[0:05] So it's 8pm. So good evening and
[0:07] welcome to this extraordinary
[0:09] budget session on Monday, January 26, 2026.
[0:14] I now officially
[0:15] open the session. I would
[0:17] need a nominator for the adoption of the
[0:19] agenda.
[0:22] THANKS.
[0:24] So before giving the floor to the
[0:27] gentleman,
[0:29] I wanted to read a few words to you. So
[0:31] it goes like this. So dear citizens,
[0:36] colleagues of the municipal council, ladies and
[0:38] gentlemen, thank you for being present this evening
[0:41] for this presentation of the
[0:43] municipal budget. This is an important time of year
[0:46] to introduce ourselves and
[0:49] explain our choices, and above all to
[0:51] demonstrate how we are planning
[0:53] the future of our municipality.
[0:56] This year, the budgetary context is
[0:59] particular, notably due to
[1:01] the entry into force of a new
[1:03] land tax roll which is changing the value of
[1:05] properties in our territory. At the
[1:08] same time, we also have to deal
[1:10] with an increase in expenses, like
[1:12] several municipalities are currently doing.
[1:15] The costs associated with
[1:17] infrastructure maintenance, roads, snow
[1:19] removal, citizen services,
[1:22] contracts, materials and even
[1:25] energy have all increased. We must
[1:28] also not overlook the impact of
[1:30] the increase in the land tax on the tax
[1:32] codes of our municipality. In addition to this, there are
[1:37] unavoidable obligations such as improving the
[1:39] quality of our services, maintaining and
[1:41] even increasing security, supporting our
[1:44] organizations and responding to the
[1:46] growing needs of our community.
[1:48] Despite these challenges, we have worked
[1:51] with a clear objective: to
[1:54] present you with a realistic, balanced,
[1:56] and forward-looking budget. A budget that
[1:59] protects essential services and
[2:01] plans for
[2:03] necessary investments.
[2:10] I want to make it clear to you that an increase
[2:12] in property assessment does not
[2:15] automatically mean an equivalent increase
[2:18] in your tax bill, but it does
[2:20] require adjustments, balance
[2:23] and rigorous management to distribute
[2:25] the
[2:26] spending pressure as fairly as possible using the
[2:28] tools at our disposal.
[2:31] Tonight, we will therefore explain
[2:33] the main directions, the
[2:36] main expenditure items and the impact of the
[2:38] new land role on taxation. in
[2:40] the simplest and
[2:42] clearest way possible. Thank you in
[2:44] advance for your attention and
[2:46] interest. Your participation is
[2:48] important because this budget belongs to
[2:50] the municipality and to our
[2:53] crazy community. So before giving the floor to the
[2:56] gentleman, I would like to clarify that the
[2:58] question period will be at the end of
[3:02] all the points on the
[3:04] agenda. So without further ado, sir,
[3:07] I give you the floor.
[3:09] Thank you very much, madam. So,
[3:11] let's get started, ready? We will actually begin
[3:15] by talking about the land role, as
[3:17] Madame la Meresse so aptly mentioned.
[3:19] So we have a new land role
[3:20] for 2026-2027.
[3:24] So what does that mean
[3:26] overall? This is because, starting from
[3:28] January 1, 2026, so actually
[3:30] 26 days ago, the land register was
[3:33] updated. So for a given value of
[3:36] 1AR, that's
[3:38] 113601500
[3:41] dollars. So that's the value you
[3:42] see at the bottom of the screen. So that was
[3:45] our value on December 31, 2025.
[3:48] So we woke up on January 1,
[3:51] 2026 and what the municipality was worth in
[3:53] terms of land value was
[3:56] 36.47
[3:57] % higher. So that makes a total of
[4:05] $1519737100. So we're going to look a little
[4:07] more deeply at this in the
[4:09] next few slides before getting
[4:11] into the pure and simple budget. So
[4:12] what is the role of land ownership? What
[4:14] impact could this have and how should
[4:16] elected officials and the administration
[4:18] work from this? So what you
[4:21] need to understand from this slide is that there has been
[4:23] an
[4:24] average increase. So the houses on
[4:28] average, so there are some that have increased
[4:29] by less than that, there are some that have
[4:30] increased by more than that. So
[4:32] the average increase in our
[4:34] land role is 36.47
[4:36] %.
[4:38] So we're going to watch a short video that
[4:40] will explain to us, in general terms, what a
[4:42] property assessment of a residence is.
[5:09] Excuse me.
[6:59] So what we just explained to you is
[7:01] not actually specific to areas below the
[7:04] snow. This is good for all
[7:05] municipalities in Quebec. So the
[7:07] land register is updated every 3 years
[7:09] and in fact there are different methods
[7:11] for assessing a residence. And in fact
[7:14] what you need to know is that the
[7:16] reference value is as of July 1st before the
[7:19] filing. So for us it's
[7:20] July 1st, 2024. That being said, how does
[7:24] all this impact your tax bill,
[7:28] the increase in your
[7:30] residence tax? And in fact, what we would like to
[7:32] propose is to do
[7:33] two small examples with you to
[7:36] understand what impact this has. And in
[7:38] fact, we're going to take an example where the
[7:40] value, the increase, and these are
[7:43] cases that we'll see in the
[7:45] municipality when we see a 71%
[7:48] increase in land value. In
[7:50] the other example, we are closer to an
[7:51] 8% increase in
[7:53] land values. So these are
[7:54] scenarios that we're going to look at and we're just going to
[7:57] look together at what that implies in
[7:59] terms of the tax account. So if we
[8:02] look at this example, so the
[8:04] left column in the year 2025, so it is a
[8:07] value, a residence, sorry,
[8:10] that was worth $356,000 on our
[8:13] old property assessment roll. So
[8:17] $356,000 will become our
[8:18] reference value. So, regarding the
[8:21] property tax rate for 2025, the rate
[8:23] was 64.7
[8:26] cents per 100 dollars. So the
[8:29] property tax for that residence of
[8:31] $356,000 was
[8:34] $2,303.
[8:37] We wake up on January 1st, 2026,
[8:40] our residence is worth $6100. So
[8:43] that represents a 71% increase
[8:47] compared to and all of that was evaluated
[8:49] in relation to the short video you
[8:51] saw, in fact, the
[8:52] evaluation methods. So the owner ends
[8:55] up with a residence that has increased in
[8:59] value by 71% (sorry), and the
[9:02] average increase is 36.47
[9:04] %. So this particular residence has increased in
[9:06] value much more than the
[9:08] average value. So what kind of
[9:10] impact does that have? Our
[9:12] working tool for adjusting
[9:14] the land roll is that we take
[9:16] the average increase, so 36.47
[9:19] %, and we decrease our rate of 100
[9:23] dollars by 36.47%. So the goal is actually to bring back
[9:29] the
[9:32] same amount of money to the municipality between December 31st and January 1st, that's
[9:33] our starting value. So we are
[9:35] reducing this 64.7
[9:37] C which was the rate for 2025 and we are bringing it back
[9:39] , we are adjusting it to the value of 2026
[9:42] with the increase of 36.47%. That
[9:45] rate gives us 47.4 cents per
[9:49] $100 of valuation.
[9:51] So for that residence which was worth
[9:53] $356,000 in 2025, now in
[9:56] 2026 it is worth $60,000.
[10:00] The adjusted rate of 47.4 cents per
[10:03] 100 dollars of assessment is applied. So, regarding his
[10:05] new tax account, we haven't done anything yet
[10:08] . We simply adjusted the
[10:10] tax account to create the same revenue stream
[10:12] for the municipality. So this
[10:15] tax bill now amounts to $2891. So
[10:19] this person experienced an
[10:20] increase in their tax bill of
[10:22] $588. So that's a reality we're going to
[10:25] experience. The distribution of
[10:27] revenue in the municipality
[10:29] based on property values ​​will be
[10:32] redistributed within the municipality. The reason for
[10:35] this is that there are
[10:36] people whose values ​​are very
[10:38] far from the 36.47% which is the average.
[10:41] So there are people who are very high up
[10:43] and people who are much lower down.
[10:45] Then through that, well, we have a
[10:47] tax rate that we can use, which is
[10:48] our tax rate for all
[10:50] residences. So we need to lower it by the
[10:52] average rate and we start from there for
[10:55] 2026. So if we take another example,
[10:59] perhaps a more fun example
[11:02] for the resident. So even in 2025,
[11:05] we start with a residence value
[11:07] of $356,000 from the previous assessment roll, which will be
[11:10] our reference value. So
[11:12] here again, we have the $2303 from 2025. The
[11:16] new value of this residence in
[11:18] 2026 is now
[11:21] $384,500. So that means an
[11:23] 8% increase in value. So
[11:27] many below 36.47
[11:29] %, which is the average rate. So if we
[11:32] apply our adjusted 2026 rate, which is
[11:35] 47.4 cents per $100, the
[11:38] new property tax account for
[11:40] this staff becomes $1823.
[11:43] Therefore, this employee will experience a
[11:44] $480 decrease in their
[11:47] tax bill. So this is what
[11:50] the administration and elected officials had to
[11:54] work with as a starting point.
[11:56] So an average increase of 36.47
[11:59] %. We are lowering the tax rate from
[12:02] 36.47%, which becomes our new
[12:05] reference value. And that's what we
[12:08] worked from. So we are
[12:09] very aware that depending on the
[12:11] increases in land values, there will be
[12:12] a
[12:14] redistribution in the municipality
[12:16] according to the increases you
[12:18] have experienced in terms of your resistance.
[12:20] If you don't know the
[12:23] new property value of your
[12:24] residence, if you're interested
[12:26] in knowing it before you get your
[12:28] tax bill in February, know that we
[12:31] have a platform called voilà
[12:33] which allows you, by registering, to
[12:36] access your new
[12:38] property value. So if
[12:40] you are interested, you can either
[12:43] call us at the municipality or
[12:45] go to our website. You
[12:47] will have all the information there
[12:49] to be able to connect to the
[12:50] platform and you will have access to your
[12:52] new land value there before
[12:54] receiving your tax bill there uh
[12:56] in the 3rd week of February.
[12:59] So this is the small land role block that we are
[13:02] presenting to
[13:05] explain the situation for
[13:07] 2026. So if we jump to the heart of the
[13:11] matter regarding the
[13:12] 2026 budget forecasts, the municipality has
[13:16] a 2026 operating budget of
[13:22] $11,584,700. So that represents an
[13:24] increase of 9.26% compared to
[13:28] 2025. And I assure you right now
[13:31] , this is not the rate
[13:32] of increase in taxes, the 9.26, but
[13:35] rather the rate of increase in the
[13:37] operating budget. So the municipality has
[13:40] several sources of revenue including
[13:41] property taxes and therefore an adjustment of
[13:44] some revenues there which means
[13:46] that the operating budget goes up to
[13:50] $11,584,700 which is an increase of
[13:52] 9.26%. We'll see later
[13:55] in the presentation what that
[13:57] means in terms of
[13:58] property tax.
[14:00] Otherwise, we will also present
[14:02] our three-year
[14:03] capital investment program, so our famous
[14:05] projects for the coming years which
[14:07] totals a pre-subsidy amount
[14:10] of
[14:13] $27,984,500.
[14:16] So if we start with revenues, so
[14:18] at the level of tax revenues, so that's
[14:21] property tax, we had
[14:24] a budget in 2025 of
[14:28] $7,541,000 and a budget in 2026 of
[14:32] $8,143,000. This can be explained by, uh,
[14:35] the increase,
[14:37] the number of residences which is increasing,
[14:39] people who are making repairs and
[14:41] also the rate of increase in
[14:43] property tax which we will see later. Here again
[14:45] , the 8% does not reflect the
[14:48] rate of increase in property tax,
[14:49] but rather the amalgamation of
[14:52] the overall increase in
[14:54] land value and the tax rate.
[14:57] Otherwise, in terms of pricing and
[14:59] compensation, we are
[15:01] mainly thinking about pricing for
[15:02] water, tastes, uh,
[15:06] ritual materials, so collection and
[15:07] the ecocentre, we are talking about an increase
[15:09] of 14%, so we are going from 1,769,900
[15:14] to
[15:17] 22,200 dollars. Uh, in terms of
[15:19] transfers, uh, we go from
[15:21] $179,000 to
[15:24] $471,300. So that's an increase of
[15:25] 163%. In terms of services rendered, we
[15:30] go from $216,000 to
[15:33] $183,200. So mainly because there was
[15:36] a different distribution between
[15:38] services rendered and transfers. So these were
[15:39] elements that were considered
[15:42] services rendered, which we
[15:44] transferred in the transfers. So that's where
[15:45] the impact comes from. We'll take
[15:47] the questions at the end. I know yes yes
[15:54] in the question for those who
[15:57] are online and who may not have
[15:59] understood the question so in fact we are being
[16:01] asked the difference between
[16:02] transfers and services rendered so at the
[16:04] level of services rendered the way it was
[16:06] treated that's really all what results
[16:07] from
[16:09] particular agreements so for example we
[16:11] have an agreement with the city of
[16:12] Beaupré and they pay us a certain
[16:15] number of dollars same thing at the
[16:17] MTQ level for example We would have a
[16:19] particular agreement with the others.
[16:20] So uh, it was considered services
[16:22] rendered and the transfers, well, it's more
[16:24] than what is governmental and does
[16:25] n't necessarily have an agreement uh that is
[16:27] related to all of that. So I'll give you an
[16:29] example. We always get
[16:31] a 1% refund of the QST.
[16:34] So those transfers are part of that from that perspective
[16:37] . Otherwise, it's fine in terms of taxes and
[16:39] duties, so mainly
[16:41] transfer taxes and
[16:44] other taxes and duties. So we're
[16:46] going from $590,000 to
[16:49] $680,000. So that's a
[16:52] 15% increase in revenue from that side.
[16:54] Regarding fines and penalties, sorry,
[16:57] we're going from $35,000 to
[16:58] $20,000 and we've come to stick a
[17:00] little closer to our reality of
[17:02] the last year where we had overestimated
[17:05] our revenues on that side. So,
[17:07] in terms of interest, it's still the same
[17:09] thing. In 2025, we based our projections on
[17:11] 2024 revenues, and we overestimated a bit
[17:13] for 2025. So now we're back to
[17:16] something more reasonable for
[17:17] 2026 at $70,000. Mainly
[17:20] , interest is the income that
[17:22] can be generated from our investments or the
[17:25] interest that is collected on
[17:27] tax accounts, right? So, for people who
[17:29] come to pay their tax bill late
[17:31] , interest
[17:32] accrues. So it's these interests that we're
[17:34] talking about here. Otherwise, various incomes,
[17:37] so other incomes,
[17:40] for example, the rural pact is part
[17:42] of these other incomes. So it's
[17:45] small incomes like that which we'll
[17:47] put in the "other" section. And otherwise,
[17:49] uh, regarding allocations, uh,
[17:52] last year we planned to use the
[17:55] $150,000, more or less $150,000, of
[17:57] our accumulated surplus. So this year,
[17:59] uh, what will be the use of the
[18:01] accumulated surplus there, uh, is uh, it's 0
[18:04] dollars. So uh there will be no
[18:05] accumulated surplus that will be used this
[18:07] year, at least for operations.
[18:11] In terms of the details of tax revenue,
[18:13] in terms of property tax, uh, as
[18:16] I was saying earlier, this
[18:17] year, if we look at column 2026, we
[18:20] were at
[18:23] $8,143,000. Just to give you a little bit of an
[18:25] idea of ​​the residential
[18:27] versus non-residential level, so we
[18:30] often talk about it, you often hear the
[18:31] council talking about
[18:33] income diversification, right? You know that there is
[18:35] strong pressure on
[18:37] residential land. We don't have much
[18:39] commerce and we don't have much
[18:40] industry. So, uh, we demonstrate it
[18:43] with this slide here. So out of the
[18:45] $8,143,000, there are $7,386,400
[18:50] that come from residences, so
[18:52] people from
[18:55] residences. And uh for everything that is
[18:58] non-residential, so
[18:59] industrial and commercial, we are talking about an
[19:01] investment of $757,000. In terms of
[19:05] sector taxes, uh this year we
[19:07] go from $407,200 to almost
[19:10] $400,000, so
[19:13] $399,200, which represents a
[19:14] decrease of 2%. And at the
[19:17] municipal services level, as I was talking about
[19:19] earlier, the high pricing and
[19:21] residual material taste and at the
[19:24] emergency centre level, 911. So we are talking about an
[19:27] overall increase from 1,346,700
[19:31] to 1,601,000,
[19:33] which represents an increase of 14
[19:36] %.
[19:37] So in total, if we look at
[19:39] property tax, sector tax and
[19:42] municipal service rates at the
[19:45] revenue level, if you see at the bottom
[19:47] in the small green line, we
[19:48] go from $9,300,000 to
[19:53] $10,143,000,200, which represents an
[19:55] increase of 9%. If
[19:58] you look at the expenses now at the
[20:00] general administration level, in
[20:02] 2025 we were at $1,928,000.
[20:05] This year, we are therefore seeing a 2%
[20:07] increase, bringing it to
[20:11] $1976150. At the level of
[20:13] public safety, therefore, our code starts from being included
[20:15] in that budget item. So, we
[20:17] go from $1,347,500
[20:20] to
[20:22] $1,501,000. Uh, in terms of transport, uh,
[20:26] we go from 2544600
[20:29] to 2976200.
[20:32] In this budget item,
[20:33] mainly, we have everything related to snow
[20:35] removal contracts. You know
[20:38] that our snow removal contract was
[20:40] 5 years old, so pre-pandemic. So, we
[20:43] renewed our snow
[20:44] removal contract. We have seen a
[20:46] 35% increase in snow
[20:49] removal costs. This is the increase that
[20:51] other municipalities and
[20:53] individuals have experienced throughout the pandemic,
[20:55] which we were fortunate enough not to have
[20:56] yet experienced because we
[20:58] renewed our contract just before the
[20:59] pandemic. So all of this has caught up with us
[21:02] this year. So from the
[21:04] summer season of 2025, which has just
[21:07] begun, we are at a level of snow
[21:09] removal contract where we have experienced a
[21:11] 35% increase on that side.
[21:14] Environmental hygiene, uh, so we go from
[21:16] 1251829
[21:18] to 1537000.
[21:21] So what is included in that is
[21:22] all the codes part, uh, at the level
[21:25] of the wastewater treatment plant in Beau Prix. You
[21:27] know that we are in co-ownership with
[21:30] Saint-An de Beaupré, Saint-Joischin
[21:34] Beuprè. Yes, thank you. I have a little, a
[21:35] little, 2 minutes. So, it
[21:37] mainly affects this area; you'll see
[21:39] when we get to the
[21:40] pricing section, there are some
[21:42] pretty significant increases on that
[21:43] side. Well, otherwise, in terms of health and
[21:46] well-being, it's mainly our
[21:48] codep at the OMH. So a 3%
[21:50] increase. On that side, we go
[21:52] from $5000 to $5150. In
[21:56] terms of urban planning and
[21:57] economic development, there is a
[21:59] decrease on that side. So, we go
[22:00] from $764,000 to $734,000 and
[22:05] $734,600, sorry. In terms of
[22:09] leisure and culture, we therefore go from
[22:11] $90,800 to $129,000,
[22:14] mainly related to the day camp.
[22:17] So we still have costs
[22:19] that have been incurred at the level of the day camp
[22:21] and the workforce. Uh, and uh, in
[22:24] terms of financing costs, there's been another
[22:25] increase, interest rates
[22:27] have gone up. So we went from
[22:30] $496,500 to $603,800, which represents a
[22:33] 22% increase for, uh,
[22:36] interest charges. So all of this brings us to
[22:38] a total of 10362900 for 2026
[22:42] in terms of expenses, which represents
[22:44] 12%. And in terms of
[22:46] capital repayment on
[22:48] long-term debt, there is a slight decrease.
[22:50] We had fewer loan settlements
[22:52] last year. So, we got that because
[22:55] we were lucky enough to have reduced
[22:57] our debt there. So we're at 117800
[23:01] on that side. So, it's more of a
[23:03] maintenance position with a small decrease
[23:05] of 1%. So this brings us to a
[23:07] total expenditure in 2026 of
[23:12] $11,470,700, therefore an increase of 11%.
[23:17] In quick succession regarding expenses, I was
[23:19] talking about part codes, so we
[23:21] present them here in more detail. Oh,
[23:24] it extends further. Oh, he's back. Uh, at the
[23:27] MRC level, so we go from a
[23:30] share of 691,000 plus or minus 691,000 to
[23:33] plus or minus 716,000 dollars. Can you
[23:36] give me microphone
[23:45] 1 or 2 like that? Great. We will continue.
[23:49] So, in terms of Quebec security,
[23:50] we've gone from $961,000 and we've just
[23:53] passed the million mark. So we're
[23:55] at
[23:57] $15,000, which is an increase
[23:58] of 4.6%. At the OMH level, we are at
[24:02] 3%. So we are, uh, we are within the
[24:04] standards in that respect. Uh, at the level of
[24:06] the Quebec metropolitan community,
[24:08] so the CMQ, we go from $48,500 to
[24:12] $53,700. So that represents a
[24:15] 10% increase. at the
[24:18] RENA intermunicipal region level, so
[24:20] we go from 80,000 to 83,500 dollars, so
[24:23] an increase of 4.4%. At the
[24:27] water treatment plant level, therefore in
[24:29] collaboration with the city of Beaupré
[24:31] and other municipalities. And that's where
[24:33] the Bobless comes in, going from
[24:36] $245,100 to
[24:39] $386,500. So that represents a
[24:40] 50.7% increase in share codes. in
[24:45] terms of mobile pricing. So, it's
[24:47] clear that in terms of comparison, we've
[24:48] introduced an additional service.
[24:52] It's certain that the increase there is
[24:55] exploding. So with the 360 ​​bus, we
[24:58] go from a contribution of
[25:00] $30,000 to $105,000. So,
[25:02] with these additional services, that definitely represents
[25:03] a difference of 350%. And
[25:07] otherwise, in terms of contributions to
[25:08] organizations, we are going from
[25:10] $72,000 to $75,000. So it's a
[25:13] monetary value of $75,000, right? It is important to
[25:16] know that there are many services
[25:17] rendered, or which are not quantified,
[25:20] that we will work to monetize and
[25:22] quantify there in 2026. So it is certain
[25:25] that our report at the level of the
[25:26] organizations is much higher there
[25:27] than the 75,000 dollars monetary that we
[25:29] see there. Uh, but that will be something
[25:32] that we can present to you there, uh,
[25:33] as part of the 2027 budget. So, in
[25:36] terms of code shares, we are going from
[25:41] $2,133,000 in 2025 to
[25:44] $2,430,000 in 2026, which represents a
[25:48] rounded increase of 14%. So you
[25:51] know that in terms of these parts, we don't have
[25:53] much to say. We
[25:55] receive the bill and we pay it. So,
[25:57] it's certain that there are some elements that we
[25:58] can put in place. So we are
[26:00] thinking, for example, you will see in
[26:01] the PTI later, we have a
[26:03] sheathing program for some of our
[26:06] water pipes. So we are
[26:08] preparing for the next
[26:10] characterizations of our
[26:12] agreement with the city of Beaupré for
[26:14] the wastewater treatment plant to put ourselves in
[26:15] a better position and reduce
[26:17] these codep, at least that is the bet we are
[26:20] going to take for the next few
[26:22] years
[26:24] in terms of the tax rate.
[26:26] So if we look at this at the residual level,
[26:28] which is residential, the
[26:30] 2025 rate was 64.7
[26:33] cents.
[26:35] So the adjusted rate we were talking about earlier is
[26:37] reduced from 36.47
[26:39] %, which becomes our reference rate,
[26:42] to 47.7 cents, and the 2026 rate will be
[26:47] 49.8 cents, which represents an
[26:49] increase of 2.4 cents, so that
[26:52] represents an increase of 5%.
[26:55] Uh, that 5%, uh, comes and is
[26:58] replicated there on the non-
[27:01] residential rate, so the commercial rate.
[27:04] So we were at 1 dollar and 14.74 cents
[27:10] in 2025, we went to 81.4 cents at the
[27:14] adjusted rate. So we are
[27:17] increasing everything by 5%, which
[27:19] gives us a rate of 88.3
[27:22] cents per 100 dollars at the commercial level
[27:25] for 2026. Agricultural rate, same as
[27:28] the residential rate. So we go to
[27:30] 49.8 cents per 100 dollars. At the
[27:34] industrial level, therefore the same as
[27:36] the commercial level, so we go to 88.3 sous
[27:40] on the
[27:43] industrial rate side. And at the level of the
[27:46] vacant land, the vacant lands
[27:47] served, so what the elected officials
[27:50] wanted to send a message from that
[27:51] side, so we decided to maintain
[27:53] the rate. So the rate that was at
[27:55] 79.5
[27:57] in 2025 before the adjustment.
[28:00] So we kept it. Uh, so it's at
[28:02] 8, uh, 80 cents per 100
[28:05] dollars for serviced vacant lots
[28:07] .
[28:11] Regarding the tax rates, if
[28:13] we look at the pricing
[28:15] now, so regarding
[28:18] property tax as I was saying, we have gone
[28:19] to 49.8 cents. If we look at the
[28:22] vertical column at the 2026 rate, which we will scroll down to the bottom, there is
[28:25] the
[28:27] pricing for
[28:28] municipal services, so water, uh, so when we were
[28:30] telling you there that the
[28:32] increases are very
[28:34] specific in the sense that we look at
[28:37] the 2025 experience and we adjust. So that doesn't
[28:39] mean that rates won't fall back down
[28:41] . Here you have rates
[28:42] that are decreasing, but we really base the
[28:44] 2025 rate adjustment on the
[28:47] 2026 rate. So we will base
[28:49] the 2027 rate adjustment on the
[28:51] 2026 rate. So these are pricing structures.
[28:53] Often there is a little more
[28:54] volatility. So at the water level, we
[28:57] go from $116 to $146, which
[28:59] is an increase of $20. And these
[29:02] are fixed prices for
[29:05] the residences. So that's a
[29:06] direct increase of $20
[29:08] for people who have the ACUC service.
[29:10] At the sewer level, the price increases from
[29:13] $139 to $173. When we were
[29:15] looking earlier at the Beaupré
[29:17] city wastewater treatment plant
[29:18] , well, that's where
[29:19] it comes to light. So, we're
[29:21] talking about a 24% increase on
[29:24] that side in terms of
[29:26] waste collection. And this year, we deliberately
[29:28] separated them there
[29:30] because, as you know, we actually have the
[29:33] municipality bought trucks and we have been
[29:35] responsible since January 1st for doing
[29:37] the collection ourselves. There were
[29:39] people who had many fears and
[29:40] wondered if we would be
[29:42] able to be profitable or if we would make
[29:44] our money with all of this.
[29:46] So the rate for 2026 is going
[29:48] from a rate of $133 to a rate of
[29:51] $136 for the collection of
[29:52] residual materials. So that's a
[29:53] 2% increase on that side. And in
[29:57] fact, the other municipalities are not
[29:59] even being taken into consideration yet.
[30:01] So you know that this is a project that
[30:03] is in collaboration with Saint-Joischin
[30:05] and Saint Titre. So, we could
[30:07] expect, uh, from next year,
[30:09] from January 1, 2027, that, uh, there will be
[30:11] less pressure on the
[30:13] residual collection level because there are
[30:14] certain expenses that
[30:16] will be shared with these two
[30:17] municipalities that this year we
[30:19] took entirely on ourselves because
[30:21] these two municipalities are not
[30:22] yet in our
[30:24] intermunicipal agreement. An interesting fact to
[30:26] note is that we have a grant from Mamache
[30:28] on that side for the
[30:30] waste management colleague. We will be
[30:33] able to raise $350,000 over 3 years
[30:35] thanks to this
[30:37] collaborative project with the two other
[30:40] municipalities, Saint-Joischin and
[30:41] Saint-Desc. At the level of the COCRs, there was a very
[30:44] sharp increase in the volume of
[30:47] waste that was brought in
[30:51] 2025, and also an increase in
[30:53] transport costs. So we're talking about an
[30:56] increase directly for the ecocentre
[30:57] . The price has increased from $57 and $50 to
[31:00] $73. So, these are still
[31:03] pricings that can be very
[31:04] volatile depending on the rates and the
[31:08] tonnage that will be brought to
[31:10] the ecocentre in 2026. But we will
[31:11] readjust the rate in 2027, but we have had
[31:14] a very strong increase compared
[31:15] to 2024 in terms of
[31:19] the increase in tonnage at
[31:21] the ecocentre. Otherwise, the
[31:22] sector taxes, the sector taxes are
[31:24] actually there, and you will see it in
[31:25] the tax account example that we will
[31:27] do later. Uh, it's not a tax, it's
[31:29] an average rate.
[31:31] Not everyone here has
[31:32] sector taxes. So, we just wanted to
[31:35] put it there, but it
[31:37] still decreased by 2% on that side on
[31:39] average. And otherwise the septic tanks,
[31:41] so we were at $104 for
[31:44] the septic tanks. We return in
[31:45] 2026 to $99 in terms of
[31:48] pricing for emptying false
[31:50] septic tanks. That's a 5% decrease on
[31:52] that side.
[31:55] So, the example of a tax account,
[31:57] how do we take a
[31:59] house value and then how will all of that end up
[32:01] there in your
[32:04] tax account specifically? So we're going to
[32:06] do an example with all the services,
[32:08] so that's the example on the left, and we're
[32:10] going to do an example with uh without water
[32:13] and without sewer, so someone who would
[32:14] only have the septic tank service
[32:15] . And uh, for the sake of this,
[32:18] we took an
[32:20] average increase in residence which is 36.47%,
[32:24] so that is the average increase.
[32:26] So if we start there in all the
[32:28] services with the vertical column so
[32:31] 2025 so if we go in bursts so a
[32:33] residence of 365000 dollars had a
[32:36] property tax in 2025 of 2362 dollars and
[32:41] rates so of 116 139 133 57
[32:45] and 50 and a sector tax as I was
[32:47] telling you which is an average rate which
[32:49] is applied for everyone
[32:50] who has the same sector tax if you
[32:52] have one. And in fact, that brought us
[32:55] to a tax bill amount of 2980
[33:00] and 50. If we look at the same residence
[33:03] for 2026, it has increased by 36.47
[33:07] %, so it is right in line with the average.
[33:09] So the land role in this example
[33:12] has no impact. So the new
[33:15] value of the residence is
[33:17] $498,000. So we're talking about a
[33:19] property tax of $2480, a water and
[33:23] sewer connection fee of $146, a utility connection fee
[33:25] of $173,
[33:28] garbage collection at $136, ecocentre fee at $73 and
[33:32] a sector tax at $170. So the
[33:35] total tax bill in this
[33:36] example would be $3178, which
[33:40] represents an increase of $
[33:41] 197 and $50. In an example without water and sewer connections,
[33:46] someone who has their
[33:48] own well and only the
[33:51] septic tank is emptied by the
[33:52] municipality depending on whether it is
[33:55] a primary or
[33:57] secondary residence. So if we
[34:00] look, pardon, at the 2025 tax bill in
[34:02] verp, the same residence was worth
[34:04] $365,000. So we had the same
[34:06] property taxes of $2362.
[34:10] So, the taxation, the pricing, sorry,
[34:13] at the level of garbage collection is
[34:15] $163, the amount for the ecocentre is $
[34:18] 57 and $50, and the emptying of false
[34:20] septics is $104 in 2025.
[34:23] So that made a tax bill of $
[34:24] 2656 and $50. If we look at
[34:28] how that translates in 2026. So the residence price
[34:30] drops to $498,000. So we're talking about
[34:33] a property tax of $2480.
[34:37] Garbage collection at 136, errands at
[34:40] 73, the fake septic tank at 99.
[34:44] So we're looking at a tax bill of
[34:46] 278 dollars. So for a
[34:49] person without access to education and without taste, that represents an
[34:52] increase of 131 and 50.
[34:57] We wanted to show you some,
[35:00] in fact, we wanted to compare ourselves
[35:02] with other
[35:04] municipalities. Often this is done using
[35:06] the tax rate. So, we
[35:09] tell you each municipality what
[35:11] the tax rate is, and for us, we
[35:13] felt that this wasn't the best
[35:15] data to present to you. So for those
[35:18] interested in the Mamache region,
[35:20] you can search for each
[35:22] of the municipalities and you will
[35:23] obtain their financial profile. There is
[35:26] a wealth of relevant information
[35:28] in these financial profiles. So that's what we went
[35:31] looking for: the
[35:32] financial profiles of each of the
[35:35] municipalities of the MRC of
[35:38] Côte de Beauprix. And one of the
[35:40] interesting data points we went to look for
[35:41] was the charges, so the expenses
[35:44] per housing unit. So
[35:46] what is the average tax account? Let's
[35:49] say it like this, uh, at the level of the other
[35:51] municipalities
[35:53] of the MRC de la Courte de Beauprix.
[35:55] So we have the first MRC which
[35:57] happens to be the average value of
[36:00] 3641 dollars and these are data
[36:03] which are 2023 and 2024 the
[36:06] financial profiles are always produced there
[36:08] a year late so for your
[36:10] information uh so if I take the
[36:13] level of Saint des Caps there we are in
[36:14] average expenditure per
[36:16] housing unit of 1947 dollars uh in Saint-
[36:21] Perron-les-Neiges we are at 2330
[36:23] dollars so a little higher than
[36:26] Saint des Caps. At the level of
[36:28] Saint-Joischin, we are at 3147 dollars.
[36:31] So there is still a significant
[36:32] difference. At Beauprix, the price
[36:34] is $4160. At Saint
[36:37] de Beau, the figure is
[36:40] $4466. In Château Richer, it's
[36:45] $296. At guardian age, $3724.
[36:49] And at Bois Châtel, 5373.
[36:52] So if you look at the graph, the
[36:53] yellow line represents the average and
[36:56] the green line represents snow.
[36:59] So we are not telling you
[37:00] that taxes are going to increase by 1000
[37:02] pieces in the coming years. That's
[37:03] not it at all. But in fact I
[37:05] think it's very healthy to compare ourselves
[37:07] and despite the increases we're
[37:09] presenting to you today, what we want to
[37:12] show you is that we are still, we are still,
[37:13] the charge per
[37:16] housing unit is still quite low
[37:18] compared to our comparables at the
[37:19] MRC level in that respect.
[37:21] Uh, the same thing applies to the
[37:24] payroll, we hear that often. That's
[37:26] a question I've had myself, I've been
[37:27] in the position for a year now and I'm
[37:29] often asked about the hiring that's been done in
[37:31] the past and what that would create in terms of
[37:33] the payroll. So
[37:36] we did the same thing, we started from the
[37:37] financial profile that is available
[37:40] on the MAMACH website and we went and
[37:41] extracted the percentage of
[37:44] remuneration, and it is the
[37:46] overall remuneration, on the
[37:48] expenses, so the each. So for its
[37:50] salary cap title, the
[37:53] overall remuneration represents 24% of
[37:55] expenses. For Saintfériol, the figure is 27
[37:58] %. For Saint-Jeoischin, the figure is 22%.
[38:02] For Beauprix, the figure is 33%. For
[38:05] Saint-Anne, the figure is 28%. For Château
[38:08] Richier, we're at 30%. For the
[38:11] guardian angel, we're at 15%. And for Bois
[38:13] Châtel, we are at 28%. What can
[38:16] explain data like
[38:17] Angardien or Saint-Joisin for example
[38:20] is that often these municipalities
[38:23] will have agreements with other
[38:25] municipalities. So for example the
[38:28] goalkeeper who has agreements with Bois
[38:29] Châtel which means that yes, he
[38:31] pays a certain percentage or a
[38:33] certain amount but it is not
[38:34] considered as remuneration in the strict
[38:37] sense. So what we wanted to
[38:40] demonstrate to you is yes, in fact, there has been
[38:41] an increase in recent
[38:43] years in terms of payroll
[38:45] compared to our expenses, but we are still in the
[38:47] middle of the pack compared to the
[38:52] other cities and
[38:54] municipalities in the MRC.
[38:57] So, madam, this is what
[38:58] would outline the
[39:01] budgetary situation before moving on to the
[39:03] three-year investment plan.
[39:07] Thank you so much. So that brings us to
[39:10] item 3 on our agenda,
[39:12] presentation and adoption of the
[39:14] 2026 budget forecasts. So the
[39:17] city council adopts the budget for the
[39:20] 2026 fiscal year as presented, a
[39:23] total of
[39:27] $12,283,900. The allocations therefore include
[39:30] repayment of long-term debt of
[39:34] $117,800, repayment of
[39:36] working capital of $193,000, and
[39:39] election fund of $6,000 for a
[39:41] total of
[39:44] $1,306,800.
[39:46] The total budget less
[39:47] depreciation of
[39:49] $921,000 gives
[39:54] $11,669,700, which is equivalent to our
[39:56] revenue. So I'm going to take a
[39:57] proposal.
[39:59] Propose.
[40:00] THANKS.
[40:02] So that brings us to point 4:
[40:04] presentation and adoption of the
[40:06] three-year capital investment program
[40:08] 2026, 27 and 28. So I'll give you the
[40:11] floor again.
[40:13] Yes. So we're going to share the screen for
[40:17] those who are online. So if we look at it in
[40:20] terms of fixed assets, then for
[40:24] 2026, which is what is planned. Uh, so we are
[40:27] continuing with the plans and specifications
[40:29] for the reflection of Notredame and
[40:31] Petitbourg streets for work that you
[40:33] will see is planned for 2027. Uh, some
[40:36] professional services for the
[40:38] Antoine Bélanger bridge. For those who are wondering
[40:39] , the Antoine
[40:41] Bélanger bridge is the one at the entrance to the
[40:43] municipality. So the MTQ is
[40:45] evaluating the thinking behind this bridge and
[40:48] what makes it possible for it to bring
[40:50] certain professional services to
[40:51] our side. Otherwise, there are some uh
[40:54] works. So, we are
[40:55] planning some work on
[40:57] E Touchette Street. Well, otherwise, we have
[41:01] postponed a PTI that was planned for 2025.
[41:03] So with what is happening with the redesign
[41:06] currently, we will have the chance to
[41:07] start there to look at everything that
[41:09] is the link to mobility in the heart of the
[41:11] village. So we call it a
[41:13] mobility link because we don't yet know if
[41:14] it will be a sidewalk, if
[41:16] it will be a multifunctional building, and so on,
[41:18] we have studies to
[41:22] push through on that side before we can
[41:23] talk to you about the solution. Otherwise, we have some
[41:26] planned discussions regarding the
[41:28] Saint-Nicolas area. So this amount
[41:30] covers the plans and specifications for the entire
[41:32] Saint-Nicolas road and a part under
[41:35] repair which will be done
[41:37] internally. Uh otherwise, we are talking about the
[41:39] acquisition of various
[41:40] fire equipment, so
[41:42] bunker replacements and purchases uh at the level
[41:45] of cylinders. Uh, otherwise, we're talking about
[41:48] driving grip. So again, this
[41:50] includes the plans and quotes for
[41:54] everything that needs to be done in terms of
[41:55] sheathing and certain works on that
[41:57] side which are eligible for
[41:59] subsidies, by the way.
[42:01] Uh, otherwise, uh, actually we are in the
[42:04] project definition phase at the
[42:06] fire station level. So, we are
[42:08] asking ourselves the question of whether we
[42:10] renovate the one we have there or
[42:12] simply move it to a more
[42:14] strategic location. So, these are the studies that we're going to
[42:16] launch this year. Well, otherwise,
[42:19] we're replacing vehicles on
[42:21] the road, mostly
[42:22] service vehicles, so good
[42:23] old pickup trucks. Uh, also our
[42:26] four-wheeler which is at the end of its life, our
[42:27] TTT which is at the end of its life and should
[42:29] be replaced. Well, here again, we have access
[42:31] to subsidies from that side. Uh,
[42:33] otherwise various parts and equipment at the
[42:35] road level for an amount of
[42:37] $80,000. We're talking about the
[42:39] installation and replacement of
[42:40] various signs in the
[42:42] municipality for an amount of
[42:44] $40,000. Information technology and software. So
[42:47] we did some major work last year.
[42:49] If you remember computer science and
[42:50] software, we had an amount that was
[42:52] four times higher than that. So we are back
[42:54] to stability, so we are no
[42:56] longer in the cycle of buying
[42:58] computer equipment that is at the
[43:00] end of its life. So, we're back to something
[43:02] that is more, uh, more
[43:04] normal in that respect. We've done a lot of
[43:05] work, so we're taking the
[43:06] time to assimilate all of this, to
[43:08] make sure we're using each
[43:10] software program to 100%. Uh, otherwise, at
[43:13] our community center, we have to
[43:15] update our PFT on
[43:16] that side. So the center is number 33 on
[43:18] church street. If we have certain
[43:21] work to be done at the town hall,
[43:23] uh, for a value of $16,000 and
[43:26] upgrades to our wells, uh, for
[43:28] a value of $15,000. And uh we
[43:30] are starting a replacement program here
[43:33] actually at the level of the false bournage a
[43:34] replacement program but you
[43:36] will see our pépine in this
[43:39] corner there deposit. So we've reached the
[43:42] suburbs. So there will be work
[43:43] that will have to be done in the
[43:44] coming years to ensure that
[43:47] the hollows, the processes, pardon, are properly
[43:49] excavated and that the water collapse is
[43:51] happening in the right way on that side. And
[43:53] while we're at it, we'll take the opportunity
[43:55] to replace some culverts that are at the
[43:56] end of their lifespan.
[43:58] So we are continuing for 2026 with certain
[44:01] furniture acquisitions for an amount
[44:03] of $12,500. So don't get
[44:05] too attached to the chairs you're
[44:07] sitting on. Several of them are nearing the
[44:08] end of their lifespan. We wonder if you'll
[44:12] be able to stay seated until the end of the evening. So there will
[44:13] be some replacements on that
[44:16] side. Uh, otherwise some purchases in the
[44:19] leisure sector, so for an amount
[44:20] of $1500. Uh, there's a big top that's nearing the
[44:23] end of its life, so we have to
[44:25] replace it for an amount of
[44:27] $20,000. Um, various works at the
[44:30] community center in terms of security.
[44:33] So, uh, the addition of more
[44:35] electronics and some cameras
[44:37] for an amount of $10,000. Uh,
[44:39] acquisitions for the
[44:41] tennis court amounting to $15,000.
[44:43] Uh, the improvements to the
[44:45] pétanque court cost
[44:47] $25,000. So we're talking about two sites
[44:50] and, uh, the issue of diverse terrain.
[44:53] So it's a sum that we're keeping
[44:54] to make certain
[44:56] land acquisitions, uh, if an
[44:58] opportunity arises in that area
[45:00] . So all of this for an amount
[45:04] of $184,000 plus the
[45:08] $4,123,000 that I presented to you in the
[45:10] previous slide, which brings us to
[45:12] $4,307,000 for uh 2026.
[45:17] If we look at 2027, uh an increase
[45:20] in expenses. So rest assured, all of this
[45:22] is linked to certain subsidies. So
[45:26] he has some projects that we're presenting to you
[45:27] today. So if we don't get the
[45:29] subsidies, well, there's a
[45:31] good chance, it will be up to the
[45:32] council to make that decision,
[45:33] but we're not moving forward if we do
[45:35] n't get those subsidies. So I've
[45:37] made a small summary table for you at the end of
[45:38] this section. So if we go at it quickly,
[45:41] well, the reflection on
[45:42] Notredame Street is
[45:44] $5 million in height. Uh, reflection of
[45:46] Campanules Street, so we start there
[45:47] with the plans and estimates, uh, for
[45:49] $20,000. Uh, Pont Antoine Bélanger
[45:52] again, we are in, uh, we are in
[45:56] professional services to support
[45:57] the MTQ in their studies. Otherwise, we have the
[46:00] famous acquisition of the Ballarue that you
[46:02] may have seen in recent
[46:03] years, which we postpone every
[46:05] year. There are some
[46:07] potential subsidies that we can
[46:08] access. So we are waiting to find the right
[46:10] time and the right subsidies to
[46:12] proceed with the work on
[46:16] Eouchette Street, so
[46:18] support work that we need to do at the entrance
[46:20] to the street. Uh, otherwise, continue with the
[46:22] mobility link, so we are claiming that in
[46:25] 2027 we will have the solution, so we can
[46:27] start doing some work.
[46:29] Otherwise, we continue our discussions at the
[46:31] Saint-Nicolas level, still under control. Uh
[46:34] otherwise the question of certain uh
[46:36] fire equipment so it's a
[46:37] recurring issue the bunkers and slimes
[46:39] have a limited lifespan so we
[46:41] have to change them uh on a
[46:43] recurring basis so uh we are returning an
[46:46] investment of $20,000 rather
[46:47] than $42,000 for uh
[46:50] our acquisition in terms of
[46:51] fire equipment. Otherwise, we have our
[46:54] fire engine which is
[46:56] slowly approaching the end of its useful life,
[46:58] so it is over 20 years old. So, we will have to
[47:00] launch
[47:01] professional services to manage all of this.
[47:04] Uh, otherwise, we're talking about a
[47:06] potential redesign of the royal avenue again
[47:08] , depending on the availability of
[47:10] subsidies. Uh, let's finish the
[47:13] planks, okay? Ultimately, the goal
[47:14] is to finish the sheathing before the
[47:17] next characterization for our
[47:19] agreement with Beaupré. So what you need to
[47:21] understand is that the less water loss you have
[47:24] , the better positioned you are for
[47:26] your characterization. So that's why we
[47:28] want to hurry up and do this
[47:30] work. So we are also talking about the
[47:33] plans and estimates for the
[47:34] potential redesign of Franclot Street. And uh,
[47:37] if everything goes as planned at the
[47:39] fire station, then we would have
[47:41] redone the plans and living quarters this year.
[47:44] So we will be there in tender mode
[47:46] for the construction or renovation of
[47:49] the fire station. of course, provided there are
[47:51] subsidies. Uh, we're also talking about
[47:53] continuing the
[47:55] installations, replacing
[47:56] signs for an amount of
[47:57] $10,000, and uh, also IT and
[48:00] software, we'll have a small
[48:01] potential implementation of software
[48:03] at the level of the uh fire. So we have an
[48:06] installation there which costs around
[48:09] $20,000. So we will have to
[48:10] position ourselves for 2027 in that regard. And
[48:13] otherwise, uh, we will then enter the phase of
[48:15] replacing our backhoe.
[48:18] So if we continue for 2027, we
[48:22] also start planning and estimates
[48:24] for the Guilla Street project and we
[48:26] continue our
[48:28] culvert replacements in the northern suburb because it's
[48:30] a 3-year program. So,
[48:33] dig up the ditches, replace the
[48:35] culverts.
[48:37] Otherwise, we also enter into a
[48:39] process of reflection on the coast of the
[48:41] river of rocks. Uh, we're
[48:43] also talking about the purchase of a defibrillator, which is
[48:45] heavily subsidized by the
[48:46] government, and lighting at
[48:50] Sablière Park, so a $20,000 project
[48:52] . And finally, we will
[48:54] look at the
[48:56] potential development of pickleball courts because we
[48:59] know that the use of
[49:00] tennis courts is more than at
[49:03] its full potential. So we are
[49:05] looking at different avenues
[49:07] to perhaps reuse the ice
[49:10] rink which is very close to the
[49:12] barracks to see if we can make
[49:14] pickleball courts in the summer in that place
[49:16] . In short, we are currently
[49:17] analyzing several scenarios. Are these
[49:18] completely
[49:20] separate, completely different plots of land? So that's
[49:22] something that we have
[49:25] on our radar. And for your
[49:26] information, these are the
[49:28] last things that are
[49:29] subsidized. Here, I am talking about
[49:30] lighting and landscaping that
[49:32] can be subsidized by our
[49:33] park and green space fund. So, it's
[49:35] a fund that is financed by
[49:38] the various housing developments, which
[49:40] allows us to use all of that to carry out
[49:42] work on our parks and
[49:44] green spaces.
[49:46] If we look at the
[49:48] 2028 fixed assets, we had
[49:51] started the life plans for
[49:52] the bellflower, so it is in 2028 that we
[49:54] plan to do the reflection. Uh, at the
[49:57] level of the Antoine Bélanger bridge, there, uh, this is
[49:59] a very
[50:00] preliminary amount, but we will have
[50:02] connection work to do there with the
[50:05] city of Beaupré if this agreement
[50:08] materializes. So to make a long story
[50:10] short, the goal is to have a
[50:11] certain form of redundancy, uh, at the
[50:13] water level, right. You know, we've
[50:16] heard a lot about water in
[50:18] recent months, in recent
[50:19] years. We are in a situation that
[50:20] is not problematic, but if
[50:22] something happens, we will have a
[50:24] certain form of redundancy. So
[50:27] the thinking we had was to
[50:29] connect, to make an agreement and to
[50:30] connect at a good price. So if anything
[50:33] happens, at least we
[50:34] know that we are able to supply
[50:36] a good part of the legislative sector of
[50:38] the municipality with reasonably
[50:40] priced water while we are able to
[50:42] make the necessary reflections on
[50:43] our side. So this is a
[50:45] very preliminary amount from that perspective.
[50:47] Everything is yet to be defined, but we still need to
[50:48] keep a buffer in case
[50:50] we decide to move forward with this
[50:51] mitigation strategy. Otherwise, we continue
[50:54] the work there on the
[50:56] active mobility link. So, there's another
[50:57] $200,000 planned from that
[50:59] side. So, we still have
[51:01] acquisitions at the incendiary level. As I was saying
[51:03] , it's something that keeps happening
[51:04] , we have to be on standby.
[51:06] Uh, we have the replacement for the
[51:08] fire engine vehicle. So again, it remains to be
[51:10] seen how all this will settle in over
[51:11] time. But depending on his age
[51:13] , we will have to
[51:16] replace him if we cannot find
[51:18] other solutions. And could this
[51:20] other solution be achieved through
[51:22] various inter-municipal agreements?
[51:23] The answer is yes. So, there is a
[51:25] budget allocated for that. Is there going to be
[51:27] something that
[51:28] happens between now and 208? Probably, but
[51:31] for now this budget is
[51:33] planned. Uh, the reflection on Royal Avenue
[51:36] continues, there are still
[51:37] potential subsidies that we can seek,
[51:39] uh, the reflection on Franclot Street,
[51:42] we had deputized the past life in
[51:44] 2027,
[51:46] reflection on Cavé Street for an
[51:48] amount of $300,000 if we are
[51:50] really talking about the plans and specifications on that
[51:52] side. Otherwise, well, the end of the
[51:56] fire station, so depending on what
[51:58] happens with the
[51:59] fire station, uh, it will be there in the 2nd
[52:02] year of construction and repair.
[52:04] So, there will probably be
[52:05] residual amounts to expect from that
[52:07] side. Otherwise, well, we maintain
[52:10] the facilities and
[52:11] signage, so another $10,000
[52:13] to keep up to date. Information technology and
[52:15] software, we're back to our
[52:17] usual $20,000
[52:19] at the community center level. So
[52:21] the overhaul will come, the
[52:22] urban planning overhaul plan will help us
[52:24] in all of this to position ourselves, to know what we
[52:26] do with our
[52:27] community centre. So is it a
[52:29] renovation of the 33, is it a
[52:31] move, so with the
[52:35] professional services that we will have done in 2026,
[52:38] we will have a good idea. Then the goal
[52:39] wasn't to put everything in at the same
[52:40] time. We're talking about a barracks, so it's
[52:42] already something, even if it's
[52:44] subsidized, which is a financial burden
[52:46] for the municipality. So we're looking further ahead
[52:48] in time at the
[52:50] community centre and in fact, you know what we
[52:53] need to plan for is that
[52:56] if we move towards a
[52:58] potential relocation of the fire station,
[53:00] it will create a potential space to
[53:03] move a community centre. So that's what needs to be
[53:05] expected. It's a
[53:06] very big game of cat and mouse and
[53:09] through all of this, well we have
[53:11] consultations, we have a refounding which will
[53:12] allow us to better position ourselves and
[53:14] then it will be up to the elected officials to make the
[53:16] decisions on that side for the future
[53:18] of our community centre and
[53:19] our box. Otherwise, well, we have the
[53:21] reflection of rue Guillaot, you
[53:23] remember in 2027, we made, we will have made
[53:25] plans and life. So that will be
[53:27] the reflection in 2028. Otherwise, we are starting
[53:30] the reflection on the island street. Uh
[53:32] so these will be the plans and specifications for
[53:34] 2028 and we continue there this will be the
[53:37] last year of our
[53:38] replacement plan for the culverts uh in the
[53:40] northern suburb uh so another 60,000
[53:42] dollars and uh we had started in 2027
[53:45] the plans and specifications for the reflection of
[53:47] the river of rocks shore. So,
[53:49] uh, it will be there in 2028 that these
[53:53] works are planned. So, to
[53:54] summarize, what does that tell us
[53:56] ? Because that's a lot of
[53:58] projects, then a lot of
[53:59] money, and a lot of years. We do that
[54:00] , we look at that in a
[54:03] summary table. So if we look at the totals
[54:05] to start with, so if we look at
[54:07] year 26, we are at
[54:09] investments of $4,307,000. So
[54:12] the amount in bold at the bottom. For 2027, we
[54:14] are at 11,567,500
[54:18] and in 2028 1,210,000
[54:22] for a total over 3 years of 27,984,500.
[54:28] So, what I have proposed here,
[54:30] what I have proposed to the council, is in
[54:32] fact an estimate because not
[54:34] everything is the responsibility of the
[54:36] municipality. So, at the 2026 level,
[54:39] we have loan settlements. So these
[54:41] loan regulations are really
[54:43] what we borrow and what is
[54:44] borne by the taxpayers. So, an
[54:46] estimate of $217,000 for
[54:49] projected subsidies of
[54:52] $2,100,000, a use of
[54:54] working capital of $60,000 and a
[54:56] use of the park and green space fund of
[54:59] $40,000. For
[55:01] the year 2027, uh, again, the projected amount is
[55:11] $4,476,000 in loan repayments to be borne by taxpayers, $6,714,000 in projected subsidies,
[55:15] $
[55:17] 207,500 in working capital,
[55:20] and $170,000 in the green space fund. And for
[55:23] 2028, again, the projected amount for
[55:27] taxpayer repayments is $4,828,000, with
[55:31] projected subsidies of $724,000,
[55:36] $40,000 in working capital, and
[55:40] no use of the green space fund
[55:42] projected for 2028.
[55:45] So, Madam, that concludes
[55:46] the presentation.
[55:51] Thank you so much.
[55:53] Therefore, for point 4, the
[55:56] municipal council adopts the three-year
[55:58] capital investment program for 2026, 2027 and 2028 as
[56:02] presented and therefore provides for
[56:04] total investments of
[56:08] $27,984,500. I will take a proposal,
[56:12] thank you.
[56:15] Point 5
[56:17] tax rates 2026 that the
[56:20] municipal council sets the property tax rates
[56:22] for the year 2026 as follows.
[56:26] So, rates per 100 dollars of assessment,
[56:28] residual property tax rate at 49.8
[56:32] sub, non-residential property tax rate
[56:35] at 88.3 sub,
[56:39] agricultural property tax rate at 49.8 sub,
[56:43] industrial property tax rate at 88.3 sub,
[56:47] vacant land tax rate at
[56:51] 80 sub, sorry, 80 sub.
[56:55] I take a proposer,
[56:57] Simon R, proposes,
[56:58] thank you, item 6, adoption of by-law
[57:02] 26-912
[57:03] amending by-law 18-746
[57:06] concerning waste management, that the
[57:09] municipal council adopts by-law
[57:11] number 26-912
[57:13] amending by-law number 18-746
[57:17] concerning waste management. These
[57:19] regulations form an integral part of this
[57:21] document as if they were transcribed
[57:23] in full. I'm going to take a proposal.
[57:25] Laclair makes a suggestion.
[57:26] Thank you, Mr. Leclaire. Item 7,
[57:28] adoption of Regulation 26-913
[57:31] amending Regulation 94-315
[57:34] establishing a compensation tariff
[57:36] for ACEDuc and sewer services.
[57:39] That the municipal council adopt by-
[57:41] law number 26913 amending by-
[57:44] law number 94-315
[57:47] amending a compensation rate for
[57:50] water and sewer services. These
[57:52] regulations form an integral part of this
[57:54] document as if they were transcribed
[57:55] in full. I'll take the offeror.
[57:57] Anthony,
[57:58] thank you. This brings us to point
[58:01] 8, the question period. So if you
[58:03] have any questions, please come to the
[58:05] microphone and introduce yourself. So any
[58:07] questions about what has just been
[58:09] presented tonight will be welcome from the
[58:17] red team. The
[58:22] accounting system there is a little bit
[58:24] weakened.
[58:26] I don't see any depreciation in your
[58:28] expenses
[58:29] . Yes, that's
[58:33] $921,000.
[58:35] OK.
[58:37] Go ahead sir.
[58:38] Yes, they are there, they are worth
[58:41] $1,921,000. It was named by the mass
[58:43] during the adoption of the resolution.
[58:46] right, there are borrowing costs,
[58:51] there is amortization.
[58:53] I don't know what you're
[58:54] reimbursing with [clears throat] what is it
[58:56] and depreciation
[58:59] is the same? I'm going to give
[59:00] the microphone back to the gentleman for the
[59:02] technical details because I'm not
[59:03] sure I understood your question,
[59:04] Mr. Coutur, about
[59:06] loan fees.
[59:08] Yes.
[59:09] Tuas of the depreciation. Yes.
[59:14] Is that included in 1
[59:17] uh you know at the level of the
[59:20] presentation we do, we take the
[59:22] expenses, we add the depreciation,
[59:24] so that makes our accounting surplus,
[59:26] so our income minus our expenses. Here,
[59:28] depreciation is included and from there,
[59:30] we make our adjustments to
[59:32] determine the tax surplus. So
[59:35] we add our payment to our
[59:39] long-term debt. We first
[59:42] deduct the depreciation, then we
[59:43] make adjustments to
[59:44] our various funds, and that's where we
[59:46] determine the tax surplus. What
[59:48] the municipality, pardon the MCH, is
[59:50] asking us is that the
[59:53] tax surplus balances, so we must reach
[59:55] zero. So what we do at the
[59:59] accountant's level is we take and
[1:00:01] consider the 1921000 which is
[1:00:03] the depreciation as an expense. So
[1:00:05] we determine our
[1:00:06] accounting surplus and from there we
[1:00:08] adjust everything fiscally so that
[1:00:10] the tax surplus reaches zero. So what we
[1:00:12] presented to you today is
[1:00:14] a tax surplus that reaches zero.
[1:00:17] 2nd question on the amortization
[1:00:21] Saint-Nicolas
[1:00:23] we redid it we are redoing it because we
[1:00:26] amortize over a period of 40 years by
[1:00:28] redoing it every 20 years
[1:00:33] in fact it is an excellent question the
[1:00:36] government through the
[1:00:38] treasury board dictates to us the
[1:00:41] amortizations that we must
[1:00:43] put on certain
[1:00:45] no in fact I think I am not
[1:00:47] certain, I think it is 15 years in terms
[1:00:48] of asphalt. So that's really where it is
[1:00:51] , it's not up to us to decide that. It is
[1:00:52] really dictated there by the
[1:00:55] Treasury Board and even at the level of
[1:00:56] borrowing regulations. It's not us who decide what
[1:00:59] length, what pattern, what
[1:01:05] length I see.
[1:01:06] Yes. What length, what period,
[1:01:07] thank you, how much time do we put in?
[1:01:10] is really said by the
[1:01:11] Treasury Board on that side and to my
[1:01:13] knowledge, I haven't done it there, I haven't
[1:01:14] looked at all the borrowing regulations
[1:01:16] that are in force to know if there are
[1:01:18] still borrowing regulations that are
[1:01:19] on the Saint-Nicolas rent, I
[1:01:22] would have to validate, I could get back to you
[1:01:23] but I don't believe to my
[1:01:24] knowledge that we have as soon as we are
[1:01:26] still paying for
[1:01:27] something that we are going to create a good ball as
[1:01:30] we call it a
[1:01:35] decrease in
[1:01:37] amortization because we are
[1:01:40] forced to redo it faster given that we were doing it
[1:01:42] less well. It's
[1:01:45] not certain that in a context it's
[1:01:47] less well done, we can create that
[1:01:49] situation. I can do the
[1:01:50] validation there, to my knowledge the
[1:01:52] answer is no, but it's worth
[1:01:54] taking a little look at
[1:01:55] that side to make sure we're
[1:01:57] not creating a bubble.
[1:02:00] THANKS.
[1:02:09] Robert Pilote, Rue de la Butte.
[1:02:10] Good evening.
[1:02:11] Um, regarding leisure activities, the
[1:02:15] swimming pool file, is there...
[1:02:18] I don't know if there's an agreement, are there any
[1:02:19] provisions?
[1:02:21] Can you give us a quick
[1:02:23] update? Is there anything
[1:02:26] in the budget for that?
[1:02:28] Indeed, you had a good eye. No,
[1:02:30] the council decided not to allocate any
[1:02:32] money for the swimming pool project in the
[1:02:35] budget. So it was a choice precisely
[1:02:39] considering everything that
[1:02:41] was presented to you, the increase in
[1:02:44] all expenses everywhere,
[1:02:46] all that. So that's it for now
[1:02:50] . I didn't put any
[1:02:52] money in your pocket, but what motivates this is whether
[1:02:55] the requests for high prices are
[1:02:58] considered excessive compared to what
[1:03:01] the
[1:03:04] proportional use of Saintféréol would be in
[1:03:06] relation to price and other factors? Well, you
[1:03:09] know, I think there's a
[1:03:10] subjective part to it in
[1:03:12] the sense that, as you know
[1:03:14] , we've been trying
[1:03:15] to reach an agreement with the
[1:03:17] pool for several years. Then, uh, you know, just recently, right
[1:03:20] before the holidays,
[1:03:23] anyway, I see, right before the holidays, we,
[1:03:26] the participating municipalities, met to
[1:03:28] see if there was anything we could agree on
[1:03:33] . Then the offer that was on
[1:03:36] the table, well for us, it was
[1:03:38] still too high compared to the
[1:03:40] amount we
[1:03:43] wanted to put into this
[1:03:45] project. We never hid anything at the
[1:03:46] municipal level, did we? We
[1:03:48] would always have liked to be able to be a
[1:03:51] paying user, in our opinion.
[1:03:54] Paying user equals one shell part
[1:03:57] plus a price at the door. Uh, but that's not quite right, it's that we have
[1:04:03] the deficit based on
[1:04:05] land values. Probably that's it
[1:04:07] indeed.
[1:04:08] Well, it's
[1:04:10] not always easy at your
[1:04:12] prices. Um, one question:
[1:04:15] transfer taxes still bring in quite a lot of
[1:04:17] money
[1:04:18] legally because we know that
[1:04:21] the population is aging. I just read
[1:04:23] an article where people say the house is
[1:04:25] big, it's a lot of maintenance, I
[1:04:27] want to go smaller. If someone with a
[1:04:30] lower property value wants to
[1:04:32] relocate to a smaller property, do they
[1:04:35] pay a transfer tax equal to
[1:04:39] the value of the new
[1:04:40] property,
[1:04:42] or do they
[1:04:46] not pay it if the property value decreases? Do
[1:04:47] you have the option of doing
[1:04:48] something like that? Would the
[1:04:50] law allow it? Perhaps something
[1:04:52] to consider because
[1:04:54] people look at it and then say, well, the
[1:04:56] house and the land, or it's this, it's that, we're
[1:04:58] years old, we'd rather
[1:05:00] rent, we know there are
[1:05:02] rental projects coming up
[1:05:04] that could be
[1:05:05] interesting, well, maybe that will be
[1:05:07] a motivation for those people who have
[1:05:09] adopted Saintol to stay in Saintol.
[1:05:11] For my part,
[1:05:13] I've already read something related
[1:05:15] to this, but I don't have the answer to
[1:05:17] your question. I'm not knowledgeable enough,
[1:05:20] I mean, on this subject.
[1:05:21] Perhaps, sir, I don't know if
[1:05:23] you... Firstly, I'm not
[1:05:25] sure I understand the question.
[1:05:28] I have a property worth millions, too
[1:05:30] big. I'm going to get something smaller,
[1:05:33] but I'd like to invest in Saintol.
[1:05:35] I'm selling my house and then buying a smaller one
[1:05:37] . Yes,
[1:05:38] but if I pay the transfer tax
[1:05:40] on the smaller one, I've already paid my
[1:05:43] taxes, my welcome fees, these
[1:05:46] things. Tell me, is there anything
[1:05:49] that would be possible by law
[1:05:51] for someone who is already a resident? You
[1:05:53] understand that if I buy something
[1:05:55] that is more expensive, well, at least I'm paying on
[1:05:57] the difference rather than on the full
[1:05:59] amount. Just to be clear, the
[1:06:00] welcome tax and then the transfer tax
[1:06:02] are the same thing. He already has a tax at
[1:06:05] my age, sometimes we do it, it's
[1:06:08] an excellent question.
[1:06:10] What I understand is that at the
[1:06:11] age level, if it's possible to make a
[1:06:14] program because what is possible,
[1:06:16] for example, is to be able to
[1:06:18] pay the transfer taxes in several installments
[1:06:20] . So that's something
[1:06:22] that uh I presented to the old
[1:06:25] council and I'm going to bring it up again
[1:06:27] with the new council because I
[1:06:28] think it's something
[1:06:30] interesting but to be able to
[1:06:32] legislate for an age group I don't
[1:06:37] know if it's not
[1:06:39] even if it's not a group of just the
[1:06:40] fact of having it's just the fact of
[1:06:42] prolocating an
[1:06:43] OK just to someone who would have a
[1:06:44] bigger house that has
[1:06:47] characters
[1:06:48] excuse me jeiqué on the not the
[1:06:51] [laughs]
[1:06:51] the question
[1:06:53] uh but we can look at it. I don't know what
[1:06:56] is
[1:06:57] legally possible.
[1:06:58] No, that's it.
[1:07:07] Uh, wastewater
[1:07:09] treatment plant.
[1:07:12] Uh, we're talking about core strengthening. There, there was
[1:07:15] an amount of 2 million in 2026.
[1:07:21] 900000 in 2027
[1:07:24] the sheathing.
[1:07:26] Uh, if I remember correctly the
[1:07:29] billing method there, the code is part of the
[1:07:32] municipality based on the volume
[1:07:35] that is sent, the water and the
[1:07:38] suspended solids.
[1:07:40] We faced some very big challenges with that.
[1:07:42] I believe we have already paid
[1:07:44] millions too much. We've proven it all in
[1:07:46] this case. So, during the
[1:07:49] characterizations, it's
[1:07:52] more about age in a period where
[1:07:54] it has become more focused, it's nonsense, so now
[1:07:58] I'm asking myself
[1:08:00] when the next characterization is and what we are
[1:08:03] putting in place to
[1:08:04] ensure that it will be done according to the
[1:08:06] rules of the art so that we don't get taken for a ride again,
[1:08:10] if you'll allow me
[1:08:11] the expression,
[1:08:13] the exact date I will let the gentleman
[1:08:15] answer later. But what
[1:08:17] I can tell you is that I know that there are
[1:08:19] now some of our
[1:08:22] employees who go on site also
[1:08:24] during the characterization.
[1:08:27] So what are we putting in place,
[1:08:29] among other things? That's what having a
[1:08:30] form of double verification is like, if I
[1:08:32] may say so.
[1:08:33] I think that's the
[1:08:37] one who manages the contract, it's Beaupré.
[1:08:40] They're not there, or almost not. He
[1:08:43] gives a contract. We had major discussions
[1:08:45] about what the methods should be
[1:08:47] . We explained everything to them
[1:08:50] and finally we had won the point
[1:08:52] that it was going to be done that way. And
[1:08:54] even then, the people who came to do it
[1:08:57] weren't of the highest caliber.
[1:09:00] So the way it was done meant that we
[1:09:02] could still argue about the
[1:09:05] quality of the results.
[1:09:09] I think sir, I think sir, there are
[1:09:10] more details there considering that it is quite
[1:09:12] technical. I'll let him
[1:09:13] complete the answer.
[1:09:17] Uh, 2028, for your information. So that's why
[1:09:19] the next characterization
[1:09:22] will take place in 2028. So that leaves us
[1:09:24] 2026 and 2027 to prepare. So from
[1:09:28] there the sheathing work uh in the
[1:09:30] PTI uh we already have for your information we
[1:09:34] already have small contracts that have been
[1:09:36] given for the treatment plant for
[1:09:38] other files and we have asked to be involved
[1:09:41] . So what was happening, what we
[1:09:42] realized, was that we
[1:09:44] weren't even there since the client
[1:09:45] wasn't inferior to the snow.
[1:09:47] We weren't even invited to the meetings,
[1:09:49] we weren't even informed. So since
[1:09:52] then, I've been here for a year now
[1:09:54] , I've had the chance to have all the
[1:09:56] mandates that were given, either me or
[1:09:58] a representative of the municipality
[1:10:00] was around the table so I could
[1:10:02] intervene. So I
[1:10:04] expect it to be the same
[1:10:06] in terms of characterizations. If we are going to
[1:10:07] name him, then we have always had
[1:10:09] collaboration, at least I have for the past year, and
[1:10:11] since I have been asking for it, there are
[1:10:13] stakeholders who have changed on the
[1:10:15] other side. I can't say because
[1:10:16] I've only been
[1:10:18] interacting there for a year. But, you know,
[1:10:20] basically our request and the openness we've had so far
[1:10:22] is to be involved,
[1:10:23] to have our say
[1:10:25] . So, uh, that's what we're going to
[1:10:28] continue to do in terms of
[1:10:29] characterizations on that side. So there's a reason we're
[1:10:31] preparing. We
[1:10:34] know that it is also the way the contract
[1:10:36] was structured that allows the residual to be
[1:10:39] paid at a good price. It's something we
[1:10:41] look at and then challenge as well
[1:10:43] . So right now, I would say
[1:10:45] that everything is on the table for
[1:10:48] the wastewater treatment plant, even seeing if we
[1:10:49] could reopen the contract there
[1:10:51] and try to come and
[1:10:53] update it because it's been a while since
[1:10:55] this control has been running.
[1:10:57] So we are here because it is certain that when
[1:11:00] the factory was built, there were
[1:11:02] assessments and we were
[1:11:04] very low on what was
[1:11:08] undervalued
[1:11:09] and undervalued. On the other hand, when
[1:11:11] you look at how the
[1:11:13] characterization was done, it was quite pointed out
[1:11:15] that maybe it wasn't that
[1:11:17] different after all. But here, if we do
[1:11:18] a good characterization,
[1:11:21] we know I don't have a problem. Do we
[1:11:22] pay for what we use, and if there have been
[1:11:25] things over time that
[1:11:27] need correcting, I have no problem with
[1:11:29] the municipality being a good
[1:11:31] partner in that. But I think it's
[1:11:33] important because we're talking about
[1:11:35] 3 million for the core strengthening. Pledge. Uh, that's
[1:11:39] for the waters that fit into the
[1:11:42] taste system. I think 25
[1:11:46] % of the bill is for the volume
[1:11:48] of water and the rest is for
[1:11:49] suspended solids. At this point I'm thinking, 25% or we put
[1:11:53] 3 million for the 75%, what are we
[1:11:57] doing to make sure we're not on
[1:12:00] a sham?
[1:12:00] The insulation work is
[1:12:02] eligible for subsidies up to an average height of
[1:12:04] 80%. On that side, the cost price is
[1:12:06] not 2.9 million, I
[1:12:08] assure you. And what also needs to be taken
[1:12:10] into consideration is where there are
[1:12:12] water leaks, but there are also
[1:12:13] sand leaks, of other materials that
[1:12:17] collect in the network and
[1:12:19] impact the data as well.
[1:12:21] OK. Yeah, I understand that. But I must
[1:12:23] reiterate that
[1:12:25] you will need to follow the keying process very, very
[1:12:27] closely.
[1:12:28] Thank you, sir pilot. Ah,
[1:12:29] I'm not finished.
[1:12:29] I'm going to... There are other people who do it,
[1:12:31] if that doesn't bother you. I was on a
[1:12:33] roll with
[1:12:35] all the questions for
[1:12:37] Merci.
[1:12:39] Yes, good evening Anne, Coubertin's laughter.
[1:12:43] Okay, I have a few questions.
[1:12:47] Uh, question
[1:12:49] 1.
[1:12:51] When you talk about PTI in the immobilis
[1:12:54] , the link between active immobility and
[1:12:57] village heart, what is it or
[1:12:59] just? Actually, uh, I don't know if you
[1:13:00] remember, but in
[1:13:02] recent years, we've talked about
[1:13:04] showing interest in having a sidewalk in
[1:13:07] the village. Then, uh, in parallel with that,
[1:13:10] the government announced a
[1:13:13] green route project, a
[1:13:15] multi-functional style road that would connect the
[1:13:18] national capital to Saint-Siméon. So,
[1:13:21] when we found out about that, well,
[1:13:23] our project was put on hold for the
[1:13:27] final part of this road trip. Then we said to ourselves,
[1:13:29] but if he goes through the royal avenue,
[1:13:32] we for example have already made a
[1:13:33] sidewalk and there for them for example it is
[1:13:35] a multi-functional track we did
[1:13:37] not want to have to undo what we have just
[1:13:39] done. So we're actually waiting for the
[1:13:42] final plans from their end. Then, I'm
[1:13:45] going a bit far here, but possibly if,
[1:13:47] for example, it's a
[1:13:48] multifunctional link or something, we could
[1:13:51] perhaps look into a
[1:13:52] form of partnership with them, you know, either
[1:13:54] a grant or something so
[1:13:56] that it could also benefit us.
[1:13:58] The fact is that basically this amount is
[1:14:00] at the level of the study there if you
[1:14:02] want there for this project
[1:14:04] for the study sidewalks for the
[1:14:05] sidewalks
[1:14:06] and or as I tell you
[1:14:08] multifunctional track according to the route also
[1:14:10] of the green road.
[1:14:12] Uh, OK. Speaking of all that, let's
[1:14:14] put the backs of the weapons there, which
[1:14:16] you told me might be going
[1:14:19] forward. Were they
[1:14:21] described in the PTI? I didn't notice.
[1:14:24] No, not like that. You wanted
[1:14:27] the amounts to have been allocated directly
[1:14:29] in the operating budget on that
[1:14:31] side. So yes, there will be a
[1:14:33] presentation to be made to the council
[1:14:35] regarding the management, I mean, of
[1:14:38] the speed and the development there of the
[1:14:41] village. So it's something that will
[1:14:43] come from that direction. I'm taking it in my hand at the
[1:14:44] same time.
[1:14:45] Yeah, [laughs]
[1:14:47] that's it. We had
[1:14:49] talked, but you know, I thought
[1:14:51] you forgot to mention if we had said it there
[1:14:52] literally there. No, you didn't miss it
[1:14:54] . It wasn't written, it didn't exist
[1:14:56] . symbol. Uh, my second question is,
[1:14:59] when you talk about the
[1:15:01] percentage of remuneration, you
[1:15:03] presented a nice graph and all that, and
[1:15:06] then Saintféréol, well you say that it is
[1:15:08] positioned well there compared to
[1:15:11] other municipalities. I would like to point out
[1:15:13] one thing to you, uh, the number of
[1:15:15] managers, the number of managerial staff
[1:15:17] in Saintfériol, it is quite high,
[1:15:20] it is very high compared to other
[1:15:22] municipalities. I calculated this earlier
[1:15:25] during the presentation in Saintféol,
[1:15:27] it's 30% of employees, in
[1:15:30] Chaicher it's 13%, in Bois Châtel
[1:15:34] it's 20%, in Beauprice it's 15%. Can
[1:15:37] I know why there are so many
[1:15:38] managers in the staff
[1:15:41] at the municipality?
[1:15:42] I want to tell you that I think it also depends on,
[1:15:44] I'll say, the
[1:15:46] title. If I give you an example in
[1:15:48] communications, the
[1:15:49] communications coordinator, well, she doesn't have
[1:15:52] anyone under her, but she
[1:15:55] is considered a manager. It
[1:15:57] reports directly to the
[1:15:59] general management. Uh, she's not the
[1:16:02] manager, she's not someone who's going to be
[1:16:04] in the union either. You know, that
[1:16:07] function in the organizational chart, we,
[1:16:09] for example, have placed it like this.
[1:16:11] is an example I'm giving you right now
[1:16:12] . We have, I don't know if you
[1:16:14] saw this go by, but we have
[1:16:16] a new coordinator
[1:16:19] for urban planning. Well, Martin
[1:16:22] Robichot, who is the director,
[1:16:24] has been more involved in the role of
[1:16:27] project manager. So, these are
[1:16:28] positions that are not unionized, uh, that's it
[1:16:33] , sometimes they will have
[1:16:34] employees under them, sometimes not. But you
[1:16:36] know, I would say that it's not bad,
[1:16:38] I think, in terms of the organization,
[1:16:40] strategically it was
[1:16:42] built like that, if you will. I don't know
[1:16:44] if the gentleman wants to address this with you
[1:16:46] .
[1:16:46] It's as if there's more ch than
[1:16:48] ien there, it makes for a very
[1:16:50] high-quality rat.
[1:16:51] In fact, it's important not to
[1:16:52] confuse these non-unionized staff members
[1:16:54] . So, uh, we have certain frameworks.
[1:16:57] Yes. Then they are all part
[1:16:58] of the same collection. So all
[1:17:01] their working conditions are under the
[1:17:03] same, uh, under the same collection. But we
[1:17:06] have many non-
[1:17:08] unionized employees who are in this position because
[1:17:10] they have access to
[1:17:11] privileged information but who do not
[1:17:14] necessarily have employees under their command.
[1:17:17] Well, uh, I also had a
[1:17:19] suggestion to make regarding this for
[1:17:21] the employees. Well, I don't have in the PTI
[1:17:23] uh you often refer to
[1:17:26] studies there to do work. Well, these are
[1:17:28] studies by
[1:17:29] engineering firms, I imagine. Yeah. Um,
[1:17:32] I know someone in my
[1:17:33] circle who is a civil engineer for
[1:17:36] municipalities in Quebec. Then, uh,
[1:17:39] in some municipalities, they
[1:17:41] actually hire engineers.
[1:17:44] Because when you do it with a
[1:17:46] firm, the firm is looking at 2.5 times
[1:17:49] what it costs, you know, when we talk
[1:17:52] about feasibility studies,
[1:17:54] profitability, it could be very
[1:17:56] profitable to have an engineer
[1:17:58] working for you who could
[1:17:59] be shared with another municipality.
[1:18:01] Indeed, sharing like that
[1:18:03] is something that had already been
[1:18:05] discussed at the MRC level,
[1:18:08] sharing of professionals like that, but frankly
[1:18:10] , I think it didn't go beyond that
[1:18:11] level of
[1:18:13] discussion. Yes, yes, it is
[1:18:14] relevant madam
[1:18:16] because there are many things,
[1:18:17] infrastructure management,
[1:18:19] intervention plans as well, to the management
[1:18:22] of government subsidies.
[1:18:24] It's very complicated. That's what
[1:18:25] the engineer was telling me. Then at some point
[1:18:27] , you need people who know about
[1:18:28] this. That's very profitable.
[1:18:31] and I'm noting it down to restart the
[1:18:34] discussion. You'll pay
[1:18:37] your engineering brothers for this quickly.
[1:18:41] Another question,
[1:18:44] I'll leave that one to you and
[1:18:45] then we'll give the floor to
[1:18:46] someone else.
[1:18:47] When you say the codes are part of
[1:18:50] the bill, we receive it, we don't have a word to
[1:18:52] say, we pay it. Personally, I think it's
[1:18:55] the bad payers, those
[1:18:57] who don't pay and those who pay too
[1:18:58] quickly. Um, I would like to
[1:19:01] tell you that the codes are open to
[1:19:04] discussion, I think. This has been
[1:19:06] proven by former Laurette and then
[1:19:08] Saint-Augustin Démor in relation to
[1:19:09] Quebec there. Uh, but what I've
[1:19:12] noticed is that this is the cost
[1:19:15] increase, the factory, the
[1:19:18] filtration factory, the factory, good price, it's
[1:19:20] very high. So why exactly,
[1:19:24] sir? Yeah, but as we
[1:19:26] explained earlier, uh,
[1:19:29] understood.
[1:19:29] Yes, in fact we have an
[1:19:32] agreement and every 3 years we have to do
[1:19:34] a characterization. So, we actually measure
[1:19:37] the sediments that
[1:19:40] pass through the pipes and it is
[1:19:42] on this charge that we
[1:19:44] are charged. I'm simplifying all of this
[1:19:46] here. It's because I'm being looked at and
[1:19:47] thinking that maybe I'm
[1:19:49] simplifying a little too much here, it's 5
[1:19:51] years and in fact it's done from
[1:19:53] this characterization the way it's
[1:19:55] done is that all the
[1:19:57] municipalities are able to make
[1:19:59] this measurement and beautiful price pays the
[1:20:01] residual of all this so if it's 100%
[1:20:04] but Saintériol pays 25 Saint-Joischin
[1:20:07] pays 25 uh
[1:20:09] in the end it's beautiful pays 25 and
[1:20:14] beautiful pays the residual so that's how
[1:20:16] it works. So it's certain that in
[1:20:17] terms of characterizations, as we were
[1:20:19] mentioning, we have
[1:20:20] certain small elements in the
[1:20:22] municipality, we have worked in
[1:20:23] recent years to correct
[1:20:26] everything and we continue to do so. But the key
[1:20:28] to war is really
[1:20:30] characterization because that's what
[1:20:31] impacts us. I said 3 years, but it's
[1:20:33] for 5 years. Thank you, sir. Uh, and that's where we
[1:20:35] need to make sure that the
[1:20:37] characterization is as accurate as
[1:20:39] possible for our municipality to
[1:20:41] ensure that it really represents the
[1:20:44] sediments that pass through the pipes,
[1:20:46] the sediments that are
[1:20:48] treated at the city of Beaupré, which is
[1:20:50] charged by Beaupré for use
[1:20:52] in the lower part. That's it. That's
[1:20:54] it. framed by an agreement, as we were
[1:20:56] saying earlier, it is negotiable on the
[1:20:57] part of the codes. I'll answer
[1:21:00] that I don't disagree, but
[1:21:01] all of this is by agreement, you know. So if
[1:21:04] an agreement states that we pay based on the
[1:21:06] land value, then our land value has
[1:21:07] increased. The SQ is a
[1:21:11] good example of this. So, the French are increasing
[1:21:14] our share at the SQ, but you have to
[1:21:16] be a little bit combative, a little bit
[1:21:18] there to, uh, so that we
[1:21:19] could try to negotiate this, but
[1:21:21] some, like with the SQ, you have to get up,
[1:21:23] happiness, well,
[1:21:24] in any case, it takes people,
[1:21:25] maybe an engineer, that could
[1:21:27] help you in this direction,
[1:21:28] me, but just the most mobile,
[1:21:30] the increase is quite astronomical, that's why,
[1:21:34] exactly, because
[1:21:36] I see this little bus passing through my neighborhood and
[1:21:37] I don't see
[1:21:40] many people on it. So this is a
[1:21:42] pilot project that Saintéréol and Beaupré
[1:21:45] have decided to implement. So,
[1:21:48] to offer a weekend service, initially
[1:21:54] teenagers were the target audience, but we
[1:21:56] quickly realized that it could also be of
[1:21:57] use to the
[1:21:59] elderly. So you know, as you know,
[1:22:01] public transport is not
[1:22:02] served on the Beaua coast, the most
[1:22:05] basic mobile option is the one that goes directly to
[1:22:08] Quebec City. So we wanted to see
[1:22:10] if this could meet
[1:22:12] a need. So it's on Friday evenings
[1:22:14] between 4:30pm and 10pm. Saturday and Sunday
[1:22:17] between 7am and 10pm. It's
[1:22:20] a loop. There are approximately 11 or 12
[1:22:22] stops in Saintriol
[1:22:25] in Beaupré and then there are two stops in
[1:22:27] Saint-Angré there. So, to take
[1:22:29] people there to the participating shops.
[1:22:32] So we did this first
[1:22:34] pilot project from September to
[1:22:36] December. Then the council, we said to ourselves,
[1:22:38] well if we stop it now, we wo
[1:22:41] n't have the portrait of the year to see if it
[1:22:44] actually meets
[1:22:45] a need. So we've set ourselves the challenge
[1:22:48] of relaunching it this year. Beaupré was
[1:22:51] also there and agreed to continue.
[1:22:54] So I would say that at the end of the
[1:22:55] year, we will see if it actually
[1:22:57] meets a need. For now, what
[1:22:59] I can tell you is that the
[1:23:00] numbers are constantly increasing
[1:23:03] every month. So, you know, it
[1:23:05] deserves to be better known. Uh, and that's it.
[1:23:07] We'll see what happens next. Indeed, we
[1:23:09] know that, public transport, I'm not
[1:23:10] telling you anything new here, is not something
[1:23:12] profitable, it's a service to
[1:23:15] citizens. So, we make the choice to
[1:23:17] say, well, we are on a
[1:23:20] longitudinal territory.
[1:23:23] THANKS.
[1:23:24] So we thought, well, why not, try and see if it can
[1:23:29] meet a need. So that's why,
[1:23:31] yes, it goes from a small amount
[1:23:34] to a very large one, and the balance sheet will be done
[1:23:36] at the end of this year.
[1:23:38] Yes.
[1:23:39] It would be at the end of the year, actually it would
[1:23:41] be.
[1:23:42] Yeah, but the end of the year would actually be
[1:23:44] like
[1:23:44] this.
[1:23:46] Yes, that's true. It's for the
[1:23:47] whole year. That's it. Yes.
[1:23:49] The year this year, end of 2026. OK.
[1:23:53] THANKS.
[1:23:58] Hello, I've been on
[1:24:01] Nagano Street for two and a half years now, there's a
[1:24:03] little miss who comes from Mont
[1:24:05] Saintler, so
[1:24:06] it makes me happy,
[1:24:07] my daughter is here. So look, with
[1:24:10] the environment I'm very satisfied,
[1:24:12] uh, just disappointed with the budgets.
[1:24:16] So I worked for 10 years in
[1:24:17] municipalities as head of
[1:24:18] cultural division and then as director of
[1:24:21] leisure. So I don't know those figures either,
[1:24:24] in sanitation
[1:24:26] or in water. It's especially when we
[1:24:28] lose water that it costs
[1:24:30] a municipality a lot of money. The fact that I
[1:24:31] understood this is a new term.
[1:24:34] The population of what I know there seems to be
[1:24:36] 3300. I thought, OK,
[1:24:38] we've reached 405,
[1:24:42] my god. Sometime between last year or
[1:24:44] 2023 in any case. OK, perfect. We've
[1:24:46] reached 4000. OK. I was the
[1:24:48] recreation director for the municipality of
[1:24:50] McMasterville, which is next to Bœil, and it had
[1:24:52] 5500 residents at the time.
[1:24:56] Um, what is the increase this
[1:24:59] year? The increase in spending
[1:25:01] there is 9%. Got it. OK. The cost of
[1:25:05] living is OK.
[1:25:07] 2.4. Well, it's
[1:25:08] because the city of
[1:25:09] Quebec, unless other miners there,
[1:25:11] but I got that from the newspaper. There can
[1:25:12] always be an error, but between 2,
[1:25:14] then 3, then 9 there is still a
[1:25:15] big difference. What is
[1:25:17] the increase this year in the
[1:25:20] budget compared to
[1:25:23] last year? What is
[1:25:24] the increase in
[1:25:25] property tax? They do
[1:25:28] n't understand my question either. I'll
[1:25:29] let the gentleman figure it out. Your
[1:25:32] examples were based on 365,000. You
[1:25:34] lowered that, good, I understood everything about the
[1:25:36] average increase in the tax fund.
[1:25:38] That's 5%.
[1:25:39] THANKS. Last year
[1:25:41] it was 10 points something.
[1:25:42] Last year, 3.2,
[1:25:45] we had 10%. There are some who had
[1:25:47] 3.2 last year,
[1:25:49] well there was a 10% where it was at the
[1:25:51] level of expenses which were 10%. We
[1:25:53] shouldn't associate increased
[1:25:54] spending with increased
[1:25:56] tax rates. OK.
[1:25:57] Um, what is the
[1:26:00] average income of people here? I do
[1:26:03] n't have that information, madam.
[1:26:04] But it would be important because we
[1:26:06] understand each other among the people who live,
[1:26:08] I think, a little bit higher up.
[1:26:09] Me too.
[1:26:11] With the lower level of
[1:26:13] resorts near Mont Saint, there's
[1:26:14] definitely a difference, we
[1:26:17] should take that into account, it's
[1:26:18] very important to know the average income, okay, we have to
[1:26:21] understand this year
[1:26:22] with the property tax roll, what it creates
[1:26:24] is tax reductions for these
[1:26:25] people, because
[1:26:28] average increases in residences tend to be
[1:26:30] lower in the east than in
[1:26:32] the west,
[1:26:33] OK yeah, that's it, there's the east and the west or
[1:26:35] not, but what I see is that it seems like there's a renewal
[1:26:38] in
[1:26:39] the houses.
[1:26:40] People have taken over their
[1:26:42] parents' house, at least that's what I
[1:26:43] guess, and there are renovations and that, and they're
[1:26:47] more beautiful and all that.
[1:26:50] OK, so there is still an
[1:26:51] increase for the gentleman who was talking
[1:26:53] about the Federation of the Age
[1:26:55] of Art at the moment regarding the
[1:26:56] welcome tax, there is nothing being done regarding
[1:26:58] the transfer tax, nothing is being
[1:27:00] done. I would be surprised if the
[1:27:01] municipalities accepted that. What I
[1:27:03] understood is that someone who was a
[1:27:04] resident of Saint-Fériol and then
[1:27:07] moves back to Saint-Fériol after
[1:27:09] a certain age, let's say 65 years old, and then I don't know, can I, apologize madam, can I bring
[1:27:13] you back to the
[1:27:15] questions, perfect. Well, I'm
[1:27:17] disappointed too because I'm very
[1:27:19] visual, it's beautiful. But I mean
[1:27:21] , I didn't photograph them
[1:27:22] like Madame Fait did, it would have been fun
[1:27:24] for us who were there, who took
[1:27:25] the trouble to at least follow along, you
[1:27:28] know, with the comparison. That's very
[1:27:29] well done. But it's just that we
[1:27:31] could have had
[1:27:32] copies. We take little notes and
[1:27:33] everything. So for me, that's, uh, that's
[1:27:36] desirable at least for the people who are running
[1:27:37] , you know. I mean, we're following along just
[1:27:39] like you. Then I think it gives
[1:27:41] us pleasure to listen to you and
[1:27:42] also to understand and then we can
[1:27:44] pass that on to everyone so that
[1:27:47] everyone knows it well.
[1:27:51] I'm going to ask you to wait before
[1:27:53] going to the microphone.
[1:27:54] No no, but you'll be doing it from front to
[1:27:56] scrap paper, newspaper, that doesn't
[1:27:58] bother me. Uh, the other thing, just
[1:28:00] quickly, also regarding leisure activities
[1:28:03] as such, there was an adaptation of
[1:28:05] Jo's camp, I completely
[1:28:07] agree, I'm a director of leisure activities,
[1:28:09] I'm not against camps, I don't know
[1:28:11] if there was a big increase or
[1:28:12] what, but in any case I didn't understand what it was,
[1:28:14] I know it's at the
[1:28:15] level of the camp, listen, I don't even want to know,
[1:28:17] not what costs me more, what
[1:28:19] tires me a little, well, not a little, a
[1:28:22] lot, is what is the percentage
[1:28:23] of the city's debt at the moment, here,
[1:28:26] exact percentage, and it seems to me that we
[1:28:29] are at 12% in fact. We are very, very low
[1:28:32] compared to our comparisons of
[1:28:35] the MRC and even Quebec. Here, we have
[1:28:37] very little debt.
[1:28:40] Well, I repeat again, we are at 3000-4000
[1:28:42] m, so much the better. 4002
[1:28:45] 4000 I don't know what. But let's just say
[1:28:46] that the babies aren't providing enough yet. We understand each other
[1:28:48] . Do you agree with that too
[1:28:50] ? I think that's what I see in the
[1:28:52] numbers. I worked in Ville
[1:28:54] d'Anjou, McMasterville, uh, Brossard, and
[1:28:57] I see figures that look like
[1:28:59] these, I'm going to call some of my
[1:29:00] colleagues. I think that's high.
[1:29:03] Well yes, you put a lot of fire
[1:29:06] there especially the fire station as far as I'm
[1:29:09] concerned I'm there there unless
[1:29:11] you buy a new
[1:29:12] fire truck which I was told
[1:29:14] separately because it no longer fits in
[1:29:16] the fire station. So now we
[1:29:18] 're ready to buy a new
[1:29:19] fire station. Community center, if the
[1:29:21] community center. Yes. Well,
[1:29:23] anyway, I came here for the
[1:29:25] Christmas shows with my little ones, my
[1:29:27] little girl, and all that. I
[1:29:28] think it's very good. It looks
[1:29:29] rustic. It doesn't always look very
[1:29:31] modern. I'm telling you this just because there are so many wasted opportunities
[1:29:33] ,
[1:29:35] the Sûreté du Québec and whoever
[1:29:37] wants to negotiate with the Sûreté du Québec, we've had to
[1:29:38] sit down for a long time. What I do
[1:29:41] know, for example, is that each of the
[1:29:42] councillors, madam, sits on
[1:29:45] these committees, whether it be at the
[1:29:48] level of water, the water board, the
[1:29:50] safety of Quebec and so on. I
[1:29:53] imagine that if you are present it is
[1:29:56] because you have a say in this, and to
[1:29:57] say, "This is
[1:29:59] expensive, guys, can we do something about it?"
[1:30:01] No, you're right, if we take
[1:30:02] the example of the SQ, it's
[1:30:04] more at the MRC level. We saw
[1:30:06] a presentation last year, and
[1:30:09] indeed, it's flat to say, but we
[1:30:12] have nothing to say, we are being told
[1:30:14] how it works, how it will be
[1:30:17] distributed, and it's the burden we
[1:30:19] have, where do we have a little power to
[1:30:21] see, I would say, it's about trying to have
[1:30:23] more presence in our
[1:30:25] territories. That's where we
[1:30:27] put the pressure to get
[1:30:29] more cars. That's where we apply
[1:30:32] the pressure. But on a purely
[1:30:34] monetary level, I told you, but I
[1:30:36] can tell you that they are not present
[1:30:38] and I asked that they be present at some point, it is
[1:30:39] me, I live on
[1:30:41] Nagano opposite the street, I don't remember what it's
[1:30:44] called, which goes
[1:30:45] towards the new development in the back, who
[1:30:46] are these fake skeptics there, the big
[1:30:48] development in the back, there is
[1:30:49] nobody who stops.
[1:30:52] Person. OK, and there are little
[1:30:55] children who, in the morning, I'm not
[1:30:57] joking, I mean, I see it, I
[1:30:58] 'm at my window, and there are
[1:31:00] little children who are there, primary school children,
[1:31:02] young primary school children, who are there, the bus, there's
[1:31:04] nobody by, you see, we're moving away
[1:31:05] from our,
[1:31:08] I just want to tell you
[1:31:09] that we take this, I
[1:31:11] saw the gentleman note it, that's kind of how we have to
[1:31:12] operate,
[1:31:14] when you have something like that
[1:31:16] to report, don't hesitate to call the
[1:31:18] municipality, we can make the connection
[1:31:20] with them, they will come and be
[1:31:22] present. It's occasional, it's not
[1:31:24] perfect, but it's something we
[1:31:26] can do. It's fantastic.
[1:31:28] In any case, I mean because at some point
[1:31:29] something is going to
[1:31:30] happen because others are
[1:31:31] always developing, it's always, it's not
[1:31:33] just the resident who doesn't stop
[1:31:35] because he's stopped from
[1:31:37] the future royal who lines up there and
[1:31:39] then on the return the same thing, it's
[1:31:41] all the companies, you know,
[1:31:42] the trucks and that which go and
[1:31:44] develop behind the
[1:31:45] houses and I find it
[1:31:47] extremely dangerous that there's an S
[1:31:49] there and they make the S, they don't make
[1:31:51] two stops, they make the S. I don't know
[1:31:52] if it's clear but covered and then it's there and then the
[1:31:54] other one, I don't remember what it's
[1:31:55] called, in front of it, you know, I
[1:31:57] think.
[1:31:57] Exactly.
[1:31:58] Okay, that's it. OK. Listen to the others,
[1:32:00] I think it's unfortunate. I think we
[1:32:01] should have the right at the next
[1:32:03] city council meeting if I receive the
[1:32:05] papers so I
[1:32:08] can ask other questions
[1:32:10] concerning the city. The
[1:32:12] clerk tells me that starting tomorrow
[1:32:14] morning, you will be able to find them
[1:32:16] there on the municipality's website.
[1:32:18] OK. Ah, perfect. Excellent. It's good.
[1:32:19] Thank you so much.
[1:32:26] Good evening.
[1:32:29] committee.
[1:32:30] Good day sir.
[1:32:31] Uh, I just wanted to clarify a little bit about
[1:32:33] the Beaupré factory and the
[1:32:36] Parchal canal. Are you
[1:32:38] familiar with this? Yes.
[1:32:39] OK. There was a protocol that had been
[1:32:40] made in my time there
[1:32:43] and uh that was supposed to be put in place
[1:32:46] systematically. Do you
[1:32:48] still have the protocol to connect all of
[1:32:50] this?
[1:32:51] Ah, I'd have to ask Benoî to
[1:32:52] find out.
[1:32:53] If you don't have it, I can
[1:32:54] help you.
[1:32:56] I worked in that field.
[1:33:00] Yeah.
[1:33:00] André, I don't know if I remember, he was the one who did it
[1:33:06] . And I
[1:33:08] think that by taking it from there and
[1:33:11] following it, we won't have a problem with the
[1:33:14] amount of residual waste.
[1:33:18] OK.
[1:33:18] Thank you, sir.
[1:33:20] I have another question.
[1:33:22] the ecocentre
[1:33:24] in winter. Have you
[1:33:26] budgeted for the
[1:33:30] expenses involved if we go to Saint
[1:33:33] for this waste disposal? Did
[1:33:36] you include anything in your budgets
[1:33:38] to compensate for this title?
[1:33:42] Yes yes yes, those are the
[1:33:45] exact figures, I don't know but yes, that's the
[1:33:46] agreement we made with them.
[1:33:48] agreement because I didn't see anything there in
[1:33:51] the budget related to all that, it's
[1:33:53] an agreement we have for one year
[1:33:55] to start, it started on
[1:33:57] January 1, 2026, so it's certain that
[1:33:59] when we made the budget we were
[1:34:00] still at the level of estimates, we
[1:34:03] definitely kept a small
[1:34:04] budget on that side, but until
[1:34:06] now what we hear is that there are
[1:34:08] volumes but it's not
[1:34:11] more in troubleshooting mode, it's
[1:34:13] really in the summer that we see the
[1:34:14] biggest volumes
[1:34:20] for me, that's all. Thank you
[1:34:22] very much.
[1:34:27] Hello to the people in the
[1:34:29] Saint-Antoine district.
[1:34:29] Good evening, officer.
[1:34:30] I saw in the plan that there were
[1:34:32] budgets for the Saint-Nicolas road.
[1:34:35] Excellent. It's good. He lacked
[1:34:37] love there. Then for the
[1:34:39] next three years. In recent
[1:34:41] years, there has been some
[1:34:42] investment in Saint-Antoine and then
[1:34:45] Sainte-Marie.
[1:34:46] Does that mean that in the
[1:34:48] next three years, there will be zero?
[1:34:51] What do you mean by "there will be
[1:34:52] zero at the Saint-Antoine
[1:34:53] Saint-Marie level"?
[1:34:54] In terms of improvements
[1:34:56] at the level of the Sainte-Marie road and
[1:34:59] during
[1:35:00] Sainte-Marie, I don't know by heart for
[1:35:03] the next three
[1:35:05] years yet. Indeed, there are no
[1:35:06] capital works. Sure there will
[1:35:08] be maintenance work but there is
[1:35:11] nothing planned at the moment at the level
[1:35:13] of Saint-Antoine then Sainte-Marie
[1:35:14] for the next three years
[1:35:15] really our energies reflection
[1:35:18] which has had in the last year or in the
[1:35:21] last years we tear everything down and
[1:35:23] rebuild there is nothing planned on
[1:35:25] that side
[1:35:26] at the level of Sainte-Antoine
[1:35:28] for the three years we are really
[1:35:30] focusing on Col a little a little
[1:35:33] sorry need
[1:35:41] Robert Pilot Saintféréol. Uh, point 6
[1:35:44] relating to waste management. Is it
[1:35:47] just the pricing or is it something else
[1:35:50] ?
[1:35:51] That's the pricing.
[1:35:54] Is waste management
[1:35:56] considered an essential service? I do
[1:35:59] n't know when she has
[1:36:00] negotiations with the union, but
[1:36:02] is this part of the
[1:36:04] essential services that cannot be
[1:36:06] affected, or are
[1:36:10] blue-collar workers considered for
[1:36:12] the moment? You know that the
[1:36:15] law has evolved in recent
[1:36:17] years, but what we have known at the
[1:36:19] blue-collar level is that it was recognized
[1:36:21] as an essential service. So it's our
[1:36:22] blue-collar workers who provide the
[1:36:24] obvious colleague service. So, up until
[1:36:26] now, it's clear that we'll need to find
[1:36:27] a
[1:36:28] legal position on that side to prepare
[1:36:30] for the convention and all eventualities. It's
[1:36:32] nice to have some cheiters there, but when
[1:36:34] it comes, we know there are some, we just
[1:36:37] had a good example of that, not
[1:36:38] too far from the union, who decided
[1:36:41] they wanted to go. Then
[1:36:43] at that point, we know that it is the
[1:36:45] municipality that is really
[1:36:47] in the thick of things.
[1:36:48] For your information,
[1:36:50] union relations are currently very good
[1:36:52] . The collective agreement ends
[1:36:54] on December 31, 2026, so
[1:36:57] at the end of this year,
[1:36:59] and we have already planned to start
[1:37:01] neglecting the
[1:37:03] collective agreement sheet beforehand. OK,
[1:37:13] I need to fill in the blanks. I had
[1:37:15] two other questions. Uh,
[1:37:18] recently we talked about possibly
[1:37:20] two new residential developments, but
[1:37:24] I can't take your
[1:37:25] question in the part related to that. Um, in
[1:37:28] your PTI you presented, did
[1:37:30] you consider the possibility that there might be
[1:37:32] costs associated with these
[1:37:35] developments? That would be
[1:37:37] hypothetical, but because it might
[1:37:39] mean that if the
[1:37:41] treatment plant needs to increase its
[1:37:42] capacity, it will be necessary to search for
[1:37:44] new water sources.
[1:37:45] Well, at the moment the
[1:37:47] quick answer is no, we haven't considered it.
[1:37:49] OK. You didn't consider it. Well, that's what
[1:37:51] I wanted to know because it
[1:37:53] could be additional costs, so
[1:37:56] I think that needs to be taken into consideration.
[1:37:58] Last question, there is a law that
[1:38:00] was adopted this spring, law 79 by
[1:38:04] the minister, the Ministry of
[1:38:06] Municipal Affairs. Does that ring a bell
[1:38:07] ?
[1:38:10] Frankly, no, what's the name of
[1:38:12] the law?
[1:38:13] It's, uh, it's the modernization of
[1:38:16] municipal contractual management. The
[1:38:17] aim is to simplify the ways
[1:38:20] of doing things, to give contracts in a
[1:38:22] less comprehensive way, with
[1:38:24] less administration, After that, awarding
[1:38:27] contracts to, let's say, local people will be
[1:38:30] easy. So, uh, how did he
[1:38:33] say that? Uh, uh, then
[1:38:37] reduce the delays. Reduce the processing times for
[1:38:41] requests. Madam,
[1:38:42] excuse me, what is the
[1:38:43] connection with what has been
[1:38:45] presented?
[1:38:46] Well, the gain is that, uh, if they
[1:38:49] have put in place this new law,
[1:38:50] there must be some
[1:38:52] financial advantages somewhere there, you know. Well,
[1:38:54] it must be reflected in the way things are
[1:38:55] done, right? Has this been
[1:38:59] evaluated yet? It has been evaluated, but the law
[1:39:02] dates from March, but still, because
[1:39:04] all the municipalities were complaining
[1:39:06] that it was difficult to give
[1:39:08] permits, and now they want to simplify,
[1:39:11] but maybe if we simplify
[1:39:13] you will have less
[1:39:15] administrative hassle, maybe
[1:39:17] from what I understand, that's it, that's it, it hasn't
[1:39:19] been evaluated yet, I'll tell you about
[1:39:21] this step, basically it's on the
[1:39:24] current budget.
[1:39:26] It's beautiful. THANKS.
[1:39:30] So I'll take one last
[1:39:31] question.
[1:39:32] Yes. Because listen to me, I'm approaching things
[1:39:35] in a similar way to the two ladies.
[1:39:37] Uh, talking about a framework, but a framework is a...
[1:39:39] So if we look here you have 30
[1:39:44] at the guardian angel 13, we're talking about a good
[1:39:48] price of 20.
[1:39:48] What's the question in relation to that
[1:39:50] ? Well, I find it
[1:39:52] very expensive to have such a
[1:39:55] high p for a small
[1:39:57] municipality. Yeah, to
[1:40:03] have a type of... Yeah,
[1:40:05] but that's what was
[1:40:10] explained earlier. And
[1:40:12] secondly, also more mobile, when you
[1:40:14] look at the figures it's very high. Is it
[1:40:16] an electric car?
[1:40:19] Well no, it's a mini, a mini bus
[1:40:21] like a 16.
[1:40:22] Yeah. Yeah. I see them passing by my house
[1:40:24] . So that means that at that
[1:40:26] moment,
[1:40:27] there is no economy, it's
[1:40:28] oil. It just goes on and on.
[1:40:30] As I said earlier, it's a
[1:40:31] service. Yeah
[1:40:33] , but you know, sometimes
[1:40:34] I find that we're in a
[1:40:37] period of uncertainty pretty much everywhere.
[1:40:40] Well, in the municipality, obviously, there are
[1:40:43] people who are quite wealthy, and there are
[1:40:45] others who are less so. So,
[1:40:47] I think that at that time, the last
[1:40:49] time, there were people who were
[1:40:50] talking about it too. You need to be a little
[1:40:52] more vigilant and pay attention to
[1:40:53] certain expenses. Uh, you live
[1:40:56] here, you know that. So, there are
[1:40:58] certain things there that could
[1:40:59] be changed in the eventuality.
[1:41:01] Indeed, but I would say to you, uh,
[1:41:03] you were talking to me about vision, uh, the
[1:41:05] last time we saw each other, well, that's
[1:41:06] part of our vision.
[1:41:08] The fact is, we often talk about the
[1:41:10] environment, well, if we succeed in
[1:41:12] setting up public transport,
[1:41:15] we will have fewer cars on the
[1:41:17] roads and provide services to our
[1:41:19] citizens, our young and our
[1:41:21] old, everyone, that is part of
[1:41:23] our vision. So I'm tempted to say if we didn't know
[1:41:25] , we won't know. So there's a
[1:41:28] lot of carpooling too. So it's
[1:41:31] the neighbor.
[1:41:32] Yes, I hear you. But you know, you
[1:41:33] agree with me that a teenager, uh,
[1:41:36] you know, he's not going to wait for a taxi. In short
[1:41:39] , it's a political decision that we made
[1:41:41] . Then uh I think I speak on
[1:41:43] behalf of the council, but you take responsibility, we
[1:41:45] try to see if it can meet a
[1:41:48] need. As I mentioned
[1:41:49] earlier, clearly, we know, this is not something that is
[1:41:53] profitable.
[1:41:55] It's a service to the citizens. Yes,
[1:41:57] that's for sure. You're also talking about a
[1:41:59] [ __ ] ball field, uh,
[1:42:02] could that be a
[1:42:03] possibility of doing something
[1:42:04] inside it for the time being? No, because we don't have the
[1:42:07] information, we don't have the
[1:42:08] infrastructure at the moment.
[1:42:10] Could accommodate that. OK.
[1:42:14] No, but it's because sometimes there are
[1:42:15] places that are free that
[1:42:18] can be used. You have
[1:42:19] buildings that are not in use. We don't have any
[1:42:21] at the moment.
[1:42:23] There are rentals that can be
[1:42:24] made at the gym, for example. People, go ahead,
[1:42:29] yes,
[1:42:29] or
[1:42:31] someone, thank you very much
[1:42:37] for your
[1:42:38] participation. This will bring
[1:42:43] the meeting to a close. So I will now ask for a
[1:42:44] motion to adjourn the meeting.
[1:42:47] Thank you very much, thank you all for
[1:42:49] being here. Have a very pleasant evening.