[9:45] Start with other perks.

[9:49] » Okay,

[9:53] » getting water.

[9:56] Uh good evening everyone and welcome to Perthy's Council on this first day of

[10:01] September. I'd like to call our meeting to order. Uh before we get into our

[10:06] agenda, we do have a presentation tonight and I'd like uh Bill Hunter to

[10:10] come to the front.

[10:20] » Whoops. Sorry. >> Okay.

[10:22] » Sorry. You need to >> No, I might. [laughter]

[10:27] » I lost my >> Oh, you lost your

[10:28] » Oh my goodness. >> Anyway, tonight we're here to honor

[10:33] Bill. He has a long service of 25 years in the fire department and we're so

[10:39] lucky 12 of those years have been here. So, in sincere appreciation of your 25

[10:44] years of courageous and dedicated service to the residents of Ontario,

[10:48] protecting their lives and property from the fire. And so behalf of uh council

[10:52] and staff, we congratulate you and thank you for all that you do.

[10:56] » Thank you very much. >> Welcome.

[11:00] » And we have a little pin for you. >> Thank you.

[11:03] » And a medal. >> Thank you.

[11:05] » And a certificate. >> Yeah. The clerk's been doing some work

[11:08] behind our back. [laughter]

[11:11] » No, I don't. It's been a pleasure.

[11:46] Okay. Uh before we do our moment of reflection, I also would I'd like to

[11:51] take a minute to acknowledge the passing of Fred Nectto, a longtime Ellis

[11:55] resident. Fred passed away on August the 27th. Fred served as both deputy reeve

[12:01] from 1977 to 1980 and Reeve of Ellis Township from 1981 to 1985.

[12:08] Fred took great pride in his community and was committed to municipal service.

[12:13] His contributions to local government and his dedication to the community will

[12:17] be remembered. In honor of his life and service to Perth East, flags will remain

[12:22] lowered at municipal facilities until the day of his memorial service. Please

[12:26] remember the Neto family in your moment of reflection.

[12:40] Thank you. Now we'll move on to confirmation of the

[12:44] agenda and Ashley has a couple additions for us.

[12:48] » Okay. Thanks Mary. So there is two additions that were miss being uploaded

[12:53] in the agenda. So the first one is item number 6.2.2

[12:57] from Dietrich Engineering Limited regarding the lit municipal drain report

[13:01] 2026 and the second item is 6.2.3 um also by Dietrich Engineering Limited

[13:07] for the Moch Municipal Drain 2026 report.

[13:13] » Okay, thank you. So, we have a motion that says that the

[13:18] um that the agenda as prepared for September 1, 2026 meeting of council of

[13:23] the township of Perth East be approved as amended. Moved by Jerry, second by

[13:28] Amanda. All in favor? Carried. If you have interest council, you can disclose

[13:34] that now or as our meeting goes along. Under consent agenda, we have 11 items.

[13:39] Is there anything anyone has questions on or would like pulled?

[13:46] Nope. Okay. We do have a motion that says items 5.1.1

[13:52] to 5.1.11 as set out in consent agenda for the September 1, 2026 regular

[13:58] meeting of council be received for information and that the minutes of

[14:02] August 11, 2026 regular council meeting be adopted. Moved by Bob, second by

[14:08] Andrew. All in favor? Carried. Okay,

[14:15] we now move to presentations. We have no public presentations. Under other

[14:20] presentations, we do have three. The first one is uh Ben Lefort from the

[14:25] Ontario Federation of Agriculture and he's going to talk about the fiscal

[14:28] impact of farmland on Ontario municipalities and Ben is joining us on

[14:33] Zoom.

[14:36] » Good evening. >> Good evening and welcome. and the floor.

[14:41] » Thank you very much. Okay. Um just see if I can share my

[14:46] screen or if the presentation comes up on the uh screen here. I'm not quite

[14:50] sure if the procedure.

[14:57] Let me see. Just try and >> you should be able to

[14:59] » Oh, there we go. I do have it now. Yes. Excellent.

[15:04] Okay. So, thank you again uh so much for

[15:08] having me here today. Um, as [clears throat] mentioned, my name is

[15:11] Ben Leaffort. I'm a senior economist with the Ontario Federation of

[15:16] Agriculture and [snorts] uh happy to share with you today uh some results of

[15:21] research we've done in the past and um some policy implications um of which I

[15:28] think uh uh will be quite relevant to to the work of Perth East Municipality. So,

[15:35] uh, we've done several of these types of reports in the past which aim to look at

[15:42] answering the question, you know, what impact does farmland have on municipal

[15:47] budgets? Um, we've done a number of case studies through these cost of community

[15:53] services studies. And really, these were studies where [clears throat] we

[15:56] partnered with municipalities that were interested in answering that same

[16:00] question. And we worked, pardon me, with uh

[16:05] municipal staff [clears throat] to gather all, you know, the uh uh

[16:10] financial documents, year-end reports of each department within the municipality

[16:15] and try best we could to allocate the revenues and expenditures of the

[16:19] municipality to four different land use categories of uh farmland, residential,

[16:24] commercial, industrial um uh properties and see uh which uh what the results for

[16:31] in terms of the expenses and revenues associated with each. Uh I'll move

[16:36] through some of these slides more quickly. Some of this work has been done

[16:39] quite in the past about seven or eight years ago.

[16:43] Um the main finding here was uh similar to what results were in in studies we

[16:48] saw in the US which is often that uh kind of non-residential properties

[16:53] commercial industrial and farm uh brought in more revenue than they

[16:57] consumed worth of expenses from the municipality. So this right here is the

[17:02] average results we saw from the US studies with that red line there being

[17:06] kind of the break even point if you will where expenses equal revenue. Um we

[17:11] wanted to then um update those to see does this uh hold for um Ontario

[17:19] municipal um financial arrangements in uh different states in the US is quite

[17:23] different from what we have here in in Ontario. Um and these are some of the

[17:27] results of the the previous um US studies I mentioned which we looked at

[17:32] before uh just to show you how much how varying the results can be. These are

[17:37] some of the results of uh state of Georgia done quite a number of these

[17:41] studies in the early 2000s. >> Ben uh you're the slides aren't moving.

[17:47] I don't know if you >> they're not moving. No.

[17:49] » Okay.

[17:52] » All right. Can you see them here? like in this way.

[17:54] » We can see the >> There we go.

[17:56] » There we go. Yep. >> Okay. I'll just keep it down here for

[17:59] the this I won't go into full presentation mode just for the sake of

[18:03] uh simplicity here. >> Sorry. So, you probably were wondering

[18:06] what I was talking about that whole time there. Okay. [snorts] I'll I'll pick it

[18:10] back up and I'll I'll jump more into the the newer study that we uh we were

[18:15] looking at because these case studies we were doing and we did a number of them.

[18:18] We did studies in BAM, Mr. Mapleton, Lannarch County, Zora Township and

[18:23] Prince Edward County. Uh, and the results, as I mentioned, they were

[18:26] similar to what we saw in the US. But those types of case studies have uh, uh,

[18:32] pretty big limitations. One being it gives average results. It can't tell you

[18:38] what is the impact of, you know, putting one additional housing unit in a

[18:42] municipality. It says here's the average of all the houses. Uh, it's subjective

[18:46] by nature. we were working directly with municipal staff to come up with these

[18:49] allocations. Um, so by the very nature of that, it's there's some subjectivity

[18:54] to it and it's static. What we were looking at was one municipality in one

[18:58] year. So when we did BAM, it was uh the results for BAM in the year 2016, I

[19:03] believe, right? Doesn't necessarily mean that's what the results for BAM were in

[19:06] the year 2017 or for like Malhide is similar, you know, another municipality

[19:11] in Alen County of the same year. So we uh wanted to uh improve this. We

[19:18] found a study that was done by economists in uh the University of

[19:22] Florida uh that had looked at a way of of compiling the kind of statewide

[19:27] municipal data and looking at how the impact of removing uh farmland. So when

[19:33] you you lose farmland to development, what impact did that have on on

[19:37] municipal budgets? So their study finding in uh Florida again was similar

[19:42] to what they found in in the other studies which is when they remove

[19:45] farmland it actually had a negative impact on municipal budgets implying

[19:49] that having farmland is a positive on municipal budgets. Uh so we wanted to to

[19:55] again adapt this for Ontario. What is the what does the data say here for

[19:58] Ontario? So I gathered um for any municipality uh that had um uh farm area

[20:06] score which meaning like uh of 10% or more meaning of the land base in the

[20:11] municipality 10% at least of that is in farmland. We included all those uh in

[20:16] the study. We obviously didn't want to include like city of Toronto in the

[20:18] study that would throw everything off. And we uh then built a model based on

[20:23] what we saw in the Florida study which which measured that. So when you look at

[20:26] the percentage of the county's total land mass that's in farming when that

[20:30] changes how does the municipality's revenues and the municipalities uh

[20:35] expenses how does that change? Um, so what we found was, uh, looking at this

[20:42] over a, uh, 15-year period, a 1% decrease in in in farmland share,

[20:48] meaning a 1% reduction in the amount of farmland in the municipality was

[20:53] associated with a 0.55% decrease in revenue and a 0.51%

[21:00] in uh, decrease in expenses. So what that's saying is when you're losing

[21:04] farmland, you're losing uh more revenue than you are saving and and servicing of

[21:09] of the land. um revenues on average when you when a municipality lost 1% of their

[21:17] um uh farm uh the farmland in their county uh revenues decreased by 1.36

[21:25] million uh and sorry and again this is through an average throughout all of all

[21:29] of Ontario and uh expenses decreased by 1.1 so there's actually uh the the

[21:36] operating surplus of the municipality decreased by over $200,000 for every 1%

[21:41] loss of farmland. So losing farmland um was associated with a reduction and

[21:48] smaller uh budget surplus and in in the scenario where a municipality uh did not

[21:52] lose in in a given year but that kind of um backs up and I I know we're quick on

[21:58] time and actually the main point I want to make here is at the end in the policy

[22:01] piece here. So um on the the main takeaway there is that we found

[22:05] consistent evidence that uh farmland um is a net positive on on uh municipal

[22:11] budgets um which leaves some of the policy pieces. A good implication of

[22:16] that is that you know there's a lot of good reasons to want to protect

[22:18] farmland. We hope this is provides an additional reason which is there's a

[22:22] fiscal benefit of protecting farmland that developing it into say housing uh

[22:27] may bring in more revenue but will certainly also bring in more expenses to

[22:30] service the new housing. Uh and that's the main point on the farmland

[22:35] protection piece is something we've tied to our our positions on development

[22:38] charges which is we believe uh farm buildings, new barns and whatnot should

[22:42] be exempt from development charges because that is for growth related

[22:46] infrastructure. uh we are happy to see that threearters

[22:49] of municipalities in Ontario including Perthies so thank you choose to exempt

[22:54] uh farms from their development charge bylaws and I think for the same reason

[22:58] that we we point out here now the big point here that I think from municipal

[23:03] perspective that's most interesting is when you look at the results we have for

[23:08] these studies why do we get a result where farmland is

[23:13] a net positive two reasons and it's not ne One of them is uh municipalities over

[23:20] the last 15 to 20 years have had to rely on an increasing share of their revenue

[23:24] from property tax while at the same time firearm assessments uh the impact

[23:30] assessments and therefore their share of the property taxes have gone up

[23:33] significantly. Uh so if we look here even in just looking at numbers in in

[23:38] Perth East and in 2010 18% of uh tax revenue came from farm properties in

[23:45] 2024 that was up to nearly 30%. So that's one portion is is your um

[23:52] increasing share of municipal revenues coming from property tax and and a

[23:56] bigger share of that's coming from farmland.

[23:59] But the other point of that is what are the services that we by we I mean the

[24:04] province um are asking municipalities to deliver and in many ways those are

[24:10] becoming more disconnected from property tax as a revenue source a lot more into

[24:16] um social uh housing and healthcare and a whole bunch of social services and

[24:21] people's services that have increased is a significant portion of uh of municipal

[24:28] budgets. And the third thing for a small rural

[24:32] municipality similar like Perth East is at the same time uh so the implication

[24:36] of a larger share of your revenue coming from property taxes a smaller share of

[24:40] that is coming from grant revenue things through like the Ontario municipal

[24:44] partnership fund. Uh so uh let me see I have some actual numbers here on on

[24:51] earth's example of a municipal partnership fund. So, um, in 2010, um,

[24:58] over three the amount of, uh, revenue from that, uh, grant funding from the

[25:03] OMF in Perth East was $3.3 million. And by 2024, we're less than half that at 1

[25:09] point uh, almost a third of that, just over $1.1 million.

[25:14] more to the point in 2011 27% of the operating revenue of of Perth

[25:22] East came from the OMF in 2024 that was less than 6%.

[25:27] So this is a big piece of what's driving that result for farmland being a net

[25:32] positive. You uh in many ways there's a lot less uh funding of this key funding

[25:37] program coming from the province to rural municipalities and farmland values

[25:41] has been going through the roof. So it is ob going to be a net positive to to

[25:45] have farmland in your in your municipality. That doesn't mean that

[25:49] this is uh a good thing per se uh that um a decreasing share of the revenue is

[25:55] is coming from uh provincial grants and while at the same time there's all these

[26:00] other services municipalities are are being asked to give. But one of his

[26:04] positions over the last year or so has been to increase for the asking the

[26:09] province to increase the municipal partnership funds annual funding

[26:12] envelope to $1 billion. It had been sitting at 500 million for quite a

[26:17] number of years. Uh in the last two years they've they've increased it to

[26:22] 600 million and that's that's welcome. Uh but that's still significantly short

[26:26] on an inflationadjusted basis of where it was in say 2005.

[26:32] Um [clears throat] so we have crunched these numbers for every

[26:37] municipality of what would your funding be uh if the OMF was of 1 billion. So in

[26:43] 2024 as mentioned before Perth East had 1.1 million in funding from the OMF

[26:50] um under the current formulas of the program if that were to increase to a

[26:53] billion that would increase to over 2.3 million. Uh so an extra $1.2 $2 million

[27:00] of funding um directly to uh the municipality of Paris if we were

[27:07] successful in a a uh OMF funding of of $1 billion annually. Um and this fully

[27:14] aligns with uh you know OFA's long um you know our primary um concern is

[27:20] advocating on behalf of farmers but farmers need strong communities to have

[27:23] a strong business and a wellunded uh municipalities that that can focus on

[27:28] the the infrastructure costs at hand and have the funding to do so. So this fully

[27:32] is in line with um our our positions over the years. Um we have done a lot

[27:38] more in the last year or so of of adding some more data and some more research

[27:42] behind some of our um policies on rural infrastructure funding and funding for

[27:47] rural municipalities and and this piece of the OPF is going to be a big piece of

[27:52] our advocacy uh as we head into the uh pre-budget submissions for for the

[27:56] province. Uh so I do hope um that we have opportunity to work with not only

[28:02] municipalities like northeast but with you know western eastern wardens

[28:05] caucuses and romas etc to find these kind of policy areas where there is uh

[28:11] an overlap of of interest and potential to work together. Uh so to sum up

[28:16] everything that I've been looking at here, we've been looking at research in

[28:19] in Ontario at the municipal level for the last um 10 to 15 years that have

[28:24] been showing kind of increasingly that yes, farmland is a net positive on

[28:29] municipal budgets. And when we dive into the details, a lot of that is driven by

[28:34] um how reliant municipalities have become on property tax and the services

[28:39] and funding that's available to municipalities. All of these dictate um

[28:44] what you know the the fiscal impacts of of different land use uh types in a in a

[28:49] municipality. The more we're asking municipalities to deliver so people

[28:53] services uh the more the nonp people property of farming commercial

[28:59] industrial will have a net uh financial positive and we do hope to be able to

[29:04] work together on issues like OPF and rural infrastructure funding which again

[29:07] are going to be key pieces of our advocacy moving forward. So, thank you

[29:11] so much. I know I've probably gone over my time, but if you have any questions

[29:14] or comments or discussion, I'd be I'd be very happy to uh review with you. Thank

[29:18] you. >> Okay. Thanks, Ben. Any questions of the

[29:21] presenter?

[29:25] » Uh I have one. Um we keep talking about uh saving farmland. We need to keep the

[29:31] farmland. Yet when someone goes to build a house and because of the farms around

[29:35] it now they're have to build their house in the middle of the farm which takes

[29:39] out farmland to get to it. So sometimes the MDS

[29:44] um distances [clears throat] cause more problems than they're worth.

[29:47] You know I know they draw a circle that manure smell does not magically stop at

[29:52] the edge of the circle. [laughter] >> Certainly not. I I uh thank you for that

[29:58] comment and uh I'll pass that back to uh my colleague Duncan in our policy

[30:02] department who handles our land use issues. Thank you.

[30:05] » Okay. Thank you, Bob. >> I don't have any questions here for you,

[30:10] Ben, but I guess my comments are this uh presentation is best suited to the

[30:17] members of provincial parliament. Um, there's not a whole lot that I can do

[30:22] about OMF or land land use planning or the fact that the province has frozen

[30:28] impacts property assessments. All these things need to be done. We all know it.

[30:33] But I've been an OFA member for 30 years and I've been hearing the same things

[30:37] over and over again and yet I never see anything done. So rather than coming to

[30:42] small rural municipalities who are immersed in all the problems that the

[30:46] province has downloaded, maybe you could advocate to try and have some of these

[30:49] services uploaded to the uh province like uh policing or social services or

[30:55] long-term care or health units. All these things that we pay into uh that

[30:59] always are going up because of unionized wages, etc. Um this needs to be taken on

[31:04] with a larger role, the members of parliament. So coming here um is great,

[31:11] but I've heard it many many times over the years and uh there's not a whole lot

[31:15] I can do as a sitting member of for the East Council. So I wish you well

[31:20] wherever you take this forward. But uh coming here to us, you're already

[31:24] preaching to the choir. So >> yeah. Uh so I I appreciate that. I I

[31:29] would like to to address that that idea though because well, first of all, we we

[31:33] do walk and chew gum. So this uh coming here does not mean we're not also taking

[31:38] this to municipal to the provincial uh MPPPS and to ministers. Um we absolutely

[31:44] uh are we we try to do both but um I do think on something like the OMF

[31:51] uh you're right we've been hearing about it for many years. I started off in in

[31:56] uh 20 uh when did I start off? 2013 and it was an old issue then. Um, and I do

[32:04] though think that the only way that we are realistically going to see any

[32:08] movement on these type of things is if there is a a coalition of of rural

[32:12] voices of the municipalities, particularly the municipalities and

[32:16] organizations like Offa and if there are other rural voices that that have a

[32:20] similar strength. Um, and maybe not particularly at the individual municipal

[32:24] level, but you never know. Sometimes that can be um uh have an impact but uh

[32:29] really through your collective voice of those groups like the Western Wardens

[32:33] Caucus, Eastern Wardens Caucus um we have worked together uh early in my

[32:38] career when one of the the first files I worked on was working with the Western

[32:42] eastern wardens to restore funding to the connecting links program which is a

[32:47] provincial funding program that uh essentially provides funding for roads

[32:51] and bridges that are kind of in that gray area between municipal and

[32:54] provincial assets. sets um and working all together. We did see some success in

[32:59] that and in over the years on certain files the municipal voices and and offa

[33:04] have worked together in certain things. Um I think there could be a more um

[33:10] orchestrated effort and more consistent effort on all of our our parts to share

[33:14] our voices together on on those rural issues at the provincial level. So,

[33:18] that's kind of uh another piece here is is um these type of meetings, they may

[33:23] may not seem like it's moving the needle, but the more of these type of

[33:26] meetings and getting everyone on the same page on on positions, I think is

[33:31] the necessary groundwork that has to happen before we could be realistically

[33:35] see any movement on these type of issues. So, I do take your point and

[33:39] this would be one of many many many many meetings at uh and presentations where

[33:43] we want to get the word out on this kind of stuff.

[33:48] Okay. Anyone else? If not, thank we thank you very much,

[33:53] Ben, for your presentation tonight. Very informative and we hope you have a good

[33:58] rest of your evening. >> Thank you so much. Have a great night.

[34:01] » Yep. Thank you. So council, we do have a motion that the council of the township

[34:05] of Perth East receive the presentation provided by Ben the Fort Ontario

[34:09] Federation of Agriculture OFA regarding the fiscal impact of farmland on Ontario

[34:15] municipalities for information. Moved by Amanda, second by Hugh. All in favor.

[34:23] Okay. Our next presentation is on the lit municipal drain and we have Bill

[34:28] Dietrich with us tonight. So welcome Bill. Good to see you.

[34:32] And the floor is yours.

[34:44] I think I'm wired up here. Am I Can you Can everybody hear me?

[34:48] » Okay. We have two drainage reports going to present this evening. We'll we'll The

[34:52] first one um is the lit municipal drain. And um well there is a drawing attached

[34:59] to the uh at the back of the drainage report and I'll be referring to it in my

[35:04] presentation. Um

[35:08] oh it's up on the screen there. Now this um this project uh was initiated under

[35:14] section 78 of the drainage act. Uh council had asked us to prepare um a

[35:20] drainage report for improvements to the main drain portion of the lit municipal

[35:24] drain. And this was initiated under a request

[35:27] signed by Peter Van Ninatan and Bob Greneste. Uh the existing drain um uh as

[35:34] you'll see on the plan here, which is the green green line on the on the

[35:38] drawing there. This is an existing tile drain that was installed back in 1930 by

[35:43] an engineer. Uh the engineers report was prepared by John Roger. And uh back then

[35:49] there was 2500 ft of 10in and 14in diameter tile installed to serve uh the

[35:55] upper portion of the lit municipal drain. Uh the outlet for this um uh tile

[36:00] system is in uh the open portion of the lit drain which is located in lot 17 of

[36:05] concession 2. Uh the open portion of of the lit drain was recently cleaned out

[36:12] under the maintenance program in uh 2025. Our proposal here is to install a

[36:17] new drainage system to replace uh the existing drain. Uh it will outlet at the

[36:23] upper end of the open ditch again on in lot 17 of concession 2 with the upstream

[36:27] end of the d tile drainage system at the east side of road 130. The the new drain

[36:33] will consist of the installation of 760 m of 450 mm tile at the upper end to 525

[36:40] mm tile at the outlet. It also includes the construction of two new road

[36:44] crossings, one under Perth uh line 36 and the other under road 130. This um

[36:51] drainage system uh serves a drainage area of approximately 133 acres and we

[36:55] used a 1 and a half inch drainage coefficient for the design. The

[36:59] estimated cost of this project which includes the construction costs uh

[37:02] allowances for right of way and damages to lands and crops and the

[37:06] municipalities administration costs. We've estimated the total um cost for

[37:11] this project at $192,600.

[37:15] So that's my presentation. Uh the purpose of this meeting is to consider

[37:18] the scope of work for this project. So I kind of outlined what we're proposing to

[37:22] do here and if there's any any questions regarding the work that's being planned

[37:25] here, I'll pleased to answer those. >> Okay. Thanks, Bill. Any questions from

[37:30] council? Is there anyone here in the audience

[37:34] who's here in regards to the strain? would like to question have questions?

[37:42] Nope. Okay. We do have a motion and the motion reads that the council of the

[37:47] township of northeast receive the report from Dietrich Engineering Limited

[37:52] regarding the lit municipal drain 2026 serving parts of lots 15 to 17

[37:57] concession 2 and part of lots 14 and 17 concession 3 township of Perth east of

[38:03] Lard County of Perth and further that the quarterly revision for the lit

[38:07] municipal drain 2026 be held on September 15 2026 at 6:30

[38:13] Moved by Amanda, second by Hugh. All in favor? Carried. Okay. And the next drain

[38:21] we're going to do is a smoke municipal drain. So, Bill, the floor is yours.

[38:26] » Okay.

[38:31] Uh, thanks um, Mayor Edg, uh, members of council. This uh um drainage report that

[38:38] we've prepared here uh for the for the municipality will be known as the Moch

[38:43] Municipal Drain 2026. The name rates uh kind of reflects back to the original

[38:49] drainage system that is in place there now. And it um it was constructed um as

[38:54] an award drain. um we were weren't able to actually find the actual copy of the

[38:59] award, but it was um uh constructed under uh a previous uh previous

[39:04] legislation under the ditches and water courses act. This act no longer exists

[39:09] and this uh existing drainage system basically is doesn't come under the

[39:13] control of the municipality any longer. So the um the land owners um have

[39:18] petitioned under section four of the drainage act to have a municipal drain

[39:22] constructed. the um the uh an on-site meeting was held back in May of of this

[39:29] year to um discuss the area requiring drainage. A survey was done to establish

[39:35] uh where the drain should be located and also the the catchment or watershed area

[39:40] for this project. Um our proposal here, you'll see uh uh it's on the up in the

[39:46] up on the plan up on the screen there. It uh it will include uh a clean out of

[39:52] the open portion of the um the Wilhelm drain which is known as C drain for

[39:57] approximately a little over 700 m to provide a sufficient outlet for this new

[40:02] new tile system. We're um um going to be removing two of the existing farm

[40:08] crossings that are in the open ditch and one will be replaced with a 12 m length

[40:12] of 1500 mm pipe. Also, uh the drain the drain itself is

[40:19] consists of a a pipe system. Um we'll be installing 1,62 m of 450 mm to 600 mm

[40:27] tile and HTP pipe. Um from the outlet in the Wilhelm drain in lot 29 of

[40:33] concession 4. This is on the Ghead Ngrassi farm uh upstream to the um uh

[40:40] east half of lot 31 of concession 5. And this also includes two road crossings,

[40:46] one under line 29 and one under road 109. We're also incorporating um the

[40:53] lower portion of the drain was installed um by Mark Cook drainage in 2012 and

[40:58] we're going to be incorporating the drain that was installed there as part

[41:02] of this project as well. And back then there was a 416 m of 450 mm pipe

[41:07] installed. Uh the drainage coefficient again we used to design this drain is

[41:11] the same as the last one and a half inch drainage coefficient and we've estimated

[41:14] the cost of this project at $354,000. So again that's kind of a brief outline

[41:21] of what what's being planned here. But again if there's any questions regarding

[41:24] the the scope of work I'll I'll be pleased to answer those.

[41:29] » Okay. Thanks Bill. Any questions from members of council?

[41:34] Any questions from anyone in the audience?

[41:39] Seeing none, may we have a motion that council of the township of Peris receive

[41:43] a report from Dietrich Engineering Limited, Moch Municipal Drain 2026

[41:48] serving parts of lot 29 to 30 concession 4 and parts of lots 30 and 31 concession

[41:54] 5, Township of Perth East, Southeast to Ford, County of Perth, and further that

[41:59] the quarter revision for the Moch Municipal Drain 2026 be held in

[42:03] September 15, 2026 at 6:30 Moved by Jerry, second by Amanda. All in

[42:10] favor? Jerry. >> Thanks, Bill.

[42:13] » Okay, good. >> And hope you enjoy the rest of your

[42:16] night. >> Have a good evening.

[42:18] » Okay, now we're going to move on. We have no delegations. We do have a public

[42:23] meeting. I declare this public meeting to be

[42:27] open. This public meeting is being held to consider a proposed zoning bylaw

[42:31] amendment affecting property currently owned by Brando Farms Limited, part of

[42:36] lot 8 and 9, concession 1, 4330-4348, line 34. This meeting is an opportunity

[42:44] for the township to advise the public of the purpose and intent of the amendment

[42:48] and receive their input prior to the to considering adoption of an implementing

[42:53] bylaw. If a bylaw is adopted to implement the zoning amendment, a notice

[42:57] of passing will be forwarded by prepaid first class mail to various agencies of

[43:01] interest and others who have requested notice. An appeal to the Ontario Land

[43:05] Tribunal objecting to the adoption of the bylaw may be efiled via the OOLT

[43:11] file service no later than the date stated on the notice. Any persons

[43:15] attending this meeting who wishes to receive written notice of a bylaw passed

[43:19] to implement the amendment is asked to give their name and mailing address to

[43:22] the clerk following this meeting. No written notice except as previously

[43:26] noted will be given unless requested in writing following the meeting. All

[43:30] persons attending this meeting will be given an opportunity to be heard or make

[43:34] a presentation. I will now call on our planner Aubrey Ericson to present the

[43:38] planning report and recommendations. So Aubrey, good to see you and welcome and

[43:42] the floor is yours. Thank you, Mayor Eggets. Good evening, Madame Mayor and

[43:45] Council. Zoning bylaw amendment application ZN12-2026

[43:51] has been submitted by Trevor McNeel of MTE on behalf of Brandell Farms for the

[43:56] lands municipally known as 4330 to 4348 line 34.

[44:02] The applicant is proposing to reszone both the severed and retained lands to

[44:05] satisfy the conditions of consent application B18-26

[44:10] which was given conditional approval on July 14th, 2026.

[44:14] The severed lands are proposed to be zoned A-201 to permit the unders sized

[44:20] agricultural lot and reduced frontage from 200 m to 110 m and the retained

[44:26] lands are proposed to be zoned A-202 to permit the undersized agricultural lot.

[44:32] The Perth County official plan and the provincial planning statement 2024

[44:36] require agricultural lots to be appropriately sized for operations in

[44:39] the area and for flexibility to change the type and size of the agricultural

[44:44] operation to meet emerging economic conditions and trends in agriculture.

[44:49] The assessment of the size of the new agricultural lot. Uh the official plan

[44:53] considers things including the assessment of the amount of productive

[44:56] land, the amount of wood lot, the presence or necessity for farm buildings

[44:59] and structures. So the area of workable land on these severed and retained

[45:03] parcels is approximately 29.5 hectares and 27.3 hectares respectively. The ACM

[45:09] lands, natural features and farm residents and accessory structures are

[45:13] located outside of that calculation. Further, the proposed lots do not remove

[45:18] any area currently in agricultural production. It is the opinion of staff

[45:22] that the law area proposed for these lands is appropriately sized to

[45:25] agricultural operations in the area and that it is suitably large enough to

[45:30] maintain flexibility for future changes in type and size of agricultural

[45:34] operations. Planning staff are supportive of the zone change

[45:37] application and approval of the application is recommended. Happy to

[45:41] answer any questions. >> Okay, thank you. Is there anyone present

[45:45] who wishes to make a presentation or speak in opposition of the application?

[45:51] Seeing no one, is there anyone present who wishes to make a presentation or

[45:55] speak in support of the application other than the applicant or the

[45:58] applicant's agent? Seeing no one, does the applicant or the

[46:03] applicant's agent wish to make a presentation or speak with respect to

[46:07] the application? Trevor,

[46:11] » evening, council, it's been a while since I've been up in

[46:15] the hot seat. Uh so the uh as Aubrey has said the application was before council

[46:20] about a month ago for the seventh approval and we're just here now for the

[46:24] zoning application which is a condition of that so we have no other issues plan

[46:30] report is is well documented any questions of council or anything.

[46:35] » Okay thanks Trevor. Are there any questions for members of council?

[46:41] Nope. Council will consider a resolution regarding the planning report

[46:45] recommendation following the conclusion of the public meeting and bylaw 212-2026

[46:51] to implement the approval of the zoning application will be considered later

[46:55] within the council agenda. The public meeting is now concluded and we will

[46:59] continue with the regular meeting of council.

[47:03] So, we do have a motion and the motion reads that the township of Perth East

[47:07] Council receive a report dated September 1, 2026 for zoning bylaw amendment

[47:13] ZN12-2026 submitted by Trevor McNeel on behalf of

[47:18] Brandle Farms Limited affecting the lands described as lot 9 less highway

[47:23] and North Park lot 8 concession 1 Ellis Ward Township of Perth East municipally

[47:29] known as 4330-434 48 line 34 for information and that

[47:35] council held a statutory public meeting pursuant to section 34 of the planning

[47:40] act with respect to zoning bylaw amendment ZN12-2026

[47:45] and that council approve zoning bylaw amendment 212-2026.

[47:50] I need a move and a second move by Amanda, second by Jeremy. All those in

[47:55] favor

[48:00] » thank you. Okay, now we're going to move to our public hearing

[48:05] and council will now temporary adjourn to this as committee of adjustment

[48:08] pursuant to section 45 of the planning act. I now declare this public hearing

[48:13] open. This public hearing is being held to consider an application affecting

[48:17] property currently owned by Pauline Hurst and described as plan 261 lot 107

[48:24] lot 108 lot 152 lot 153 part lot 154 part Victoria Street as RPS 44R704

[48:34] 44R 2887 part 1 Morningington Ward which is 4069 Northro Street in Milbank. The

[48:43] purpose of this hearing is to give the committee and the public an opportunity

[48:46] to hear all interested persons with respect to the proposed application and

[48:51] receive their input and for the committee to make a decision on the

[48:54] application. All persons attending this hearing will be given an opportunity to

[48:59] be heard or make a presentation. Committee members may ask questions for

[49:03] the purposes of clarifying the application but are asked to withhold

[49:06] comments on this application until all present have been given an opportunity

[49:10] to be heard. Any person who wishes to receive written notice of the decision

[49:14] made by the committee of adjustment is asked to email their name and mailing

[49:18] address to the secretary treasurer at this time. An appeal to the Ontario land

[49:22] tribunal objecting to the decision made at this hearing may be eiled via the

[49:27] OOLT eile service by the applicant, the municipality, the minister or prescribed

[49:32] utility providers with the secretary treasur no later than the date stated on

[49:36] the notice. No written notice except if previously noted will be given unless

[49:41] requested at this time. I will now call on our planner Aubrey to present the

[49:45] planning report and recommendation. So Aubrey, the floor is yours.

[49:49] » Perfect. >> Thank you, Mayor Eggets. The minor

[49:51] variance application MV7-2026 was submitted by Pauline Horst for the

[49:56] property at 4069 Norfolk Street in Milbank.

[50:01] The applicant requires relief from section 9.2.5 2.5 to reduce the exterior

[50:06] sideyard minimum from 7.5 m to 5.2 meters.

[50:12] The property is designated village and zoned HVR. The intent of the village

[50:18] designation is to ensure that growth is the focus of serviced settlement areas.

[50:23] The design of any proposed development in village designations should

[50:26] complement the general form and density of existing neighborhood development

[50:30] with access to a public road. Development should occur outside of

[50:34] natural hazards and not generate conditions which are hazardous to

[50:37] traffic movement and servicing capacity and storm water management are

[50:41] appropriate to the proposed development. The intent of the Hamlet Village

[50:45] residential zoning provisions are to ensure that there is appropriate space

[50:48] available for private servicing and that development is orderly and compatible

[50:52] with the area. The exterior sideyard provisions are to ensure appropriate

[50:56] sight lines at intersections for pedestrian safety.

[51:00] The proposed minor variance is an expansion of a prevented use in both the

[51:03] Perth County official plan and the Perth East zoning bylaw with no change to the

[51:07] settlement area boundary and the development proposed is appropriate and

[51:11] similar to existing neighborhood uses. There is no change proposed to the

[51:15] existing public road access and the development proposed is outside of

[51:19] natural hazards. The proposal remains well below the HVR lot coverage in the

[51:23] zoning bylaw with an appropriate area remaining for storm water management.

[51:27] The lot is on private services and based on the size of the addition proposed

[51:31] both septic and grading will require review as a part of the building permit

[51:35] which satisfies the intent of the official plan and zoning bylaw servicing

[51:38] requirements. The setback reduction is not anticipated to interfere with the

[51:42] sight lines at the intersection as the expansion is proposed to be located

[51:46] outside of the site triangle. All other zone provisions are met. The application

[51:51] for MV7-2026 conforms with the official plan policies

[51:55] and maintains the general intent and purpose of the zoning bylaw. The

[51:59] variance requested is minor in nature and is desirable use of the land and as

[52:03] a result approval of the variance is recommended. Happy to answer any

[52:07] questions. Okay, thank you. Is there anyone present

[52:11] who wishes to make a presentation or speak in opposition of the application?

[52:16] Seeing no one, is there anyone present who wishes to make a presentation or

[52:20] speak in support of the application other than the applicant or the

[52:23] applicant's agent? Seeing no one, does the applicant or the applicant agent

[52:28] wish to make a presentation or speak with respect to the application? No.

[52:32] Okay. Are there any questions from committee members?

[52:38] No questions. The committee will now consider a motion regarding the

[52:41] application. And we have a motion that the township

[52:45] of Peris committee of adjustment approve application file MV7-2026

[52:51] submitted by Pauline Horst for lands described as plan 261 lot 107 lot 108

[52:57] lot 152 lot 153 part lot 106 part 154 as Victoria Street 44R704

[53:07] part 1 44R2887 township of Perth East municipally known

[53:12] as 4069 Norfolk Street as it relates to number one, relief from section 9.2.5

[53:21] to reduce the minimum exterior sideyard with from 7.5 m to 5.2 m to facilitate

[53:28] an 89 m squared addition to the existing resident subject to the following

[53:33] condition. That condition is that the owner obtains a necessary building

[53:37] permit within two years of the approval of the minor variance. I need a in a

[53:42] second. Moved by Jerry, second by Amanda. All in favor?

[53:48] I declare this public hearing closed. Okay. You're welcome. Okay. Now, we're

[53:55] going to move to reports. And the first report is we have planning uh and

[53:59] development. It's an application for our zoning amendment uh by Steve Jefferson

[54:04] on behalf of Allan and Harriet Banker uh for in Northeast Hope. And we have Jeff

[54:09] with us tonight for this. So, Jeff, good to see you. and welcome to Perth East.

[54:12] The floor is yours. >> Thank you. So, the property is located

[54:16] on the north side of Perth Line 43 between road 104 and 103 and it's

[54:21] municipally known as 1682 per line 43. The proposed amendment to the zoning

[54:28] bylaw is intended to resone a portion of the lands from an agricultural zone and

[54:32] a adjacent land overlay zone to an adjacent land overlay zone with a

[54:37] special agricultural zone A-194 to facilitate the non-farm residential

[54:42] use uh without a farm use sorry residential use without a farm use on an

[54:47] undersized lot with a lot of 6 meters due to the proximity of the non-farm

[54:52] residence to the existing wood lot across adjacent to the subject lands

[54:56] that submitted an environmental screening report in support of the

[55:00] development. Perth East Council approved ZN5205

[55:06] on April 8th, but withheld the final reading in the zoning bylaw until the

[55:10] required field studies could be completed, peer reviewed, and the

[55:13] recommendations of the final version of the screening report are implemented.

[55:18] The field studies have now been completed and the recommendations of the

[55:23] environmental study have determined that a 30 meter building setback and a 10

[55:28] meter naturally vegetated buffer between the house septic and amenity area and

[55:32] the significant woodland limit is required. Existing driveway does not

[55:37] need to be relocated and a landscape plan is necessary to detail the

[55:41] plantings within the vegetated buffer. Recommendations of the environmental

[55:46] screening have resulted in changes to the proposed zoning bylaw. As changes

[55:50] have been made to the mending bylaw that was approved in principle, this staff

[55:56] report has been prepared to inform Perth East Council of the changes being

[56:00] proposed to the approved in principal zoning bylaw.

[56:05] applicant has submitted a signed letter of undertaking

[56:08] to the township of Perth East which provides asurances that the landscape

[56:12] plan will be prepared and implemented prior to building occupancy. The letter

[56:16] of undertaking has been accept accepted by staff. The proposed zoning bylaw has

[56:22] been updated to include building setbacks in a vegetated buffer to the

[56:26] significant woodland limit and planning staff are the opinion that policies of

[56:30] the provincial planning statement and the official plan have been satisfied

[56:34] with the implementation of the recommendations of the screening report.

[56:38] Planning staff have no further concerns with the revised bylaw. Implementation

[56:43] of the zoning bylaw allows for a non-farm residential use without a farm

[56:46] use on an undersized lot that is compatible with the surrounding area.

[56:50] The applicant is consistent with the PBS, conforms with the official plan,

[56:54] and represents good planning and available to answer any questions.

[56:59] » Okay, thanks Jeff. Questions of the report?

[57:03] Hugh? >> Not necessarily a question, but uh I

[57:09] think people should be very careful about making any kind of water on their

[57:13] farm in the state. >> Also, Mr. Jefferson is joining us on the

[57:19] on Zoom. So, if anyone had any questions for him as well, he is with us tonight.

[57:24] So if there's no questions and we do have a motion that the township of

[57:29] Perthy's council receive the report dated September 1, 2026 for zoning bylaw

[57:34] amendment ZN5-2025 submitted by Steve Jefferson on behalf

[57:39] of Allen and Harriet Banker affecting the lands described as part 8 concession

[57:44] 7 northeast board township of Perth East municipally known as 1682 Perth line 43

[57:51] for information and that council give a third and final A reading to zoning

[57:54] bylaw amendment 2052-2026 as revised. I need a mover and a

[58:01] seconder. Moved by Hugh, second by Jeremy. All those in favor carried.

[58:10] Thanks Jeff. >> Thank you.

[58:12] » Excuse me. >> Okay, moving on our agenda. We have no

[58:16] reports from the CEO uh from the clerk. The first one is our meeting schedule

[58:21] for regular meetings of council for 2027. I'll turn it over to Ashley.

[58:26] » Okay. Thanks, Mayor Eggets. So, just in the report, since the time of writing

[58:31] the report, we were able to figure out the uh Ontario Small Urban Municipality

[58:36] Conference. That one's April 26th to the 28th and it's going to be hosted in

[58:42] Stratford this year. And then just a couple of comments um moving forward

[58:46] with the daytime meetings. I've suggested to not host any Wednesday

[58:51] meetings. Past practice was to move um the Tuesday meeting if it followed along

[58:56] weekend to the Wednesday. So, this proposal is to keep everything on

[58:59] Tuesdays. Um March 3rd on the agenda should actually be March 2nd. It says

[59:04] Tuesday, March 3rd, but it's actually Tuesday, March 2nd. And the only other

[59:09] day change is the April 8th Thursday proposal. And that's just how the

[59:14] calendar fell with the um OGRA conference. And I can try to answer any

[59:21] questions if there's any or suggested changes. Um that's it.

[59:27] » Okay. Excuse me. Questions of the report or comments?

[59:33] Andrew. >> Thank you, Mayor. It's um I know we kind

[59:37] of hashed this out before, but was there any consideration the the July and

[59:40] August meetings are very very busy? Is there any consideration or do we want to

[59:45] make consideration for maybe having a meeting? It might be better to cancel it

[59:48] rather than have two large agendas in the summer. Just throwing that out there

[59:52] if there's any support for that. If not, carry on.

[1:00:00] » Yeah, it is. Uh it's up to council if they want to add one or not. We can

[1:00:04] certainly do that. One thing that has historically happened and again it'll

[1:00:08] depend on the new mayor but there is usually a budget visioning meeting

[1:00:12] that's in July. So just one thing to consider too that there is not currently

[1:00:17] any budget meetings um in this schedule.

[1:00:24] Okay. Anyone else?

[1:00:30] No. Okay. Well, we'll read this motion, see where it goes, and if you want to

[1:00:33] change it. Uh that council of the township of Perth East receive a report

[1:00:38] prepared by the manager of legislative services/municipal

[1:00:41] clerk dated September 1, 2026 entitled 2027 meeting schedule for regular

[1:00:47] meetings of council CL-2026-32 for information and further that the

[1:00:53] 2027 schedule for the regular meeting of council be approved as outlined in

[1:00:58] schedule A as amended. We have a mover moved by Jeremy, second

[1:01:04] by Amanda. Any more questions? All in favor?

[1:01:10] Carried. Okay. And our next one is a petition for

[1:01:14] drainage work. Ashley. Okay. Thanks, Margot. So, this is a request to add a

[1:01:21] new municipal drain. Um, it was received by Gary Pletch and then there is other

[1:01:26] property owners in the area that have signed the support um as well. It's in

[1:01:30] the southeast hope board just uh south of the rail trail connecting into the

[1:01:36] central train branch A. And I will try to answer any questions if there's any.

[1:01:42] Okay. Thank you. Any questions of the report?

[1:01:47] Seeing none, we do have a motion that council of the township of Perth East

[1:01:51] receive the petition for drainage works section 4 of the drainage act by

[1:01:54] property owner Gary Pletch for concession one north part Law 31

[1:01:59] southeast hope board township of Perth East for information and that council of

[1:02:04] the township of Perth East appoint Dietrich Engineering to prepare a report

[1:02:08] under section 4 of the drainage act and that staff proceed to provide notice of

[1:02:12] the proposed drainage works to the secretary treasure of the conservation

[1:02:16] authority. that is jurisdiction over the lands in the affected area. I need a

[1:02:21] mover and a second move by Andrew, second by Bob. Questions? All in favor?

[1:02:29] Carried. Okay. Thanks, Ashley. We have uh nothing

[1:02:33] from finance, nothing from public works, nothing from

[1:02:38] building bylaw enforcement. Under parks and recreation, we have community sports

[1:02:43] and recreation infrastructure uh fund stream one round two. And Mike's going

[1:02:47] to take that tonight. >> Thanks, Mayor Ro. I'm pinch hitting

[1:02:51] tonight where Becky, she sends her request regrets. She's under the

[1:02:54] weather, unfortunately. So, um, this report recommends that council support

[1:02:58] an application to Ontario's community sport and recreation infrastructure fund

[1:03:03] stream one round two for the rehabilitation of the perk pool

[1:03:07] filtration system and related facility upgrades. Uh, the deadline for

[1:03:11] application is December 22nd, 2026. The project has an estimated total cost of

[1:03:17] 468,000 consisting of 36,000 for final engineering and design work and 432,000

[1:03:24] for rehabilitation of the pool filtration system and pump house post

[1:03:28] facilities. The existing filtration system is nearly 30 years old and has

[1:03:32] been identified through multiple technical reviews as approaching end of

[1:03:36] its useful life. Uh staff are proposing a funding strategy that combines

[1:03:40] municipal reserves and external grant funding. The township would contribute

[1:03:45] 36,000 from the pool reserve toward engineering design work while

[1:03:49] applications would seek 216,000 from the CSR

[1:03:54] and 216,000 from the build community strong fund to fully finance the

[1:03:59] project. Uh council previously uh authorized the submission to the build

[1:04:04] community strong fund application on July 15, 2026.

[1:04:09] Um I'm happy to try to address any questions.

[1:04:12] Okay, thanks Mike. Any questions of the report? You

[1:04:18] » will like I know there was bigger figure that we seen before about

[1:04:26] fixing up stuff like that. This go to get up to speed.

[1:04:34] » Yeah, certainly this critical stuff that needs to be done. Yeah, this is the most

[1:04:38] im imminent of the works at the pool and the most critical as it relates to kind

[1:04:43] of um the filtration system is kind of reaching its end. Some of the other pool

[1:04:48] items, decking, those type of things are future needs, but I think from Becky's

[1:04:53] standpoint, she sees this as the most timesensitive.

[1:04:56] » Okay. is a particular reason uh you decide to do two funds and not just one

[1:05:03] » the the funds the way they're structured are basically 50% max for each of the

[1:05:08] funds. Uh one of my first questions to Becky was whether or not there would be

[1:05:13] eligible for stacking. One of the funds is federal and one of them is

[1:05:17] provincial. So there would be potential for stacking if we were successful with

[1:05:20] both. I would indicate the council that because of the nature of the project and

[1:05:25] the imminent need, if we're not successful with one or either of the

[1:05:29] applications, it's likely that Becky will come to council and look for

[1:05:34] reserve um allocation in order to move forward with the project. Perhaps not in

[1:05:39] 2027, but probably within the next couple years.

[1:05:45] » Okay, any other questions? If not, we do have a motion and that the

[1:05:51] council of the township of Perthies receive a report prepared by the manager

[1:05:54] of parks, recreation, and community services dated September 1, 2026

[1:05:59] entitled community sports and recreation infrastructure fund stream one round two

[1:06:04] for information and further that staff include 36,000 in the 2027 budget to

[1:06:10] obtain an engineer to complete the final design drawings for the Perk Pool

[1:06:14] rehabilitation project and further that council direct staff to submit an

[1:06:18] application for the community sports and recreation infrastructure fund stream

[1:06:23] one round two for the pool rehabilitation project. Moved by Amanda,

[1:06:28] second by Hugh. All in favor? Carried. Okay, thanks Mike. Uh we have no reports

[1:06:36] from flyer. We do have one uh item under correspondence and that's from the

[1:06:41] Legion here in Milton uh requesting about uh the uh where the Senate is and

[1:06:47] the township owning the property and they will still maintain it. There's

[1:06:51] still a lot of unanswered questions. So, we're wondering if we should send that

[1:06:54] back to staff and they can uh figure out some of the things that we need more

[1:07:00] stuff we need to know and bring it back again.

[1:07:04] That work? Do you removing that? >> Sure. travel comments first.

[1:07:08] » Okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. This originally came to myself

[1:07:10] through President Dale. Um and Sunday they did do the the announcement um at

[1:07:16] their 100th anniversary celebration um for the Legion um Can Canadian Legion.

[1:07:22] And yeah, again, as as Mayor Rhonda suggested, I think we should send it

[1:07:26] back to staff for report for a report because this obviously is a very

[1:07:30] important part of our of our community. Um and hopefully we can we can make make

[1:07:35] this work. to through to three three parties with the AC society, the Legion

[1:07:40] and us. Yeah. I I would move that we send it to staff for report.

[1:07:45] » Okay. So that the council of the township of Perth East received the

[1:07:49] correspondence of Marilyn Dale, president of the Royal Canadian Legion,

[1:07:52] Milbertton regarding a request for Senate placement at 24 Tempered Street

[1:07:57] for information and at council direct staff to prepare a follow-up report.

[1:08:02] Moved by Jerry, second by Amanda. Anyone else with comments or questions? All in

[1:08:07] favor? Carried. Okay. Now, we're going to move down to

[1:08:13] council and committee reports. My mayor's meeting log will come next

[1:08:17] month. Uh, do we have any verbal reports on any of the committees people sit on?

[1:08:22] Jerry, >> thanks for you, Mayor. I guess not not

[1:08:25] from a committee. I did attend the AMO conference August the 16th to the 19th.

[1:08:30] a number of good uh sessions. Uh was able to also uh have a attend a couple

[1:08:36] of delegations. One was with the uh the minister of um transportation, the PA um

[1:08:43] to that uh portfolio in regards to our our the OP per county attachment.

[1:08:49] Looking for some clarification on some of those um road closure signage and

[1:08:53] some of the the parameters around that. That was well received. Looking to have

[1:08:57] some feedback after that. also sat in on the county's um session with the

[1:09:04] Minister of Finance PA Dave Smith in regards to the OMF funding um through

[1:09:10] the the farms and um treasurer um Corey um kind of headed that but they weren't

[1:09:18] quite as receptive to that um indicating that hey if we give money here we have

[1:09:22] to take it elsewhere. So, um that that was that was always a good always a good

[1:09:27] um um thing to to sit in on. Also, the uh the premier board was there as was

[1:09:32] all the other leaders. Um they elected a new president. Again, the the sport fund

[1:09:37] that Becky's applying to was announced at that conference. So, overall, another

[1:09:42] great conference. I there was over I don't know how they organized it all

[1:09:46] amongst the provincial people, 3,000 delegations that they got to get in over

[1:09:51] that time. Um so yeah, all in all another great informative um conference

[1:09:57] and appreciate the I was able to attend.

[1:10:02] » Okay, thank you. I know you were there too.

[1:10:07] » I was at a better place. I was at the Wilson fair. So thank you for being

[1:10:11] away. I enjoyed that. And like you know Mr. West got me by to buy a very very

[1:10:17] expensive pie which I'm enjoying. And at the conference and it was uh fairly

[1:10:25] interesting. The uh uh one thing is the professional planners uh unfortunately

[1:10:30] not for next year for the new term of council but uh they're going to have a

[1:10:35] lot of uh information uh sessions that they'll be able to put

[1:10:39] on for counselors and other people. uh impact. They uh they had

[1:10:48] a session and in the future uh unfortunately they're no longer going to

[1:10:53] be sending somebody out to assess your property. You're going to have to take

[1:10:56] your phone and go around and do it. So I know a picture is worth a thousand

[1:11:00] words, but somebody on the ground is a whole lot uh a whole lot better. And uh

[1:11:07] and there was an awful lot of uh funding announcements. I hope can keep up with

[1:11:13] all the different streams and it's always interesting at these conferences.

[1:11:18] It's seems interesting more interesting to be talking to people from other

[1:11:23] municipalities and their problems and how they're trying to solve their

[1:11:27] problems. But it seems that doesn't matter whether you come from almost

[1:11:32] James Bay or Windsor urban or rural it seems that the vast amount of properties

[1:11:39] are the same. I know homelessness is not qu

[1:11:42] problem for us, but we buy that service through Perth County buys it through

[1:11:47] Straford. So, in a way, it affects us like it affects everybody else. And

[1:11:51] everybody is short on money for infrastructure and and again, it was it

[1:11:57] was quite a work.

[1:12:02] » Okay. Thank you, Jerry. >> Yes. said I almost forgot they attended

[1:12:06] the Moonlight Madness on behalf of the business association

[1:12:09] presented the pillar of the community to uh in memory of Carly Schneider. So that

[1:12:14] was accepted that night at the Moonlight Madness was happy to um present that.

[1:12:21] » Okay. >> Sorry, just forgot one thing too.

[1:12:26] They were talking about the reassessment cycle and things like that and uh I

[1:12:31] wouldn't hold my breath on that. They awful lot about fairness and uh uh it

[1:12:37] seems like they were looking more towards uh industrial and commercial

[1:12:42] taxes, not other taxes. So, I just it didn't seem like they were they said

[1:12:49] they were working on it, which I'm sure they are, but we all know that when the

[1:12:54] assessment happens, there's going to be quite a spike. And so, I'm sure they're

[1:12:59] busy trying to figure out how to massage that.

[1:13:05] Okay. Anyone else? If not, uh, what do we need? We just We

[1:13:12] receive the verbal reports for information. Moved by

[1:13:18] Q, second by Andrew. All in favor? Carried.

[1:13:23] Okay, we're down to bylaws. We have uh one bylaw for first and second reading,

[1:13:28] and that's by bylaw 212-2026. And that's a bylaw to amend uh 30-1999.

[1:13:36] And that was item 7.1.1 tonight. So I need a motion to receive

[1:13:41] it for first and second reading. Moved by Amanda, second by Hugh. All in favor?

[1:13:46] Carried. And then we

[1:13:50] » addition. >> Oh, sorry.

[1:13:56] » They need to be added. >> Yeah.

[1:13:58] » Okay. So, we need to add the true uh drains that we did tonight and then do

[1:14:04] we have the numbers for them?

[1:14:08] » 119 >> 119 and one and 120

[1:14:14] » 2026 for both of them. So, we're going to add them to that. So,

[1:14:19] » only first and second reading. And that was by Amanda and Hugh. All in favor of

[1:14:23] that? Harry. Okay. And the drains in third.

[1:14:27] No. Okay. So third and final reading we have bylaw 205-2025

[1:14:32] a bylaw to amend uh bylaw 30-1999 and that was 8.1.1 tonight bylaw 212

[1:14:40] 20226 bylaw to amend bylaw number 30-199 and that was 7.1.1 tonight and then the

[1:14:48] third one is bylaw 103-2026 being a provisional bylaw for the

[1:14:53] Hawthorne municipal drain and that these bylaws be read a third and final

[1:14:58] I need a move in a second. Moved by Bob, second by Jerry. All in favor? Carried.

[1:15:05] Okay. Do we have any notice of motions? Any other business?

[1:15:12] Any announcements?

[1:15:16] » Oh, sorry, Amanda. >> Hi. Yes. Just wanted to put in a plug

[1:15:20] for the Octopus Club of Ellis is hosting their sixth annual dinner in the country

[1:15:26] smoked chop barbecue. It is Friday, September 18th from 5 to 6:30 at the

[1:15:32] Rosstock Hall. Um they've been promoting it on Facebook, so you can get your

[1:15:38] tickets and they're always looking for volunteers to help um with the

[1:15:42] drive-thru. So hope to see many of you there.

[1:15:46] Okay. Anyone else? Just on when we're talking about dinners, the twinning

[1:15:50] committee is putting on a schnitle dinner on October the 1st here in

[1:15:55] Milbertton at the Perk, I believe. I'm not sure what time the supper is. I

[1:15:59] don't want to I'll find that out for the next meeting, but tickets, you can get

[1:16:03] tickets from Patrick Miner and I'm not sure who else has the tickets, but uh

[1:16:08] it's going to be held and it's something

[1:16:12] different that we've never had. So, uh hopefully

[1:16:15] I'm sure it will go well. So, just keep that in mind. I'll have more information

[1:16:19] at the next meeting. Okay. We do not have a need for a closed

[1:16:24] session. We have no business in when we don't have a closed session. We have our

[1:16:28] confirmatory bylaw. And we have a motion that bylaw 41-2026,

[1:16:33] a bylaw to confirm the proceedings of council of the township of Perth East at

[1:16:37] its regular meeting held in September 1, 2026 be read at first, second, and third

[1:16:42] time. Moved by Jeremy, second by Hugh. All in favor carried. And the last

[1:16:49] motion of the night is that we adjourn at 8:07.

[1:16:53] Moved by Amanda, second by Harry. All in favor carried. Thanks everyone. Enjoy

[1:17:00] the rest of your night. Bye.

Regular Meeting of Council Tuesday September 1, 2026

Transcript