Okay, good evening everyone. I'll now call the open Council
meeting of Monday, August 24th, 2026 to order and request
everyone turn their cell phones off for the duration of
this meeting. I'd like to call for Declarations at Petini
Interest in the General Nature thereof undermissible conflict of interest
to act with respect to the agenda for this meeting.
Seeing none. I'd also like for a call for Declaration
of Pecunia Interest and General Nature thereof on a municipal
conflict of interest to act for means which a member
had not attendance and which not been previously declared. See
none. I'd like to begin by acknowledging with respect that
we were in the 3D - 3 territory in the
land on which were gathered as traditional territory, the Nishinabi,
the MAT people. Welcome to this Council meeting of the
Corporation of the City of Drydon. This forum is a
place for Democracy, respectful discussion, and debate. We are committed
to the values of integrity, honesty, responsibility and respect. We
ask that everyone present, Council members, staff, and the public
exercise self - discipline. Please focus your comments on the
issues at hand. Respect the time limits and accords others
the same courtesy you wish to receive. Let us work
together to build a community where diverse views are heard
and valued. So we have no delegations this evening or
no presentations. No public notices, so we're now at the
consent of general electasic clerk conduction of the agenda, please.
Okay, I will review the items that are in the
consent agenda this evening and ask if anyone would like
to speak to our sever anything for a separate vote.
Just the two items tonight under Adopt and Receive Minutes.
We have the minutes of the August 10th Council meeting
to be adopted. And under by - laws, there is
By - - - - - - - 2026 -
60. Two amendments by - law 2026, two to account
for the 2025 operating surplus as presented by the Treasurer
at the August 10th Council meeting. Does anyone want to
speak to her several either of those items. Nope, I
will look for a remover in a seconder, please. Oh,
thank. You. Move by Councillor Charteff, seconded by Councillor McKinnon,
the Council hereby consider the following items of the consent
agenda under date of August 24, 2026, as read and
adopted, 9a and 12a. Okay, we call the question all
in favor. Carried. Thank you. So we're now back to
the regular agenda, which is out of consent, and each
item on the regular agenda will be presented individually to
Council. And I'd like to call on Mr. Bagshaw to
present his report, please.
Good evening, members of Council and members of the Public.
The report before Council this evening provides an update on
the Planning Work underway for the South Vanholt Autofront lands
and introduces the draft South Manhorn Master Plan for Public
Consultation. The starting point for this work is policy of
4. 1, 0. 1, 0. 23 of the C's official
plan. That policy requires large - scale mixed use waterfront
development to proceed through either a secondary plan or master
plan process undertaken by the city. The purpose is to
determine the appropriate balance of residential and commercial uses, open
space and amenity areas and protection of the lake. Staff
App prepared the draft South Benhol Monster Plan as the
planning instrument contemplated by that policy. It's important to emphasize
that the master plan is not a development approval. It
does not amend the official plan remove the existing holding
provisions, approve a plan of subdivision or site plan or
authorized construction. Those approvals and technical requirements remain to be
addressed through later stages. Staff of proceeding with a master
plan rather than a secondary plan because the official plan
expressly permits either approach and the existing waterfront mix -
view framework is considered capable of accommodating the contemplated development
without an official plan amendment. The master plant also addresses
the official plan direction concerning views and vistors at the
terminus of ENHORN Avenue through specific public realm and design
policies. The draft master plan establishes the city's broad expectations
for the approximately 30 acre study area. The current reference
concept identifies approximately 396 residential units across the broader area.
Uh, this is a planning benchmark only. It is not
an approved density. And the final number of units will
depend on servicing capacity. Environmental constraints, open space requirements and
future planning approvals. The draft also identifies a target housing
mix that includes multi - unit housing single - de
- touched housing and assisted living. Supportive or seniors housing.
Commercial uses are also contemplated, including food service Moscow retail,
marine related and seasonal uses. A central component of the
plan is public access to the waterfront. The draft establishes
an open space benchmark of approximately 35 percent of the
study area, including the shoreline buffer, MASH interface, parkland, uh,
and trail corridors. It also seeks to ensure that the
wobbygoon lake shoreline remains publicly accessible and that exclusive private
residential frontage is not created. The plan also seeks to
contemplate the signature trail connection through the area and connect
lower how mastery our system will be green lake waterfront.
Environmental protection is another major component. Detailed environmental review will
be required before the final development layout is established. This
includes an environmental impact study, consideration of fish and wildlife
habitat. Ecological function of lore halmarge, shoreline protection, stormwater management,
flood and hazard conditions, archaeological assessment, and potential contaminated slight
requirements. Several of these requirements arise directly from legislation or
the official plan and are therefore identified as fixed requirements
rather than discretionary preferences. The report also distinguishes the earlier
Vanholm Landing RFP from the master plan process. The RFP
was a procurement process, it tended to identify a development
partner and obtain concepts for the approximately 10 acre city
- owned first phase. It was not a planning approval
and it does not replace the cities responsibility to undertake
the master plan process. The mask plan is city -
led. And the City establishes the planning framework leads the
consultation, considers the feedback received and brings the final document
back to Council for Pro Decision. Separate engagement undertaken by
the development proponent may inform its proposal, but it does
not replace the City's consolidation. It's also important to recognise
that approximately 20 acres of the broadest study era remain
in principle ownership and acquisition of those lands is not
assured for that reason the draft master plan requires the
city - owned precinct A, be capable of functioning independently
if the provincial lens are not never acquired. Sourcing and
land use planning are also being advanced concurrently. Infrastructure, construction
does not approve of a particular development layout. Water pressure,
Firefoil Capacity must still be verified. Wastewater capacity confirmed and
transportation and stormwater requirements addressed before development approval. Uh, an
agreement of patients and sale has been executed for the
City - owned precinct A, but conditions under that agreement
have not been waived. A development agreement accepted by Council
is required before closing. And the draft master plan is
to be adopted before or could currently with Councillor's consideration
of that agreement. The land transaction therefore needs to be
distinguished from development approval. The existing holding provision and subsequent
statutory planning approvals remain in place. The next major step
is Public and Indigenous engagement. Staff are recommending that the
Draft Master Plan and Supporting Materials be released for 30
- day city - led public consultation period. The city
would issue its own notice and receive comments electronically and
in writing at City Hall. The consultation will focus particularly
on the balance of residential and commercial development, open space
and amenities, public waterfront access and protection of what we
can like following the consultation period, Stafford document the comments
received. Consider NSRE revisions and return the final master plan
to Council for consideration. Council may also direct additional consultation,
including a city hosted public open house, if it considers
that appropriate. Indigenous engagement will also be undertaking, it accordants
with the official plan. There are several outstanding matters, including
completion of the housing needs study for the consideration of
the Sinister Trail Study, clarification of the reference concept by
Precinct. And the Uncertain Status of the Provincial Lens, those
aren't even matters reinforced the key point this evening that
the document before Council establishes a planning framework. It does
not approve a final development to sign. Accordingly Staffa recommending
that Council will receive the port direct staff to release
the draft master plan for 30 - day CD -
LED public consultation period undertaking disous engagement. Document and considered
the feedback received and return the final master plan to
Council before or concurrently with the development agreement. And before
I play pool conditions associated with the disposition of the
city own lands are waved. Thank you. Oh, thank you
Mr. Bagchaw. For your report, before we go to questions
from Council, I just want to remind Council the recommendations
that we receive this draft South Vanhoor Master Plan for
Information. Council Direct Staff to release the draft South Van
Horn Master Plan Supporting Material for 30 - day City
- led Public Consultation Perry with comments accepted electronically and
writing, Staff under Indigenous Engagement, accordance with digital plan and
Staff document the feedback received, consider revisions as appropriate and
return the final master plan of Council for consideration and
adoption prior to a concurrently with Council's consideration the development
agreement. And prior to the waiver of applicable conditions associated
with opposed disposition of city - owned loans. Okay. A
lot before us open up Council for questions. Council Ethan.
I would like to defer this. Meeting to the next
meeting on September the 14th. I would like a recorded
vote on it because we have to vote if we're
going to have a meeting or not. Um, there's, I
found that there's a lot of things in here, a
lot of issues. That are unknowing. And we need some
time to absorb this more. That's my opinion. Your worship.
Let's confirm with our clerk here. On. The Motion. We
generally will continue with some. Discussion and see how the
rest of the group feels. Okay, duly noted. Um, Councillor
Kievney. Yes, thank you through the chair. Um, I just
had a few questions. Sorry, let me just pull this
back up. Okay, so, um, I'm curious. The 2010 plan
that was mentioned. So in that, um, in the master
plan, it states that, you know, we have to cancel
or rescind the 2012 plan. Do we have any legal
obligation to following the 2010 plan. Okay, that would be
for flying department or Mr. Husband. Through your worship.
You're talking about the waterfront plan from 2010 Councillor Couning?
Yes. So the big kind of group. Project that plan
that you're referring to. No, so just in general, the
fact that we also have emotion tonight to rescind and
within the master plan, it says, you know, we want
to. Again, it sounds like from what I understand through
reading through it, that we have to rescind this plan.
Is there a, did we have previously did we have
a legal obligation to follow through with that. 2010 waterfront
development plan or like, I'm just curious what the point
of rescinding it is, if it's not actually a hindrance
to moving forward with this master plan. Thank you for
clarifying. Uh, to move forward with a new master plan
that we recommetion would be for Council to rescind that
motion. Yeah, I can also answer that. I brought the
motion for, um, knowing the 2010 plan has really not
been, um. Really worked on for the last four terms.
It's also been dropped for a long time. It was,
I think it's clean. If we want to move forward
in different direction, it's clean for us to rescind that
to make it, uh, we need to follow policies and
procedures. So we need to follow our own act, even
though it's done 16 years ago. It's still on the
book. So we need to make a decision on that.
Okay. Um, and my next question has to do with
the public consultation. So if you go to page
16 of the document. Where is she? Here she is.
Um, so it does have a whole section on public
consultation. So this, uh, 10. 6. 1 states that, or
A, I suppose. So consultations should occur before conditions are
waived. And before council adopts this master plan so that
it can influence the outcome. This is all great and
good. I'm curious about some sort of deadline or timeline
that we are working with. Um, I feel like we,
we received these documents on Thursday. I had only the
weekend to review these, um, and I want to make
sure, uh, because this document is very. Fulsome is the
word I'm going to use. I don't know if I
absorbed as much as I could have and I don't
know if any of the other, um, councillors feel the
same, but there is a lot in this document. So
I'm curious if we have to have this completed or,
you know, this draft available to the public sooner rather
than later or if there is a way that we
can maybe spend some more time with it. So it
wouldn't be opposed to, um, maybe deferring the draft so
that we can have, um, a deeper think on it
and kind of dig into the more particular parts of
it. Um, but I'm just curious if that, if there
was some sort of rush on this. Staffonic tackle that
one through your worship. I think Council has time or
in parallel with any public consultation to absorb and ask
questions as well. Uh, once the public consultation is complete.
Uh, Staff will bring those results back to Council and
Council can take that into consideration for any further refinements
to the master plan, including their own thoughts on the
master plan. Okay. Um, and then just a comment again
about public consultation. I do think that, um, I think
that we should lean heavily into the accessibility, um, bit
of this. And from what I have heard around the
community, a lot of folks in Driden are wanting to
participate in some sort of in - person larger scale
public consultation that is led by the city. So while
I enjoy participating in these things from the comfort of
my home, I think, um, I think it would be
a better or best move for us to kind of
check every box when it comes to public consultation. Create,
you know, some sort of online something where people can
write in or email in, but also have a space
where people can move through their ideas and talk about
these things. I think that one of. The things that
people really liked about the 2010 plan was that it
felt like. It felt like all of the parts of
a, you know, college group project without, hopefully, the, um,
the annoying bits of it. Um, so I'm curious if
that is something that we can also look into and
ensure that that's part of our public consultation. Okay. Go
online first to Councillor Noel. He's had your hand up
for a while. Thank you, Mayor.
Sorry. I was, I was hoping my colleague would ask
a pile of questions, uh, because she often rattles off
a few of them that I had written down, but
there are a couple. The first one is I'll go
through the questions and anyone who's qualified to answer can
answer. The first one would be that on page five
of eight of that huge document that we had by
seen in the paragraph that starts with land transaction that
there's reference to the transaction for purchase and sale has
been executed. Um, can somebody comment on if there's, if
that property is actually been sold and the signed contract
for it, um, the other concern that I had or
questioned would be if somebody could explain the term, uh,
holding provision to me. The next question would be, why
are we only limiting 30 days for submissions on this.
By email and writing. We have to remember that we
have a diverse community here. Sometimes the electronic methods of
participating in something, although very user - friendly, if you're
familiar with that, it may cut out a certain demographic
that we have. You know, seniors may not be necessarily
as familiar with the process as many others. So I'm
wondering if it has to be a 30, what, like
what's the rush for 30 days for submission. Next question
would be, would the First Nations consulting consultations also be
within that timeframe of 30 days. Would that be done?
Cause I'm not sure that that's even a reasonable expectation
for that to happen within 30 days. I have to
echo my colleagues'comments. Councillor Latham in that I feel extremely
rushed with this. I too, uh, read all these documents
twice just to see if I could delineate some of
the questions that I had, but the nagging feeling I
have at the back is I feel this is being
put before us. At the 11th hour, so to speak,
when there's a, there's potentially the completely new council is
going to be coming in in a very short time.
I don't understand the rush here. This is something that
we need to really get correct and have the public,
no matter which way we go on this, there. But
this is a very important decision. I hope that both
sides, if you want to call it that of this
equation, we'll accept and realise that if not for residential
development down there, we wouldn't have the opportunity to do
anything because that's what levied sewer and water going down
there because there's no way the city would have been
able to afford that on their own. So there has
to be a balance here and I hope everybody understands
that. My concern, Mayor Harrison and colleagues is that we
have to be transparent. I don't see the necessity to
rush. At this point. It's not like everybody's going to
pack up their back holes and go home if we
don't make a decision in the next 30 or 60
days. So if someone can answer those questions for me
and for the purposes of the record, I support Councillor
Latham's suggestion that we defer this so that all of
us can have a little bit more time to read
and ask questions. I know myself, I'm limited to who
I could ask questions to on this. So it's been
a challenge. Thank you. Okay. I'll go to Staff. Mr.
Nesmith. You'd like to address those questions? Um, I can,
you worship and through your worship. Uh, an agreement to
purchase and sale was struck with the developer at Council's
Direction. But as Mr. Begg Shaw reported tonight, uh, there
are many conditions that have not been waived as of
yet. Uh, one of those conditions is development of an
acceptable development agreement that will come back and publicly be
discussed with Council in an open meeting. From a standpoint
of public consultation, staff field at 30 days is adequate.
Um, we can, uh, we can start that process immediately
at Council's Direction. Um, the outcome of this meeting, uh,
and again, 30 days should be ample time for the
public to provide their input on this matter. Okay. Thank
you. I'll go to Councillor Taref. Yeah. Um, I was,
uh, same on the concerns about, uh, public consultation, but
I had to, um, I guess quiller for a question.
Council Kevening had said that there was so much more
input on the initial studies. I read them. The first
one from CMHC had they invited a hundred people to
participate. 33 took part and not all of them stayed
for the whole Presentation. And in the, uh, second one
for the 2010 final, Mr. Tariq, you're talking about the
2010 2008 first. And then the 2010, they had, uh,
open houses. That 60 people attended. And 13 people actually
left written in commons. So I don't see, like obviously
we want everybody's input. And in this day and age
30 days on electronic, I think does, you know, meet
it. And if at everything goes in, uh, it, the
people are concerned, obviously the two sides of everything out
there. And there's a lot out electronically. And that's where
we seem to be getting everything from. If our history
repeats itself and we delay and put out for, and
the expense of having public, uh, in - person. Presentations
and that. I don't know how much, but what I've
seen in our last two, I don't know how much
more we're going to see. Yeah. They had a charee
at the first one and they said they couldn't even
keep the people there for three days that they had,
uh, on that 2008 one and the 2010 again was
poorly attended. And I don't know. We didn't have the
electronic capacity that we do now. I think we'll see
a lot. I mean, we're still counsel at the end
of 30 days if we don't see what we want
or we don't think that participations have been great. We
still have to accept it in 30 days except our
extended then. So why keep delaying stuff. Okay. Thanks to
all line back to Councillor Noel. Thank you Mayor
Harrison. That prompts another question. Thank you for that, Councillor
Tarta. So if the property has been sold now, let's
suppose that we don't, um, agree with the development plan
or with the developers. Vision. We no longer own that
property. So can, can the developer then sell it now
that it's been newly serviced with, uh, water and sewer
and everything. It may seem a simple question, but it
seems like it's a win - win for the development.
And it's a win and it's a lose. Win -
lose for us perhaps. So if you can speak to
that, please. Mr. Nesbert, like to talk to us. Through
your worship, the way that an agreement of purchase and
sale of land works is that the initial agreement is
signed off. Um, and in most cases, there are conditions
attached to that contract. Um, in some cases, there isn't.
In this case, they're absolutely is. There's, there's quite a
few conditions, including, um, development agreement, uh, being created and
agreed to by both parties, meaning the municipality and the
developer. If a condition is not waived, uh, buy the
closing date. Then the parties do have some options. They
can extend the closing date and continue to work to
waive conditions or the agreement becomes null and void. So
the key point to know is that, uh, the land
is not sold until, uh, this agreement is closed. And
it's not closed until all the conditions are waived by
both parties. Yeah, thank you for that explanation, actually. We've
gone through this quite a bit through different sales. I
can think of the property behind KK Penner. That was
signed agreement, uh, with the developer there. And two years
to develop. And we actually had to extend that because
he didn't meet his conditions. And we had to make
a decision. How are we going to look for another
developer? Keep going. But we, we had some, I guess,
faith in the developer now he's building two buildings there.
So it is pretty typical. It's not done until all
the conditions are. I've been waived and signed off by
the city. You want to add to that, Mr. Nesmith?
Uh, through your worship, I do want to clarify the
situation that you speak to, uh, was a situation under
the actual development agreement after the lands were sold. This
is, this is a different situation. Uh, the agreement of
purchase and sale for the lands, the conditions have not
been waived. So the final sale has not, um, actually
happened. So when the conditions or if the conditions are
fully waived, then the sale will proceed. And that's when,
uh, in order for the sale to proceed the development
agreement, we'll have to be in place. And then from
there, the development agreement, uh, becomes the contractual obligation that
the developer has with the municipality. But right now the
land is not technically sold. There's an agreement of purchase
and sale against the land. But the conditions all of
the conditions associated with that, with that agreement have not
been waived, not be met, not being waived at this
time. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. Councillor Lethal. Thank you,
worship. Um, one of the other issues I found when
I was reading through the document, as you look at
the public space that's available, I can't quite figure out
how much public space there is there. Uh, I get
lots of comments from some of the public is that
they basically feel like this is our last piece of
property that could be enjoyed by all. So there's the
conception that there's not that much community space for events
or whatever wants to happen. And it's very unclear in
this document. So. Um, that's one of the concerns. And
that, that's coming from the constituents that have talked to
me about it. They feel that that's the very last
piece of space that is for. Whatever kind of mixed
stuff they want to do. But, um. And, and quite,
some of them are quite concerned about it because they
feel like it is the last piece of property that
they would have to use for space for enjoyment. Actually,
there is a, there's a hard number in there. What
was the number for open space. Matt, do you want
to read this? Yeah, I'll go back up there. Yeah.
Thanks. Um, yeah, the, the benchmark is 35 percent for
open space, but just want to reiterate that the key
component of, of the actual or any development plan would
be, uh, protection of open space access to the waterfronts.
Um, all the, um, all the things that the public,
um, uh, it's important to them. Um, so those elements
of any approval will be at the forefront of anything
that comes forward. So, but we are aiming for a
particular benchmark, which is 35 percent for open space. Okay.
Thank you. I think Mr. Nespit want to add to
that. Yeah. Through your worship. I would like to add
to that because the, uh, the South Vann Horn Conceptual
subdivision design that the city undertook several years ago, uh,
it's very clear what there is for, uh, for open
space and publicly accessible space, uh, in that design. And
anything coming forward from any future developers. It would also
be clear what's designated as open space and publicly accessible
space. So, um, I think if you, this master plan
is, is really just, um, pulling together the work that,
uh, that Council has asked Staff to do, uh, probably
since 2022, when we launched into the Comity Capacity study,
uh, the South Van Horn area was, uh, was looked
at, uh, through that study, uh, we looked at, um,
we looked at the South Van Horn area, of course,
through the, uh, through the official plan, uh, update that
we did after that, uh, the South Van Horn area,
you know, came into, I think, the conversation when Council
our Staff to undertake the outdoor event venue conceptual design
work, uh, that we did in 23. Uh, again, that
area came into, into, uh, I think the work that,
uh, was done with the trail feasibility study that we
did 23, 24. So that area has been looked at
extensively through different, uh, initiatives over the years. So the,
uh, and of course then the, uh, the South Vannhorn
Conceptual Subdivision design that I mentioned. So this master plan
really simply, uh, brings all that under, you know, this
term master plan. Uh, for, uh, for additional public consultation,
because most of those initiatives that I mentioned included fairly
extensive, uh, public consultation. Okay. Thank you. We'll go to
Councillor Kieving. Thank you through the chair. Um, I don't
think that anyone around the horseshoe are online is wanting
to discredit all of the work that we know and
has clearly gone into this master plan. I think. Some
folks would feel that it is part of our due
diligence to make sure that we, you know, understand what
we're putting out to the public completely before it gets
there officially. Um, so when looking at these conceptualizations, like
I'm looking at the JR cousins like mockups kind of
right now. And like some of them are very. Nice.
Like they extend, um, our, our trail system. They create,
you know, this lovely boardwalk along the water and extend
our existing doc structure and include a kayak launch and
a little dock for, you know, non motorized, uh, water
sport. Things. Um, so I think that they're, you know,
on, on the right track, I'm curious about these, um,
these drawings and maybe Matt, you can answer this. Were
these documents also provided to the public with like in
addition to like the master plan or was this just
kind of like, this is part of the agenda package.
And if people knew where to find it, that's how
they would find it. Uh, these were provided as part
of the agenda to the master plan. So yes, this
is the, this is, this is informed the master plan.
But it is an important part of informing the master
plan and the direction that we would like to explore
and go in. So yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. So for any
members of the public who are watching or listening, um,
and you haven't seen these drawings yet. They are attached
to our agenda package and go look at them to
help inform your thoughts about this, um, the master plan
its entirety, I guess. Yeah. Just add, I think that
document from the consultant you're referring to the Van Horn
Lanning Subvision pre - design report. Like part of the
purpose of that was really, uh, to compete against 440
municipalities for infrastructure funding for sue and water to get
down to the end of Van Horn Landing. So without
some documentation showing the ministry of infrastructure, uh, that we
had a plan that could get move forward. Like we
would not get any funding. So, so this was pretty
key, I think, and just showing our due diligence and
part of municipality to the government. And unfortunately, we were
rewarded that funding. You can see the work ahead. We
wouldn't be here tonight if that wasn't going ahead. So
that was a key document and moving that forward. Any
other further questions, comments, Councillor Taref. Through the chair. So
basically as I understand it, this is the culmination of
five different studies that have been undertaken presented to Council
over the last four years. That are now being amassed
and put into a single master plan. So I understand
it's overwhelming because you're all of a sudden seeing five
at once, but we've seen them throughout the year and
accepted them or received voted to receive them as reports
from each department as this went along. And again, like
I'm saying, it's not that I want to rush it,
but nothing burns me more than watching government red tape
and drags stuff around forever when you've already looked at
it. And it's been there. And we've got another 30
days to look at it before it comes back to
us again to be accepted. So giving another 30 days
another, I'm starting to think we're part of the federal
or provincial government, which, you know, and we see what
happens to any investment when they get involved. It's deferred
and gone forever or drug out. And if I've just
described this accurately as the culmination of all these reports
we've looked at over the last four years, I think
if we've been doing our job up till now, we
shouldn't continue to ask staff to wait around and ask
for more and ask for more. When we've already had
the opportunity to ask questions about this, get our details
straight. And we do have another 30 days. To do
that. Before we have to accept it or send it
back at that point. But I just want to be
clear where we are here on this because. I guess
I'm not that I'm impatient. I just hate stuff dragging
out. Yeah. So the staff, the best ability to put
together this master plan, like Mr. Nesba said and you
said that based on all the information we've got to
say over the last number of years. Really this, we're
asking to now bring this to the public and ourselves.
We have 30 days to review this and to bring
back any comments, questions, concerns. For review of staff to
put together and to then try to put a final
plan together, Presentation, the Council so that we can then
deliberate on whether or not we accept that final plan.
I think that's really what they're asking. So do we
really, we think it's time. We put the RFP out
in, I think, January for looking for call for developers.
So it's been a long time since the AFC come
back to the public because we had to do that
in a closed session. So I think we have, although
the public may not be aware, but we've spent a
lot of time. And then a lot of energy to
try to move this forward up to this point. Councillor
Kieving. Mr. Nesbitt, can you give us an idea of
when the 30 days? So if this was received tonight,
when does our 30 days begin. Through your worship staff
would be ready to go with kicking off. I guess
the electronic portion of the public consultation. Almost immediately. Okay.
With Staff, consider like a half day in person consultation
so people can come and talk to people in person.
To your worship staff will do what the majority of
Council instructs them to do. Great. I think we're hearing
that that is a desirable. Council Ethan. You should just
one more question. So explain what the vote today would
be for. Like it's, it's, it's the vote would not
be making that this is going to be done. This
is to make it just move on to the next
stage. Yeah. So I can say it again, as I
said earlier, like receiving the report. So we have an
opportunity to look at it. And really, to release it
to the public and start a 30 day public consultation.
So everyone has a chance to read through it and
put in comments electronically or writing or in person. And
then, um, also do indigenous engagement. It's not the same
as the consultation, but it's engagement. It's a bit different.
So then they document that feedback receive considering revisions appropriate
and bring them all the comments back and bring a
potential final master plan to Council for our deliberation debate
and then decide whether we move forward without or chain
make changes. So this is just the beginning of a
process. We're not approving this document or anything like it.
We're really approving consultation on the document to get started
on it. Any other further. Comments or questions.
I guess one thing is our, is there a majority
willing to move forward on this. Because we're looking for.
I guess, the mover in second. So. Okay, moved by
Councillor Price, seconded by Councillor Taref. No, thank you. I
was just going to ask Councillor Lathan needs to like
a recorded vote. Oh, yes. Okay. Thank you. Ready. Moved
by Councillor Price, seconded by Councillor Tardif, the Council received
this report regarding the draft South Van Horn Master Plan
for Information. And that Council Direct staff to release the
draft South Vanhorn Master Plan and supporting materials for a
30 - day city - led public consultation period with
comments accepted electronically and in writing at City Hall. And
that Staff Undertake Indigenous engagement in accordance with the official
plan and the staff document the feedback received. Consider revisions
as appropriate and return the final master plan to Council
for consideration and Adoption prior to, or concurrently with Council's
consideration of the development agreement and prior to the waiver
of applicable conditions associated with the proposed disposition of city
- owned lands. Go around the table, Councillor Keening. I
can't tell you if that's right or wrong. It's on
you. Mostly paying attention. Don't worry, my mic is on.
Um, yes, I will support moving forward right now. Hey,
Councillor Latham. Yes. Councillor McKinnon. Four. Councillor Noel.
Thank you. I'm sorry, I'm against. I don't think 30
days is enough time to get it all done. That's
my only sticking point is a 30 days. Councillor Price.
Taref. May. Harrison. Yay. It voted of six to one
in favor. The vote is carried. All right. Thank you.
So I'd like to now call Ms. Warren to present
her report, please. Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Mayor and
Council and everybody in attendance. Uh, the purpose of my
staff report tonight is to request council's approval to create
one permanent full - time non - union building and
by - law services, supervisor position. So staff, uh, are
recommending that Council approve one permanent full - time building
in Bylaws Services, supervisor position within the building and planning
department effective upon recruitment. Approved the attached job description and
placement on the non - union paygrid at Group 7
with a salary band of 95, 680 to 107 470,
360. A prove 2026 operating budget amendment of 73, 0120,
which would be funded from existing salary vacancies. And then
Direct Staff to include the estimated annualized cost of approximately
137, 992 in the draft 2027 operating budget. So some
of the key requests is the, this request is intended
to address an operational and statutory service delivery gap in
our building in Byloft Services. So currently the chief building
official is a city only qualified staff member authorized to
issue permits and complete mandatory building code inspections. Bylaw Services
is also supported by one municipal law enforcement officer without
a designated day - to - day supervisor. And then
the proposed combined role would add qualified inspection capacity. Provide
by loss services supervision and create a plan succession plan
for both for the CBO function. So why we're asking
for this first reason why we're asking is reduced statutory
compliance risk. So provincial requirements established permit review timelines and
require mandatory inspections within two business days of notice at
present. An absence of the CBO for vacation illness training
turnover leaves no qualified internal backup to review applications issue
permits, complete mandatory inspections or issue orders, which would create
an immediate, you know, risk to the organisation. A second
reason we're being, we're asking for this position to be
created is to respond to increased development activity. So building
activity has increased while staffing has remained at the historical
complement of one qualified inspector. Construction value increase from approximately
12. 6 million in 2022 to 30. 5 million in
2025, which is about 143 percent increase. Permits issued increased
from 60 to 116 over the same period, which is
a 93 percent increase 130 properties for the same period
of 2022 to 2025 have been inspected for property standards
concerns, which adds to Staff's time for inspection and enforcements,
which drives Staff resources from building parking and animal control.
The report also identifies practical pressures already being experienced, including
deferred plan review, longer pre - consultation timelines, inspections being
scheduled near the end of required timeframes and administrative duties
reducing available field time. The third reason is to improve
our bylaws services coordination. So this position would provide designated
operation operational supervision for Bylaus Services, which would include complaint
and investigation file triage, consistent application of progressive enforcement, quality
control for notes, evidence, photocrafts, and prosecution disclosure. Coordination with
OPP Fire Services Public Works, Property Standards Committees, et cetera.
And then support for escalated public interactions in proactive compliance
education. The combined structure is intended to be efficient because
building and Bylaw work have overlapping subject matter, enforcement tools,
field activities, and Public Safety Objectives. Another reason is to
establish a CBO Succession Capacity. So the City currently has
no qualified internal successor for the CBO role. Building official
qualifications take time to obtain. And the rule also requires
operational knowledge of local building stock approvals and final history.
Recruiting a qualified CBO externally in Northwestern Ontario was expected
to take 9 to 18 months while interim contracted services
could come at a substantial and uncertain premium. Creating this
position now permits knowledge transfer while the current CBO remains
available and allows the city to build qualifications over time.
So the Financial Summary, um, as I said, we're recommending
a salary band grid in Group 7, which is 95,
680 to 107, 47360. This reflects comparable Northwestern Ontario and
small urban Ontario municipal positions that are similar to this
that have combined inspection and enforcement roles, including the supervisory
responsibilities. So assuming that this gets passed and we start
recruiting and someone can come starting October 1st, our 2026
budget amendment, which would be 73, 210. And we would
fund that through existing salary vacancies. And then our estimated
2027 annualized costs would be 137. 982, which would have
to be considered through the 2027 budget process. So, um,
so it also, uh, aligns with our strategic alignment. So
the request aligns with the city is 20, 26 to
2031 strategic plan, the growth management goal and properties related
to, uh, proactive investment and critical public services, municipal capacity
infrastructure first development. It also supports community safety and wellbeing,
economic and investment diversity and communication in our people through
development approvals, organisational capacity and employee development and retention. Uh,
this is not solely a growth related staffing request. It
is also a risk management and continuity of service measure
for statutory building functions. Approval, like I said, would commit
council to reoccurring annual operating costs beginning in 2027 budget.
And then recruitment and timing, um, of the successful candidate
existing building code identification, number qualifications may affect how quickly
full inspection redundancy is achieved, obviously. And so the options
to consider. Option one is approved the position, which we
recommend. This option provides inspection backup, Bylaws supervision and a
succession pathway for the CBO position. As I said, there'll
be no tax levy impact for 2026. But Council must
be prepared to fund the position recurring costs starting in
2027. Option two. Contract building inspection services on a NAS
needed basis. Uh, which is not recommended as a standalone
solution. It provides limited backup, but does not address by
loss supervision or succession planning and availability of contract services
and costs is unpredictable. Option three is enter a shared
service agreement with a neighbouring municipality, also not recommended, distance
and regional capacity constraints, uh, not support timely response to
mandatory inspection timelines. Option four, defer to the 2027 budget
process. It's also not recommended. It extends the current risks
and does not reduce the eventual cost. And then option
five, remain status quo. Which is also not recommended as
it continues a single point to failure and service delivery
risks. Any question. All right. Thank you for your report
and I'll open up four for questions. Councillor Noel. You're
up first. Thank you Mayor Harrison. Thank you for your
report, Ms. Warren. I just have one question. First of
all, I'm supportive of option number one. I'm happy to
have another employee come on the fray here. We certainly
need that, especially given what you've said about the increase
in construction. And the workload that must come with that.
I just wonder if we're going to be able to
find a person that is that. Qualified. So just if
you could comment on. Background that I had read this
is Bylaws Services had delivered by a single municipal law
enforcement officer reporting the chief building official. Was presently no
designated day - to - day supervisor for Bio -
Laws Services Staff. A former coordination for file assignment. Investigation
standards, evidence handling. And this is the part where prefixes
act prosecution readiness. So as this person going to do
all that, including POA prosecution, supervision and readiness.
So through your worship Council Noel. So basically our department,
as we stand right now with my self - assess
chief building official and manager, Building and Planning with our
loan Bylaw officer. Do all of those functions today. Um,
the additional person within the department, obviously allows us to
devote more time and efforts and preparedness in all of
those aspects. So whether that is in the enforcement piece,
whether that is in the education piece for the public.
And then of course on the provincial offensive side, when
we do have challenges to our enforcements, to our offence
tickets writings, all of those things require a lot of
administrative effort together, um, our, our packages to submit to
the court. So the additional person is going to add
to that role and hopefully lessen it across the board.
That's the intent. Okay. So that clarifies it that it's
just for municipal prosecutions basically under the bylaws, the her
municipal bylaws and orders and so on and so forth.
It's not for the regular. Highway traffic active and wildlife
and things like that. That's, that was my, my question.
So thank you for that. Okay. We'll go to Councillor
Eckening. Thank you. Say where you are, Pam. Um, okay.
So, and also maybe Marcy. Uh, okay. So first question.
What is the urgency on hiring this position? Um, is
there an option? I assume things were discussed probably at
the Finance Committee that we, uh, just don't know about,
um, is there an option to do any internal cross
training. To kind of supplement. This, um, I guess this
position instead of, you know, hiring and having a whole
new person. Are there, I assume that they've been explored,
but I don't know about them. So I'm just curious
about that. Okay. Three worship. Basically our internal staff are
myself and one By - la officer. That by -
officer is currently going through the in - house training
to understand the by - law enforcement role and peace.
So there's a certification process that goes through that alone.
Second, from that piece is the ability to inspect and
understand building code and the construction industry on how buildings
have to be put together. Um, that is a whole
separate education piece that you either come with as a
carpenter, uh, project leader, project estimator, maybe a designer, whatever
your background is, leads to that. Um, the Bylaw Enforcement
Rule can be learned. The building construction end of thing
is more of somebody coming from that industry. Um, so
our current byla officer is great in the By -
la Officer Role, but his construction industry background is not
existent. So it's better if we can get somebody who
has more experience in both of those realms or at
least comes with that construction. End of things and can
learn the rest of the piece. And then it would
complement both roles and allow us to move forward out
in the public. Okay. So the expertise in that specific
realm is what is lacking currently? Correct. Okay. Um, but,
but, uh. Is I, and again, this is maybe a
question that was already asked, but I don't know the
answer. Talking about that specialty or expertise or special training,
um, is, is there a major cost associated, um, to
bring that staff person up to that level versus hiring
a whole new person or is it just the cost
benefit analysis of having a separate person in that role.
Was determined to be the way to go. We will
hopefully luck out to have somebody who has started the
qualification process and comes with that background. However, if that
person does not exist, then yes, anybody who enters into
the role of the inspection side of things requires that
qualification background in order to inspect. So it really doesn't
matter if we were to do that in - house.
That person is still going to go through that process,
but not necessarily having the background experience in the construction
industry. Okay. Um, and so who does the bylaw officer
report to right now. So by - law reports to
me as manager of building and planning and Bylaw, even
though the title doesn't necessarily add by - law in
there, I myself am a certified property standards officer as
well. So I have that same authority. Um, so that
person does report to me. They do have my supervision.
However, my supervision is limited to when I am in
office and or not on the building side of things.
So we need that person that transitions those rules who
can provide that person with more hands - on assistance,
but also supervision. And I can concentrate on what I'm
trained to do, which is the building side of things.
Okay. So from what I'm understanding, your capacity to oversee
that person currently is not where we would like it
to be. My capacity to engage in my entire role
as it currently exists is overdrawn. Yes. Got it. Got
it. Okay. Perfect. Um, Marcy, question for you. How many
non - union employees do we have? And is it
easier for us to hire non - unionized employees. Or
I'm just curious about, um, how or why the decision
to make it a non - union position was brought.
I believe there's 32 full - time, but don't quote
100 percent quote me. I believe it's 32. 32 or
33, non - union right now. It would just, yeah,
all of our by - law, like anything at a
supervisory level is non - union. So supervisory management level
is known union. If you were to go into, um,
a collective agreement. And it would be at a lead
hand. Lead hand roll, not as a supervisory role. And
we're looking for a supervisory position. Gauchy, gotcha. Um, and
so from the report, uh, for 2027's budget, we are
likely going to have to look at some sort of
tax increase to accommodate this position or some sort of
deferral of a city project or priority to accommodate this.
Well, Mr. Nesbitt was going to talk to that one.
Go ahead, Roger. Thank you. Thank you to your worship.
I can jump in on that one. Councillor Keening. Yeah.
That's exactly as the report states. Uh, that's a consideration
that Council needs to weigh is that this will impact
taxation. Um, uh, going into the 2027 budget or it
could impact taxation. Uh, but, and, uh, your conversation, your
back and forth with our CBO finally got to, you
know, one of the key components of this report. Capacity
is overdrawn within the department. It has been for quite
some time. Uh, this, uh, this request is, is probably
overdue at this point. So that's, that's why the recommendation
is, is to do this out of budget. Uh, but
for sure Council wants to be fully aware that by
moving forward on this, this, this is included in House
to be included in the 2027 budget. Okay. We'll go
online to Council McKinnon. Just one quick comment. If you
want this community continue to grow like it should, then
you got to spend some money on employees. So think
about that. Just don't think about reasons to get out
of spending the money. This is a requirement that we
need. Dreden needs lots of new houses that needs lots
of economic work. All that work leads to. People that
know how to do this kind of work. Can't be
resisted. Okay. Thank you. I'll go to Councillor Latham. You
have a question? Uh, through the chair, this is kind
of both the same as what Councillor McKinnon said. Um,
this is actually a good thing because it proves that
we are growing as a community. And that's something that
we've all wanted for a long time. Yeah. Thank you.
Um, it's been a conversation, a couple of conversations when
I've been down to many municipal meetings or conferences chief
billing inspectors. There are statutory. They're in high demand. There's
many municipalities don't have one. Um, so the options are
limited. If you want to move forward, talking to frustrated
mayors who don't have a CBO. So they're have to
have a third party. And they actually have to go
around and take pictures of everything. Sentine out the mayor
himself. But staff member take pictures of all the building
forward it to somebody in another city. And they look
at it. And say, uh, could you go back and
take another picture? Cause I can't really tell if that
stud is in the right place. So very frustrating, uh,
for developers. I have talked to two, uh, two developers
in this city that said we started a project in
another city, but they didn't have the staff to handle
us. So we've actually started our project after theirs and
completed and dried because we had the staff to do
it. So that says a lot of the quality of
our staff. And we know they're overworked with 147 percent
increase. And it says, the testament to Dragon is attracting
a lot of development at this moment. So we are
inundated with crust. So I know it's been a strain
on our staff. So. I think this isn't an important
position. If developers come in and they can't get their
approvals in place. And we have actually now statutory requirements
that the, uh, provincial government have tightened that we must
meet without the staff in place. Than we fall behind.
And I think there's actually, some sort of penalty system.
The government penalized a municipality if we can't follow these
obligations. So it's important that we have adequate staff. To
make meet those deadlines. So yeah, so I'm definitely in
favor. Any further comments or questions. We're really, um, is
to bring this as a motion to the future Council
meeting. I assume next Council meeting. So all in faith,
I think I'm seeing everyone in favor of doing this.
Okay. Very good. Thanks. So it's your direction. Thank you.
And thank you. For Pam for the great work you
do and your staff. Okay. I'd like to now recall
Ms. Junko to presenter reports, please. Thank you. You worship.
Good evening Council and members of Public. So tonight my
first report is the Q2 2026 financials. The recommendations that
Council received the report for information purposes. The purpose of
this report is to provide Council with the City's Financial
Results for the period ending June 30th, 2026, including comparison
year - to - date revenue and expenditures for the
2026 operating and capital budgets. The background is the Council
approved the 2026 operating capital budgets January 12th, 2026. The
approved budget provides financial plan for delivering municipal services maintaining
infrastructure, funding capital projects and meeting legislative and operational obligations
for the year. The report includes data from January 1st
to June 30th. Some of the key highlights, um, the
tax levy, we are unfavorable and that's basically intern billing.
It doesn't, it reflects the 50 percent of the 2026
budgeted. So we're a little bit lower there. Other revenue
is unfavorable, mainly due to the June Airport Revenue was
not included, that got put into July. So we're missing
that revenue for airport. And the hockey school programming revenue,
which doesn't start until Q3. The salaries for expenses. We
are under budget for that. And that's mainly due to
vacancies and seasonal positions. Um, the materials and other, we
are, um, under budget there. And again, that's POA Q2
billing was not done until after June 30th. And the
hockey school programming doesn't start until Q3 as well. Um,
and the contract services, the notice we are under budget
there. No spending in public works contract services for hot
mix patching and crack ceiling. That doesn't start until Q3.
And the legal fees are just as I mentioned, legal
fees are over about 113, 000. Are there any questions?
Thank you for reporting any questions from Mr. Chunko. No
questions. You're off the hook, but I just wanted to
say, um, the just the, these reports are getting easier
and easier to understand, which is really, really great. Um,
for us, us newbies. Um, so I just really do
appreciate how they are laid out and how, um, easy
to comprehend they are. So thank you. Thank you. Okay.
Is there no questions? We're receiving this information. Thank you
very much. And you have a second report for us.
Sorry. Thank you. Chair the chair. Um, the next report
is to best notice of vesting for 215 and 221
Florence from a tax sale. The purpose of this report
is to seek Council's direction on the disposition of the
Tax Cell property following unsuccessful tax sales for 215 Florence
Avenue and 221 Florence Avenue. The recommendation is that Council
Direct Staff to register a notice of vesting for the
properties and to authorize staff to write off outstanding taxes
in the amount of 35, 329 dollars and 21 cents.
The background for 215 Florence, the property was purchased in
2021 by the owner of 221 Florence Street. The property
proceeded to tax cell in 2024. No bids were received
through the Tax Cell. The property is currently listed for
sale through Sunset Country Real Estate for 37, 500. For
221 Florence Street, the property previously proceeded to Tax Sailing
2019 and was purchased in 2019. The property again proceeded
to tax sale in 2024. No bids were received through
the 2024 Tax Sale process. Uh, the property has also
been listed for sale through real estate. However, the listing
has since been removed. A construction lean and certificate of
action has been filed against a property. The lean holder
has obtained a court order. For the sale of the
land with a sale proceed to be paid to the
lean holder. Um, the lien holder, however, has agreed that
the city can go ahead and vest the property. So
prior to proceeding with the Tax Sale process for 221
Florence, the city obtained illegal opinion confirming that the municipality
could proceed with the tax sale. And that cities interest
would be protected. So because of the, there was no
bids for the Tax Sale properties. The city has four
options. We could write off and charge back. Um, these,
the, um, outstanding taxes. And we're going to register or
we could register and notice of vesting. So we take
ownership of the property. And then we could, um, declare
it surplus later on. Uh, we could re - advertise
for Tax Sale or we could do nothing. Um, and
then in two years, we'd have to start the Tax
Hill process all over again. So Staff recommends vesting these
Tax Sal properties because they have not sold through the
Taxel Process and leaving it would just continue to accumulate
taxes. So it would be better just to vest it,
in our opinion. Financial implications. We have to write off
35, 329 dollars in 21 cents in tax rears and
the penalties. Are there any questions? Okay. Thank you for
your report. Councillor Keeve. Just a quick one. Do you
have any idea what the school charge back costs would
be super significant or just the, sorry, the school board
charge back? Oh, they're not. Yeah. They're not. Huge. I
don't know exactly the number, but I can find out
for you if you like for next week. Yeah. Okay.
These are vacant properties. Yeah. Okay. They are vacant land.
Yep. Any further questions. Councillor. Through this area. So the
agreement with the contractor that has to lean when we
vest it, uh, it still stays in our possession. And
he's got to, does he still is there a an
agreement as to what percentage he'll receive on sale of
it after? No. I mean, as far as I know,
we get what we, um, we are owed for that.
And then, uh, it's ours. So he doesn't get anything.
So he would get the surplus after if the, if
the, it's coming into our possession. So we own it.
Okay. Thank you. So the staff is recommending that we
vest these two properties. That can't go ownership of them.
Um. That's, and everyone's in favor of that. We're aimed
to bring this as a bylaw to, or September 4th
meeting. Born in favor of that. Nodding heads. Yep. Okay.
Very good. There's your direction. Thank you. Thank you. So
we have no, no. We have one motion this evening,
which we'll ask the correct review. Thank you. You worship
at the last meeting. I advise that Mayor Harrison had
put forth a notice of motion. So it comes forward
this evening as a motion. And I believe. I'll ask
Councillor Lethum, who's our deputy mayor to chair this section
of it so I can speak on behalf of my
motion. Did you want to stay there or switch chairs
more? Okay. I'll turn it over to you. Mr. Chair.
So Harrison, can you cover your report, please? Right. Uh,
thank you, Chair. Mr. Chair. Um, yeah, I talked a
little bit about why we're bringing this. I think we
do have to clear the air on this one. Um,
there's really three reasons why I'm bringing rescind or, or
the basis of it. You know, I appreciate the time
and effort that was put by folks and the cost
to bring this plan forward by almost 16 years ago
now. But I think we have to consider the time
has changed considerably in our community since that time. You
know, we think about that 16, actually probably 20 years
ago when they started thinking about waterfront development with the
2008 plan and then morphed into 2010. You know, you
look back to that time, the local pulp and paper
mill had significantly downsized. You know, from well over 1200
employees to down to about 350. People, and the sense
in the forest industry that their days were numbered, uh,
they were in a bit of death spiral. And the
city would need to shift become more of a tourist
destination, much like our neighbour Kanora. Times have changed because
I'm happy report in our area. The forest industry is
very strong and healthy. Uh, the new owners driving fibre
Canada, you know, continue to provide high quality jobs. They've
increased the employment from 350 to 400. We still have
approximately 400 employees in the forced lands. Harvesting and hauling
to the mill. And this company is now contributing a
regional economic impact about 550 million dollars to our area
quite substantial. Uh, make it not only major employer, but
really a cornerstone for economic growth, community development Northwest. Actually,
we're pretty fortunate last since I retired from full -
time work. I've been doing some consulting work and going
around the Northwest Northeast doing independent forest audits of communities
from Fort Francis to marathon and all parts in between.
And Northwest Ontario is a very special spot in that
we have full markets for all their products. Uh, some
of the ones out Easter missing a Pult Mill without
a Pult Mill. You're really challenged to cut conifer. They
don't have a hardwood market like we have down in
Baruck or Kanora. So we are fully utilising our, uh,
our wood supply basket and the Poltmill local is the
key that will make all this happen. So we're very
fortunate that this company has purchased it. So a lot
of growth opportunities. And also what the big change, I
think, uh, like this, this plan is really focusing on
developing a four season. A tourist destination. You know, when
reality, you know, that would be very difficult to achieve
and doubtful. Uh, to obtain. And really, you look at
the plan in depth. It really adds more taxation burden
to our resident. I'm sure Council Redoff would probably go
on more detail than I will. But we're looking at
a different scenario where we saw a decline in population.
A lot of young people leave our community. We've got
the opposite happening. We've got a lot of growth, a
lot of potential. Really the necessity is developing a housing
needs for the upcoming growth of our community. Such as
the mining and energy activities that are real create new
jobs and putting pressures on our municipality. To plan for
this growth. That's part of our leadership is we need
to plan for incoming growth. Our population is expected to
grow over 9, 000 over the next decade. So really
our responsibility is to, is to look at what's happening
today and address those planning issues. Take for example like
NWO is Billy and a new billion Ignis. They say
160 to 200 employees there. That's a big deal. So
where are they going to live. So I mean, they
could all live in ignies. They could move to Dryden.
But say, for example, 80 half that, say take the
low number 16 employees, half that 80 decide to move
to Dryden. What side, what's the impact for our community.
80 homes. Do we have Adams for sale? No. Think
about who maybe, um, coming. Nuclear scientists, well paid. Who's
going to be able to compete for our homes, will
our locals be able to compete for homes? It'll be
challenging. Like we have good paying jobs, but so we
need to protect our local citizens from to make sure
that they have the housing we have name. Because we
all want our kids to stay and dried, don't we?
So our focus from 16 years ago has changed. Housing
has become a focus. I guess the second reason I
look at the folks's plan is not really financially viable
for our city. You look at the centrepiece of the
development of the plan is this Ontario outdoor education centre.
And also the relocation number of museum. And there was
no viable business plan component for this Ontario outdoor education
centre. It suggested that the canora Patricia district school board
may be operated or perhaps the seed of Dryden or
maybe the northwest Catholic school board would all contribute to
make it a viable option. Most successful outdoor education centres
range from anywhere from 5, 000 at a low end
to 20, 000 on a high end. Would we be
able to track even the low end. Of 5, 000?
The plan says, well, maybe we can, the school board
will pay to bus every child from the whole Knorr
District, from Knorr Red Lake Ignis to hear throughout our
education. Is that. Really likely possibility. I mean, we have
to ask the questions when we look at the amenities
that we have, you know, who's going to pay for
the amenities. Or what's the, what's the cost? Who's going
to pay? And then what's the burden on the taxpayer.
That's questions we're asking this report. So it's nice to
think, yeah, it'd be nice to have one, but is
it financially viable? What's the burden on the taxpayer. We,
you know, when I come to this job, it's an
eye opener when you look at how many beautiful amenities
we have when we look at a double arena pool,
fitness centre, beautiful baseball diamonds. This goes on soccer fields,
but they're all tax. They're all supported by residents. Tax.
Your taxes are going to support that. To increase our
quality of life. So we know we have a heavy
tax burden. Every amenity that we add, we have to
really ask that question. What's the burden on the taxpayer?
That question has not been asked in this report. When
you think about an outdoor education centre, like would a
large communities come to Dryden to have one here? Like
go to Winnipeg. I'd been to Omad Marsh. I hope
you all have. It's a wonderful outdoor education north of
town, north of Winnipeg. You can see the geese fly
in. It's just, it's amazing. They have the Fort White
Centre. What's the business case for them to travel four
hours to dried in for something similar. Outrider Education near
a marsh. We have to ask those questions. Would this
be financially viable? I think not. But I think the
lastly, and I was kind of surprised when I went
to the Detailed proposals there because they have drawings. And
you look closely at the public access that's proposed. And
the plan really calls for the commercialization of the boat
launch. And dock space. What do you see disappear? You
see the Public boat launch, which is free for everyone
to use Garn. It's moved into a commercial area. People
have to pay. To use that boat launch. What if
our doc that people enjoy and Fischer off and swim
off of. That's reventually replaced by a commercial marina. Does
this council want to take away the free use of
a boat launch? And, uh, the land, the Van Horn
Doc, which we just reinvigorated and put money into. You
know, does this Council want to be the one who
eliminates that free access to Open Lake for all our
exhibition, but I want to overhaul their shocks owners of
the leak. Or our neighbours to the south who use
it to cut off time. So I think in conclusion,
this is an outdated waterfront plan. It's not really relevant
today. I think it actually reduces access to what we
have. And as a very high potential of putting a
tax burden on our residence for manys, that would be
a little used to our community. So I encourage Council
members to stay the course that we've been on. We,
with our master plan, we'll enhance our waterfront. We will
create open spaces to folks to enjoy. We also focus
on our housing stock to meet the coming demand. And
while doing so, we also increase the property taxes generated
by creating all these housing. We have already attacked high
tax burden for amenities by bringing in, uh, new folks
and housing them increasing our property taxes. It actually may
reduce our tax burden for individuals. So as a win
- win, and I really urge the Council to rescind
this 16 - year - old water plan so we
can go in the right direction. That this city needs
today. Thank you. Thank you, your worship. Does anybody have
any questions for the mayor. Council Noel. Thank you.
Chair Latham. Just a question, like why do we have
to abandon? Why can't we edit it accordingly? Like I
agree with many of your comments. Mayor Harrison saved the
one about, uh, our kids. I want our kids to
go out and experience the world and come back here
if they so choose. Um. I mean, both my kids
are here. I'm grateful for that. So yeah, if you
could comment on why it is that we can't just
amend that plan. Cause I'm looking at all the people
who put in time the citizens and the project team.
And there were a lot of smart passionate people involved
in this back when it was implemented. I do agree
though. Things have changed drastically since then. So. If you
could perhaps comment on that. Thanks. Yeah. Sure. I'll be
happy to. I think the focus is entirely on a
forest. He's in tourists destination. There's so much to be
changed on that plan. For instance, a large part of
the Eminar property is devoted to a seasonal RV park.
Really a seasonal RV park. Does that what we need
in our community? No. Like that's, so many things. Do
we need outdoor education cetera? No. Do we need, should
the museum be relocated down there. I think you'll find
that the best place if we're going to relocate a
museum is on the highway. So we can get traffic
coming through. Stop in, you know, kids spend some time.
That's, you get a high traffic area on our, on
our streets. Or highway out there because we're actually being
on the main highway is incredibly beneficial for businesses and
commercials. So the like about it. The 2010 plan also
took into place the private property owned by the nature's
in and the other properties. And they kind of said,
well, we want you to follow our plan or basically
solace the plan. So are we going to now expropriate.
Private property. No, like the master planets were going is
going to just utilise them and our base land base
and the 10 acres. So yeah, I think it's the
master plan going with the master plan and giving this
new, this current residence and opportunity to, I say, is
the right way to go. Target. Through the
sheriff. Again. Um, I guess I look at things too
quickly out of a financial lens. And I understand the
situation leadership was in at the time they developed this
plan and that. But I had a hard time going
through it because every time I saw any of their
financial justifications or plans, it was totally irresponsible spending, in
my opinion. And, uh. Mayor Harrison mentioned the tax burden.
And I mean, to even come close to this on
the assumptions that were in here, you're talking double digit
tax increases to try and fund this. Just the order
of construction they did putting the non commercial, uh, parts
of the phases of the project ahead of everything meant
that was coming out of municipal coffers, which we don't
have, uh, they allude to FISA, Financial feasibility studies, but
never do them. And to pass a plan before you've
done that again, I find that totally irresponsible. Um, it's,
you look at these numbers and the assumptions. The assumptions
that the school board is going to pay for 30
percent of construction centre. So that part at least doesn't
hit your property tax, but your school board tax assures
hell is going to go up. I mean, everything in
here, we're just getting out from under the debt of
the other decisions to do with a cell phone company.
We got four years left to pay for that. It's
another four million dollars going to be paid out. Well,
this is coming in. And this, uh, if you take
the cumulative inflation area increases since this plan was developed,
we're looking at 60 percent on your average consumer goods
when it comes to construction, you're looking 250 percent probably
200 million. And just we should know just from the
proposals we received. This project is a 200 million dollar
project. And on the low side municipal participation at 30
percent, And we know that the government ain't going to
jump in and say, Oh, here's a check. Go for
it. So where do you get that from? Are you
going to finance 60 million dollars over 20 years and
pay another 60 million in interest before we get close
to it? And we're going to be 20 to 25
percent property tax increases to try and keep up with
it. I mean, you can't be chasing this kind of
debt. And it's beautiful and it's great. And it's really
good. If someone else is paying for it. But that's
not what's going to happen. We're paying for this. And
we've got these other plans. We've got what Matthews presented
tonight. We've got the opportunity to bring in a developer.
But if you tell a developer, yeah, we'd like a
hundred million for me. But you don't get to say
in. Like, and that's what this is. This is way
too much government involvement. Because we are government. And if
we're going to stick our noses into how somebody spends
their money, that's like, yeah, getting an inheritance wanting to
invest it somewhere and someone telling, Oh, no, we should
keep that over here so we can spend it on
something else. It's foolish. It's, and this is a, and
it's a nice plan, but it's just not feasible for
our community. Not unless we buy Super Bowl tickets and
states and win something. It's not, it's not something we
should even be considering. And I, I really wish they
hadn't accepted it until they spent a little more time
getting the studies done right financially. And Councillor Noel said,
how about revamping it. Again, I don't know if that's
spending throwing good money after that already. If there's that
old saying that, uh, doing the same thing over again
and expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity.
And that's what this looks like to me. So. Uh,
just my comments on.
Thank you through the chair. To me, this sounds like
an opportunity for our counsel and our community members. To
start fresh. I am fairly optimistic. That. By
trusting our community members, trusting our staff to kind of
lead us through this process that we are going to
come away with something that is great for our community.
That, you know, works out in favor for these developers
who, you know, kind of want to build what they
want to build, but also take deep consideration from our
indigenous community members, other indigenous leadership, um, our citizens, our
council, our staff members. So all of that being said,
I feel more comfortable. Accepting the motion to rescind this
plan because I think that we, I think that we
can do it better. I think that we can take
all of the information that we have. We can listen
to our constituents and listen to our staff and move
this forward. At a pace that kind of works for
everyone. Again, maybe I'm insane and or optimistic about this.
But I really believe that. There is a way for
us to move forward where people will be content with
the plan that our community has come up with. So
I think, you know, if we're focusing on what our
community wants to see, um, what is reasonable, uh, to
our developers and to staff, like I think that that
all needs to be considered. So. I think it's a,
it's a great opportunity for us to kind of start
fresh. Things have definitely changed in the last 16 years.
Um, and so, yeah, we, we really do have a
great opportunity ahead of us to, to do something different,
um, that still meets all of those kind of like
lofty goals. Um, and ideals, you know, within the original
plan, but also kind of create something new and fresh,
hopefully in this new plan. Thank you. Councillor Taref. Yeah,
through chair again. I just wanted to add that there
had been the comment out there that what was the
rush to do this as we're going to be going
to a new council. And I think that's an important
thing, uh, that, uh, the new Council should have the
opportunity to take the information, whether it was presented tonight
from our building staff and every planning staff. And like
Catherine was saying formulate something that's going to work for
the community rather than being handcuffed to an outdated financially
and unfeasible, uh, plan, uh, should never have been passed.
Uh, any more questions. Councillor Noel. You chairly.
Right up until this discussion started tonight. I was leaning
towards not supporting the notice of motion, but I'm so
grateful that some of the questions that were asked, uh,
Councillor Tardif explaining the numbers. He's always very good at
that. Um. And my review again on, on what the
information the committee had at the time to come up
with this plan has changed drastically, our population is certainly
different. Median household income is different. Um, there's a lot
of things that are different now. Uh, that there's no
way that this team could have foreseen at the time.
So I'm, I'm thankfully changing my position on supporting this.
So I probably would support this, um, notice a motion.
I guess I get to speak. Um. I still believe
that there's a lot of good things in that plan.
Uh, I'm hearing what everybody's saying. But, um, with perhaps
a new Council coming on, it may be able to
give people some ideas of what's feasible and what's not
feasible. I know for sure when they talk about putting
the arena down there, I'm on the committee that museum
meeting. And we have kind of other ideas of where,
where it should go and, uh, stuff like that. But
I'm still stuck on this staying around and giving people
some information for the next plans that we're going to
be doing.
For the motion, please. Council of Price. Seconder Councillor Taref.
Thank you. Move by Councillor Price, seconded by Councillor Tardif,
that Council hereby consider. No. Let's start again. Move by
Councillor Price. Second by Councillor Tired. F. The Council here
by rescind the Adoption of the Phasing and Implementation Strategy
outlined in the sustainable waterfront development planal report dated May
2010. All in favor.
Carried. Did I say that wrong. You gave me.
Thank you, Councillor Lathan for leading that portion of. Thanks
everyone for your participation and discussion. So we're down to
Administrative Reports and I'll call REO, Mr. Nesbitt, for his
report, please. Thank you. Three of your worship. As I
recorded, I believe at the last meeting of Council, we
were on our way to the Ontario Municipal Association Conference
in Ottawa. I did attend with Mayor Harrison and Councillor
Price. I won't, um, I won't cover all the details
because I believe Mayor Harrison is going to cover those
off. So I don't want to step on him. But
it was, uh, it was a good conference, productive, uh,
we were able to meet with, uh, with, uh, I
think about a half dozen different ministries and discuss some
of those, those priorities that I had elaborated on at
the last meeting. So all in all. Excuse me, a
good conference. Um, I would like to just build on,
uh, some of the comments that, um, Mayor Harrison made
while discussing, uh, the, uh, the additional position and the
building and planning department, Mayor Harrison had, uh, mentioned some
of the feedback that he's received from developers and such
positive feedback in relation to, uh, to the, uh, services
that our chief building official, uh, Miss Gillin provides along
with her department members. Um, Ms. Skillen or Pam, I
guess if I may, uh, was, was probably one of
the first management hires that, uh, that I had to
do coming into this position. Um, I think, uh, I
think the day that, uh, that, uh, that Council announced,
uh, myself moving into the CAO position. Our chief building
official of the day tendered resignation, uh, from a standpoint
of retiring from, uh, from the position. And, uh, quite
frankly, um, I don't think there's being, I know there
hasn't been a regret in bringing PAM on board. Pam
spoke a bit about the, uh, the background that, uh,
that really, I think gives a good, a good base
to a building inspector or a chief building official. Uh,
PAM had that base and, uh, I think it was
Councillor Keevening maybe ask a question about development of that
position. And PAM is a living example of that. POMs
built herself into, uh, I think one of our region's
best chief building officials and Dryden is lucky, lucky to
have her. Um, and with the addition of, uh, Mr.
Bagshaw in the planner's seat, uh, we have an extremely
efficient and effective, uh, building and planning team, uh, at
this point, uh, supported by a strong by law enforcement
officer. So I just really want to give, uh, much
thanks and appreciation to the entire department. And, uh, the
strong focus, the strong customer focus, uh, that miss Skillland
has brought to the department. That's done so much, so
much to get us that, uh, that quality name, uh,
amongst the developers in our region. Thank you. Thank you.
Call on our Director of Finance Treasurer, Ms. Junkel. Well,
thank you. Uh, your worship. I have nothing at this
time. Thank you. I'll go to our clerk, Ms. Idler.
Thank you. And I will use some of the treasurer's
time because I'm going to ask everyone to bear with
me while I, um, speak a little longer than normal
at this point in the meeting. Because nominations for Council
and School Board Elections closed at 2 p. m. on
Friday. Those nominations have been certified. And I can advise
we'll be having elections for the following offices. Mayor, we
have three nominees with one to be elected. Council. There
are 12 nominees with six to be elected. Key waiting
Patricia District School Board trustee. We have three nominees and
one will be elected. Northwest Catholic district school board trustee.
We have three nominees with two to be elected. Locally,
there will be no election for the French separate school
board trustee as there was just one nominee for the
one position. And Michelin Lovnik has been acclaimed. And there
were no nominations received in the region for the French
Public School Board. Also on August the 14th, we received
the then - current voters list amendments to the list
can be made by members of the Public Beginning September
the 14th by completing a form at City Hall and
providing proof of identification and their address. And finally, as
six of the seven current members of Council are running
for re - election, we do not find ourselves in
a lame duct situation from now until voting day on
October the 26th. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. And I'll
call on our Director of Public Works, Mr. Olson. Thank
you through the chair. Nothing out at this time. And
now Director Community Services, Mr. Boyer. Thank you, Mayor. Just
a reminder to Council that the pool is down due
to a mechanical issues that happened last weekend. Um, due
to the limited availability of the parts, it looks like
it'll be down for at least until after the September
long weekend. So we do have the parts ordered, but
some of them are coming from, um, U. S. manufacturers,
because that's our only option. Um, so we got to
deal with some border stuff. So, um, yeah, we're hoping
that everything gets here in a timely manner. Uh, and
then once it does, it just takes us a few
days to rebalance and heat up the pool and get
that running. Uh, also just wanted to let Council know
that we do have, uh, the ISAs back in ISAN
operations went fairly well last week. Building ice. And I
want to thank the team for all their hard work
and dedication to building that, um, we have started to
hockey school as of this morning. So we got lots
of kids bustling around and getting note on the ice
and sort of another new hockey season. And ices and
I should say. Thanks. Thanks. That's all. Thank you. And
I'll knew we're going to hear from our fire chief
chief wood. Thank you worship. Uh, I do have a
couple of things. I just want to start by last
week, the restricted fire zone and municipal fire ban was
lifted. Um, throughout that, uh, we had most of the
summer as we were under that restriction. And I want
to thank our residents, uh, doing a great job following
those restrictions. I believe we only had one burn complaint
and so our residents did a great job helping protect
our community. I want to congratulate all members of the
Dryden Fire Service for achieving surface water rescue certification. We
spent, uh, five and ten days in the water. And,
uh, we're well ahead of our deadline of 2028 and
achieving this. So, uh, for surface, water and ice rescue.
Uh, we've done a lot of work this year and
we're in a really good shape. And then lastly, I
want to talk about something new. We, we went after,
uh, Council Retardo food emotioned early in the term for
us to achieve superior tanker accreditation. And we, we went
after that and trained for it over about two months.
And on August the 8th, we achieved that accreditation where
the first one's a Northwestern Ontario. The first fire department
in Northwestern Ontario to achieve that. And what that means
for our residence is if you're within eight kilometers of
our hull too and five kilometers of a fire hydrant,
you will get the same insurance rating as if you
were protected by hydrants the same in the city. Stay
tuned to the website. We will update those certificates and
the dwelling protection map as the fire underwriters hasn't updated.
And that can be shared. We've already shared it with
our insurance companies. So that should, uh, get our citizens
a little bit better of insurance relief for some of
our citizens. As well as improve our fire protection rating,
which is really important. That's all from your worship. Thank
you. Great. Thank you. And congratulations. Hey, when I'll go
to Council Announcements, uh, did want to speak a little
bit about our trip to Amo and Ottawa or annual
trips to the conference down there with, uh, this time
with, uh, Mr. Nesbitt and Councillor Price. We really had
three, three issues or three areas that we want to
talk to. The first one was, uh, with the Minister
of Natural Resources. It was in, I guess the spring
of 2023 that the then, uh, minister Graydon Smith agreed
to surplus the Aminar Land base, which is what we
talked about tonight, the Van Horn Landing. So in the,
in a phased in portion, because we knew that the
half of it was basically vacant. So and actually already
put a fence up in between the second half was,
uh, buildings on it. We're mainly used for storing outdoor
equipment. So being a former mayor, uh, Mr. Graydon Smith
agreed to phase that out that really, that whole area.
So if the housing needs that are important or dried
and the little thrust from the province to get housing
into Ontario, um, he agreed to that. The surplusing, uh,
the first phase one, the empty 10 acres was surplus
immediately. And we were now realising it's quite a long
process. That's going through every or every department in the
province to see if they want it. And then it
comes closely to, uh, has to go through other consultation
period. We're hopefully we're near the end of that. That'll
soon be made available. But we don't have a date
on that. Just want to give an update. But we,
uh, we worked, uh, we talked a lot about the
second phase, which is the waterfront with the buildings on
it. And they agreed to try to expediate that. They
really need to find another location for that equipment. And
so they're working with the ministry of infrastructure to find,
uh, location and to build some building. So that will
take a bit more time, but, uh, we've really asked
them to speed as much as possible. Still follow the
policy and procedures, but ensure that, uh, that becomes available.
Really the second discussion we had was with the, uh,
parliamentary assistant for MTO. And they're really talking about the
scheduled air passenger service. And we know we lost that
a few years ago and our, our neighbours, can aura.
And Fort have been able to establish it. We probably
could have too, but we don't want to really, we
won't have burden our taxpayers by putting a backstop in
to make this profitable. Really asking for some partnership with
the province in the Fed to make this really an
economically viable air passenger service. So that it would be
attractive for many people to fly. Uh, we feel that
the taxpayers shouldn't backstab a company coming in for a
pilot project to make them whole as they build up
the ridership. That the economic development that's happening in our
area with a mini activity. And Dryden would not be
the only community using this airport that's important that we
find partners. So the bad news is they don't have
a funding stream that can just tap into, uh, but
we're looking at it. They're looking at options and we're
continuing meeting with them. Uh, lastly, we met with the
ministry of Finance, Missel Affairs and Housing, Ministry of Northern
Economic Development and Growth and Administrative Engine Mind all around
the concept of Dryden is like a regional hub, a
service hub to the north. And we're kind of leading
this charge for about, 13 to 15 communities across the
north. That we provide services, community services to a broader
group than just ourselves. Um, but it's our taxpayers are
facing that burden. As Ontario is looking to the north
to drive the economy in the south as well through
mining and energy projects, we're asking the government, like you
are collecting taxes from these other economic development areas. But
they're outside or municipal boundaries. Um, we like to be
recognised that we are, we're servicing there's without our communities
across the North servicing these that we, they wouldn't be
successful. So we're having that conversation, uh, making it aware
that we think the whole provincial municipal partnership needs a
bit of Twinkie for a communities like Dryden. Um, I
know there's, there's been talk about us trying to ask
the annexed areas or increased taxes out in the unorganized.
We have, we're adamantly opposed to that. We made that
clear to the ministry. But we're thinking that when we
look at the economic growth in the North and the
small size of municipalities that are supporting that growth and
the income that the parental government is receiving from some
of these outer areas, especially the economic growth in crown
land, that they need to support our communities to make
it economically feasible for our taxpayers. And lastly, I did
have a private conversation with, uh, Mr. Calandrus, Minister of
Energy. I've been trying to support, uh, Michael Williams, who's
the Ground Father, the two children that ground in our
community. What we as a group have been trying to
do is get, uh, mandatory streaming lessons across Ontario. And
I really want to thank Chief Wood. He was one
of the leaders in bringing it to Dryden. So we
have in - house training at our schools as well
as the swim to survive training or pool, which happened
this spring. I think it was grade threes that were
all taken from the public school system. Learn it when
they fall off a dock, how to get back to
dreadwater and to swim 50 metres. Fantastic. Like we're, we're
in good shape. But we're really asking that the province
take this on. And so only conversation, we originally asking
for Instagram lessons as well as in class and talking
to the grandfather Michael Williams. We realise that now and
Mr. Conlandra agrees. It's very difficult to mandate in pool
lessons all across Interior because some school boards just not
have, um, access to pools. So our ask is now
to move off that and to make it make sure
that it's mandatory that each class gets the, um, three
40 minute in - class sessions on swim safety. Because
one of the things that's important is just kids, you
know, when they come to a doc, some of them
don't know how to swim or not used to water.
We found that like. The attraction of water is great.
And if they fall off the dock, they have no
chance of really getting back on. So just the safety
to prevent them, I know the danger of being by
water. And also really the danger of, if someone falls
in and you don't know how to swim, um, and
you go in and after rescue them, So that just
that education and knowledge, we think is a very important.
So we're continuing to ask Administrative education to make this
mandatory. We've revised our requests and we're very hopeful that
the province will hear our concerns and make this mandatory
cross, Ontario. So that was some of the work that
we've done. And we're pleased to represent our city there.
A very long winded today. All right. Let's go around
the table. Let's start with Councillor Latham. I have nothing
your worship. Councillor Keevening. Uh, thank you. I just want
to let the community know that on September 12th, there
is a beauty mingle at shoppers drug mart to support
Hashzaki house. So you can make an appointment, um, and
all of the proceeds raised are going into our own
community. Thank you. Thank you. Go online up to Councillor
Noel. Thank you, Mayor Harrison. I just wanted to command
our first responders for the recent. Service call at our
local fair at Behooves Me that young people don't get
a kick out of what we used to, which would
be jump in the fence to get in with OPing.
Or maybe getting into the beer gardens before you were
19 back in the day. But, uh, it was a
heck of an effort by our dried and fire ambulance
and OPP and the public were there. So, uh, I
think it's mentioned that, uh, they did a good job
and difficult circumstances and something that, uh, nobody really expected,
even though, as I understand it, the same thing happened,
uh, at the CLE and Thunder Bay. So kudos to
everybody involved. Thank you for your service. That's it. All
right. Thank you. I'm going to go to Councilman Kinnan.
I have nothing you worship. Councillor Tardif. Nothing. Councillor Price.
Yes, thank you through the chair. And I agree with
Council Noel. I was at the fair at the time.
And the quality of service that was given, um, was
exceptional. And, um, keeping the fear factor down and keeping
people safe, um, was also exceptional by the fair providers,
I would say. It was a outside of that. It
was a great weekend to be at the Fair for
Families to enjoy the rides and the food and the
entertainment and everything that went on. And it shows that
we have a great community outside of that one, one,
um, event that up. And unfortunately. So kudos to the
fair organisers. I know it's a lot of work for
them. Um, I've, I've seen them there for probably 12
hours a day as I was there as well. And,
uh, so yeah, kudos out to them for continuing to
bring the fall fare in and expanding it as they
have with their new barn and for all of the
4H people that were involved in it. It was, um,
it was a great time. So, uh, thank you. All
right. Thank you. And we'll go to our confirmatory bylaw.
In a seconder. Council evening and a second, Councillor Noel,
thank you. Move by Councillor Keening, seconded by Councillor Noel,
the By - Law 2026 - 61 being a bylaw
to confirm the proceedings of Council be adopted. Call a
question. I'll in favor. Carried. Thank you. Now we're at
the time of German. Can I have a mover in
a seconder? Councillor Keeney Moose. Second councillor price. By Councillor
Covening, seconded by Councillor Prince. It is meeting be declared
adjourned. Long favor. Gary, thank you. Thanks everyone for participation.
Good night.