Okay, welcome back for November 25th meeting of the committee of the whole. Next on the agenda is approval. Resolves that the agenda for the November 25th, 2025 committee of the whole meeting be approved as presented. Will we're secular, please?
I'd be adopted.
Move your second, please.
Councilor Zaguerre, Councilor Noble.
All in favor?
Motion carries.
Any disclosure of beginning of interest
through nature thereof?
Not seeing any?
Next, any members' motions?
I see any.
Down to item six, 6.1,
manager of procurement risk general insurance
and risk management services program
for 2026. Welcome, Mike.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Warden. Through to County Council.
So this report provides details regarding the general insurance and risk management services for 2026.
So Marsh was selected in 2021 through a competitive RFP process to provide the services for up to five years.
So this is the final year of that contract term.
The proposed insurance premium cost for 2026 is just over $620,000.
a 0.3% increase from the 2025 premium.
And I'll know that's a welcome change to our last large percentage increases.
The attached premium comparison provides a difference for each policy line.
You'll note that we've added in the cost of provincial sales tax as well.
And as that cost is not rebated to the county.
At this time, we're recommending renewal of this program for one year term and
the issuance of a new RFP process in 2026.
The two staff recommendations are before you, at this time, I'd be pleased to answer any questions.
Thank you, Mike.
Congratulations, please.
Resolved that the general insurance and risk management services program proposed by Marsh Canada Limited
be approved at the annual premium cost of $620,684 plus tax, 8% PST, commencing December 15th, 2025,
and expiring on December 15th, 2026.
and that the manager of procurement and risk and director of financial services
treasurer be authorized to renew the policy.
We're in second, please.
Councilor Latham, Deputy Warden Ketchbaw, any discussion, questions from Mike.
Seeing any, all in favor, motion carries.
Thank you, Mike.
Next, we have Director of Planning, Development, County Planning, Update,
welcome, Matt, floor is yours.
Good
afternoon, through the warden to members of the committee and council.
The report before you highlights the evolution of the planning department here at the county.
What started with a team that was primarily focused on policy and development matters here
at the county, we've expanded, we're currently providing planning service to two of our local
municipal partners, Dutton Dunwich and Southwold.
Most recently, we have had two other of our local municipal partners, councils decide
to sign on with the planning service, which is pretty exciting.
Growth with our department is something that will really be focusing on in 2026.
So, the report before you breaks down the numbers, projected revenues, projected costs.
We're looking to hire an additional development planner to help us with the increased workload that the two LMPs will bring with them to our department.
Any additional details? I'm here for questions, but I can leave it there. Thanks very much.
Thank you, Matt. Congratulations, please.
Results at the report titles County Planning Update from the Director of Planning and Development dated November 25th, 2025.
be received and filed and that county council direct planning staff to proceed with hiring a new planner FTE
to increase the county's planning staff complement to provide planning services to West Elian.
Move her a seconder please. Councillor Hance, Councillor Atham, questions from that?
The answer is your gear.
Just a couple of clarifications. Thank you for the good report through you, Mr. Warden.
The planning consultant, do we need to have a retainer fee to maintain his or her availability?
And my second question is when it comes to service that you talk about being available
in the office, do you mean the office here at sunset or an office in the municipality?
Through the warden to Councillor Jagerre, we do not pay a retainer fee for our consultant.
The consultant is a long time consultant. It's Paul Hicks office out of Montreal.
That service has been going well for us. We've been drawing on it as a needed basis.
Your second question in regards to service in the office, we will be providing in office
the service at the each municipality as requested.
So currently our service to done which in office
has been put on hold,
but we do provide a day of service
in the South Hold Office.
We'll be providing a day at the West Algan Office
and a day at the Bayam office.
And then in addition to that,
we are also available all the time in our office.
So if something comes up and somebody would like to speak
to us in person, and it's not on a day that we're there.
They're invited to come to the county's office, and there'll be someone here that's available.
I guess I can comment from selfless perspective.
It's worked out very well, having Paul in the office once a week.
And if there are questions from our own staff, they know where to call.
It's worked out very well.
The other questions from Matt?
Matt, we'll go ahead, Deputy Warden.
Just for a clerk,
does your motion need to include Bayham as well?
I really don't care, because we're going to do it regardless, but.
Through the awarding, just for clarification, when I started writing this report, at the
time, only West Elgin had indicated interest in signing up to the County's Planning Service,
and then halfway through writing the report, we were notified that Bayham was as well, so
and that park doesn't need to be updated to include them, please.
I think that's a good new story, maybe.
Any further comments?
I'll call vote, all in favor.
Motion carries.
Thanks, Matt.
Next, Jeff, Director of Financial Services, the Treasurer, regarding Eldon County Grant Funding Request.
Floor is yours, Jen.
Through you, Mr. Warden, to members of Council.
In 2024, Council approved a new and simplified grant and sponsorship policy.
Then ensures that all funding requests submitted to the county are handled in a consistent, fair and equitable manner.
The policy is provided for you in Appendix 1, and through this program, the county of Algonn allocates grants and sponsorships to eligible organizations and initiatives that support the county's current mission.
vision and values and council's strategic plan.
Council awarded sponsorships to 24 applicants in 2025 and has awarded one grant to date in 2025 in the amount of $5,700 to the Wallace Town Fair Agricultural Society for their office building project.
Council allocated $240,000 in the 2025 budget towards the capital grant program.
The purpose of this report is to seek council's direction regarding awarding the grant funding
for three additional applications that have been received under the grant stream of the program.
Applications have been submitted by the South Doorchester Home and School Association,
the Port Burwell Home and School Association, and the Hospice of Elgin for Capital Projects.
Details regarding each application are provided below, as well,
While each application is provided in your agenda package under appendix 2, 3 and 4.
The three applications submitted under the County of Algon Grant and Sponsorship Program
demonstrate strong community leadership and alignment with Council's commitment to supporting
projects that enhance the quality of life and promote community well-being across Algon
County.
Both the South Doorchester and Port Burwell Community well-being, home and school association
have met all eligibility requirements under the policy, and their playground projects will provide lasting recreational and social benefits for children and families.
The Hospice of Elgin Project, while providing an essential community service, does not fully comply with the terms of the county's grant and sponsorship policy due to its faith-based affiliation, multi-year funding request, and submission timing.
Staff are requesting that Council provide direction regarding the funding requests received from the South Doorchester Home and School Association, the Port Burwell Home and School Association, and the Hospice of Algan.
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Jen. Questions, concerns?
I guess I would like to address the hospice of Elgin with regards to affiliated health
care of face-based organizations.
I think that's false.
Yes, it is an associate of the St. Joe's health care, but I've spoken to management,
I've
There's a team that has put this proposal together.
You can walk in that door, it doesn't matter what faith you are.
It's the same as walking into St. Joe's Hospital for a shoulder repair.
They don't, there's no faith involved.
It's this funding from the province to ensure that she get proper care.
This is no different at the hospice.
They have a chaplain on site.
Chaplain is trained in multiple face,
whether it's Muslim, Buddhist, whatever.
They are then trained to fill the needs
of whoever walks through that door.
With regards to maid, I know that's been mentioned before.
or most hospice in Ontario do not promote me, whether they're associated with the hospital
or private clinics, there's only a couple that do that.
This is based on the thought process of what a hospice is and the hospice is not part
of, or made is not part of that program for majority of hospice in Ontario.
So I really argue the fact that this is a faith-based organization because they support
all faiths and without question.
So with regards, I do have an issue with the Yask or five years, I think it should be,
and I told people that this should be a one-year ask and keep coming back and applying, and
you either get or you don't get it but that's my statement for that one and I'll leave it there.
So Catherine would like to do each request individually so we'll start down that list then.
All right thank you Mr. Warden. So the first resolution would be that county council provide funding
in the amount of $12,000 for the South Doorchester Home and School Association.
As for a mover and a seconder, Councillor Noble, Councillor Gagher, any discussion, all in
favour? Motion carries.
Resolves that County Council provide funding in the amount of $2,000 for the Port Burwell
Home and School Association.
I have a mover and seconder please, Councillor Hance, Councillor Noble, discussion,
all in
favour, motion carries.
And the third is that county council provide funding in the amount of $1 million over
a five-year period to hospice of Elgin.
over in seconder, please.
Councilor Noble, seconder. Councilor Ziegair.
Discussion?
I guess
I've stated my case as I'll leave it at that.
Go ahead, Councilor Ziegair. No.
So, through you, Mr. Morgan, so what would
I'm wondering if the committee should be considering a one-year commitment and what that would look like. So, we're, I don't know, staff of the comment of what that amount could be if we were to pro-read it to one year. I would agree. I can't support five years, but I definitely would consider one year commitment and then be considered again in a future year.
Jen?
You mean Mr. Warden to members of Council, at this point, if the two other ones are approved,
there would be approximately 222,000 left in that pot, so that would be the maximum amount
for this year that we could allocate.
We have a mover second, would you like to throw it in hell?
So we could add that amount to the motion then, if the mover is willing that the committee
consider funding the hospice to the tune of 222,000.
So that's okay with the mover.
Yeah.
Thank you, Mr. Warden.
So if the mover and seconder are okay with it, we could modify the resolution to say that
that the County of Elgin provide funding in the amount of $220,000 in 2025 to hospice of Elgin.
Is it 20s?
It's this year.
Councillor Giorgio?
Thank you, Mr. Warden.
So based on your statement earlier and based on the report, so that means this amount is already
accounted for in the budget.
So it's been allocated by this Council for the 2025 budget and if we consider the comments from the warden, then this would qualify under this policy.
So in other words, if it fits policy and it's already in the budget, there's not a lot more to debate or any reasons to not support it.
I guess if I had a wish, there's a couple of open houses at the hospice and where they
walked you through the process and I think that would have been clear in the presentations
from all the different managers that work in there including the chaplain of how things
work.
and so I think I was probably the only one from County that went through the open house,
but anyway, it's just food for thought, but that has been backed up by management and as well
as the two doctors which I highly respect as being professionals and not and being very upfront
with how the process works.
There's nothing else to other questions at Deputy Warden.
Go ahead.
Just an observation, Mr. Warden, it seems to me
that if the county worked down this road, it's changing horses,
sort of speak, in a direction that it had already mapped out previously.
I wouldn't wonder that this might be considered a bit of an insult
call to those who pioneered the idea of serenity house.
I don't agree with your assessment on not being faith-based.
There were three categories here that staff had identified that it didn't meet the criteria.
We've leapfroged through and perhaps tried to convince ourselves that in two categories it does.
I'm sorry, I just can't support this.
Councillor Gagard, go ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Warden.
So can we clarify the other two areas?
So I think one of them was that it was a five-year ask.
So we would be modifying this to a one-year commitment.
And what was the third criteria that it didn't meet?
Submission one year before project meeting.
Gotcha.
And I guess I would say with submission, they have submitted the pass because of procedure they were turned down in the past.
I can't exactly remember what the reasoning was, but they think they're too late at the time before.
Memory serves me that I know they tried to apply in whatever reason that didn't happen.
If I, Mr. Warden, if I may, my recollection is that then they came before us, there was
an initial ask at the time, we didn't have a policy in place.
So we kind of put it on hold, council asked staff to develop a policy to help us deal with
these types of requests.
they then returned last June, I believe, or may, they had a delegation at which point,
and if I recall that delegation didn't have a specific ask, so Council said, now that we have a
policy in place, could you please come back and with a specific ask, so Council could consider it.
So that was my interpretation as to why that criteria in terms of the timing.
in fairness to them, we've put them on hold so that we could sort out our mechanism
for making a decision. They have been quite patient and have followed all of the requirements
we put before them. So that's why in my interpretation, I was waiving that third criteria.
Anything further?
Then I'll call Councillor Hance. Go ahead.
I'm trying to recall all the details they've been here a number of times and I'm trying
to wrap my head around what's changed this time with their request and I'm having trouble
supporting it at this time.
I think they have the right to come back with a specific ask and I think all we're doing
as changing words and language to somehow try and accommodate and ask that it's nothing
like what I have before me here right now. So I'm having really a challenge with accepting
their request that we've modified in order to make it work.
Okay. Anything further? Not all in favor? We're in favor? Opposed? Opposed? Have a dead
lock. No decision.
Okay moving on to 6-4, Director of Legal Services, kind of shared services.
Nick back there. Yep, here he goes.
Good afternoon, Warden, through you to council.
So the report that I have before you is an update to a report I brought in August of this year.
That's why it's entitled 3-B and remains with the Title County Shared Services. And before I even
start because I'm going to say different words about roughly the same concept.
So earlier this summer, we were talking about the services that the county provides,
either in conjunction with or to the local municipal partners as shared services.
As we went through that early report in August, which is attached to this one for ease of reference,
it became apparent that one of the things we needed to focus on in order to tackle this project
is the ones where we are essentially selling a service like a professional consulting
style service to other local municipal partners or public entities that we have arrangements
with. And so I have moved to more accurately calling those contracted services. So the
policy that's before you today is a contracted services policy and the updated report that's
before you in November uses the terminology contracted services. And so that is the gist
of this report in any event. So on August 12, I guess it's committee of the whole
directed staff to develop a philosophy and policy framework to govern when and how the
county will sell services to external organizations and to return before you today with that.
So that's what we've done. I led the project, but it was in conjunction with all of ELT. We looked
at the Algon County Strategic Plan, the most recent service delivery review, which is done back in
2020, and then we all just walked through because we deliver contract and services across
our departments at what some of those merits, benefits, challenges, drawbacks were across
the different departments, and we came up with, first of all, a philosophy that's actually
contained in the report, which is the county may provide contract and services to other
public entities where it can be established that providing such service will provide value
for the citizens and ratepayers of Logan County that at the very least the cost will be recovered
to ensure fairness to the county's ratepayers and that there will be no negative impact on county
operations or resources including personnel. So I realize it's a very long sentence but I'm trying
to capture all the different ideas in a philosophical statement. If we go to the first appendix which
in the PDF of our agenda starts on page 105, it's just behind my report. If you're looking at the
report separately in eScrib, that policy statement sort of sets out why we're doing this,
and then just below that under the main heading purpose, we see an underlying area that
says criteria, and these are really the established criteria that fills that philosophy.
So sorry, I do promise I'm not going to read the entire policy, but I think it's worthwhile
reading the criteria that we set out so that committee can make an informed decision on
whether to approve this policy.
So first of all that a request for contracted services been received by one or more external
public entities and that's just to sort of move forward with the we don't we don't sit
around ELT table and generate ideas of things to sell essentially unless we have some direction
for council to do that. So where this starts with what is the need and that need is usually
described to us by someone who is external to us. Second that there's demonstrated value
for the citizens or ratepayers in Elgan County for the service to be delivered by the county.
The third is that there's sufficient resources at the county to deliver the service,
and that's without materially or substantially delaying other county projects or services
that are core things. That there is a minimum full cost recovery to the county and delivering
the service, and that's to make sure that there's no unfairness to any ratepayers in any portion
of the county. So ultimately, our levy dollars are collected from everyone. If we're unfairly
subsidizing a service to a particular rate payer than the effect of that is shifting the burden of
that service to the other rate payer. There's another municipality. So that's what we're trying to
achieve is the level of fairness. And the reason it says that minimum is there is the option to have it
not just capture cost but to generate revenue that still has a business case to provide value
for citizens so that there is a way to generate revenue for the county and yet it still be cheaper
than what would be going to the private sector for the locals.
And then the last one is, of course, is that there's a formal agreement in place sitting
out the terms and conditions of how we're going to do that, which will cover all of these
areas.
And the part I'm not going to read every bullet point about it starts in the next page, which
is the assessment factors.
So we came up with a list of essentially factors that we would walk through in a way
to guide or decision making any time that we have a new contracted service proposed to
us or for just re-evaluating one that we already provide.
They are designed to answer the question of are all the criteria met.
So you will see in there things like cost recovery which is toward the bottom of the page is
to include not only all expenses related to directly providing the service but all of the
administrative overhead or corporate support department, so if legal does work for a local,
we have billing, and so my clerk works on it, which is fine, but then also finance supports
that billing ultimately to reconcile it into our budget.
So there's work that finance is doing that is less apparent than the direct delivery of
the service.
All actual out of pocket expenses, of course, are for purchasing anything for some reason.
Then we will make sure that the county recovers that, and then all indirect expenses, and
And this is one that we don't capture with the high level of exact due to all the time,
but what I mean by that is risk.
So often if you're hiring a professional consultant, one of the things you are buying is to offload
risk to the other entity.
And we want to find a way to deliver services at the county in a way that we aren't taking
on the risk of a local municipal partner at the expense of possibly spreading that risk
over the entire county.
So we're going to build in mechanisms into the contracts essentially to take care of that
to again make sure that risk is apportioned fairly, even though we hope nothing ever comes
of those risks in any of it. The next couple of pages capture the procedure. It's relatively
straightforward. I suspect it's what you would imagine would occur when we receive a new
request through administration. Essentially, it will flow through the affected director. If they
think it's possible or a good idea, they'll bring it to executive leadership. That gives the other
directors of what will end up being sort of corporate support to that, the opportunity
to chime in. Ultimately, the CAO will decide whether or not staff should engage, sorry,
recommend engaging in the contracted service, and that is one area. Step five of that procedure
drive inadvertently called a shared service, which will be corrected in the phone.
And then the CAO will advise the entity that initially asked for the service of what the staff recommendation will be, and then we bring a report to council. So whether staff thinks we should deliver the service or not, provided that there's been enough movement to get us to do the entire analysis, we will come to council with our recommendation on whether or not to do it. So council will make that decision. Any time there is a new type or form of contract
And I'll get to how we get to that in a moment when I talk about the existing ones.
There's also a procedure where it's received through Council.
So this flips a bit of the process on its head, which is either through statement by member.
It's just identified at committee of the whole or council that you wish us to assess a contract in service, and that's fine.
Or if there's just a piece of correspondence that appears on the agenda.
As long as there's a resolution by committee of the whole or council to bring a staff report.
we'll just do that, right. So we'll skip over the steps where the department had decides whether
they're interested, that department will still assess it all and bring a report back to you.
For existing contracted services because we have a number of them already,
the requested contract service already exists in a formalized arrangement in this instance. So
one of the ways to put it hopefully fairly easily is for legal services, we have arrangements with
the various LMPs to provide legal advice, so that's an existing contract and service that said
on each and every file I take in, I do actually decide whether or not we have capacity in the moment
to deliver that service in that instance, and so I assess the request. I do this more intuitively
than walking through every bullet point, but going forward we'll go through the bullet points of
the assessment factors, and then they can essentially the director of the primarily affected
department should inquire with other directors if it's not something that's already being
routinely done to make sure that it's not going to cause any obstacles for anyone else.
And then essentially you approve or refuse the provision of the contracted service.
That said, where the intensity or scope of it is just expected to increase in a way that it just
requires a full reconsideration of it, then that will again trigger an assessment as if it's a
new contracted service, including returning to council. So if we have agreed the most likely
scenario where this would occur is essentially to help out and a particular LNP or a bunch of
them with a service area and often it's due to personnel change over or whatever it may be.
If we're then approached later to say we want to make this permanent and we want you to take it all
on not just help us with our most pressing files, then at that point that's such a difference in
magnitude that we will assess it as if it's a new contracted service and return to council with it.
So that council is not only deciding whether we're in a contractual arrangement with
Another public entity did provide these, but you're also deciding the level of service we're providing right because this makes a difference on the workload of our folks what other council priorities you have. So it's making sure that councils a part of this process.
There are a couple of exemptions because we thought it was prudent to build those in.
One is if there's an acute need from the requesting entity for the service, so essentially if an emergency arises, then blame can authorize folks here to work on it.
that the assessment factors are still being considered in the spirit of the criteria.
So we're not just going to do it because someone asked really nicely,
we're still going to go through the exercise to make sure that the spirit
of what this policy set set is meant, that there's a firm end date to temporary assistance.
So if we get a temporary request like, hey, we've run into a jam, can you help us have
for X number of weeks or days, that everyone is clear that there's a firm end date.
And the reason I put that in there is if we go past that, we're getting into the criteria
of when we would come to council them, right, removing beyond that quick level of assistance.
And then lastly, we do still need formal agreements in place.
So this has to do with the risk and the cost recovery.
So even if we're doing something very briefly or just to help out, we do need formal arrangements
in place to make sure if anything goes awry that we can sort through any issues that arise.
And then the other exemption, which is in Section 2, is essentially with the approval of
the CAO, directors can accept requests to provide assistance with specific projects.
So often we are asked to store RFP, things like that, to sit in on an interview panel.
So those are out of this policy, like that's just sort of a one-off.
Everyone knows it'll take a couple hours and we just do it in addition to our work.
So that's my report.
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
But I'm hoping that I've captured what the direction was in August, which was to try and
set out both a procedure as well as the factors we're trying to hit that will guide how and when we do these things.
Thank you, Nick.
Any questions for Nick?
Sorry, can't go ahead.
Resolves that the report titled LS253V, county shared services from the director of legal services dated November 25th,
2025, it be received and filed, and that Council for the County of Elgin endorsed the county
contracted services policy attached to this report as Appendix A, and that Council
for the County of Elgin direct staff to create a standardized set of terms and conditions
for the delivery of contracted services by the county that conforms to the county contracted
services policy.
Thank you, Mr. Wardens.
First, I want to thank staff for putting the effort to sort this out.
I think this will be really, really helpful because I've said from the beginning, I certainly
they don't begrudge the collaborative spirit that they're ought to be in the relationship
and the support that they're ought to be between LNPs and the county.
I just want to make sure all along that this was done in a transparent, fair and equitable
way.
And I think you have achieved that with this proposed policy so that we can keep tabs on
where our capacity and resources are going.
So thank you.
Thank you for that.
And even including the risk management, like that was another aspect that I think had not been fully captured before, so that's spot on and I also appreciate the agility that you've left in for, you know, a cute request when you don't have to put time to put an agreement together that there's still room for obviously judgment and agility and flexibility, so thank you for that.
But on that note, I'm wondering then if there's a plan or there could be a plan to report on that minimum once a year to say that in addition to all the contracted services that we've all seen maybe twice a year once a year by the way here are the ones that didn't come to council but here's like roughly how many hours or what types of services were provided to which municipality.
So that way, there's again, that overall transparency provided.
Through you, Ward and Jones, to Councillor Chigarri, yes, absolutely.
We can include that in our regular reporting framework, absolutely.
Any other questions?
That'll call the vote, all in favour?
Well, she carries.
Thanks, Nick.
And next, Director of Engineering Service, Transportation Master Plan, final report.
I bet Peter's been looking forward to this one.
Thank you, Mr. Ward, and yes, this has been a lengthy process, and it deserved the
due consideration and the pause that the report experienced because we received lots of
new information that modified the plan, because growth needs didn't exist when we began
our transportation master plan.
And we were effectively formalizing policies and then power co showed up and so what's
before you today is the final transportation master plan report and it's before council
to receive final approval before it is issued for a final 30 day review period.
The TMP encompassed a number of studies and policy work that span a number of focus areas.
At their September 9th meeting, County Council approved 31 initiatives supporting these
areas, and those are summarized in the Transportation Master Plan final report before
you today.
This includes an action plan, and that starts in Section 5 and on page 48.
That action plan identifies a phasing schedule and high-level cost associated with each one
of these Council-approved initiatives.
In accordance with the class EA planning process, a final 30-day comment period will
commence once County Council approves the final report at their meeting on December 11th.
The final implications resulting from implementing the TMP's recommendations will vary with no financial
impact, and that is simply formalizing existing practices into formal policies, to potentially
very costly investments. In one example, front and center of the TNP is the expansion of
library avenue. Near-term recommendations that require capital improvements, such as
our review of road safety intersection concerns, they are, have been, and council will see them.
They have been included within the county's tenure capital plan. Other initiatives will
require further council input before any investment would be made, and that's once council determines
of direction. And an example of that is the provision of transit services.
The county's LMPs will play an important role in implementing some of the recommended TMP
initiatives, and will require collaboration with LMP specifically for,
carpool lot development, road safety concerns, collecting transportation data,
provision of transit services, and pedestrian crossing infrastructure.
The TMP report will guide policy development and capital planning into the future,
As our communities evolve, it will be important to update the TMP within a five-year time frame to ensure longer-term initiatives continue to meet Council's priorities.
Be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Peter.
Resolution.
Resolved that the report titled Transportation Master Plan Final Report Adoption from the Director of Engineering Services,
dated November 25th, 2025, be received and filed and that the attached transportation master plan final draft report and engagement summary report be approved for a final 30-day public review period to conclude the project.
We'll be very seconder, please.
Councilor Hans, Councilor Latham.
Any further discussion or comments?
Councilor Whitner.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Wardens, here to Peter.
On the weekend, there was an interesting Facebook book.
That one was about Fingall or Shadden,
about agriculture equipment and newly designed roads.
About 350 comments about it.
What are we doing to accommodate
the larger equipment that's on the road
because it is getting bigger?
I just not going to get any smaller, there's a lot of misconceptions we don't belong in
town, so we have to get where we have to get, so what's your take on that, please?
Thank you for the question to you, Mr. Warden to Councillor Woodner and the rest of council.
The TMP formalizes many of the practices the county has been exercising over many, many
years, and that's the guidance of the Transportation Association of Canada or otherwise known as
tack manuals for lane widths, shoulder widths, general roadway design geometry and design
features depending on the classification of a roadway. So for example, arterial roads have
wider lanes and wider shoulders and collector roads or minor arterial roads, all which are
sufficient enough to accommodate agricultural equipment that does create a challenge in urban
areas once curb and gutter are are installed. And so for example in the village of Fingle Reconstruction,
our design team staff and the consultant heard loud and clear from the community in regards
to the challenges of agricultural equipment. What it had transpired in Fingle specifically was in
the pre-design phase, cyclolanes were incorporated into the design consistent with the TMP's recommendations.
Council did not support cycling master plan at this time and they were subsequently removed from Fangle and it created this
potential
challenge
So the design team is going to
Reload look at at the design of Fangle and have already committed to
Accommodating larger of vehicle equipment moves through incorporating laybys or parking bays in strategic areas on every approach
It should be noted that some of these towns had always had restricted areas where
curb and gutter had been present for many, many years.
These are shorter stretches of roads that anybody who lives in these, although there are
towns and villages and populated areas in our rural areas, they're familiar with agricultural
equipment.
They see them a couple times a year, predominantly, and other times a year as well.
In my experience, most people are courteous.
The messaging and staff has worked with the OFA to develop a logo, share the road flag, and there was a flag raising.
Our education to inform the public on how they should treat slow moving large equipment for their own safety and safety of others.
That education campaign should be ongoing.
The TMP specifically references that road design should accommodate agricultural equipment so it'll be a focus of staff going forward to ensure that those needs are met.
However, it will be a balance going forward because at the same time the public is seeking a change in roadside environment design when they enter in populated areas to attempt to lower speed limits.
And one of the best tools we have is to
To reduce the width of travel lanes that will inherently slow people down. And so we're taking a bit of a hybrid solution here where we're going to have restricted areas to reinforce that message to the majority of the traveling public, while still having design features that to accommodate the larger agricultural government.
I guess I like to address some of that as well, directed at the Shedden.
If you look at before and after pictures, nothing changed.
The road with the still the same as it was before.
The only thing that did change was there's a race curb on the west side of the road that
wasn't there before, but it was parking before.
So vehicles could have been parked in that spot and created the same challenge as what was
shown in a staged photo op.
So there are challenges, but nothing in shed and
changed from before. It's the same with as it was. And that'll be the same in
fingernails. Well, we have a lot of areas where we have various heights of
curves, different configuration of curves. And right now we have square
curves where I think people think they're tapered curves because there's an extra flow to asphalt
that is hidden about that much of the raised curve. So when we put those curves back, we're
talking about doing an angled curve curve of some sort instead of a square curve because
people recognize that as an impediment which it was at some point in the past too. So
Yeah, and there are alternative routes that are only going to increase travel time by 5-10 minutes at the most for any industrial or agricultural equipment.
And myself, I'm retired farmer, I understand it, but there are, we have to look at what the greater good of the community is as well as the farming community.
We're trying to find some happy medium.
It's not going to make everybody happy where we recognize that.
But with when you're looking at growth,
it's going to increase the population of Fingle on Shedden by several
fold, probably another three or four thousand.
So we'll be at the size of Donald Dutton at some point.
and we have to look at this as being an 80-year investment, 60 minimum, probably 80-year investment,
and we have to look at what that 80-years looks like, not just what today looks like.
But there are that post is unfortunate because it does put farming in a bad light to some extent.
We can see by some of the comments after that, that's, when you do stuff like that, you need
to understand what the consequences of those posts are, and I don't think it really
put a cultural, a real good light for the, for the rural, or not the residential areas
of our community that somewhat took offense to it.
Go ahead, Councillor Winnard.
Yes, but as to clarify, you're saying nothing changed in the real profile, but are the
Curb is the same as they were before?
No, the West Side Curb was a rolled up curve
onto a paved area and down it turned into grass at some point.
It's the, there is paved there at the very intersection,
but the pavement did continue on down for a while.
And that doesn't exist now, it's now grass.
But the thing is anybody can still roll up.
You can roll into a driveway and stop
and wait. There's lots of opportunities on there to stop and wait. You can pull off into a driveway,
you can roll up on the curb, like to pick up in the picture. That's not only the question. It's
not only the question for a tractor to roll up on that curb as well. The tractors are built to go
over washouts, combine school, or washouts all the time. It's the same difference as rolling up
a curb. So I wish the farming community would understand that this our communities are built
for both residents and their culture and they have to, I understand they're in a hurry
that's a short time window, but do consideration be given to the public as well?
Thank you for that. I am a huge fan of the rollover curbs because you've got a $15,000 or $20,000
our tire and you paint the side wall because you hit one of those square curves. You're not going
to be happy. I think to me they work better, but that's my opinion, but I do run this big equipment
and I know what can do to you.
Anything further on to the pasture plan?
If that'll call the vote,
call in favor. Motion carries. Congratulations, Peter.
And adjournment.
Result that we do now adjourn at 2.10 pm to meet again on December 11th, 2025 at 9.30 am.
We'll wear a seconder, please.
Wetner and Latham, all in favor.
Motion carries.
We need to go up now again again.
So we're going to take a five minute break while they reset.