[0:53] Good afternoon, everyone. Going to call our council meeting of April 9th, 2024, to order. Mr. Coleman, we have an agenda in front of us. Are there any additions or deletions? No changes from administration, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. Looking for someone to move as presented. Councillor Verde, thank you very much. Any comments or questions on that? None, all in favor? None of us. We have minutes of our March 26th, 2024 regular council meeting.

[1:22] looking for someone to move those.

[1:24] Councillor Lewis, thank you very much.

[1:27] Questions, comments, errors or emissions noted in those?

[1:30] I am seeing no hands, all in favour?

[1:34] Unanimous.

[1:35] At 130, we have an opportunity for anyone from the public who would like to present to

[1:40] Council on an item that is not on the agenda can do so now.

[1:45] Anyone who would like to present on an item not on the agenda?

[1:51] Okay, moving on to 5A, a community services recreation, Warburg, Arena funding, the floor

[2:02] is yours when you're ready, Mr. Honesty.

[2:09] Thank you and good afternoon.

[2:11] For the last few years, administration has been working with the village of Warburg towards

[2:16] Board's redevelopment of their arena in 2022, Council provide some conditional funding towards phase two which was the upgrade of the Zambroni room and the replacement of the ice plant, including some storage space.

[2:33] With that conditional funding, the Village Warburg was able to secure a million dollar grant from the province and then proceed towards project completion with some of that securities in place.

[2:46] Over the last year we've been working with the village to confirm project details and

[2:53] prepare for construction this spring and be ready for next fall.

[3:00] Throughout that process, there was a few adjustments that we were, we supported, throughout

[3:08] reviewing the ice plant modifications and a few of those and now that we've completed and

[3:15] And reviewed all the project details, there are some additional funding required.

[3:21] Some of the reasons for the additional funding, resulting us scoping the ice plant to accommodate the curling rink as well.

[3:30] Currently there's two ice plants in the community.

[3:32] We felt that it would make sense obviously to make sure we scope this new one to be appropriate to accommodate both the curling rink and the ice plant into the future.

[3:44] The current rent ice plant was not at the end of life, but is near the end of life, so it would have been something we would have to have addressed in the future.

[3:54] We also wanted to make sure we made sure the ice plant was suitable for the next 25, 30 years.

[4:03] So we did make sure we added some components around heat recovery to make sure we were creating and addressing some of the efficiencies for the facility as well.

[4:15] at as well as making sure the heat floor of the arena was operational,

[4:21] currently was an operational, and we thought there'd just be some long-term benefits

[4:25] of the infrastructure to make sure that heat floor was functioning.

[4:29] With some of those adjustments, we did remove from the scope the storage space knowing

[4:35] that there would be obviously some increased cost due to the ice plant as a result.

[4:42] We, one of the other contributing factors towards the adjustment is that we continue to use

[4:49] the dollars that we had budgeted and anticipated in 2022.

[4:53] Obviously, as you go through a grant process and then a tender process, we're now two years

[4:58] later and we didn't build a full inflationary factory into that original budget, which is

[5:05] Obviously, we know what's currently happening in our economy with some of our inflationary costs.

[5:12] There is also an outstanding grant that the Warburg Execity is applying for,

[5:17] so that may help our end dollars, so they're applying for $100,000 to help with the current and

[5:23] rank component of the ice plant.

[5:25] And our budget continues to have $75,000 in contingency that may not be needed,

[5:32] as we go through the next couple of months, so our recommendation is to support an extra

[5:41] $200,000 up to an additional $220,000 from the statutory municipal reserve, which resulted

[5:48] in a total contribution for this project of $1.33 million.

[5:52] Thank you very much.

[5:54] Questions for Mr. Honesty, Councillor Lutilis.

[5:57] Thank you, and before I sat in this chair for council, I would sit in our meeting

[6:02] And I remember there being an ask for more money back then for the original building.

[6:10] I guess I'm seeing that there's three phases where this would be phase two.

[6:15] How many more times are we going to be asked for more money and more funding for this project?

[6:21] This project will be complete with this number.

[6:25] Phase three will be the next phase and that will be grant dependent.

[6:29] I think the obviously the lessons learned are to make sure that we just fall in the years following our grant submission.

[6:39] The grant submission is key. We got a million dollars. We got $500,000 dollars last time.

[6:44] I think the key is to make sure we continue to just each year some inflationary factors into that budget.

[6:50] I wouldn't, I'd say the factor is not that this is over budget, other than it's just we didn't budget enough is how I look at this project.

[7:02] Okay, follow-up and then Councillor Smith.

[7:04] Thank you. When is phase three going to be started and completed in anticipation?

[7:10] There's not a set time right now. Some of it comes down to the Village of Warburg and the Fortibility.

[7:15] It's timing around us as a partner, as well as the timing of the grants.

[7:22] As I mentioned, these grants are key, so the timing will come down to win those key grants are available.

[7:29] And when the village might be successful in acquiring some of those grants.

[7:34] Councillor Smith?

[7:35] So just to summarize and rephrase, if you were to get the $220,000 allocated today, what are the risks that this project may not continue even with funding?

[7:45] providing today if that's the decision here, what risks do you see to summarize going forward that we could run into more problems with the project?

[7:52] Yeah, I think they're limited. I think we've researched and understood. So these are fully confirmed costs.

[7:59] Both projects are tendered and confirmed. Any of the unknowns as they get into the facility might be a risk, but I think it's minimal.

[8:09] almost one part of the building, one room of the building, and we've anticipated and budgeted

[8:17] for anything like the electrical transformer was identified as something that had to be

[8:22] relocated.

[8:23] That's been scoped, budgeted.

[8:25] So I believe that the 75,000 hour contingency that we have built in is enough for any of

[8:30] those minor unknowns.

[8:34] I have a couple of questions that are linked together.

[8:38] where the last paragraph of your report says with Council approval we will continue to

[8:43] work with the village of Warburg. What role does the county have throughout this tendering

[8:51] and work process if you could? Because we have a significant investment.

[8:56] Yes. We've been engaged in every meeting that's been held by the committee because it involves

[9:02] the arena board, the village and ourselves. So we've attended every meeting. We've been

[9:07] And then a part of those scope change decisions that have happened, and then we also have a funding agreement.

[9:13] So that funding is agreement is in place.

[9:15] So if there are changes like this, we would have to agree to those changes.

[9:19] So all three of those are in place, and then we'll continue to be at every project meeting for

[9:24] the next few months until it's complete.

[9:27] Thank you.

[9:27] And just sort of linked to that, the village of Warburg is a very small municipality with limited personnel.

[9:35] Are they are we in conjunction with the village hiring a project manager who's taking on one of the things we've learned or I've learned sitting here is you know good project management from from the administration from the municipality makes a big difference on getting things done on time on budget so just how are they managing that or how are we.

[9:58] Yeah, they're using their engineering firm, and then we're communicating with them regularly.

[10:03] So it's professionally tendered, professionally reviewed.

[10:07] All that is in line with what our expectations would be.

[10:11] And that project manager will lead the entire construction project for the billage.

[10:16] Thank you very much.

[10:17] Any further questions?

[10:20] Councillor Lewis?

[10:21] Thank you.

[10:21] Have we seen the usage of the arena go up since the initial investment.

[10:26] and like the phase one has been complete?

[10:32] The improved facility doesn't increase the usage.

[10:35] Our usage is strong there.

[10:36] I think that's just demand in the region.

[10:38] What these projects are doing, they're providing it as a safe,

[10:42] accessible place for the residents, right?

[10:45] So the arena was well used before, I believe it's still well used.

[10:49] These improvements aren't going to increase the number of users.

[10:53] It just makes it one safer for sure this project makes it safer and then the phase one made it, you know, more easily accessible, more accommodating for our residents.

[11:03] Thank you, Councillor Blaser.

[11:04] Yeah, there's two things I wanted to bring up.

[11:07] Mary DeBlanco brought up the comment of who's running and what our say is in this and I got to thank you because I know we probably have a little more say than what Warburg has.

[11:21] And this is coming from a mayor that I know quite well that is quite pleased the way you are running things and I mean you.

[11:31] And the second comment is to usage big time.

[11:38] It's like every other arena out in the country.

[11:41] It seems like ice time is huge and it has not slowed down out there whatsoever.

[11:45] So other than that, that's about all I got to say was a little shocked at the number, but it is what it is and with the economy has gone up.

[11:56] So with that, I would move the recommendation if there's a lot of other comments or questions.

[12:01] So we have the motion on the floor to approve the additional funding contribution to the Warburg Arena project up to the 1.3300001.33 million.

[12:14] then with an additional 220,000 allocated from the statutory municipal reserve. So thank

[12:22] you for that, Councillor Lewis. Can you just explain what the statutory municipal

[12:26] reserve is for?

[12:29] I might ask our director of finance. I can give you the answer, but

[12:34] she might be able to give you the. A little more precise. Good afternoon. The statutory

[12:38] Reservous, the municipal reserve trust that we hold, so any when we maybe development would be better to answer this, but a portion of some of our land purchases when developers do it go into the municipal reserve trust that can be used specifically for very specific projects when it comes to revitalizing the community.

[13:00] And if I may add to that, it's just at times we'll take cash and lieu as part of the land

[13:05] through that development.

[13:06] Instead of.

[13:07] And which is required to be in a, you know, statutory reserve.

[13:11] Reserve?

[13:12] Yeah.

[13:12] All right.

[13:13] Thank you very much.

[13:14] So the motion is on the table.

[13:17] Any further debate or questions?

[13:20] I see none.

[13:21] I'm going to call the question all in favor.

[13:24] This unanimous, good luck with the continued work on that and please keep us in the loop.

[13:31] Moving on to 5B1, 5B is Finance, 5B1 is the presentation from Metrix Group, LLP 2023

[13:40] year end financial records, and Ms. Klamasco will be introducing the report, the floor is yours.

[13:47] I think Madam Mayor and Council, the administration has a report for your consideration today and a recommendation that Council approve the following 2023 financial year end documentation, so that's the 2023 audited financial statements in the 2023 accumulated surplus schedule.

[14:07] So, at the Governance and Priorities Committee meeting on April 2nd administration presented Q42023 reporting where we went through in great detail all of the operational plans, major and capital project plans, the operating budgets for every department today we are presenting our financial statements so financial statements are prepared in accordance with the Canadian public sector accounting standards.

[14:35] So that is why they are shown differently than what we present to you in our quarterly reporting package.

[14:44] So today we have with us Curtis Friesen, who is our external auditor with metrics group.

[14:49] So he will go through the financial statements in greater detail.

[14:53] There were a couple of changes to some of the accounting standards for 2020.

[15:00] So there were a couple of more substantive changes in our statements this year. So I will turn it over to Mr. Friesen, and then we can answer any questions council has. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Good afternoon, everybody. Yeah, so our firm completed the financial statement audits here in the last few weeks. We provided a draft financial statement to management for them to have a chance to take a look at it. And it's here today for your guys' consideration for approval. So just to talk about the audit to start, we issued what's called our audit findings letter.

[15:31] Again, when we come in, our interest is in testing the transactions, how the different

[15:35] types of revenues get recorded approved, booked in your records, how operating expenses

[15:40] in payroll, how they get approved, and again, recorded in your books and records.

[15:44] So our testing went smoothly, results were good, all of our questions were answered, anything

[15:49] we wanted to see in terms of support for a transaction was provided.

[15:53] So, as I said in other meetings, you know, another good clean audit from our perspective.

[15:59] So, you'll see in the slider again, if there was any issues we had over how the county goes about doing its day-to-day bookkeeping, we would be writing about that.

[16:07] It's, you know, we don't have any concerns about your internal controls, how you go about doing your day-to-day bookkeeping.

[16:12] Next comment is about accounting policies and estimates, so every financial statement has some estimates in it on the second page.

[16:18] We list a few of the larger ones, and again, that's just to bring those to your attention.

[16:22] You know, amortization of capital assets is an estimate.

[16:25] The new item that we'll talk about a bit later, the asset retirement obligations is an estimate,

[16:30] and we're listing the amounts that were included in the last one, the allowance for potential

[16:35] uncollectable amounts in your receivables.

[16:38] So all of those are estimates.

[16:39] Our job is to look at what management has done.

[16:42] They explain their approach to us on those items, and we agree with what management did.

[16:46] But there's no uncorrected misstatements to bring forward.

[16:53] So anything that we suggested for a judgment was done, again, very few adjustments.

[16:58] No difficulties in completing the audit.

[17:00] So I just want to hit a few of those highlights to start, you know, and then that leads us

[17:04] to the audit report that's in the financial statement itself.

[17:07] So a couple of pages in.

[17:09] So this one is the management's responsibility for financial reporting.

[17:13] So management will sign off on that, it just explains their role in the financial reporting

[17:17] process. Then the audit report follows first paragraph there is where you see our opinion.

[17:23] That based on the work we did, we're comfortable signing off on the financial statements and

[17:27] seeing that they're a fair and reasonable representation of what happened at Laduk County in 2023.

[17:33] So it's a standard worded, clean, audit opinion.

[17:40] So that's the audit side of things. And then

[17:42] I'll just make a few comments on some of the main couple of pages here. See if anybody

[17:46] has any questions. There's a couple of new notes. Maybe we'll point those out. But looking

[17:50] here, first page of numbers, statement of financial position, so this is again a snapshot of

[17:55] what the county owns, who they owe and what's left over at the end of December.

[18:00] So on the top of the list, you got your cash, $41 million, so up a little bit over last

[18:05] years, $33 million, basically what happened is you collected some receivables, you have

[18:09] a few more payables than you did last year, so your cash balance goes up, $41 million.

[18:16] After that, there's a list of a variety of receivables, so we split them out for information

[18:20] So taxes receivable, 1.7, pretty close to last year.

[18:24] Other trade grant and GST receivables, 5.6 compared to 12.6 last year.

[18:31] So that's where the difference happened in 2022.

[18:34] There was a variety of grants that you received in 2023.

[18:39] So that brought that number down.

[18:42] Local improvement taxes receivables, so there was nothing new added in 2023.

[18:46] So that decrease from 4 to 3 is just for regular repayments made during the year.

[18:52] Same with the annexation proceeds receivables, so down from 3.1 to 2.6 for the regular annual payment.

[19:02] Investments rate around 40 million, pretty close to last year.

[19:07] debt charge is recoverable that is the amount from the Duke housing foundation so that you have some debt taken out on their behalf they owe you are

[19:15] receivable for for the same amount. Total assets just over 97 million. Pretty consistent with last year and then we switched the liabilities. So again, accounts payable are just the regular bills that we're

[19:27] outstanding at the end of December up to 10 million. There's a little bit more hold back payables going on on some of the larger projects.

[19:35] So that's what drove that number up a little bit.

[19:39] Deposits up to three million, so a variety of new developer related road deposits, land deposits brought that to three million contaminated sites, so you have a couple sites identified with some soil contamination, so those that live potential liability on cleanup is there.

[19:57] Deferred revenue is your offsite levies, most of that is offsite levies that have been received.

[20:03] So what 22 million of that is off site levies, 3 million are grants that have been received

[20:08] and haven't yet been spent in accordance with the requirements.

[20:12] So 25 million deferred revenue.

[20:15] Asset retirement obligation is the new item.

[20:17] So again, that was an accounting standard change that came into effect for 2023 year ends.

[20:24] Required people to assess their assets and determine if there was any potential liabilities

[20:30] on retirement of the asset, basically when it stops being used.

[20:33] It's different than contamination, it's just, you know, cost to wind it up.

[20:38] So some landfill sites or transfer station sites were identified, potential costs were

[20:45] estimated and put together, so that liability is on the books for the first time this year.

[20:52] Long-term debt, so you started at $37.5 million, you added about $6.5 million of new debt,

[20:57] and then regular repayments were about three,

[20:59] so net increase of about $3 million in long-term debt.

[21:05] Total liabilities, 83 million,

[21:07] puts you in a net financial asset position of 14 million.

[21:10] And then to that, we add what's called

[21:12] the non-financial asset values.

[21:16] So tangible capital assets,

[21:17] that's the book value of all your infrastructure,

[21:20] buildings, equipment, et cetera.

[21:22] So you started the year at 348 million,

[21:24] you added about 29 million in new capital,

[21:27] A couple of larger items were the NISQ Fire Station, Township Road 510 work, and then

[21:33] you did receive a variety of contributed assets from developers.

[21:37] So when you take over ownership of roads, water sewers, that developers have done.

[21:44] So, 29 million came in, annual amortization was 18 million, so that's how we're netting

[21:49] out from 340 to 350.

[21:53] A little bit of inventory, some prepaid expenses, so you add those up, $359, add in the net

[21:59] financial above there, 14 leaves you with here, what's called your Accumulated surplus,

[22:04] $374 million.

[22:05] So, in total, it changed the $1 million compared to last year, increase.

[22:12] So, I mean, the takeaway from this page is that you've operated, you have actually more

[22:17] cash than the year before, and your surpluses is roughly where it was before.

[22:21] So, you know, it's a healthy looking statement of financial position, for sure.

[22:25] There's a little section at the bottom down there that is new.

[22:28] That's the other financial standard that changed.

[22:31] So, some of your accumulated surpluses from operations and some is now from something called

[22:36] accumulated measurement losses.

[22:39] And so, this is related to investments.

[22:40] Again, the accounting standard changed.

[22:43] They want some investments recorded at fair market value instead of cost.

[22:47] So, if you have an investment in a GIC or a bond, we're going to keep recording it.

[22:51] at cost just like we always have if you are into some sort of mutual fund or in your case

[22:57] principal protected notes. You have a few of those with your CIBC account and those

[23:01] have to be recorded now at fair market value. So because the reason it's at fair market

[23:07] values because the ultimate return is not fixed like it is on a GIC or a bond. So that's

[23:14] the concept behind it. I'll leave that at that. Next page, a couple of comments on your

[23:20] So here we're thinking more about what actually happened at the county in 2023, we got the 2023 Actuals middle column compared to budget compared to last year.

[23:30] So top of the page again, we're looking at net municipal taxes 51.1 million, but a 9% increase over last year is 46.7.

[23:38] Most of that due to actual assessment growth that occurred in 2023.

[23:43] sales and user fees the bulk of that number with six and a half million dollars of that seven point nine is your water waste water fees and then a variety of other fees virtually from every department right so seven point nine transfers for government transfers for operating

[24:00] grants up to four point six a little bit more in public works related grants and also some wildfire grants that you received.

[24:08] And investment income is up to 2.8, so obviously rates have increased full year of a little

[24:13] bit higher rates, so it brought in more revenue.

[24:17] Developer agreements in levies and levies, so up about a million dollars, you did have

[24:22] one developer provide cash and lieu municipal reserve land, so that's the reason for the

[24:28] increase to 2.6.

[24:31] Other income, the biggest item in there is your NISQ and Ebonton Airport water-related

[24:36] fees.

[24:36] That's about $1.6 of that $2 million.

[24:39] And so those fees that increased in 2023.

[24:45] Variety of other items there are smaller amounts.

[24:47] Total revenue 74.3 million.

[24:50] And then we get into your list of expenses.

[24:52] Top of the list is public works surprisingly close

[24:55] to last $30.4 million.

[24:57] You spend $30 million and you can get within 100 grand each year.

[25:02] A budget and last year.

[25:04] Transit costs.

[25:05] Last year was a bit higher because you cost-shared on the actual bus purchase.

[25:11] Going down the list, general and in min, so 10.2 million increase over last year, variety

[25:17] of things, salaries, software costs.

[25:20] Every time that you change the allowance on your uncollectable receivables, that gets recorded

[25:25] in general and in min, so that was about a $400,000 swing in 2023.

[25:32] So, a couple of reasons why that went up.

[25:38] Fire, we've got 9.4, so again, salary position's added, salary increases, a lot of small

[25:44] equipment to supply type purchases going on in there, so 9.4 million there.

[25:50] Enforcement is up as the police funding model is increasing, so 2.5 for that.

[25:56] Disaster has the wildfire-related costs, up to $292.

[26:03] After that, we get into water, wastewater, solid waste, all those categories all increasing

[26:08] the top two, the water, the wastewater, basically additional repairs, the rate increase

[26:14] from the Alberta Capital Region Water Waste Water Commission is in that 3.5.

[26:20] The asset retirement obligation amount of 3 million that we talked about, that is included

[26:25] in the solid waste management expense, so that's why we're way up to 4.5 as that got recognized

[26:31] for the first time.

[26:36] Other items down the list. Towards the bottom there we've got increases

[26:40] in planning, agriculture, FCSS, all primarily salary related. And then the last item on

[26:47] the list is the City of LeDuke tax share agreement, so 3.3 for that. Total expenses, 83.8.

[26:56] So at that point we're in a loss of 9.5 million, but we always have to remember that the 83

[27:01] $13 million includes amortization of 18 million, so that is not a cash cost, that's an accounting entry to recognize the assets have been used.

[27:09] Just a question on protective services, if I may.

[27:12] You said that the wildfire costs are all under disaster, is that correct? 292?

[27:20] Some disaster and some in fire.

[27:23] Thank you.

[27:27] So nine and a half if we flip to the next page we finish off this statement of operations

[27:31] So to the nine and a half we always add a few other things

[27:35] So you'll see the contributed capital assets that I talked about those developer related items again

[27:40] This is not a cash item. This is us putting a value or management putting a value to to the different

[27:47] Infrastructure taken over from developers the road water waste water some land. So that's what's in that 7.3 million

[27:54] Government transfers are capital, are actual dollars, those are grants received and used

[27:59] for capital projects on roads and the purchase of fire engine, so 2.7 for that.

[28:07] So we add those, a few items up, you get 10 million and that pushes you into a small

[28:10] surplus, 5.19 for accounting purposes.

[28:16] So that's your operations and those are the main two pages of the statement.

[28:20] Maybe I'll just talk about this next page because it's brand new.

[28:23] This is the statement of remeasurement gains and losses, so this is where we're supposed

[28:27] to take care of any investment changes that are related to fair market value adjustments.

[28:34] They want, obviously, they want it separate from operations because it's not, you know,

[28:37] technically an operating item, not something that you would budget for.

[28:41] It's just something that happened within your investment portfolio.

[28:45] So you'll see 2022 had quite a difference between cost and fair market value and a lot of

[28:52] that was regained in 2023.

[28:55] So, just so you're aware that that statement is there.

[29:00] And I think as we're paging through,

[29:02] I don't really have any comments on the next few pages.

[29:06] We get into the accounting policies.

[29:08] The main new policy is on page 13,

[29:11] your asset retirement obligations.

[29:14] So it's standard wording and describing

[29:17] what I mentioned before that you're assessing assets

[29:20] and any kind of costs associated with cleaning them up.

[29:23] at the end, seen a variety of different things.

[29:27] We included in here as we've done our municipal audit work and your approach to how you

[29:32] went and assessed your assets, you know, it lines up with what others have done as

[29:36] well.

[29:39] Maybe I'll point out one of the notes, note number two, just so everybody's aware, taxes

[29:44] are receivable.

[29:45] I always want to point out the allowance, right?

[29:46] So the 2.3 is what was receivable from residents at the end of December.

[29:52] We have a $670,000 allowance on that for potential uncollectable amounts and then also in your other receivables

[30:00] The trade government, et cetera. We have a small allowance there of 141.

[30:14] Investments, I mean, here is where we have some details on the, you know, the fixed income securities that you have that we're carrying at cost. And then the principal protective notes that we're carrying at market value.

[30:35] Maybe of interest, note number nine deferred revenues. Just again, it gives you the details of the different grants. What you've received grants and offsite levies that you've received if you go to the far, far side of the far column.

[30:48] the 2023 amounts which just shows you what's left to spend on some of those levies and grants.

[30:55] And then right below there is the asset retirement obligation note so again just some comments on

[31:00] you know the the act that we're following and the standard change and then that the obligation has

[31:08] been recognized this year.

[31:15] Top of page 18 note number 11 so long-term debt just gives you a breakdown

[31:19] of what kind of debt you have, rate as a general tax, special levy supported,

[31:25] offstate levy supported those types of things, so 40.8 in total.

[31:34] Cumulated surplus, as

[31:40] we said, in total it's increased for $1 million,

[31:43] and it just details below there about your operating reserves, your capital reserves,

[31:49] amounts that went in and out of those during the year, and your ending balance

[31:52] is about $46.47 million compared to about $49 last year.

[32:06] Salary and benefits disclosure, standard disclosure, same as other years, for council.

[32:14] And I think I will leave my comments at that.

[32:16] I don't know if that raises any questions for anyone.

[32:21] Any further questions from council?

[32:28] And please understand I know Mr. Friesen, you do a lot of these, you speak to it so

[32:33] naturally and easily like it's reading a primer book in school for the rest of us that's

[32:39] a little bit more complicated but we believe that we have good as you said at the beginning

[32:46] in internal ways to manage what's happening with the money we do get to see financials

[32:53] every quarter now in our quarterly report we do get to approve all of the every time we move

[33:01] money into reserves and so we're comfortable that our budget hear it at not only the budget

[33:10] but the financial status of our county is in good hands. Would you agree with that? We're in a

[33:15] good financial. Yes you're in a good financial position for sure. Thank you. Thank you. Any further

[33:21] questions? Also Smith you usually have math questions.

[33:30] Just your recommendations and your auditing

[33:32] practices there's pretty typical year after year and I really don't see anything pointed out and again

[33:38] we have a long range plan that seems to again year after year appear on these statements as being

[33:43] very sound. Thank you for that report today.

[33:48] And do appreciate the explanations of the new areas

[33:53] even though the re-numeration of whatever that was around investment was still a little foggy for me

[33:59] as we as we explore it more I'm sure it'll become more clear.

[34:04] Not a GIC, not Guaranteed, so there's a liability.

[34:10] Oh.

[34:11] Just to add to that point, with a principal protected note, the principle that we invest

[34:16] is secure.

[34:18] So, so while this is showing a loss, the only way we would realize a loss is if we sold

[34:25] that asset on December 31st at that value.

[34:28] So our principle is protected.

[34:30] The intent is not to sell these assets early and take losses, but rather to hold them to the maturity.

[34:38] So while the accounting standard requires us to report the market value on December 31st,

[34:44] it's not our intent to be taking losses.

[34:48] We're in a solid cash position that we do not have to sell our investments to meet our cash obligations.

[34:55] So, I just wanted to highlight that because it can look, because on the report we presented at governance and priorities, we spoke about how we have a really positive additional revenue that we've realized because of our investment strategy.

[35:10] So, this looks different than what we talked about on April 2nd.

[35:14] So, I just wanted to make that comment.

[35:16] Thank you.

[35:16] Councillor Smith.

[35:18] Again, all of these findings are public.

[35:20] We've gone through, again, presented in public today, so I'd be prepared to move the recommendation that Council approve the following 2023 financial year in documentation, which is the 2023 audited financial statements and the 2023 accumulated surplus schedule.

[35:37] Okay, thank you. We have a motion on the floor. I will open the floor up for comments, questions or debate on the motion.

[35:47] I am seeing none. I will call the question all in favor.

[35:51] Thank you very much for your work. Thank you very much to our financial department for all the work that must go into a audit of this magnitude.

[36:00] We really appreciate your eyes on the money of our residents and businesses. Thank you.

[36:08] All right with that we will go to 6a which is a public hearing so excuse me it is 205 at 205 I will open our public hearing

[36:25] My name is Mayor Blanco and I'll share our public hearing all questions and comments will be directed through myself

[36:32] itself. Council is here to listen to the information presented and make a decision on the

[36:38] matter that is before the hearing. And that matter is by law number 0324 second reading

[36:44] to adopt the municipal development plan and repeal by law number 08-19. This is a formal

[36:52] hearing and not a debate. Everyone wishing to speak who has pre-registered will be given

[36:59] an opportunity to speak once to the matter as called on by myself the chair. Each presenter

[37:05] must state their full name, address, their interest in the matter, and whether they are

[37:10] in support or not support. Individuals who do not identify themselves will not be given

[37:17] an opportunity to speak. We're also requesting that you provide your name and address on the

[37:22] paper provided at the back.

[37:25] Presenters are asked to stay within a five minute time limit and we do provide a timer

[37:31] on presentation and are encouraged when speaking to keep the presentation to the point

[37:36] and refrain from restating points raised by previous speakers if possible.

[37:41] Again, this is a presentation. It is not a question and answer and it is not again a debate.

[37:48] If new presentation materials are provided, you may be required to email a copy to our legislative coordinator and with that, I will call on Mr. Evans to introduce the subject of the hearing. Mr. Evans, the floor is yours.

[38:03] Thank you Madam Chair.

[38:06] As mentioned, this report is relating to public hearing and potential second reading

[38:13] for the revised municipal development plan.

[38:17] I have a presentation to go through just with regards to the report itself, and then we

[38:22] also have a summary of some of the comments and responses that we've received from advertising

[38:29] in the referral.

[38:31] So with regards to the report itself, just to revisit the project, the project itself was

[38:42] informed by input received from Council in 2023, updates to provincial legislation regulations,

[38:52] new plans and studies approved by the region, particularly the regional agriculture master

[38:58] plan approved by the regional board. New study strategies and plans adopted by the county

[39:05] and feedback received from the public at open houses.

[39:11] So with regards to those open houses,

[39:13] we did hold three of them back in November on the 20th, 21st and 22nd. Those were in

[39:19] early view and disrupt and tell for real respectively. And at those open houses we just provided

[39:27] provided an overview of the project, what the proposed revisions were, and then gathered

[39:32] feedback from the participants.

[39:37] So that feedback has been compiled into what we heard

[39:40] report that is attached to the report on your agenda. And where possible, we've considered

[39:46] and reflected that feedback in the proposed revised MDP.

[39:54] It's just a brief overview of what

[39:56] some of those revisions were. We revised policy relating to home-based businesses, indicating

[40:02] that it shall be secondary to the established president principle, residential use of the

[40:08] property, and shall not detract from the rural or residential character in this surrounding

[40:14] area. That language was a little softer in the previous version. We added an objective around

[40:23] water-shed systems where we are going to strive for a no-net loss of wetlands

[40:28] were possible and also to ensure that wetlands are incorporated into

[40:33] statutory plans. We've also modified the description of new

[40:37] syrup to clarify that residential, commercial and institutional uses should be

[40:42] located in the core with light industrial around the periphery.

[40:50] With regards to

[40:51] other revisions to the plan in the rural area we've reduced the number of

[40:56] agricultural areas from 4 to 2.

[41:00] We've provided that residential subdivision may be considered in the primary agricultural

[41:07] area.

[41:08] We've added a criteria by subdivision type.

[41:15] We've clarified that employment growth and business development may be considered in

[41:22] agricultural areas where it's not considered prime and we've added that one

[41:27] subdivision may be considered in the country residential area prior to the

[41:32] preparation of an ASP.

[41:37] So this is just an overview of what the rural area looks

[41:40] like in the current municipal development plan. You'll see there that there are

[41:46] four agricultural areas, ABC and D, relating to Northwest Southeast,

[41:54] in the

[41:55] proposed revisions that is reduced to two, so they relate quite closely to lands that

[42:03] are identified as prime agricultural lands in the regional agricultural master plan,

[42:10] and those were identified by using a tool called Lisa, which is a land evaluation and

[42:16] site assessment.

[42:18] So in the identification of prime agricultural lands, they did consider both soil quality

[42:24] and the suitability of those lands for agricultural uses.

[42:31] With regards to the NISQ area, oh, it's not screwing anymore.

[42:36] With regards to the NISQ area, we have rebranded that area from the NISQ area to the greater

[42:42] NISQ area.

[42:43] It just better reflects the centrality of NISQ within the area, but also recognizes some

[42:49] of the other portions.

[42:50] So NISQ area, the greater NISQ area includes NISQ itself, the East Vistas, the Vistas country

[42:58] residential subdivisions and the Emmets and International Airport.

[43:07] So some of the other key revisions to the MDP include the addition of major employment

[43:12] area adjacent to the airport.

[43:15] That area was previously identified in the City of Laduc, Laduc County, Interminisable Development

[43:20] Plan.

[43:21] With the repeal of that plan, we've now incorporated it right into our own municipal development

[43:26] plan.

[43:28] So it's not new, it's just new to this plan.

[43:31] We've updated the referral requirements with adjacent municipalities where we don't have an intermeasible development plan, we've updated definitions and maps and we've clarified that the vistas subdivisions, the country residential subdivisions east of NISQ are expected to remain and will be supported for the duration of the plan.

[43:57] This is the grader and rescue area map within the proposed

[44:03] MDP. You can see here the identification of the major employment area,

[44:09] the existing country residential areas, the urban center, and the

[44:12] Emton International Airport. And this is the land here that was previously identified

[44:17] in the IDP with City of Lidook. So an overview of some of the other changes to

[44:24] map. This is the Recreation Open Space and Community Assets map. It's been updated to reflect

[44:31] both the T, the drafts, transportation master plan, and the Recreation Open Space Master

[44:39] Plan.

[44:42] Transportation infrastructure map has also been updated. You'll notice updated roadway

[44:50] classifications, interchange in intersection areas, major ones. There's also a conceptual

[44:58] alignment of the future.

[45:00] There are 170th Street Highway 2, 2A corridor, and that's just identifying an area where it will go generally. The exact area needs to be refined through future study.

[45:17] The Interminisable Development Plans and Collaboration Map has also been updated. It's been updated to reflect the repeal of the City of Lidook, Lidook County Interminisable Development Plan, as well as RIDPs with the County of Otasco and Otasco.

[45:33] 20 county, which have both been repealed since the adoption of the municipal development

[45:39] plan. We've also added the intramisable development plans with Warburg, Thoriz B. Calmar,

[45:47] and the sub-rivillages, which have been adopted since the original adoption of the MDV.

[45:55] So with regards to process, we are currently here today with the public hearing and potential

[46:02] consideration of second reading. We've recommended adoption subject to feedback for the public hearing

[46:13] and we have received some feedback and so I'm just going to pass it to Ada and Ada will give you

[46:20] a brief summary of what that feedback has been.

[46:31] Good afternoon, Madam Chair and Council. This presentation

[46:34] is regarding the referral responses when we refer the MDP to various municipalities

[46:40] and organizations.

[46:44] So these are the municipalities and organizations who provided no concerns

[46:49] with the MDP, which includes City of Beaumont, Brasow County, Parkland, Stretcona, Stony

[46:55] Plain. Epic's utilities tell us communications so they have no concerns and comments on the

[47:02] update of the MDP.

[47:07] We received a very detailed response from the City of Ladouk, and they mentioned four

[47:13] policy areas where they want some clarifications and they have some comments.

[47:18] The four policy areas is a greater NISQ area expansion.

[47:24] There is a policy provision in the MDP that when the greater NISQ area expansion is going

[47:29] to take place what will happen. So they want some language change around that greater

[47:35] misguided expansion policy, which is policy 3.2.0.8A. And they also like if you see the current

[47:46] policy in the proposed MDP states that the proposed development is contiguous with existing

[47:51] built areas. So obviously it is like the look county MDP, but they want this wording to

[47:58] be added which says in purple in Ladoo County. So that's they want to add. Second thing they

[48:05] want another policy, a subsection to be added to 3.2.0.8, which means that in the event that the

[48:14] county wants to expand the greater NISQ area, they want that counties should require some sort of

[48:21] an impact study to see that how this expansion of the greater NISQ area will have impact on surround

[48:28] surrounding municipalities.

[48:32] We do have a map for transportation.

[48:36] So on the map and the transportation map,

[48:39] they identified that 65th Avenue and Spine Road

[48:44] both are of same classification.

[48:47] And they want that the county map should

[48:52] use the same colors for Spine Road and 65th Avenue,

[48:56] which they consider arterial. While in the proposed MDP map, a portion of it is within the city,

[49:05] but once you go out from the city, it becomes a free way. So that they want some amendment to

[49:11] the transportation map.

[49:16] They also want some clarification on cost sharing around boundary road

[49:21] construction. So although our MDP have a whole chapter on collaboration and

[49:27] cost sharing but they want some language to be added to the to road construction

[49:33] and cost sharing on the boundary roads. So in this map madam chair you can see

[49:40] that where that arrow like points it has black color and then it has this green

[49:48] which going off 170 feet, although this black portion of it is within the city of Laduk jurisdiction.

[49:58] So it's beyond our jurisdiction, like the road is within there, but they want that both those roads

[50:04] like Spine Road and this road should be represented in the same color as arterial classification.

[50:14] They also mentioned the next idea.

[50:21] They also want some clarification on the water policy.

[50:25] So policy 8.2.1 of them DP talks about water.

[50:30] And there is a policy 8.2.1.1 which says that development in the county

[50:35] shall connect to the municipal water system where available.

[50:39] So, one of the comment was that municipal is not defined in the proposed MDP, but it's

[50:45] presumed that municipal means Ladoo County, where the water service is being provided by

[50:52] the Capital Region Commission, so they want the rationale and the intent of this policy

[50:58] that do the county promotes discouraged wells and do they want people to hook up to the

[51:05] commission water and some sort of a clarification on that.

[51:12] Then the energy corridor, another comment which we received about energy corridor 8.2.6.

[51:20] So on this map, there was the benefits of this corridor alignment.

[51:26] There is a transmission line east of the city of Ladouk and south of the city.

[51:31] It will show up in the next map.

[51:34] So, on the east side of the city and south side, there is a, there is a, this transmission

[51:42] potential corridor transmission.

[51:45] They want some side of a conceptual that wording being used by the county.

[51:52] I look into the specific subject, this map is representative of the Edmonton Metropolitan

[51:58] Regional Growth Plan.

[51:59] And back in 2016, there was a master plan by these companies, like Alta Link,

[52:10] Etko, Appcore, and they created this map and the intent was to hook up this electricity power transmission to the town of Calmar through this loop.

[52:22] group. Some of that loop goes into the city. So maybe they want some clarification on

[52:28] that. That way we deem consider this loop and this map as a conceptual rather than

[52:37] now again this is like being taken out from Edmonton Metropolitan Growth Plan so I'm not sure

[52:44] that what what we can do about this. And they also want MDP timeline that we

[52:53] communicate the timeline with them because they want really to contribute to

[52:57] the preparation of the MDP in the county. So that's their comment. We also

[53:04] received comments from a resident about four comments about MDP. First is

[53:12] As basically, the resident is being alarmed that this proposed NDP will allow employment

[53:20] and business uses in area B. So one of the apprehension is that it may trigger more

[53:26] employment in area B. The second comment was clarity in subdivision policies. They think

[53:32] that subdivision policies are not very clear. Third is clarity in employment uses is required

[53:39] and forth as funding should be dedicated to support policies related to historic sites.

[53:45] So those are the comments which we received.

[53:48] Although I would mention that area B where the employment uses are being allowed,

[53:56] it's not very simple. There is a very hard test that if someone wants to have employment set up in area B,

[54:03] They have to demonstrate that why it cannot be settled in NISQR, local employment areas

[54:10] are in hamlets or agriculture hub.

[54:13] So second is that it will be going to low capability land and third like it should not impact

[54:19] current agriculture operations so that's the rationale.

[54:24] And then we received detailed comments from a resident about trail system, especially with

[54:31] the Nas-Sunders Lake trail.

[54:35] So we have a Map 7.

[54:37] And the resident is saying that our Map 7

[54:41] is not showing alignment with the previously approved plans,

[54:44] like the Sanders Lake Local Area Structure Plan.

[54:49] The resident also mentioned that it is not aligned with the TMP.

[54:53] The previous MDP did not show most of the trails now included.

[54:57] So, that is one of the comment, one of the comment is that this map 7, which is proposed

[55:06] in the NDP, should be revised to be aligned with the previously approved plans.

[55:13] And lack of consistency between approved and potential revisions should be addressed.

[55:19] So I look into this trail system, the thing is that in 2023, the county approved recreational

[55:27] master plan, and that master plan showing some potential projects for future.

[55:34] And this trail system, the Sunders Lake, which will ultimately connect to the Black

[55:38] Mud Creek, that's on one of the projects, but it is for a long term, like six to fifteen

[55:44] years.

[55:46] Second thing is, this is only conceptual, like we are, the MDP is not showing exactly where

[55:51] the trail will go, because it will depend on the top of the bank, some technical details

[55:57] about slope and erosion and the Sunday's Lake local area structure plane talks about

[56:05] this will be considered at the time of outline plan and subdivision. When those take place then

[56:10] it will be determined that where the trail will be connecting to the future trails. Next slide.

[56:18] We received comments from Alberta Health Services and most of these comments were on all those

[56:24] topics like safe drinking water, solid waste, natural resource, urban agriculture, and

[56:30] a nutshell, they support the MDP, but one of the things which I got from their comments

[56:35] is that they want to be involved in future subdivision or development applications or area

[56:40] structure plans regarding these issues, but they overall support the proposed MDP.

[56:50] Social media comments, we received some social media comments, some comments were not relevant

[56:55] to the policies of the MDP. There were some apprehensions about 15-minute cities.

[57:02] There is one comment that county is not listening to people and businesses.

[57:06] Farmlands will be used for windmills and solar farms, so those are some of the concerns

[57:10] the residents mentioned. Reference to a section 3.5.2, which is home-based business, so the policy says

[57:18] that it will reduce reliance on cars, so that is being taken out of that context.

[57:25] timing of public hearing is not appropriate because it happens during the day and most

[57:30] of the people are working, so one of the comment. There is one optimism, positive comment

[57:36] which was that the plan will show the industrial growth, slow down the industrial growth and

[57:43] farmland. So those are the comments which we received. Thank you, Madam Chair.

[57:48] Thank you. Thank you very much.

[57:50] Sorry, Madam Chair. I was just going to add one final comment that we have also had an initial

[57:55] for a preliminary review with the Edmonton-Mitch-Poltson region board.

[57:59] They suggest one clarification around the major employment area, but it is something that

[58:04] we can address quite easily.

[58:06] Okay.

[58:06] Thank you very much.

[58:08] Thank you for the presentation.

[58:11] Thank you for the summary of the feedback you received as well as how you address the

[58:17] feedback you've received so far.

[58:19] I will open the floor for any questions to administration at this time.

[58:26] Councillor Lewis.

[58:28] Thank you very much.

[58:29] Can you tell me what the benefits are from going from four agricultural zones down to

[58:33] two are?

[58:36] Madam Chair, that revision was undertaken primarily in response to the regional agricultural

[58:42] master plan adopted by the region.

[58:45] That plan does identify prime and non-prime agricultural lands within the amateur metropolitan

[58:53] region as a whole.

[58:56] And while those areas did broadly align with the four agricultural areas that we had

[59:02] previously, this reduction in areas simplifies the policy context for our residents and more

[59:12] are closely aligned to the regional and your cultural master plan.

[59:16] Thank you very much.

[59:19] Go ahead, Councillor Bertie, for sure.

[59:22] Just to address some of the notes that you guys heard on social media.

[59:26] So first and foremost, I want to appreciate your guys' time and effort to hold these open

[59:30] houses to the public and all doing so with our internal resources versus going out to external

[59:36] consult and spending more money, et cetera. So we were able to do everything in-house and

[59:40] and there was kind of a closer connection between the planning department and the public,

[59:44] and it did all happen evenings and weekends, so we were able to get the most direct feedback

[59:50] in as many locations as possible. It's just a note, and thank you for your help there.

[59:56] I have a, my questions all.

[1:00:00] I actually center around the feedback that we've got from the city of Ladouque. And I appreciate their feedback. I guess my question is, it's feedback that we need to consider. And I'm not sure that we need to do an impact study to, including migration. I'm not even sure what that meant. I think it was a suggestion. I don't think, yes, if you could go back. Thank you. Yep.

[1:00:31] I

[1:00:34] think it's, you know, it's a bit of wordsmithing to add in LaDuke County when we talk about contiguous, I don't mind that, that's a small, I'm okay with that.

[1:00:42] I'm actually not okay with the impact study on adjacent municipalities, consultation and mitigation.

[1:00:51] Do we do that currently when we do any kind of expansion and do other municipalities do that, Mr. Evans?

[1:00:58] Madam Chair, I was going to come back and suggest a modification to our recommendation

[1:01:03] that we defer second reading so that we can address some of these comments.

[1:01:08] But with regards to these specific comments, yeah, so they'll be addressed in the plan

[1:01:16] prior to bringing them back for a expansion of the NISC area would also require an amendment

[1:01:23] to the municipal development plan itself.

[1:01:25] And there are legislative requirements for us to collaborate with our neighboring municipalities in the event of municipal development.

[1:01:34] One's within without an IDP, correct?

[1:01:38] Correct, well both but yes.

[1:01:43] So I think we would suggest that it's probably baked into that process.

[1:01:48] Again, we would go back and have a closer look at it.

[1:01:51] And just with regards to the first area, I think there's we would have some concern about adding in the wording there, it just it relates to a principle of the municipal development plan that we encourage collaboration with our neighboring municipalities, and we would potentially have some concern that this wording might be inconsistent with that principle.

[1:02:21] Thank you.

[1:02:22] If you just go through these, so I just found it very interesting.

[1:02:25] They were so detailed.

[1:02:26] Just if you could walk through the next bunch.

[1:02:29] Yeah.

[1:02:31] Madam Chair, I just want to read exact words so it clarifies further than this.

[1:02:38] The fourth point which they want to add is a fourth criteria, added SD, which requires

[1:02:44] There's impacts to adjacent municipalities be considered in consultation and mitigation

[1:02:50] measures implemented.

[1:02:52] So it's not impact study, but what they say is that impacts be considered in consultation.

[1:02:58] So I don't know how one can consider impacts without an impact study.

[1:03:03] And I'm hearing from Mr. Evans that that would be if we were looking at the expansion, then

[1:03:07] we would do the change to the MDP and at that point we would put that language in.

[1:03:11] Is that what I'm hearing?

[1:03:12] That's correct.

[1:03:13] Okay. The roads do we consider the roads arterial? I hear that yes. So this one is probably

[1:03:23] not a concern to us. It's relating only to that area of 65th Avenue that is within the city

[1:03:30] of Ladouk and so of course we would reflect the meet regional matter. It is not our road if it's in

[1:03:34] the city of Lidouc, correct.

[1:03:39] Is it appropriate to add cost-sharing bond? Is that not an agreement

[1:03:43] we make with development about cost-sharing? It's not an MDP piece, is it?

[1:03:49] Again, we'll go back and look at these in more detail. The MDP does speak at some length

[1:03:54] about our intent to explore cost-sharing and benefit-sharing with adjacent municipalities.

[1:04:00] I think it's just a matter of good to put out there that the new county does have 16 adjacent municipalities.

[1:04:12] And so we don't go through our specific priorities with each one of them.

[1:04:17] Unless we have an inter- municipal development plan, which would be the appropriate place for us to have specific inter- municipal.

[1:04:23] Thank you. And my only other one was around, you know, the municipal water system that was that next piece.

[1:04:37] Right. And their issue was around municipal water system. Was that correct that that term.

[1:04:42] That's correct. So they're just looking for clarification on our intent and we'll have that discussion.

[1:04:47] All right. Thank you. Those are my questions. Just a comment. I realize and there was a social media comment that you shared about land being used for wind farms and solar farms.

[1:04:57] Just a reminder that that's not at all within the ability of Ladut County to approve those. That is a Alberta Utility Commission approval.

[1:05:08] and we would be working with proponents and being able to, now I understand, sit on hearings with standing and be able to share where we believe they need to be as opposed to just the proponents.

[1:05:21] I just wanted to make a comment on that. Any other questions? Councillor Euse.

[1:05:25] Thank you. The comments from the City of LaDue, what would be the process at this point? You would say, I remember you saying something about referring it back to administration.

[1:05:36] So we'd be recommending that upon the close of the public hearing that second reading be deferred so the process would be that administration would take the comments received both through the advertisement and referral and presented here today in the public hearing and we would address those in the MDP and bring it back for second reading for council's consideration.

[1:06:00] Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions before I ask our administration to step back? I am seeing none. So thank you very much gentlemen. You can step back.

[1:06:14] Mr. Coleman, they shared the most relevant correspondence we received. Is that correct or we had more?

[1:06:23] No additional correspondence manager. Thank you very much. Ms. Gavin, we did have a registered

[1:06:28] speaker that withdrew. Do we have any other registered speakers? Okay. We have no registered

[1:06:34] speakers, but if there's someone who is in the chamber wishing to speak, you can come forward,

[1:06:40] state your name and your address, whether you're for or against and fill out the form, so we have your

[1:06:45] name recorded.

[1:06:49] I will call the second time. Anyone in the council chambers who wishes to speak

[1:06:54] at this public hearing for or against or has information they believe council needs to consider.

[1:07:01] Step forward now.

[1:07:04] I will call a third time. No one is stepping forward. Is there anything

[1:07:12] else we need? Actually I'll ask Mr. Evans to come forward again. Thank you.

[1:07:18] And if you could

[1:07:19] just clarify our next steps before we close the public hearing.

[1:07:28] Thank you Madam Chair.

[1:07:31] The recommendation would be as per the option presented in your agenda package.

[1:07:37] So administration would recommend that following the public hearing that County Council defer

[1:07:42] a second reading of BILA0324 to allow for feedback provided at the public hearing to be

[1:07:49] addressed in the draft MDP.

[1:07:52] And Mr. Evans, do we have an idea of a timeline on that?

[1:07:57] We don't believe that any of the feedback will require structural changes to the MDP.

[1:08:06] These are largely clarifications that we can provide within the MDP itself and so we'll

[1:08:11] be looking to schedule second reading at the next available agenda.

[1:08:18] And at that time those changes would be highlighted for council to clearly understand the intent

[1:08:24] and how they were put in. Correct.

[1:08:26] That's correct. Thank you very much.

[1:08:29] With that, I'm going to close the public hearing.

[1:08:34] It's 237.

[1:08:36] That was said with confidence.

[1:08:38] 237 and I will open up the floor for debate by council on the recommendations.

[1:08:46] Councillor Smith.

[1:08:48] Definitely be in support of the motion as we have gone through a long process of listening to the public,

[1:08:54] listening to municipalities and it looks like we need to continue to hear those comments

[1:08:59] and let administration bring back some changes that would probably address those concerns.

[1:09:06] So I would be in support of that today, that motion.

[1:09:10] Are you putting that motion on the floor?

[1:09:12] I can put that motion on the floor, yes.

[1:09:16] That we defer second reading to by law 0, 3, 2, 4 to allow for feedback providing,

[1:09:22] provided at the public hearing to be addressed in the draft M.D.P. Thank you.

[1:09:28] Motion's on the floor. Any comments, questions or debates?

[1:09:35] I just have a question

[1:09:36] related to the significant comments from the City of Laduk. Could some of those

[1:09:42] have been dealt with if we would have maintained our IDP with the City of Laduk?

[1:09:48] Madam Chair, comments relating to the classification identification and construction of infrastructure within a intermeasible development plan area is generally addressed by an intermeasible development plan.

[1:10:11] So we could have dealt with that had Laduk city not chosen to end the IDP that we had shared with them correct.

[1:10:22] That's correct madam chair.

[1:10:24] All right, just good to know.

[1:10:26] Motion on the floor and thank you Councillor Smith for your wise words about during this process we have listened to our public.

[1:10:35] We have listened to other municipalities, we have some other feedback that we can perhaps put in to clarify the document, make it easier to use and be respectful of what we've heard so I will support that motion as well.

[1:10:51] Looking for any other comments?

[1:10:54] I am seeing none. I will call the question all in favor.

[1:10:57] that is unanimous. Thank you very much. Thank you for your work on that and we look forward to

[1:11:04] the next rendition.

[1:11:09] Thank you very much and with that I will be adjourning our meeting at 240 p.m.

[1:11:15] We are adjourned. Thank you for all who joined us today. Have a great afternoon.

Council meeting

Agenda

Transcript