[0:22] Yes. Uh just while we wait for staff to
get us online, I'd remind everyone to
[0:27] sign in.
[0:38] Eli.
>> Okay.
[0:43] » All right. Good evening everyone and
welcome. Um just a note that this
[0:47] meeting will be recorded and livereamed
excluding any inc camera topics. First
[0:53] order of business I'll call the meeting
to order and begin with our historical
[0:57] acknowledgement. I would like to begin
by acknowledging that we are in Migmagi
[1:01] in the district of Sebagani, the
ancestral territory of the Migma people.
[1:06] East Hance further acknowledges the 50
African Nova Scotian communities whose
[1:11] 400year history have contributed to the
province's culture, history, and
[1:15] legacies. We are all treaty people.
We'll now have a moment of silent
[1:21] contemplation.
[1:36] Next, we'll set the t date and time for
next council meetings, which will be the
[1:41] regular meeting of council for policy
and in camera, which will be September
[1:46] the 15, 2026, and the regular meeting of
council, which will be September the
[1:51] 23rd, 2026.
[1:55] Are there any
amendments to the agenda?
[2:02] Seeing none, I declare the agenda
approved.
[2:05] Next, we're looking for the approval of
the minutes of the regular meeting of
[2:09] council for policy and in camera on June
the 16th, 2026 and the regular meeting
[2:14] of council June 24th, 2026.
>> Second.
[2:21] » We don't need a motion, folks. I just
need to know whether there are any
[2:25] errors or omissions. And uh seeing none,
I declare them approved. Next, we'll
[2:30] move to correspondence for information.
Uh counselors, you have it uh you've had
[2:37] it in front of you for some time and it
is on the screen. Is there anything
[2:42] under correspondence for information
that any counselor wants to draw
[2:46] attention to?
[2:53] Oh, councelor Mitchell.
>> That's looking at item number 17, the 4
[2:59] clubs. Uh, on behalf of council, I'll be
presenting those four four trophies at
[3:05] exhibition on the 19th of Sep of August.
Just want to let council know.
[3:13] » Thank you, counselor. Any other items?
[3:19] Seeing none, we'll move to
correspondence for decision.
[3:28] Okay, we'll start with the um
[3:34] item number 78, notice from the province
regarding a new policing billing model.
[3:39] Consultation is planned in August and
the CAL and warden need direction for
[3:45] participation. So, who's taking that?
CEO.
[3:54] » Thank you, Madam Morton. So, we received
this letter today. Um, however, um, at
[4:00] the staff level, we've been to a couple
of sessions with the RCMP where this new
[4:05] billing model was discussed. Um, one was
strictly on the billing model itself,
[4:10] what that would look like and the level
of policing across the province. Uh
[4:15] there was another one which was a
general RCMP
[4:18] uh engagement with municipalities where
this became uh one of the topics.
[4:25] This change although it looks great you
reduce your your policing cost by 25%
[4:31] which is very significant for E stance
the caveat is that we must spend that
[4:37] money on other community safety
initiatives. So there will be a sort of
[4:44] a drop-own list of what we are permitted
to spend the money on based on what our
[4:49] community needs itself.
And
[4:55] my my feedback to them was we're not in
this business. That's why we contract
[4:59] with the RCMP. We are not in the public
safety business generally. I mean, we
[5:05] have bylaw enforcement and sidewalks and
that type of thing, but we don't have um
[5:11] community safety officers that we send
out to do wellness checks for people. We
[5:14] don't have social workers on staff. We
don't have folks who are mental health
[5:18] professionals on staff. And that is what
they will expect you to do with that 1.6
[5:24] million that that you're saving from a
police perspective. So, it's a really
[5:28] big conversation for East Hans. Um, it's
one that I foresee will will force you
[5:37] shifting your priorities from what they
are now in your strategic plan to that
[5:41] of public safety. And if you don't, I'm
not sure what the what the carrot is
[5:44] that, you know, maybe like do you lose
your money or do you pay it to them? I'm
[5:49] not really sure at this point. Um, they
haven't been clear about that. On one
[5:54] hand, we will have to do this and on the
other hand, they say there'll be
[5:59] municipal autonomy. So, I'm not sure how
the two reconcile um yet. Hopefully, in
[6:08] August, they're going to reach out for a
virtual meeting. I'm not sure who
[6:12] they're going to ask to attend that
meeting, whether it's going to be the
[6:14] police advisory board. Um up to this
point, it's been the CEOs. Um now that
[6:20] this announcement's been made, I would
assume they're going to involve at a
[6:24] minimum the warden of the municipality
they're discussing,
[6:28] but I don't know. So, I guess I need
some direction from council as to how
[6:33] far we have these conversations. Um,
what it looks like for East Tants, I I
[6:38] can't tell you, but I need to be able to
have some kind of conversations with
[6:42] them to move this forward to see where
they want us to get to, if that makes
[6:47] sense.
>> Okay,
[6:52] » Councelor Perry. Um yeah, looking at
this today and reading the provincial
[6:58] announcement, it, you know, was not a
detail in the provincial announcement
[7:03] today as much as there is in this
letter. And looking at it, I mean, for
[7:07] my for my the way I look at it is,
you know, for towns and small areas, you
[7:14] know, that model might work because it's
all in the same small geographical area
[7:18] if when you're dealing with with a town,
but as a municipality that covers a
[7:22] large footprint, we we already uh with
our RCMP um have them stretch stretched
[7:29] pretty thin to respond and cover the
area that we currently have them
[7:33] serving. And I don't see how we could in
any way um with that little bit of money
[7:41] come anywhere close to providing the
services to the residents of the
[7:44] municipality and covering the whole
municipality in that manner. Uh so this
[7:50] is definitely something that uh I think
needs to be taken and and there needs to
[7:54] be some uh some push back and some hard
questions uh asked and uh and I and I
[8:02] would you know if there's a motion
needed to say that we need to have these
[8:06] conversations and that it should be the
CEO and the warden and leading these
[8:09] conversations I am all for making that
motion. Uh, but I see the warden and a
[8:13] couple other people on and if and if
after they speak they want that motion
[8:17] made, I'll be happy to make it.
>> My mic is just on. So, councelor Rhino.
[8:24] » Thank you, Madam Warden. Well, from this
explanation here tonight CEO, there
[8:29] doesn't seem to be any savings to the
taxpayer whatsoever. To me, if you're
[8:34] going to decrease [clears throat] the
cost of 25%, but you're going to tell
[8:38] somebody how to spend that 25% that you
did save, there's no saving. The
[8:44] taxpayer isn't going to see it's the
thing. So, uh, until we dive deeper into
[8:50] this and find out, you know, what
exactly the province is heading for,
[8:55] this to me is just was a press release
that made himself look good. Thank you.
[9:01] Councelor
Musa.
[9:06] » Uh, thank you, Madam Morton. So, so they
didn't tell you what we could spend it
[9:11] on yet?
Like, like could it be extra police
[9:15] officer on the ground? Like, no. Or or
like I know probably like uh would would
[9:22] the street lights be in that? No.
>> No. So, so the model for policing is
[9:29] changing as you know it. Um, what
they've done is they've looked at a new
[9:34] model for calculating the cost of
policing not based on the per officer
[9:39] model but based on the crime severity in
a in a community based on the um
[9:46] standard assessments um couple of other
indexes that they have. So the premise
[9:53] being that every municipality regardless
of how much a council wants to invest in
[9:58] policing will get the same standard
level of service.
[10:03] » So that's what they're going to agree to
pay for is a standard level of service
[10:08] across the board. And if you've and
they're adding more money to the pot in
[10:13] order to make sure that happens. So,
municipalities won't receive less
[10:19] service than they get now, but they may
receive more under this new model.
[10:24] But in the in the discussions I've had
with them um and in the press release,
[10:29] the press release says these savings
must be reinvested into local public
[10:34] safety priorities such as layered
policing, community safety planning,
[10:38] mental health and addictions response,
and crime and violence prevention. So,
[10:44] those are all things that we don't do
right now. We we have one bylaw
[10:48] enforcement officer. That's what we do.
And we do some um senior safety
[10:53] programming with the RCMP.
So, all of these things, the way they
[11:00] described it at the meeting I was at is
sort of a drop down. What does East
[11:04] Hance want to take from the drop down?
What can you do? What does your RCMP
[11:08] office in in East Hance need as
supports? and what are your council's
[11:12] priorities for for this? None of these
people we have on staff at the moment.
[11:18] Um, so I've I've tried to advocate that
they take these folks on. So if you need
[11:23] a layered policing model, those police
those people should report to the RCMP
[11:29] commander and provide that support to
the officers similar to what we've done
[11:34] with our admin support and court liaison
officers. We don't supervise those
[11:38] people or tell them what to do. we pay
for them through the RCMP contract.
[11:43] That is not the model that they're going
with. So again, I don't know what it
[11:48] looks like. Um, but if it looks like
what it looks like in some other
[11:52] provinces,
this is like having community safety
[11:56] officers that report in through the CAO,
like do you need a that will support the
[12:02] RCMP and their 24-hour policing model?
Uh, one of the examples they gave was in
[12:07] Wolfville, you could send in a community
safety officer to shut down a party
[12:11] instead of wasting RCMP's time shutting
down the party.
[12:15] I don't know how feasible that is, but
that was one of the examples that was
[12:20] given in the meeting that that I
attended. So, um, the other one would be
[12:24] doing wellness checks for people.
Instead of sending officers in to do
[12:27] wellness checks, you could send a
community safety officer who would be a
[12:31] municipal employee [clears throat]
in to do a wellness check for somebody.
[12:34] again, not the business we're in
currently. Um, and not identified as one
[12:39] of your priorities for sure,
[12:47] » councelor McY.
>> Uh, thank you, [clears throat] Warden.
[12:50] And, uh, thank you, uh, Kim. That
explained at least some of what I was
[12:55] wondering about. But
could you, what do they mean by layered
[13:02] policing exactly? I kind of have a
thought but uh
[13:06] » so that is that through you madam warden
that is that model that I just
[13:10] described. So you [clears throat] have a
police officer to do the sort of crime
[13:15] and and whatnot but then you could also
have a community safety officer to do to
[13:20] do
wellness checks or to take somebody to
[13:24] the hospital. Um,
[13:29] there's stories where you have RCMP
officers who go to the hospital and have
[13:32] to sit there for 12 hours and wait with
somebody until they get admitted.
[13:36] » That could be a layered policing
structure where you have someone who's
[13:40] not a full RCMP officer do that. You
have someone who works for municipality
[13:43] take them instead. A community safety
officer.
[13:47] So, that's the layered policing. Um,
they've talked as well about increased
[13:52] bylaw enforcement. So, a lot of the
things that we get the RCMP to enforce
[13:56] in our bylaws now, that could be in um
enforced through bylaw enforcement
[14:01] officers that we would hire instead of
having the RCMP go out and and hire that
[14:06] or [clears throat]
perform those uh you know, if it's
[14:11] parking violations or speed violations,
you know,
[14:16] » so would that so would those officers
work answer directly to you as CEO or
[14:22] » that would be to be det they would
answer to me at some point. Maybe not
[14:26] directly to me.
>> No,
[14:28] » but they would be municipal employees.
>> Be municipal employees. Yeah.
[14:31] » Right.
>> And so you're saying that
[14:34] » nobody [clears throat] will they're
going to try to have a standard rate
[14:37] across the province
>> for policing.
[14:39] » For policing we're kind of above that
standard. We've chosen I think with the
[14:44] 24hour the number of officers that we
have per capita in that work. So do we
[14:50] continue with that number of officers?
>> My understanding is yes.
[14:55] » So
>> yeah,
[14:57] » other municipalities are going to have
to come up to our
[15:00] standard. So it's actually going to cost
some municipalities money then.
[15:03] » Uh the the model shows that there's no
cost increases for anybody in year one.
[15:09] And I I tried to find it earlier. Um
there's something about the first five
[15:15] years. there's no increases or there's
minimal increases in the first five
[15:19] years to get you to where you need to
be. I can't remember the
[15:22] » the formula, but
>> so will we still have the choice then of
[15:27] how many officers we have like we have?
No, we won't.
[15:30] » So,
>> the policing model is such that the
[15:34] department of justice will determine the
level of service the province has across
[15:38] the board. They will rein they will
invest more money into policing so that
[15:43] everybody gets the same level of service
across the board and council will no
[15:48] longer be paying based on the number of
officers you have. You'll be paying for
[15:54] a police service that is standardized
across.
[15:56] » So we will probably have fewer officers.
If if you're going to go down to a mean
[16:01] and you're above that mean then you have
to have less.
[16:04] » Not necessarily.
But but you will be out of that decision
[16:11] » with this new model
>> and that's not up for debate.
[16:14] » Yeah.
>> I mean politically you can debate with
[16:17] the province whatever you want but in in
this model the new policing model has a
[16:22] standard level of policing across the
province. No one will lose the the level
[16:26] they have now.
Um
[16:30] and some people won't see a decrease in
their cost because they'll
[16:35] the level is not is going to go up. go
up for them. Yeah. So, I can't see how
[16:40] » the people that are above the mean
aren't going to lose policing, have to
[16:45] lose services if you're wrong to have
less. But anyway, maybe I remember when
[16:51] we met with uh the minister and at that
time I thought he [clears throat] was
[16:54] trying to convince us that everything
would be hunky dory, but I wasn't buying
[16:58] it then and I'm not buying it now. Thank
you.
[17:01] » Thank you, counselor. Councelor
Mitchell.
[17:05] Thank you, Madam Warden. [clears throat]
Based on the discussion and the
[17:08] information, I'm getting a feeling that
we might have to add staff to cover the
[17:13] skill sets that we don't have on staff.
>> Uh, three, Madam Warden. I certainly
[17:19] don't have
anyone on staff who could supervise a
[17:25] community safety officers.
So, do we have to uh add somebody to do
[17:32] that going forward or
>> uh through
[17:36] » I know they're pushing it on us.
>> I think you would have to determine h
[17:40] how this is all going to work. There's
no, you know, is it a regional approach?
[17:44] Is it a municipality of East Hans
approach? I don't know the answer, but
[17:49] um I
>> this is another provincial initiative
[17:52] that has been pushed out with an
announcement that is downloading things
[17:56] onto municipalities [clears throat]
without a lot of detail on how it's
[17:59] going to work. I'll be blunt.
>> And they are setting up separate
[18:04] meetings with each municipality to talk
about each municipal unit and how it's
[18:09] going to work and what they what they
believe needs to be in place for each
[18:15] community. But you're going to have a
community safety board instead of a
[18:19] police advisory board. Um, your
community safety board, I assume, will
[18:22] set those
priorities for your community and then
[18:26] we'll have to to fund them.
>> Okay. U
[18:34] [clears throat] counselors, I'm going to
go to councelor garden cole next. I'm
[18:37] going to try and cycle through the
counselors who haven't spoken yet and
[18:40] then come back to those who have. So,
councelor garden.
[18:43] » Thank you, madam warden. So just
thinking about this over in my mind, my
[18:48] concern with this is when you talk about
wellness checks and you know mental
[18:53] health checks and those kinds of things
that people think might not be fall
[18:58] under the umbrella of policing or might
not require policing. Any of those
[19:02] checks has the potential to escalate
very quickly to to the point where you
[19:07] do need policing. So, I just don't know
how they could strike those off as being
[19:13] potential areas where they could, you
know, lean on safety officers.
[19:19] I feel like we would be having to hire
police to do the policing for the areas
[19:26] that the police aren't willing to do,
which sounds really redundant,
[19:29] » but that would be um, you know, if we
can pass that on, that would be the way
[19:36] that I'm seeing it. So through you,
Madam Morton, I have passed that on. Um
[19:41] my feedback to them was if you want to
have community safety officers that
[19:44] support the RCMP and policing, then the
police should operationalize those folks
[19:50] and be able to call on them when they
need them, not based on what when I say
[19:53] they should be working and when they're
not. So that is part of the conversation
[19:58] I had with them at a meeting in Angones.
I don't know how
[20:04] well I asked them again today if it they
had taken that into consideration and
[20:10] they have not.
>> I I understand that they are looking at
[20:13] their system and saying, you know, it's
like taking someone to the hospital and
[20:17] ending up there for 9 hours. I I
understand that part of their time seems
[20:21] like it's tied up unnecessarily or for
situations that don't require policing,
[20:27] but this sounds like a really drastic
attempt to solve solve those problems.
[20:33] Thank you,
>> Councelor Miam.
[20:38] » Thank you, Madam Warden. I was wondering
if um one avenue for uh giving feedback
[20:45] and advocacy might be the NSFM or Nova
Scotia Federation of Municipalities. Uh
[20:50] I don't know if they've come out with
anything yet, but um maybe this this is
[20:55] a question for the CAO as well. You
know, could that be an avenue? Because I
[20:59] I'm thinking this isn't just an US
issue. It's a you know, it's an everyone
[21:04] issue.
After you, Madam Warden, I know the NSFM
[21:08] was um copied on all of our letters
today. Um in one of our sessions, they
[21:13] did say that they were going to engage
with the NSFM. Um so that would have
[21:17] probably been a couple weeks ago. Um I'm
not sure what the conversations have
[21:22] been with that group. Um but certainly
I think if the municipalities all have
[21:28] individual meetings with Department of
Justice,
[21:31] it's sort of one of those, you know,
divide and conquer kind of situations.
[21:36] Um I think we do need to engage the NSFM
as soon as we know what the agreement
[21:42] looks like and what the expectations
are. Um and that will come hopefully in
[21:46] our meeting in August with them.
>> Okay. Um thank you,
[21:51] Deputy Warden.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess I'm
[21:54] similar to councelor Mitchell and
council garden cole is the uh wellness
[21:57] and the parties and the things like that
these people go to hospital injuries are
[22:02] who is going to be training them the
liability uh RCMP take a person to the
[22:07] hospital they have handcuffs to handcuff
the person to a chair if they have to go
[22:10] to the washroom these people have all
this protection for themselves so I
[22:15] think I go back to the warden's comments
it's the problems downloading more stuff
[22:19] to municipalities thank Thank you.
[22:24] » Back to you, Councelor Perry.
>> Uh, thank you, Madam Warden. And, and
[22:29] when we talk about the 55, I think it's
55 municipalities in the province of
[22:33] Nova Scotia, you're probably going to
see a lot of municipalities are going to
[22:37] get a win out of this because they're
not meeting the standard. They don't
[22:41] have 24-hour policing. They don't have
enough officers. So, for them, this is
[22:46] going to be good for their areas. For
ones like us that have been proactive
[22:51] and been ahead of the curve, it's could
be detrimental because they're not going
[22:56] to need to take the money that was
already being spent on policing and
[23:00] create new services. Their money is just
going to just go to policing uh as ours
[23:04] used to. And when I look at all the
services that they talk about in this
[23:07] multi-layered policing, if we had a
hospital here that had a mental health
[23:12] unit, if we had, you know, an emergency
room or we had any type of the supports
[23:17] that's required to support these
positions, it might be something that
[23:22] our municipality could look at, but we
don't have any of those within our
[23:26] borders. So we don't even have the
supports if we wanted to do layer
[23:31] policing to support the people on the
back end for doing this. So that is a
[23:36] huge huge concern as well. Um and for me
I I I really think that we could talk
[23:44] about this for the next two hours but
the big thing is there's a meeting
[23:48] coming up in August and then there will
be a meeting coming up with us at some
[23:53] point. the minister's and his team is
going to come here and hopefully meet
[23:56] with all of council about about what's
going on. So,
[24:02] I'm going to move that uh
you know, we authorize the CEO and the
[24:08] warden to relay at the August meeting uh
the displeasure with this current uh
[24:15] funding model and announcement
um that was presented by the province
[24:21] today outlining our concerns uh for not
only the resident's safety but also the
[24:27] ability for us to manage and protect our
residents in the future.
[24:32] » Seconded by councelor McY councelor
Rhino, you were on before the motion.
[24:39] » Thank you, Madam Warden. Well, I don't
know if I can agree with the motion or
[24:44] not because all we have is a letter. All
we have is the little information our
[24:50] CEO has. We don't know. We have
assumptions.
[24:55] We have our thoughts. We have our
questions. So until we have a sat down
[25:00] meeting and get some final information
on what it's going to be like, then I
[25:05] can think we could spend an hour or we
could spend an evening on this or more
[25:10] discussing this all together. This is no
good to beat this around here tonight
[25:14] because there's too many unanswered
questions. There's not enough
[25:17] information.
I think councelor, correct me if I'm
[25:21] wrong, councelor Perry, the intent of
the motion is really to allow for the
[25:26] meeting that will take place in August,
the CAO and I to proceed along the lines
[25:31] that with the information we have at
hand, we see some difficulties with
[25:35] this.
>> I'll I agree with that. However, putting
[25:39] our concerns out there, we don't know
what all our concerns are because we
[25:43] don't have an information. All we have
is assumptions on our concerns. And that
[25:47] can be one of the concerns we express.
>> I think we just don't want to go into
[25:52] these meetings blind with no idea how
council wants us to proceed.
[25:56] » They may invite all the council. I don't
know.
[25:58] » Yes. But it could certainly be open. We
don't know.
[26:05] » They've already got it all planned.
[26:09] » I see no one else left to speak. There's
a motion on the floor. We'll go to the
[26:13] vote.
[26:18] And the motion has passed unanimously.
[26:24] » Okay, we are three minutes from our
public hearing. What's the next item on
[26:29] correspondence for decision
>> and we might be able to do we might be
[26:33] able to set this date in three minutes.
Let's give it a shot.
[26:38] » You're brave.
Council
[26:42] has been asked to consider booking a CAO
priority session on Thursday, September
[26:46] 3rd, or at another time acceptable to
council and the CAO. So, I believe
[26:52] September the 3 is traditionally left
open in case there's anything over from
[26:57] August that has to be dealt with
quickly. I'm not sure, but that's
[27:02] September 1st.
>> Oh, okay.
[27:04] » That's the public information meeting.
All right, Councelor Perry,
[27:08] » I will move that uh we book September
3rd to have a CIO pri priority session.
[27:18] » Seconded by Councelor McY, councelor
Rhino.
[27:22] » Well, okay. If everybody wants it on the
third, that's fine. But I'll inform you
[27:26] now I probably won't be here. I'm
getting a new knee on the 25th, so I'm
[27:30] not probably going to be very happy to
have you be here that evening. So, and
[27:35] but I I do wish that it had been put off
a little bit so I could uh hear those
[27:40] priorities. Thank you.
>> Well, we certainly could, if counselor
[27:44] wishes, put it off until October.
So,
[27:49] » do October 1st
>> and uh anyone and uh
[27:56] councelor Gordon Cole.
>> Thank you, Madam Morton. I'm going to
[28:01] make a motion that we put it off until
>> we have a motion.
[28:06] » Motion on the floor. We'd have to move
to table that motion I believe or
[28:11] » amend it to change the date. I think
would not change the intent of the
[28:15] motion. We'd still be having a meeting.
>> So if you wish to do that.
[28:21] » Okay, that's what I would like to amend
the motion to uh have the meeting on
[28:25] October 1st rather than September 3rd.
Second.
[28:29] » Seconded by councelor Miriam. Any
discussion on the amendment?
[28:35] » Seeing none, we'll go to vote. Go to the
vote. This is on the amendment.
[28:46] Two people who haven't voted yet, folks.
[28:52] » Okay. Motion is passed unanimously by
those present in the room. All right.
[28:57] All right, we'll go to the vote on the
amended motion.
[29:08] Motion is passed unanimously by those
present for the discussion.
[29:13] All right, we have reached the hour of
7:30 which is the time of our public
[29:18] hearing.
[29:23] Uh we have two items on the public
hearing agenda this evening.
[29:30] Uh the purpose of this hearing is for
council to hear input from the public
[29:34] prior to making a decision on the
proposals. To the members of the public
[29:38] who have chosen to participate this
evening, welcome. Please note the
[29:43] council's procedural policy requires
that you not cheer, boo, clap, or
[29:47] otherwise disrupt this hearing. Everyone
who wishes will have an opportunity to
[29:51] be heard. Tonight, council may approve,
reject, or defer its decision to a later
[29:56] date. Council approval is required for
the proposals to proceed. I will now ask
[30:01] the municipal clerk to outline when the
public hearing advertisements were
[30:06] published.
>> Uh Madame Warden, a public hearing
[30:09] notice appeared in the July 14th, 2026
and July 21st, 2026 editions of the
[30:14] Chronicle Herald. The notices described
the proposals, gave the date and time of
[30:18] this public hearing, and indicated the
staff reports were available to the
[30:22] public.
>> Thank you.
[30:26] Uh
counselors, the first public hearing
[30:30] item this evening is a mapping amendment
application from Andrew and Julie
[30:34] Gildby. I will now ask the chair of the
planning advisory committee to present
[30:38] his report. Councelor Mitchell.
The planning advisory committee has
[30:43] considered the proposal on behalf of
municipal council. The committee has
[30:48] reviewed staff reports, completed their
evaluation, and will make a
[30:52] recommendation to council during this
hearing.
[30:55] Madam Warden, through you, I would now
ask staff to present their final report
[31:00] on the proposal.
>> Nice. Okay.
[31:06] » Thank you, [clears throat] Madam Morton.
So, the subject property is 809 Horn
[31:10] Settlement Road. Uh the property's area
is 23 acres. It's currently splitzoned
[31:16] rural use and established residential
neighborhood zone. Um the application
[31:22] relates to just the rural use portion of
the property.
[31:30] So [clears throat] the applicants are
proposing to change the zone and
[31:34] designation from rural use to establish
residential designation and zone. The
[31:39] application is to enable the
construction of a private road and then
[31:42] subdivide off that private road. In the
rural use zone, new roads are not
[31:46] permitted. So the design redesignation
and reszoning will result in the whole
[31:51] property being established residential
neighborhood designation and zone and to
[31:55] permit that private road.
So the applicant suggests an additional
[32:00] eight lots could be created. Uh so
that's nine lots total although the land
[32:04] would need to be surveyed and meet the
requirements of the subdivision bylaw
[32:09] and this is just their concept.
So here are the proposed amendments. Uh
[32:15] the entire property would be established
residential neighborhood designation on
[32:20] the left and zone on the right.
So staff have referred to the MPS
[32:28] policies associated with the rural use
designation as well as general policies
[32:32] related to amending the MPS and land use
bylaw. Policy IM10 states council shall
[32:38] consider the this type of application
and policy IM19B states council shall
[32:43] have regard for the adequacy of site
conditions for private and on-site
[32:47] septic and water systems. So the
applicants uh engaged a hydrogeeologist
[32:53] to conduct a level one groundwater
assessment for the property. The study
[32:57] found no potential environmental
concerns related to the development. The
[33:02] underlying aquifer is capable of
supplying sufficient water quantity and
[33:06] quality um with conventional inhome
treatment systems for the proposed
[33:10] development.
Uh the study suggests that if the number
[33:15] of lots does increase um the study
should be reviewed.
[33:21] So planning staff contacted the fire
department, RCMP and the municipal
[33:26] infrastructure and operations department
for comments. Uh there were no concerns
[33:31] with the reasonzoning of the property.
They just highlighted um that the new
[33:35] private road will have to comply with
the municipal standards for private
[33:39] roads.
Nova Scotia Public Works was also
[33:42] contacted and they do not anticipate a
negative impact on the road network. Um,
[33:48] private road access can be obtained in
the vicinity of the existing residential
[33:52] driveway on the property.
[33:56] So, an advertisement outlining the
proposal and indicating that it was
[33:59] under review was placed in a May edition
of the Chronicle Herald. Uh, there was a
[34:04] public meeting public information
meeting held on June 2nd. Um, this was
[34:08] for three applications. 14 people
attended. Um
[34:13] there was only one comment about this
application and it was just to clarify
[34:17] if any of the neighboring properties
would be reszoned as well and staff
[34:21] indicated that this was a sight specific
amendment.
[34:26] So questionnaires were mailed out to uh
all the properties within 300 meters uh
[34:32] of the subject property to allow
residents the opportunity to comment on
[34:36] the application. 111 questionnaires were
sent out and seven were returned. Um,
[34:42] most letters indicated no concern or
oppositions. Um, there were some
[34:47] concerns about where the proposed road
would join Horn Settlement Road. Um,
[34:52] they would prefer if the road would be
located on the other side of the
[34:55] property. Um, again, there were concerns
about land use changes to adjacent
[35:00] properties. Um resident asked if there
would be any businesses on the
[35:04] properties or if it would just be
private dwellings. Um there were also
[35:09] questions about where the homes would
draw their water. Um and then there was
[35:13] just general discussion on neighborhood
pride and the wish to maintain the
[35:17] peaceful nature of the area.
So a letter was mailed to property
[35:24] owners again within 300 meters
indicating the date and time of this
[35:27] public hearing. Um, as we mentioned, a
notice of public hearing was placed in
[35:31] the July 14th and 21st editions of the
Chronicle Herald. Uh, and the municipal
[35:36] website and social media pages have been
updated regularly.
[35:41] So, staff have reviewed the proposed um
the proposal for portion of the subject
[35:47] property to be reszoned and redesated to
establish residential neighborhood
[35:51] designation and zone. The proposed
amendments have been evaluated using all
[35:56] applicable policies in the MPS. Um, and
staff are recommending approval of this
[36:01] application.
Council's decision on this application
[36:05] is not appealable to the Nova Scotia
Regulatory and Appeals Board. Thank you.
[36:10] Thank you. Does any member of council
have any questions for staff?
[36:19] Seeing none, I would now ask if the
applicant has any comments or would like
[36:23] to make a presentation.
[36:30] [clears throat]
[36:40] Uh, good good evening everyone.
>> Uh, my name is Andrew Gilby. I'm here
[36:44] with my wife Julie, daughter Grace, and
son Gage. Um, I guess most everybody
[36:51] here was at the public information
meeting the last time we were here. So,
[36:57] um, I think everyone is,
I guess, pretty well, um, aware of what
[37:02] we're trying to do and accomplish. Um, I
guess I would first like to thank the
[37:09] staff and everybody here for for,
you know, going through this process for
[37:15] the first time, recognizing how much
work and detail goes into this. Um, we
[37:20] read [clears throat] through some of the
stuff was online
[37:23] a couple nights ago and reading through
it like there's a lot that goes into
[37:27] this. There's a lot of detail. There's a
lot of, you know, engaging the public.
[37:32] So, um it's kind of eye opening that,
you know, um that this stuff happens. Um
[37:39] and so we appreciate uh everyone's
efforts on it. And after the previous
[37:44] conversation about the RCMP and police,
there's way [clears throat] bigger
[37:49] problems uh than than what we're trying
to get through here tonight. So, um I'll
[37:54] keep it short and sweet. We are working
our way through this. I can touch on a
[37:59] few points uh that were brought up by
some of the questions. We are would be
[38:05] certainly open to moving the driveway
over to the other side of the road. We
[38:10] have no preference. Um if that um
appeases to a neighbor that asks a
[38:17] question, we're okay with that. Um I
think some of it falls in line with
[38:21] sight lines and stopping distances based
on the speed limits or speed zone of the
[38:26] area. um we have to work our way through
that with the engineer.
[38:30] Um but we're certainly not opposed to to
any of that if if that helps um makes
[38:37] this easier for someone else. Um
the
[38:43] most of the I think the hydraological
study indicated that um they preferred
[38:49] drilled wells on the properties um which
most of these properties will have
[38:54] drilled wells. I don't think
um living in that area now. I don't
[38:59] think dug wells are um are doing that
well. We've we've had some friends and
[39:05] family live close by that have dug wells
and they're not they don't produce a lot
[39:08] of water, but I suspect most everybody
around drill wells. We're not putting
[39:11] any any kind of water system out of the
lake. Um
[39:16] we will, you know, our intent is um you
know, keeping the peacefulness and the
[39:22] nature character. We we're from the
community. We live on the lake now. We
[39:27] want to uh create a a very nice um
property and have lots for our our kids
[39:35] and extended family. And it will be very
it will you know our intent is to have a
[39:41] very well-designed and you know nice
property that only adds to the community
[39:47] um and doesn't take away from it. So we
will respect the uh the natural
[39:52] character of the of the area. We're not,
you know, like I said in the previous
[39:56] meeting, it's we're not looking to put
in a a big building or apartment
[39:59] building or, you know, have public boat
launch or anything. This is a private um
[40:05] family compound and and that's really u
all we're looking to intend to do. So,
[40:11] that's really it for me. If anybody has
any questions, I'd be happy to answer
[40:16] them.
>> Thank you very much.
[40:21] I will now open the floor for comments
and questions. If you are viewing the
[40:26] YouTube live stream, you may use the
YouTube chat feature which is being
[40:30] monitored. First, does anyone attending
in person have any questions or
[40:34] comments?
[40:40] Seeing none, I would ask if any member
of the public has any questions or
[40:44] comments through the live chat on
YouTube.
[40:47] » No.
>> No. No one is waiting to speak there.
[40:53] Does any member of staff have any final
comments?
[41:00] I would now ask the chair of the
planning advisory committee to present
[41:04] his committee's recommendation.
Councelor Mitchell.
[41:09] Planning Advisory Committee recommends
that council give second reading and
[41:13] approve the proposal for a portion of
PID 455080801
[41:19] to amend the missile planning strategy
land use bylaw by changing from rural
[41:24] use zone and designation to the
established residential neighborhood
[41:28] zone and designation. As chair PAC, I so
move
[41:35] » second.
>> Moved and seconded. Are there any final
[41:39] questions or comments from municipal
counselors?
[41:46] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[clears throat]
[41:57] And [snorts] the motion has passed
unanimously.
[42:05] Okay, councilors. The second public
hearing item this evening is a
[42:09] development agreement application from
Barry Hill and Darren Lawrence. I would
[42:14] now ask a chair of the planning advisory
committee to present his report.
[42:20] » Planning advisory committee has
considered the proposal on behalf of
[42:23] municipal council. The committees had to
review staff reports, complete their
[42:28] evaluation, and will make a
recommendation to council during this
[42:31] hearing. Madame Warden, through you, I
would now ask staff to present their
[42:35] final report on the proposal.
[42:53] » Thank you, Madam Warden.
Um, so the applicant is Barry Hill and
[42:58] Darren Lawrence. The location of the
property is located in South Matland
[43:02] along Highway 236.
The subject properties outlined here in
[43:06] red. The approximate size is 50 acres.
And the proposal is to enter into a
[43:11] development agreement to permit a
motocross track on land zoned rural use
[43:14] north RU2 zone. Um there is currently an
existing house and barn on land and the
[43:21] land had been used for agriculture
purposes. So the neighboring zones are
[43:25] also um rural use north and there's the
five mile river to the south of the
[43:31] property. Um the five mile river
starting at the high water park and uh
[43:35] high water mark and going to a depth of
about 30 mters. There's the water course
[43:38] green belt along that and then in
between um the river and the subject
[43:42] land there's the former DA line and that
is zoned open space.
[43:50] Um the Royal Use North Zone permits any
potentially obnoxious commercial
[43:54] developments to include vehicle
racetracks and amusement park uses by
[43:57] development agreement. In addition to
the motocross track, the applicant is
[44:01] also proposing to construct supporting
structures such as a tower, bleachers,
[44:04] parking area, portable washrooms, and a
temporary canteen. Um, the house is
[44:09] located on the subject properties to
remain and at this time the applicant
[44:12] proposes uh the use of the motocross
track for practices with events taking
[44:16] place in the future and the DA does
include provisions for future events.
[44:20] The development agreement includes hours
of operation that extend from 10:00 a.m.
[44:24] to 7:00 p.m. So, here is the site plan
for the motocross track. Um, as you can
[44:31] see, the brown squiggly lines is the
actual track. Um there is an existing
[44:37] driveway there um that wouldn't be able
to be used for the motocross track. Um a
[44:41] new driveway would have to be installed
here and personnel would have to be on
[44:44] site to direct traffic during motocross
events. So this is where Nova Scotia
[44:49] Public Works has indicated that the
driveway shall be located and they're
[44:53] providing parking for 90 parking stalls
here in the rear. Um they're showing
[44:57] cantens, washrooms, a first aid station,
bleachers and the tower. Um, and also
[45:03] there will be another parking area and
that driveway is approved by Nova Scotia
[45:08] Public Works is okay by them. It just
has to be upgraded for um for the use of
[45:13] the property. And this here would be for
the pit area where you have your utility
[45:16] trailers at.
Um, and I should mention that the
[45:20] applicant is proposing to maintain a
green buffer along that south uh of the
[45:25] property line here.
And this is a aerial photo of the
[45:29] subject uh property and it just shows uh
the track that um they had started.
[45:36] So it's policy AR39 of the municipal
planning strategy that propins council
[45:39] to consider the development agreement
application. Um, so as part of the
[45:44] application, staff contacted Nova Scotia
Public Works about the driveways and
[45:48] they, as I mentioned, they did supply
feedback and indicated that um, they
[45:53] required to have a new driveway location
um, that would allow for that commercial
[45:58] use and um, it has been updated on the
site plan. The pit area is acceptable,
[46:02] but the driveway will create require
upgrades for the large larger vehicles.
[46:07] Um Matland and District Volunteer Fire
Department have no issues with the
[46:11] proposed development and the RCMP um
have provided planning staff with
[46:14] comments on the proposed development and
one of their concerns was that the
[46:18] proposed ingress egress to the site
shall accommodate access for emergency
[46:22] vehicles. Um there CMP have requested
that the applicant have parking control
[46:27] personnel for motocross events and that
requirement has been included in the
[46:30] draft development agreement. um ensuring
that there's adequate parking for the
[46:34] motocross events was another concern and
as I mentioned they provided parking for
[46:39] 90 parking stalls and then in addition
to that they have a pit and utility
[46:42] trailer area um for uh the motocross
events the applicant will be required to
[46:49] build uh yes and um under citizen
engagement so an advertisement outlining
[46:56] the proposal and indicating it was
review under staff was placed in the
[46:58] Chronicle Herald a letter and
questionnaire was mailed out to all
[47:01] property owners within 300 mters of the
subject property asking for comments on
[47:04] the proposed application. So we mailed
out 28 letters and we had seven
[47:08] responses and the responses were mostly
positive. Um there were two concerns
[47:13] mentioned and that was in regards to
parking as I mentioned and the tra
[47:17] concerns around traffic if people were
trying to park along the road and as I
[47:20] said they've provided parking um for 90
people or 90 stalls and um the other
[47:27] concern was potential noise and
motocross events do have noise but um
[47:34] we've limited the hours of operation
from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
[47:39] Uh this application as with all
development agreements is appealable to
[47:42] the Nova Scotia Regulatory and Appeals
Board and uh below here is just the
[47:48] process that we followed and we're at
the public hearing tonight and um if
[47:51] council will approves or refuses the
applicant and the public have the right
[47:55] to appeal. Thank you, Madam Warden.
>> Thank you.
[48:01] Does any member of council have
questions for staff?
[48:07] Councelor Mitchell.
>> Yes. Thank you, Madam Warden. Looking at
[48:11] the diagram, my question to you for
staff is how did you connect the pit
[48:16] area? How is it that pit area connected
to the to the other part, the track
[48:21] area? I don't see a roadway and uh
>> um path.
[48:26] » So you madam chair, they probably will
drop off their um they may drop off the
[48:31] bikes here or they may put in a path to
that area. Not all of the pedestrian
[48:35] pathways have been showing on here.
>> Okay.
[48:38] » Yeah.
>> Just concerned they might have to go
[48:39] back out on the roadway. That's all.
>> Yeah.
[48:41] » Thank you,
>> Councelor Gordon Cole.
[48:46] » Thank you, Madam Morton. Uh just a
couple of I want to acknowledge the
[48:50] concerns of the uh residents nearby. And
so when it comes to parking, I
[48:55] understand that parking on the road
would not be ideal for any event, but I
[48:59] see that they've uh put in 90. So
hopefully that will suffice. And of
[49:04] course the noise issue. So is this a
just because I'm very familiar with dirt
[49:09] bikes and even tracks back at lees. Is
this a uh competition only track or is
[49:15] it a uh training and practice track as
well? Just trying to get an idea of how
[49:20] often there will be dirt bikes on this
track. um through you Metam Morton
[49:24] through from what I understand um it's
initially going to be used for a
[49:28] practice track with possible future
events taking place but the intention
[49:32] right now is for a practice track.
>> So in saying that could it be could
[49:37] there be someone on it every day or just
on Saturdays or has that been hammered
[49:41] down?
>> Um through you Madam Morton there could
[49:45] potentially be people on it during the
days. Um, and when I talked to the
[49:50] advocate, they said if they were going
to hold events, it would be during uh
[49:53] like once a month kind of thing on a
weekend type event, but yes, there could
[49:58] be people on it uh daily.
>> I see. Okay. Thank you.
[50:05] » Okay. I would now ask if the applicant
has any comments or would like to make a
[50:09] presentation.
[50:15] » I guess I'm elected to speak.
Um, I don't have a lot to add except
[50:21] that I want to thank Debbie because I'm
sure I was the epitome of the biggest
[50:27] bother ever. If it wasn't for her, I'd
have never got through this
[50:33] and
we've worked together hand in hand. Uh
[50:38] we have tried to come up with every
option we could to fix everybody's
[50:44] concerns such as the parking, the
overflow parking. There's the path down
[50:50] to the
track from the overflow parking. It's
[50:55] already there. Just needs to be spruced
up a little. And they've come out and
[51:02] showed us where the new driveway was.
They'd like to see it. and the other
[51:07] driveway widened out. We gave the
dimensions to them that they wanted
[51:13] and I guess it's just kind of
up to council now if it goes through
[51:18] before we do anything else.
[51:23] Thank you, Carla.
[51:28] Okay,
I will now open the floor for comments
[51:33] and questions. If you're viewing the
YouTube live stream, you may use the
[51:36] YouTube chat feature which is being
monitored. But first, does anyone
[51:40] attending in person have any questions
or comments?
[51:48] Seeing none, I would ask if any member
of the public has any questions or
[51:53] comments through the live chat on
YouTube.
[51:56] » No.
>> No.
[51:58] Does any member of staff have any final
comments?
[52:01] » Uh, no.
I would now ask the chair of the
[52:05] planning advisory committee to present
his committee's recommendation.
[52:11] Planning Advisory Committee recommends
the council give final consideration and
[52:15] approval to enter into development
agreement for a motocross
[52:18] track use located on property identified
as bid 4510440360
[52:27] highway 236 South Matland signed within
one year of council's approval. As chair
[52:33] of PAC, I so moved
>> seconded by councelor Rhino.
[52:38] And any final questions or comments from
municipal counselors? We'll go to
[52:43] councelor Rhino.
>> Thank you, Madam Bordon. I believe that
[52:46] this uh opportunity is u another
[clears throat] attraction for uh
[52:53] tourism and such in the Hans North area.
I've talked to a lot of people. I have
[52:57] the biggest district uh all in East H. I
geographical district. I've talked to a
[53:03] lot of people. People in Walton have
mentioned it. People in N have mentioned
[53:06] it. people through null road have
mentioned and up down the shore and that
[53:10] was mostly all positive. You're not
going to please everybody. There's going
[53:14] to be always some naysayers, but I think
you know this, as I said, this is
[53:18] another attraction. We used to have the
uh uh race matland dragway down there
[53:23] that brought in a lot of people. This
has the potential to bring in more
[53:27] people. Has to has the potential to
create some employment if it goes to uh
[53:33] bigger events. There's tracks uh
motocross is is definitely catching
[53:38] growing bigger uh right across the
province and right across Canada and I
[53:44] think that this if if the development
agreement is followed I think there
[53:50] should be no hopefully no problems
heading down the road. So I'm in full
[53:55] support of this and and uh I hope I hope
council is is as well. Thank you.
[54:00] » Thank you. Does any other counselor have
any final comments or questions?
[54:06] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[54:13] Motion has passed unanimously.
[54:18] So, that concludes tonight's public
hearings and I would just like to thank
[54:23] everybody for attending.
[54:29] » [cough]
[54:31] » So councilors, we'll return to the
agenda and we will go back to
[54:38] » correspondence for decision.
So we'll go to item 20, which was a
[54:44] letter from Jeff Mercer, the executive
director and chief librarian from the
[54:49] Colchester Eastands Public Library
requesting repair and paving of a
[54:53] driveway and parking lot at the Mount
Uniac Library.
[54:58] Atlanta
staff.
[55:03] Go ahead.
>> Thank you, Madam Warden. Um, so as you
[55:08] mentioned, the request before you was
from the Colchester East Tent Public
[55:11] Library executive director, chief
librarian um for the paving of the
[55:15] parking lot of the Mount UNIA Library.
Uh, so staff have looked at this. We we
[55:20] don't have this listed as a project, nor
do we have funding identified. And um
[55:25] estimates for this kind of work would be
around $75,000. So from a staff
[55:31] recommendation, um we would suggest that
council, if you wanted to support this,
[55:35] would actually bring it forward as part
of 2728 budget discussions and that
[55:39] would allow us time to um you know,
determine funding sources, etc., etc.,
[55:44] but certainly up for council discussion
and consideration. Councelor
[55:50] Perry,
>> I I wholeheartedly agree with staff. Um,
[55:55] as we see a lot of things in flux coming
up in the next number of months and uh
[56:00] we are over halfway throughout the year.
I think this is something that we should
[56:04] uh bring to budget discussions. Uh no no
definitive answer whether it's going to
[56:08] be done or not be done but to be
discussed at budget time in 2627. So, I
[56:13] will move that uh the the conversation
around paving the UNIAC library be
[56:19] brought up at budget discussions for
2627.
[56:25] » Moved and 2728.
>> I was just going to say I think you
[56:28] » 272828.
>> Yeah. I can't I can't go back in the
[56:31] past. Sorry.
>> Okay.
[56:32] » Moved and seconded. Is there any
discussion on the motion?
[56:36] » Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[56:45] And the motion has passed unanimously
and someone will contact Mr. Mercer and
[56:50] let him know we're putting that into our
budget discussions.
[56:55] Next item, due to staff availability for
the September 1st, 2026 public
[57:02] information meeting, staff are seeking
an alternative date to hold a PM
[57:06] anticipating four topics. staff suggests
September 14th or 21st or another date
[57:14] at council's discretion
[57:26] » and a reminder
[clears throat and snorts] counselors
[57:28] don't have to come to the p
>> I understand that but depending on what
[57:31] it is there might be uh counselors that
wish to attend
[57:37] um My only suggestion would be that in
the interest of perhaps
[57:44] there are some things that I expect will
be coming up with these PIMS that folks
[57:49] would be hoping we would get through the
PIM and perhaps be able to have a report
[57:55] and some recommendation at committee in
September
[57:59] which would require the PIM being held
prior to the 15th. So Councelor Perry
[58:08] Thank you, Orton. I I understand uh your
comment about having it uh done and have
[58:14] a report. I just don't know if if it's
uh if it's feasible to have a a meeting
[58:20] the day before and a report generated
for the next day. Um,
[58:25] I I I would move that the 14th or 21st
be set aside for the PIM based on
[58:32] staff's availability,
but uh if if it's the will that you want
[58:37] it done before then, then you'd have to
look at moving it to a different date
[58:43] because I I just don't think the 14th
will work for any type of report uh that
[58:49] comes into us at the standard that our
staff brings to be done.
[58:53] you know, in zero time because if it's
the meeting's in the evening, there's no
[58:57] time to do a report until the next day.
So, uh,
[59:03] yeah, I'll wait and see what other
counselors like to say.
[59:05] » So, you're moving?
>> I
[59:08] » Or you're going to wait?
>> I'm not I'm going to wait. I was going
[59:10] to move that based on staff availability
and uh but I'll wait to see if anybody
[59:17] else has anything to say.
>> Okay. Well, Councelor Mitchell,
[59:24] » just a question through you to staff.
Could they go the the week before,
[59:29] » Tuesday the 8th?
[59:32] » Here.
>> That would give them time to do a report
[59:36] for the 15th.
Looking at the calendar, [clears throat]
[59:42] » I think the staff read of the country.
>> Oh, okay.
[59:47] » Yeah. The the issue uh
Madame Warden, is I don't think all the
[59:53] staff that need to be at that meeting
are going to be available until the week
[59:56] of the 14th.
>> Okay.
[59:58] » Is there any chance we could do? Are any
staff available that we could if there
[1:00:03] are four? That's a lot to do in one
night anyway. Could we do two?
[1:00:07] » Yes. So, the week before um there would
just be one staff person, critical staff
[1:00:12] person missing. So, we there are
probably some applications we could
[1:00:15] bring forward to append the week of the
7th. That's the Labor Day weekend.
[1:00:21] » I guess my my concern is that these are
issues that [clears throat] have been
[1:00:25] brought to council and we are off for
the month of August, which already has
[1:00:31] these folks waiting an extra month and
to put it late enough into September,
[1:00:36] but that adds another month to the
process is is not ideal. So, I guess
[1:00:43] it's no secret. What are the four items
that we would be looking at going to a
[1:00:48] PM4 in September?
>> Um, they are the
[1:00:54] uh let me see here.
[1:01:03] Yeah, the So, if you're willing to come
to two nights that month, then the
[1:01:08] eighth we could do as well. Um,
let me just find the
[1:01:19] » I believe one is the um changes to the
subdivision bylaw for churches and
[1:01:25] cemeteries.
>> Yes, that is one of them. Um,
[1:01:31] the other ones
>> townhouse parking.
[1:01:36] Um,
no, it's a um,
[1:01:44] uh, would be the 100 unit maximum under
DA. So, it would be another one.
[1:01:49] And the other two I don't have in front
of me. So, I they're from an earlier
[1:01:53] applications.
[1:01:56] Um, so
[1:02:02] » yeah, I think that is Yeah, let me just
um find another document here.
[1:02:08] » Well, it's kind of hard to make a
decision. I really
[1:02:12] » I'd like to know what we could do on the
[clears throat] ETH and what would have
[1:02:16] to wait. Well, um, so Madam Morton, if
you would just want to set this aside
[1:02:20] for a bit, then I'll go back and look
and tell you exactly which applications
[1:02:24] are, uh,
>> and which could be done earlier and
[1:02:27] which would have to wait.
>> Okay. So, someone remind me to go back
[1:02:31] to John later. Is that okay with
counselors?
[1:02:36] » Okay, next item.
[1:02:43] the paving of subdivision Jclass roads.
Is that Jesse or No, that's Kim. Okay,
[1:02:53] » go ahead. Through you, Madam Warden. And
this is an agreement that's very similar
[1:02:57] to agreements you've um approved in the
past. We do need a motion of council to
[1:03:03] sign it based on the provincial
requirements. and it essentially enables
[1:03:07] you to enter into the paving agreements
with the province that may come up. It's
[1:03:14] not a paving agreement for a particular
road. It just it enables us to to enter
[1:03:20] into them at a future date. And we do
need a motion of council to approve
[1:03:24] signing the agreement and then I can
sign it.
[1:03:27] » Is someone prepared to make that motion?
[1:03:32] Councelor McI.
Uh, thank you, Warden. Uh, I move that
[1:03:38] council approves entering into a
three-year agreement with the province
[1:03:43] entitled
parking of
[1:03:46] » paving
>> or paving of subdivision Jclass Streets
[1:03:49] Agreement, which will be active until
March 31st,
[1:03:54] 2030.
>> Second.
[1:03:57] » Moved and seconded. Is there any
discussion on the motion?
[1:04:02] » Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:04:09] And the motion is passed unanimously by
those present.
[1:04:16] Okay, that concludes correspondence for
decision. Um we'll go through these uh
[1:04:22] first readings and second readings and
then maybe we'll circle back to John
[1:04:26] before we go into the committee reports
or we can wait till PAC report.
[1:04:32] So, next is um Councelor Perry and it is
uh first reading of bylaw IO-300-2,
[1:04:42] an amendment to bylaw IO300, a bylaw
respecting the regulation of connections
[1:04:47] and discharges to public sewer systems.
[1:04:53] Go ahead, councelor Perry.
>> Thank you, Madam Water. Madame Warden,
[1:04:58] sorry, not water. [laughter]
at the regular meeting of count. Okay.
[1:05:03] First reading bylaw IO 30300-2
an amendment to bylaw IO300 a bylaw
[1:05:09] respectricting the regulations.
The infrastructure and operations
[1:05:12] committee received a staff report at the
July 21st, 2026 executive committee
[1:05:17] meeting regarding the sewer bylaw
recommending that the bylaw be updated
[1:05:22] to decrease the allow of biochemical
oxygen demand the BOD concentration. The
[1:05:28] Infrastructure and Operations Committee
recommends that council give first
[1:05:31] reading to bylaw IO300-2,
an amendment to bylaw IO-300,
[1:05:37] a bylaw respecting the regulation,
connections, and discharge to public
[1:05:41] sewer systems, the sewer bylaw, as
attached the executive committee agenda
[1:05:45] of July 21st, 2026. Chair of the
committee, I so move second.
[1:05:49] » Moved and seconded. Is there any
discussion on the motion?
[1:05:54] » Seeing none, we will go to the vote.
[1:06:00] The motion has passed unanimously.
Next, we are looking at second reading
[1:06:07] of bylaw F-300-1,
an amendment to bylaw F-300, bylaw
[1:06:13] respecting the maintenance and
improvements of private roads.
[1:06:19] And we will go to Councelor Garden Cole.
[1:06:26] The corporate and residential services
comm reading bylaw F300-1 an amendment
[1:06:31] to bylaw F300 respecting the maintenance
and improvement of private roads. The
[1:06:35] corporate and residential services
committee received a staff report at the
[1:06:38] June 16th, 2026 executive committee
meeting regarding housekeeping
[1:06:42] amendments for bylaw F300 to change the
fee charged to road associations
[1:06:47] promotion C24
422 reducing the fee from 5% to 3%. The
[1:06:53] reduction was included in the 2526
budget and the bylaw amendment is the
[1:06:57] final change needed. First reading was
done in June and second reading can now
[1:07:01] proceed.
[1:07:06] The corporate and residential services
committee recommends that council give
[1:07:09] second reading to bylaw F300-1, an
amendment to bylaw F300, a bylaw
[1:07:14] respecting the maintenance and
improvement of private roads as attached
[1:07:18] to the executive committee agenda dated
June 16th, 2026. As chair of the
[1:07:23] committee, I so move
>> seconded by councelor Mariam. Is there
[1:07:27] any discussion on the motion?
>> Councelor Musa.
[1:07:34] [laughter]
>> Uh thank you, Madame Gordon. Uh I think
[1:07:39] that reduction is
is very good.
[1:07:44] I I would like to see it at zero, but 3%
is better than 5%. and uh
[1:07:51] uh we already hearing some good feedback
from from the community about that and
[1:07:57] they're happy with it. So I will be in
full support of it. Thank you.
[1:08:01] » Thank you.
>> Any further discussion?
[1:08:06] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:08:12] Motion has passed unanimously.
[1:08:17] Okay.
[1:08:22] Okay, we will go back to bear with me
[1:08:29] John with our question on public
information meetings.
[1:08:32] » Thank you, Madam Morton. Okay, so the
two applications that would be ready to
[1:08:36] go for the week of the 8th would be the
100 unit uh change and the LRO Williams
[1:08:43] resoning application in Lance. and then
we would have to wait for say the 15th
[1:08:48] for um the swinks application as well as
the cemetery report.
[1:08:55] » I'm quite disappointed to hear that
because the one is very timesensitive,
[1:09:02] but it is what it is, I guess. Um so
there's no way these could be have
[1:09:07] before the 14th.
Um, we could if it's um if it's
[1:09:13] important to council, we we would just
have to bring another staff person in to
[1:09:17] stand in for the planner whose
application it is. And we could do that.
[1:09:21] It's not ideal, but we could do that.
[1:09:29] » Okay. Uh, councelor Perry,
[1:09:34] » I would not be in favor of of uh having
another planner stand in because they
[1:09:40] wouldn't know the intricacies of of the
person who's handling the file uh if the
[1:09:45] public do have any question marks. I
understand it could be an inconvenience,
[1:09:48] but there have been plenty of
inconveniences done uh for multiple
[1:09:53] different applications based on this. If
the only way that we avoid this is have
[1:09:59] more staff, staff need to have the
ability to go on vacation and they they
[1:10:02] have every right to do it. So if it
creates an inconvenience, that's just
[1:10:06] the way it is based upon our our
numbering levels. And I don't think that
[1:10:10] we should put other staff under stress
to try and meet something that uh when
[1:10:15] the director has clearly said that he
can do two on one and and the other the
[1:10:19] the one on the other, it's uh I I don't
think we should be picking based upon
[1:10:25] applicants. We should just be looking at
what can be processed. And if we want
[1:10:29] things to to to be able to be processed
at any time, then we need to look at
[1:10:33] budget of hiring a lot more pe people.
Thank you.
[1:10:36] Thank you, councelor Gordon Cole.
>> Thank you, Madam Morton. [clears throat]
[1:10:42] So, is there is there a different uh
setup that we can do? Is there is there
[1:10:48] a different uh combination that would
allow for the cemetery one to come
[1:10:52] forward first?
>> Um through you, Madam Morton. Again, um
[1:10:58] the way to do that would be another
staff person would fill in for the
[1:11:01] planner that's going to be away. Um and
again, we can do that. It's not, as I
[1:11:06] said, it's not ideal for the reasons
councelor Perry cited, but it could be
[1:11:10] done.
[clears throat]
[1:11:14] » Councelor Mitchell,
>> thank you, Madam Warren. [clears throat]
[1:11:20] Looking at the calendar,
is the PIM on the first still going?
[1:11:26] » Sorry. Is
>> on the calendar up there?
[1:11:28] » Yeah.
>> Public information on the first due to
[1:11:31] the first. Um
>> well that's that was the original
[1:11:35] schedule but um I've got even more staff
away that week. So
[1:11:39] » okay
>> that's
[1:11:40] » so we're looking at the 8th and beyond.
>> Okay. Okay. Just trying to get some
[1:11:45] clarification. Thanks.
>> I would just ask the deputy warden if he
[1:11:50] would take the chair for a moment.
>> Okay. [clears throat] Go ahead and
[1:11:53] warden.
>> I guess I don't quite share of a deep
[1:11:56] concern about having our staff stand in
for one another. Um, we have very very
[1:12:01] efficient staff and some of these PIMS
they're not public hearings, they're
[1:12:07] public information meetings and I think
that all our staff are quite capable of
[1:12:12] presenting the reports and it's not like
these are deeply deeply complicated
[1:12:18] reports. So, personally, I would have no
problem with having other staff stand in
[1:12:23] and try and move these items along and
not add another month to a process for
[1:12:30] for some of these things. But that is
simply my opinion. Um, yes, staff are
[1:12:36] certainly entitled to have a vacation,
but the business of the municipality has
[1:12:40] to continue whether we have staff on
vacation or not. Thank you.
[1:12:44] » Is that everything, man?
>> That's it.
[1:12:46] » Okay. Now we'll go to councelor King
[1:12:53] » uh through the chair. Uh if if the uh
development that or the situation that
[1:13:00] uh the warden is looking at is is that
important. Is there any possibility or
[1:13:05] would it be reasonable to uh switch with
another py that's going to happen? like
[1:13:10] would would one of those be upset if if
the the date was changed
[1:13:16] » through Madame Morton. It it's it's not
really a matter of like time on the
[1:13:20] agenda. It's the people available. So,
>> okay.
[1:13:23] » Um again, first is what we would
normally schedule. Uh but I've got some
[1:13:28] folks away. I've got one back on the the
next week and they're both back the week
[1:13:33] after that.
>> Understood.
[1:13:51] Thank you. Uh, Deputy Warden, um,
according to the schedule that you have
[1:13:58] presented,
um, the ideal schedule, is that the
[1:14:02] order in which the the applicants were
received? because to me it's it's uh
[1:14:10] everything's a pressing issue for
everyone every one of these people. Uh
[1:14:15] and whether it's timesensitive or not, I
I don't believe we should be showing uh
[1:14:20] favoritism to any applicant when they
come in, it should be done in order and
[1:14:24] uh pushing things forward based on
somebody else's need. It should be done
[1:14:28] in the process that they're received.
um through Madam Morning. It's not
[1:14:32] really an issue of capacity or one sort
of bumping in front of another. You
[1:14:36] know, we always take these things when
they're ready regardless of when they
[1:14:39] come in and you know, some things just
happen faster getting comments back from
[1:14:43] reviewing agencies and so on. So, it's
really just the issue here is staff
[1:14:47] availability.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[1:14:57] » Thank you, Deputy Warden. Um, I kind of
tend to agree with the with the warden.
[1:15:04] Uh, this is July 29th, if I'm not
mistaken. Uh, you're looking for what,
[1:15:11] September
the 8th or or whatever. If if staff
[1:15:17] can't update another staff member to
stand in for a public information
[1:15:22] meeting in that amount of time, we're in
serious difficulty. Thank you.
[1:15:29] Is that everything?
>> Seeing no one else is speaking, I'm
[1:15:32] going to ask the director question. Do
you feel that staff would be ready for
[1:15:35] the ETH if we could if the time
permitted?
[1:15:38] » Um through Madamorn, yes, we could. Um
again, we always prefer that the planner
[1:15:44] whose file it is is there for the pin,
but as I said earlier, we could do it.
[1:15:49] » Thank you. I'm going to pass the chair
back to his warden, please.
[1:15:56] » All right.
So council what is the wish?
[1:16:06] We have heard we can split it in two. We
can do it all later. We have indication
[1:16:12] from staff that if it's council's wish
they can do them all I believe on the
[1:16:16] 8th. Is that correct John?
>> That's correct.
[1:16:21] » Councelor Rhino.
>> I move that all pals would be directed
[1:16:25] to September the 8th.
Do we have a seconder?
[1:16:30] » Second that
>> moved and seconded. Is there any
[1:16:32] discussion on the motion?
[snorts]
[1:16:36] » Councelor Musa
[1:16:39] trying here.
>> So the director said he could
[1:16:46] [clears throat] move one. So now we're
adding another one.
[1:16:49] » So we're going to do all four at the
same day.
[1:16:51] » Yeah. Uh it it it's basically the same
issue. Um, so you know, we could do them
[1:16:57] all on one night that like doing four on
a night is not usually an issue unless
[1:17:01] they're unless they're very
controversial. It was just a matter of
[1:17:04] who was available. So, you know, whether
we do all four on the eth or not doesn't
[1:17:09] uh or three doesn't matter.
[1:17:15] » Okay. Thank you,
[1:17:19] » Councelor Perry. [clears throat]
I can't support the motion based upon
[1:17:25] the availability of staff and I believe
that we are getting in the weeds in the
[1:17:29] operation and showing favor favoritism
towards certain applications we want
[1:17:33] process in a certain time uh for certain
applicants and this does not happen for
[1:17:38] every applicant that comes in. Thank
you.
[1:17:42] » Well, councelor Mitchell
>> through you mad and warden to staff is
[1:17:48] John. You're saying it's doable to do
all four and uh how much time would be
[1:17:52] required do you think for to get through
four
[1:17:57] to
>> you never know with a pin madam chair
[1:18:01] you know could take 10 minutes for an
item or 40 minutes um with these four I
[1:18:07] I'm sure we'll be out of there in a
couple of hours.
[1:18:09] » Okay. Okay. If you're comfortable I'm
comfortable.
[1:18:14] » Any further questions?
Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:18:25] Motion is passed by a vote of nine to
two
[1:18:29] with counselors Musa and Perry voting
nay. And I would just like to comment
[1:18:35] that this is not intended to move any
application ahead of any other
[1:18:38] application. It is intended to keep
these PIMS as close to the regularly
[1:18:44] scheduled PIM date that these all would
be expecting.
[1:18:49] Thank you.
[1:18:55] Okay. Next on our agenda is the
Municipal Firefighter Long Service
[1:19:01] Awards annual report. I'm guessing
that's Adam.
[1:19:05] Go ahead.
>> Yeah. uh through you madam warden or uh
[1:19:09] to council just this is a an item on
your uh correspondence um we could have
[1:19:15] a motion to accept it really is an
information item for council we started
[1:19:18] putting this on your agenda a few years
ago just as an awareness factor for for
[1:19:22] council as a whole so it's here you can
accept it we process it uh according
[1:19:25] policy through your annual uh
>> so you don't need a motion for this it's
[1:19:30] just anformational report
>> correct yeah
[1:19:32] » okay thank you councelor Rhino Yes,
>> just wanted to point out that there is
[1:19:38] an error in that the 15 years of service
by Chris Thompson is not through the
[1:19:43] Kennagook District Fire Department is
through Maitland.
[1:19:52] Uh three on board. Thank you councelor
for that and uh we'll modify it.
[1:19:59] » Deputy Warden.
>> Thank you madam warden. Uh question I
[1:20:03] have about the awards. We present the
awards and the volunteer service these
[1:20:09] black lapels or labels for them did uh
most times it's a different design like
[1:20:16] the province federal municipal
government. I do not care for the black
[1:20:21] ones. I think that we should really look
at a different color more like the
[1:20:26] province and the other levels of
government. I don't know that's ever
[1:20:28] been discussed or how that decision
came. has been brought to me by members
[1:20:32] of Enfield as well as members of uh
Milford.
[1:20:37] » Adam,
>> yeah, thank you, Madam War. That's
[1:20:39] something we'll take back to staff. I'm
not sure how many we have in inventory.
[1:20:42] We we do order them kind of in bulk. Um
but absolutely when we work through our
[1:20:46] inventory, we could look at a different
uh color selection. I guess the other
[1:20:50] thing I would say is um that I didn't
mention earlier is these awards, we
[1:20:55] typically notify the counselors of the
area as part of it. uh they do go to the
[1:20:59] departments themselves, the 10 and 15
year awards. So sometimes uh counselors
[1:21:04] may present them, other times the
department will present them themselves.
[1:21:07] It's a little less formal than your uh
annual awards event as part of the uh
[1:21:11] volunteer recognition week. Um so we
will uh definitely be uh keeping council
[1:21:17] informed of the awards in their their
area. Um and then the other piece I'll
[1:21:21] note, you have a motion on the books for
uh it'll be coming back to you in
[1:21:25] September. There was a request from the
fire service around adding in this the
[1:21:29] the service bars for the station gear.
So we'll have a report forward uh back
[1:21:33] which is separate from this but it
sometimes the topics can get uh
[1:21:37] interchanged.
>> Great. Thank you
[1:21:41] » councelor Rhino.
>> Yeah through you. Did I hear like I I
[1:21:45] guess the last time that I presented
these sort of to some of my fire
[1:21:49] departments is that did I hear that's
going to be the case again that you will
[1:21:53] contact the counselor from the area to
do this or can you clarify that please?
[1:21:59] » I think it's usually left up to the fire
department.
[1:22:03] » Adam
three war I believe uh Amanda reaches
[1:22:07] out to the the fire departments and also
makes the local counselor aware. Um we
[1:22:12] we typically leave it up to the
department to determine how they want to
[1:22:16] present it. Some do it on a general
night. Some do it as part of an awards
[1:22:19] banquet. Sometimes um the local
counselors are invited. It's not kind of
[1:22:23] a mandatory requirement. Okay. But we do
keep uh everyone informed, but it does
[1:22:27] go to the to the chiefs of the
department. Thank you for allowing me to
[1:22:30] clarify that.
>> Thank you.
[1:22:34] » All right. So moving along,
[1:22:39] we'll go into our committee reports and
we will start with the corporate and
[1:22:43] residential services committee. Uh
councelor Gordon Cole.
[1:22:52] The committee held regular meeting on
July 21st, 2026 in council chambers. The
[1:22:56] following motions are coming forward as
a result of that meeting. First item,
[1:23:00] carry forwards report. At the end of
March 31st, 2026, there were several
[1:23:04] amounts that had been approved in the
2526 budget that had not been entirely
[1:23:08] spent. Budget managers requested that
some of these previous budget items be
[1:23:12] approved to be included in the 2627
budget so the work can be finalized. The
[1:23:17] corporate and residential services
committee recommends that council ratify
[1:23:20] the transfer to reserves and year-end
carry forward amounts as presented in
[1:23:24] the 2526 budget carry forwards request
report dated July 15, 2026 and presented
[1:23:30] on July 21st, 2026 be accepted and
approved. As chair of the committee, I
[1:23:34] so move
>> second.
[1:23:35] » Seconded by councelor Mitchell. Is there
any discussion on the motion?
[1:23:40] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:23:48] Motion has passed unanimously.
>> Second item, housing accelerator fund
[1:23:52] allocations report. The municipality was
approved to receive 5.885 million
[1:23:57] through the federal housing accelerator
fund in February 24 following a review
[1:24:01] of spending and project timelines after
the March 31st, 2026 fiscal year end.
[1:24:06] Staff are recommending updates to
current funding allocations to ensure
[1:24:09] all half funding is spent by the
February 23rd, 2028 deadline. The
[1:24:14] corporate and residential services
committee recommends that council
[1:24:17] approve the reallocation of half funding
as noted in table one of the July 21st,
[1:24:22] 2026 report. As chair of the committee,
I so move.
[1:24:27] » Well, that was a tie. Seconded by the
deputy warden. Is there any councelor
[1:24:32] Tingley?
Uh question for staff. Uh the 1,135,700
[1:24:40] that was taken removed for the lift
station at Highway 277, how will that
[1:24:45] impact that uh that work or does it
impact it at all?
[1:24:56] » Go ahead, Wade.
Uh from a financial perspective, it
[1:25:01] won't impact the work. Um the funding
will have because we can't get that work
[1:25:08] done within the time frame needed to
spend it on half. We're simply taking
[1:25:13] those half and then allocating it
elsewhere. Uh but we will have to find
[1:25:18] funding for that uh elsewhere.
uh and
[1:25:26] uh it may be through a debenture at the
moment but we will determine that as we
[1:25:30] move forward.
>> Okay. So the brutal honest fact is it
[1:25:35] can't be done quick enough to
>> yeah understood
[1:25:39] » u and so we'll be looking to find other
funding and exactly
[1:25:44] » and the date when the work will be done
will be determined.
[1:25:47] » Yes. Yes.
>> Okay. Thanks.
[1:25:50] Any
further discussion on the motion?
[1:25:56] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:26:02] » Motion has passed unanimously.
>> The corporate and residential services
[1:26:05] committee also recommends that council
direct staff to draft the next iteration
[1:26:09] of the half-funding update consider
funding 100% of the Mount UNIAC
[1:26:13] streetlight project. As chair of the
committee, I so move.
[1:26:17] » Seconded by councelor Musa. Is there any
discussion on the motion? Councelor
[1:26:22] Musa.
>> Uh, thank you, Madame Morton. I guess
[1:26:26] Jesse wasn't here last time to ask him
the question. [snorts] So, what happened
[1:26:31] with that uh [clears throat] project?
Like, we we were Did we buy all the
[1:26:36] lights?
We were supposed to buy them all, right?
[1:26:46] uh through Madam Morton as as was talked
and and we updated uh actually there was
[1:26:50] a meeting um where we went through the
scope um uh at the Mount Union Pizzeria
[1:26:57] actually with with both of you. We went
through the scope of what could be done
[1:27:00] and and how many lights were included
and what was out of scope and there was
[1:27:05] no wiring availability for a section um
on on what set of roads and so we're
[1:27:11] waiting for
uh development expansion which was a
[1:27:15] large uh that's in the Long Lake area.
We're waiting for the developer to
[1:27:19] potentially go that route and so we
ordered the lights that were available
[1:27:24] for spots to go up and that's what we
did on scope. Oh,
[1:27:27] » okay. So, we didn't buy the extra the
extra lights. So, okay. Yeah, just
[1:27:33] » wasn't sure if we should relocate them
somewhere else if we already bought them
[1:27:36] or something. Okay. Thank you.
>> Any further discussion on the motion?
[1:27:43] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:27:48] Motion has passed unanimously.
Item three, potable water options during
[1:27:54] droughts. As its June 24th, 2026
meeting, council directed staff to
[1:28:00] explore drought response options with
community organizations and bulk water
[1:28:03] carriers and confirmed the municipality
would shift from bottled water
[1:28:06] distribution to education, conservation,
and support programs. This report
[1:28:11] summarizes staff's findings, including
limited bulk water capacity and review
[1:28:15] of rain barrel programs. The corporate
and residential services committee
[1:28:18] recommends that council direct staff to
have the municipal climate change action
[1:28:22] plan include an initiative on water
scarcity and drought resilience planning
[1:28:27] as part of the plan update and to
include a timeline and resources
[1:28:30] associated with the plan. As chair of
the committee, I so move.
[1:28:34] » Second.
>> Seconded by councelor Mitchell. Is there
[1:28:37] any discussion on the motion?
>> Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:28:48] Motion has passed unanimously.
>> The corporate residential services
[1:28:51] committee also recommends that council
direct staff to include a water
[1:28:54] conservation assistance program with a
total program budget of 50,000 to
[1:28:58] support the purchase of rain barrels or
water storage totes for eligible
[1:29:01] residential properties in the 2728 draft
budget for further discussion. As chair
[1:29:06] of the committee, I so move.
>> Second.
[1:29:09] » Seconded by the deputy warden. Is there
any discussion on the motion?
[1:29:14] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:29:20] Motion has passed unanimously.
Item four, fire service review. At its
[1:29:26] March 26th regular meeting, council
directed staff to report on options for
[1:29:30] a fire service review. Since then,
provincial developments related to the
[1:29:33] fire service governance have emerged.
The July report proposed a fire services
[1:29:37] master planning framework, including a
community risk assessment, and fire
[1:29:41] protection service review to help
council proactively assess current
[1:29:45] service delivery, future needs, and
long-term planning ahead of provincial
[1:29:48] timelines. Based on subsequent
discussion at the July 23rd regular
[1:29:52] meeting of council policy, and in camera
meeting, and further clarification, the
[1:29:57] following updated wording is
recommended. that council authorized the
[1:30:00] chief administrative officer to
undertake a fire protection service
[1:30:04] review and a fire services master plan
with a project budget of 150,000 to be
[1:30:10] funded from GTR contingency reserve and
further that engagement with council be
[1:30:14] done after each stage of the process and
that we thank the East Hanss Fire
[1:30:19] Service Association for their June 2026
letter and respond with the following.
[1:30:23] council is supportive of funding a fire
service master planning process in
[1:30:27] collaboration with the East Hanss Fire
Service Association and that the EHFSA
[1:30:32] will be invited to participate in the
full process in a format to be
[1:30:36] determined by the chiefs and that the
municipality will utilize the results of
[1:30:40] the community risk assessment to
complete a fire protection service
[1:30:43] review as part of a fire service master
plan in collaboration with the EHFSA
[1:30:48] and that due to the significant
investment being made by council and the
[1:30:51] anticipated participation of of the
AHFSA. The results of the fire service
[1:30:56] master plan will be binding.
I so move.
[1:31:02] » Seconded by councelor
Perry I think was first and a direct uh
[1:31:09] deputy warden.
>> Thank you madam chair. Guess the
[1:31:11] question I have one pri says and that
the ehfsa will be invited to participate
[1:31:17] in the full process in a format to be
determined by the chiefs. I'm taking
[1:31:21] that that would include comments from
the fire personnel under that chief's uh
[1:31:25] operation.
[1:31:29] I don't think it's actually worded in
there.
[1:31:32] » Okay. CO
[1:31:39] » through Madame Morton. So, it's
important that the the chiefs are the
[1:31:43] group that we we correspond with the
fire service are the chiefs, right? So
[1:31:48] it's important for them to come to the
table in the format that they want. Um
[1:31:53] at individual departments
um you know the chief represents the
[1:31:58] department. However they gather that
information from their personnel or
[1:32:02] whether it's it might be the whole group
that we um that we engage with um it may
[1:32:08] be a subset.
We will look to them to tell us that. Um
[1:32:14] and there may also be engagement with
the whole fire service as well. So um
[1:32:20] that that is really to make sure that
we're not telling them how we get
[1:32:24] information from them that they come to
the table and and have that say.
[1:32:29] » My concern I guess to the CEO is u not
all chiefs relate to the fire service
[1:32:34] and I think there's a lot of valuable
firefighters that could contribute
[1:32:37] information to this and hoping that we
can include them in that. Yeah, I would
[1:32:41] say the consultant that does that
undertakes this work, I am almost
[1:32:46] positive they're going to want to engage
with the whole fire service in some
[1:32:51] manner. Um, how that looks, we don't
know at this point, but it'll be
[1:32:54] important that the chiefs um
buy into the methodology of
[1:33:00] [clears throat] the the engagement.
>> I appreciate that. Thank you.
[1:33:03] » Thank you, Councelor Rhino.
>> Thank you, Madam Warden. So to be clear
[1:33:08] and kind of on that subject,
collaboration then means information
[1:33:12] gathering. Would that be correct?
Because
[1:33:17] I just want to get that clear because
collaboration means different things to
[1:33:21] different people and and some may take
that as municipality and the fire
[1:33:26] service are doing this together where
this is review should be somewhat
[1:33:30] independent but the information and
should be gathered through the east
[1:33:35] fire. So I just want to make I want to
get this corrected on this uh meaning of
[1:33:43] collaboration
[1:33:46] » three a metamorton. Um it absolutely
will be done by an independent
[1:33:52] body like through a consultant. Um the
piece we need to be uh mindful of is the
[1:33:57] legislation is doing this in
collaboration or in conjunction I'm not
[1:34:01] sure of the exact wording of the
legislation but involving our fire
[1:34:04] service providers. Mhm.
>> So, um we do uh and we have a great
[1:34:09] relationship with with the East Hands
Fire Service. So, it's a really good
[1:34:12] opportunity for council uh and them to
be undertaking this together. So,
[1:34:16] collaboration um means they they need to
be part of the process. You know, we're
[1:34:20] going to um work through that um with
them uh with how they as the CEO
[1:34:26] mentioned how they want to be engaged
and we'll be going through the chief's
[1:34:30] association as our starting point um to
to start to ask those questions.
[1:34:35] Okay.
>> So, so collaboration
[1:34:38] um they need to be part of the process.
It won't necessarily mean that they're
[1:34:42] driving the process, but they need to be
involved in a meaningful uh way. Uh
[1:34:48] yeah. So, I guess my concern is we make
that perfectly clear up front that
[1:34:53] they're independent from this
independent person doing this, but the
[1:34:57] they are there for information gathering
and uh questions being asked of them. I
[1:35:03] just don't want them to think this is
part and parcel uh us and the review
[1:35:09] person are uh are doing this together
and I think it has to be independent
[1:35:15] really. I really do.
>> Thank you.
[1:35:18] » Thank you.
[1:35:22] Any further questions on the motion?
Seeing none, we will go to the vote.
[1:35:31] Motion has passed unanimously
>> that until the fire service review is
[1:35:35] complete, council requires any projects
using fire levies that relate to capital
[1:35:39] spending to be approved by council. I so
move
[1:35:43] » seconded by councelor he [clears throat]
councelor Musa.
[1:35:48] » I sorry I will not be supporting this
motion. I know we have few fire
[1:35:52] department and already have some capital
budget and they're saving some money for
[1:35:56] it and anything that come to council
could put them behind and they could
[1:36:00] they could miss out on a on a buy or
something. So, they've been doing it
[1:36:04] forever and they're the one on on the
ground. They know what they need. They
[1:36:09] know what they want. They know where the
fire station is going to go. So, I will
[1:36:12] not be supporting this. I I will rely on
the experience of my firefighter before
[1:36:17] I rely on anybody here. Thank you.
Councelor
[1:36:21] Rhino Megaw Warren. I understand the pro
the process of this. However, my concern
[1:36:27] lies if there is
if there is something that has to be
[1:36:33] made a decision on quickly. Will that
not hold up that process by having to
[1:36:39] come to council for a decision? And this
is where that I'm I'm really concerned
[1:36:45] about this.
[1:36:48] I think perhaps to answer that first, we
should uh
[1:36:55] we should perhaps the wording of this
motion is capital spending
[1:36:59] » and I don't want to go into specific.
>> I believe it would be major capital
[1:37:03] projects or something. I'm I'm not
thinking that um I don't know if a fire
[1:37:10] department needs to buy six new BAS that
they would have to come to council. So I
[1:37:17] just would go back to staff to see if
there's something that you know
[1:37:26] CIO
through you Madame Warden. The intent
[1:37:31] here is for like major capital projects
that wouldn't be sort of rush spending
[1:37:37] um things that would involve some
long-term planning. Um and again if if
[1:37:43] fire departments have contracts let for
things then you know that's not included
[1:37:48] in this because they they do their own
procurement and if they have contractual
[1:37:52] obligations that wouldn't be included.
This would be any new spend um that
[1:38:01] should be long like have long-term
planning attached to it.
[1:38:06] Well, I guess I I think we were on
camera the last time we discussed this
[1:38:10] and I brought up a specific uh uh item
and and I just don't want to we may
[1:38:17] things may have to be acted on on
quickly and to hold this up or may pro
[1:38:23] possibly lose an opportunity because of
the time frame has got me concerned.
[1:38:29] I like I say, I understand the purpose
of it, but I'm just I'm wondering if we
[1:38:36] could give the CAO a little bit of room
to
[1:38:41] authorize something.
>> Well, I was going to say perhaps um it
[1:38:46] has been in the past, if I could weigh
in, when fire departments have had
[1:38:50] something come up quickly that they
needed approved, we have called
[1:38:54] emergency meetings to uh to deal with
those requests. And I don't think any it
[1:38:59] can be done by Zoom,
>> you know, if it's a one item thing. And
[1:39:03] I don't think any counselor ever
objected to coming together to vote on
[1:39:07] whether or not to release money for a
>> if that's the way we can do this. I I I
[1:39:12] would be happy with that, but I just put
people on notice that that could very
[1:39:16] well happen. So
>> So I mean, do we need that added to the
[1:39:20] motion or is that just simply understood
that that's okay, Madam Board? If we got
[1:39:26] a request at, you know, August 10th that
they had to know by August 17th or so
[1:39:32] it's something then we would call a a
meeting of council.
[1:39:35] » Thank you.
>> By Zoom, not
[1:39:38] » so there be. Thank you. That
>> that helps. Thank you.
[1:39:43] » Any further discussion?
[1:39:47] Seeing none, we will go to the vote.
[1:39:55] And the motion is passed by a vote of 10
to one
[1:40:00] with councelor Musa voting nay.
>> Item five, 202526 annual report
[1:40:05] including the treasures report. The CEO
and director of finance presented the
[1:40:09] 202526 annual report including
treasurer's report. Discussion ensued
[1:40:14] and questions were addressed by staff.
Corporate and Residential Services
[1:40:17] Committee recommends that council
accepts the 202526 East Hance annual
[1:40:21] report including treasures report and
that it be made available to the public.
[1:40:25] As chair of the committee, I so move
>> second.
[1:40:28] » Seconded by councelor Miriam. Any
discussion on the motion?
[1:40:34] Seeing none, we will go to the vote.
[1:40:40] Motion has passed unanimously. Item six,
D land management proposed D corridor
[1:40:46] legacy encroachments policy and the
municipal fee policy. During the July
[1:40:50] 2020 20 July 23rd 2026 regular meeting
of council and policy and in camera
[1:40:55] meeting council gave notice of intent to
two policy updates and council can now
[1:40:59] consider approving the dates to those
policies followed the required 7-day
[1:41:03] notice period that council consider
adoption of the D corridor legacy
[1:41:08] encroachments policy as presented and
attached to the July 23rd 2026 regular
[1:41:13] meeting of council policy and in camera
agenda. I so move
[1:41:17] » second
>> seconded by councelor Mitchell. I'm
[1:41:21] going to ask the deputy warden to take
the chair. [snorts]
[1:41:24] » Okay, madam wooden, go ahead, please.
>> Just a brief comment. Uh certainly a lot
[1:41:28] of hard work and an excellent report
from staff, but as I said at the
[1:41:33] committee meeting, I cannot in good
conscience vote in favor for the simple
[1:41:37] reason that I would have preferred a
more robust uh encroachment policy for
[1:41:44] the residents affected. Um an
encroachment license that uh could have
[1:41:51] uh more easily followed with the
property in case of sale or things like
[1:41:56] that. I I just would have preferred a
little more protection for the
[1:42:00] residents. Thank you.
>> Would you like me to finish this?
[1:42:03] » Sure.
>> See anyone else to speak? Call for the
[1:42:06] vote.
[1:42:10] » I'll pass the chair back to Madam
Warden. Thank you.
[1:42:13] » And motion is passed by a vote of 10 to
one with myself voting nay. That council
[1:42:18] approve added adding encroachment fees
to the municipal fee policy as attached
[1:42:22] to the regular meeting of council policy
and in camera agenda dated July 23rd
[1:42:27] 2026. I so move
>> second.
[1:42:32] » Seconded by councelor Tingley.
Discussion on the motion.
[1:42:37] We'll go to the vote.
[1:42:42] The motion is passed by a vote of 10 to
one. Once again with myself voting nay.
[1:42:48] » This concludes the report.
>> Thank you.
[1:42:52] Next we will go to parks, wreck and
culture with councelor Rhino.
[1:42:59] » Hey madam warden committee held it
regular meeting on July 21st 2026 and
[1:43:04] councelor chambers. The following
motions are coming forward as a result.
[1:43:09] » [clears throat]
>> Tinsmith shop museum operating options
[1:43:13] following the east east historical
society's annual general meeting and
[1:43:19] successful completion of the governance
review requirements and municipality
[1:43:24] released the 2026 operating staff
funding.
[1:43:32] So fun that the parks recreation and
culture committee recommends that
[1:43:36] council continue the current partnership
model with the east museum
[1:43:41] society there I I said the eastance
historical that should be corrected to
[1:43:45] the east museum society so I'll start
again continue that the current
[1:43:51] partnership model between the east
museum society and the municipality with
[1:43:56] the municipal staff providing support to
strengthen the governance and operation
[1:44:01] and request that the society develop a 3
to fiveyear operational plan to help
[1:44:07] guide future operations and plan for
available grant funding and encourage
[1:44:12] the society to pursue additional grant
opportunities to strengthen its
[1:44:16] operations and reduce reliance on
municipal funding and enlist a
[1:44:23] structural engineer to assist the
building structure for better long-term
[1:44:27] planning up to $8,000 HST
from professional fees reserve and that
[1:44:34] the East Hance Museum so Society be
required to present to council as part
[1:44:40] of the 2728 budget discussions as chair
of the committee. I do so moved
[1:44:46] » moved and seconded. Is there any
discussion on the motion?
[1:44:51] » Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:44:56] » And the motion has passed unanimously.
This concludes my report.
[1:45:01] » Thank you. Next, we will move to the
infrastructure and operations committee.
[1:45:08] Councelor Perry.
>> Thank you, Madam Warden. The committee
[1:45:12] held its regular meeting on July 21st,
2026 in council chambers. The following
[1:45:16] motions are coming forward as a result
of that meeting. Snow clearing standards
[1:45:20] for Mount Uniak Business Park and
Municipal Roads. Staff presented a
[1:45:25] report outlining a standalone service
level to allow staff to utilize current
[1:45:29] contractor availability and gain a
better understanding of the potential
[1:45:33] challenges posed by conducting snow
clearance operations in the UNIAC
[1:45:37] business park. The current contract for
snow clearing runs through 2728 fiscal
[1:45:41] cycle and this would allow for
additional updates at that time. As a
[1:45:46] result, updates to the policy were
suggested. The infrastructure and
[1:45:49] operations committee recommends that
council approve the East Hance policy
[1:45:52] for winter clearing standards for roads
and sidewalks as presented to the
[1:45:56] committee on July 21st, 2026 and that
council approve the East Hance policy
[1:46:01] for winter clearing standards for roads
and sideswalks as attached to the July
[1:46:06] 21st 26 committee agenda. As chair of
the committee, I so move.
[1:46:11] » Second.
>> Seconded by councelor Mitchell. Is there
[1:46:14] any discussion on the motion?
Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:46:22] » Motion has passed unanimously.
>> Bylaw IO300-2,
[1:46:27] an amendment to BO IO 300, a bylaw
respecting the regulation of connection
[1:46:32] and discharges to public sewer system
updates was dealt with earlier in the
[1:46:36] meeting. So, this concludes the report.
>> Thank you.
[1:46:40] Next, we will go to the planning
advisory committee report. Councelor
[1:46:44] Mitchell.
Thank you, Madam Warden. The committee
[1:46:49] held its regular meeting on July 21st,
2026 in council chambers. The following
[1:46:53] motions are coming forward as well this
meeting.
[1:46:57] Number one, plan 26-004 Andrew and Julie
Gilby red designation resoning infill
[1:47:03] first reading which was dealt with at
the public hearing. Number two, plan
[1:47:08] 26-009
Swinks Agro Engineering Limited land use
[1:47:13] bylaw amendment. The municipality has
received an application from Switz Agro
[1:47:18] Engineering Limited on behalf of the
Atlantic Borers Limited to amend the
[1:47:22] land use bylaw to reduce the minimum
setback requirement for an intensive
[1:47:27] livestock operation use from the public
road to the rural use
[1:47:33] rural use north zone.
The planning advisory committee
[1:47:37] recommends the council direct staff to
seek comments from the east hands
[1:47:42] agriculture advisory committee on the
applicants to amend the municipal
[1:47:45] planning strategy and land use ped to
allow an intense livestock operation in
[1:47:50] the rural use north zone which does not
meet the minimum se separation distance
[1:47:55] in section 5.2.3
to be considered by development
[1:48:00] agreement and authorize staff to
schedule a public information meeting.
[1:48:05] As chair of the committee, I so move
>> seconded by councelor Rhino. Is there
[1:48:10] any discussion on the motion?
>> Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:48:18] [clears throat] Motion has passed
unanimously.
[1:48:22] » Number three, plan 26 as 007 Barry Hill
and Darren Lawrence development
[1:48:28] agreement of final report. It was dealt
with at the public hearing. Number four,
[1:48:33] amendments to official community plan
regarding setbacks from cemeteries.
[1:48:39] Council directed staff to prepare
amendments to the east end official
[1:48:43] community plan that would enable the
subdivision of properties containing
[1:48:49] places of worship, former places of
worship from cemeteries. Council
[1:48:54] directed that these amendments should
enable reduced setback
[1:48:59] setback area and frontage requirements
to permit the cemeteries and the
[1:49:04] buildings to be relocated on separate
lots. The planning advisory committee
[1:49:08] recommends that council authorize staff
to schedule a public information meeting
[1:49:13] to consider an application for
amendments to the missile planning and
[1:49:17] subdivision bylaw to allow the
subdivision of places of worship former
[1:49:22] place of worship from cemeteries and all
zones where there is deed access to both
[1:49:27] lots. As chair of the committee, I so
moved.
[1:49:32] » Seconded by councelor Rhino. Is there
any discussion on the motion?
[1:49:37] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[1:49:44] » Motion has passed unanimously.
>> Number five,
[1:49:48] municipal planning strategy policy
regarding 100 units max in the DA
[1:49:53] initial report. Planning and development
staff have been directed to change the
[1:49:58] MPS
to not entertain any developments over
[1:50:01] 100 units without a second access to an
arterial or collector road by
[1:50:06] development agreement.
This report proposes a new policy.
[1:50:13] » I'm sorry it's turned off. You saw me
turn it off.
[1:50:17] » This report proposes a new policy to be
added to
[1:50:21] » part D. Realizing the plan of the
missile planning strategy MPS to address
[1:50:27] council's direction, the planning
advisory committee recommends that
[1:50:30] council authorized staff to schedule a
public information meeting to consider a
[1:50:35] council proposal to amend the municipal
planning strategy by adding a new policy
[1:50:39] to part D realizing the plan which would
only permit council to consider
[1:50:44] development agreements for more than 100
dwelling units where a proposed multiple
[1:50:49] unit development is serviced by more
than one access to a collector or
[1:50:55] arterial street. As chair of the
committee, I so moved.
[1:50:59] » Do we have a seconder?
>> Seconded by councelor Mcy. Councelor
[1:51:03] Garden Cole.
>> Thank you, Madam Morton. I I just wanted
[1:51:07] to comment on this because I've been on
the fence about this topic since it
[1:51:12] first came up and [snorts] I see the
need for action in this area, but I just
[1:51:20] can't decide what action is appropriate.
So, I was on the Lucasville Road the
[1:51:27] night that um they were evacuated from
Hammond's Plains area back a number of
[1:51:31] years ago when the fires happened. And
one thing that I keep going back to is
[1:51:36] that they were exiting on the sackful
end because they weren't permitted to
[1:51:39] exit on the Hammonds Plains end of that
road. And [clears throat] while the ex
[1:51:46] the the evacuation was steady, it wasn't
uh panicked uh crazy like it would have
[1:51:54] been in a subdivision or or in a more
densely populated area where everybody
[1:51:59] was desperate to get out all at the same
time where the houses are a little more
[1:52:03] staggered. It was it was a steady
evacuation process.
[1:52:07] And I just keep thinking about that and
wondering if by making a blanket motion
[1:52:16] that the whole municipality is going to
be under this 100 dwelling units limit
[1:52:22] that it might not be the best thing for
the entire municipality. That maybe we
[1:52:29] should be looking at breaking this type
of motion down to
[1:52:37] » [snorts]
>> more densely populated areas versus more
[1:52:41] rural areas or roads that could possibly
be evacuated
[1:52:46] uh with less of a uh urgency or less
chaos and panic. Obviously, if you're on
[1:52:52] a street that has three or four
apartment buildings or you're in a very
[1:52:55] densely populated area, you are going to
everybody's going to be trying to leave
[1:53:00] at the same time. So, if you've got
apartments and there's two apartments
[1:53:03] with 72 units and everybody's got two
vehicles, everybody will literally be
[1:53:09] trying to get, you know, 144* 2 out at
the same time if they're being
[1:53:14] evacuated. And I just see that as being
different from even though there's only
[1:53:19] one exit on a long road that might be in
Enfield or it might be in Mount Unia
[1:53:23] area or it might be somewhere else that
people it's going to be more of a
[1:53:28] staggered exit or a steady exit not so
much of a of a panicking chaotic exit as
[1:53:36] it would be in a more densely populated
area.
[1:53:39] So that's what that's what I have come
up with and
[1:53:44] » as a result result of that I would like
to make a motion. Now there is already a
[1:53:50] motion on the floor. So what if my
motion is different from the motion on
[1:53:54] the floor?
[1:53:58] What what's my pro what's my options?
>> If it's a different motion we would have
[1:54:04] to deal with this motion first I
believe.
[1:54:07] » So I can't You can
>> you can move to table this motion.
[1:54:13] » So there's no way of amending this
making an amendment to this motion.
[1:54:17] » Well, that would depend on what the
amendment was because the the intent of
[1:54:21] this motion is for
council would only consider development
[1:54:27] agreements for more than a 100 dwelling
units where a proposed multiple unit
[1:54:31] development is serviced by more than one
access. So
[1:54:36] you would be very limited in what you
could make for an amendment. I believe
[1:54:39] that wouldn't change the intent of that
motion.
[1:54:42] » Okay.
>> So, and I mean I don't know if council
[1:54:48] has an appetite for this, but I just
feel like it's it's uh it's worth making
[1:54:53] a uh it's worth putting a motion out
there that we this is the this would be
[1:55:00] what my motion would be given the
opportunity. I just want to lay it out
[1:55:03] there for council is that we look at
putting a 100 limit on more densely
[1:55:08] populated areas and that would have to
be determined.
[1:55:12] » Yeah, there'd have to be some more
clarity to that.
[1:55:16] » Okay. So, I guess I would be looking for
a motion to table this motion that's on
[1:55:23] the floor.
>> You can make that motion if you desire.
[1:55:26] » Okay. So, I'm going to make a motion to
table this motion.
[1:55:31] That's my motion.
>> Is there a seconder for the motion to
[1:55:35] table?
>> There is no debate on the motion to
[1:55:38] table. So, we'll vote on the motion to
table this motion.
[1:55:50] And the motion has failed by a vote of 8
to3
[1:55:56] with councelor Rhino, councelor Perry,
and councelor Garden Cole voting in
[1:56:00] favor to table and everyone else voting
nay.
[1:56:04] Okay, we'll go back to the motion on the
floor.
[1:56:11] Uh, it hasn't changed, Sher. Oh, wait. I
can do that myself. Never mind.
[1:56:17] Okay, CIO, have you wished to speak?
Okay, councelor Perry.
[1:56:24] » Thank you, Madame Warden. And as along
the same lines as uh councelor Garden
[1:56:28] Cole, I believe this is this is
overregulation. And uh I I do not
[1:56:34] believe in blanketing anything. We
should be looking at things on a
[1:56:36] case-byase basis. Uh because there are
always many contributing factors in any
[1:56:42] development which can be access to
water, length of road, uh frontage and
[1:56:46] and many different things. And just
putting a blanket thing out there for
[1:56:50] 100 dwelling units and requiring these
two things might take care of five or
[1:56:56] you know 70% but there's still 25% that
can be be there. And I just don't think
[1:57:01] uh this is is good policy. I think it's
uh it's over government regulation. and
[1:57:08] I cannot support this motion.
>> Thank you, councelor Musa.
[1:57:15] » Uh, thank you, Madam Morton. I'm glad
councelor Gen Cole mentioned that, but
[1:57:19] we're comparing Hammonds Plane Road or
like Hammonds Plane Road to
[1:57:26] all old Anfield Road, not degrading old
road, but hardly any people on that. So,
[1:57:31] if you have a 100 homes, you could
evacuate that in no time.
[1:57:34] » Correction, we're not doing that. We're
we're not comparing Hammond's Plains. We
[1:57:40] are simply discussing any development
agreement anywhere
[1:57:45] with over a hundred dwelling units. It
could be the old Enfield Road. It could
[1:57:50] be
>> like not not even any road in East come
[1:57:54] close to that road like to to what
started the whole thing. That that fire
[1:57:59] started the whole debate about this.
That's why I'm saying we're comparing
[1:58:02] that that fire that happened over there
that a possible fire that could happen
[1:58:06] here in in East Ens and we forgot that
if we have apartment building you don't
[1:58:10] have to to run away with your car you
could leave your car you have insurance
[1:58:14] on your house on your car and you could
run away on foot so there is a lot of
[1:58:18] pathway between those apartment building
so we should be looking at something
[1:58:22] that encourage our development not
hinder our development and we need that
[1:58:27] tax base all the time So I wouldn't be
supporting anything like that. So we
[1:58:33] should be looking at some new strategy
and look what where each look at each
[1:58:39] area by by itself. Like we have some uh
I could state couple area in mount uniak
[1:58:44] that it's a dead end street like uniak
mines road have 10 houses on it and they
[1:58:50] have one subdivision of 100 homes and
we're we're stopping everything over
[1:58:53] there. So I I don't think that's good
governance that's hindering development
[1:58:58] and we should be looking at something
could be save could be safe but could be
[1:59:03] open to to new ideas, new development,
new thing going on. Thank you.
[1:59:09] » Okay, councelor Tingley.
>> Uh through the chair, I'm going to
[1:59:13] support the motion uh because I think
it's in line with the fires smart
[1:59:18] guidelines from what I understand. Uh,
and I haven't heard anybody else present
[1:59:23] anything any better or if if somebody
can present something that's uh can
[1:59:28] alleviate that concern, I'd be happy to
hear it. Uh, the other thing, we're
[1:59:32] going to a py. We're not making a
decision here tonight to uh to do this.
[1:59:37] We're going to go to a public public
information meeting. I would like to
[1:59:40] hear what the public has to say about
it. Uh, it's a big issue, not just here,
[1:59:44] right across Canada. So, I wouldn't want
to shut it down without going to a pin.
[1:59:49] That's it.
[1:59:52] Council Rhino.
>> Thank you, Madam Warden. I will not be
[1:59:55] supporting the motion because just for
the fact I know it's going to the motion
[2:00:00] is to go to appeal. However, I think
Councelor Garden Cole has brought up
[2:00:06] another idea and aspect and I think we
would be doing our due diligence if we
[2:00:12] took a little breather, listen to what
her motion might a it or might say and
[2:00:19] then get a staff report on that. It may
be something that that may be doable.
[2:00:23] So, I don't know the why the rush on
this. However, I'll respect the will of
[2:00:29] will of council, but uh I cannot support
this meeting or this motion, excuse me,
[2:00:34] [laughter]
>> councelor McI.
[2:00:37] » Oh, thank you, Warden. It seems to be a
bit of confusion here when we talk about
[2:00:41] things like the old Enfield Road. Well,
you could go to [clears throat] trunk
[2:00:44] 14. You can come out to trunk two.
There's two ways out any place off of
[2:00:50] the old Enfield Road. If there were 100
homes in the road I live on, you could
[2:00:55] go to trunk two. You could go to Route
224. There would be two ways out. If you
[2:01:01] are in the New Havenwood development and
there's 150 homes in there, there's only
[2:01:07] one way out to trunk two. So, that's the
kind of scenario we're talking about.
[2:01:13] And yeah, it's fires smart. If you read
it, that's what this is in line with.
[2:01:19] And it is a P a pin that we're talking
about. Not making a final decision on
[2:01:24] anything. So, I'll certainly be
supporting the uh motion. Thank you,
[2:01:34] » John.
>> Uh thank you, Madam War. From a couple
[2:01:37] of comments, I just want to uh maybe
clarify that this only applies to when a
[2:01:43] development agreement is triggered. So,
if you're on an existing road, you have
[2:01:46] an existing lot, doesn't matter if
there's more than 100 dwelling units on
[2:01:50] that street, whether it's UNIAC mines or
whatever, you can still build a house
[2:01:53] there. This is only when you're a
development agreement is triggered for
[2:01:57] multi-unit development.
>> Thank you. Any further comments or
[2:02:03] questions? Councelor Musa.
[2:02:10] » So, so you consider reszoning as a
development as something like that too
[2:02:14] or
[2:02:19] » or subdividing or something like that?
So,
[2:02:21] » yeah. Well, so there's there's existing
regulations that would impact your
[2:02:26] ability to subdivide. That is the 100
lot rule. So, right now, council does
[2:02:30] have in the subdivision bylaw rule that
prevents you from um creating more than
[2:02:36] 100 lots with one access. So, that's
separate from this 100 unit rule. Um and
[2:02:42] you know, okay,
>> but where the lots have already been
[2:02:45] created, then nothing's going to stop
you from getting a building permit
[2:02:47] there.
>> Thank you.
[2:02:50] Any further comments or questions?
Seeing none, we will go to the vote.
[2:03:02] And the vote is passed by a vote of 7
to4
[2:03:07] with councelor Musa, councelor Rhino,
councelor Perry, and councelor garden
[2:03:11] cole voting nay.
[2:03:18] » Oops.
Sorry, Councelor Mitchell. [laughter]
[2:03:22] Go ahead.
>> The planning advice committee recommends
[2:03:24] the council direct staff to come back
with a report on secondary access
[2:03:29] options across the municipality to make
the community safer. As chair of the
[2:03:33] committee, I so moved.
>> Seconded by councelor McY. Is there any
[2:03:40] discussion on the motion?
Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[2:03:49] Motion has passed unanimously.
>> Number six, plan review what we heard
[2:03:55] report.
Planning advisory committee received a
[2:03:59] report summarizing public consultation
in the plan review. To date, East has
[2:04:04] sought active engagement from East
residents and property owners through
[2:04:10] visioning meet visioning meetings,
surveys, and interest holder meetings.
[2:04:15] Community engagement will continue
throughout the planning process through
[2:04:19] community meetings, social media posts,
and direct engagement with property
[2:04:23] owners whose property may be considered
for a land use designation
[2:04:29] and zone change.
Number seven, pre-application policy
[2:04:34] requests. The committee considered two
requests under council's pre-application
[2:04:39] policy. This policy enables developers
an opportunity to request a discussion
[2:04:45] with PAC regarding a proposed
development in CRA prior to an
[2:04:50] application being submitted. The
committee approved both requests but has
[2:04:55] directed
that the presentations be held in open
[2:04:59] committee instead of in camera. This
concludes our report.
[2:05:04] » Thank you.
All right. That brings us to the
[2:05:08] warden's report. So, I'll turn the chair
over to the deputy warden.
[2:05:12] » Okay, mad warden. Go ahead, please.
>> I keep my report very brief this evening
[2:05:17] as we still have a couple of inc camera
items to deal with. Um, I did attend the
[2:05:23] graduation at Hance North on June the
26th. In spite of the fact that they
[2:05:28] were expecting counselor Rhino, and I
know the crowd was disappointed, I did
[2:05:32] manage to get through it. Um on the 27th
I I attended the opening of a memorial
[2:05:39] park at the Legion in Null which was uh
very enjoyable and well attended and
[2:05:44] they've certainly done a beautiful job
there. attended Canada Day celebrations
[2:05:49] in uh watched the parade in in
Shubanakadi and then took with a friend
[2:05:55] um took a drive down through the shore
and dropped into several of the
[2:06:00] locations of interest along the shore
drive and uh did enjoy the day. Um other
[2:06:07] than that uh numerous community uh
functions and uh presentations and uh
[2:06:14] director's meetings and just on the 27th
um attended uh the director's meeting
[2:06:21] with councelor McI and the MLA where a
public uh photo was taken for the
[2:06:29] announcement of the we're getting ready
to begin those new apartments those um
[2:06:34] public housing in Shubanagod. And we're
pleased to say that instead of 16 units,
[2:06:40] there are now going to be 18. So, uh
anyway, that uh that concludes my report
[2:06:46] at this time. Thank you.
>> Thank you, madam. I'm going to pass the
[2:06:49] chair back to you.
>> All right. We'll now move into business
[2:06:52] from counselors and we'll start with
councelor Tingley
[2:07:00] » uh through the chair. I'm just going to
discuss one item here tonight. Uh
[2:07:05] I I I've had a lot of inquiries or yeah
quite a few inquiries actually about
[2:07:11] bylaw issues, dust, lights, sewer uh the
sewer system um about uh connecting uh
[2:07:18] the sewer into the storm drain and stuff
like that. And uh first I want to prefix
[2:07:25] it by I I I think staff generally
provide good service on everything. But
[2:07:31] uh I end up in with uh dozens of
communication uh when somebody puts in a
[2:07:38] uh a concern and says could we look into
the dust from this job site or can you
[2:07:42] look into the lighting from this? and
they're all bylaw issues and uh it
[2:07:48] doesn't seem like there's a full
explanation or a a prompt response that
[2:07:52] goes back to the uh to the u constituent
and I I like to provide swift accurate
[2:08:01] friendly service to people and I don't
know what the timeline is for getting to
[2:08:05] the bottom of something but uh I wish
I'd like to see a a a reasonable
[2:08:11] timeline on getting back and making a
decision. whether we're going to uh deal
[2:08:16] with these issues or not. And the issues
are even worse with the province. Uh you
[2:08:23] know, like I made a mot couple of
motions that that uh constituents came
[2:08:27] to me uh uh in January. I think I made
the motions around uh Jake Brakes on the
[2:08:34] connector and uh [snorts] uh a crosswalk
on the connector in Lance and it's
[2:08:40] crickets. I I don't get anything back
from anybody. Um, and I I don't want to
[2:08:46] make a big issue of it, but I would like
to know
[2:08:51] uh through staff, is there timelines on
getting a a firm answer on these things?
[2:09:01] » Okay. Well, public member two wants to
speak for some reason. Don't ask me how.
[2:09:11] » Okay. Go ahead, John.
>> Uh, thank you, Madam Warden. Um, to
[2:09:15] answer the counselor's question, there
there's not directly a specific, you
[2:09:19] know, we'll get back to you in 24 hours
or whatever number of days. It's it
[2:09:23] really depends on the issue. Um, as soon
as somebody puts a complaint in through
[2:09:27] our online portal, they immediately get
a an email back, an automatic email, so
[2:09:32] that they know that their complaint has
been received. Um
[2:09:38] but we're also careful about um what we
tell complainants uh because it's an
[2:09:43] investigation. It's an enforcement
action potentially. So you know you
[2:09:47] don't want to jeopardize an
investigation by um you know u
[2:09:52] I guess u telling folks too much but we
do uh probably heir on the side of
[2:09:57] sharing information. Um
and but as I say it depends on the
[2:10:02] issue. It depends on um how quickly
staff are able to get to it and and so
[2:10:09] on. So there's not a a service standard
per se about getting back to a
[2:10:13] complaintant within a specific period of
time.
[2:10:16] » Well, let me give you an example. I I've
got one constituent. He's been
[2:10:20] complaining about dust for a year and I
don't know if anybody's gotten back to
[2:10:26] him and and confirmed that uh yeah, we
know you have dust. It's reasonable.
[2:10:32] it's unreasonable. Uh we're going to do
this or there are precautions being
[2:10:37] taken. Uh you know what staff know about
like a year is a long time and like this
[2:10:43] particular guy I must have 30 emails and
um
[2:10:49] you know he's he's a demanding
constituent. Um, but and I have my own
[2:10:53] opinions about it and I'm not trying to
drive staff as to what the ultimate
[2:10:56] decision is, but I don't want to go on
for a year. Uh, like I I don't feel like
[2:11:01] I'm providing good service that way,
>> but I do believe and I'll refer to the
[2:11:06] CA on this. I do believe at that
particular instance there have been
[2:11:10] responses.
>> Yeah, I Madam Warden, I don't think it's
[2:11:12] fair to say he's been complaining for a
year and not gotten a response. We've
[2:11:17] been back and forth several times with
individuals around dust. of it. I don't
[2:11:21] know the person you're speaking about,
but I can assume I know who it is.
[2:11:24] » You're right.
>> Um because I'm copied on most of the
[2:11:27] emails to and from the individual. Our
bylaw enforcement officer has been
[2:11:32] dealing with dust complaints both in
Enfield and Lance. Um but but I would
[2:11:37] say in this instance,
bylaw enforcement isn't something that's
[2:11:42] done. It's not a back and forth
communication. like you're not going to
[2:11:47] get direct communication back to
somebody to say this is like we don't
[2:11:52] update the complainant every step of the
way. We go out and we investigate. It's
[2:11:58] not a back and forth between us.
>> I understand this, but let me ask
[2:12:01] » right. But but you're making it sound
like we're doing nothing for a year.
[2:12:04] » Let me ask a question. And uh do we know
if that contractor is taking reasonable
[2:12:11] precautions? Do we know that? From
everything that I've read and the
[2:12:15] communication that's been had, yes, I
believe they are and and that has been
[2:12:20] communicated.
>> Okay. Well, I'll accept that. I live
[2:12:25] there and I know what the situation is,
but if that's what if that's what staff
[2:12:28] says, I'll I'll accept that.
But I don't I I haven't seen anything
[2:12:34] that went back to him and said, uh, yes,
they're taken. I believe there's been at
[2:12:39] least two mail two emails today saying
that to that
[2:12:43] » might have been today, but this has been
for a year,
[2:12:45] » but there have been other emails back
and forth between he and our b law
[2:12:48] enforcement officer.
>> Okay.
[2:12:50] » And through you, Madam War, I would say
it's not all the same case. Like if
[2:12:53] somebody put a complaint in last summer,
um that is not the same file as, you
[2:12:59] know, a complaint that comes in um six
or eight months later. It's like
[2:13:03] obviously that one has been dealt with
and and so on and now we're it's a new
[2:13:07] complaint that we're dealing with.
>> It's a different situation, but I I live
[2:13:11] there and he's sending us photographs.
>> Yeah.
[2:13:14] » Like it's well documented.
>> Yeah. And and
[2:13:16] » I think counselor, what we're being told
is that staff have received the
[2:13:20] complaint
>> and they've dealt with it. Okay.
[2:13:22] » And they have dealt with it and they
have been in contact with the
[2:13:26] complainant.
>> So the other guy
[2:13:28] » and and we continue to be in contact
with the developer. Right.
[2:13:33] » We will continue to monitor it because
it is an ongoing
[2:13:36] um construction site.
>> Well, the the other couple of situations
[2:13:40] uh with the lighting, it was like uh he
was just dropped as far as I'm
[2:13:46] concerned. Like nobody nobody helped
deal with the situation at all. and the
[2:13:51] the follow with the sewer. He's been
asking about, you know, can the
[2:13:55] municipality do an investigation into um
uh people dumping their sewer into the
[2:14:02] uh or their their uh storm drainage into
the sewer uh because it's affecting him
[2:14:08] where he lives at the bottom of a
street. and uh I don't think he's ever
[2:14:12] got a direct answer as to u
whether we can or will do anything to to
[2:14:20] investigate it.
>> I do know that staff regularly when they
[2:14:23] become aware of these situations do take
action on that.
[2:14:28] » So and through to you madam I would say
this about that particular case that one
[2:14:33] is still an open file I would say. So it
hasn't been concluded yet.
[2:14:37] » Okay. Uh,
and uh, so anyway, I'm I'm I'm airing
[2:14:44] what my concerns are with with these
people, and some of them have been going
[2:14:48] on for a year, and I think uh, they're
open, and they keep following up with me
[2:14:53] because they don't think they're getting
an adequate response, and
[2:14:57] [laughter]
I'm going to accept your response here
[2:15:00] that you give me tonight,
>> CO. So through you, Madam Morton, the
[2:15:04] bylaw process is a regulated process and
it doesn't involve counselors.
[2:15:10] So, if we receive a bylaw complaint and
it has been investigated and it has not
[2:15:18] and and it isn't what the person wants
to see as a resolution, they may come to
[2:15:24] you as their counselor to say this
wasn't what I expected as a resolution
[2:15:29] or I'm not happy with the service I
received or whatever that might be. In
[2:15:33] that case, you send those to me and then
I will look internally as to what's
[2:15:38] going on. when we get emails being sent
to two different directors in the case
[2:15:43] of dust. Uh we've had a meeting
internally where I've just said there's
[2:15:47] too many emails going around about dust
because I can't keep track of who gets
[2:15:51] sent what and then John responds or
Jesse responds and then the bylaw
[2:15:55] officer's responding and then the
counselor sending stuff to one director
[2:16:00] and not the other like it's almost
impossible to to keep track of it all.
[2:16:05] So if we have issues with bylaw
enforcement in particular because it is
[2:16:09] a regulated process, those should come
to me and I will sort it out internally
[2:16:14] and get back to the counselor whether it
was dealt with appropriately from from
[2:16:19] my investigation. And I do investigate
those things like I pull the team
[2:16:23] together and say, "Okay, what have we
done? What should have been done? What
[2:16:26] was expected? Where did we fall down?" I
do all of that. Um and I will respond
[2:16:31] back to the counselor. that in
specifically with bylaw enforcement
[2:16:36] cases, it is not a back and forth
between staff and counselors,
[2:16:41] staff, counselors, and the the
complainant. Um, that can't be the
[2:16:45] process we follow because it's not it's
just not okay.
[2:16:50] » Well, it might not be okay, but if they
don't feel they're getting an answer,
[2:16:53] they're going to they're going to
contact me,
[2:16:55] » right? And then you contact me,
>> right?
[2:16:57] » I'm your employee. I I
you're all you're CC to every one of
[2:17:02] them.
>> But I'm CC. But but
[2:17:04] » just contact me and I will sort it out
and get back to you. And if I feel like
[2:17:09] we've fallen down and not done the right
thing by the complainant, we will I will
[2:17:14] » Well, I've got three things here that
have not been sorted out. And
[2:17:17] » I would caution you. I just caution you
to be respectful.
[2:17:21] » Well, I'm going to be respectful, but
I'm I'm going to advocate for my
[2:17:25] constituents. And the same thing when
dealing with the province uh when we
[2:17:30] when they bring a concern and you raise
it and it goes six months, eight months,
[2:17:35] nine months or a year and you get no
response. Uh you know what what h how
[2:17:41] can you even help them? Like does nobody
have to respond to anything?
[2:17:47] » You know, is is that's not a fair that's
not a fair question. I'm going to
[2:17:52] address I I believe that's an unfair
question because I do believe that
[2:17:57] municipal staff do do their very best to
reply to everything. The CEO has
[2:18:02] outlined the process that if a counselor
feels that an item has not been dealt
[2:18:08] with or that they need further
information on how it's been dealt with,
[2:18:12] then the avenue as it has always been is
to go to our one and only employee, the
[2:18:17] CEO, and have her dig a little further.
With regards to the province and their
[2:18:23] speed or lack thereof in responding to
things, we have no control over that. We
[2:18:29] can certainly make a call. We can write
another letter, but we have no way of
[2:18:34] forcing them to answer any faster than
what they do.
[2:18:38] » Well, are we following up?
>> Are we following up?
[2:18:44] » That would depend on the situation.
Council,
[2:18:47] » can anybody get a straight answer? So
through you, Madam Warden, the
[2:18:52] » any issues that we send a letter to the
province, and I'll use Jesse as an
[2:18:56] example, um if we send a letter to the
province on an issue, he will follow up
[2:19:02] with the province. If we have a meeting
with them on a regional sort of
[2:19:07] transportation meeting, those issues all
get brought up from a transportation
[2:19:11] perspective. Yeah.
>> Um and then any updates to those motions
[2:19:15] that you've made or letters that are
written um will be on your status update
[2:19:20] report that you get every month right
before council. You get an update on the
[2:19:24] status of things. Um, we can't control
what the province does, but we certainly
[2:19:29] when council has an issue that is they
want brought to the forefront, we try to
[2:19:35] keep that at the forefront, but we can't
>> I don't recall ever getting an update on
[2:19:39] after after the motion was made other
than a letter was sent.
[2:19:43] » But I'm not going to
>> but those are followed up with staff.
[2:19:46] So,
>> when we have the opportunity to, we do
[2:19:50] follow up with them.
>> Right. I'm not going to beat this to
[2:19:53] death any further. I'm just wanted to
mention it. Uh it is very uncomfortable
[2:19:59] when people follow up with you 3 months,
6 months, a year and uh you've got
[2:20:05] nothing to report back. That's that's
it.
[2:20:11] » Okay. No.
[2:20:20] Okay. Next, we will go to councelor
Musa.
[2:20:26] soon as I find you here.
Go ahead.
[2:20:31] » Uh, thank you, Madam Morton. I was going
to I had my lights on, but I thought I'm
[2:20:37] next so I could ask my question. So, my
question is we have all kind all kind of
[2:20:42] bylaws here. Do we have enough officers
like bylaw officers to
[2:20:48] to address all those? because I know
like sometimes somebody call about blast
[2:20:53] in Mount Yuniaak and you're like 35
minutes away so everything happening
[2:20:58] there you're not going to be doing
anything right so but but my question is
[2:21:03] sometimes the the the the
resident was asked to contact me so what
[2:21:09] I'm going to do about that so I think if
we have bylaws we should have enough
[2:21:14] people to to enforce them or we should
never have them because when when you
[2:21:18] have bylaws there the residents uh
expect something from you and if you
[2:21:23] don't have anybody to enforce it we
might not have them better. I think it's
[2:21:26] better not to have them. Thank you. Do
>> you have any comment on that John?
[2:21:30] » Sure. Thank you madam warden. Um I I
would say we do I mean we have one very
[2:21:34] good bylaw enforcement officer right now
and um in addition when he's doing dog
[2:21:39] control we have backup for that
function. Um but remember it's not an
[2:21:43] emergency service. So it's not a 911
service. it's a um an investigative
[2:21:47] service that but the idea that
somebody's going to respond immediately
[2:21:50] or within 10 minutes or 30 minutes it
that's really not the way we operate. Um
[2:21:57] and so you know we do we're I think
fairly timely within uh a day or so if
[2:22:03] there's a bylaw infraction somebody's
brought to our attention we will get out
[2:22:06] and have a look at it um to start an
investigation. Not to say that it would
[2:22:10] be completed, but um yeah, so
I think we do have the resources that we
[2:22:17] need right now and um you know,
something I guess we pay attention to
[2:22:22] every year when budget time comes around
to look at staffing.
[2:22:28] » Yeah. I just want to make sure that you
have enough employees for for that. And
[2:22:32] uh and that's that's all for for me for
now. Thank you.
[2:22:37] » Thank you.
[2:22:43] Councelor Perry.
>> Nothing at this time. Warden,
[2:22:48] » Councelor Miam.
[2:22:53] » Uh, great. Uh, thank you, Madam Warden.
And, uh, mine is very short, too. I I
[2:22:58] just want to take the opportunity to
extend congratulations to the organizers
[2:23:04] of and and the volunteers as well of
Tidefest which happened this past
[2:23:08] weekend. Um you know I I went uh a
number of times. Uh it was an excellent
[2:23:14] kind of a homecoming event. Very well
attended. Everyone seemed to be having a
[2:23:18] great time. So hats off uh to those
folks. and um other than just general
[2:23:24] constituency type work, nothing uh
nothing to report. Uh no, I'm not
[2:23:29] bringing any motions forward at this
time. Thank you.
[2:23:32] » Thank you, Deputy Warden.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh just a couple
[2:23:37] quick things. Uh I also attended
Tidefest and was quite impressed with
[2:23:40] it. Uh Canada Day, I uh Enfield Fire
Department had their breakfast and this
[2:23:44] is the most profitable year they've ever
had, which is the thanks to the
[2:23:48] community. And most of the complaints I
got I forward to our MLA and hopefully
[2:23:52] he'll resolve them. The bridge in
Enfield that's uh tying up traffic and
[2:23:56] the dust and all those issues. Um the
only I see coming as an issue maybe in
[2:24:00] the future is we're going to redo the
sidewalks in Enfield and there's so many
[2:24:04] people walking and they have will they
have to walk out in the road or if some
[2:24:08] we can address that ahead of time
because there's a to me it's a future
[2:24:13] concern that maybe we can look at before
it happens.
[2:24:17] » Throwing it right at you Jesse. Uh yeah
through through uh Madame Warden the
[2:24:23] there is a sidewalk replacement project
there's two actually on the capital
[2:24:26] budget uh the Enfield a large portion in
Enfield is set to be designed this year
[2:24:32] ideally constructed next year it will be
an expansion in width and a rebase uh so
[2:24:38] they're currently
um uh 1.2 two wide, so four feet wide,
[2:24:43] if you will. Um, currently in ashvault
and and it and the base hasn't held up
[2:24:48] and so they've got the waves in them, if
you will. Uh, those are being replaced
[2:24:52] with concrete 1.8 m wide and that's how
we're setting up with some accessibility
[2:24:59] features. And so that is is the plan.
There's also um uh staff has gone out
[2:25:06] for some pricing for continuous um
sidewalk repairs. Some have already
[2:25:11] started. Uh there was some priority
areas of larger holes if you will that
[2:25:16] had to be taken care of first uh in
Milford and then there's some spots in
[2:25:20] Lance, but those are all being triaged
this summer and are active now.
[2:25:24] » So that hopefully will help shortterm
and there is the plan for longterm in
[2:25:28] Enfield
>> because the long term my concern would
[2:25:31] be people having to walk out on the
street when they're doing the
[2:25:34] construction because I know even I'm one
of the walkers now my age I had to do
[2:25:38] it.
uh through through Madam Morton st
[2:25:44] standard practice is is you there isn't
always a great opportunity to redirect.
[2:25:49] You have to close a sidewalk and and
ideally communicate in advance so the
[2:25:54] public can make alternative routes for
the day that those are are going to
[2:25:58] happen. Um, if there is an opportunity
to create a a detour around, that's
[2:26:03] ideal. But say I would I would suggest a
lot of those are challenging, especially
[2:26:08] if it's along the number two because
it's such a busy street that redirecting
[2:26:12] or alternative routes onto the road
rightway isn't ideal and so we wouldn't
[2:26:16] do that as a best practice.
>> Okay, thank you. That's everybody
[2:26:19] everything I have. I hope everybody
enjoys the month the bug is off. Thank
[2:26:22] you.
>> Thank you.
[2:26:25] Okay, Councelor McI.
>> Uh, thank you, Warden. I am going to
[2:26:32] make a motion here, but first I'll just
give a little preamble and it's to do
[2:26:36] with the Shibanacity uh the ball field
in Shibonacity at the Shibanaki River
[2:26:42] Park. Um,
the lights are old. Uh I was there on
[2:26:48] the 30th of June when the second game of
the night uh they just got started
[2:26:54] played one inning I think the lights
went off on one side they reset them
[2:26:59] they played another inning the lights
went off again and the
[2:27:03] » [clears throat]
>> umpires called the game. Now one of the
[2:27:06] teams that was participating was from
Cape Breton. So this is a you know has
[2:27:12] become an important ball field for the
association and uh the lights are very
[2:27:17] old. So uh I'm going to uh move the
council direct staff to bring forward a
[2:27:22] Shibanagi ball field light replacement
capital project as part of the 2027 2028
[2:27:30] budget discussions.
>> Second.
[2:27:34] » Seconded by
councelor Tingley. Is there any
[2:27:39] discussion on the motion?
Councelor Garden Cole.
[2:27:44] » Thank you, Madam Morton. I'm just
thinking so Enfield
[2:27:48] the [clears throat] Legion Ballfield had
their lights replaced not that long ago.
[2:27:53] Was that something
that we were a part of? I'm just
[2:27:58] wondering who typically funds
>> We don't own that field. We own the
[2:28:02] shooting.
>> Gotcha. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
[2:28:08] Any further discussion on the motion?
Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[2:28:20] Someone has not voted
[2:28:25] and the motion is passed by a vote of 10
to one.
[2:28:31] Councelor Rhino voting nay.
[2:28:35] » Okay. Okay. And just a couple other
things, uh, the CBC had a radio and and
[2:28:42] also on their news site, uh,
report regarding the Senate half and
[2:28:48] Shubinakadi and, uh, council for
district 5 was interviewed and I just
[2:28:53] like to correct one thing. He stated in
his interview that uh, everyone was
[2:28:58] happy now and I just want to let council
know that indeed everyone is not happy
[2:29:02] in Shanaki with this. I'll just leave
that at that. Uh along that same line,
[2:29:08] the rejuvenated uh parking uh area in
Shibanac is looking really good at this
[2:29:14] with the site. Um
that [clears throat] includes the Senate
[2:29:19] and uh I see that it looks like the
parking lot's going to be paved next
[2:29:24] week. People have been anxious to keep
asking me if this really is going to be
[2:29:29] paved. So, I've been assuring them it
has. So, I'm glad to see that it's going
[2:29:32] to be going ahead soon. Um, Heydays was
a huge success. I'd just like to thank
[2:29:38] all the volunteers and sponsors and make
the event possible every year. That was
[2:29:41] our 40th year. Also, the fireworks
display was exceptional this year. A lot
[2:29:46] of people were very impressed and uh
yeah, was great attendance. same as the
[2:29:52] Enfield Legion, the or Fire Department,
the Shibanagi Legion had their biggest
[2:29:58] turnout yet for their breakfast and of
course like people pointed out it was on
[2:30:02] a Wednesday so more people around. Um
the pro provincial road committee uh
[2:30:08] continues its work and we had a meeting
today with some of the CAOs. Uh um
[2:30:16] it looks like the consultation with
counselors may begin or probably will
[2:30:21] have to begin in August. Not uh not
great, but
[2:30:26] if we're going to get the report done in
the timeline that we're probably going
[2:30:29] to have to just do that, it might run
into September with the uh
[2:30:34] consultations.
Also, I have received an email from Don
[2:30:37] Smith, Harry Smith's uh nephew, and he
was glad to see that some activity has
[2:30:43] been occurring. Uh he's been following
us. He has been in contact with uh
[2:30:47] Jackie at the uh museum, and he uh made
a donation to the tea party, so that
[2:30:54] they're having in next month, I guess,
August coming right up. And also, I
[2:30:59] attended with the Gordon and the MLA the
housing announcement. So that was
[2:31:04] exciting for Shanaki. Thank you.
>> Okay, councelor H.
[2:31:09] » Thank you, Warden. Two or three little
things. Uh July 1st, I was uh present at
[2:31:15] the Hayes and participated in the uh car
show. Couple of uh social events going
[2:31:21] on in the communities around and uh got
to uh socialize with a lot of people
[2:31:25] throughout the municipality. And uh one
note that uh we had a longtime resident
[2:31:30] of Nim River pass away, Cara Vandoule.
Uh she was 106 years old and uh it was
[2:31:38] uh I didn't I knew she was up there, but
I had no idea she was that old. Anyway,
[2:31:43] uh I'm going to make a motion here. Um,
Route 14 and Nim River by the Renfruit
[2:31:48] Road has been a long time place for cars
leaving the road and because there's a
[2:31:54] couple big intersections, most of them
just they don't go in the ditch, but
[2:31:57] over the years I've had several light
poles there and we've had four people uh
[2:32:02] lose their life at that intersection.
And uh it's mainly because of the S turn
[2:32:07] approaching that Renfruit Road. It's uh
it's very sharp and it's only 70 km, but
[2:32:13] most people don't recognize it is 70.
So, [laughter] I'm going to move for the
[2:32:17] municipality to submit a request for an
intersection sign each review along that
[2:32:21] section of Route 14 at the intersection
of Renfruit Road and seek approval from
[2:32:26] the public works to have a municipally
owned digital speed sign be located on
[2:32:30] the west side of the Renfruit Road
entrance to support drivers awareness of
[2:32:34] the S term risk while drivinging
eastbound. Second
[2:32:38] » moved and seconded. Is there any
discussion on the motion?
[2:32:44] Seeing none, we'll go to the vote.
[2:32:50] Motion has passed unanimously.
[2:32:55] Anything else? Councelor H.
Okay. Councelor Mitchell.
[2:33:04] » Thank you, Madam Morton. Just a couple
items. uh attended the graduation. Hence
[2:33:08] east at the end of uh June, the young
lady that got the municipal award
[2:33:16] also [clears throat] had the highest
average for grades 10, 11, and 12.
[2:33:20] So he made a good choice.
Uh attended the July 1st parade as a
[2:33:26] spectator and uh had a chance to visit
with some of my neighbors who I don't
[2:33:30] get to see very often. Uh on the 22nd,
the mutual aid barbecue was held at
[2:33:37] Elmstead fire and we had uh departments
from the corridor come in have eating a
[2:33:43] fellowship with hot dogs, hamburgers and
some
[2:33:47] some pop and water. I attended Tidefest
on Saturday and Sunday. Had a chance to
[2:33:52] talk to some of the washer tossers and I
went back on Sunday to watch some of the
[2:33:57] cornhole players. Uh
uh on the discussion of dust, uh as you
[2:34:07] know, Elmwood Drive is next to Elm
Lumber and they have trucks coming and
[2:34:11] going all day every day and they do
create dust.
[2:34:18] But besides the dust, we also get some
wood f wood wood fibers.
[2:34:23] And if an issue comes uh up with the
dusting, I just make a call to Elmstead
[2:34:28] Lumber and they deal with it. And as a
resident of Elmwood Drive, I uh don't
[2:34:35] call as a council, I call as the
resident.
[2:34:38] And if the pictures that council tendi
was the amount of dust that his
[2:34:44] constituents are complaining about,
mine' be happy to have that amount of
[2:34:48] dust from those trucks because that is
not the dust that we see on a dry day
[2:34:56] when the log trucks are going into Elm
cell lumber. Those are my comments and
[2:35:01] they're
my feeling as a resident.
[2:35:07] Anything further?
>> And that's all.
[2:35:10] » Councelor Garden Cole.
>> Thank you, Madam Warden. I just want to
[2:35:15] touch on a few uh things that I
attended. We had the July 1st parade
[2:35:18] going from Ellensdale to Enfield. It was
uh very successful. I want to thank the
[2:35:24] RCMP, the local fire departments, the
volunteers who helped barricade the ends
[2:35:28] of the roads, and also everyone who went
to the trouble of participating. Uh it
[2:35:33] was very much appreciated. We had a ton
of uh spectators and it was enjoyed by
[2:35:40] all. I also end my July 1st uh always
always have by going to the Shibonacity
[2:35:47] uh um fireworks and they were extra
extra amazing this year. So I thank
[2:35:52] Shibonacity for that. I caught some
Tidefest activities and it looked to be
[2:35:58] very uh very successful and everybody
appeared to be having a good time. So
[2:36:02] appreciate all the people who go to the
trouble to put that that on for our uh
[2:36:07] for our residents. Just wondering um to
staff, is there any developments in the
[2:36:14] street sweeping?
[2:36:21] » Go ahead, Jesse.
>> Uh
[2:36:25] through Madame Warden. So uh staff have
contacted the province. They do have a
[2:36:31] street sweeping along the two scheduled.
Uh did inquire and to get their
[2:36:37] perspective on the municipality also
doing
[2:36:41] rounds. Uh they're very much open to it.
Uh so we would get we would get approval
[2:36:46] to do something like that of of course.
No shocker there either, right? So um uh
[2:36:52] so
uh Park Road was done as as the business
[2:36:56] park uh gets done annually usually
through uh it's like a it's part of a
[2:37:01] annual business
uh uh related cost for the business park
[2:37:05] upkeep. Uh we're looking to benchmark
those costs and then try and translate
[2:37:09] that to figure out what the cost would
be based on council's motion along the
[2:37:12] two and see where it could fit in. Um it
looks like there's been some efforts
[2:37:17] along the two. Um, but I it wasn't the
municipality, the po Porticana. I I I
[2:37:23] took a look uh this morning at it and
that that developer has actually had a
[2:37:30] sweeper in. It's actually clear right
around, but that wasn't us. Uh are
[2:37:34] looking at it. There is gaps. There's
still mounds in different locations, but
[2:37:38] we've been reviewing and and it and
trying to build that scope up. So, it's
[2:37:43] a work in progress.
uh but very active and that's everything
[2:37:49] I know on the topic as of now.
>> Okay. So, just a couple questions. You
[2:37:54] say that the business park gets um
street sweeping done as a separate
[2:37:58] business initiative. Who does it?
>> So, through through Madam War Morton uh
[2:38:03] a contracted street sweeper uh and it's
it's always been a a EBD cost uh over
[2:38:09] the years. it's not a something that's
tended to hit uh the roads cost center.
[2:38:16] Um
and so in the past we we've sought out
[2:38:20] different contractors and so there's
rental companies that do it uh and you
[2:38:25] just check on availability. There's one
in Burnside and also uh Elmstale
[2:38:31] Landscaping has a truck and if it's got
availability or sometimes we've used
[2:38:35] them in the past as well. So those are
the the options we would explore. Okay.
[2:38:39] [snorts]
>> So, it's it's not a flat rate. It's an
[2:38:42] hourly rate. And sometimes you you get
what you get. Uh we had uh the the
[2:38:48] business park had to have a second run.
Uh they had some mechanical issues, but
[2:38:55] » well, I guess that will be part of the
report that's brought back to us. And I
[2:38:59] also me I also noticed that uh the curly
development uh cleaned a section of the
[2:39:06] of the street there which was quite
encouraging. Um which leads me to my
[2:39:12] next topic which is no surprise dust. Um
so I sent uh pictures and videos around
[2:39:20] to uh the other counselors just so that
you can get a feel for the area that I'm
[2:39:25] talking about. It is extreme this uh
development that's going on in that it
[2:39:30] is and now mind you the pictures that I
sent were not at a time when there's any
[2:39:35] activity going on but you can from the
general uh geographic uh pictures you
[2:39:41] can get a an idea of when that is loaded
with heavy equipment and trucks the
[2:39:47] amount of dust that would be uh
happening on that particular site and
[2:39:52] also the close proximity that the
neighbors are to it. So, I mean, we are
[2:39:58] talking not swimming in their pools this
year, not hanging clothes on the line.
[2:40:02] Some of them had their lines ripped
ripped down, um not not enjoying their
[2:40:07] backyards at all, not on their back
decks, and and I mean really impacting
[2:40:13] their quality of life. On the front
side, we have, as we know, and I already
[2:40:18] discussed this, the trucks trucking down
Albany Drive. So after the rain last
[2:40:24] week on Wednesday and Thursday and for
us it was a pretty substantial rain
[2:40:29] Friday evening I drove up Alony Drive
for something else and was appalled at
[2:40:37] the you can imagine those big trucks
using Aldery Drive after all that rain
[2:40:42] and the muck. huge chunks of mud on the
road just just a disaster and then had
[2:40:49] driven over them. So they were huge
patties of muck everywhere and never
[2:40:54] never cleaned the road when they left
their site on a Friday after after this
[2:40:59] mess was left on it. I I uh commented to
a a resident who flagged me down and
[2:41:06] said about the street cleaning and he
said yeah. He said they don't they don't
[2:41:10] clean the street. they don't care and
nobody nobody does anything about it.
[2:41:14] So, and then he just just walked away.
So, my question is and I didn't realize
[2:41:19] it was a bylaw officer. So, so dust
control on a construction site is a
[2:41:25] bylaw. Is that correct through you to
staff?
[2:41:33] » Go ahead, John.
>> Yeah. Through you, Metamor. Yes. that
[2:41:35] your community standards bylaw has a
section that deals with what we call
[2:41:39] fugitive dust.
>> Okay. So then every development would be
[2:41:43] subject to that at some level depending
on how dusty a development is.
[2:41:47] » Correct.
>> Okay. So
[2:41:50] so does every time So does dust control
never happen? Are they never obligated
[2:41:56] to take some measures of dust control
unless they are contacted with
[2:42:00] complaints by a
>> by residents to a community bylaw
[2:42:04] officer?
>> Yeah. through you, Madam Warden. I mean,
[2:42:06] we do operate on the basis of a
complaint. So, when we do get a
[2:42:09] complaint, we get in touch with the
property manager and
[2:42:13] um some developers are quite good.
They're using sodium chloride. They're
[2:42:18] occasionally using water, other
techniques, uh slowing their vehicles
[2:42:22] down and so on to try and suppress dust.
Um and the bylaw doesn't say you can't
[2:42:27] have any dust that escapes your
property. That would be unreasonable for
[2:42:30] a construction site. It basically says
um has the property owner taken you know
[2:42:36] reasonable steps to prevent the release
of dust. So are they using any kind of
[2:42:41] dust suppression on site or um water or
what have you. Um
[2:42:46] » so right so that would indicate that
they actually are responsible they if
[2:42:52] following the bylaw they are responsible
for maintaining some level of dust
[2:42:56] control.
>> They are. Yes.
[2:42:58] » Okay. So then when they don't, that's
when the bylaw officer steps in. Because
[2:43:02] I had a resident send me this. Under the
East T community standards bylaw P 100,
[2:43:07] there are no visible dust suppression
measures, uh, routine water truck
[2:43:11] spraying, soil bonding agents. Uh, so
those would be the things that they
[2:43:17] would be expected to do under our bylaw
B-1.
[2:43:21] » Yes, those would be some of the
reasonable steps that they could take to
[2:43:24] to try and prevent dust from escaping.
>> Okay. So for a developer that isn't
[2:43:31] doing any apparent dust control. So then
that's it. It's all hinges on complaints
[2:43:38] and then staff
>> and then we start a discussion with the
[2:43:44] property owner the or the contractor and
if that gets nowhere there are fines
[2:43:50] available. I mean they they sort of ramp
up from$150 to$300 to $600 a day kind of
[2:43:55] thing. But um uh we haven't used that to
this point. We've simply talked to
[2:44:00] property managers and and they've taken
corrective action.
[2:44:04] » Really? So you So they've taken
corrective action there.
[2:44:07] » Yeah. Uh I I don't know specifically
about the Enfield site. I'm not sure.
[2:44:12] » Uh other than complaining about the
road, we've actually had complaints
[2:44:15] about fugitive dust come in.
>> Um
[2:44:18] » Okay. I guess I'm just getting the
complaints.
[2:44:21] » Yeah. um
>> you need to send them to
[2:44:22] » Yeah. encourage people to go online and
and log it in that way,
[2:44:25] » right? Uh and you know what,
some people want to come to their
[2:44:31] counselors with complaints and sometimes
they do that first, sometimes they do it
[2:44:35] as a as a an an end measure, but it is
challenging as a counselor when a
[2:44:42] resident is coming and you're hoping to
resolve their issues. I mean, we are
[2:44:45] elected officials. Uh second part of
that is that the road the mess of the
[2:44:50] road. So I guess they are in keeping
with the dust control or lack of it.
[2:44:55] Same with the with the lack of washing
the road.
[2:44:59] » Yeah. Slightly different that because
and again it's it's it falls under the
[2:45:03] traffic authority I guess. Although in
this case it's even more complicated
[2:45:07] because it's a provincial role but I'll
let Jesse speak to that part.
[2:45:11] » Thank you.
>> Uh through Madam Warden. So yeah, the
[2:45:15] the
debris on Alderne, if you will, the
[2:45:20] debris getting onto Alderne, um
the topic comes up as what is the
[2:45:27] erosion and sedimentation control plan
for the development. Uh the design
[2:45:31] engineer for the development uh lists
the criteria of what needs to take
[2:45:35] place. Um uh so from a staff
perspective, staff have followed up with
[2:45:42] that design engineer saying, you know,
look at requesting for them to follow up
[2:45:47] with the the contractor to make sure
they're following their sedimentation
[2:45:51] and erosion plan and also staff notify
the province so they're aware of the
[2:45:58] condition of the provincial road. And so
the area manager was engaged and we
[2:46:02] notified them as well. and we notified
the contractor of the complaint so they
[2:46:08] were aware in case the province was act
requesting anything just as being
[2:46:14] transparent as possible with them.
>> So if you've got a contractor, if you've
[2:46:19] got a developer who is
[2:46:24] isn't concerned about it and you've got
the province who doesn't action it,
[2:46:30] that's it.
There's there's no other tools in the
[2:46:35] toolbox currently.
>> Okay. Um and my last item is that a uh
[2:46:42] resident on Alderney concerned about the
um the traffic, the speed and and
[2:46:48] obviously now all the new issues on
Alderney um wrote to the MLA and the uh
[2:46:55] um Department of Highways, the old
Department of Highways Public Works and
[2:46:59] to address the situation wanted to know
about um speed mitigation like in the
[2:47:05] rest of the subdivision. And you I think
you were c I'm not sure if you were
[2:47:09] copied on this or not. Uh I think it was
co uh Cody the MP and the MLA and the uh
[2:47:16] Department of Public Works. Anyway, the
response back to her was that in order
[2:47:21] to for them to look at it as on a
provincial road, um there needs to be a
[2:47:26] request from the municipality to spark
them to do a
[2:47:32] assessment
um to see if that's required. Does that
[2:47:36] sound right to you
[2:47:41] » Jesse?
[2:47:45] » Through madam. Um
[2:47:50] I'll give some additional information
then I'll answer the question.
[2:47:53] » Okay. Um
[2:47:57] [snorts]
so interestingly enough uh as as you
[2:48:02] know it's been it's at times challenging
to to get um digital speed display signs
[2:48:10] up on provincial roads. Uh a request did
come in uh for from the province if the
[2:48:17] municipality would engage a temporary
DSDS on Alderney. So, we're looking into
[2:48:22] that
>> to help support with the current
[2:48:24] challenges.
>> Okay.
[2:48:25] » Um, so to get that on the list in the
schedule, I don't have any uh ETA on
[2:48:29] that, but
>> that that is something we're looking to
[2:48:33] accommodate to support. Um, yes. Uh, so
so any review
[2:48:41] would be an official request. So, if
council wanted to make a motion for a
[2:48:44] request for
um
[2:48:48] um trafficcoming
options to be reviewed or an assessment
[2:48:53] for the need for traffic calming on
Alderney subdivision or Alderney Drive,
[2:48:58] I should say specifically where it's
provincial. That could be a motion of
[2:49:02] council. Uh that that could go.
Um, anecdotally,
[2:49:08] staff have had discussions with
provincial staff in the past about
[2:49:14] um, ultimately an Eastand staff
perspective is on a pre-existing road
[2:49:20] where you're not going to realign or the
road you're you speed humps are are the
[2:49:26] way you're going to go. Uh, and that's
typically something that the province
[2:49:29] has not accepted or not moved forward
on. And that is kind of going to be
[2:49:35] where this likely ends up in a request
for review. Uh, however, doesn't mean
[2:49:40] you don't ask and don't put it out there
cuz I'm just because we've as brought it
[2:49:45] up in the past doesn't mean the answer
won't change the next time we ask. So, I
[2:49:50] just want to manage expectations of that
too where we've been given feedback that
[2:49:55] that's not something that that would
tend to happen. Well, I just think in
[2:50:00] this particular section section of the
road with um the speed mitigation action
[2:50:06] being taken in the rest of the
subdivision, which all feeds out into
[2:50:09] this road, and there's going to be way
more feeding out in this road and and
[2:50:13] the problems that are going to ensue
with it. And with them giving her that
[2:50:17] direction that um it would come from the
municipality for a request for an assess
[2:50:22] for them to do an assessment. I felt
like like
[2:50:26] » you know
>> councelor you could make a motion asking
[2:50:28] council to send a letter to public works
and ask them to do that.
[2:50:32] » Yeah. So I'm going to make a motion
asking uh
[2:50:36] requesting that the municipality send a
work to send a uh a letter to public
[2:50:42] works asking that they do an assessment
on Alderney Drive for
[2:50:50] speed mitigation.
[2:50:54] uh for
traffic calming consideration due to
[2:50:59] speed concerns.
>> Right.
[2:51:03] » Seconded by
>> councelor M.
[2:51:05] » Councelor Musa.
>> Discussion on the motion. Councelor McI.
[2:51:12] » Uh thank you Warden. I would just uh I
will support the motion, but at the 16th
[2:51:18] of June road provincial roads committee,
I brought that up with the officials
[2:51:25] from public works thinking specifically
of Alderly Drive, not mentioning Aldery
[2:51:29] Drive and was told that they just don't
support traffic calming and won't
[2:51:35] support it. Not saying we shouldn't make
the motion and send the letter, but I
[2:51:39] have to agree with Jesse. is probably
going to be a no, but maybe they'll
[2:51:43] change their mind. Thank you.
>> No one left to speak. We'll go to the
[2:51:49] vote.
[clears throat]
[2:51:54] » Motion has passed unanimously.
>> Uh, thank you council for that. I know I
[2:51:59] was a little long, but just um things
going on. Thank you.
[2:52:04] Okay. Coun councelor Rhino.
>> Deputy warden says it's the best for
[2:52:11] last. So we're we're waiting with baited
breath.
[2:52:14] » That's to be voted on. All right. On
pardon me.
[2:52:21] On uh June the 26th, I attended the no
uh Legion Peacekeepers Awards and on the
[2:52:28] 27th
along with the warden, I attended the
[2:52:32] opening of the Veterans Park. On July
1st, I attended and participated in the
[2:52:39] fireworks of the Melan Fire Department.
On July the 11th, I had the uh occasion
[2:52:47] to present a 90th birthday certificate
to Mr. Leonard Green who was very
[2:52:52] appreciative and it was a great
gathering on Oh, I missed the June 30th
[2:52:57] one which was 50year anniversary to
Northfield residents uh Mickey and
[2:53:02] Cheryl Mlullen. They were very
appreciative of that. On uh July from
[2:53:08] July 17th to the 19th, I attended
various things at the N fun fair. And on
[2:53:13] July 25th, I did the same thing for the
Walton uh fire fireman's day. So, uh, it
[2:53:20] was a very busy month and, uh, I took
great pride in covering the area. Thank
[2:53:26] you.
>> Thank you. That concludes business from
[2:53:31] counselors.
Uh, counselors, uh, I know the hour is
[2:53:34] getting late. We do have three in camera
items on the list. Um, so if we're going
[2:53:42] to continue, I would be looking for a
motion to move in Cameron to discuss a
[2:53:46] land issue, a legal issue, and a
contractual issue.
[2:53:52] » Okay. Moved by councelor Hib, seconded
by councelor Musa. All those in favor?
[2:53:58] » Contrary, motion is carried. We will
give staff time to take us in camp.
[3:31:01] Okay, welcome back everyone. I would
report that we met in camera to discuss
[3:31:05] a land issue, a legal issue, and a
contractual issue. There are no motions
[3:31:10] coming forward from those discussions as
staff was given direction. That
[3:31:15] concludes the business on tonight's
agenda.