:13:13] schedules or the stops or whatever then
[4:13:15] we will try to do that as
[4:13:19] well okay thank you and and they'll be
[4:13:23] uh getting that on our website I'm sure
[4:13:25] too yes the
[4:13:30] okay any other uh
[4:13:35] announcements hearing none there was no
[4:13:37] new business this evening on the um on
[4:13:42] our agenda
[4:13:44] okay we're at questions from the
[4:13:47] gallery com your worship I did have one
[4:13:50] registrant for questions from the
[4:13:52] gallery but they have since felt that
[4:13:54] their question was answered and they
[4:13:56] have let me know that they no longer
[4:13:58] will be
[4:13:59] speaking okay thank you uh we're at
[4:14:02] number 11 confirmatory bylaw
[4:14:08] 209-2020 Council Harris councelor
[4:14:12] Harris seconded
[4:14:16] by councelor
[4:14:22] vanenburg all those in favor of the
[4:14:24] confirmatory bylaw say I I I any opposed
[4:14:30] hearing none motion carries I need a
[4:14:33] motion to
[4:14:36] adjourn
[4:14:38] councelor councelor wetone thank you
[4:14:42] seconder
[4:14:45] counselor beer
[4:14:47] Becker thank you all those in
[4:14:51] favor hi say say good night right good
[4:14:55] night all right thank you everyone it's
[4:14:57] been a we had a lot of stuff to discuss
[4:14:59] tonight I appreciate your time and your
[4:15:02] patience thank you