[0:01] Okay, colleagues, it's just after 4 p.m., we'll call the meeting order. We have an extremely extensive agenda ahead of us, and so I know we'll be here for hours and hours. On that note, I'll look for any disclosures of pecuniary interests.

[0:20] Okay, they're being done.

[0:23] What I'd like to suggest colleagues, we have a number of scheduled items, 7, 8, and 9.

[0:29] I'd like to deal with those first, so we have some guests from the London Medical Innovation

[0:34] and Commercialization Network that have been working to get on the agenda for some time.

[0:39] Then we'll deal with the PPM for the Water Waste Water and the Smart City Strategy Terms

[0:45] reference, and then we'll circle back to the consent items and work our way through up to

[0:50] number six. Before we deal with number six, that's the LMICN. We need to spend some time

[0:56] in camera. We'll come out of camera and deal with 10, 11, 12, and then go back in camera for the

[1:03] remainder of the evening. We also call each have a request for delegation status. It's with regard

[1:09] to the BMO Center, expansion of the London Optimus Sports Center. What I would like to suggest

[1:14] The first colleague is that we find a way to get this on subsequent agenda, so we can deal

[1:21] with it as quickly as possible and ensure that we give it the attention that's required.

[1:28] I also was suggest that there might be some prep work that's required that we could provide

[1:31] some instruction to staff to make sure that there's some communication back and forth for

[1:35] this comes forward.

[1:36] And again, with the focus on getting it on an agenda as a timed item, so the public knows

[1:42] to expect and so the presenters know what to expect is quickly as possible. Otherwise it could be

[1:47] very far into the evening before we deal with that one. Definitely a huger.

[1:53] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think with the BMO Center what I'd like to suggest is I would move

[1:59] that the committee secretary would be directed to place Mr. Tom Pertales, President of London

[2:05] to the Sports Center as a delegation on a future agenda of SPP, PPC with respect to the

[2:12] London Optimus Center request for additional funding from the City of London and that

[2:17] a business case be forwarded as part of that agenda as well so that Council can evaluate that.

[2:27] And I would say that if I could with just a very brief comment that everyone I think we had a

[2:34] conversation about this last year. Earlier this year rather is part of budget deliberations and we recognize

[2:40] the outstanding contribution that the BMO is making to our community. And so we want to get this back in front of Council.

[2:49] Let's quickly close possible.

[2:52] Okay, so that motion will come up on screen. I think reiterating the need to have this come back as quickly as possible is important to do.

[3:01] so we can deal with this effectively, but also in a time-efficient manner.

[3:06] I'm just looking for a second here at this time.

[3:11] We have a motion.

[3:13] Councillor Ashwin, did you want a second?

[3:15] Okay.

[3:15] If you could just second it.

[3:16] Oh, it's been seconded by Deputy Mayor Cassie.

[3:20] And we'll start.

[3:21] Quick speakers list, but I'll remind everyone that if this passes, we'll be dealing with this.

[3:26] Very shortly at our future SPPC.

[3:29] Councillor Ashwin.

[3:31] Since we are asking for a business case, I would just like to report from staff also

[3:36] to a company that will tell us the facts of this situation because we haven't heard

[3:41] the facts yet.

[3:42] The total picture I'm talking about.

[3:44] Absolutely.

[3:45] Any other speakers?

[3:46] Councillor Ridley.

[3:48] Thank you.

[3:49] We're just a quick question to yourself.

[3:52] Does SPPC is that the only committee that's would fit for it to be reported back to our

[3:56] critical back to our corporate services committee or another committee?

[4:00] Excellent question and not surprise it's coming from the chair of governance.

[4:04] This could be dealt with through a different committee as well and it might be easier

[4:08] to get it on one of those agendas we can deal with it in a more time efficient way.

[4:14] Thank you.

[4:14] I believe that the corporate services committee would likely be the most appropriate committee

[4:18] and I'd like to move in amendment that it go back to a future agenda of the corporate

[4:23] services committee.

[4:26] the point misrares we want it on the agenda so it's back in front of Council ASAP.

[4:32] I think this is the most expeditious way that we can do that.

[4:36] I'm informed by the clerk that it would be appropriate to send the caps, not CSE,

[4:41] even more appropriate that it would be coming to caps from your perspective.

[4:45] So it's seen as a friendly amendment by the mover, and I'm assuming by the seconder,

[4:50] and look for any other speakers.

[4:52] Yeah, it comes to the squire, Ben Holtz, and then Morgan.

[4:58] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[4:59] I just want to clear up any concerns that this organization has not sort of done its background work to bring this matter forward.

[5:09] They have that with staff.

[5:11] They've worked through numbers.

[5:13] They are presenting and have provided the city of London with a top rate facility that's reduced a lot of

[5:21] to the city of London. And I want them and I expect them and I guess you can, we can not

[5:26] do that, them to be treated with the utmost respect as they move forward. I would like

[5:30] their business case certainly to be considered with every other business case that comes

[5:35] before, before us. And last year I must say I was extremely disappointed in the manner in which

[5:43] they retreated. In the manner they had to basically sit in the gallery and make a pitch for

[5:49] what is a significant and valuable community asset.

[5:54] So I will continue to be pushing to make sure these people are treated in the manner that

[5:59] they deserve.

[6:01] Thank you.

[6:01] I'm sure that your colleagues agree.

[6:03] Councillor Van Host.

[6:05] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I would also like to say that I'm looking forward to seeing

[6:14] So as I did my own work, three pretty compelling economic reasons to just go forward with

[6:22] this song.

[6:23] I would just share one the fact that right now we're leasing them a property on Coney

[6:28] Boulevard for a dollar a year, which we could sell for $560,000,000 for my own rule of

[6:37] thumb is that anytime we can speed up the payback for our industrial land strategy by

[6:44] half a million years, we should go ahead with that.

[6:50] So, so thank you.

[6:52] Thank you, Councilor Councillor Morgan.

[6:55] Just a question.

[6:58] I don't mind going this route if it's the will of the committee.

[7:02] I just want to make sure that we don't cause undue delay if there are questions or information like that

[7:09] of what Councilor Van Holtz just referenced in that, you know, a source of financing is another

[7:13] piece of property.

[7:15] How do we make sure that all of that comes back so that we're not going to invite them

[7:19] back into future meeting of whatever committee asks for that information and then have to invite

[7:23] them back to a future meeting to make the decision.

[7:25] In other words, like, what's the process for what you said and that if people have stuff that

[7:30] they want to come back with this when it comes to committee, how do you want us to let them

[7:34] know that?

[7:36] Councillor, the way I read the motion, it addresses that, that exact concern that that

[7:42] business case come forward, and if you'd like to add anything to the motion by all

[7:47] means, please do so, but I think you raise a very good point that we want to make sure

[7:51] that staff are prepared to answer our questions, that the delegation has the opportunity

[7:56] to present their opportunity in a time-efficient manner and that we can make a decision on

[8:03] this opportunity is quickly as possible and so that's I think the spirit of the motion if you

[8:08] want to add anything to it I think you're more than welcome to but from my perspective I don't

[8:13] think it's necessary because I think that's included in this motion. Councillor Halmer.

[8:21] Thanks very

[8:21] much and without saying anything about the BMO Center what does they want to do with this money

[8:26] I have some concerns about what we're doing here and at this point I think I'll be voting against

[8:32] The motion has been suggested, I want to say why, so it's not, it's clear that it's not really about the actual issue.

[8:39] So we have later in our agenda, we're talking about changing the sort of way we fund on profit organizations in the city.

[8:44] And one of the key elements of that is that we're not going to make any changes to funding for anybody for next year, 2016.

[8:50] And we had this issue as a kind of request come forward last year.

[8:54] And I think the idea then was to go forward into the multi-year budget for consideration next year.

[9:02] I'm a bit concerned that we've got our 13 business cases going forward from the city we

[9:06] said to all other nonprofit organizations as a city don't come here for any kind of money

[9:10] for 2016 and then we have this one that's a bit of a special case it's certainly different

[9:15] in terms of the scope and they do a very particular thing in the city certainly but I'm

[9:20] a little concerned about you know when we're going to be dealing with it we're dealing

[9:23] with it before the budget we're dealing with it during the budget deliberations and it's

[9:27] to stand a committee rather than SPPC which deals with budget matters and so my preference would

[9:33] be if it went anywhere that I went to SPPC and even then I'm a bit concerned about it and I think

[9:39] unless I hear convincing arguments otherwise I won't be supporting this particular motion.

[9:44] That's a wrap.

[9:48] Thank you and through the chair. I too will not be supporting this motion.

[9:52] I think it should be coming back to SPPC. We are already starting a conversation here on the floor,

[9:58] So I would like to see it back as soon as possible.

[10:04] We'll call the question that the purpose of it going to caps was to allow for the presentation

[10:10] to happen sooner rather than later.

[10:12] There might be more of a delay for it to go to SPPC.

[10:15] However, we'll make that decision together as a council.

[10:18] And so if there are no further speakers, Councillor Vandholz really quickly please.

[10:23] Thank you. Well, then if we're going to be asking staff to bring be able to answer questions.

[10:29] I just want to put out those two other points. I'll be as briefly as I can.

[10:34] One is that through you to my colleagues,

[10:38] we wouldn't be seeing any cash from DCs coming to us from this project.

[10:44] Basically, the way I see it to two things are going to happen.

[10:47] One will help them in the way they asked when the DC funds come through, they'll pretty much cover the cost of the grant.

[10:59] If we don't help them, then it's likely instead of building our premium structure, they'll put up another bubble.

[11:08] And those according to Antichiot's article 306, if I could, if I could, if I could,

[11:15] if I could, if I could, if I could, if I could, if I could, if I could, if I could, if I could, I could, you're kind of getting into the meat of the matter and to the debate and we haven't even had the opportunity for the idea to come forward to a committee.

[11:25] And so from an agenda, control perspective. It's a heavy agenda. If we could have that conversation, and if you could make those points at the time of the delegation is received, I think that that would be a precinct.

[11:36] I think that we could deal with the remainder of the agenda.

[11:40] Okay, I'm sorry.

[11:40] I thought that there was a call to make sure that staff would respond to the questions

[11:45] we were going to have.

[11:46] So I was hoping they would confirm a couple ideas like that.

[11:51] There's no DCs for a bubble.

[11:55] But that's fine.

[11:56] We can vote.

[11:57] Let's give us some time to make sure that we flesh out all those questions.

[12:00] If we flesh them all out and that we're able to make sure they're addressed

[12:03] at a committee.

[12:04] Do you want to speak Councillor?

[12:04] I just want to remind committee when there's a discussion about not providing on profits with money.

[12:10] I just reminded that the London Community Foundation has come to us and will be coming to us asking for a substantial amount of money through their auspices,

[12:19] a project they're leading and my view is that we're dealing with it because they're going to make some kind of contribution to a community asset in the same manner.

[12:28] as this is. So, I think sometimes if we decide we're going to, sometimes setting rules and

[12:35] thinking we're being consistent with them when in fact we're not and stating that

[12:38] in fact, I think can be prohibiting for council. So I just wanted to make that very clear

[12:45] example of the ability to where we are through the auspices of a non-profit doing something

[12:50] and giving them what may be a large amount of money.

[12:54] Thank you, Councillor. Okay, I have no additional

[12:55] speakers so with that I'll call the question we're voting

[13:30] just a reminder that we're voting

[13:58] closing the vote the motion carries 11 to four okay thank you colleagues so we'll

[14:04] will be in touch with bemo and with the volunteer group to ensure that we find a time to add

[14:11] this to the next cap's agenda clerk's office will be in touch and if you have any questions please

[14:16] just let us know thanks so much colleagues if we get then turn our attention to

[14:22] Scheduled items. This is number seven. This is the London medical innovation commercialization network update.

[14:27] I'd like to welcome Paul Palado and Peter White to the podium. Welcome.

[14:32] We'll see if we can get that raised up to

[14:36] More comfortable height for you and I will pass things over for you for what I understand is a presentation

[14:41] and then an opportunity for some question and answer after that.

[14:45] Call these. I'll also remind you that it's 415 now at 510.

[14:48] We are taking a break to

[14:52] I've heard me at 6-10, we are taking a break to light the menorah and you're all invited to join.

[15:00] Join us at that time, just on the north side of City Hall. Mr. Plata.

[15:07] Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councillor. We certainly appreciate this opportunity. In the interest

[15:13] of time, for those of you who may know how I present, I move fairly quickly. We have a fairly

[15:18] content rich agenda, and it's more than just the commercialization that work. We have a number

[15:22] of updates to provide to you today as part of an annual commitment. We make to the city for some

[15:27] initiatives that we funded as partners between Western and the city.

[15:32] So, I'm joined by my colleague today, Peter White, he'll be speaking regarding the

[15:36] project front-offer project center. I'll be taking care of some of the other elements

[15:39] and most notable, of course, is the fundamental network. So, if you'll just indulge us,

[15:44] I will move quickly. I promise, I speak quite quickly. And if there are questions at the end,

[15:49] we'll be happy to take them. So, thanks very much. With respect to the

[15:56] just click here, I'll just move it this way. There we go. So these, this is basically what

[16:01] we're going to be speaking to. We have a report on the Stiller Center, which is a holdover

[16:05] agreement for some time now. We have some very good news to share with you on that, as well

[16:09] as well as the medical innovation network, which we're going to truncate that name to London

[16:14] Medical Network just to make it easier. And then of course, Bronhofer, throughout the presentation,

[16:19] we'll be talking about some of the opportunities and challenges we face as part of a research

[16:24] development, commercialization community, and we'll just be talking about next steps and how

[16:28] we go forward.

[16:29] For your edification, Western Research Parks is actually an accomplishment of three parks,

[16:34] the two that you're familiar with here in London and Discovery, and the advanced manufacturing

[16:39] park in the South End.

[16:40] We also include in part of our catchment, the London, Sarnia, sorry, the Sarnia Lampedon Research

[16:45] Park.

[16:46] And as you will know, each of the parks have what we call a sectorial bias based on the research

[16:50] agenda of the university.

[16:52] So we cross the gamut of health sciences, bio-industrial, as well as manufacturing, wind, and materials.

[16:59] And you can see where we bias.

[17:00] That doesn't preclude from having same medical devices down in AMP or some other technology at

[17:06] another part.

[17:06] But the intention is to try and maximize space, utilization, and most importantly, the research

[17:11] assets of the region, not just of Western Ontario.

[17:16] In terms of the parked fast backs, I'm not going to go through all of it with you.

[17:20] I can point out that's a value where importance is that we're at 98% occupancy across the 624,000 square feet and we're at 100% occupancy and discovery park, which is an impressive statistic when you think about not too long ago, there were people concerned about the fact that we were struggling with occupancy levels.

[17:40] So we've made a huge inroads and that can be attributed to the fact that research parks are increasingly becoming economic development engines for respective communities and London is very fortunate to be in a situation where its parks are at a mature state and become highly valued contributors to the local economy.

[17:58] We have 95 high-tech tenants right now, a mix of what we call anchor tenants or large-scale multinational type tenants and then we have also a number of entrepreneurial companies.

[18:09] All of our tenants are designed or selected with a premise of contributing to the advancement

[18:14] of the research, development, and commercialization agenda.

[18:17] So we do not directly compete with commercial interests in this community quite to the contrary.

[18:22] Well, we look to do our look for tenants who may not necessarily fit within a commercial

[18:27] or a standard commercial lease.

[18:29] We give very flexible terms, that kind of thing.

[18:32] Or we look alternatively for tenants that might not otherwise come to London.

[18:35] tenets like Langsis global companies that come here for specific access to the research assets

[18:42] of the university and the community. We're in the neighborhood now 1600 knowledge workers

[18:46] and our estimated contribution is around 112 million. This gives you a sampling of the tenets

[18:51] mix that we have at our parks large companies like Nova and Langsis as well as a very small

[18:58] early stage companies. Some of the more notable companies that you would be familiar with are

[19:02] companies that have graduated, EK-3, voices.com, they generally are now very much in the mainstream

[19:11] media, and that's in large part because those companies have been very successful there.

[19:15] Now I believe located largely downtown, and the beauty of those companies is they all were

[19:20] Genesis was in the research park and partnership with our partners.

[19:25] Our vision here is pretty self-explanatory, we're really all about dreams and discoveries,

[19:28] But at the end of the day, the research parks primary mission is to fulfill one of the mandates of Western

[19:34] University. So it's part of its strategic plan. Economic development is a key tenant.

[19:39] It is a key value within the organization. It is well supported by the organization. And it's manifested itself through largely the research

[19:46] parks program. Our mission, again, is to basically serve as an enabler for these attributes.

[19:52] invention, economic growth, employment, wealth creation, and also of note social good.

[19:58] And that becomes a particularly important tenant when you think about the line of medical

[20:01] innovation network.

[20:03] Social good is a key contributor to where we're going.

[20:05] It's not just about growth, wealth creation, it's about making people's lives and improving

[20:09] upon them.

[20:11] I mentioned to you some of our successes, so we've had 35 graduate companies, some 770 estimated

[20:15] jobs.

[20:17] A lot of this stuff, some of it's in the mainstream media, but a lot of this is not always

[20:20] recognized in large measure because they're small companies, and they don't necessarily

[20:24] attract maybe the attention that more mainstream or larger companies would.

[20:29] It is worth noting that Western and this may not be well-known.

[20:34] Western research parks program is ranked fifth among university incubators in North America and

[20:39] second Ontario.

[20:41] It is the second year we've finished in the top 10.

[20:43] It is a ranking that is actually done by a company out of Sweden.

[20:48] And it pits us against over 300 incubators around the world.

[20:52] So we're very, very proud of that ranking.

[20:54] And when you see the level of investment and how we manifest that investment

[20:58] London, it's actually even more impressive in that respect.

[21:02] And we are one of only two self-sustaining parks.

[21:04] So one of the nice things about our research parks program

[21:07] is that we do not come down here looking for money from the city

[21:10] or the feds or even the province in that regard.

[21:13] We do offer programs if they are strategic values to our clients.

[21:17] But at the end of the day, the park is a self-sufficient entity, and we're very, very proud of that.

[21:22] When I mention the park's accomplishment, most notably the fifth ranking, it's important to realize that we do this with very, very little investment.

[21:31] And the reason for that is because we have relied on what we call a tentacle formula, which many of you in the retail industry would know, which is an anchor tentant and an entrepreneurial tentant.

[21:41] and, you know, any mall in the area would know that

[21:44] where you would use, say, the bay would pay for a lot

[21:46] of the smaller tenants and some of the churn

[21:48] that happens with smaller tenants.

[21:50] So our park uses what we call the two thirds,

[21:52] one third tenant formula.

[21:53] And it allows us to maintain a self-sufficient operation.

[21:56] The two thirds will be organizations like Langsis,

[21:59] but it all could be also could be public sector organizations

[22:01] like the hospital, is a tenant of the research parks.

[22:04] And the larger tenants pay a healthier rent,

[22:09] don't tell them that,

[22:10] but they pay a healthier rent in large measure to help us cross subsidize the smaller

[22:14] tenants who may have to manage through cash flow issues that may have to take a few months off.

[22:19] We work very closely to ensure that the tenants are the opportunities for the tenants

[22:24] success is maximized using the funds that are largely contributed through the larger

[22:28] players.

[22:29] It's also interesting that the larger players that we attract are generally interested in

[22:32] as I mentioned the research talent and technologies and even the people, the young people

[22:38] that are put out by the university.

[22:42] So we've become a very powerful attraction tool for not just the university,

[22:48] but for London itself in terms of its growth and development.

[22:53] We also have what we consider very strong executive commitment.

[22:56] I can tell you categorically, I've done a Western now about eight years,

[22:59] and I joined it around the same time as Dr. Chakma.

[23:03] We have an exceptional executive at Western and they have all collectively committed to

[23:08] economic development agenda. It is not the core mission of the university, but it is a central

[23:13] tenet to its overall strategic plan. I have never been, I've never suffered from

[23:17] want in that organization, and they've always been supported via our agenda in that respect.

[23:22] And the final key piece that really is that I'm really proud of is our entrepreneurial

[23:26] support network. This is a key component now, the community's economic roadmap, and what

[23:33] we did at the park, and we're very, very fortunate to have this, is we rely extensively

[23:37] on tech alliance to serve as our accelerator, as our driver.

[23:42] So the park is able to offer a lot of services through tech alliance.

[23:46] It also relies on OCE, NRC, IRAP.

[23:50] We also have world discoveries there.

[23:52] So we consider a really supportive ecosystem, all designed to drive the success.

[23:58] And so when you look at the level of federal and provincial investment incubators over

[24:01] the last three years, I'm not at all.

[24:05] trialins by Waterloo's success in securing funds.

[24:09] I think it's a lot of bowl, and I think, frankly, it's good for Canada that we have

[24:13] tech sectors that are globally recognized.

[24:16] But it's really important to also appreciate that what we do with our resources in London

[24:21] is pretty impressive, and our cluster here is very, very impressive, especially when you consider

[24:26] the level of investment that's been affected over the last three to five years.

[24:30] In terms of the Stiller Center itself, we're really, really pleased with this particular

[24:36] and I'm happy to provide you with this report, because I think it will be the last time

[24:41] I need to actually specifically report on the Stiller Center.

[24:44] The university assumed operations in June 2010.

[24:47] We made some management changes in 2012.

[24:50] What we did is we consolidated the programs that were offered in the Stiller Center into

[24:55] the tech alliance and effectively, basically, allowed us to reduce the overhead and improve

[24:59] the incubation services.

[25:00] So as a result, we're in a position where at the end of this year, at the end of 2016, sorry, Martin.

[25:05] At the end of 2016, we will no longer be needing the subsidy that the city has been providing the Stiller Center for the last 12 years.

[25:13] I understand that the police are looking for some help.

[25:15] So I might want to think about it.

[25:16] But, failing that, one of the, one of the opportunities, taking those kinds of questions.

[25:20] Sorry, sorry.

[25:21] Sorry, sorry.

[25:22] But one of the opportunities for this $200,000,

[25:25] you may be to redirect it into organizations like the ESN, like small business center, like

[25:31] tech alliance, who have been masterful at moving the entrepreneurial stream through the process.

[25:38] We're very big beneficiaries of that, and our ranking really is attributed to them unless

[25:42] less to the specific services that I provide. This gives you a sense of the numbers that have

[25:47] occurred since 2011, so you can see the financial turnaround, that the unit is self-sufficient.

[25:52] It is, as I say, 100% occupancy, and we're very proud of this particular turnaround, because

[25:57] what it does is it's reflective of our entire research parks program.

[26:04] In terms of the London Medical Network, this is the network vision, globally recognized,

[26:10] globally renowned leader in this roster of services.

[26:15] I'm really, really proud to have served as a scribe, and I don't know, underwriter for

[26:21] group right group of healthcare leaders in our community who have driven this process over the last

[26:26] year and a half. I got a compliment the mayor and Mr. Hayward on their contribution to this

[26:32] process. I have to convade my thanks to the previous council who set aside the original money.

[26:40] And it's my hope that it's all of our hope, frankly, that this council will now proceed with the final

[26:51] talk about when I talk about the network people really don't truly understand what I'm talking

[26:57] about and it's very frustrating thing but at the end of the day when I get up in the morning

[27:00] this is what I think about. I look at the Mayo Clinic and if you look at the graph in front

[27:05] of you they have in the neighborhood of about 40,000 jobs attribable to the or their health sector

[27:10] and about 9.1 billion dollars in economic value economic impact is attributable to their

[27:17] RSR health sector is actually quite robust by Canadian standards where I think in the top five

[27:21] Peter, in terms of a health care and health sector cluster.

[27:26] But there is no reason that London cannot move across that pendulum.

[27:31] And when I talk about what we're trying to build in terms of the community medical innovation

[27:34] network, really at the end of the day, what we're trying to build, there's team-based innovation,

[27:39] by actually blending entrepreneurs and industry and our researchers and co-locating them

[27:45] together for the express purpose of driving invention, innovation, commercialization, validation,

[27:51] and ultimately products and services that not just bring economic good to the community,

[27:55] but bring social good to our society.

[27:58] And when we look at the organization, we now have a very, very strong organization.

[28:03] We have effective game plan where we will be building medical innovation centers.

[28:08] These medical innovation centers will be predicated on the various strengths and London's

[28:13] research community, we've identified 14 what we call strengths of areas of excellence in medical

[28:19] research and this is the first one, MSK and brain health. And our goal is to assemble the

[28:26] dollars and the resources together to try and drive this process to create the innovation team,

[28:31] the first of what we hope will be ultimately 14 innovation teams all directed towards

[28:36] commercialization, economic growth and a wealth creation and social good.

[28:42] The returns are fairly impressive.

[28:44] The phase one returns alone and you may be already familiar with this from the business

[28:47] plan but we're in the range of about 125 million or 12x on the city's investment, 550 long-term

[28:55] jobs and we think that's conservative, a fairly strong local ongoing economic contribution,

[29:02] and direct contribution and of course an opportunity to enhance lives is 20 million Canadians and one billion people around the world who are suffering from MSK or brain impediments.

[29:13] So it's a fairly fairly powerful statement. It gives us a great identity as a community and we think it really is something that we can turn into something that we all can be very, very proud of.

[29:23] This is the team, it's a 20 member train currently. A lot of those names you would recognize,

[29:29] and they have been all very in-levels committed to this process. Our government council has been

[29:34] driving it, and now we're going to be rolling in our business advisory and scientific advice

[29:39] remembers. The reason for all of this expertise is we want to make sure that all of the decisions made,

[29:44] including the money, all of the investment, if any, that's coming from the civic money,

[29:48] our investments that ultimately advance the mission and vision of this particular initiative.

[29:53] And as I say, there's a lot of checks and balances in this process.

[29:56] The city money is a late, late, late, late.

[30:00] Investor, so everybody, the other money has to be at the table. Any new project will never be led by the city. It'll always be led either by the private sector or by alternative funding. And the reason for that is we do not want to put the city money that risk ahead of anybody else.

[30:16] In terms of progress to date, the additional operating structure been established.

[30:20] At some point, somebody is going to be recruited to replace me. It's going to be very difficult to do because I'm extremely popular.

[30:26] But there is going to be a time where somebody is going to have to come in and replace me, ideally somebody with a clinical background, more somebody from the scientific community who has a broad-based background.

[30:37] Our job, my job, Peter's job, most of the, what we call the support team, I've been really charged with putting in place the foundation, so people have confidence that there is a strong organization here, it is well governed, well managed, and something that the city can be proud of.

[30:53] And we are actively aggressively pursuing research leaders and just

[30:57] reporters and projects solicitations as we speak.

[31:01] I'm going to turn the floor over now to Peter White and he'll talk about

[31:05] AMP and then I'll swing back and we'll bring it home.

[31:09] Thanks, Paul.

[31:10] So we just wanted to give you a quick update on the Front Offer Project Center and

[31:14] the Advanced Manufacturing Park.

[31:16] I know over the last three years everyone's seen what was a greenfield site

[31:19] now led with three amazing facilities for Western.

[31:22] and now a new facility that's also being built in the park by Fanchak College, and I think

[31:26] really continuing to expand the vision that was originally set up for innovation

[31:31] park phase four.

[31:33] Probably one of the tougher things when we originally started with Fraunhofer, is that

[31:37] the work we do with Fraunhofer is usually very confidential with the manufacturers of working

[31:41] with.

[31:41] And I know the first two years when we're in front of Council discussing some of the

[31:45] accomplishments that we've had has been very difficult because we haven't been able to

[31:49] speak directly to some of the clients we're dealing with.

[31:51] but we've had an extremely successful year.

[31:54] We now have four tenants associated with the work

[31:56] we're doing at Fraunhofer, who are at our Collider Center.

[31:59] We now have 30 employees, researchers, and associates

[32:02] that are associated directly in the work

[32:03] that we're doing at the Fraunhofer Center.

[32:06] And some great news is that we've really

[32:08] started to attract some significant clients.

[32:11] So we have a number of automotive, regional equipment

[32:13] manufacturers.

[32:14] We're working with them.

[32:15] We're now publicly able to disclose

[32:16] that we've been working with the Ford and General Motors

[32:19] to those clients. We're also working with a series of material suppliers such as Hexicon and Hexion

[32:26] and Delivell. And we've really been able to reach a really interesting element where we're

[32:31] supporting a lot of different phases of the change of the automotive supply chain. The North American

[32:36] supply chain is very different from what our European partners at Fraunhofer and Germany have.

[32:41] So it's been a good learning experience for them as well to understand some of the pressures

[32:44] and some of the different business processes that take place here. And I think we're really

[32:48] starting to build on that.

[32:49] We're also seeing some big interest in the automotive outside of automotive and the defense,

[32:54] the building products, the green energy and consumer sectors.

[32:58] The other thing that we know that's going to be coming into place in starting in 2017 and

[33:02] then progressing through through to 2025 for the upcoming CAFE Vehicle Mission Legislation.

[33:09] If every auto manufacturer decided they wanted to build hybrid cars or electric vehicles,

[33:13] There's only enough battery production worldwide of lithium-ion batteries to support 15% of the

[33:19] world's automotive production.

[33:20] So the only thing the auto manufacturers are going to be able to do is get the weight of the

[33:24] vehicles to meet these new restrictions and we're really starting to see that take place.

[33:29] The other great thing is that the FPC is now the center point of the international composite

[33:34] research center and this is something that Western is set up with 12 partners from around

[33:37] the globe.

[33:38] We're getting international attention bringing international researchers and again really able

[33:42] to put some great focus on the technologies and the processes that we have here in London.

[33:49] The other really exciting thing is now with the second funding stage that we receive from

[33:53] Fed Devon Ontario.

[33:55] We now have three global first technologies, so London Center has three things not available

[33:59] anywhere else in the world for light waiting, and we have three North American first.

[34:03] So this means that we really are cutting edge and have an availability and a capability

[34:07] that aren't able to be found anywhere else worldwide.

[34:10] The other great thing is through a process we've been working off the last year we've made two specific

[34:16] hires at the FPC initially everybody is thinking we're just doing engineering, we're just doing the research work but we actually have hired two certified technical people to work at the center which allowed us to pass all the Ontario Ministry of Labor requirements so that we can actually do prototype production.

[34:32] So we can actually do ongoing production of parts and why this is going to be important in working with both the Canadian federal governments.

[34:39] So we know that as the auto supply chain moves to Mexico, the US Southwest, potentially some

[34:44] of the things to Asia, the Canadian, the Ontario, the one that suppliers are really going

[34:48] to have to focus on being able to produce products that have great engineering and have

[34:52] a lot of advancement in them.

[34:54] And so one of the things we'll be able to do at the center now is that if one of our companies

[34:57] has a great idea on how to take a metal part, turn it into a composite part, not only can we

[35:02] help them design that, do the validation, figure the best material and produce it, but what

[35:07] We can do with that as well as do full prototype production, so it would mean a company

[35:11] rather than having to go to maybe invest $10 or $15 million right off the bat to bid

[35:16] to an OEM, they'll be actually to use the front-offer project center as the base at producing

[35:20] their first 500 or 1000 prototype parts, and with that full certification, we've actually had

[35:26] our first client, unfortunately, not from London, it was a Windsor company but we got all the

[35:31] certification through and they were actually able to get an order with the company they've

[35:35] never dealt with in California, and are going to be able to move ahead with some great orders.

[35:41] We've also had great research support from the province and the federal government.

[35:45] You'll see some announcements coming up about or F funding that we're going to be very excited about.

[35:50] And as well we've had a great partnership with LADC in the Front Offer Project Center.

[35:54] We've done four different seminars of various sides bringing in composite general manufacturers working at specific item.

[36:01] We took the opportunity with LEDC's best defense conference to have actually a series of tours

[36:06] with a variety of different defense companies, so it's been a great partnership.

[36:11] We've also been recognized as a national center of excellence for the production of lightweight materials.

[36:16] So really, our goal now is to continue to build on those strong partnerships across the province, across Canada,

[36:22] and take the opportunity again with our front-offer partners to build more opportunities with the global OEMs and global supply chain.

[36:30] And just a couple of other economic development initiatives, Paul touched on really that Western

[36:35] doesn't know it's got an important role and we're happy to be a partner in the development

[36:40] of the economic roadmap.

[36:41] For some of you who've made not seen our KPMG report that was released earlier this year,

[36:46] it showed that we are contributing from a Western over all standpoint, $3.1 billion in economic

[36:50] impact in London.

[36:52] And one question we get asked on a continual basis is what impact do the students have?

[36:56] Well, between the students and visitors, it's $500 million in direct spending into the economy

[37:00] and London just to give you an idea.

[37:02] Another really exciting announcement that we had in April and pleased to say things are moving

[37:07] ahead of full speed as the movement of our roll-barks clinical trial group.

[37:12] The team Lisa Harrison and her team of doing a phenomenal job.

[37:15] That group had about 25 employees four years ago and the exciting news is we're going to

[37:20] be moving the end of January with 105 jobs into the downtown.

[37:24] we're taking an entire floor at the bell building and going to be again looking at growth and

[37:30] we know we're going to be adding additional staff members through Q1.

[37:33] So I think from our standpoint that's one of the most important contributions we can bring

[37:37] back to the city to bring 105 high-tech jobs into the downtown.

[37:43] And as I mentioned earlier we're a strong partner in the economic roadmap planning and I think

[37:48] we know some of the roles we can continue to contribute with and we're really happy to

[37:52] the city.

[37:58] I just wanted to add this one slide here. Well, two slides because I think it's

[38:04] noteworthy. We don't necessarily generate a lot of press on our Asia operation, but we

[38:09] wanted to at least acclimate you to it and also share with you a little bit of fun. So currently,

[38:14] for those of you who don't know, we have three offices in Asia, Nanjing, Tanging and Hong Kong,

[38:19] We have five FTEs full-time.

[38:22] We are the first technology transfer university-based offices

[38:27] in mainland China.

[38:30] We joined MIT and Oxford in that regard.

[38:33] We have three, which is more than anyone else.

[38:35] We've done more deals than anyone else.

[38:37] They're value now at $4 million.

[38:39] We have figured out how to do transactions with China.

[38:42] We're able to secure the currency and bring it

[38:46] to intercandidate for a purpose of advancing research.

[38:50] We did the first joint venture ever executed

[38:52] between a North American university

[38:53] spin-off in a Chinese multinational.

[38:56] And I'm proud to say that one of our joint ventures

[38:58] recently was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange,

[39:03] which is the first university spin-off

[39:04] if it's kind of do that.

[39:06] I don't own any serious personally,

[39:08] but I think Western will do quite well.

[39:10] And now we're representing seven Ontario universities.

[39:13] The reason I bring this up is that it would be very helpful

[39:15] given the city's interest in this part of the world, if World Discovery's Asia served as a

[39:23] valuable portal, the resources are already on the ground and able to assist. And as a resource,

[39:29] we should be leveraging, because the mayor and I have had this conversation a few times,

[39:34] it's my firm belief given the situations in China with respect to air quality that you're going

[39:40] see a lot of capital and a lot of people and a lot of talent moving this way and if we're

[39:45] well positioned we could actually turn that to our advantage in terms of economic growth and

[39:49] development. So it's great to have these offices there and we wanted to at least make those

[39:53] assets available to the community. The other one that we're working on is an initiative we're calling

[39:59] innovation village. We're not seeking any money or anything like that, but what we're looking to

[40:04] do is build an identity or an enterprise and the north end of the community that emulates what's

[40:09] on and places like velocity and community tech and even Mars, it would be the best known

[40:14] model.

[40:15] We currently have this property windmir manner, which most people are familiar with, and we

[40:19] will continue to sustain that operation for a little while, but ultimately the goal is

[40:23] to migrate it towards an initiative that better reflects the mission of the university.

[40:29] So we are starting with the first phase of our work in that area.

[40:33] This is a self-funded initiative.

[40:35] It's going to be about a million dollars, and we're going to start to work our way

[40:38] through the conference center and then the hotel and eventually hopefully add on some facilities

[40:43] for the purpose of creating what we think will be a unique statement piece around entrepreneurship,

[40:48] spin-off, start-ups, and a really cool environment which to do it.

[40:54] So we're really excited about this thing.

[40:56] It's going to take a few years because we're self-funding and our real primary focus right now

[41:00] is to secure support funding for the network.

[41:03] The parks overall goals remain unchanged, we're really our focus on building our communities

[41:07] brand building economic and social value. We continue to maintain our anchor and incubator balance

[41:14] and we continue to drive what we call our research agenda in each of the respective parks,

[41:20] pursue new industry partners and trumpet, our tenant successes. And the big thing with the parks

[41:25] is I always tell people this, I have the best job easily in London because I get to see first hand

[41:31] some of the creative work and some of the wonderful things that is going to be much more mainstream

[41:36] in the coming years. And what's really fascinating about it now is that London no longer has what I consider an emerging technology sector.

[41:44] It's here. It's robust. It's powerful. It's everywhere. It's evading every crevice of the place and it's really really exciting to see it.

[41:53] Someday soon, it will be in the mainstream media and it will show up and people start to see it.

[42:01] Some of it now, but at the end of the day, this is no longer an emerging center.

[42:05] This is a leading technology center, and it's something we can be very proud of.

[42:10] So our remaining game plan is around the Innovation Funding and of course the network.

[42:14] So my next role, once this money is released and I'm hoping Martin that we can get her done,

[42:22] is that we start to seek funding to build the home.

[42:25] At the end of the day, the co-location of an enterprise,

[42:28] at the co-location of these innovation teams,

[42:30] and a concentrated environment,

[42:32] is something that this particular network requires very much.

[42:37] And we've been tapping on the door of the federal government.

[42:40] We're very hopeful that the change in government

[42:42] will be of some assistance to us.

[42:44] And if the council can play any role going forward in this initiative,

[42:49] it's, and I know you have a lot of asks out there,

[42:52] and a lot of priorities, and I respect that.

[42:53] But if Council can do anything in terms of prioritization, this has to be one of the top ones.

[43:00] We need the communities advocacy to suggest that this is paramount to our success,

[43:05] and we want to in place so that we have a destination, a home that we call the London Medical Network.

[43:11] With that, I'll be happy to take any questions and really really thank you for your attention and all your support,

[43:18] this particular initiative, as well as all the other ones at Western.

[43:21] Thank you.

[43:22] Thank you.

[43:23] And I'll start with a speaker's list.

[43:24] I'd invite both you and Mr. White to just rise and stay podium.

[43:28] It's very exciting.

[43:29] I think that there is clear alignment with our community economic roadmap, and speaking

[43:35] specifically about the medical commercialization network when you reference the Mayo Clinic

[43:40] comparison.

[43:40] It really helps us focus on what London could be.

[43:43] So thanks for the presentation.

[43:44] I imagine there would be some good discussion in lots of questions.

[43:47] We'll start with Councillor Zafan.

[43:54] Thank you.

[43:54] I just have a quick question, and then I may have some questions after, but we're also going through a report on this, and item number six.

[44:02] I'm just wondering if I don't have to speak because we're going to stick around for that, or we want substantial questions now, or at that point of time, because they are somewhat related.

[44:13] I think it's great opportunity to ask those questions.

[44:16] There may be some questions that need to be dealt with in camera, but we'll just see how it goes.

[44:24] Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, through you to our guests, soon spoke of 14 medical

[44:31] innovation centers, where would those be located?

[44:38] Councillor, to be honest, I mean we got to get up the first one first and the science

[44:45] has to be refined.

[44:46] There's a lot brighter people who are going to ultimately determine the where and how.

[44:50] But the envisioned is not to necessarily have it all concentrated at the university.

[44:55] It could be very much spread throughout the city.

[44:58] It ultimately will be decided by...

[45:00] Is the best proximity, because proximity is really important, particularly to our industry partners, the proximity to the assets that they need from our research community, so it could very well be near hospitals or other locations such as that, but it's the linkages to the talent as much as it is to any like the actual commercial property itself.

[45:20] Councillor Burke.

[45:22] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to speak an optimism about how fortunate we as a city are to have such great post-secondary educational institutions that play that leadership role in the community.

[45:32] and it's really heartening to see that community atmosphere there and it really makes me happy

[45:38] to see those anchor institutions really moving forward and sending the elevator back down.

[45:42] It's just making me feel good as being a Londoner and also as a city council here, so thank

[45:46] you for that.

[45:49] Councillor Tritter.

[45:51] I was an expecting to be up so soon.

[45:53] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[45:55] It's room, Mr. Chair.

[45:56] Just thank you for the presentation.

[45:58] I just had a quick question if you might perhaps, Mr. White might be in the best position

[46:02] or Mr. Plato. One of the concerns I've heard in the past was with regard to Western's policies

[46:10] on intellectual property. And as part of this network, I see success of such a medical innovation

[46:18] network being predicated upon perhaps latitude within that area. Are those areas that are being

[46:25] contemplated for adjustment?

[46:30] So, thank you for the question. I couldn't ask for a better segway. So, in my capacity

[46:35] at World of Discovery's Asia, and a lot of people don't know this, but we made a material

[46:39] change to our IP policy that now become as manifested itself through all of our programs,

[46:46] and it's around adventure choice. So, there was, from there, with inventor-owned and institutional-owned.

[46:51] What we did is we allowed the inventor to make the determination if they want to retain the

[46:55] and go out and go forward with it, and then we, but if they want to use the institutional

[47:01] resources for marketing and support and legal and all that other stuff, we will then

[47:08] retain a certain percentage of that, and we will retain an ownership and represent them

[47:12] effectively.

[47:13] When it comes to the research projects themselves, that's always a difficult, it's always almost

[47:20] case-by-case basis. We find that some organizations are much more free with background

[47:28] IP, for example. Other organizations are much more focused and want to turn it directly

[47:33] into a contract research role. Our objective is ultimately to maximize the return to the

[47:39] community. I mean, and that applies to everything. So we want it to go to the researcher

[47:43] and to the community ultimately. Yes, Western would like to get its piece of the pie, but

[47:47] Western is never going to make its money on IP.

[47:50] It's going to make its up where the opportunities for Western are the advancement of the

[47:54] University brand, the advancement of the research mission, and that kind of thing.

[48:00] So I really think actually we have one of the more progressive IP policies now in North American

[48:05] fact.

[48:06] It's been written up to that effect.

[48:07] So I really think that's going to be less of an issue and more of an opportunity for us

[48:11] going forward.

[48:14] I guess there's Armstrong and usher, no additional for the first round.

[48:22] Well, first of all through your workshop, but thank you for your presentation, quick and precise.

[48:28] I guess the thing is listening to this, I just wanted to sort of understand a little bit more about the Chinese connection

[48:34] and how that works because it sounded to me like, you know, you're developing partnerships there

[48:43] product research development here. How does that sort of unfold down the road? Are you sort

[48:53] of protecting our turf in that if there's new product new innovation when you partner

[48:58] with industries in China and they're over here using our innovation, our research. Are they

[49:06] going to be manufacturing these products or using this research here or are you just sort

[49:11] is it that goes back to China and then we don't reap the benefits of the, you know, so if you can sort of make me understand how that works and how do you protect their interests?

[49:26] Great question, Councillor.

[49:28] So what we've done with China is a lot of the technologies are what we call in the later stages of its IP cycle.

[49:35] So we haven't been able to secure North American investors,

[49:38] we haven't been able to secure seed funding any of that sort of thing.

[49:42] Chinese capital is a lot more aggressive and fluid right now.

[49:46] And so what we have, so technologies of what other

[49:48] why sit on the shelf have become deployable.

[49:52] And so the deals that we've been struck in the two

[49:53] to rejoin venture deals that we struck that are,

[49:56] of no, in both cases, what we do is we develop the R&D here.

[49:59] So there are jobs here.

[50:01] Now, in fairness, the Chinese have been doing what they want

[50:04] do the manufacturing and they do create jobs over there and they do have a lower cost

[50:09] based in which to do that but the R&D has always been remained here where we benefit

[50:15] again is on the distribution so they will take distribution rights in China we will have

[50:20] distribution rights the joint venture will for the globe what that does is generate income

[50:24] which generates opportunities to drive further R&D so we've it's it's not ideal but a lot

[50:31] a lot of the technologies that we're moving to China, our technologies that might not have

[50:36] otherwise ever end up in the marketplace. So it's do it there or don't do it at all.

[50:46] Thanks Russia.

[50:49] Thank you Mr. Chair and gentlemen, thank you very very much for a very impressive

[50:54] doer, doer, doer, presentation, really appreciated, almost like Martin Jeff. But you did well.

[51:01] I have three simple questions from where I ask all three of them is a chair all at once.

[51:06] It was difficult one might be the follow-up on Councillor Armstrong.

[51:11] Have you looked at any, what we might be heading in the future,

[51:15] with respect to the European Union trade agreement as well as the Pacific Trade Agreement.

[51:23] Canada has with those places.

[51:25] Number one, number two, the easiest one is we'll be able to get a copy of your presentation.

[51:30] And the last one is something that I would not be sitting here if I wouldn't ask you the question.

[51:36] I look at the board of directors, all mail or white mail.

[51:41] Perhaps, I'm not criticizing it because you have to start somewhere.

[51:46] But I would hope that somewhere done the way we're going to have a little bit of diversity.

[51:54] Well, thank you for the question, Councillor.

[51:56] The board of directors is not all white males.

[51:59] I mean, it does have a large number, but we do have female representation on the board as well.

[52:04] We definitely recognize that as an issue, probably one of the bigger challenges when you have

[52:09] a commitment to a board that requires a lot of time and effort and is a volunteer board,

[52:15] the number of candidates that we have available to us along with some of the rules that the

[52:19] University of Western Ontario Act requires.

[52:22] We do not have as much freedom as we'd like to be able to put forward representatives.

[52:26] And you know, a good example is our faculty representatives, they have a group of representatives

[52:31] on the board, but the faculty representation then votes who each of those members are going

[52:36] to be.

[52:37] So, we do want to over time continue to get a better reflection of diversity on the board.

[52:42] But I think we have a strong board right now, and we'll continue to work towards that.

[52:48] In regards to the trade partnerships, the European Free Trade Agreement did not get signed

[52:53] to the elections. So the details of that are still underway. It's anticipated that Canada and

[53:00] Europe will develop an agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I mean, the document

[53:04] 6,000 pages. So there's an awful lot there. But I think again, looking at it, there's going to be

[53:10] there will be some winners and some losers in Canada. I think anybody that's read

[53:14] processing that there is going to be pressure potentially in the auto parts sector. There may

[53:18] be some other pressures on manufacturing, but there are going to be areas in food processing,

[53:22] in research and development and health care different areas that we can take advantage of.

[53:28] So I think it's really going to be so important for particularly community areas to decide

[53:34] where those changes happen.

[53:35] I mean, London certainly seen a couple of major changes take place when the original free trade

[53:40] agreement took place in the 80s and then what's happened through the recession from 2007 to 2012.

[53:46] So I think again, it's great that the economic road map's been completed because then we

[53:50] and what could that as far as what priorities would be best for all the partners together

[53:54] whether it's LEDC, the chamber, the city, our local business partners to get together

[54:00] with, and then how Western can help support that.

[54:04] Oh yeah, and we'll definitely get copies out of the presentation for you.

[54:08] Thank you for first round. I have councillors Helmer and Hopkins.

[54:14] Thanks very much for the presentation. I covered a lot of different organizations in addition

[54:19] to the stuff, specifically about the lot of medical network.

[54:22] So first my question is about the name,

[54:24] because it's recently, as I wrote map,

[54:27] it was called something different.

[54:28] So if you could speak to the change in the terminology,

[54:33] what, the London Medical Network name?

[54:35] It's actually more of a description than it is the name.

[54:37] We're using it just because we need to give it some sort

[54:39] of identity.

[54:41] The expectation or hope is that we,

[54:44] I mean at the end of the day, if I had my brother,

[54:46] so I'd like to find a benefactor.

[54:48] I'd like to find a benefactor that we name the whole thing

[54:50] after. I think it's going to be a big number. But I think one of the things I'd love to do is

[54:54] see us self-enance through a benefactor. Because at the end of the day, I hate having

[55:02] to run down the road to ask for money all the time and to get these things started. It's

[55:06] just you're always, you're always, be held to the rules and conditions around that. So the

[55:11] name right now is more of a description. It's a placeholder. We'll use it for the time being.

[55:15] It'll always be identified with London. But I think it would be very cool if we could

[55:20] if we could trade the name of this enterprise,

[55:23] this ultimate enterprise, for something that helps kickstarted

[55:27] and gets it really going for the community.

[55:34] Interesting.

[55:36] So I'm looking at the 2004

[55:38] executive summary around the medical innovation

[55:42] and commercialization network.

[55:44] And at that time, it was kind of the first three phases

[55:46] when I'll be focused on the discovery park.

[55:49] Is that still the plan?

[55:50] Is that, you know, you talked about having the musculoskeletal

[55:53] one brain health one, but then the next two are about biomedical devices and biomedical imaging.

[55:58] I just wonder if that's still the general plan and if you're still thinking at Discovery Park.

[56:04] Yes, the answer is short term answer is yes and really the only reason is the proximity

[56:10] to the university. That is the secret sauce to help getting the industry partners. We think we're

[56:15] going to need to help drive each one of those particular phases. The phases may change,

[56:20] priorities may change other than MSK, but the expectation is the first three

[56:25] centers would be located at the Discovery Park.

[56:31] Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank

[56:35] you very much for the presentation. I was interested in the slide back regarding

[56:42] the board of directors, the structure, if you could explain a little bit more

[56:47] There were three groups there, and also how you do report back to the city and ultimately

[56:54] to Council.

[56:57] Great questions today.

[57:00] So the makeup of the governing council is actually a member from the private sector.

[57:06] Well, two members from the private sector, as well as each one of the institutional senior

[57:10] people.

[57:11] So the two presidents from the hospitals, the Vice President of Research from the University,

[57:16] as well as the two the Dean of Faculty from the Schulich School of Medicine and the Director

[57:23] Scientific Director for Lawson Health Research.

[57:26] So we probably have in the room at the same time, oh, no disrespect to the mayor of

[57:30] Martin, but they're also part of the team to keep an eye on us.

[57:33] But we probably have from a leadership perspective, all of the key elements of the healthcare

[57:40] group.

[57:41] But what we wanted to do was make sure that we had a strong business acumen and we wanted

[57:45] have a strong scientific acumen without creating such a large organization that becomes difficult

[57:52] to manage.

[57:53] So we go with the tight group of the governing council, and then we have these business

[57:58] advisories and scientific advisory groups that will ultimately vet the various proposals

[58:02] that come through.

[58:03] It gives that level of assurance to both the governing council and ultimately to you and the community

[58:07] that every investment made is in accordance with the principal set of by the network plan.

[58:13] With respect to the reporting back to the city, I think it would the agreement currently

[58:19] calls for, I think, an annual report of some form.

[58:22] I like the idea of sometimes coming and doing the face-to-face.

[58:25] I can do that, sorry, the net, or we can do that, or we can do a written report or a

[58:30] combination.

[58:30] But I really like the idea of proactively coming to council, because I think at the end of

[58:34] the day, I know the community and road map envisioned some sort of a group in between.

[58:39] I like coming to council.

[58:40] I think at the end of the day, you have to look at the community in the eye, you're the

[58:43] representatives of the community, you're the ones with the highest vested interest in these

[58:47] things.

[58:48] And, you know, as long as I go quickly, I think it's a useful exercise.

[58:52] So thanks.

[58:58] Councillor Squire.

[59:00] Thank you, Mr. Sharon, for you.

[59:02] I think it's really important, at least for me, as the Council for Ward 6, where the

[59:05] University is located, to point out how pleased I am about the number of times I've heard

[59:10] the idea, the London community being mentioned, along with Western University.

[59:14] And that's important to everybody in London is particularly important to the people in my

[59:19] ward to know that we're neighbors, that the people in Ward 6 and the University are neighbors.

[59:24] And since I've been accounts, I've certainly realized a number of things, countless things

[59:29] that the university and the city are involved together in.

[59:32] And that brings a great deal of comfort to me as a political representative, and also a great deal

[59:37] of trust in the relationship that the Western's interests are London's interests.

[59:42] So I want to thank you for that.

[59:44] I, obviously, this is a sort of approving to me

[59:47] that the principles of the economic roadmap

[59:49] have already started and that we're already working on

[59:52] and that we have the ability to do that.

[59:54] So you're getting a big, big thank you certainly

[59:56] from me and the people who live in my work for the world.

[1:00:03] Thank you, Councillor. I don't have any additional for the first round. So I will go to the second. I have Councillor Zafeman, Van Holston, I'm strong.

[1:00:13] Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I guess I'll just quickly echo my colleague's comments already, but obviously a lot of really incredible things that are being done.

[1:00:21] I have a question in the community. I know that early this year had a chance to explore Fraunhofer and the windy dome with Mr. White, and it's pretty incredible to see some of the stuff that's happening there and really incredible that it's happening.

[1:00:32] Monday it really is internationally renowned for what is taking place there. I wanted to speak

[1:00:37] with the more in terms of questions around the medical commercialization or medical invasion

[1:00:43] commercialization network. I know I was had a chance to get earlier today the executive summary

[1:00:49] from the March 2014 strategic plan and just raise some questions for me around some of what

[1:00:56] exactly we're talking about. I'm trying to understand a little bit around the fact we talk about

[1:01:01] having multiple pillars. That will be taking place as part of this network and that the first pillar

[1:01:06] is all that we're talking about so far. And so I'm curious what the other pillars would be

[1:01:12] that we're talking about because I didn't really find much mention of them.

[1:01:17] So the next one was around simulation medical devices in biomedical imaging. Those are kind of

[1:01:22] the latter two phases. They are mentioned briefly in the executive summary, but there's very

[1:01:27] be on the first phase or the first pillar at this point. I think the expectation we

[1:01:33] have in the first pillar is we have to prove out the model. I think before we start to

[1:01:36] get really ramp up new sectors and new areas there are 14 areas all of which consider themselves

[1:01:42] priorities by the way. So they all have great teams, talent and all of them have an interest in

[1:01:47] seeing themselves second, third, fourth, fifth and so on. So if I'm being a bit ambiguous in my answer

[1:01:53] I'm not a skilled at this as maybe political people, but but but I the reason ultimately the reason is two and three and four and so on will follow from from what we learned in one face one

[1:02:07] Thank you for that and I guess it's just for me. There's some maybe similarities in terms of the language as being used for pillars and phases

[1:02:15] And some of the phases that you're talking about there there are phases as part of what's called the first pillar. So I guess maybe of those 14. There's other ones just aren't included in here

[1:02:24] The next question I had was, and this is just maybe a new one that was missed or changed,

[1:02:29] but I know that in what's coming to us today, and what was on the screen,

[1:02:33] there was an estimated 550 jobs that are coming from this report,

[1:02:38] and it talks about the fact that there's 400 jobs that are coming.

[1:02:40] And so obviously more jobs is better.

[1:02:43] I'm just wondering why that was an increase from this report to the next of 150 jobs.

[1:02:49] So basically the reason is, is when we reassess the situation,

[1:02:52] and we think there's a greater opportunity to secure more industry partners.

[1:02:56] At the end of the day, the entrepreneurial stream and the spin-off stream is a good one.

[1:03:00] But the real secret sauce in this plan is around attracting industry partners that might not

[1:03:05] otherwise land in London or look to locate at London.

[1:03:09] And what we look to do is we look to secure a piece of their R&D business and then build

[1:03:13] the relationship from there.

[1:03:14] I can't reveal any of the vendor names that we're targeting, but I'll give you an example.

[1:03:18] So one of the vendors we're looking at is ultimately looking at setting up some sort

[1:03:22] functionality, I really have to be careful when I say, but they're looking to set up some sort

[1:03:26] of functionality and partner with our research teams.

[1:03:28] They're also very interested in securing access to some of the students that graduate from

[1:03:32] the program out of the MSK research cluster.

[1:03:36] Their hope is that if all goes well, they will set up a much manufacturing center along the lines

[1:03:43] where you would be mass producing the medical devices that were created in our innovation

[1:03:49] center.

[1:03:49] So, I mean, I can't get much further than that, but the ultimate target for our role, my role,

[1:03:55] is to start to pull in some of these industry players that, again, would not necessarily look elsewhere

[1:04:00] or outside of London, at two London, previously.

[1:04:06] Through the chair, thanks for that clarification.

[1:04:09] And I'm very glad to hear you speak about opportunities for students.

[1:04:11] And I know that one of the goals for the network is creating opportunities, long-term employment opportunities,

[1:04:16] for youth graduating and for local businesses. That's great.

[1:04:20] One thing I know that was talked about recently, which I don't think I was hoping to clarify,

[1:04:24] was a question around the fact that the past Fed dev did not give funding for this

[1:04:30] project.

[1:04:31] And obviously, that's a big key component piece because it talks about in this plan that

[1:04:34] needed to secure $37 million in cash investment before really getting started.

[1:04:38] And so, a big chunk of that's already there.

[1:04:40] But I'm wondering, I haven't heard much of a reason as to why that funding wasn't necessarily

[1:04:43] provided or given if it was the government of the day in decisions based off that or if there

[1:04:47] some more substantive reason behind it.

[1:04:57] There were really, I think, three realities that took place with what we're working through

[1:05:01] with FedDev.

[1:05:01] We've been very successful as a city in a community with FedDev programs, and really with

[1:05:07] the latest launch and with the demands that came through, some of the parameters of what we

[1:05:12] applied under originally were altered, and areas where we traditionally had been able to gain

[1:05:18] funding, particularly in building the bricks and mortar infrastructure were set so that they

[1:05:24] We're focused more on programs and they're focused on more of the innovation agendas, is really

[1:05:30] where one of the big changes took place, so we've actually had very strong discussions with

[1:05:36] Fed Dev on how we need to look at our plan and which will be the best way for us to meet

[1:05:41] the parameters they're looking at and we're anticipating that with the new government they'll

[1:05:45] probably create some other priorities around things they want to see Fed Dev support and once

[1:05:51] we better understand that then we'll be able to go back in with an updated application.

[1:05:55] And I think given that we do have a strong job quotient to it and a number of strong partners

[1:06:01] we'll be able to take to the application.

[1:06:03] We will have a good opportunity and a good capability success.

[1:06:11] Councillor Vain, host, Armstrong, and Turner.

[1:06:17] Thank you Mr. Chair and through you, through all of your accomplishments, I think through

[1:06:21] three great goals would it be best to be first, to be self-sustaining and you've hit

[1:06:25] all of those at times. I want to ask you about your manufacturing capacity. You're going to be

[1:06:32] doing prototyping, which is very exciting, but that's usually an intermittent thing. Do you have

[1:06:38] plans to use the the latent capacity on a regular basis?

[1:06:47] Is this a question that goes to the front

[1:06:48] of the front officer?

[1:06:53] Yes, I think. One of the goals we have with the front officer is to maximize

[1:06:59] as much time usage in the facility as possible.

[1:07:03] So one of the things we've been able to do with the certification is we're allowed to actually

[1:07:07] operate the facility and again we're in the correct zoning area that we can actually

[1:07:11] then do later hour operations and as well as weekend operations.

[1:07:16] We have actually in our case some great opportunities for our engineers and our technicians

[1:07:21] to also educate the students as we work through some of this so what we will be able to

[1:07:26] As in a case where, you know, right now we're running it about a three to four month backlog on testing, depending on the technology, which is about where you want to be with a research and development center.

[1:07:37] Generally takes us 60 days to get everything set up relative to how the research will take place in acquiring the materials.

[1:07:44] But one of the things we are looking at right now is we are really only operating the center at eight or nine hours a day.

[1:07:49] So if we have a client who comes to us and said,

[1:07:52] we want to develop this technology,

[1:07:53] we'd also then produce some prototype parts.

[1:07:56] We now do have the capability to go into a later

[1:07:58] our production run or also go into the weekends.

[1:08:01] Because the equipment that we have is made for industrial applications.

[1:08:05] I mean, it would be three or four years down the road from now.

[1:08:08] We'll start seeing some of the equipment.

[1:08:09] We have our types of styles of it.

[1:08:11] In some of the main OEM and the main parts suppliers.

[1:08:14] So it's made to run 24-7 if that's something

[1:08:17] that we have the capability and really the financial resources to do.

[1:08:21] So as long as the company is willing to

[1:08:23] again support the operational cost for us,

[1:08:26] we can go to longer hours rather than just our typical

[1:08:29] eight or nine hour day that we have today.

[1:08:34] That's our Armstrong intern.

[1:08:39] Through you worship and I hope I'm that too off track here,

[1:08:42] but you sort of keep my interest in a couple areas

[1:08:45] with some of your comments and back to China a bit.

[1:08:50] You mentioned that a lot of products would potentially not see R&D, you know, would stay on the shelf unless, you know, you entered into agreements with Chinese manufacturers.

[1:09:05] Whatever the case may be.

[1:09:08] And so I'm just wondering because these products that you talk about that would have stayed on the shelf if you didn't, and of course somebody's making a decision that they would stay on the shelf, you know, I don't know who that is or how that works, but in any event, what I'm getting to know, you can address this, this is that, is there a flaw in what's going on?

[1:09:38] that products would sit on the shelf that we have to go out and look to partnerships

[1:09:42] in places like China, then end up giving up a piece of the pie where they're doing

[1:09:48] manufacturing, even if it's only for distribution in China and you've got other deals

[1:09:55] cooked, you know, worked in there.

[1:09:57] Somebody letting us down by us not having those products do we do the R&D, whatever area

[1:10:05] in and the manufacturing's happening here because that's the problem here where we've lost

[1:10:12] our manufacturing and to see new products develop new ideas, innovation and then for somebody

[1:10:21] for you to have to go out and partner somewhere else and we lose that capacity, that

[1:10:26] opportunity. I sort of have an issue with that. Are we missing something there because they're

[1:10:33] the shelf. And the second part that I hope you'll address is, you mentioned, well, you know,

[1:10:39] China, they can manufacture and you sort of touched on labor. Is that what the issue is as well?

[1:10:48] The labor cost, uh, it manufactured, and is that an issue? And so I know this is a right on,

[1:10:57] but I sort of, because you too now, I've spent a lot of time in this area, it's sort of

[1:11:01] like to know your thoughts in those two areas.

[1:11:06] I'll go very quickly.

[1:11:07] Really, it's a question of capital, counselor.

[1:11:10] Canada, like it or not, just does not have the market size or the capital base

[1:11:15] to make sometimes the investments required to drive these types of initiatives.

[1:11:20] So it's not for lack of trying.

[1:11:22] We obviously try to push the technologies into the North American marketplace.

[1:11:26] It's easier for us to service.

[1:11:28] They usually manifest itself in additional research contracts, that sort of thing.

[1:11:33] But the Chinese have been very aggressive and they have a lot of capital.

[1:11:36] We just don't in this country.

[1:11:38] And so that's a frustration.

[1:11:41] In terms of the manufacturing, I think it's less of a labor differential as it is that because they've made the investment,

[1:11:47] they want to have some control over the means of production.

[1:11:51] So what we're doing a lot over there, and there's not a lot of manufacturing,

[1:11:55] we're not talking thousands of jobs or any of that other sort of thing, but they are doing

[1:12:00] some of the main factors because they want to have some control over that aspect of the

[1:12:03] process. And frankly, they're the ones who have taken the headline share of risk in terms

[1:12:07] of making the investments and moving the technology from a lab bench or pre-commercial state

[1:12:13] into a market-ready product. So I mean, that's kind of that sad reality that we live in

[1:12:18] and it's frustrating for us as much as it is for anybody else, but we're not the most risk-oriented

[1:12:25] country, and we also seem to defer a lot to the United States in terms of that regard.

[1:12:31] So it is frustrating.

[1:12:32] But at the end of the day, the university needs to migrate these technologies, and it's

[1:12:35] much better into the marketplace for social good.

[1:12:38] And even the chance to make some of that money back here and create opportunities for our students,

[1:12:42] and that kind of thing, then nothing, which is, have it sit on the shelf and basically waste

[1:12:46] away.

[1:12:47] I hope that helps.

[1:12:50] That's your turn.

[1:12:51] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:12:52] I actually, Councillor Zafman asked my question as well.

[1:12:56] I noticed a discrepancy between the 2013 report, which had 350 jobs, and this one had

[1:13:01] 550, and Mr. Plato answered it quite well.

[1:13:03] Thank you.

[1:13:05] At this time, I have no additional speakers.

[1:13:06] So I look for a motion to receive.

[1:13:10] Thank you, Councillor Ashill, we'll do that on screen.

[1:13:13] And that was just the motion up in the moment.

[1:13:14] We'll go to you.

[1:13:15] So motion to receive, Councillor Ashill, seconded by Deputy Mayor Hubert.

[1:13:19] Just as we're opening this up for discussion.

[1:13:21] I'll turn things over to Councillor Morgan.

[1:13:25] Sure, just I just have a question for probably Mr. Hayward or the staff through the chair.

[1:13:31] So when I read this originally, I saw that money was flowing originally and trust to

[1:13:37] to to to healthcare institutions in this particular report.

[1:13:41] It seems like it's going to flow to the London Medical Innovation and Personalization Network,

[1:13:45] which I read the governing terms on what their board constitutes.

[1:13:48] I need to know, because there's a presentation that included a lot of information about Western,

[1:13:55] what benefit or role does that institution get from this particular innovation and commercialization network?

[1:14:09] Through the chat, can I just clarify the question?

[1:14:12] So are we asking, does Western get any benefit from the grant that we give LMI-CN?

[1:14:21] That's correct.

[1:14:23] Western is one of the members of the LMICN as well, the bulk of the activities taking place in the research part.

[1:14:33] So to the extent that there's any capital placed in that research part with building or whatever,

[1:14:40] and these funds would be used for that, toward that, in order to attract others to the extent that they have that on their land.

[1:14:50] I guess that would be their building ultimately, so they would walk away with that, but the intent is really for us to invest in capital that helps attract.

[1:15:00] These investors to come in, so they can commercialise their ideas. So that would be about the only area that I can think of that they would plan if it was.

[1:15:09] Yeah. So I'm just going to add a caution and declare a pecuniary interest on items 6, 7 and C1 as Westerners buying a player chair.

[1:15:18] Okay. Great. Thank you.

[1:15:21] Okay, we have a motion that's been moved and seconded for receipt. Any additional discussion?

[1:15:29] Get re voting.

[1:15:41] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 with one request.

[1:15:45] And again, thank you to Mr. White, Mr. Plato. This is a very exciting, exciting to see you

[1:15:50] command and present to all of those things happening with one of our most important community

[1:15:55] partners here in London and looking forward to seeing what the future brings. Thank you very much.

[1:15:59] With that colleagues why don't we then move to the timed item it's item eight this is the

[1:16:05] PPM for the 2016 water and wastewater rates and I'd hand things over to Mr. Brahms

[1:16:12] I understand as a brief pardon me, but just pick a John, let's give it to any John out there

[1:16:18] that wants to present just before we enter into debate.

[1:16:44] Mr. Mayor and committee, I am pleased

[1:16:46] to be here on behalf of Mr. Brom and Mr. Hayward and the respective engineering and budget

[1:16:52] teams who have put together this rate proposal for you.

[1:17:02] Just a few slides have provided

[1:17:04] some background. Normally the rates are provided with a budget in the fall and that didn't

[1:17:09] even happen last year for a different reason, though, because it was an election year and the budget

[1:17:17] couldn't be approved by the Council of the day until the coming year.

[1:17:23] This time we're proposing that the budget also be deferred until the new year with the

[1:17:28] tax budget because it's a different kind of budget for your budget, and we think it should

[1:17:33] all be presented to you at the same time.

[1:17:36] However, like last year, not approving rates, but January 1st has a financial impact on us

[1:17:41] last year because it was a 7% rate increase.

[1:17:45] I think it was about $840,000 a month, hit on our revenues, this time at 3%, it didn't

[1:17:51] be 400, but still, we're not comfortable with foregoing that, we're recommending that we

[1:17:55] make those changes January 1st.

[1:18:02] 3% rate increases include a pretty significant decline in consumption, and therefore changes

[1:18:08] on our revenue streams.

[1:18:10] This chart shows where we've been.

[1:18:12] you can see on the left side there, almost 55,000 cubic meters in total for

[1:18:20] 2001, and an hour down to about 40,000 cubic meters, 40 million cubic meters, we're about 72% of

[1:18:32] what we were from a volume, and yet we know from a population standpoint we are higher.

[1:18:37] So, this is an important factor.

[1:18:40] It's critical to our revenues because 63% of our revenues are variable.

[1:18:46] So, as the consumption overall consumption goes down,

[1:18:51] our revenues are being affected.

[1:18:53] But we've accommodated this within the 3% rate increase,

[1:18:58] and should also know that the numbers you see in front of you here,

[1:19:01] that chart includes growth on top of it.

[1:19:04] So, conservation is outpacing growth as well.

[1:19:07] You will see that there is a recommendation E in your package.

[1:19:11] This is a critical element that we think you should be directing us back to look at more detail.

[1:19:16] It's becoming problematic to forecast what our revenue streams are.

[1:19:20] There seems to be a lot of factors involved and it's becoming difficult to nail it down for you.

[1:19:28] 3% includes some significant costs that are rising at rates much higher than our own projected rate increase.

[1:19:38] First one is natural gas between eight and 10% per year is forecasted.

[1:19:44] However, it's not a large expense, $530,000 a year is pretty significant but in the utility world it's not the largest thing that we face.

[1:19:53] But the percentage is what becomes difficult.

[1:19:56] Electricity is more important, a $7 million expense account cost to both water and wastewater and it is projected to increase by almost 7% per year.

[1:20:08] And that has us investigating and implementing a number of efficiency projects to reduce our consumption of electricity.

[1:20:18] We're pleased to see that the purchase of water is forecast to come down and match our proposed rate increases of 3% going forward the next four years.

[1:20:28] And the last line underneath in the yellow line is that's the Bank of Canada inflation target rate and all of these are above that.

[1:20:40] 3% includes investing in our infrastructure to manage our infrastructure debt.

[1:20:46] Back in 2013 you heard that we had a total value, asset value of 6.7 billion dollars.

[1:20:55] We have 20 year plans to invest in that infrastructure to manage the infrastructure gap,

[1:21:02] to manage the condition of it, is not something that you solve, it is something that you manage over the longer term.

[1:21:10] And in fact, we've planned longer than 20 years, this is an example, our water system, where we look at the full life cycle, a real life cycle, such as replacing spring bank reservoir number 2 in 2023, other reservoirs of spring bank in 2050, even as far out as replacing the Arab pumping station in around 2065.

[1:21:38] long-term trends are there. We know when these big expenses are going to come, but we have

[1:21:43] normalize it at a forecast at a half a percent per year increase in capital investment. So these

[1:21:50] are parts of our long-term plan, and that's how we're going to manage our assets over the long-haul.

[1:21:59] 3% rating increase includes building up a reserve funds to a healthier level. Our finance

[1:22:06] Department has targeted 1% of the acid value for sulfur water that would be achieving a reserve

[1:22:13] fund balance of 27 million and 40 million for wastewater.

[1:22:18] Present forecasts indicate that we would be there by 2022, so we're on our way towards

[1:22:25] a healthy reserve fund.

[1:22:27] There's a little star beside the water one, the one on the left, and that's because shortly

[1:22:31] after that, it does dip down because we draw it down, but then it comes back up again.

[1:22:36] These healthy reserve funds allow us some flexibility when it comes to accommodating deficits.

[1:22:42] And we've seen a few of those in recent years.

[1:22:45] And funding strategic investments, and I've got a few examples listed at the bottom there.

[1:22:50] Investments that utility might have to make to conform with the low end and downtown plan.

[1:22:56] The rapid transit might induce some costs that are not understood yet, not known yet.

[1:23:01] We have a wastewater optimization strategy that require upfront money so that we can invest and then recover within the reduced operating budgets.

[1:23:11] Our pollution prevention and control plan is still underway.

[1:23:15] We have put funding in the future years for this to reduce our overflow to the river.

[1:23:22] And we're just covering off the fact that maybe the answer might require more investment than we forecast it.

[1:23:28] And the last one is regulatory change, and there was a recent one within the last a month and a half,

[1:23:34] and that was Bill 66, and Bill 66 is the regulatory framework under which the province will pursue a reduction,

[1:23:44] a targeted reduction of 40% phosphorus in the times of river.

[1:23:49] And we don't have very much information on what that means to London yet, and we continue to investigate that.

[1:23:57] So here we are at financial sustainability, our finance folks have defined that as a state

[1:24:03] at where future rate increases are at our near inflationary levels based on a combination

[1:24:07] of the consumer price index and the construction price index with the appropriate use of

[1:24:12] debt financing, adequate reserve funds, and the appropriate investment in capital.

[1:24:19] And we came to that after many years of some pretty significant rate increases, as you can

[1:24:25] across the top, other than the 2011-0%. The chart underneath indicates when we were forecasting,

[1:24:34] we would achieve financial sustainability. In 2010, we thought it would be around 2015. That

[1:24:40] changed after the 2011-0% rate increase and it got pushed out to 2017. There's other factors

[1:24:47] there that pulled it back in. Pushed it out and pulled it back in. We had then in 2014-4

[1:24:54] because of 2016 and here we are in 2016 financial sustainability.

[1:25:01] Similar on the wastewater side, some of the rate increases over the years.

[1:25:07] I've been even higher, even double digits of 11% in 2005.

[1:25:12] But in the end, achieving financial sustainability in 2016.

[1:25:20] This 3% rate increase is, we're forecasting out for four years.

[1:25:28] We forecasted that in our last budget cycle, so this is not anything different.

[1:25:33] We put that in our regulatory financial plan for water, which was approved and submitted

[1:25:38] to the Ministry of Environment in May of this year, so this is exactly what we suggested

[1:25:43] was going to happen and this is where we are.

[1:25:49] So what are others doing?

[1:25:51] It appears that not everyone is at financial sustainability and they're still pursuing

[1:25:55] it. Some at different rates of progress, some have taken a attack where they're going to

[1:26:01] add a medium kind of level of rate increase, not the 8th and 9th but something lower

[1:26:07] than that. It'll take longer to achieve it. The case of Toronto, we've learned that they're

[1:26:15] proposing 8%. They're going to have 2 years of 5% and then they'll have a 3%. So they might

[1:26:22] declaring financial sustainability in 2019.

[1:26:29] So what does it mean to the average residential customer?

[1:26:31] The left column is the 2015 costs for an average home that we had projected

[1:26:39] would use 171.9 cubic meters per year and the cost was $842.

[1:26:48] In the next column to the right, we've forecasted a reduction in the

[1:26:53] assumption and applied the 2015 rates. So at 2015 rates and a reduced consumption in 2016,

[1:27:02] the service would cost $815 per year. The 3% increase would increase that by $24 for a

[1:27:09] total of $840 per year for an average residential home using $165.42 meters.

[1:27:21] And comparing

[1:27:21] to other municipalities, this is not based on the London average, this is based on a

[1:27:28] a simple flat number of 200 cubic meters. It also does include a storm charge because not

[1:27:34] every municipality has that charge. So this is water and wastewater and not a storm charge.

[1:27:43] The blue bars are all 2014. That's the latest information we have that is complete.

[1:27:48] So, in 2014, London's cost for 200 cubic meters would have been $737, as compared to the average, the red bar, which is 856.

[1:28:01] So, we're below the average.

[1:28:03] Applying our 2015 and the proposed 2016 rates, the cost, the comparable cost, you would be $815.

[1:28:11] But that's two years after everyone else, as you've seen others, are increasing their rates as well.

[1:28:16] So, at least to believe that our position being below average is going to be maintained in 2016.

[1:28:26] Similarly, for industrial customers using a 30,000 cubic meter per year baseline,

[1:28:33] 2014, the cost for an industry in London would be 60,000 as compared to 84 for the average of these municipalities.

[1:28:44] And there will be a movement up to 66,000 in twenty-six dollars, but again, we believe

[1:28:51] we will still be at the lower end of this scale when the information comes back from the

[1:28:56] others and the element of spallies and what their rating increases are.

[1:29:01] So in summary, we're recommending that the revenue stream may be maintained by proving

[1:29:08] the rates in January 1st, and that will allow us to not have to take into account $400,000 per

[1:29:15] month in revenue loss. The 3% rate increases are what we projected in last budget. There

[1:29:24] were what we had forecasted and put into our financial plan for the Ministry of

[1:29:28] Environment for our water financial plan. And the cost of you as you seen are very

[1:29:35] competitive, particularly in the industrial side when you had on top that not only we

[1:29:39] the lower end of the scale, but we also offer connection to two great lake systems.

[1:29:45] Thank you.

[1:29:48] Thank you.

[1:29:49] Thank you, Mr. Lucas.

[1:29:49] We have a couple of questions.

[1:29:51] I'll start the list.

[1:29:52] I have councillors Armstrong and Usher Turner.

[1:29:58] Well, just...

[1:30:00] In theory, Councillors, if you have questions of technical nature, I guess we could ask them now. We do have to have a PPM. It might be wise to hear from the public first and then we can enter into our questions in the morning. Is that work for you?

[1:30:11] Are you saying to wait and the public will first?

[1:30:14] That's going to be PPM and then we'll be sure. I'll keep this list.

[1:30:17] Okay, so if I can get a motion to go into to open the public participation meeting.

[1:30:25] Let's be moved by Councillor Helmer, second by Councillor Silly, any discussion?

[1:30:29] All those in favour?

[1:30:33] closing the vote the motion carries 15 to zero. Okay and at this time I'll look

[1:30:38] up to the gallery to see if there's anyone here to speak on this matter and I'll

[1:30:43] ask a second time if there's anyone in the gallery or on the main floor from the

[1:30:47] public interest in speaking to this matter

[1:30:53] and I'll ask a third time is there anyone

[1:30:55] here to speak to this matter. There being none will look for a motion to close the

[1:31:01] the PM, move by Councillor Sulee, second by Councillor Morgan, any discussion or voting?

[1:31:16] closing the vote, the motion carries 15 to zero. Councillor Armstrong. Thank you,

[1:31:22] worship and through you. First of all, thank you for the short brief and precise presentation.

[1:31:30] I guess there's a couple of things. We're seeing the numbers. Consumption drop, water consumption.

[1:31:40] I probably think that it's because of consumption,

[1:31:47] in way of conservation, but the other

[1:31:50] is, and the bigger concern, is affordability, and I just want to ask a quick answer

[1:31:57] from staff, would those be probably the two reasons why in your mind affordability and

[1:32:04] conservation as to why consumption is dropped continuously.

[1:32:12] Through the chair, it's not just the city promoting conservation as the province as well.

[1:32:18] Through the plumbing code,

[1:32:23] the equipment that is allowed to be used is allowed to be used

[1:32:25] has to be more efficient. We are seeing that over time having a significant impact, not just the new construction,

[1:32:34] which is probably the most efficient but also the house renovations.

[1:32:39] Are we at a point when our prices are so high to start into effect consumption?

[1:32:46] To some extent we do hear from those who actively conserve

[1:32:50] and get down below the 7 cubic meter threshold

[1:32:56] and there isn't a benefit in going below that

[1:32:59] and it's something that we have thought about

[1:33:02] But when you compare us to the other municipalities, our prices are pretty good.

[1:33:09] So we don't think we're quite at that point where the elasticity of the rate is having

[1:33:16] that much of an effect.

[1:33:19] Not as much so as the actual plumbing code requirements and people's just natural desire to

[1:33:25] use less water.

[1:33:26] I

[1:33:28] have a couple more quick ones. On page 125, we talk about hauled liquid waste and

[1:33:38] leachade and there's price per thousand liters. Because I can't remember this. Are we

[1:33:45] allowing companies, other municipalities, outside of London to bring in leachade and

[1:33:54] liquid waste to dispose of here in the city, just a yes or no is fine with.

[1:34:01] Through the chair, yes.

[1:34:06] This is quite a bit.

[1:34:07] In other words, if there are developments on the around the city and other municipalities,

[1:34:18] Could they be taking advantage of our system that we've invested in order to allow for larger developments, and I'm thinking industrial, you know, would we allow, and is, and would we have a choice of so many, for an example, about a hundred thousand acres, and they wanted to develop that, and put a plant there, and suddenly, I wouldn't happen less London accepted their waste.

[1:34:46] Is that a scenario that could happen? Like are we obligated to take their waste and also is that cost recovery or could we be actually

[1:34:58] Increasing that cost in that area.

[1:35:03] So through the chair

[1:35:06] No one would expect a very high water consuming industry to somehow develop on septic fields because it's just it's just the pump out that we receive

[1:35:17] And so it's not really cost effective

[1:35:20] And so you don't usually see that you might see an industry that does associate with transportation and that not really producing water

[1:35:26] It's just they just have

[1:35:28] Staff toilets for fleshing and that's about it

[1:35:31] As far as recovering costs yes, we recover our costs

[1:35:34] Can we recover more than that? No, we're not allowed to recover more than that we can recover our costs and that's what we're legally allowed to do and what we believe we are doing

[1:35:45] Thank you, and my final point, which is an question, but rather common, I think the thing

[1:35:51] is that I'm sure all the members of council can see that we're at the point now where things

[1:35:58] are good, you know, and it's taking a lot of years to get there and a lot of high increases

[1:36:06] seven, eight, nine and so on. But I think the thing is, some credit has to go to our past

[1:36:14] staff for starting this years ago, because it wasn't too popular to tell people that year

[1:36:24] after year, you're getting seven, eight, nine percent. Usually I'd believe that forecast was seven.

[1:36:30] It was a popular, but it was something that we saw had to be done and I think back that I remember

[1:36:38] Councillor Hume, also Councillor Usher, who shared those committees over that time.

[1:36:46] That was that showed leadership back then, as far as elected officials are concerned.

[1:36:52] So I wanted to mention that because I was around when we started this program.

[1:36:56] So, I think the thing is this is certainly what we've done here is gotten our city back on track as far as water, wastewater, concern, and those sometimes we do things right and we have vision and today we're benefiting by this council.

[1:37:16] So, in any event I wanted to mention our staff and some of those councilors who I recall had a hand in this.

[1:37:23] Thank you, Councillor.

[1:37:24] We'll just move through these pictures list, I have Councillor Asher, Van Holst, Morgan,

[1:37:28] Hubert, anyone else?

[1:37:30] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:37:31] Just to complete some of the things that comes to the Armstrong just said, the staff

[1:37:37] certainly has had a lot to do with this, and I've looked into the gentleman up in a top corner

[1:37:41] up there, Mr. Walker, who he eats sleep and drink this thing for two years while we

[1:37:47] structured this water cost about two or three years ago. And I just had to say that because I

[1:37:55] remember him coming and make presentation to see the busy over and over and over and over so

[1:38:00] as we could understand is I'm not putting Mr. Brown down and Mr. Lucas down but Mr. Werther

[1:38:05] paid a major part in this. And one of the things that we were very concerned about is how

[1:38:12] is going to happen with this new structure. How are we going to sell it to the community?

[1:38:19] And even up to this day, I'm not sure sure that we have completely sold it because we just

[1:38:23] got an email, I think we all got an email from a gentleman who said that he only used five cubic

[1:38:29] meters of water and he's charging so much and he thinks that he's charged for every cubic

[1:38:34] meter but he gets the first seven cubic meters free. The difference is that he gets that lump

[1:38:40] up to that seven and then he's charged for each additional cubic nature. So, and the miracle

[1:38:48] about this is that we are now a 3% steadily, but we purchased water at 4% from the urine

[1:38:56] water board, and 9% from the algae and water board. So I don't, you know, when you look at it

[1:39:02] it's almost like a miracle, and then we have all these additional expenses. So I really

[1:39:07] this stuff for the structure and what they used here. I wanted though that if Mr. Lucas could

[1:39:16] just remind us, take a minute, just to remind us of this formula that we used. I just repeated

[1:39:23] part of it, I believe, with respect to the first seven. Cubic meat is free for any user, but there's

[1:39:32] fixed cost for everyone because that fixed cost was not there before the beginning of 2014.

[1:39:40] Could you just remind us of that Mr. Lucas, if you remember?

[1:39:45] Through the chair I'll try to remember.

[1:39:48] We described it as a humpback curve for the variable costs, where it's low for those who

[1:39:55] are using less water, it increases to promote conservation, and then it tails off for those

[1:40:02] consumers basically industry to make it to make their business commercially viable it

[1:40:09] helps it helps us economically. There are the fixed charges we're introduced such

[1:40:15] as for fire protection for what we call the connection charge. There's a cost

[1:40:20] and just having the infrastructure and having it there not necessarily using it

[1:40:24] to the extent that it might be capable, but so we went from I believe it was less

[1:40:30] and 1% fixed charge to where in the somewhere between 35 and 40% right now, fixed charge.

[1:40:39] Having said that, you already heard me speak to the fact that the 60% percent that is

[1:40:43] very well is still difficult to manage because of the continuing reductions.

[1:40:51] Thank you Mr. Lucas.

[1:40:52] If I remember right, Mr. Chair, it went up, like Mr. Lucas said, up to 35 cubic meters

[1:40:58] was the high rate and then it started going down and that's one of the reasons why the industrial

[1:41:03] repeal a little bit less than the residential. But I think we've got a formula here now and

[1:41:09] I think that I'm so happy that we've reached that 3% that we were promised years ago and hopefully

[1:41:14] we could sustain it even after the four or five years. So thanks very much, I appreciate seeing that.

[1:41:22] Thank you, Councillor. Councillor VanHolst.

[1:41:27] Thank you, Mr. Chair, through you.

[1:41:29] I'm very pleased with the 3% because, of course, the joint waterboards had asked for 4%

[1:41:38] at here on and 9% at Elgin. So, we'll done, is that that's going to work out fine for them.

[1:41:51] Through the chair we've incorporated those projected rating creases.

[1:41:54] For us, it was shown in the chart as a blend between the two because we buy more from the cheaper side.

[1:42:00] you're on side then we buy from the elegant side. Okay, well done, thank you. And on page 123,

[1:42:08] it talks about a charge for meters being checked for accuracy. And this has, have those,

[1:42:18] those prices gone up in 2016. That's the second, the second row on page 123.

[1:42:28] And

[1:42:32] through the chair, what is presented in there are all the changes to the by-law, it's not the whole by-law, it is just the changes.

[1:42:41] So anything you see in there is different than what it was before, and it is increased by 3%.

[1:42:52] Thank you, Councillor Morgan.

[1:42:56] Thank you, I want to make a quick comment that I have a question.

[1:43:01] The common is in reference to the presentation and something and with all due respect and through the chair, of course.

[1:43:10] I think sometimes we present some of this information.

[1:43:13] It's not particularly helpful for telling the story to the public.

[1:43:17] The shards that were put up showed our 2016 rates compared to everybody else's 2014 rate.

[1:43:24] It doesn't, isn't a particularly great visual for for the average person looking at the document.

[1:43:30] I mean, it shows where we've moved, but it looks like we're moving way, you know, a chunk down the chart towards the average.

[1:43:37] And really, we don't know if that's what's happening at all, because we don't know where everybody else is going over those two years.

[1:43:42] So I appreciate that we're trying to be visual in this, but I think it's not helpful to telling the story of what's happening.

[1:43:48] And the other thing that's in the presentation that is sometimes confusing for the public

[1:43:52] is when we use the term inflation without any sort of context.

[1:43:56] And here in this sub-note to see that we're referring to inflation is not just CPI, but

[1:44:00] the construction price index, which has a completely different rate than the household rate.

[1:44:04] When people here and read inflation at home, they're thinking about the household whole basket

[1:44:09] of goods, which, as you've outlined, in the costs and the cost pressures, doesn't really

[1:44:15] to the water system, and quite frankly, we don't have the option of cutting back on service

[1:44:21] when there's strong provincial legislation that says we have to control quality in health

[1:44:25] and standards, as well as some of our fiscal plan to the provincial government. There's not

[1:44:31] a lot of options to us to really do that. So I just, you know, I'd appreciate, and the future

[1:44:36] has to try to paint the pictures clear as possible, because I know I got a number of questions

[1:44:41] about, you know, how much above inflation we were and, you know, but the rate increases were

[1:44:45] and, you know, they look at the chart and the report and they say we're moving way over.

[1:44:50] And those aren't actually true when we're actually talking at the reality of the situation.

[1:44:55] So, so that's just my comments to pass on for.

[1:45:00] Future reports and future dialogue on this. The one question I wanted to ask is, we talk about the

[1:45:07] cost pressures in the system. We also made a change this year to the way that we allow for water

[1:45:14] to be consumed in the summer months, shifting more towards weekend and holidays, part of the rationale

[1:45:19] for that shift was electricity prices are cheaper during those times, and I'm wondering, and if you

[1:45:24] don't have the information today, because I'm putting it on the spot a bit, you know, down

[1:45:27] road I'd be interested to know, to that have any sort of impact was it, you know, positive

[1:45:32] it was marginal at fast if we know that now. I'd love to hear it if we don't, I'd love to hear

[1:45:36] it at a future date.

[1:45:40] Yeah, through the chair, it was a bad summer to evaluate that. We did not,

[1:45:45] we did not sell a lot of water on weekends. We didn't have a lot of lawn watering. It was a very

[1:45:51] good summer for watering your lawn naturally every few days we had a rain. So, no, we don't, we don't

[1:45:59] to tell us exactly what it might have happened. We would just have to monitor and

[1:46:03] and future summers and see if we noticed a difference.

[1:46:08] If you may are hubris and then I have councillors Turner and Squire.

[1:46:12] Thank you. I'm glad Mr. Lucas confirmed that this is consistent with the financial

[1:46:19] plan that we were requested to file with the province and did file so we're on track

[1:46:25] with that and I think that's a really important piece.

[1:46:28] I'm kind of curious just to, you know, that we're building the reserve funds that is healthy

[1:46:34] and I've always agreed with that to some degree, but a slight element of it you mentioned

[1:46:41] downtown London and some of our plans for that, when we consider the my Dundas project, the

[1:46:49] Dundas Street project, you know, it's never what we see that cost us money is what we don't

[1:46:56] frankly, the cost of money, it's the infrastructure under it. And some of the numbers were quite

[1:47:04] large with respect to that project. What portion of some of those numbers would have been

[1:47:11] attributed to water and sewer, because you're kind of presenting both today, so water and sewer

[1:47:18] infrastructure, and would the funding for them be out of future capital budgets,

[1:47:29] or have we

[1:47:31] identified the source of funding?

[1:47:41] Through the chair, I was generalizing about downtown.

[1:47:44] There's an awful lot of activities and proposals being considered in the general downtown

[1:47:48] area, including growth, such as some towers that are being proposed.

[1:47:54] We're taking a broad view of investment in downtown and looking at the capabilities of the infrastructure we have, the condition it's in.

[1:48:05] So we're trying to accommodate all things that might happen downtown, including RT, including the back to the river, including Thundas Place.

[1:48:14] In the case of a done-dass place, it's not a huge cost.

[1:48:18] We did budget some very specifically for a main replacement along the corridor, and we

[1:48:23] don't have a lot of sewer work associated with that particular corridor.

[1:48:27] But we do have investments to make downtown regarding overflows, one particular corridor,

[1:48:35] we're looking at specifically for the nearer term in the next few years, is York Street,

[1:48:40] where it is a pure combined system.

[1:48:42] And it does end up right at the river, not far from downtown.

[1:48:47] So that is an important project where we're presently working out the technical requirements of,

[1:48:55] and trying to find the right mix with all the other projects that are going on,

[1:49:02] and to show that the benefit is going to be there for growth downtown,

[1:49:06] for overflow reduction in the river, as part of the pollution prevention and control plan.

[1:49:10] So, I was generalizing more about downtown because there's just so many things going on and we are looking at it holistically on the utility side.

[1:49:24] Constrainer.

[1:49:25] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:49:26] Thank you, Mr. Lucas.

[1:49:27] A couple questions to you through the chair.

[1:49:31] I guess looking at the graph that you have about to decline in water use.

[1:49:35] If you extrapolate that out, it shows we actually get to zero water use by 2025.

[1:49:39] but you kind of start the inflection back up at around 2020 and then show some leveling out.

[1:49:47] Also, you also mentioned about how in 2015 there was 5% less usage of water than you had anticipated.

[1:49:57] And so I guess I wonder where the confidence is in that leveling out in water consumption comes from and how confidence are you?

[1:50:08] because I think if that number change is then that really changes the projections on our revenue stream side.

[1:50:16] Through the chair, so that exactly is why we have recommendation E.

[1:50:23] That our short term forecast for revenues is shaky.

[1:50:28] And we need to look at the factors. We had a couple of very cold winters.

[1:50:32] That doesn't actually have an impact on water loss in our water system through main breaks and services.

[1:50:39] So there's revenue losses associated with a number of factors, and we're just struggling with trying to get the right information to forecast where it is.

[1:50:50] And as the council has just indicated, where does it bottom out?

[1:50:54] Yeah, we need some intelligence to suggest to us where that's going to happen.

[1:50:58] For the long long term, we have already engaged and we're part of a research project out of

[1:51:04] University of Waterloo to look at the long-term trends, but that doesn't help us in the

[1:51:11] near term as in the next five years.

[1:51:14] So we do want to take that back and look at it very thoroughly and confirm that we can make

[1:51:21] the three percent over four continuous years or whether there's some of the factors that

[1:51:26] not properly taking into account yet.

[1:51:31] I think Mr. Lucas, and I guess the follow-up through Mr. Chair, is, I guess what

[1:51:36] to sustain a bodily really mean twist.

[1:51:39] We have a, is that maintaining the status quo, or is this improving the situation?

[1:51:45] We talk a little bit through the report about the infrastructure gap and starting to

[1:51:49] close that anticipating those components, but the reality is we still see

[1:51:56] bypasses from our pollution control plants.

[1:51:58] We still see bypasses from, I believe,

[1:52:02] from pumping stations as well.

[1:52:04] I remember when I sat as the chair on the advisory

[1:52:06] committee on the environment, we asked,

[1:52:10] when do we get to zero bypasses, for example?

[1:52:13] So does 3% get us anywhere closer to that at what rate?

[1:52:20] And I guess the other question,

[1:52:22] Councillor Hubert and I talked about kind of alluded to the fact that the core is a growing

[1:52:28] component.

[1:52:29] You answered in part, Mr. Lucas, about when we took a look at the, we have the DC community

[1:52:37] improvement plans for downtown Seoul, Seoul, all-deast.

[1:52:41] When we start to concentrate towers together, the draw on the infrastructure that exists

[1:52:46] there, now won't have a counter contribution from the development through the development

[1:52:51] charges because there's a CIP in place so that kind of comes from the tax base rather than

[1:52:59] from from the industry itself I guess I kind of put two questions in there. So first part

[1:53:06] is when what does what does sustainability mean mean to us what does it look like? How do we get

[1:53:11] to to zero bypasses and then how do our CIPs impact our projections?

[1:53:21] Through the chair on the first

[1:53:21] question about sustainability actually it does include improvements because we do we have

[1:53:28] forecasts significant investments in the future to reduce overflows and we've accommodated

[1:53:33] that in our 20 year plan. The flexibility in the reserve trying to build it up one of the reasons

[1:53:40] was that that might cost more than we have presently forecasted or we might find it we're so

[1:53:46] while trying to act to invest more.

[1:53:49] So we're trying to cover off what we know and make improvements

[1:53:52] as well as provide some flexibility to do more if that's

[1:53:57] what is needed and that is what is required

[1:53:58] using the reserve fund.

[1:54:01] On the downtown,

[1:54:06] we had forecasts that we put in the DC

[1:54:09] for infrastructure investment that might be required

[1:54:12] to support growth.

[1:54:14] And so we've covered it off that way.

[1:54:16] It is covered in the water and wastewater sides of the DC charge, and there is a revenue

[1:54:24] stream for that, that is handled city wide.

[1:54:30] As far as how much growth occurs, that might be a question for any impact of the CIP, it might

[1:54:38] be a question more on the financial side about the affordability of that would depend on

[1:54:45] how much development actually occurred and I don't know if that's something that

[1:54:50] Mr. Hayward or someone else can comment on about the CIP.

[1:55:00] With respect to the CIP through the chair, the CIPs that we have for the residential

[1:55:05] increases in residential in the downtown are expecting to have quite a significant draw on

[1:55:11] those and you'll actually see that in the surface report I think we mentioned it and

[1:55:16] about three or four towers that are supposed to be going in, that is going to have an impact

[1:55:23] on the system, on the service system, on the water system, on the road system, and so that's

[1:55:28] something we're going to have to build into our plans as we move forward. There will be an element

[1:55:35] of that that will be development charges, and there will be an element of that that will be

[1:55:39] replacement as well. Some of those would have been anticipated in some of the planning that we've

[1:55:45] but I don't believe everything was fully anticipated at this point.

[1:55:54] If I make a back to the first question a little bit about the downtown as well, talking

[1:55:58] about more people living downtown, but with the consumption patterns coming down, we are creating

[1:56:05] capacity.

[1:56:06] So, we're trying to find the balance between what future population be downtown and what their

[1:56:10] consumption patterns will be and what capacities we have.

[1:56:13] But I'm finding that a lot of our investments aren't related to capacity and necessarily

[1:56:19] It's more to do with the condition of it and the overflows, which are something we would like to resolve

[1:56:25] while growth occurs and in preferably before it.

[1:56:31] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:56:31] So just the final question then, do we have an anticipated point at which we reach our considered

[1:56:40] generally acceptable bypasses?

[1:56:43] Do we have a projected date at which we did that?

[1:56:45] When I sat on Ace, we're looking 20 years out and that was about 10 years ago.

[1:56:51] So, I'm not sure where we are in that because most recently, I thought I've heard about 20 years out again, so just seeking clarification because that would drive this rate.

[1:57:04] If I knew that we could achieve the elimination of bypasses earlier as a result of going 1% more, then that would be something that would be important to me to know.

[1:57:15] Just point out that we're at eight minutes, you've had the floor, I've provided some allowance because the questions have been succinct and the answers have been extensive, so we'll go over to Mr. Lucas.

[1:57:27] Yeah, through the chair, it's probably very difficult to put a date on when our overflow would be reduced to nothing.

[1:57:33] and probably giving you a system that continually ages, the answer is probably it never does

[1:57:38] completely become zero, but certainly we've put in place programs to reduce the inflow of

[1:57:47] water into the system at the source, which is at homes. We know we are meeting the regulatory

[1:57:52] requirements for overflows. It's called the guidelines called F55, and in fact we are exceeding

[1:57:58] and Greenway is a major project that's going to not only meeting the guideline right now at Greenway,

[1:58:05] but with the improvements we'll be significantly exceeding that guideline.

[1:58:14] It's an ongoing investment versus aging of the system balance that we see in the long term.

[1:58:23] And if it's a different direction to take to create zeros, I'm not sure that's a very different financial model and very difficult to achieve when your infrastructure is valued at $6.7 billion.

[1:58:36] It's very difficult to have all new infrastructure that is completely tight at any one time.

[1:58:41] But certainly we're striving for continuous improvement and that's acceptable to the regulatory agencies and we continue to show what those improvements are to both them and the public through our documentation of

[1:58:53] overflows and our performance.

[1:58:56] Okay, thank you.

[1:58:58] We'll go to Councillor Squire and Ridley.

[1:59:02] Thank you very much for your report.

[1:59:04] It certainly makes it clear why we are.

[1:59:08] I know this was the prediction for last year that it would be 3% so I'm not surprised by it.

[1:59:14] To receive this.

[1:59:14] My question, though, through you Mr. Chair, I was interested in your comments about rapid transit,

[1:59:19] something that we're dealing with, and you talked about putting a reserve aside

[1:59:25] pertaining to rapid transit, and I think it raises a concern certainly for me

[1:59:29] of ancillary cost related to rapid transit.

[1:59:33] It may not be directly transit related, and if we're building contingencies and reserves in other areas

[1:59:39] to fund this project, and by that I mean if we have to do work on water mains or something like that

[1:59:45] because we're putting in a rapid transit project.

[1:59:47] I suppose what I'm thinking is that should be attributable

[1:59:50] to the rapid transit project rather than being part of this reserve.

[1:59:55] I just wonder if you could help me with that.

[2:00:03] From our perspective through the chair, that's correct. So if rapid transit is initiating the digging up of the civil water main and having requiring that it be moved then rapid transit would pay.

[2:00:17] If, however, there's an element of replacement that we'd be doing anyway, then there will be an element of the rate that would be repaying for it.

[2:00:25] It starts to get a complex calculation because you're involving DCs, you're involving estimate useful life

[2:00:31] and how are we extending that? There's a whole bunch of factors that come into it, but essentially you're correct.

[2:00:40] Okay, I have a few more speakers. Just a reminder, we have a hard stop at 6.10 for a recess so we can go out and celebrate the lighting of the lights.

[2:00:48] I have Councillor Ridley.

[2:00:51] Thank you, Chair. My questions are more specific to the sanitary sewer rates.

[2:00:58] With this report because I think as I understand it, water coming into homes is needed in charge.

[2:01:06] But water going out of homes, there's no way to meter that in my correct amount.

[2:01:13] The chair, there is a way to meter it.

[2:01:15] And for some large industries, we do, but to put that on all of our 100,000 plus customers,

[2:01:22] it's not realistic.

[2:01:29] And so when I look at some of the recent issues, we've been having,

[2:01:35] and anything specifically to the weeping tiles and the extra water that we're treating,

[2:01:38] That is truly stormwater but running for a sanitary feeding into the bypasses and being treated as sanitary.

[2:01:48] I don't see anything that's being captured in here and I get the point that we can't meet or 100,000 houses and charge them on their output.

[2:01:57] But what could we be doing to make sure that we're not doing those bypasses or treating that stormwater?

[2:02:05] Are there any options for us?

[2:02:10] Through the chair, we've provided council with a work program to look at

[2:02:19] baseman flooding and flooding in general. We opened that up and quite generously

[2:02:25] willing to look at anything and everything, starting with what others do, what other

[2:02:30] municipalities do and in fact have already got a date set with my counterpart in Toronto

[2:02:35] and so we're already on the move.

[2:02:42] The technologies that are available, we would want to look at what is possible.

[2:02:47] Again, experiences of others.

[2:02:50] And if the billing system is a way of dealing helping to deal with this, then we'd be looking

[2:02:55] at that too as well as our own drainage bylaws and plumbing codes.

[2:03:00] We have in the past made pictures to the province to change the plumbing code and support of things

[2:03:05] that we thought were important.

[2:03:07] So in this work plan, we are opening up a lot of doors.

[2:03:14] OK, one final speaker, we're just a few minutes away

[2:03:16] from having to call that recess.

[2:03:18] I'll look to you, Mr. or Councillor Van Holtz,

[2:03:20] pardon me if you have a question.

[2:03:24] Thank you, just a comment.

[2:03:25] There's been a lot of talk about conservation.

[2:03:27] And I wanted to point out that that's really not

[2:03:30] as important here around the Great Lakes

[2:03:33] as in other places.

[2:03:36] A lot of our water would normally flow

[2:03:38] from like here on through lakes and clear into Lake Erie.

[2:03:42] And really, we're not consuming water as consumers,

[2:03:44] we're just rerouting it.

[2:03:46] So it comes from like here on, flows into my water heater,

[2:03:49] flows over me, luxuriously in the shower,

[2:03:51] and then goes back through the tens to Lake Erie again.

[2:03:55] So it's just a rerouting.

[2:03:59] And now that we've got our capacity built up,

[2:04:03] it's not as a significant factor.

[2:04:07] Okay. I've got three minutes left in the clock. Councilor Hammer.

[2:04:13] Great questions from committee. I don't have any because you covered off all the

[2:04:16] things I want to ask about. We have your item number e reporting back about revenue

[2:04:20] forecast. I will say I'm going to support the recommendation, but I think it might be a bit

[2:04:23] optimistic. I say that because, you know, we had a deficit in the water service area.

[2:04:29] You know, on the revenue side of $1.9 million, and that was, you know, we had a cold

[2:04:32] wet summer and we have this double-way on the water where you know you have a lot more rain

[2:04:38] and you have issues related to that in the summer and then you've got colder winters and freezing

[2:04:43] and breaking and so increased capital costs. So you have less money on the revenue side

[2:04:46] and higher expenses and that's not a good place to be. So I'm optimistic that we can get

[2:04:52] there anyway but in this report that comes back I'm particularly interested in those because

[2:04:56] those are things that we can't control and you know there's a few things we can control

[2:05:01] the water system, but not everything. And I'm a bit concerned that this might be an optimistic

[2:05:06] forecast. So I'll support it. I'll look forward to the report.

[2:05:10] Thank you, Councillor. I have no further speakers. We're just coming up on 610, which is

[2:05:13] perfect timing. So what all the motions have been moved in seconds. So we will call the

[2:05:18] question.

[2:05:30] Closing the vote, the motion carries 15 to 0.

[2:05:33] Okay, Councillor, 610. I'll look for a motion to recess. This is both a recess so we can

[2:05:39] had down and enjoyed the celebrations as well as for dinner will be returning at 7 p.m.

[2:05:45] moved by Councillor Asherson, seconded by Councillor Turner, any discussion all those

[2:05:49] in favour?

[2:05:50] We'll see you seven o'clock.

[2:05:51] Thanks so much everybody.

[2:07:03] It's just after 7 o'clock so we'll call the meeting to order.

[2:07:07] We've got quorum so let's get moving.

[2:07:12] Folks, what I suggest that we do right now is heading cameras so we can deal with item 6.

[2:07:19] There are some guests here that are interested in speaking this about that.

[2:07:22] I think that would be the best use of time at this point.

[2:07:25] So if I get a motion to please go in camera for the reason stated on the public agenda

[2:07:31] and I wonder Kathy, if I could have you read that, I believe it's C1.

[2:07:41] Thank you Mr. Mayor.

[2:07:42] It's a matter pertaining to advice that a subject's a solicitor client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose,

[2:07:49] as it relates to the London Medical Innovation and Commercialization Network Contribution Agreement.

[2:07:57] Okay, if we get a motion on screen, please.

[2:08:19] Okay, it's been moved in second and in any discussion.

[2:08:21] No discussions are rewarding.

[2:08:41] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14-0.

[2:08:54] London Medical and a virtualization network in the city of London. We originally had a

[2:09:00] grant agreement with the Hospital Foundation, so two hospital board foundations. Since

[2:09:06] the network has now been established, it has a proper governance and border directors. Since

[2:09:15] it has a bank account and it has been incorporated, we want to move it to the next step

[2:09:19] move the funds from the foundations over to the network so that it can begin its work.

[2:09:27] Thank you. Any speakers? Any questions? Councillor Turner's statement?

[2:09:31] Thank you. I'm just with respect to this. I see now and I certainly appreciate a lot of the

[2:09:40] due diligence has been taken in terms of creating the network and the governance structure

[2:09:45] and that helps to certainly calm my fears of the transfer of such a significant grant.

[2:09:55] This is probably, well, this is the largest grant transfer that we've seen on this term of

[2:09:59] Council as far.

[2:10:02] The source of funding was the reserve fund, within that fund, in the report, it didn't

[2:10:12] It gives through the balance of that fund and what other allocations might be.

[2:10:17] I guess this has been set aside and allocated beforehand, but does this have much impact on that fund?

[2:10:26] So the funds have actually, the grant has already been dispersed to the hospital foundations,

[2:10:31] is $5 million in each hospital foundation. The original funding source came from the economic development reserve fund.

[2:10:41] Thank you Mr. Chair. Two questions. First one, my understanding with this agreement. So while the

[2:10:51] money is already been dispersed from the city, any dispersion of funds from the network will

[2:10:59] have some pre-requirements on it before being met in terms of establishing a certain amount of

[2:11:04] money for the network, and I was wondering if our staff could comment on that.

[2:11:10] So, through the chair, basically knowing legal terms with this is paragraph for subclaws or whatever,

[2:11:17] but one of those things, number four in the agreement, to really lays out what the serial all the lawyers around here.

[2:11:28] I'm an accountant, I just get to the bottom line, that's all.

[2:11:32] So, basically all the items are laid out in there, so it has to comply with the municipal act,

[2:11:37] to be used for capital investment and those types of things. In order to look at the type of

[2:11:43] thing, investment that's coming forward that we may need to be investing to promote. There is

[2:11:49] also an evaluation form that the ICN is supposed to bring forward to us, that we can sign

[2:11:56] off on and that's supposed to happen 10 calendar days in advance of any disbursements so we

[2:12:08] Board of Directors and have a pretty vocal sound on that committee.

[2:12:16] Through the chair, I was actually looking for a different question or answer.

[2:12:21] Specifically around the fact that while the city has made its dispersements to the network,

[2:12:27] other potential parties that may be involved in whether that's federal provincial dollars

[2:12:31] have not been established at which may be hopefully included in that network

[2:12:35] in that the network itself may not necessarily make dispersements until a point where that money

[2:12:42] is received.

[2:12:45] So, through the chair, sorry I misunderstood the question.

[2:12:48] There are applications in the federal and provincial governments, there was, as you heard,

[2:12:53] earlier, some hold-ups with respect to the Fed dev application.

[2:12:57] They're still working on that, there's elements and we're hoping that we'll have that money

[2:13:01] in place.

[2:13:02] There are other areas like the University, Western University, as committed already $10 million

[2:13:09] for the $10 million under way.

[2:13:11] They've already dispersed, I think it's around $1.1 million in terms of allocating FTE's

[2:13:18] operating cost to this.

[2:13:21] So there are other partners that are coming to the table, depending on what the timing of

[2:13:29] investments that we need to make, some or most of that money should be coming in, prior to

[2:13:36] any disbursements being made. But again, it's about getting the right investment in and

[2:13:41] getting those jobs in London and those kind of businesses starting out here. So I can't guarantee

[2:13:47] you with respect to the federal provincial bottom line for the other partners for sure. And certainly

[2:13:52] private sector money will be there.

[2:13:56] Through to I thank you and just one more question just this is just a curiosity for me

[2:14:01] It's good to lay the agreement it under B

[2:14:04] talks about some of the economic benefits to the network to the city

[2:14:09] And those including a lot of estimated numbers and I was just curious why in a sort of more formalized agreement

[2:14:15] We have estimated numbers versus just the formal agreement that would talk about the relationship

[2:14:21] So

[2:14:25] these would be specific opportunities or business plans that come forward and so what we're trying to do is satisfy some of the reporting

[2:14:34] requirements. We want to see that that money is in fact going to generate a certain number of jobs and there will be a business plan that says,

[2:14:41] you know within a year we might have five positions or jobs and then in ten years will be in many as 300 or so.

[2:14:49] That's the type of thing we're trying to get out with that form, and it's really just by

[2:14:53] way of reporting back to us.

[2:14:55] They will have already undertaken the net.

[2:15:01] The scientific review to make sure that the science behind whatever is coming forward is a good idea, and there will have also also undertaken the business plan review to make sure that whoever is coming forward to the idea can implement it and make sure that it will survive in terms of the financial diligence and so on. So that's what the purpose of this is really more to report back to give us a comfort level that they are investing in the right things as well.

[2:15:30] and the other speakers.

[2:15:33] Councillor Hummer.

[2:15:35] Thanks very much.

[2:15:37] So, Councillor Zafin is kind of getting at the.

[2:15:40] The question I want to ask about, and it's really those first two under B in terms of the,

[2:15:45] you know, these are the objectives we have for the initiative.

[2:15:49] These ideas will be linked in the sense that if we're talking about $56 million in impact,

[2:15:54] we're looking at jobs that are 550 full-time jobs around $100,000 a year,

[2:15:59] or these economic impacts beyond just the salary that we're talking about for the jobs itself.

[2:16:04] I asked that because if those economic impact numbers include a broader range of things, that's fine.

[2:16:10] But I would be much more interested in the sort of total wages going to those jobs that I am in the total natural number of jobs.

[2:16:16] The number of jobs is not that useful as a metric.

[2:16:19] So I just wonder if the treasure can clarify that.

[2:16:26] So there's really two elements that we're looking at.

[2:16:29] Number one is the impact of role of the network, which is sort of the annual reporting piece

[2:16:34] that we'd be looking at.

[2:16:35] And that is, there's a whole, and we can request more information if we want it, and that's

[2:16:42] one of the things that we have.

[2:16:43] But that would be more general and some of thecillary stuff as well.

[2:16:47] When you get into the specific economic benefits evaluation for them, that's each project,

[2:16:51] and that gets a little bit more specific into the number of jobs anticipated, the additional

[2:16:55] investment for that project.

[2:16:56] So, what are they leveraging, how much is coming from the private sector, how much are they

[2:17:00] getting from other levels of government, how much is coming in from other investors.

[2:17:06] So, that's the type of thing that we're after in that, you know, it benefits evaluation

[2:17:10] forms.

[2:17:11] So, that, again, is on each project before every disbursement as a control.

[2:17:15] The other one is a report that you will get annually that says, here's how we're doing.

[2:17:20] And you get that for, I think it's 10 years we put in there.

[2:17:28] Great.

[2:17:28] So I just want to make sure, and maybe we're looking at different sections in the same agreement.

[2:17:34] And I want to be clear, I'm going to support the recommendation I'm just getting into the questions,

[2:17:38] to make sure it's fully understood by me.

[2:17:41] So part B talks about the economic benefits, and it's sort of lists off for, right?

[2:17:45] So this is like, schedule A, part B, lists off for benefits.

[2:17:49] Later on in the same agreement, I guess it's section O, it lists off five, and it says these

[2:17:55] economic benefit metrics, including these five specific things.

[2:17:59] And so for me, then people have different views, I guess, about how important these

[2:18:03] methods are as metrics.

[2:18:05] But the number of full-time sustainable jobs to me is not as important as the sort of wages

[2:18:10] associated with those jobs.

[2:18:12] Because there's a big difference between 550 jobs at $40,000 a year and 550 jobs at $85,000

[2:18:18] a year, right?

[2:18:19] And I think we're trying to aim for a certain kind of job here that is not necessarily

[2:18:24] a lower-paying job.

[2:18:26] Another thing of the additional investment in the network, including other sources of funding,

[2:18:30] that's just not that relevant to me, and I don't know why we would necessarily want to include it.

[2:18:35] I get to understand why would be good for the network to get to the money, but I don't know why it's important for us.

[2:18:41] And then the other ones, I think, are fine.

[2:18:42] They have building permanent activity in the assessment growth,

[2:18:46] not the most exciting of metrics, but reasonable ones.

[2:18:50] And so I guess it's really my questions around squaring up those four that at the beginning

[2:18:53] in the five that are later, and then the bit around number of jobs, and I might be the only person who cares about this, but I just want to ask that.

[2:19:04] Okay, so through the chair, in the, in schedule A, the front part where the letters are all the, again, it's,

[2:19:20] So, and I was looking at where the reporting was in the numbers side of it, the clause side of it.

[2:19:27] These are the recycles here. So, in the recycling B, that is really restating what the strategic plan and the LMICN was when it came forward.

[2:19:36] And so, basically what we're saying is this is our understanding of what you are bringing forward.

[2:19:42] So then when we get down to a recital O, the economic metrics,

[2:19:50] that's what we had outlined that we would intend to assess and so in the focus of the day when we originally went forward with this was jobs and

[2:20:04] and leverage investments. So what other investments are we getting in? And so that was really

[2:20:10] where the focus was. So I mean as we go through over time we can probably add to that or request

[2:20:17] more information that provision does exist in here that we can ask for more other information

[2:20:21] that we want. When you get down to the annual report that is in number nine in the actual agreement

[2:20:29] side and it ties it back into those economic metrics so that's basically what

[2:20:36] then your report right now will be tied to in terms of what we'll be delivering.

[2:20:40] What we can do is work with them to draw in numbers in terms of wages and things like that,

[2:20:46] the wages or the average wage and the individuals. So we can try and tie some of those things in

[2:20:50] and I'll work with the network to see if we can do that.

[2:20:56] I don't have any additional speakers.

[2:20:58] We'll open the vote here. We'll look for a mover in a seconder.

[2:21:02] Move back down to our Helmer, seconded by a council event host. Any further discussion?

[2:21:06] We're voting.

[2:21:17] Closing the vote, the motion carries.

[2:21:19] 13 with one request.

[2:21:22] Okay, let's move then to item 9.

[2:21:24] Scheduled item. This is smart city strategy terms of reference.

[2:21:34] Mr. Fleming, did you want to introduce this?

[2:21:38] Thank you, Your Worship. I'll be brief, but I just want to point out that this is an initiative that cuts right across

[2:21:44] of the organization, and I think that is reflected by the fact that the group that is leading

[2:21:51] this involves planning services, engineering services, information technology, government

[2:22:00] in VA's own, as well as, sorry, government liaison, as well as economic development.

[2:22:07] And I imagine that at some point it's going to touch all of the different service areas.

[2:22:13] So it is something that certainly is being worked on by a broad group and will affect a broad

[2:22:23] cross-section of the organization.

[2:22:26] There are also a number of external partners that have been involved in the project

[2:22:30] to date.

[2:22:31] So with that, I'll head over to Mr. Galway.

[2:22:37] Thank you.

[2:22:37] Through you, Mr. Chair, first I want to say a quick thank you to a variety of people who have

[2:22:44] instrumental in pulling this together, Mr. Daley at the end, Edward Saldo from the Engineering

[2:22:50] Department. Tonight we had, they were in the audience, unfortunately they had to go, but

[2:22:55] the chair of large net, Peter Gilbert and Jeff Greath and Elena Corsac, who is the director of IT

[2:23:03] for London Hydro. LEDC could not be here, but they are also part of the team, Larry McKinnon. David

[2:23:10] who's part of the Smart City or Smart Campus Initiative at a Western, and then staff members

[2:23:15] Mark Johnson, Jersey, Smolleric, Ryan Nemis, Lauren Suley, and Alex, Maletus, from our shop

[2:23:21] along with Kate Graham's area. I have also played an integral role in pulling this together

[2:23:27] and bringing it forward and we'll continue to play a role and we'll talk about the partnership

[2:23:31] in second. But first, we produced a video and I'm just going to show that to you now.

[2:23:41] On a daily basis, the world experiences unprecedented changes.

[2:23:47] 180,000 people are moving into cities every single day

[2:23:52] due to urbanization and rapid population growth.

[2:23:56] This is the equivalent of adding the entire population of London

[2:23:59] to urban centers every two days.

[2:24:03] Competition among cities continues to grow environmentally,

[2:24:07] socially and economically.

[2:24:10] The cities that embrace technology and modernization will emerge as the leaders see.

[2:24:17] This year alone, we will have 4.9 billion connected things.

[2:24:23] Though this number is large, currently only 1% of things that can be connected are connected.

[2:24:30] By 2020, experts agree that we will have over 50 billion internet connected things.

[2:24:36] Imagine the possibilities of connecting people with constraints.

[2:24:42] There are new services and richer experiences, exceptional economic opportunity,

[2:24:48] and considerable improvement in overall quality of life to the residents of the city.

[2:24:54] This is smart facilities.

[2:25:01] In London, there are many potential smart cities technologies that can help to improve our quality of life.

[2:25:07] Imagine transit stops, with large touch screens where you can find local points of interest,

[2:25:14] current events, get real time reading information.

[2:25:18] Imagine using Wi-Fi and even having the possibility of charging your smart phone all

[2:25:23] the while you wait for transit. Imagine knowing where there are available parking spaces on

[2:25:29] street and off street in real time, cutting down your need to drive around the block to find

[2:25:36] And imagine using your smart phone to pay for that parking spot from the exact time you

[2:25:41] park your heart until the moment you drag away.

[2:25:45] Imagine an out-fetched museum up-to-date on all city projects, initiatives and programs in

[2:25:51] your needs.

[2:25:52] One place that gives you access to all the pertinent information and upcoming changes to your

[2:25:58] such as planning applications, street state and park improvements, and new recreational programs.

[2:26:07] Smart Cities is about getting information on the flow of services, on noise pollution, traffic, and weather conditions.

[2:26:16] Allowing cities to streamline their operations reduces costs and also improve economic sustainability.

[2:26:24] We're investing in smart living, smart infrastructure, a smart economy, and smart decisions.

[2:26:32] We can build a city of connective citizens.

[2:26:35] Technology is for people. Technology is there for us to use it.

[2:26:42] Technology is for improving people's lives.

[2:26:45] Smart cities represents places where people want to live by community and connected.

[2:27:03] I'm going to jump in and talk a little bit about a couple of examples of what's happening around

[2:27:09] the world in other places, and I'll note that I'm going to take you to some far off places,

[2:27:16] but technology knows no bounds and remembering that like everything in technology it's scalable

[2:27:21] and has the opportunity to work in our neighborhood at the right type of scale.

[2:27:28] In Barcelona, which is probably the most noted smart city in the world, presently, they have

[2:27:34] a variety of apps and applications that their current local government is using, particularly

[2:27:40] Barcelona, contactless.

[2:27:42] This is the ability to walk around town and tap your smartphone next to a light pole.

[2:27:47] And I'll tell you exactly what's happening in and around that light pole at the local restaurants,

[2:27:51] at the local theaters, where the next transit connection is within so many hundreds of meters.

[2:27:57] And the ability to also, if it's not tapping through near-field communications, you can also take pictures of the post and it would give you the same information.

[2:28:06] They have a CDOS system that allows residents that takes real-time data that residents input as well as real-time data that they are collecting through their sensor system.

[2:28:16] And the city OS then puts out or collects the data, puts it together, and creates real-time

[2:28:23] simulations to help with decision-making, and can per attempts to predict future or anticipated

[2:28:29] problems to assist with the decision-making through the data that they've collected.

[2:28:35] In Boston they have initiated a new office of urban mechanics, and this office is working

[2:28:41] of RIDE projects, just to show you the scale in Boston, there are a project now in their

[2:28:47] parks where it's called Sufa, and they put an urban sofa in each park, then allows you to

[2:28:53] charge cell phones, two cell phones at one time, and collects environmental data on air quality

[2:28:59] and other type things that then gets put back into the system and allows city staff to make

[2:29:04] decisions on issues related to the environment. And it also has Citizen Connect, which allows

[2:29:10] people to input data directly into the work maintenance system and through that, if a

[2:29:16] light goes out, it goes right into the work maintenance system and that system then informs the

[2:29:21] people who are required to find a solution to that problem. In Nashville, they use an application called

[2:29:31] InclusiveX and that takes open data, they're open data initiative through the Metro

[2:29:37] national government and turns the data into readable data for the local citizens takes the

[2:29:43] takes that raw down and turns it into charts and applications so that people can use that data in a

[2:29:49] conversing with their local government. And lastly in Chicago there's a partnership between the city of Chicago

[2:29:56] and the urban center for computation and data.

[2:30:00] Your way of things. This is a project that has sensors on every lightpost in Chicago, and then

[2:30:06] can feed information to somebody walking by. Is there an IC patch on the sidewalk up in front of

[2:30:11] them?

[2:30:13] Is there an event that's going to be occurring? Is data is a rapid transit coming near

[2:30:20] them if they need to connect? What's in particular? They highlight that they can send people

[2:30:26] information of the most busiest path to walk at night time.

[2:30:30] So if you want information about how to get to a transit station,

[2:30:34] the data will be collected and then sent to your application

[2:30:36] and your smartphone telling you, this is the most safe

[2:30:39] and best way to walk to that transit station.

[2:30:43] So that's what's going around just a small sample.

[2:30:47] One of the interesting things about smart cities

[2:30:49] is it's so broad, it can mean anything to anyone.

[2:30:51] And so we're hoping to go through a process to narrow that down.

[2:30:58] A lot of the issues or a lot of the smart technology that you're seeing related to smart cities

[2:31:03] is really driven at its finding a solution to a particular problem like in Barcelona.

[2:31:08] They found out that 40% of all traffic congestion is caused by people looking for parking spots.

[2:31:14] And so they decided to put sensors in every un-street parking spot.

[2:31:17] then loud people to find spots on the spot, sorry, that's bad, grammar, but ability to move

[2:31:25] and be able to get to that spot and reduce overall traffic congestion. We have grouped these types

[2:31:32] of things into four categories as you'll note in the staff report, and so we believe between

[2:31:38] smart living, smart infrastructures, smart economy and smart governance and decisions,

[2:31:42] We can focus on things that allow us to define what we need and move forward and then be able to have a strategy to look at options and projects that will help us implement some of these smart technologies over time.

[2:32:01] And so smart living is more about public engagement, how to converse with the public, smart infrastructure, I think speaks for itself, smart economy.

[2:32:10] This is about supporting a lot of those elements around the technological components of the economy.

[2:32:16] And of course, using the data we collect, how do we manage it?

[2:32:20] Because eventually we're going to be able to collect lots of data, so how do we manage it?

[2:32:24] And how do we use it to assist in our decision-making?

[2:32:29] The scope of work, as you will note in the staff report, is broken into three phases.

[2:32:35] The first phase is pulling together a public engagement component and doing an assessment

[2:32:41] of where we are right now. What level are we at right now? Doing analysis of the best practices

[2:32:46] that are out there and then finding the gap between what we're doing right now and what is

[2:32:51] the best practice out there. From there, in the second phase, we will pull that data

[2:32:57] and the data we've garnered through the public engagement component and put that together to

[2:33:04] facilitate a draft of a smart city strategy that will allow us to pinpoint our focus

[2:33:09] of where we need to move forward. And then phase three is building implementation plan because

[2:33:16] smart cities can be as little as putting a sofa with a ability to charge a phone at a park to

[2:33:22] doing some significantly larger-scale public projects, creating a list of those things that

[2:33:30] will drive the implementation of the strategy that we've come up with and costing so that

[2:33:35] we can sit down and have a conversation that Council can then have a conversation about

[2:33:41] what they wish to implement and here's the costs that are associated with implementing it.

[2:33:48] It's a partnership, large net is put $75,000, and that large net includes the hospitals,

[2:33:57] the college, the university, the university, and other smaller public scale entities.

[2:34:04] Large net is the service provider for internet, for these entities.

[2:34:09] ITS and planning services have then put in the remaining 50,000 to make a total of 125,000 to initiate the project.

[2:34:19] And over the project team, as I noted earlier in my thank you's, has a wide variety,

[2:34:26] I apologize there is one group missing the community, an economic innovation group under

[2:34:30] Kate Graham, but also involved and of course environment engineering information technology.

[2:34:37] So that is a quick overview of the project and the direction we're hoping to take, so I'm open

[2:34:44] for questions.

[2:34:46] Thank you, Scalaway. Okay, colleagues. You've seen the presentation. You've read the report. Any questions or comments at this time?

[2:34:53] Definitely a few.

[2:34:55] I'll be brief. I think this is absolutely very much parallel with any of the things we've been doing over the last four or five years.

[2:35:06] And ironically enough, you know, the planning department is playing a central role, and I think technology plays a central role in this well.

[2:35:14] I know that both the Chamber of Commerce and Western are very excited about this initiative.

[2:35:22] There's discussion with a significant commercial venture establishing a smart city lab at Western that we hope will come to fruition.

[2:35:30] And that will provide us with, as I say, excuse me,

[2:35:36] was some significant resources and advantages.

[2:35:42] But, you know, Mr. Mayor, one of the things

[2:35:43] that my research on this whole initiative that I've seen

[2:35:46] is it's really interesting to me.

[2:35:49] They talk about generations, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0,

[2:35:53] and God knows what 4.0 might be.

[2:35:55] But they haven't gotten there yet.

[2:35:57] But what's interesting to me is 3.0 is where the city is the co-creator.

[2:36:03] 2.0 is the city, it leads it, but it's tech enabled.

[2:36:09] And I just think of our London plan and how it was a co-creation.

[2:36:14] It was a ground up, if you will, versus a top down initiative.

[2:36:22] and this really sets us up, and I looked at your strategy and it's like, oh, we already

[2:36:28] got this kind of in place, a different subject matter, but we've already done this sort

[2:36:34] of thing significantly, and so I think we're very much poised to be able to engage.

[2:36:41] I am interested and will be interested to see not so much at a city level, but I think

[2:36:48] It's interesting, we talked in our strategic plan about London being a city of neighborhoods.

[2:36:56] And I think there's something, maybe just my intuition is livingston, around neighborhoods

[2:37:04] as being sort of those connecting points.

[2:37:09] And what that might look is you populate the data into the technology at a neighborhood level,

[2:37:16] versus at a global city level.

[2:37:19] And I think it might be fascinating to see how that could become

[2:37:23] an engine for some of the neighborhood initiatives

[2:37:28] as the Strength and Lent in Neighborhoods initiatives comes forward.

[2:37:33] And using that data at a neighborhood level,

[2:37:36] you always got to pick what your level of population

[2:37:40] when you're looking at data basis is.

[2:37:42] And I think the neighborhood for London may be that

[2:37:46] That level because there's what 50 45 40 42 42 I stand corrected. So I think this is brilliant

[2:37:55] I'll be fascinated to see where it goes, but also this isn't just about cool

[2:38:00] This is about economic development and strategic advantage and for small businesses and for the tech sector and I was talking to someone last week

[2:38:10] and they're very excited about

[2:38:13] about this initiative with some of the Wi-Fi stuff and some of the cabling that's happening

[2:38:21] in terms of moving our city forward was smart technology but as a smart city.

[2:38:29] Councillor Russia.

[2:38:33] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess anyone who reads this or just see this presentation would

[2:38:37] get excited if there's smart enough that they want to be part of a smart city. So I fully agree

[2:38:43] everything. I'm not fully agree with everything that comes to the

[2:38:47] Hebrew said.

[2:38:51] I love it. One of the things that, well, there are many

[2:38:55] things that concerns me because I don't know where we're going to get the

[2:38:58] money to do this, but we're going to have to find it. However, the one thing I

[2:39:01] want to ask about is the infrastructure. Because we talk about a lot of

[2:39:06] things, you talk about large net, comes to the Hebrew, talk about the

[2:39:13] There's some basic infrastructure that is needed in order to be able to accommodate such

[2:39:19] as a network of fibroptics or anything like that in order to down below, I'm just asking

[2:39:28] that question because in all days that's what you need it, is there something that you don't

[2:39:34] need to make this a complex list?

[2:39:40] Well, one of the things is technology is constantly changing, so we don't know what tomorrow will bring.

[2:39:48] But certainly, don't just think of it in terms of fiber optics, but there's all the components around sensors.

[2:39:56] Managing infrastructure, our current infrastructure, and the report you'll notice there's a list of things that we are already doing right now.

[2:40:04] And so, don't just focus on the fiber optics, there is a network's in place, and certainly

[2:40:13] I might turn it over to Matt to speak more appropriately about technology, I just know

[2:40:20] how to operate my mobile phone at this point, but Matt might be able to help out a little

[2:40:24] more.

[2:40:26] Thank you, and through the chair.

[2:40:28] I can't stop sure it brings up a very good question.

[2:40:30] ITS is currently right now working with Rogers to create an access point, name, network.

[2:40:38] And in some cases, we'll remove us away from our need for fiber.

[2:40:42] We will never completely leave the need for fiber for backhaul.

[2:40:46] But what this allows us to do is, this allows us to leverage a personalized cell network.

[2:40:52] So for all those sensors, they would have a SIM card in them, then communicate up to the

[2:40:57] network and then back into our servers and our databases. So some of that work is already being done.

[2:41:04] So when it comes to some of that infrastructure stuff, there will undoubtedly be costs

[2:41:08] associated with this, depending on the scope that comes back associated with the gap.

[2:41:14] But to Councillor Sussher's question about the infrastructure, there will always be a need for

[2:41:19] fiber for backhaul, but there's also very interesting opportunities right now around those personal

[2:41:25] sell networks that the city is seeking to leverage right now. Thank you.

[2:41:31] Well, I'm really happy to get it answered. It's the chair because one of the things that I always

[2:41:36] fair is that we, every time we talk this language and we talk about that book hall infrastructure,

[2:41:45] people may think that we are talking from one end of London to the other, but it's really,

[2:41:49] those facilities are only really in the dumb town. And I'd like to see something like this if we're

[2:41:54] talk about smart city. We're talking about we're encompassing all of London from one

[2:42:00] boundary to the other and I know that we have the region that work that might be

[2:42:04] able to help facilitate this but I just wanted to be sure. Now my last question is

[2:42:11] that ultimately how is it going to be financed or is that a silly question at this

[2:42:18] point in time?

[2:42:22] Well ultimately I think the first step is to find out what we need

[2:42:26] to do to find out what exactly the projects are that we as a community and use a council

[2:42:32] wish to undertake. And so that's why that implementation plans put in place with the in the

[2:42:41] terms of references to cost those elements out so that our conversation can happen about the

[2:42:47] cost of doing these things and what projects then are the most beneficial for us to move forward

[2:42:53] in investing in the smart city.

[2:42:57] Mr. Zidabon did you want to say something?

[2:42:59] Yeah, I just wanted to try and then on that one as well and when it comes to the cost

[2:43:04] through the chair, we have some fabulous businesses in this community and some of those businesses

[2:43:11] might very well want to get into the smart city world and in that regard, they might look for

[2:43:20] assistance at some point in time, they may not be looking for our money, but they may

[2:43:26] be looking for our partnership to work with them to move their businesses forward in

[2:43:32] such a manner that we can do it without infusing cash.

[2:43:37] So I think we need to keep our minds open.

[2:43:40] There might be things that we might do that cost something, and there might be things that we

[2:43:45] do as ambassadors with our business community to facilitate London being put on the map

[2:43:51] and the business world perspective in terms of smart cities.

[2:43:57] Councillor Morgan.

[2:44:00] Well, thanks for the presentation.

[2:44:03] Through the chair, I just want to make a couple of comments and the overall strategy.

[2:44:07] First, I think this is a step in the right direction, but quite frankly, this is one of those things

[2:44:13] where if you're going to do it, you're going to have to change the culture of not just

[2:44:18] this institution, but the businesses and the policy framework out there.

[2:44:26] I know that you say, we'll come up with a plan, we'll start with no cost solutions and kickstart off the implementation plan,

[2:44:32] where this has been successful in the cities that you've named.

[2:44:35] They've set up a structure to try to embrace this, whether it's embossed in the newer room in canics,

[2:44:40] setting up a department that goes out and figures out how to implement and do this stuff, regardless of the cost.

[2:44:46] In some cases, they're cost-free, and they're doing really cool things there beyond what you mentioned.

[2:44:51] And some of it is about policy framework and a approach of the organization.

[2:44:55] I'll give you an example.

[2:44:56] They have an app that requires...

[2:45:02] The City sends back a picture of the crew fixing it, right? And saying, hey, thanks for that. And that's like a connecting with people type thing.

[2:45:11] But you can have all the technology in the world if you're not going to embrace it in a approach it in innovative ways. You're not going to achieve the maximum result.

[2:45:19] And, you know, there's a reason why like dominoes is testing, you know, delivering pizzas by drones.

[2:45:28] And then I'm not doing it here.

[2:45:29] It's because we don't have a permissive policy framework for a private business to innovate and become part of this foreign city.

[2:45:35] So the one thing that's missing this report is if you want to go in this direction,

[2:45:39] how are we going to create a permissive policy framework?

[2:45:42] How are we going to be ahead of the curve so that we're not spending money?

[2:45:45] but we're allowing innovation to happen from the private business where we don't have

[2:45:50] unintentional barriers because of the way that we simply have always run, you know,

[2:45:54] our policies, guidelines, bylaws, and framework, and who in the city is going to look at those

[2:46:00] and provide a permission framework. So I like the concept. I think it's, you know, we don't want

[2:46:06] to get too far behind on this stuff quite frankly. We are light years behind other cities in where

[2:46:12] we could get to. We've got great people on staff who can start to think about this, but I think

[2:46:17] if you want to come back and do this right, you've got to think pretty big and you've got

[2:46:21] to think innovative well beyond the scope of what you have here and into upper missive policy

[2:46:28] framework as well.

[2:46:31] Briefly?

[2:46:34] Thank you for that, and maybe it didn't come through as well as it could have, but the intention

[2:46:37] was the smart governance and decision-making element, was to talk about our policy framework

[2:46:44] And of course, we have some of that in the London plan as well, but certainly we can take a look and add more.

[2:46:51] Then I would add it right into the bullet under smart governance decisions, because it's not clear there.

[2:46:57] It's not one of the items.

[2:46:58] I mean, it says government structures for private and public partnerships to operate potential municipal assets,

[2:47:05] but it's not talking about us really taking a look at the barriers that policy can create to that sort of innovation.

[2:47:13] if you want to be a place you're going to leverage this if we're going to build this and we're going to do it the way that you you you you but the grand vision

[2:47:19] then you got to allow the private sector to take advantage of it in some effective way and we may as well say that very clearly

[2:47:26] Okay, fair enough, Councillor Schwerp

[2:47:30] I have to admit through you Mr. Chair this is one of those things when I receive it I read it I look at it I get it sort of that it's important but I can't appreciate I suppose on a day-to-day basis

[2:47:41] how it's going to help the people that elected me because I can tell you that on a day-to-day

[2:47:46] basis, their priorities are not the things that you've talked about. They don't want to go

[2:47:51] tap a phone on a poll to do something. They want me to do concrete things. I get very skeptical

[2:47:58] about this stuff and one of my predecessors say, well, what happens, Phil, as you get what's called

[2:48:03] approval creep? You get the terms of reference out there. Administration starts working on it.

[2:48:09] They come over the plan with a bill attached to it and then they say, well, you sort of set us along in this course, so now we want to spend a whack on money.

[2:48:17] So I think from my point of view this does not excite me. I'm sorry.

[2:48:22] I get it, but I just think there's so many priorities in our city right now that we have to cross before we start tapping our phones on polls that I'm sorry.

[2:48:33] I get it, but I don't have the level of excitement that you want me to have and I'm sorry about that.

[2:48:40] So when it comes back, if you're going to get someone like me on board and the people who voted for me,

[2:48:46] you're going to have to do what Councillor Morgan said.

[2:48:48] You're going to have to practically show people how this is going to make their lives better day to day.

[2:48:55] And I think that's important.

[2:48:56] In Ward 6, if you put an internet sofa in a park, people think the students have gone crazy and taken over the park or something.

[2:49:03] I mean, this has to hit ground floor, and I wish I could be more enthusiastic than not.

[2:49:09] Councillor Benholst.

[2:49:14] Thank you Mr. Chair on through you. I like that Councillor Morgan brought up innovation.

[2:49:17] Innovations are very exciting. I remember 2001 working on smart homes, and we were programming

[2:49:24] technologies that were just coming off the lines and combining things that had never been

[2:49:29] put together before, in my third year in university, I invented a chemical process, and so the one thing I'd like to say is that when you do your search for best practices and your gap analysis is that you don't always have to look to other people like there's the possibility that you can just come up with something yourself, but often I see that we're going to look and see what other municipalities are going to do.

[2:49:59] as somebody who think is an innovator and likes innovation, I want us to just start thinking

[2:50:05] on our own as well as use your imagination because if we make up our own things we can

[2:50:13] capitalize on them just copying somebody else isn't quite just good so leave yourself

[2:50:19] open to that because you know it's certainly possible I think we've got excellent creative

[2:50:26] smart people here that and I don't want to have us be stuck in the wrong mindset that doesn't

[2:50:34] doesn't allow us to leapfrog ahead of other people's ideas so thanks okay I have no additional

[2:50:41] speakers at this time other than Councillor Helmer thanks very much so you know I like this

[2:50:50] approach I think Councillor Morgan is is very right in saying that one of the areas we have to look at

[2:50:56] is the policy framework, and what kind of regulations we've got on businesses that are trying

[2:51:02] to do work in this area already, and I know from some of them that how we'll let people cut

[2:51:09] or not cut into the roadway and lay fiber optic is an area that they've got some concerns

[2:51:13] with.

[2:51:14] It drives up the costs the way we want them to do it, they could do more of it if we let them

[2:51:18] do it in a different way, other cities do do it in a different way.

[2:51:21] So when you talk about doing municipal best practices review and that kind of piece, I know it's

[2:51:26] in our usual plan to look at that, I know that there's lots of policies in the London

[2:51:31] planner on smart cities that support that.

[2:51:33] But I do think that needs to part of the phase one of the terms of reference and I don't

[2:51:38] know to what extent it actually needs to be amended because I think the language is there,

[2:51:42] I just want to make sure that we do it.

[2:51:44] The other piece is that we're kind of dancing around the issue around fiber optic infrastructure

[2:51:48] throughout the city.

[2:51:52] And one of my colleagues is asking about it, you know,

[2:51:54] I don't focus too much in the fiber. I want to focus a lot on the fiber.

[2:51:58] And this is, you know, right now the way I would describe how we look at this is that

[2:52:03] this is something that private business is going to provide in the city.

[2:52:06] And our responsibility really is to,

[2:52:09] there's a little bit of conduit space somewhere in the road allowance.

[2:52:13] And people can use it or not when we happen to have the road opener or not.

[2:52:17] And when we build new communities we have some requirements around making that connection available to those new communities.

[2:52:25] My concern is that this is just a fundamental piece of the economy now, and it's really important to get people's goods to market.

[2:52:31] It's also important for attracting and retaining the kind of people who make good incomes and work and high growth industries that are connected to the internet.

[2:52:39] And it's not good enough just to have it at work.

[2:52:42] You know, you want to go home and have really fast affordable internet at the same person who does that for their job wants to have it at home as well

[2:52:48] And it's something that I think we need to have a city-wide

[2:52:52] It's also very

[2:52:53] It can be very expensive depending how you do it and I'm not convinced that it needs to be a municipality that led

[2:52:59] Venture, which is how it has done in other places

[2:53:03] My old hometown of Braisebridge is that a joint venture with six municipalities most of them smaller than Braisebridge

[2:53:09] that to provide fiber optic internet service throughout the entire region

[2:53:12] at a cost of $70 per month

[2:53:15] uh... and that's a made self-financing

[2:53:17] and uh... and it's real amazing uh... economic advantage for them in that region

[2:53:21] uh... so i don't know we have to go that route i think we can probably do it by just

[2:53:25] supporting and changing the policy framework

[2:53:28] to allow uh... probably business to be a bit more competitive here

[2:53:32] the problem we have generally in Canada and i think this is why brace purchase

[2:53:35] being able to do things that other cities have not, is that they've been ignored by some of the big operators,

[2:53:41] and they had to figure out themselves because no one else is going to do it for them.

[2:53:45] And now we've got a situation in London where a lot of people have pretty good internet access if you have money.

[2:53:51] And if you don't, you probably have pretty junky internet access, and it's probably something you would like faster and cheaper.

[2:53:59] And it is possible to do it faster and cheaper, but it will require us to look at it as a different thing.

[2:54:04] If we keep looking at it as, it's some kind of like thing you may be, yeah, it would be better if it was a little bit faster.

[2:54:10] That's not right.

[2:54:11] You know, it's just like having a road or having power. This is how fundamental it is to getting things done and growing our economy.

[2:54:18] So, I think this is falling a bit short, frankly, on that front. You know, I don't think I don't see really clear articulation on what are we trying to achieve there.

[2:54:25] even in the sort of phase one, like looking at what's the situation now,

[2:54:29] what are people paying now, how faster this speeds now,

[2:54:31] who are the providers, what parts of the city have good access and which don't,

[2:54:36] where they're opportunities to improve.

[2:54:37] Like, I think that should be part of our smart cities.

[2:54:40] A lot of it seems to be from the perspective of

[2:54:43] the municipality as I need to acquire data, I want to get sensors, and I get all that,

[2:54:48] and that's, I think, reasonable good reasons to do all those things.

[2:54:53] But what's not there is, this is an infrastructure piece we've got to be providing in the city.

[2:54:57] What is the current state of that infrastructure in the way it's been provided so far?

[2:55:01] How can we change our policies or the way we do our other infrastructure pieces?

[2:55:05] Complete streets, all that stuff to make sure that we can give the private sector what they need to make it happen.

[2:55:12] And I know we've got in a community economic roadmap, a piece in there, but working with the developers to make sure this stuff works out, which is good.

[2:55:19] We've got a lot of these things

[2:55:22] But I'm not sure that this one is is really embracing that piece so I'm fine with the smart city strategy

[2:55:27] But I don't think it's covering all of the all of the work we need to do and I think there's other stuff we need to do on the infrastructure side

[2:55:34] That we have to pursue elsewhere

[2:55:38] Okay, thank you. We're into our second round at Councillor Morgan in banhol. Yes, I just want to make clear that you know, I came across fairly

[2:55:48] a brace of perhaps, I don't know what the term is.

[2:55:51] I'm very supportive of this, and I guess the way that I spoke was because I think

[2:55:56] that we can, I think we just think about this in a lot more aggressive way, and I think

[2:56:00] if you want to do it, let's not go for a plan that might maybe work, and we'll decide what

[2:56:06] we're going to do it or not, but engaging that private sector and creating a culture of

[2:56:12] I think it's got to be a parallel strategy to this, like Councilor Helmer said, and I think when you start to talk about infrastructure, and this is being digital infrastructure, then when we get into future reports on this, I'm hoping I see some other names to do with intergovernmental relations, and we start to think about when we go for infrastructure asks of the federal government, who's going to move into that phase the way they campaigned and what they put their platform on, that this is the type of stuff that we want to try to be innovative about, and push to say, this is infrastructure.

[2:56:42] structure for us. This is, you know, like the other things that we're asking for and it's a parallel

[2:56:46] ask within that envelope as well.

[2:56:50] How's your event host?

[2:56:53] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just wanted to support Councillor Helmer with a number that I heard

[2:56:59] while talking to as somebody in the tech industry that a fast connection can mean so much to them.

[2:57:07] Especially a startup because just in terms of communications, might save a thousand dollars a

[2:57:14] If you can, if you can do your communications through streaming and that's a, that's a, that's a big deal for a company to just starting out. So quite valuable.

[2:57:24] And again to the point that Councillor Morgan had made kind of going bigger going home, deciding to be a leader.

[2:57:33] That's, of course, that's what London Hydro did.

[2:57:35] their board decided we're losing IT people and our approach should just be

[2:57:43] we need to be at the front the best so this is the most exciting place to work

[2:57:48] and that happened people want to stay there and they are at at the leading edge

[2:57:54] so you may have some catching up to do but you can always do a little leap

[2:57:58] progging and I hope we do it thank you great I have no additional speakers

[2:58:03] Mr. Gallaway, thank you for the presentation. We will call the question now.

[2:58:06] It's been moved by Councillor O'Shaer, seconded by Councillor Zafin.

[2:58:10] We're voting.

[2:58:27] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 to 0.

[2:58:32] Great. Colleagues, let's turn our attention and then do consent item.

[2:58:36] We need to deal with consent items. 2, 3, 4 and 5.

[2:58:40] We could deal with those collectively unless you'd like to pull one or more Councillor Park.

[2:58:45] I don't need it pulled, but I'd like to speak to number two.

[2:58:47] Speaking to two. Okay. And the others. Do you want to pull three or just speak three?

[2:58:54] Pull three. Okay. We'll do a three separately. Councillor Hummer. I'd like to pull all of them.

[2:59:04] Okay. We'll deal with them one to time. Councillor Park, you're up for two.

[2:59:11] Thank you very much. And this report, I think, might be one of the most significant

[2:59:14] that we have going for it as a council with regard to building bridges with our Aboriginal

[2:59:19] populations in the city, and I just want to speak not only as a collective, but as an individual

[2:59:26] counselor alongside with Councilor Rand Holes have really reached into the NAMRI in Friendship

[2:59:32] Center and has really been participating in two really outstanding projects that they have

[2:59:38] working last week. We attended a feasibility workshop with regard to homework bound, which is a

[2:59:49] Aboriginal mothers and their children, and it just makes me so proud that NAMRIANT is

[2:59:55] going to the next level and bringing that project here to London because of

[3:00:00] Those people's lives, and at the end of the project in Toronto where this project is originally from, they had 80% positive outcomes with this project where Aboriginal mothers were housed, and their children were housed, and they were gainfully employed. That's the 80% success rate, which is outstanding.

[3:00:20] And in turn, the other project that NAMRINE is working on is to reach out to the business community to ensure that they have strong relationships with employers and job training organizations that are helpful with urban Aboriginal population.

[3:00:39] So I think that this is something we certainly need to move forward on.

[3:00:43] Thank you, Councillor. I have Councillor Hopkins, statement and capacity.

[3:00:48] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was very pleased to to receive this report. I do have a couple of questions and one of the questions I have is about the consulting process. I understand that first nations will be consulted and report will be coming forward.

[3:01:07] And given that, will there be an opportunity for Council to hear First Nations views on the report?

[3:01:17] I know there's probably not a public participation process here, but I would like to know if there is going to be an opportunity that we will hear response from First Nations as to their comments on the report coming to us.

[3:01:40] Thank you for the question, so the main recommendation in this report is that we'd be very actively engaged in the FCM work and a part of the scope of what that group will be doing is direct connections.

[3:01:52] So as an example, FCM just recently reached out to us. I vote holding a joint workshop with one of.

[3:01:57] It's with the Chippewa of the TEM sometime in the New Year, which council members would be invited to. So there may be opportunities through working with FCM for us to have those direct connections.

[3:02:07] Good. I'm glad to hear that. As a counselor, it's going to be important for me to hear

[3:02:12] exactly from them with their views. The second question that I have through you, Mr. Chair,

[3:02:19] is the part here on the education component. I understand that I guess there will be staff training

[3:02:29] opportunities once that education piece is put in place but will there be an

[3:02:33] opportunity for the Londoners to become educated? I know as a counselor I would

[3:02:39] like to know a little bit more and I think of the more education we put out to

[3:02:45] the public the greater understanding and reconciliation we will have.

[3:02:51] I'm again through the chair so you'll note that the FCM working group identified

[3:02:55] five recommendations specifically that they would like to advance as a group. And one of them

[3:03:00] was the piece on education. I think it was number 57 of the recommendations list. So there may

[3:03:06] be opportunities for us to work with FCM to develop training or participate in programs that

[3:03:10] would be useful for city staff as far as the broader community piece. Completely agree. I think that's

[3:03:15] the intention of this entire process of anything we can do to help advance awareness in the community

[3:03:20] of this process and its report is a benefit.

[3:03:24] Councillor Zipman.

[3:03:27] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[3:03:30] And I very glad to hear about a lot of the work.

[3:03:33] Obviously, as one of the, as one of City Council's members representatives on FCM.

[3:03:39] I know one of the committees that I said on issues such as this have been talked about,

[3:03:42] and I know I'm assuming Deputy Mayor Cassidy will likely speak a bit about this.

[3:03:46] She's been involved quite heavily in doing some work on this as well, which I think is great.

[3:03:51] I know I had the fortune as well last Friday to be at an event with the mayor of the Deputy Mayor for at Loza, and hearing from Justice and Claire speaks specifically about the truth of reconciliation commission, and it was very, very interesting hearing from him and what he had to say, obviously.

[3:04:08] One thing that I guess I feel is a bit missing from this is, while there's lots of work being done at the FCM level, this report does only speak much in terms of what we're doing locally here in London.

[3:04:18] And we as a council could possibly do, and obviously there is some work through the FCM working group that may come to us.

[3:04:24] But one thing I want to ask to the mayor to staff, we have a lot of items here that we're looked at to be considered as action items for us to pursue,

[3:04:32] but none of them are recommendations that we're looking at.

[3:04:34] And so I wonder why none of those are here as recommendations today,

[3:04:38] or why there was not much of a discussion around why or why not we would be taking up some of those actions.

[3:04:45] Through the chair, so thank you, that's a great question.

[3:04:47] We did with the direction of SPPC do a consult internally on all of the 94 recommendations in the report to identify the ones that would have a municipal impact.

[3:04:57] You'll note in the report that we identified five that there is a municipal impact for and the list is very similar to the list that FCM's group is working on.

[3:05:06] So what we're recommending here is that we investigated those things as a part of the FCM work, but not necessarily independently as a city.

[3:05:17] Don't be mere casting.

[3:05:19] Thank you.

[3:05:20] I just want to, through you, Mr. Chair, thank you, Ms. Graham and the rest of the staff that

[3:05:26] I worked on this report.

[3:05:27] I thought it was a really thorough and a really good report.

[3:05:32] In the report, it talks about the mandate of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and I really

[3:05:37] think, you know, the second bullet point, where it says to guide an inspire process of truth

[3:05:41] and healing, leading toward reconciliation within Aboriginal families and then it goes on

[3:05:45] say, and Canadians generally, and the process to work, to renew relationships on the

[3:05:50] basis of inclusion, mutual understanding, and respect.

[3:05:53] And I really see that that's necessary for London to respond appropriately and towards

[3:06:02] this goal of mutual understanding and respect.

[3:06:07] In London, we have almost 2% of our inhabitants identify themselves as Aboriginal, and as

[3:06:14] Councilors, I can say we have a lot of, we're doing a lot through FCM to address some of

[3:06:22] the issues as well and I have the honor and privilege to sit on a urban Aboriginal working

[3:06:28] group through FCM and I get a chance to see what other municipalities are doing and what we

[3:06:34] can do here in London to make our relationships stronger and better.

[3:06:41] We also have the three first nations in our immediate area of the Chippewa's of the TEMS

[3:06:45] First Nation, the United Nation of the TEMS in the Munti Dalloway First Nation.

[3:06:49] So it's not just our urban, original population that are within our city, but also our

[3:06:55] very close neighbors as well.

[3:06:58] So I see this report and the recommendations in this report as a step forward, as a way

[3:07:06] for London to improve how we, and already as it's stated in this report, so our different

[3:07:12] departments are improving how we interact and consult with our neighbors. That was one thing when

[3:07:21] I participated in the workshop at the, at the, at the, at the, at the, at the, at the

[3:07:25] tip was of the town's first nation back in February. That was one thing that came out, that

[3:07:29] was that we have, we have a, a set way of communicating certain things that are happening

[3:07:35] in the city and we do that to our residents and with our constituents and with stakeholders

[3:07:40] within London.

[3:07:41] But it's not necessarily the ideal way that our neighbors would like to communicate.

[3:07:48] And so it hasn't been necessarily a very effective communication, so our staff have already

[3:07:52] identified that we need to improve that and they're taking steps to do that, which is great.

[3:07:59] And again, as Councillor Saffron said, it was an honor to attend the event at Museum

[3:08:04] London with you, Mr. Mayor, and with Councillor Zafman in support of Atlosa, and it was

[3:08:12] an honor to be able to speak at that event as well.

[3:08:16] I know it was Councillor Van Hulse, suggestion at the beginning to participate in a smudging

[3:08:24] ceremony in our first meeting in these council chambers, and I thought that was a really great

[3:08:30] start for this term of council and as I said, everything in this report and the recommendations

[3:08:36] contained therein are, it's all about strengthening and building our relationships and

[3:08:42] I think this is a step in the right direction.

[3:08:46] Thank you.

[3:08:47] Any other speakers?

[3:08:48] Councillor Helmer, anyone else?

[3:08:49] Councillor Ession.

[3:08:53] I'd like to pick up on some of the council's statements comments.

[3:08:57] I think a lot of agreement that this is important, which is good to hear.

[3:09:02] I guess one of my concerns is that we're talking about, I think, just directing staff to participate in this action-oriented working group, which sounds really exciting.

[3:09:14] But I'm pretty interested in the action part of that, which is, I'd like to do something to move us forward to reconciliation and not just talk about it and not just have reports.

[3:09:30] So we had, you know, initially talked with us back in June, I think this

[3:09:35] Council really who brought it up, and I thought it was a great idea.

[3:09:37] I was very timely.

[3:09:38] And then we had our advisory committee in September, give us some pretty

[3:09:42] specific suggestions along the lines of recommendations that are

[3:09:48] identified by the working group at FCM and also by our own staff and this

[3:09:52] report about things we could specifically be doing.

[3:09:54] a memorial, intercultural training, endorse the UN declaration on the rights of religious people.

[3:10:01] Like it's very specific about what they would like to see.

[3:10:05] It seems clear at this point that the working group has identified the five things that

[3:10:09] they are looking for municipalities to do.

[3:10:11] So I guess my question is what are we waiting for if we're going to do some of these things,

[3:10:16] which I think we should, when are we going to do them?

[3:10:19] Because I don't know what we're expecting from the working group at FCM, beyond saying, these are the things we think you should move on.

[3:10:27] I noticed the only one that is not listed as some of the, in the four at the end of our report as the areas where we could take action is the memorial.

[3:10:36] And that sort of, as far and off, and that's one that was specifically recommended for consideration by Eldrax.

[3:10:42] So I guess my question to our staff is the direction is to participate in the working group

[3:10:46] and I think it's fine, but what is the timeline for the working group's going to do work

[3:10:51] and eventually it's going to lead to actions when do we think that would be?

[3:10:58] Through the chair, so as far as the timeline of the working group, the last meeting was within

[3:11:02] the last few weeks, my understanding is it will progress fairly quickly and the interest of the

[3:11:07] group is certainly to see action in all municipalities participating in these areas.

[3:11:12] As you rightly note, there are some specific actions that we, during our staff review, identified

[3:11:17] that could be taken in London.

[3:11:19] Our view is that we can explore them through the FCM process.

[3:11:23] That said, Council of Code, of course, look at doing things specifically in London that's

[3:11:28] not within that timeline, but you may wish to request a little bit of legal advice to

[3:11:32] get some of the background information as to why we're not recommending those specific

[3:11:36] things.

[3:11:37] For example, the United Nations Declaration, you may want to hear from Mr. Robert on that

[3:11:40] one first.

[3:11:41] So what we're recommending is that we continue to work with FCM on exploring these things without taking any specific action in London right now.

[3:11:54] Well, it's certainly like to hear from Mr. Barber. I know we have another item.

[3:11:58] I just wonder if we need an additional reason to go in about that.

[3:12:02] So I'd like to tack that on to that being.

[3:12:09] Okay. We can do that. I have a counselor.

[3:12:13] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to talk on to what the last two speakers had to say.

[3:12:19] I think that it's good to start, and I wanted a timeline also, but I like to see what the entire

[3:12:27] Minister for Body, right across the country is going to do so that we don't do something

[3:12:32] that's going to embarrass one or the other, because we need to share our ideas with them,

[3:12:37] and they need to share our ideas with us, at the best rate that we're at the strips, the

[3:12:41] MNM, and I'm sure we're going to be talking about this again, unfortunately, it's not

[3:12:45] the march that we are going to meet again, but in a meantime they might be sending out information.

[3:12:53] One of the things that I think that we have to be careful of, Mr. Chair, we get all concern

[3:12:58] and interested and excited when we get a report like this report, but it was presented to us

[3:13:04] at Parliament Hill. There are so many recommendations, but only five of them are really related

[3:13:10] to the municipalities, and that's directly from the report, and the five are mentioned here,

[3:13:16] and we have decided that we, there are four of them that we could work on, I want to ask

[3:13:22] a question about the fifth, but I'm not going to ask that right now, but I do believe that we

[3:13:27] could slowly take actions so that when we go to FCM in March, we could say something about what

[3:13:34] our direction would be, share it, and if we need to add something to it, we can add a subtract

[3:13:39] at that point in time.

[3:13:41] So I think that this is a good start, the report to us.

[3:13:45] And I think that I want to wait to hear what

[3:13:48] Conqueror Hermes is going to ask Mr. Barba.

[3:13:51] But I would quite, I would be prepared to work

[3:13:54] on the educational piece.

[3:13:56] And I want to mention Mr. Chair that long before the reconciliation

[3:13:59] report came out, our staff have been finding

[3:14:04] appropriate ways to communicate with our neighbors

[3:14:08] with the trees, whether we call it our reserves, we still call it our reserves in this area.

[3:14:17] Commentating with respect to the work that we do in the area always trying to bring it in.

[3:14:22] This is something a little different because this is specifically the deal with reconciliation

[3:14:29] of what happened over those 100 years at those schools.

[3:14:32] So, I'm quite prepared to receive this report at this point in time and wait for the next step.

[3:14:39] Thank you.

[3:14:42] Do I have any other speakers?

[3:14:45] Okay.

[3:14:45] The motion is up on screen.

[3:14:47] There's some direction provided.

[3:14:50] We could have a mover.

[3:14:51] Thank you, Deputy Mayor Cassie.

[3:14:52] Seconded by Councillor Armstrong and further discussion.

[3:14:55] And Councillor Hummer, we will deal with the questions that you have.

[3:15:02] Go ahead. Is the idea that people would like me to vote for this without hearing from Mr. Barber?

[3:15:13] That's a decision that you can make. This is the motion that's been moved and seconded by the committee.

[3:15:19] It certainly isn't exclusive of any further action that we take. This provided some direction. We could potentially anticipate additional direction if it's provided at a subsequent time.

[3:15:31] Okay.

[3:15:39] We're voting.

[3:15:58] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 to 0.

[3:16:01] Okay, call the exec brings us then to item 3.

[3:16:04] This was pulled by Councillor Morgan, so we can go to you, Councillor 1st, and I'll also start a list.

[3:16:10] I believe a number of people want to speak to this Councillor Ben Host.

[3:16:15] Yeah, so I do want to speak to it.

[3:16:17] And I'd also like to propose just two small amendments to it.

[3:16:24] Maybe I'll I'll first outline what the two small amendments are and and speech of the policy in in general

[3:16:31] The the one amendment is simply the addition of a C to the recommendation and that is one of the things referenced in in the report is

[3:16:41] The corporations current unfunded liability and I wanted to add a

[3:16:46] See that basically said well actually it's up on the screen. This is the change that I wanted to make to the motion

[3:16:53] that the civic administration would be directed to bring forward a report providing information

[3:16:57] with respect to the corporations' unfunded liability.

[3:16:59] In other words, the giant number, just a little bit more details on exactly what that is,

[3:17:05] and then we can decide how we move forward whether a portion of that needs to be in camera or not,

[3:17:09] it would be obviously up to the, up to the way that the reporting came forward.

[3:17:13] So that's the C. And the other change is just a small addition to A, which you'll see is made,

[3:17:19] and it says subject to the contribution to the operating budget contingency reserve being confirmed by

[3:17:25] municipal counsel. In other words, when you look at the process of the way that the surplus policy

[3:17:30] would flow, one of the first things is a contribution to the OBCR. With a target of establishing

[3:17:37] it in a range of 1.2, 1.5% to 2% of the property tax revenues over a certain period of time,

[3:17:44] I wanted to have that confirmed by municipal counsel so that we could essentially keep up

[3:17:49] on exactly, you know, the pace and scope of how we're making changes to that, and how we're

[3:17:55] contributing to the operating budget contingency reserve each year, so much like the, you

[3:18:00] know, the other components of the report are approved by Council through the various reporting.

[3:18:05] This is one that I just wanted to see come to us at the appropriate time in the cycle, so that we

[3:18:10] had a sense on what that contribution was going to look like at the appropriate time. As for the report,

[3:18:16] as a whole. I think that there's been some good work done to try to balance the needs on how

[3:18:23] to appropriately deal with surpluses in general. That is, you know, a lot of fiscally responsible

[3:18:28] decisions here, ensuring that we have a reserve fund that is adequate, ensuring that we are

[3:18:33] committing to dealing well-infunded liability at some level in some pace. And then eliminating debt,

[3:18:39] which is a form of future tax avoidance, whether that's avoiding debt or simply canceling debt,

[3:18:44] Having the capacity to invest in some community initiatives, which is the contribution to a new municipal council community investment reserve fund,

[3:18:55] which of course council could set the terms and parameters of once it's established and started to be funded.

[3:19:00] And then of course the capital infrastructure gap reserve fund, as the report shows, there's no shortage of capital needs in the future.

[3:19:09] and so being able to sock away some money to address those, I think, is responsible as well.

[3:19:14] So overall, I'm pleased, and I know my colleagues will have some discussion about the content

[3:19:19] and the breakdown.

[3:19:20] The structures I want to change are more to the both accountability mechanisms, as well as getting

[3:19:25] some more information on one piece, important piece of the corporations,

[3:19:31] financial picture that being

[3:19:32] the unfunded liability reserve, and so those are the changes that I would propose if the

[3:19:38] it was willing to support it and I'm happy here at the debate on the rest of the document.

[3:19:48] Yeah, it should be on your screen, Councillor Ray on your screen.

[3:19:54] Okay, so it has been moved by Councillor Morgan and seconded by Councillor Squire so we'll

[3:19:59] start the discussion there. I have Councillor Van Hulls next and Councillor Squire subsequent to that.

[3:20:17] There we go. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[3:20:22] And through you, I'd like to come in. I'm thrilled that

[3:20:28] This section C2 on page 45, the municipal council community investment reserve fund is coming forward.

[3:20:37] I think it's great that we'll have something that we can go to if during the year and outside the budget.

[3:20:47] We and event comes up and we decide that we want to be able to support that.

[3:20:53] I would, through you to my colleagues, I would hope that the wording of this is fine, so it's not to be overly, overly prescriptive.

[3:21:04] I mean, who knows what we might want to do, but I hope that you'll imagine in your mind.

[3:21:09] The kinds of things that might happen, and then I hate to see someone say, you know,

[3:21:17] and expenses and expenses and expense here, and we're not able to do something, so I hope that name is, is name is general enough.

[3:21:28] I also wanted to ask through the chair to our staff.

[3:21:34] This is going to be split up, I guess our surplus is going to be split up into these things.

[3:21:43] And I'm wondering about the possibility of taking parts of our surplus and putting them into

[3:21:49] something in particular beforehand, and the suggestion I want to make really came to me as

[3:21:58] I was at one of the community conversations on poverty on Friday night, and speaking to

[3:22:05] many of the people who came out to an event at the coffee house on Hamilton Road, very pleased

[3:22:12] the conversation was going on, but the theme that came up again and again was that they just

[3:22:16] hope something would happen. You know, tell me something, you're not just getting us here

[3:22:20] to talk for no reason, but that something was going to happen. And I would really like to have

[3:22:27] us place some funds in a reserve so that when we get the findings on that mayor's advisory panel

[3:22:39] on parry, we can actually we've got something to act from and so I wanted to ask Mr.

[3:22:50] Heward how that could happen.

[3:22:59] Through the chair you have a current policy that's in effect so if you choose to use that

[3:23:10] to allocate the 2015 estimated surplus and I will emphasise it as an estimated surplus at

[3:23:17] this point we don't know. What the final number is going to be until we close out with

[3:23:24] the year end and so you'll get that in the fourth quarter next March. But basically you could

[3:23:29] use that in the sense of 50% believe or the balance of the surplus there could be used for

[3:23:40] whatever council wants, whatever pressures on needs they want. Similarly with this one,

[3:23:45] if you have a community investment reserve, you can basically allocate that, whichever way

[3:23:51] this council wants as well. So it just, it's actually gives you a bit more flexibility,

[3:23:57] maybe on a slightly less amount at this point, but certainly gives you a bit of flexibility in

[3:24:02] terms of what you may want to do. So the two alternatives are if you enact this, you've got

[3:24:07] that reserve that you can allocate any way you want or use the existing policy if you're

[3:24:12] going to keep that until the end of this year to deal with 2015.

[3:24:17] So essentially, Councillor the option is there and available to us in the first quarter of 2016.

[3:24:23] Did you have a follow-up?

[3:24:26] Yes, so it's possible if we enact this then you will establish this municipal council

[3:24:32] investment reserve fund, and I'm going to ask you that that would happen at what time.

[3:24:39] And is it possible to before 2016 to put a larger amount than 25% into it because we take

[3:24:49] some prior to the end of the year and put it in there?

[3:24:57] If Council wanted to allocate some money towards that, it would lower that surplus of 4.7 and

[3:25:03] put that right into a reserve for this particular purpose, and you could do that before

[3:25:08] year-end if you wanted to. But you need a resolution of council in order to do that to

[3:25:13] have that reserve to establish that expenditure in the current years budget. But again, that would

[3:25:20] lower the 4.7 down by whatever amount you wanted. If you don't want to do it that way,

[3:25:26] and you leave it with an allocation of surplus, then you'll have to wait basically till March

[3:25:30] next year in order to do the allocation because again we've got to go through here and to establish

[3:25:35] finally what that said.

[3:25:39] Thank you and it's really my concern that we have something in there so that people know

[3:25:46] when they go to these meetings that yes something will be done and so to give it give a sense

[3:25:52] of certainty and I hope you all have a certain sense of certainty that we are going to act on this

[3:25:58] because it's a great initiative.

[3:26:00] So I guess I would just have a question.

[3:26:02] I don't really want to come up with an emergent motion.

[3:26:06] I suppose something could be added to this.

[3:26:09] I don't know if it's appropriate,

[3:26:11] but is there is there time before the end of the year

[3:26:13] to get a motion to counsel for first such a thing

[3:26:19] and what committee might it go through

[3:26:21] if I could ask through the chair to the clerk?

[3:26:28] If it's related to this policy

[3:26:29] and the application of the policy,

[3:26:31] would have to come back to SPPC. I'd like to also point out that the bilis that's currently written

[3:26:38] has a force and effect data upon the data's past, which would be tomorrow evening. So the provisions

[3:26:44] of the policy that's before you would come into effect as of the state and you wouldn't have the

[3:26:49] the ability to choose between the policy previously enacted by the resolution in this one enacted by

[3:26:56] by law would take precedent unless there was a direction by council on a notwithstanding

[3:27:04] basis.

[3:27:10] And is there an SPPC?

[3:27:12] Well, I think if we we can allocate anything before the year is over, can't we as an active

[3:27:20] council?

[3:27:21] Is there an SPPC meeting before the end of the year?

[3:27:26] I believe this may be the last SPPC meeting before the end of the year, but really council

[3:27:31] there are two windows. There's a window this evening, and then assuming that this bylaw passes

[3:27:36] this evening, then there's another window in March, two different mechanisms, but a window

[3:27:41] that you could prepare a motion and bring it forward if you chose to at that time as well.

[3:27:48] So essentially, I'm trying to say you're not going to miss an opportunity to bring a motion forward

[3:27:52] if you don't have one prepared this evening, but it would be under a different policy, and it would be

[3:27:56] in March.

[3:28:01] Okay, thank you.

[3:28:04] I have councillor Squire, Zeifman, and Ashak.

[3:28:08] Through you, Mr. Chair. I'm, I seconded Council from Oregon's motion, and I have to say,

[3:28:15] I'm extremely pleased with the work staff has done on this, and if I might say how

[3:28:19] physically prudent they are, in terms of the allocation of the money from the surplus,

[3:28:23] I think it's, it's the direction that we should be going in when we have a surplus. So I appreciate that work very

[3:28:29] much. My question is, there has been, and there will continue to be an $850,000 draw towards

[3:28:38] tax mitigation. It looks like until 2020 won, which is during the transition period to

[3:28:45] the new policy. I'm just wondering if there's other opportunities, if that's correct, what

[3:28:51] I'm saying. And if so, are there other opportunities for tax mitigation, or are we assuming

[3:28:56] those opportunities are all in those three buckets that are at the end of the other report.

[3:29:04] So currently what we do is we draw from the operating budget contingency reserve

[3:29:08] and amounts to bring into revenues for the next year that would actually lower the amount

[3:29:15] we'd request for taxes and that's really what we're doing. So there are a couple of items that we've

[3:29:20] done in the past to think studying in 2009 or somewhere around there. We had what we saw as an

[3:29:27] increasing on TeraWorks case load, but we knew they were going to be uploaded and so what

[3:29:32] we said was we'd shaved the peak off the mountain and we'd draw from the reserve and then

[3:29:36] as the case loads, the cost of the case load went away as we uploaded we would lower

[3:29:40] that amount and we were actually on track with that. Then in the last few years there's been

[3:29:47] an increase in that draw almost as much as 1% so about $4.7 million per year that we're drawing

[3:29:55] from that reserve fund. So we're having to replenish.

[3:30:00] We would be in the whole fairly quickly, as you can appreciate with that kind of money coming out. Right now, I think we're around $10 million in the reserve fund, but we're declining over the next four years to about $4 million.

[3:30:11] And what we're trying to do with that is actually wean ourselves, having that one-time money come in, so that when you actually get out of the business of subsidising the current year with that reserve fund, then any money that flows into here would be used in accordance with the 50 for tax reduction.

[3:30:29] for debt reduction, 25, 25. That's kind of what we're aiming towards and that, you know,

[3:30:35] to use a phrase that I think has been used around here a few times. We don't want to kick

[3:30:39] the can down the road when it comes to use of reserve funds for ongoing expenditures. We want to,

[3:30:45] basically, if it's an ongoing expenditure, we want to use an ongoing revenue source to fund it.

[3:30:53] But if it's a one-time expenditure, that would be an appropriate time to use these.

[3:30:56] So mitigation, I would say increase your other revenues that are ongoing. That would be the best kind of mitigation you could come up with.

[3:31:06] Through you Mr. Tricky, increase the expenses.

[3:31:13] Mr. Hayward, by kicking the can down the road, you create a potential future.

[3:31:19] That would be budget bomb for $10.

[3:31:22] Gas is eighth.

[3:31:25] Thank you Mr. Chair.

[3:31:27] One thing I just wanted to point out, just in the background of this report,

[3:31:30] I know this is from 2007, but in the resolution it spoke to ensuring that the policy around

[3:31:36] surplus and deficit was aligned with the current desires of the current term of municipal council.

[3:31:42] And I just want to say that I hope that I think that this is going towards something which is not just for our term of council.

[3:31:49] When we're looking at creating a policy which is around surplus and deficits, I think the idea is around proper fiscal prudence and management.

[3:31:55] And it's not shouldn't be based around one term of council versus another obviously things change over time.

[3:32:00] But, you know, I think as we go forward trying to do it, the best we can is just some of the best in terms of financial management.

[3:32:09] I had a couple of questions.

[3:32:11] I think what we're going to for here again is very fistly pertinent and the idea that we're trying to go for in terms of mitigation with our unfunded liabilities,

[3:32:20] as well as where the money will go to with our budget.

[3:32:24] Continuity reserve is a great step forward, obviously something we've been practicing

[3:32:28] but need to do more in the future of.

[3:32:30] But when we look farther down, we start getting into both debt servicing and

[3:32:35] then specifically the concern I have is with 25% of the surplus going into a reserve

[3:32:39] fund which we haven't created yet, and there's no information about yet.

[3:32:44] And I appreciate through the chair of the comments that Council Morgan made.

[3:32:48] You know, that it could be something very good and we can deal with how we want to do it later

[3:32:52] For I would prefer that if we were wondering if it's established and you reserve fund that we have the principles in place to do so beforehand before we actually put that in place

[3:33:00] And I from what it is, I'm not exactly sure what it is, but community investment to me can mean many different things and

[3:33:06] And you know right now the idea that I have in my head of what this might mean is certain things that come to our attention throughout the year

[3:33:13] That we may not have had funding for we don't have money for and we want to put money aside for

[3:33:18] And while I think that's great, I think one of the difficulties is that we find ourselves in situations where certain interests come to play.

[3:33:24] I think everyone on council has different interests as well, and certain things that they may go to bad for versus others.

[3:33:29] And I think that made great problems, and I think that's why we have an agenda today.

[3:33:33] Another policy around where we're moving to with our grants.

[3:33:36] And that is taking me out of the hands of the politicians and making it much more arms like process.

[3:33:41] And so I'm not sure if putting aside money from our surplus for that type of purpose,

[3:33:44] specifically that's what it seems to me is really the best idea so if we do

[3:33:48] go ahead with this policy today because I am mostly okay with it I prefer

[3:33:52] that we take be separately and not have the included

[3:33:55] I potentially have that 25% allocated either to debt servicing or to infrastructure

[3:34:00] funding.

[3:34:05] Thank you Councillor Asher, Councillor Helmer, I see you.

[3:34:12] Thank you. I

[3:34:14] I just want to pick up on where Councillor Van Holtz left off and I guess in

[3:34:18] respect where conclusive what he just said because I do agree with

[3:34:23] conslav and holds. I think that we need to have some where some money

[3:34:28] somewhere that we could allocate to one time contribution or some

[3:34:36] emergency fund and he gave a good example and I thought when I first

[3:34:46] was or could be used for that purpose. But if we need to reserve separated out for that one time

[3:34:56] contingency, I'm quite prepared to do so because I've set around this horseshoe for so many years

[3:35:01] and there's always something that is dire that we need to do that comes up at budget time. Once

[3:35:10] I'm talking about that will not affect the budget in the next year and I think that we need to have some money for that.

[3:35:18] I can't tell you exactly how much but I'm quite prepared to say that this community investment reserve fund is for that purpose that I'm quite prepared to leave it that way.

[3:35:28] But if it is not then I would like a part of that, like two-thirds of that, so I would think 10% in total,

[3:35:36] not 10% of that, but 10% in total, be put aside for that one time, so I'm going back to the recommendation

[3:35:45] if he was trying to make, and see how I could make that recommendation because between us and Mr. Hayward,

[3:35:52] I do believe I like to put that on the floor. So I'm going to ask through you, Mr. Chair,

[3:35:57] If we could use a part of that 2 in C2, that's 25% for some emergency one time spending fun if and when we need it, that's my request, that's my request.

[3:36:20] The surplus basically sets that up for you and in the body of the report on page 45 and 46 at

[3:36:28] top of 46, basically it talks about emerging issues, opportunities, the required funding,

[3:36:35] and basically allowing Council the opportunity to have a source of funding to fund those

[3:36:39] one-time requests and assist in advancing the strategic plan, so I think that's one area

[3:36:45] to consider Zafin's point, you may want to suggest that it does tie him with your strategic plan,

[3:36:52] but it certainly gives you a broad enough scope here to be able to use those funds as the

[3:36:59] Councillor Oshron is indicated.

[3:37:02] So, does that satisfy your question that that was a definite yes that you're a concern

[3:37:05] to satisfy?

[3:37:06] I think so.

[3:37:06] I just want to make sure that are we talking about the bottom of page 45, that 25%, is that

[3:37:13] but you were referring to Mr. Heward.

[3:37:17] That's correct, you worship the bottom of page 25 and the top of page 46 describes it a bit more.

[3:37:24] And then it's contained in the policy in section 3, C2.

[3:37:33] So that's the policy piece that relates to it.

[3:37:36] So Mr. Heward, when else it?

[3:37:39] I want to go back to it. If we don't change this, the example that Council of Unholds used,

[3:37:49] if we need money for that purpose, it could be taken from this. If we, as a council, decide,

[3:37:55] this is a location that money could come from.

[3:38:00] Yeah, if you take a look at Councilor Page 46 at the very top, throughout the emerging issues

[3:38:05] opportunities requiring funding or brought to the if if they are brought to the

[3:38:09] potentially municipal council by civic administration and or the

[3:38:11] community. These types of funding requests are often one-time in nature and

[3:38:15] may assist municipal council in advancing a strategic plan. So that's the

[3:38:18] intention absolutely. Okay well thanks very much I appreciate that.

[3:38:28] Okay we have

[3:38:29] councilor Helmer and I'll get you on second round and the other speakers for first.

[3:38:41] Thank you very much. So colleagues I'm not sold on this idea of the kind of municipal

[3:38:46] council community investment reserve fund. First of all, I don't think it should

[3:38:49] be called municipal council anything. I think if it's a community investment reserve fund,

[3:38:52] that's what should be called. I also don't think we necessarily need it. It sounds to

[3:38:58] me like it's sort of like an operating budget contingency reserve but for a

[3:39:02] a smaller subset of things and I don't it's almost sort of like rebranding part of

[3:39:06] the operating budget contingency reserve and I don't know that it's necessary. There are

[3:39:10] a lot of sources of financing that we can draw on to pay for things that come up

[3:39:14] unexpectedly. And I don't want to narrow it down the discussion around that to be just about

[3:39:20] what we do with the surplus and or deficit, which is what this policy is about. So for me,

[3:39:25] I would prefer to have 50% of the piece that's not unfunded liability and not the piece of the

[3:39:33] top from the operating budget conditions. There are 50% to go to canceling authorized but on an issue

[3:39:39] at 50% go to the infrastructure gap. I think that's a better use of surplus funds. I wouldn't

[3:39:45] want to rely on surplus funds as a way of funding the community investment reserve fund. I think

[3:39:51] we want to make community investments that we that should be a core part of our operating budget and

[3:39:55] we need to allocate that appropriately in the budget process. So, and even if we did, I would prefer

[3:40:01] that if we were to allocate stuff to those community investments that we were to take that money and

[3:40:06] put it into the funding for existing grants program,

[3:40:09] rather than this sort of special municipal council

[3:40:11] community investment reserve fund.

[3:40:13] For all the reasons that the council has

[3:40:15] even in many of us have talked about sort of why we wanted

[3:40:18] to modernize that whole grants process in the first place.

[3:40:20] I just feel like this is sort of saying,

[3:40:22] well, unless you wanted to come with five or six requests

[3:40:24] throughout the year, you know,

[3:40:26] sort of random times not even during the budget.

[3:40:28] So I don't know why we want to encourage that sort of thing.

[3:40:32] I do think there's some advantage to having

[3:40:35] A source of financing for small requests that are a community supporting in nature.

[3:40:42] I don't think we need to finance it through this surplus policy.

[3:40:45] I think we can finance it through our budget discussions.

[3:40:48] And I would prefer with the surplus specifically to put that into closing the infrastructure gap,

[3:40:54] which right now the way things are going, where it's going to be going larger and larger and larger over time.

[3:40:59] So we're doing a lot of good things in our front, but we're not doing enough to stop it from growing and we need to be doing more.

[3:41:05] So we're looking at a business case. I'm sure in the multi or budget where we'll be talking about that

[3:41:09] But I think this is another opportunity where we could say let's take 50% and put into infrastructure gap instead of this

[3:41:16] Community investment

[3:41:17] Reserve fund. So my suggestion and I'm gonna make a

[3:41:21] Motion to amend it. I guess and we'll see a far gets

[3:41:24] Is to

[3:41:26] Delete that section out of like 3c2

[3:41:29] Delete it at a schedule a

[3:41:32] Because I don't think we need it and to change the

[3:41:35] part that is three now to say two, and then to change that from 25% to 50%.

[3:41:41] I think that it's a better use of surplus funds to put it towards a capital thing like the infrastructure gap, and it is a community investment or a fund.

[3:41:51] I hope other people support that.

[3:41:54] Thank you for the little clarification on your motion counselor.

[3:41:57] You're intending to put the first 850,000 towards the tax mitigation and the remainder

[3:42:04] then split between these two areas.

[3:42:08] Thanks for asking to clarify.

[3:42:09] The only part I would like to change is the section in Schedule A under principles.

[3:42:15] 3C2, I'd like to delete it, and I'd like to change the part that's 3 to say 50% instead

[3:42:20] of 25%.

[3:42:20] Everything else is the same.

[3:42:21] Okay. So before we enter into debate on that, I'll look for a seconder, a seconder by Councillor

[3:42:27] Zafeman.

[3:42:30] We'll get it up on screen. Everyone's here. You can get some clarity and I'll

[3:42:34] start to speak your list on this new matter. I do have you, Councillor Van Holstown, I'm

[3:42:39] already in Councillor Armstrong, your next.

[3:42:43] Thank you very much. So, Councillor's please. I hope you'll defeat this motion. And, of course,

[3:42:51] I also want to thank Councillor Helmer and Councillor Zayfman for answering my question which

[3:42:57] was, is the name of this, is the appropriate, in my mind what I want, what I'm thrilled

[3:43:05] about and what I want to have for City Council is exactly what Councillor Usher suggested

[3:43:09] is some operational flexibility, I'm sure you remember that term, but it allows us to deal

[3:43:18] situations as they come up in the fly. I wish I had given the example that I had before,

[3:43:23] when I had talked about this, and that was Councillor Zafin's very motion. When we wanted to

[3:43:32] extend the overnight parking, all of a sudden we were in a situation where there was going to be

[3:43:38] a $200,000 impact on some other budget item, and where was that going to come from? And so what I

[3:43:46] is us having something where we can just say, well, don't worry about that, just take it from here.

[3:43:53] And this is what I'm hoping for. So, not really. I think the problem with that name as it is,

[3:44:00] is it again implies that this is just for a community investment and then community groups are going to see this and say,

[3:44:08] well, that must be what this is for. So I almost prefer it to be a name like, you know,

[3:44:18] discretionary reserve fund for council, but we're going to, there's going to be things that we will deal with

[3:44:27] that that come out of, come out of left field and our urgent, and I hope that we have something to

[3:44:33] with rather than here while there's nothing in it for the budget. So that would be a

[3:44:40] direction I would like to go. Also happy if we were to put a limit on this, whatever

[3:44:47] that would be, I can't see it ever being more than five million, but two million

[3:44:52] might have people be comfortable. But again, we've got something that we can work with.

[3:45:00] We're not digging around in other reserved funds to try and find it. We can go here. We know we've got it set aside for ourselves.

[3:45:10] So for me, this is extremely important. It's extremely important for me as a council. We've got some things to work with and a little wiggle room when things come up like the change in the parking.

[3:45:28] So, again, I hope you'll just defeat this emotion and then we can repair this in a different manner.

[3:45:42] Thank you.

[3:45:44] Thank you, Councillor Armstrong.

[3:45:47] Well, thank you.

[3:45:48] We're shipping through you to staff because I'm not really sure what to do on this one.

[3:45:54] So, Mark, maybe you can help me out.

[3:45:58] We've got your stats recommendation.

[3:46:00] We've got this motion in front of us.

[3:46:04] Can you help me out?

[3:46:06] What do you see as the difference?

[3:46:10] Obviously, there's a difference.

[3:46:12] But what do you see as the best policy to follow in a situation like this?

[3:46:19] The one that you're stats for, you're the one that's here.

[3:46:22] We get asked Mr Hayward to answer the question.

[3:46:24] It's nine o'clock.

[3:46:25] We've got two hours before our heads start.

[3:46:27] So let's get to the question.

[3:46:32] So the purpose behind this particular piece was to give Council a pressure valve.

[3:46:39] So they have a fund that they can deal with issues that come up from time to time.

[3:46:45] I mean, you could put limits on the upper end of it and the lower end of it.

[3:46:49] That's that type of thing.

[3:46:49] And I think that's what my Council of Morgan was going, but in terms of, is it a good thing to have?

[3:46:57] I think for Council, it might be a desirable thing to have, but if you're going to ask me, do you want it in there?

[3:47:06] I'd probably go more the way Council Helmer would go, but that's just because I'm a tight one.

[3:47:13] And I think in my experience with Council, they do need something that they can just tap into and there's limits on it and you can satisfy certain pressure points.

[3:47:32] I guess the thing is I'm not going to support the motion on the floor.

[3:47:37] But I guess the thing is, and I hope I'm getting this correctly, that some on-counts

[3:47:46] are looking to use this funding later on as an opportunity to deal with the poverty issue.

[3:47:54] And if that's the case, I just want to sort of be clear that I couldn't support one time

[3:48:00] wondering because I just don't think that that's going to solve the problem and I think

[3:48:06] the money's involved that are going to need to solve the problem are just going to be quite

[3:48:12] a bit more than what's available through this issue so I want to be clear on that I hope

[3:48:18] that people don't think you can solve poverty with one time funding out of this issue that's

[3:48:24] not going to happen so I think one has to be prepared if one wants to do with that issue

[3:48:30] to look at ongoing funding and a lot more than what's even in this issue, so in any event.

[3:48:39] Thank you, Captain Morgan.

[3:48:41] So, I'm not going to be supportive of the change.

[3:48:45] Because I don't think that the current structure, as it's contemplated in the staff report,

[3:48:50] precludes us from putting money towards the capital infrastructure reserve fund,

[3:48:53] if that's what we want to do out of the 25% pot.

[3:48:57] that what concerns me is when everybody wants to spend the money before it hits the bank account

[3:49:02] and so, you know, it's reserved fund, you just put money into it and then later you decide

[3:49:08] what you want to do with it. And this is the type of thing where a counselor van holes set it right

[3:49:13] and that's, you want to try a pilot project on parking, let's take it out of the council reserve fund.

[3:49:19] You want to try a participatory budgeting in some way on a one-time basis, you take it out of the council reserve fund.

[3:49:23] If you don't want to use it that way, you want to socket towards more debt reduction or the capital infrastructure gap, you can take it from that fund.

[3:49:32] But we have no flexibility if we don't have something.

[3:49:35] And it's not meant to be a special spending account.

[3:49:38] Unless we decide that it's going to be a special spending account for community groups to come and ask for it.

[3:49:42] If we set clear parameters on how we're going to use it and we have that discussion, then that's the way that we can deal with it.

[3:49:49] So, you know, there's lots of times during the year where small things come up and quite

[3:49:54] frankly staff, as rightly so, gets pushy when we're trying to spend money, we don't

[3:49:58] have.

[3:49:59] And if we put money in a savings account, then we can say we're doing it anyways, and we're

[3:50:04] taking it from our savings account, not that we can't say we're doing it anyways, but we

[3:50:08] got the staff out there who's saying, here's the budget, we're managing the budget as best

[3:50:13] we can.

[3:50:13] sometimes I would put the surplus, if we drop some of it into this type of reserve fund,

[3:50:18] we have some flexibility outside of the budget process at other times of the year,

[3:50:23] and if you want to use that reactively akin, if you want to use it proactively, we can,

[3:50:27] but that's probably a discussion for another time, once we actually get money in the account,

[3:50:34] because there's nothing in it, and if we're not going to put anything in it, and we want to spend

[3:50:36] it before it even gets there, then it's not going to matter anyways. I think we should defeat this,

[3:50:42] I think we should go with the staff recommendation.

[3:50:45] I think we should have a discussion at the appropriate time

[3:50:47] on how we want to use that effectively.

[3:50:51] Councillor Perk.

[3:50:53] I think you're much, I'm not going to be supporting the motion

[3:50:56] on the floor for a lot of the reasons

[3:50:58] that we're articulated by Council Morgan.

[3:51:00] And I'm also of a mind where I think that this reserve

[3:51:03] fund does need a rename.

[3:51:05] And I'm also of a mind that perhaps we're not the best words.

[3:51:08] Smith said this hour the night.

[3:51:09] And I wonder if a referral back to staff on this would be supported by colleagues.

[3:51:15] So I hope I like to put that motion on the floor.

[3:51:17] I think we might run into a timing issue based on the end of the year.

[3:51:23] And so I think we've provide some direction to come up with better name.

[3:51:28] But the establishment of this fund needs to be decided today.

[3:51:32] And I believe tomorrow at Council in order for the timeline required to give me this platform to be met.

[3:51:37] is that right, Mr. Award?

[3:51:42] Through you, for the by-law to be established for the establishment of the reserve, and yes, we

[3:51:47] would need it by tomorrow night. You've already allowed us, or you will have, hopefully, by tomorrow,

[3:51:53] allowed us to transfer everything to the operating budget continuously reserve, so it's not

[3:51:57] not really necessary by December 31 in that particular case.

[3:52:02] With the understanding that we come up with a new name for the fund at a different time, I think,

[3:52:06] does that satisfy your concern?

[3:52:08] Yes, very much so.

[3:52:11] Diffy Mayor Hubert, and then Councillor Zeya.

[3:52:14] She's a rose by all other names, it's still a rose,

[3:52:20] so poetry.

[3:52:22] Just to this comment, I really wasn't going to get into this a whole lot.

[3:52:27] I won't be supporting the motion on the floor.

[3:52:29] I think the motion actually sort of set a, establishes a priority in terms of the 25 to 50%.

[3:52:40] I think what's here is to allow Council some discretion, some flexibility, as a merchant

[3:52:46] issues come forward.

[3:52:48] I think it's really clear that you still have to be tight with your money.

[3:52:57] You know, reserve accounts, whether they have $100 in it, and it's your family reserve,

[3:53:03] or $100,000, or a million dollars, they can disappear pretty quickly.

[3:53:07] And so we would have to be very judicious on how it's used.

[3:53:12] I think even tonight earlier we had an issue before us where there's a significant

[3:53:17] aspect.

[3:53:17] There's a lot of appetite for that asker on this table, but there's pieces that we're

[3:53:22] looking for to be able to move that forward.

[3:53:25] But then we would be looking to Mr. Hayward to say, so what various sources of funding

[3:53:31] do we have available to us and how could we achieve that?

[3:53:35] And if council call S is around that idea, then it's Mr. Hayward's role to tell us where the source of funding is.

[3:53:46] So the name, notwithstanding council or park, I think, you know, it's quite carefully.

[3:53:53] I did want to just clarify, on page 45 in a year of surplus number A, what is the property tax gross expenditure budget?

[3:54:04] Mr. Hayward, because I think we have capital, we have this, that and the other thing.

[3:54:08] Can you just clarify what that number?

[3:54:11] So there would be the tax-supported operating expenditures in the 800 million range.

[3:54:17] Thank you. That's really helpful to me.

[3:54:20] So I support the staff recommendation.

[3:54:22] I think it's a balanced recommendation.

[3:54:24] It's a transparent recommendation.

[3:54:27] So I won't support the amendment to this.

[3:54:31] Councillor Zayman.

[3:54:33] Thank you Mr. Chair, and I appreciate that the idea around this new reserve fund is creative and obviously things

[3:54:42] do come from time to time. I still will say that I'm supportive of this motion on the floor in part because I do

[3:54:51] think that it is more fiercely prudent as a way to go. I think Councillor Armstrong asked to

[3:54:57] what would be the more prudent way to go or what he may go, and obviously this is a direction

[3:55:02] of council that's like we decide, but I think from when we're looking at how we can best manage our assets,

[3:55:09] we talk about the infrastructure gap, as well as our debt, and how we can most reduce our costs

[3:55:14] in the future, this is likely the best way to go. And again, I think I'll just reiterate the comments

[3:55:21] from Council of Helmer, you know, this potential reserve fund, we have no idea how much money

[3:55:29] that's going to be. First of all, there's two major pieces that have to get funded, and we

[3:55:34] talk about the unfunded liabilities as well as the contingency budget, or contingency reserve,

[3:55:40] and then we get 50% additional to budget, or excuse me, to debt payments, and then we get 25%

[3:55:48] And so this 25% could be, who knows what it could be, again, I think this is definitely

[3:55:53] where he works at, you know, you could get a hundred dollars in there, you could get a thousand,

[3:55:56] you could get a hundred thousand, you could a million ever know, depending on what the surplus

[3:55:59] or deficit is going to be in a year.

[3:56:01] And so if you really want an opportunity to be able to fund whatever emergency initiatives

[3:56:04] may come up, I think this counts on how much I'll do to it, if we want something that we want

[3:56:08] to pay for in the year and say, let's have this reserve fund, then we can make a decision

[3:56:12] as council to say, we're going to put this much money into that reserve fund each year, and

[3:56:15] as a decision we can make from our total budget,

[3:56:18] doesn't have to be stable or connected to a surplus

[3:56:22] or deficit, a surplus that may not exist.

[3:56:24] So even if we want this money, it may not happen.

[3:56:26] I mean, people talk about let's spend on poverty,

[3:56:29] let's spend on whatever other issue may be coming up.

[3:56:31] Nobody may be there, and then we come to a point

[3:56:33] where we say we still need to spend this money,

[3:56:35] what we have to do, that's how we're gonna do that,

[3:56:37] and we have done that in the past in other ways.

[3:56:39] So that's the reason why I'm supporting this,

[3:56:41] and again, I think this is a much more fiercely

[3:56:43] for the way to go, and I hope college support that.

[3:56:49] That's just where.

[3:56:53] I think from my point of view, I think I view

[3:56:55] that the 25% I think we can call it the community

[3:56:58] investment reserve.

[3:57:00] I'm really as a way to protect our tax rate.

[3:57:02] That money is going to be in there.

[3:57:04] It's going to be in this year.

[3:57:05] And I agree we should be putting more money into it.

[3:57:07] Because one of the things I discovered

[3:57:08] through the budget process is that certainly from my point

[3:57:11] of view, when I thought we had a solid group of numbers,

[3:57:13] things started coming in and adding and adding

[3:57:17] on to that tax load. So I agree with a lot of what counselors happen in Councilor Halmer said,

[3:57:24] and I certainly won't consider that they're more physically prudent than I am. But I think

[3:57:30] in this situation, this is a way to start down that road to saying, look, rather than putting

[3:57:35] it on the backs of the taxpayers, let's put the money that they paid from last year, that

[3:57:40] accumulated surplus and let's use that for those investments, rather than putting it on

[3:57:44] their backs next year.

[3:57:45] So I understand their points, but I think in this particular circumstance, I think this is a way to make community investments and the one thing I have learned since I've been elected is that the community and people living in London do want us to make prudent community investments where they're appropriate.

[3:58:00] I've heard that over and over again, and I think this council is capable of doing that. So I won't be supporting the amendment, but I'll be supporting the name motion.

[3:58:09] Councillor Helmer.

[3:58:12] Well, I can see it's going to be going so well for the idea of closing the infrastructure gap with our surplus

[3:58:22] I want to try one more time to convince people. I I see that you indicated that a lot of you don't want to

[3:58:27] Move in this direction, but we have like a

[3:58:31] $191 million in various kinds of reserve funds

[3:58:34] There's at least 42 of these reserve funds for various different things and

[3:58:38] And what I'm wary of here is creating a new reserve for one or two new reserve funds in our surplus policy amendments.

[3:58:47] One of which doesn't have any definition at all the other one I think is very straightforward.

[3:58:52] What it's about.

[3:58:54] And then allocating a significant chunk of the surplus to those two reserve funds.

[3:58:58] So I'm okay with the one around the capital infrastructure gap. It's very clear what that is for.

[3:59:02] The other one is quite neveless and who knows what it is we're going to use this for and it's not even defined yet

[3:59:08] So I think this is a matter of sort of simple prudence. It's not a great approach

[3:59:12] I would prefer to create reserved funds and events and then change the policy to direct funds in there or whatever

[3:59:18] The other thing I would say is that you know we're talking about is this way of spending money better than that way of spending money

[3:59:23] That's a great discussion to have in the budget

[3:59:26] And I think we're going to have those discussions about where we think the priority should be

[3:59:29] This is just about the surplus policy, and my own personal view is that a good way of using the surplus policy

[3:59:35] about the surplus funds is to pay down the cancel that you don't need anymore, excellent,

[3:59:40] and start closing the infrastructure of a gap, a very long-term thing that has long-term benefits,

[3:59:45] greatly of using this one-time surplus money. That's why I think it's appropriate for the surplus policy.

[3:59:49] I also think there's good arguments for having it in your operating budget as a way of closing that gap,

[3:59:55] but I think for the surplus policy specifically, the canceling

[4:00:00] I need to issue and then contributing more money towards the infrastructure of gap. It's a perfect way of doing it. It's really boring. It's extremely boring. It's not exciting, but it's essential. And I would encourage you to support this particular thing here. And if you want to make an argument for a reserve fund for these other purposes, do that in the multi-year budget process, we're considering all the different ways that we can spend money, including how much we should be spending on a plan way on the infrastructure gap.

[4:00:25] Okay, I have no further speakers, so I'm inclined to call the question.

[4:00:31] So this is the amendment, moved by Councillor Helmer, seconded by Councillor Zaytman, we're

[4:00:35] voting.

[4:00:42] Closing the vote, the motion loses, 3, 11.

[4:00:45] Okay, and on the main motion moved by Councillor Morgan, seconded by Councillor Squire, any further

[4:00:50] discussion?

[4:00:52] Councillor Zaytman?

[4:00:57] Through the chair, I'm not sure if it's possible or not, within what we're doing here,

[4:01:01] but I request if possible to vote on B separately.

[4:01:06] Certainly, we can vote on the separately.

[4:01:09] Councillor Hummer, did you want to speak?

[4:01:12] Yeah, I'd suggest you change the name of it from municipal council.

[4:01:17] I'll just drop that.

[4:01:18] But I'm going to be voting against that part anyway,

[4:01:20] but I think other people might want to change it.

[4:01:26] Okay, we'll deal with A and C at this time.

[4:01:36] Question from Councillor Morgan?

[4:01:38] Well, listen, if there's relative consensus for a committee,

[4:01:41] and I just agree that if municipal council, the term is a stumbling lock for colleagues

[4:01:46] and I don't think it changes the structure of the description of it, so if people want

[4:01:51] that out, we don't have a problem with that, but I would like to make sure it's something

[4:01:55] generally supported.

[4:01:56] I think some people don't like the name, some people don't like the policy, so let's deal with

[4:01:59] A and C, and then we'll have that conversation about B right afterwards.

[4:02:02] Okay, so we're dealing with A and C.

[4:02:18] This is motion to prove A and C. There's no further

[4:02:21] discussion and we're voting.

[4:02:36] Councillor Silly,

[4:02:42] closing the vote, the motion carries 12-2.

[4:02:46] Okay, B. Councillor Morgan, this is your motion. If you wanted to make a slight amendment to the name, this would be a appropriate time.

[4:02:53] Yeah, I don't mind dropping the term municipal council, just to leave it as community investment reserve fund.

[4:03:02] So, friendly amendment to supported by both mover and the seconder. Councillor Zaykin.

[4:03:09] If you're interested, thank you for the opportunity and not to be a dead horse, but it

[4:03:15] just wanted to reiterate that a point I made earlier, we're voting on a reserve fund which

[4:03:21] right now has no principles, there's nothing really attached to it as to what it can be used

[4:03:26] for.

[4:03:27] It's simply just a name, and so that is the reason why I'm voting against it, looking

[4:03:32] for a bit more sums and some principles around how we can actually how this reserve fund would

[4:03:36] be utilized. As far as I recall, going through it, there's no in terms of actually bringing the principles

[4:03:43] and what we need for it to actually create it. I much rather have what the exact purpose of it is

[4:03:49] how it can be spent, how it can be allocated, brought before Council before any decision is made on it.

[4:03:56] Thank you. A couple of speakers, I have the mover of the motion, Councillor Morgan.

[4:04:03] Yes, so there is a small description. It's basically relatively open-ended at this point

[4:04:08] on what we could use it for, which is very similar to one of the provisions in the old policy

[4:04:13] about community investments, but a certainly doesn't preclude us from doing a number of the things

[4:04:18] that was discussed today. If we wanted to discuss it, the Treasury says this will output in the policy

[4:04:23] the end of the quarter next year that we certainly have time to debate and discuss that in

[4:04:28] the establishments parameters. But as it stands now, there's a short description, which parallels

[4:04:33] of a previous description of the old surplus policy.

[4:04:36] Okay, thank you.

[4:04:37] And Councillor Hurrah, pardon me, Deputy Mayor Hubert.

[4:04:40] Well, I think I have my answer from Councillor Morgan.

[4:04:43] I understand we'll get some clarity around its disposition prior to making any funding

[4:04:50] decisions.

[4:04:50] Is that correct?

[4:04:51] Through you, Mr. Chair.

[4:04:52] Does that answer here?

[4:04:55] Through the Chair.

[4:04:56] Yes, we won't have any final numbers on surplus and therefore disposition will be made

[4:04:59] until probably March next year.

[4:05:04] Okay. No further speakers. So let's call the question. This is part B. We're voting.

[4:05:18] closing the vote. The motion carries 12.2.

[4:05:25] Okay, colleagues, that brings us to consent item number four. This is the

[4:05:29] Stratplans City of London 2015-2019. I believe is Mr. Zidim, are you reporting

[4:05:33] note on this? Sure. And I'll endeavor to be fairly brief. I think we can all

[4:05:42] We recollect that last week marked the one year anniversary of this Council having taken office

[4:05:49] and one of the accomplishments that the Council achieved last year was the development and the approval

[4:05:56] of a strategic plan in your first hundred days in term.

[4:06:02] And in that, it's important with strategic plans that we periodically reflect and report on how we're

[4:06:10] doing. And so the report that we have prepared references and suggests a process by which

[4:06:20] we can report on how we're doing. And more specifically, the report suggests a semi-annual

[4:06:29] progress report that would be released in May and November of each year, and that report

[4:06:38] would provide a detailed indication of the progress

[4:06:42] that we're making towards each of the strategies

[4:06:44] in the Strat Plan.

[4:06:46] And then on an annual basis, as we've been doing in the past,

[4:06:50] there would be a report to the community,

[4:06:53] which would come out in December,

[4:06:55] and that would highlight some of the accomplishments

[4:06:58] that have been made over the past year.

[4:07:02] So what we have included attached to your report

[4:07:07] is an initial progress report, and that progress report shows that approximately 84 percent

[4:07:17] of the strategies in the strategic plan are in process, but 4 percent are complete.

[4:07:26] And what we've also provided to you and hold it up is what we've got as a bit of a work

[4:07:33] progress a first cut if you will of our first 2015 report to the community and that document

[4:07:44] captures some of the highlights of the past year. It centers in on the four focus areas that

[4:07:50] you've identified in your strategic plan and as I say this is this reports in a draft form

[4:07:57] and we hope to finalize it before the end of the year.

[4:08:02] In concluding, Council Strategic Plan sets a very bold vision for our organization for this community,

[4:08:11] and that includes many transformative projects and activities.

[4:08:15] And I think today is an opportunity for us to all reflect on what's already been accomplished,

[4:08:20] And how Council might consider these various reporting mechanisms to ensure that the progress and the monitoring of what you've sought to do and the progress that's being made can be provided both to Council and the community.

[4:08:41] So, that is the extent to which I wanted to address the report and happy to try and entertain

[4:08:50] any questions that you might have.

[4:08:53] Thank you.

[4:08:53] I have Council here.

[4:08:54] Deputy Mayor Heaver.

[4:08:56] Thank you, Mr. Zudem, and I read the answer as a report with interest and all of the

[4:09:01] background.

[4:09:02] It's quite volume this.

[4:09:04] And I think one of the things that I would congratulate my colleagues on is many of them

[4:09:10] are having ward meetings on a periodic

[4:09:15] some quarterly, some by an early basis.

[4:09:18] And I wonder if there's a way in which staff could help us

[4:09:21] so that we all don't have to reinvent the wheel.

[4:09:23] This is great to take out, but if we could somehow create

[4:09:27] a 15-slide deck that we could share amongst ourselves

[4:09:33] so we're all not, and the deer folks that work with us

[4:09:38] counselors office aren't trying to figure out how to put this into a slide that we can

[4:09:43] probably modify it if there's something we wanted to emphasize versus something else

[4:09:48] but if we could create that to go along with the documentation, I think that'd be really

[4:09:53] helpful for us to use in the early part of the year as many of us will have ward meetings at that

[4:10:00] time.

[4:10:03] We can certainly do that, thank you. Thank you, any other speakers? Councillor Helmer and then

[4:10:11] Thanks very much, so I guess this is a comment and perhaps a question through to our staff.

[4:10:19] So I appreciate the detailed tracking sort of for each item and the strategic plan like where are we at.

[4:10:26] I'm a bit concerned that most of the items are in progress and that they'll be in progress for many years and we won't really see any changes in the indicators for a lot of these things,

[4:10:38] because it's sort of binary, it's like it's in progress,

[4:10:41] so it's going to be completed or not started.

[4:10:43] And there's a lot, there's a lot of differences within in progress.

[4:10:47] And I wanted to bring here attention, there was an example that I saw,

[4:10:51] which I thought was a little bit more detail,

[4:10:54] which was, it's sort of like, red, a red yellow green.

[4:10:59] Green was advancing well in progress, no big problems,

[4:11:02] it's on the track.

[4:11:03] Yellow was, you know, in progress, but it's kind of stalled.

[4:11:06] and Red was, you know, since that started.

[4:11:09] And so I wonder if you considered having that kind of,

[4:11:13] like, slightly more detail around the in-progress items

[4:11:15] and whether you think that'd be helpful.

[4:11:17] Because I'm worried that this looks pretty good

[4:11:19] for the first cut, and then we'll look at it again

[4:11:22] and it'll look almost decent,

[4:11:24] and that won't be as helpful as a way of monitoring.

[4:11:27] Through the chair, I certainly appreciate that comment

[4:11:31] and there may be other ways in which we could approach this

[4:11:35] And recently at a LEDC meeting, we had a presentation that, in a very similar way, utilized

[4:11:42] the red, the green, and the yellow, I appreciate that the Councillor is coming, and this

[4:11:47] is our first time through.

[4:11:49] And we put this together fairly quickly wanting to be able to have the first report.

[4:11:55] But certainly I think on a go-forward basis, we would want to as accurately as possible

[4:12:01] be able to show where we are and how we've been progressing and so your comments are appreciated

[4:12:07] and we'll take that back to see how we can bring back the next iteration in a way that's

[4:12:13] meaningful and shows the progression over time.

[4:12:18] Okay, that's just where did I be down?

[4:12:20] Yeah, go ahead, please. The first,

[4:12:26] I think I, it's sort of like council how much point in

[4:12:29] when you when you have a strategic plan and then you say here how are we doing it and you

[4:12:34] cite another plan and then you say it's in progress on going I could see seeing the exact

[4:12:39] same thing next I would prefer to know something specific that we've done in that plan

[4:12:43] and other would type we these are big element of that plan that we've finished is or not but to

[4:12:48] just say you know we're we're in progress on a big plan doesn't doesn't really help me and when

[4:12:53] I compare that to the report to the community the thing about it I really like is it does

[4:12:57] site specific things. It doesn't speak in the language of plans. It speaks in the language

[4:13:02] that citizens can understand. So when I compare the two I suppose as a counselor, I would

[4:13:08] prefer it. I would prefer more of what the reports the community has in other

[4:13:11] specific items that have been completed but I really like the reports of the community

[4:13:19] MSI. Councillor Hopkins.

[4:13:22] Thank you. I'd like to also make the same comment as the previous counselors. I was

[4:13:28] very pleased to see the record of the community come forward, that gave me a lot more detail

[4:13:34] as opposed to the record in the agenda. So I would like to see something different coming

[4:13:40] forward in May and November. The dashboard, I think the green yellow red automatically gives me

[4:13:47] an indication as to what's going on just by looking at it. I found when I was looking at certain items

[4:13:54] had completed in progress on going which I think is it's fine for the first report but I would

[4:14:01] kind of question that as we move forward so again would appreciate the report to the community

[4:14:08] and maybe a change in the other reporting. Councillor Morgan.

[4:14:17] I like the report thinking community

[4:14:19] although I will mention when I mentioned the first time and that there are pictures of other

[4:14:24] who will place in the city beside downtown,

[4:14:26] and I think fanship I made it in there.

[4:14:27] I'm not sure how Mo got that happen, but I do like it.

[4:14:32] And on the reporting of the progress,

[4:14:35] I appreciate the comments that are made so far.

[4:14:37] The one thing that I've seen with previous organizations

[4:14:39] that I've worked on reporting out on a strategic plan

[4:14:42] is who the lead is on that particular component

[4:14:46] to follow up with more information.

[4:14:48] So if I want to see where one of these things is going,

[4:14:51] whether that's the SLT person,

[4:14:53] even maybe digging it down to the person who's like actually leading on on the item that that could be a

[4:15:02] So we recognize the work that the individuals are doing as well as no who to go to if we had some questions about the initiative.

[4:15:12] I think that feedback is well received.

[4:15:15] I have come through as sure and your other speakers at the time, Councillor Asher.

[4:15:19] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I like the report. I do agree with what Councillor Helmer said. It would be nice to have some different colors.

[4:15:27] I wonder if if we see anything else because I haven't had time to go through this, and I don't want to go through it critically, I just want to go through it and make some comments that might be advantageous, but I do want to make one specific one right now, and it's on page 10 where we talk about diverse employment opportunities.

[4:15:46] I'm not sure sure that what it says here is relevant to the city of London.

[4:15:53] I'm not sure sure what it means at all.

[4:15:55] I like to see something as specifically for the city of London and the diverse employment opportunities.

[4:16:01] I think that when we made a statement, we were talking about the demographics of the employees of the city of London,

[4:16:08] not anything to do with London and economic development cooperation.

[4:16:12] But I'd like to be allowed to get my input within the next 40, additional input within the next 48 hours.

[4:16:19] Yeah, I'm seeing nods from Mr. Zidim that once you have a chance to go through the document detail to provide your feedback in this time for that.

[4:16:28] Any other speakers?

[4:16:30] Okay. If you get open the vote please, we'll look for a mover and a seconder.

[4:16:42] Move by Councillor Rain, hold a second by Councillor Helmer. There's no one on the speaking list, we're voting.

[4:16:50] closing the vote. The motion carries 14 to 0. Great. That brings us to our last consent item.

[4:16:56] This is five. This is the letting community grants program. Is that Ms. Livingston? Is that when yours?

[4:17:06] Thank you. The purpose of this report is to bring back the details around the further work on modernizing the grant process.

[4:17:15] So at a previous SPPC, you endorse the overall framework for the modernized grant process.

[4:17:23] What this report entails is the specific policy, the updated grant agreement, and the evaluation criteria that would be applied.

[4:17:33] Okay, at this time we'll open this up for questions from any members comes to the park.

[4:17:48] Thank you.

[4:17:49] I don't have questions at this time.

[4:17:50] More so comments.

[4:17:51] Is that appropriate enough?

[4:17:52] Great.

[4:17:53] Under schedule A, section 4, 4.1, the last sentence of that paragraph where possible availability of grants would be advertised.

[4:18:03] I feel that every grant should be advertised. I would like to see that removed. I know I'm digging into the weeds, but I'll only be there for another minute.

[4:18:13] Under, the appeals process, I'm not happy with the wording of, so this is section 4.5,

[4:18:21] On page 83, 4.5.6, an appeal does not delay or suspend the city's disbursement of allocated funds to approved organizations.

[4:18:31] To me, that shines no hope to the appeals process whatsoever because every dollar I'm assuming would be allocated to groups.

[4:18:38] I'm seeing shaking heads, so that makes me happy.

[4:18:40] But I still don't like that wording because for individuals organizations looking to apply for this funding, I would look like, okay, there's no lead at the end of the tunnel.

[4:18:49] So if I get some clarification on that, that'd be great.

[4:18:57] Through the chair, I think the intent was to have the grant allocation process proceed,

[4:19:03] but if the understanding of what is said here is that we would not actually entertain an appeal,

[4:19:13] then we'll reword it so it's

[4:19:18] clear.

[4:19:18] That's Russia.

[4:19:20] Just a quick one.

[4:19:22] Can you tell me more or less how much money we are talking about for our grant like this?

[4:19:25] I get the impression that there's about 2.3 million dollars and I were on the right with that.

[4:19:30] That's what show I got that from.

[4:19:35] Through the chair, there is a total at the moment of 2.4 million.

[4:19:40] And we were proposing a distribution between the multi-year lines and the innovation and capital line of 2.3 million and 100,000.

[4:19:49] That decision of course is yours to make during the budget discussions,

[4:19:53] but that's the amount that is available currently.

[4:19:58] Councillor Zain.

[4:20:01] Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[4:20:02] I have four questions.

[4:20:06] Under 4.3.5,

[4:20:10] specific type of confidentiality and conflict of interest.

[4:20:14] The third bullet speaks to members of the community for

[4:20:17] Upanel, remaining anonymous until all

[4:20:20] funny decisions have been made at that time

[4:20:22] that committee membership will be released

[4:20:23] the public through the chair as a question and just I may have just missed earlier.

[4:20:29] So how often does the membership of the community review panel alternate or does it switch?

[4:20:35] Does it terminate at the end of the period when that funding has been given out and then a new

[4:20:39] group has put on?

[4:20:40] Because otherwise it would seem like that sort of an anonymity would be less than helpful if they

[4:20:48] get released at that time.

[4:21:13] Through the chair, the names for the multi-year review is so it's once every three years in 2017 to 2019, and then moving forward once every four years.

[4:21:24] So that review panel is once, so it will be one panel every end of change every three or four years, the membership.

[4:21:32] For the annual and innovation and capital stream, the review panel will be an annual panel.

[4:21:38] question

[4:21:43] one done. Thank you. Question two under 5.1 under the application. Sorry 5.1.

[4:21:49] Point two, grant applications must be accompanied by financial statements for the previous year.

[4:21:54] So are we excluding organizations that have never existed before and have not had a full year under their both?

[4:22:04] We need to have at least some type of audit statement.

[4:22:09] Probably if it's audited, it doesn't have to be.

[4:22:11] we have funded organizations in the first year before where they haven't had any formal funding

[4:22:17] but at the minimum they've had some type of informal financial statement or budget

[4:22:22] that we've reviewed and just a quick comment through the chair so

[4:22:28] and I don't and I think that's probably a important thing to do I guess I just want

[4:22:32] we want necessarily to advertising ourselves as necessarily the first place that

[4:22:35] organization might come for a grant potentially which is okay we can help support

[4:22:39] after a certain point. Under 5.3.4, the City of London through its grain process will not

[4:22:46] contribute to outstanding deficits. So that's a key one to me. I just want to ask for the chair.

[4:22:52] So we talk about not contributing to outstanding deficits. Does that mean that we will not

[4:22:56] contribute to organizations that have existing deficits at all?

[4:23:04] Through the chair, this is what we

[4:23:05] currently have in practice and we would continue if the organization has an outstanding deficit.

[4:23:11] For example, in 2015, we will not fund them in 2016.

[4:23:20] Through the chair, in my last question, and thank you for that clarification.

[4:23:23] I'm glad to hear that.

[4:23:24] This is under schedule B1 under the grant agreement, and I just, we have the innovation and

[4:23:32] capital grants, but under the schedule, it doesn't actually speak as far as I can see to

[4:23:35] innovation grants.

[4:23:36] I was wondering if that's that fall under a capital or operating.

[4:23:42] Through the chair, thank you for that.

[4:23:44] The innovation falls under the operating.

[4:23:46] Any

[4:23:51] other speakers? Councillor Armstrong? Okay, sorry my list. Quick one, three or

[4:23:58] ship. What's there's something I read in there about if an organization's from

[4:24:02] outside a London and not eligible for funding?

[4:24:09] Through the chair that is

[4:24:10] correct you have to be an incorporated organization within the city of London

[4:24:14] boundaries.

[4:24:20] Okay, because I remember but maybe they haven't applied. I remember

[4:24:24] there is at least one I remember that was from outside of London so when you go

[4:24:29] down this policy that one would be immediately excluded. I'm going from memory that

[4:24:35] there was a group and that was the issue at the time and I'm not sure. I don't

[4:24:41] think I supported that group because of that issue. I won't get into the name but

[4:24:47] usually when they start getting funding they get thing funding every year unless

[4:24:52] something changes. So anyway, I'm sure you'll find that out later on when you

[4:24:57] implement the policy.

[4:25:01] Thank you. Councilor Morgan.

[4:25:04] Thank you. I think that

[4:25:07] whatever organization we're talking about will be fine for next year because we

[4:25:10] we've rolled them all over from this year into 2016 which was and at that time I

[4:25:16] had asked if we could review based on the strategic plan that that vote didn't

[4:25:20] So, well, but I will say, I'm really happy with the way that the strategic plan has been integrated both into the granting and application process and aligning, you know, the priorities and direction that we've set with the qualification and scope of projects.

[4:25:37] So, I know having moved that previous motion, I'd wanted to say very, very happy with that integration into the report.

[4:25:44] But I think that's exactly what we should be doing with community grants is getting community

[4:25:48] organizations to help align with the strategic plan and helping us as community partners

[4:25:54] implement segments of it.

[4:25:55] So that's quite well done.

[4:25:57] Thank you.

[4:25:59] Councillor Vandholst.

[4:26:02] Thank you.

[4:26:02] We're shipping through you.

[4:26:05] Hopefully this will roll out without any bugs.

[4:26:08] But if not, then I'm just wondering how you'll deal with that.

[4:26:13] So if something doesn't quite work out, how you will approach that situation.

[4:26:22] Through the chair with humor and that now.

[4:26:27] I think what we're going to do is undertake a significant communication effort.

[4:26:32] And also everyone in the community understands this.

[4:26:35] And we'll hold information sessions so people are well prepared.

[4:26:38] If we learn something as we undertake the process that we feel needs to result in a change in the policy direction,

[4:26:48] then we will bring that back to council for direction, otherwise we'll operationalize it within the confines of what we've put in front of you.

[4:26:59] So at this time I have no further speakers Councillor Helmer.

[4:27:04] Thanks very much Mr. Mayor.

[4:27:06] So my question is about, well, it's not really a question, I think we should get rid of it.

[4:27:11] It's four to one.

[4:27:12] This is about the mandatory community information meeting.

[4:27:16] And my concern with that is that this is your one chance to participate in this program,

[4:27:20] and if you miss it, you're done, and you can't participate.

[4:27:23] And I think that that is not a good idea.

[4:27:25] Especially in conjunction, I'm glad Councillor Park asked about the advertising piece,

[4:27:29] because my concern with the overall thing was, if you already know into the city, we'll contact you.

[4:27:34] If you come to our community information meeting, you can then participate, but if not, you know, a tough lock and you're not going to be able to participate.

[4:27:42] So I like the idea of having a community information meeting great idea.

[4:27:45] If somebody did miss it, I think you should be able to have a kind of catch up or maybe more than what meeting or something.

[4:27:50] But that seems like a very harsh thing to have a mandatory meeting, and if you don't make it, you're out.

[4:27:58] Through the chair, we certainly take the point.

[4:28:00] I think the reason for the language is we want to stress the importance of people understanding

[4:28:05] the information sharing and that the obligation rests with them as well, not just with us

[4:28:10] in terms of understanding what they need to do.

[4:28:12] I will say to you that that's our language currently, we don't say no to anyone we do our best

[4:28:18] to encourage everyone.

[4:28:19] If you wish to remove the language of mandatory, that's fine, but we'll make it clear

[4:28:24] in the communication pieces that the onus is also on those that wish to apply to be up to speed

[4:28:30] understand what the steps are. Not just a one-way street.

[4:28:39] Yeah, so for what it's worth

[4:28:41] something for you to consider. I think having the meetings is good. Having people

[4:28:44] have to come to meetings is not great for everybody and a lot of this information can be

[4:28:49] conveyed through some kind of video or something where you're like, here's what you need to know

[4:28:52] about applying and you say, you know, it's mandatory that you go through this thing and learn

[4:28:56] about the process. I'm not necessarily come to a meeting, so for your consideration.

[4:29:03] Thank you.

[4:29:04] Okay, we have the motion up on screen now.

[4:29:07] It's been moved by Councillor Park.

[4:29:08] It's been seconded by Councillor Armstrong.

[4:29:10] I'll draw your attention to Part B,

[4:29:13] which includes a further amendment to advertise for all grants

[4:29:16] as per Councillor Parks comments.

[4:29:18] And I'll also draw your attention to the updated bylaw

[4:29:21] that was distributed earlier this evening

[4:29:23] to replace the bylaw that was in the agenda package.

[4:29:29] I won't call the vote until I get a sense of people ready.

[4:29:36] Okay, let's open the vote.

[4:29:50] closing the boat the motion carries 14 to 0 okay great work committee

[4:30:00] This is item 10 revised. There were four names listed on the original agenda package. There are now three. It's Councillor Park, Squire, and Zafeman have put their names forward to sitting in the county city lays on committee. This requires two members of council in one alternate member. Before we go into a comprehensive and complicated voting process, I'll just look to Councillor Parks, Squire, and Zafeman, see if any one of them might be interested in sitting as an alternate.

[4:30:27] Just

[4:30:32] wait just for one moment in your Councilor Park, Squire and Zacon, all interested in

[4:30:39] I think serving a Guide Councilor Zavan?

[4:30:45] Through the chair and I apologize for doing this way.

[4:30:48] I've just more had a question.

[4:30:51] I've been fortunate where my award is situated also through AIMO and through FCM.

[4:30:57] I've had a lot of great connections with county colleagues.

[4:31:00] I'm doing a lot of work with them, connecting with them.

[4:31:03] I know Councilor Park and I had the opportunity to be at the inaugural meeting for the County

[4:31:07] last week with the mayor, and that was great, and I know that earlier tonight, the Deputy

[4:31:12] Mayor of TEMC center Marcel Myers was here, and he was hoping to be here for this item,

[4:31:17] but he thinks that we talk quite a bit, and that's rightly so, and so fortunately he had

[4:31:24] to leave just for time commitments, but what I'm getting at is, I feel as though I'm fortunate

[4:31:30] I've had a lot of opportunity to work with the County, and I would love more opportunity

[4:31:33] to work with the county, but if my colleagues are up to it, I'd be curious just to hear reasons

[4:31:39] why they're interested in serving on this. Just because then if there is, you know, a really

[4:31:43] strong interest and something different than what I'm looking to do, then I might be happy to

[4:31:48] set it as the alternate. Okay, I will invite both Councilor Squire and Park to advocate on behalf

[4:31:55] of themselves. Should they so choose? Sure. Yeah. The reason this appeal to me is it really matches

[4:32:02] the background that I had previously to this when I was council of school board. I was on the school board trustee

[4:32:08] and I was chair for two terms and I had the opportunity through that process to work with 40 other school boards

[4:32:14] of varying sizes and complexity and in that system you have a board such as on the district traffic school board

[4:32:20] with 18,000 students and you have other boards that have maybe 4,000 students. So I'm really used to working

[4:32:26] with organizations of different sizes, different priorities and getting those priorities sort of together

[4:32:31] so that they're matching up and we're able to see what it is we want to work together on.

[4:32:35] So it's something that's in my background and working in before I'm currently on the liaison

[4:32:39] committees with the two school boards and I enjoy that.

[4:32:42] So I think it fits in with with what I've done in the past in terms of my experience and sort

[4:32:47] of building that consensus between maybe what is a large organization and a slightly smaller

[4:32:52] organization in terms of certain aspects and making that work.

[4:33:00] That's a perk.

[4:33:01] Thank you, through my role as Councilor, I've been pretty good at build bridge building, really, and historically I grew up in a real community, so I really get the role urban divide and how the conversations go in melding that relationship.

[4:33:16] So that's something I'm keen to work on whether get appointed as a full-time member or if I'm lucky enough to get the alternate position also.

[4:33:25] I think it's important that we have a strong representation of a stronger relationship with the county as there are neighbors here and in working on council in the new proposal coming forward

[4:33:36] in the next planning meeting.

[4:33:38] I've developed some strong relationships with counselors on the other council and I'd be happy to work with them to continually build that bridge.

[4:33:48] Thank you.

[4:33:50] Councillor Zafan.

[4:33:53] To the chair, I'm very satisfied with the answers that the two Councils have provided and I'll be happy to sit as the alternate.

[4:34:00] Looking for a motion then to support Councillor Park and Squire as the two members will get you a moment when we take a look for that first.

[4:34:11] Councillor Armstrong?

[4:34:13] Well, I'm happy to support the motion when it's, uh, I gather a counselor because I mean

[4:34:20] I miss that counselor at Cassie's with Dron, all the guidance here that are there, so that makes

[4:34:26] a lot easier.

[4:34:27] But it's really great to see your, your worship that we have people like, I remember other

[4:34:33] councils where you would have to drag people into these committees, where you're, uh, this

[4:34:40] Council every time these opportunities come up, there's many applicants and a willingness to

[4:34:47] almost argue as to who should get on there.

[4:34:51] And this is, this is, this is work, this is time commitment.

[4:34:55] So I just want to recognize these Councillors for putting their names forward on this issue and volunteering.

[4:35:05] So we have a motion's been moved and seconded over you, Councillor Resher.

[4:35:12] And the other speakers,

[4:35:16] Councillor Zafan, you've earned the right to speak again, B.R. Guests.

[4:35:23] Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, I'm not. I just want to reiterate that I think we do have two members.

[4:35:28] And myself as the alternate we'll be serving on this, so I think are great, and obviously very genuine reasons for wanting to do this.

[4:35:34] And I think I just want to reiterate that we do have a great relationship with the county, and I think this will only serve to strengthen it with the members that will be serving.

[4:35:43] and I think the more members that we can have with stronger and better relationships with the

[4:35:46] county, I don't only serve us in the larger region, quite a bit better, so very supportive of this.

[4:35:53] Thank you, Councillor. I'm looking forward to working with all of you on this committee.

[4:35:57] We'll look then if you know more speakers, we'll call the question.

[4:36:02] We are voting.

[4:36:09] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 to 0.

[4:36:12] Item 11, this is a point of an individual for the outstanding

[4:36:17] lender and ambassador awards committee. It requires one representative from Urban League,

[4:36:20] Urban League is brought a name forward. It's before you. I'll look to Councillor Hopkins.

[4:36:28] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd just like to make a comment. I was very pleased to see the

[4:36:32] coming forward. Dan Dorenchenko is a co-chair of the borrowing community organization. In fact,

[4:36:41] he took my position as being the urban league representative, and he also is quite involved

[4:36:46] throughout London. So, just very, just wanted council to be aware. I'm very pleased to see his name

[4:36:51] back for it.

[4:36:55] Thank you. And it's up now. I wonder if you'd be willing to move that.

[4:36:59] If I consciously and second by councilor Hoppins, that's fine. Any further discussion?

[4:37:05] We're voting.

[4:37:16] Councilor Silly.

[4:37:21] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 to zero.

[4:37:24] And this brings us to item 12. This is the eighth report of the governance working group.

[4:37:28] The chair is not with us at this time. I wonder if I can look to the vice chair councilor Morgan to move this.

[4:37:34] Great. Thank you very much for coming up at a moment.

[4:37:36] Any discussion?

[4:37:37] This is

[4:37:53] really a metaphor of the governance committee as we wait for.

[4:37:57] All right.

[4:37:58] Here we go.

[4:37:59] It's been moved by Councillor Essir.

[4:38:01] It's taken by Councillor Morgan.

[4:38:03] Any discussion?

[4:38:04] No.

[4:38:04] They're being done.

[4:38:05] We're voting.

[4:38:15] Close in the vote.

[4:38:16] The motion carries 14 to 0.

[4:38:19] Okay.

[4:38:20] Colleagues.

[4:38:20] We dealt with item 13 earlier this evening.

[4:38:22] So we're moving then through deferred matters.

[4:38:24] Additional business.

[4:38:25] I don't believe there's any.

[4:38:26] So we're now on the final stretch.

[4:38:28] some confidential stuff to deal with, we have C2, as listed on our agenda, we have the other

[4:38:34] matter that I'll look to Miss Saunders to read out loud, so we can also deal with that

[4:38:39] well in camera.

[4:38:40] Is it wrong?

[4:38:45] Yes, the other matter is as follows, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, like computer just went

[4:38:52] wrong.

[4:38:58] We're pertaining to advice, subject, solicitor, client, privilege as the relates to the

[4:39:08] momentarily,

[4:39:34] move by Councillor Van Hull, second by Councillor Morgan, any discussion or

[4:39:37] voting.

[4:39:50] Closing the vote, the motion carries 14 to 0.

Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

Transcript