Good e good good evening. I will now
call to order the July 23rd to 2026
municipal council meeting. Madame clerk,
for the record of this meeting, please
show councelor Ley is absent with
notice.
Item B in our agenda tonight is a
declaration of interest. Are there any
declarations of interest from members of
council?
» Thank you, Madame Mayor. Uh so the first
declaration is item uh F1 as it relates
to file 010426
as this item uh directly pertains to
myself regarding a high school in
Eastchoolbury. Item G2 under the uh July
21st recommendations. Um uh number two
and three, it's regarding the
designation of the heritage properties.
Um I own a company that owns uh one of
the properties that's being designated.
And then I will um also address uh July
23rd's committee of the whole uh from
earlier today. I don't have the numbers
to those yet, but we can address the
those numbers when we get to it. So
thank you, Madam Mayor.
Thank you very much.
We're down at
land acknowledgement statement. The town
of Esquilenberry recognizes and
acknowledges the lands originally used
and occupied by the first peoples of the
Williams first treaties nations and
other indigenous peoples. And on behalf
of council, I thank them for sharing
this land. We also acknowledge the
Chipawas of Georgina Island First Nation
as Eastberry's closest First Nation
community and recognize the unique
relationship the Chipoas have with the
lands and the waters of this territory.
They are the water protectors and
environmental stewards of these lands
and we join them in these
responsibilities.
Before we begin hearing from deputants,
I'd like to outline expectations for
conduct at this meeting. All
participants are expected to conduct
themselves respectfully and in
accordance with the town's procedure
bylaw. Disruptive behavior, including
interruptions or inappropriate language,
will not be tolerated. Each deputant
will have up to five minutes to speak
unless otherwise approved and must limit
their remarks to the subject for which
they have been granted approval.
As a reminder, deputent shall not speak
disrespectfully
of any person, use offensive and
unparliamentary language, speak on
matters outside their approved topic, or
disobey the rules of the procedure or
decision of the chair. If there is
disorder or breach of these rules, I may
curtail a deputation or rule it
concluded. An individual may be asked to
leave. We will now proceed.
» Madame Mayor,
>> yes. Um, do we not need to make a motion
to rece to uh allow these p these
deputations to proceed given our prior
uh resolution? I know that the there have been submissions written. I'm
fine to to allow the the deputations,
but I just want to make sure that we are
following our our prior procedure. Happy
to make the the motion to receive both
of these deputations.
>> Madame clerk, could you assist with this
please?
>> Through you, Madame Mayor. That's
correct. So um in accordance with the
procedure bylaw, the consent of council
is required. Councelor Ray de Clemente
has moved to consent to hearing the two
deputations listed on the agenda. You
will require a seconder and a vote of
council.
>> Do I have a seconder and a vote of
council? Counselor.
» Thank you.
And we're fine.
All those in favor
and that's carried. Thank you.
And we will start with uh number one a
lusty on behalfan
a making a deputation to council
regarding item L1 bylaw 2026-072
being a bylaw to adopt the new town of
East Berry official plan.
>> Welcome. Good to have you with us this
evening.
>> Thank you and it's great to be here. As
a preliminary matter, I'm wondering if
my letter could be brought up on screen.
There's just a graphic in there I'd like
to make reference to on the first page
of it,
>> but I can start anyway while that's
happening. So,
>> if you're good with that, then
>> yeah, fantastic. Uh, well, look, good
evening everyone. Uh, good evening,
Madame Mayor, members of council. My
name is Alex Lusty and I'm a lawyer at
Davies How. Our address is 425 Adelaide
Street West, Toronto, Ontario, M5V3C1.
And as soon as that letter gets up on
the screen, um I'll show you where the
properties that I'm uh dealing with
tonight are. But I'm appearing for a few
corporations with some properties at uh
19,61.
There they are. uh 19,071
and 19,083 Lesley Street which is just
south of the Vince's Market Plaza and
not very far from here at all. And I
have just one request tonight and that's
to please defer any decision about these
lands in the new official plan.
Doing that won't hold up the official
plan, but it'll give my client a lot of
clarity. And so what um we're proposing
um is is that it be deferred. And the
reason for that is when you look at the
new official plan, it's supposed to be
forwardlooking, but um right now it
doesn't reflect the intended future
state of my client's property. The
site's going to be redeveloped. It's
going to be a mixeduse site. There's
going to be 139 residences there. uh
some 188 parking spaces, groundf flooror
commercial, that kind of thing. That
application's still in process, but
that's what the current proposal is. Um
and if there were more time to work on
this official plan, maybe we would have
got the policy right for this property,
but uh it it just hasn't turned out that
way, and that's why we're asking for
some more time. If we could scroll to uh
page three of the letter, so just down
two pages, um you'll see some text
there. There's some a couple uh
underlined areas where it's just minor
modifications to the adopting bylaw. I
think that would do it. Um they're not
lengthy. It just makes it clear those
properties are being excluded. And um
notes can be added to the schedules for
the official plan to say these
properties aren't part of it. And I
think that approach is pretty simple. I
think it'll be effective and it won't
hold anything up because I remember when
I was a planner and projects would come
along and you need to move them on or
they stack up and they get delayed,
progress falls behind and it's no good.
So, we don't want to hold anything up,
but we think it's a it's a simple
request. And what the modifications do,
okay, is provide certainty to my client
about two things. And the first is that
they won't run into an interpretive
issue with the new official plan. And
not that we have one today that I know
about or whatever, but I'm looking at
this from the perspective of a lawyer
thinking about a process into the
future. Okay. And sometimes what happens
is people get in a rush to apply the
policies in a new official plan to
applications that were never made under
it. And we that's when you get a dispute
and we just don't want that to happen.
Um the other is, you know, you get to
the end of the official plan process,
it's approved, the application's still
out there and folks say, "Well, they
just approved a new official plan.
You're you're off side of that. What are
you doing?" And we want to avoid that.
We don't want those headaches. and
that's why we're asking for this minor
modification.
So, I hope you'll agree with me that
what we're seeking requires minimal
effort to implement, but it'll go a long
way to ensuring fairness for my client.
Um, so in conclusion, these changes
would bring a great deal of peace of
mind to my client. Um, and I don't think
they're harmful to the town in any way.
So, thank you. That's all I had intended
to say. Thank you.
Do I have a mover and seconder from
members of council?
Thank you.
Moved by councelor Cone, seconded by
councelor
Ry Clemente.
Be it resolved that the deputation made
by Alusky on behalf of area regarding
item L1
bylaw 2026-072
being a bylaw to adopt the new town of
Eastenbury official plan be received?
>> Yes, please do.
>> Just a comment on the motion uh through
you, Madame Mayor to Mr. Lusty. Uh I
guess uh we're simp I I believe we're
simply going to be receiving your
deputation. From my perspective, uh
notwithstanding your client's
application, our official plan is our
expression of our vision for our
community and those lands. And so uh
you've got an application in place that
in that we're processing uh that asks us
to change that vision, but we're being
consistent in our vision for those lands
at this point. And so from my
perspective, I'm not I'm not u taking
action on your deputation because I I
simply believe in uh the process that
we've undergone and uh and we're going
to continue to process your your
client's application under the under the
provisions of of our documentation. So I
just wanted to make that comment rather
than simply receiving it and sending you
on your way. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
>> Thank you.
All [clears throat] those in favor?
And that's carried. Thank you very much.
» We're now at number two in our uh
agenda. M. Corey on behalf of the
Eastbury White Belt Land Owners Group
making a deputation to council regarding
item L1 bylaw
20226-072
being a bylaw to adopt the new town of
East Squenberry official plan and item
L3
bylaw2026-074
being a bylaw to amend
bylaw number 202015-078.
Specifically, a schedule A to revise
fees and charges for the corporation of
the town of East Squillberry in relation
to items L1 and L3.
I have a mover, please.
Thank you. And a seconder.
Thank you. All those in favor
» I'm sorry. Go ahead, please.
>> No problem. Uh good evening and and
thank you, Madame Mayor, and to council
for hearing the deputation. Really
appreciate it. Um you've already had a
lot of time with you. Uh you heard me
before, but there's just two items we
really like to talk about. I'll keep it
very brief. Um I'll start with the
official plan item L1. Um really
appreciate all the work that your staff
and consultants have done. Uh we think
they've done a great job with the
official plan. Very eager to see that go
to the province. As we all know, the
province can take a horrendous amount of
time to finally approve it and we want
to get that ongoing so that can happen
immediately. So very much want to see
that go forward tonight. There's just
one last uh comment we had we'd very
much like you to consider. Um uh that is
the distribution of the retail uh
commercial uh quantums uh through the
new community uh design areas community
plan areas in um the new communities as
part of uh the official plan. Um uh we
had previously made comment on this and
asked for a revision to the amount.
We're not asking for that. Um really all
we're asking for tonight is a
redistribution. Um, I had covered this
in the submission I made on June 30th uh
to committee prior to uh it being
adopted. Um, it wasn't addressed at that
time. Still hoping it's something we
could get addressed and and so
respectfully requesting that council uh
potentially give direction to staff to
make a modification to redistribute the
retail commercial amongst the CDP areas
in accordance with table two of what we
had submitted. That's something that we
have looked at and vetted with our
landowner group. Uh it maintains the
same amount of retail that uh is being
contemplated overall. But the reason for
the change and I I completely understand
why uh the consultants and the staff put
forward the distribution that's in the
official plan. That is a distribution
that's focusing on uh concentrating a
lot of the retail on arterial roads,
especially second concession. Um but
that as much as that is a traditional
and a well- tested and a well um
successful way of delivering retail, it
also has the effect of concentrating
retail into certain areas and really
promoting potentially more drive to for
those uh retailing experiences and
commercial experiences. Whereas the
distribution that we had requested would
put retail um in uh commensurate size
and in location with the amount of
population that's happening in each of
the different CDP areas. So it's the
same number. It's it's a minor change, I
think, but it's a redistribution to
really put the retail and commercial on
sites that are within walking distance,
which is very much in keeping, I think,
with what this council I've heard over
the years talk about in terms of
walkability, sustainability, having um
services people can get to without
having to get into their car. That's the
real intent of that request. And it also
helps with the relative amount of retail
relative to the size of each of those
CDP areas by right sizing them. So there
isn't an overwhelming amount of retail
space versus other uses. So it's a good
balance overall. I know we've vetted
this with our whole group. The group is
supportive of it. Um so we're very much
asking please if you can make that
change. I I know it's something that
could happen through the discussions
with the province. Uh with respect I've
been through a few of those processes.
Um getting changes done with the
province can be quite painful. Um and
it's not certain. Uh I I'd much rather
see uh this council and staff have
something that they put forward that
they're uh happy with and that we can
work together on. So that's the request
on that, Madame Mayor. Happy to stop
there and answer any questions and have
something very brief to talk about on
the fee bylaw.
>> Thank you very much. Uh I will allow
time for you to u give some information
as well.
>> Okay. Uh maybe why don't I cover the the
fee bylaw then as well. Madame Mayor,
it's a very brief point on that one.
That's item L3 on your agenda. Um, very
simple request. Uh, many places now when
these new fees are created, uh, there's
a perunit fee. And the common practice
throughout York Region and Durm Region
is to put either a cap a maximum cap on
a perunit fee just because it's meant to
be a cost recovery mechanism and and
that ensures that happens or uh the
perunit fee is graduated down as you
have more and more units. And the reason
for that is if you have a fairly large
subdivision plan for instance come
forward uh the fees can get quite
excessive. Um I I can I can tell you
that um when we did a rough calculation
of what the fee would work out to for on
the subdivision for instance under the
new bylaw if you had a thousand units in
a subdivision which would be you know
probably larger than anything you'd get
but it's a it's a good quantum measure
the fees would be upward of 500
something thousand just for the
subdivision. Um the city of Vaughn has
just imposed a maximum fee on
subdivision of just under 170,000 as a
comparator and there's other uh fees
that are in that range. So, not asking
for anything specifically, but but
respectfully requesting that staff and
council consider a cap on the fees to
just keep them uh within context of cost
recovery um and in uh context of what
other fees are being in the rest of the
region and other places. With that,
thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm happy to
take any questions on either of those.
>> Thank you, Mr. Corey. Um, I have a mover
by councelor John's and seconded by
councelor Roy D. Clemente.
Comments. Go ahead, please. Uh, thank
you, Madame Mayor. Uh, I'll start with
the last one first. Um, as far as the
fees and charges are concerned, uh, as
you note, it's a cost recovery
mechanism. Uh, the report that came to
us, uh, last month, uh, noted that we
hadn't changed our fees in six years.
And so, um, I know that, uh, by
comparison, we are still some of the
lower fees in in the the province. And
quite frankly, um, it was one of the
first orders of business that our our
new general manager of planning, uh, and
development services came in and said,
we're not recovering what we need to
recover. And this was one of her first
initiatives. And so, uh, coming from the
city of Toronto, I think she would have
a little bit of experience with that.
And so, if she's making that
recommendation to us, I'm loathed to
change that. Um, so that's that's my
opinion with respect to that. Uh, as far
as um the redistribution of the
commercial. Uh, it's a it's a little
interesting because um I note that you
did make a deputation at our last
meeting and I wasn't here so I went back
and watched and you said that our OP
needs to go ahead and you're happy to
see it adopted. Um, committee at the
time chose not to make any changes or
give direction to staff. So you're
asking again. Um and uh from my
perspective um
building communities includes creating
commercial opportunities close to home.
And so you're suggesting that uh your
clients would prefer not to have
commercial uh on on second concession
because they would prefer to build build
houses rather than put commercial bu
commercial commercial buildings there.
And so from my perspective, uh I want to
see commercial there. And and quite
frankly, after six years of work, uh if
this is the only issue we have together,
then I think we've done really really
well. Uh if we were to reconsider re the
distribution of that of that commercial
land, we would have to go back to the
drawing table with all of the other
community design plan stakeholders and
other land owners because you're
suggesting, well, we don't want it. We
want to give it to somebody else. but
what if that other person has already
invested in their community designs and
their secondary plans? So, I think at
this point we have a really great plan
and I'm proud to support it tonight. So,
I I appreciate you taking the time to
try again. Um but I'm I'm not I'm not
comfortable with making any changes at
this time. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Other questions, counselor,
go ahead, please.
>> Thank you. um listening to your
presentation, you're talking about the
redistribution that there isn't enough
uh homes in the current uh CDP area to
warrant that much retail. When I look at
it, I'm looking at the homes that have
already been built. And certainly in
that area, we have a lot of development
planned and de development that's
recently been executed uh that requires
more uh commercial. So, I I take your um concern about the
redistribution. I just wanted to see if
uh staff could uh respond if this is
something that can be if we can continue
to adopt the plan and this is something
that can be looked at as we progress
further into um moving towards the uh
secondary plans. Thanks.
>> Thank you.
» Uh thank you uh through you madam chair.
Um certainly this is uh a conversation
or letter that was received uh examined
uh by our department and also had uh
meetings with our own um retail
consultant
um who was here with us today if council
had any questions uh Mr. Rowan Fluty of
Urban Metrics um and and certainly at to
promote commercial within the town of
school and uh we are uh at least of the
opinion that um the flexibility for land
owners to be able to uh reallocate some
of that commercial is something that
we're certainly open to. Uh the concern
for us was to retain the overall uh GFA
for retail commercial. Uh and this
proposal does not uh suggest to reduce
that. It simply uh or more simply
suggests to reallocate amongst uh the
land owners within the community design
plan areas. Uh so to that to that uh
point um because of that uh we felt
comfortable uh with the change if that's
something that council uh directs staff
to move forward.
Yes, go ahead, please.
>> Um, thank you. So, what I'm hearing from
you is that this is something that we
can look at going forward because to
councelor Roy de Clemente's point, I
would be uh I think it would be unfair
for us to make a change and another land
owner end up with more commercial than
what they thought was going in.
Otherwise, they'd be up here at the
microphone. Uh, if it was different, we
really really are in the 11th hour now.
Um, and I I think making those kind of
changes uh to a plan that has been
unanimous unanimously um agreed to by
council uh would be a step backwards and
I think we really really need to be
moving forward. So I'm hoping that staff
can work with each of the land owners um
as on a go forward basis to uh ensure
that we are getting enough commercial
and that it is in the right place. Thank
you.
>> Thank you councelor Foster.
>> Thanks Madame Mayor. Um, I may be trying
to simplify this too much and Jack,
hopefully you can uh help me out here,
Mr. Krebnik.
Uh, the question that jumps out at me is
who's going to be responsible for
redistributing?
Is that going to be a function that town
staff looks after or is that going to be
a function that the uh the landowners
group looks after? And what simply
happens if you don't have a willing
partner to uh to trade with? I mean, it
just it sounds good. I'm not sure it I'm
not sure it works.
» Uh thank you councelor for your question
and through you madam chair. Uh
certainly um my assumption in uh in
hearing from uh Mr. Corey is that he is
representing the east school liberty um
landowners group um sorry the the
land owners group that are part of the
um commlete communities dime plan
process. So, um, you know, there is some
confidence in that that that those land
owners are comfortable with the numbers
putting forward or put forward to
council here today as well. If um and certainly I'm of the opinion that
I'd like to give uh retail and
commercial the best possibility of
success within Eastchoolbury. So, that's
why I'm open to um reallocating if
that's the best thing for each to do.
Um, that being said, it's it can either
be directed here by council today for us
to make that change. Um, and if council
did not direct staff to make that change
here today, uh, we would, you know, I'm
sure Mr. Corey would make that um,
submit his his letter or thoughts to the minister. uh when there is an ERO
posting on the official plan. Uh or we
can also um and and the ministry may
make that change or we can also examine
that at a future point in time after an
adoption uh of this op by council and an
approval by the province.
» Councelor John's comment.
>> Yeah, thanks Madame Mayor. That was uh
through you madame mayor to to Mr.
Kernick that it's it's interesting you
have now spoken twice saying staff is
open to it to you said
best possibility for success to in order
to have uh commercial neighborhood
commercial which is which is
interesting. So, I was reflecting on
that comment while I'm sitting here and
I'm I was picturing what had happened um
in these past three and a half almost
four years and I feel like um many times
applications come forward
um where a uh stakeholder developer is requesting the change because the
market conditions aren't necessarily
correct for commercial. they either want
it downsized
um or looking to have somewhere in a
different location. And I'm actually I'm
sitting here from a pragmatic
perspective and I'm thinking if the if
the landowners group are proactively
to councelor Roy de Clemente's comments,
this is now your second time before us.
You're sending us letters. Um, I tend to
treat whispers as louder yells when I
hear things multiple times. And so,
multiple deputations, multiple letters,
uh, I just had a this the staff member,
Mr. Krebn, just said
twice open to the possibility. Um,
I don't know if I have support on this
council to send it back to staff, but I
would move it because
the thing is is that we need the best
possible outcomes. And I picture what a
next term could end up being is that if
this doesn't go through or the the
province um doesn't contemplate this,
then are we going to witness four,
eight, 12 years
uh it could be maybe it's 20 years based
on our official plan 16 years since our
last official plan. Are we just going to
get hit with uh stakeholder developers
coming forward and saying change change?
I don't know what the answer is. But I
guess the reason why I would support
sending it back to staff to look further
is because I don't know what the answer
is. But I do know from experience um uh
if it doesn't slow down the official
plan process then why wouldn't we let
staff who have now said twice to us we
would be open to it. So those are my
comments. I would be happy to move a
motion if there was support around the
table for a pragmatic uh approach to it.
» Yes. Go ahead please.
I worry sending it back to staff delays
um getting on with the the official plan
and it's been in the works for a very
long time. Um the change change change
that you talked about councelor John's
we're going to see that they always come
forward and ask for changes. We we know
that's that's a fact of our job is to um
debate and deliberate on the changes
that uh developers want to make to our
plan. Uh I also heard Mr. Kick say it's
something that they can look at uh later
going forward. Um, so hearing that from
our staff, I'm I'm comfortable with
moving ahead [clears throat]
uh with the plan uh as we uh voted on it
at our last uh CWC um sorry in our June
CWC um that's here for ratification
tonight. Thanks.
>> Thank you, Councelor Cone.
>> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um through you
to Mr. Corey. I'm not unsympathetic to
your your concerns. I I I think you may
have a legitimate beef with the
aortionment of commercial property. Um
and uh
and and and you know what as as
members of the of of the council here,
uh we want we want all our our partners
to be successful because if you're
successful, we're successful. Um,
that's that's the positive stuff I'm
gonna say to you. Now, [laughter]
I I I really wish wish we could have uh
gotten a little more serious about this
earlier. So, it's not at the we're at
the, you know, we're not at the 11th
hour here. We're at the 11th hour and
59th minute. And it's I I I really am
not a fan of rushed decisions because
sometimes you don't always make the best
decisions when you're rushed. So, uh, I
would what I would say my my comments is
to to to staff and to to to yourself,
let's endeavor to try and and find that uh situation that sets everyone up
for success, whether it's
starting tomorrow and getting ready for when this this is uh sent their
official plan is sent to uh uh to the
province for for their approval. But
let's start it. Don't Let's not delay
because delay got us to this point. So,
let's not find ourselves in that
position again. But I I think I I have a
hard time trying to send this back now.
Um
I think we're we're we're
at the commitment line and we have to
make a decision. So, that's that's where
I I stand. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
>> Thank you. Other comments,
>> Madame Mayor. Um Council Cohen was
speaking to me. I maybe through you if I
could just address something a couple
things that were just said. I I just
want to be crystal clear. The request
from the LERs group is not to send this
back or delay it at all. It's to approve
the official plan tonight. The only
consideration is whether there's
direction to staff to reconsider that
table in finalizing it and sending it to
the province. Absolutely. We don't want
this delayed or or held up in any way.
Um just the second thing uh madame mayor
and to council um the CDP areas we're
talking about are represented by me by
the whole land owners group and they own
90 something% of it. They've all looked
at this. They're comfortable with the
redistri numbers. We're not trying to
put this on somebody else. We're just
talking about a redistribution
um amongst the owners and absolutely not
a reduction of any kind. I think it
could be a very simple and quick change
if council directed staff to do it. But
that being said, um also hearing uh the
concerns and very much so I think second
place for us would be uh a nod from
council and staff to say it's something
we'll prioritize and look at and
finalizing it with the province too. Uh
absolutely have no intent and don't want
it in any way this to be held up
tonight. Want it approved tonight for
sure just to be crystal clear. M madame
mayor and council.
>> Thank you. Some comments,
» councelor Foster and go ahead, please.
Thanks, Madam Mayor. I had to give that
one some thought. Um,
Mr. Krebnik, if if we go ahead with the
official plan tonight, but as Councelor
John suggested, maybe we send something
back, how long is it going to take to
put a
an information report together to get
back to council, and does that hold up
the official plan going to the province?
Uh thank you for your question counselor
through you madam chair. Um I think Mr.
Corey made it clear and I thank him for
that that there is no um desire I
believe on our part that's and and I'm
speaking for staff and that on the land
owners to um send this back or to delay
it from being adopted here by council
and going uh then proceeding to the
province. Um so I would suggest um we we
either do that or we do it with um a
replacement of the official plan uh or
we do it as well sorry with a
replacement of the of the official plan
table five as presented in the official
plan uh with um Mr. Cory's uh table two
in the letter dated uh June 30th to
staff.
» Go ahead please.
There's too many microphones on. There
we go. Thank you. Um
my perspective is that when when we are
when I'm I'm looking at the schedule
3G-1
and it shows where the commercial mixed
use is going to go, it is adjacent to
lowdensity residential and medium
density residential as well as
residential mixed use. And for me, um,
part of the appeal of, for example, the
village of Sharon is that while I live
in Sharon, I can also walk to the
grocery store and get something. I don't
have to get in my car. And if we move
this commercial mixed use out of this
area and put it somewhere else, then
we're allowing the development community
and the land owners to put in just
houses or just what they want and not
what we want. And I'm I'm sorry, but the letter that was received by uh by
staff uh shows that there was a there
was a requested reduction from 74,000
square
GFA meters squared to 45,000. I think
that's a five, maybe a six. I don't have
my reading glasses on. There was a a
requested reduction. What's happening
now is they're leaving the reduction off
the table and they want to simply move
things around. This is too little too
late in my opinion. I would like us to
move forward. the province still has the right to make changes and the
development community still has the
ability to make applications to make
changes to the official plan as they're
going to do anyway. So, let's just move
forward tonight. That's my opinion.
Thank you.
>> Thank you,
» Councelor Johns.
>> Yeah, thanks, Madam Mayor. Just one
comment off of that. what was said like
I I actually don't see it that way. Like
I actually do see like when you are
clustering commercial there's an
opportunity on the flip side to be able
to have neighborhood retail for walking.
I I if if you were looking specifically
in that area, I will agree with the
statement that you said, but if you were
looking at the overall picture, um
having um
having commercial
um redistributed throughout the
community does not necessarily give the
negative approach because it's not
finalized. So, you can't say it's
negative. And what I'm suggesting is is
that staff have now made two comments
that they are open to it. Uh because
they don't actually necessarily know
what it looks like on the other side.
And I'm simply saying if it doesn't slow
down the process and if we have an
opportunity to improve it, even if it is
1159 and there is an opportunity to
improve it, I'm simply suggesting that
why wouldn't we do that if it doesn't
slow down the process? And if staff feel
that it doesn't uh doesn't improve, then
so be it. I will say that maybe there's
a small window for a seconder from one
of my colleagues, but I will also I do
feel that I don't have the votes to
carry. But I do want to uh state that
um an opportunity just because it's
11:59 doesn't mean that it's an
opportunity that we shouldn't explore.
I'll leave it at that. If there's any
further discussion that would allow for
a further window to um to explore it,
then I'm open. If if there's no further
discussion, then that's it.
» Thank you.
Other speakers at this point,
we have a motion uh to receive the
deputation. This has been moved by
councelor John, seconded by councelor
Roy de Clemente.
All in favor?
>> And that's carried.
>> Thank you, madame mayor and council for
listening to us.
» We're at item E in presentations. Report
of the integrity commissioner, town of
Equilenberry, formal code of conduct
complaint number 0110426,
investigation report. Could I have a
mover and a seconder, please?
>> Sorry, Madame Mayor. Just uh for clarity
purposes, I have uh declared conflict of
interest and uh I believe it's customary
that there is an opportunity for the
individual to speak prior to the um uh
the agenda proceeding to the item.
» Okay,
go ahead please.
>> Thanks, Madam Mayor. I just have uh
three brief paragraphs I'd like to say
as it relates to this item. I'd rather
be too loud about what matters to
residents than risk being comfortable
with the silent status quo. East Wenbury
is the only municipality in York Region
without a public high school. Over
40,000 people and growing. And every
single morning, our kids leave town and
go to school in someone else's
community. For generations, residents
have been told the same thing. The
numbers aren't quite there yet. The
formula isn't right. Eventually, in
time. And there's a style of leadership
that values keeping things comfortable
over getting things done, that mistakes
silence for professionalism and calls it
leadership. And I don't buy that. Our
residents deserve fierce advocacy that
champions their needs. Thanks, Madame
Mayor.
>> Thank you.
» I'd like to refer to the integrity
commissioner to provide an overview of
this report.
Thank you, Madame Mayor. uh to you
through you and to members of council.
The report before you sets out my
findings of the formal code of conduct
complaint 010426
in which uh councelor Brian John's was
named as respondent in relation to his
conduct involving the March 31st, 2026
delegation to the York Region District
School Board's Finance and Property
Standing Committee, a related
publication on his website, and a
related public communication. The events
and materials at the center of this
matter have been in the public domain
for some time, the delegation itself,
the slide deck, the related social media
post. As a result, I do not intend to
take you through this report in detail
as has been my custom. Instead, I will
give a highle overview of what I found,
explain the sanction I have recommended,
and close with a few words on the role
of my office and the role of council.
Let me begin with what this matter is
not.
It is not about whether East Squirre
should have a new high school. It is not
a finding that a member of council
cannot advocate for a school or for
other matters important to their
constituents. Advocacy on behalf of
constituents before this council before
outside bodies and agencies is
legitimate. It's important and it's
expressly protected. The respondent was
fully entitled to advocate for high
school in East Willoughbury, to question
existing educational planning, and to
call for further study. Nothing in my
report should be read as, nor was it
intended to discourage any member from
doing so. Speaking about needs and
bringing those needs of the public to
council or committees of council is what
a counselor does when working to affect
change within the decision-making
framework of their municipality.
What I found was narrower and it's about
the manner in which the respondent
communicated not advocacy. The
respondent's conduct crossed the line
from legitimate advocacy into using the
indisha of his office in a way that
conveyed an authority he did not have to
submit aspirational positions albeit
needed and wanted by your community as
approved town positions. He branded his
materials east. He framed his own
proposals as town planning, including
statements such as, "Town planning
envisions a coll-located campus model,
town branding, but aspirational
position." And he presented conceptual
infrastructure concepts as though they
were grounded in municipal planning,
direction, and approved. Taken together,
this created a reasonable impression
that he was advocating and advancing an
authorized position of town direction
when in fact council had adopted no such
position.
The consequences I set out in the report
was real public and institutional
confusion. with his presentation on his
website and intent to make a delegation
at the school board. Town staff
clarified the town position and then
following the presentation on March
31st, the school board made a decision
to write to families to address what
they believe to be the confusion the
respondent's presentation had created
regarding the move of a school. As
underscored several times in the report
before you, the finding of breach is not
that the respondent advocated and
represented a much and very strong a
much needed and very strong voice of his
constituents. The report sets out the
finding of breach in so far as the
respondent's conduct had the foreseeable
result of blurring the line between
aspirational position as a political
representative of constituents and an
official position of the town and the
statements of town planning were not
accurate to which as the respondent
stated in his comments to the draft
findings uh through his legal counsel
his delegation before the school board
purported to have reliance on and
legitimacy in a 2018 document on future
projections and options. The
respondent's comments to the draft
findings that I provided to him in
summary stated the town's 2018 master
plan and the school board's previous
enrollment studies said what he said in
his delegation. This is what was
received. I found differently those
documents did exist. The 2018 documents
identify the possibility and the
opportunity of a future muchneeded high
school in your town and projected
enrollment supports the need for
additional capacity. My findings do not
dispute that in any way. But identifying
a possibility in a plan, particularly
one adopted in 2018, a possibility is
not the same as a current council
authorized municipal planning position.
The breaches that the respondant
presented an envisioned possibility as
though it were a decided
authorized position.
I have recommended the council issue a
formal reprimand to the to the
respondent. Let me explain what a formal
reprimand is and why I'm making this
recommendation. The municipal act at
section 223.4 sub5 gives two penalties
where uh the integrity commissioner
reports to uh council on uh the actions
of a member. A reprimand or a suspension
of pay for up to 90 days.
A reprimand is a formal public censure
which is a statement by council placed
on the public record in minutes or
following the meeting that council makes
that the member's conduct in their view
based on the findings of the integrity
commissioner fell short of the standard
of the code requirements. It's a public
statement for the record. The
legislature created two uh deliberate
penalties that council could impose in
response to the integrity commissioner's
findings and can be uh proportionate
based on her findings. The reprimand
marks and denounces the breach and
affirms the standard set out in the code
and affirms council's commitment. Even
though I found two breaches or of two
sections of the code, um I did not
recommend suspension of remuneration.
And let me explain why. First, two
breaches uh two sections of the code
breach does not mean that there have
been multiple breaches. Um the fact that
the same conduct, the delegation to the
school board and the post related to
that delegation on its own does not make
it twice as serious. Uh second, this was
not a case of dishonesty for personal or
financial gain or harassment or
disparaging staff or the public or
calling into question the professional
integrity of staff. It was advocacy, but
it was advocacy that overreached and
confused through giving the perception
of an approved town position. Currently,
the regulations for the municipal act as
it relates to codes of conduct has four
requirements in codes of conduct. Gifts
and benefits which underscore the need
to avoid conflicts of interest.
Respectful conduct in particular towards
staff as it is very important not to
undermine the role of staff. Protection
of confidential information and
appropriate use of property of the
municipality. So, generally speaking,
where there is a finding of breach that
relates to those significant areas,
there likely will be based on the facts
a recommendation of a harsher uh
penalty. But in this case, I did not. I
determined that the recommendation of a
formal reprimand is proportionate in
this instance to the conduct that I
found with this particular matter.
Before I close, I will say a few words
on process and roles. I've said it
before. I'll just reiterate for clarity.
My role as integrity commissioner is to
investigate the complaint independently
to apply the code rules to the facts
that I have gathered and to make
findings on a balance of probabilities
and report to you council and you
council are the decision maker based on
my findings. You make a decision on the
recommendation. I have done that and now
it's up to you. My investigation is
complete and my report before you is
final. Council is now to receive the
report, decide whether to adopt my
recommendation, vary my recommendation,
or reject my recommendation. In doing
so, council may ask me questions on
clarification about the process I
followed um and the recommendation on
sanction um but cannot open the
investigation. The investigation is
complete. This evening is not an
opportunity for council to reopen or
rearview the findings to introduce new
information that is not in the report or
to question the respondent uh who has
already been given an opportunity to
respond. Uh he was provided with the
complaint. He was provided with uh the
opportunity to reply that is appendex A
to this report. Also, in accordance with
the rules of procedural fairness, the
respondent was given a copy of my draft
findings and provided an opportunity to
make comments on errors or emissions. He
did so and you can find those comments
on page 17 to 19 of the report before
you. I'd like to close by saying as set
out in the preamble of the code,
formalized standards and rules help you
to provide uh uh to have a reference
guide with respect to your conduct and
it supplements the legislative
parameters when within which members
must operate. Code rules enhance public
confidence that the town's elected
representatives operate from a base of
integrity given the weight and the
credibility that you gain when you
become an elected officer. Members are
therefore expected to perform their
duties of office in a manner not just
doing so, but in a manner that will
always bear the closest scrutiny. I
thank you for your time. I appreciate
the work you do. I'm happy to answer any
questions you may have.
Thank you very much for taking the time
out of your your time to spend uh with
us. I appreciate it very much. Thank
you.
Are there any questions or comments from
members of council regarding the
integrity commissioners report?
>> Councelor Cone.
>> Thank you, Madam Mayor. Um, I think I
said this the last time we found
ourselves here uh receiving a report
from the integrity commissioner uh for
councelor John's. It's it's a truism
that in politics the often the worst
wounds that are inflicted are the ones
that are self-inflicted.
You know, there was a but I want I want
to draw a line from a report from the
report that that really jumped out at me
and gave me concern. The line was the
complaint is politically motivated and
constitutes an attempt to weaponize the
code to restrict legitimate political
expression.
Now the integrity commissioner uh is an
append independent officer of council
appointed by us to apply the code of
conduct impartially without regard to
politics or electoral calendar. That
independence is the whole point of the
office. When a finding doesn't go
someone's way. The answer isn't to look
for a scapegoat. It's to accept the
outcome and to do better.
Blaming political opponents for your own
accountability failures is a tactic more
common south of the border than it is
here. And it's not one that East School
residents deserve to see imported to our
local politics. Our community expects
better of the people who serve it and
frankly so do I.
But to suggest that these comments are
politically motivated points a finger
directly at me
and that I am the only opponent right
now in the current election towards
councelor John's and I want to make it
crystal clear on this point.
I categorically deny making this
complaint or having any involvement with
it or my team having any involvement
with it whatsoever in this process that
led to this ruling.
Now, I know we're not supposed to ask
the respondent any questions, but at
some point, I would hope councelor
John's will either withdraw these
remarks or at the very least state that
he accepts my assurances about my
non-involvement.
I have tried to conduct my campaign
differently and my actions towards
councelor John's. This is
this has nothing to do with me. So
that's it for my comments. Uh Madame
Mayor, thank you.
» Thank you. Are there other speakers at
this point?
» Councelor Kthers, go ahead, please.
Thank you. I too am so disappointed that
we find ourselves here again. When the
integrity commissioner finds in an
unbiased independent investigation that
a counselor has breached the code of
conduct, it brings shame to this chamber
because it undermines the public trust
our residents have put in us. One
mistake can be excused if there is a
genuine desire to take responsibility
for one's actions and change behavior
going forward. But sadly, that doesn't
seem to be the case here.
In the response from councelor John's
and his lawyer, I'm hearing excuses. I'm
hearing blaming. I'm hearing deflection.
Again, this is not the first time our
integrity commissioner has called out
councelor John's behavior by using words
such as misleading, inaccurate, and
misinformation.
Words like these were used over a dozen
times in the last investigation of
councelor Jones behavior and almost 20
times in the ruling before us tonight.
misleading, inaccurate, misinformation.
This is now a clear and troubling
pattern of behavior that absolutely
cannot be excused. It's a pattern of
misleading the public. The report is
very clear that this is not about
advocating for high school. This report
and findings are about misleading the
public when doing so. Without a
demonstration of remorse for his actions
or even a demonstrated understanding of
what his obligations are under the code
of conduct, I don't see this pattern of
behavior changing. Residents need to be
aware of the findings of this
investigation because there has been no
evidence from councelor John's that he
intends to change this behavior. A
formal reprimand is how we do that. The
public places their trust in us and that
trust is broken when one counselor is
found by an impartial third party to
have misled the public on multiple
occasions. It's a troubling pattern of
behavior that councelor Jones did not
appear willing to change. Thank you,
» councelor. Go ahead, please.
>> Thanks, Madam Mayor. I I'll be short
here. Uh I I don't like making these
things personal. Um this is numerous
investigations uh during this term.
Uh I I can't help but wonder how many
times
that we've engaged with the integrity
commissioner. Um we we talk about strain
on funds. I think we're inventing ways
to spend money. Um, and you know, as a
kid, I was taught this, and I and I
think this points here to
a sober second thought before you uh
open up and start to speak. Um, and and
far be it for me, but I mean, again, who
knows? Maybe it'll be me tomorrow that
says the wrong thing. Um, but I I just
think this is a terrible road that we've
gone down. Um, and need to do a lot of
thinking before you open up your mouth.
I'll I'll leave it at that.
» Council Roy Demente.
>> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um,
every single one of us at this table has
an opinion, a passion,
uh, a way of wanting to vote.
And
uh at the opening comments made by the
respondent uh there was a suggestion
made that somehow um that
his colleagues were complacent and quiet
and essentially not championing the
needs of our community.
And I want to say that I I deeply resent
the suggestion that any one of us,
despite our differences,
has not championed our community, fought
for what our residents need
simply because we have not undertaken
the same sort of unacceptable behavior
that has unfortunately become a pattern
here at this table. And um
there's a right way of advocating and
leading and there's a wrong way. And
we've now heard repeatedly that this was
the wrong way of doing it and that there
are good ways of doing it and there are
effective ways of doing it.
So I am um really disappointed
um that we find ourselves as we've as my
colleagues have said that we find
ourselves here again. Um madame mayor I
would like to uh move receipt of the
report as well as uh that we adopt the
recommendations of the integrity
commissioner as outlined in the report
before us today. Thank you.
Do I have a seconder? Please, counselor.
Be it resolved that the report of the
integrity commissioner dated June July
20th, 2026 entitled Town Squilbury
formal code of conduct complaint
01
0426
investigation report be received and
that the recommendations contained
within the integrity commissioner's
report be adopted. All those in f
>> Yes,
>> madame mayor. Uh my motion was that the recommendations be adopted.
>> That's what I have on there.
>> The recommendation on the screen says
that the the recommendations contained
be received.
>> I'll I'll just repeat it. That the
recommendations contained within the
integrity commissioner's report be
adopted. Thank you.
Are there any questions, comments at
this point? Now
the vote's been called.
All those in favor?
Opposed?
It's carried. Thank you.
We are now moving now our agenda down
our agenda. Uh item G, committee
recommendations. Number one, to adopt
the committee of the whole council
recommendations from the meeting held on
June 23rd,
2026.
But I have a mover and a seconder,
please. Councelor Cone, Councelor
Foster,
all those in favor. And that's carried
to adopt the committee of the whole
council recommendations from the meeting
held on July 21st,
2026.
Could I have a mover, please?
>> Sorry, madame mayor. I just wanted to
flag that um uh item G2 as we're voting
on now for the July 21st
recommendations. I declare a conflict of
interest on the items uh two and three
that are contained within that.
>> I apologize.
>> Thank you.
Madam
» I'm just wondering if we can have them
put on the screen, please. I I believe
there are a couple of them that we may
wish to to pull for some discussion.
>> We can do that. It'll take a few
moments, but we'll do the best that we
can.
Madame Mayor, uh per I'm not sure if it
is the will of council, but perhaps if
uh you would like to entertain
considering number two and three to
which council Johns has declared an
interest first and then we can uh bring
forward the balance of the
recommendations.
>> Thank you.
>> Yes, thank you.
>> Okay, just bear with us as we um
populate the screen with those.
>> Happy to move those two.
>> Thank you.
Madame Mayor, on the screen before you
is uh recommendation number two that
councelor Johns had um declared an
interest. Subsequent to that is number
three. I believe those were moved by
councelor Kurthers. You do require a
seconder.
» We need a seconder at this point. Is
that correct?
>> Councelor Chrome,
» Councelor Foster.
>> Uh, thanks, Madam Mayor, and Madame
Clerk, if you can help me with this. I
don't know that uh I'm 100% in my right
to uh to do what I want to do here, but
I I just want to state that I I still
disagree with the fact that we are
taking
um addresses off
our uh intention to designate I think
we're circumventing the Ontario Heritage
Act, but specifically with uh number
three
um the removal of 1982 Young Street,
which is the upper landing. Um I I said
earlier if there's any piece of property
in East Williambury that needs to go
through the proper process with the
Ontario Heritage Act, I believe this is
the one. Um, you know, I I've got a few
things written down here that I can I
can go very quickly and I hope that
there's a maybe an appetite to
reconsider the removal of of this one.
Um, you know, we're talking about a
piece of property that is directly
associated with the War of 1812. It was
a part of of a network of trails used by
indigenous people to travel through what
is now southern Ontario.
Um, it was at the original northern
terminus of Young Street. Uh, Joe
Johnson, who built the inn there, uh, is
linked to the 1837 rebellion.
This piece of property and the house on
it met five of nine criteria, and we
were told earlier today that anything
over three is considered to be very, important.
This is the site where indigenous people
embarked along the East Holland River to
make that trek across Lake Simco, what
is now Lake Simco, uh, and ended up in Penitentang. Now, the property in
Penetang has been long recognized as a
historically significant property,
although there's been nothing done at
this end. And, uh, we have the province
ready to uh, bulldoze the lower landing
for the Bradford bypass.
which I think may make this uh even a
little bit more important.
I'm very surprised that since Tuesday,
we haven't heard from some of our
harshest critics
uh about this property actually being
taken off. So, I'm not sure if they were
on their game the way they should have
been, but uh uh I think this one's very
important. So, I will leave it at that.
Hopefully, there's there's more here at
the table that uh think along the same
lines as myself. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um,
>> Madame Mayor,
>> yes.
>> Can I just
>> Yeah, sure.
>> Since I move the motion, I would like to
add to that motion 1982 Young Street if
that's okay with the second.
» Madame Mayor, I'm [clears throat] quite
uh
quite happy to entertain this. I had a
uh a very good conversation with uh
Councelor Foster the other day and he
made a number of compelling arguments.
Uh I I was in favor of taking it off,
but uh Councelor Foster did did his best
work and I uh I found the arguments uh
worthwhile and I'm happy to to to put it
back on the list. I will say though that
the the the homeowner has still has the option to appeal and and get their
removal. And I would uh I would
encourage uh history buffs in uh in East
Gulenberry to to make the argument about
why they should do this. And uh u I
think I think it could be good. So let
them uh let them do their work. Uh
anyway, happy happy to uh to put this
back on the list.
>> Thank you.
» Go ahead, please.
>> Uh thank you, Madam Mayor. uh as I was chairing uh this portion of our
committee of the whole meeting, I I was
somewhat subdued in my comments and and
I just wanted to express that um for all
of the the uh properties that were being
proposed. I felt very strongly that we
should be following the process and that
we should be making those notices to to
declare so that we could have those
meaningful conversations with those
property owners. Uh I'm really delighted
to hear that u my colleagues have agreed
with councelor Foster about this
particular property. Um I know that uh
through its real estate history uh the
listings when it has changed hands have
always um reflected uh the the
historical and heritage importance of
that property. And so I think it's it's really important for us to uh to
proceed with it in this way. So, I just
wanted to express my support for
councelor Foster's work. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
Are there others that wish to speak at
this time?
I'm not I'm not seeing any.
Madame May, just for clarity, um as you
can see on the screen, that particular
property has been added as item J on on the screen on the projector.
Thank you.
All those in favor
and that's carried. Thank you very much,
>> Madame Mayor. Uh we are uh still at the
July 21st committee of the whole
recommendations. These are pertaining to
the balance of the recommendations to
which councelor Johns does uh not have
he has not declared an interest in. So
what you see on the screen uh in the
next couple of seconds will be the
balance of the recommendations from our
Tuesday's meeting.
>> Thank you,
» Madame Mayor. I do apologize. We're It's
a little slow. Um our team is working
diligently to move it down. Just bear
with us as as it moves down.
three. Madame Mayor, we have been able
to capture those on the screen. Starting
with number one and it proceed it moves
to number four as we just dealt with
number two and three.
You would require a mover and a sec
seconder if it's the will of council to
move and second all items.
No. Um, can I just ask our production
desk if we can scroll up? Thank you.
Yeah,
» Madame Mayor, I'm happy to move all four
of these.
Thank you.
>> Sorry, the one on Solar um staff were
going to try and get the wording nailed
down and uh I just want that's the
wording that's changed that I need to to
see, but it scrolled too fast and too
slow at the same time. Thanks.
[laughter]
Madame Mayor, I'm I'm comfortable with
that language. I want to thank staff for
putting that together and appreciate you
catching that council ks.
Second.
» All those in favor?
Opposed?
That's carried. Thank you very much.
We're on number three at this point to
adopt the committee of the whole council
recommendations from the meeting held on
July 23rd, 2026.
Three, Madame Mayor, those uh are the
recommendations from uh this afternoon's
committee of the whole meeting. As you
can see on the screen before you, they
are noted in a sequence of one, two, and
we will scroll down so that you can see
the balance of them.
» Uh madame clerk, if I could just uh
address I spoke earlier at the beginning
of the meeting regarding the declaration
of conflict of interest and I just want
to be clear. I believe that this is uh
night number three is in relation to
what I declared at the committee of the
whole. I believe
And so to that end for number three, I
won't be participating in that vote as
well.
» Perhaps Madame Mayor, if you would like
to uh entertain the balance of the items
that councilor Johnson does not have an
interest and then we can separate out
number three for a separate vote in a
count taking into account the conflict
of interest.
>> Then I would be starting at number
three. Uh three madame mayor you'll be
starting with number one and two to
which councelor John does not have an
interest.
>> Thank you.
Number one, be it resolved that
development services planning branch
report DS2026-27
dated July 23rd, 2006,
20 thou 2206 entitled zoning bylaw
amendment 1 19350
Woodbine Avenue 19
350
Woodbine Avenue, Inc.
be received and that council approve the
zoning bylaw amendment ZBA
20 62 included as an appendix to report
DS2026-27
to reszone the lands from rural RU to
environmental protection EP and
Employment General M2-194
four with a with site specific
permissions and the recommendations of
the report DS2026-27
be ratified at the July 23rd 20 and026
meeting of municipal council be it
resolved that the development services
planning branch report DS2026-28
dated July 23rd
2026 entitled zoning bylaw amendment
application 20366
Lesley Street Private Club.
Sher Sharon Ma Masonic te temple
association be received and
the council approve in principle subject
to an approved site plan application and
associated agreement as well as a formal
shared parking agreement include
included as appendix 4 of report
DS2026-282
reszone the lands from residential
private services RPS
to sightspecific residential private
services RPS-195
bracket and that the implementation
zoning bylaw be brought forward for an
enactment
uh at a future council meeting after the
owner has obtained site plan approval
and entered into a site plan agreement
with the town and that the
recommendations of the report DS2026-27
be ratified at the July 23rd, 2026
meeting of municipal council.
I need a mover and a seconder.
>> Thank you, Councelor Foster.
All those in favor
and that's carried. Thank you very much.
Madame Mayor, we're now proceeding to
number three. Um, which is the item that
councelor Johns had declared an
interest. So, you would require a mover
and a seconder for this.
>> I have a move and a seconder, please.
Councelor Foster. Thank you. Thank you.
and councelor Roy declmente.
All in favor? And that's carried.
I'm now at item H, adoption of minutes.
Uh, could I have a mover and a seconder,
please?
Councelor Kthers, Council Cone.
All those in favor?
That's carried. Be it resolved that
council adopt the following minutes.
Committee of the whole council minutes
from the regular meeting held on June
23rd,
2026. And council
minutes
uh from regular meeting held on June
23rd, 2026.
Thank you.
We are now on item I, correspondence for
consideration. There is none at this
time. I will move to item J, reports.
None at this time.
Item K, resolutions. None at this time.
Item L, bylaws.
I have a number here.
>> Madame Mayor, might might I suggest we
uh we separate out uh bylaw uh number
one, the adoption of the official plan
because it is a uh fairly momentous
occasion. I think we should uh also call
for a recorded vote.
>> Thank you.
So, a request to remove uh number one
bylaw. Is that correct?
separating it out.
» Madame Mayor,
>> yes.
>> Um, with respect to bylaw number uh
2026-072
associated with the town's official
plan, councelor Cone has requested for a
recorded vote. You would require a mover
and a seconder.
» Councelor Cone.
Enter.
>> Chair. Thank you,
>> Madame Mayor. Can um I'm now going to
carry out the uh recorded vote. So,
councelor Cone, uh you have requested
for a recorded vote. How do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Thank you. Councelor Foster, how do you
vote?
>> Yes.
>> Mayor Haxton, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Johns, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Lehey is absent with notice.
Councelor Roy de Clemente, how do you
vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Kathers, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Madame, that motion carries unanimously.
Thank you very much.
>> Madame Mayor, can we also do the next
one for a separate and recorded vote? So
that's bylaw uh 2026-073
uh which is uh regarding um uh the
Greenear Village project.
>> Happy to second that as well, Madame
Mayor.
>> Thank you.
» Three, Madame Mayor. This item has been
moved by councelor Ray de Clemente,
seconded by councelor Cone. There's been
a request for a recorded vote. Councelor
Ray Demente, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Kathers, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Cron, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Foster, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Mayor Haxin, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> Councelor Johns, how do you vote?
>> Yes.
>> And to for the record, Councelor Ley is
absent with notice.
>> Madame Mayor, that motion carries
unanimously.
>> Thank you very much.
Madam Mayor, might I suggest we bundle
the remaining bylaws into one?
>> Happy to move that.
>> And I'll second it. No. Thank you.
[laughter]
» All in favor?
And that's carried.
We're at item M, other business. There's
none at this time.
>> Madame Mayor, given that uh given that
there is other business um on the agenda
and given that the procedural bylaw does
allow for um for council, if they do
wish to entertain uh a motion, I I've
prepared a simple motion uh given
tonight's meeting uh for the council to
simply endorse the need for a high
school in East Wenbury. And so if uh
procedurally I would like to move it, if
somebody wishes to second it um uh that
would be appreciated so that we can we
can fully endorse a high school the need
for a high school with any school.
» Do we have anyone who is
interested at this point about a high
scale school?
I'm not seeing anyone at this point.
Madame Mayor, we would need a motion to
discuss this um by all of council in
order to put it on the table. We don't
have the motion. We have not seen the
motion. We've not had any time to
prepare for this motion. We've not been
able to talk to staff. We do not have
another meeting coming up until
September. So, I think trying to put
this shoehorn this in at the last minute
when it's very clear that everyone at
this table has said repeatedly that we
want a high school. But I don't think
that this type of uh lastm minute trying
to throw something on the agenda um is
going to make any difference to us
getting a high school. Uh so I I'm not
prepared to entertain at this time
because I would want to have time to
think about and make sure that
everything is included in that motion
etc. So I will not be uh voting to
entertain this.
>> Thank you. Other comments?
» I have Mayor. May I move to the uh
adoption of the confirming bylaw,
please?
» That would be uh item M under other
business.
>> Madame Mayor, no, it's just
letter N.
>> N I missed it by one.
>> Confirming bylaw. I moved it. I don't
know if you need a seconder, but I'm
pretty sure you do.
>> I have a seconder confirming bylaw. Be
it resolved that the bylaw 2026
79 being the bylaw to confirm the
proceedings of the council meeting held
on July 23rd,
2026 be taken as read and acted and
signed by the mayor and municipal clerk.
All in favor?
That's carried. Thank you very much. Uh,
and we have an adjournment in front of
us at this point this evening. Uh, could
I have a mover and a seconder? Councelor
Kthers. Council
>> Councelor Johns.
Be it resolve that the meeting of
council adjourn at 7:26 p.m. All those
in favor?
And that's carried. Thank you very much.
Thank you for all your support and um
feedback. back.