[0:17] So, I think we're live. We're just um
[0:20] it's a hustle and bustle in downtown
[0:22] West Arash. Uh lots of construction. So,
[0:25] we have at least one counselor who's
[0:26] stuck in traffic. Uh so, there are three
[0:30] of us here, but um yeah, we've got
[0:33] somebody on their way. So, um we have
[0:35] quorum though, so we can start and get
[0:37] some of the formalities out. So, welcome
[0:39] everyone to this special meeting of
[0:42] council. Uh, we have a certain number of
[0:44] items on the agenda. Um, and uh, we'll
[0:48] begin with um, the CAO doing the roll
[0:53] call of counselors.
[0:55] » Sure. Thank you, Madam Chair. District
[0:57] one, councelor Sean Samson,
[1:01] » Present.
[1:02] » District two, warden Lois Landry,
[1:04] » Present. District three, councelor Brian
[1:06] Nar Shaw is on route. Y
[1:10] » Uh district four, councelor Amanda
[1:12] Mrevette. We don't have her online
[1:13] either, do we? We have nobody online.
[1:16] And district five, Deputy Warden and
[1:19] Brent Samson
[1:20] » Present.
[1:21] » She may be in the same the same line of
[1:23] » She may be.
[1:24] » Yeah. Okay. So, uh while we're here, uh
[1:28] and we do have a quorum so we can uh
[1:30] dispense with some of these items. Um,
[1:33] the agenda is in front of you. It was
[1:35] circulated uh late last week, I believe.
[1:39] So, are there any errors or omissions or
[1:42] additions to the agenda? And if not, I
[1:45] would entertain a motion to approve.
[1:50] Moved by councelor Samson to approve the
[1:54] agenda as circulated. Oh, seconded by
[1:57] Deputy Worth Samson. Thank you. Um any
[2:00] discussion on that motion? Hearing none.
[2:02] All those in favor signify by saying I.
[2:04] I.
[2:05] » I. Those opposed. Motion carries. So
[2:08] there are three of us here. Um
[2:12] I know we have uh some items that are
[2:16] grant applications. Uh so we have four.
[2:20] We have a sponsorship request and um
[2:23] then we have a request for a letter from
[2:27] Dundy Hills Vacation Village and uh
[2:30] Richmond Arena report followup. So, uh
[2:33] I'm happy to begin with the Acadia Bill
[2:36] Community Center if you can go ahead and
[2:40] plug along with that. So, um in the
[2:45] I didn't even turn that on at all today.
[2:49] And there.
[2:51] » So in the
[2:53] in the package you
[3:00] we're good. Okay. So um council is just
[3:04] messaging that he will be walking in the
[3:06] door in about 2 minutes. So um while
[3:10] we're but we have a forum now. So, um,
[3:13] we can direct folks to if you're using
[3:16] the online package at home, uh, starting
[3:19] on page two, um, is the community grant.
[3:24] We had some technical difficulties and
[3:25] people in traffic, so we're just getting
[3:27] going. So, we're at the Acadiaville
[3:30] Community Center society has a grant
[3:33] application for the tier 2 community
[3:35] grant funds uh, requesting $7,500.
[3:41] um they are requesting um to provide an
[3:44] accessible method of transporting
[3:46] individuals with mobility challenges
[3:48] between the different floors. So I'm
[3:50] sure everybody's been to the Kadia Bill
[3:51] Hall. Um and so the project total is
[3:54] $37,242.35.
[3:57] They're requesting uh the maximum
[3:59] amount. So, I'll throw it out for
[4:01] discussion and possibly a motion and
[4:04] would entertain $1,000 from district two
[4:08] funds uh as part of that discussion if
[4:11] folks are open to that.
[4:20] So we have a further uh
[4:24] further discuss
[4:26] I would thousand from this district
[4:30] three I would go 500 from district one
[4:35] and whatever we feel we can afford to
[4:39] okay
[4:39] » Take out of our district fund. So that
[4:42] would leave uh so do you want to make
[4:45] the motion for the total amount plus
[4:48] from with a th00and from district 2 500
[4:50] from district 1 and then we can have
[4:52] some discussion on that motion.
[4:54] » Yes.
[4:54] » Okay. So the motion is uh to provide the
[4:59] $7500
[5:01] 6,000 from district funds,000 from
[5:03] district 2 and 500 from district 1. Can
[5:05] I have a second?
[5:06] » 6,000 from general
[5:08] » 6,000 from the Yeah.
[5:09] » Yeah. Can I have a second?
[5:11] » I'll second that.
[5:12] » Okay. So, there's a motion on the floor.
[5:14] Any discussion on the motion?
[5:16] [Music]
[5:24] » Is there anybody who has any comments,
[5:27] concerns on that matter?
[5:28] » No, I think it's a good project. I'm
[5:30] just trying to figure out We're all
[5:32] trying to figure out how to make a map
[5:33] for it tonight.
[5:34] » Yeah. Um I don't know if there's any
[5:37] appetite for any more in the district
[5:39] funds, but Um I Yeah, just worry. I got
[5:43] a couple of things I'll I'll I'll chew
[5:45] into mind later on.
[5:47] » Yeah. Yeah, fair enough. Yeah. Okay. So,
[5:51] um yeah, we're going to have to mind the
[5:53] numbers here. Um
[5:55] so, that is
[5:59] Okay. So, there's a motion on the floor.
[6:01] All those in favor signify by saying I.
[6:03] » I.
[6:03] » I.
[6:06] I.
[6:07] » Those opposed.
[6:08] » Motion carries. Okay, moving on. Uh, and
[6:11] I think these are actually out of
[6:12] sequence in your package. So, um, the
[6:15] next, uh, item on our agenda
[6:19] is the Jolly Club. So, that's a little
[6:22] further down. The sponsorship is in the
[6:25] middle of this in your package, but on
[6:27] our we'll just follow the agenda. So, if
[6:29] you scroll down, you'll see that there
[6:31] is a request from the Jolly Club.
[6:33] They're looking for $6,726.
[6:37] Uh that is the total amount of the quote
[6:40] as well. Um so I'll throw that out to
[6:44] anybody who'd like to pursue that.
[6:51] » I'm still on this. Yeah. Um I like to
[6:56] put a thousand from the district funds
[6:57] on this, but I'm not sure if we really
[7:00] have anywhere to go in the regional
[7:02] funds based on what's coming up.
[7:06] So,
[7:07] for folks who are following along, we're
[7:09] actually on page 58 of our package. And
[7:12] so, what I'm hearing uh Deputy Warden
[7:15] say is that if someone or he himself
[7:19] would like to make a motion, there is uh
[7:22] an ask. I I know that we have had
[7:24] conversations about when groups ask for
[7:27] the full amount. Um so, we have $1,000
[7:31] from district five. um kind of
[7:35] committed. Uh don't if anybody else
[7:38] wants to speak to district funds or make
[7:39] a motion about um a grand total that we
[7:43] can debate, but I'd entertain a motion
[7:45] for some discussion.
[7:46] » Did you have something?
[7:48] » I'll make that motion. $1,000 from
[7:50] district five funds.
[7:51] » Okay. So, the motion
[7:54] the motion on the floor is for $1,000
[7:56] from district five funds. Um do we have
[8:00] a seconder?
[8:01] » I'll second it.
[8:02] » Okay. Seconded by uh councelor Marchon.
[8:06] Any discussion on that motion?
[8:09] » Go ahead.
[8:15] » We may have lost them again. Just go
[8:17] ahead.
[8:18] » Oh, you're there. Y
[8:21] » Um I just asking a question, Deputy
[8:24] Warden. What's your thoughts on it? Do
[8:26] you want to support it at half out of
[8:28] general or full the rest of a general?
[8:30] It's up to you. Um I'll support either
[8:31] way.
[8:33] I mean, if the circumstances were
[8:34] different, but I I just feel the next
[8:36] one is more important than this one at
[8:38] the end of the day.
[8:39] » So, you want to go 50%.
[8:41] » No, like I I I wouldn't take anything
[8:44] original.
[8:45] » Oh, you just want to leave it at the
[8:46] thousand.
[8:47] » Yeah, because I I don't like I think
[8:48] it's it's just not not as crucial as the
[8:52] other things on the list and I wish it
[8:54] » And it is 100% of the ask, right?
[8:56] » Yeah, exactly. So, it wouldn't have been
[8:57] something I would have considered to
[8:59] begin with for 100%. But, you know, it
[9:01] would have been nice to see it get to
[9:02] 50, but we just don't.
[9:04] » Yeah. Don't have it here.
[9:07] » So, we have a motion and we have a
[9:08] seconder. And I'll just remind folks,
[9:11] I'm going to ask you individually to
[9:13] keep track of your own district funds,
[9:15] but at this point, we have $4,349.50
[9:18] in the regional funds, right? So, um
[9:22] after that, Yep. Do my math right.
[9:25] » Yep. Okay. So, uh there's a motion on
[9:27] the floor for $1,000 out of district 5
[9:29] funds. Uh any other discussion on that
[9:32] motion? Hearing none. All those in favor
[9:34] signify by saying I.
[9:36] » Those opposed. Motion carries. The next
[9:39] um agenda item is the request from the
[9:44] Grand River Presbyterian Church. That is
[9:47] a request on tier 2 and it is for
[9:51] $7,500. they have a roof that is leaking
[9:55] uh and they have an ask that is uh
[9:58] included in your package. So again, I
[10:00] would uh entertain
[10:02] discussion or motion 85
[10:07] » Page 85 of your package if you're
[10:09] following up. Um,
[10:21] » It cycled and then went out. They all
[10:23] lit up and then heard quite
[10:28] » No, it's struggling.
[10:31] » Okay,
[10:31] » We're all done.
[10:33] » Okay, carry on. do our best.
[10:34] » Yeah.
[10:35] » Um like
[10:37] » Considering they're saying this is
[10:38] leaking a bit, it's I don't think I've
[10:40] seen this group come since we've been on
[10:42] council. Um I like
[10:46] I'd like to see if we could make a
[10:48] motion to 4,000 of the regional and
[10:51] 3,000 of the district funds, district 5
[10:54] funds, which should give it bring it up
[10:56] to 7,000 anyway and make a motion on
[10:59] that if anyone's open to second.
[11:01] » Okay. Okay. So, the motion on the floor
[11:04] is um 3,000 from district. There's it.
[11:07] So, 3,000 from district five and 4,000
[11:14] from district, sorry, from the regional
[11:16] fund.
[11:19] Uh do we have a second? Second.
[11:21] » Seconded by councelor Merchon. Any
[11:24] discussion on that motion?
[11:26] » Yes.
[11:28] » Oh, yeah. Right. Okay. So, um, so that
[11:31] will effectively deplete our regional
[11:33] our regional funds $349.50.
[11:37] » Yeah.
[11:38] » Okay. Um, and I'm just I just want to
[11:41] sober second thought kind of discussion
[11:43] and do we anticipate any like are we
[11:46] forgetting about something that's going
[11:47] to come up later in the year is what I'm
[11:49] wondering.
[11:50] » I Right. But I'm just like has staff had
[11:53] any conversations about that kind of
[11:56] thing that we might not be aware of? I I
[11:59] know of something in my own district
[12:00] that I have funds in my district funds
[12:03] to to provide for. Yeah. Uh and and you
[12:06] know, this does beg the question um when
[12:10] we revisit the advantages and
[12:12] disadvantages of some of the changes
[12:14] we've made to this policy. By going up
[12:16] to 7,500, we've likely decreased the
[12:20] number of projects that we can support.
[12:22] Right. But
[12:24] » They've all been important projects.
[12:25] It's not like we've given money that I
[12:27] regret giving out. Um, and at this
[12:29] point, one thing I am I do feel a little
[12:31] bit better about is that anybody who's
[12:34] planning to build this building season
[12:36] has clearly come to us.
[12:38] » Yeah.
[12:38] » So, it may be that we have to advise
[12:41] folks that look, you may want to
[12:42] consider waiting until March and and
[12:45] looking at the next fiscal year, but
[12:47] certainly this gets us through the the
[12:49] the building season.
[12:52] And I and
[12:54] sorry
[12:55] » Maybe that's working I saw the light.
[12:57] Yeah. And to be clear I can't think of
[12:59] anything either. I just wondered if
[13:00] » There was something maybe on the radar
[13:02] staff or
[13:04] » We're hearing but again come November
[13:06] people will start thinking about holiday
[13:08] things or things.
[13:11] » Yeah.
[13:11] » But nothing at this time.
[13:13] » Okay. That's great. And I do think this
[13:14] is an urgent one as well. You know the
[13:17] leaky roof is not a good not a good
[13:19] thing.
[13:20] » Okay. Okay. So, we have a motion uh on
[13:22] the floor to give uh 7,000 in total,
[13:25] 4,000 from regional fund, and 3,000 from
[13:29] district 5. Any other discussion on
[13:31] that? Hearing none, all those in favor
[13:33] signify by saying I. I.
[13:35] » Those opposed? Motion carries. The um
[13:39] next item on the agenda is a um village
[13:44] on the canal um grant application for
[13:49] tier three waterfront development grant
[13:51] funds and I
[13:53] » Yeah. So warden, I'm going to declare a
[13:55] conflict on that one right off the bat.
[13:57] » Yeah, we see your name on the on the
[13:58] list of directors.
[13:59] » Something I've been involved with. So
[14:01] I'll just step out of the room and you
[14:02] can
[14:02] » Good. So um this one is um one of our
[14:08] tier three which is waterfront
[14:12] development. This one is um a little
[14:16] different. Uh so we've just talked about
[14:18] how we've spent all our money but there
[14:20] is a budget line from CCBF.
[14:25] » Yep. CCDF waterfront development fund.
[14:28] So uh and and I think we've recirculated
[14:31] that. Just a reminder, I think the
[14:33] original um report that came out from
[14:35] the director of finance said that we
[14:36] hadn't spent any of those dollars. We
[14:39] actually did commit uh 10,000. Yep. So,
[14:42] but we still have a good chunk of money
[14:43] in there. So, um this one is for
[14:47] waterfront development grant tier three.
[14:49] Maximum request can only be 50% of the
[14:52] project. It is um from the village on
[14:55] the canal uh association and it's
[14:58] regarding the splash pad. So, I'll throw
[15:01] it out for discussion if anybody has
[15:04] anything. You can find that package
[15:06] starts on page 101 in your uh online
[15:10] package.
[15:13] » So, are we saying that the total
[15:16] » Do you want to press your button there,
[15:18] counselor? Go ahead.
[15:20] » So, looking is the total of the project
[15:22] 480,000. Is that what we see there?
[15:24] » So, the project Yes. So, the provincial
[15:28] government contributed um 360,000.
[15:33] Thank you. Uh 360,000. There's been
[15:36] community fundraising all along. Uh and
[15:38] so the specifics of this one are are
[15:41] laid out there. I I I do want to just
[15:45] sort of say that I did some math on this
[15:48] and they don't appear to have included
[15:51] HST when they calculated the 40,000.
[15:54] they they I actually when I did the math
[15:56] it's actually more than 40,000 um
[16:00] » Commission
[16:01] » For yeah because all of the things that
[16:03] are there uh uh when you actually go to
[16:06] the actual quotes it includes plus HST
[16:08] so but um and and there is some you know
[16:13] we have been very clear that we expect
[16:16] projects not to begin until
[16:20] after approval has been granted and
[16:23] there are kids playing on the playground
[16:24] on the splash pad. We've seen video. I I
[16:26] went and saw them. Um this project is
[16:30] outlined as it's been described to us in
[16:32] phases. So, Deputy Warden.
[16:36] » Yeah. So, I'll make the motion that we
[16:37] support it to the tune of the 20,000. Um
[16:40] and it's partially because I' just like
[16:42] to officially get discussion started
[16:44] here if somebody wants to second that.
[16:46] » Would would I be able to say
[16:49] » That? Just is your motion 20,000? When
[16:53] we have done these in the past, we've
[16:55] always written them contingent.
[16:57] Actually, there's a kind of a draft
[16:58] here. Um,
[17:02] village on the canal um approved village
[17:05] on the canal association grant
[17:06] application for the tier three
[17:08] waterfront development to the amount of
[17:10] $20,000 to be allocated from the CCBF
[17:13] subject to assessment by staff as to the
[17:15] project's eligibility.
[17:17] » Is that is that what we've done with
[17:19] water? some of the questions.
[17:21] » Okay. And if that's how we
[17:25] » Yeah, it just Yeah, we wrote out the
[17:27] motion as similar to the others. So
[17:29] that's the motion. Uh and I'll read it
[17:31] again just because it it to be
[17:32] consistent with the others. So um moved
[17:35] by Deputy Warden Samson. I'm looking for
[17:38] a seconder. that council approved the
[17:40] village on the Canal Association grant
[17:41] application for the tier 3 waterfront
[17:43] development grant fund in the amount of
[17:45] $20,000 to be allocated from the Canada
[17:48] Community Building Fund subject to
[17:50] assessment by staff as to the project's
[17:53] eligibility.
[17:55] So that's the motion.
[18:03] » I'll second that motion
[18:04] » Seconded by Deputy S. So sorry by
[18:07] councelor Do we have any discussion on
[18:10] that? Council member,
[18:13] » Um they speak of getting a lease after
[18:16] the fact. Would we I don't know if we
[18:17] care that they own or lease this
[18:19] property or not. Uh the letter of
[18:22] support is not even signed and the
[18:24] project's already started as you
[18:25] mentioned. Those are issues I have. Uh
[18:28] the group in my community was they were
[18:30] told very clear if you start anything
[18:32] you're not getting it. So this seems to
[18:34] be something different. I know it's been
[18:36] creative with the phase one, two, and
[18:38] three, but the project is, as you
[18:40] stated, is being used. Uh, so I'm kind
[18:44] of confused as to what this
[18:46] commissioning and extra work is for.
[18:49] » Yeah, no question. And that may be
[18:52] something that the CCB folks say, hold
[18:56] on. I I I I've taken pictures of the
[18:59] sorry I've taken pictures uh because I
[19:02] was there with family and um I see that
[19:05] they're looking for armorstone and I
[19:06] believe there's actually armorstone
[19:07] already there. So it may very well be
[19:10] that some of the phase three things have
[19:12] started but maybe they're going to do a
[19:14] different thing. I on this matter it is
[19:17] subject to CCBF eligibility. So I I'm
[19:21] I'm happy to defer to that but but I I
[19:24] respect your wishes. to consider it a
[19:27] different way.
[19:27] » Yeah. Considering what happened
[19:30] » Considering what happened with the group
[19:32] in my community, I I couldn't support
[19:34] it.
[19:38] » Okay. So, uh we have a motion on the
[19:41] floor and a seconder. Is there any other
[19:43] discussion? Deputy Warden.
[19:48] » Yeah, just to confirm and I don't want
[19:50] not to put anyone on the spot, but I
[19:52] guess um maybe I am. Um yeah, is that
[19:55] criteria about not starting though? We
[19:57] generally the same thing with the like I
[19:59] know this the waterfront development has
[20:01] been kind of treated differently anyway.
[20:04] So is that like I I'm just trying to
[20:06] think if look up the uh the policy on
[20:09] it. Yeah,
[20:10] » The policy lists all three of them under
[20:12] » As the same thing umbrella. Okay.
[20:15] » But if they
[20:17] » But they've explained how they are
[20:20] justifying that as the NFAS three. So if
[20:23] that gets through staff through CCBF.
[20:27] » Yeah. And I I
[20:31] » I guess at the end of the day, it's not
[20:32] up to us to police it necessarily in the
[20:35] sense that if if if staff looks over
[20:38] this and feels that no, this is this
[20:40] meets the requirements, then then I'm
[20:42] fine with it. we're we're making a
[20:44] decision assuming that it meets the
[20:45] requirements because there are lots of
[20:47] times that there might be projects we
[20:49] don't know if they started or not
[20:50] because we may not have physically seen
[20:52] something you know. Yeah.
[20:57] » Yeah. I I I will say we did there was a
[21:00] previous version of this policy and
[21:04] through sort of conversations we came up
[21:07] with some things that maybe we wanted to
[21:10] change in our revision in our
[21:12] discussions about changing the policy. I
[21:14] don't think we ever once said it's okay
[21:17] with us if they've already started right
[21:18] and I mean I know that I told the hall
[21:20] and disuse you cannot buy a single
[21:23] thing. We've had conversation with
[21:25] people saying, "Look, I know your
[21:27] quote's going to expire, but you cannot
[21:29] buy that." You know, so we've been
[21:31] pretty clear about that and and I'm not
[21:34] because this is going to CCBF. I'm happy
[21:36] to to have them, you know, decide if
[21:39] they if that meets their criteria
[21:41] because it is it is phases whether that
[21:44] is a if that's okay to them. If not, it
[21:47] has to come, you know, some there'll be
[21:49] some other request to us.
[21:54] Does whether or not it started though,
[21:55] does that matter to as far as CCBF goes?
[21:58] Like in the sense that I don't know that
[22:00] they're going to consider that, right?
[22:02] » Sure.
[22:04] » Okay.
[22:05] » We'll wait and see what they come back
[22:07] with.
[22:08] » Okay.
[22:12] » So, I was just going to say a lot of the
[22:13] federal and provincial funds you cannot
[22:15] start. You cannot put a shovel in the
[22:17] ground. I can't speak for certain that
[22:20] this one is the case.
[22:25] And I'm just going to their
[22:27] » I got right here
[22:30] and it has tomit one of their
[22:34] whether this falls in the recreation
[22:36] because this is earthworks
[22:38] around a recreational site. So hopefully
[22:41] that
[22:42] ticks enough of the boxes to fit that
[22:44] criteria. Right. So
[22:46] » Yeah. And and I'm also I'm just reading
[22:48] from what they wrote. In keeping with
[22:50] Richmond County's grant policy, we are
[22:52] applying for $20,000 from the Richmond
[22:54] County from Richmond County to support
[22:56] 50% of the final phase which is set to
[22:59] begin in July. So, you know, I'm hoping
[23:01] that we can get them the information
[23:03] that CCBF says yay or nay. And then you
[23:07] know I I mean we we did inquire like we
[23:09] did support for example the playground
[23:11] in Arashhat not through the construction
[23:13] but we did you know uh provide $1,000
[23:17] for uh grand opening that kind of thing
[23:20] like there may be something else
[23:23] » Did we
[23:26] » Oh many years ago. Yeah in the initial
[23:29] design phase. Y
[23:31] » Yeah before anything started. Yeah.
[23:34] » Yeah. Okay.
[23:39] » Yeah.
[23:39] » So,
[23:41] » Yeah, I'm fine with it if
[23:44] if it meets the criteria basically at
[23:46] the end of the day because it's not up
[23:47] to me to police whether or not this is
[23:49] exactly what started or not. If it it's
[23:51] I think it's like anything else though.
[23:53] If if we had you know it's something in
[23:55] our own district that they had started
[23:57] and staff says, "Hey, listen doesn't
[23:59] meet the criteria." Well, it is what it
[24:01] is. You know, that that's what's set
[24:03] out. So, I'm fine with making this
[24:05] motion assuming it's met the criteria.
[24:07] And if it comes back to us that staff
[24:08] determines that it hasn't, well, then,
[24:11] you know, it's not up to me to argue it.
[24:13] Yeah.
[24:15] » Okay. So, there's a motion on the floor.
[24:17] Is there any other discussion?
[24:20] Hearing none. All those in favor signify
[24:21] by saying I.
[24:23] » I. Those opposed.
[24:24] » Councelor Marshon. And can we have that
[24:26] recorded? And just uh reminder that we
[24:29] have quorum, but it's only four. So we
[24:31] can let councelor Mumbreet know that she
[24:33] can come on back in. Uh and so then it
[24:40] are you coming back? Are you you're not
[24:42] pirate association?
[24:43] » Nope.
[24:43] » Yeah. Okay, great. So we'll welcome
[24:45] counselor. Uh you're just a really good
[24:48] pirate.
[24:49] » That's right.
[24:50] » Yep. So um this is a little earlier in
[24:53] your package. So if you go to um
[24:58] uh second item in your package, you will
[25:00] see that there is a sponsorship request
[25:02] from the the pirate uh St. Peter's
[25:07] Pirate Association. Um, so I'll throw
[25:10] this out to So can you can I put the CEO
[25:14] on the spot a little bit to just give us
[25:16] an explanation about how this money sits
[25:18] separate
[25:22] » And and how much we have in this
[25:24] » Sure. Uh, within the approved budget for
[25:26] this year, uh, we have $7,500 put aside
[25:29] for sponsorships.
[25:31] uh sponsorships are outside the grant
[25:33] structure and we're working on getting
[25:36] this in September's or October's bylaw
[25:40] and policy meeting to put some framework
[25:41] around this but right now we don't have
[25:44] a framework. So, it's in front of
[25:46] council to determine at what level a you
[25:49] want these sponsorships coming to you
[25:51] and which ones would be fine to be dealt
[25:53] with by administration. And for this one
[25:55] in particular, where does council feel
[25:58] comfortable uh sponsoring this event for
[26:00] this year? and and as I recall we have
[26:04] sponsored the superport days this year
[26:08] and but I believe the um the one in
[26:12] » Okay Britain partnership
[26:14] » But was the oh the partnership
[26:16] » The summit this fall
[26:17] » But that's that was in the last fiscal
[26:19] year so this fiscal year it's just
[26:21] superport does that sound right
[26:22] » Super and Cape Britain summit the the
[26:25] summit that'll be this fall
[26:26] » Oh coming up this fall yes okay and the
[26:29] the one um
[26:34] Yes, maybe.
[26:36] » Yes.
[26:37] » Y
[26:37] » And then there's the U
[26:40] Aman conference because it's in Cape
[26:42] Breton this year. The municipalities.
[26:45] » So we have we have enough money that
[26:46] we're not in a panic at this point.
[26:53] » Superport has its own
[26:56] » Funding contribution.
[26:57] » Yes. under the grants is K Prattton
[27:00] Partnership Summit. Uh I want to say
[27:03] it's 1500 or 2500 if you recall. Shand
[27:07] it's 15 or 25. A man's is 2500. We're
[27:10] 25. Inesse is 25. Victoria is 25. CBRM
[27:14] is like 9,000 on their own.
[27:17] » Um
[27:18] » 6,000 already.
[27:20] » No, no. I think he was talking about the
[27:21] other municipalities.
[27:22] » 5,000 for us. Uh that's gone between
[27:26] Cape Breton Summit and the Aman's
[27:28] conference
[27:28] » Plus 1,000 takes you up to six. So you
[27:32] got 1500 left.
[27:34] » Okay. So we have $1,500 in our
[27:36] sponsorship. Yeah. Minimum case. Okay.
[27:38] So um we So for those folks following
[27:44] along on page 35, there is captain's
[27:47] chest level of sponsorship at 3,000.
[27:49] First mate is a,000. Quartermaster is
[27:51] 500. uh Buccaneer backer is 25 250 to
[27:56] 500 and donor under $250.
[28:00] » Madam Chair, if I may on your grant
[28:02] booklet now, the sponsorships are
[28:03] listed. There is only one there. Now
[28:05] it's 500 for the Aadian Festival of
[28:07] Betty Degra.
[28:09] » It's right at the very bottom all by
[28:10] itself.
[28:11] » Oh yes.
[28:11] » The most recent one
[28:13] » On on this one.
[28:14] » Uh it be on the most recent one that was
[28:16] like later today.
[28:17] » Yes.
[28:20] So then we would be at
[28:25] » 5,500.
[28:26] » Yeah.
[28:27] » 5,500 in total.
[28:28] » The absolute most at this point. So you
[28:30] have 2,000 left to play.
[28:32] » Okay. So I'm looking for a motion that
[28:35] would capture whether we are interested
[28:37] in uh sponsorship and if so how much.
[28:40] » Deputy
[28:41] » I'm sorry.
[28:44] » Don't believe we did. We look for
[28:46] previous and we didn't find one from
[28:47] pirates or
[28:48] » Councelor.
[28:50] » Yeah, thank you Warden. Um so I would uh
[28:53] yeah I don't believe they were
[28:54] recipients in previous years. Um recent
[28:58] years anyways. Um so I would make a
[29:00] motion to support the request for uh
[29:03] sponsorship for the St. Peters Pirate
[29:04] Days for $500
[29:07] from our
[29:09] » Sponsorship budget line. So
[29:14] » I'll second that.
[29:16] » Any other discussion on that motion?
[29:19] » Hearing none. All those in favor signify
[29:21] by saying I.
[29:22] » Those opposed. Motion carries.
[29:26] Okay. And and I um we probably should
[29:29] have the on this we can keep track of
[29:31] the promised amounts too, not just the
[29:32] amounts that have gone out. Yeah. Okay.
[29:34] So, um, that takes us to a, uh, request
[29:39] for a letter or affidavit from Camp
[29:42] Samson, Dundy Hills Vacation Village.
[29:45] So, um, we
[29:49] » Page 124.
[29:50] » 124. Thank you. Okay. So, um, as you can
[29:54] see, if you've Sorry, go ahead. Oh,
[29:57] » Yeah. I'd just like to declare a
[29:58] conflict on this one. We've done work
[29:59] there recently, so
[30:07] Good. Okay. So, uh, Deputy Warden Samson
[30:10] has left the uh the room and um so you
[30:14] can probably read through uh and and
[30:18] read through the the number of emails
[30:20] that uh that go ahead here. He is
[30:22] requesting a um a letter which would
[30:26] form an affidavit um saying that uh they
[30:32] have met the criteria for zoning. So uh
[30:36] item six if you're looking on page 125
[30:39] uh registration requirements affidavit
[30:42] from the municipality consenting to the
[30:43] project and confirming that the project
[30:45] complied with zoning bylaws and building
[30:48] regulations at the time it was
[30:50] constructed. And so we had confirmation
[30:52] that um on page 126, the municipality
[30:56] can give a letter to support phases 1
[30:58] and three of the Bearland condominiums
[31:01] as a grandfathered campground. And then
[31:03] further, it speaks uh item number four
[31:06] on page 127, a letter of support in
[31:08] principle from staff for an expansion to
[31:11] the condominium phases 4 to 7 subject to
[31:14] amendments by the bylaw can be provided.
[31:16] There's a lot in there about things he
[31:18] doesn't need any letters about and what
[31:22] what uh but the the situation here is
[31:24] that he he got a building permit and
[31:26] actually started to build before zoning
[31:28] bylaws went in and so we just had to
[31:30] calculate figure out exactly what date
[31:32] shovels went in the ground, what date
[31:33] the building what the what the building
[31:35] permits at the time um the the bylaws
[31:38] were at the time. So uh we're looking
[31:41] for a motion. Should we re run this now?
[31:47] » Um,
[31:50] » Sure. So, I think we would I think we
[31:54] need I think one motion.
[31:56] » One motion.
[31:56] » It's one motion. We we'd be looking for
[31:59] um council to authorize the warden to
[32:02] write the uh letter um of support for
[32:08] phases one to three and a support in
[32:12] principle phrases 4 to 7 something to
[32:14] that effect.
[32:15] » I'll make that motion.
[32:16] » Okay. Seconded by uh so moved by
[32:19] councelor Mumbette and seconded by
[32:21] councelor Samson. So motion and
[32:23] seconder. Do you have some discussion on
[32:25] that motion?
[32:28] Okay. Uh, one of the emails, hard to
[32:31] tell what the date is because it says
[32:33] from Tro Troy on July 15th and from Cam
[32:35] on July on June the 5th. But it seems to
[32:38] be John Bane that wrote that. Uh the
[32:42] third last paragraph it says there's a
[32:44] there is however a possibility that you
[32:46] have some prejune 5 2024 approval for
[32:51] phases 4 to 7 in which case that area
[32:55] would also be grandfathered similar to
[32:57] one and three
[32:59] » If he can
[33:01] draw that submitted prior to the
[33:06] » Yeah but it's being grandfathered after
[33:08] the fact of the zoning coming in which I
[33:11] don't have an issue with uh I don't have
[33:14] an issue with that
[33:16] but is that the case for everyone
[33:19] » Cuz he didn't have a permit for this 4
[33:21] to7 before that he I think his initial
[33:24] plan way back was something different
[33:26] and I'm supporting you know giving the
[33:28] affidavit I just find in reading these
[33:31] emails you're grandfathering something
[33:33] there's a possibility you did this oh
[33:35] this zone allows this that zone allows
[33:38] that but the zone that you are in
[33:40] doesn't allow what you want to do, but
[33:41] we'll grandfather that in. It's just all
[33:44] confusing reading the three different
[33:45] emails
[33:49] permit, development plan, whatever he
[33:52] needed prior to the date, and I'm losing
[33:56] my notes here.
[33:58] » June 5th. So, the zoning bylaw came into
[34:01] effect June 5th of 2024. anything before
[34:04] that he can he can build do whatever
[34:08] based on the the the grandfathered
[34:11] bylaws of the day what or or lack
[34:14] thereof anything that he
[34:16] » Then there would be no question
[34:18] » Right so that's what he's asking for
[34:20] » The grandfather something if he got
[34:23] permit before
[34:24] » June the 5th of 2024
[34:27] all this discussion of of the RG zone or
[34:30] the commercial zone is not relevant so
[34:33] Why was there even a waste of time of a
[34:35] discussion about those things?
[34:36] » Probably to make him aware that things
[34:37] have changed now.
[34:39] » But it doesn't matter.
[34:40] » And he's just saying these are the
[34:41] things we need to make sure that they
[34:43] were submitted prior prior to the date
[34:45] of them changing. That's all.
[34:47] » But he's grandfathering them.
[34:48] » Yeah. But but anything that he wants to
[34:50] start now, I think the idea is they want
[34:52] to be very clear. anything you want to
[34:55] start now is subject to these rules as
[34:58] so if he's saying you know next year I
[35:01] might like to do XY Z just for the sake
[35:03] of clarity you are now
[35:07] » Required
[35:11] » That's only for 1 to three
[35:14] » The motion is 4 to 7 as well we giving a
[35:16] letter
[35:19] » That's all they were asking for
[35:23] Okay, good.
[35:26] » Number four on page 127, a letter of
[35:30] support in principle,
[35:31] » Right,
[35:32] » Subject to amendments,
[35:33] » But I'm not looking for that.
[35:35] » He's not looking for that.
[35:36] » No, we're only looking for amendment
[35:37] three at this point in time.
[35:39] » Well, that's the motion that's on the
[35:40] floor to provide a letter that says the
[35:42] two the two things. So, can we have a
[35:45] motion to amend? Hang on. Can we have a
[35:48] motion to amend to take out the second
[35:50] piece of that? So, what we'd be looking
[35:53] for is a letter that says he has
[35:57] um
[36:01] where am I at here?
[36:03] Uh I'm looking at page 125, item number
[36:07] six, that the project complied with
[36:09] zoning bylaws and building regulations
[36:11] at the time it was constructed related
[36:13] to um phase one through three.
[36:16] » Perfect. So
[36:18] » Before we go amending a motion, um is
[36:21] this is this not going to just come back
[36:23] to us from on four to seven phases four
[36:26] to seven that he's so then why are
[36:28] » In my email the very first email it said
[36:30] there's work to be done on phases.
[36:32] » So why would we not agree to support it
[36:35] to provide a letter of support and
[36:36] principle at this time?
[36:37] » Like are we are we just dragging out the
[36:40] conversation?
[36:41] » You could unless you see something
[36:43] that's really contentious that you're
[36:45] not comfortable with. But again, I
[36:47] haven't heard from my planning
[36:48] department. The four to seven is fine
[36:50] and
[36:50] » We're providing it in principle. You
[36:52] are, you know, and we could make the
[36:53] word
[36:55] » Exactly what John Bane says.
[36:56] » Exactly. John Bane,
[36:58] » I don't see a need to amend this.
[37:00] » A letter of support in principle from
[37:01] staff for an expansion to the
[37:03] condominium phase 4 to 7 subject to
[37:06] amendments to the bylaw can be provided.
[37:10] » So is it an opportunity to say both
[37:13] things?
[37:14] » Yes. and therefore not not have to come
[37:16] back if need be.
[37:18] » I wasn't trying to make it bigger than
[37:19] it needed to be.
[37:20] » Yeah. And and Morton, I think too, you
[37:23] know, this is one of those projects that
[37:25] began at a time where there were not
[37:27] really a set of rules there. The project
[37:30] begins now, you know, it's phases. Now
[37:34] there's all kinds of rule well what
[37:37] feels like all kinds of rules now
[37:39] compared to what there was before. So, I
[37:41] think this would just be one that we
[37:42] want to maybe try to provide that kind
[37:45] of a little bit of handholding. Um, if
[37:47] there's anything that we can do in
[37:48] advance, like this seems preemptive to
[37:51] to provide a letter of support in
[37:52] principle. Maybe that'll solve some
[37:53] problems for for Cam, you know, and and
[37:56] I think that development will be good
[37:57] for everyone. So, that's kind of what
[37:59] I'm thinking.
[38:00] » Okay. So there's a motion on the floor
[38:02] and a seconder about writing a letter
[38:05] that says go ahead one through three and
[38:09] exactly as it's worded here um
[38:12] construction
[38:13] B was uh subject to amendments uh to
[38:17] bylaws. So using this language that's
[38:20] the motion on the floor with the
[38:21] secondary. Is there any other
[38:22] discussion? Go ahead.
[38:23] » So 1 3 4
[38:25] » Yes.
[38:29] one to three
[38:31] is moved.
[38:34] » So
[38:34] » That the motion that I would have made
[38:38] is that we provide a letter of support
[38:40] for phases one to three of the Bearland
[38:42] condominium as a grandfathered
[38:43] campground use and further to provide a
[38:45] letter of support in principle from for
[38:48] an expansion to the condominium uh
[38:50] phases four to seven subject to
[38:52] amendments
[38:54] to the bylaw.
[38:58] Okay. So
[39:01] what I read earlier, the paragraph above
[39:04] that says your next phase, second phase
[39:06] 4 to7 does not appear to predate the
[39:08] zoning and therefore will be subject to
[39:10] a reszoning to permit the use. So what
[39:13] is it? It does or doesn't. The planning
[39:16] should know. So what's he going to get
[39:19] that's going to be any different than
[39:20] what planning? as planning is saying it
[39:23] does not appear to predate the zoning.
[39:26] So all of this stuff is just slowing
[39:28] down this project on a whole.
[39:32] I don't understand what
[39:33] » Speed it up is
[39:34] » What you're doing,
[39:36] but my thing is we're obviously
[39:38] grandfathering or allowing this project
[39:40] to go ahead. I have no issue with what's
[39:42] happening. Let it go ahead. I have issue
[39:44] with how this is kind of written. It
[39:47] doesn't. And then it says there is
[39:48] however a possibility that you have some
[39:50] pre-june approval for phases four to
[39:53] seven. Well, you're saying it doesn't
[39:56] and then you're saying ah there's a
[39:58] possibility all subjective.
[40:01] I have no issue with this thing.
[40:07] I think you're saying,
[40:08] » Right? I I think
[40:11] » The three units he has built
[40:13] » And the campground is something
[40:14] different.
[40:15] » Is that unless you have some
[40:17] documentation that says that you started
[40:19] before July June 4th, then you are
[40:23] subject to the new zoning bylaws and if
[40:25] you would like to move forward on phases
[40:27] 4 to 7, you are going to have to request
[40:30] a change to zoning. and he's opening it
[40:33] up to say if you have something that
[40:36] shows that you started and that you
[40:38] qualify for grandfathering in by all
[40:40] means let me know but it doesn't appear
[40:42] to me that you have. That's what I'm
[40:44] taking from that.
[40:48] So we have a motion on the floor which
[40:50] is to write the two letters as outlined
[40:53] here and Cam Samson and it can be two
[40:58] separate letters. But I think I'm happy
[41:00] to do it in two separate letters. That
[41:02] way he can use them as he see sees fit.
[41:04] Any other discussion on that
[41:07] hearing? None. All those in favor
[41:09] signify by saying I.
[41:10] » I. Those opposed.
[41:12] » Motion is carried. Can you just yell out
[41:14] to Brent there? Thank you. Okay. So then
[41:16] the last item is the uh Richmond Arena
[41:20] report. Um so uh that is to bring people
[41:26] kind of up to snuff. that is are up to
[41:29] speed. This is a report that was
[41:33] requested by council. Um, so there was a
[41:36] motion made at some point through um
[41:39] last year uh last this past winter where
[41:42] we said we wanted um to put money in
[41:45] reserve for the repair of the arena
[41:50] floor, but we wanted to get some
[41:53] assurance that the items that had been
[41:55] flagged in a 2019 report, we just wanted
[41:58] some eyes on the structure of the
[42:00] building. And and I certainly would like
[42:02] to start by saying that it does appear
[42:05] through much of this that this building
[42:08] is in much better shape than it should
[42:09] be for a 50-year-old building. And that
[42:12] is no doubt a result of the caliber of
[42:14] the staff that have dealt with this
[42:16] building since it opened going all the
[42:18] way back to when there was a volunteer
[42:20] board. So I I I think there is
[42:21] recognition here that there is uh you
[42:24] know humidity control is something that
[42:25] they clearly were on top of and
[42:27] understood the importance of that
[42:28] because there is clearly almost a sense
[42:31] of surprise that the building uh a lot
[42:34] of the the issue here is is uh is as
[42:36] good as it is. But there are a series of
[42:39] recommendations. Um and um
[42:44] for all of my uh we all have other jobs
[42:48] and other lives, but in my previous
[42:50] life, if I read the sentence um there is
[42:53] obviously risk in continuing to operate
[42:55] the facility with this reduced
[42:57] structural capacity as it pertains to
[42:59] the life safety of building occupants is
[43:02] not something that we uh as owners of
[43:04] that building can ignore. So there are a
[43:07] list of recommendations that speak about
[43:11] um some work that needs to be done and
[43:13] the recommendation is that it needs to
[43:15] be done before November of 2025
[43:18] which I assume rightly so means before
[43:21] we open the arena and some of those
[43:23] things include um things items that I
[43:28] believe are actually
[43:30] department of labor who who flagged some
[43:34] of that work
[43:36] » Some of the work we already have planned
[43:38] » Department of labor right so there were
[43:40] already some items that we have
[43:43] » I thought he said Chris said I think
[43:44] that there's some of these that are
[43:46] going to be fixed anyway as part of the
[43:47] work that was already planned
[43:49] » Yeah
[43:51] so um you know we we are um so the
[43:56] maximum what they're suggesting what
[43:58] they're not suggesting this is stated it
[44:00] is recommended that if the build that
[44:01] the building be closed to the public if
[44:03] the snow load on the roof reach reaches
[44:05] 24 lbs per square foot. Um, and that
[44:08] that represents whatever 3 and 1/2 ft of
[44:11] life fluffy snow or 1.2 ft of wet heavy
[44:14] snow. Um, and that um, real life
[44:18] monitoring uh, by maintenance staff or
[44:21] equipment. And it also speaks to cutting
[44:23] down trees on property that we don't
[44:25] own. So quite a lot to to to go through
[44:28] here, but you know, we are responsible
[44:31] for uh the residents of the county who
[44:34] go into that building. We're also
[44:35] responsible for our, you know, any
[44:38] liability we would incur in the event
[44:40] of, you know, the worst case scenario.
[44:42] So opening this up for discussion about
[44:45] anything we would like to and I
[44:47] personally would like some more
[44:48] information about what's it like. Do you
[44:50] get this real time
[44:53] um
[44:54] » Snow
[44:54] » Snowload monitoring system? Do you just
[44:57] Is that like 50 bucks a Canadian Tire or
[44:59] is that tens of thousands of dollars? I
[45:01] I don't know. But I think and and is
[45:03] there anything on this list that our
[45:05] director of public works says uh oh,
[45:07] can't do this by November or is this all
[45:09] just stuff that we can easily do? So I
[45:11] you know I think there's some questions
[45:13] before we make any big decisions but we
[45:15] cannot ignore a sentence that says um
[45:19] you know life safety of building
[45:20] occupants.
[45:21] » Chair if I may
[45:22] » Go ahead.
[45:25] » As was discussed before budget that you
[45:28] guys wanted to talk about this midsummer
[45:30] uh your director of public works is
[45:32] pulling together what things will look
[45:34] like for you guys in September. But this
[45:37] was an opportunity since we were having
[45:39] the meeting that if u you in the review
[45:42] of the same documents had other things
[45:44] that you wanted us to dig into, just let
[45:47] us know. Like uh the uh
[45:52] you know that that the statement about
[45:54] uh
[45:56] um putting people at risk. Uh we're
[45:59] asking that to be qualified by the
[46:01] person who wrote that as well. just uh
[46:03] because the whole rest of the document
[46:05] talks about how well the building is and
[46:07] what good a shape it is and
[46:09] » However what
[46:10] » Stress
[46:11] » Right and however what he put in there
[46:14] in that one sentence is quite
[46:16] inflammatory. So we need that qualified
[46:18] uh against what all the other data in
[46:21] the report is telling us. So, uh, Chris
[46:24] has pulled stuff together for you guys
[46:26] to have in September, but if you saw
[46:28] anything else in the documentary or you
[46:30] had other things you wanted us to dig
[46:32] into while we're digging into this,
[46:34] again, he's looking at what does the
[46:36] live monitoring look at, what are the
[46:38] solutions, and having a couple options
[46:39] for everybody to look at. So, we'll have
[46:42] some answers for you in September. So,
[46:44] hopefully we can acquire in September
[46:46] and October and be ready to go when we
[46:48] want to open the doors this fall.
[46:52] So, I'll I'll go around and see if
[46:55] anybody has any um additional questions
[46:58] you want to make sure are provided. You
[47:00] know, information is provided for our
[47:02] September committee of the whole report.
[47:05] So, councelor Mumb.
[47:06] » Thank you, Warden. Um so, I guess for me
[47:09] a couple questions spring to mind
[47:11] because we've had this since I think
[47:12] May. um the the life I agree CEO that is
[47:17] that is inflammatory language and it's a
[47:19] little bit out of context with the rest
[47:21] of the report but it's also one of those
[47:24] situations where once this cat is out of
[47:26] the bag and this has been brought to our
[47:27] attention we must act um to to mitigate
[47:31] any risk um I I you know and we're
[47:36] talking about some of the work needing
[47:37] to be done in November if we're only
[47:39] seeing information in September
[47:42] like and we've had since this since May.
[47:44] Like I'm I'm a little concerned about
[47:46] how tight a timeline that's going to be
[47:49] because if you know if it comes to
[47:51] council and we're making budgetary
[47:52] decisions
[47:54] um in September that's going to take
[47:57] Okay, that'll be a couple weeks. So
[47:59] it'll be the end of September before our
[48:01] regular council meeting. So then October
[48:03] the work's getting done.
[48:05] » I think some of the work is starting
[48:06] this summer. I should say like the metal
[48:08] work that's mentioned in here that's all
[48:10] being done over the summer as soon as it
[48:12] was identified that stuff's being done
[48:14] » Because like I think at the end of the
[48:16] day what we really need is okay we have
[48:18] this assessment
[48:20] there's something being done that we're
[48:22] not necessarily aware of as counselors
[48:24] not our job to be you know to know that
[48:26] but what we need is in the context of
[48:28] this assessment what's the work that
[48:30] we've done to address some of these
[48:32] risks in a timely manner and what are
[48:34] the next pieces and what would they cost
[48:37] » And and to your point on monitoring snow
[48:39] load, what does that mean for our staff?
[48:42] Like I I have visions of our staff
[48:44] members in a you know in after a
[48:47] snowstorm on the roof of that building
[48:48] and it doesn't sound very safe to me. So
[48:50] I'm Anyway, that those would be my
[48:52] comments. So thank you.
[48:55] » Pretty similar to
[48:56] » Yeah. No, I I don't think there's
[48:58] anything else. I mean, yeah, these
[49:00] things can be dealt with um manually, I
[49:03] guess, if need be until a more permanent
[49:06] solution may be up there. I mean, tie
[49:07] downs could be placed on the roof, and
[49:09] that's not unusual for commercial
[49:10] buildings to have, you know, somebody
[49:12] clear snow if need be um when you get
[49:14] really high snow loads, but it's not
[49:16] necessarily, as the director of public
[49:18] works said, he had reached out one time,
[49:20] it's not necessarily easy to find
[49:21] someone on short notice. So, it may be a
[49:23] matter of planning ahead or contacting,
[49:26] you know, companies that might do that
[49:28] this time of year and, you know, having
[49:30] something set up with them. Um, not
[49:32] saying it's a long-term solution, but it
[49:34] may be at least for for this year. Um,
[49:37] no, I'm happy to hear we'll we'll get
[49:38] some more information on it, and I'm
[49:40] fine with that.
[49:45] Yeah, just a further add to
[49:49] your comments, warden, and and the
[49:51] comments of council member kitten,
[49:53] deputy warden Samson. Uh, for me, it's
[49:55] hard to ignore when people talk about
[49:57] the safety of occupants. So, that's the
[50:00] number one priority in my opinion. Um
[50:02] secondly to voice uh what councelor
[50:04] murket said if we're looking at
[50:06] September meetings and looking come back
[50:09] in September to discuss what has to be
[50:10] done. Uh I think all the residents know
[50:13] there's been delays the last couple
[50:14] years with the opening of the arena.
[50:16] Right. So what kind of time frame and
[50:18] how tight of a time frame are we looking
[50:19] at if something serious has to be done
[50:21] from September to November. Right.
[50:23] That would be my only concern
[50:30] » For the lifetime monitoring. I think
[50:32] that's something you can install on the
[50:33] beams anyway at any point. Uh maybe it's
[50:37] not a bad idea, but
[50:40] I don't think in November, December
[50:41] we're going to have snow loads we're
[50:43] going to have to worry about. So I think
[50:45] that'll give us some time anyway. Uh and
[50:48] the fact Yeah.
[50:51] » Yeah. The with our souls closed.
[50:54] » That's all.
[50:55] » Yeah.
[50:55] » Uh
[50:56] » The cons the concern is if any of the
[50:58] buildings locally would be assessed by
[51:02] the same person. I would would imagine I
[51:04] mean you're putting quite
[51:07] I guess uh you know a stress on the
[51:09] person looking at any of these buildings
[51:12] to say. So he's at least quantified some
[51:14] numbers and he would like the building
[51:16] closed. He's not saying the building's
[51:18] going to collapse if it has that. He's
[51:19] going to say this is what he thinks
[51:21] based on the size of those beams what it
[51:23] can handle and if there's loads higher
[51:26] than that then shut it down. Uh and
[51:29] that's fine. I think the public wouldn't
[51:31] be against us, you know, for that. Uh I
[51:35] don't maybe Chris can find out what the
[51:36] live monitoring is going to cost and we
[51:38] can look at putting that in. Yeah, we
[51:40] can look at getting that
[51:43] problem.
[51:43] » Yeah. And I I I think it's not a bad
[51:46] idea to to do that. and uh all the other
[51:50] necessary work that needs to be done. Um
[51:52] I think he needs to get that done. He's
[51:54] aware of that. I think he's working on
[51:55] that as well. So I think the report, you
[51:58] know, it states that over 50 years
[52:01] doesn't look like the building has been
[52:02] stressed. I think that's something
[52:04] because when I was when I was a kid with
[52:07] snow all the time, so I'm sure that
[52:08] building had quite a bit on it.
[52:12] » Thank you, Warden. There are, you know,
[52:14] I know in my prior life if we lost our
[52:17] fire alarm systems, we had to do fire
[52:19] watch and there's very particular things
[52:21] and, you know, we it could be that
[52:23] there's just protocols that our legal
[52:26] department says, yes, this meets all the
[52:28] criteria for appropriate real time
[52:30] monitoring or some sort of mechanical
[52:33] thing. And like you said, it's not every
[52:34] day, it's when there's snow load. My my
[52:37] only other concern when I was reading
[52:38] through this is I and I'm not an
[52:41] engineer, but I I would like for
[52:44] somebody to go through this in
[52:45] tremendous detail to make sure that
[52:48] everything in the report is included in
[52:50] the recommendation. So on page five, it
[52:55] says the misalign and I am not an
[52:57] engineer. So it may be that it says this
[52:59] in different engineer words, but the
[53:01] this misalignment is noted in the items
[53:04] below and should be rectified even
[53:06] though the system appears to be so rod
[53:08] bracing and so on. So and I I don't know
[53:10] if that's captured in the
[53:12] recommendations. Same for page six. Um
[53:16] it talks about C figure one. So noted
[53:19] damage and missing items. Um just to
[53:22] make sure I I'm not clear that that is
[53:24] captured in the recommendation. So just
[53:26] to make sure that you know all the items
[53:29] even if it's because one of the things
[53:30] about this is that you're you're reading
[53:33] along and then there's a sentence about
[53:35] you know this is
[53:36] » Yeah so just to make sure that
[53:38] thoroughess and I'm not an engineer so
[53:40] but just to make sure all the necessary
[53:42] fixes have been captured. Deputy Warden,
[53:45] I see you. Or Councelor Marshon, you
[53:46] have your
[53:48] » Yeah, there if I remember correctly,
[53:50] there was also some other discussions
[53:52] about some of the plland that may have
[53:53] been on an angle. A bolt or two wasn't
[53:56] in the right spot. So, yeah, I don't
[53:57] think any of those things are in the
[53:59] recommendations because I don't think
[54:00] they're really serious. He noticed some
[54:02] of the the uh cross bracing wasn't
[54:05] didn't look like it was in the right
[54:06] spot because looking on the opposite
[54:09] side. Yeah. So, I mean
[54:11] » Oh, I'm sorry. Press your button again.
[54:13] Sorry. If Chris feels that those things
[54:15] need to be looked at, get them look get
[54:17] them done. You know, there's some plland
[54:19] that there may have been some damage
[54:21] because the garage door was put in the
[54:22] back end, could have been hit or
[54:23] something. Uh those kind of notes were
[54:26] in there. Uh it's been like that for
[54:29] quite some time. Uh there hasn't been no
[54:31] renovations. You know, this door was put
[54:34] on many, many, many years ago. Uh but
[54:36] yeah, if anybody feels they should be
[54:38] done and they've been brought to our
[54:40] attention, get them done. Don't have an
[54:42] issue with that.
[54:45] Go ahead.
[54:45] » Just ask one more thing. Um, so yeah,
[54:48] and I I totally I totally agree with
[54:50] Councelor Marshand. Um, I would say
[54:52] though that even if they are fairly
[54:55] minor because they showed up in a
[54:57] report, could we just at least have them
[55:00] listed in whatever status update that
[55:02] Chris brings forward just so even if
[55:04] it's just complete complete whatever. I
[55:06] just think because they've showed up in
[55:08] the report, it' be nice. I think I think
[55:10] it's it's important for us to do that
[55:12] due diligence. Yeah. Thank you.
[55:15] » Yeah. You know how I like a list.
[55:17] » And and I appreciate I'm not an
[55:19] engineer. So, as I was reading this, I
[55:21] thought there may be times where it's
[55:22] described here and I'm not capturing the
[55:24] connection, but I think we need to make
[55:26] sure that we've there's been an
[55:28] exhaustive review of all the points here
[55:30] on a on a go forward basis.
[55:32] » Okay. Any other uh and I I think do we
[55:37] need a motion of counsel? I think we've
[55:38] directed staff, so I think we're fine.
[55:40] Okay. So, um, seeing that there are no
[55:44] other items on the agenda, uh, this
[55:46] meeting is adjourned. Thank you,
[55:48] everyone.