[0:31] On the treaty and traditional territory of the Mississauga, the

[0:35] Ashenabic, we offer our gratitude to the First Peoples for

[0:39] their care for. It teaches a boat. Our earth and

[0:43] our relations. May we honor those teachings. Our next Edmo

[0:48] Business is 30 seconds. Of silent reflection.

[1:07] I'd ask those that are able to remove your hats

[1:09] to please stand for the singing of the Canadian National

[1:11] Anthem.

[2:06] Or. Strong and. Free.

[3:04] The Council of the City of Peterborough recognizes the principles

[3:07] contained in our Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights

[3:11] and Freedoms. The next type of business is approval of

[3:14] minutes of December 8th, 2025. And January 12th, 2026. Councillor

[3:19] Beamer, conference your question, Councillor pronounced Senator. Comments or questions.

[3:23] We're going to vote.

[3:49] And that is Carried Councillor's Basiliatus, the Councillor Dude are

[3:53] both online, Mr. Clerk. Is that correct? Thanks, your worship.

[3:56] We have Councillor Vassi Addis online at the moment. And

[3:59] we're just waiting for Councillor Dugay. Thank you. Zarade Decoration

[4:03] Pecurity Interest at this particular time. Decorations Councilor Burke, please.

[4:13] Merrill, thank you. I think I have an interest. On

[4:19] 7B official plan and zoning bylaw amendment for 223 crescent

[4:23] street. I have a business relationship with RP with the

[4:29] applicant. I have a business relationship with the African. Thank

[4:31] you. We have that flag, Councillor Burke, 10. Aye. Any

[4:38] other declarations at this time. Declarations. I don't see any

[4:43] more decorations. Our next item versus register delegations. Our first

[4:49] delegation that the CD was going to be Martha Sullivan

[4:53] on 362 Queen Street. Peterborough, Ontario, report IPGPL 25 -

[4:59] 009. Her concerns have been addressed, so she won't be

[5:03] delegating this evening. Our next series of delegations deals with

[5:08] the procedure bylaw report, LSCLK26 - 007, and our first

[5:15] presenter would ask Diane Terry inhale to come forward. Diane,

[5:18] please. If we could have your name and address for

[5:21] the public record, you know, the root five minutes to

[5:26] make a delegation after the end of four, we'll let

[5:28] you know you have one minute left. And as I

[5:30] said, if we could have your name and address for

[5:32] the public record. Sure. Four minutes and 15 seconds, the

[5:36] time did. So good evening, Mayor Leal and members of

[5:39] council. My name is Dianetarian Hale. I live at 626

[5:42] Romain Street in Peterborough. I am here to speak to

[5:45] the draft changes to the procedure bylaw. I fully understand

[5:49] the mandate of council to review the bylaw each term

[5:52] and update as needed. Some of the proposed changes are

[5:55] valid and necessary. Although others seem to be at odds

[5:59] with the municipality that despite the efforts of some counselors

[6:03] and staff, continues to face criticism about being somewhat archaic

[6:07] and a council that has often been accused of lacking

[6:09] and transparency and forward thinking decision making. First, I do

[6:13] support the proposed change to orally record closed session meetings.

[6:17] I believe that having oral recordings of in - camera

[6:20] meetings is important, particularly with reference to potential investigations regarding

[6:25] conduct in those meetings. I understand there are concerns from

[6:28] some counselors about this change. However, I fully trust the

[6:32] city clerk in their office to maintain those records securely

[6:36] and inconfidence. Second, I do not support the change regarding

[6:41] the banning of electronic devices, including cell phones and council

[6:44] chambers. In closed session, absolutely. But an open session, such

[6:50] a ban is an outright overreach of authority and something

[6:53] that literally know other municipality in the province has enacted.

[6:57] Passing the bylaw with this ban will only serve to

[7:00] further the city and this council's reputation as being stuck

[7:03] in the 20th century, unable and or unwilling to adapt

[7:07] to the current technological reality of how the world works

[7:11] in 2026. I take particular umbridge with some members of

[7:15] council who spoke in support of this change by making

[7:18] unfounded accusations towards other members and contributing their own state

[7:22] of desire to elect respect. Such cognitive dissonance continues to

[7:26] be disappointing, but not surprising. Moreover, implementing such a ban

[7:32] three months before the May 1st nomination period opens for

[7:35] the October Municipal Election seams as the kids would say

[7:39] highly sus. While the explicit purpose of this ban might

[7:43] not be to further alienate young people from the political

[7:46] process, I can tell you that that will be one

[7:49] of the outcomes. If you personally don't want to use

[7:53] or learn to use a cell phone, that's fine. But

[7:55] do not police the rest of council and the incoming

[7:58] council was such unnecessary and regressive measures. Lastly, with regards

[8:03] to limiting public delegations, I truly believe that further work

[8:08] should be done to ensure fairness and equitable access of

[8:11] residents to be able to speak before council. Limiting delegations

[8:15] to a maximum of 10, regardless of the number of

[8:18] agenda items is deeply problematic. There are often cycles of

[8:23] council where there are multiple highly contentious issues on the

[8:26] agenda and restricting the public's ability to delegate on those

[8:30] issues is not helpful in building trust and confidence between

[8:34] the public and our elected officials, which at all levels

[8:37] of government seems to be at an all - time

[8:39] low. Allowing only 10 delegations means that the ability of

[8:44] people to register depends entirely on their quick access to

[8:48] reliable technology and internet. Their ability to navigate the website

[8:53] or their ability to physically attend the clerk's office to

[8:56] fill out the delegation forms. I would argue that this

[8:59] is unfair and borders on discriminatory to people with out

[9:03] reliable technology and to folks who rely on transit or

[9:07] other forms of transportation to physically get to city hall,

[9:11] to register in time to be one of the first

[9:13] and only 10. I would suggest that perhaps as a

[9:18] compromise, the number of delegations be changed back to per

[9:22] item. And you could reduce it from 10 to between

[9:26] three and five, which is something that other municipalities have

[9:30] done and is quite in line with how other municipalities

[9:33] and Eastern Ontario have handled this issue. In conclusion, while

[9:37] it is council's prerogative to review the procedure bylaw each

[9:40] term, there is nothing binding saying that multiple changes must

[9:44] be made. That is at your discretion. And I implore

[9:48] you to use that discretion to consider what is best

[9:51] for the residents of Peterborough and our democratic process at

[9:55] large. Thank you. And I'm happy to take any questions.

[9:58] Thanks very much Diane. There may be some questions, questions

[10:02] real and counselor Baldwin. Councillor Real, please. Through the chair

[10:07] to Ms. Hale, Diane, thank you very much for being

[10:11] here. I know when you were the mayor of the

[10:14] city of Peterborough, you brought some changes to the procedural

[10:17] bylaw. And one of them was the amount of delegates

[10:19] that we could have to ten. Could you give me

[10:21] a little bit of a thought, your thought process? You

[10:24] spoke about here about the changes that are made and

[10:27] overall delegates for the complete meeting. Can you give me

[10:31] your thought process when you looked at that procedure bylaw

[10:35] and came to the number of 10? Sure. Uh, through,

[10:37] through the chair, Mr. Mayor, when I was the chair

[10:40] of Easter Ontario Mayor's caucus, there was a time where,

[10:43] um, we had unlimited delegation. Some of you will remember

[10:46] those days. And there were changes brought forward to, uh,

[10:50] to put some limitations around it, uh, there were, of

[10:54] course, nights where, uh, you know, the vast majority of

[10:57] the time was taken up with, with delegations that can

[11:00] get repetitive, fair enough. Um, and other municipalities, Eastern Ontario

[11:04] thought that, uh, the city of Peterborough having no limits

[11:08] was just like wild and unheard of. So, uh, I

[11:11] know that other municipalities, Kingston, Belleville Cornwall have some limits,

[11:18] um, although going from what we have now, 10 per

[11:21] item to 10 overall, regardless of what the agenda looks

[11:25] like to me is just going to be problematic down

[11:29] the road. Because as you know, some agendas are quite

[11:31] light. Some cycles, the agenda is super heavy and you

[11:35] have a ton of different issues that people want to

[11:37] speak to. Um, and then like I said, for people

[11:40] to be able to be one of the first 10

[11:42] to register, they need to be on the website or

[11:45] at the clerk's office or on the phone, like immediately

[11:48] to try to be one of those, those 10. Like

[11:51] to me, that's, uh, it does border on discriminatory for

[11:54] folks who don't have the access to be able to

[11:56] do that or who perhaps, um, aren't inclined to speak

[12:00] right away like some of us who don't mind coming

[12:03] here and, you know, stirring the pot a little bit,

[12:06] I guess. So I think that there, you know, is

[12:08] a way to do it. I think going by agenda

[12:11] is problematic. I think having limits per item makes more

[12:15] sense. And certainly there could be discussion about, uh, bringing

[12:19] that down from 10. There's, you know, few items. I

[12:23] think that you generally would have 10 or more. It

[12:26] does happen. But there are of course other ways for

[12:28] folks to express concerns to council. Um, so I hope

[12:32] that sort of answers a little bit of your question.

[12:35] Thank you very much for coming tonight. Thank you.

[12:50] Thanks, your worship is for you. Diana. It's good to

[12:52] see you. Um, I can recall four years ago, uh,

[12:56] you and I working on the procedure of bylaw trying

[12:58] to bring some changes in and you're exactly right. Uh,

[13:02] I can recall one meeting when, um, there were probably

[13:05] 40 or 50 delegates talking about BXWT. And we didn't

[13:09] finish the delegation till almost 1130 at night. The council

[13:13] business completed at 3 a. m. There were a number

[13:16] of us, I think including yourself at the time said

[13:18] that, you know, councillor couldn't make great decisions after midnight.

[13:23] Um, and so that's, I think that was part and

[13:25] parcel for one of the things that we worked on

[13:27] to try and get that limit down to 10. Um,

[13:30] the clerk can probably, correct me if I'm wrong, but

[13:32] I wanted to ask your opinion, Diane. If, if the

[13:37] procedural bylaw restricts the number of delegates speaking to 10,

[13:41] I believe a counselor could move a motion to suspend

[13:43] the order, the rules of order, which would allow unlimited

[13:47] numbers of delegates to come on a particular issue. You've

[13:50] referenced that in your comments. So let's say it's perhaps,

[13:53] let's say it's the, um, knocking down the buildings at

[13:56] general electric, let's say. True. I can see that being

[14:00] a situation where we might want to have or there

[14:03] may be more than 10 people who want to come.

[14:05] I suspect one of the councillors could make a lotion

[14:08] to suspend the order of operate so we can, we

[14:12] can have more people delegate. Is that a compromise in

[14:15] your opinion as well? Um, I think that, you know,

[14:19] well, a good suggestion, I don't know how that would

[14:21] play out because again, that motion would have to be

[14:25] made at the general committee meeting. I believe, unless, you

[14:30] know, you're telling you're making the motion at council when

[14:32] people have already been told they can't delegate counsel any

[14:35] cause that's what they, so, you know, if there already

[14:37] is a cap on 10 delegates for the whole meeting

[14:40] to then suspend it, well, people have already been told.

[14:42] Cause I know that I've tried to, uh, registra as

[14:44] a delegate before when there was already 10 people on

[14:47] an item. And it was like, there's already 10 people

[14:49] on this item. So, um, I, I don't think that

[14:51] that would solve the issue. Um, uh, because again, people

[14:55] would have already thought, well, I'm not allowed to delegate.

[14:58] So why, you know, they might not, um, take the

[15:00] pains to come be here. Yeah. Yeah. Fair enough. And

[15:03] I guess the other, the other comment. I like to

[15:04] make Mr. Chair is that there are no limits on

[15:07] statutory meetings like planning or on budget. So, you know,

[15:11] if we had 35 or 40 people that wanted to

[15:13] come and talk about the budget, they are not limited

[15:15] there or on a planning issue. So it's just these

[15:18] other items. So I just wanted to kind of have

[15:20] that put out there. And Diana, it's great to see

[15:22] you again. Absolutely. You too. Yeah. And I know those,

[15:26] um, legislated, you know, the, by the province, obviously there,

[15:29] you know, you can't cap those delegates, uh, but I

[15:32] think again, for some of those other issues that fall

[15:34] just under the municipal mandate, it still is important to,

[15:38] um, make constituents feel like they're able to come and

[15:42] express concerns, you know, they can do it through email,

[15:45] but, you know, some people like to come up and

[15:46] actually speak face to face. So counselor Chica, please. Uh,

[15:53] thank you very much through your worship to Diane Tyrion.

[15:57] And thank you for being hell. Thank you for being

[15:58] here. And, um, it's, it's interesting to hear your remarks

[16:04] regarding different scenarios that one could come up with, uh,

[16:07] regarding, um, number of speakers, length of speaking, all of

[16:12] that. Um, from your experience as a counselor and as

[16:16] a mayor, um. Do you feel that it's a short

[16:21] window of time to make decisions such as what has

[16:24] come forth in this particular, particular procedural, uh, proposal. And

[16:29] secondly, in your experience, what is the best case scenario,

[16:34] uh, for implementing these ideas and proposals, um, should, should

[16:41] there be consultation with other counselors or the public? What

[16:45] would in your experience have been the best case scenario,

[16:49] uh, to come up with procedural bylaw changes. Thank you

[16:52] very much. Diane, please. Okay. Thank you very much to

[16:55] the chair. Um, the few in there. So I'll try

[16:57] to answer them, but, um, again, I know that there

[17:00] is sort of like a procedural bylaw subcommittee that meets,

[17:03] um, I think that having consultation, uh, beyond that, that

[17:07] group, uh, would have been helpful, whether or not that

[17:10] occurred, I'm not, I'm not privy to that. Um, I

[17:13] think again, that the, uh, the way that the council

[17:17] cycles are working where it's committee and then council immediately

[17:21] the next week without that week in between, um, has

[17:24] sort of changed, uh, the vibe a little bit for

[17:27] a long time. There was sort of that, uh, well,

[17:29] used to have planning committee committee the whole and then

[17:32] council, over the years, uh, as things evolved. Um, so

[17:36] I think that that sort of short window between general

[17:39] committee and council, uh, is something that, uh, is a

[17:42] bit tricky for people, uh, to navigate and certainly for

[17:45] all of you to read like the vast amounts of

[17:48] materials that come before you, each cycle, uh, never mind

[17:51] having to respond to all the constituent requests and all

[17:54] the other things that go on behind the scenes that

[17:55] folks, um, might not realize as part of being an

[17:59] elected official. There's so much more than just this meeting

[18:01] that happens on Monday nights. Um, so, you know, I

[18:05] think the comparison and looking at what other municipal councils

[18:09] have done, that's good, but that, you know, you don't

[18:12] necessarily need to, uh, take that as a blueprint. You

[18:16] can tailor it to our very unique community and the

[18:19] needs that we have here. Um, I forget if there

[18:22] was probably another question in there, but. Thank you. No,

[18:25] that answered. Okay. Anything further counselor Chico. Council work, please.

[18:31] I'm here, Leo. Thank you through you to Ms. Terry

[18:33] and Hale. Diane, thank you for coming. Um, I sort

[18:37] of agree with, I think a lot of focus has

[18:39] been put on, um, the personal device issue from this,

[18:43] but I believe that, um, the more concerning change being

[18:47] implemented is the limitation of public input. And I agree

[18:50] with your suggestions. And also in my own research agree

[18:54] with, um, what you said about how other municipalities are

[18:57] addressing, um, what this is trying to address. Um, but

[19:01] my question is back to the personal electronic communication devices.

[19:05] Um, I had a, I had a sort of idea

[19:08] on the fly last week as a compromise where it

[19:11] would enable staff, um, to look at how, how communication

[19:18] besides speaking as I am could be problematic. Um, like

[19:22] it would take that into heart and also address, um,

[19:26] our autonomy to be able to follow the rules. Um,

[19:28] so I just suggested to change the wording from not

[19:31] being possession of to not use, um, your personal device

[19:35] for these reasons. Do you think that is a more

[19:38] reasonable approach if staffs, um, if the outcome that staff

[19:43] wants is for us not to do city business, uh,

[19:46] or communicate around this table besides in this way. Damn,

[19:51] please. Sure. And through you, Mr. Mayor, uh, I think,

[19:54] yeah, it's, it's an interesting issue that, you know, the

[19:58] use of personal cell phones. I can understand, uh, folks

[20:01] feeling like there's, you know, business being done. Uh, the

[20:04] flip side is that a lot of folks in the

[20:05] general public feel like the business is being done sort

[20:08] of behind closed doors, which isn't out in the open

[20:11] anyways. And so there has to be sort of a

[20:13] balance between, uh, what the procedure bylaw says and, you

[20:18] know, what is happening, um, around, around the horseshoe. And

[20:23] to, you know, you can have a cell phone. I'm

[20:24] not sure how that, you know, is going to be

[20:27] policed, you know, like, are you going to, you know,

[20:29] because it sounds very punitive like I've heard folks in

[20:33] elementary school saying like, we don't, or high school saying

[20:35] we don't even have these kinds of rules for our

[20:38] students. So, you know, are you all going to get

[20:39] sent to the hallway if you have your cell phone?

[20:42] Like what, you know, that's, uh, that's going to be

[20:44] tricky to navigate. And I just don't, uh, I just

[20:46] don't see how that's the best use of, of council

[20:48] time, uh, I don't think that, uh, that, as you

[20:53] said, I think a couple of folks made the point

[20:55] last week that it's trying to solve a problem that

[20:58] hasn't really been pointed to actually being a problem. Um,

[21:01] if that were the case, then, then sure. Um, but

[21:05] I think, I think it's an overreagent. And again, my

[21:07] concern too is that the impact that it will have

[21:10] on, uh, folks who hear about it and are like

[21:15] considering wanting to get involved in municipal politics, particularly younger

[21:18] folks, um, to be told that, you know, they do

[21:22] all their emails and business on, on, on cell phones.

[21:25] And so certainly you don't want folks being distracted, you

[21:29] know, while they're in council chambers, but having been around

[21:32] this, that table for eight years, uh, I know folks

[21:35] use their cell phones around that table. Um, whether you

[21:38] voted forward or not, uh, some of you still do

[21:42] use those cell phones. And that's okay. Um, as long

[21:45] as we're paying attention paying attention and making the best

[21:47] decisions for the community. Um, thank you. And one final

[21:50] question, Mr. Chair. If you read as I'm reading the

[21:54] bylaw, um, the paragraph about our personal electronic communication device

[22:01] is actually pursuant to the bullet point above it, which,

[22:04] which really is in reference to how at this table

[22:07] we communicate and how that has to be done through

[22:09] the chair. Um, so as someone who's had experience at

[22:13] this horseshoe, is it absurd to you like it is

[22:15] to me. That these devices are electronic devices that have

[22:22] all of the same ways in which we can communicate

[22:24] to each other and the public embedded in them. They

[22:27] have access to the internet. They have access to any

[22:30] app that I have on my phone. They're only this

[22:34] computer's only personally accessible by me via password. Is it

[22:38] not kind of, uh, illogical to say that I can't

[22:41] have a phone in my pocket, but I'm allowed to

[22:44] maybe or maybe not communicate through this device that we

[22:48] rely on. Yeah. I mean, I again, I think as

[22:51] long as things are done through, through the chair and,

[22:54] you know, folks are, you know, abiding by all the

[22:57] other guidelines that this council abides by, uh, I just,

[23:00] I feel like it's sort of an unnecessary overreach. And

[23:06] again, something that just seems to be again, taking up

[23:09] time and energy when the other more pressing issues in

[23:13] the community. Yeah. Thank you very much. And it's nice

[23:15] to see you. Councillor Chica, please. Thank you through you.

[23:24] Thank you. Uh, something else just came to mind a

[23:27] question. So thank you, your worship. Um, I had a

[23:32] labor lawyer this week to me about, uh, the scope

[23:36] of a procedure bylaw that a procedure bylaw really is

[23:40] about the rules of debate. Uh, and that the purview

[23:45] of the, of the, of that around the cell phone,

[23:48] uh, possession, um, would have more, it seems implicit from

[23:52] the debate last week to do with, um, code of

[23:55] conduct. Um, and so, you know, why is this coming

[23:59] up in a procedure bylaw when that has to do

[24:02] with the rules of debate? Um, your thoughts or reflections

[24:05] on that. Do you have any? Thank you. Through the

[24:08] chair, uh, I'm not a labor lawyer. So, uh, but

[24:10] I do think that, uh, indeed, if somebody was using

[24:13] their personal cell phone for what turned out to be,

[24:16] you know, an inappropriate ways or ways that we're not

[24:19] conducive to the business of council, certainly that would be

[24:21] something that in my mind would, would make more sense

[24:23] to be covered under the Code of Council, sorry, Code

[24:26] of Conduct, um, rather than the procedure bylaw, because, you

[24:30] know, in my experience, the procedure bylaw is to govern

[24:33] sort of like how these meetings are run. And so.

[24:37] Thank you. Any further questions. Thank you very much, Diane.

[24:43] Thank you very much. Our next delegate is Danielle Turpin.

[24:46] Mr. Pi, please. If we could have your name and

[24:49] address for the public recorded at five minutes to make

[24:53] a presentation. Welcome. Welcome. Thank you. I'm Danielle Turpin 1288

[24:57] Bridal Drive. Please proceed. Thank you. Mayor and members of

[25:01] council. I'm here tonight because I don't think this council

[25:04] is being honest with the public or maybe even with

[25:07] itself about what this vote is really about and who

[25:10] is going to be most affected by it. This isn't

[25:13] just about how meetings run. It's about how democracy is

[25:16] exercised in this city who gets heard and whether public

[25:19] participation is something this council truly values and protects. I'm

[25:24] a founder of a worker - owned cooperative. I spend

[25:27] my life inside democratic decision - making. And one thing

[25:30] I have learned over and over again is that when

[25:33] governance gets quieter or gets smoother, it's rarely because things

[25:37] are working better. Usually it's because people have stopped believing

[25:40] it's worth speaking up. So a board with no friction

[25:44] is an unhealthy board. Fiction doesn't mean chaos. It means

[25:48] people are engaged. It means decisions are being tested instead

[25:52] of rushed. It means power isn't just flowing from one

[25:55] direction without challenge. And when I read this report, what

[25:59] stood out to me wasn't clarity, transparency or efficiency, it

[26:03] was how many of these changes are designed to reduce

[26:06] that friction. Limits on delegations, limits on counselors questions. Titan

[26:13] response times shoulder debate. More decisions that are bundled together.

[26:18] So we take all this together and all of that

[26:20] points in one direction. Less space for people, less time

[26:25] to think and less room for challenge. And this doesn't

[26:29] just affect the public. This affects every single one of

[26:32] you. And your ability to do your job properly and

[26:36] meaningfully as we elected you to do. If counselors are

[26:40] being rushed, if questions are capped, if answers are forced

[26:43] into these short timeframes, then decisions are being made without

[26:47] fully understanding their real impact. Complex issues don't resolve themselves

[26:52] with two questions and 90 second answers. Real impact surface

[26:56] through conversation and disagreement and with time. At the last

[27:01] meeting about this, several counselors actually tried to engage in

[27:04] this good faith discussion. They suggested reasonable solutions and amendments

[27:09] to the cell phone band, for example, changing the word

[27:12] to focus on use rather than possession. They asked what

[27:16] problems were actually being solved with all of these changes.

[27:19] Those are basic governance questions, yet no one could really

[27:22] answer them clearly. And this should concern all of us

[27:26] because it shows that decisions here are moving forward without

[27:31] meaningful collaboration without reason and without explanation. And without the

[27:35] willingness to just slow down and listen. And it shows

[27:39] exactly why debate matters because the person with the last

[27:42] word isn't always right. We're seeing our democratic rights being

[27:47] played with here under the guise of process, through rules,

[27:51] through changing or through decisions framed as reasonable. And well

[27:56] power is becoming more centralized and democratic spaces are getting

[28:00] smaller and less accessible. That erosion doesn't start in a

[28:04] vacuum. It starts with people like you. In rooms exactly

[28:08] like this with decisions exactly like this. And it starts

[28:12] with leaders who believe that efficiency is more important than

[28:15] democracy. If these procedural changes were truly small and technical

[28:21] as this report was implying, they wouldn't be worth talking

[28:24] about publicly. Yet Councillor Parnell went on CBC's Ontario morning

[28:28] to talk about them. She was able to have her

[28:31] voice heard and her position heard unchecked and unchallenged. Yet

[28:36] Councilor Parnell will likely vote in favor of minimizing all

[28:39] of our voices tonight. So it's hard to accept the

[28:42] idea that this is just procedural. While at the same

[28:45] time debate with the people who actually live with the

[28:49] consequences of these votes are going to be restricted. As

[28:53] elected officials, you don't get to make decisions that affect

[28:55] people's housing services, neighborhoods and dailies lives, and then treat

[29:01] public input is something just to manage. We aren't an

[29:05] inconvenience. We are actually the reason this room exists. Tonight's

[29:10] vote is an about procedure. It's a values test for

[29:13] each and every one of you. If residents start to

[29:16] feel that meaningful input is always rushed, capped or quietly

[29:20] sidelined, we don't just get frustrated. We're going to push

[29:24] back. And once people start believing this room in here

[29:28] belongs to them, trust slowly doesn't erode. It breaks completely.

[29:33] So yes, how you vote tonight will tell us exactly

[29:37] how you value democracy and how you value us as

[29:40] the real stakeholders and all of these decisions. And to

[29:44] those of you who are running again, please know this.

[29:47] If people feel shut out of democracy inside these chambers,

[29:50] they're going to find another way in. And that way

[29:53] is going to be at the ballot box in October.

[29:56] So please vote tonight as if you're a political career

[29:58] depends on it because it does. Thank you. Sturman, thank

[30:02] you very much for your presentation. Uh, there could be

[30:04] some questions. Questions. Councillor, please. Through the chair to Ms.

[30:11] Turpin Danielle. Thank you very much for being here. And

[30:15] I, I believe you poverty answered my question at the

[30:18] end. Um, if this procedural bylaw change goes through. Um,

[30:26] and your ability to come and present at council. What

[30:33] is your last resort. Being heard in the community. It's

[30:38] going to be media. It's going to be social media.

[30:42] It's going to be media or it'll be depending on

[30:44] what the topic is that our voice is going to

[30:46] be, uh, shut out from. It'll be rallies on front

[30:51] in, you know, in city hall. There's other recourses. I

[30:54] just don't understand why the people who are really being

[30:56] affected by this because it's all of us here do

[30:59] not have a right to be able to be heard

[31:02] on every single agenda item that is going to be

[31:06] discussed. These aren't your items. These aren't your decisions solely.

[31:10] They have to be made in partnership with the stakeholders

[31:13] here. And that's us, right? So we are in a

[31:17] position right now where I'm feeling the political climate everywhere

[31:22] is a little bit crazy. And I think we all

[31:24] can appreciate that. People are feeling that our voices every,

[31:30] you know, everywhere we look, we are being shut out

[31:32] from decisions that are affecting our lives. This is such

[31:35] a simple decision for you guys, really. And especially because

[31:39] it's only a few months before this next election, I

[31:42] don't understand why any of you would risk this, to

[31:44] be honest. There's no real reason for it. No one

[31:48] could give a proper explanation on why any of these

[31:51] decisions actually had to be made right now. And then

[31:56] make any of these decisions. So I implore you all

[32:00] to really just take a step back, really think about

[32:03] this and think about the message that each and every

[32:06] one of you is sending about what you value. Because

[32:10] that's what we're going to take away tonight. Cause we

[32:16] have it. Thank you. Another question. Okay. Any other counselor

[32:19] burnt, please. Um, thank you Marilyl. Mr. Pin, thank you

[32:24] so much for coming. Um, my personal belief in terms

[32:27] of what makes a good leader is someone that understands,

[32:31] um, uh, and listens to the people that have opposing

[32:35] views. And so that's why it was important for me

[32:37] last week to try to, even though personally I felt

[32:40] differently to try to find some sort of middle ground

[32:43] between what was being proposed. Um, versus how I feel.

[32:47] And, you know, I do understand where, where some of

[32:49] these changes are coming from. So my question to you

[32:53] through the chair is around, um, Miss Terry and Hale's

[32:58] suggestion, which I think is a good example of that

[33:00] compromise. And Diane suggested, um, that maybe we could limit,

[33:06] um, because she was, she was bang on some nights

[33:09] our agendas are very, very light and other nights we

[33:12] have a heavy agendas with a multitude of different, um,

[33:16] issues that are important to different groups of people. So,

[33:19] um, Diane suggestion was a great one. I hope, I

[33:22] hope we talk more about it, but it was to

[33:24] limit the amount of delegates per agenda item between, I

[33:27] think she said between three and five. Would that be

[33:29] a sort of compromise that, um. That you could handle,

[33:34] please? Yeah. Thank you. Through you. Um, I think, uh,

[33:37] that's a really important compromise. And I think that word

[33:39] is really important compromise. It has to be about different

[33:42] perspectives and coming together and finding a solution that works

[33:45] for everyone. I firmly believe that in most times there

[33:48] are solutions that work for everyone if time is put

[33:51] into this. I know for a fact that if this

[33:56] law was or this bylaw was passed and voted for

[33:59] prior to this meeting, there's four of us right now

[34:02] who are speaking on this very important agenda item. So

[34:05] you guys look around and tell me who you don't

[34:07] want to speak or who shouldn't have a right to

[34:09] speak because that's exactly what's going to happen every single

[34:12] time. So yeah, we have to have a limit. And

[34:15] if we go over and we have a really long

[34:18] agenda item, I think counselor Baldwin, you had mentioned that,

[34:21] that some have gone into like one in the morning

[34:22] or whatever. You guys know what your agendas are going

[34:25] to look like. Is there any reason why you can't

[34:27] spread that out over two days? Or, you know, or

[34:31] shorten the agenda down and break it down. That's on

[34:33] you guys. That's not on the public's responsibility to manage

[34:35] that. Right. Um, so I do think it's important that

[34:38] we look at that compromise. I would fully support that

[34:42] at five people per agenda item. Um, Mr. Chair, thank

[34:46] Danielle, thank you so much. Um, it is incorrect though.

[34:49] We do not absolutely do not know what our agendas

[34:52] are going to look like. We receive our agendas the

[34:55] day before the public does. And we are just, um,

[34:58] we are as in the dark as the public is

[35:00] in terms of what is going to be on that

[35:01] agenda. Who creates the Jedpa staff. Okay. So they would

[35:05] be able to maybe manage that a bit better than.

[35:08] Yeah through the chair possibly. Yeah. That'd be my suggestion.

[35:14] Anything further counselor Burke. Thank you Mr. Chairman Chica, please.

[35:19] Thank you very much. So you, your worship to Ms.

[35:23] Turpin. Thank you for coming. And, um, for your articulate

[35:26] presentation, uh, there's a great deal of thought analysis. You

[35:31] provided on each of the points you raised. And it's

[35:34] much appreciated. Thank you for reminding us who this house

[35:38] belongs to. And, and who it is that have elected

[35:42] us, and the importance of voice. Um, the issue of

[35:47] length seems to be the impetus behind reducing the, the

[35:52] number of speakers in delegations. And given that, and you've

[35:57] already mentioned and endorse the idea that, uh, counselor Burke

[36:02] and Ms. Tierra Hale had mentioned earlier, is there anything

[36:05] else that you can think of, you know, when we're

[36:08] reaching one o'clock in the morning on a long agenda

[36:11] with many delegations, um, what, what do you think as

[36:16] a thoughtful politico that you are might be a helpful,

[36:20] um, approach or a different approach to address that particular

[36:25] issue so that we're not fatigued so that length isn't

[36:28] the big issue. Thank you very much, your worship. Mr.

[36:31] Pippen. Thank you for you. Um, I would say, I

[36:33] guess I would be speaking to the city staff who

[36:36] are making these agendas and seeing if they can maybe

[36:39] make them a little bit more concise, separate them into

[36:42] different days if possible. If the one that's going to

[36:45] be more fulsome, um, I also believe that staff and

[36:49] council are very aware of some of these contentious items

[36:52] where you may get some, you know, a lot of

[36:54] delegates coming to, um, and so maybe if the little

[36:58] bit of forethought into that and planning ahead of time,

[37:03] then folks might not be here until one of the

[37:05] morning, but I'm going to, uh, just add one more

[37:09] thing to that because. Democracy is not supposed to be

[37:14] efficient. Democracy isn't supposed to be clean and neat. It's

[37:19] supposed to be messy. And it's supposed to be about

[37:22] listening. And it's supposed to be about multiple personalities. Most

[37:26] importantly through the people who are the stakeholders of every

[37:29] single decision you make. So yep. When you're going to

[37:34] have to listen to us. And that's what you're elected

[37:37] for. So I understand that you guys have a job

[37:41] and you have lives and you have all of that.

[37:42] And I'm pretty sure one AM meetings don't go and

[37:47] don't happen all the time. But I need to know

[37:49] that our city council who's making really important decisions about

[37:53] our daily lives are doing that with the best intentions,

[37:57] not because they want to get in and out very

[38:00] quickly. Right. And that's what I'm seeing here with this.

[38:03] So I'm hoping that tonight you guys will vote better.

[38:07] Um, and realize that the people who really, really matter

[38:11] in these decisions are the ones that the decisions affect.

[38:14] And that's, that's us. Here. Thank you. Councillor Baldwin, please.

[38:22] And thanks, uh, Mr. Chair Danielle. It's good to see

[38:24] you again. You too. Um. One of the things that's

[38:28] been done at council, um, over the last 12 years

[38:32] when I've had the privilege of sitting here is that

[38:35] one person or a couple of people will take a

[38:38] variety of different inputs from, uh, from a community. And

[38:42] they'll be the speaker. And they'll come. I can recall,

[38:46] let's just use one person in average, for example. He

[38:50] would come and he would express or give a presentation

[38:53] for councils consideration on behalf of a certain organization. Would

[38:59] you concur with that as an option of presenting information

[39:02] to counselor? For sure. If it's for a group of

[39:04] people or a certain organization, um, but again, I'm going

[39:08] to put the onus back on council in city staff

[39:12] because we're not here to accommodate you to make your

[39:15] job easier. You guys are here to be listening to

[39:17] us and to really get that input from us. So

[39:19] absolutely I would try to prioritize and maybe encourage public

[39:24] to, if you're a part of an organization or a

[39:26] group of people, um, to have that one person to

[39:29] speak. That makes perfect sense. But, um, that's not something

[39:33] that we should be forced to organize, you know, for

[39:37] ourselves. But I would definitely encourage it. Second. Share. Danielle,

[39:43] I know each of the counselors works a little bit

[39:45] differently. Certainly, uh, counselor reality are quite often dealing with

[39:52] individuals, uh, one - on - one or one on

[39:55] three or one on two. At a coffee shop. We

[39:59] do some of our best work. I would say Keith

[40:02] on the grassroots level. Um, I can count on my

[40:05] hand this year, the number of people I've conversed with

[40:08] who've actually come to council, made it to delegation. Um,

[40:11] but this means it's right or wrong. That's just the

[40:13] reality of it. So I'm assuming you do reach out

[40:16] to counselors in a different way as opposed to coming

[40:19] to council after we council chambers. Uh, yeah, I am

[40:23] very engaged with council. Um, I would like to believe

[40:26] that some would be engaged with me. Sadly, I don't

[40:28] get the responses via email. As I should through my

[40:32] own counselors, um, so yes, but I do. And I

[40:35] hear what you're saying. So maybe there could be a

[40:37] way to have some sort of campaign to really talk

[40:40] and highlight, um, different ways to communicate with your counselors

[40:44] and encourage that because one to one is definitely the

[40:46] best way I think. Right. And then they don't have

[40:49] to come and speak because you guys are already answering

[40:51] that. Like the one person who had today, right? Her

[40:54] issue was already solved. That's perfect, um, but, uh, yeah.

[40:59] And unless we can rely on getting that really decent

[41:02] response back from the city councillors, um, this might be

[41:06] sometimes people's last resort. We also don't know how every

[41:10] council learner communicates with others. Right. So, and even though

[41:14] I speak to my counselors regularly and many others, um,

[41:19] I don't know if they're communicating my views to everyone

[41:21] else and their vote also is important and their vote

[41:25] affects me as well. So I think that there needs

[41:28] to be multiple avenues for people to express their concerns.

[41:32] Lastly, uh, your worship, one of the reasons I do

[41:35] communicate with, um, my constituents and members across the city,

[41:39] um, we are city councils. This is not war counselors

[41:43] quite often when you send back an email response. You

[41:45] lose proprietary over that. You don't know where it goes

[41:48] to whom it goes. So quite often I don't teeth

[41:50] and I work this out a lot. We'll send back

[41:53] a response. Thank you very much for your, uh, for

[41:56] your correspondence. Would be happy to converse and meet and

[42:00] talk about this because I don't know, um, how you

[42:04] infer response from me, for example. And if I'm talking

[42:08] to someone, uh, just like you and I are now,

[42:12] uh, across the desk. I think you've got a much

[42:15] better opportunity to make a conversation that's authentic. And it's

[42:20] between two or three people. It doesn't go wildfire across

[42:24] the city. I have no idea where it goes and

[42:27] what's that and what's inferred. So my method of dealing

[42:31] with people, um, is to converse absolutely by email, but

[42:36] let's have a conversation list sit down and have a

[42:39] conversation one - on - one or a small group.

[42:42] I. e. coffee with the counselor. I have two or

[42:45] three becomes sit down with a counselor. And have a

[42:47] good dialogue and discussion. You get a lot of good

[42:50] things done that way. Sure. Can I, can I answer

[42:53] or not? I don't, I know it wasn't really a

[42:55] question for you. Thank you. Um, yeah, and I guess

[42:58] maybe my, my response to that. And I think what

[43:01] I'm hearing here is excellent. That's exactly what I think

[43:03] we would want. Right. If you were my counselor and

[43:06] I reached out to you and you did exactly what

[43:08] you said and then you asked, you know, Hey, would

[43:10] you like to meet? And I would if I could.

[43:14] What do you do with that information? Do you bring

[43:16] it back to council? Do you speak to my issue

[43:20] at council? So everyone else gets to hear my concerns.

[43:23] Because if you don't, then the onus again is on

[43:27] the constituents to reach out to every single one of

[43:30] you guys sit down and have a coffee because you

[43:33] don't want to respond by email. And I understand why,

[43:36] um, it's not, it doesn't work as well. You want

[43:38] to have these personal conversations. So in order to make

[43:41] sure that my voice is being heard by every single

[43:44] council person here, the expectation would be that I set

[43:47] up meetings with every single person because I'm not too

[43:51] sure what you do with that at, at, at that

[43:53] time. So me, I don't know. Maybe you can clarify.

[43:56] Do you say I had a meeting with somebody and

[43:59] these were some of the concerns. And I want all

[44:00] of these council members to know that, um, cause I

[44:03] don't hear that often here, but. Danielle, that would, that

[44:09] would be a conversation between you and I. Could I

[44:12] share some of our conversations with my counselor colleagues. Um,

[44:16] I wouldn't just automatically do that without getting your permission.

[44:20] Okay. Because it may seem maybe some things that you

[44:22] and I are discussing on a personal level that you

[44:23] don't want to go anywhere any further. But certainly if

[44:27] you're saying, Gary, would you please share these conversations with

[44:30] your counselor colleague or the mayor or anybody else. I

[44:34] would have no problem doing that. So I do have

[44:36] one response through you, Mayor. So I, I'm hearing what

[44:40] you're saying and I'm not opposed to any type of

[44:43] engagement with constituents. That's what has to happen. But I'm

[44:47] also hearing that to make things easier for counselors, um,

[44:52] that they onus is on the constituents to organize themselves

[44:56] to be able to reach out maybe several times, right

[44:59] through email or through a coffee or whatever. So that

[45:02] brings back accessibility issues, childcare issues. It brings up when

[45:07] we can work, when we count work. They're important and

[45:10] they are absolutely part of that process. But they can't

[45:14] be the only or the most private, like the priortized

[45:17] one. Right. So I think it's important that we really,

[45:20] really focus on different avenues accessible avenues for everybody. And

[45:26] most importantly and lastly, we cannot limit. From 10 to

[45:32] one per item. The amount of people who have to

[45:35] speak. I can promise you we are going to have

[45:37] problems. Not we, not us, but it's going to be

[45:40] a problem. People are not going to be happy with

[45:42] that. We're not going to have a problem. We are,

[45:43] we've had problems. I know. Where is. Thanks. Yeah. It

[45:47] was my son's principal. So yeah, any further questions for

[45:52] disturbance. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next Mr. Heyllman,

[45:58] please. Stay hell, but if we could have your name

[46:01] address. For the public record, you have five minutes to

[46:04] make a presentation. Sure thing. Thank you. Awesome. My name

[46:06] is Rob Hellman. My address is 500 Murray Street in

[46:09] Peterborough. Please proceed, sir. Great. Thank you. So I'm here

[46:12] to expect my concerns about the bylaw. Most importantly about

[46:14] the changes to the delegations and to the debate, the

[46:18] time of debate for counselors. But first I want to

[46:20] make a very brief comment about the ban on personal

[46:23] electronic devices. It is nonsensical on its face for precisely

[46:26] the reason the counselor Park mentioned. You have computers on

[46:28] your desks. Um, there may be our concerns about communication

[46:33] and information outside of the public record and the rules

[46:35] of debate. But banning personal devices does not resolve it.

[46:39] In this term, we've seen counselors make intimations about others

[46:42] that there have been information or even specific texts of

[46:45] motions and things brought forward that were conducted by unseen

[46:48] actors. To my knowledge, this has always been baseless. There

[46:51] is evidently distrust and disrespect amongst this council, but that

[46:55] does not need to be enshrined in a bylaw. The

[46:58] limits on delegations, uh, are inappropriate and non - democratic.

[47:02] In the time that I've been involved in political life

[47:04] computer, bore, I've seen the scope of public demigrations being

[47:07] progressively weakened over, over 20 years. The reduction in speaking

[47:10] time, the institution of a cap on the number of

[47:12] delegates. The restriction that you can only speak to one

[47:14] agenda item, the removal of unregistered delegates. Unreal delegations. We

[47:19] can debate the wisdom of those changes, but the current

[47:21] change, I think, goes far much too far. The staff

[47:26] report names a number of municipalities that were taffed for

[47:28] best practices. Um, as my friend David King noted in

[47:32] Article Hero for Arthur, none of those municipalities have a

[47:35] restriction on delegations as restrictive as the one proposed today.

[47:39] Moreover, many provide greater opportunities for participation by delegates, allowing

[47:43] more time the opportunity to speak to more than one

[47:45] item or the opportunity for delegates themselves to ask questions.

[47:50] I've similar concerns about the reduction in speaking time from

[47:54] counselors in meetings. This would reduce the time to speak

[47:56] to a total of 10 minutes per counselor per item

[47:58] in general committee. And just six minutes in council. To

[48:02] be honest, I'm bewildered as to what makes that necessary.

[48:04] I can see the reasoning in a municipality with a

[48:06] large council such as Toronto with 26 members of council

[48:09] and a restriction of five minutes per counselor per agenda

[48:12] item or an auto always 25. But I don't see

[48:15] the reason in a council of 11. Both of these

[48:19] changes directly serve to undermine the purpose that council is

[48:22] here to serve. I've heard many people say publicly and

[48:26] privately throughout this term of counsel that it seems like

[48:28] decisions are made behind closed doors that by the time

[48:31] reports come to cancel, uh, and to these meetings, votes

[48:35] are already decided and that delegations and debate of council

[48:38] itself is a little more than pageantry. Perhaps I'm a

[48:41] fool, but I'm not convinced of that. But the changes

[48:44] of this bylaw do point to a future without certainly

[48:46] could be the case if it is not already. I

[48:49] can't make the case plainly enough that public comment and

[48:52] debate by elected officials are not just an important part

[48:55] of democracy. They are democracy itself. And yet general committee

[49:00] has already endorsed a plan to restrict them in the

[49:02] name of efficiency. As we've heard from other delegates this

[49:04] evening, there is attention between efficiency and the work of

[49:07] governance. Ensuring that voices are heard and that hard decisions

[49:10] are given consideration and debate on the record and in

[49:14] public is time consuming. It can be painstaking. It can

[49:17] be profoundly unexciting. It is also the work that you

[49:20] are elected to do. If efficiency means doing that work

[49:24] less than we should welcome and celebrate our inefficiency together.

[49:28] Once again, there is evidently distrust and disrespect amongst this

[49:31] council, but that distress does not need to be enshrined

[49:33] in a bylaw. I won't labor the point by talking

[49:37] about the bigger issues here, but the importance of fighting

[49:39] for democracy right here in a world where fascism is

[49:42] climbing back faster and faster every day. But if hearing

[49:45] from the public and from each other is a burden

[49:47] to onerous for any of you to bear, there is

[49:49] a simple solution. And one that does not require putting

[49:51] a bylaw end office. There's an election this year and

[49:53] you are welcome to end your public service then. If

[49:56] that is too untoweight, there is a door right there

[49:58] and you are welcome to walk through it and not

[49:59] return. And I'm not, I'm not joking. That is a

[50:02] you do not have to do this work. So let

[50:04] me offer a few solutions to wrap up. First and

[50:08] foremost, tonight either remove these couple of items from the

[50:10] procedure bylaw before adopting it. Or perhaps based on what

[50:13] we've heard this even being deferred until such time that

[50:16] aversion, that respects the principles of democracy can be prepared.

[50:20] A recent editorial in the examiner made some very valuable

[50:22] suggestions. And pointed that these issues can be addressed in

[50:26] the consideration of how council agendas are prepared. It is

[50:29] very seldom as a surprise by the time we get

[50:31] to a meeting what item will spur a great number

[50:33] of delegations or what Adam will score a great deal

[50:36] of debate. This should be taken into account when drafting

[50:39] agendas to avoid the situation we've seen too many times

[50:41] when meetings are six, eight, 10 hours long. And then

[50:43] in the next cycle they're 45 minutes long. We could

[50:46] also consider strengthening rules and processes around multiple delegations from

[50:51] individuals representing the same group. I think we've all been

[50:53] at meetings where a group which has great deals passion

[50:56] a lot to say about an issue. My register five

[50:58] or six delegates. Um, there could be consideration or some

[51:03] processes put in place to prioritize people who are not

[51:06] representing those groups. But any such change we need to

[51:08] be drafted with great care. Let's finish this slide. Um,

[51:11] to ensure that, sir, great. Thank you. So just those

[51:14] rules need to draft it with great care to make

[51:15] sure that they do not, that they are balanced themselves

[51:18] and do not exclude people participating in a good faith.

[51:20] So that would also be a reason to defer. So

[51:22] more than anything for the sake of democracy itself, I

[51:25] ask that the bylaw has written not be adopted this

[51:27] evening. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Hillman. There could be

[51:30] some questions, questions. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you.

[51:34] Mr. Brady, please, Roy.

[51:56] If we could have your David address for the public

[51:57] record, of course, uh, Roy Brady wear street. Okay. Also

[52:04] on delegations with a few extra points really. Um, I

[52:08] was caught sleeping last week and thanks others were too

[52:10] because of the report did state in it. Quote that

[52:14] a maximum of 10 delegations be permitted at a council

[52:18] meeting, uh, unquote. Then it was justified quote in order

[52:22] to support efficient agenda management. Unquote. As if the public

[52:28] speaking as part of the Democratic process breeds inefficiency and

[52:34] is not so necessary. That was my impression. City Council

[52:38] meetings are, are held not only for municipalitics to debate

[52:42] and vote. But so importantly for residents to address city

[52:46] council themselves or have other people do it. Do realize

[52:49] that the audience includes more than the residents in this

[52:52] gallery, but also at homes on live stream. This is

[52:56] sharing input. And the central part of the whole Democratic

[53:00] process as much as need as much as needs to

[53:03] be communicated. Otherwise the public input, according to this report,

[53:08] is to be undemocratically restricted to as few opportunities as

[53:12] possible. And as short a period of time as possible,

[53:16] all in the name of efficiency. Hathaben serious problems. With

[53:22] delegations. I haven't heard it expressed by you. There's been

[53:26] no particular public Oakrai or any Ocry around the council

[53:32] people here. So, uh, if it hasn't been expressed publicly

[53:36] or democratically, the problem. You can find it easy to

[53:40] drop this one, that part. Because of restrictions toward delegations,

[53:45] there would at times, uh, be a lively competition to

[53:49] get on that proposed magic 10 list such as apply

[53:53] on Tuesday, or maybe on Wednesday, you wouldn't be eligible.

[53:57] Imagine. To speak or not to speak at a mandated

[54:02] political form. Being restricted. For this particular proposal, and for

[54:07] some others, um, cheering me, I'm sure. Yes. There are

[54:12] separate parts. They're all important. That need to be addressed,

[54:17] such as in this case, there's delegations, cell phones, notices,

[54:20] emotion, deferrals, other businesses and so on. Such occasions require

[54:25] additional delegations because all these challenges can't be crammed into

[54:30] one short delegation. Another problem affecting use of delegations is

[54:36] the city's regularity of having overloaded agenda items at one

[54:40] city. Often. Number, yes. And also complexities. This problem affects

[54:47] counselors to read study further than debate. So much and

[54:51] devote so much attention. But residents thus experience related problems

[54:57] such as overload that would likely increase the need and

[55:00] opportunity to address so much in such a certain time

[55:04] delegations then are even more necessary as part of the

[55:08] democratic process. Also, please do try to stop directly involving

[55:14] the non - political staff to assert political discourse and

[55:18] decision - making decision making. They have enough responsibilities that

[55:21] workload. They've got problems of provincial interference research. So much

[55:27] detailed changing issues. Staff could still speak to counselors. But

[55:32] as residents. As residents. In general, deferring proposals allows for

[55:38] further serious study and reaction to public input and then

[55:42] return with an improved version. Reduce contents perhaps. And even

[55:46] at times withdrawals, withdrawal of it. So from me, of

[55:51] course, the delegation section of this report needs to be

[55:55] removed. Absolutely. And realizing other contentions in the report deferring

[56:01] the report in its entirety should be considered. Seriously considered.

[56:07] Oh, and here's a novel idea. To examine these issues,

[56:10] important issues further. How about involving the public. Who weren't

[56:15] previously involved. And that would be real democracy. Thank you.

[56:22] Thanks very much, Roy. There could be some questions. Questions

[56:25] for Mr. Brittany, Councillor Baldwin, please. Mr. Chair, just a

[56:30] comment first. Royce, always great to have you here in

[56:33] making a delegation to city council. What's that story? It's

[56:36] always nice to have you making a W. Thank you.

[56:38] Thank you. Last year you weren't here nearly enough. You

[56:43] were missed. Last year you weren't here nearly enough. You

[56:48] were missed. Well, I'll do something about that. Don't worry.

[56:54] Now the question Mr. Chairish, well you made a, made

[56:57] a statement. About staff. Either making saying things. But I

[57:05] know that they're not casting a vote. And I refer

[57:08] to staff as subject experts. So, and the other point

[57:12] I want to make about that and I'll ask you

[57:14] the question in a minute. Some of our staff are

[57:17] not city of Peterborough residents. So you say they are

[57:20] residents. They are residents, but they may not be residents

[57:23] of the city of Peterborough. Um, how do we go

[57:26] about getting information from them if we don't ask. Well,

[57:30] great. Of course. They are to provide information. But this

[57:34] was a committee that did a lot more than that.

[57:36] It made very serious suggestions for, Oh, we could duck

[57:40] ourselves around this table and how people conduct themselves. So

[57:43] I'm not too sure that's what we're the staff should

[57:45] be involved. And I don't think they want to be.

[57:50] Fair enough. Thank you. Thank you.

[58:12] Welcome Philip. If we get out of here, David addressed

[58:14] for the public record. And you'll have five minutes, sir,

[58:16] to make a presentation. Thank you. It's a Philip Jolliker

[58:20] 37 York drive. Beautibor on Zero. Of course. Thanks Mary

[58:24] Leo counselors and city staff. Thank you for the opportunity

[58:27] to speak today. I'm here as someone who has had

[58:30] the privilege of working alongside Dr. Peggy Shaunesty and the

[58:33] team at Righte the Heel and Red Path Wellness Center

[58:36] over the past couple of years. I initially came into

[58:38] this work through marketing support, but very quickly it became

[58:41] something much more personal. Through this work, I have met

[58:44] people who are the success stories of Red Bath. I've

[58:48] heard their words have listened to where they were, where

[58:50] they are now. These are not abstract outcomes or statistics.

[58:54] These are people who were once written off and are

[58:57] now showing up for their lives. Their families and their

[59:00] community because someone believed in them. And that believed them

[59:05] in them when it mattered most. This issue is also

[59:07] personal to me beyond my professional involvement. I have family

[59:11] in this community who struggle with addiction and her on

[59:14] the streets. I've watched the impact ripple through families, relationships

[59:18] and generations. And I've also lost close family members to

[59:22] a drug overdosed in several to alcoholism. Those losses stay

[59:26] with you. It changes how you hear these conversations. It

[59:29] changes how you view responsibility, urgency and compassion. We often

[59:34] talk about meeting people where they're at. Red path does

[59:37] exactly that. This program is a proven piece that the

[59:40] recovery puzzle. It meets people who are ready for recovery

[59:43] where they are through accountability structure and depersonal work. It

[59:47] helps them rebuild their lives. This is not a quick

[59:50] fix and is not a band - aid. It's a

[59:52] model with a proven track record. Grounded indignity, wellness, and

[59:56] long - term healing. An essential part of this work

[1:00:00] in one that many of you already acknowledged is the

[1:00:02] critical gap in our community. Uh, for the need of

[1:00:07] transitional beds. All councillors agree that PETABO does not have

[1:00:10] enough transitional housing options, particularly for people moving from treatment

[1:00:15] into stability. This funding request directly supports the planning of

[1:00:19] transitional beds at the red path location. These beds are

[1:00:23] not about warehousing people. They are both continuity of care,

[1:00:28] stability, accountability, and giving people a real chance to sustain

[1:00:32] recovery during the most vulnerable stage of their journey. Last

[1:00:35] week has cancelled discussed. Meeting this funding request forward. Something

[1:00:40] stood out to me. Every one of you that took

[1:00:42] the time to visit the new red path facility. Ask

[1:00:45] questions and listen directly to Dr. Shaughnessy voted in favor

[1:00:48] of moving this request to the next step. Those who

[1:00:51] did not visit expressed hesitation and asked for a deferral

[1:00:55] or did not support at all. That is not criticism.

[1:00:58] It's simply telling. See in the work matters, listening matters.

[1:01:02] Understanding the scope of the heart of the program matters.

[1:01:06] I also want to acknowledge a moment that moved me

[1:01:08] emotionally. Councillor Parnell thanked Councillor Crowley for bringing Dr. Shaughnessy

[1:01:14] and write to heel to the table for discussion and

[1:01:16] support from the city. That moment mattered because I know

[1:01:19] how long and how hard Dr. Sean is he has

[1:01:23] been fighting for this community. This did not start yesterday.

[1:01:26] This has been years of persistence, advocacy, and showing up

[1:01:30] when it would have been easier just to walk away.

[1:01:32] Let me be clear. This is not about investing in

[1:01:35] one person. This is about investing in our community. It's

[1:01:38] about investing in a solution, not a temporary response. It

[1:01:43] is about recognizing that addiction is a growing complex issue

[1:01:46] that touches housing, mental health, safety, and families across the

[1:01:50] city. It was said during council discussions that addiction services

[1:01:54] and transitional houses fall under provincial responsibility. And although I

[1:01:58] understand that perspective, and I agree that provincial and federal

[1:02:01] governments must be due more. At the same time, our

[1:02:04] city has stepped up before. We have supported Brock Mission.

[1:02:07] We've supported one city and others. We recognize that while

[1:02:11] jurisdiction matters, so does leadership. Addiction does not wait for

[1:02:15] funding silos to be resolved. It lands in our community

[1:02:19] whether we like it or not. People who struggle with

[1:02:21] addiction are often abandoned. Long before they find help. Families

[1:02:26] burn out. Friends lose hope, system spail them, communities unintentionally

[1:02:31] give up. Dr. Sean is he has not given up.

[1:02:34] She shows up day after day, year after year, often

[1:02:38] outside the system. Always judgment - free always focused on

[1:02:41] healing and always caring. And how are we without failed,

[1:02:45] offering a warm hug as people walk out the door?

[1:02:48] That human connection is not incidental. It is part of

[1:02:51] why this works succeeds. Like and or not, this is

[1:02:54] part of our shared responsibility as a community. Supporting those

[1:02:58] who suffer, supporting those who have knowledge, the heart, and

[1:03:02] rely of the experience to help in choosing to be

[1:03:04] proactive rather than reactive. And on a final note, as

[1:03:08] a board director of the Peterborough Core at the Chamber

[1:03:10] of Commerce and has a co - host of the

[1:03:12] Upcoming Chamber AM on Tuesday, February 10th at 8 a.

[1:03:15] m. I'd like to personally buy all members of city

[1:03:18] council to join us for copy, networking, and a tour

[1:03:21] of the new red path wellness center alongside some of

[1:03:24] our city's business leaders. I truly believe that teams work

[1:03:28] firsthand and hear indirectly from Rosenthal continues to be one

[1:03:32] of the most powerful ways to understand its impact. Thank

[1:03:35] you for your time and thank you for considering this.

[1:03:37] Thank you very much, Mr. Jolliker. There could be some

[1:03:40] questions. Councillor Crowley, please. Um, thank you Chair through you.

[1:03:43] So, HiFil, thanks for coming. That was really great. I

[1:03:46] loved listening to that. That was fantastic. Thank you so

[1:03:48] much. But you also do a lot of work. I

[1:03:52] mean, I didn't know that you were coming at all

[1:03:53] games tonight, but you do things to help the community

[1:03:58] directly to with your harmony for healing. That's right. Right.

[1:04:01] When is that? Because I think that's important because that's

[1:04:04] also helping. Yeah. So through you mayor, um, that's February

[1:04:08] 19th. It's in support of the assertive. I reached suicide

[1:04:10] prevention program. It's a sold I'd show at Marco Hall,

[1:04:13] but it's a five year initiative to help raise awareness

[1:04:15] around suicide. Beautiful. And I'm waiting for my invites that

[1:04:18] I can come and sing at it. But that's fine.

[1:04:21] Whatever film. Thanks Phil. Thanks. Councillor Dugay has joined us

[1:04:26] online. We've just confirmed that Councillor Beam release. Thank you

[1:04:33] Mayor. Phil, thanks for being here through you. Uh, Bill,

[1:04:36] can you just talk quickly about, um, how Red Path

[1:04:39] is or can be a good neighbor. Um, needless to

[1:04:42] say the concerns this term around Trinity and Wolf Street

[1:04:47] and the challenges in those neighborhoods. Um, can you just

[1:04:50] talk about your experience with, uh, with red path being

[1:04:54] a good neighbor or what the plan will be moving

[1:04:56] forward, please? Uh, three, you married. Yeah. Of course. I've

[1:05:00] had many, many visits at the red path building, both

[1:05:02] at their old location and their new location. Now once

[1:05:05] has there ever been an ambulance there? No one's has

[1:05:07] there ever been police there. Everybody that they treat has

[1:05:10] been respectful, kind. And they're there for a reason. They're

[1:05:14] there at a point in their life when they're ready

[1:05:15] to get better. And that's what Dr. Peggy Shaunesty's there

[1:05:19] to do. And that's what Red Pat does. Of course

[1:05:24] any additional questions were filled. Thank you very much, sir.

[1:05:26] Thank you. Our next delegation is George Horton. And if

[1:05:31] the deputy clerk, we want to reach them online, uh,

[1:05:33] Natalie. Sorry.

[1:06:18] Seed, Mr. Hort, please. Oh, is this on speaking to

[1:06:27] council now? Uh, sir. Uh, hello everybody. I hope everybody.

[1:06:32] Okay. Hi. Um, hear me. Okay. My name's. Ok. Okay.

[1:06:37] My name's George Horton. I live on four or five

[1:06:40] five Stewart Street. I spoke to council before when the

[1:06:44] one city was, uh, municipal funding, um, and, uh, this

[1:06:48] is a similar organization, uh, red path. Um, and I

[1:06:52] just wanted to bring to everybody's attention to ensure there's

[1:06:55] consideration for people that live in the neighborhood. Um, I

[1:06:59] think that's a very important aspect of these types of

[1:07:02] things and how these organizations affect people that live in

[1:07:06] the neighborhood. Um, that sometimes gets overlooked. Um, uh, red

[1:07:12] path, uh, moved into its current location, I think at

[1:07:16] the beginning of last summer. Um, and I, in fact,

[1:07:19] have to say that it has been pretty positive with

[1:07:21] them there. That corner summer prior, summer 2024 was pretty

[1:07:28] negative. There's a lot of prostitution around that area. Um,

[1:07:32] drug use and all sorts of things. But the, uh,

[1:07:35] red PAC center seem to be very positive. So I

[1:07:39] actually think, um, I want to say the council should

[1:07:42] support them because I like the idea that they're focused

[1:07:45] on rehabilitation healing. Um, you know, I sort of noticed

[1:07:51] that that property was becoming more active, like more cars

[1:07:54] or parks there. Um, people coming and going, um, I

[1:07:58] never saw anyone around there like smoking drugs. Half doubt

[1:08:03] on the grass. As I'd seen over at the other

[1:08:05] places, it just generally seemed like, uh, improvement in the

[1:08:10] neighborhood. Um, so I thought that was very positive. I

[1:08:14] have, I don't know much about, um, the organization itself

[1:08:19] other than following the money on Instagram. And I understand.

[1:08:22] Peggy's honestly, which I haven't seen yet. But just as

[1:08:28] somebody that lives slip in a much directly across the

[1:08:32] street from where they're wanting to set up, um, for

[1:08:35] me, it's been, they have seemed pretty positive, um, and

[1:08:40] if they continue down that path, um, I think that's

[1:08:43] generally a good thing, but yeah. So that's all I

[1:08:46] wanted to say to ensure everybody's just taking concern for

[1:08:50] how these things affect people that live in the neighborhood.

[1:08:53] So yeah, thanks very much. Mr. Hort for your presentation.

[1:08:58] There could be some questions. Questions for Mr. Wharton. No

[1:09:03] questions for you, sir. Thank you so very much. Next,

[1:09:06] uh, Dr. Peggy Shaudy. Have a good day. Bye. Welcome

[1:09:15] by Dr. Shotacy if we could have your name and

[1:09:18] address for the public record, please. Um, Peggy Shauna see.

[1:09:24] Stuart Croft Crescent. You worship. I'm here through worship to

[1:09:29] counsel for any questions. For Dr. Shawsny. Councillor Bigger, please.

[1:09:38] Through you mayor to Dr. Shaughnessy. Thank you for being

[1:09:40] here. Um, similar to my first question and Mr. Horton

[1:09:44] mentioned it as well. I'm always very cognizant of neighborhoods.

[1:09:48] And when we look at facilities like this, I don't

[1:09:51] think I have to get into it, but Trinity and

[1:09:54] Wolf Street have not been positive for those neighborhoods, high

[1:09:57] crime, low property values, vandalism. Can you just talk about

[1:10:01] how you'll work with the neighborhood with Red Path and

[1:10:05] what the history is working with the neighborhoods you're located

[1:10:08] in. Dr. Shauty, please. Do your worship. Um, yeah, we

[1:10:13] like, so prior to the location at 271 Brock Street

[1:10:16] where we are right now, we were at the old

[1:10:18] St. Andrews Church. We were there for three years. So

[1:10:21] we never had a needle, an ambulance of police officer

[1:10:24] other than a coffee. Um, when people come to our

[1:10:26] center, they have like, you might come in and you

[1:10:29] might be high at that time, but you're only going

[1:10:31] to do it once. And then you have to commit

[1:10:33] that you're going to start, start your healing journey. So

[1:10:36] we don't do harm reduction. I'm not against harm reduction.

[1:10:39] We do not do harm reduction at the center. And

[1:10:42] we've never had any problems whatsoever for overdoses. And we

[1:10:45] have total, people have total respect of our property or

[1:10:48] they wouldn't be invited back. Thank you, Peggy. Appreciate you

[1:10:51] being here. Okay. Thanks. Councillor Burke, please. I'm merely a

[1:10:56] three of you to Dr. Sean and Stepeggy. Thank you

[1:10:57] so much for being here. This is awesome. Um, I

[1:11:00] believe you received close to unanimous support at the last

[1:11:03] meeting for this funding. And that's a great thing. Um,

[1:11:06] definitely aware of the program at St. Andrews. I haven't

[1:11:09] been to the new site. Um, one of the questions

[1:11:11] I had was around, um, you know, I understand your

[1:11:16] program well enough to know that there is a healing

[1:11:18] component, but in this pitch, there was a, uh, there

[1:11:21] isn't affordable housing component. And, um, the question I had,

[1:11:26] and I assume that part of this funding will allow

[1:11:27] you to explore the capacity for what that looks like.

[1:11:31] Um, but can you just share with council, please, what

[1:11:33] the vision is, um, in terms of the affordable housing

[1:11:37] portion of the project, like what, what is your preliminary

[1:11:40] vision for that to look like, sorry. Thanks for your

[1:11:45] worship. Councillor Burke, um, just as I spoke with Brock

[1:11:49] Mission, I watched your council meeting last week, um, and

[1:11:52] I spoke with them on their process when they came

[1:11:54] in front of council for the 250, 000. That just

[1:11:58] like they said, this is a vision. Um, this is

[1:12:01] totally separate from what we're discussing how wonderful we are

[1:12:04] here tonight, because we already know that what we're trying

[1:12:07] to move forward is transitional housing. So we need the

[1:12:11] funding in order to start the process of the preliminary

[1:12:15] parts of the vision. And then, um, from there, see

[1:12:19] one thing that we've never really had was the support

[1:12:22] from council. So as a support from council, then you,

[1:12:25] that shows that the government wants to get behind you

[1:12:27] as well. So the more that we come in front,

[1:12:30] the more of people we come with new ideas and

[1:12:33] innovations such as this and add to what we need

[1:12:36] is a transitional housing. We can bring more funding to

[1:12:39] the city. Thanks. And through the mayor there, but there

[1:12:43] definitely is an affordable, like a living component to this

[1:12:46] that differs from the old models where people that are

[1:12:49] taking your programming will also live, like live on scent.

[1:12:51] Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Councillor Baldwin, please.

[1:12:57] Yeah. Thanks, your worship. Peggy, uh, good evening. How many

[1:13:01] clients do your service in a year. Does it vary

[1:13:04] or do you have a finite number there that you

[1:13:06] can speak to. Well, they do fifty three hundred, maybe

[1:13:10] more. They know by when my staff, I could get

[1:13:14] that number for you. I'm just guessing right now, but

[1:13:17] when we put in our Frontaria, how do we get

[1:13:20] funding through Ontario House? So we do reports back to

[1:13:23] them how many people come through. You worship. Peggy, how

[1:13:30] long, how long does it take for your, your clientele

[1:13:35] to no longer require your service? Or do they always

[1:13:38] require your service. Well, I guess through your worship, um,

[1:13:43] I guess that's a really difficult question because we're building

[1:13:46] community and we're building support. And I should never end

[1:13:49] in your life. So, um, once you start coming to

[1:13:52] us, you have us for life. If you need us,

[1:13:56] but like, you know, we have people come, they just

[1:13:59] do program, they go off and do their work or

[1:14:01] get their life back or whatever. And then you might

[1:14:03] have someone out set really loves because we have so

[1:14:06] many other things other than just addiction treatment program. Right.

[1:14:09] So that is an even part of what we get

[1:14:11] funded for we just do. Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:14:16] And Peggy, thank you for what you're doing. Thank you.

[1:14:18] Councillor, please. Chair to Ms. Shaughnessy, uh, Peggy. Thank you

[1:14:22] very much for being here. Uh, a couple of questions.

[1:14:26] There are two streams of money. Um, on affordable housing

[1:14:30] and homeless streams and social services. If you have build

[1:14:33] yourself to apply for either one of those, um, funding

[1:14:36] streams for portable housing towards social service at the department

[1:14:41] through your worship to Councillor Real. Uh, so. It looks

[1:14:47] like there might be two questions there. I'm not sure.

[1:14:50] But, um, I did speak with Sheldon. We did sit

[1:14:53] down. Um, I had then I spoke to a few

[1:14:56] other councillors that on the invitation came to visit us.

[1:15:00] And we had chats on that I should probably come

[1:15:02] in front of council. So that's how this all started.

[1:15:05] And then we realized that it would be best to

[1:15:08] go to for transitional housing. And but we needed the

[1:15:13] sort of this money in order for to start to

[1:15:17] make it beyond division. I really hesitated during that. I

[1:15:21] don't even know if that's what you asked me. That's

[1:15:24] real. Keep going. I'm through the chair to Mishawn. Let's

[1:15:26] see. There's also, um, the heart fund, the eight million

[1:15:29] dollars that is alligated to city Peterborough that is from

[1:15:34] the forecast is the agency that's responsible that of you

[1:15:38] made your, uh, if you're trying to make an application

[1:15:40] or talk to forecast about, uh, applying for some missing

[1:15:44] that, um, a lot of your things that you're doing

[1:15:46] addiction mentally health, um, certainly that, uh, the work that

[1:15:49] you do of you reached out to them to see

[1:15:52] if you might be applicable of an applicant, uh, for

[1:15:58] some of that money, uh, Peter Housing Corp. Certainly we're

[1:16:02] a partner there and writing some of the housing. So

[1:16:04] have you, um, have you reached out to them to

[1:16:06] see if there's any funding available, uh, for right to

[1:16:09] heal. Dr. Shauna State, please. The Ontario Health Heart Hub,

[1:16:15] they call for proposal was issued to organizations already receiving

[1:16:19] Ontario Health Funding. It was a highly detailed and competitive

[1:16:24] process with only a small number of hubs funded across

[1:16:28] to province. For this application, a group of established service

[1:16:31] providers, including forecast, the Canadian Mental Health Association, the city,

[1:16:37] and the office of the MP Dave Smith. Came together

[1:16:41] to submit a proposal. As with any Ontario Health proposal,

[1:16:46] the application required details on how funding would be used

[1:16:52] and which organizations were formerly involved. The discussion we are

[1:16:56] having now about possible transitional beds is part of a

[1:17:00] future vision. Those beds do not currently exist as a

[1:17:05] program service or funded initiative. Because there is no defined

[1:17:10] project yet. There has been no basis to seek formal

[1:17:13] support or funding partnerships for that idea at the time.

[1:17:19] So if you ask me whether I approach forecasts for

[1:17:22] support. No forecast was not asked to support this concept.

[1:17:27] And they are not in the position to fund other

[1:17:29] organizations unless they have current beds now. They are, like

[1:17:33] others, other table, a service provider that receives funding for

[1:17:38] their own programs. In short, this is an early stage

[1:17:41] idea being explored. Not inactive funding proposal or partnership request.

[1:17:51] The chairman is trying to see perhaps my question was,

[1:17:53] um, it's confusing. It's not, if you're making an application

[1:17:59] to be the proponent for the heart fund, it was

[1:18:03] an application for a part of what the heart fund

[1:18:06] in. And part of that is transitional housing. Which we

[1:18:10] were housing court has been a player or providing some

[1:18:13] of the housing. And I asked you if the proposal

[1:18:16] you're doing with the traditional beds that you're hoping to

[1:18:22] apply for, if you applied through forecast, who is the

[1:18:26] agent for the heart fund in the city of Peterborough.

[1:18:30] And I asked if you had made applications through forecasts.

[1:18:34] For money for that program. Of supplying traditional housing housing

[1:18:38] under that application of the hard fund. Dr. Shaughnessy, please.

[1:18:43] To your wife, um, my understanding on what I'm coming

[1:18:46] in front of council once again is for the first

[1:18:50] section. Once I'm there, I'd be more than willing to

[1:18:54] speak with broadcast. Thank you. Any further questions for Dr.

[1:19:02] Shaughnessy. Councillor Burke, please. Um, yeah, through you, Marilyal and

[1:19:07] the Dr. Sean, as you please, this is just like,

[1:19:09] this is just, this question is not at all. It's

[1:19:13] just for my own personal clarity as the counselor that

[1:19:15] is in charge of homelessness and housing and whereby we

[1:19:19] deal with a lot of requests similar, similarly to this,

[1:19:24] which I do, I would support either way, but I

[1:19:27] just, for my own self, I just need to get

[1:19:30] some sort of clarity around because the motion specifically speaks

[1:19:33] to affordable housing. Like the ask is attached to the

[1:19:37] idea that there will be affordable housing produced. Um, and

[1:19:40] I understand that it's just division right now, but, um,

[1:19:45] council, by support by council supporting this, um, the goal

[1:19:49] is to get you closer to that vision. Um, which

[1:19:54] does include a certain number of units. Do you have

[1:19:58] any sense of how many units the building has capacity

[1:20:01] for or would you be applying for capital funding to,

[1:20:04] to build, uh, to build out the building, um, can

[1:20:07] you give us a sense of how many units, uh,

[1:20:10] best case scenario could be provided. Please. Dr. Shaughnessy, please.

[1:20:13] To your worship. Um, that, that's really hard. I'd like

[1:20:16] to, I'd like to say, and it's transitional housing that

[1:20:20] I would really like to say 20 units. Um, but

[1:20:24] then I might be just BS union. I've been known

[1:20:26] to do that before. So, um, I'm not really sure.

[1:20:29] But, you know, we have to work with the city

[1:20:32] like we don't know what the foundation of that building

[1:20:34] is. Like we need engineers. We need the support of

[1:20:39] the city who have the expertise to say, no, you're

[1:20:41] not going that high or yes, you can. So like

[1:20:44] I said, I'd love to say I could have, um,

[1:20:46] 20 beds. But like I said, you can come and

[1:20:49] yell at me later. Thank you so much. Any, oh,

[1:20:54] Councillor Faciliatis, you have a question. Thank you, Mayor, through

[1:20:58] you and thank you to Dr. Shawnese for being here

[1:21:01] tonight. And thank you for explaining to me, uh, when

[1:21:05] I came to visit you, what you do. Um, yeah,

[1:21:07] I get it. And, uh, I understand as much as

[1:21:11] I can definitely. And so again, just to clarify, and

[1:21:14] from this is I mentioned this and a few remarks

[1:21:17] that I made, um, during general committee. Again, this is,

[1:21:21] this is not, uh, grant or money for construction is

[1:21:25] to complete planning preparatory work. And, you know, required to

[1:21:28] unlock, you know, greater previncial federal capital funding is probably

[1:21:33] what you're looking for. So if people are asking, you

[1:21:35] know, what's the plan, what's the plan? Is this the

[1:21:38] money basically is to develop the plan. Right? Fewership. Yes,

[1:21:43] it is. Okay. No, I just, no, I just wanted

[1:21:46] that clarification too. I understand. And, uh, no, I'm, I'm,

[1:21:50] uh, I'm happier here tonight. And thank you very much.

[1:21:53] Thanks. Thank you. Any further questions. Thank you very much,

[1:21:57] Dr. Shaw. This is for being with us this evening

[1:21:59] and thanks to you. That concludes our register delegations. Uh,

[1:22:06] the next, um, item is, uh, consent agendas, uh, 10A.

[1:22:11] Anybody want to speak to 10A. 10A. 10B. 10B.

[1:22:25] Can see. Oh, Kevin Dugay. NC, Councillor Dugan.

[1:22:36] Your worship. I trust you're able to hear. I'm sorry.

[1:22:48] Sorry, Councillor Duge. We can't hear you. Are you able

[1:22:51] to hear me now. Yes. Thank you. Your worship. I

[1:22:55] spoke prematurely. I just wanted to, uh, advise counsel that

[1:22:58] I have a conflict with item 10i. I jumped the

[1:23:02] gun in part in this queue, but I just want

[1:23:04] to ensure that was identified as part of the, uh,

[1:23:10] agenda and moreover, I have a funary interest on them's

[1:23:13] 10i and 14. If they are interrelated. Thank you. Uh,

[1:23:18] but nothing on 10 C. No, that is correct. No

[1:23:23] 10 D. 10 E. 10 F.

[1:23:36] 10 G. 10 H. 10 Eyes have been separated out

[1:23:45] because of the two decorations. 10 J. 10 K.

[1:23:55] Okay. 10 K. Sorry, been separated out. Council Rail 10

[1:24:00] K. Okay. 10 L. 10 L separated. Out.

[1:24:10] 10 M.

[1:24:29] Q. 10 Q. 10 are. 10. R. Okay. So if

[1:24:38] I get somebody to move 10 A B C D

[1:24:42] E F G H L or sorry M N O

[1:24:48] P O P. Councillor Purnell a seconder. Councillor Crowley. We'll

[1:24:54] go to a vote. No 10 K. Is on the

[1:25:01] consent list. Yeah. Correct. That's correct. It's Bill dually move.

[1:25:11] We'll go to a vote. We got a seconder Wisconsin

[1:25:18] Crowley. Councilor Purnell Councillor Crown.

[1:25:57] Carried. 10 eye. Someone separated that one out. That's. Okay.

[1:26:04] It's been we have a declaration of purely interest there

[1:26:07] has been separated out. Somebody like to move in second

[1:26:09] at Councillor Purdown. Councillor Baldwin will go to a vote.

[1:26:39] And that's carried with the, uh, two conflicts duly noted.

[1:26:43] The next item is 10 J. Councillor Hankey, please. Thank

[1:26:48] you very much for worship. Um, I have a feeling

[1:26:50] we're going to discuss this a lot, but I'd like

[1:26:53] to propose an amendment that I'd like to get out

[1:26:56] so we can discuss it and then talk to it

[1:26:58] afterwards. Um, it's to change the number of speakers or

[1:27:03] item on the registered agenda. I could do in need

[1:27:09] a seconder for that. You do. Councillor Burke. Are you.

[1:27:15] Four. Discussion. Uh, thank you very much. It was interesting

[1:27:24] to hear one of the common themes tonight. Was I

[1:27:29] don't think so much as timing as speaking to a

[1:27:32] specific issue. Um, I happen to agree that I think

[1:27:36] limiting it to 10 delegations across the board. I find

[1:27:41] a bit too restrictive. I'd like to propose limiting it

[1:27:45] to or opening it to four per item. Now we

[1:27:49] all know as counselor sitting here that you're not going

[1:27:52] to get a discussion on every item every night. Um,

[1:27:56] it was, uh, Diane, Terry and Hale that had mentioned

[1:28:00] it. And subsequent speakers also. And I think that it

[1:28:05] is important, um, for the public to have their say.

[1:28:08] I understand streamlining things. I think most of us do.

[1:28:13] But on different items, I think it is very important

[1:28:17] that the public does have their say. So I'd like

[1:28:18] to throw it out there for discussion. And see where

[1:28:21] we end up. It was between three and five. I

[1:28:25] pick four the middle ground. It's up to all of

[1:28:27] us. Okay. I have Councillor Burke on the amendment and

[1:28:30] then Councillor Crowley. And amendment. Um, yeah, Merit. You're fine.

[1:28:35] Marley through you. Thank you. And my counselor Crowley was

[1:28:39] also going to move something similarly. And I think that

[1:28:42] this is all just to demonstration around how good governance

[1:28:45] works. You know, we're presented with some changes and we're

[1:28:48] able to sort of, um, make those changes. And look

[1:28:51] what happened tonight. Look what happened tonight. We're actually adopting

[1:28:54] a change that was presented to us by one of

[1:28:56] the delegates. That came to speak to this. So that's

[1:28:59] a beautiful thing. Um, it, it shows that the process

[1:29:03] does work. And it feels to me like a good

[1:29:05] compromise. And it doesn't, it doesn't freeze anyone out from

[1:29:09] a specific item. Um, I'd like to also stick up

[1:29:12] a little bit for our staff because it was implied

[1:29:14] that, um, they're the sole reason that our agendas can

[1:29:17] be heavy. Some nights and not heavy other nights. I

[1:29:21] do believe that we could do some work to sort

[1:29:23] of organize the cycle of what is on our agenda.

[1:29:26] So we don't have such a misbalance. But I would

[1:29:29] believe, and I understand that Stafford much in the same

[1:29:32] position as we are as counselors, which is they're doing

[1:29:35] their day - to - day work and then things

[1:29:36] come up like five, five alarm thing fire type situations

[1:29:40] come up. And they're also just doing their best to

[1:29:42] respond, um, to the issues and the changes in policy,

[1:29:46] the best that they can. Um, I do agree that

[1:29:48] we could better streamline that process so that there isn't

[1:29:51] such a misbalance. Um, but, um, this is, this is

[1:29:55] just the culture we're in. And I think, uh, I

[1:29:58] support counselor Heyckey's motion from, um, the delegates idea and,

[1:30:04] uh, I think that's a great compromise. And it will

[1:30:06] allow, it will allow, it will allow for items on

[1:30:10] our agenda not to go without public input, which is

[1:30:14] an important part of our process. So thank you, Mr.

[1:30:16] Chair. I support the, uh, the amendment. Counselor beamer to

[1:30:19] the bend of police. Thank you, Mayor Lowell supported as

[1:30:23] well. I think it's a good compromise. The genesis here's

[1:30:25] last term as Councillor Baldwin alluded to. It was unlimited.

[1:30:29] And you would get 20, 30, 40 delegates. Sometimes you'd

[1:30:32] have to go two full nights. At the end of

[1:30:35] the day, we do have a duty to have efficient

[1:30:38] meetings and move the city's business along in a timely

[1:30:41] manner. However, the balance that we do need to, uh,

[1:30:44] listen and give the constituents an opportunity. So I think

[1:30:47] this is a good compromise. Kingston, just as an example,

[1:30:52] has three delegates, period. Not three in agenda, three the

[1:30:56] whole night, period. I think that's a little extreme. Um,

[1:31:00] 10 was what we came up with. But I think

[1:31:01] this is a good compromise just through you to a

[1:31:05] CO ray and a CORena. There's been some talk tonight

[1:31:07] about the agendas and staff working to sort of balance

[1:31:10] the agendas out and balancing contentious issues out. I know

[1:31:15] it's easier said than done. And I think staff do

[1:31:17] that anyway, but just to get you on the record

[1:31:20] is that stat. Is that something staff will continue to,

[1:31:23] uh, focus on to try to have balanced agenda. So

[1:31:27] the contentious issues followed by a 20 minute meeting. Mr.

[1:31:33] Rada, please. Through you, Mr. Mayor, absolutely. We will be

[1:31:36] working on that. Thank you, CR. Renaissance. So Marilyn, I

[1:31:40] think a fair compromise. It's what, uh, former mayor Terrion

[1:31:44] came up with a great idea Diane. And we're here

[1:31:47] to listen. Thank you. Further comments on the, uh, amendment.

[1:31:51] Councillor Rial, please, to the amendment. Through the chair, um.

[1:31:57] It's interesting that here were cherry picking stuff out of

[1:32:03] a procedural bylaw. That was not written. Or any input.

[1:32:10] From counselors. And I made it a furl last week.

[1:32:17] That we do exactly that. So here we are going

[1:32:20] to start picking apart. Gets in pieces of this procedural

[1:32:26] bylaw, which should have been done before. And it became

[1:32:31] here. And every one of us had an input. On

[1:32:35] what we think the new procedure bylaw should be. I

[1:32:39] didn't have any input. There was five people from staff

[1:32:45] and two chairs. Well, the two chairs, their counselors don't

[1:32:50] speak for me. I happen to be a participant in

[1:32:55] this. This is my workplace right here. Why don't I

[1:33:01] get a right to tell you what I think how

[1:33:04] you should run this house. Or the people. So I'm

[1:33:11] hearing the counselor making. Bits and pieces where we're going

[1:33:15] to go instead of three and five, I'm going to

[1:33:18] pick four. This all should have been discussed before it

[1:33:22] ever came here by us. I'm having a problem this

[1:33:26] because I was going to resubmit my deferral again to

[1:33:31] go back and maybe we as counselors. Could find me

[1:33:35] look at the procedure bylaw that we want. To run

[1:33:39] our house. Not cherry picking and looking at this and

[1:33:43] picking that apart and whether you should have a cell

[1:33:45] phone or shouldn't you have a cell phone or you

[1:33:48] should have instead of three and five, we'll have four.

[1:33:51] All this stuff. That should have been long done debate

[1:33:54] should have happened before it ever come here by us.

[1:33:58] Not by senior staff. On my two representative enough picking

[1:34:02] on them, but you don't represent me. My represent the

[1:34:06] taxpayers would pay myself. So I'm going to reintroduce. And

[1:34:13] I get a chance to deferral that I brought back.

[1:34:17] I think there was six to five vote. And see

[1:34:20] if I can pull it and go the other way

[1:34:23] six, five in favor of a different. Councillor facility, please.

[1:34:30] Yeah. I'm going to speak to the amendment and just

[1:34:33] the amendment that that's okay. Yeah. Just to be amendment.

[1:34:36] Thank you. Um, no, I, uh, you know this idea

[1:34:40] was brought forward by a delegate tonight. And we're having

[1:34:43] the discussion tonight and from everything I've heard tonight, this

[1:34:46] is when we were to have these discussions too. So

[1:34:49] I think, uh, four is a compromise. Uh, I think

[1:34:53] it's reasonable compromise. And I'll, I'll definitely support it. I

[1:34:57] mean, we all, I think are haunted by the BWXT

[1:35:02] delegations. I think it was 54. I've tried to look

[1:35:05] that up the other day. Uh, delegations. And yeah, that

[1:35:08] becomes a little, uh, one extreme. And this other with

[1:35:12] just 10 is, is another extreme. So I think this

[1:35:15] is a reasonable compromise. And certainly willing to support it.

[1:35:18] Thank you. Scounser facilities, Councillor Corley to the amendment. Um,

[1:35:23] uh, thank you, Chair. And, uh, like, uh, my counselor

[1:35:28] to the right had mentioned I was going to bring

[1:35:30] something like this. So thank you, Dave, or we're doing

[1:35:32] this counselor Yankee. And just, just to, just to quickly

[1:35:36] address the, the, um, uh, contention that we have, um,

[1:35:40] that we didn't all get input. And I, um, one

[1:35:44] of the former speakers, Councillor Real made a fantastic point

[1:35:48] that we didn't all get input on this. We didn't

[1:35:50] all get direct input. We were all consulted and we

[1:35:54] didn't come together as a big group and work on

[1:35:56] this and try to mold this into what we want.

[1:35:59] I do sort of, we did have a subcommittee that

[1:36:03] looked at it. I did speak with, uh, counselor beamer

[1:36:07] briefly, not anything official, but certainly like anything that you'd

[1:36:11] like to see in the, in the procedural bylaw, we

[1:36:14] had, you know, short conversation about it. Um, I think

[1:36:17] that sort of how a subcommittee works. And I think

[1:36:19] the fact that we are city council, I think this

[1:36:21] is our opportunity to then look at this document brought

[1:36:25] to us by a subcommittee that did fantastic work on

[1:36:28] it, by the way. Maybe we don't agree on some

[1:36:30] things. This is our opportunity to change it. Um, I

[1:36:33] think that, uh, it's, it's the perfect time for us

[1:36:37] to look at it. And maybe Cherry pick the odd,

[1:36:41] um, the odd, um, line in the bylaw that we

[1:36:45] don't agree with. Maybe we want more delegates. We want

[1:36:48] less, whatever we decide, but that's why we're here. And

[1:36:51] that's what we're doing right now is to talk about

[1:36:53] that. So if we, if we want to fix things,

[1:36:55] if the broken, then we have the opportunity now. This

[1:36:59] is our meeting for it. So, um, thank you, Chair.

[1:37:03] Thanks, Yorley. Councillor Letchica to the amendment. Uh, thank you

[1:37:08] very much. You worship through you and to the amendment.

[1:37:12] Um, I'd like to say that I appreciate, um, that

[1:37:18] the tone and the thoughtfulness that, um, Councillor Heyckey has

[1:37:23] used in bringing this forward that the listening and appreciating

[1:37:26] with the public delegations to have, to have brought it

[1:37:28] forward. And I really do the idea of compromising to

[1:37:33] something like this. Um, is appealing. And I support that

[1:37:38] idea. However, it resonates with me what counselor real estated,

[1:37:46] um, around the idea of consultation on some level, you

[1:37:51] know, at the beginning of our term and annually, we,

[1:37:56] we meet about our strategic plan. We regroup about the

[1:38:01] things that, that impact, um, how we're going to govern.

[1:38:06] Well, this has a significant impact on how we're going

[1:38:10] to govern. And it sits in a similar place. And

[1:38:13] so the fact that counselor, um, Crowley has stated that

[1:38:19] he had a consultation with one of the committee. That's

[1:38:23] great. But where we know that transparency is something that's

[1:38:26] really important. I will transparently say that no one consulted

[1:38:30] with me. I didn't know I was to reach out

[1:38:32] to be able to do that. And I was surprised

[1:38:35] by the, by the proposed procedure bylaw changes when they

[1:38:40] came out in the agenda. We only had days to

[1:38:44] look at this with a very meaty agenda to be

[1:38:47] able to reflect, to be able to do our own

[1:38:50] research. It's not adequate time. We haven't had the time

[1:38:54] to talk together even about what the priorities are for

[1:38:58] changes to our procedure bylaw. That is something that is

[1:39:01] the purview of this whole council. And we didn't ever

[1:39:04] take that opportunity. So the great deal that needs to

[1:39:07] be done around inclusiveness. And consultation on, on common sense

[1:39:12] things, like something that is so significant to our public,

[1:39:16] to public voice is our procedure bylaw. If we want

[1:39:21] to be a future prepared city, we need to talk

[1:39:24] to each other. We need to trust each other. And

[1:39:27] we need not to be impugning. By some of the

[1:39:30] things that are coming forward in a proposed procedure bylaw.

[1:39:35] So, um, you know, as much as I do support

[1:39:39] what counselor Heyckey has proposed, I agree with the idea

[1:39:43] that Council Real is saying, let's look at this together

[1:39:46] for a short time. But to be able to have

[1:39:49] the conversations given that we've heard from some of the

[1:39:52] public. And we appreciate that in informing our decision making.

[1:39:56] Thank you very much, your worship. Councillor Chica, I have

[1:40:00] counselor Dugay Baldwin and Crowley. On the amendment. Councillor Dugay,

[1:40:07] please, Councillor Dugan. Thank you. Thank you, your worship. And,

[1:40:11] uh, fellow council members. Um, I, um, I've inclined to

[1:40:19] support Heyke's, um, uh, recommendation. I do not, uh, note

[1:40:28] that, uh, the four delegates that spoke this evening, um,

[1:40:33] are very, very well versed in municipal procedures, municipal protocol,

[1:40:38] delegation, uh, delegation related matters. What was it present this

[1:40:44] evening. Were the other 80, 2000 members of our public?

[1:40:48] But I do respect and listen very closely through the

[1:40:52] input provided by the, uh, for dialogue. I have considered

[1:40:57] the bylaw, um, in its entirety. I have no issues

[1:41:02] with the mayor and the two committee chairmans who have

[1:41:06] met with staff who have collectively advanced to procedural bylaw.

[1:41:10] They have considered, uh, for example, the way our meetings

[1:41:16] operate, um, efficiencies, effective communications that are like, and I

[1:41:23] respect the outcome of their work and its evidence in

[1:41:26] our proposed procedural bylaws. So I have no issue with

[1:41:29] how we got here. And I do not, would not

[1:41:32] support a deferral, but I do support Councillor Hankey's recommendation.

[1:41:37] For delegates per item, um, is important. And what I

[1:41:40] did here this evening, I believe is that, um, related

[1:41:45] to delegates on statutory and budgetary items. There are no,

[1:41:49] there is no limit on delegations. And that's very important

[1:41:52] distinction to make. So I will support Councillor Hackey's recommendation,

[1:41:57] your worship. Thank you. Thanks Councillor Gate. Councillor Baldwin to

[1:42:00] the amendment. Two things. You worship. I will be supporting

[1:42:06] the amendment and thank Councillors, um, Heyckey and Crowley for

[1:42:10] bringing it forward. I'm wondering, uh, your worship of I

[1:42:14] could ask the clerk a question. By all means, um,

[1:42:17] as I referenced earlier in the meeting, um, uh, Diane

[1:42:22] Tyrion and I had been, uh, on the procedural bylaw

[1:42:26] committee meeting Mustafa four years ago, um, and we'd made

[1:42:30] a few minor changes, one of which was to limit

[1:42:33] the number of delegates to 10 per item. And that

[1:42:37] was referenced earlier by Councillor Beamer. I'm wondering, Mr. Clerk,

[1:42:41] um, could you explain for the viewing audience and those

[1:42:44] in the chamber? And for those who are on council,

[1:42:47] we're sitting here, what the process was for the working

[1:42:50] group. To be able to come up with the procedural

[1:42:53] bylaw recommendations that you have. Just a general overview of

[1:42:57] the amount of work that was done. The research that

[1:42:59] was done into other communities and other, um, uh, councils.

[1:43:04] I just think that would be important information to share.

[1:43:07] Mr. Clerk, if you could respond, please. Uh, thank you,

[1:43:10] Mr. Chair. Yes. Um, typically the working group, uh, may

[1:43:14] have met several times to convene and discuss procedural matters

[1:43:18] as indicated. Uh, there was a number of staff conducted

[1:43:22] research among our, uh, municipal peers just to understand their

[1:43:26] procedure bylaws understand how they conduct business and to try

[1:43:29] to get a sense of, uh, some best practices out

[1:43:31] there. And those were, um, those were shared with the

[1:43:34] working group. To then, uh, assist, uh, coming forward with

[1:43:38] what you see this even. Thank you, uh, your worship.

[1:43:44] I'd be, um, again, I'm going to support the amendment

[1:43:46] and thank the councillors bring it forward. Thanks, Councillor Bellman.

[1:43:49] Councillor Crowley to the amendment. Thank you, Chair. I just

[1:43:52] wanted to clarify that my discussions with counselor beamer weren't

[1:43:55] official consultations. It was just in the midst of an

[1:43:59] unrelated conversation about who knows what. And it was in

[1:44:03] passing. So thank you, Chair. Thanks, Councillor Carley. Any further

[1:44:07] speakers, the amendment. We'll go to a vote. On the

[1:44:10] amendment.

[1:44:28] I just worried about the point of, uh, point of

[1:44:31] information. Yes. Councillor Berg. I just, is there a, is

[1:44:34] there an error in the, in the wordsmithing here? Because

[1:44:38] it says that it will exceed for. Mr. Potts, please.

[1:44:47] Thank your worship. Actually, uh, if I could take counsel

[1:44:50] to section 33 of the draft proposed bylaw, 33 reads,

[1:44:56] the city clerk made a client to include a delegation

[1:44:59] on an agenda if. And so the proposed wording, uh,

[1:45:03] actually matches the intent of the amendment. Thank you. Thank

[1:45:07] you very much. Just wanted to make sure. The vice

[1:45:10] counsel Burke. We're good. We'll go to a vote. On

[1:45:19] the amendment.

[1:45:35] And it's carried. The amendment carries Councillor Beamer. You're next.

[1:45:40] To. The amended. That's 10J and a seconder for that.

[1:45:45] Counselor Hickey. And we'll start the debate. Councillor Burke. Um,

[1:45:51] yes, Marilyal. In terms of efficiency, I won't repeat what

[1:45:56] I've said to speak out against what I feel is

[1:46:00] not. Um, aligned with any sense or reason. Um, so

[1:46:06] I'd like to move an amendment. Um, on the member

[1:46:10] section of the bylaw to change the wording from being

[1:46:14] possession of to communicate through. And I'll just try to

[1:46:18] walk. Do I need a second turn for that? Well,

[1:46:20] we'll look see what we have. We eat one. Councillor

[1:46:24] Crowley, seconder. Yeah. And so this is this, this is

[1:46:27] also just in the spirit of, um, of, of trying

[1:46:31] to make sense of something and considering the other side

[1:46:35] and making some compromises. And what this language does is

[1:46:39] it's very important. I believe that the, the debate and

[1:46:42] the talk around how we communicate has been not very

[1:46:46] focused actually. And you have to really read the bylaw.

[1:46:50] Like Commissioner Potts just corrected me on what, what we

[1:46:53] voted on is, is, is also about what precedes it.

[1:46:57] Right. So in this section that we're voting on, that

[1:47:00] bans, the possession of electronic devices bans the possession of

[1:47:05] them, um, it's, it's really in the section about members

[1:47:10] conduct at a meeting. And it's really in a section

[1:47:13] that helps us to find that we as members of

[1:47:16] council need to have our discussions be done properly and

[1:47:19] through the chair. Meaning that it's out of order for

[1:47:23] me to text Mary Leal right now and say, Hey,

[1:47:25] can you come to me first on, on item 10

[1:47:28] J, you know, that should be done. When he gets

[1:47:31] to that item 10J on the agenda. And I can

[1:47:34] put my hand up. That's the fair way to do

[1:47:35] it. So my stipulation and my changing of the wording,

[1:47:40] um, is really about the whole section on how we

[1:47:44] as members are supposed to function. And is changing the

[1:47:47] final caveat section E. To say, which currently says not

[1:47:51] being a possession of any electronic device that could facilitate

[1:47:55] a communication. It says much like the, the, the sentence

[1:48:00] before it, which says not communicate, accept and pursuant to

[1:48:03] direction of the chair. Until it's his turn. It gives

[1:48:09] me the option as a grown man to understand the

[1:48:12] rule. And so I am changing the wording, which would

[1:48:16] allow us if we need to have our personal cell

[1:48:19] phones on us, but it will very clearly and straightforwardly

[1:48:23] stipulate that we are not to communicate. On that device

[1:48:26] to facilitate a communication that does not comply with paragraph

[1:48:30] D. Straightforward. I think it solves the problem that that

[1:48:35] staffer trying to solve in a much more realistic way

[1:48:38] that we're able to follow. We have proven this whole

[1:48:41] term that we're able to follow the rules here. We

[1:48:44] have no, we have no open files from the ombudsman

[1:48:48] on our conduct in terms of how we function at

[1:48:51] a meeting. And if, if staff wants to stipulate how

[1:48:54] we use our, our personal devices at the meeting, then

[1:48:58] this is also accomplished with my change. It just limits

[1:49:01] the very awkward thing of, of the chairs having to

[1:49:04] police, what I'm going to do with my phone. And

[1:49:06] that will be an awkward situation. I'm telling you, that

[1:49:09] will be an awkward situation. So this negates all of

[1:49:11] that. It is just, it is putting the onus on

[1:49:14] us to follow the rules. And it doesn't take these

[1:49:17] drastic steps that are being proposed that no other municipality,

[1:49:20] including the municipalities that were consulted in the report are

[1:49:23] taking this wording alliance much more closely with how other

[1:49:29] municipalities govern communications out of meeting. So just to be

[1:49:33] clear, I'm changing, I'm taking out the idea of not

[1:49:37] to be in possession of. And I'm asking for us

[1:49:40] to not communicate through an electronic device. And that includes

[1:49:44] this electronic device. Which I'm still unclear how that's going

[1:49:49] to be police. Because to me, that this, this falls

[1:49:53] under the definition as the bylaw is written as an

[1:49:55] electronic device. So. I'll take a breath. So what does

[1:49:59] the microphone? So, um, so listen. What I'm, what I'm

[1:50:05] proposing is just a simple word change that allows us

[1:50:08] to follow. What is in this section, which relates to

[1:50:12] how we conduct ourselves at this meeting and advises us

[1:50:16] to communicate through the chair when it's our turn. Thank

[1:50:18] you very much. Mr. Potts, please. And then counselors Crowley

[1:50:23] Lachico Ria. Mr. Pods, please. Sir, Mr. Lee, I don't

[1:50:26] have a question for Mr. Paws. Thank you very much.

[1:50:28] But he put his hand up to provide some clarity,

[1:50:30] Mr. Potts. No. In assist if the question, your worship.

[1:50:36] Okay. Councillor Crowley. Then. Um. Thank you, Chair. I think

[1:50:42] one of the delegates, they came up and I apologies.

[1:50:47] I'm not sure who said it, but they were, uh,

[1:50:49] mentioning how they think that the council business that's done

[1:50:53] behind the scenes. And they were saying, Oh, I, you

[1:50:56] know, people come out and they're all they come out

[1:50:59] and they already have their minds made up and they're

[1:51:01] already talking. And I think that part of, I can

[1:51:03] understand part of the reason that, that this bylaw is,

[1:51:08] is proposed. Because just like there's people in the community

[1:51:11] that think counsel is, is colluding behind the scenes, behind

[1:51:16] closed doors. Well, if I have my phone and I'm

[1:51:18] texting counselor Baldwin and I'm saying you got to go

[1:51:21] with me on this vote. Or I'm saying to Councillor

[1:51:24] Beamer, yeah, are you, are you going to vote with

[1:51:26] me on this? Or I'm talking to one of the

[1:51:29] staff members and I'm saying, Hey, I'm going to ask

[1:51:31] you this question. So this question is going to, this

[1:51:33] will really help me out with that's all stuff that's

[1:51:36] done behind the scenes. It shouldn't be happening on a

[1:51:39] phone. I agree with counselor Burke that it does seem

[1:51:44] like a little bit much that maybe we shouldn't be

[1:51:48] in possession of it. Having it in my co -

[1:51:50] pocket, having in my pants pocket, I mean really we

[1:51:52] shouldn't be using it. At the same time. It's not,

[1:51:56] um, there's no ability to FY that. If I'm doing

[1:52:01] something that I shouldn't be doing with council business on

[1:52:05] my phone and somebody in the gallery says, Oh my

[1:52:08] gosh, you know what? I think what counselor Crowley did

[1:52:11] was way offside. And I'm going to go to the

[1:52:13] integrity commissioner. And we have to get FOI his phone.

[1:52:17] Well, I did it on my personal cell phone. So

[1:52:19] you're all out of luck. We need to ensure the

[1:52:23] integrity of what we're doing here in council chambers and

[1:52:27] doing it on my personal cell phone doesn't do it.

[1:52:29] And I don't care if the young person out there

[1:52:32] that won't run for council because, Oh my God, I

[1:52:34] can't up my phone and with me in council. That's

[1:52:37] not the point. We do council business here. We do

[1:52:41] it in public. So everybody can see exactly what we're

[1:52:43] doing exactly what we're talking about. They can hear the

[1:52:46] questions that I'm asking staff. They can hear the questions

[1:52:49] that I am asking of other counselors. That being said.

[1:52:53] The proposed change that the counselor Burks making here still

[1:52:57] doesn't let me use my iPad, which kind of irks

[1:53:00] me because I use that for all my reports and

[1:53:02] it saves paper and stuff, but still. It's a minor

[1:53:06] inconvenience at worst. So I'm going to support counselor Burke.

[1:53:12] I think that it's a worthy, um, uh, notation here.

[1:53:16] I think it's a worthy change. But let's not fool

[1:53:19] ourselves that this is not fascism run rampant by saying

[1:53:24] we can't have a cell phone on our desk during

[1:53:27] a meeting. Or it can't be using it during a

[1:53:30] meaning. Excuse me. So anyway, that's my, uh, what I

[1:53:33] get some clarity on what the amendment you're proposing. The

[1:53:37] clerk has to, if you could just. Yeah. So, um,

[1:53:41] Mr. Cleric, thank you on page 83 of the draft

[1:53:44] bylaw. There's the section called members, which dictates are as

[1:53:49] members, how we're supposed to speak. How are we supposed

[1:53:51] to speak to one another. At a meeting. And there's

[1:53:56] a paragraph E or subsection E, which says that we're

[1:54:01] not to be in possession of electronic, an electronic device

[1:54:04] that could facilitate a communication that does not comply with

[1:54:08] paragraph D. Paragraph D talks about how we're only supposed

[1:54:11] to communicate through the chair. So I am proposing that

[1:54:14] we change. Um, the phrase not being possession of and

[1:54:22] replace that phrase with not communicate through. So we're taking

[1:54:26] out not to be in possession of and we're changing

[1:54:29] that to not communicate through. Thank you. Thanks. And you

[1:54:33] have a sector. Okay. Uh, counsel and her chica to

[1:54:37] this amendment, please. Councillor Chico. Thank you very much. Your

[1:54:43] worship. I have, um, an amendment to the emotion that,

[1:54:49] uh, counselor Burke has put forward to the use of

[1:54:52] the language. I'd like to add except for emergency. Or

[1:55:00] family reasons. And, and I say that genuinely and from

[1:55:06] the bottom of my heart, there are people that want

[1:55:11] to engage in, uh, perhaps a campaign to run for

[1:55:15] council in upcoming years who may have children who may

[1:55:20] have a very ill or close to death parent. Or

[1:55:26] loved one. Or someone who might be in crisis or

[1:55:31] in need. And it is family status issue not to

[1:55:35] be able to have two way communication for emergency purposes.

[1:55:39] And, and, and there are single parents with infants who

[1:55:43] should not be excluded for participating in municipal government because

[1:55:48] they are not allowed to have a cell phone on

[1:55:51] their body. Should there be some reason that they need

[1:55:55] to be reached. So this is, this is an issue

[1:56:00] that has to do with, uh, the occupational health and

[1:56:05] safety act. I mentioned the labor code last week. This,

[1:56:08] this is on that level. And it's a human rights

[1:56:11] issue based on family status. And I think that language

[1:56:15] would be really important. I agree. If we want to

[1:56:20] lift up professionalism and communication. And that's the mode of

[1:56:25] behind this, then let's just change the language from not

[1:56:29] being possession of. And I can support what, uh, Councillor

[1:56:32] Burke is bringing forward around communication. Uh, of a nature

[1:56:36] that is work related. Thank you very much. Councillor Burke,

[1:56:39] Councillor Crowley. There is an amendment. Are you, uh, okay

[1:56:42] with the, uh, proposed word counselor La Chica just to

[1:56:46] include it in a. Cancer. Yes. Go ahead.

[1:57:00] Yeah. We're dealing with the amendment to the amendment. So

[1:57:03] I have a new speakers list to the event. You'll

[1:57:06] want to speak to the amendment. Okay. Just one moment,

[1:57:10] Councillor, Kelsey Real. Do you want to speak to the

[1:57:12] amendment to the amendment? I don't want to lose anybody

[1:57:14] here. Well, this is around about way. Of supporting him.

[1:57:21] The comments I'm going to make is if we would

[1:57:23] have gathered together to talk about this and cell phones,

[1:57:28] I have to declare a disability. Because my cell phone

[1:57:33] is hooked to my hearing aids. So nobody asked me

[1:57:40] and nobody that made this motion or this procedural bylaw

[1:57:46] here. But I have to declare that I have a

[1:57:50] disability. That's, I shouldn't have to do that. If we

[1:57:53] would have all collectively got together and talked about the

[1:57:57] changes that pleasure bylaw, I just want to get back

[1:57:59] to the amendment. But I mean, he's making another cherry

[1:58:04] picking something and making amendment. The I have to wear.

[1:58:10] My cell phone or my hearing aids because it is

[1:58:14] a device for me for volume control and other things

[1:58:17] with my hearing aid. We're therefore. The cell phone should

[1:58:22] be allowed in this room. I don't know if anybody

[1:58:24] else has that. But it's on mine and I'm not

[1:58:27] going to ask you and I'm not going to ask

[1:58:30] the chairs if it's all right for me to have

[1:58:31] a cell phone. We're just speaking to the amendment to

[1:58:34] the amendment. Yeah. But the whole thing, the debate here

[1:58:38] about cell phone. We're going to order. If I may

[1:58:42] your worship. Yes. Um, thank you. Um, to, to counselor,

[1:58:46] um, Riel's point. And I meant to add this as

[1:58:48] well accessibility. Absolutely. Family status and accessibility issues. Thank you.

[1:58:57] Mr. Clerk, we just. Did you have a. We got

[1:59:04] a counselor Burke moved amendment to the amendment. And Councillor

[1:59:08] Crowley second, the amendment to the amendment. Earn Councillor, sorry,

[1:59:13] Councillor Chico. Okay. Okay. You want to speak to the

[1:59:20] amendment to the amendment. Mr. Mayor, I'll just be brief,

[1:59:24] but this is what I was trying. This is just

[1:59:26] what I was trying to say when I feel like

[1:59:28] we're getting off track because we're talking about how we're

[1:59:30] supposed to do city business. We're really talking about stuff

[1:59:34] that, that falls under our code of conduct. We have

[1:59:37] a separate code of conduct that governs what Howard's supposed

[1:59:42] to act as city councillors in terms of how we're

[1:59:45] supposed to do business. This is the procedural bylaw. Okay.

[1:59:49] This is the procedural bylaw, which is about the procedure

[1:59:53] of how these meetings are run. General committee and council.

[1:59:56] And so therefore, I kind of did a hot second

[2:00:00] take here. I think the line that we're all up

[2:00:03] in arm is about only applies to this meeting and

[2:00:06] how we communicate with each other in the chair because

[2:00:08] that's how the previous, that's what the previous bullet points

[2:00:12] reference. So I support the amendment to the amendment, but

[2:00:16] I actually don't think it's necessary because I believe it's

[2:00:19] just not asking us. I believe my solution to say

[2:00:23] not communicate through would be enough. It would still allow

[2:00:26] us to do what we need to do for personal

[2:00:27] reasons or for note taking or for preparation in a

[2:00:30] meeting on an iPad. Um, I believe that this section

[2:00:34] is very specifically about how we're supposed to communicate with

[2:00:37] one another at a council meeting. And as, as making

[2:00:40] sure that we don't communicate with one another at a

[2:00:42] council meeting, besides through the chair. And in the way

[2:00:45] that the subsequent bullet points in that member section lay

[2:00:49] it out. So I think that I will support the

[2:00:53] amendment to the amendment, but I don't, I don't actually

[2:00:55] think it's necessary in reading the whole subsection. Um, because

[2:00:59] it's very specifically around how we're supposed to communicate with

[2:01:02] each other in the chair. Thank you. To the amendment

[2:01:07] to the amendment, please amendment. Um, I'm, I'm, I'm also

[2:01:10] going to agree with, um, Councillor Burke that I don't

[2:01:14] think it's necessary because I think it sort of encapsulates

[2:01:17] how we conduct meetings with each other. However, if I

[2:01:20] may ask staff a question, go ahead. Um, Ms. McFarlane.

[2:01:24] Hi, welcome. Um, regarding assistive devices, it's a really great

[2:01:31] point that, that Councillor La Chica made, um. Does Ontario,

[2:01:37] or sorry, is there already city legislation in place or

[2:01:40] Ontario legislation in place that were super, that would supersede

[2:01:43] anything in our procedural bylaw that would allow somebody with

[2:01:47] a disability to not have to publicly state that they

[2:01:50] have a disability. Somebody who's a counselor maybe who might

[2:01:53] have a disability who is running for council and comes

[2:01:56] on board and has an assistive device. Uh, they would

[2:02:00] just be able to use it and not have to

[2:02:02] go through any sort of hoops with the chair. They

[2:02:05] would be taken care of through sort of some sort

[2:02:08] of legislation. The farmer, please. Through the chair, there is,

[2:02:12] uh, the GD2 accommodate under the Ontario human rights code.

[2:02:15] There is a process involved in that. So they would

[2:02:17] have to, um, disclose a disability of what the accommodation

[2:02:21] needs are, but not publicly in this type of forum.

[2:02:24] It would probably be between, um, them in the chair

[2:02:28] or I'm not sure what the process with council would

[2:02:31] be, but, um, if the bona fide, you know, medical

[2:02:34] reason or family status issue or something that is under

[2:02:38] the grounds under human rights, we would have to explore

[2:02:41] accommodations. So that would not need to be in the

[2:02:44] procedure bylaw. That's fair. And I don't think I'll, I

[2:02:47] don't think it's required. Um, and I think having it,

[2:02:51] having that amendment to the amendment for that. Yes. I'm

[2:02:56] a little getting confused here. Um, having that specific wording

[2:02:59] in this, this would, would maybe be, um, unneeded. It

[2:03:03] would be a duplication of effort. And I don't think

[2:03:05] it's required because I think legislation supersedes this. So thanks,

[2:03:10] Jose Girley. Councillor Purnell to the amendment to the amendment.

[2:03:15] Yes. Thank you. Uh, the previous speaker did ask, um,

[2:03:18] an important question I was going to just confirm, uh,

[2:03:21] through, through you, your worship, uh, two staff, you know,

[2:03:25] how we would indeed handle, um, accessibility, which we must

[2:03:29] do. Um, you know, that, that's a given. And if

[2:03:32] there was a family emergency through you, I would totally

[2:03:36] expect a simple communication with the chair and accept could

[2:03:39] be made in such a situation. Um, but I also,

[2:03:42] I mean, that's just, that would be the right thing

[2:03:44] to do in that situation. Um, and there are ways

[2:03:47] to reach us. There are ways to reach us for

[2:03:50] sure. Uh, but through you, um, perhaps Mr. Potts, um,

[2:03:57] or the clerk. I'm not sure who want, but what,

[2:04:00] how would we handle an emergency situation? If something, if

[2:04:04] somebody came to a meeting and that they had a

[2:04:06] family member who was not well, and they actually still

[2:04:09] came to the meeting, how would that work. Spots, please.

[2:04:14] Uh, thank you, your worship. Um, that's specific. I think

[2:04:17] I need to start with the, how one reads paragraphy

[2:04:22] of section 18 and Councillor Burke has actually made the

[2:04:24] point quite well, uh, and that is that, um, everything

[2:04:29] about paragraph E, uh, related to electronic devices is subject

[2:04:35] to the chair's directions. And so, um, I think this

[2:04:41] point was discussed amongst the working group. I'm not sure

[2:04:43] that it's been adequately made in, in this discussion. But

[2:04:47] the intent of the bylaw, at least the way it's

[2:04:50] been drafted is that the presiding chair may make a,

[2:04:53] um, a direction of specific to a meeting or may

[2:04:56] even have a standing direction that is published in the

[2:04:59] agenda to the effect that, um, electronic devices provided at

[2:05:07] the meeting may be used for the purposes of the

[2:05:10] eScribe and for communicating with the city clerk. And I

[2:05:16] think, uh, I'm not going to be specific, but my

[2:05:19] understanding of previous term of council, uh, that, uh, a

[2:05:23] member with a need was accommodated by means of electronic

[2:05:27] means for, um, a differently abled reason. Uh, so the

[2:05:34] chair's directions, um, uh, can extend, well, first of all,

[2:05:38] there's nothing precluding a member from providing the city clerk's

[2:05:43] contact information to be, uh, contacted in any manner of

[2:05:47] emergency or urgency during, during a properly constituted meeting. And

[2:05:52] members also have the right. If the, if the urgent

[2:05:56] need that arises without of being inspired from an incoming

[2:06:00] communication, a motion to recess is also, is always available.

[2:06:04] But I think the most important point, having listened to

[2:06:06] the debate is to go to paragraph 18d. The intent

[2:06:11] is that the, that the presiding chair gives directions that

[2:06:16] actually enable the use of electronic devices. But scopes how

[2:06:21] there to be used. Thank you. Thank you, uh, very

[2:06:25] much, uh, your worship and commissioner pots. Um, that, that's

[2:06:29] exactly what we all need to understand. Um, is the,

[2:06:33] the procedural bylaw is an overriding document, uh, on how

[2:06:37] we will run our meetings in a very open transparent,

[2:06:42] clear, uh, way. Um, with communications going through the chair,

[2:06:47] any exception, um, or emergency or accessibility can still all

[2:06:51] be handled, uh, those have all been contemplated and would

[2:06:55] be accommodated without having to publicly disclose things or what

[2:06:59] have you, um, there's no reason to, you know, throw

[2:07:03] the whole body of work that's, you know, taken a

[2:07:06] couple of years and significant, um, significant consultation with through

[2:07:10] legal through the clerk's office, through the embudsmen, uh, consulting

[2:07:15] with other municipalities. Um, and by the way, three members

[2:07:18] of council on the working group and the two portfolio

[2:07:22] co - chairs, um, so the, the procedural bylaw covers

[2:07:26] all of that, anything exceptional that comes up can be

[2:07:30] accommodated. Thank you. Um, I have Councillor Heyckey speaking to

[2:07:34] the amendment to the amendment. Councillor Chica for a second

[2:07:37] time to the amendment to the amendment. Councillor Hickey on

[2:07:40] the amendment of the amendment. Yes. Thank you, your worship.

[2:07:43] Um, we heard accessibility act as covered, but, uh, through

[2:07:47] you to Mr. Potts, would we human rights was mentioned

[2:07:51] in the labor code would be contravening any of those

[2:07:55] policies with this spots, please. I think the director of

[2:07:59] people and culture, uh, referenced a duty to accommodate, uh,

[2:08:02] the need to identify the need for an accommodation. And

[2:08:06] the example that's been provided, uh, that the city has

[2:08:10] in fact done that for the purposes of, um, the

[2:08:13] meetings that it conducts for a differently abled person. Uh,

[2:08:18] so that, that would be the, the context for accommodation,

[2:08:22] which is something that's contemplated by the Ontario human rights

[2:08:25] code. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Mr. Potts. And Mr.

[2:08:29] Chair comment, um, this term of council, um, my father

[2:08:34] - in - law passed away when I was attending

[2:08:36] a council meeting. And if you remember, I spoke to

[2:08:38] you beforehand saying that I may have to run. I

[2:08:41] didn't disclose it publicly. Um, and I had my phone

[2:08:46] and my wife had said to me, I better get

[2:08:49] there. And I left the meeting early. So the counselor

[2:08:51] La Chica's point, it is a very legitimate situation that

[2:08:55] can arise. Um, but I think I'm okay with me

[2:09:00] going to the chair and mentioning it. And that's the

[2:09:05] accommodation I would expect. And that appears to be the

[2:09:07] accommodation that this bylaw does address. Thank you. Thanks, Her

[2:09:13] Cherokee. Councillor Chica, second time on the amendment to the

[2:09:16] amendment. Thank you very much, your worship. Through you, I

[2:09:21] absolutely believe this language should be here. And, and I've

[2:09:25] spent a lot of time this week researching, and I

[2:09:28] mentioned earlier that I did call a Labor lawyer, very

[2:09:32] renowned Toronto Labor lawyer who said there is indeed a

[2:09:35] family status concern about something like this being written into

[2:09:38] a bylaw. Because there are minors who cannot contact the

[2:09:43] clerk by phone. Who may have had an accident, who

[2:09:47] who may be in need of their parent for some

[2:09:49] reason. And if I do not have a phone, the

[2:09:54] child knows to phone my number. Not a clerk, not

[2:09:58] through the red tape and administravia of what it would

[2:10:01] take to get through to a parent. It is discriminatory.

[2:10:06] To a counselor to not be able to have on

[2:10:09] their body, uh, two way means of communication. And that

[2:10:14] stated, if you read the language in the interpretation of

[2:10:17] the Ontario, um, health and safety act, that language is

[2:10:23] there. It must be two way communication. Paramedics are meeting

[2:10:27] very acute needs. And this is what the labor lawyer

[2:10:29] told me. Very acute needs of people in life and

[2:10:32] death situations. And cannot be distracted, but they are allowed

[2:10:37] to have a phone on their body in case they

[2:10:39] have a personal emergency in their family or a need

[2:10:43] of a child that's trying to reach them. This language

[2:10:46] needs to be explicit. I'm not sure. And I wasn't

[2:10:50] told by the procedures committee whether this was even vetted

[2:10:53] through our accessibility office or through our accessibility staff. There

[2:10:58] is not to have to disclose. A personal ability issue.

[2:11:07] Publicly because we're being recorded to the chair is not

[2:11:11] something. It's a privacy issue and it's not something we

[2:11:14] should need to do. We don't have working phones for

[2:11:18] counselors because we don't have offices or desks that are

[2:11:21] two way communication. Nobody's answering phones in this building when

[2:11:25] a council meeting is happening at 10 p. m. at

[2:11:27] night. And we need for safety reasons as human beings

[2:11:33] and a citizens of Ontario, like every other worker to

[2:11:36] be able to have access to two - way communications,

[2:11:40] direct communications from a family member or someone in crisis

[2:11:43] that we take care of. And that issue was not

[2:11:47] addressed earlier. Accessibility was mentioned and differently abledness. But family

[2:11:52] status is a legitimate issue. We, I also contacted the

[2:11:55] ombudsman this week. And the ombudsman absolutely told me with

[2:12:00] the utmost clarity that there is no vetting. For procedural

[2:12:06] bylaws, including any item like this that happens through the

[2:12:09] ombudsman's office or has happened through the ombudsman's office. It

[2:12:13] is beyond their scope. They don't provide legal recommendations or

[2:12:18] bylaw creation recommendations to municipal councils. They only can give

[2:12:23] information about what exists in other municipalities. We heard last

[2:12:27] week that there is no other municipality that has overreach

[2:12:31] to the point of saying the counselors are not allowed

[2:12:34] to have a cell phone on their body. If we

[2:12:36] need to have trust and more respect for each other

[2:12:38] than let's just have it and agree that that will

[2:12:40] happen. But let's not take away the human rights that

[2:12:44] we have as individuals. And for those who will run

[2:12:47] for council in the future, we don't need to overreach

[2:12:51] like this. Let's build trust. Let's build optimism for those

[2:12:55] who want to participate. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[2:13:03] Dugas. Speaking of the amendment to the amendment. Yes, thank

[2:13:09] you, your worship and colleagues. Um, I appreciate the comments

[2:13:17] from, uh, director and Farlane and Safaris. The duty to

[2:13:23] consult. I appreciate the context of the, of that legislation.

[2:13:29] Uh, colleagues, I haven't witnessed throughout this council term and

[2:13:35] like Councillor Heyckey, I had a family emergency involving my

[2:13:38] mother's health. Which, uh, I had to deal with while

[2:13:42] attending council meetings. But my family in this case know

[2:13:47] how to reach me not only through my first cell

[2:13:49] phone, but if necessary, while some might view it as

[2:13:52] being archaic, but they certainly could still send me an

[2:13:55] email directly to, uh, by Cid email and staring in

[2:13:59] front of each of one of you this evening. Is

[2:14:03] a monitor in which those emails could be received. And

[2:14:07] there are mechanisms for emergency procedures. I'm not making light

[2:14:11] of the matter. But other than Councillor Hackey's incident, um,

[2:14:16] I, there was a moment where I thought I might

[2:14:18] have to also leave for emergency purposes. Um, I'm not

[2:14:23] certain, I think we are over speaking the issue. Uh,

[2:14:27] now. The fundamentally your worship, I know we're talking about

[2:14:31] an amendment to the amendment. But I'm still struggling with

[2:14:34] why. Any other than if it is associated with the

[2:14:38] disability, why any counselor, when, why any elected official would

[2:14:44] need to have a personal cell phone at their disposal

[2:14:48] during a council meeting, I could see no reason for

[2:14:51] it. For example, this evening your worship colleagues, I'm able

[2:14:56] to attend your meeting virtually. I'm working from a city

[2:15:00] assigned laptop. I'm working from printed agenda material. And I

[2:15:04] was able to send a Microsoft note to the clerk

[2:15:08] indicating that I was available for this meeting. That's all

[2:15:10] public information. I did not need at all during this

[2:15:15] for purposes meaning to make use of a personal device.

[2:15:18] For any reason. I just don't know why. Um, why

[2:15:22] it is appeared to be such an obstruction or an

[2:15:26] impediment for other counselors to be able to carry out

[2:15:29] their office. Those are my comments. Dein of order. Uh,

[2:15:33] but I do recognize that there are circumstances where persons

[2:15:36] with disabilities may need such a device. Thank you. Thank

[2:15:39] you, Jerry. Thank you, your worship. My point of order

[2:15:45] is that, uh, the previous speaker has just stated. That

[2:15:52] it is an impediment. The use of the word impediment

[2:15:56] to have a family status issue with, I explained in

[2:16:00] detail that some of us, our parents of minors, young

[2:16:03] children. And there may be future counselors that have babies

[2:16:08] or toddlers or babysitters taking care of their children. And

[2:16:12] I feel that that was disregarded and the use of

[2:16:15] the word impediment for anything that has to do with

[2:16:18] family status and accessibility is inappropriate. Thank you very much,

[2:16:22] Mr. Chair. Point of order duly noted. Councillor Purnell to

[2:16:26] the amendment to the amendment. And I have a question

[2:16:28] Mr. Potts on the ombuds when Councillor pronounced that amendment

[2:16:31] to the amendment. First, sir, um, Councillor Dugay was interrupted.

[2:16:35] Well, he was speaking. Did he finish concluded? Okay. Okay.

[2:16:40] Thank you very much. I got. Ok. So, so very

[2:16:46] quickly, uh, where we are getting into the weeds here

[2:16:49] that we need not enter into. One of the major

[2:16:54] points of this new procedural bylaw is to really streamline

[2:16:57] things down from 23 pages to 12. Um, we have

[2:17:02] removed a lot of the references that were in there

[2:17:04] before that really did duplicate other, uh, other legislation, including

[2:17:09] the municipal act, um, the code of conduct, um, accessibility

[2:17:13] legislation, F we've, we've heard, those things do not need

[2:17:16] to be in the procedural bylaw. They are covered by

[2:17:19] other legislation, uh, that is already there. Um, and would

[2:17:23] override the procedural bylaw anyway. Um, so that's, I mean,

[2:17:28] at the points are well taken. I understand that. But

[2:17:31] all of these, um, all of these points can be

[2:17:34] easily handled. We're not on an island in the middle

[2:17:36] of nowhere. Um, and we, we do have to try

[2:17:40] and remember one of the main focuses was to make

[2:17:43] the procedural bylaw easier for everybody. Make our meetings more

[2:17:48] transparent for everybody in the public to see what, what

[2:17:51] is being said and what questions are being asked. And

[2:17:54] the answers and all of that and not through any

[2:17:56] type of, uh, devices, um, so I'll leave it at

[2:18:00] that, but that is those are the, um, the important

[2:18:03] points. Thanks. Thank you. Mr. Pods, I have a question

[2:18:06] on the role. The ombudsman and his review of the

[2:18:09] procedure bylaw, if you could respond, please. Thank you. Your

[2:18:14] worship. We didn't ask the embudsman nor with the umblitzman

[2:18:18] to offer to review a draft of a procedure bylaw.

[2:18:22] Um, I will say that I reached out to wearing

[2:18:26] my city solicitor hat, a colleague. I know several of

[2:18:30] the senior colleagues in the office of the emblismen. It

[2:18:34] was a consultation, uh, that shared with, uh, with Mr.

[2:18:38] Kennedy, uh, it was under the heading of what I

[2:18:41] would say informal, uh, it was a discussion about the

[2:18:45] risk of the perception. Which is as important as reality.

[2:18:51] And by that, I mean, uh, the discussion that, that

[2:18:54] we have had internally here at the city, includes, and

[2:18:59] this is for council to decide because the procedure bylaw

[2:19:01] and how council conducts its meetings is not about its

[2:19:05] relationship with staff. It's about council's relationship to the citizens

[2:19:09] that it serves. And those citizens, the open meeting rules.

[2:19:15] Uh, that included, um, after, uh, amendments to the municipal

[2:19:20] act to make very clear about the specific grounds upon

[2:19:24] which council could have closed meetings, but conversely the general

[2:19:28] rule being that they must be open meetings and the

[2:19:31] assignment to the Umboodsman a number of years ago now

[2:19:35] of closed meeting investigations. The first foray by the embudsment

[2:19:38] into municipal affairs, which is now broadened as council knows.

[2:19:43] And the overriding policy objective and the drafting of the

[2:19:47] bylaw being that the citizens that this council serves should

[2:19:51] be able to believe their eyes and their ears when

[2:19:54] they watch decisions being made. And that means that an

[2:19:57] agenda that has to be published, it means open session

[2:20:01] reports unless you're a specific reason to be able to

[2:20:04] have a reporting camera. The procedure bylaw has implemented measures.

[2:20:11] The council knows I've recommended previously. And that the emblizon

[2:20:17] celebrates, uh, and that is, for example, the recording of

[2:20:20] closed meetings. All of which is intended to give the

[2:20:23] citizens that you serve, the council serves, uh, confidence that

[2:20:27] they can believe their eyes and their ears in terms

[2:20:29] of how decisions are made. So the consultation with the

[2:20:34] embudsman, uh, was a brief written exchange. It was, uh,

[2:20:40] it was, um, uh, it addressed the possibility. I mean,

[2:20:47] we know this, but the embutment's office legal counsel also

[2:20:52] observed that, for example, a series of communications could result

[2:20:58] in, uh, in illegally closed meetings. If it involves the

[2:21:02] majority of members of council, uh, a quorum, sorry, uh,

[2:21:06] and a quorum could be something less than a majority.

[2:21:09] If there's a declarations of interest. Not discussed with the

[2:21:13] emblismen, but discuss with Mr. Kennedy as a related issue

[2:21:16] that I don't think is being considered. And that is

[2:21:19] that, uh, any device, personal or otherwise used during a

[2:21:24] properly constituted meeting could produce electronic records that would be

[2:21:29] the subject of a records request. Um, and, uh, there

[2:21:34] is precedent. It comes from a municipality that I used

[2:21:37] to serve. Where an individual member of council's personal email,

[2:21:42] uh, was, was found to be in the custody and

[2:21:45] controlled municipality. And that email happened outside of a properly

[2:21:48] constituted meeting. Frankly, electronic messages during a properly constituted meeting.

[2:21:54] I think would make the better case. But all of

[2:21:56] these issues were within the contemplation of the consultation that

[2:21:59] did happen with the Inglisman's office. Thank you. Thank you

[2:22:02] very much. Mr. Boss, is there any more speakers? The

[2:22:04] amendment to the amendment. We'll now go to a vote

[2:22:07] on the amendment to the Christian Kennedy. Can you just

[2:22:09] walk us through here, please? Cause I don't want to

[2:22:12] visit anything. Uh, thank you, your worship. So just at

[2:22:15] the moment, it's been, uh, moved by Councillor Chica and

[2:22:18] seconded by a counselor Burke. That the amendment be amended

[2:22:24] as follows. If it's my understanding correctly, it's to add

[2:22:27] the wording to section. 18 E.

[2:22:38] And the words are as follows except for family status

[2:22:41] or accessibility purposes. So if that's the, that's the

[2:22:51] correcting. Hold on. Is that correct. Okay. That's correct. Thank

[2:22:55] you. Mr. Baldwin, please. At this point of order, but

[2:23:01] I just like point of order. What counselor Parnell just

[2:23:05] did whisper to you off Mike is exactly what we're

[2:23:07] talking about here. This whole sec. Well, this whole section

[2:23:11] is about how we communicate with one another around the

[2:23:13] table. And then that needs to be done through the

[2:23:15] chair. So. I didn't hear any wish break. So just

[2:23:18] for the record councilburn. Councillor Baldwin, I did see your

[2:23:22] hand. Councillor Baldwin. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks, your worship. Um, the

[2:23:31] question I have is, um. Are we to take this

[2:23:35] whole procedural bylaw. The first amendment, the amendment. And then

[2:23:42] there's going to be another one. Amendment. Um, are there

[2:23:46] going to be any, is there going to be any

[2:23:47] more cherry picking as we go along. Um, because I'm

[2:23:51] reluctant to vote positively on this if it's going to

[2:23:53] have an impact on the next piece. Or vice versa.

[2:23:58] So it would be easier for me to see all

[2:24:00] of the amendments and then vote on it as opposed

[2:24:03] to doing this one. Then another one and then another

[2:24:05] one. This is just from the personal perspective. So I

[2:24:08] guess I'm asking the clerk. Is it better to do

[2:24:10] that way or do we have to jump procedurally do

[2:24:12] it this way? Mr. Clerk. Uh, thank you, uh, your

[2:24:18] worship current procedure by law would direct that there's, uh,

[2:24:22] one amendment permitted tune amendment. I'll go ahead and both

[2:24:27] then. Thank you. And just for the record council work,

[2:24:31] I was listening to the clerk because I asked him

[2:24:33] for some clarification. It wasn't Councillor pronounced. Anything further on

[2:24:40] this. We'll go to a vote on the amendment to

[2:24:42] the amendment.

[2:25:47] Councilor Dugay, we have an hour. We don't have a

[2:25:49] vote for Bion. I'm having tech difficulties, but I will

[2:25:58] return to eScribe momentarily. Okay.

[2:26:14] And that's carried. Now we're going back to the amendment.

[2:26:19] Mr. Clerk, please. Uh, thanks your worship. It's been moved

[2:26:24] by Councillor Burke and seconded by Councillor Crowley. That section

[2:26:29] 18E be amended to replace the words. Not be in

[2:26:32] possession of with not communicate with any. And of course

[2:26:39] that's been subject to the amendment. We just, uh, just

[2:26:44] voted on. Perhaps I can just clarify that wording with

[2:26:48] the, uh, the mover. Councillor Berkeley. As soon as I

[2:26:55] see it cast. All.

[2:27:05] That seems, that seems fine. Thank you.

[2:27:26] Sorry, Brescourt, uh, your worship. Would you like us to

[2:27:29] then cast the vote for this. Is there any further

[2:27:32] comments on this one? Most people probably spoke twice. Yeah.

[2:27:37] Just, I'll just say quickly that to me, the real

[2:27:39] game changer to this was reading, uh, page 82, the

[2:27:43] section about members. And it's pretty self - explanatory. Thank

[2:27:46] you. Thank you. We'll go to a vote.

[2:28:24] And that amendment is lost. So now the main motion

[2:28:30] as amended was moved by Councillor Bieber at Secretary Councilor

[2:28:34] Aki comments your questions. Councillor Real, please. The main motion

[2:28:41] that's 10J as amended. I am deeply concerned with the

[2:28:48] recent changes to the council's procedural bylaw. While efficiencies in

[2:28:55] council meetings is important. It should never come of the

[2:28:58] expense of transparency accountability. Or meaningful public participation. What is

[2:29:06] particularly troubling is the, that these changes were developed by

[2:29:11] city staff without meaningful input from all of city council.

[2:29:15] Despite the fact that the procedural bylaw governed, I would

[2:29:19] like the officials conductor business and council chambers. Decisions about

[2:29:23] how council function should be shaped first and foremost. By

[2:29:27] those elected to represent the public. These changes restrict the

[2:29:33] public's ability to engage with their elected representatives and limit

[2:29:38] the opportunity for residents to be heard on matters that

[2:29:42] directly affect their lives. Public participation is not an inconvenience

[2:29:47] to be managed. It is the cornerstone of democracy and

[2:29:51] local government. Council chamber should be a place where residents

[2:29:56] feel welcome respected. And encouraged to participate. Reducing public input

[2:30:03] rest eroding trust in municipal government and creates a perception.

[2:30:07] The decisions are being made about the community rather than

[2:30:11] with it. I believe good decisions. I believe good decisions

[2:30:18] making is strengthening, not weakening by public scrutiny and engagement.

[2:30:23] Any procedural changes that diminish the engaged engagement deserve careful

[2:30:29] reconsirption broader consultation with council and meaningful input from the

[2:30:35] public. So I will not be supporting the procedural bylaw

[2:30:42] changes on that. And I think this, what's happened tonight

[2:30:45] is cherry picking this. And Cherry picking that. And if

[2:30:49] we would have had, and that's all of council at

[2:30:52] open dialogue and how the procedure bylaws or how we

[2:30:55] conduct our business on behalf of the public here in

[2:30:59] our workplace, then we wouldn't be going through this. We

[2:31:02] would have some procedural bylaws that account for everybody and

[2:31:05] make this work. So thank you very much. Councillor Baldwin,

[2:31:09] please. To the, uh, to the main motion as amended.

[2:31:14] Yeah. As a minute, your worship. Thank you very much.

[2:31:16] Um. Worship, I want to thank the committee and staff

[2:31:21] or their work on this. I think Councillor Parnell alluded

[2:31:24] to the number of meetings and the clerk to a

[2:31:26] question I'd mentioned. Uh, listening to my, uh, my award

[2:31:30] made here, um, I think the, the concern that the

[2:31:35] counselor might have with respect to listening to the public,

[2:31:39] um, we've demonstrated tonight that we have listened to the

[2:31:42] delegates. And as a result of their delegation. Council sitting

[2:31:46] tonight has made a change on the fly. Because we

[2:31:50] have heard that. Um, with respect to the communication devices,

[2:31:54] I believe we're in the, in the throes of making

[2:31:56] that decision tonight. So, um, all the work that's been

[2:31:59] done given the changes we've made and the dialogue we've

[2:32:02] had tonight to worship. I feel comfortable in supporting the

[2:32:05] procedure of I want. Motion as a medic counselor Burke

[2:32:11] plays. Three Marilyla, a question to staff, please. You know,

[2:32:15] the, the report, the staff report is fine. It's one

[2:32:18] thing that goes in detail. It goes into detail around

[2:32:21] the sort of justification and rationalization around creating the bylaw.

[2:32:25] I'm looking at a draft bylaw that says, I'm not

[2:32:28] to be in possession of any electronic device that could

[2:32:32] facilitate a communication. That's the bylaw. That's his plan as

[2:32:35] day. So how does staff justify us being able to

[2:32:39] have this electronic device. And not another electronic device? Councillor

[2:32:44] Burke, who do you want to post a question to.

[2:32:46] No idea. Whoever can answer it. Well, we'll go with

[2:32:49] Mr. Potts. Um, your worship. Thank you. Uh, probably a

[2:32:55] version of a, of an answer I gave previously. But

[2:32:58] you have to read you one should read paragraph E

[2:33:02] in conjunction with paragraph D. It comes back to the

[2:33:06] presiding chair's directions. It's contemplated that the chair will give

[2:33:10] a direction. That members of council obviously should be able

[2:33:13] to use microphones. The equipment on a desk. Microsoft Outlook

[2:33:19] for the sole and eScribe for the purpose of, you

[2:33:22] know, casting votes and participating in the meeting for communicating

[2:33:26] with the city cleric electronically. And that's all accommodated. It

[2:33:32] could be on a per meeting basis or probably more

[2:33:35] efficiently and effectively if it were just built into the

[2:33:40] agenda, uh, and that, you know, subject to the chairs,

[2:33:44] different direction from time to time or additional directions as

[2:33:47] circumstances warrant. Thank you. Councillor Burke further. I mean, I'm

[2:33:52] just, I'm just, I understand that answer, but the answer

[2:33:54] is not in the bylaw. So 10 years from now,

[2:33:57] you know, it would be very tricky for a whole

[2:33:59] new group of people and city staff to interpret the

[2:34:02] bylaw, which clearly states all electronic advice devices. You know,

[2:34:06] this is some of the nuance where, where, you know,

[2:34:09] on one hand, we want transparency, um, and this is

[2:34:12] a movement towards transparency. But on the other hand, um,

[2:34:16] you know, the real gray area with this bylaw and

[2:34:19] it reminds me of the gray area we experience with

[2:34:21] our portfolio chairs bylaw. Which, uh, which guides your no

[2:34:26] sort of referenced a couple meetings ago in his interpretation

[2:34:28] of it. And he's a lawyer. So it's fine that

[2:34:31] we have, it's fine that we have some clarification on

[2:34:35] the fly. But to me, the thing that we're passing

[2:34:37] tonight and the thing that's going to be said in

[2:34:39] stone is the bylaw. And no matter how you package

[2:34:43] it up, um, and no matter how you justify it,

[2:34:47] at the end of the day, we're, we're putting forward

[2:34:49] something here that says, uh, any electronic device. And it's

[2:34:54] just, it confounds me. That, um, that this is happening

[2:34:59] when it's really specifically talking about one thing to me

[2:35:03] when I read this, it says all any electronic device.

[2:35:10] To the main motion design. That counselor Baldwin. Councillor Chica,

[2:35:15] please. Thank you very much. Your worship, Peth, for you

[2:35:17] to counsel. We just, we just passed an amendment to

[2:35:21] an amendment with a seven to four in favor of

[2:35:25] acknowledging accessibility and family status as issues for having a

[2:35:30] personal device. And so the conundrum is how then can

[2:35:36] we turn the other way and then say you can't

[2:35:40] have any personal devices, period. It's just, it's just oxymoronic

[2:35:46] to me. I don't understand. And to me, it just

[2:35:49] shows, shows us that we are not prepared to go

[2:35:53] through and go forward with this proposed bylaw as it

[2:35:56] is because there's conflict, um, in terms of the understanding

[2:36:02] of, of, of what exists on the page of this

[2:36:06] report. And what we desire in order to be equitable

[2:36:10] and not discriminate against counselors. I would ask us, you

[2:36:14] know, each one of us, how would we feel if

[2:36:18] we could not be reached by our loved one if

[2:36:21] one of them had a heart attack, God forbid. Or

[2:36:24] had a fatal accident. This is not a situation where

[2:36:29] we can expect others who would be dealing with that

[2:36:34] situation to, to reach out to the chair of this

[2:36:38] meeting, which changes as to whether it's general committee meeting

[2:36:41] and planning meeting, that this is just unprecedented. It doesn't

[2:36:45] happen anywhere. It defies the human rights code. And the

[2:36:50] labor code of Ontario. So do we want to have

[2:36:53] people appealing to those bodies because it's unfair. Every staff

[2:37:00] member, every journalist in this room is allowed to have

[2:37:03] one, two, whatever devices they want, but the counselors who

[2:37:07] are doing the work of this municipality for their constituents

[2:37:11] can't look up an article or can't look at their

[2:37:13] notes that they took a couple of weeks ago because

[2:37:15] they keep it on their iPad. This is ludicrous. This

[2:37:19] is not the future of what a municipal government should

[2:37:22] be. So I support the deferral because this is not

[2:37:27] done. And this is not appropriate in how it's been

[2:37:31] analyzed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Councillor Zinker, there

[2:37:34] on the, uh, on the floor. Uh, the main motion

[2:37:37] as amendment was moved by Councillor against the main motion.

[2:37:41] Thank you. Thanks. That's quite a counselor Baldwin to the

[2:37:44] made motion as a bend. Yeah. Your worship, this is

[2:37:47] the second time just in case you're keeping track. So,

[2:37:50] um, I'm keeping very close. Okay. So my question, uh,

[2:37:55] with respect to the concern that Councillor Burkitt raised previously,

[2:37:59] uh, I'd like to ask, um, Commissioner Putts, David, um.

[2:38:04] There would be time, time, times, um, for counselors to

[2:38:08] receive educational training. I suspect that given the debate that

[2:38:12] we've had, um, I think the counselor had referenced, you

[2:38:15] know, 10 years from now. We won't even know what

[2:38:18] the bylaw means. Would it be something that. The CEO

[2:38:24] and in conjunction with your office might think about doing

[2:38:27] an educational topic at the beginning of every term with

[2:38:30] a new council with respect to the procedure to bylaw.

[2:38:34] So those who are sitting here, um, would have an

[2:38:37] understanding of the bylaw. And I guess like a goal

[2:38:40] to see a reign of rather than Commissioner Bosnies. Mr.

[2:38:43] Rato, please. Thank you through you, Mr. Mayor. So we

[2:38:47] are having every year, a council workshop. So we are

[2:38:51] planning one in the march. So then we'll be a

[2:38:54] standard protocol. We'll be reviewing it and discussing it with

[2:38:58] the council. Hey, to the main motion as amended. Sure.

[2:39:06] Good. Councilor Hankey. Uh, thank you very much, your worship.

[2:39:09] Um, as you know, I chair, uh, finance, one of

[2:39:13] the things that I guarantee I will do is before

[2:39:16] the meeting, I will be asking people if there's any

[2:39:18] accommodations that they require and they can come to me

[2:39:22] and speak to me about them, uh, again, having, having

[2:39:25] been in that situation, I understand the importance of it.

[2:39:28] The other thing that, uh, I just wanted to say

[2:39:31] is, um, Councillor La Chica referred to, it's against the,

[2:39:35] I believe you said the human rights code. And the

[2:39:38] labor code, but we determined that that is not the

[2:39:40] case. Um, here earlier, Oh, I'm sorry. I misunderstood then

[2:39:45] counselor Lachica. Maybe you could. There are different legal opinions.

[2:39:52] And I sought the legal opinion of two lawyers outside

[2:39:57] of the city offices this week. And they, they told

[2:40:01] me contrary to the advice that we've had today. Thank

[2:40:03] you. Okay. Thank you very much for hanging out the

[2:40:07] floor. Thank you very much, your worship. Um, and our

[2:40:10] city solicitor has said that that is not the case.

[2:40:13] And I'm going to go with our city solicitor. But

[2:40:17] again, getting back to, um, the main motion, I'm glad

[2:40:20] I was explained to me properly because I do understand

[2:40:24] that the chair has full discretion to make any adjustments

[2:40:28] that are required. At that meeting. Again, for me, I'm

[2:40:32] going to state up front. Earlier than the meeting begins

[2:40:37] and ask people if there's any accommodations that they need

[2:40:39] and I'd be happy to, happy to make them. Um,

[2:40:41] so I don't. I don't have an issue actually, um,

[2:40:45] my phone's been off all night and it's been a

[2:40:48] treat. Uh, because it's not ringing, um, my family knows

[2:40:52] where to get a hold of me. If there is

[2:40:54] an issue, um, and if I thought that I had

[2:40:57] a need for a phone, I would speak with the

[2:41:01] chair tonight and ask for the permission. Um, I'm okay

[2:41:05] the way that it is written. We've made some changes.

[2:41:08] And again, and I don't think I was really clear,

[2:41:10] but there was four speakers in particular tonight that spoke

[2:41:14] very well that made me realize that we do, uh,

[2:41:17] have to make some changes. And we not only did

[2:41:20] we make the changes. They were the right changes based

[2:41:23] on the input from the public. So, um, contrary to

[2:41:26] what some people may believe, I do listen. Um, not

[2:41:30] necessarily at home all the time, but I do listen

[2:41:33] at council. And I think that it was a what

[2:41:36] we've done tonight is a good compromise. We've extended questions

[2:41:40] from one to two last week. And we can be

[2:41:43] concise. And that's one of the issues we all can

[2:41:46] speak very short and very concisely if we're required to.

[2:41:51] And I think that that's important for the, uh, for

[2:41:53] the speakers to understand also when they're up here. So

[2:41:56] thank you very much. Thank you very much, Councillor Hickey.

[2:42:00] Councillor Burke for a second time. Thank you, Marilyn. And

[2:42:04] this is just in response to Councillor Baldwin. It is

[2:42:08] my personal belief that a bylaw should not need to

[2:42:10] be translated and that a bylaw should not need an

[2:42:13] education session. It should be clear to everyone involved. And,

[2:42:17] you know, I'm just raising a point to me that's

[2:42:19] very unclear. You know, maybe it's just the fact that

[2:42:21] I'm the youngest on council. I understand how I can

[2:42:24] use this thing in the exact same way as I

[2:42:26] can use my phone. And it's like absurd to me

[2:42:29] that this is allowed when the bylaws explicitly says any

[2:42:33] electronic device. Thank you. Thank you. It's a work any

[2:42:37] further comments. It's been booed by Councillor Beamer. Segway counselor

[2:42:42] Heggie. We'll go to a vote.

[2:43:17] And that is Carried eight to three. The next item

[2:43:23] is 10L. 10L. 10L. Sorry, Kelsey, I think it was

[2:43:33] Ted Alu. You flagged for me. So you don't want

[2:43:40] to discuss it. Now somebody would like to move Teddy

[2:43:42] Councillor Bieber. Councillor Pernell. We'll go to a vote.

[2:44:41] 10M, 10M Councillor Parnell and M. Councillor Baldwin, your second

[2:44:48] 10M. Any further commerce or questions? We'll go to vote.

[2:45:49] That's carried. Councillor Crowley 10Q. You want to speak to

[2:45:52] RedPath. That was a notice of motion. Yes. Um. Thank

[2:46:01] you, Chair. Um, I, I just wanted to say that

[2:46:04] there's, there's just for the notice of motion for red

[2:46:08] path. I mean, there's awe of. And I think, um,

[2:46:12] Dr. Sean, as he actually falls in that category. And

[2:46:15] I know that my, um, my mother was, was, um,

[2:46:19] absolutely love Peggy and supported everything she did and followed

[2:46:23] her, uh, religiously, uh, I know Peggy did so much

[2:46:29] for me, um, during March of last year when I

[2:46:32] was going through stuff with my mom. I think that

[2:46:35] this is really great. And I think it was touched

[2:46:37] on that, that the potential for this funding to open

[2:46:41] up other avenues of funding for red path is really

[2:46:45] important. And I think for someone like Peg, who has,

[2:46:48] um, has Dr. Sean, excuse me, who has been sort

[2:46:51] of shown the door, um, time and time again by,

[2:46:55] uh, different organizations. And even, you know, the city in

[2:46:59] the past, she's had trouble trying to get funding from

[2:47:01] the city. And I think that this is a really

[2:47:03] great thing that we're doing. Uh, and I think that

[2:47:05] it'll, it'll benefit the city in a really great way.

[2:47:08] So I just wanted to say thank you to her.

[2:47:10] Thank you to Liz and thank you to Red Path.

[2:47:12] And thank you for everybody involved. And thank you for

[2:47:14] everyone who's been here tonight. So thank you colleagues. Next

[2:47:18] year early. Councillor Dugay, please on Red Path. Your worship.

[2:47:24] Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Uh, the general

[2:47:30] committee meeting and prior, um, I had expressed a knee,

[2:47:36] a potential need for a business plan to be produced

[2:47:39] in support of Dr. Shaughnessy's, um, proposal for some transitional

[2:47:45] housing, um, at her Brock Street property. I have, um.

[2:47:52] Uh, consider, uh, this evening's delegations plus, um, reflect upon

[2:47:58] some of the initial meetings I had. With Dr. Shaughty.

[2:48:01] I also reflect upon in 2014 Dr. Shaughnessy Peggy at

[2:48:08] the time. She and I were both, uh, core sponsors

[2:48:11] of Clary Hughes, big blue bike ride, which dealt with

[2:48:15] mental health issues and related matters in our city. He

[2:48:20] has been. Firmly committed to helping people dealing with a

[2:48:24] various, uh, dealing with addictions and needing to heal self.

[2:48:29] And what I see, what has been requested this evening

[2:48:32] is a reasonable, um, a reasonable request to have the

[2:48:37] city provide some. Seed funding to allow, uh, Dr. Shaughty

[2:48:42] and her group to advance a proposal that will, uh,

[2:48:47] and, uh, referred to better her, her business model. And

[2:48:53] as noted to introduce necessary housing that potentially conserve a

[2:48:57] transitional means persons dealing recovering from addiction. So I'm in

[2:49:02] full support of our allocation of funds, uh, given these,

[2:49:06] uh, this background in these circumstances. Thank you. Councillor Weber,

[2:49:11] please. Thank you Mayor Ale counseling real alluded to it

[2:49:17] last week. And I don't know if he's speaking or

[2:49:18] not, but I just wanted to make some comment. Are

[2:49:20] you on the list? Okay. Um, is, um, certainly right

[2:49:26] the, I support this. I supported last week. And thank

[2:49:29] you, Dr. Shaughnessy, for all your great work. It's a

[2:49:31] great organization. They do great work. Um, it's important to

[2:49:35] point out the great organizations in the community who are

[2:49:39] doing great work. I've met with rising above. And, uh,

[2:49:42] I think they're all also going to be looking for

[2:49:45] some financial support. Many great organizations doing great work in

[2:49:50] the community who will be looking for financial support. But

[2:49:54] we do have to keep in mind Merrill as we

[2:49:56] all know the taxpayer. And we have to keep that

[2:49:59] in mind moving forward. This termic council, we've been very,

[2:50:03] um, we've invested significantly in Wolf Street. In Trinity, uh,

[2:50:10] Brock, both capital and operating. Yes. Cameron House, approximately 13

[2:50:17] million dollars municipally and provincially on homelessness services. Um, that's

[2:50:22] increased significantly this term. So a lot of great services

[2:50:26] and programs and providers out there. A lot of them

[2:50:29] coming to council looking for some seed funding or for

[2:50:32] some support for capital and operating. Um, and I don't

[2:50:37] want to be sort of the downer mayor allele, but

[2:50:39] there's only so much the property taxpayers can pay a

[2:50:43] lot of the property taxpayers are struggling them, themselves right

[2:50:46] now. And although we want to be generous and the

[2:50:49] property taxpayers want to be generous, uh, many of them

[2:50:53] are, are tapped out. Many of them are tax wary.

[2:50:56] And many of them are saying we just can't afford

[2:51:00] higher property taxes. So, um, something this council and next

[2:51:05] council will just have to keep in mind Merrill. There

[2:51:08] is a limit to the amount that we can spend

[2:51:12] on homelessness and all those of these services and organizations

[2:51:16] are great. Uh, they're, there is a limit where property

[2:51:19] taxpayers are saying there's only so much that I can

[2:51:22] afford myself. Thank you, Mayor Lil. I know it was

[2:51:25] moved by a councillor Crowley a secondary for Councillor Burke.

[2:51:30] Councillor pronounced that you want to speak. I just want

[2:51:37] to say something on a personal basis. My late mother

[2:51:40] who was a nursing supervisor at St. Joseph Hospital actually

[2:51:44] helped a higher peaking when she was an O'Reilly in

[2:51:47] those days. And I said this at the pathway of

[2:51:51] aim introduction that my mom always thought Peggy was going

[2:51:54] to have a special mission in life. So I, I

[2:51:57] just wanted to reiterate this tonight. Council Rial, please. Through

[2:52:01] the chair. I will not be supporting this. I want

[2:52:05] to be very clear at the outset. I fully support

[2:52:09] the work of right to heal does and the people

[2:52:13] they serve. Addiction and mental health challenge are real complex

[2:52:17] and deserve serious sustainable sustained support. My concern is not

[2:52:23] about the value of the program. It's about the appropriate

[2:52:25] role of the city of Peterborough as a funder. Write

[2:52:31] to heel is an aftercare treatment recovery program. While traditional

[2:52:35] housing is important component of that work, it remains fundamentally

[2:52:40] health and social services mandate, not a municipal one. These

[2:52:46] types of programs are probably funded by senior levels of

[2:52:49] government, which have both the jurisdiction. And the long -

[2:52:53] term funding capacity to support them. The city already contributes

[2:52:58] through two established affordable housing and homeless funding streams within

[2:53:04] our social services department. Those programs are designed to access

[2:53:10] need and share fairness and allotment funding in a transparent

[2:53:14] and accountable way. Bypassing those processes set a difficult presidence

[2:53:21] and undermines the integrity of an existing system. In addition,

[2:53:26] the province has committed 8 million dollars through the heart

[2:53:30] fund specifically for initiative addressing homelessness, addiction and mental health.

[2:53:36] Precisely the type of work that right to heal does.

[2:53:40] Those funds exist. So municipalities are not forced to back

[2:53:43] fail responsibilities that belong elsewhere. At a time when the

[2:53:48] city is facing significant financial pressures and rising property taxes,

[2:53:54] we must be disciplined and consistent. Every dollar we allocate

[2:53:58] outside of our core mandate is a dollar. We cannot

[2:54:02] spend on housing. Infrastructure transit for emergency services areas where

[2:54:09] the city has clear responsibility. So I think I pointed

[2:54:14] out tonight and I asked questions of Dr. Shaughnessy. If

[2:54:19] she has applied to these funding. And I guess the

[2:54:22] answer is null. Well, that's where the buck stops with

[2:54:27] me. She should have applied there. Instead of coming to

[2:54:31] city council looking for 150, 000 dollars. Taxpayers money. Councilor

[2:54:40] Basiliatus, please. The council of Chica and the Councillor Parnell.

[2:54:43] Councillor, please. Oh, thank you Mayor. Um, yeah, I'm happy

[2:54:48] to support this. Um, you know, with this, uh, support

[2:54:52] from the city, it will open up another streams of

[2:54:55] revenue, uh, for Dr. Sean and see, you know, I

[2:54:58] like that she didn't take the traditional, uh, route to

[2:55:00] this. It's when you have the door shut on you

[2:55:03] quite a few times, you have to look at a

[2:55:05] different way of getting the funding. Um, we, we've seen

[2:55:10] the results that she's been able to produce. And, uh,

[2:55:13] we always talk about those results and different levels of

[2:55:17] government and, and even with the city. And so, um,

[2:55:21] I'm happy to support it. And, um, I know that

[2:55:23] being a good neighbor was brought up. And, you know,

[2:55:26] we deal with that and all of our awards of

[2:55:29] being a good neighbor. And she's proven to be that

[2:55:32] too. So when, when you have all these things that

[2:55:34] are working for you, why wouldn't you support something like

[2:55:37] this. To me, it's, uh, it sure is a different

[2:55:41] approach. It's not your traditional approach. But it's effective and

[2:55:46] it's, and she's very effective on what she does. And

[2:55:48] I think a part of being a good neighbor is

[2:55:50] holding people accountable. And it's pretty clear that she does

[2:55:53] that too. So again, very happy to support this, uh,

[2:55:57] I wish you're well in the future. Thank you. Councillor

[2:56:00] Chica, please. Well, thank you very much. Your worship through

[2:56:04] you. I just would like to say, and I spoke

[2:56:09] last week, um, just how much belief, um, I have

[2:56:15] and Dr. Shauna C, and, um, everything that happens at

[2:56:18] Red Path. There's clearly, um, a nucleus there of, of

[2:56:24] strength, of support, um, and it's one of the tools

[2:56:28] that we need here in our toolkit in Peterborough. And

[2:56:31] as a downtown Ward Counselor, this is a force that,

[2:56:35] that is, is so important for our downtown. And this

[2:56:39] is a special place. Second to none. And we've heard

[2:56:44] tonight from Dr. Shaunacy that support of the city is

[2:56:48] necessary for further scaffolded funding from other sources and from

[2:56:53] the government. So it was great to hear all that

[2:56:55] explained very clearly. We need this. It's contagious. When, when

[2:57:01] you do go inside red path to see the vision

[2:57:04] that's, that's at work. And to hear, um, Philip Jolie

[2:57:08] Coast testimonial today. Such a powerful thing. So thank you

[2:57:13] for your presence here today, Red Path. And I fully

[2:57:16] support this. Thank you. Please. Thank you, your worship. Um,

[2:57:21] I will, I did speak to this last week. And

[2:57:23] of course, I will be supporting a red path tonight.

[2:57:26] Um, if you'd seen my hand first, I would, I

[2:57:28] would have moved it. Uh, but I will definitely be

[2:57:30] voting for it. Um, first I do want to clarify

[2:57:33] that we, we heard very specifically from Dr. Shaughnessy that

[2:57:37] they were not eligible for the heart funding. And that

[2:57:39] is a very, uh, prescribed amount of funding that is

[2:57:42] going through forecast, um, there's no access there. Um, this,

[2:57:47] this is funding for transitional housing specifically the planning for

[2:57:52] transitional housing. The wraparound services that we keep going on

[2:57:56] about that we absolutely need is people seek to improve

[2:58:00] their lives and get away from addiction. They need these

[2:58:03] wraparound services. And that's exactly what this does. And we

[2:58:07] have done this very same thing before the precedent has

[2:58:10] been set where we do a municipal contribution that shows

[2:58:14] confidence in the organization and the program. Uh, and that

[2:58:19] does leverage other, uh, grant opportunities provincially federally quite often,

[2:58:24] as we've seen in other programs, significant private money will

[2:58:28] come in when that confidence is expressed in such an

[2:58:31] important program and other ones out there. We did the

[2:58:34] exact same thing for the Brock mission on Murray Street.

[2:58:38] I was personally involved in a fundraiser for that six

[2:58:41] months selling raple tickets. Uh, we also, uh, contributed to

[2:58:45] the new Brock mission, transitional housing. And I'm sure and

[2:58:48] then that will be also the relocation of the women's

[2:58:51] shelter. And then we also supported the, um, incredible, affordable

[2:58:56] housing, uh, apartment on Monagan Road. And all of those

[2:58:59] things really depended on the council of the day. And

[2:59:03] this council, um, supporting them through the planning application and,

[2:59:09] uh, securing that vision and actually making it, um, happen

[2:59:13] and into a building permit. So I will be supporting

[2:59:15] it based on all of those points. Thank you. Thank

[2:59:18] you, Councillor Perdell. Any further speakers. Councillor Baldwin, please. Thank

[2:59:25] you, your worship. First of all, I'd like to thank

[2:59:29] Councillor Crowley for bringing forth a notice of motion. I'd

[2:59:33] also like to thank Dr. Shanasi for reaching out to

[2:59:36] all the counselors, uh, with their correspondence via email. I

[2:59:40] did respond to her and I still haven't made it

[2:59:42] to the red path, but make it committed this evening.

[2:59:45] And I will be visiting, um, sometime in February, if

[2:59:49] I can pull that together. So absolutely will be supporting

[2:59:53] Councillor Crowley's motion here and happy to do so. Thank

[2:59:57] you, your worship. Thank you, Elsa Baldwin. Anything further.

[3:00:17] And that's scary.

[3:00:28] The next time in business is bylaws, and I know

[3:00:31] Councillor Dugay won a couple separated out, I believe. Sorry,

[3:00:37] thanks for your worship. Yeah, just the next item would

[3:00:40] be recommendations from this evening's general committee meeting. Oh, I'm

[3:00:45] sorry, yes. There's two items you're worship. The first one,

[3:00:48] if you would like, I could just paralyze. Please do.

[3:00:51] I'm sorry. Mr. Hork. Thanks for your worship. So from

[3:00:56] this evening's general committee meeting, there was a recommendation regarding.

[3:01:01] Collective bargaining. That council approved the recommendations that the dining

[3:01:05] report, CAO, PC 26 - 001, dated February 2nd, 2026

[3:01:10] of the Chief Administrative Officer as follows. That council direct

[3:01:14] staff to proceed as recommended in closed session report, CAO

[3:01:19] PC26 - 001, dated February 2nd, 2026. Of the Chief

[3:01:24] Administrative Officer, respecting the collective bargaining process. We have a

[3:01:29] mover to that. I do have a point of order,

[3:01:33] and maybe I missed something, if I may. Yes. 10R,

[3:01:40] did we move that on consent. Because I don't see

[3:01:42] that we moved on. Did we move it on consent?

[3:01:45] I didn't send. Oh, TEDR. Senior snow clearing program? Point

[3:01:52] of order. Oh, okay, go ahead. Councillor Burke, if you

[3:01:55] want to talk about it. Oh yeah, we'll, uh, the

[3:02:00] chair always has a degree of discretion. Take care with

[3:02:04] the chair likes the program. And if you don't have

[3:02:07] that discussion now, you'll definitely have it after this bylaw.

[3:02:10] Um, Mr. Mayor, this is sort of a self -

[3:02:15] serving, uh, more self - serving than usual speech. Um,

[3:02:19] but I just wanted to say, I had a long

[3:02:21] talk today with the resident Ingrid Buck, whom you know.

[3:02:24] And I just wanted to sort of clarify my support

[3:02:27] of your motion, Mr. Mayor. Um, I wholeheartedly agree with

[3:02:31] it. Um, I think that, uh, Ingrid Buck was saw

[3:02:36] an article in the examiner where they, they pulled out

[3:02:39] just a quote where I was trying to have the

[3:02:42] public understand the reality of the cost. Um, in terms

[3:02:46] of, and investing in the infrastructure to have those machines

[3:02:49] that, that sweep each driveway, whatever it's called, um, and

[3:02:54] I just wanted to have, uh, sort of reality checked

[3:02:57] because a lot of people ask me as a counselor

[3:02:59] about, Hey, can you just do this? Like I've seen

[3:03:01] a real, like assuming that it's just a simple, uh,

[3:03:05] cheap effective thing to do. And many of us on

[3:03:08] council have actually tried to investigate that because I'm sure

[3:03:11] we all get those emails. And my, um, acknowledgement of

[3:03:15] the cost of that strategy, um, does not at all

[3:03:19] mean that I don't support a program like you're suggesting,

[3:03:22] which looks into subsidies, um, for people I wholeheartedly support

[3:03:26] that and definitely have many, um, residents, um, who are,

[3:03:30] aren't able bodied, uh, in my award. This, especially this

[3:03:34] winter, um, could use that support. So I, I support

[3:03:37] this. And I think, um, Miss Buck for reaching out

[3:03:39] today. Just for the record, those that may subscribe to

[3:03:43] the Toronto star. There was a lengthy, uh, story yesterday's

[3:03:47] version of a gentleman who's disabled in Toronto had a

[3:03:51] windrow in his driveway of 76 centimeter. It's been isolated

[3:03:56] for a week because they can't get out. By the

[3:03:59] way, very popular program in discussion I had at the

[3:04:03] Legion last Friday, very popular counselor beaver, please. Well, just

[3:04:06] a shout out to Ingrid Buck. She's a North and

[3:04:09] residentist, strong, strong supporter of Councillor Burke is moving at

[3:04:13] counselor quality second. Strong counselor Hakis and I, um, it's

[3:04:17] interesting. All the important and big issues, uh, we dealt

[3:04:21] with tonight. This was the one I got the most

[3:04:24] cause of this week. And they were all positive from

[3:04:28] residents and seniors in North Crest Ward. And, uh, it's

[3:04:31] because it affects people. It's potentially allow seniors to stay

[3:04:37] in their homes longer. And it is an issue that

[3:04:40] we all get a lot of calls about. So when

[3:04:43] we talk about, uh, important issues tonight, this is one

[3:04:45] that really resonated with a lot of, a lot of

[3:04:48] seniors, Marily also, so kudos on you for bringing this

[3:04:51] up. I do have to say counselor Heyckey brought it

[3:04:54] up in 2014. But counsel wasn't ready at the time,

[3:04:58] but I think this needs to be look at in

[3:05:00] a really, really good program that a lot of people

[3:05:03] appreciate Merrill. So I fully support it. Thanks very much

[3:05:07] Councillor Beamer. I think we've had a good discussion. We'll

[3:05:10] go to a counselor Purnell. I would like to try

[3:05:14] and add on a little public service announcement to this

[3:05:17] if I may, uh, because you had recommended that we

[3:05:20] read was at the Toronto Star yesterday. Yesterday's Toronto Star.

[3:05:24] So, uh, those of you who don't have subscriptions, this

[3:05:26] is a plug for our library. If you have a

[3:05:30] city of a payroll library card, which is of course

[3:05:33] this free to our taxpayers, uh, that includes press reader,

[3:05:36] which gives you free access to over 10, 000 publications

[3:05:41] magazines and newspapers, um, so I would have to double

[3:05:45] check with Commissioner Laidman if the Toronto Stars actually one

[3:05:47] of them, but it probably is, Oh, I'm getting the

[3:05:50] nod. So there you go. Get your library card and

[3:05:53] then you can have access. And I provided Commissioner Seminewski

[3:05:56] with the story. So he has all that background for

[3:05:59] a part of his extensive and comprehensive research that he'll

[3:06:04] be doing on this topic. Any further comments. We'll go

[3:06:07] to a vote.

[3:07:34] Carcoi Bisting against Councillor Fasiliac. Councilor Dugay, we're just waiting

[3:07:39] for your vote.

[3:07:52] Your worship, a question procedurally. Am I permitted to a

[3:07:55] vote because I did not attend that closed session, uh,

[3:07:58] meeting. Yeah. Unless you have a pecuniary interest, Kevin.

[3:08:09] I do not. I will vote. And that's Carrie 11B

[3:08:17] 314 Carnegie Avenue. Councillor Burke, Secretary Counselor Beamer. I will

[3:08:23] go to a vote.

[3:09:09] And there's a couple that we have to, uh, because

[3:09:13] of your getting interest. Uh, thanks your worship. Um, bylaws

[3:09:16] 25 or 26 - 010 through to 26 - 016

[3:09:22] or before council this evening for consideration, uh, bylaws 26

[3:09:27] - 015 and 016, uh, we're, we're the subject of,

[3:09:32] uh, Crescent Street, the rezoning, the official plan and counselors,

[3:09:36] uh, Burke and Dugay declared interest on those matters. So

[3:09:40] if I could, I get what's up and do.

[3:10:45] And that's carried. If someone could move 26015 at 2606,

[3:10:51] the ones that counselor Dugue Council Burke have declared a

[3:10:54] beginner interest. Councillor Pronoun, Secretary Councilor Baldwin. We'll go to

[3:10:57] a vote.

[3:11:45] Councillor Dickey, have you voted? Or sorry, you don't vote

[3:11:46] on this one. S Parnell in Baldwin.

[3:11:56] And Councillor's Dugain Burke have the confidence.

[3:12:20] Cheap enough, we could vote there.

[3:12:54] Tell service Elias who are waiting for you to vote.

[3:13:03] Yeah. Highbone favored. It didn't pop up, but I'm in

[3:13:05] favor definitely. And that's Carrie. Next item is other business.

[3:13:13] Other business counselor pronoun, please. Thank you, Mayor Leel. Uh,

[3:13:17] Mr. Chair, um, a little public service announcement. It is

[3:13:21] that time of year where we are seeking nominations from

[3:13:23] the community for the 2025 Civic Awards. Uh, so we

[3:13:29] absolutely encourage people to nominate somebody in your life that

[3:13:33] you know has been an exemplary in arts, in sports,

[3:13:37] in music and community betterment and environment, uh, also please

[3:13:42] self - nominate. We know we have absolutely amazing people

[3:13:46] in our community mayor doing all kinds of great projects

[3:13:49] and programs. And they deserve to be thanked publicly and

[3:13:54] acknowledged by us at a very special event in May.

[3:13:58] The deadline to get your nominations into the clerk's office.

[3:14:01] It's all run through the clerk's office. Um, is March

[3:14:04] 13th, I believe. So please get, go to paper. ca,

[3:14:09] check out the civic awards, um, fill out the application

[3:14:12] and let us know about the wonderful people in your

[3:14:15] life, even if it's yourself. We want to know about

[3:14:17] you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Councillor

[3:14:20] Pernell and any other business. Next item is confirmation bylaw.

[3:14:24] Someone like to move 26017 Councillor Crowley, Councillor Hickey. We'll

[3:14:28] go to a vote.

[3:15:07] Councilor Basiades, uh, on the confirmation bylaw. Yes. Thank you.

[3:15:19] That's Carrie. Motion to adjourn Councillor Crowley. Councillor Hickey. We'll

[3:15:23] go to a vote.

[3:15:38] Councilor Faciliatus. Yes. Yes. Definitely.

[3:15:51] And that's carrying. Take your colleagues. Thank you staff. Thank

[3:15:54] you audience.

City Council Meeting

Transcript