Transcript
SOURCE TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.
[0:30]
Chères citoyennes et chers
[0:32]
citoyens bonsoir et bienvenue à
[0:34]
cette séance ordinaire du 2 mai.
[0:37]
>> Their citizens, good evening.
[0:38]
Welcome to the May 2nd council
[0:39]
meeting. Just before getting
[0:40]
started, just to alert you to
[0:42]
the fact that 14.3 has been
[0:45]
pulled off the agenda. For more
[0:50]
discussion, we are probably
[0:52]
going to have a subsequent
[0:54]
special meeting on the subject.
[0:55]
It is a Hughes X huge
[0:57]
expenditure and although Council
[0:59]
is usually in support of public
[1:00]
works, we do want to respect the
[1:04]
fiscal needs of the citizenry as
[1:06]
well, so we are trying to juggle
[1:08]
the two. So, it's impending. It
[1:10]
is an upcoming issue. I would
[1:13]
like to start as Décès de M.
[1:14]
John Jenner well with the --.
[1:17]
Nous avons appris cette semaine
[1:18]
le décès de Monsieur John Jenner
[1:20]
survenu le 30 mars dernier.
[1:21]
Monsieur Jenner était un employé
[1:24]
de la Ville jusqu'au moment de
[1:28]
sa retraire en mars 2015, il
[1:31]
avait 23 ans de service. C'était
[1:34]
un employé des travaux publics,
[1:36]
préposé à l'entretien des parcs.
[1:40]
Nous tenons à offrir nos plus
[1:41]
sincères condoléances à sa
[1:44]
famille et amis.
[2:05]
We need another chair? Do we
[2:08]
have another? No worries.
[2:20]
Out of respect, I will return to
[2:22]
it. Once we get this resolved,
[2:26]
--
[2:41]
>> You good, Cynthia? Okay,
[2:45]
good. That is true. It got moved
[2:49]
at the last minute. Nous avons
[2:52]
appris cette semaine le décès de
[2:53]
Monsieur John Jenner survenu le
[2:54]
30 mars dernier. Monsieur Jenner
[2:55]
était un employé de la Ville
[2:56]
jusqu'au moment de sa retraire
[2:57]
en mars 2015, il avait 23 ans de
[2:58]
service. C'était un employé des
[2:59]
travaux publics, préposé à
[3:00]
l'entretien des parcs. Nous
[3:01]
tenons à offrir nos plus
[3:02]
sincères condoléances à sa
[3:03]
famille et amis.
[3:18]
Le mois de mai est, dans tout le
[3:19]
Canada, désigné comme « Mois du
[3:21]
patrimoine juif canadien », en
[3:25]
le désignant ainsi, le Parlement
[3:27]
du Canada reconnaît l'apport
[3:29]
substantiel des Canadiens juifs
[3:30]
au patrimoine social,
[3:34]
économique, politique et
[3:36]
culturel du pays, Les membres du
[3:37]
conseil et moi-même, saluons la
[3:38]
communauté juive de
[3:41]
Pointe-Claire, et nous leur
[3:42]
souhaitons un excellent mois de
[3:44]
mai.
[3:50]
J'aimerais débuter cette soirée
[3:52]
ne remerciant sincèrement nos
[3:54]
équipes des travaux publics,
[3:57]
pour le travail colossal qu'ils
[4:00]
accomplissent tous les jours,
[4:01]
depuis presque un mois
[4:03]
maintenant. Je comprends
[4:04]
l'impatience que certaines
[4:05]
personnes expriment
[4:07]
publiquement, mais il faut
[4:09]
comprendre qu'en période
[4:12]
normale, faire le tour de la
[4:14]
ville pour ramasser les branches
[4:15]
prend presque un mois, ce n'est
[4:17]
pas une période normale, le
[4:22]
verglas a endommagé notre
[4:24]
importante canopée, malgré ce
[4:25]
que
[4:29]
j'entends, ce n'est pas mieux
[4:31]
ailleurs, nous avons mobilisé le
[4:34]
maximum de personne et nous
[4:36]
tentons de faire le ramassage le
[4:39]
plus rapidement possible. Nous
[4:42]
allons communiquer plus souvent
[4:43]
des informations sur
[4:44]
l'avancement des travaux, à ce
[4:47]
jour, un peu plus de 50% du
[4:49]
territoire a été visité par nos
[4:51]
équipes.
[4:58]
Il y a de multiples activités
[4:59]
pour les citoyens en mai je vous
[5:01]
les donne en ordre
[5:04]
chronologique, mais vous pourrez
[5:06]
suivre tous ces événements sur
[5:07]
les médias sociaux et sur le
[5:09]
Site Internet de la Ville. Les
[5:14]
citoyennes et citoyens de
[5:15]
Pointe-Claire sont invités à
[5:16]
participer à un deuxième atelier
[5:17]
pour la révision du plan
[5:18]
d'urbanise le 17 mai prochain en
[5:21]
soirée, cette fois c'est au
[5:27]
pavillon Baie-de Valois et les
[5:29]
inscriptions sont commencées
[5:30]
depuis hier, vous pouvez
[5:33]
réservez en ligne sur le site
[5:34]
internet, pour participer il est
[5:36]
important de réserver votre
[5:37]
place.
[5:43]
Le samedi 20 mai, le nouveau
[5:47]
poste de police PDQ 5 ouvrira
[5:48]
ses portes au public, pour
[5:51]
l'occasion il y aura des
[5:54]
activités extérieures et vous
[5:55]
pourrez visiter les
[5:56]
installations intérieures, les
[6:00]
familles seront invitées à
[6:02]
participer, les équipes du poste
[6:03]
de police préparent les
[6:05]
activités de cette journée et
[6:06]
des informations suivront
[6:08]
prochainement.
[6:14]
Deux grands rendez-vous
[6:16]
clôtureront le mois de mai. Le
[6:20]
samedi 27 il y aura la
[6:24]
traditionnelle journée des
[6:25]
travaux publics, cette activité
[6:26]
toujours très populaire est
[6:28]
ouverte à tous et il y aura des
[6:32]
activités pour les enfants, nos
[6:37]
équipes s'affairent à terminer
[6:38]
la programmation de la journée
[6:39]
et c'est toujours un grand
[6:40]
plaisir pour moi d'y participer
[6:42]
et de rencontrer les familles.
[6:45]
Un autre événement populaire se
[6:49]
déroule dimanche le 28 mai c'est
[6:51]
le rendez-vous culturel au
[6:52]
Stewart Hall, il y aura des
[6:53]
activités toute la journée, à
[6:54]
l'intérieur et dans le parc
[6:57]
Stewart. Il y a des expositions
[6:59]
temporaires et permanentes, des
[7:03]
ateliers pour tous et plusieurs
[7:04]
activés pour les enfants.
[7:11]
En terminant, j'aimerais
[7:12]
souhaiter la bienvenue à Claude
[7:14]
Cousineau qui a été assermenté
[7:15]
vendredi dernier. Bienvenu
[7:16]
Claude à cette première séance
[7:17]
du conseil avec nous tous cette
[7:18]
année. 1 Ordre du jour de la
[7:19]
séance ordinaire du conseil de
[7:20]
la Ville de Pointe-Claire, à
[7:21]
être tenue à l'hôtel de ville,
[7:22]
451, boulevard Saint-Jean,
[7:23]
Pointe-Claire
[7:24]
. Je souhaite vous donner les
[7:26]
principaux éléments du budget.
[7:28]
Vous serez en mesure de
[7:30]
constater que la gestion
[7:33]
rigoureuse des fonds publics
[7:34]
donne d'excellents résultats. On
[7:39]
l'exercice financier 2022 se
[7:41]
termine avec un surplus de
[7:44]
25000... 25 millions. Les
[7:47]
revenus additionnels proviennent
[7:49]
principalement de notre parc
[7:51]
industriel pour l'établissement
[7:53]
d'entreprises dans les
[7:55]
(inaudible)
[7:56]
(---)
[7:57]
, avantageux. De l'arrivée
[8:00]
prochaine de deux stations
[8:01]
durement sur notre territoire.
[8:05]
Le Serbe ça explique en grande
[8:08]
partie de la façon suivante.
[8:10]
Nous sommes à 15,2 million
[8:13]
provenant principalement des
[8:14]
droits de mutations. Des revenus
[8:17]
de taxation, ainsi que des
[8:18]
revenus d'intérêt.
[8:19]
(---)
[8:20]
. Aussi, les subventions reçues
[8:25]
notamment pour le développement
[8:27]
des collections de la
[8:28]
bibliothèque, de la gestion des
[8:30]
matières résiduelles, grâce aux
[8:32]
bonnes pratiques des citoyens et
[8:34]
citoyennes axé sur la réduction
[8:35]
à la source. Également, de
[8:38]
bonnes
[8:39]
(inaudible)
[8:40]
(---)
[8:41]
.
[8:42]
Au chapitre des dépenses au
[8:43]
cours de l'année 2022, Noah
[8:49]
équipes ont continué de
[8:50]
prioriser les qualités et
[8:52]
services au bénéfice de
[8:53]
l'ensemble de notre communauté,
[8:55]
ainsi que l'application et
[8:59]
l'efficience dans les opérations
[9:00]
quotidiennes. La diminution de
[9:05]
certains activités normalement
[9:07]
planifié et une gestion
[9:08]
responsable des ressources a
[9:10]
permis de réaliser des économies
[9:13]
au niveau des charges et des
[9:16]
attractions, affectation, de 10
[9:17]
millions. La majorité du surplus
[9:24]
sera affecté au financement et
[9:27]
au remboursement de la dette à
[9:28]
long terme. Une portion sera
[9:33]
utilisé est aussi utilisé pour
[9:35]
continuer la mise à niveau
[9:37]
donnons bâtiments municipaux.
[9:40]
Nous continuons également
[9:42]
non-intervention pour lutter
[9:44]
contre la... l'agrile du frêne.
[9:48]
C'est conséquences sur notre
[9:50]
canopée
[9:51]
(inaudible)
[9:52]
, cela inclut sur les
[9:53]
subventions offertes aux
[9:54]
citoyens et citoyennes. Le
[9:57]
rapport financier 2022 souligne
[10:01]
qu'afin de terre
[10:02]
(---)
[10:03]
, dans les opérations régulière,
[10:05]
plusieurs projets ont été
[10:06]
réalisés. Voici quelques-uns.
[10:14]
Des travaux routiers et
[10:16]
d'infrastructures pour plusieurs
[10:17]
rues. Le barrage de plusieurs
[10:18]
sections de rue ainsi que la
[10:21]
réfection de non-brûler
[10:22]
trottoirs. L'aménagement d'une
[10:26]
piste additionnelle de ski.
[10:29]
Des sentiers de marche au club
[10:32]
de Beaconsfield. Des travaux
[10:34]
d'aménagement et de sentiers
[10:35]
ainsi que des travaux de
[10:36]
verdissement. Day travaux
[10:40]
d'amélioration dans plusieurs
[10:41]
parcs. Différents travaux de
[10:46]
réfection au Centre culturel
[10:47]
Stewart Hull. Je tiens à
[10:50]
remercier les équipes de la
[10:51]
ville ainsi que notre territoire
[10:53]
des Finances, monsieur Daniel
[10:54]
Seguin pour la gestion
[10:55]
rigoureuse du jus de budget.
[11:00]
Monsieur Cousineau.
[11:08]
En terminant, j'aimerais
[11:09]
souhaiter la bienvenue à Claude
[11:10]
Cousineau qui a été assermenté
[11:11]
vendredi dernier. Bienvenu
[11:12]
Claude à cette première séance
[11:13]
du conseil avec nous tous cette
[11:14]
année. 1 Ordre du jour de la
[11:15]
séance ordinaire du conseil de
[11:16]
la Ville de Pointe-Claire, à
[11:17]
(---)
[11:18]
.
[11:20]
>> I had a whole bunch of
[11:22]
additional French parts put in.
[11:24]
I should've practice beforehand.
[11:26]
Je m'excuse, j'ai fait quelques
[11:27]
erreurs. The death of John
[11:28]
Jenner. This week, we learned of
[11:30]
the death of Mr. John Jenner on
[11:32]
March 30th. Mr. Jenner was an
[11:33]
employee of the city until his
[11:35]
retirement in March, 2015. After
[11:38]
23 years of service. He was a
[11:41]
public works employee,
[11:42]
responsible for parks
[11:43]
maintenance. We would like to
[11:44]
offer our deepest condolences to
[11:47]
his family and friends. The
[11:49]
month of May is designated as
[11:51]
Canadian Jewish heritage month.
[11:54]
By so doing, the Parliament of
[11:56]
Canada recognizes the important
[11:58]
contributions the Jewish
[11:59]
Canadians have made to Canada's
[12:00]
social, economic, political, and
[12:02]
cultural fabric. City Council
[12:05]
and I salute to Jewish community
[12:07]
of Pointe-Claire and wish them a
[12:08]
wonderful month of May. I would
[12:12]
also like to add to this evening
[12:14]
by sincerely thanking our public
[12:16]
works crews for the tremendous
[12:17]
work they are doing every day,
[12:18]
for nearly a month now, since
[12:19]
the ice storm. I understand the
[12:22]
impatience of some residents or
[12:24]
the impatience that some
[12:25]
residents have expressed
[12:27]
publicly. Under normal
[12:28]
circumstances, branch pick up
[12:29]
can take up to a month. It's an
[12:32]
extraordinary situation this
[12:33]
time. The ice storm extensively
[12:35]
damaged our tree canopy. Despite
[12:37]
what I have heard, it's pretty
[12:38]
much the same everywhere else.
[12:40]
We have mobilized to the maximum
[12:42]
and we are working as quickly as
[12:43]
we can. We will communicate
[12:46]
information on the progress of
[12:47]
the work as frequently as
[12:48]
possible. To date, our teams, I
[12:50]
believe, have covered well over
[12:52]
50% of the territory.
[12:55]
Activities. There are many
[12:57]
activities for citizens in the
[12:58]
month of May. I will list some
[13:00]
incredible article order, but
[13:01]
you can follow these events on
[13:02]
social media and on the City's
[13:05]
website. Pointe-Claire citizens
[13:07]
are invited to participate in a
[13:08]
second workshop for the revision
[13:10]
of the urban plan on the evening
[13:12]
of May 17th. This time, it's
[13:14]
being held at the Valois Bay
[13:16]
pavilion and registration
[13:18]
started yesterday. Reservations
[13:20]
can be made online on
[13:22]
Pointe-Claire's website. To
[13:23]
participate, it is important to
[13:25]
reserve your place. Also on
[13:30]
Saturday, May 20th, the New PD
[13:34]
cute five police Asian will open
[13:35]
its doors to the public. For the
[13:37]
occasion, there will be multiple
[13:39]
activities. Families are invited
[13:41]
to participate and all will be
[13:43]
available to visit the indoor
[13:45]
facilities. Officers are
[13:46]
preparing the daily activities
[13:48]
and information will soon
[13:50]
follow. Two major events will
[13:53]
close the month of May. On May
[13:55]
27th, there will be the
[13:56]
traditional public works day.
[13:58]
This is always very popular and
[14:00]
the activities are for everyone.
[14:02]
Our teams are working hard to
[14:03]
complete the programming for
[14:04]
this day of. As always a great
[14:06]
pleasure for me to participate
[14:09]
in need families. On Sunday, May
[14:10]
28th, another great event is to
[14:14]
go to the cultural rendezvous at
[14:17]
Stewart Hall. There will be
[14:18]
activities all day long inside
[14:20]
the building and outside at
[14:22]
Stuart Park. There will be
[14:23]
temporary and permanent
[14:25]
exhibitions, workshops for all,
[14:27]
and many activities for
[14:28]
children. Budget 2022. Tonight,
[14:33]
we are tabling to the 2022
[14:35]
budget and tomorrow, a detailed
[14:37]
press release will be issued to
[14:38]
that effect. I would like to
[14:40]
give you the main information or
[14:43]
ingredients of this budget. You
[14:44]
will be able to see them once
[14:46]
again, the -- manager of public
[14:48]
funds is producing excellent
[14:50]
results. The 2022 fiscal year
[14:52]
ends with a surplus of $25
[14:55]
million. The additional revenues
[14:56]
are mainly due to the
[14:58]
establishment of businesses in
[14:59]
our industrial park, due to its
[15:01]
advantageous location and the
[15:03]
impending arrival of two ram
[15:06]
stations in our territory. The
[15:08]
surplus is primarily explained
[15:11]
by 15 point $2 million coming
[15:12]
mainly from the transfer duties,
[15:14]
tax revenue, and interest
[15:15]
revenue. These additional
[15:18]
revenues also include grants
[15:19]
received, particularly for the
[15:20]
development of library
[15:22]
collections and waste
[15:23]
management, thanks to citizens
[15:26]
good practices geared to source
[15:28]
reduction and proper sorting of
[15:30]
materials. In terms of expenses
[15:33]
during 2022, our teams continue
[15:35]
to prioritize the quality of
[15:37]
services for the benefit of our
[15:38]
community as a whole, as well as
[15:40]
effectiveness and efficiency and
[15:42]
every day operations. The
[15:44]
reduction of some normally
[15:46]
scheduled activities and
[15:47]
responsible management of
[15:48]
resources made it possible to
[15:50]
save $10 million on costs and
[15:52]
allocations. The majority of the
[15:54]
surplus will be allocated to
[15:56]
refinancing and repayment of the
[15:57]
long term debt. A portion will
[15:59]
be used, will also be used, to
[16:02]
continue upgrading our municipal
[16:03]
buildings. We will also continue
[16:06]
our interventions to fight
[16:07]
against the -- emerald ash borer
[16:09]
and its consequences for our
[16:11]
urban canopy, which includes the
[16:13]
grants offered to the public.
[16:15]
The 2022 financial report points
[16:17]
out that to maintain the quality
[16:19]
of service and regular
[16:20]
operations, several projects
[16:21]
will be carried out. Here are
[16:23]
just a few of them. Road and
[16:25]
infrastructure work on several
[16:28]
streets. The paving of several
[16:29]
streets sections and the repair
[16:30]
of many sidewalks. The
[16:33]
development of an additional
[16:34]
cross country ski trail and a
[16:35]
hiking trail at the Beaconsfield
[16:37]
golf course. Trail development
[16:39]
work and greening work.
[16:41]
Improvement works in several
[16:42]
parks. Various repairs to the
[16:45]
Stewart Hall cultural center. I
[16:49]
would like to thank the city's
[16:50]
teams and our director of
[16:52]
finance, Danielle segway, for
[16:54]
the rigorous management of the
[16:56]
budget, or the budgets. Finally
[16:58]
in closing, as I noted in
[17:00]
French, we would like to welcome
[17:02]
Claude casino, who was sworn in
[17:03]
last Friday. So, welcome,
[17:04]
Claude, to your first council
[17:06]
meeting with us this year. We
[17:09]
have any. Madam Thibault?
[17:18]
- 1.1 Adoption de l'ordre du
[17:19]
jour.
[17:22]
>> Adoption of the agenda with
[17:23]
changes. Number one, at 10.1 and
[17:29]
10.3, we should read 2022
[17:32]
instead of 2023. Nous devrions
[17:37]
lire
[17:38]
(---)
[17:39]
à 2022 plutôt que 2023.
[17:43]
And the withdrawal of 14.3. Le
[17:48]
retrait de 14,3. Do I have a
[17:53]
mover?
[18:01]
>> Yes, you do. Bruno Tremblay,
[18:05]
district six scenery, I propose
[18:06]
to move the agenda.
[18:08]
>> And seconder?
[18:11]
>> Claude Cousineau, district
[18:12]
one.
[18:13]
>> All in favour?
[18:23]
Monsieur Cousineau, levez votre
[18:24]
main.
[18:30]
>> 3.1, prove the minutes of the
[18:32]
regular meeting of -- 2023.
[18:34]
>> Do I have a mover? Proposé
[18:38]
par Bruno Tremblay, district.
[18:39]
Six.
[18:40]
>> And seconder?
[18:43]
Claude Kusie, non districts un.
[18:45]
All in favour?. Claude
[18:48]
Cousineau.
[18:53]
- 4. Période de questions,
[18:54]
>> Question period. Ce soir,
[18:59]
vous avez été accueilli à
[19:01]
l'entrée pour vous inscrire à la
[19:03]
période de questions.
[19:06]
L'intention de cette démarche
[19:08]
est d'abord de permettre aux
[19:10]
personnes de demeurer à six
[19:12]
jusqu'à l'appel de leurs noms et
[19:14]
d'accorder la priorité aux
[19:16]
résidents et résidentes de
[19:17]
Pointe-Claire. Nous garderons 90
[19:21]
minutes pour la période de
[19:22]
questions. Une personne à la
[19:24]
fois au micro. Nous vous
[19:28]
remercions d'attendre que le
[19:29]
citoyen a terminé de poser sa
[19:31]
question et que vous soyez
[19:33]
appelé avant pour poser votre
[19:34]
question. Les non-résidents
[19:38]
présents pourront poser leurs
[19:40]
questions par la suite, si le
[19:42]
temps n'est pas écouler.
[19:45]
>> For question period tonight,
[19:47]
during question period, you were
[19:48]
greeted at the entrance to
[19:49]
register for the question
[19:51]
period. This approach, the goal
[19:53]
of, it is to remain people to
[19:54]
allow seated before they -- give
[19:56]
priority to Pointe-Claire
[19:57]
residents. When we shall stick
[19:58]
to the 90 minute time limit for
[20:00]
question period. One person at a
[20:03]
time at the microphone. Thank
[20:05]
you for waiting for us is in to
[20:07]
finish asking their question and
[20:08]
to be called before you get up
[20:10]
to ask yours. And three,
[20:13]
non-residents present will be
[20:14]
able to ask questions
[20:15]
afterwards, if there is still
[20:16]
time.
[20:28]
- Voulez-vous qu'on appelle les?
[20:29]
Non
[20:30]
- J'ai la liste ici.
[20:31]
- Allez-y.
[20:32]
- Monsieur Glenn Nolan.
[20:36]
>> -- person on the list. We
[20:39]
have three more people on the
[20:40]
list. They were at the end.
[20:46]
>> Good evening. My name is
[20:48]
Glenn Holland. Here to talk
[20:49]
about the or ask questions about
[20:52]
the Northview Improvement Plan.
[20:53]
It seems to be a subject of
[20:55]
great interest to our immediate
[20:57]
community, of which there is a
[20:58]
fair presence here tonight. If
[21:00]
anybody from north of you, put
[21:01]
up their hands. This is why we
[21:03]
are here, to talk about this.
[21:05]
So, we became aware of the
[21:07]
Northview plans on March 17th.
[21:10]
Subsequently on April 4th,
[21:11]
council meeting, there was
[21:14]
questions posed to the council.
[21:17]
I understand there is a special
[21:19]
council meeting held after that.
[21:21]
To review the decision of going
[21:23]
forward. In particular, the
[21:25]
outfield fence. We I'm just
[21:27]
wondering if you guys could
[21:28]
share the results of that
[21:30]
special council meeting.
[21:31]
>> No conclusive results as of
[21:33]
yet, but we are still actively
[21:35]
involved in the debate.
[21:37]
>> Because there is lots of
[21:38]
neighbourhood gossip that it is
[21:39]
a done deal. I've been
[21:40]
personally in contact with
[21:42]
Jennifer Ward, who says she
[21:44]
advised me, Jennifer Ward, being
[21:47]
the person they contacted at
[21:48]
Pointe-Claire. And she has
[21:51]
advised that the net will not be
[21:53]
going up in the outfield fence.
[21:56]
But I have asked her to provide
[22:00]
feedback about the warning track
[22:02]
that also goes along with that
[22:03]
fence, as well as the chain link
[22:05]
fence, and ultimately, what is
[22:08]
the core reason of the outfield
[22:10]
fence? Regardless of the height.
[22:13]
>> Yeah, I can't speak to that
[22:16]
inclusively myself. We are still
[22:17]
debating in Council.
[22:18]
>> Okay, so my question then is,
[22:20]
who makes the final decision? I
[22:23]
understand council approves it.
[22:25]
Whatever decision may be, but
[22:26]
who actually sits down and says,
[22:28]
yes, this should be going
[22:29]
forward, the fence?
[22:31]
>> Council does.
[22:33]
>> Okay, so they don't get
[22:34]
involved with fans, no fans,
[22:36]
partial fence?
[22:37]
>> Council gets involved in
[22:38]
everything. Council decides.
[22:40]
>> Okay, but who proposes the
[22:41]
solution?
[22:42]
>> Different members of Council.
[22:45]
We decide ourselves.
[22:46]
>> So, the solution does not
[22:47]
come from Jennifer Ward, who's
[22:49]
been very, very helpful?
[22:50]
>> Well, staff advises us, for
[22:52]
sure. Staff has the expertise,
[22:54]
staff is prevalent in the
[22:55]
discussion, for sure.
[22:56]
>> Okay, so when do we expect,
[22:58]
what do you expect to have a
[22:59]
final, final, final?
[23:01]
>> That's a good question. I
[23:02]
would think within a week, maybe
[23:03]
a week or two, I would imagine.
[23:07]
>> As I said, all sorts of
[23:09]
rumours flying around in the
[23:10]
neighbourhood. That's why I'm
[23:11]
here tonight.
[23:12]
>> Well, we are still talking
[23:13]
about it.
[23:14]
>> So, you're still talking
[23:15]
about it?
[23:16]
>> Yes.
[23:17]
>> Okay, second question, then.
[23:21]
In the original CIP of 2021, the
[23:25]
baseball improvement project was
[23:27]
estimated at 600,000. September
[23:30]
2022, it was reestimate it in
[23:32]
the latest CIP at 750,000. It's
[23:36]
coming in at 900,000. Any
[23:37]
comments?
[23:39]
>> Seems to be happening all
[23:40]
over the place. It's quite
[23:43]
shocking for us how much things
[23:45]
are going up rapidly, all the
[23:46]
time. An original estimates are
[23:49]
jumping by huge amounts, and
[23:50]
it's not fun for us either, let
[23:52]
me tell you. So, my comments are
[23:54]
that we are as shocked by it as
[23:55]
you are.
[23:56]
>> Okay, do we have a start date
[23:57]
on the construction for the
[23:58]
park?
[23:59]
>> Not that I know of. Madam --
[24:02]
do we have a start date? We
[24:04]
don't have a decision at least.
[24:07]
>> Okay, so it's still open
[24:09]
subject, then?
[24:11]
>> Yes.
[24:12]
>> Okay, do we know, like,
[24:13]
details such as what's the
[24:16]
intended age, what are the age
[24:18]
groups going to be using? We've
[24:20]
heard bantam. I'm just looking
[24:22]
for confirmation of that.
[24:23]
>> I have heard bantam, but it
[24:24]
could be wrong. I'm not an
[24:25]
expert on this, okay? Go ahead,
[24:28]
Kelly or Eric. Go ahead, Eric.
[24:32]
>> I thank you from the sports
[24:33]
department that it would be the
[24:34]
same play, it would be Bantam
[24:35]
and pet play.
[24:36]
>> Bantam and PD.
[24:37]
>> Which is currently there.
[24:38]
There is no plan for softball or
[24:41]
anything of that nature, so it
[24:42]
would be exactly the same play
[24:43]
that existed in the last.
[24:46]
>> Again, feedback -- thank you.
[24:48]
>> Would you like to add to
[24:49]
that?
[24:52]
>> Yes, just bantam or midget,
[24:56]
which is younger?
[24:57]
>> Peewee is younger than Mitch.
[25:00]
>> Bantam is the older one.
[25:01]
>> Midget is 16-year-olds,
[25:02]
right?
[25:03]
>> Currently the SPVM bantam
[25:05]
there.
[25:06]
>> Bantam is the older.
[25:07]
>> I have three sons, I'm
[25:09]
getting confused.
[25:10]
>> So, along that line, one of
[25:13]
the, again, neighbourhood
[25:15]
gossip, is that it's because of
[25:17]
safety reasons we need the
[25:18]
outfield fence. And we must
[25:20]
conform with the latest Ministry
[25:23]
of -- regulations. Just to point
[25:25]
out, for bantam level regulatory
[25:29]
field, the outfield fence should
[25:32]
be 300 feet away. It is not. In
[25:37]
the plans, it's not at 300 feet.
[25:39]
So, immediately out of the
[25:40]
starting gate, it can be a
[25:42]
regulatory field. I would like
[25:43]
you to verify that.
[25:44]
>> I will. I will have to
[25:46]
research and verify.
[25:48]
>> Which brings up the whole
[25:49]
subject, the whole point of the
[25:51]
field to begin with.
[25:53]
>> We have Fenway park as a huge
[25:54]
example of exemptions being
[25:58]
made, you know?
[26:02]
>> And I could go on and on, but
[26:04]
since you guys are still
[26:06]
discussing it, is there some way
[26:07]
the public can be informed and
[26:10]
provide input? We've done a lot
[26:11]
of research on this, you saw all
[26:14]
the hands. Everybody has done
[26:15]
independent research. One of my
[26:16]
neighbours, Dan, he did a
[26:19]
beautiful diagram. It's on
[26:20]
Facebook, Eric, your explanation
[26:21]
of why you are supporting the
[26:22]
fence is on Facebook. Great
[26:24]
explanation, thank you very much
[26:25]
for your support. Support --
[26:29]
>> I was going to say, --
[26:31]
>> Support not having the fence,
[26:32]
my bad. So, it's an ongoing
[26:34]
discussion. So, how do we get
[26:38]
involved with those discussion
[26:39]
points?
[26:40]
>> Keep doing what you are
[26:41]
doing. It's called citizen
[26:44]
activism and you do what you are
[26:45]
doing. You know, that's how you
[26:47]
get involved. You can write, you
[26:49]
can email, you can do it,
[26:51]
unfortunately, to our
[26:53]
bombardment, that's what we are
[26:54]
here for and continue to be
[26:57]
active.
[26:58]
>> So, if and when a decision is
[26:59]
reached by the council,
[27:01]
vis-à-vis the Northview
[27:02]
improvement, how will the
[27:05]
information be released?
[27:06]
>> Good question. Probably by,
[27:08]
how would the information be
[27:09]
released? Madam -- how would we
[27:11]
release that information?
[27:17]
[Inaudible]
[27:24]
>> Does this work? Yes, okay.
[27:26]
So, we can -- citizen
[27:28]
communication, if you want.
[27:31]
Maybe for the neighbourhood, you
[27:32]
know? Around the north of you
[27:34]
park.
[27:35]
>> Or City website, I would,
[27:37]
think would be a good, you know,
[27:39]
or email. I would think. I'm
[27:41]
just throwing it out there, but
[27:42]
I'm pretty sure it's --
[27:43]
>> Right now, the feeling in the
[27:45]
neighbourhood is it is a done
[27:47]
deal and we, again, have heard
[27:49]
all sorts of rumours, but
[27:51]
hearing tonight, that's why I
[27:52]
came here tonight. You're saying
[27:53]
it's still an open subject,
[27:55]
still under discussion, with no
[27:56]
timetable? You said maybe within
[27:58]
a week.
[27:59]
>> Timetable is soon.
[28:01]
>> We can maybe have, you know,
[28:03]
a port parole from the citizen
[28:05]
that we can talk with, is that
[28:07]
good?
[28:08]
>> Go ahead, Eric.
[28:09]
>> The initial plan, as I
[28:10]
mentioned to some of you, there
[28:12]
emails were sent in and I think
[28:13]
there was the reply email to, I
[28:15]
think, I'm pretty sure we were
[28:18]
trying to say everybody.
[28:19]
Somebody will be forgotten, but
[28:20]
obviously, I know the lead
[28:22]
people on this. So, my
[28:23]
suggestion would be, I could
[28:27]
work with the Mayor and Madame
[28:28]
Verdun in terms of, you know,
[28:29]
the primary people so they can
[28:31]
get it at the same time.
[28:32]
>> When a decision is reached,
[28:34]
could we have a copy of who
[28:35]
voted for what?
[28:39]
>> It would be none. Not caucus.
[28:42]
>> There is no vote, official
[28:44]
vote in caucus meetings.
[28:45]
>> But there will be at the
[28:47]
council meeting, right? At a
[28:48]
Public council meeting?
[28:49]
>> There will be a council
[28:50]
meeting and there's eight plus
[28:51]
one. Yeah, but we will have a
[28:55]
record of voted for the fence,
[28:56]
voted for no offence?
[28:58]
>> No.
[28:59]
>> Why won't we have a record?
[29:01]
>> Hang on, I will clarify. This
[29:04]
already went through the caucus
[29:05]
vote, so what we are looking to
[29:06]
do is not a change order, which
[29:08]
would take the existing contract
[29:09]
and make modifications to it.
[29:11]
So, there would be a discussion
[29:13]
and a vote in caucus, but
[29:15]
historically, those votes are
[29:16]
not made public. Because it's in
[29:18]
caucus. If it was public, out
[29:20]
here, again, then it would be a
[29:22]
public vote. But in caucus,
[29:24]
historically, there's no --
[29:27]
votes.
[29:28]
>> Why can't we change that?
[29:32]
>> --
[29:33]
>> This is an important enough
[29:34]
subject in our neighbourhood. We
[29:35]
want to know why. Eric has
[29:37]
already come out and said, no
[29:38]
fans. He is our representative
[29:40]
Council. He's our expert on this
[29:42]
subject. I would not understand
[29:46]
why fellow council people would
[29:48]
not follow his lead.
[29:49]
>> It's an interesting debate,
[29:51]
Councillor -- brought this up a
[29:53]
year and a half ago. It's
[29:54]
brought up frequently in
[29:57]
municipal politics, the role of
[29:59]
caucus confidentiality and
[30:00]
whether it's worthy or not. Some
[30:04]
municipalities don't use caucus
[30:06]
confidentiality, some who, most
[30:07]
new. It's an ongoing debate. If
[30:10]
you want to change it, you can
[30:12]
articulate that perspective.
[30:14]
There are a lot of people out
[30:15]
there that support that, you
[30:16]
know? So, it's a debate. Caucus
[30:18]
confidentiality is something
[30:19]
that is generally held and
[30:22]
respected across the province,
[30:23]
but there are exemptions. And
[30:26]
it's less so in parts of
[30:27]
Ontario. So, you know,
[30:32]
certainly, you can change it if
[30:33]
you want to influence political
[30:35]
discourse and try and change
[30:37]
that, absolutely.
[30:39]
>> Thank you.
[30:40]
>> It's certainly a possibility.
[30:42]
>> One last, just to mention. In
[30:43]
the current CIP, there's a line
[30:45]
item and I will read it. 2025
[30:50]
Cedar Heritage Northview --
[30:51]
development of cooling zone.
[30:54]
What's a cooling zone? Good
[30:55]
question.
[30:58]
>> I know it. It's not a full
[31:01]
splash pad, but you know when
[31:02]
you go to certain parks, it's a
[31:05]
misting zone.
[31:06]
>> Okay, so again, to avoid all
[31:08]
this plan-ification again, where
[31:11]
do we see the plans? Where
[31:12]
would, in the context of
[31:14]
Northview park, where would the
[31:16]
cooling zone or missing zone be
[31:18]
located?
[31:19]
>> We are very far away from
[31:20]
that, that usually, you can ask
[31:22]
Eric to see the plan that goes
[31:24]
up in your different area when
[31:26]
they get submitted to us, if we
[31:28]
go ahead and approve that
[31:30]
option. It was something that
[31:31]
was discussed --
[31:32]
>> North of you is not even at
[31:33]
the top of the list. So, there's
[31:35]
been no discussion about
[31:37]
planning, as to specifics.
[31:39]
>> Yeah, I just want to avoid
[31:41]
another situation we are in
[31:42]
right now. As I said, we, the
[31:44]
public, found out that the plans
[31:47]
and March this year. We came
[31:49]
immediately to April 4th. Up
[31:51]
until March this year, we didn't
[31:52]
have any plans to look at. It
[31:54]
has been a line item since 2021
[31:56]
and he has, we have been asking
[31:58]
since 2021 what are the plans?
[32:00]
What is this line item of
[32:02]
security improvement at
[32:03]
Northview park actually mean?
[32:05]
Well, apparently it means
[32:06]
digging up the grass, putting up
[32:07]
new drainage, putting in fences.
[32:10]
But there was no underlying
[32:12]
detail.
[32:13]
>> There was no underlying
[32:15]
decision or it has not been
[32:17]
resolved by anybody as of yet.
[32:20]
That's why it's so underlying.
[32:21]
>> It's an ongoing discussion,
[32:22]
yeah. Perfect. Thank you for
[32:23]
your time.
[32:24]
>> Thank you.
[32:31]
- Deuxième, Paul Atkinson?
[32:40]
>> Good evening. At last month's
[32:43]
Council meeting, Councillor
[32:45]
Stork commended the proposed --
[32:47]
project in Kirkland and -- 47
[32:49]
houses are to be built across
[32:51]
the street from single family
[32:52]
units. His direct quote was,
[32:54]
when you developed a project as
[32:55]
such, you respect the projects
[32:57]
next to it. Single family units
[32:59]
next to single family units. He
[33:01]
called this, again, I quote,
[33:03]
standard urban planning
[33:04]
principles. I agree 100% with
[33:07]
what he said. That is what
[33:10]
development should look like.
[33:11]
That is why people in my
[33:13]
neighbourhood are completely
[33:14]
baffled as to why the City
[33:16]
allowed -- to install three
[33:18]
storey town houses just eight
[33:19]
metres off the property line of
[33:21]
single family homes on Austin.
[33:23]
The City also allowed -- group
[33:25]
to build a massive six storey
[33:26]
condo building diagonal to
[33:27]
single family homes on Austin.
[33:30]
The permits for these buildings
[33:32]
were awarded in 2018 and 2019,
[33:34]
while all President members of
[33:35]
Council, except Councillor
[33:38]
Tremblay, where elected
[33:39]
officials. This means the vast
[33:40]
majority of you played a part in
[33:42]
enabling the development that
[33:44]
didn't at to your own councillor
[33:47]
is calling standard urban
[33:50]
planning principles. As a result
[33:51]
of this, we have massive
[33:54]
imposing buildings from which
[33:55]
you can stare not only into our
[33:56]
yards, but into our windows. My
[33:59]
bedroom included. To put it
[34:00]
lightly, our privacy has been
[34:02]
shattered. Again, the city
[34:05]
failed to adhere to standard
[34:07]
urban planning principles and
[34:09]
now citizens are being forced to
[34:10]
pay the price for that.
[34:14]
Furthermore, last month,
[34:16]
Councillor Cowan posted a
[34:17]
comment on a Facebook group in
[34:18]
which he said the following. I
[34:20]
quote, no one other than the
[34:22]
developer is interested in doing
[34:24]
what is best for the developer.
[34:26]
Government is interested in
[34:27]
doing what's best for its
[34:28]
citizens. Again, the Greenwich
[34:32]
and one west projects completely
[34:33]
contradict what you are saying.
[34:35]
It's blatantly obvious that they
[34:36]
were not executed in our best
[34:40]
interests or with our best
[34:42]
interest in mind. The --
[34:44]
collateral damage and that's not
[34:46]
right. Now, last November, I had
[34:49]
a conversation with Councillor
[34:50]
sand Ford and she said it would
[34:51]
be challenging to get Council's
[34:53]
vote on a motion to fix the
[34:54]
situation for Austin residents,
[34:56]
but I wonder if that is true.
[34:57]
So, during election season,
[35:00]
Councillor stand fourth and
[35:01]
mayor Thomas both said something
[35:02]
should be done to fix the
[35:03]
situation. Councillor Stork
[35:05]
wants urban planning principles
[35:06]
to adhere to, which, I'm
[35:07]
guessing, it means he would be
[35:08]
in favour of fixing issues
[35:10]
caused by those principles being
[35:11]
ignored. Councillor Cowan says
[35:13]
that our government is
[35:14]
interested in doing what's best
[35:15]
for our citizens. And a few
[35:17]
years back, Councillor
[35:18]
Bissonnette had a massive condo
[35:20]
building built next to his home.
[35:22]
I'm certain he understands our
[35:23]
play. That's five of you. So,
[35:27]
why can't we get this done?
[35:29]
Would restoring our privacy be
[35:30]
easy? No. But you have a real
[35:32]
chance to help citizens who were
[35:34]
run by the City who, again,
[35:36]
ignored standard urban planning
[35:37]
principles. You have a chance to
[35:40]
demonstrate that when the city
[35:41]
breaks something, they will fix
[35:42]
it. If you don't want to help
[35:45]
the citizens on this, it comes
[35:48]
across as just, you know, seeing
[35:51]
saying the right things to
[35:52]
citizens and letting developers
[35:54]
do whatever they want,
[35:55]
regardless of consequence. So,
[35:57]
my question tonight is, would
[35:59]
Council be willing to discuss
[36:01]
the situation in caucus and at
[36:03]
the next meeting, let us know
[36:05]
explicitly why each councillor
[36:06]
is in favour or not in favour of
[36:09]
restoring privacy for the
[36:10]
citizens of Austin? Again,
[36:11]
privacy that was lost because
[36:12]
the City failed to adhere to
[36:14]
standard urban planning
[36:15]
practices but.
[36:20]
>> I will get there. You put me
[36:21]
in a very interesting position,
[36:25]
Mister Atkinson, because as you
[36:27]
know, I'm a huge non fan of that
[36:30]
development for a lot of the
[36:31]
reasons you've detailed. I mean,
[36:35]
just from a personal
[36:36]
perspective, I mean,
[36:37]
unfortunately, we can't shrink
[36:39]
the building. There are a couple
[36:41]
others that wouldn't mind
[36:43]
shrinking to. One in the corner
[36:45]
of Cartier and -- I wouldn't
[36:46]
mind shrinking as well. There
[36:47]
are a few, which is close to me.
[36:53]
I lament a lot of what has
[36:55]
occurred and it's why I ran. By
[36:57]
the way, you didn't exclude me
[36:58]
when you were mentioning who is
[37:00]
part of the original process. I
[37:08]
think what -- that Greenwich
[37:10]
project serves is, it serves as
[37:12]
an example of what not to do
[37:13]
going forward, which is why we
[37:14]
have an RCI in place.
[37:16]
Unfortunately, you guys are
[37:17]
living the consequences of what
[37:18]
I think we should avoid, which
[37:21]
is I would like to see better
[37:22]
urban planning. I would like to
[37:23]
see more prudent urban planning,
[37:24]
and I would like to see
[37:26]
developments that better fit
[37:27]
their environment. And I feel
[37:29]
that one does not. And it is why
[37:33]
Iran, really. And so, I'm in a
[37:36]
tough position here, as far as
[37:38]
responding. I do feel for you, I
[37:40]
feel, I mean, I did have visited
[37:44]
the site a few times and I have
[37:45]
seen the consequences on
[37:47]
privacy. I lament them. That's
[37:49]
all I can say, really, from my
[37:51]
perspective. Councillor Stork,
[37:53]
you wanted to?
[37:54]
>> Yeah, I just wanted to
[37:55]
clarify the comment. I'm sure I
[37:57]
know what I said because I stand
[37:58]
by what I've said. When I say
[38:01]
single family across the street
[38:03]
-- as you go further away, there
[38:05]
is an increase in the height.
[38:06]
So, standard urban practice
[38:08]
policies would be next to one
[38:10]
building, slightly higher,
[38:11]
slightly higher, and you create
[38:13]
a platform as you angle. Doesn't
[38:15]
mean a whole area, in terms of
[38:17]
densification, must be the same
[38:18]
height. The urban packed
[38:21]
policies are that next to a
[38:22]
single family maybe two storey,
[38:24]
maybe fourth storey, so you
[38:25]
create that urban planning arc.
[38:29]
That's why I think Laci Green
[38:30]
did, that was simply because
[38:31]
they said, okay, we will have a
[38:33]
development, split some single
[38:34]
family homes. If you look at the
[38:35]
rest of the project, it does
[38:36]
incline as we go further away
[38:37]
from those single family units
[38:40]
with site lines and such. So, I
[38:43]
stand behind my comment, but it
[38:45]
did not mean we must have all
[38:47]
the time single family units. As
[38:49]
we get further away from the
[38:50]
single family units, you create
[38:52]
a higher intensification or
[38:53]
higher height as we go towards
[38:54]
the city centre or ram, anything
[38:56]
of that nature.
[38:58]
>> Around 2008, the City sent
[39:00]
letters to residents on Austin
[39:01]
saying that if any property
[39:03]
development was done, back then,
[39:05]
that would be single family
[39:06]
houses. Which sounded like
[39:09]
standard urban development
[39:10]
practices. These bylaws were
[39:15]
changed over time when, quite
[39:17]
frankly, people were not paying
[39:19]
attention and all of a sudden,
[39:20]
we have the large buildings
[39:21]
sprouting up right behind our
[39:22]
houses. Like, eight metres is,
[39:24]
for me, to the wall. It's not
[39:27]
standard, what was done. And it
[39:29]
blows my mind that no one's
[39:30]
willing to do anything to
[39:31]
rectify the situation. Like, I
[39:37]
appreciate that people
[39:38]
empathize, sympathize, but
[39:39]
that's not really doing
[39:40]
anything. Is there any way to
[39:47]
take action? I know Dave Webb
[39:48]
said last month the problem is
[39:50]
people don't provide
[39:51]
suggestions. Despite providing
[39:53]
him with list of suggestions
[39:55]
that he just said no to.
[39:56]
>> Can you provide us one? Can
[39:58]
you provide us a list? I would
[39:59]
love to see it.
[40:00]
>> Yeah.
[40:01]
>> By all means.
[40:02]
>> Look, like, we suggested
[40:04]
things before any ground was
[40:05]
broken and everything got
[40:06]
refuse. That's why we stopped.
[40:13]
>> Needed an RGI.
[40:15]
>> Look, we weren't, we're not
[40:18]
politically savvy. We are just
[40:20]
residents who have gotten
[40:22]
screwed over. And we just want
[40:24]
the city to make it right. It
[40:26]
just seems like there is no
[40:27]
willingness to do that.
[40:29]
>> Well, --
[40:30]
>> And it's disheartening.
[40:31]
>> Well, I would love to see
[40:32]
what you can come up with. As
[40:36]
suggestions, I would be curious
[40:38]
to look.
[40:39]
>> Mayor Thomas, part of the
[40:40]
issue is that we are talking
[40:41]
about private property that does
[40:42]
not belong to us. No, what he's
[40:45]
discussing. So, this has been
[40:47]
our ongoing issue on the City.
[40:49]
>> We are well aware of that. We
[40:51]
are well aware of that,
[40:52]
Councillor stand fourth. We are
[40:55]
talking over and above that
[40:57]
consideration. It's already
[40:59]
occurred and going forward, I
[41:00]
mean, all developments, most of
[41:02]
them are on private property.
[41:04]
So, we have to deal with this
[41:06]
issue going forward and we can't
[41:07]
just say because private
[41:08]
property, anything can go on.
[41:10]
That's not our job as a city.
[41:12]
Excuse me, Councillor sent,
[41:13]
fourth time responding to the
[41:15]
citizen. And so, going forward,
[41:18]
you are right. We have to, I
[41:21]
think we have to get citizens
[41:22]
more involved which is what we
[41:23]
are currently, doing. So that we
[41:24]
can try and avoid the areas of
[41:26]
the past, and I certainly hope
[41:27]
we can do so, going forward. And
[41:30]
with your situation, please give
[41:31]
us suggestions.
[41:38]
>> She has her hand up.
[41:39]
>> Yes?
[41:42]
>> What I'm saying is there's a
[41:44]
complexity involved because
[41:45]
we're not permitted to go and do
[41:47]
work on private property.
[41:48]
>> Are you talking to Mr.
[41:50]
Atkinson?
[41:51]
>> Well, to both of you because
[41:52]
you just quoted me as saying
[41:54]
that just because it's private
[41:55]
property. As you know, this has
[41:56]
been the complexity in the
[41:58]
issue. It's not an unwillingness
[41:59]
to move forward on the project.
[42:01]
It is a complication with the
[42:03]
fact that the property no longer
[42:05]
belongs to the developer and
[42:08]
it's a private property that
[42:09]
doesn't belong to the city. So,
[42:10]
as you know, we had to wait for
[42:11]
all the condo developments to
[42:14]
finish being built, put into
[42:17]
place their, condo boards. And
[42:19]
to register their condo boards
[42:20]
so that we have the registry,
[42:21]
and we can then begin
[42:23]
negotiating with the condo
[42:24]
boards. You know how I feel
[42:27]
about this situation. We've
[42:29]
spoken about it numerous times.
[42:30]
You know, me telling you how bad
[42:31]
I feel about it doesn't solve
[42:34]
your problem. But know that it
[42:37]
is an open file at the city and
[42:40]
it's something that is not an
[42:41]
unwillingness on our behalf.
[42:44]
We've discussed other options,
[42:45]
such as planting a hedge on your
[42:47]
property to give you more
[42:49]
immediate, and I know the
[42:50]
reasons, but to give you more
[42:51]
immediate privacy.
[42:53]
Unfortunately, that's not a
[42:54]
viable option, which I
[42:56]
understand. We have certain
[42:59]
restrictions, legal
[43:00]
restrictions, as well. And as
[43:01]
much as I would love to just go
[43:03]
in there and do whatever we
[43:04]
want, it is private property and
[43:07]
so, we do have to wait for the
[43:09]
county boards to all be formed,
[43:10]
so that we can enter into
[43:12]
negotiation with them. In order
[43:14]
to get your privacy screen up.
[43:16]
And the situation is terrible.
[43:19]
It really is terrible and I
[43:21]
reiterated that many times. I'm
[43:23]
not against you guys, but my
[43:26]
hands are legally bound until we
[43:28]
are able to move forward on that
[43:30]
process. And once we are able to
[43:32]
discuss with all of them, that's
[43:33]
when we can move the file
[43:34]
forward.
[43:35]
>> Okay, but part of the problem
[43:36]
is that when, I mean, --
[43:38]
>> Closer to the mic, Mister
[43:40]
Atkinson.
[43:41]
>> Sorry, part of the problem
[43:42]
with this issue is that we are
[43:43]
informed by our previous
[43:44]
councillor, Dave Webb, that they
[43:46]
were going to leave a row of
[43:48]
trees to enter our privacy. That
[43:51]
was false. We were misled on
[43:52]
that. They basically raised all
[43:54]
the trees, then we were told
[43:55]
they are going to put insiders.
[43:57]
These cedars have, like, they
[43:59]
are three feet high and Robert
[44:01]
told us that they're not even
[44:02]
viable because of the ditches
[44:03]
there. So, I mean, where does
[44:06]
that leave us, in terms of
[44:07]
privacy? It's it feels like the
[44:11]
city just left the developer
[44:12]
just, just do what you want and
[44:14]
these guys will deal with it
[44:15]
after, these people will be
[44:17]
forced to live with it, there's
[44:18]
nothing that can be done. I just
[44:20]
don't buy that nothing can be
[44:21]
done.
[44:23]
>> So, give us a list. To work
[44:25]
with.
[44:27]
>> All right.
[44:28]
>> Thank you, sir. Nikki for
[44:32]
knit.
[44:45]
>> Good evening, Mister Mayor,
[44:46]
councillors, citizens. For those
[44:47]
of you who do not know me, I was
[44:50]
one of the main people that
[44:52]
fought against the development
[44:54]
of brave yeah in the 575 old
[44:57]
master parking lot. Now we find
[45:01]
ourselves following what this
[45:04]
gentleman just said. I'm a bit
[45:06]
torn because the minister of
[45:08]
health and for seniors, Sonia
[45:11]
Bélanger, in a press conference
[45:13]
not long ago, said that there
[45:15]
will be two facilities built in
[45:17]
the West Island. One in Dollard
[45:20]
and one at 575. Long term care
[45:23]
for seniors. The problem is it
[45:28]
was ten storeys. The committee
[45:30]
and I fought day and night with
[45:32]
the help of some councillors,
[45:36]
and we won. We stopped Bravo
[45:39]
from building ten storeys in our
[45:40]
backyard. We were lucky we stop
[45:47]
before what this gentleman is
[45:48]
now living. But now the clinic
[45:51]
that will be built on the bottom
[45:54]
and six storeys on top will make
[45:56]
it seven storeys for a building,
[45:58]
again, behind our backyard. The
[46:01]
problems that we fought before
[46:05]
with Brevia, traffic,
[46:06]
infrastructure, the traffic on
[46:07]
May would, traffic on St.
[46:09]
John's, all kinds of stuff, is
[46:12]
still there. The building will
[46:13]
still be seven storeys. When I
[46:16]
canvas, when I knock on doors,
[46:20]
nobody knows. 95% of the people
[46:23]
around my streets don't even
[46:25]
know that that is going to
[46:26]
happen. And people say, the
[46:30]
people that know, well, we saw
[46:32]
it in the news. If you are like
[46:33]
me, I don't listen to the news.
[46:37]
Because I don't trust them. They
[46:40]
say whatever they want us to
[46:41]
hear, not what we want to hear.
[46:46]
I am torn because we need
[46:48]
facilities like this. I'm one of
[46:50]
those that in a few years, I
[46:51]
might be in a rocking chair
[46:52]
somewhere, and I might need such
[46:54]
a facility. But do we need to
[46:57]
put them in people's backyards?
[46:58]
I wrote to the minister a month
[47:01]
ago. I still am awaiting an
[47:03]
answer. Not even the decency to
[47:06]
let me know that my email was
[47:07]
received. We have to stop these
[47:13]
things before they happen. Like,
[47:16]
what Outremont did to these
[47:18]
people and this poor man on
[47:20]
Austin, it's still not settled.
[47:22]
He had four feet of junk in his
[47:25]
basement last year, it's still
[47:26]
not settled. Nobody wants to
[47:29]
take responsibility. Can we not
[47:32]
work together to stop these
[47:33]
things? Like we did before. The
[47:38]
councillors that helped me stop
[47:41]
Brevia were phenomenal and the
[47:43]
committee that helped me do this
[47:44]
was phenomenal. But we worked
[47:47]
hard to meet people -- in this
[47:49]
line of St. John's, where we
[47:50]
only have homes, why are you
[47:51]
going to stick a ten storey
[47:53]
building their? So they can look
[47:57]
in my living room, they can look
[47:58]
at my bedroom, I can invite them
[48:01]
for dinner, watch a little
[48:02]
movie, watch me shower. No! Can
[48:09]
we not please put it somewhere
[48:10]
else? That lot, that mattered a
[48:12]
lot, seems to be gold. Everybody
[48:13]
wants it. Everybody wants it.
[48:20]
Make a park. Have you seen the
[48:22]
traffic at the corner of St
[48:23]
John? I will invite you to come
[48:25]
sit in my backyard and watch the
[48:27]
traffic, feel the pollution,
[48:29]
watch what is happening, watch
[48:31]
what's happening again across
[48:32]
the street of St John. They are
[48:33]
putting another ten storey
[48:35]
building. They want to put some
[48:39]
more across Hymus on St. John's,
[48:41]
they are tearing down the Bank
[48:43]
of Nova Scotia, the bank, the
[48:45]
Royal Bank, all the stories that
[48:47]
were there, they want to put
[48:48]
more high-rises. Are you trying
[48:50]
to kill us with the traffic on
[48:51]
Saint-Jean? You know, when I was
[48:56]
young, maybe I'm naive. I went
[48:59]
somewhere and the city had a
[49:01]
beautiful mosaic. I walked in
[49:03]
and there was a plan for the
[49:05]
future. What they thought the
[49:07]
city would look like. I had
[49:09]
never seen this. I've lived here
[49:11]
45 years, I've never seen this.
[49:14]
Yes, there are plans, thank you,
[49:16]
the City, whoever has organized
[49:18]
it. There is a meeting committee
[49:20]
pretty soon where people will
[49:21]
have the chance to see what the
[49:24]
future development might be. But
[49:29]
we need more of these. Now I'm
[49:31]
fighting the government, I'm
[49:32]
fighting the provincial
[49:36]
government that will not even
[49:37]
answer me. They want to start
[49:40]
building this summer. And I
[49:43]
can't get any plans. I can't get
[49:45]
anybody to answer me. It is so
[49:49]
frustrating to live in such a
[49:51]
beautiful city that we are
[49:54]
allowing people to destroy. Like
[49:58]
I've said before, people,
[50:00]
engineers, come, they look at a
[50:02]
spot on top of the map and they
[50:04]
say, oh yeah, we can put
[50:05]
something there. Yeah, why not?
[50:06]
There is space. Who cares what's
[50:10]
around, who cares whose lives
[50:12]
are disrupted? It's not us. We
[50:13]
are going to go home. When they
[50:17]
built Hymus, when they built
[50:18]
that path, like I said, I don't
[50:19]
care. We are taking the arteries
[50:21]
away, we don't care what's
[50:22]
happening. I'm going home, I
[50:23]
live in Saint-Eustache, I live
[50:25]
here, I live there. So, you deal
[50:27]
with it. I don't want to deal
[50:30]
with it. I have one neighbour,
[50:32]
one. I chose that house because
[50:37]
of that, but now I'm overwhelm.
[50:42]
There is no other words. I'm
[50:44]
overwhelmed. Thank you for the
[50:47]
good decisions that are made,
[50:48]
but I think we are making some
[50:51]
ones that need to be looked at
[50:52]
really closely.
[50:57]
>> So, your question?
[51:00]
>> My question, -- said a while
[51:02]
ago, why can't communities not
[51:05]
be sent to the people of
[51:07]
district seven and let them know
[51:08]
that at least this is happening?
[51:10]
I'm telling you, 95% of the
[51:12]
people that I spoke to in my
[51:15]
district do not know that that
[51:17]
building is planned to go up
[51:18]
there.
[51:19]
>> What, the health care
[51:20]
facility?
[51:21]
>> The health care facility.
[51:22]
>> Well, it was put out
[51:25]
publicly. It was on the City
[51:26]
website, it was a newspaper
[51:28]
stories, okay, so nobody reads
[51:30]
the news, but what else can we
[51:31]
do?
[51:32]
>> The website either, Mister
[51:33]
Mayor. Nobody goes to it, I'm
[51:35]
sorry.
[51:36]
>> And nobody reads newspapers
[51:38]
anymore either, and it was also
[51:39]
on television. It was also
[51:41]
covered --
[51:42]
>> Absolutely.
[51:43]
>> So, what else can we do,
[51:45]
besides that?
[51:46]
>> I agree with you, I would
[51:48]
love to have more land local
[51:49]
newspapers. People don't seem to
[51:50]
buy them. So, --
[51:51]
>> We had one, we know what
[51:53]
happened to that one.
[51:56]
>> Well, it is commonplace --
[51:59]
>> Is it possible to have a
[52:01]
community, like Miss Verdun
[52:03]
said, to the people interested
[52:04]
in one, so they at least are
[52:05]
aware that that's happening?
[52:07]
>> Well, in fairness to the
[52:08]
city, we do our best to let
[52:10]
people know what's happening.
[52:12]
Now the health care facility
[52:14]
was, first of all, to correct
[52:16]
you on a couple of things. --
[52:18]
was not finished and the only
[52:20]
way that there was still a court
[52:22]
case pending in the health care
[52:25]
facility precipitated that,
[52:26]
eliminated that court case. So,
[52:28]
you weren't far from out of the
[52:29]
woods. So, you might have had
[52:32]
ten stories. You are right, I
[52:33]
agree with you. The health care
[52:35]
facility is smaller and we will
[52:37]
put far less demands on the
[52:39]
community, but it's still a
[52:40]
development. Is it a preferable
[52:42]
development? It's one that
[52:43]
provides health care for
[52:44]
seniors, it's one that's helpful
[52:45]
to the community, and is it a
[52:47]
lesser of two evils? Perhaps.
[52:49]
>> We are not sure.
[52:50]
>> Well, I'm pretty sure. I'm
[52:52]
pretty sure it is, but that's up
[52:53]
to you. I mean, hindsight, it's
[52:56]
hard to evaluate now, but had
[53:00]
the Brevia project continued,
[53:01]
then we removed it, then we
[53:03]
would know that it's never
[53:04]
happened. You look at the amount
[53:06]
of traffic density and volume of
[53:08]
cars that were going to use,
[53:10]
either of the two, it's
[53:11]
lessened. So, it's preferable.
[53:14]
It's a preferable -- to the one
[53:16]
that was previously anticipated.
[53:18]
Is it perfect? No, it is not.
[53:19]
But it does provide a whole
[53:22]
different service and element to
[53:25]
the community, other than the
[53:26]
huge condo project. So, you
[53:28]
know, it is what it is. You are
[53:32]
talking about working together,
[53:34]
it's well taken. That's exactly
[53:35]
what we are doing right now. We
[53:37]
have building freezes all over
[53:39]
the city. For exactly that
[53:41]
reason. To allow the citizens to
[53:44]
be involved, so we can avoid
[53:46]
what Mr. Atkinson just outlined.
[53:49]
I sincerely want to avoid that.
[53:51]
It is in all of our goal to have
[53:53]
as many citizens participate and
[53:55]
we heard as possible. If the
[53:58]
citizens don't participate,
[54:00]
don't watch news, or don't pay
[54:01]
attention, that's a pretty hard
[54:02]
thing to deal with. I mean, you
[54:04]
know, and it's frustrating for
[54:05]
those of us to make these
[54:07]
decisions because we, all of us
[54:08]
up here, would wait prefer more
[54:10]
citizens got involved and more
[54:12]
people came out to vote, and may
[54:14]
their opinions known. That would
[54:15]
be better for democracy, in
[54:17]
general. You know, so, the
[54:20]
system -- we all do our best.
[54:22]
There is a responsibility in
[54:24]
democracy on the part of the
[54:25]
citizens, not just the decision
[54:27]
makers. Yes, Councillor Stork?
[54:29]
>> I think just some
[54:31]
clarification required here. We
[54:33]
do not know, at this point, what
[54:34]
the height is. Historically,
[54:37]
they've said they -- I read all
[54:39]
those documentation's well. We
[54:41]
don't have any clarification if
[54:42]
there is going to be more or
[54:44]
less. We know the density.
[54:46]
Because this provincial project,
[54:48]
we fundamentally have no say, in
[54:49]
terms of density and such. So,
[54:52]
whatever power that we had in
[54:53]
our hands has now been removed
[54:54]
and is up to the provincial
[54:57]
government. I've done my initial
[55:00]
surveys that have put on my
[55:01]
page. I'm sure most of you in
[55:02]
this -- especially read them. I
[55:05]
am a bit concerned, -- I do not
[55:07]
know that. That time will tell.
[55:09]
One thing is for sure, we are
[55:10]
going to have to mitigate the
[55:11]
traffic. It's coming
[55:13]
fundamentally, especially, at
[55:15]
the provincial level, to this
[55:18]
area. We have to address the
[55:20]
traffic concern of -- and St.
[55:22]
John's, which is a huge issue.
[55:23]
We have to look at me would,
[55:24]
what can be done, as potentially
[55:26]
one way, I do not know. But
[55:27]
those conversations, we are
[55:28]
going to have to have and
[55:29]
resolve. But I cannot tell you
[55:31]
if it's going to be less or more
[55:32]
traffic, at this point. I have
[55:34]
my concerns, in terms of shift
[55:36]
work, in terms of no ambulances,
[55:38]
in terms of deliveries. We just
[55:40]
don't know what the F as I would
[55:41]
be, what's the densification?
[55:43]
You know, they are not going to
[55:45]
be putting seven storeys on the
[55:47]
front of your house, but in the
[55:48]
back, and most likely, they
[55:49]
will. What's the density? Is
[55:51]
there going to be 120 units? 450
[55:53]
units? That, you know, I don't
[55:56]
think anybody knows at this
[55:57]
point.
[55:58]
>> Well, we do know the square
[55:59]
footage of the building. It's
[56:01]
much smaller. The square footage
[56:02]
of the plant building is smaller
[56:04]
than the original proposal and
[56:07]
I'm fairly confident that the
[56:09]
traffic volume will be
[56:10]
considerably less because it
[56:11]
will be health care facility
[56:12]
work, people are permanently in
[56:14]
rooms. As opposed to a condo
[56:17]
project where you have families,
[56:18]
guests, et cetera. It's a
[56:20]
different type of usage. The
[56:22]
anticipated traffic flow is
[56:24]
considered to be less from
[56:27]
everything I've looked at, and I
[56:28]
know that the buildings, in
[56:29]
general, you can see them. They
[56:31]
built some that the plan, the
[56:33]
formula that they're using has
[56:34]
been built elsewhere. You can
[56:35]
see the size of them, they are
[56:37]
smaller than the proposed
[56:39]
preview project. So, I can only
[56:42]
imagine that I'm pretty sure
[56:43]
that the traffic flow will be
[56:45]
less. As far as the height goes,
[56:48]
I was in an interesting first
[56:50]
meeting, and I fought hard all
[56:55]
night perhaps too hard. I was
[56:58]
with Mr. -- I spoke to a senior
[57:02]
official later and, you know, I
[57:04]
didn't want to fight to the
[57:05]
point jeopardize the project. It
[57:09]
required expropriation and
[57:10]
required a lot of work on the
[57:11]
provincial government's part to
[57:12]
get health care facility there,
[57:13]
as opposed to a condominium
[57:15]
project. So, there were some
[57:18]
political calculus going on in
[57:20]
there and, you know, we will see
[57:21]
the consequence. I think the
[57:23]
consequences are better, it's
[57:24]
definitely preferable to what
[57:25]
was proposed. So, it is what it
[57:30]
is.
[57:31]
>> We discussed. If I'm torn
[57:32]
because I need the facility, but
[57:33]
I don't want to get in the
[57:34]
garage door in my backyard.
[57:36]
Like, --
[57:37]
>> I encourage you to get
[57:38]
involved.
[57:39]
>> Well, I got involved with the
[57:41]
station, the entrances, again
[57:42]
in, my driveway.
[57:44]
>> No, and you are dealing with
[57:45]
a different level of government,
[57:47]
right? Mobilize the citizens and
[57:49]
have some impact on the project
[57:51]
is all you can do, right? If you
[57:53]
try it, then they will,
[57:54]
eventually, be doing PR, public
[57:56]
relations, or dealing with the
[57:59]
public.
[58:00]
>> We'll, if they want to start
[58:01]
building the -- summer of 23, it
[58:04]
is now. Where are the plans?
[58:06]
Nobody has seen anything. How
[58:07]
can we find something that we
[58:09]
don't know anything about? It's
[58:14]
very hard. Like, I'm a smart
[58:16]
woman. Give me a plan, then we
[58:20]
will talk business. Come and
[58:22]
impose something on me --
[58:23]
>> We are eager to see the
[58:25]
plans. I mean, we are all eager
[58:26]
to see the plans, for sure.
[58:28]
>> When? Whenever they decide?
[58:31]
>> That's not us to decide, it's
[58:32]
a high level of government, so
[58:34]
we will see what happens. I
[58:36]
personally think I'm somewhat
[58:37]
grateful for the project. I
[58:40]
think Pointe-Claire is overall
[58:41]
lucky to have it, I hope. We
[58:43]
will see what the end result
[58:44]
will be, but for me, it's not
[58:47]
something I'm opposed to. I
[58:49]
think it was, for that lot of
[58:51]
land, I mean, it could've been
[58:53]
worse. You know, could've been a
[58:54]
lot worse.
[58:55]
>> Could've been better.
[58:56]
>> Well, yeah.
[58:58]
>> Thank you.
[58:59]
>> Okay.
[59:04]
>> Katie Hadley.
[59:11]
>> Lower that a little bit. Can
[59:12]
you hear me okay? Good evening.
[59:16]
I prepared a bit of context, but
[59:17]
it does echo a bit what Glenn
[59:19]
was saying. But if you just bear
[59:22]
with me for one moment, I am
[59:24]
here as a resident of district
[59:26]
seven, Northview Park. I'm a
[59:28]
longtime Pointe-Claire resident.
[59:30]
Almost all of my 43 years. I
[59:32]
know live here, work here, and I
[59:33]
raise my family here. And having
[59:36]
grown up here, I enjoyed, had
[59:39]
the pleasure and privilege of
[59:41]
enjoying many of our parks in
[59:42]
Pointe-Claire. And after eight
[59:44]
years ago, I moved to north of
[59:45]
you, and every day, I washed my
[59:47]
dishes, and I look out the
[59:48]
window, and I watch all of the
[59:51]
multitude of ways that we use
[59:54]
the park, which I think many of
[59:55]
us have tried to share and have
[59:58]
that voice here. I mean, I could
[1:00:00]
list them off. Day camps, day
[1:00:02]
cares, Viking pool members, kite
[1:00:05]
flyers, seniors, children. Like,
[1:00:07]
the list goes on and on how we
[1:00:08]
use the park in our
[1:00:10]
neighbourhood. And I really
[1:00:12]
think the wide open green space
[1:00:15]
that allows for us to have that
[1:00:18]
multitude and diversity of how
[1:00:21]
we can use our park is what
[1:00:22]
truly makes Pointe-Claire a
[1:00:24]
beautiful place to enjoy our
[1:00:26]
local parks. My daughter is keep
[1:00:30]
asking, why does the park need
[1:00:32]
offence? And I'm really
[1:00:34]
struggling with the answer,
[1:00:35]
which is one of the reasons I'm
[1:00:36]
here tonight. It is my
[1:00:38]
understanding that baseball
[1:00:40]
could continue in our park, as
[1:00:41]
it has been four years. With
[1:00:43]
perhaps a few extra game rules
[1:00:45]
to ensure continued safety, but
[1:00:46]
that for the level that's
[1:00:47]
played, which was earlier
[1:00:48]
discussed, that the fence would
[1:00:50]
not even really serve the
[1:00:52]
purpose that it's intended to.
[1:00:53]
If the ball can't reach that
[1:00:55]
level or whatever else, I would
[1:00:56]
like some clarification on that.
[1:00:58]
For the park is beautiful and
[1:00:59]
open, but it's not large. The
[1:01:01]
fence would consume the openness
[1:01:03]
of the park and limit the
[1:01:04]
multitude of activities that I
[1:01:06]
mentioned previously. There is
[1:01:08]
also other points of concern
[1:01:09]
that my fellow neighbours and I
[1:01:10]
have expressed in previous
[1:01:11]
emails, previous council
[1:01:12]
meetings, we've listened them. I
[1:01:14]
will not go over all of them
[1:01:15]
tonight. But I would like to say
[1:01:19]
that I'm really struggling with
[1:01:21]
the pro list for the fence being
[1:01:23]
part of the upgrade plan. So,
[1:01:25]
the reason that I'm here this
[1:01:26]
evening is that I really want to
[1:01:28]
understand why the upgrade
[1:01:29]
project from Northview Park
[1:01:31]
currently includes the eight
[1:01:32]
foot fence, which would
[1:01:33]
unfortunately have the impact of
[1:01:34]
altering the unique beauty and
[1:01:36]
limiting the usage of the park
[1:01:38]
with our community. Is there not
[1:01:40]
an alternative to the current
[1:01:41]
proposed plan that could
[1:01:42]
preserve the current identity
[1:01:44]
and functions of Northview Park?
[1:01:45]
As I said at the beginning, each
[1:01:47]
park has its unique flavour to
[1:01:49]
it and functionality. Can we not
[1:01:53]
preserve Northview as the part
[1:01:55]
that it is, that serves so many
[1:01:57]
multiple purposes? With putting
[1:01:58]
the fence, it would impact that
[1:02:00]
and I just can't understand why
[1:02:02]
that decision would be put
[1:02:03]
forth. I guess basically, I
[1:02:07]
would like to preserve the idea
[1:02:09]
of it being a space that
[1:02:10]
celebrate diversity of
[1:02:11]
activities that our community
[1:02:13]
enjoys altogether. I know our
[1:02:15]
voices have been allowed, but
[1:02:16]
it's because we love Northview
[1:02:17]
park. We love our community and
[1:02:18]
we want to contribute to the
[1:02:20]
vision that we all share to
[1:02:21]
preserve Pointe-Claire and all
[1:02:23]
that it offers to our community.
[1:02:24]
Originally, my question before
[1:02:26]
tonight's other speakers was,
[1:02:27]
what are the pros of the reasons
[1:02:30]
for supporting putting offence?
[1:02:31]
And what would the impact be if
[1:02:33]
the fence was not included? But
[1:02:37]
after listening to all our
[1:02:38]
requests and information, even
[1:02:39]
the other related things, I
[1:02:40]
think part of it is, I don't
[1:02:43]
want to be here playing my case.
[1:02:44]
I want to have a conversation. I
[1:02:46]
want to have a dialogue, I want
[1:02:47]
to understand, so that I can see
[1:02:51]
why us frontline users of the
[1:02:54]
park maybe we're not
[1:02:55]
incorporated, our voice was not
[1:02:57]
there, or we could be put our
[1:02:58]
voice? I think we're using a lot
[1:02:59]
of councils time to ask these
[1:03:01]
questions, ask for clarity, to
[1:03:03]
ask to understand, to be
[1:03:04]
involved. I've worked in the
[1:03:06]
community sector, which some of
[1:03:07]
you know for, like, 11 years and
[1:03:09]
we are very strong and having
[1:03:11]
those conversations around the
[1:03:12]
table with different
[1:03:13]
perspectives. I know it's hard
[1:03:14]
to include citizens in all the
[1:03:16]
different projects, I get that.
[1:03:17]
And it can make it more
[1:03:18]
complicated. But at the end of
[1:03:19]
the day, it would clear up some
[1:03:21]
of this information that we are
[1:03:23]
not sure about or I can't
[1:03:24]
understand the logic, so now I'm
[1:03:25]
mad or a just want to be part of
[1:03:27]
the conversation, because I love
[1:03:29]
this community and I think all
[1:03:30]
of us that are here do. And we
[1:03:32]
want to understand why a
[1:03:34]
decision we made after something
[1:03:36]
that's so important to us.
[1:03:38]
Explain it to me, make it
[1:03:40]
rational, can we have a special
[1:03:41]
meeting where recreation sits
[1:03:42]
there? The councillors sit
[1:03:44]
there, you don't have to let us
[1:03:46]
make the decision, but could we
[1:03:47]
be part of it? Could we
[1:03:48]
understand, could we have a
[1:03:51]
voice? And what's the best way
[1:03:52]
you would like us to do that in
[1:03:54]
this situation? Or should we
[1:03:55]
just keep coming here and
[1:03:56]
listening what we think are our
[1:03:58]
priorities and what we think the
[1:03:59]
reasons are that preserve the
[1:04:00]
park? We want to be part of your
[1:04:02]
vision as well. We want it to
[1:04:03]
work for all of us. And yes,
[1:04:05]
some of us would be
[1:04:06]
disappointed. But if there's
[1:04:07]
logic, if there is
[1:04:08]
understanding, the alternatives
[1:04:09]
that were looked at, I think
[1:04:10]
that would help clear up a lot
[1:04:12]
of this chaos around the
[1:04:15]
project. So, my question tonight
[1:04:17]
is, can we have a special north
[1:04:19]
view meeting? Can we look at
[1:04:20]
some of the stuff that was
[1:04:21]
considered by the wreck team?
[1:04:23]
Are there alternative parks that
[1:04:24]
were, are we meeting all the
[1:04:26]
standards as Québec baseball?
[1:04:28]
Does the impact mean that if we
[1:04:29]
don't put offence, baseball can
[1:04:30]
be played in Pointe-Claire? I
[1:04:32]
want to understand the logic. I
[1:04:33]
want to be part of the
[1:04:35]
conversation and many of us here
[1:04:36]
tonight would like that. If
[1:04:37]
there is an opportunity to
[1:04:38]
schedule that, to be able to
[1:04:41]
hear the other list, I just want
[1:04:44]
to understand. So, that's my
[1:04:45]
question. Can we have that
[1:04:47]
opportunity or is this the best
[1:04:48]
place to keep going back and
[1:04:49]
forth with what we think the
[1:04:51]
reasons are or what we would
[1:04:52]
like to have heard? Like, I want
[1:04:53]
to know where to be constructive
[1:04:55]
and how to use the best use of
[1:04:56]
everybody's time.
[1:04:59]
>> I think you are doing it
[1:05:01]
right now. I think the most of
[1:05:04]
all the decisions made by city
[1:05:07]
councils are made by having City
[1:05:08]
Council meetings. And that's
[1:05:10]
generally procedure, there are a
[1:05:11]
multitude of decisions that are
[1:05:12]
made over the course of a year,
[1:05:13]
and that's generally how it is
[1:05:14]
done.
[1:05:17]
>> So, if there is step, sorry
[1:05:19]
to interrupt you.
[1:05:20]
>> I mean, there used to be
[1:05:22]
better ways. When we had more
[1:05:24]
develop -- local media where you
[1:05:25]
could get it more covered, you
[1:05:27]
can get at the issue discussed
[1:05:29]
more. I lament constantly the
[1:05:31]
loss of local media. We're
[1:05:33]
probably going to lose the
[1:05:34]
Gazette in the next half year to
[1:05:35]
year. Which saddens me because
[1:05:38]
the issues don't get out and
[1:05:39]
don't get debated as much when
[1:05:40]
we have less media coverage. So,
[1:05:42]
that's a huge part of the
[1:05:43]
problem. Other than that, what
[1:05:45]
you are doing is excellent. What
[1:05:46]
you guys are doing right now. I
[1:05:48]
mean, I can't speak for the a
[1:05:50]
people that make this decision.
[1:05:52]
And we make it with a multitude
[1:05:55]
of information provided and make
[1:05:58]
their decisions accordingly, and
[1:06:00]
have been doing so for some of
[1:06:01]
them a long time and will
[1:06:02]
continue to do so. That's really
[1:06:04]
the process. We are engaged in
[1:06:06]
it right now, all of us
[1:06:07]
together.
[1:06:08]
>> Is there a set beforehand?
[1:06:10]
For example, the recreation
[1:06:11]
department, I'm assuming the
[1:06:12]
responsibility is to look into
[1:06:13]
ideas, what sport teams do we
[1:06:15]
have? What did we move from
[1:06:16]
terracotta to here? I'm assuming
[1:06:18]
there is a multitude of steps in
[1:06:20]
the process of proposing a
[1:06:21]
project.
[1:06:22]
>> Elected officials don't
[1:06:24]
bombard city workers or
[1:06:27]
departments. Generally, we are
[1:06:29]
elected for a reason. You are
[1:06:30]
here to speak to us, there are
[1:06:32]
nine of us up here that are
[1:06:33]
elected for that purpose. They
[1:06:35]
are there to implement the
[1:06:36]
policy. It's their job, so they
[1:06:38]
don't get bombarded. They advise
[1:06:39]
us, certainly, based on their
[1:06:41]
expertise. That's what
[1:06:43]
administrations do. And we
[1:06:44]
listen to their expertise. That
[1:06:45]
is our job. We will listen to
[1:06:46]
what they advise us on and we
[1:06:49]
will also listen to our
[1:06:50]
citizenry. We make the two merge
[1:06:52]
together, that is our job.
[1:06:53]
>> Right, and so my question
[1:06:55]
then is, when the project got
[1:06:57]
presented, like, it wasn't the
[1:06:58]
eight of you sitting around a
[1:06:59]
table saying, what should we do
[1:07:00]
to north park? Correct? It's
[1:07:03]
recreation, it's a combination
[1:07:04]
of association conversations,
[1:07:06]
and then the project comes here
[1:07:08]
and says, what do you think? Can
[1:07:10]
we vote? Correct, that's how it
[1:07:11]
works? You're not developing
[1:07:13]
recreation projects. So, my
[1:07:14]
question is, in the city's
[1:07:17]
functionality, in that
[1:07:19]
pre-planning, let's have some
[1:07:20]
ideas. Is there a space or was
[1:07:22]
there for a focus group on
[1:07:24]
citizens? Again, I don't need to
[1:07:25]
weigh in on the decision, but
[1:07:26]
I'm a frontline user. I've been
[1:07:28]
using parts for 43 years. I say
[1:07:30]
at Northview every day three
[1:07:31]
times a day. Like, I know how
[1:07:33]
the parks used. And I would
[1:07:34]
appreciate that being a valuable
[1:07:35]
piece of information to projects
[1:07:37]
that are proposed. Is there
[1:07:39]
something in place where certain
[1:07:40]
projects, and I know there are
[1:07:41]
bigger ones, that's more
[1:07:42]
complicated. But a park that we
[1:07:44]
all use and that we, you know,
[1:07:46]
benefit from, not only just us
[1:07:48]
around vanguard. Like, so many
[1:07:49]
people come to that park. It's
[1:07:53]
unique, wonderful, has a lot of
[1:07:54]
purposes. Can we conserve that
[1:07:55]
without losing baseball? I'm not
[1:07:57]
even saying get rid of baseball.
[1:07:58]
I'm saying, can we look at the
[1:07:59]
alternatives? What is there?
[1:08:01]
Having worked in the community,
[1:08:02]
a lot of magic comes from those
[1:08:04]
conversations. I don't want to
[1:08:05]
miss the chance for the magic to
[1:08:06]
make Pointe-Claire better and
[1:08:08]
our parks better. Just saying, a
[1:08:09]
lot of people have great ideas.
[1:08:11]
Can we come to the table
[1:08:13]
somewhere before it ends up
[1:08:14]
being this pro, con, Council, we
[1:08:16]
don't want this? Like, can we
[1:08:19]
get involved before? Can we be,
[1:08:22]
as users of the services, can
[1:08:24]
our expertise be tapped into
[1:08:25]
shape the project that's
[1:08:26]
proposed?
[1:08:27]
>> You can shape public opinion
[1:08:28]
as if citizen anytime, any day
[1:08:30]
of your life. And if you are
[1:08:33]
politically involved, and if
[1:08:34]
you're politically attentive,
[1:08:36]
you can shape public opinion
[1:08:37]
every day of your life. And
[1:08:39]
citizens can. If they want.
[1:08:41]
That's how politics work. And of
[1:08:42]
course you can. And that's
[1:08:45]
always available to you. If you
[1:08:46]
want to meet or engage in
[1:08:49]
discussion on stuff, you always
[1:08:50]
can. That's what the process is
[1:08:52]
all about.
[1:08:53]
>> So, can we meet about north
[1:08:55]
of you park specifically? Can we
[1:08:57]
have a meeting to let us all
[1:08:59]
express --
[1:09:00]
>> I can't speak for Council, I
[1:09:01]
can't speak for Council. We can
[1:09:03]
certainly discuss when we can
[1:09:04]
meet. My feeling is that we are
[1:09:10]
still, the subject is still in
[1:09:12]
discussion, so we can --
[1:09:13]
>> Great, that's what I'm
[1:09:14]
saying. Involve us now. Let's
[1:09:16]
forget this back and forth.
[1:09:17]
>> You are involved right now.
[1:09:18]
>> Great, so how else? We all
[1:09:21]
have our list of stuff we want
[1:09:22]
to say and I don't want to --
[1:09:23]
>> I can't answer that for you
[1:09:26]
right now. I would have to speak
[1:09:27]
to my council and my
[1:09:28]
administration before I can
[1:09:29]
answer any one of those
[1:09:30]
questions, I can't make that
[1:09:31]
decision.
[1:09:32]
>> Fair enough. I just want the
[1:09:33]
question out there. I would just
[1:09:34]
like to have a dialogue, I would
[1:09:35]
like to understand, I would like
[1:09:36]
to tell my daughters why this
[1:09:37]
fence has to go there. I want to
[1:09:38]
be able to be behind it, also. I
[1:09:39]
want to celebrate the park, I
[1:09:40]
want to be part of the solution.
[1:09:42]
>> Okay.
[1:09:43]
>> If we can, please include us.
[1:09:44]
>> Thank you. Dave Webb.
[1:10:01]
>> The web, 95 portrayals. Going
[1:10:03]
to stand up here at the
[1:10:04]
beginning and just extol all the
[1:10:05]
virtues of Pointe-Claire, but
[1:10:07]
Katy, she stole all my whims.
[1:10:10]
Great discussion. It is a great
[1:10:11]
city to live in and a great
[1:10:12]
place to raise our kids. I'm
[1:10:15]
just up here, I would like to
[1:10:16]
shout out a couple of kudos.
[1:10:18]
First of all, to public works.
[1:10:20]
On the subject of the branch
[1:10:22]
collection, I would just like to
[1:10:24]
thank them. I live in district
[1:10:26]
six. Up in the Hermitage area,
[1:10:28]
which is north of the 40s. So,
[1:10:30]
first of all, I would like to
[1:10:32]
thank public works for
[1:10:34]
remembering that we are part of
[1:10:35]
Pointe-Claire and that Caitlin
[1:10:36]
picked up our branches, they did
[1:10:38]
a great job. I understand that
[1:10:40]
it's something that's going to
[1:10:41]
take a little bit of time
[1:10:43]
because it was an exceptionally
[1:10:46]
drastic storm that we lived
[1:10:47]
through. So, people, be patient.
[1:10:49]
But I know they're working very
[1:10:51]
hard to remedy the situation.
[1:10:53]
Another thing I wanted to point
[1:10:54]
out that I wasn't going to
[1:10:56]
mention, but Mr. Thomas
[1:10:57]
mentioned, I believe it's on the
[1:10:59]
27th, the public works day for
[1:11:04]
in the public works area. Near
[1:11:07]
terracotta. I implore everybody
[1:11:09]
to tell your friends, your
[1:11:10]
neighbours, your kids about it,
[1:11:12]
it's an amazing day and you get
[1:11:13]
to see everything that's going
[1:11:15]
on, as far as our public works,
[1:11:16]
what they do, how they repaired
[1:11:18]
things. It's just a fantastic,
[1:11:21]
fantastic way to get to know
[1:11:22]
people that are working for your
[1:11:23]
city. I would also like to put a
[1:11:27]
shout out to all our senior
[1:11:28]
staff. Madame Verdun and all her
[1:11:33]
team working behind the scenes
[1:11:34]
to make sure all of the things
[1:11:36]
we benefit from as citizens of
[1:11:40]
Pointe-Claire, you people bring
[1:11:41]
it all together. I'm very
[1:11:42]
appreciative of the work you do.
[1:11:46]
I'm grateful that you come in
[1:11:47]
every day and you work for the
[1:11:49]
benefit of the citizens keeping
[1:11:50]
all of our best interests in
[1:11:55]
mind. Thank you very much. I
[1:11:59]
actually have no questions
[1:12:00]
today. I just wanted to come up
[1:12:01]
and say thank you to the city.
[1:12:02]
>> Okay. Alexander Russo.
[1:12:16]
Hello.
[1:12:17]
>> I will be short and sweet.
[1:12:18]
Basically, I've been -- I had a
[1:12:20]
tax presentation from Eric Stork
[1:12:23]
and dance again a few weeks ago.
[1:12:25]
If you ideas were flooded out a
[1:12:26]
thought were interesting. I dug
[1:12:27]
into them. Presently,
[1:12:31]
Pointe-Claire splits its tax
[1:12:32]
bills twice a year. Not everyone
[1:12:34]
can afford that, it's easier to
[1:12:35]
split a little bit more. I'm
[1:12:37]
curious how much that would
[1:12:38]
cost. The answers about $600,000
[1:12:40]
out of the budget. We can
[1:12:42]
probably do this in a tax
[1:12:43]
neutral way, split it into four,
[1:12:45]
and give people a break on big
[1:12:48]
payments coming out. Maybe they
[1:12:49]
need a bit of help.
[1:12:50]
>> That's more administration, I
[1:12:52]
would think, to do it. But who
[1:12:53]
knows, I will speak to Mr. say.
[1:12:55]
I think he has strong opinions
[1:12:57]
on this, he is our expert on
[1:12:59]
these matters and cities don't
[1:13:00]
do it that way. None of them do.
[1:13:03]
I don't know why that is the
[1:13:05]
case, or they may do it that
[1:13:06]
way.
[1:13:07]
>> And they do.
[1:13:09]
>> This one doesn't and the ones
[1:13:10]
I've lived in haven't. I am just
[1:13:13]
wondering why they don't it's, a
[1:13:14]
very good question. I suspect
[1:13:16]
the cost of administration. But
[1:13:18]
who knows. Very good question. I
[1:13:20]
would like to speak to him on
[1:13:22]
that one.
[1:13:23]
>> Great, I will come see you
[1:13:24]
next month and we will see where
[1:13:25]
we are at. All right.
[1:13:26]
[Laughter]
[1:13:28]
Goodbye, everyone.
[1:13:32]
>> Ceramic owes.
[1:13:38]
>> Okay. I'm also here for North
[1:13:39]
you Park, sorry. There are a lot
[1:13:40]
of us.
[1:13:42]
>> Come closer.
[1:13:43]
>> Oh my God, that's very loud.
[1:13:47]
I'm here for Northview Park as
[1:13:48]
well. There are a lot of us
[1:13:50]
here. A lot of us were here last
[1:13:52]
month as well because we are all
[1:13:53]
very concerned. I just wanted to
[1:13:58]
know if I could ask, just by
[1:13:59]
show of hands, from the
[1:14:00]
councillors, who's actually been
[1:14:02]
to the park and seeing where the
[1:14:03]
fence is going to be? So has
[1:14:09]
anyone seen Eric's happy place?
[1:14:13]
Oh, God, that does not sound
[1:14:15]
good. On Facebook, Eric's likes
[1:14:18]
the posed a picture from
[1:14:19]
eventual or he sits when he
[1:14:20]
walks his dog at night.
[1:14:21]
[Laughter]
[1:14:27]
>> The night he walks Eric?
[1:14:31]
>> Yes, exactly. The fence would
[1:14:33]
be literally wear Erik's toes
[1:14:35]
are, and the edge of that path.
[1:14:38]
So the reason I asked that
[1:14:40]
question, and I think we've
[1:14:42]
expressed a lot of the points of
[1:14:44]
why we think this may be, just
[1:14:46]
that outfield fence may not be
[1:14:47]
the best move. That park is so
[1:14:50]
unique, so small. Because the
[1:14:53]
baseball field takes up such a
[1:14:55]
huge percentage of the space. We
[1:14:58]
wonder if there is an
[1:14:59]
alternative. To Katie's point
[1:15:03]
and Glenn's point as well, we
[1:15:04]
want to be a part of the. We
[1:15:06]
want to offer suggestions a
[1:15:08]
living directly in front. We
[1:15:10]
have a messed up path that goes
[1:15:12]
around that park. I know I
[1:15:14]
believe it's in the plans for
[1:15:15]
the coming years. There is a
[1:15:16]
basketball court at the back
[1:15:18]
corner that is lumpy and
[1:15:19]
concrete broken. There is not
[1:15:22]
any ability to play with it.
[1:15:24]
That could use an upgrade. There
[1:15:26]
is broken playground equipment
[1:15:28]
in both parks that could be
[1:15:29]
upgraded as well. To hear the
[1:15:34]
comments about the price of the
[1:15:36]
project going up by $150,000 in
[1:15:39]
just a couple of months because
[1:15:40]
of the cost increases, we are
[1:15:41]
all seeing that in our life,
[1:15:43]
could this not be a good
[1:15:44]
opportunity to save money for
[1:15:46]
the city and maybe say, hey,
[1:15:47]
let's take down that exterior
[1:15:49]
fence if in fact it it is not
[1:15:51]
required by baseball Québec and
[1:15:53]
--
[1:15:54]
[Applause]
[1:15:55]
Could we take that money and
[1:15:56]
added to the surplus and use
[1:15:58]
that to pay off the debt to
[1:16:00]
upgrade the buildings we all
[1:16:01]
use. To do things that serve the
[1:16:05]
majority of the population,
[1:16:08]
versus a sport which, I will
[1:16:09]
submit these calculations, it's
[1:16:12]
played 17 weeks of the year for
[1:16:14]
only a few hours of the day,
[1:16:16]
whereas the park is utilized, I
[1:16:17]
would give it a good 12. I may
[1:16:20]
have been over happy there. My
[1:16:23]
calculation say it's played
[1:16:26]
about 14% of the total time in a
[1:16:27]
calendar year. But it's enjoyed
[1:16:28]
by the citizens at least if the
[1:16:31]
other 86, if not and the other
[1:16:34]
hours in the day that baseball
[1:16:35]
isn't happening. I just want to
[1:16:38]
make sure we are making the
[1:16:39]
right decision for the citizens
[1:16:41]
who live in the area for the
[1:16:43]
majority of the people who enjoy
[1:16:44]
the area. And I think that's
[1:16:47]
even more compounded by the
[1:16:49]
further doesn't suffocation we
[1:16:50]
are having in the city. We are
[1:16:51]
building condos just nearby. So
[1:16:53]
many more families are living in
[1:16:55]
condos versus homes because of
[1:16:58]
affordability. This is the only
[1:17:01]
open green space within, like, a
[1:17:03]
kilometer of their. We've taken
[1:17:04]
Del Mar. There is a splash path,
[1:17:06]
so happy about that. But there
[1:17:07]
is no green space there now.
[1:17:09]
This is a green space. We are
[1:17:11]
asking to keep that. We love
[1:17:13]
everything Pointe-Claire does to
[1:17:14]
be a green city, to be friendly
[1:17:15]
to the environment. Can we do
[1:17:19]
one more thing here and keep a
[1:17:20]
beautiful open space?
[1:17:22]
>> Okay.
[1:17:25]
>> My question would, be I think
[1:17:27]
Katie is on the right angle. Is
[1:17:29]
it possible before the next
[1:17:30]
caucus meeting to meet with
[1:17:32]
several councillors, perhaps at
[1:17:34]
the park with a couple -- to
[1:17:37]
miss Verdun's point -- to have
[1:17:39]
one spokesman, or spokesperson
[1:17:41]
who could meet and discuss if
[1:17:43]
these things. There are a
[1:17:45]
multitude of points we have not
[1:17:46]
been able to bring up at
[1:17:48]
meetings because of the interest
[1:17:49]
of time and organization.
[1:17:52]
Brevity, honestly. I wonder, is
[1:17:56]
there an opportunity to speak to
[1:17:58]
that more length prior to the
[1:17:59]
next caucus meeting in order to
[1:18:01]
be able to help explain a little
[1:18:03]
bit more how we feel about this
[1:18:06]
park more strongly?
[1:18:10]
>> I feel for you, Sarah. But I
[1:18:12]
can't respond for my fellow
[1:18:13]
councillors on that when. I
[1:18:15]
don't know what the decision
[1:18:16]
would be on that. When we will
[1:18:17]
certainly discuss it.
[1:18:19]
>> Okay.
[1:18:20]
>> But, you know, generally,
[1:18:22]
decisions get made according to
[1:18:23]
a certain process. We are
[1:18:25]
following it. But I can't speak,
[1:18:29]
I can answer to that one myself.
[1:18:33]
>> Okay. I hope you guys don't
[1:18:34]
mind. I might email you and ask
[1:18:36]
you if you want to have a chat.
[1:18:38]
We want to try to do the best
[1:18:39]
for the majority, if we can,
[1:18:42]
here. And really service the
[1:18:43]
bigger part of Pointe-Claire.
[1:18:46]
>> Yes, go ahead, Councillor
[1:18:48]
Cowan.
[1:18:54]
>> I would like to say what's
[1:18:59]
coming across loud and clear is
[1:19:00]
the multi purpose functionality
[1:19:01]
of the park. I think it is fair
[1:19:05]
to say we didn't really think
[1:19:06]
about that when we made the
[1:19:08]
decision and that was made. When
[1:19:13]
the earlier question talking
[1:19:15]
about the decision-making
[1:19:16]
process, well, that's our
[1:19:19]
responsibility, to have our
[1:19:20]
radar up, so that if there is
[1:19:22]
going to be a lifestyle change
[1:19:25]
on citizens, we think about it.
[1:19:27]
Then we reach out, as individual
[1:19:29]
councillors. We reach out to the
[1:19:30]
citizens and bring them in.
[1:19:32]
That's where you bring them into
[1:19:33]
the conversation. I'm not going
[1:19:37]
to prejudice the outcome, but I
[1:19:38]
think it's fair to say that none
[1:19:40]
of us really considered -- well,
[1:19:44]
it never came up before. You are
[1:19:48]
quite right, it should have come
[1:19:49]
up either from you or from us,
[1:19:50]
that's our jobs. I'm prepared to
[1:19:53]
say that, you know, I goofed by
[1:19:55]
not seeing it. And that doesn't
[1:19:57]
prejudice -- doesn't mean you
[1:19:58]
will get the decision you want
[1:19:59]
in the end. It just means I
[1:20:00]
acknowledge the fact that we
[1:20:03]
didn't consider all that stuff.
[1:20:04]
At least, I didn't.
[1:20:05]
>> We appreciate your
[1:20:06]
transparency. Thank you.
[1:20:10]
>> Ray Colwell?
[1:20:31]
>> Good evening, council and
[1:20:33]
attendees. During late March
[1:20:37]
2023, a journalist from CBC
[1:20:39]
Radio Canada approached the city
[1:20:42]
of Pointe-Claire for comment on
[1:20:43]
the issue surrounding Columbus
[1:20:44]
Avenue and district eight. A
[1:20:48]
spokesperson for the City
[1:20:49]
explained Pointe-Claire has not
[1:20:51]
traced in its archives the
[1:20:52]
origins of Columbus Avenue. A
[1:20:55]
statement which is completely
[1:20:57]
contrary to what the mayor
[1:20:58]
admitted on camera at the
[1:21:02]
February 20 -- 2023 meeting. The
[1:21:05]
spokesperson claims a company
[1:21:06]
that when it existed on the
[1:21:08]
corner of Hymus and Columbus
[1:21:10]
avenue called -- industries
[1:21:12]
limited named it after Columbus,
[1:21:15]
Ohio, where it's supposed
[1:21:17]
headquarters were located. After
[1:21:20]
contacting industries limited,
[1:21:21]
whose real headquarters is in
[1:21:22]
Madison Heights, Michigan, it is
[1:21:25]
revealed that there were never
[1:21:27]
associated with the non
[1:21:28]
operational company bearing the
[1:21:29]
same name in Pointe-Claire. Nor
[1:21:32]
did they operate in any capacity
[1:21:33]
in the city of Columbus, which
[1:21:36]
is incidentally still named
[1:21:37]
after Christopher Columbus. A
[1:21:40]
historical figure widely
[1:21:41]
accepted by academia as being
[1:21:43]
responsible for genocide,
[1:21:44]
slavery of the worst kind. Some
[1:21:47]
residents find this
[1:21:48]
flip-flopping to be offensive
[1:21:49]
and support a protest. This
[1:21:53]
discrepancy was corrected also
[1:21:54]
in the article which eventually
[1:21:57]
got published on April 2nd 2023.
[1:22:00]
The question is, why is the City
[1:22:05]
retracting its previous position
[1:22:06]
on the origins of Columbus
[1:22:09]
Avenue? A fact that can be
[1:22:11]
verified by the documents.
[1:22:14]
>> My understanding is that's
[1:22:16]
not true. My understanding, from
[1:22:18]
what I'm told, is when first
[1:22:20]
research they thought it was,
[1:22:22]
but with more in-depth research,
[1:22:24]
archaeologists went deeply and
[1:22:26]
took a deep dive into it and
[1:22:27]
found that it was not named
[1:22:28]
after Columbus.
[1:22:30]
>> I have the documents with me.
[1:22:32]
>> My administration and top
[1:22:34]
archaeologist of the city says
[1:22:35]
otherwise. I'm certainly open to
[1:22:38]
whatever the historical fact is.
[1:22:40]
Do we know anything over and
[1:22:41]
above, that Madame Verdun? Am I
[1:22:45]
giving a correct rendition of
[1:22:46]
what occurred?
[1:22:50]
>> You don't have the certitude
[1:22:53]
about what we can name Columbus
[1:22:55]
Street.
[1:22:59]
>> The document says that
[1:23:01]
voyager Street and Columbus
[1:23:02]
Street was named on the exact
[1:23:03]
same day. And the rational
[1:23:07]
person would see that, the
[1:23:10]
context was that Columbus was a
[1:23:11]
voyager. These two names were
[1:23:14]
synonymous.
[1:23:15]
>> That's your linkage. But who
[1:23:16]
knows. I'm a history major. You
[1:23:20]
can't revisionist history.
[1:23:23]
>> A spokesperson says it's
[1:23:24]
named --
[1:23:25]
>> You say it sounds illogical
[1:23:26]
to. That's not what occurred.
[1:23:29]
>> The spokesperson says it's
[1:23:31]
named after Columbus, Ohio. It
[1:23:33]
still named after Christopher
[1:23:34]
Columbus.
[1:23:35]
>> A spokesperson. Our top
[1:23:37]
archaeologist and researcher
[1:23:38]
says there is no convincing
[1:23:40]
evidence one way or the other of
[1:23:41]
how the name of the street came
[1:23:43]
about. I don't know who your
[1:23:44]
person is. We each have resident
[1:23:47]
experts. I don't know. For me,
[1:23:49]
it is somewhat confusing.
[1:23:52]
Initially, it was said to me
[1:23:53]
that it was. It was convincingly
[1:23:56]
said to me, oops, it's not. We
[1:23:59]
looked at it and there is no
[1:24:00]
evidence anywhere it is what
[1:24:03]
I've been told. Where we go from
[1:24:05]
here, I am not sure. Do I
[1:24:09]
question the validity of the
[1:24:10]
people who did the research in a
[1:24:11]
city that have provided me that
[1:24:12]
research that convincingly says
[1:24:14]
it wasn't named after
[1:24:15]
Christopher Columbus? I don't
[1:24:17]
know whether you are right or
[1:24:18]
the city's right. I am not sure.
[1:24:21]
I don't know where we go from
[1:24:22]
there.
[1:24:23]
>> If the City of Montréal
[1:24:24]
changes its Columbus Boulevard
[1:24:25]
which is considering in a
[1:24:27]
committee in the summer, the
[1:24:29]
city would still not change it?
[1:24:31]
>> Have to speak to my
[1:24:32]
colleagues, I have to speak to
[1:24:33]
Council, I have to speak to
[1:24:35]
resident experts and find out
[1:24:36]
what we should do.
[1:24:39]
>> Okay. Thank you for your
[1:24:40]
time.
[1:24:41]
>> Thanks.
[1:24:42]
>> Thanks.
[1:24:45]
>> Nursery held Abe?
[1:24:57]
>> Good evening, Mayor and City
[1:24:58]
Council. To save all the trouble
[1:25:03]
and to be positive. And before
[1:25:08]
you do any decision for building
[1:25:10]
or any thing going into the city
[1:25:18]
seriously, can you take the
[1:25:19]
opinion on the district? If you
[1:25:22]
did that with all the districts,
[1:25:25]
we wouldn't have all the trouble
[1:25:26]
and all these argument about
[1:25:27]
that. Park. About the building
[1:25:35]
that's going to be in
[1:25:39]
Saint-Jean. All that high miss
[1:25:45]
west, the high-res building and
[1:25:46]
condo, if we did all that with
[1:25:50]
the district opinion and just to
[1:25:54]
involve them, we wouldn't have
[1:25:55]
this argument. The city council
[1:25:58]
is supposed to be elected to
[1:26:02]
represent the city, this it
[1:26:04]
isn't, so that's my question.
[1:26:08]
Are you going to do that for the
[1:26:10]
future?
[1:26:11]
>> We are doing it right now. We
[1:26:15]
have a freeze on, a development
[1:26:16]
freeze on, and we are developing
[1:26:18]
an urban plan and we are in the
[1:26:21]
process of talking to citizens
[1:26:23]
and organizing meetings to hear
[1:26:24]
what they have to say. We are
[1:26:27]
doing exactly what you are
[1:26:28]
proposing.
[1:26:29]
>> Yes, but, 100 people, 200
[1:26:37]
people --
[1:26:38]
>> That's not the city's fault.
[1:26:40]
>> I know, but with the
[1:26:42]
technology, they have the
[1:26:43]
internet. You can't involve
[1:26:46]
people direct going there. It's
[1:26:50]
very simple now.
[1:26:53]
>> It's not simple. You have to
[1:26:54]
make sure you are getting
[1:26:55]
citizens of a certain the strict
[1:26:58]
or certain area over the
[1:27:00]
internet. It is not silly, it's
[1:27:02]
not as simple as that, it's not
[1:27:04]
just overnight. People are
[1:27:05]
working hard to be as open and
[1:27:08]
inclusive as they can to the
[1:27:09]
citizens of Pointe-Claire. The
[1:27:10]
city is working to be as
[1:27:12]
representative as it can be in
[1:27:13]
those meetings. We are doing the
[1:27:16]
best we can. The best you can do
[1:27:19]
is show up and the citizens can
[1:27:21]
show up and actively
[1:27:22]
participate, which is what we
[1:27:23]
are asking you to do. I would
[1:27:26]
argue an example, though. When
[1:27:27]
we were in the village
[1:27:29]
consulting on how to redo
[1:27:30]
lakeshore road in the village,
[1:27:33]
as the dozens did not show up.
[1:27:35]
After the fact, most of the
[1:27:36]
merchants then show up and got
[1:27:37]
really upset after the fact. In
[1:27:40]
democracy, really have to show
[1:27:41]
up. If you want people to make
[1:27:43]
the right decisions, people have
[1:27:44]
to show up and get involved and
[1:27:46]
articulate themselves so we can
[1:27:47]
make the right decisions. Which
[1:27:49]
goes right to all the decisions
[1:27:51]
we're talking about tonight. The
[1:27:53]
more you guys participate, the
[1:27:55]
better the result. Simple as
[1:27:56]
that.
[1:27:57]
>> Yes, and that's what we are
[1:27:58]
doing. But the majority -- we
[1:28:00]
went door to door of with --
[1:28:03]
everybody else was against it.
[1:28:06]
The meeting for Cadillac
[1:28:07]
Fairview, the majority was
[1:28:08]
against the building and the
[1:28:12]
reserve Cadillac Fairview
[1:28:14]
forest. In the end, the City
[1:28:20]
Council do the opposite thing.
[1:28:22]
>> Not yet. That's not sure. We
[1:28:25]
have not done anything yet. We
[1:28:30]
are still in consultation.
[1:28:32]
Nobody is ignoring the
[1:28:34]
consultation. We have not even
[1:28:35]
had them all. Again, we've had
[1:28:38]
this conversation before. You
[1:28:40]
can't jump the gun as to what
[1:28:41]
the result will be.
[1:28:42]
>> That's what I'm saying. If
[1:28:44]
you take the opinion of the
[1:28:46]
district six or district seven,
[1:28:48]
what's going on with that
[1:28:49]
project, you save all the
[1:28:51]
trouble and money, even.
[1:28:54]
>> Except that we are going
[1:28:56]
beyond that. We are doing a
[1:28:59]
citywide consultation and urban
[1:29:00]
development across all of
[1:29:01]
Pointe-Claire. It's not just
[1:29:03]
district six or seven, it's the
[1:29:05]
entire city.
[1:29:06]
>> I'm talking about it's your
[1:29:07]
district. I'm not talking about
[1:29:08]
mine or his. Each district, if
[1:29:09]
you take the opinion or you know
[1:29:12]
the right thing to do. I'm
[1:29:17]
talking that for the future,
[1:29:18]
please. My second question for
[1:29:20]
the election, the last one,
[1:29:23]
about 900 people went to elect.
[1:29:27]
That's about 31%. The gentleman
[1:29:33]
to get the city council, he won
[1:29:35]
with 316. That is 30% from the
[1:29:42]
60%. Meaning he won with 10%
[1:29:44]
from district one. Is that the
[1:29:45]
democratic way in 2030, 2023?
[1:29:54]
That's what we can do to get
[1:29:56]
better results and better
[1:29:59]
representation for the district.
[1:30:02]
>> With all due respect, people
[1:30:05]
can interpret election results
[1:30:07]
in all kinds of ways. The bottom
[1:30:11]
line is, the more people that
[1:30:12]
show up, the better the voter
[1:30:14]
turnout, the better the results.
[1:30:15]
You are correct on that one. You
[1:30:19]
can't limit the legitimacy of
[1:30:20]
someone's mandate.
[1:30:23]
>> I'm just trying to say for
[1:30:24]
the next election, we have to
[1:30:26]
put that all in front of us to
[1:30:29]
involve the majority of the
[1:30:30]
citizens.
[1:30:31]
>> They have to show up and
[1:30:32]
vote. But as it stands, we've
[1:30:36]
got the majority of the votes
[1:30:37]
for Mr. casino. He's the setting
[1:30:39]
councillor. That's generally how
[1:30:41]
it works.
[1:30:42]
>> I know. I'm not against that.
[1:30:43]
I'm just saying for the next
[1:30:44]
election --
[1:30:45]
>> What's wrong with the last
[1:30:46]
one, though?
[1:30:50]
>> To get it more to be at least
[1:30:51]
50% to get and the right person
[1:30:54]
for the --
[1:30:57]
>> The right person is your
[1:30:58]
decision, and not the voters.
[1:31:00]
That people voted.
[1:31:03]
>> Can you do it by mail or
[1:31:05]
email, people to involve people?
[1:31:08]
>> Personally, I wait prefer the
[1:31:10]
old-fashioned way of voting. And
[1:31:12]
myself, I can't speak for
[1:31:14]
everybody else. I think it's a
[1:31:15]
more secure way of voting. I
[1:31:16]
like it. I will you prefer it
[1:31:18]
over electronically, myself. But
[1:31:20]
that is my bias. I'm old school.
[1:31:24]
We do our best to get the best
[1:31:27]
results to get a fair result and
[1:31:28]
we live with it. That's called
[1:31:30]
democracy. That's how it works,
[1:31:31]
right?
[1:31:33]
>> I respect Mister Mayor for
[1:31:35]
all that what you are saying.
[1:31:36]
But I'm saying, to improve, to
[1:31:39]
get it better, to involve more
[1:31:42]
people, I lived in the city for
[1:31:44]
30 years. I wanted to get
[1:31:46]
better, not worse.
[1:31:48]
>> I touched on that a few times
[1:31:49]
tonight. My personal perspective
[1:31:53]
it is in the decline in local
[1:31:55]
journalism and the decline in
[1:31:56]
journalism in general has had a
[1:32:00]
decay on how informed the vote
[1:32:03]
is. People are less informed
[1:32:05]
about local politics or even
[1:32:06]
national or international. I
[1:32:11]
lament what's happening within
[1:32:12]
news and newspapers and the
[1:32:14]
whole industry. I think it's a
[1:32:15]
crucial part. I think the state
[1:32:16]
has traditionally played a huge
[1:32:21]
role in getting people casting
[1:32:23]
an informed vote. If you want to
[1:32:24]
improve local democracy, start
[1:32:28]
right there, are getting more
[1:32:29]
people interested in local
[1:32:30]
politics is huge. People are
[1:32:31]
very busy. A lot of people don't
[1:32:33]
pay attention to local politics.
[1:32:35]
That's not the fault of local
[1:32:36]
politicians. That, for me, is in
[1:32:40]
part the fault of the citizen.
[1:32:44]
I've often said, the problem
[1:32:46]
with democracy is often the
[1:32:49]
voter. The voter has to make
[1:32:51]
themselves informed, pay tension
[1:32:52]
to what's going on in their
[1:32:54]
local government, and then vote
[1:32:56]
accordingly. That is the best
[1:32:57]
result. In the meantime, we
[1:32:59]
carry on and do our best. That's
[1:33:00]
all we can do.
[1:33:03]
>> We thank, you really, for
[1:33:05]
doing your best. God bless you
[1:33:06]
all to work for the citizen of
[1:33:07]
Pointe-Claire. We always give
[1:33:11]
our opinion to make it better
[1:33:12]
and better.
[1:33:15]
>> That's why you are all here
[1:33:16]
tonight.
[1:33:17]
>> We are coming here every
[1:33:18]
month to make the city better
[1:33:19]
and better. Please, God bless
[1:33:22]
you and work hard for us and
[1:33:23]
make it better for your kids,
[1:33:28]
young family, and next
[1:33:29]
generation. Please.
[1:33:32]
>> You've said this one a few
[1:33:34]
times. But I thank you for it. I
[1:33:35]
appreciate that. Thank you. Lin
[1:33:40]
Connolly?
[1:33:41]
>> I will pass.
[1:33:42]
>> You will pass? Okay. Susan?
[1:33:49]
>> Okay. I'm going to thank the
[1:33:54]
employees and councillors for
[1:33:57]
organizing earth day cleanups
[1:33:58]
and District Park. People were
[1:34:00]
able to walk or ride to the park
[1:34:02]
nearest to them, rather than
[1:34:04]
drive because of distance. It
[1:34:06]
makes good sense for earth day.
[1:34:08]
In the past, we used to do clean
[1:34:10]
ups and terracotta with
[1:34:11]
employees, all of Council, the
[1:34:13]
scouts, and citizens. My
[1:34:15]
suggestion to the Environment
[1:34:16]
committee, and those at public
[1:34:18]
works, a fall cleanup with a
[1:34:20]
terracotta, simply were not many
[1:34:22]
people at terracotta this year.
[1:34:24]
At one point I was told only
[1:34:26]
four. And there should be a
[1:34:27]
terracotta cleanup later this
[1:34:28]
year. I have no question. This
[1:34:29]
is my question. Separate. I was
[1:34:36]
told Pointe-Claire no longer
[1:34:38]
offers lifts for seniors to
[1:34:40]
activities. They don't like to
[1:34:42]
ask people for lifts and taxes
[1:34:44]
are expensive. Will they end up
[1:34:46]
being housebound? If this is the
[1:34:48]
case, you can easily find a
[1:34:49]
solution. My question -- why are
[1:34:52]
we removing services from
[1:34:54]
seniors?
[1:34:55]
>> I didn't know we were. Are we
[1:34:56]
removing services, lifts? That's
[1:34:59]
a good question.
[1:35:02]
>> It's a legal issue that these
[1:35:05]
traffic cannot be driving people
[1:35:06]
on their vehicles. That's the
[1:35:09]
problem. I believe there was a
[1:35:11]
suggestion at one point at one
[1:35:13]
event to use a city vehicle, it
[1:35:16]
wasn't available. But there are
[1:35:17]
options that we try. But we are
[1:35:20]
putting staff in proper position
[1:35:22]
to drive senior citizens. They
[1:35:24]
didn't want to change. That is
[1:35:25]
the problem.
[1:35:28]
>> Can we do something?
[1:35:35]
>> We've had this discussion
[1:35:37]
before, a number of times in
[1:35:38]
this council and past councils,
[1:35:40]
in reference to picking up
[1:35:41]
seniors, using buses, services.
[1:35:43]
We are stepping on the toes of
[1:35:45]
the STM, which has jurisdiction
[1:35:47]
over passenger travel, ice you.
[1:35:50]
Have we looked into it to see if
[1:35:51]
we can slide around it in
[1:35:52]
something, maybe that could be
[1:35:53]
done. And that is about legal
[1:35:57]
quagmire that exists.
[1:36:01]
>> Melanie?
[1:36:12]
>> Hi. My name is Melanie, I'm
[1:36:17]
here also from Northview, I was
[1:36:18]
point in Pointe-Claire. I've
[1:36:20]
lived here for almost my whole
[1:36:21]
life. I grew up going to
[1:36:23]
northeast park, I played
[1:36:24]
softball at the park. Okay, I've
[1:36:29]
lived here almost my whole life.
[1:36:30]
I grew up going to Northview
[1:36:32]
park using the pool, using the
[1:36:34]
softball field. Now I have a
[1:36:36]
16-year-old son who uses the
[1:36:37]
pool. I used to play baseball
[1:36:38]
with baseball West Island. And
[1:36:40]
the only concerns and comments
[1:36:42]
we ever heard about north of you
[1:36:44]
park was maybe not a cold water
[1:36:46]
fountain and not enough shade.
[1:36:48]
My concern is, if we put a
[1:36:50]
barrier fence from the first
[1:36:52]
baseline to the third baseline,
[1:36:55]
the elderly trees all around
[1:36:57]
there are within about a five
[1:36:59]
metre distance. It's going to
[1:37:00]
disrupt those routes. They've
[1:37:02]
already survived to ice storms.
[1:37:03]
I don't think we will survive
[1:37:05]
that, if we dig it up all the
[1:37:06]
way around again. And you also
[1:37:10]
mentioned that you are involving
[1:37:12]
the citizens more. There is a
[1:37:14]
youth council and also, I think,
[1:37:15]
a citizen's Council. And at the
[1:37:18]
youth council get to see the
[1:37:20]
plants for north of you park at
[1:37:22]
all?
[1:37:24]
>> That's a good question. I
[1:37:25]
don't think so. Tara, did they?
[1:37:28]
>> No, they did not look at the
[1:37:30]
plans for Northview park. The
[1:37:33]
fans has to do with security
[1:37:35]
reasons so it's not something
[1:37:36]
you would necessarily present to
[1:37:37]
the youth council. They are on
[1:37:40]
an advisory board and they
[1:37:42]
advise primarily on programming,
[1:37:45]
public transit park makeup but
[1:37:48]
as far as something like
[1:37:51]
security issues or illegality
[1:37:53]
issues, insurance issues, things
[1:37:54]
like that, no, they are not
[1:37:55]
consult.
[1:37:58]
>> Did the citizens group get a
[1:38:00]
look at the plans before they
[1:38:01]
were submitted or approved?
[1:38:05]
>> What citizen groups are we
[1:38:08]
referring to?
[1:38:09]
>> Pointe-Claire citizens group?
[1:38:12]
There is no citizens group, just
[1:38:13]
the youth group?
[1:38:17]
>> Ideally, there are a
[1:38:19]
multitude of groups. There is no
[1:38:20]
one expert group that gets
[1:38:22]
consulted on things. And that's
[1:38:23]
generally not how democracy
[1:38:26]
works. They are called lobby
[1:38:27]
groups in the U.S. and often
[1:38:29]
more prominent are the best
[1:38:30]
funded. Not as certainly the
[1:38:32]
best way to engage in a
[1:38:34]
democratic process. Better to
[1:38:35]
listen to citizens on an equal
[1:38:36]
basis, generally. Yeah,
[1:38:38]
excellent point. That's what we
[1:38:41]
are hearing tonight. Hopefully,
[1:38:43]
we will hear more from them.
[1:38:46]
>> Has there been any injuries
[1:38:48]
reported from balls or damage to
[1:38:52]
property at Northview Park that
[1:38:53]
the City has had to pay lawsuits
[1:38:56]
for?
[1:38:57]
>> Madame Verdun, have we had
[1:38:58]
any injuries or lawsuits in this
[1:39:00]
regard?
[1:39:01]
>> We have no claim.
[1:39:03]
>> No claims?
[1:39:04]
>> No claim.
[1:39:07]
>> One last comment, I would
[1:39:08]
feel safer having a young child
[1:39:10]
running backwards into nothing
[1:39:12]
then into the metal pool or a
[1:39:13]
fence or gravel on the field if
[1:39:15]
they are going like this and not
[1:39:16]
looking where they are going.
[1:39:19]
I'm very against the barrier
[1:39:22]
fence acts Northview Park.
[1:39:23]
>> Okay, thank you. Ivan.
[1:39:42]
- C'est au sujet
[1:39:43]
(inaudible)
[1:39:47]
de la crise du verglas avant
[1:39:48]
Pâques. Qu'est-ce que vous allez
[1:39:52]
faire avec les arbres
[1:39:54]
(inaudible)
[1:39:55]
qui ont 60 ans, 70 ans,
[1:39:58]
au-dessus des files? Quand il y
[1:39:59]
a un peu devant, du verglas, ça
[1:40:02]
tombe. Les Sabres et les fils ne
[1:40:05]
sont pas pour
[1:40:06]
(inaudible)
[1:40:07]
(---)
[1:40:08]
. Est-ce que vous allez
[1:40:10]
(---)
[1:40:11]
pour nettoyer tout ça?
[1:40:13]
- Bonne question, Madame Verdon.
[1:40:16]
- Tous les arbres à 3 mètres de
[1:40:18]
chaque côté des lignes
[1:40:20]
électriques, de la
[1:40:21]
responsabilité de Hydro-Québec.
[1:40:25]
- Dans un rayon de 3 mètres,
[1:40:27]
c'est la responsabilité
[1:40:28]
d'Hydro-Québec.
[1:40:30]
- Ils sont sur le terrain de la
[1:40:31]
ville.
[1:40:34]
- L'entretien et la
[1:40:35]
responsabilité d'Hydro-Québec.
[1:40:39]
- Hydro-Québec
[1:40:40]
(inaudible)
[1:40:41]
les arbres
[1:40:42]
(---)
[1:40:45]
Je trouve que ce n'est pas une
[1:40:47]
bonne idée. La Ville devrait
[1:40:49]
envoyer et enlever les arbres,
[1:40:51]
les planter ailleurs.
[1:40:59]
(inaudible)
[1:41:00]
(---)
[1:41:01]
. Ce sont des arbres qui ont 70
[1:41:04]
ans. On peut voir tous ceux qui
[1:41:06]
ont les branches cassés, ils ont
[1:41:07]
des maladies.
[1:41:10]
- Est-ce qu'il faut faire la
[1:41:11]
même chose avec les personnes?
[1:41:14]
(rires)
[1:41:16]
(inaudible)
[1:41:18]
(---)
[1:41:24]
Il faut prendre une décision.
[1:41:26]
- On a des experts. On a des
[1:41:30]
experts dans toutes les villes,
[1:41:32]
Hydro-Québec aussi.
[1:41:33]
(inaudible)
[1:41:34]
(---)
[1:41:35]
. Ils font le travail. Il
[1:41:41]
décide. Il protège la canopée
[1:41:43]
dans la ville.
[1:41:46]
Il décide si c'est dangereux ou
[1:41:48]
pas. Il y a des experts qui font
[1:41:49]
ça souvent.
[1:41:53]
Il y a beaucoup qui voudrait
[1:41:55]
protéger les arbres aussi.
[1:41:57]
(inaudible)
[1:41:58]
(---)
[1:41:59]
. On ne peut pas anticiper le
[1:42:01]
verglas. Si on anticipe un
[1:42:06]
verglas, il faut couper tous les
[1:42:07]
arbres.
[1:42:10]
- Ça fait 45 ans que je suis au
[1:42:12]
Québec, trois crise du verglas.
[1:42:16]
Elles vont encore venir. Encore
[1:42:18]
beaucoup de vent, de pluie, ça
[1:42:21]
va faire la même chose. L'été
[1:42:23]
dernier, on a eu des pannes
[1:42:25]
électriques à cause des branches
[1:42:26]
qui sont tombés sur les files.
[1:42:29]
Ce n'est pas que le verglas.
[1:42:31]
- Quelle est la solution? Couper
[1:42:32]
tous les arbres?
[1:42:35]
- Les files et les arbres ne
[1:42:36]
font pas bon ménage. Il faut
[1:42:37]
couper tous les arbres en
[1:42:38]
dessous des fils.
[1:42:46]
- Il faut planter autre chose,
[1:42:48]
mais pas des arbres qui grandit
[1:42:49]
à 25 mètres.
[1:42:50]
(inaudible)
[1:42:52]
(intervention en anglais)
[1:42:54]
(---)
[1:43:00]
- Vous pouvez voir sur la rue
[1:43:01]
(inaudible)
[1:43:02]
(---)
[1:43:03]
. Ils ont des problèmes.
[1:43:05]
- Il faut couper tous ces
[1:43:06]
arbres? On est dans une crise
[1:43:11]
environnementale.
[1:43:12]
(inaudible)
[1:43:13]
(---)
[1:43:17]
- Merci.
[1:43:25]
(inaudible)
[1:43:26]
(---)
[1:43:34]
- Il reste sept minutes.
[1:43:36]
>> Seven minutes left.
[1:43:37]
>> Seven minutes left? Okay.
[1:43:39]
>> So, I'm here tonight to
[1:43:40]
follow up on some information
[1:43:41]
that are forwarded to a few of
[1:43:43]
you about funding opportunities
[1:43:44]
to purchase the forest. Fairview
[1:43:46]
forest, in case that wasn't
[1:43:48]
clear. I want to preface my
[1:43:50]
question with a short preamble.
[1:43:52]
We know that the deforestation
[1:43:54]
at Fairview forest, even
[1:43:55]
partial, would have a permanent
[1:43:57]
impact on the health and safety
[1:43:58]
of residents north of the 40.
[1:44:01]
Currently, the force is
[1:44:03]
mitigating pollution, rain, snow
[1:44:05]
melt, wind, effects of climate
[1:44:08]
emergency, but as well as noise,
[1:44:10]
which is going to get much worse
[1:44:12]
very soon. I don't know how many
[1:44:13]
of you know how loud the R.E.M.
[1:44:15]
is going to be, but it's quite
[1:44:17]
loud, very loud. Which is going
[1:44:20]
to affect residents on both
[1:44:21]
sides of the 40. Pointe-Claire
[1:44:24]
is incredibly blessed and very
[1:44:25]
lucky to still have this
[1:44:27]
exceptional ecosystem within its
[1:44:29]
territory. Despite this, we are
[1:44:32]
still well below, well, well
[1:44:34]
below the minimum required
[1:44:36]
protective green space we should
[1:44:37]
have with about 2% of protected
[1:44:39]
forest canopy in Pointe-Claire.
[1:44:41]
And about 10% of green space,
[1:44:42]
which includes grass. So, with
[1:44:47]
that context, Fairview forest
[1:44:49]
needs to stay intact. The best
[1:44:51]
outcome would, obviously, leave
[1:44:52]
all the parties with a vested
[1:44:55]
interest happy. We want
[1:44:56]
everybody to be happy at the end
[1:44:58]
of all of this. First, the
[1:45:00]
residents would be happy because
[1:45:02]
they already live near a sea of
[1:45:04]
concrete. Secondly, the
[1:45:06]
administration could pride
[1:45:07]
itself and having protected an
[1:45:08]
exceptional ecosystem and create
[1:45:12]
a central park and its downtown
[1:45:13]
sector. And Cadillac Fairview
[1:45:14]
would be happy. Yes, they own
[1:45:15]
the land. Perhaps it don't
[1:45:16]
understand the forest
[1:45:17]
contribution to the community.
[1:45:20]
With this information, my
[1:45:22]
question tonight is the
[1:45:23]
following. Will the city
[1:45:25]
administration, including our
[1:45:27]
elected officials, commit to
[1:45:29]
putting energy into finding
[1:45:31]
funding, both private and
[1:45:32]
public, to try and protect the
[1:45:34]
forest? To start, we just need a
[1:45:38]
willingness. The residents
[1:45:40]
expect a willingness from all of
[1:45:41]
you. We really do want everybody
[1:45:44]
to come out of this happy. That
[1:45:45]
would be the ideal situation. We
[1:45:49]
owe it to our children, our
[1:45:51]
grandchildren, and all the
[1:45:53]
future generations of
[1:45:54]
Pointe-Claire residents, to try.
[1:45:55]
I've said this previously and I
[1:45:56]
will say it again, as F F -- is
[1:45:59]
willing to assist you in this
[1:46:01]
process. So, my question is,
[1:46:03]
will all of Council
[1:46:04]
administration agree? I can't
[1:46:06]
speak for all of the
[1:46:07]
administration, but would the
[1:46:08]
Council at least agreed to be
[1:46:10]
willing to look into private and
[1:46:11]
public funding to purchase the
[1:46:12]
forest?
[1:46:15]
>> I think it is, but I cannot
[1:46:17]
speak for them all. Yeah, I can
[1:46:23]
answer. Here is the problem with
[1:46:25]
me answering. I can't just
[1:46:27]
immediately speak for eight
[1:46:28]
people who vote on these, I
[1:46:29]
can't. Here, I will give you my
[1:46:32]
answer on this, okay? I will
[1:46:33]
give you my answer. And my
[1:46:35]
answer on this one has always
[1:46:36]
been the same. I totally agree
[1:46:39]
with what you outlined at the
[1:46:41]
outset, that we are below our
[1:46:43]
requisite level of green space
[1:46:44]
in Pointe-Claire. People in
[1:46:45]
Pointe-Claire don't realize that
[1:46:46]
we are below. We are actually
[1:46:49]
remiss at our amount of green
[1:46:52]
space in the city. We have two
[1:46:54]
pressures. We have pressures to
[1:46:56]
densify and we have pressures to
[1:46:58]
protect green space and to
[1:47:00]
become more green. The two are
[1:47:03]
conflicting, in many ways,
[1:47:04]
conflicting pressures. And I
[1:47:05]
marvel at this. I've always
[1:47:07]
marvelled at this that we are
[1:47:08]
actually, we have developed and
[1:47:11]
densify'd and enormous amount in
[1:47:13]
the last decade, more so than
[1:47:15]
our neighbouring municipalities,
[1:47:16]
yet, our green spaces diminish.
[1:47:19]
So, for me, the solution is
[1:47:22]
obvious and the emphasis is
[1:47:23]
obvious. We've emphasize one
[1:47:26]
direction for a minimum of a
[1:47:27]
decade and we have barely
[1:47:29]
touched the other. Maybe we
[1:47:30]
should start paying attention to
[1:47:31]
it. That's my personal opinion.
[1:47:33]
I also think, in the instance of
[1:47:36]
the Fairview forest, that if
[1:47:38]
you're developing a large
[1:47:40]
residential development, you
[1:47:41]
should have a requisite green
[1:47:43]
space to accompany it and it's
[1:47:45]
right there. So, for me, the
[1:47:47]
solution is already there and
[1:47:49]
should be followed accordingly.
[1:47:51]
That's my simple look at it. I
[1:47:53]
can't speak for my fellow
[1:47:54]
councillors, but they are
[1:47:55]
welcome to, if they want. But I
[1:47:57]
agree with everything they've
[1:47:58]
just said and I feel the
[1:48:00]
solution is obvious.
[1:48:01]
>> I think there's a lot of
[1:48:03]
funding options out there,
[1:48:05]
including perhaps the City PQ,
[1:48:07]
perhaps nature conservancy of
[1:48:08]
Canada, there's a lot of
[1:48:09]
opportunities out there for the
[1:48:10]
City to have a willingness to
[1:48:12]
look into. Just a willingness,
[1:48:13]
not saying you guys all need to
[1:48:15]
sign contracts tomorrow,
[1:48:16]
whatever. We are just asking for
[1:48:18]
willingness. That is a simple
[1:48:20]
thing.
[1:48:21]
>> It is and I think it is
[1:48:23]
there. I really do think it is
[1:48:24]
there and some efforts have
[1:48:26]
already been made. But, you
[1:48:28]
know, it would be nice for it to
[1:48:31]
be bandied about in the media
[1:48:33]
and get possibilities in
[1:48:36]
political discourse, as
[1:48:38]
solutions as well, so we can
[1:48:39]
find them other than writing
[1:48:40]
letters or emails to different
[1:48:42]
funding agencies. But hopefully
[1:48:44]
there are other ways, like, you
[1:48:46]
know, one of my girlfriends had
[1:48:48]
a kidney problem and she did
[1:48:50]
everything she could to find a
[1:48:51]
funder for her kidney. So, I
[1:48:53]
mean, we could do this to get a
[1:48:54]
new kidney. You know, it's a
[1:48:57]
long for the world, that forest.
[1:48:59]
Let's find funders for it. Let's
[1:49:01]
find solutions. We can all do
[1:49:02]
that and they are out there.
[1:49:04]
Hopefully if the benefactor's
[1:49:05]
are out there, people that are
[1:49:06]
willing to help -- preserve this
[1:49:11]
planet and it's survival, some
[1:49:13]
could step up to or, you know,
[1:49:15]
besides us just going in trying
[1:49:16]
to find them, you know?
[1:49:17]
>> I think we never expected the
[1:49:19]
City to pay for whatever the
[1:49:20]
force was going to cause. That
[1:49:21]
was never an expectation.
[1:49:22]
Clearly, there was money for --
[1:49:25]
this potential money for 25
[1:49:26]
million for the public works.
[1:49:29]
The money seems to be found when
[1:49:30]
there is interest in having that
[1:49:33]
project. So, it's curious, but
[1:49:36]
anyway, if you said you can
[1:49:38]
contribute some, think that
[1:49:39]
would be amazing. But we never
[1:49:41]
expected this to fit the entire
[1:49:42]
bill. That would be not, anyway,
[1:49:45]
not what we were thinking at
[1:49:46]
all. I don't want to run the --
[1:49:50]
do you want to say something?
[1:49:52]
>> I want to share with you that
[1:49:56]
the different grant information
[1:49:57]
you sent me has been sent to the
[1:49:58]
administration.
[1:50:00]
>> Okay.
[1:50:02]
>> So they should be looking
[1:50:03]
into that.
[1:50:04]
>> Okay. I can expect something
[1:50:08]
from the administration then,
[1:50:10]
maybe? Can we expect feedback
[1:50:12]
from the administration about
[1:50:13]
what's been looked into and what
[1:50:14]
hasn't been looked into?
[1:50:17]
>> Yes. In the future. It is
[1:50:19]
still being done.
[1:50:20]
>> Yeah, okay.
[1:50:22]
>> The director general and I
[1:50:25]
are planning some work this
[1:50:26]
week, this upcoming week in this
[1:50:28]
regard. We are still in the
[1:50:29]
process of doing a lot of that.
[1:50:31]
>> Okay. Looking forward to
[1:50:32]
getting some news.
[1:50:34]
>> Yeah. Councillor Stork? I
[1:50:35]
>> Would like to clarify in
[1:50:36]
reference to densification of
[1:50:38]
green space. If you look at the
[1:50:39]
multiple projects across
[1:50:41]
Pointe-Claire, on Hymus for
[1:50:43]
example, we just passed a
[1:50:45]
project at two 85, I think
[1:50:47]
that's 64% green space, if I'm
[1:50:49]
not mistaken. It was a concrete
[1:50:52]
industrial office parking lot of
[1:50:54]
concrete. There are some
[1:50:55]
projects with green space
[1:50:57]
respected. The vast majority
[1:50:59]
have been placed in industrial
[1:51:01]
buildings where there is --
[1:51:03]
we've added housing to the area.
[1:51:06]
The exact type of housing we
[1:51:07]
were looking for, maybe not.
[1:51:08]
There's been a push in the other
[1:51:10]
direction. I think that we've
[1:51:12]
done everything we can to
[1:51:13]
protect green spaces. Upper
[1:51:17]
Lindsey, 75% behind the arena,
[1:51:20]
we are looking at Ponner Woods,
[1:51:22]
what can we done when something
[1:51:23]
goes there. We are doing what we
[1:51:25]
can. We have to find that proper
[1:51:27]
balance. I'm 100 percent in
[1:51:29]
support of doing what we can to
[1:51:31]
be involved and save the
[1:51:33]
Fairview forest within its legal
[1:51:36]
confines and its financial
[1:51:37]
parameters. We have to find a
[1:51:39]
solution. I have my solution.
[1:51:41]
But more information is gathered
[1:51:45]
and information is provided, I
[1:51:46]
will be more than happy to make
[1:51:47]
a statement as such.
[1:51:49]
>> Thank you.
[1:51:50]
>> If I can add to the, Miss
[1:51:51]
Lucia. Hi Miss west, for me, it
[1:51:57]
is still, no matter what,
[1:51:59]
insufficiently -- it does not
[1:52:02]
have nearly the green spaces
[1:52:03]
should for a residential
[1:52:04]
development. We should be doing,
[1:52:08]
we should learn from it and do
[1:52:10]
much better than what we've done
[1:52:11]
at Hymus west. I look at
[1:52:14]
Griffintown as the most obvious
[1:52:15]
example. Parts of Mississauga.
[1:52:18]
We have examples of what not to
[1:52:20]
do all around us. I think our
[1:52:22]
development in the last ten or
[1:52:24]
15 years is testimony to. That I
[1:52:27]
think we have not done well
[1:52:28]
enough and I think we can do
[1:52:30]
better. That would be my answer
[1:52:32]
to that. Hymus West being the
[1:52:33]
best example of that.
[1:52:36]
>> Councillor Stork, you've
[1:52:37]
already spoken.
[1:52:40]
>> Can I speak, please?
[1:52:41]
>> Yes, you may.
[1:52:42]
>> That you concur that though
[1:52:44]
there isn't as much green space
[1:52:45]
as you would like, there is more
[1:52:46]
than there was previously?
[1:52:49]
>> There are a whole bunch of
[1:52:51]
buildings that have been built
[1:52:52]
that have taken potential green
[1:52:53]
space away. I feel that it's
[1:52:57]
insufficient, and it remains
[1:52:58]
insufficient. That would be my
[1:52:59]
answer. Thank you, Miss Lucy.
[1:53:03]
>> Time is up,.
[1:53:06]
>> Time is up? Okay. Sir, could
[1:53:10]
you at the microphone. At the
[1:53:13]
microphone, sir. By all means.
[1:53:18]
There are other people who --
[1:53:21]
>> Since you're talking about a
[1:53:24]
time limit and stuff, being
[1:53:25]
Democratic, we should limit the
[1:53:29]
conversation two minutes each, I
[1:53:30]
think.
[1:53:31]
>> That is -- that has been
[1:53:35]
suggestions. If you people sure,
[1:53:36]
there are consequences as well
[1:53:37]
for doing so. It's a fine line,
[1:53:41]
sir. I understand what you are
[1:53:42]
saying. But the people -- serve,
[1:53:46]
I will do it right now,
[1:53:47]
actually. Answering to the,
[1:53:49]
thank you very much. There are
[1:53:50]
other people.
[1:53:52]
>> There were lots of people
[1:53:53]
waiting to speak who didn't get
[1:53:55]
to speak. I've been gracious
[1:53:56]
with you. You are very welcome.
[1:53:58]
Thank you. Okay, Madame.
[1:54:12]
- 5.1 Avis de motion et dépôt
[1:54:13]
d'un projet de Règlement
[1:54:14]
constituant le Comité
[1:54:15]
consultatif de Stewart Hall.
[1:54:25]
Le règlement datant de 1980, des
[1:54:28]
mises à jour pour la
[1:54:30]
terminologie, les
[1:54:31]
responsabilités, le mandat du
[1:54:32]
comité, la nomination des
[1:54:33]
membres, le nombre de réunions.
[1:54:42]
>> Okay. Do I have a mover?
[1:54:44]
>> I need someone to give notice
[1:54:46]
of motion.
[1:54:47]
>> Notice of motion, sorry. Will
[1:54:51]
someone get the notice of
[1:54:53]
motion?
[1:54:54]
>> Cynthia -- district five.
[1:54:58]
>> Five point, to adopt amending
[1:55:01]
By-law PC2949 decreeing the
[1:55:02]
exigibles tariffs for the
[1:55:03]
financing of properties,
[1:55:04]
services and activities offered
[1:55:05]
by the City of Pointe-Claire,
[1:55:06]
for fiscal year 2023. the strap
[1:55:10]
by limes to correct the rate of
[1:55:11]
a service offered at zero
[1:55:13]
dollars on the residents of when
[1:55:14]
it is not applicable.
[1:55:19]
6.1 Accorder un soutien
[1:55:20]
financier pour un montant total
[1:55:21]
de 500 $ à AMCAL. La 15e
[1:55:26]
collectes de fonds annuelle, le
[1:55:28]
17 avril dernier, pour montrer
[1:55:30]
son, soutient le Conseil propose
[1:55:32]
de faire un don de 500 dollars
[1:55:33]
pour leur cueillette de fonds.
[1:55:36]
6.2 Grant financial support to
[1:55:38]
various non-profit organizations
[1:55:39]
for a total amount of $ 132,500.
[1:55:46]
this list is available
[1:55:47]
- To citizens upon request. 6.3
[1:55:48]
Joindre la ville de Côte
[1:55:49]
Saint-Luc en tant que
[1:55:50]
codemandeurs pour contester la
[1:55:51]
loi 96 devant les tribunaux. La
[1:55:56]
ville de Côte-Saint-Luc demande
[1:55:58]
de se joindre à eux en tant que
[1:56:01]
co-demandeurs pour contester les
[1:56:02]
articles de la loi 96, en
[1:56:05]
demandant un statut pour une
[1:56:07]
éventuelle contestation sur le
[1:56:08]
fonds afin d'éviter les effets
[1:56:10]
préjudiciables que la loi
[1:56:11]
pourrait avoir sur les
[1:56:12]
municipalités bilingue.
[1:56:17]
Do I have a mover?
[1:56:19]
>> Tara Stainforth, district
[1:56:20]
four.
[1:56:21]
>> And a seconder?
[1:56:22]
>> Eric Stork, district seven.
[1:56:23]
>> All in favour?
[1:56:31]
10.1 File the 2023 financial
[1:56:33]
report and the external
[1:56:35]
auditor's report for the 2023
[1:56:36]
fiscal year, as well as
[1:56:37]
authorize the publication
[1:56:38]
thereof on the City website.
[1:56:42]
10.2 Déposer la liste des
[1:56:43]
amendements budgétaires et le
[1:56:44]
registre des chèques pour la
[1:56:45]
période du 23 mars au 19 avril
[1:56:46]
2023.
[1:56:51]
10.3 Authorize the Treasurer to
[1:56:53]
proceed with the assignment of
[1:56:54]
the 2023 surplus. The surplus
[1:56:59]
for fiscal year 2022 being
[1:57:04]
$25,093,823. It's recommended
[1:57:06]
the amount be appropriated to
[1:57:07]
reserves for the repayment of
[1:57:10]
refinancing scheduled in 2024,
[1:57:11]
2025, and 2026. The portion of
[1:57:15]
the balance will be used for
[1:57:16]
specific projects, such as
[1:57:18]
funding capital expect --
[1:57:20]
municipal buildings, for the
[1:57:22]
emerald control strategy, and
[1:57:24]
the reserve for legal fees. The
[1:57:26]
residual balance of the 2022
[1:57:27]
surplus of 3 million $60,823
[1:57:31]
will be put into the non
[1:57:32]
allocated surplus. 10.4 Octroyer
[1:57:34]
un contrat pour
[1:57:35]
l'approvisionnement de pièces
[1:57:36]
électroniques pour portes
[1:57:37]
d'accès, à SECURMAX SYSTÈMES
[1:57:38]
INTÉGRÉS DE SÉCURITÉ INC.pour un
[1:57:39]
montant total de 263 632,44 $,
[1:57:40]
taxes incluses.
[1:57:49]
Pour l'acquisition de pièces et
[1:57:51]
composantes électroniques neuf
[1:57:52]
des accès à des portes
[1:57:54]
sécuriser, le six mentions du
[1:57:55]
besoin basée sur les
[1:57:57]
l'historique d'achat de 2017 à
[1:57:58]
2022.
[1:58:00]
10.5 Award a contract for the
[1:58:01]
purchase of 2 SAN
[1:58:03]
(Network Attached Storage)
[1:58:04]
systems, to ITI INC., For a
[1:58:05]
total amount of $ 189,292.54,
[1:58:08]
taxes included. This acquisition
[1:58:14]
of -- systems is to replace the
[1:58:16]
two existing 11.1 Ordonner à la
[1:58:17]
greffière, ou en son systems we
[1:58:18]
already have. Absence, à
[1:58:19]
l'assistante greffière, de
[1:58:20]
vendre à l'enchère publique les
[1:58:21]
immeubles indiqués à l'état
[1:58:22]
dressé par le trésorier et sur
[1:58:23]
lesquels des taxes
[1:58:26]
imposées n'ont pas été payées en
[1:58:27]
tout ou en partie. Conformément
[1:58:32]
à la loi de recouvrement des
[1:58:35]
arrérages des taxes, la ville
[1:58:37]
entreprendre par la résolution
[1:58:39]
des procédures de recouvrement
[1:58:40]
auprès des propriétaires en
[1:58:41]
défaut de payer les montants du
[1:58:43]
depuis le 30 septembre 2000 22
[1:58:46]
août antérieures. La vente aux
[1:58:47]
enchères a prévu le 20 juin 2023
[1:58:48]
à 9 heures. Toute immeubles pour
[1:58:51]
lesquels des taxes ont pas été
[1:58:52]
payé en doux en partie à cette
[1:58:53]
date pourront y être vendue.
[1:58:58]
>> For 10.3 until 11.1, do I
[1:59:02]
have a mover?
[1:59:04]
>> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,
[1:59:05]
district. Three
[1:59:06]
>> And a seconder?
[1:59:07]
>> -- in the district five.
[1:59:08]
>> All in favour?
[1:59:14]
- 12.1 Déposer la liste des
[1:59:15]
changements au personnel
[1:59:16]
>> Par décisions déléguées pour
[1:59:17]
le mois de mai 12 point when,
[1:59:18]
file a list of 2023. delegates
[1:59:19]
that changes for the month
[1:59:20]
- 12.2 Approuver la liste des of
[1:59:21]
changements au personnel par
[1:59:22]
décisions non déléguées au 2 mai
[1:59:23]
May 2023. 2023.
[1:59:24]
- 12.3 Approuver une
[1:59:25]
modification à la Politique sur
[1:59:26]
les déplacements à la demande de
[1:59:27]
l'employeur. 12.3 Approve an
[1:59:28]
amendment to the Policy on
[1:59:29]
Travel at the Employer's
[1:59:30]
Request. It is an indication of
[1:59:34]
personal automobile allowance of
[1:59:35]
-- as well as
[1:59:36]
Meal allowances for travel as of
[1:59:38]
May 1st, 2023.
[1:59:40]
>> For 12.2 to 12.3, do I have a
[1:59:44]
mover?
[1:59:51]
>> -- Stainforth, district four.
[1:59:52]
>>
[1:59:53]
- Le secondeur, Bruno Tremblay,
[1:59:54]
district six. All in favour?
[1:59:56]
- 14.1 Octroyer un contrat pour
[1:59:57]
la coupe des mauvaises herbes et
[1:59:58]
le nettoyage du dépôt à neige
[1:59:59]
pour l'année 2023, à 9042-0845
[2:00:00]
QUÉBEC INC., Pour un montant
[2:00:01]
total de 44 998,91 $, taxes
[2:00:02]
incluses, avec l'année 2024 en
[2:00:03]
option.
[2:00:12]
Le contrat consiste à effectuer
[2:00:14]
de coupe de mauvaises herbes en
[2:00:16]
bordure des rues, le nettoyage
[2:00:17]
du dépôt à neige.
[2:00:19]
14.2 Award a contract for the
[2:00:20]
annual marking of roadways for
[2:00:21]
the year 2023, to ENTREPRISE
[2:00:24]
TECHLINE INC., For a total
[2:00:25]
amount of $ 196,773.33, taxes
[2:00:27]
included, with the year 2024 in
[2:00:31]
option.
[2:00:34]
The contract is for annual
[2:00:36]
marking work, including major
[2:00:37]
streets and arterial roads in
[2:00:39]
the city of Pointe-Claire. 14.4
[2:00:41]
Octroyer un contrat pour le
[2:00:42]
remplacement et l'installation
[2:00:43]
de raccordement de services sur
[2:00:44]
le territoire de la Ville de
[2:00:45]
Pointe-Claire pour l'année 2023,
[2:00:46]
à CONSTRUCTION CAMARA INC., Pour
[2:00:47]
un montant total de 499 544,64
[2:00:48]
$, taxes incluses.
[2:00:54]
C'est le contrat consiste à
[2:00:55]
effectuer des travaux de
[2:00:56]
remplacement et d'installations
[2:00:57]
de raccordement des services
[2:00:58]
d'égouts et d'eau potable des
[2:01:01]
conduites principal demandée est
[2:01:02]
payée par les propriétaires.
[2:01:06]
14.5 Award a contract for the
[2:01:07]
supply with delivery of
[2:01:08]
ready-mixed concrete for the
[2:01:09]
year 2023, to MELOCHE, DIVISION
[2:01:10]
DE SINTRA INC., For a total
[2:01:12]
amount of $ 55,027.03, taxes
[2:01:14]
included, with the year 2024 in
[2:01:16]
option. The contract is to
[2:01:21]
supply and deliver cement
[2:01:22]
concrete on demand for the
[2:01:24]
reconstruction of sidewalks and
[2:01:26]
curbs in the city territory.
[2:01:31]
>> 14.1 to 14.5, do I have a
[2:01:33]
mover?
[2:01:34]
>> Brent Cowan, district eight.
[2:01:36]
I move to award the contract at
[2:01:38]
14.1, 14.2, 14.4, and 14.5.
[2:01:42]
>> And a seconder?
[2:01:43]
>> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:01:44]
>> All in favour?
[2:01:46]
- 14.6 Octroyer un contrat pour
[2:01:47]
des travaux de plantation et
[2:01:48]
entretien d'arbres en motte pour
[2:01:49]
l'année 2023, à TERRASSEMENT
[2:01:50]
TECHNIQUE SYLVAIN LABRECQUE
[2:01:51]
INC., pour un montant total de
[2:01:52]
192 675,11 $, taxes incluses.
[2:02:00]
Le contraire de plantations et
[2:02:02]
d'arbres
[2:02:03]
(---)
[2:02:04]
de remplacement des arbres
[2:02:05]
municipaux, des travaux qui
[2:02:06]
permettent de répondre aux
[2:02:07]
demandes des citoyens pour la
[2:02:08]
plantation de nouvel arbre
[2:02:09]
devant la résidence.
[2:02:10]
(---)
[2:02:11]
. 14.7 Award a contract to
[2:02:13]
ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS CANADA for a
[2:02:14]
total amount of $ 84,916.00,
[2:02:17]
taxes included, and a contract
[2:02:18]
to BUDGETAUTO INC., For a total
[2:02:19]
amount of $ 33,120.00, taxes
[2:02:24]
included, within the
[2:02:25]
Framework of the grouped call
[2:02:26]
for tenders No. 2021-0698-01 for
[2:02:30]
the rental of light vehicles of
[2:02:32]
the Centre d'Acquisitions
[2:02:37]
Gouvernemental also known as the
[2:02:38]
(CAG)
[2:02:39]
. These vehicles are tense of
[2:02:41]
contact passenger cars and three
[2:02:42]
extended --
[2:02:43]
- 14.8 Octroyer des contrats à
[2:02:44]
BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS TIRE
[2:02:45]
OPERATIONS, LLC., CONTINENTAL
[2:02:46]
TIRE THE AMERICAS LLC., GOODYEAR
[2:02:47]
TIRE AND RUBBER COMPANY et
[2:02:48]
COMPAGNIE GÉNÉRALE DES
[2:02:49]
ÉTABLISSEMENTS MICHELIN, pour un
[2:02:50]
montant total de 297 160,00 $,
[2:02:51]
dans le cadre de l'appel
[2:02:52]
d'offres regroupé n°
[2:02:53]
2023-8109-50 pour l'achat des
[2:02:54]
pneus neufs, rechapés et
[2:02:55]
remoulés du Centre
[2:02:56]
d'acquisitions gouvernemental
[2:02:57]
(CAG)
[2:03:12]
>> For 14.6 to 14.8, do I have a
[2:03:14]
mover?
[2:03:17]
>> Bissonnette, the trick to.
[2:03:19]
>> And a seconder?
[2:03:20]
>> Kelly Thorstad-Cullen,
[2:03:21]
district three.
[2:03:22]
>> All in favour?
[2:03:26]
>> Okay, 15.1, two 15.1 Accept
[2:03:27]
the renewal option provided for
[2:03:28]
in the contract entered into
[2:03:30]
with HYDRAULIQueS R & O INC.,
[2:03:31]
For the the period of May 2023
[2:03:32]
to May 2024, in the amount of $
[2:03:35]
62,316.45, taxes included for
[2:03:37]
the inspection, the cleaning and
[2:03:40]
the maintenance of the
[2:03:41]
ventilation ducts and the CVAC
[2:03:43]
systems in the City's different
[2:03:44]
buildings. The cleaning and
[2:03:48]
balancing of ventilation and see
[2:03:50]
vaccines as necessary to ensure
[2:03:51]
the comfort of 15.2 Accepter
[2:03:52]
l'option de renouvellement
[2:03:53]
prévue au users of city
[2:03:54]
buildings. Contrat intervenu
[2:03:55]
avec CIMCO RÉFRIGÉRATION, pour
[2:03:56]
la période de mai 2023 à mai
[2:03:57]
2024, au montant de 110 000 $,
[2:03:58]
taxes incluses, pour des travaux
[2:03:59]
répétitifs ou imprévisibles,
[2:04:00]
visites préventives et entretien
[2:04:01]
du système frigorifique à
[2:04:02]
l'ammoniac Ecochill de l'Aréna
[2:04:03]
Bob-Birnie.
[2:04:12]
L'entretien du système
[2:04:15]
frigorifiques à l'ammoniac de
[2:04:17]
l'aréna sont nécessaires pour
[2:04:18]
assurer un bon entretien des
[2:04:19]
glaces.
[2:04:21]
15.3 Accept the renewal option
[2:04:22]
provided for in the contract
[2:04:24]
entered into with OMNI
[2:04:26]
VENTILATION INC., For the period
[2:04:27]
of May 2023 to December 2023, in
[2:04:28]
the amount of $ 88,588.24, taxes
[2:04:32]
included for maintenance and
[2:04:34]
repair works on the mechanical
[2:04:35]
systems of the City of
[2:04:36]
Pointe-Claire. This contract
[2:04:40]
will be used to provide hourly
[2:04:41]
rate for service called and to
[2:04:43]
provide materials, equipment and
[2:04:45]
tools necessary to perform
[2:04:46]
various preventative maintenance
[2:04:47]
and mechanical repair works.
[2:05:02]
>> --
[2:05:03]
- Seconded by -- 15.4 Accepter
[2:05:04]
l'option de
[2:05:05]
>> All in favour? Renouvellement
[2:05:06]
prévue au contrat intervenu avec
[2:05:07]
LES TERRASSEMENTS MONTRÉAL INC.,
[2:05:08]
Pour la période de mai 2023 à
[2:05:09]
décembre 2023, au montant de 176
[2:05:10]
206,09 $, taxes incluses, pour
[2:05:11]
des travaux répétitifs de
[2:05:12]
réparation de surface en béton
[2:05:13]
et pavage.
[2:05:21]
Les travaux nécessaires pour
[2:05:22]
assurer la sécurité à travers le
[2:05:23]
terrain et bâtiments municipaux.
[2:05:28]
>> 15.5 Award a contract for the
[2:05:29]
supply and the delivery of
[2:05:30]
janitorial products, for the
[2:05:31]
period of June 1, 2023 to May
[2:05:32]
31, 2024, to Sani-Depot Division
[2:05:38]
du Groupe Dissan, for a total
[2:05:41]
amount of $ 97,353.79, taxes
[2:05:43]
included, with the periods
[2:05:44]
2024-2025, 2025-2026 and
[2:05:48]
2026-2027 in option. 15.6 Award
[2:05:50]
a contract for 15.6 Octroyer un
[2:05:51]
contrat pour des travaux de
[2:05:52]
béton pour la réparation des
[2:05:55]
piscines extérieures, à
[2:05:57]
(---)
[2:05:59]
. Ce contrat permet la
[2:06:05]
réparation des piscines
[2:06:07]
extérieures pour la saison 2023.
[2:06:10]
>> For 15.4 to 15.6, do I have a
[2:06:13]
mover?
[2:06:14]
>> Brent Cowan, district eight.
[2:06:16]
>> And seconder?
[2:06:17]
>> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:06:19]
>> All in favour?
[2:06:26]
15.7 Award a contract for
[2:06:27]
maintenance of municipal
[2:06:28]
buildings, to ENTRETIEN SANS
[2:06:31]
DEFICIENCES INC., 9322-6132
[2:06:32]
QUEBEC INC. And PRO MAGIC
[2:06:34]
MAINTENANCE, for a total amount
[2:06:38]
of $ 64,851.46, taxes included.
[2:06:44]
Services were required include
[2:06:45]
post event housekeeping in
[2:06:46]
various buildings, carpet and
[2:06:48]
for cleaning, and all conical
[2:06:49]
housekeeping in various city
[2:06:50]
buildings. 15.8 Régulariser les
[2:06:51]
dépenses envers VITRERIE PARR,
[2:06:52]
pour le remplacement des
[2:06:53]
fenêtres extérieures et
[2:06:54]
intérieures du deuxième étage du
[2:06:55]
chalet de parc Cedar Heights,
[2:06:56]
suite à l'incendie survenu au
[2:06:57]
printemps 2022, pour un montant
[2:06:58]
de 5 484,31 $, taxes incluses.
[2:07:07]
Au cours des travaux, une
[2:07:08]
demande de modification était
[2:07:09]
fait afin d'ajouter des pays
[2:07:11]
(---)
[2:07:12]
d'aluminium afin de couvrir les
[2:07:13]
espaces supplémentaires entre
[2:07:14]
les murs et de maçonnerie et les
[2:07:16]
cadres de mur
[2:07:17]
(inaudible)
[2:07:18]
(---)
[2:07:22]
Do I have a mover?
[2:07:24]
>> Bob Bissonnette, district to.
[2:07:26]
>> And a seconder?
[2:07:27]
>> Brent Cowan, district eight.
[2:07:28]
>> All in favour?
[2:07:32]
>> So, the persons present
[2:07:33]
The persons present may address
[2:07:34]
Council on the subjects
[2:07:35]
hereunder from the items 17.1 to
[2:07:36]
17.3: 17.1 Consider a minor
[2:07:42]
exemption request concerning the
[2:07:43]
property situated at lot 2 528
[2:07:49]
020 of the Cadastre of Quebec
[2:07:51]
(corner Avro Avenue and De
[2:07:52]
l'Aviation Road)
[2:07:53]
. In order to allow, a, a full
[2:07:55]
area of 1060 square metres in
[2:07:58]
the minimum required of 2000
[2:08:00]
square metres for occupants aid.
[2:08:02]
A four space of 1080 square
[2:08:04]
metres, rather than a minimum
[2:08:05]
required of 2000 square metres,
[2:08:07]
for occupant be. The storage of
[2:08:09]
a, composting, and garbage bins
[2:08:11]
in the secondary -- setback,
[2:08:13]
rather than in the lateral or
[2:08:15]
rear setback, as permitted. D, a
[2:08:17]
parking area located at three
[2:08:19]
metres from a public street
[2:08:20]
right away in the secondary
[2:08:22]
front setback, rather than a
[2:08:24]
minimum required of 7.5 metres.
[2:08:25]
Eat, a parking area occupying
[2:08:28]
87% of the secondary front
[2:08:30]
setback, rather than the maximum
[2:08:31]
permitted of 75%. If, loading
[2:08:35]
and unloading docks located in
[2:08:36]
the secondary front setback
[2:08:37]
where they are not permitted.
[2:08:40]
Gee, four parking spaces not
[2:08:42]
accessible at all times, as
[2:08:43]
required. And H, and industrial
[2:08:45]
building with 30 parking spaces
[2:08:46]
rather than the minimum required
[2:08:48]
of 35 parking spaces. 17.2
[2:08:50]
Considérer une demande de
[2:08:51]
dérogation mineure concernant la
[2:08:52]
propriété sise au 6701-6901,
[2:08:53]
autoroute Transcanadienne.
[2:08:59]
Permettre sur le mur latéral est
[2:09:01]
du Bloc situé au-dessus de
[2:09:03]
l'entrée, une en signe avec une
[2:09:06]
superficie de 40
[2:09:07]
(---)
[2:09:08]
. Plutôt que le maximum permis
[2:09:09]
de 18,6 mètres carrés.
[2:09:11]
17.3 Consider a conditional use
[2:09:13]
request concerning the property
[2:09:16]
situated at 133 Labrosse Avenue
[2:09:19]
(Microbrasserie Labrosse)
[2:09:20]
. 17.4 Consider the site to
[2:09:24]
allow provided that no more than
[2:09:26]
the total floor area be occupied
[2:09:28]
the commercial terrace being
[2:09:29]
excluded from the 30%
[2:09:31]
calculation. A, a counter or
[2:09:32]
sort for the direct sale to the
[2:09:34]
public of manufactured products
[2:09:36]
within the facility. Be, a space
[2:09:37]
dedicated to the public reserved
[2:09:39]
exclusively for the tasting or
[2:09:41]
consumption of craft beers or
[2:09:43]
spirits manufactured within the
[2:09:44]
facility. See, a space reserved
[2:09:46]
for the public and dedicated to
[2:09:48]
the consumption of a snack or a
[2:09:50]
light snack, to accompany the
[2:09:51]
tasting or consumption of
[2:09:53]
products manufactured within the
[2:09:54]
processing and or at the
[2:09:56]
facility, sorry. And the, a
[2:09:58]
commercial terrace. 17.4
[2:10:00]
Considérer les plans
[2:10:01]
d'implantation et d'intégration
[2:10:02]
architecturale relatifs à la
[2:10:03]
propriété sise au 25, avenue
[2:10:04]
Claremont. Modification de
[2:10:06]
l'entrée charretière
[2:10:07]
(---)
[2:10:08]
. 17.5 Consider the site
[2:10:09]
Planning and architectural
[2:10:10]
integration programme plans with
[2:10:11]
respect to the property situated
[2:10:12]
at 56 De La Pointe-Claire
[2:10:14]
Avenue. Which is an extension
[2:10:17]
and a renovation.
[2:10:21]
>> For 17.1 to 17.5, --
[2:10:27]
>> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:10:29]
>> Do I have a mover?
[2:10:30]
>> Okay, sorry, Eric Stork,
[2:10:32]
district seven.
[2:10:33]
>> And seconder?
[2:10:34]
>> Brent Cowan, district eight.
[2:10:37]
>> -- the utilization has a land
[2:10:39]
in that planned site.
[2:10:42]
>> 17.3?
[2:10:44]
>> 17.3.
[2:10:47]
- Vous votez contre 17,3,
[2:10:50]
monsieur Bissonnette?
[2:10:54]
>> Also, I vote for all of the
[2:10:57]
17.1, 17.2, 17.4, 17.5. I go
[2:11:02]
against 17.3.
[2:11:03]
>> That's the only one you vote
[2:11:04]
against? Okay.
[2:11:06]
>> Councillor Charlie?
[2:11:07]
>> I'm in agreement with 17.2,
[2:11:12]
through 17.5. I'm voting against
[2:11:13]
17.1.
[2:11:19]
>> Okay, -- j'ai une objection
[2:11:23]
pour le 17,3.
[2:11:32]
Nous allons voter l'un après les
[2:11:33]
autres.
[2:11:36]
- C'est une bonne solution,
[2:11:37]
merci beaucoup. 17,1?
[2:11:39]
>> All in favour? And those
[2:11:44]
against?
[2:11:48]
>> Hold on. Okay.
[2:11:51]
>> 17,2? All in favour? Excuse
[2:11:56]
me. Those against? Okay. 17,3?
[2:12:00]
17.3? All in favour? Those
[2:12:02]
against?
[2:12:10]
17,4? 17.4, all in favour?
[2:12:13]
Those against? 17,5? 17.5, all
[2:12:16]
in favour? Those against? Okay.
[2:12:25]
- C'est clair. 17.6 Considérer
[2:12:28]
les plans d'implantation et
[2:12:29]
d'intégration architecturale
[2:12:30]
relatifs à la propriété sise au
[2:12:31]
440, avenue Saint-Louis. Une
[2:12:37]
modification au plan d'entrée
[2:12:38]
charretière.
[2:12:42]
>> 17.7, consider the site
[2:12:43]
planning and planning and
[2:12:44]
architectural integration
[2:12:45]
programme plans with respect to
[2:12:47]
the property situated at 442
[2:12:48]
Saint-Louis Avenue.
[2:12:50]
- Which is 17.8 Considérer les
[2:12:51]
plans a modification to the
[2:12:52]
driveway. D'implantation et
[2:12:53]
d'intégration architecturale
[2:12:54]
relatifs à la propriété sise au
[2:12:55]
6701-6901, autoroute
[2:12:56]
Transcanadienne. Pour une
[2:12:57]
rénovation extérieurs.
[2:13:01]
>> 17.9, consider the site
[2:13:02]
planning an architectural
[2:13:03]
integration program
[2:13:04]
And with respect to the property
[2:13:05]
located at 153 -- extension an
[2:13:09]
extension and a front veranda.
[2:13:12]
>> For 17.6 to 17.9, do I have a
[2:13:15]
mover?
[2:13:16]
>> Yes, Bruno Tremblay, I
[2:13:18]
propose moving 17.6 through
[2:13:20]
nine.
[2:13:21]
>> And seconder?
[2:13:23]
>> Seconded by Kelly
[2:13:25]
Thorstad-Cullen, district three.
[2:13:26]
>> All in favour?
[2:13:29]
(---)
[2:13:34]
- 18.1 Se prévaloir de l'option
[2:13:35]
de renouvellement prévue au
[2:13:36]
contrat intervenu avec
[2:13:37]
SYNERGLACE CANADA INC., Pour la
[2:13:38]
saison 2023-2024, au montant de
[2:13:39]
352 014,36 $, taxes incluses,
[2:13:40]
pour la location d'une patinoire
[2:13:41]
extérieure réfrigérée et d'un
[2:13:42]
sentier extérieur réfrigéré.
[2:13:48]
Il s'agit de la deuxième et
[2:13:50]
dernière année de
[2:13:51]
renouvellement.
[2:13:53]
>> 18.2 Approve the agreements
[2:13:54]
To be entered into regarding the
[2:13:55]
exterior pools of the City.
[2:13:59]
These agreements are required to
[2:14:00]
establish the vision of
[2:14:01]
responsibility between the city
[2:14:02]
and the organizations, in order
[2:14:03]
to ensure the application of the
[2:14:05]
Sanders in fourth and providing
[2:14:06]
of the organizations with the
[2:14:08]
facilities and equipment
[2:14:09]
necessary to carry out the
[2:14:10]
service offer.
[2:14:13]
>> For 18.1, do I have a mover?
[2:14:18]
>> Cynthia Homan, I move to
[2:14:20]
approve 18.1, 18.2, district
[2:14:22]
five.
[2:14:23]
>> And seconder?
[2:14:25]
>> Bruno Tremblay, district six.
[2:14:26]
>> All in favour? With comment,
[2:14:32]
I vote for 18.2. I vote against
[2:14:34]
18.1. Thank you.
[2:14:38]
>> I, to, I'm against 18.1 and
[2:14:41]
in favour of 18.2.
[2:14:54]
- 18.3 Approuver le plan
[2:14:55]
d'action municipal pour
[2:14:56]
l'intégration sociale et
[2:14:57]
professionnelle des personnes
[2:14:58]
handicapées 2023 et autoriser
[2:14:59]
les objectifs 2023 et les
[2:15:00]
réalisations/résumés 2022 du
[2:15:01]
comité d'accessibilité afin de
[2:15:02]
les soumettre à l'Office des
[2:15:03]
personnes handicapées du Québec.
[2:15:07]
Les objectifs de 2023 vise à
[2:15:09]
ignorer la communication le
[2:15:11]
transport, la sécurité publique,
[2:15:13]
l'accès aux installations dans
[2:15:14]
le but de accommoder notre
[2:15:15]
clientèle.
[2:15:17]
>> 18.4, 18.4 To authorize the
[2:15:19]
Department of Culture, Sports,
[2:15:21]
Leisure and Community
[2:15:22]
Development to submit a request
[2:15:23]
for funding with the Ministere
[2:15:26]
de la Culture et des
[2:15:27]
Communications to be paid to the
[2:15:28]
City of Pointe-Claire Library.
[2:15:30]
the amount received over the
[2:15:33]
last three years -- and --
[2:15:34]
dollars.
[2:15:44]
>> A seconder?
[2:15:45]
>>
[2:15:46]
Seconded by Kelly
[2:15:47]
Thorstad-Cullen, district three.
[2:15:48]
>> All in favour?
[2:15:51]
And foreclosure, do I have a
[2:15:53]
mover?
[2:15:55]
>> Eric Stork, district seven.
[2:15:56]
>> And seconder?
[2:15:58]
>> Tara Stainforth, district
[2:15:59]
four.
[2:16:00]
>> All in favour? Bonsoir tout
[2:16:01]
le monde. Good night, everybody.