[1:00:03] presentation answering all the questions. Who knew 10 minutes

[1:00:06] would turn into 60? So I apologize for that. No, no, thank you

[1:00:10] very much. Thank you so much for your time.

[1:00:13] Please pull the vote through the chair. So I have as moved by

[1:00:17] Councillor DeBoer and seconded by Councillor early as

[1:00:21] displayed. Councillor DeBoer

[1:00:24] in favor. Councilor early in favor.

[1:00:28] Councilor Kiernan in favor.

[1:00:32] Councilor Napoli in favor.

[1:00:35] Councilor Rosa in favor. Councilor Russo

[1:00:39] in favor. Councilor Sheen in favor.

[1:00:43] Mayor Groves in favor. Chair Mascal in

[1:00:46] favor. D the chair. The motion carries. Thank you very much. We'll take five

[1:00:50] minutes, please.

[1:07:55] Hear ye hear.

[1:07:56] Yeah,

[1:08:02] no, I think

[1:08:22] that has slightly different wording for the noise of motion section.

[1:08:26] So which one am I using then? If. If this one is okay for you.

[1:08:29] Okay. But if not, I snuck some

[1:08:33] snuck handwritten note in.

[1:08:42] Okay. Okay,

[1:08:45] thank you. We're ready to resume now. At this point

[1:08:49] I don't believe there are any presentations.

[1:08:52] So we're going to go to our

[1:08:56] staff reports and I believe we have item 10.1

[1:09:00] staff report 2025 0084,

[1:09:05] 2022 post election report.

[1:09:10] Is there any discussion on the report? We have the

[1:09:14] clerk here today to answer any questions from council.

[1:09:20] Seeing the first questions. Councillor DeBoer,

[1:09:25] thanks. The staff report does ask

[1:09:28] us to make a recommendation or part of the motion and

[1:09:32] I would like to have the motion written

[1:09:36] that option three, the status quo with

[1:09:40] respect to regional council representation be the

[1:09:44] motion put on the floor.

[1:09:49] Thank you. Thank you. And councelor

[1:09:53] Early. Thank you chair. I'm happy

[1:09:56] to second that. And do you want me to make comments

[1:09:59] as well or how does this like? Well, we do have the opportunity for

[1:10:03] councillors to make comments on the staff report. So I'd

[1:10:07] like to make sure we have any comments be hopefully

[1:10:11] before we proceed to a vote on a motion. Okay, thank you.

[1:10:14] So I'm happy after reading this

[1:10:18] and also going through last term of council and

[1:10:21] I'll say that last term of council when we did the ward review, it was

[1:10:24] on the table for us to vote at large for

[1:10:28] regional council and actually it was myself and one other councilor

[1:10:31] that did support at large voting.

[1:10:35] But when I come into this term of council as the Ward

[1:10:38] 1, 2, 3 council counselor, I've replaced three

[1:10:42] councillors. On the other side we added wards.

[1:10:45] So it's a little bit different on the 456 because we added, you know,

[1:10:48] Ward 6. It was a new ward. We really had one councillor on

[1:10:52] the Bolton side for a very long time. And then we sort

[1:10:56] of split 3 and 4. Notwithstanding the bigger piece

[1:11:00] for me though, there's 10 associations on the 1, 2, 3 that

[1:11:03] if we had a populated area and if we ran it large and

[1:11:07] the populated area got two individuals and at this point

[1:11:11] we are talking two regional councillors,

[1:11:14] you're at risk of losing the rural voice,

[1:11:17] you're at risk of losing the association voice.

[1:11:20] And quite frankly, when you're running at large as a regional councillor

[1:11:23] in the size of this municipality, it's like running like a mayor.

[1:11:27] And I'm not confident that that would be the right direction.

[1:11:30] I don't know if the regional composition is going to

[1:11:34] change. There's certainly rumors, but rumors, you know,

[1:11:38] are just rumors. So hard to understand whether that

[1:11:41] will change in the near future. But I will tell

[1:11:44] you that it's really important from a democratic perspective that all

[1:11:48] voices are heard and that you share this position,

[1:11:52] how you want to share it, whether you want to do one on the north

[1:11:55] side, one on the south side. That's other things that you can decide.

[1:11:59] But you need to make sure that everybody is going to be heard from a

[1:12:02] democratic perspective. So those are my kind of immediate thoughts and thanks

[1:12:06] for letting me ramble on for a little longer than I normally do. Thanks.

[1:12:09] No, thank you, Councilor. This is why we're, we're here today. So I'm going to

[1:12:13] go next to Councillor Russo and then to Councilor Kieran after

[1:12:17] that. Councilor Russo, thank you. Through the chair. Firstly,

[1:12:20] I think the report warrants a

[1:12:24] fulsome probably perspective

[1:12:29] from the, the clerk. I think there's so many variables in there and I think

[1:12:31] they did a great job of isolating and going through post

[1:12:35] election. And some of the questions I have down the road

[1:12:39] will be or when we get to that is some of

[1:12:43] the budget implications, some of the staff costing that was associated.

[1:12:47] So there are some questions I'd like to go and

[1:12:50] kind of dive into as well before getting into

[1:12:54] any vote right now. But I guess in terms of

[1:12:57] the options, fundamentally I have a different perspective is

[1:13:02] truthfully sitting at that table,

[1:13:05] we're often tasked with Understanding issues that are in

[1:13:10] the other wards and we still have to vote on those issues.

[1:13:14] So having a perspective of mayor

[1:13:19] and regional councillors all working on the same issue,

[1:13:23] you know, very similar to how the local councillor and the

[1:13:27] regional councillor, from my perspective, work so that the represent

[1:13:31] the citizen or the resident has two actual representatives.

[1:13:35] In this case, I feel that you actually have four representatives

[1:13:39] working on your behalf. So actually having more

[1:13:42] ability and more democratic representation

[1:13:47] I feel is warranted. Is the challenges on the

[1:13:51] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is that

[1:13:54] there's issues in the other wards that we need to always

[1:13:58] be included in anyway. So having the

[1:14:03] auspice of we're not privy to that is

[1:14:07] challenging because when we're voting on whether it

[1:14:10] be urbanization in Bolton or aggregates

[1:14:14] in Ward 1, we still have to have the same perspective

[1:14:18] of Caledon wide and we're not always included in those in

[1:14:22] those conversations. And this is a perspective or an

[1:14:25] ability to have mayor and regional councillors always

[1:14:29] included in those conversations. So I would support

[1:14:33] the option one and actually proceeding in that

[1:14:36] direction so that we have several individuals

[1:14:40] representing the resident themselves so that there's.

[1:14:45] And then there'll be a natural ability of

[1:14:48] the counselors working in that area that find that,

[1:14:52] you know, in this case you're able to be more knowledgeable in

[1:14:55] this, you'll take the lead. But we're always having to work with one another on

[1:14:59] regional issues and vote on them as well. So I

[1:15:03] feel having the at large just gives better representation to

[1:15:07] our residents because we only have three people at the region.

[1:15:11] So it's very important that the three of us that are there are very

[1:15:15] well versed in all Caledon issues.

[1:15:20] Thank you, Councillor Russo. I'm going to go now to

[1:15:24] Councillor Kiernan.

[1:15:27] Thank you. Through you, Chair,

[1:15:30] I'm a little at a loss from that last comment because I'm not sure

[1:15:34] how running at large gives you an advantage

[1:15:38] to be better versed at the regional table. We have

[1:15:41] all said around this table that the

[1:15:45] councilors in their wards know their wards the best.

[1:15:49] And as far as urbanization of Bolton and or

[1:15:52] aggregates in Ward 1, I think the staff keep

[1:15:56] us up to date from their expert reports.

[1:16:00] So I'm wondering how we

[1:16:05] would explain how it would play out

[1:16:10] if, let's say option

[1:16:15] one is chosen and two representatives from East

[1:16:18] Caledon or Bolton are chosen, or two representatives

[1:16:22] from Northwest Caledon are chosen, how would the people

[1:16:25] in Bolton feel? Because I honestly feel that they

[1:16:29] would believe that their representation was diluted.

[1:16:33] And I would say that the Northwest Caledon would feel the same

[1:16:36] way that their representation was diluted. And I don't think we want to do

[1:16:40] that. So I would be

[1:16:43] very keen on supporting the status quo. There's too many

[1:16:47] unknowns here. There is zero benefit to

[1:16:51] the community that we work for to go

[1:16:55] with option one, in my opinion.

[1:17:00] I say that again, I've said it before,

[1:17:04] as someone who's lived here her whole life,

[1:17:07] that would not go over very well. And my question, I have a question.

[1:17:10] Clerk, through you, Chair to the clerk, please.

[1:17:14] Is the public going to be offered the opportunity

[1:17:18] to have comment on this through

[1:17:24] the chair to Councillor Kiernan with respect to whether

[1:17:29] an option, a specific option gets selected or with respect

[1:17:33] to the staff report. So there

[1:17:36] is, yes, it's a little bit of a two parter. So the

[1:17:40] first part was, would be that they have the opportunity to speak

[1:17:43] to the staff report in response through delegating and

[1:17:48] providing written comment. And the second one is if,

[1:17:52] let's say option one is to proceed depending on

[1:17:55] the will of counsel, there would be not a

[1:17:59] legislative requirement, but we would embed

[1:18:02] a public open house and we would be

[1:18:06] available to do that even though it is not a legislative requirement with

[1:18:10] respect to the passing of a bylaw if we are to proceed with an option

[1:18:14] one. Okay, thank you. Through you,

[1:18:17] Chair. I appreciate that answer, Clerk.

[1:18:21] I have had people call me about the report, concerned with

[1:18:25] the length of the report. So my question

[1:18:29] or my consideration is of all the public

[1:18:34] comments that we seek. This is very important.

[1:18:37] This is representation. Okay. And I believe

[1:18:42] this supersedes many things that we have gone to the public

[1:18:45] for. And I would say that it should be

[1:18:48] brought forward to the public and their opinions and their comments

[1:18:52] sought, not just through delegation, but through a

[1:18:56] public process. Because I do believe it would

[1:19:00] be a very slippery slope to put a

[1:19:04] situation in place that has the potential to

[1:19:11] change the balance. Because I think that the residents of Caledon

[1:19:15] would be very unhappy with that situation.

[1:19:17] And so I will be supporting option three. I think it's

[1:19:21] the best, most democratic way to go. Thank you.

[1:19:27] Thank you, Councillor Kiernan. I see Councillor

[1:19:31] DeBoer is back on the board, but I'm going to

[1:19:34] Skip over Councillor DeBoer for a second and go to Mayor Gross, who we

[1:19:37] haven't heard from yet. Thank you,

[1:19:41] Chair, and through you, so listening

[1:19:45] to the comments and I'm going to respectfully disagree with respect to

[1:19:50] if we were to go to option one, that the residents

[1:19:54] would not be represented. I think that's

[1:19:58] a lot of assumptions that we are making. We have to,

[1:20:02] you know, we've got to recognize that when we sit here,

[1:20:06] every single one of us that sit here vote on every

[1:20:09] issue, whether that's award one or two or three or four or five or six

[1:20:13] issue, we all vote on those issues. I think we

[1:20:17] all do our homework when we're going to vote. So this way we are.

[1:20:21] We're well informed on whatever those issues are in

[1:20:25] whichever ward they're in. And I

[1:20:29] would only hope that anyone

[1:20:33] that puts their names forward to

[1:20:37] run for election and to serve the community would also do

[1:20:41] the same thing and would be of the same mindset.

[1:20:45] I sat here for many years and I'm tired,

[1:20:48] very tired of hearing it was always east versus

[1:20:53] West. I don't want to hear that because I think

[1:20:56] we all live in the town of Caledonia. I think

[1:20:59] that we all look at every

[1:21:03] issue that comes to the table as issues that are

[1:21:06] important to whatever ward it's

[1:21:12] dealing with. And so I look at Caledon,

[1:21:16] it's Caledon as a whole. We are one community.

[1:21:20] So I don't agree with the

[1:21:24] statement that any of the areas, whether the rural areas

[1:21:28] or the urban areas are going to be. Are not going to be represented

[1:21:32] if we go with option one. I also don't recall Councillor

[1:21:37] early alluded to that earlier. I don't recall us going through any public

[1:21:41] process when it was brought forward

[1:21:45] to see, to have that discussion around voting

[1:21:49] at large. I know that Orangeville, I believe

[1:21:52] Orangeville, they vote at large. City of Vaughan, they're at large.

[1:21:56] I think Durham is at large. If I'm. If I'm correct,

[1:21:59] I'm not sure about Durham, but I know that Vaughan and Orangeville are at large.

[1:22:03] So anyway, those are my comments. And again,

[1:22:07] I think that when we sit at this table,

[1:22:10] you know, we used to, in our prayers that we used to have the prayer

[1:22:14] here, we always talk about parochialism.

[1:22:17] And I think it's time that we do away with that and

[1:22:20] look at Caledon as a whole and understand that we

[1:22:24] have an urban area in Caledon, we have a rural area in Caledon,

[1:22:28] and the needs are very different. Thank you.

[1:22:32] Through you, thank you very much,

[1:22:36] Mayor Groves. And I'm going to go to Councillor Rosa because

[1:22:40] he hasn't spoken yet. Thank you. And through you,

[1:22:43] Chair, yeah, the mayor addressed some of the things, same things I

[1:22:47] was thinking. I've made some notes here. I would hope that anybody

[1:22:51] at this stage of Caledon's, when we're looking

[1:22:54] at the future of this municipality and what's going to happen here over

[1:22:58] the next 10 years. I would hope that if you're putting your name forward for

[1:23:01] regional councillor, that you would be prepared to represent Caledon

[1:23:05] as a whole, that you understand the needs of the entire

[1:23:09] municipality, that you understand that we are,

[1:23:12] are a municipality made up of various hamlets,

[1:23:16] villages, urban, rural areas. You need to have that understanding

[1:23:19] of where we are and where we're going. And you need to represent everybody fairly.

[1:23:24] So regardless of where you're living or where you are stationed

[1:23:28] in this municipality, I would hope that you would

[1:23:32] understand that what the needs are and that you would represent all

[1:23:37] of Caledon. Since we've only got three votes,

[1:23:40] since we've only got three members, I think a unified approach,

[1:23:43] you know, when the mayor goes there, the mayor is representing the entire

[1:23:47] municipality. I'm not sure that it's a requirement to

[1:23:50] represent a ward at the region. I think we're representing the municipality

[1:23:54] at the region. That's at least been my experience in watching

[1:23:58] regional meetings and understanding how it functions as an upper

[1:24:02] tier government. And I think the unified

[1:24:05] approach might be the first step in

[1:24:09] eliminating some of the divisiveness that I clearly see and I have experienced

[1:24:13] personally and then try to combat myself over the

[1:24:16] last six years. We are Caledon. We are not

[1:24:20] Bolton and Calvin east and Calvin Village,

[1:24:23] and we are one unified municipality. When we're

[1:24:27] occupying three chairs at the region, that's. That's just the way

[1:24:31] I approach it. And here I feel

[1:24:35] the same way when I'm called to vote on something. Here, the majority of

[1:24:39] time I'm actually voting on things that are not affecting my

[1:24:43] ward personally. And I have to take the time to understand it, to research

[1:24:46] it, to read, to understand the reports so that I'm making a

[1:24:50] decision in the best interest of everyone.

[1:24:55] I was called to do that today. Right. So I

[1:24:58] think it's really, really important for us to understand that. I think when we're trying

[1:25:01] to make local decisions, I understand the necessity of award

[1:25:05] representation. But when we're trying to represent this

[1:25:09] municipality at the region appeal, I think that, you know,

[1:25:12] a unified approach, where the three individuals

[1:25:16] are there to be the voice for Caladan, is really

[1:25:20] what I think is where we're heading in the future,

[1:25:23] especially with the growth that's anticipated. Thank you.

[1:25:27] Thank you. Councillor Rosa and Councillor Sheen,

[1:25:31] you're on the board now to speak for the first time.

[1:25:34] Well, thank you, Chair Mescal.

[1:25:39] I didn't expect to go next, but if you wish to defer,

[1:25:42] I can do that. No, no, it's okay. I can put it together.

[1:25:47] There's some very compelling arguments for option one and three.

[1:25:51] And I think it was Councillor early that alluded to this conversation

[1:25:55] or this issue being discussed last term of council when

[1:26:00] they did the ward boundary review. And I just wanted to check back with

[1:26:03] the clerk, as I'm sure he looked back at that process. Can you confirm whether

[1:26:07] or not this question was discussed and analyzed and

[1:26:11] debated? I suppose in the last term of council when the ward boundary

[1:26:15] review was done, as I rec call, it, was a pretty extensive process that involves

[1:26:19] some public consultation through

[1:26:22] the chair to Councillor Sheen,

[1:26:25] there was public consultation on the word boundary review there.

[1:26:30] It was very extensive. The primary focus of that

[1:26:33] discussion and that question to be answered was

[1:26:37] focused on the specific word boundary, drawing of the lines

[1:26:42] and the addition of award and proper representation amongst

[1:26:45] the wards. Right. As outlined in the report,

[1:26:48] it didn't appear as though this was largely

[1:26:52] or broadly discussed or debated upon and served

[1:26:56] as a basis for the rationale to discuss it now. Right.

[1:27:00] So would it be fair to say that it wasn't largely

[1:27:04] discussed or dwelled upon because there was

[1:27:07] an assumption that there would be a regional councilor coming from Wards

[1:27:12] 123 and Wards 456. Is that

[1:27:16] when you look back at how the ward boundary review was done, was it there

[1:27:19] an assumption made that that's just how we were going to do versus a

[1:27:23] regional councilor at large through

[1:27:28] the chair to Councillor Sheen?

[1:27:32] I don't necessarily wouldn't call it an assumption.

[1:27:35] It just wasn't the focal point.

[1:27:39] And that

[1:27:43] basis for not having it as a focal point or

[1:27:46] being overshadowed. Excuse me,

[1:27:49] overshadowed by the larger,

[1:27:52] broader, more intensive review of the word boundaries

[1:27:56] would be why we should

[1:28:00] kind of. This would be a bit of a concluding exercise to that word

[1:28:04] boundary review to finally square off

[1:28:07] and conclude this lasting aspect of

[1:28:10] it. Okay, so my understanding is that the ward

[1:28:13] boundary review received a lot of attention and participation from the public.

[1:28:17] I found online that there were like over 3,000

[1:28:21] unique visitors to the ward boundary review website and

[1:28:26] there were lots of people participating in a couple of surveys.

[1:28:30] Anyway, the town went to great lengths to get some feedback from the community

[1:28:33] about how they wanted to be represented. And I think it was Councillor

[1:28:37] Kiernan that made the point that this gets at the heart of representation

[1:28:40] in our democracy. And I

[1:28:45] don't think we've asked the public how they want to be represented on this issue.

[1:28:48] And I think unless that's not fair to say.

[1:28:52] Mr. Klingenberg, do you disagree?

[1:28:57] Through the chair to Councillor Sheen I don't disagree that

[1:29:01] the public has an opportunity to

[1:29:06] or has yet for a fulsome opportunity to discuss and debate on this

[1:29:09] matter. As outlined in

[1:29:14] response to an earlier question, there is the opportunity for open

[1:29:17] house if option one is selected and public

[1:29:21] meetings to hear that that public perspective.

[1:29:26] This current recommendation is to proceed with option

[1:29:30] one. It's not to pass the bylaw, so there

[1:29:34] would be that second. So let's say you get

[1:29:37] an open house, public sway

[1:29:40] council or influence counsel in their decision making,

[1:29:44] then that would be reflected on the vote on the pilot

[1:29:47] itself. Yeah. So I would advocate

[1:29:52] for us receiving some public feedback.

[1:29:56] I appreciate Councillor Rosa's opinions, everyone's opinions. Everyone's made

[1:29:59] a very compelling argument for both options

[1:30:03] we're discussing 1 and 3. I would just like some input from the public.

[1:30:07] I'm not sure how we get there, but I'll leave it to my colleagues to

[1:30:10] continue the discussion. Thank you. Thank you,

[1:30:14] Councillor Sheen. And I'm going to weigh in for a moment and then

[1:30:18] go back to the board for people who have a second opportunity to speak

[1:30:21] to this. And I do concur with Councillor

[1:30:26] Sheen and I just want to clarify with the clerk what the process

[1:30:29] for public input would be regarding this. Because if we

[1:30:33] do, it seems if we proceed with

[1:30:37] option one today, that there would be an opportunity for

[1:30:40] there to be some sort of public engagement

[1:30:44] and then a bylaw would come back to this

[1:30:48] council which would be voted on at that time

[1:30:51] regarding that specific change to the

[1:30:54] representation. Can I just get that clarified from the clerk

[1:31:00] through the chair? Yes, that's correct. What your statement is,

[1:31:04] there is that opportunity, if option one is selected today and

[1:31:08] approved at March 25th council, then there

[1:31:12] would be that open house or a public meeting opportunity.

[1:31:15] It is not legislatively required. If option two were selected,

[1:31:19] it would be legislatively required by the region to do it.

[1:31:22] Option one does not have that. But we can go

[1:31:25] above and beyond the legislative requirements to do the open house.

[1:31:32] Just to clarify then. So is that something we can make

[1:31:37] sure happens some sort of way that

[1:31:41] is written in there that so it doesn't end up sort of

[1:31:44] getting omitted somehow

[1:31:47] that we were committing to that

[1:31:51] public consultation piece through

[1:31:56] the chair? Yes. Council can direct staff to an

[1:31:59] open house as well. If option one is selected and

[1:32:04] that open house, would we also be able to recommend that

[1:32:08] something go through have

[1:32:12] youe say Caladan. So there's a public commenting

[1:32:15] piece there also through

[1:32:20] the chair? Yes, that can be included, but that also

[1:32:24] would be something that we would include as an implementation Component

[1:32:27] that's definitely staff would do anyways. Okay, so this is a significant

[1:32:31] change that we're. We're contemplating here. And I would feel

[1:32:35] very, very uncomfortable making

[1:32:38] a decision on this without specific public

[1:32:43] consultation, because from what Councillor Sheen says,

[1:32:47] when the, when we were. The previous council was

[1:32:50] considering the changes to the ward boundaries and the ward review system,

[1:32:54] there was apparently considerable civic

[1:32:58] engagement in that process. And I think if we're going to be making decisions

[1:33:02] about how people are represented and how people are governed, I think

[1:33:06] that people should have the opportunity to express their opinions on this.

[1:33:10] And we need to be taking that into account because, you know,

[1:33:14] in the end, we are public servants, we serve the

[1:33:17] public, and I really think we need to get a sense of what that is.

[1:33:21] And also the fact is that, you know, we just went through a

[1:33:25] ward boundary review where we ended up with six wards with

[1:33:29] new boundaries drawn and then we ended up with a new

[1:33:32] system in terms of. For regional councillors because they lost a regional

[1:33:36] councilor at the region and had to redraw

[1:33:39] and figure out how region would work. So, you know, we've only

[1:33:43] really had one turn through this process. So.

[1:33:46] And one of the things, even when we said, when we were debating whether or

[1:33:50] not we were going to hire a consultant to look

[1:33:53] at the ward boundaries coming up, we as a council

[1:33:57] deferred. That said, we don't need this because the system's

[1:34:00] still so new, we're still working our way through it. So from

[1:34:04] my perspective, I really think if we do proceed with option

[1:34:07] one, that we have,

[1:34:11] that guarantees in there that we're getting public consultation and that

[1:34:14] we're coming back as a council to vote on that before we

[1:34:18] ever proceed any further with it. So I'm going

[1:34:21] to leave it there and I'll let some other speakers come back on the board

[1:34:24] now in the order in which they appear. Councillor DeBoer, your second

[1:34:27] time to speak on the issue.

[1:34:30] Thanks. Yeah, My first speak was to put

[1:34:33] option three on the table. The reason I support option

[1:34:37] three is primarily a lot of the comments here are.

[1:34:40] Are interesting to say the least. Most of them focus around how,

[1:34:44] once the individual is elected, how they should be acting, whether they're

[1:34:48] representing all of Caledon or a specific board. The reality is,

[1:34:51] as the mayor correctly pointed out, all six of us make decisions

[1:34:55] based on all of Caledon. The mayor

[1:34:58] and the two regional councillors make decisions at the region for all of

[1:35:02] Caledon. What this is being asked is how

[1:35:06] do the residents choose who they want to represent them

[1:35:10] and what's going to happen. And you can use Orangeville and Orangeville votes at large,

[1:35:14] but Orangeville is a community that's all urban,

[1:35:18] so you can vote somebody that's at large because they're

[1:35:22] representing a largely urban area. What's going to happen,

[1:35:25] and we did have some preliminary discussions when we looked at the boundary review,

[1:35:29] is that if we had a at large

[1:35:33] system, the candidates will concentrate where

[1:35:36] the votes are, because all you need is a number and be the

[1:35:39] top numbers and have the numbers to be, because it starts

[1:35:43] at who gets the most votes and then it's the second, third,

[1:35:46] fourth, fifth. You're never going to get a candidate to

[1:35:49] enter into the villages, you're never going to get a candidate to go to the

[1:35:53] rural areas. The reality is the candidates will concentrate where

[1:35:56] the numbers are. And what's going to happen is that rural Caledon

[1:36:00] won't have the exposure to the candidates when it comes time to vote,

[1:36:05] because the concentration of the activity will always be where the urban areas.

[1:36:09] When we've got a community like this, and this comes for me,

[1:36:13] comes as part of the same conversation we had with the previous

[1:36:16] delegation, is that we've got a community that's urban and

[1:36:19] we've got a community that's rural and they're very different.

[1:36:23] And what we've got to do is come up with a hybrid plan and a

[1:36:27] plan that will ensure that representation of both

[1:36:30] the urban area and the rural area is well represented. And to turn

[1:36:34] around and vote for your candidates,

[1:36:37] regardless of whether they're local or regional at large will take

[1:36:41] away the opportunity for the rural people and the rural

[1:36:44] residents and the village residents to participate in

[1:36:48] the process is where the concern was when we talked about it

[1:36:52] before, and I still hold by that.

[1:36:55] That same concern is, is that the candidates

[1:36:59] and all the points made, that when the candidates do arrive there,

[1:37:02] you do represent. And as the mayor says, you've got to do your homework and

[1:37:05] you've got to do the homework in the other wards. You've got

[1:37:08] to make a decision on air on other areas of Caledon,

[1:37:11] even if it's not your ward. But what the question we're asking here is how

[1:37:15] do the residents pick who they want to represent?

[1:37:19] And as far as I'm concerned, the best way is the current way that we're

[1:37:23] doing it and that the individuals would represent

[1:37:26] the three wards. Essentially, Airport Road is

[1:37:29] the boundary, so you have one on the east and one on the west.

[1:37:33] But I've never been a proponent of like.

[1:37:36] Once again, the mayor made the comment of east and west as Being against each

[1:37:40] other, Bolton being against the rest of Caledon. I've never

[1:37:43] been a proponent of any of that. And that isn't the reason why we're.

[1:37:46] Why I would say east and west. It's just three wards.

[1:37:49] One, two, three. And all of the wards that the combination

[1:37:53] is that some wards, some regional councilors have urban areas,

[1:37:57] but there's regional councillors that would have both urban and

[1:38:00] rural. When you look at the makeup of the actual wards,

[1:38:04] we do have three, four wards that

[1:38:08] will eventually largely be urban and we do have two wards

[1:38:12] that will be largely urban. Rural and villages is

[1:38:16] the way that it's set up. But to make sure that the representation

[1:38:20] is across the board is that the regional councillors will have

[1:38:23] both rural represent rural wards and urban wards on

[1:38:27] both sides. And that's how we came to the conclusion. So,

[1:38:30] you know, I'm still. I still think that

[1:38:34] the current system, the way we have, you know,

[1:38:37] we've gone through one election. I still think it's the best way

[1:38:40] to get representation and ensure that every resident in Caledon feels

[1:38:44] that they're being represented and participating evenly within the

[1:38:49] current regional structure as well as the current Caledon structure.

[1:38:53] So thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor DeBoer. And then I'm going to go

[1:38:56] to Councilor early and then to Councillor Kew Kieran. Councilor early,

[1:39:00] thank you. Thank you. Through Chair. First of all, it's really important,

[1:39:04] if anybody is listening from the public, that every Mississauga

[1:39:08] councilor on the region table has a ward. Every Brampton councilor

[1:39:12] on the region table has a ward. It's not that we go to the region

[1:39:15] table and we sit there and we talk about ward specific items.

[1:39:18] It's a rare occasion, there is the odd occasion where somebody's advocating

[1:39:22] for something in their ward, a motion is put on the floor or something from

[1:39:26] a region perspective attacks a certain ward in Mississauga, Brampton, Caledon.

[1:39:30] But it's not the norm. You go to the region, you go to the region

[1:39:33] to do your job, whether based on water, waste,

[1:39:36] roads. I know that's all changing. Social services,

[1:39:39] you then have another job and the other job is back in your municipality.

[1:39:43] For Mississauga and Brampton, that's their big job. It's their huge job. That's what they

[1:39:46] get paid a ton of bucks for. Here. It's a little bit different,

[1:39:49] right? We did a ward boundary. We're growing. We've got

[1:39:53] six wards, we've got two regional councillors. We're a bit more split. Our job

[1:39:57] became bigger this term. Because we had to take on all the extra wards.

[1:40:00] But when you're back in this municipality, you're working on your

[1:40:04] ward areas on their issues, you're going to your association meetings or

[1:40:08] you're going to BIA in Bolton or you're going to some of the specific items

[1:40:12] and to muddy the water is to say in Alton, well,

[1:40:15] two regional councillors are going to come and a ward councillor is going to come

[1:40:18] to the association. Just makes no sense. You are here working on specific

[1:40:22] ward issues with the ward councillor and it works well.

[1:40:25] It works very, very well. You know, for me I've got three and

[1:40:29] obviously in some cases they don't all work the same, but it works

[1:40:32] pretty good. And you're there as an assist for the minute for the ward councilor

[1:40:36] in the area and you're there to help, but you're not. No one

[1:40:40] should be saying that we're going with not going as

[1:40:43] a unity to regional councillor because council, because we are.

[1:40:47] And when the roads get downloaded or if they do, when this new bill comes

[1:40:50] and if waste is coming and all that stuff's coming, I hope we're all fighting

[1:40:53] for Caladan. But it's got nothing to do with wards,

[1:40:56] it's got everything to do. And I will say that if the waste ever got

[1:41:00] downloaded, someone better understand what kind of waste requirements are needed

[1:41:03] in rural Caledon and I mean waste buckets at a community center, et cetera,

[1:41:07] et cetera. So this has got nothing to do with going unified

[1:41:11] or east or west or. And that's truthfully I'm quite

[1:41:14] shocked that's even being spoke about tonight. So I'm going

[1:41:18] to support Ward 3 and if it gets defeated.

[1:41:21] Gets defeated. Thank you to Councillor Chair Mescal

[1:41:25] for wanting to engage the public because I think we're going to need to engage

[1:41:28] the public on this. But let's not get this mistaken. We have two jobs

[1:41:32] here, one at the region table and one at at the council table and at

[1:41:35] the council table that's working with your ward representatives and the

[1:41:39] residents in each specific ward on their issues. Thank you.

[1:41:43] Thank you Councelor early and thank you for your words of support. I do appreciate

[1:41:47] that Councelor Kieran.

[1:41:50] Thank you through you Chair Mel. So I

[1:41:54] appreciate the opportunity to speak again and I think I started this with inquiring

[1:41:58] about where was the public going to be engaged and

[1:42:03] a few things. I think Councillor DeBoer said it so well.

[1:42:06] We have spoken about through our discussions

[1:42:10] regarding our official plan and committed to the fact that

[1:42:14] we do have different Areas in Caledon that we are

[1:42:18] committed to support, including our historic hamlets

[1:42:22] and villages. And they have a different need. And Councillor

[1:42:25] DeBoer is right. An at large candidate is

[1:42:29] going to be focused on the concentration of doors to knock on.

[1:42:33] And that's just logically not going to include the

[1:42:37] side roads and lines and the great distances.

[1:42:40] That's human nature. Having said that, my question

[1:42:44] through you, Chair, again, to the clerk, please.

[1:42:48] I think there seems to be a consensus here on

[1:42:52] the table that, that the public need

[1:42:55] to be engaged. I mean, the public were engaged in our word boundary review.

[1:42:59] I am, you know, I am

[1:43:03] very interested in seeing that happen. To the clerk, please.

[1:43:08] Why would we not consider a deferral until we can have

[1:43:12] the open house and the public

[1:43:16] engagement on. Have your say Caledon and then bring

[1:43:20] this back? We should not be making a decision today without

[1:43:23] seeing what the. What the community says. I think this is premature.

[1:43:28] I'd like to hear the clerk's answer for that, if that's okay.

[1:43:30] Please, through the

[1:43:34] chair to Councillor Kieran. Thank you for the question. So if

[1:43:38] option three is passed, there will be no need for public consultation with the

[1:43:41] status quo. So if option one is

[1:43:45] selected, it's just to proceed with

[1:43:49] that public consultation component included of it on it. That will provide the

[1:43:52] opportunity and there will

[1:43:56] be a subsequent vote on the bylaw when it comes forward to council.

[1:44:00] So there will be that

[1:44:03] public consultation component, assuming that there would be also

[1:44:07] that requirement built into the motion for option one, and that

[1:44:11] would allow for the public discussion to occur.

[1:44:15] Option three, if passed, there would not be any public consultation.

[1:44:19] Thank you. Thank you through you, Chair, and thank you for that.

[1:44:23] So, one final question to the clerk, please. So what

[1:44:27] would the timeline be between that? Will that give you enough

[1:44:31] time to engage and get that set up?

[1:44:35] I think that's an important component here because I can't

[1:44:39] be at the end of March, Mr. Klingenberg, that's not

[1:44:42] going to be enough time. You've got March break coming up and families

[1:44:46] busy, you know, planning things. So what would that look

[1:44:50] like, please, through the chair. Option one

[1:44:54] would not bring forward the bylaw in March. I'd recommend

[1:44:58] by the summer. So June.

[1:45:01] I really appreciate that answer. And one

[1:45:05] more, please. I'm sorry. And thank you, Chair. I just want to say I concur

[1:45:09] with what the mayor said about this east west

[1:45:13] thing that has been discussed many times. I concur with what she has said

[1:45:17] and I believe that everyone on council does

[1:45:20] not feel that way. But I think the important thing to consider is

[1:45:24] that the community feels that way. And until the community

[1:45:28] no longer feels that way, then we have

[1:45:31] some work to do. And I don't want to foster that

[1:45:35] narrative in the community in any way, shape or

[1:45:38] form. And my concern is that this has the potential

[1:45:42] to do so. So thank you very much, Chair.

[1:45:46] Thank you, Councillor Kiernan. I'm going to go one more time to

[1:45:50] Councillor Russo and then I have some instructions.

[1:45:55] Thank you. Through you, Chair. Yeah, so listen to

[1:45:59] some of the comments. I'm a

[1:46:02] little confused in terms of the train of thought is truthfully,

[1:46:06] as it stands right now, if someone was of

[1:46:10] the mindset that they wanted to focus on the urban and not

[1:46:13] the rural, unfortunately they can do that. As it stands,

[1:46:18] if I as Ward 4, 5 and 6 representative

[1:46:22] did not take the time to focus on my word,

[1:46:25] 4 in terms of numeric is 5

[1:46:28] and 6 would have the greater amount, no different than 1,

[1:46:32] 2 and 3. If you focused on only 2 and 3, you'd be

[1:46:35] doing exactly that. The risk of someone not focusing on

[1:46:39] the rural exists there anyway. However you

[1:46:44] I, all of us when we're there and door knocking and trying

[1:46:47] to, you know, is we are now as the regional

[1:46:51] councilor, still tasked with rural

[1:46:55] representation and urban representation.

[1:46:59] The thing that I see here is all it would be is at

[1:47:03] large encompasses or requires that the regional

[1:47:08] councilor now just has a greater role in terms

[1:47:11] of representing the entire town. Like the mayor.

[1:47:16] The mayor, when they go to the doors, they're going to every

[1:47:19] single door. Whether they live in Bolton or whether they live in

[1:47:23] Terracotta or wherever they live, they represent

[1:47:27] all Caledon. You're tasked to make the

[1:47:31] voter feel like you're going to be their voice. And that's our

[1:47:35] job, regardless. The way

[1:47:38] I look at this is how I work with

[1:47:42] my local councilor in Ward 5 or 6 or 4

[1:47:46] is they focus on a day to day basis on the local issues.

[1:47:51] But that doesn't negate that if a local issue comes to me that I

[1:47:55] just pawn it off on my local counselor, I will still deal with it.

[1:47:58] We deal with it collectively. So you have two

[1:48:02] representatives dealing with this when you have

[1:48:06] an issue along with the mayor. So fundamentally three,

[1:48:09] I feel this would just give the resident four representatives

[1:48:14] because having someone on your side that

[1:48:18] understands the issues at large is

[1:48:22] a fundamental plus. I pride myself,

[1:48:25] and I think all of us do that. We actually, regardless of

[1:48:29] If I represent 4 or 5 and 6, if there's an issue in Ward

[1:48:32] 1, 2 or 3 and I'm able to attend, I'M happy to attend.

[1:48:36] And I feel like because when. When I wear this pin

[1:48:40] that says Caledon. I'm a Caledon councillor. I may

[1:48:44] represent 4, 5 and 6, but if an issue

[1:48:47] comes before us, we're here to vote on it

[1:48:50] overall. So how it changes the dynamic.

[1:48:54] I feel that history teaches us something and why

[1:48:57] some of the. The municipalities around us

[1:49:01] have. Have the at large system is we were forced

[1:49:05] to go into this and we only have one term

[1:49:09] of knowledge base right now, two and a half years technically.

[1:49:14] And we're learning as we go along. I feel that's what's super

[1:49:17] important. Why we didn't have a full ward

[1:49:21] review at this time is. It would be premature for that. We haven't given

[1:49:25] it enough time. We haven't gone through the influx

[1:49:29] of residents at this point in time to justify changing the wards.

[1:49:34] But as we progress, there's a maturity that's going to have

[1:49:37] to occur is the local councilors. In my mind,

[1:49:41] this whole conversation of part time is going

[1:49:45] to have to be gone in a few years from now.

[1:49:48] But perhaps now is still not the time. The at

[1:49:52] large is. I see it as a stepping stone of saying, okay,

[1:49:56] we are different than Mississauga and Brampton and we will remain to

[1:49:59] be different. How do only three

[1:50:02] representatives do the best job possible for

[1:50:06] the residents of Caledon? And I feel having us understand

[1:50:11] every single issue thoroughly is only a benefit to the residents

[1:50:15] of Caledon and say, hey, I don't only have one

[1:50:19] regional counselor. I have two regional counselors I can go to. And if this one

[1:50:22] is busy dealing with an item, I can go to the other. It happens

[1:50:26] intrinsically now anyway. There's times that people don't even

[1:50:29] understand their own wards and say,

[1:50:33] hey, can you help me here? I'll say your regional

[1:50:36] counselor is councilor early or whatever, but happy to help at this

[1:50:39] point in time speak to staff about this or that. So we're doing it on

[1:50:43] a daily basis, but it just creates a. There is

[1:50:46] no, There is no boundary. You are representing

[1:50:50] Kaladin. If you are a regional counselor or the mayor, it just gives

[1:50:54] you more representation to the actual residents. So how I see.

[1:50:58] I don't see that as a negative. I see it as a positive. The public

[1:51:01] component is something that happy to include that

[1:51:05] in the actual motion itself. And I feel that that can

[1:51:08] actually be parlayed to actually lead us into the further

[1:51:12] conversations of, hey, we made a decision not to

[1:51:15] actually have a board award boundary review. What do you feel about

[1:51:19] this? We can have further dialogues and reading the report,

[1:51:24] there's an obligation to work with the region here anyway, so we're

[1:51:27] going to have to have a lot of dialogue. This just gives the

[1:51:31] resident an understanding of what their representatives are leaning

[1:51:36] towards and why. Happy to have those

[1:51:39] conversations with our residents. I think it's super important because if

[1:51:43] at the end of this dialogue, the residents feel that it's

[1:51:47] premature, then, hey, we will listen to our residents.

[1:51:52] But if the outcome is that, you know what, that makes sense.

[1:51:56] So why wouldn't we initiate the process as

[1:51:59] opposed to status quo and not changing anything?

[1:52:04] Thank you, Councillor Russo and Councillor Sheen.

[1:52:08] You have your second opportunity to speak.

[1:52:10] Thank you, Chair Maskell. Again, you know, people are making

[1:52:14] some very convincing arguments for both sides of this conversation.

[1:52:19] So going back to my original

[1:52:23] concern, which really echoes Councillor Kiernan's concern,

[1:52:27] I feel like this is something that is really kind of an

[1:52:30] effort to tweak the results of our ward boundary

[1:52:34] review in the last term of council. This is kind of sort

[1:52:39] of a mini version of that. And I would like to propose

[1:52:42] a referral motion where we don't.

[1:52:45] That results in us not voting on these three options today,

[1:52:49] refers it back to staff to conduct that consultation with

[1:52:53] the community. It doesn't have to be long or extensive, but it

[1:52:56] has to be extensive enough that

[1:53:00] we get a good read from the residents on how

[1:53:03] they want to be represented. I think a lot of good arguments have been made

[1:53:06] here today, but I think probably

[1:53:10] the way there are some firmly held feelings about it here,

[1:53:15] probably there are some firmly held feelings about it in the public,

[1:53:18] and I think we should tap. Tap into that public sentiment

[1:53:22] and get a read on it before we're forced into making a decision here today.

[1:53:26] So I'd like to refer it back to staff and give

[1:53:29] them as much time as they need, a couple of months, probably,

[1:53:33] to conduct that kind of consultation.

[1:53:39] Thank you, Councillor Sheen. So we have

[1:53:43] a motion on the floor and now we have a motion to refer.

[1:53:46] So I'm going to defer to the deputy clerk

[1:53:50] to. As to how to proceed,

[1:53:54] not to speak on. On behalf of the municipal clerk. But I. I might

[1:53:57] just ask Councillor Sheen for a point of clarification. If you're

[1:54:01] move. If you're moving the motion as a whole or in part,

[1:54:05] if you move the clause that pertains to

[1:54:10] the option that's being sought from council today, if you

[1:54:13] refer that back to staff as a.

[1:54:17] If you split the question to refer just that portion back to staff,

[1:54:20] it would allow staff to continue with the accessibility Advisory

[1:54:24] Committee consultation that had been noted in the other clauses

[1:54:28] of the staff report recommendation.

[1:54:34] So what we're looking for, Councillor Sheena, is a split vote then on that.

[1:54:37] So we don't want. We want to be able to proceed with the other pieces.

[1:54:39] That makes total, total sense. I don't want to come up the works. I just

[1:54:42] want to consult with the public. Thank you.

[1:54:48] Yeah. Do we have someone

[1:54:51] who would second Counselor Sheen's referral?

[1:54:55] Councilor Early Councilor

[1:55:04] Sheen, Would there be any timing on the referral? I would leave it

[1:55:08] to the. I mean, I know the clerks are busy, they've got a lot

[1:55:11] on their plate at any given time, but my sense

[1:55:15] would be a couple of months. But I'd rely on the clerk to give us

[1:55:18] his advice. Mr. Klingenberg,

[1:55:23] through the chair. A couple months would be

[1:55:27] required. If I can,

[1:55:31] if I may. The referral to do public consultation

[1:55:36] could also be alternatively done through selection of option one

[1:55:40] and to add that council direct staff to,

[1:55:44] as a component of that, complete public consultations

[1:55:48] for that matter. And then the

[1:55:51] bylaw could not be delayed as long and

[1:55:55] it could still go forward in June. So my.

[1:55:59] If public consultation is sought, then option

[1:56:03] one would be the approach to take. If I may advise

[1:56:06] council and then whether or not

[1:56:10] to proceed with option one would be to vote

[1:56:16] on the bylaw when it comes back after the public consultation is done.

[1:56:20] So it would allow for a bylaw to come forward for a

[1:56:23] council vote based off of the public consultation.

[1:56:29] Thank. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to.

[1:56:32] I kind of. I heard you say that a couple of times that if we

[1:56:35] voted on option one, there would still be an opportunity

[1:56:39] for public consultation. But I made my referral motion knowing

[1:56:43] that anyway, because I think feel like it would help us all not

[1:56:46] to tip our hand about how we each feel on this issue and

[1:56:50] not provide a. Even a slightly biased view of where we

[1:56:54] want to go with it and put it in the public realm. Let them provide

[1:56:58] their input and then we'll make our decision when the time comes.

[1:57:03] Thank you, Councillor Sheen. Councillor Deber, are you speaking to the referral?

[1:57:06] Yeah, and I think.

[1:57:10] I'm not sure what where the comment was that Councillor Sheen

[1:57:13] had made, but I think that the council,

[1:57:17] that the residents should be allowed to decide if we're

[1:57:20] going, rather than going into having to support option one

[1:57:25] and presenting that to the community. Allow the community to decide between 1,

[1:57:28] 2 or 3, then allow the community to make the decision that if

[1:57:32] they want to stake with the status quo, rather than making a decision and saying

[1:57:36] this is what we're doing and we're going to have a public meeting based on

[1:57:38] this. If I'm understanding the clerk

[1:57:42] correctly, I really think that, you know, we just defer

[1:57:45] this whole option to a public meeting and to a public process.

[1:57:51] Thank you. Councillor Boer, are there any other speakers to the referral?

[1:57:58] Seeing none, I guess, Kurt, we would call the vote.

[1:58:04] So through the chair, just to confirm,

[1:58:07] I have a referral motion which we have a

[1:58:11] draft of to be displayed, and it

[1:58:15] would provide that the first clause as outlined

[1:58:18] in the staff report and completed by council to reference option

[1:58:22] three regarding the status quo, that that

[1:58:26] selection be referred to consideration at a future meeting

[1:58:29] and accompanied with some public engagement.

[1:58:34] I think we've got some draft language coming up there.

[1:58:37] I have it moved by Councelor Sheen and seconded by Councelor Early.

[1:59:02] It's so

[1:59:37] through the chair, this was the clause that will be referred.

[1:59:49] I thought. I don't think this captures what we're looking for here.

[1:59:53] From my feeling, I think we want to. My feeling

[1:59:57] as the chair and hearing everyone speak today, that we don't

[2:00:01] want to necessarily proceed with any option at this

[2:00:04] point. If Councillor Sheen said tipping your hand one way or the

[2:00:08] other, I think we want to make sure that we're putting it out that

[2:00:11] all options are on the table. We want to hear from the public, and then

[2:00:14] we're coming back to make a decision after that. So I don't really think

[2:00:18] that captures what I think Councillor Sheen, you were saying, nor what

[2:00:21] I heard from many people here today, too.

[2:00:25] So through the chair, this represents

[2:00:28] what was initially moved and seconded by Councilor Deborah in

[2:00:31] Early when it was first tabled by the committee.

[2:00:34] The language that Zach has drafted there provides

[2:00:39] a little bit more for the discussion that's developed over

[2:00:43] the course of the meeting to provide that staff

[2:00:46] report back following some consultation and important. But.

[2:00:50] So there's a little bit of a disconnect there between

[2:00:54] what was initially tabled versus what is being referred and

[2:00:58] sought back for some further work

[2:01:01] by staff. So do we need to take that motion that was tabled off

[2:01:05] the floor then? So the referral

[2:01:09] takes precedence, but we've worked some language

[2:01:12] into the referral to recognize counsel's

[2:01:16] direction on the matter. Okay, Councillor Russo,

[2:01:22] through the chair. I don't want to put words in to Councillor

[2:01:26] Early's mouth, but I think what was being asked is,

[2:01:29] can we get clause one put on the actual screen so

[2:01:33] that. Because we're speaking to clause one in

[2:01:37] of what we're referring. So let's be very clear on what clause one is.

[2:01:41] So we're recognizing what's being referred.

[2:01:52] So, Zach, they are looking for

[2:01:57] clause one instead of the clause three that was,

[2:02:00] that is incorporated to the motion there. I don't know if you might still have

[2:02:03] that language.

[2:02:07] I don't think that either, either option

[2:02:11] should be identified. I think you can identify, you can ask for clarification

[2:02:15] on what option one was. But I think the intent is to

[2:02:19] refer the motion with no option.

[2:02:22] Is the intent test all of a sudden turn an option into

[2:02:26] the motion is the same thing as turning

[2:02:30] option three in as part of the motion, then referring that back. I think

[2:02:33] the intent was the motion that you had there without referring to

[2:02:37] any of the three options, which is all I would support. If we're going to

[2:02:41] identify an option that we're going to present to the, to the residents of

[2:02:44] Caledon, that isn't the intent and that isn't anything that

[2:02:48] I would support. Deputy Clerk, clarity through

[2:02:53] the chair.

[2:02:56] Option one provides that the town of Caledon exercises its

[2:03:00] authority under the Regional municipality appeal Act 2005

[2:03:04] to change the method of electing its regional council representatives

[2:03:08] from voting based on ward to voting at large. Council is

[2:03:12] correct that that's not explicitly provided for in the referral.

[2:03:17] I want to reassure council that I think staff has

[2:03:20] understood the direction here today to take

[2:03:26] back the question as a whole about the method of

[2:03:30] election with regard to the regional councils, not necessarily with

[2:03:35] a specific recommendation in mind. I think that direction

[2:03:40] has been well established through the

[2:03:43] discussion here today. We are discussing

[2:03:47] the referral a little bit more than the procedural bylaw might

[2:03:51] like us to at this point point. But I

[2:03:55] think that the referral C

[2:03:58] captures that intention that has been expressed by council

[2:04:02] for, for a future staff report and to

[2:04:06] provide for some opportunities for that public engagement.

[2:04:11] I would defer to the chair. I think that there's an additional question from

[2:04:14] Councilor Sheen. Counselor Sheen,

[2:04:17] thank you. I, I, I, I just wanted to

[2:04:21] confirm that Councillor Maskell summarized what I was trying to do and Councillor

[2:04:24] DeBoer also summarized what I was trying to do, which was refer the

[2:04:28] whole question back to staff with the exception of

[2:04:31] the proceeding with the consultation about

[2:04:35] accessibility. But I realized the confusion now

[2:04:39] that the Deputy Clerk has been explaining because there's already a motion

[2:04:42] on the floor. Now, I understand what the problem is, but my intention was

[2:04:46] to refer the entire staff report with respect to

[2:04:51] having choices there and not tip our hands about what our preferences are.

[2:04:54] So however we get to that, I don't know what you do with the Motion

[2:04:57] that's on the floor, but I'm trying to refer this whole

[2:05:00] question without tipping our hand. Thank you.

[2:05:03] Okay, so I think if I proceeding

[2:05:07] we need to vote on the motion and get

[2:05:10] that cleared off the table and then we can. Then we can deal with the

[2:05:14] referral. Is that correct? The referral

[2:05:17] takes precedent through the chair. If, if we would

[2:05:21] like to take a recess and staff can have further consultation

[2:05:25] and refine the wording with the mover and seconder to make sure that we're all

[2:05:28] on the same page, we would be very happy to do so. Perfect. Sure.

[2:05:31] Let's take five. Chair. Chair. Can I speak first? My hand has

[2:05:34] been up. Please. Councillor Kieran,

[2:05:38] thank you very much. And through you. So I think this is getting

[2:05:41] pretty convoluted and I

[2:05:45] think Councillor Sheen said it right, as did you, chair,

[2:05:49] that the intent is to have

[2:05:55] everything referred back paused until we can

[2:05:58] engage with the community. And I think we're getting

[2:06:02] down a rabbit hole and it's getting convoluted.

[2:06:05] But I have to agree with Councillor DeBoer, you, Chair and Councillor

[2:06:09] Sheen. The intent is to not bring an

[2:06:12] option forward, not do this, to refer the entire.

[2:06:16] The entire report regardless of that option.

[2:06:21] Require the public. Well, maybe it does. Maybe the public wants to

[2:06:25] comment on option three as well, sir. So I really

[2:06:28] do think that this is getting convoluted potentially

[2:06:32] unnecessarily. And I think to simplify it, as councelor

[2:06:36] Sheen had said, it's the entire report that we want

[2:06:40] referred back. Thank you. Thank you,

[2:06:43] Councilor Kieran. Mr. Klingberg, you have a comment through

[2:06:48] the chair to committee. Yes. So I just wanted

[2:06:52] to provide a little bit of perspective. I believe what

[2:06:56] the intent here is is to refer the first clause

[2:07:01] to determine which option 1, 2 or 3.

[2:07:05] So I would suggest some

[2:07:09] the referral language to reflect it being the first clause

[2:07:12] without referencing a specific option.

[2:07:17] And also for consideration if a

[2:07:21] referral does carry, I would request a

[2:07:24] shorter turnaround because this there is option to still at

[2:07:28] play and options two will require some time and

[2:07:31] it has to get done by the end of the year before the

[2:07:35] election year. And there would be the regents requirement

[2:07:39] to also do a public

[2:07:43] meeting at their composition if

[2:07:48] option two is selected. And that would be what the public input does.

[2:07:52] So we would need if we are going to refer this entire clause

[2:07:56] back for public for a public meeting,

[2:07:59] it would require a shorter turnaround and I would request May the

[2:08:03] 6th General Committee for that report back. Thank you.

[2:08:08] Thank you. Clerk Klingenberg for the Clarification So,

[2:08:12] seeing no speakers now,

[2:08:15] do you want to take five minutes to get this all figured out

[2:08:19] and then we'll come back and. Yes, proceed. That would be great. Perfect.

[2:08:22] Thank you very much. We'll take five.

[2:21:38] Okay, let's. Let's try to get back at this and

[2:21:42] maybe we can. We can move this out of the way by

[2:21:46] 5:00. All right, so let's

[2:21:51] start to proceed here. So, Deputy Clerk, you want to give us some advice

[2:21:55] as to how we're going to proceed here? Absolutely. Thank you. Through you, Mr.

[2:21:59] Chair, if Council would permit me the opportunity,

[2:22:03] what we have prepared in front of you today and displayed on screen

[2:22:07] is the initial staff report recommendation

[2:22:11] with the clause in question. And I

[2:22:14] think there was some confusion there with regard to a reference to an option

[2:22:18] versus a clause. I'm referring to that first paragraph highlighted

[2:22:22] in yellow there as a clause. It's my understanding that

[2:22:26] following the staff report recommendation being tabled by

[2:22:30] councillors DeBoer and Early, that there was

[2:22:33] a request from Councillors Sheen and

[2:22:37] Early to refer the portion of the

[2:22:40] staff report with respect to the regional councilor

[2:22:44] composition to a future meeting following public engagement.

[2:22:51] So if we can scroll down a little bit, Zach,

[2:22:55] we have before you what we understand that proposed partial

[2:22:59] referral language to be that that first clause of

[2:23:03] the staff report recommendation be referred back to staff to prepare

[2:23:07] an additional report following that public consultation and engagement

[2:23:11] process. And so we differentiate that language

[2:23:15] there without an option indicated, as was kept council's

[2:23:19] preference through the discussion here today.

[2:23:23] And it provides a May 6,

[2:23:26] 2025 return report, which I believe

[2:23:31] was to the satisfaction of the clerk.

[2:23:34] And so then what we also have before you proposed

[2:23:38] is the balance of that staff report recommendation

[2:23:42] as initially moved and seconded by councillors

[2:23:46] DeBoer and Early, which provides that staff are able

[2:23:49] to proceed with the consultation to the

[2:23:53] Accessibility Advisory Committee and the

[2:23:56] additional consultation pieces noted within the staff recommendation of

[2:24:00] the report. It is my understanding that this

[2:24:03] captures the direction and discussion from Council

[2:24:07] here today, but I would be happy to answer any question, questions of clarification,

[2:24:11] if I can, about where we might have

[2:24:14] missed an element. Thank you,

[2:24:18] Mr. Chair, for your indulgence. Thank you. A lot of

[2:24:21] work there. So thank you very much. And so

[2:24:25] I guess the first thing we would do is proceed with the vote on the

[2:24:28] partial referral. Okay,

[2:24:32] so I guess we would. At this point, we would need to be calling the

[2:24:35] vote on the partial Referral, please.

[2:24:40] Councillor DeBoer in favor.

[2:24:43] Councilor early in favor.

[2:24:46] Councilor Kiernan in favor.

[2:24:50] Councilor Napoli Opposed.

[2:24:54] Councilor Rosa? Opposed.

[2:24:57] Councilor Russo? Opposed.

[2:25:01] Councilor Sheen? In favor. Mayor Groves?

[2:25:05] Opposed. Chair Mascel?

[2:25:08] In favor.

[2:25:14] Through the chair. The motion carries.

[2:25:25] And so if it please the chair, we can move to

[2:25:29] the balance of that staff report recommendation. Okay, moving to

[2:25:33] vote on the balance of the staff report recommendation.

[2:25:40] Councillor DeBoer? In favor.

[2:25:44] Councilor Early? In favor.

[2:25:47] Councilor Kiernan? In favor.

[2:25:52] Councilor Napoli? In favor.

[2:25:56] Councilor Rosa? In favor.

[2:26:00] Councilor Russo? In favor.

[2:26:04] Councilor Sheen? In favor. Mayor Groves?

[2:26:07] In favor. Chair Mascal? In favor. Through the chair.

[2:26:11] The motion carries.

[2:26:22] Okay, so we all finished with that? Okay, great. Thank you very much.

[2:26:27] I guess the next item would be item 10.3,

[2:26:31] staff report 2025 0108,

[2:26:34] Palgrave Tennis Club, State of good repair.

[2:26:38] And I did hold this motion,

[2:26:43] sorry, staff report, not necessarily

[2:26:47] regarding the contents of this, of the staff report itself,

[2:26:51] but what I really wanted to do was follow up on discussions that

[2:26:55] were had by this council during our budget deliberations

[2:27:00] regarding the stewardship agreements with

[2:27:04] the tennis clubs in the town of Caledon.

[2:27:07] And I brought that up during the budget talks where we were trying

[2:27:10] to figure out how we could get better town

[2:27:14] access, public access to the courts. I understand that there's very

[2:27:18] limited access, and we've been engaged in numerous repairs over the

[2:27:22] years where we provided up to 50% of the funding for

[2:27:26] repairs to these courts, but we don't have adequate

[2:27:30] public access. So I'm really just wondering if there's been any, Any follow

[2:27:34] up to that discussion that was held in December and

[2:27:37] where we're at with that and when we can expect something coming forward. I'm sure,

[2:27:40] Mr. Ahoy, if you're able to. To deal with that at this time, but I

[2:27:44] just want to make sure was on the record this evening, that we need to

[2:27:47] make some progress with that. Thank you to you,

[2:27:50] Chair. Yeah, so staff have initiated

[2:27:54] discussions internally. I think I'm meeting on Friday with recreation

[2:27:58] staff who lead that process to discuss our approach to how

[2:28:01] we will move forward with these service or stewardship agreements with tennis

[2:28:05] clubs. Okay, so that's coming up to this Friday.

[2:28:09] Internally, staff will be discussing how we're going to move forward in discussing

[2:28:13] with the tennis clubs, their stewardship agreements. Okay. Do you think was that something

[2:28:16] that would come back to this council in the form of some

[2:28:19] sort of a memorandum? Because it was part of our discussions here

[2:28:23] at budget time, and I know a number of councilors were very interested in seeing

[2:28:27] where those discussions would go.

[2:28:30] You. Chair? Yeah, I. I believe through those discussions,

[2:28:33] we will Come up with proposals of how we want to move forward. And I

[2:28:36] think that would be better if we. We had council support for how we would

[2:28:39] move forward with that. Okay. To the. So will that be in the form of

[2:28:42] a staff report or memorandum, do you think?

[2:28:46] I would probably choose a. A staff report. So at least it has some recommendation

[2:28:50] and some teeth behind it, as opposed to a memorandum. Okay.

[2:28:55] Councelor. Oh, sorry, is that. Who's that?

[2:28:59] No, that's. That's that Jason there. Mr.

[2:29:02] Shield Roth, you have your hand up? Yes,

[2:29:06] through the chair. I just wanted to reiterate what Mr.

[2:29:10] Hoy was suggesting. So we are in the process, as well as working on a

[2:29:12] council workshop to discuss tenants agreements, options and some deeper

[2:29:16] information for council. So we are looking at a date in either April or May

[2:29:19] for that as part of the follow up. Perfect. Thank you very much,

[2:29:23] Mr. Child. Roth. Much appreciated. Councillor Russo, you're on the board.

[2:29:30] Thank you. Through you, Chair, happy to move the report as you indicated.

[2:29:33] I think the report itself is very supportable.

[2:29:37] I appreciate you bringing up the stewardship agreements. I think it's something

[2:29:41] that every hamlet is dealing with.

[2:29:44] So I appreciate staff's actually taking the bull by the

[2:29:48] horns and figuring that out quickly so that we can

[2:29:51] get something decided on. Because I think the lack

[2:29:55] of clarity breeds problems for both the

[2:29:59] public and members of the actual tennis clubs themselves, which a lot

[2:30:03] of people there are volunteers and they're doing great work.

[2:30:06] But the ambiguity creates confusion.

[2:30:10] So I appreciate this being a priority. So thank you.

[2:30:16] Thank you. Councillor Russo,

[2:30:18] seeing no other questions or comments from

[2:30:22] council, I guess we at this point, we can

[2:30:26] proceed with the vote. Do we have a

[2:30:30] seconder who's moved it?

[2:30:33] Move. Councillor Russo.

[2:30:37] Councillor deboer. Thank you.

[2:30:42] Moved by councillor Russo and seconded by Councilor DeBoer.

[2:30:47] And will I have the motion display. Slade.

[2:30:51] Councilor DeBoer in favor.

[2:30:54] Councilor Early. In favor. Councilor Kiernan.

[2:30:59] In favor. Councilor Napoli.

[2:31:02] In favor. Councilor Rosa. In favor.

[2:31:06] Councilor Russo in favor. Councilor Sheen.

[2:31:10] In favor. Mayor Gross. Yes.

[2:31:13] Chair Mascal. Chair in favor. Through the chair. The motion carries.

[2:31:20] Next on the agenda is notices of.

[2:31:24] Oh, sorry, note. The Canadian

[2:31:28] suppliers. That was held on consent. Right. So we're good. Okay. So the next

[2:31:31] would be notice of motion. There have not been any notices of motion received

[2:31:35] for today's meeting. If any notices of motion are received,

[2:31:38] they will be Presented at the March 2020. 25th,

[2:31:42] 2025 Town Council Meeting. Are there any notices

[2:31:45] of motion to be presented at today's meeting?

[2:31:51] Seeing none, we'll move on correspondence.

[2:31:56] We will now move on to correspondence. Are there any

[2:31:59] comments or items that require action in the correspondence?

[2:32:03] Package for memorandums 24.

[2:32:07] Statement of remuneration expenses 2025

[2:32:11] Roma conference summary. Purchasing biannual

[2:32:14] report for July 2024. December 2024.

[2:32:20] I was on. Oh, good. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I did

[2:32:23] want to talk about the Roma Conference summary and

[2:32:27] more of a query. And it's fine that we do

[2:32:31] the summary. I think it was a motion that was put forward by Doug

[2:32:34] Berd years ago and then re brought forward by somebody this term.

[2:32:37] I'm not sure who, but I'm more wanting to get some

[2:32:41] information. We had about eight staff members come

[2:32:45] with us to Roma, which is great. I think there's a lot of goodwill

[2:32:49] there, not only from a team perspective and obviously for

[2:32:52] some assistance, but in many cases, the counselors

[2:32:55] themselves were not allowed to attend delegations

[2:32:59] of their choice. So they were asked to attend four delegations.

[2:33:04] In one of the delegations, I think it was the last one with transportation,

[2:33:08] we had all eight staff members in that room, and yet there

[2:33:12] was a counselor that wasn't allowed to attend.

[2:33:16] So I guess I'm wanting to get some comfort level. I certainly have talked to

[2:33:20] a lot of municipalities. It's not a practice the councillors

[2:33:23] are not led into a delegation if they choose to be there.

[2:33:26] There is a practice that sometimes there's a counselor that

[2:33:30] has more awareness of a certain topic and they take

[2:33:33] the lead on the conversation. But if we're being

[2:33:36] asked as councillors to do a report on

[2:33:40] our activities, I guess I would sort of like to understand the

[2:33:45] activities of the staff, some who arrived on the Saturday. I am a Roma

[2:33:50] board member, so. So it was very different in my capacity in that I had

[2:33:53] a Roma board meeting on the Saturday and a zone hookup on the Sunday

[2:33:56] morning where I presented. And then we had multiminister delegations

[2:34:00] as a Roma board. And then I had, you know, the delegations that

[2:34:04] I was allowed to go with this and the conference. So not

[2:34:07] sure who that question is geared to, but I did want to query

[2:34:11] that, especially as we head into Amo for the summer months.

[2:34:16] Thank you, Councillor Early. That Cao Hyde would

[2:34:20] be something you would be able to address. Well, thank you. Through the chair.

[2:34:23] I guess my question back to Councillor early is, do you want that in the

[2:34:26] form of a staff report? I don't certainly want to put staff who are in

[2:34:29] the room on the spot right now. It's a very straightforward

[2:34:33] answer. I would think that they could Take offline. But unless you want something that's

[2:34:36] more public, we could look towards a staff report. So I would just maybe ask

[2:34:39] for some clarification on that.

[2:34:43] Thank you. Thank you. I think a staff report is fine. I don't think

[2:34:47] we need to do anything public. I think it's more just an issue as we

[2:34:49] move into amo, that I think that we want to make sure that

[2:34:53] all of our counselors, our sitting councillors that choose to be part

[2:34:56] of these delegations, I mean, AMO and Roma FCM to some small point

[2:35:00] as well, they're created so that these elected officials

[2:35:03] have, you know, an opportunity to learn from their colleagues,

[2:35:07] but also an opportunity to have facetime with the ministers. And I just

[2:35:10] want to make sure moving forward that we get that opportunity 100%.

[2:35:14] Understand, not everybody can do the talking at these delegations. They're 15 minutes long,

[2:35:18] but everybody should have the opportunity. But I will say it just for

[2:35:22] me, very concerning when there are various

[2:35:26] levels of staff taking the seats of counselors that could be in

[2:35:29] the room. So I'll leave it at that. And I'll leave it to your leadership

[2:35:33] to decide how you'd like to handle it with the staff report.

[2:35:37] Thank you. Thank you. CEO Hyde, anything to add?

[2:35:40] Well, thank you. Through the chair, I think how we might handle that is simply

[2:35:43] a memo to council. I think it's pretty straightforward. I know that the team implemented

[2:35:47] a new process for it this year that all counselors were prepped on. We can

[2:35:50] certainly articulate that. I don't think it's a matter of anybody taking

[2:35:53] up seats of, but I know there was a process that was developed by the

[2:35:57] team, and certainly we can articulate, and I think the memo is probably the most

[2:36:00] effective means by which to do it. Thank you very much,

[2:36:03] CEO. High Councillor Russo, you have a comment?

[2:36:08] Yeah, I just actually want to draw attention to 1313, the purchasing

[2:36:11] BI annual report. I think Chair,

[2:36:14] you alluded to this at one of the previous meetings. This is

[2:36:18] just a helpful tool for members of the public and council in general

[2:36:22] to just go over things and costing that

[2:36:26] were absorbed throughout the year or that

[2:36:30] time frame from the town. So just bringing attention

[2:36:33] to it, because sometimes in

[2:36:37] correspondence, this is just kind of gone over.

[2:36:41] But any members of the public that like to look at that, I think it's

[2:36:44] a very useful tool. And for council in general,

[2:36:47] it's a very useful tool, and I appreciate staff doing it on a

[2:36:51] biannual basis. Thank you.

[2:36:57] Thank you, Councillor Russo.

[2:37:00] Okay, going forward. Oh, Councillor Sheen.

[2:37:04] Thank you, Chair Masc thank you, Councillor Russo. I wasn't going

[2:37:07] to speak to this, but since you brought it up,

[2:37:10] I read this biannual

[2:37:15] report with some interest and noted that the

[2:37:19] topic we talked about in some length, at some length last week, I think it

[2:37:22] was around non standard procurements. I noticed

[2:37:26] that there's about 3, 6, 10, 8,

[2:37:30] maybe 10 non standard procurements on

[2:37:33] page 4

[2:37:37] of 5, and all of them were relatively low dollar amounts,

[2:37:41] nothing more than $50,000, which I thought was pretty interesting

[2:37:45] considering the high amounts we were talking about last

[2:37:48] week or the week before. So I just wanted to draw attention to that as

[2:37:51] well. Thank you. Thank you,

[2:37:54] Councillor Sheen. And I think that's germane to our topic last week where

[2:37:58] we were speaking about this. And really in the area

[2:38:02] of procurement, you know, the one you least want

[2:38:05] to engage in is the non, non standard ones.

[2:38:10] So that's why those purchases are so low, I would believe. And would

[2:38:14] that be the case, Commissioner Cummings? That's probably

[2:38:17] the least preferred method of procurement out there. So you're kind of

[2:38:21] reserving it for small things or timely matters.

[2:38:25] You're absolutely correct, Chair Mescal. It's very

[2:38:28] specific situations. Thank you very much.

[2:38:38] At this time, we do not have a closed session.

[2:38:42] So at this point, I would believe this is time for our

[2:38:46] adjournment and that this would conclude

[2:38:50] the March 4, 2025 general committee meeting.

[2:38:53] I declared the meeting adjourned. And just so the public's aware, there is a public

[2:38:57] meeting tonight for planning and development. So we'll see you at

[2:39:01] 7:00.

General Committee Meeting

Agenda

Transcript