Okay, we are set to go, so I will call to order this committee the whole meeting of July 9th, 2026. At this point, time, I'll put out a call. Are there any declarations of interest on today's agenda?
Seeing no hands raised, we'll progress, business arising for minutes.
Okay, so then we will move on then, too. We do have a delegation this morning. I would like to welcome both Ashley Cameron and Robin Strange-Wake.
Who will be providing us with the delegation, but let me first get the motion on the floor before they speak. So I will look for a motion that the financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2025, be received.
To approve and sign the financial statements and the staff be authorized to receive prior to Council approval as per section 26,
six B of the procedural by law 51 and 34 or 22 may ask for a mover and a seconder. Okay,
so be fresh here. So we're going to go Councillor Mackie and Councillor Hutchins in a second
seconding. Thank you. It's now on the floor for discussion. So welcome to you, the lectern is yours
and we'll just make sure that we alternate between when the red light is on, so I'm going to turn
mine off and you can turn yours on and we'll go back and forth. Thank you. Can you hear me? Excellent.
I'd like to thank Council for having me here this morning. I'm Robin Strangly-Colder. I'm the
engagement partner on your audit and I assume the rule that used to be Tracy Smith upon her retirement.
I have with me Ashley Cameron, a manager who's taken over the rule of supervising the audit.
I'd like to thank your entire management team for their assistance during the audit. I especially
like to thank Garrett Sue Mary Liu and the rest of the finance team. Preparation of the financial
statements, including all the disclosures and the notes as the responsibility of your management
team, although we can assist in formatting and making suggestions on the wording, all the numbers are
provided by your management team from the accounting records of the county. If you have any questions
during the presentation, I would be happy to stop my presentation in the answer that I must be go or you
can save them until the end. The first item we'll be going through is the letter that goes along with the
drop financial statements. This is a required communication under-creating auditing standard. So the
content of this letter will seem very similar to prior years. The financial statements need to be approved
by Council before MNP can issue a final audit report and that is why the statements in the other
package are unsigned at this time. For us to issue final statements, they need to be approved and then
management signs of representation letter and we finish subsequent event work up to the date that they
are approved. Materiality remained unchanged from planning at $6 million. No suspected actual or alleged
fraud came to our attention during the audit. Should you become aware of any, please reject to us directly.
We did not find any deficiencies in the internal controls that we tested during the audit.
If I keep moving on, I'm just going to continue with a few highlights. I can confirm that we are
independent. There is a detailed letter and appendix A that outlines our communication
in regards to that under-canion auditing standards but I won't go into it in detail. We are independent
and therefore can issue an independent auditors report and there were no unadjusted differences that
were identified during the audit. So there is no schedule of unadjusted differences included in this package.
Does anyone have any questions about this required communication before we move on to the statements
themselves? So I'll just look around and room to see if anybody has any questions at this point.
Seeing none, please carry on. Thank you. Okay, so we're going to look at the consolidated statement
of financial statements starting with the independent audit report. Our audit opinion is a period before
the financial statements and it's the only part of this package that belongs to us or part of the
statements that belongs to us. The statements are management, as I already went over, and the audit
opinion belongs to M&P. It is an audit opinion and is the highest level of assurance that can be provided
by a public accountant. In second paragraph under opinion is where we say that, in our opinion,
the financial statements present fairly in all material respects the financial position of the county
as I've December 31, 2025, for the year ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting
standards. Therefore, it is a clean audit opinion and we had no issues or concerns that came to our
attention during the audit. In the middle of the report, it highlights management's responsibility
for the financial statements and at the bottom of this page it also highlights those terms of governance
in this case council are responsible for overseeing the county's financial reporting process. On the next
page it details the responsibilities of the auditor, which I won't go into in detail. So if there's
no questions about the audit opinion itself, we'll move on to the statement of financial position.
On page 4 of the financial statement is the statement of financial position or balance sheet. It presents
the county's financial state assets and liabilities at a point in time on December 31, 2025. Financial
assets total $130 million with $118 million of that in cash and investments. You will notice that
cash decrease compared to last year and that was due to timing of deferred revenue that had been on hand
at the end of last year but was spent during the year. So basically, you're holding last
provincial funding in the bank at the end of 2025 because you used it in 2025 compared to last year.
Liabilities totaled $94 million and included in that is a council sorry.
Included in that is $40.9 million in normal trade payables and improved liabilities that were paid
subsequent to year end. There's also $36.5 million in deferred revenue which is broken down in the
continuity schedule on page 30 of the financial statements. Within that schedule of deferred revenue,
you'll see that there's $24.5 million in unspent development charges and $8 million unspent
Canada community building funds previously referred to as gas tax that are available to be spent in
future years. These are really more like reserves but because they are legislated they don't get reported
as revenue until they're actually used to finance projects or unspent. There's also $11 million received
late in 2024 for Rockward Terrace in advance of expenditure being incurred since those were spent in 2025
because the Rockward Terrace project proceeded. That's why deferred revenue decreased so much.
Total assets of $130 million less liabilities of $34 million comes to the net financial assets of $36
million. Below that you'll see the non financial assets increased to $307.1 million and this includes
the tangible capital assets which are the linear infrastructure roads, buildings, vehicles and that
increased to $305.4 million in the year. The bottom of this comes to the accumulated surplus of $343 million.
It is the equity of the council and includes both monetary assets and physical assets. The detailed
breakdown can be seen in note six the cumulative surplus and this is where you can also see that
the reserve balance is $65.5 million because that equity number includes your reserves.
On the next page is the consolidated statement of operations and accumulated surplus.
The statement of operations is the transactions for the year. Revenue include all external revenues
for both operating and capital. You can see that total revenue for 2025 was $213 million.
Included in this is taxation, fees and user charges, government transfers and other income.
If we look at government transfers for a moment you will see that the actual of $106 million was lower than
the budgeted amount of $113.8 million. A lot of this relates to the Canada-wide child care funding coming
from the province so it's sometimes referred to as C-Wilk or Kwilk. Basically the province
sent funding amount that they were willing to give up to and they cash flowed a lot of it.
But it wasn't used in 2025 and since it wasn't used, it can't be recognized as revenue.
But that budget was based on that maximum funding that was available to centers. Should they take
advantage of all of the spots and one-time startup funding? That's partly why accounts payable was
so high on the balance sheet is that because that money was cash flowed and not used, it is due
back to the province. The other item is other income budget of $23 million compared to actual with $15.9
million. A lot of that was anticipated to be using a lot more development charges for capital in 2025.
But timelines changed on some of those capital projects and since those development charges weren't
used in 2025 they cannot be recognized as revenue. Expenses including operating costs,
sorry, expenses include operating costs, amortization and accretion for asset retirement obligation.
It does not include capital or reserve transfers. Total expenses for 2025 were $185.8 million.
Budget expenses and actual expenses are significantly different because the actual expenses
include amortization of those tangible capital assets as required by public sector accounting standards.
Amortization is a non-cash amount for accounting purposes, which is the estimate of the wear and
tear and physical assets from their use. And it's based on the historical cost of the assets that
they're set up in the balance sheet. The budget does not include amortization. So if amortization was removed
from actual expenses, then the actual expenses would be $171 million, which is more in line with
a total budget of expenses for 2025. Total revenue, less total expenses, comes to the annual
surplus of $27.2 million. The $27.2 million annual surplus presented on the statement is not the operating
surplus. The annual surplus on the statement focuses on the long term. It is the amount of external
revenue raised during the year after paying all operating costs and to cover amortization. The annual
surplus should always be a positive amount to be able to make a debt payments and also be large
enough to fund capital asset purchases. So you don't see on this statement what would be the operating
surplus for the year. So on April 23rd, there was a report to Council that reported a projected operating
surplus of $1.8 million that was transferred into reserve and that didn't change significantly
as result to be on it. The next statement is the statement of changes in net financial assets,
and it takes that annual surplus for the year of $27 million from the previous page and adjust for
amortization and the actual amount that was spent on capital assets during the year. So during the
year there was $51 million in capital assets acquired. So the statement comes down to a decrease in net
financial assets of $7.2 million, which agrees to the change in the assets on the balance sheet.
The 2025 budget had anticipated that rock would terrorist project would be further along at the end of
2025 and that is why the budgeted decrease in net financial assets was so much larger at $64 million.
The project had anticipated incurring both external debt and utilizing reserves. And so you can also see that
in note eight of the budget. So if you were to look at note eight in the budget, you would see that
there was budgeted reserve transfers and we're seeing more debt and since that didn't happen
because the capital expenditures weren't incurred. That's also why there wasn't as large a decrease in
that financial assets in the year. So the difference to budget is just reflecting changing in timelines.
I'm trying to keep the presentation at a high level overview. So I'm not going to go into the
rest of the statements in more detail unless anyone has any specific questions. So I guess any questions?
Okay, thank you very much. I'll put it out to committee the whole members if they have any questions
about any of the other details that were already in the information or what was presented today.
We'll go to Councillor Greg.
Thank you for the presentation this morning. And this is these two questions are probably more
for staff. But the one item was government transfers. It was budgeted at $42 million.
The actual is $36 million, $24 was $32 million. Really the answer here just supports me when we're looking
at the report later our corporate financial update as to that difference between the $42 million
and the $36 million. I presume it's just government transfers. So I guess perhaps that's maybe more
to gear it and so just to reply to that. Okay, so I'll invite manager Reed to come to the
collector and identify the response. Good morning through the warden. Yeah, that's a good
question. So that is the social services grant that you're referencing on page 28, or sorry, page 20.
That is our C-well grant. So we don't know our grant funding when we develop the budget. Usually it
comes out. Somehow they know when they do it a bit of a week after we pass the budget and then tear
cockerel brings their report back saying here's the changes that we're posing based on the
change in funding. 2025 was the first year of us being fully within the C-well program. So it was a complete
overhaul in our funding. The $42 million budget is still pretty close to the overall funding they
provided. But there were quite a few buckets that we could not use in the year. The first to our top
of mine is start up an infrastructure funding that was available to build new child care centers
or an inch child care centers. But there was no increase in our licenses attached to that funding.
So the operators kind of had the opinion that why would we build this space if the province isn't
going to provide us with the C-well funding. So we weren't able to spend any of it.
So, that province has cash flowed it. We're going to give that back to the province because we had no use for it. The other is because it was done mid-year, and Terran, her team were scrambling to get it rolled out to as many providers as they could with our license counts.
We didn't spend our full CWL allocation for the operating funding either because by the time we got them enrolled in the new system, we were already, you know, three, four months into the year and working through that. There was also some changes within our non-CWL funding for child care.
As a result of the increased CWL funding, so one of the major things we spend money on is a fee subsidy for parents that can't afford the full rate of daycare.
And that's a formula that we have based on income and based on cost of child care, how much that we reimburse for a given family, and that's administered by the county.
As more families in Grey County get on the CWL program and are paying 22 dollars in a day, or 22 dollars a day, more families become un-ineligible for that fee subsidy because they're overall daycare cost of filling down.
So that is a fair number. I think it actually might be a bit higher. I think that variance you mentioned is about $5.7 million budget to actual.
I think we're actually giving back about just north of six million dollars to the province of child care funding that we are not able to use.
Okay, thank you for that response and maybe don't go too far because really my questions do just support me looking at the one third of the way through the year.
The auditors did point out in page 29, the notes to the Consolidate Financial Statements show year over year. So just a question of growth in the transportation salaries, which is probably explained by the overtime accumulated during the heavy winners.
Besides that is human services went from 67.8 million to from 62.8 million. So just wondering if you could explain a little more so on particularly the human services salaries line there.
Yep, through the warden. Correct. The transportation will be a result of increased overtime cost in wages as a result of the harsh winter, which we talked about in our year and transfer report.
Human services so as a reminder to council that's made up of the housing department social services long term care and paramedics services and you're correct that increased 2025 over 2024 by 4.9 million, which would be an increase of about 8% a little bit less than that.
We would expect it to increase every year with collective agreement wages and cost of living adjustments for non union staff, but within the paramedic and long term care departments there were also increased staffing.
So I'll start with paramedics services in we have our deployment enhancement plan where we're adding shifts.
In 2024 we added two shifts, which requires eight full-time paramedics plus back though, but because of how the funding works we don't start that enhancement until July 1st in the year.
So when you're looking at 2024 you'll only have half a year of actuals on those enhancements and then in 2025 they'll be here for the full year and then in 2025 July 1st there was another enhancement to add one more shift and again that would have started July 1st.
So when we're looking at the paramedic increase it's partially due to collective agreement wages increases and non union wage increases, but it's really that we've added essentially.
Three shifts to our operations and again the 2024 wouldn't include the full costs of the 2020.
2024 enhancement because we started halfway through the year.
Similarly to long term care council remember that in 2024 the long term care department had a large surplus as there was an increase in grant funding.
Part of that was case mix index part of it was also increased indirect care funding from the province we did not know of that increase until part way through the year so same thing we then go out and need more staff to to meet those direct care hours which are then funded by the province through that grant program.
But when you're just looking at the salary and benefits line yes it will show a big increase but then if we're looking at that same those two same pages you'll also see an increase in.
Government transfers as well for that department as there's now more long term care funding to cover off those wage increases as well as more 50 50 funding as part of the paramedic services grant formula.
So it is partially increase in just the cost of our staffing but those two very large departments did have staffing enhancements in 2024 and 2025 which will impact those numbers.
Okay thank you for that answer all around if there are any other questions.
Okay well I'm not seeing any then and we do have a motion that has been moved and seconded that is on the floor so I'll call the vote for that then all those in favor.
And that motion is carried thank you very much we appreciate you coming and presenting the material test today.
And thank you to manager Reed as well for providing the extra information.
At this point in time we will look at our list in item six the consent agenda and I'll put a call out for any of those items there are five items listed any that.
Any community the full member wishes to pull for a separate discussion.
Okay councilor McLean.
You can add a warden hours to pull six A.
Okay so six A has been pulled.
And Councillor Greg.
Six E please.
Six E has been pulled.
Any others.
Okay so see no further handson.
It is recommended that the following consent agenda items be received and that staff be authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to the recommendations in the staff reports.
And that the correspondence be supported or received or information as recommended in the consent agenda noting that we will look at item six A and six E separately.
May ask for mover in a seconder.
Move by Councillor Keeveny seconded by Councillor Eccles.
All those in favor.
And that motion is carried.
So we'll make sure we revisit those items after seven section seven.
So we will now move on to our items for discussion.
The first the first one is item seven A.
It is it's recommended that report.
E D T C C W 0 9 26 regarding the Bruce Duffin Gray Wellington regional transit study update and interim recommendations be received.
And that council endorse the contract extension of the GTR route two and ghost to and reintroduce the GTR route five from Owen sound to Wyerton.
Until a decision can be made on a unified regional transit network and subject to funding approval from the province and that all service be funded within the approved 2026 county budget allocations and supported by the Ontario transit investment fund known as OTIF.
They ask for mover in a seconder.
Got to move by Councillor Hutchison seconded by Councillor Dobring.
It's now on the floor for discussion.
And so okay, we will begin with director Myers.
Thank you.
I'm just buying Stephanie a moment to come into the room.
I just wanted to make a note that this is the same almost the same report that was on the agenda in May.
We pulled it off the report because we were in mids to conversations with the province but after last week we finally got some answers which is good.
So we are back with an amendment to that report and Stephanie is going to present it.
So I will hand it over to her.
Good morning.
All right.
So as a benefit, I will be providing you with a little bit of an update.
So I'll begin with the overall study update and then I'll move into the interim service recommendation for council's consideration.
So the purpose of this report is to provide you with an update regarding the Bruce Duffering Gray Wellington regional transit study and recommend interim measures to maintain and introduce temporary service while the regional working group continues to investigate potential of the unified regional transit network.
Since our merge council presentation, the project team has continued to work alongside Dylan consulting towards a draft unified regional transit plan.
In the past couple of months, several developments have unfolded in parallel to this work, including the asks from the Western Terri Wardens coclaves to establish a regional transit authority, which is modeled after this work that we're doing here today.
So following those discussions as Savannah has discussed.
We will continue this great work and we will come back to you soon.
As staff understand it, the Bruce Duffering Gray Wellington regional transit study is the largest of its kind in the province, which contributes to its overall complexity.
Project partners are recommending more time is given to the current study phase to ensure the best possible information is available for councils and the smart board to make their decision on a unified regional transit network.
We have suggest taking the summer together more information to supplement the draft plan through a request from information regarding technology and operator interest to explore the requirements and potential of the unified right share by law.
Staff will also continue to work alongside the MTO to better understand the Oative program and gas tax opportunities and limitations along with implications from changes to build 98 and the Metro links act.
Governors have been going through the study, the need for further analysis regarding specialized transit has also been identified.
With the support of Oative, this will be explored in further detail as part of the final leg of our study.
With more time and this additional information, the project team and dealing consulting would return this fall to present the draft plan and recommendations for information.
At that time, staff will seek direction to include budget allocations in the proposed draft 2027 budget for consideration.
Final recommendations for decision would be brought forward to councils and the new smart board in 2027.
On that turn to the interim service recommendations, which is intended to maintain continuity will all the broader study work continues.
So as per the report, we shared with you in November of 2025, the great transit route from Dundoct to Orangeville and Guelft, Owen Sound, was extended from until August 31, 2026 to ensure service continuation during the study period.
As the study period progresses, the project team is recommending a pre approval phase that sees the continuation of those existing routes along with the reintroduction of GTR route by from Owen Sound to Wyrton and a seasonal solvable beach service.
In 2027 until a decision can be made on a unified transit network. All services would exist under the same operating and funding currently in place.
Staff in the project partners, so Bruce County, Duff and County, Gray and Wellington along with smart, see value in these services and are aligned in their support of the same these operations during the study period and using the OTF funding to accommodate these extensions.
As a pre approval phase, the continuing the service ensures that riders are not left without access, while long-term solutions are being considered and helps avoid a loss of ridership.
It also provides Bruce County with temporary service on a previously popular route, including coverage during peak seasons until a recommendation for permanent solution can be developed.
The interim approach also helps leverage available OTF funding by utilizing 2026 budget allocations from each county and pending OTF approval from the province.
There's no additional funding required to maintain this in term phase.
Funding required for 2027 operations will be included in the annual budget looking at council consideration.
So in summary, the recommendation is to allow the study team more time to complete regional transit planning work while using available funding to maintain temporary reintroductions.
And key services to riders are not left without access during this decision making period.
Are there any questions?
Hey, thank you very much and we're going to start with Councillor Nielsen.
I think the question I have is more long lines of the reintroduction of the GTI route five and my question only is because.
If you can just refresh my memory as to how long it has been out of service if we're reintroducing it and to.
It's out of service we're putting it back into service we're not 100% sure it's going to continue service.
That's the part where I don't understand the logic and redoing it for a short period of time when we're still discussing what the broader picture looks like.
So if you can just help me understand the logic there.
Thank you, Russia. Thank you, Councillor Nielsen. So to answer your first question, it started October 2020 and went to December 2024.
So part of the logic is as I mentioned, it was a really popular route and right now Bruce County is without our service.
So it would support the Bruce County residents that are in need of transit option.
I do hear your concerns and I I understand but at the same time there's also a need and we are trying to service not need as well.
And I see.
Through you weren't just a build on that and thank you for those explanations.
So another.
Another item to the importance of the own sound to wireton route.
War match sauce I think provided updates.
A couple months ago that we attended along with Bruce County.
Warden and CAO to the table as an A wash and they have a bus that provides a connection between.
It was an A wash and wireton and so this owns kind of wireton will allow them to get to wireton, but also to get to own sound if if needed as well.
So that was an important connection for them.
So we see reestablishing that not only provides the the Bruce County connection.
Again, this is a four-partner partnership that's being done as part of this project and all the other three
county partners have some sort of roots in them. This would provide that Bruce County connection in the interim until we finalize the study. When we look at where we're looking at the routes and other things in terms of the long-term study, those
those pieces would still be part of what would be coming forward as some of those recommendations. So we're confident that those will be part of the recommended network going forward as well.
So those are some of the considerations as to why these are recommended.
Hey, follow up, Councillor Nelson. Thank you very much for yourself. So just I think one main follow-up is where, where are we on the timeline of the study completion? Just maybe help.
We have the report suggesting that the funding is in place if there's no extra capital costs or funding costs for the county, but that it will be a budget discussion for 2027.
So I'm just trying to wonder, do we know where we are on the project completion for the study we're doing and where are we at the end of that because we've already had a few discussions on what the 27 budgets looking like and as we keep having these discussions, it just impacts that.
Thank you through you, Warden.
Right now, the intent is to come back later this year with the draft study. We are getting very, very close to the end of it.
The amount of number crunching that has gone on in the last little while is things constantly changed has been impressive.
So I think that what we wanted to ensure is that we have crunched everything possible and we've looked at all of the if this then that things that could happen as part of this so that we can bring it back.
But what we do know is that we're not going to ask this council for approval of the whole network at this moment because by the time it comes back to you we are right in transition mode.
So it would be looking to new council to make a formal decision on whether or not they're ready to support unified transit network, but we want to make sure that this council is aware of all of the work that's been done because you have been with us all along the path so that you can see what we're looking at and then that would give you an indication of what would be included in that budget going forward.
Okay, thank you. I'm going to go online to Councilor Bordeanio.
Thank you. Good morning, kind of council. Good morning, boarden for three year.
We've talked about this in the past. We talked about our regional partners, Bruce, Stafford and Gray, Wellington, Suggane. What about Simco?
I know it's been in the conversation in the past and we know just from being at the far east end of the region, the need for more regional transit.
Not just the resort, but we have other employers in the area and people moving back and forth. So if somebody just reiterated the points of.
Possibility of looking at Simco, I don't know if it's for the CAO or but through the warden of South could answer that place.
Yes, thank you. We're going to go to CAO for that.
Thank you for that question, Councilor Bordeanio. The.
So well, start with is that we are fortunate that's the same consultant that we're using for this study is also the consultant that Simco's using for part of their transit review as well.
And so the sharing of information has been a lot easier to be able to to provide some of those updates.
And so with that we've had some preliminary conversations with Simco County as well as calling wood as well as other providers that provide transit connections that don't just end at the border.
So to speak, to make sure that whatever transit network is being recommended.
There's connections that are being provided to to those routes.
So that's that is being implemented and being discussed actively as part of the study work.
And to make sure that at the end of the day, hopefully we'll be able to also look at things like unified fair structures unified payment systems etc.
Long term as well.
So that's that's the goal is to try to not just look at the end of those borders of those four counties, but how they connect overall.
And Stephanie indicated as well.
Question to your words.
Caucus is very interested in in what this looks like as a model that could be scaled to also of Western Ontario.
So back to Savannah's earlier comments making sure that we get this right.
We're taking the time to get this this to do this study work is is very important because there's lots of lots of folks that are very interested in the results of the study.
So that's that is something also that we're looking at so it's it's we recognize it's even bigger than the for county and the for partners for county partners.
It has to connect and be scalable and connect to other operations that are through the our neighbors as well.
Thank you and I would add to that to that the the provincial interest and our local provincial representation.
Definitely seeing the value that what we do here the work we do here could be duplicatable not just across the Western Ontario Wardens caucus but across counties across Ontario we're all looking for the same solutions so.
We we are people are watching and and I'm glad because there's great work going on so thank you very much for that.
Any other questions we'll go to Councillor McQueen.
Oh sorry follow up Councillor board you know.
I know thinking about morning you actually you answered my head my next follow up in your in your comments so thank you.
Okay thank you and then we'll go to Councillor McQueen.
I think you met a more just follow up with.
Wilson with regards to budget wise any idea when that might be coming like.
Hold up for a minute I think what you're saying Randy about.
These and how we can charge I mean the system has to be sustainable.
And I know what's the pass with the grants we're limited to what we can charge are we able to move past that to it's cost money to have a car insurance gas is something that so you know five dollars a ride.
It's not sustainable at five bucks a ride so.
So point is roughly when that budget numbers will be coming with the options I'm sure but also the model that is makes it sustainable in the sense of what we can charge for feed.
Thank you for ship I think Council of Queen so we have heard the feedback over the last few years of operating the previous system so.
I can assure you that when we do present our final findings that we will present a different fee structure to assist in the sustainability of a regional system and also accounting for the large geography that people may be traveling.
So as if in a noted when we bring that all back to you in the future it will all be covered in those documents.
Okay we'll go to the deputy warden.
Thank you Madam Warden and thank you Stephanie for the report and Savannah.
Without necessarily pulling the curtain back too far.
Savannah alluded to a lot of number crunching a lot of idea crunching.
I'm wondering if you could give us any kind of sense of where are the pain points and you know where we kind of headed and why is taking so much longer than we anticipated.
Please.
I'll take a stab at that I think as soon as you go beyond one.
Council and one.
County and work with four and a huge geography like we're talking over 12,000 square kilometers we're 53% larger than the GTA and this is the biggest study of its kind in the province.
So that complex of the alone has really added to it because everybody has a little bit of a different need.
So trying to understand where those base levels could be and where those enhancements could be so that we're not all in the hook for the same things we're on the hook for what matters to us but we're also sharing those base components as well.
So that has been complex.
A lot of certainty that's a conversation that we just had with provincial staff and our minister delegates because understanding up provincial certainty really matters when it comes to gas tax for example.
We have frozen figures but they're based on assumptions from ridership two years ago.
So it's trying to figure out when is the proper timing to actually look to gas tax as oh tiff goes down gas tax could come up.
But originally it was slated right from the very beginning so that is one of those policy certainty pieces as well trying to make sure that we utilize and leverage the dollars that are available to the best ability that we have.
Well looking to your six so I will sorry I don't know that was me.
I will say that year six backwards is how we have been doing all of the financial crunching because we need to know when oh tiff is no longer available what does that look like on the budget that is where we have spent the majority of our focus.
Making sure that we can be comfortable bringing something forward to this table and three other councils and board.
Knowing that we are all on this together so looking around the different metro links act bill 98 all of those pieces even though they don't actually apply to us this very moment Metro links applies to two of the four partners.
So there are little bits and pieces that we just need to be sure about before we come back with a recommendation because the last thing we would want is to.
To ask you for your approval and your endorsement of something and then realize that we actually ask you for the wrong thing.
So that's why it's taken a little bit longer but I think that right now project partners feel very comfortable with the information that we're gathering the work that we're doing and the extra time that we've taken and we're hoping the council will be supportive of that as well.
Thank you anything further will go to Councillor Greg.
Thank you just to follow up on Councillor McQueen's comments regarding the fair structure I'm still when we're looking at.
reintroducing another route why we are so fixated and stuck on five dollars a ride over the years that we've had this service.
The wages for the driver went up the mechanics of wind up the bus cost more to buy the fuels.
Has increased none of these costs have went down and for a young person they're paying ten dollars a day approximately just to get insurance on their own vehicle and bought the car or the truck yet they're just ensuring what they're going to plan on driving.
When I looked at the audited financial statements we have like ten point I don't know ten a half to eleven million dollars and fees and charges that we derive from our own revenues as a corporation which is about the same as we haven't owned sound and I wonder if we shouldn't be.
More.
Concerns not the right word but look for opportunities to increase that line item in our budget and this is one of those where.
I get it we're going to bring the report back and you'll look at the fair structure but here's another opportunity after five or six years where in reintroducing a route it could be six dollars a ride and people would understand that people will push back everybody wants everything for free.
But when you explain it and say over this many years the price has been static and as a corporation we should identify that opportunity for increased revenues.
Because that in itself makes it more sustainable long term if people pay the fair share and when you parallel it with what people the cost of owning a vehicle.
It's a really good bargain so I still I struggle with why we pass up an opportunity even now for an opportunity to derive some increased revenues and make it more sustainable.
Through your worship thank the council right so just as a note the reintroduction of route five there is a fair increase so previously it was three dollars and fifty cents one way and we haven't been to five.
So there is an increase on that new introduction or reintroduction sorry.
I also think there's a piece of this puzzle is right now the system is not you can't go all over yet so right now you're still kind of in sections you can go on sound a wire to go on sound a glove and then you can do don't don't want to.
So I think there's some legitimacy in leading the fairs the way they are at this exact moment I appreciate your comment like I hear where you're coming from but I think because the system is not completely.
Connected yet there is rationale to leave it at its current price but happy to reconsider if that's the bullshit.
Okay.
All right. Oh, we'll go to Councillor Marquis.
Thank you. Thank you. Stephanie I know there's a lot of work being done and I guess my question is in regards to point to point as opposed to fixed route what is being looked at from point to point based on our geographic.
Fastness point to point in my opinion is going to be an necessity.
I don't think there'll be any fixed route going to all this fall so how is that person get to highway six or highway 10 so can you just elaborate and what work being done on point to point please.
I feel you were shook thank you Councillor Mackie so.
There's a few different options that will be presented to you in the future as to how the system can work there will be potentially a fixed route system previously our consultant and march spoke to the different options as well.
A fixed route there can be point to point as you noted there's the first mile last mile connections to help and people get to the fixed route so there's a various options that you can kind of turn on and turn off and they'll come with different costs associated to them and they all come with different pros and cons so currently our peers in Wellington County have.
Point to point across their entire geography as noted there's wasn't launched to both and so I think once we come back with our final study results we can show you all of the different options and how we plan on rolling out a successful system so.
I assure you those those things will come back to you soon with some more detail.
Okay.
That motion is carried. Thank you. We'll call a break now. We're at just past 10 after, so if we can be back by 1120, that will allow us to carry on with item 7A and B and then return to 6A and E. Thank you.
Thank you.
Excellent. Thank you very much.
We are on to item 7B at this point in time.
Thank you.
Wonderful. Thank you very much, Madam Warren.
Very glad to be here with you today.
We'll be brief.
Thank you.
very high level background, highlight those things have been met and we can move along.
This official plan, I'd probably think as I was sitting, it's been a process.
I think maybe I started with Laura Lee a number of years back and then David Smith
had to candle through, I know Matt Racky, as most recent additions to the
time of apartment has brought this through to completion.
This was approved locally or adopted locally in December.
And we have been working with staff since that time just to refine.
We picked out a few, we little typos that needed some correction.
There was one more major situation where an area of land had been proposed to be added to the
settlement area and staff are actually suggesting perhaps that's better done through a
site specific process.
But beyond that, I think the plan is wonderful.
They did a great job in pulling that together in its very concise.
Sometimes the official plans can be over both like the planners who are engaged
in drafting those as well.
So this one is very concise.
It does what it needs to do, but it does not go into duplicating
any policy in that type of thing.
So legislation in policy, that's one of the areas that we're looking to analyze as we're
looking at a new official plan.
So we are required to be consistent with the provincial planning statement and
conform to the county plan, as well as have regard for matters of provincial
interest.
So you'll note within the staff report, I have walked through those areas of
provincial interest and spoken briefly at a high level to how the plan has
addressed them.
Additional details found within the staff report at the local level, which is
dependent to the report as well.
And the staff do find that we have regard for matters in the planning act, and we would
find that this is consistent with the provincial planning statement as well, subject to those
modifications in a plan.
And then I guess that's conformity with the county official plan.
So this is a requirement of the act.
I did highlight around that duplication piece, I think.
One of the things I really would like to make this plan is, you've done a really good
balancing between the details that's included locally, but that in referencing
also the county policy that might go up kind of more expansive around the
English use rather than embedding that directly into that local plan.
Which I thought was a nice nice approach.
Great.
And so yes, subject to the suit modification,
that this would conform to the county official plan as well.
So then just for reference, I've included the schedules.
So three.
Education, around those added lands. News that did not see any changes to the land use schedule.
The appendix A for germ, I did see some changes and again we were just stopping and reflecting the features out to that rounded out boundary.
News that again, I know changes to the constraints, visual versus what was adopted, and then just with respect to the well-head protection area mapping.
For a germ, we had done a very minor bringing the boundary out to concession one, which that just in the side of the boundary.
A barrier previously, so we brought that mapping just out to that session boundary for the settlement as well.
So I'm happy to address any questions that arise, but I think generally I would leave it there.
I think we are a good position for adoption, and that would be my recommendation to council. Thank you very much.
Okay, thank you. So I'll put it out to many of the full members. If they have questions or comments.
Okay.
Well, I guess the map say it all. I don't see any questions being raised. Excellent. Well, thank you.
It has been moved in second it, so I'll call the vote then, all those in favor.
And that motion is carried. Thank you very much, planner, button.
And next, we'll move to item 7C. It's recommended that report FRCW 1626 regarding the corporate financial update as of April 30th, 2026, be received for information.
May ask for a mover and a seconder.
Move by Councillor Dicard. Seconded by Councillor Acles. It's now on the floor for discussion.
And a returning welcome to manager Reed.
Thank you very much through the warden. This report provides a financial update to council as of our financials as of April 30th.
A lot can change in those remaining eight months in the year.
I made a joke earlier about provincial funding announcements, long term care won't have their funding announcements yet.
So there's a lot of variances that can change.
And then a lot of the variances you'll see in the financial statements can be explained by seasonality.
We pay our insurance once in the year. So it might look like it's in a surplus right now, but that's just because we haven't paid the bill.
That's the case in housing. We have paid our corporate insurance policy.
But so there's a lot of different timing differences that get explained in this report and a lot of them repeat themselves throughout departments.
So I'm not going to go through it all, but if there are questions, I'm happy to answer them.
I'm just going to touch on the high level variances that we've noted.
And I will also reference that there is a sister report on the consent agenda that provides a detailed update for all of the capital projects as well.
So these going together is kind of nice, but again, acknowledging that we only have four months of data in there, so things are subject to change.
And that these financials that you're seeing are what I would call at a pretty high level.
So that the report does not become a thousand pages.
They get reviewed with the financial analyst team and managers and directors on a monthly basis at a much more granular level.
I think housing, I believe there's two FRX pages that we provided.
I think there are actual FRX package that they go through about 87.
Thank you so long.
So there is a lot more detail than what you're seeing here compressed.
But because we're looking at it, corporately, we have to kind of shrink it a little bit.
So starting with the corporate services, I'll just highlight and this wasn't a previous staff report that there isn't expected deficit within the IT capital budget.
As a result of our switches and wireless access points being over budget.
A portion of these costs are due to new buildings that we're constructing, so those costs get built into the capital project.
But the replacement of switches and wireless access points within our existing buildings get funded through Jody's IT budget and they're expected to be in a deficit.
Court security, when you're looking at the financials, nothing has been paid as a vapor 30th, but we have received the invoice from own sound today.
We received it before they as of today.
And we had a budget of 400,000.
Their actual costs are coming in at about 497,000.
So that will create a deficit in the 2026 budget and will be something we need to add into the 2027 budget to reflect this increasing costs.
Within the property budget, at the year and transfer report, I spoke of how the capital deficit was not as large as we expected as the roof repairs did not end up the emergency repairs did not end up getting done in the year.
However, now they have been done in 2026 and the budget was not rolled forward.
Therefore, it will create a deficit in 2026.
Taxation and grants.
I just want to flag that one.
It's a tricky one.
As the taxation is collected by the lower tiers and remitted to the county on a quarterly basis, we usually don't get the year and reconciliation until a few months after year.
So it's very difficult for us to project whether we're going to be in a surplus or deficit within supplemental taxes and write-offs in any given year.
But what we are going to try to do this year is put out a survey to the lower tier groups.
And just see if they have an idea right now, again, acknowledging that that steps and write-offs can change drastically from month to month.
But just to give us a bit more.
Or buy a site, which will be included in the next financial update, which will include a year and projection as well.
Within the planning department, I want to highlight that user fees for application fees are trending to be under budget.
There is quite a bit of fluctuation in these based on when things are coming in, but at this point in time we do expect to be in a shortfall or deficit within the revenue within the planning department based on the volume of applications coming in right now.
Economic development and tourism.
This was communicated to Council through EDTCCW0526.
But there's a few projects that were not carried forward into the 2026 budget that did not get completed in 2025.
So staff have brought back a report to get those done in 2020 or get permission to get those done in 2026.
As well as an emergency repair at the CITNM Campus for a.
Let me see this one for a hot water tank and boiler failure.
And then the other projects are at great roofs and are highlighted in that section.
Currently housing is trending towards a surplus in their user fees.
We're trying to make sure that the rents are trending higher than budget right now.
This can change a little bit based on tenant circumstances and and move out in the timeline between.
Move out but based on the first four months of data we have we are looking at slightly higher than budget tenant rents from our from our tenants.
We are looking based on the first half of winter we are looking at a deficit within that budget again.
So we're working to right size that within the 2027 budget.
We do not expect it though to be as large as the 2025 deficit was it was an as severe winter.
But but we do anticipate a deficit at this point in time.
But again the severity of that will depend on October November December.
And I think it's a little bit like that there will be a deficit within their machinery and equipment capital budget as a greater was received.
In 2026 that was included in the 2025 budget and was not rebudged it for.
This is really a timing difference or a timing deficit as that project would have been funded by reserve and 2025.
So we wouldn't have taken that money out of reserve in 2025.
But we don't have the authority to take it out of reserve in 2026 without the budget approval or without a without council approval.
It's just the 2026 budget does not include that transfer reserve.
So it'll create a deficit to be funded by that reserve at 20 at the end of 2026.
But it doesn't all impact the overall financial position of break County.
And then last say I just want to highlight for the major construction budget that staff are currently monitoring the asphalt indexes as we go through and get our invoicing.
I at the year and transfer report last year I reported a large surplus in the major construction budget and that was primarily driven by us not using any of our contingencies which also funds changes in asphalt index pricing.
Based on the increases we're seeing right now we do expect for those contingencies to be.
Consumed more for for those asphalt projects that are subject to indexing.
And with that I'm happy to answer any more questions that came up from the poor, but those are the high level known surplus or deficits that that we know at this point time.
Okay, thank you very much for that introduction and as you noted we will be shortly returning to item six.
So if there is a question that leans more on that side will that question for where we get to that report, but in the meantime questions for or comments.
Or manager read.
Councils.
Thank you madam Warden.
I'm sure you to get.
Just it was a couple in there the one in transportation on the greater.
The roof.
How is it that we didn't.
Transfer that to reserve remove that back and forth in reserves just.
There was one I believe in housing yep we did the transfer didn't get finished in 25 so we moved it.
But the sphere for in here.
Yeah, well we didn't move it and now we're going to end up with the deficit and.
Just have the auditor's here and when what.
How can I guess what all of a season we put in place.
That would make sure that that does happen from a clarity in budget moving forward on on projects.
Yep, that's through the warden that's a great question.
We've talked about that as staff about what mechanisms we have to avoid those timing deficits because.
I said how did we miss not transferring that money.
It's really just when we're developing our 2020 our next year's capital budget.
We're looking at what was in the previous capital plan and then is there anything in our current capital plan that will get done.
So these would be items that you know based on when the budgets were developed in August September.
We we thought we're going to get done.
I know for the roof.
The emergency repair the the contractor was ready and then winter came sooner than we thought so so they couldn't get up on the roof to make their pair.
The greater same thing the the successful.
Tender company was.
Telling us yet you're going to have that greater November December and then December 31 came and we didn't have a greater.
So we work on the best information we have available at the time, but those are all those there's always going to be those changes.
Whether we look at you know having a separate item included kind of at the end of the budget process that says.
We presented the budget but now we're we're also asking to add in these last minute items which will be funded from a zero from the previous years budget and we do that.
Or what we've talked with two is in the one we do the year and surplus deficit report and that comes back in margin April we also say and staff are looking for authority to.
And then we're going to add in to these projects within the 2026 budget using 2025 reserve funds again it's it's really a timing difference because staff do not have the authority to touch reserves.
So we get that authority through the budget process and we get that authority through counselor reports.
So probably.
There is something that we can look at to avoid these timing deficits.
And we are talking about how we're going to address that in 2027.
Okay, thank you very much.
Others.
Okay, I'm not seeing further questions in so it's been moved in a second and I'll call the question all those in favor.
And that motion is carried.
Thank you very much manager Reed and you'll have a moment's rest will we go to six A but then we'll bring you back for six E.
Okay, so with that we will return to item six A it's recommended that the correspondence from the municipality of Gray Highlands regarding traffic calming measures on gray road 13 B receipt for information.
May have a mover in a seconder.
Got to move by Councillor Nielsen.
Seconder seconded by Councillor Greg.
It's now on the floor for discussion.
Councillor McQueen, you had to request this be pulled.
Thank you.
I don't have an award in the county council.
So this motion was passed out as the city at our community safety committee and we have a community safety committee that sort of followed up.
And we used to have our own please services boards meetings or committees.
So this is sort of a continuation of of that body and to report back and have meetings roughly four times a year.
Just talk about the safety of our municipality.
So you can see here as the motion reads that council advocates the county of Gray for the installation of a physical traffic calming infrastructure for gray road 13 as a pilot initiative for the village of Kimberly.
So this is not unique just for Kimberly.
The county of Gray that transfers through a lot of small communities and speeding is is always an issue.
Few travel to earnings mills down into around Ferguson that type of area.
You'll see those traffic calming devices that sort of are sort of temporary for the summer months that sort of sit there and they do work.
They do slow down traffic.
So they they they narrow the driving lane it just sort of they're physical barriers that sort of stand up there that I guess that ours are.
Our permanent but our seasonal and then we move for the way reminds kids you can't have barriers when you're applying snow and that thing.
So it seems to be something that throughout the province.
They don't know any great county that they use but throughout the province that they have these physical barriers out.
They did offer.
With the cancellation of the.
Speak cameras the risk offering up money for municipalities and I understand it.
There's other funding possibly there for that as well. So again, the ask here is, again, I want to put a shout out to the county over the years, great, great, really 13 and the billiards of Kimberly has had a lot of items, chains that has worked quite successful for traffic calming in the billiards. And I know that something has been ongoing for quite a few years. So the ask here is just to look at a possibility of the road's department to look at is there.
Something that could be investigated with regards to physical traffic calming that could be used as a as a pilot project and maybe also use to root the county in other areas. So that is the request and also the second request that the council requests new speed data from the county of Great for the billiards of Kimberly to be reported back to the community safety committee and that is something that the county does do throughout great county and and so they're asking for that.
With that that latest data. So I like to make an amendment to this motion to include that we support the requests here of the Miss Valley of Great Highlands and maybe come back with a report or if it needs to be report, come back how we would initiate the traffic calming and also the move board with providing that information.
Okay, thank you all the first secondary and then we'll confirm the wording is our seconder seconded by Councillor Nielsen. So it is on the floor. We'll just make sure that the clerk has a moment to capture your wording.
Okay, so Councillor McQueen, can you just have a look at the, oh, that hasn't been, that's not showing it.
Okay, so the clerk has captured that the motion be amended to insert a clause that staff be directed to follow up with council on a report to implement traffic calming measures in Kimberly on a trial basis is is that correct.
Okay, and that's correct with the seconder.
Okay, so I'll just do as we as my mic is still live physical traffic calming measures.
Okay, implement physical traffic calming measures in Kimberly on a trial basis. Okay, so it has been moved in seconded is on the floor now for discussion Councillor to bring.
Thank you. Good morning and through you, Warden. I just wondering.
I always am cautious about when we provide direction that the report must include the implementation of the physical traffic calming measures as opposed to a report that provides options.
I'm a simple and constant to that traffic calming measure.
Councillor McQueen mentioned just one such physical barrier, there may be others, as opposed to the the language that says the report that implements physical traffic calming measures, it almost is it's it's just language.
I think we need to see the information and then make a decision as a whole as opposed to assuming that it will be implemented.
Okay, so in consultation with the cleric, perhaps I'll just ask the mover and seconder if this would help clarify your intent to the motion.
On a report about the implementation of physical traffic calming measures in Kimberly on a trial basis with that capture correctly what you meant to move.
Okay, I'll let you answer.
Yeah, yeah, that that that I think that makes good sense to have those options that come back with that report.
I just just for clarity, though, there was a second ask in that motion for the data, does that have to be included in that motion or is that something that could just on might be out.
Okay, we'll go to the CAO. I did hear that you said that is actually already a practice and effective great county, so I'll look to the CAO.
Through you, Warden, as of late to this, the speed data itself as correctly noted, we collect that.
Try to collect that in a regular basis.
Translations service staff will be collecting the deployed some some some of that to capture some of that information to have the latest data and happy to share that with with greater than staff once that's captured will probably have that available in a few weeks.
While I can through you Warden, just to just to speak to the matter in terms of when we look for opportunities for physical and physical improvements when it comes to traffic calming, we've tried different measures.
In various communities across Craig County, we try to incorporate those when we're looking at capital improvements or a capital project that's part of of that.
And so I just wanted to note that that's a typical practice is when we're doing a capital project, we would look at opportunities to do some sort of traffic calming or at least try to mitigate some of the impacts that we might try to do to improve overall safety for everybody that's using the roadways and those communities.
So that's something that we normally do as part of that practice, we don't have anything that's slated right now in capital program for for Kimberly.
But of course, always willing to work with municipalities if there's infrastructure improvements that are required for for disabilities.
That may change some of the timing in terms of what improvements may come forward.
So again, we're happy to work with in this case, very haven't staff with respect to those pieces as well.
We have tried different measures over the years and Trevor can speak to some of the things that we've tried in Kimberly specifically to be limit reductions some signage since being notification signage.
I think that has been installed and some other improvements here in the air over the number of years.
Based on the speed data we've seen there hasn't been much difference in terms of driver behavior for those those measures.
We've seen that in other cases to across other communities where we've tried in many certain things some things are maybe more helpful.
Like physical improvements, but again, those are typically associated with capital projects because they're too costly often to implement outside of a capital project.
But we'll take the direction of council if you want to report or what we're happy to bring that report back to council and explore other options that may be available for physical improvements outside of a capital project or as part of a capital project.
Well, Councilor McQueen.
Do you remember what in thanks for that.
Because I think it's something that we're seeing throughout our communities is the increased traffic and increased speeds.
I think we are everybody you talk to everybody agrees with that.
You know, there's talk about you put speed bumps what's be bumps don't work because we have snow and that's you know and there are places where they actually put asphalt homes.
It's I don't know how they work off that in the winter time.
There was an accident just recently in somewhere just about kitchen or somewhere down that area where particular farm was going to cut his hay in the early in the morning going down the road done it for.
Life kind.
Right that to one other farm and there was a tractor trailer came along never slowed down and ran into the back of the back of this equipment.
And there was no sign of any in reduction speed and and so.
There, you know, I guess there's just in time for delivery.
You know, with the commercial vehicles they just they you know they have to get there and understand that they got to drop to do as well it's just in the point of community like can really no different others there's two things unique there they don't sidewalks.
Number two is there isn't a slope.
And then it has a tendency to keep people a little higher and I know that the county is some great things with reduction of speed reduction of speed for up a hill.
It just seems to be from what I gather communities that had those physical barriers put up.
There is a psychological thing that does have a tendency to slow you down.
And they're moved like if you had a real move that's not going to like something that's that's permanent or solid it's something that.
Just have a tendency to slow you down and I know just in in.
We've had a talk about some of the ones that you've incorporated in your reconstruction.
You know, I'm sure people going North school.
That's new that's different, but it you know, there's a physical berry in the middle of the of the two lanes and why was that well I know we've had always been.
We've had a lot of great work with an area where speeding has been an issue.
So, you know, I think we know that people have to get from point A to B and I don't think we're anything you're trying to stop that but if it takes, you know, 10, 10, 12 seconds longer in your day to slow people down I think that's while we're that point of safety and that sort of thing.
So it's it's a request that and this is not something that.
We're talking through this motion, it's specifically for continually we have all the communities to grow a great county that you know and we're saying you could use this as a.
As a trial area and something works something doesn't work but certainly with options coming back I think it's something that needs to have to be mindful and how do we try to slow that.
Public and we have growth our growth is continue to put more more traffic on our roads as well.
So I'll give it to that Mr. Adam Gordon.
Okay, thank you very much and I do know that the discussion about temporary speed bumps that can be removed during the winter season has also been something that's been floating out there in the in the.
In the infrastructure roads infrastructure universe so I'm sure that any of the potential options under this this motion would be included in reports counselor to bring.
Thank you and I was actually going to wait for the report to come back before debating options but you through you warden you mentioned the temporary speed bumps.
I actually ask this question of transportation staff locally and they do need to be mounted into the pavement.
When you drill a hole or create a.
In perfection in the pavement come our winters with freezes and thoughts that allows moisture into the pavement which reduces the longevity of the pavement.
I wanted to just talk about the.
The sign that goes on the center line.
They have one in Formosa it does it's very effective that catches your attention you slow down but again you're mounting that.
Into the pavement so we have to weigh those costs and I will look forward to having the full some report in order to evaluate what makes sense and where we can maybe employ different options.
In our various hamlets to explore what works what doesn't and and the cost associated with those.
Okay thank you so that is the intent of this motion is to capture the potential options because it is specified that it'll be options it'll be entertained in the report so we're we're not in a debate about about which ones are best we're asking for report about the options but it's important that we all understand what we can expect from the report.
Council McQueen brief follow up.
Briefly in the sense that to also investigate funding because there has been originally funding from the province when they this band the traffic cameras but there's I heard something that there's more funding coming.
I think that would also help if that's investigated and what options are there as well.
Okay thank you so I think we can we can expect that if we leave it and if this motion is passed and we leave it in the hands of staff they will work collaboratively with each other in terms of giving us that kind of information that we would have to contemplate as well.
And with that we'll go to Councillor Gray.
I'll just note the reason I'll vote against the motion as it's presented right now is it does name a specific community I would have no problem with the report coming back I get it can release the catalyst for the discussion.
But we have not heard from staff that Kimberly is any worse than Desboro or Hopeville or Skone or Plathra of other communities within the county so to isolate it.
By naming Kimberly in the motion.
Give me pause and reason to vote against it if you want to amend it to examine.
Physical traffic calming measures in the county which we're charged with oversight for as a whole.
I could be supportive of that I wouldn't.
Presum anything.
You know in terms of cost on the taxpayer in advance I would wait for the report but I don't think it's appropriate I get it Kimberly was the.
Impetus for the discussion.
Great highlands but I don't think the amendment should name a specific community in terms of bringing the report back.
Okay I have a thought on this.
Looking at the way that it reads and hearing the discussion the idea is that perhaps if something were to come through on the report that looks like a good match for trial in Kimberly that it might be a county wide trial it might be deemed as.
Good mechanism to test out and it may be or may not be selected in Kimberly I'm going to look to the mover.
To identify.
If this is because I'm reading it in Kimberly on a trial basis. So I'm hearing Councillor Graves concern that it is tied to a specific location. But I've heard you talking about that this could be a good trial for the county to see what's going on and what we could best do. So may I just ask for clarification from the mover on that?
Yeah, I can maybe try to add some clarity. I mean, certainly the community of Kimberly had been very concerned. No, I say.
And certainly I would say it could be removed, maybe with the motion attached that that sort of shows where it's came from. I just think that they are quite willing to offer up.
The whole point was, I think, was not to put the burden in as far as cost across the whole miscellaneous.
I don't think it was looking like special treatment. It was more or less in the sense that, you know, we know there's an issue. We've been working on this for a long time.
There is the decline of the road. There's just needs to be a community with no sidewalk. Just it's a community that's very concerned and they're offering it up as a trial basis.
I don't think it's not trying to be taking it away from anywhere else. They're just offering it up as a place to. But I mean, if it needs to be removed, I think then I think you just need to reference to the resolution that came.
So then there's reference that if it comes back from the report, it's still it's still there that that option is available to the count. So I guess in any.
I'll accept the point of order, but I did ask a question to the mover. So so I would like to hear the mover finish the thought and.
He is.
This is the amendment is moved by Councillor McQueen and second by Councillor Nelson. So Councillor McQueen, so I'm hearing that.
I'm. What I would like to do to make clean process on the minutes that will follow this discussion is your right you are correct. If this primary if this amendment to the main motion passes.
It will be attached to that original motion, which is Councillor Nelson and Councillor Grace, which refers to the correspondence. So we'll definitely be embedded there that this is in response to the correspondence.
But because we've already delved into discussion on this particular amendment, the main motion, I would like to be able to look to the clerk.
We could do an additional amendment to this amendment to remove Kimberly or I'm going to look to the clerk to make sure that we're following very carefully the discussion process that we've been in.
I would agree with that that there could be an amendment done to remove the reference to Kimberly to apply more to a county wide basis for.
Keeping it as is I think gives the option to if successful in Kimberly for feature implementation throughout the county.
But I think those are the two immediate paths I see at this.
Okay, so in order for us to be respectful of all of the input that we've heard along the way there's a main motion way at the back we're at an amendment to the main motion.
If somebody would like to amend this amendment to the main motion to suggest removing in Kimberly so that it is representational of what we've heard about a county basis.
I can allow that from either it can be moved by anybody here at the at the horseshoe.
So is there somebody that would like to move in amendment to the main amendment and amendment to the amendment.
Got to be careful.
Yes point of clarity council.
So like I guess the point of clarity it's what I'm seeking here is the village of Kimberly the speed drops from 80 70 60 40.
Do we want traffic calming on our 80s kilometer or 70 kilometer or 60 kilometer.
This is a 40 kilometer hours.
So do we need clarity and and on where we're looking for traffic calming.
I mean, this is this is this is getting into a big, you know, it was reference Kimberly is it is a community on a county road that has a reduction in speed to 40 kilometers.
So I mentioned it in here, but do we need to zero in at what we're looking for traffic calming because you could still look for traffic calming at 80 kilometers or I don't know I don't have that answer.
But the idea is is Kimberly is it is an example of other small communities within our great great county road network that have reduction in speed from the normal speed.
I don't know I'm asking that clarity on that sense because it makes reference to Kimberly because of the sort of sense that is there from the speed reduction.
Okay, so just before I look to staff and to the clerk, I will note that in order for should should this be amended should this amendment go to the main motion if this is is passed through this process.
staff would automatically be taking into consideration speed because that that's going to be part of the formula in which they they advocate for what can work and what cannot work.
So I would think that that would be already understood that it would have to be with a lens of of speed, but all look to either the CAO or to Mr. Irton.
For clarification on their understanding of what would this motion look like in a staff report.
Through you, Warden.
For most of our physical traffic calming measures that we've looked at in the past, they are they are associated with within communities and will be associated with areas where we have tapered speeds from 80 down to a lower speed limit.
So, so that's the area of focus that that we would assume that we'd be looking at in terms of exploring any options if that's the direction of council is a look for those traffic calming measure options and communities of that nature.
So much to Kimberly, so much to some of the other communities that have been mentioned.
Those are the those are the areas that we'd be looking at where there's that those speed reductions from the 80 down to a lower lower speed limit zone and where there's there's some build built up area.
In terms of communities homes stores things of that nature.
The traffic calming measures within hamlets and built up areas within great county.
That cover it.
Okay, so that I'm clear to remove in Kimberly and insert.
Okay, so the amendment to the amendment now reads that the motion be that the motion be amended to remove in Kimberly and insert hamlets and built up areas within the county road system.
Is there a seconder we've got to move by council.
Okay, I'll put in another calls or seconder.
Okay, seconded by councilor Kenner, so that's now on the floor for discussion.
The only discussion we're having now is the removal of him Kimberly and the addition of hamlets and built up areas within the county road system.
Any discussion on that.
Seeing no hands up all in favor of that amendment.
Okay, and that amendment passes.
So now the back to the first the primary amendment.
It now reads that the motion be in the main motion be amended to insert a clause that staff that staff be directed to follow up the council on a report to investigate options to implement physical traffic calming measures in hamlets and built up areas within.
The Greek the county road system on a trial basis.
Okay, we're back to discussing now then therefore the whole main motion.
Any further discussion there.
Councilor Eccles.
Thank you, Madam Warden.
Implement physical traffic calming measures.
We have already implemented how many.
On a number of county roads.
Over the years, especially on county road 13.
In the hamlet area of Kimberly.
Obviously.
None of them have worked yet.
Or we wouldn't be back here to where we are today.
To the satisfaction of some individuals in that area.
I've always struggled with this.
As we had a report this morning showing the construction and how we've smoothed out the roads so that traffic can flow.
More effectively and efficiently.
And then an hour or so later.
We're debating on how to slow it all down.
Well, we shouldn't have spent $3 million on the break and road.
We should have just left the pod holes there and people wouldn't have had to slow it down.
It does work.
So maybe looking at staff that might be one of the ways.
It's truly the only way to slow the traffic down.
And it's traffic.
It's physical driver.
Performance.
You put up a traffic sign.
The electronic one.
And the guys.
And girls.
We're driving to access.
No.
Sorry.
No, something is sensitive on my monitor.
Thank you very much.
That just gives me a bit of a break to refresh here and really get going now.
I think that it is the physical presence of traffic control officers that are going to be implemented.
If it becomes known that this area or other areas are speed traps and that enforcement is going to be there.
By the physical presence of the ticket.
Well, maybe a lot of said some of our court costs as well too.
But the physical ticket is going to be the is always been my thought of that's going to be the answer.
Because the people that are driving past an 80 kilometer or 40 kilometers that are 20 or 30 kilometers over that.
I'm just not certain how any physical thing is going to stop it.
A lot of staff time is going to be expanded here.
Nine just have difficulty with it.
Without any back up that there's been any real problem other than it.
Depending on a few people.
But think that cars are going past and fast in that area has been considerable accidents.
And violence.
Traffic I don't believe so.
I can't support this.
Thank you.
Cut me off now.
Okay.
Thank you.
We do need to keep in mind that our job is about the roads and about what we can do.
Enforcement by police is not something that we as a body here as a county council can influence all of it.
I think believe all of us sit on sit on police boards that is a whole separate matter for a whole separate governance.
Understanding that everybody's budget start tight everybody is stretched.
We cannot we we don't have the luxury of assigning police officers at every.
Hamlet across great county in order to be able to preserve that.
As effective as that may be acknowledging that that that that would be the most effective method.
It isn't necessarily what we're able to do.
So we do have to keep our focus on our discussion on to this.
I will note that lunch is now overdue.
So that I will look and see if there's any further discussion.
Okay.
So here you know further discussion.
Seeing no further hands up then we do have that main motion that has been amended.
It does include reference to the letters, but it is now been amended as as the primary and secondary motions.
So I'll call the question then all those in favor.
And that motion carries. Okay. So with that then.
We haven't done that for okay. So thank you.
That was the clear just reminded me.
I'm one step ahead.
We still now need to embody it into the main motion.
So we now have the main motion.
I better read it just to make sure we're all clear on what we're voting on here.
That the correspondence from the municipality of Gray Highlands regarding traffic calming.
Measures on Gray Road 13.
We received for information and that staff be directed to follow up with council on a report to investigate options to implement physical traffic calming measures in hamlets and built up areas within the gray.
The county road system on a trial basis.
Any further discussion now as it has now become the main motion.
Okay. All those in favor.
And that motion carries. Okay. Thank you very much.
So with that, we have one more item to entertain.
It's item six E is recommended that report.
FRCW 1326 regarding a 2026 capital project status update as of April 30th, 2026.
Be your see for information.
May ask for a mover and a second.
Move by council.
Seconded by Council Pringle. It's now on the floor for discussion. And so with that manager read, if you'd like to come back to the lectern and provide us any insight before we go into discussion. Thank you.
Through the warden, thank you. Similar to what I've said for the operating report.
A lot of work happens from January to April on the procurement side. So if we look at figure one in the chart where projects are, whether they've been awarded, the procurements and progress or whether impairment isn't applicable.
But the video that Trevor shared earlier in the meeting, those rope was weren't paved as of April 30, so a lot of them will be marked completed.
A lot of that work happened in the summer into the later months of the year. So where were at as far as project completion and statuses? I think it's pretty consistent with previous years.
And then attach the report is the detail of every single project and where they're at and comments were applicable and what we've committed.
And we also did prepare a budget book, which is linked in the report or can be accessed through our general great county open book site where you can, it works more like an Excel sheet as opposed to a PDF where you can actually filter for certain projects or departments and look up specific items.
That I'm happy to take any questions.
Okay, thank you very much. And yes, I know it would be wonderful if I know as could produce lovely videos to make all these numbers come alive.
But you have touched on the point that it's so important that this is really a cross sector cross department item and this allows this picture is worth a thousand words to be able to drive on a road or to be able to see it in the video today really really help support the information that you provided us in terms of the numbers and figures. So thank you for that.
So with that, I will look to Councillor Greg who had pulled the item.
Well, apparently nobody likes a Scott the stands between them and lunch. So my two questions are brief.
First question there is in the attached table references to the waste management study that's being done. My first question there to staff is are there plans to actually engage with municipal councils on that.
It does speak to municipal staff, but just wondering about the level of engagement with councils and second question is regarding two structures on county road 40, which I believe was about 3.1 million dollars budget and it's almost a million dollars in origin, including contingency. So just wondering if staff can comment on what obstacles have arisen from from those projects or any key takeaways that council needs to be aware of.
Okay, so we're going to start with the CA.
Do you want to start with the waste management study and maybe I'll turn to Garrett and Trevor to talk about the culverts on the structure some 40.
With respect to the waste management study, there definitely will be consultation and sharing information with all member municipal councils.
We have been working with the waste management community practice and staff that are in each of the nine members of the palates.
The consultant has been doing side visits to the various lampel sites, transfer stations and collecting data information.
So the bulk of the work to date has been with staff engagement, but there will be definitely some overall community engagement as well as engagement with each and member municipalities.
We anticipate some of the early results will be maybe later this year and then definitely into next year will be doing some like consultation work.
Okay, so I see manager iron ten is coming up.
Thank you, Warden. In regards to the, I guess there's the capital structure, it's the one is actually under 40 and the other's concession to which is in chatsburg township.
Basically the original budget figures were based on the consultant estimate that we're put forward.
I guess it's about the middle of the summer.
So last year and then based on.
The interpretation after the bids came in there basically three bids all around 3.1 to 3.3 million pretty competitive and then there's three other bids that were significantly higher.
But initially the variation in the bid prices compared to what the term in the estimates.
A lot of it has come down to the temporary flow.
System that's used for bypassing the river through the structure during construction.
The engineers originally and assume that the showing that was used could be sacrifice or sorry could be reused after the construction.
So basically they pay for the steel pile of sheet or put the sheet piles in and pull them back out and reuse them on other projects.
However, in talking to the different contractors, they determined that it wasn't basically the sheet pile will be sacrificial.
So basically they put it in and then they can never use it again.
So the costs of that were one of the factors that drove that price up also the cost of the fabrication of the precast structures was higher than the expected and that's largely to to changes in steel pricing since the time of the estimate compared to when the bids were placed.
Yeah, I hope that answers that question.
Okay, follow up or no, okay.
Any further questions and or comments.
Okay.
In that case, then I'll call the question all those in favor and that motion is carried. Thank you.
Okay, so with that then we will move on to finish off the agenda. We do not have any close many matters other business.
Seeing no hands raised, we will go to notice as a motion. Are there any notice and motion to serve today.
Okay, seeing no hands, then we'll look for a motion to adjourn.
Thank you move by Councillor Nielsen, second of my Councillor Carlton, all those in favor.
And this meeting is adjourned. Thank you very much, everyone.