[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?
[1:24:30] I
[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] (---)
[1:40:43] .
[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] (---)
[1:41:19] .
[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)
[1:42:53] .
[1:42:54] (---)
[1:42:55] .
[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] (---)
[1:43:14] .
[1:43:17] - Merci.
[1:43:25] (inaudible)
[1:43:26] (---)
[1:43:27] .
[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)
[2:02:58] .
[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] (---)
[2:07:19] .
[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.