[0:02] Council meeting on Monday, June 24, and I'd like to

[0:06] call the meeting to order and ask if there is

[0:10] any disclosure, pecuniary interest in nature thereof for the closed

[0:15] session. That we are about to move into. Seeing none.

[0:21] Then I would have a motion to move into close,

[0:24] please. Councilor mcdugal. Councilor rock. Thank you.

[49:05] Okay. So that concludes our closed session, and at this

[49:13] point in time, we will now recess until our regular

[49:17] council meeting at 630.

[3:25:06] Good evening, everyone, and welcome to our council meeting. This

[3:25:14] Monday, June 24, 2024. Welcome. And please join me in

[3:25:19] a moment of personal reflection.

[3:26:05] Thank you. Please be seated. Both of you that can.

[3:26:12] And I'm sorry we don't have enough chairs for. Everyone.

[3:26:16] So my apologies on behalf of our council for that.

[3:26:26] Skugog is situated on treaty land that is steeped in

[3:26:29] rich indigenous history. Today we acknowledge that we are gathering

[3:26:33] on the traditional territories of the Mississaugas of Scubag? Island

[3:26:36] First Nation. We recognize and deeply appreciate the historic, indigenous

[3:26:42] connection to this land. And recognize the contributions First nations

[3:26:49] may tea and Inuit peoples have made both in shaping

[3:26:52] and strengthening this community, in particular, our province and country

[3:26:57] as a whole. We are grateful for the opportunity to

[3:27:00] meet here, and we thank all the generations of people

[3:27:03] who have taken care of this land for thousands of.

[3:27:06] Years. You can come in, but it's standing room only.

[3:27:13] The alcohol is not a bad spot to stand either.

[3:27:24] Okay, so at this time, I asked for a disclosure

[3:27:26] of any pecuniary interest in. Nature thereof for the pending

[3:27:29] agenda. Councilor McDougall. Yes, Madam mayor. I made

[3:27:39] a declaration on GPNA council meeting in it, so I

[3:27:43] don't. Have it right in front of me right now,

[3:27:45] but I did enter that declaration with clerk. Thank you,

[3:27:48] Madam Mayor. Thank you very much. Are there any other

[3:27:51] declarations or disclosures of pecuniary. Seeing none. We'll move on

[3:27:58] earlier today. Council met in a closed session. For. Several.

[3:28:08] Reports. And if I could have a display of them.

[3:28:15] The first report 3.1. Sorry. Was dealing with the committee

[3:28:22] resignations and appointments to Sadie Advisory Committee and the appointments

[3:28:27] to the community grants committee. Just like to say that.

[3:28:33] The motion is before us, and if I could have

[3:28:35] a mover and a seconder for that. Councilor Guido. Councilor

[3:28:38] McDougall. Thank you. All in favor? And that is carried.

[3:28:44] Thank you very much. Our second. Report. Dealt with dev

[3:28:52] 20 24 00:26 which. Was a summary of the dogs

[3:28:58] on High Point Road. And we have just a motion.

[3:29:04] To receive that information, and I'll have them over in

[3:29:06] a second. Please, Councilor Leroy. Councilor rock. Thank you. All

[3:29:11] in favor? And that is carried as well. And the

[3:29:16] third and final one from this afternoon. Was 3.3 and

[3:29:21] that dealt with the Magnum general contracting and township of

[3:29:26] Skuggaugh. Minutes of settlement. And just further to that. We'll

[3:29:33] have a council gave direction to staff. And that was

[3:29:39] the end of our closed session. Moving right along. We'll

[3:29:45] ask for announcements from council and then from staff. So

[3:29:49] I'll start with. You, councilor rock. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[3:29:57] I had the pleasure to attend the BIA summer solstice

[3:30:02] sidewalk sale. Unfortunately, It didn't seem to be as many

[3:30:07] people as normal as I think a lot of people

[3:30:09] were worried about the terrible forecast, but it was a

[3:30:13] great event, some good bands playing and great to walk

[3:30:17] around and see people there. I followed that up by

[3:30:20] attending the campfire sip and enjoyment at Applewood Farms after

[3:30:28] that. Were having a special event. In association with the

[3:30:31] summer solstice as well. Which was a lovely event. And

[3:30:36] again, probably. A few less people than they had originally

[3:30:40] hoped for, based on the weather. And finally, on Sunday,

[3:30:44] I was here in town for the roar by the

[3:30:48] shore event. And unfortunately, same news. It has been more

[3:30:53] well attended in the past. Some amazing vehicles there, just

[3:30:57] absolutely gorgeous vehicles. But. I don't believe when we get

[3:31:02] the final attendance tally that it was as well attended.

[3:31:05] As it has been in previous times, but it was

[3:31:07] still great to be out in the town. And seeing

[3:31:09] some of the absolutely amazing vehicles and the dedication that

[3:31:13] the individual. Individuals put into maintaining and refurbishing these vehicles.

[3:31:19] And it's not a wonder that the attendance may have

[3:31:22] been a little bit lower given the weather forecast, especially.

[3:31:26] For. Those beautiful old cars. But thank you on behalf

[3:31:31] of myself and those of us that couldn't. Attend these

[3:31:34] events. For attending on our behalf, thank you. Councilor wright.

[3:31:46] Thank you, madam mayor. On Saturday, I had the pleasure

[3:31:48] of attending the amateur radio operators day at Purplewood Conservation

[3:31:54] area. Ham radio operators are able to communicate. With other

[3:32:00] amateur radio operators around most of the world. With a

[3:32:04] system that bounces signals. Off the ionosphere, as opposed to

[3:32:08] the traditional line of sight method of radio communications, amateur

[3:32:14] radio. Operators can be called on in times of emergencies

[3:32:18] and disasters for essential communication to another systems like the

[3:32:22] Internet and telephone communications fail. It was a very informative

[3:32:28] visit there. And a big shout out. And thanks to

[3:32:32] the amateur radio clubs that put this day on, thank

[3:32:35] you, madamor. Thank you, councilor. I believe a relative of

[3:32:39] yours. Was one of the. Perhaps not in today. 's.

[3:32:46] Time, but previously. And I'm pretty sure they didn't deal

[3:32:49] with Internet back then. Did they? Yes. Thank you, ma'am.

[3:32:53] That is correct. My uncle was a ham radio operator,

[3:32:57] and he. Was a communications officer in the marine during

[3:33:01] the war, so I still have his mobile AM radio.

[3:33:05] So it was a very interesting day for me to

[3:33:08] attend. Very thought provoking. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. Are

[3:33:18] there any further announcements from council councilor McDougall? Thank you,

[3:33:22] Madam mayor. With July 1. Coming soon. Of course we've

[3:33:27] got candidate. But that's not what I'm. Here to mention.

[3:33:30] We have a blue box program and is changing. To

[3:33:34] the extended producer responsibility program. And as well, we have

[3:33:38] an enhanced green bin program. All the details are on

[3:33:41] the region website, but I do know, for instance, diapers

[3:33:44] are now going to be able to be placed in

[3:33:46] the green bin as before. They weren't able to, so.

[3:33:49] Amongst many other changes. So please have a look on

[3:33:52] the Germ region website as well. I believe they have.

[3:33:54] Facebook posts on it as well. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[3:33:57] Thank you, councilor. And. I would just. Actually, I think

[3:34:01] Councilor Guido has an announcement about this afternoon. Thank you.

[3:34:07] Madam Mayor. We would like to offer our congratulations to

[3:34:09] Marwan's global bistro. For celebrating their 10th anniversary. Anyone who

[3:34:18] has had the pleasure of having a meal there knows

[3:34:21] that it is quite. The complement to our downtown. So

[3:34:24] if you are able to stop in and say hello

[3:34:26] at some point this week and offer them your congratulations

[3:34:29] as well. Thank you, madam. Here. Thank you, councilor. And

[3:34:33] moving on to staff. We'll start with you, Rob Froska.

[3:34:39] Thank you, Madam Mayor. This Saturday, June the 29th, the

[3:34:45] Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters will be hosting the

[3:34:48] free boat washing event at the township's old rail boat

[3:34:51] launch in Port Perry. The purpose for this event is

[3:34:55] to help promote the. Invading species awareness program, also known

[3:34:59] as ISAb. The. Event conducts public engagement and outreach to

[3:35:05] educate the invasive species. And their associated ecological and economical

[3:35:10] impacts. ISOP staff will help or will be providing educational

[3:35:14] resources and speaking with the public to increase awareness on

[3:35:17] how to mitigate the risk. Or spread invasive species like

[3:35:22] zebra muscles and asian carbs. I thought we'll be providing

[3:35:26] a free boat cleaning service using a pressure washer to

[3:35:29] disinfect watercrafts as they exit the water. Thank you very

[3:35:33] much. Mr. Frosco and moving on to director Bowers. Thank

[3:35:43] you, madam Mayor. Scubar has experienced a few severe storms

[3:35:46] already this season and more can be expected. Emergencies can

[3:35:50] happen quickly, without warning, at any time of day and

[3:35:52] in any season during an emergency, you may have no

[3:35:55] electrical power or be asked to evacuate. Having an emergency

[3:35:59] plan and. Home kit in place will assist you and

[3:36:05] your family to be prepared and survive on your own.

[3:36:07] For at least 72 hours. Keep a kid at home,

[3:36:11] work and in your car. Your kit should be easy

[3:36:13] to carry and portable, such as a rubber tote or

[3:36:16] suitcase. Check contents twice a year to ensure freshness of

[3:36:20] food and water. Have a crank radio on hand. Portable

[3:36:23] lights, extra power, bank to keep phones charged, first aid

[3:36:27] kit and much more. A list of contents for your

[3:36:30] kit and tips on how to shelter in place are

[3:36:32] available at Ontario, Ca. Emergencypreparedness emergency preparedness starts at home.

[3:36:38] Make sure you have a kitten place and a plan

[3:36:41] to keep your family safe. Thank you, Director Ballist. Are

[3:36:44] there any further announcements from staff? I would just be

[3:36:51] remiss if I didn't mention. Skugog's candidate. Canada Day celebrations.

[3:36:59] They start on Monday, July 1 at 1030 and I

[3:37:04] hope that everyone who can will come out and celebrate

[3:37:08] the vets in fets. Parade and then join us all

[3:37:12] at Palmer park. It's a great day and it's full

[3:37:16] of festivities for family. Families of all ages. So please

[3:37:21] join us in celebrating. Thank you. Okay, so if that

[3:37:26] is it for presentations and delegations, then I would like

[3:37:29] to move on. To. A. Sorry by matthew

[3:37:39] hare, senior manager of bdo canada llp. To present the

[3:37:44] very exciting consolidated financial statements. I told him that you

[3:37:49] guys were all here for that, so. He's really psyched

[3:37:54] up for it. So go ahead, Matthew. Sorry.

[3:38:04] Thanks for that. Good evening, mayor and councilors. Thank you

[3:38:08] for having me here to present the audited financial statements

[3:38:10] for the corporation of the township of Scoogog. The financial

[3:38:14] statements are intended to report on the financial position of

[3:38:16] the township as of December 31, 2023 to ensure accountability

[3:38:21] and transparency. And to assist the township with long term

[3:38:25] and strategic planning. Okay. So our first slide here just

[3:38:32] deals with our audit report. We're currently working on the

[3:38:36] wording of the report this year, as there is a

[3:38:38] qualification in the report. The report will still note that

[3:38:42] the financial statements are presented fairly. In all material respects,

[3:38:46] the financial position of the township. The difference this year

[3:38:49] is we have qualified the report over the scope limitation,

[3:38:52] over the accuracy. Of the asset retirement obligation. Over the

[3:38:58] cost estimates used in the determination of the new asset

[3:39:01] retirement obligation liability for the new accounting standards this year.

[3:39:10] The township engaged a specialist to identify and assess the

[3:39:13] potential asset retirement obligations within the township to meet the

[3:39:17] new standard, the special supplied valuations to the liability that

[3:39:20] could not be verified through audit procedures which led to

[3:39:22] the qualification. As noted, this does not impact the overall

[3:39:26] opinion on the report. Next slide. Our next part of

[3:39:32] our report talks about our responsibility, so our responsibilities to

[3:39:35] obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free

[3:39:39] from material misstatement, either through fraud or error or both.

[3:39:45] Conduct our audit in accordance with. Canadian generally accepted auditing

[3:39:49] standards identify and assess risks and material statements. Obtain sufficient

[3:39:55] and appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for our

[3:39:58] opinion. Obtain an understanding of internal controls relevant to the

[3:40:02] audit. And evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies, estimates and

[3:40:07] presentation of the financial statements and disclosures. Next slide, please.

[3:40:14] So, turning to the statement of financial position. So the

[3:40:17] consolidated statement of financial position highlights four key figures that

[3:40:21] just together describe. The financial position of the township. So

[3:40:25] the first is the cash resources, the second is the

[3:40:27] net. Financial position. For assets. The third is the non

[3:40:31] financial assets used to provide services, and the fourth is

[3:40:34] the accumulated surplus. This year. The financial assets of the

[3:40:41] township are 48,408,000. Overall, the assets have increased about $4

[3:40:48] million from. 2022. It's mainly due to an increase in

[3:40:53] cash and investments of approximately 3.3 million, in addition to

[3:40:57] an increase in receivables of approximately $828,000 mostly due to

[3:41:02] the reconstruction of the Balsam street and reconstruction for the

[3:41:06] skating oval. Which were funded by CCVF and the Tourism

[3:41:11] Relief Fund grant, respectively. Offset by decrease in $600,000 for

[3:41:17] the taxes receivable due to significant supplementaries near the end

[3:41:21] of the 2023 being receivable. Next slide. Sorry. So the

[3:41:28] next slide talks about are the net financial assets which

[3:41:32] form a part of the financial position and is a

[3:41:34] difference between the financial assets and the liabilities. The non

[3:41:38] financial assets are normally used to deliver services and are

[3:41:41] primarily comprised of tangible capital. Assets. Overall, the net financial

[3:41:48] assets of the township are 20.1 million, which is an

[3:41:52] increase of 2.6 million from the prior year. The changes

[3:41:55] in liabilities this year were mainly in the deferred revenue,

[3:41:59] which was an increase in 2 million. Which was due

[3:42:03] to funding received for development charge levies. Specifically for the

[3:42:09] Lake scuga. Enhancement construction and the Palmer park washroom. There's

[3:42:15] also the new asset retirement obligation liability that's on the

[3:42:19] statement as well. And that's offset by a decrease in

[3:42:22] the deposits. The share of 400,000. Next slide, please. Your

[3:42:30] statement of your consolidated financial position also includes your non

[3:42:34] financial assets. Which. Is overall consists of your capital outlays

[3:42:40] for the year, your disposals in the air. And your

[3:42:42] amortization of your tangible capital assets. This year, there was

[3:42:47] an increase in the tangible capital assets in total by

[3:42:51] 1.9 million. Overall, the tangible capital assets increased as a

[3:42:54] result of rotary visitations. The Lake Scoogog enhancement. The old

[3:42:59] rail lane, multi use trail. There were no significant asset

[3:43:04] disposals, and the remainder, I believe it was about $4

[3:43:07] million. Was in amortization of previous tangible capital assets. Next

[3:43:14] slide, please. The next statement in our financial statements is

[3:43:20] the consolidated statement of operations. So what we have here,

[3:43:26] it just sort of shows the makeup of revenue for

[3:43:28] the last year. So 59% of your total revenues consist

[3:43:33] of taxation, revenue which. Was decreased 7% from 66% from

[3:43:40] the prior years. That's just due to increases. In other

[3:43:43] areas. The grants have decreased to 1% from 11% in

[3:43:48] the prior year. User charges have increased in the current

[3:43:52] year, as well as some other revenue, which mainly. Is

[3:43:56] the development church, and there's the casino revenue, which has

[3:44:00] decreased as a total of 1% of your total revenues.

[3:44:05] Next slide, please. The next slide here shows a year

[3:44:11] over year expense analysis for the past five years by

[3:44:13] department. The majority of the. Department expenses remain consistent year

[3:44:19] over year as outlined there. There is not usually much

[3:44:24] change in. These, as everything gets allocated in the same

[3:44:28] sort of buckets every year. Next line there. Our next

[3:44:32] slide there. Sorry. So this chart here. Shows your overall

[3:44:41] revenue and expenditures, as well as your annual surplus and

[3:44:44] deficit for the preceding this year and the preceding four

[3:44:47] years. Overall revenue has fluctuated based on grant revenues, which

[3:44:53] fluctuate based on current projects that have been funded. The

[3:44:56] revenues have increased $3 million from the previous year, and

[3:45:01] the expenses have increased 1.9 million. So it shows an

[3:45:04] increase in your overall surplus. The township has an overall

[3:45:08] sur. Surplus in each of the last five years. A

[3:45:12] portion of that relates to operating, but other parts of

[3:45:14] that relate to capital and what we call accounting purpose.

[3:45:20] Revenues. After that. We have the summary of significant accounting

[3:45:27] policies. So the only significant changes there, there's two. Changes

[3:45:30] this year. In the notes to the financial statements. The

[3:45:33] first one is. Financial instruments, which is a new note

[3:45:38] that's required this year. That just outlines the various financial

[3:45:43] instruments. That the municipality has. Mostly the cash and investments.

[3:45:49] They have to be staged, and we have to show

[3:45:51] the types of risks. That the township has, and it

[3:45:56] mitigates for each area of those risks. And then the

[3:46:01] other one is the asset retirement obligation. As I mentioned

[3:46:03] before. Other than that, the notes remain fairly similar from

[3:46:08] previous years. One more. Happy to answer.

[3:46:19] Any questions? Thank you very much, Matthew. And are there

[3:46:24] any questions to the presenter? Councilor McDougall. Thank you, madam

[3:46:32] Mayor. I did have a question on slide 9.1, I

[3:46:36] think it was. With regards to revenues. I noted that

[3:46:44] they were up significantly this year. And I think if

[3:46:48] I had heard you correctly, I think the idea is

[3:46:52] that projects that are not completed as of yet but

[3:46:55] are scheduled are put back in as revenue. Is that

[3:46:58] correct? And that's what would possibly ski the higher. Sorry.

[3:47:07] No. So projects that are under construction. Typically show up,

[3:47:12] so it depends on what your project is. So if

[3:47:17] you get grant funding for specific projects, that typically gets

[3:47:20] recognized in the revenue when the expenses are incurred. So

[3:47:23] if you have significant projects going on, that's when that

[3:47:26] would get recognized in terms of revenue. The other part

[3:47:30] of that is your development charges. So your development charges

[3:47:33] sit as deferred. Revenue on the balance sheet until you

[3:47:36] use them towards specific projects. And so that depending on

[3:47:40] what projects are going on in the year, can increase

[3:47:42] the revenues, depending on how much you take out of.

[3:47:46] Your deferred revenue or your obligatories. Okay. And then further

[3:47:49] through, madam. Is the increased revenues for the year. We

[3:47:54] had a significant amount of surplus there. Are the increased

[3:47:58] revenues for the year, mostly development charges. Then? I can

[3:48:02] tell you exactly what it is in just a second.

[3:48:05] There is a fair amount. Of increase in revenue from.

[3:48:14] The development charge. Let me just see. Some of it

[3:48:19] is a part to the increase in levy. Some of

[3:48:21] it is due to the increase in grant, but there's

[3:48:24] not much there. I'm just looking through to double check.

[3:48:30] So there is quite a bit in there from interest

[3:48:33] revenue, which would be just due to the increase in

[3:48:36] interest rates this year. That was about $700,000 compared to

[3:48:39] the prior year. There was a little bit of increase.

[3:48:44] In terms of. Your other revenues. So contributions from others.

[3:48:52] Mainly for the Balson street reconstruction. There's contributions from others,

[3:48:56] so not internally, but externally. There's contributions. That was about

[3:49:00] a million dollars there. So there's about a million five

[3:49:03] from your increase. From. Those contributions. Very good. That's all.

[3:49:08] Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you for answering questions. Thank

[3:49:11] you, councilor. McDougall, before we go further with any further

[3:49:15] questions. Could I have a mover? In a second. Could

[3:49:18] we bring forward report 10.2 point. Ten and I'll ask

[3:49:21] for a mover in a second or so that questions

[3:49:23] can be directed to both Matthew and the report. Councilor

[3:49:27] Guido. Councilor Wright. Thank you. Any questions to the report?

[3:49:34] Or to further questions to Matthew. Seeing none. We'll just

[3:49:44] ask that. The. Financial statements. Be received.

[3:49:55] And be approved and that the presentation. From Matthew harrisived.

[3:50:03] All in favor? Thank you. And that is carried. Thank

[3:50:08] you very much. You can state that you don't need

[3:50:11] to.

[3:50:39] Okay. So at this time. We have a presentation. Actually,

[3:50:48] a delegation from Mr. Powell. Mr. Powell, are you in

[3:50:51] the room? There you are. Please come forward.

[3:51:03] Welcome. And you can start whenever you're ready. And you

[3:51:11] have five minutes. Thank you. Madam Mayor, with respect, some

[3:51:16] housekeeping. I was here in February. And there was a

[3:51:20] commitment for Mr. Nick through to Mr. Heritage at that

[3:51:24] February council meeting, the public consultations for revised zoning would

[3:51:30] happen in the spring. I live in the wilds of

[3:51:32] Blackstock and haven't heard any public meetings. I wondered if

[3:51:37] there was an update. Is there anything further that you

[3:51:40] want to add? We'll answer the questions at the end.

[3:51:44] Of your presentation, if you're okay with that. I've made

[3:51:47] note of that one. Okay. Thank you. Today, the federal

[3:51:54] minister of housing, MP Fraser, was quoted as saying that

[3:52:00] municipalities that freeze development charges can assess government funding for

[3:52:05] infrastructure development. And I read the May 28, 2024 Scoogog.

[3:52:14] By law, number 1624 does not appear to freeze development

[3:52:19] charges. Is the required freeze on development charges not applicable

[3:52:24] to this revised bylaw, or is this a provincial matter

[3:52:28] and doesn't apply. Okay. Thank you. And anything further? The

[3:52:35] last thing, most important part is my wish to ask

[3:52:39] council to consider awarding energy stock compliance. Building practices. My

[3:52:46] suggestion is a reduction on permit costs and property taxes

[3:52:50] for energy style compliance structures. And you could take it

[3:52:55] one step further. And provide. Incentives for using alternative energy

[3:53:01] sources, wind and solar, to be considered to qualify for

[3:53:05] such reductions and I have a quote for the Natural

[3:53:10] Resources Canada energy efficiency. Canada program. Which I'm following as

[3:53:17] closely as I can. Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank

[3:53:21] you, Mr. Power. We appreciate you coming forward. And who

[3:53:25] would like to take Mr. Powell's first question with regard

[3:53:29] to. The public consultation, I believe that had to do

[3:53:33] with the housing bylaws and that in February. Director Heritage.

[3:53:40] Thank you, Madam Mayor. The additional residential unit issue was.

[3:53:48] Initially addressed by council back in a staff report back

[3:53:50] in November of 2023. And one of the recommendations that

[3:53:56] came out of the resolution from council that came out

[3:53:58] of that meeting was. To prepare a draft OPA and

[3:54:03] ZBA to implement additional residential units and present that draft.

[3:54:08] To the housing committee. Those drafts have been presented to

[3:54:12] the housing committee. They came forward in May of this

[3:54:14] year. We've received comments back from. The housing committee, and

[3:54:20] we're reviewing those comments now. We intend to. Revise, where

[3:54:26] required, the OPA and the ZBA, and bring those to

[3:54:30] a public meeting. In the fall. Thank you. Moving on.

[3:54:37] The second one was about. The announcement about freezing dcs.

[3:54:44] Ms. Hendry or director. Are you familiar with that? I

[3:54:47] know it was an early. It was. Just announced today.

[3:54:51] So, director Barda. Anybody, okay? So I put you on

[3:54:59] tasks to find that out for me and for Mr.

[3:55:01] Powell. And if we could advise him when we have

[3:55:05] that answer. And the council energy start building compliance. Personally,

[3:55:14] I think that's kind of a good idea. Councilor McDougall,

[3:55:16] you wanted. To comment on that. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[3:55:21] Thank you for your delegation, Mr. Powell. The region of

[3:55:26] Durham has a really good program called Durham Greener Homes,

[3:55:30] which is open up for retrofits and deep retrofits and

[3:55:34] for rebates, and I know one. Of the things, and

[3:55:36] I haven't had a chance to look at it myself,

[3:55:38] but heat. Pumps have been very popular in being able

[3:55:42] to. Cut people's energy bills overall, and I know that

[3:55:47] there's been many that have applied for rebates on the

[3:55:49] heat pump installations and seen great success for that. So

[3:55:53] personally, I'm interested in looking into it, but I haven't

[3:55:55] had a chance yet. But. The information for Durham Greener

[3:55:57] Homes is on the Durham region website. Thank you. Thank

[3:56:01] you, Councilor McDougall. And if I'm correct, they do offer.

[3:56:07] Some. Inspections and so on and so forth. For people

[3:56:13] interested in doing that, but I still would like to

[3:56:16] just speak. To the energy Star building compliance and the

[3:56:21] use of. With respect to incentives and use of wind

[3:56:26] and solar and so on and so forth. I'm not

[3:56:29] sure. That. It can be. A reduction. In taxes or

[3:56:36] anything like that, but. I would task a staff when

[3:56:40] they have time. I'll qualify when you have time. To

[3:56:44] perhaps consider what we could potentially look at as a

[3:56:49] move forward. Thank you. Are there any further comments or

[3:56:55] questions to Mr. Powell? Seeing none. Thank you very much

[3:56:58] for your time and thank you for coming forward.

[3:57:09] Okay, at this time. The clerk wants to confer.

[3:58:07] Okay, first of all, I would like a mover and

[3:58:12] a second that Mr. Powell's delegation be received, councilor. Rock.

[3:58:18] Councilor coin. Thank you. All in favor? Thank you very

[3:58:22] much. We do have a presentation. From avenue properties and

[3:58:29] then. We have a number of delegations, and we've had.

[3:58:35] Some last minute delegations as well. That will be in

[3:58:39] the interest of transparency, will be put up. As well

[3:58:44] as we've had numerous. Additional correspondence that came in late

[3:58:49] that is also going to be part of. This evening.

[3:58:55] 's agenda, results or minutes? Anyway. At this time. Could

[3:59:01] we have a mover? In a second? That we waive

[3:59:04] the rules of procedure to allow for delegations. Councilor McDougall.

[3:59:09] Councilor Leroy. All in favor? And that is carried. Okay,

[3:59:16] so, moving on, at this time, we will invite. The

[3:59:22] presenters from avenue properties to come forward.

[3:59:36] Welcome. And thank you for coming. I remind you, we

[3:59:42] have. A I remind you that. Really? You have five

[3:59:46] minutes this evening, given the length of our agenda. So

[3:59:50] as best you can. Thank you very much. Just a

[3:59:53] moment. We need your mic on. There it is now.

[3:59:58] Thank you very much, your honor. And thank you, everybody.

[4:00:01] I recognize many people. From many of the meetings we

[4:00:04] held. Thank you for coming out tonight. I know we'll

[4:00:06] have a lot to talk about in question, period. I'm

[4:00:12] not going to say anything about the project other than

[4:00:14] the fact that we were given instructions on December 4

[4:00:18] of last year. To go away, do a homework. And

[4:00:23] go through a process for the project. I think everyone

[4:00:26] knows the project, so I don't. Need to speak about

[4:00:29] it here anymore. We produced every bit of. Anything that

[4:00:36] we did. In this book, which has been posted online,

[4:00:40] every technical report, every meeting with every stakeholder and we

[4:00:45] went through a whole process. On the expectation from December

[4:00:50] that we were going to be working towards a community

[4:00:53] infrastructure, housing accelerator. And as everyone knows, the government pulled

[4:00:59] that out partway through the process, which is why we

[4:01:02] have. Some changes to astron Mzo, which is a minister's

[4:01:07] zoning order. I simply want. To say that. A minister's

[4:01:12] own order is to set the parameters of development within

[4:01:17] the terms of the official plan which is already in

[4:01:20] place and preceded us. We came to port pay with

[4:01:24] an official plan in place. That said, this is Greenfield,

[4:01:27] this is urban area, this is settlement area, and it

[4:01:31] needs intens. Intensification. And we simply looked at the overall

[4:01:35] picture, the objectives, and that's how we've developed this project

[4:01:39] and brought it forward, and I think it speaks for

[4:01:42] itself. I was trying to relax on the weekend. Generics

[4:01:49] is a very important meeting. It's a very important meeting

[4:01:51] for us. It's. A very important meeting for you, for

[4:01:54] stakeholders, for all of us. Your honor. And I bought

[4:01:58] a wonderful story. Of Merkel. A biography of her. I

[4:02:03] should tell everybody I spent five years. In East Germany.

[4:02:07] When the wall came down, I won the. Largest contest

[4:02:11] in the world to build refugee housing, 3600 homes to

[4:02:16] be delivered, and I went. There, and I did that,

[4:02:18] and I lived in East Germany, so I'm very sympathetic

[4:02:22] and I admire Angela Merkel, and Merkel said, They're talking

[4:02:27] about her being a common, analytical person. And. Organization said

[4:02:34] to her before she was given a speech, he said,

[4:02:38] well, couldn't you put a little more poetry in your

[4:02:41] speech. Turned to him and said, Because she was a

[4:02:47] physicist. And what she said was. I think things through.

[4:02:55] Starting at the end. From the desired outcome. And work

[4:03:00] backwards. And she said, What matters is what will be

[4:03:04] achieved in two years. Not when we read in the

[4:03:08] papers tomorrow. And so I'm just ending my presentation to

[4:03:12] say you're honoring counsel. It's. A great project. I apologize

[4:03:18] to many people who've raised the issue about density and

[4:03:20] so on. Look, it's the official plan. It's what the

[4:03:23] town for all those years they worked to make that

[4:03:27] official plan. Said that wants and needs to meet the

[4:03:31] needs going forward, and we're responding to that. And that's

[4:03:35] it. And I'm looking forward and I hope council will

[4:03:38] see fit. To ask the minister to just set the

[4:03:41] parameters so that we can go on the road of

[4:03:44] going for environmental approvals and every other ruling regulation that

[4:03:48] needs to be. Met over the coming years to get

[4:03:51] a project actually built. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[4:03:56] Before I move. If there are any questions to Mr.

[4:04:01] Methurst. Councilor rock. Thank you for being here this evening.

[4:04:09] As you can see, it's fairly well tended, so a

[4:04:11] lot of interesting things. I know you only have a

[4:04:14] certain time, but I think everyone would benefit from having.

[4:04:19] Some, I guess, clarity around exactly what this is and

[4:04:22] what is before us tonight. So can you. Be very

[4:04:26] explicit. What exactly does the MZ? Mzato do why is

[4:04:31] being requested? And. What does it not do? Because. There

[4:04:36] may be some misunderstanding of. Granting the mzto. Would do

[4:04:41] and not do within the confines of the municipality. Sure

[4:04:47] the purpose of the MZ? In the big picture is.

[4:04:52] To. Thank you. The purpose of an MZO in the

[4:04:57] bait picture is to settle the issue. As to what

[4:05:03] kind of units. Single family, Maltese, townhouses. Can be built

[4:05:08] and how many of them you can build. The purpose

[4:05:12] of an mZO is to take away. Lots of appeal

[4:05:16] process of people who will just say, well, I'm going

[4:05:19] to object to it on principle of objecting and then.

[4:05:24] It's a one, two, three year process going through Ontario

[4:05:28] and tribunal meetings on things just on the issue of

[4:05:31] density. The density is settled within the parameters of the

[4:05:35] official plan, and so what the government tried to do

[4:05:38] is to say that if you're within the four square

[4:05:41] corners of an official plan. You have to be able.

[4:05:45] To move ahead without many impediments. What the Mz O

[4:05:48] does not do. Or we're not asking for it. You

[4:05:53] can ask, but we didn't ask. And we specifically have

[4:05:56] said. The resolution we're requesting of counsel. We're not asking

[4:06:01] for any special consideration. We're only asking that you ask

[4:06:05] the minister to settle the size of the project, and

[4:06:09] we're not asking for any dispensation from any environmental study,

[4:06:13] any application for license. Any application to the Trent Severin.

[4:06:18] Any application to Parks Canada, anything to do with court

[4:06:21] a conservation, all of those things. Are a process that

[4:06:25] needs to be followed and will be followed. And if

[4:06:28] there is an environmental impediment that can't be overcome or

[4:06:32] met. Then there'll be no project. It's simply to set

[4:06:36] the parameters, and for us, We cannot even design. A

[4:06:42] waste treatment plant to take forward to the minister of

[4:06:46] environment. Until we know what we're planning for. So it

[4:06:50] costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to do the background,

[4:06:53] to do the engineering study, and we're asking town council

[4:06:57] to fix the parameters so that we can spend our

[4:07:00] money. Make the specifications. Give them to the lake stewards,

[4:07:05] give them to court the conservation and everyone. Else and

[4:07:09] say, okay, can we approve this? And I assure you,

[4:07:13] I can't assure, but. We've given reports in the study

[4:07:17] and they're all online. We went to the best experts

[4:07:22] we can find. We ask those experts, is this feasible?

[4:07:26] They've all said yes. We said, please put those parameters

[4:07:30] in writing. They're in writing. They're online. They're there for

[4:07:33] you. To see. We're not asking anyone to give us

[4:07:36] any environmental approval. We're just asking for us to have

[4:07:42] the parameters of the project so that. We can design

[4:07:46] it and submit it. And that's what we're asking. And

[4:07:51] just to say to her worship, who knows? The resolution

[4:07:54] we've asked for. The wording says not asking for any

[4:07:58] relief of any issue from the minister. Just tell us,

[4:08:02] can we? Build four and five story buildings? Can we

[4:08:06] build townhouses? Can we build single family homes? Can we

[4:08:09] put a health care center there, which is a commercial

[4:08:12] operation, not just residential. That's what we're asking. I hope

[4:08:16] I asked your question. Yeah, that was great. So further

[4:08:20] to that. I guess. If we were to vote in

[4:08:26] favor and whatever that may be, can you describe a

[4:08:29] little bit about what the next steps will be, because.

[4:08:34] I think again. There may be some lack of clarity

[4:08:37] on. What support, or lack thereof, of the MZTO would

[4:08:41] actually do what those next steps are. So what would

[4:08:44] be the next step after this? In this process. Well,

[4:08:50] if council sees fit to pass an order to ask

[4:08:54] the minister. To consider granting a minister's zoning order. Then

[4:09:00] the briefing book that we've prepared just needs to be

[4:09:04] finalized off to be updated. And then it goes to

[4:09:09] the minister's office and the minister and his planners and

[4:09:12] his advisors look at everything. They look to see if

[4:09:17] the homework is done and look to see if. They

[4:09:21] will give an order saying. Okay? You can build those

[4:09:24] kinds of homes, and that's your density. And it's 100%

[4:09:29] in the hands of the ministry. And my understanding is

[4:09:34] it all goes and they do it all by themselves.

[4:09:37] I don't. Believe. There's delegations from anyone. I don't believe

[4:09:41] we make a delegation, I think. It's simply an ask.

[4:09:45] And you present the evidence to the minister's office. So

[4:09:49] the MZ owes that have been delivered so far. For

[4:09:53] example, for a hospital. For example, new buildings. There's a

[4:09:58] recent one in Niagara Falls, typically within the four square

[4:10:03] corners of an official plan like ours is. This is.

[4:10:07] And the minister decides whether it's. Useful or not. To

[4:10:12] give the minister's zoning order, and all we're asking for

[4:10:15] is the density. Right. And further. Further through you, madam.

[4:10:18] There. So while the minister is doing that deliberation. The

[4:10:22] minister would still require all of the necessary. Assessments to

[4:10:27] be done, environmental assessments, public consultations, things of that nature.

[4:10:31] They will still take all of those into consideration as

[4:10:34] they go through that process before they make a final

[4:10:36] decision is that correct. Yes, and because we're not asking

[4:10:41] for anything other than settling the density and the type.

[4:10:45] Of units. We're not asking for environmental approvals. We're not

[4:10:48] asking for road approvals. We're not asking for any of

[4:10:50] those things. The minister can issue the zoning order and

[4:10:54] the minister can attach whatever conditions they choose to. So.

[4:10:59] If, for example, There are community stakeholders that feel strongly

[4:11:04] nothing stops a community stakeholder for reaching out to the

[4:11:07] minister and saying you ought to include this obligation. I'm

[4:11:11] clear about it. We're not asking for relief of anything.

[4:11:14] We're only asking for the density and type of units.

[4:11:17] That can be built at the property. And just my

[4:11:20] final question through you, Madam Mayor. So. This would not

[4:11:26] even if you were granted MZo, there's still a very

[4:11:30] long path. Ahead of you. Even after you get that

[4:11:33] MZO and you will still be required to come. Back

[4:11:36] to council to get a site plan approval and approval

[4:11:40] of subdivision. Is that correct? Yes. That's correct. And I

[4:11:44] know. That if we're answering questions later, we do have.

[4:11:49] Our expert. Various consultants here, and I know that the

[4:11:54] planning consultants have prepared a chart and a list of

[4:11:57] all the approval things you have to ask for, but

[4:12:00] correct, you still have to get all the approvals from

[4:12:03] the town, the building approval, the roads, the layout, the

[4:12:06] site plan. All the provincial things like. Ministry of the

[4:12:11] Environment to approve that. You're going to use recycle water

[4:12:14] to flush toilets. All of that has to be approved,

[4:12:17] and all of that is in a separate approval. Process.

[4:12:21] And all of it happens afterwards. So I know I

[4:12:25] said my final question, but one more very quick one.

[4:12:27] So just to be. Clear. This would not be giving

[4:12:30] you cart blanche to start developing this. You will be

[4:12:34] back before us. For us to make any final decisions

[4:12:37] once we've seen the totality of evidence. That's being pulled

[4:12:42] together from the list that you'll have for us who

[4:12:44] evaluate. A fulsome design. And all of the environmental impacts

[4:12:49] prior to a shovel going in the ground. Is that

[4:12:51] correct? Yes. That's correct. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. Councilor

[4:12:57] Clay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Mr. Methurst. If you are

[4:13:05] granted the Mz O tonight. And. It's in. Concentrated on

[4:13:13] density and housing development. Does that MZo z o give

[4:13:18] you the ability to appeal and expand that scope? Not

[4:13:24] to my knowledge. And in any event, The request is

[4:13:29] that the minister gives the MZ O and the minister

[4:13:32] if the minister gives. It to us. The minister may

[4:13:34] not, we don't know. But if the minister does give.

[4:13:37] It, it just sets the. Density and. The type of

[4:13:43] housing and. It's not appealable. Which means we can't ask

[4:13:47] for anything more either. We can't change our mind and

[4:13:50] say we want this. That's the fixed zoning. It can't

[4:13:58] change. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, council coin. Are there

[4:14:02] any further comments or questions from anyone? Councilor Leroy. Thank

[4:14:10] you. Madamaran through you to Mr. Medhurst. Thank you. For

[4:14:16] the voluminous amount of information that you've provided. Within the

[4:14:20] document. And as you have repeated tonight, the sole purpose

[4:14:24] of the MZTO request is to settle density and unit

[4:14:26] type mix, all of which are within the parameters of

[4:14:30] the township. Of skewog official plan. So I'm not entirely

[4:14:36] sure I understand. Why the need for the Mz O.

[4:14:41] And my concern is if it's really just about the

[4:14:44] density. There's a process to achieve that. And my thought

[4:14:51] or concern is. If a density is just given. Without

[4:14:56] any further study, particularly with regard to environmental considerations. Given

[4:15:01] this site has many concern. Concerning constraints. What would happen

[4:15:09] if you were approved for 600 units? But when environmental

[4:15:12] reports come back saying you have to have greater setbacks

[4:15:15] from the shoreline, You have to defer construction or prevent

[4:15:20] construction on certain sensitive areas. What happens to that density

[4:15:25] if the density cannot be achieved within a reduced scale

[4:15:29] of. Developable land. This is not clear to me. Well,

[4:15:34] my understanding is that. If it's not buildable within the

[4:15:39] parameters that are set, then you can't. Build it, and

[4:15:42] we're only asking. We're sticking in the four square corners

[4:15:47] of the height rules that are set out. In the

[4:15:50] official plan. We're not asking for relief. We're not asking

[4:15:53] for more. We're just asking. For the density. One of

[4:15:58] the things that. People get a bit confused on. If

[4:16:03] I have a 10,000 square foot building. It could be

[4:16:08] ten apartments at 1000 each. Also could be 20 apartments

[4:16:13] that are 500 sqft each. So because the way planning

[4:16:17] works in this township. It's not by the floor. The

[4:16:22] total floor space. It's by number. Of units. So we're

[4:16:26] willing to build attainable housing, meaning smaller housing. So we've

[4:16:31] expressed in the report, we're thinking of 700, 750 square

[4:16:35] foot two. Bedroom, two bathroom apartments for most. Of the

[4:16:40] development. So that's just more apartments. If we would build

[4:16:44] a 1500 square foot. Three bedroom apartment, it would be

[4:16:47] half the number of units. So we don't know the

[4:16:50] mix yet. We're trying to just create the flexibility. So,

[4:16:54] to be frank, we're trying to get the parameters so

[4:16:58] we can go to those. Design. And if it was

[4:17:01] not achievable, that question, you wouldn't be able to build

[4:17:04] it. And. We believe, because we worked within the core

[4:17:09] setbacks that they gave before for the plan of subdivision

[4:17:13] that is approved a 30 meters setback. We respected that,

[4:17:17] and the architects believe we can. Get the density, but

[4:17:21] it may be the project ends up 510 apartments or

[4:17:26] 400, and. 80. We don't know. We're just trying to.

[4:17:31] Create an envelope that makes sense. And we need a

[4:17:34] certain amount, we need a certain size. To be able

[4:17:38] to put in the technology we want to put in.

[4:17:40] We want to put in. Wastewater treatment that is an

[4:17:43] a septic tank that is better for the environment that

[4:17:47] we can take the heat out to make cheaper heating

[4:17:50] for the buildings, like geothermal. So. This technology. Psychic cruise

[4:17:55] ship. When you build a cruise ship, you put the

[4:17:57] technology in. You need to know. What you're building, and

[4:17:58] you need to know the technology you can use. That's

[4:18:01] what we're trying to do here. I understand the concept.

[4:18:08] And what concerns me is the math. So partly what

[4:18:11] you're requesting, the MZ four. According to your documentation, is

[4:18:13] to secure financing. If you don't know that, you can't.

[4:18:17] Actually build what you're proposing to build. You can't get

[4:18:21] financing. Well, we're of the view that we can build.

[4:18:26] We did a proposed site plan. It's in the MZ

[4:18:30] O book. We show you. A block plan. We show

[4:18:34] where houses are along Capsule harbor, where townhouses are behind.

[4:18:39] Where these small buildings, which are four to five stories.

[4:18:43] In a block of 24 apartments for each one. We're

[4:18:45] sure that will all fit there. So there's a lot

[4:18:47] of land there. The whole site is 87 acres. There's

[4:18:52] 62 acres on the land we're looking at. And the

[4:18:56] density is actually medium density in the hole. We're not

[4:19:00] asking for high. Density, which is in the official plan,

[4:19:03] is a high density possibility here. If I may, I'm

[4:19:08] fully supportive of increasing density. In our urban area. We

[4:19:14] have to stop building single family million plus houses on

[4:19:17] wells and septic. However. In this case, I feel the

[4:19:21] card is a little bit before the horse, because when

[4:19:24] I look at the comments you receive from corporate conservation.

[4:19:26] There's unstable land. It's a class one wetland. It's provincially

[4:19:29] significant wetland. There's lakeshore issues, there's erosion risk. It's on

[4:19:34] a floodplain. I mean, if you hard pressed to imagine

[4:19:37] a more difficult site. If this were right in the

[4:19:40] central town, it would be fabulous. And maybe there's an

[4:19:43] opportunity to put. Consider. Honestly, I don't know that the

[4:19:50] center of town people would feel the same as we.

[4:19:52] Spoke. We're only 2.1 km from here. From. This office.

[4:19:59] And the site was approved, it could have. 20, 15,000

[4:20:04] square foot mansions. We realized that there's a lot of

[4:20:08] privileged houses. Just north of us, and they're big houses,

[4:20:12] and the site already has a site plan. And a

[4:20:16] plan of subdivision for 20 of those houses. Each one

[4:20:20] can be 30% coverage according to the current. Existed site

[4:20:24] plan that the town of Port Perry has issued, the

[4:20:27] scubong has issued. So you're trying to make it more

[4:20:31] effective, and we think that smaller units and apartments are

[4:20:35] better, and we think it's needed. The town of Port

[4:20:39] pay has 80% of its housing stock in single family

[4:20:43] homes. The average community in Ontario is 54%. This is

[4:20:49] a town that's all big homes or homes or single

[4:20:52] family and people. Have to move out because they can't

[4:20:56] find places to stay in the community. When you like

[4:21:00] my age. I'm 73. I'm downsizing, I'm not upsizing, and

[4:21:05] I like to stay within a couple of kilometers of

[4:21:07] my friends and where I live. There is a whole

[4:21:10] community in Canterbury commons. Wonderful community, 320 or 60 homes.

[4:21:19] But people. In the neighborhood were legal. This project next

[4:21:24] door is a great project for that, and they're going

[4:21:26] to like it. And a small grocery store so they

[4:21:28] can get food nearby. A small cafe. It works. I

[4:21:33] believe it's the right project at the right time. One

[4:21:38] further question, okay? From the people in the chamber unless

[4:21:45] you are speaking directly, please. Remain respectful and

[4:21:54] listen to what the speakers have to say. Thank you.

[4:22:01] Councilor Laroy, do you have anything further? Yes, madam. Through

[4:22:06] you to Mr. Medhurst. I want to acknowledge your analysis

[4:22:10] of our housing situation. I think you're absolutely correct. However,

[4:22:14] an mzido is, in my view, the last resort. And

[4:22:19] I really wish that more studies could be undertaken to

[4:22:23] confirm the density required for this project. To be financially

[4:22:26] viable actually is viable. You begin with a curious quote

[4:22:32] from Angela Merkel, who I also admire, that you focus

[4:22:35] on. What will be achieved in two years. You're actually

[4:22:38] asking for something tomorrow instead of going. Through the process

[4:22:41] that will result in something, maybe in two years. There

[4:22:46] is a process for any kind of development. And it's

[4:22:51] pretty well understood by everybody, and I realize it's going

[4:22:53] to take time. But sometimes time is needed so that

[4:22:56] mistakes aren't made. We have examples of mistakes all around

[4:22:59] us when people jump. Into the 11th hour of process,

[4:23:05] which can begin at 01:00. I think the MZTO is

[4:23:11] a little bit difficult to advance at the start of

[4:23:14] a project personally, but I do understand. Your concerns. Well,

[4:23:20] if I just may reply to say I've been personally

[4:23:23] working on this. It's been two years. We've been engaged

[4:23:26] now one and a half years in the process to

[4:23:28] get to today's. Meeting. If we don't have. A settled

[4:23:34] density, which we hope the minister will give will be

[4:23:37] another two years, probably settling density. Because anybody with $129

[4:23:42] can file an appeal to force everything to the Ontario

[4:23:45] land tribunal. So. We'll be two years before density settled,

[4:23:49] and then we'll be the next two. Years for all

[4:23:51] the environmental reports. So if you're thinking like Angla Merkel,

[4:23:56] where do you want to be in two years. If

[4:23:58] we get the density settled, it's going to take us

[4:24:01] two years for. The environmental reports. If we get them

[4:24:04] signed off and if they're done. So it's. A long

[4:24:07] process. And at 73, I'd like to see shovels in

[4:24:11] the ground when I'm 75, and I'd like to see

[4:24:15] people being able to move in when I'm 77. I'd

[4:24:17] like to maybe be one of these people. I just

[4:24:20] say it's a long process. It's not hasty. It's not.

[4:24:24] Haste makes waste. Within two years, we've had a lot

[4:24:26] of consultation. We've had guidance from planning the department and

[4:24:30] many others, and we've met. With hundreds of people in

[4:24:34] the community. We're not all in agreement. But. Everybody knows

[4:24:39] the issues housing needed. There are two reports in the

[4:24:44] online, there are two reports in this Mz O book

[4:24:47] about two case studies. One. Is the Dockside Green and

[4:24:54] Victoria Harbor. 1.3 million sqft all on its own. Sewage

[4:24:59] system and Netherlands in New York, that 20 year old

[4:25:02] building, which is still in the top ten. Most energy

[4:25:06] efficient buildings in the US. That building is 293 apartments.

[4:25:10] It takes a certain size to afford the technology. And

[4:25:15] that's why I didn't want to build 20 big houses

[4:25:17] with 20 septic tanks. It just offended me. And I

[4:25:20] take no offense to anybody who owns a big house.

[4:25:23] With a septic. I get it, but I don't want

[4:25:25] to be building that new. Our company doesn't want to

[4:25:27] build that, so that's why we're asking. For some size.

[4:25:32] To ford the technology to do it better. Thank you.

[4:25:35] Are there any further questions from anyone else? I just

[4:25:41] have one. My question is. Should

[4:25:51] the mseto be granted. Should the density be? A minimum.

[4:26:05] That you could move forward. With through an MZTO say

[4:26:09] they granted you 500 units, and yet through all the

[4:26:15] environmental issues through all. This studies, so on and so

[4:26:19] forth. It's determined that only 300. Units? Could be. Is

[4:26:24] there a minimum where. It would become not feasible to

[4:26:30] move forward. In the project. It's hard for me to

[4:26:38] answer that with a yes or no or a simple

[4:26:40] number. Because the issue is if I build two apartments

[4:26:44] of 600 sqft versus one apartment of 1200. Sqft where

[4:26:50] are we in this? It's about what mix and the

[4:26:54] size and type. Of uni. Units. So we're asking for

[4:26:58] 600 units for some flexibility. If 600 units doesn't make

[4:27:03] sense. We're not going to build it if we. Still

[4:27:05] have to go to a bank to finance it. We

[4:27:08] have so much work in future to get the project

[4:27:12] to reality. My work is just starting. If we have

[4:27:16] the density. It's very challenging. We've been told that you

[4:27:21] can only sell 100 new homes a year in Fort

[4:27:24] Perry. They're saying to me. It's like there are many

[4:27:29] challenges. So you need a certain scale of size to

[4:27:34] afford the technology we're proposing to put in. The way

[4:27:39] those with Durham region servicing Dorm region has said it's.

[4:27:45] In lighting, director of development for the town knows it

[4:27:48] that there are no solars planned for. Castle Harbor. Until.

[4:27:53] 2051. So if we don't. Do different technology in a

[4:27:58] better way or different technology. Nothing's going to happen there

[4:28:02] until. 2051. That's just the way it is. We're proposing

[4:28:06] to do modern, great technology, invented in Canada, used for

[4:28:10] 20 years in New York city. And do it better

[4:28:14] than. Region is doing the better quality and we want

[4:28:18] to recycle the water to flush the toilet. Why should

[4:28:21] we buying expensive portable water and wash it on a

[4:28:25] toilet? 30% of water. Use. Is total use. Like, it's

[4:28:30] just stupid. And so many people around the world are

[4:28:34] recycling. It's the law in Australia. That's what we want

[4:28:37] to do. That's what we're trying to do here. It's

[4:28:40] a really environmentally good project. Outcome and people you're going

[4:28:43] to like what's built. You go to Friday harbor. You

[4:28:46] see what a lovely community is? A lovely community and

[4:28:51] it will be much liked and loved when it's up

[4:28:54] and we're sensitive builders. Okay, thank you very much. So

[4:29:00] if there are no further questions. Sorry, councilor mcdougall.

[4:29:12] Mayor, is this the only opportunity to ask Mr. Medhurst

[4:29:14] questions? Yes, I would say so. Okay. Thank you. I'll

[4:29:24] continue. Thank you, Mr. Methurst, for your presentation. And thank

[4:29:27] you for your interest. In Porpe Perry in our community,

[4:29:30] I do have some questions. Some on the brief, but

[4:29:34] not so much, but some others as well. Just a

[4:29:37] question in terms of the brief. There was one thing

[4:29:39] I came across, and I just was looking for some

[4:29:41] clarification. What is an underwater lands reclamation process. It has

[4:29:50] come to pass. That when we started to look at

[4:29:56] the land. We found that, and we believe that, in

[4:30:02] fact, the land footprint is much bigger than shows on

[4:30:07] the plans and the plan of subdivision that was approved

[4:30:09] for the houses. We. Love the view that approximately 25

[4:30:14] acres. Underwater and Lake Scubog, actually. Was. Owned by it.

[4:30:22] And so, after a year and a half of research,

[4:30:24] we've come to the conclusion that that's correct. And. We've

[4:30:29] applied to the province. To certify our boundary that. This

[4:30:35] was. Buyer the land. But it belonged to all land

[4:30:39] and it was flooded and it should be properly. Belonged

[4:30:43] to the site. And thus far it appears where 100%

[4:30:48] correct and we've applied for it. And if it comes

[4:30:51] to pass that the province certifies the boundary, it would

[4:30:55] mean that we would have some ability to do. A

[4:31:00] bit more on the waterfront. Subject to the approval of

[4:31:03] Trendsaveren, subject to the approval of Parks Canada, subject to

[4:31:07] the approval of corporate conservation, subject to environmental assessment. All

[4:31:11] of those issues. We would have some old attitude to

[4:31:16] maybe do as you're doing in the town here. To

[4:31:18] try and augment. Part of your waterfront. So that's why

[4:31:23] we've applied for that. And that's? Why we mentioned it

[4:31:25] in the book, so that you understand what we're applying

[4:31:27] for. Okay, thank you. Thank you for that. Further through

[4:31:32] you, Madam Mayor. Just in terms of consultation. With First

[4:31:37] nations community. And I know that your lawyer had sent

[4:31:40] in a letter with regards to consultations to first nations

[4:31:44] communities. It appears that. You've had. Several reach out to

[4:31:52] Msifn. To have comment from them back, but they haven't

[4:31:57] commented very often or very frequently or very fervorishly. Does

[4:32:02] this equal meaningful conversation with First nations communities? Is this

[4:32:08] enough? For us as council to put stock in. Well,

[4:32:15] I'd like to answer that by saying that. We have

[4:32:19] asked many times. And. If the other side chooses not

[4:32:26] to engage in answers, there's not much we can do.

[4:32:29] About it. And. There is no obligation. To conclude consultations,

[4:32:37] but we've made attempts and we're trying to do it.

[4:32:40] On the record. The issue was we were asked to

[4:32:43] sign a nondisclosure agreement. Which we felt. Was not right

[4:32:48] for the project because we have so many organizations we're

[4:32:51] working with and. We want to be transparent with all

[4:32:55] of them, and we were asked to provide. Financial capacity,

[4:32:59] which meant to pay for studies, to study our studies.

[4:33:05] And in many cases, for example, Councilor Loy hired two

[4:33:10] environmental firms, not just one. We hired two because. We

[4:33:14] knew this would be an issue. I just didn't want

[4:33:16] to pay for a fair. Environmental firm to report on

[4:33:21] the work of the other two. So we said, no,

[4:33:23] we wouldn't. Provide financial capacity. And we said, no, we

[4:33:27] wouldn't sign an NDA, and that's become a block. However.

[4:33:32] Our doors open. We want to discuss issues and. We'll

[4:33:37] continue to reach out and we continue to be open.

[4:33:40] But everything that can be done, we can't do any

[4:33:43] more than ask, and we have. Done that. Further through

[4:33:46] your madam. So if my understanding is correct, the mzido

[4:33:50] that's presented before us today is an application for the

[4:33:53] township of Scugog to apply for the Mz. O for

[4:33:56] this property. And so my question to you, Mr. Medhurst,

[4:34:01] is the information that's provided in here. Adequate for the

[4:34:04] township of Scugog to say that we have adequately. Consulted

[4:34:10] MSifn on this project. Hear you, madam. Well, in fact,

[4:34:16] You've kind of hit the nut on the head very

[4:34:17] well. In fact, if town council asked the minister to

[4:34:23] consider. And if they so considered to issue a minister's

[4:34:26] owning order, it's up for. The minister to decide if

[4:34:30] the minister is happy with all of the things that

[4:34:33] have been done. Is the minister happy with our community

[4:34:36] outreach? Is the minister happy with how we've approached MSiFn

[4:34:42] the duty to consult is actually the crowns. It's the

[4:34:45] ministers. It's not a town. It's not ours. The crime

[4:34:50] has the obligation and the crown can easily call Msifn

[4:34:55] and ask and engage themselves the minister needs to make.

[4:34:59] In this case, it's a him, his own decision, am.

[4:35:02] I going to issue an MZO? If the minister doesn't

[4:35:05] like it? If the minister. Doesn't, then he won't do

[4:35:08] it, and there's no appea. Appeal. There's nothing we can

[4:35:11] say about it. If he turns it down, he turns

[4:35:13] it. Down. If the minister approves it, the minister can

[4:35:16] approve it, and the minister can attach any condition the

[4:35:20] minister likes. The minister can say, I want you to

[4:35:24] do ten environmental studies and then it has to be

[4:35:27] done. The minister can set any condition. So. One further

[4:35:31] question on this, madam. There, and then I'll leave it

[4:35:32] alone. And what happens if MsIFN or any of the

[4:35:40] other, I think, ten signatories to the. Williams lake treaties.

[4:35:48] Are unhappy with. The considerations that the township as Cougar

[4:35:52] has given. To their request for meaningful engagement. With some

[4:35:58] repercussions for us. Well, I'm not a lawyer, and I

[4:36:02] could ask you. I think we have a lawyer. Our

[4:36:03] own lawyer there. But the answer is that the duty

[4:36:07] to consult the obligation. To consult is the crowns, not

[4:36:15] ours and not yours and not the towns, and that's.

[4:36:18] Gone all the way. There's a small town in British

[4:36:21] Columbia. They had the same dilemma. You did. It went

[4:36:24] all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, and

[4:36:26] the Supreme Court said, it is not the town's obligation

[4:36:30] because it's outside of. Your knowledge and capacity. It is

[4:36:33] the crown. And us too. It's the crown. So the

[4:36:36] minister will make his decision on this. It's his to

[4:36:41] do and our position. We're open to any discussion with

[4:36:45] MSiFn. Thus far. There's an archaeological studies already been done.

[4:36:53] It's been provided. There were three levels of study. It

[4:36:58] already said there's nothing on this site you can issue.

[4:37:02] A development permit and you already did for the plan

[4:37:05] of subdivision you've already previously done. That. So it's all

[4:37:10] to the minister. Okay, very good. That's all for now.

[4:37:13] Thank you. Thank you, Councilor McDougall. If there are no

[4:37:18] further comments or questions of Mr. Methurst. We will continue

[4:37:23] on and we will move on to our delegation. 9.4

[4:37:31] from Rob Maservi on behalf of the Skigog Lake stewards

[4:37:35] regarding the Amsetto request. Rob, come on forward. Thank you,

[4:37:40] Mr. Matturst.

[4:37:58] Good. Go ahead. Welcome. And you can start anytime you're

[4:38:05] ready. Madam Mayor, members of council, thank you for the

[4:38:09] opportunity to speak to you on behalf of the Scoogog

[4:38:12] Lake. Stewart's number of my board members are present tonight.

[4:38:16] I'll first speak to a resolution passed by our board

[4:38:18] just last week. Which I filed with the clerk. I

[4:38:22] believe that the resolution has been provided to you and

[4:38:25] I'll. Then have some additional comments. So we're aware that

[4:38:28] township is currently in receipt. Of the Avenue Properties development

[4:38:30] proposal, which seeks to rezone lands to facilitate intensive residential

[4:38:35] development on private services directly adjacent to the lake at

[4:38:38] the mouth of cockers creek. This proposal is conceptual only

[4:38:42] without the necessary data and studies to enable essential assessment

[4:38:46] of its potential short and long term impacts on the

[4:38:49] health of the lake and therefore the economy of the

[4:38:52] community. The proponent's apparent intention is to obtain rezoning approval

[4:38:55] of their proposal for the land through the new bill

[4:38:57] 185 and a ministerial zoning. Order. Does council support this

[4:39:04] ministerial zoning order in the face of missing prerequisite information

[4:39:08] or feedback? From the community to evaluate its short and

[4:39:11] long term impact to lake Scoog for the record. Scuba

[4:39:14] Lake Stewards, Inc. Was established March 2003 as a nonprofit

[4:39:19] charitable corporation with a mandate which includes the conserv. Conservation

[4:39:23] and protection of Lake Scoogog in its watershed and to

[4:39:26] increase public awareness of the Blake health and support for

[4:39:29] continued economic, social and recreational development around the lake in

[4:39:34] an ecologically responsible and sustainable manner. We believe that the

[4:39:37] health and vitality of Lake Scoogog is critical to the

[4:39:39] continued success of the economy of the township of. Scogog

[4:39:43] and its livability and viability as a community. Especially since

[4:39:47] around 2015 or about 2015, we have observed further deterioration

[4:39:52] of lake quality. Including the subject area, through the impact

[4:39:56] of many factors, including the various results of recent climate

[4:39:59] change. The introduction of destructive invasive species and continued shoreline

[4:40:03] development, deteriorating near shore viability and balance to name a

[4:40:07] few. And just to add to this point, Long term

[4:40:10] monitoring, including some sampling we just did last week of

[4:40:14] Cockers Creek and its outlet. Shows virtually all environmental and

[4:40:17] water quality parameters, such as total phosphorus, nitrogen, chlorides, and

[4:40:23] benthic macro. Invertebrates. Get a grade of D. The scublic

[4:40:28] stewards are supportive of continued development in the township at

[4:40:30] Scoogogen. Would not oppose development, including elements of this one,

[4:40:34] provided it's been evaluated positively with regard to its short

[4:40:37] and long term impact on the environment generally and upon

[4:40:40] Lakes Scoogog in particular. Therefore, the Scuba Lake stewards supportive

[4:40:44] directors have resolved that squoglike stewards, Inc. Recommends that council

[4:40:49] not support advancing this major conceptual proposal to the province

[4:40:52] at this time or until such time as the necessary

[4:40:55] detailed information is provided that confirms, based on science based

[4:40:59] assessments, that the development will not negatively. Impact the health

[4:41:03] of the lake and or the municipality's financial responsibilities in

[4:41:07] both the short and long term and further, prior to

[4:41:09] making any decision on the proposed development that the township

[4:41:11] council not the proponent, hold a public hearing or hearings

[4:41:16] to enable residents and stakeholders the opportunity to be updated

[4:41:19] on council's due diligence. About the potential impacts of this

[4:41:23] development on Port Perry's overall livability and economic viability together,

[4:41:28] importantly, with the impact upon the health of Lake Scoogog,

[4:41:30] a lake already under threat. So some additional comments if

[4:41:34] I could, Madam mayor, I'd like to make on behalf

[4:41:36] of the stewards. Based on review of the project brief,

[4:41:39] section 47 of the Planning act. And the MMAH website.

[4:41:43] I don't see the imperative nor the benefit nor the

[4:41:47] feasibility of an mz owed. To establish unit density for

[4:41:50] this development at this time. First, where is the imperative?

[4:41:54] Where is the provincial interest does a 582 unit proposal

[4:41:58] number should be in question. And one that mentions a

[4:42:02] health center and some level of transit in its conceptual

[4:42:04] plan in order to check some of the provincial criteria

[4:42:07] boxes constitute or create a reasonable level of provincial interest.

[4:42:12] The Ministry of Municipal affairs and Housing website on MZTO's

[4:42:16] states, quote, as best practice, proponents should consider whether there's

[4:42:21] a demonstrable need for urgency of zoning relief. Such as

[4:42:25] timelines related to funding or grants or an emergency public

[4:42:29] health and safety concern. Proponents should also assess project feasibility

[4:42:33] prior to making a request, such as anticipated timelines related

[4:42:36] to applying for downstream approvals. And progress to address water

[4:42:42] and wastewater and other servicing. So is council satisfied the

[4:42:45] proponent has met these considerations. Secondly, what's the benefit? I

[4:42:50] don't see benefit to the township in supporting an M.

[4:42:52] Said, which would seem to remove. Or usurp the township's

[4:42:57] control and authority over key elements. Of this development process?

[4:43:01] And thirdly, how is it feasible for the proponent to

[4:43:04] propose or the province to approve a unit density and

[4:43:08] land uses. At this time, I don't see how. A

[4:43:11] unit density can be effectively established. At this time, there

[4:43:13] are no substantive science based studies to support the densities

[4:43:17] proposed. For example, there have been. No updated studies undertaken

[4:43:22] to support the redefinition of specific environmental zones and wetland

[4:43:27] boundaries. And setbacks from development. There have been no comprehensive

[4:43:32] geotechnical. Just a couple, few more seconds. Okay, you're past

[4:43:37] your five nor hydrogeological studies. That have addressed soil stability

[4:43:40] in the carrying capacity of the site for the density

[4:43:42] and sighting of units proposed. There could be major threats

[4:43:46] to the site in Cockers Creek from sedimentation, contamination and

[4:43:49] other impacts from construction and possible failure or overloading of

[4:43:53] services. So my other question is what's? The rush to

[4:43:56] take this to the province? That a proper basis for

[4:43:58] determining an acceptable density? In site plan, so it seems

[4:44:02] premature and without benefit. My final comment, madam, may. Mayor,

[4:44:06] if you allow me. Is that an option to denial

[4:44:10] of this request from avenue by council? Is deferral of

[4:44:12] this matter to staff. From a meeting I had with

[4:44:15] senior staff last week it was confirmed. Stop is not

[4:44:18] in a position currently to advise counsel on this matter.

[4:44:21] Deferral. To staff would enable them to lead and conduct

[4:44:24] necessary assessments of. And consultations on the merits of seeking

[4:44:28] an McEdot and the feasibility of elements of the proposal

[4:44:32] and bring recommendations back to council. Part of that process.

[4:44:37] Consultations. Thank you very much. Thank you for this opportunity.

[4:44:41] Are there any questions to Mr. Masovi? Councilor Rock. Thank

[4:44:47] you. Thanks for coming up. I always appreciate you coming

[4:44:55] and providing the information. Whether we agree or disagree on

[4:44:58] the topic, I always enjoy the conversation that we have

[4:45:00] on any of them, and I appreciate that. In taking

[4:45:05] a look at the letter that you read and some

[4:45:06] of the concerns. Have any of the concerns stated in

[4:45:12] that letter? Been removed based on hearing what that MZO

[4:45:17] was looking to do and not do so for example,

[4:45:21] all of the environmental reports are going to be done

[4:45:23] before anything's happening, I guess. When we hear the actual

[4:45:27] request of what's being done. Does it structurally change any

[4:45:30] of the things in the declaration from the Lake Stewarts

[4:45:33] that you put forward. Because I guess my concern is.

[4:45:39] I didn't hear that. They're looking for a rezoning, for

[4:45:40] example. It is already zoned to do that. And correct

[4:45:43] me if I'm wrong. You won't be asked to leave

[4:45:46] if you interrupt again. What I heard was this was

[4:45:54] already zoned for subdivision, right. So this is just a

[4:45:56] matter. Of density. It's not a matter of zoning. So

[4:46:00] I guess my concern is I appreciate everything you're saying.

[4:46:04] Absolutely. And I absolutely agree that all of these things

[4:46:09] have to be done. But I think from what I've

[4:46:12] heard and from what I've read or taken away from

[4:46:14] going through these things are. All of these things will

[4:46:18] be done, but. Instead of going through the process for

[4:46:23] the next couple of years, arguing back and forth around

[4:46:27] how many houses exactly can be built here or there.

[4:46:30] It's setting that parameter out and then working to make

[4:46:33] sure it will be feasible. And it will be. Environmentally

[4:46:39] sustainable to do that. So I appreciate the concern. I

[4:46:42] agree with the concern. And if we were voting on

[4:46:45] actual approval, of this, I would have a lot more

[4:46:47] concerns, but that's not what we're being asked to do

[4:46:51] tonight, in my mind, we're being asked the question of.

[4:46:55] Density, not any of these other questions. So I just

[4:46:58] wanted to. Based on what you've. Heard. Do any of

[4:47:00] your opinions or anything that we've heard from you today

[4:47:04] change? Thank you, Councilor Rock. Appreciate your question. I would

[4:47:11] say from my continuing review. Of materials been made available.

[4:47:17] Our position remains. My concern. I think the concern of

[4:47:21] the stewards is that. Setting a density now. Without studies

[4:47:28] that would basically determine the development envelope seems premature. In

[4:47:34] the brief ghd. Has just contracted. Two very excellent. Ecologists

[4:47:43] to begin to update. Environmental feasibility study. They sign their

[4:47:49] contract on June the third, I think if I can

[4:47:50] recall from the brief. So that's three weeks ago. And

[4:47:54] in the proposal, it was suggested that. There's probably some

[4:48:01] obvious changes in the boundaries of the wetland and other

[4:48:04] environmentally sensitive features. Since studies were previously done, and I

[4:48:09] assume those were in concert with the original proposal, so.

[4:48:14] It's already been. I think, considered that there have been

[4:48:17] ecological changes on the site. So I guess our view

[4:48:20] is how do you set a density within a building

[4:48:24] envelope when we don't know? What are the effective land

[4:48:29] uses available and what are the new environmental protection zones

[4:48:34] going to be? How much of that developed land, as

[4:48:37] presented in the brief, is actually developable, and it seems

[4:48:40] to me premature to send something to the province to

[4:48:43] take away from. The council's oversight of this planning process

[4:48:50] before very basic information like that is in hand. It

[4:48:54] just doesn't make sense to me. Let's let that environmental

[4:48:57] feasibility study. Proceed and have that come back as part

[4:49:02] of what I'm suggesting, perhaps as an option. Back to

[4:49:05] staff as part of a staff report to say, here's

[4:49:07] what we think is a reasonable density. In terms of

[4:49:10] rezoning or zoning. I thought density was part of. The

[4:49:14] zoning. So I think just some fundamental information, councilor, that

[4:49:19] seems to me lacking for this. To have merit to

[4:49:21] go to the province at this time. Thank you. Thank

[4:49:26] you, Councilor Rock. Are there any other questions? To mr.

[4:49:32] Maso. Called you, counselor. Councilor Loroy. Yes. Thank you,

[4:49:42] madam. Through you to Mr. Mercervy. You are somewhat unique,

[4:49:49] deputy, having Lake Stewart's role and former CIO of court

[4:49:54] conservation. Of course. That. Makes you quite an expert in

[4:50:00] many matters that we discuss here at council. So thank

[4:50:02] you for bringing your perspectives. And just to extend on

[4:50:06] that, I'm intrigued by your idea of requesting staff. To

[4:50:11] examine. This further. And I'm curious, what is the position

[4:50:15] of the lake stewards with regard to what the expectations

[4:50:19] of staff would be should we decide to. Defer to

[4:50:23] staff evaluation. Do you have some guide posts that you

[4:50:28] would like to share with where you think that study?

[4:50:30] Should go or be directed. Thank you, Councilor Leroy. Stewart

[4:50:37] we haven't had, I would say, an in depth discussion

[4:50:40] about that particular option. We knew it was certainly a

[4:50:44] consideration. I think what we agree upon is that the

[4:50:48] additional time. For additional studies to be undertaken and completed

[4:50:54] and part of. The information base of science based information

[4:51:00] would be be valuable as part of that process that

[4:51:04] staff would coordinate. So. It retains. Going to stop. Retains.

[4:51:13] The oversight of the development process for now with the

[4:51:16] township. It enables staff to have meaningful. Consultation and engagement

[4:51:23] with those who have an interest, who may not, at

[4:51:26] this point have had that opportunity this has been. Moving

[4:51:30] pretty fast. I do appreciate. Mr. Methurst and his team

[4:51:33] have had extensive consultations, but there's a lot more. That

[4:51:36] need to be held. So I think our view, councilor,

[4:51:39] is that this provides time for critical studies which will

[4:51:44] address really the whole essence of what's developable and. From

[4:51:50] what densities can be. Can be established and also provides

[4:51:55] for meaningful engagement within the community that council can benefit

[4:52:00] from before council makes its decision whether an MZ O

[4:52:04] is required, whether it's a benefit et cetera. Any further

[4:52:09] questions from any counselors. Seeing none. Thank you very much

[4:52:17] for your presentation. Thank you, ma'am. Sorry. Sit back down,

[4:52:22] Rob. Council, guido. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mercervi, for

[4:52:30] taking your seat again. Just a quick question. Scoogog late.

[4:52:35] Stewards have been around since 2003. What were your positions

[4:52:40] or the position of the committee at the time, with

[4:52:42] the development in Canterbury? And then. The new houses that

[4:52:47] were built along Castle Harbor Drive, was there a similar

[4:52:51] position that would have been given at that time? Or

[4:52:54] is this more specific to the location? Of the proximity

[4:52:59] to the lake. Thanks. Councilor. That question for you, Madam

[4:53:03] Mayor. I can't really comment. Back to Castle. Harbor development

[4:53:08] personally, but I was involved with some elements of Canterbury

[4:53:12] commons development not relating to an Mz O. The issue

[4:53:18] before us is an MZO, not so much the development.

[4:53:22] But for Canterbury commons. We had, I think, stewards and

[4:53:28] other organizations and the public had a major interest in

[4:53:32] how that site would be treated. Before the plan was

[4:53:38] approved in terms of particularly stormwater management and servicing. And

[4:53:44] how could we protect Lake Scoogog from. Possibilities of erosion

[4:53:50] and contamination and celtation. And so we spent a lot

[4:53:53] of time with the engineering team from the proponent to

[4:53:57] ensure that they were using. What they consider to be.

[4:54:02] A high degree of technology. New technology. So that was

[4:54:05] our focus from the stewards, was what's the impact on

[4:54:08] the lake? In terms of what could possibly happen in

[4:54:12] terms of impacts from the site and from runoff and

[4:54:16] unfortunately, notwithstanding that, I think there was a considerable investment

[4:54:20] in studies and. There was a lot of convincing of

[4:54:23] us that they had the technology in place. There were

[4:54:27] massive situations of major. Erosion, sedimentation and just claims of

[4:54:34] silty material into the lake Durhan aspects of construction. So

[4:54:40] that's sort of all I can comment on. That was

[4:54:41] our area of focus, counselor. I can't relate that to

[4:54:45] tonight's conversation on MZto, if that's. Helpful. Perfect. Thank you.

[4:54:49] But there were some lessons learned from that development that

[4:54:52] the Lake Stewarts have built. Their knowledge base, particularly to

[4:54:56] scoogog around them. Yes, I would say that example. We've

[4:55:01] learned from. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, councilor.

[4:55:06] To councilor Guillo's comments. Had the density been determined before

[4:55:13] you had these meetings? I can't answer that, Madam mayor.

[4:55:17] I don't know. Okay. Thank you.

[4:55:27] This time. Thank you.

[4:55:37] Okay. Residents of Castle

[4:55:47] harbor, please come forward. Thank you and welcome. Kathy, in

[4:55:52] the final five minutes. Go ahead when you're ready. Okay.

[4:55:55] First, I would like to start by just saying that

[4:55:58] I feel that the township should not grant the sims.

[4:56:00] I don't request. I feel that the residents and a

[4:56:04] lot of the other residents feel the same. I know

[4:56:06] have not. Had sufficient time to even look at the

[4:56:13] 459 page MZ eight o request. I don't know if

[4:56:17] any of the counselors have been able to get through

[4:56:19] it. In order to understand the process, the rapifications this

[4:56:23] order will entail. We were only given the information three

[4:56:28] business days ago prior to this meeting and two business

[4:56:31] days. Before the deadline to submit a request to speak,

[4:56:35] so it was virtually impossible to be able to get

[4:56:37] a lot of information out of that 450 page document.

[4:56:42] Anyways. Mr. Medhirst went on about how this plan. Adheres

[4:56:50] to. The. Official plan for Scoogog. First of all, although

[4:56:58] I'd like to say something. About the zoning. And I

[4:57:02] did get through some of that report on page 138.

[4:57:06] It does say in that large book that the zoning

[4:57:10] bylaw changes. Will be asked in the mzo. Currently zoned

[4:57:17] r three, which does not allow for apartments. They are

[4:57:21] asking the Mzo to divide the site into two zones.

[4:57:24] Zone one for single, detached, and townhomes, which would be

[4:57:28] called RM three and zone two, which would allow apartments

[4:57:32] and commercial space. So they are asking the MZO for

[4:57:37] zoning changes, just if you want to look that up.

[4:57:40] But that's on page 138. That's a little bit. I

[4:57:44] got some of that red. Anyway, the official plan for

[4:57:48] lakes. For. The township. Does state, however. In this MZO

[4:57:57] council resolution, they say, whereas the township has identified port

[4:58:01] period as the highest priority area for new development and

[4:58:04] intensification, particular in greenfield sites. That's one of their comments

[4:58:08] in the resolution. Our official plan states that township consists

[4:58:12] of many significant environmental features. Approximately 20% of land is

[4:58:16] within the Oak Ridges Marine and the remaining 80% within

[4:58:20] the green belt. The significant natural heritage features valley system

[4:58:24] significant forest areas and wetlands provide habitat for a wide

[4:58:29] range. Of fish, wildlife, vegetation. There is sufficient land available

[4:58:34] for development in the township without the need to disturb

[4:58:38] these environmentally sensitive areas. I guess they didn't see that

[4:58:42] part of the official plan. It also provide the official

[4:58:46] plan says. The township will provide for the protection and

[4:58:50] preservation of the natural environment through the Oak Ridges. Marine

[4:58:54] conservation plan, green belt plan, and within the settlement areas.

[4:59:00] Another comment. It says. Whereas the proposal replaces a limited

[4:59:07] use, large lot, single home estate subdivision. It goes on

[4:59:12] a little bit from there, but since I don't have

[4:59:14] time, I won't. Read the rest. Avenue Properties is not

[4:59:17] a developer. They admit that they have never built any

[4:59:21] project like this before. This will be a pilot project

[4:59:25] being done on environmentally sense of land bordering lake Scoogog.

[4:59:29] I feel this is a high risk project. The township

[4:59:33] should not turn the decision making process over to the

[4:59:36] province in order to fast track a pilot project. So

[4:59:40] we must ask what processes, reviews, assessments, environmental studies will

[4:59:45] be shortchanged. In order to fast track this development. Once

[4:59:49] the MZo is granted. There will be no turning back.

[4:59:54] Also. Where am I? Here. The council unanously passed a

[5:00:00] motion on February December 4, 2023, confirming they prepared to

[5:00:05] explore the utilization of the community with structured housing that

[5:00:09] has been changed. However, the point I wanted to make

[5:00:12] there was that the motion was passed December 4 without.

[5:00:17] Proper public consultation. The official plan also states the township

[5:00:22] will make available to the public information regarding future development

[5:00:25] patterns of the township in order to reduce speculation in

[5:00:29] land, which arises when residents and land developers are not

[5:00:32] aware of future development policies and plans. I don't feel

[5:00:36] the resident. Residents have been properly informed about this at

[5:00:39] all, given that we've only had three days. To prepare

[5:00:44] for this meeting. Also. Just a couple more seconds. All

[5:00:52] right. It says here too, whereas the proposed development forms

[5:00:56] to the applicable policies of the regional op. Has explicit

[5:01:03] permission for servicing by municipal water and private sewage systems.

[5:01:09] I don't see where the explicit permission comes from. In

[5:01:11] the MCO request, it states that they will have to

[5:01:14] receive. Ministry of Environment. Conservation and parks approval and responsibility

[5:01:22] agreement with the region for this private septic sewer system.

[5:01:27] So how? Does that equate to explicit permission? Thank you

[5:01:32] very much. Any questions to the delegate? I really don't

[5:01:38] like to cut people off, but we have 14 delegations.

[5:01:47] If we don't keep to a time script, we will

[5:01:51] be here well past midnight. Anyway, censor development is on

[5:01:59] environmentally connected land. Kathy, thank you very much. Are there

[5:02:03] any questions to Kathy?

[5:02:16] Thank you. We'll move on to our next delegate, who

[5:02:19] is Nancy page. Nancy, if you're here, I don't have

[5:02:25] an address for you, so please state your address. When

[5:02:30] you come forward. Thank you. We'll control that. Nancy.

[5:02:40] Page 15, Cockers cove Road. L nine, l one, p

[5:02:43] four. Okay, go ahead. Thank you. And I have my

[5:02:47] timer here as well. Perfect. So, first of all, thank

[5:02:55] you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I am here

[5:02:57] to voice my opposition to avenues request for an MZo

[5:03:02] I'm going to talk from a very general. Layperson understanding

[5:03:05] of this situation. Firstly, this municipal council is the most

[5:03:11] important and powerful protector of our community, and it is

[5:03:16] this. Council, not developers, that determines the developments and the

[5:03:21] speed of developments in our community. As we know, accelerates

[5:03:26] the development process from two to three years to three

[5:03:29] months to support housing and developer goals. These may not

[5:03:35] align with our community and our council goals. It bypasses

[5:03:40] the Ontario Land Tribunal. It cannot be reviewed. It cannot

[5:03:44] be appealed. It is final. It includes employment assessments, which.

[5:03:50] Have been better just by me, but to a lesser

[5:03:52] extent than the manual process. It means this council loses

[5:03:58] control over critical components of this development. The Mississaugas of

[5:04:04] Scogog island. The lake stewards and local residents are opposed

[5:04:09] to this MZO. Court. The conservation has not been provided

[5:04:13] with plans for review and comment. I understand this is

[5:04:17] not a requirement, but their input is critical. I'm going

[5:04:21] to quickly reference some things from Abby's presentation on page

[5:04:25] 126. There are reasons for requesting this MCO, and I

[5:04:30] quote, investments are ended. Anything needed so financing can be.

[5:04:37] Secured. Time is critical to unlock funding initiatives needed for

[5:04:41] financial viability. Without an MZO and subsequent financing, they cannot

[5:04:47] advance further. What does this mean? What time is what

[5:04:51] initiatives? What happens if they get the Zenzio and. There's

[5:04:55] another hiccup along the way. What I'm hearing, and I

[5:04:59] could be wrong, is that they don't have the money

[5:05:02] to build this. So who is advancing the money? Who

[5:05:05] is in control? Are they going to flip this and

[5:05:10] never come through? And since they don't have the money

[5:05:13] to build this, why are they asking this council? To

[5:05:17] help them accelerate things. I do not see transparency, accountability

[5:05:23] or credibility here. To counsel. I say, why would you

[5:05:27] even consider hurrying things up to help these guys out

[5:05:30] if they don't have the money to do this. Whoever

[5:05:34] ends up doing this is probably not going to be

[5:05:36] them. Referencing page 43 and 180 of their presentation, as

[5:05:43] well as section eight of the Ontario building code. Sewage

[5:05:46] system design flows. Just as a quick example, because time

[5:05:50] is short. But when you use their numbers, their plans

[5:05:55] of 26 detached 36 time loses 520 apartment type units.

[5:06:02] That number of 2.2 people per unit, and I crunch

[5:06:05] those numbers through the Ontario building. Code. The daily wastewater

[5:06:09] that will require treatment is 414,000 liters per day. Their

[5:06:15] plans are for 280,000 liters per day, 68% of design

[5:06:21] capacity, a full 32% unaccounted for, as per the Ontario

[5:06:26] building code. I know they might have. Some highfalutant plans,

[5:06:30] but I feel like I am missing something here. These

[5:06:34] are just some red flags I quickly found on a

[5:06:37] Sunday afternoon scanning a report that is high on vision,

[5:06:41] low on details, and I can't imagine what a full

[5:06:44] review might find. Given all this, it follows that it

[5:06:50] is better that this development not proceed via any kind

[5:06:54] of MZO so that this council can continue to ensure

[5:06:58] proper review of all aspects of the development. In addition

[5:07:04] to my previous questions, based on the points I raised,

[5:07:07] I want to ask this council five questions. One, is

[5:07:10] my general understanding correct? Two. Has the planning department issued

[5:07:14] a planning report? Do they support this development? Do they

[5:07:18] support this? MCO. And if so, why? Three addresses. Environmental

[5:07:24] assessments. All I can say is we can't take any

[5:07:26] shortcuts. Four. Do you support this development? If so, why?

[5:07:34] Do you support an NZO for this development? If so,

[5:07:37] why? I respectfully ask. This council votes against avenues MZo

[5:07:42] request granting us the time to move. Forward prudently. Their

[5:07:46] motives for an accelerated process are clear, and things don't

[5:07:49] add up. But we do not have to be rushed.

[5:07:54] Tonight's decisions could make things final. The environmental impact and

[5:07:58] loss to our community is forever. We must take every

[5:08:01] step. To protect. I ask that you did not have

[5:08:05] any MCO request so that you can continue to act.

[5:08:08] With patients. Prudence, collaboration, control and time. Thank you very

[5:08:12] much. Are there any questions to the delegate? Seeing none,

[5:08:20] thank you very much. Okay. And just a general process.

[5:08:22] Question. My questions, will they be. Answered at some point.

[5:08:30] If you submit them. Please. That would be great. Thank

[5:08:33] you. Okay. Moving on to

[5:08:43] 9.7, which is a delegation from Janice Hamilton Dicker. Regarding

[5:08:49] the Mzetto request. Janice, are you in the crowd here

[5:08:53] somewhere? Oh, there you are.

[5:09:06] Thank you. Go ahead. When you're ready. And you have

[5:09:09] five minutes. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council. I

[5:09:13] represent others in the castle harbor and surrounding neighborhoods and

[5:09:16] requests that you do not endorse the minister's zoning order

[5:09:20] for avenue properties court if council wants to move forward

[5:09:23] with this, then we in the community need more public

[5:09:26] consultations before that. Is done. The lake, wetland and marsh

[5:09:30] surrounding the site are evaluated as provincially significant that must

[5:09:35] be protected in the words of our famous canadian painter,

[5:09:38] Robert Bateman, we are wiping out our natural heritage. And

[5:09:42] replacing it with uniformity, which is dangerous. It is creating

[5:09:46] grandchild abuse because we will not leave. Them parcels of

[5:09:50] land that are left in its natural state. This development

[5:09:53] would destroy the marshland. And the habitat of hundreds of

[5:09:56] birds, turtles, frogs, fish, an array of plant and wildlife.

[5:10:00] All eight of Ontario's turtle species have been designated as

[5:10:04] species at risk under the endangered Species act. The development

[5:10:08] would impact and displ. Displace a variety of species. This

[5:10:12] property is a popular corridor for wildlife. Please protect it.

[5:10:16] Since at least 2004, this property has been under the

[5:10:19] threat of development. On April 25, 2006, the Regional Municipality

[5:10:24] of Durham Commissioner of Planning report stated that originally a

[5:10:28] development of 25. Residential homes with a marina was proposed,

[5:10:33] but was reduced to 20 homes in consideration of the

[5:10:36] environment. Protection. And yet here we're talking about 600 units

[5:10:40] and a road over a marsh area. What about the

[5:10:43] buffer between the construction area and the wetland? With a

[5:10:46] proposed marina, the buffer is gone. The proposed. New road

[5:10:50] will run right through a provincially significant marsh area. In

[5:10:54] looking at the Ontario online wetland mapping system. You can

[5:10:58] clearly see the wetland, how many truckloads of soil will

[5:11:01] be required to build this road. When the 20 homes

[5:11:04] were to be built, 6000 truckloads of soil would have

[5:11:08] been needed. How many truckloads of soil? Would be required

[5:11:11] to build this new development and road. It would be

[5:11:14] almost impossible to guarantee no contaminated soil is brought in.

[5:11:18] Constructing roads and parking lots will destroy even more green

[5:11:22] space and replace it with hard surface. More roads and

[5:11:25] more parking lots equal more road salt in the winter

[5:11:27] months. Road runoff and road salts will cont. Contaminate surrounding

[5:11:31] waterways and wetlands and impact wildlife within the waters. How

[5:11:35] will that be managed? Chlorides from road salts are toxic

[5:11:38] to freshwater ecosystems and species and ecosystems. Enhanced amount of

[5:11:44] road salts will transform cool freshwater environments into salty, warmer

[5:11:48] walters waters. We all know that. More affordable housing is

[5:11:52] needed. But the provincial government of Ontario has stated they

[5:11:55] have ruled out allowing municipalities to build fourplexes and little

[5:12:00] communities like ours. They stated it was off the table.

[5:12:03] For them yet they are planning twelve apartment buildings. The

[5:12:07] development is completely out of character with the surrounding single

[5:12:10] family dwelling home. Homes. Who will be responsible for the

[5:12:13] cost of upgrading our infrastructure, such as our healthcare, transportation,

[5:12:18] police fire and education for possibly 2400 new residents. The

[5:12:22] taxpayer will be as a community, we have concern with

[5:12:26] Avenue as a company. What if they change their name,

[5:12:29] close the company or declare bankruptcy? And a sewage system

[5:12:32] that they have installed. Malfunction. Who will be financially responsible

[5:12:36] for the cleanup. Can avenue please confirm how many units

[5:12:40] they want to build. Really confirm it. If Avenue got

[5:12:43] their approvals they need to build. Will they stick with

[5:12:47] the project or will they get the approvals? And then

[5:12:49] sell the property. What are their plans? The ministry zoning

[5:12:54] process is required to cut the planning process. What planning

[5:12:57] department requirements? Will be short changed. We would encourage council

[5:13:01] to take the proper time, complete proper due diligence. And

[5:13:05] not be driven by the developer's request. Now, I am

[5:13:08] representing others in our community. And this is what's been

[5:13:12] said. There is talk about contacting the ombudsman. Ontario, to

[5:13:17] discuss the decision of council if. They choose to support

[5:13:20] this ministry zoning order council should support the majority of

[5:13:23] their residents wishes. Thank you. Very much. On. Any questions?

[5:13:31] To. The delegate. Thank you very much. And if you

[5:13:36] haven't already submitted your presentation, you could certainly do that.

[5:13:43] Councilor Douglas decided he wants to ask a question. Sorry.

[5:13:48] My question is actually just a point of clarification. You've

[5:13:52] indicated that the delegates could submit their questions, as this

[5:13:56] is not a public meeting. And we don't have a

[5:13:58] proper form for submitting and answering questions. What would that

[5:14:02] look like? True matter, mayor? Well, I don't know, but

[5:14:05] I'd like to have them. Very good. Thank you. I'm

[5:14:10] assuming I'm allowed to ask for them. Mr clerk. Am

[5:14:18] I totally wrong?

[5:14:30] Anyway, please submit it. Okay, so, moving on.

[5:14:42] We will now have a delegation from Lori Bray.

[5:14:53] Welcome. And you can go ahead whenever you're ready. Thank

[5:14:55] you. There was a number of madamarin to all of

[5:14:58] the members of council. There was a number of things

[5:15:02] that I was going to say, but they've been so

[5:15:04] eloquently. Shared. In previous

[5:15:14] delegations. I'm really going to. Say as clearly, as clearly

[5:15:19] said another time in other delegations. We must take our

[5:15:24] time with this development. My main concern is the proximity

[5:15:27] to the wetlands and the lake, the natural habitats of

[5:15:31] birds and other wildlife will be affected. As we know,

[5:15:35] wetlands are such an important part of health for the

[5:15:39] environment. So I feel we need to take into account

[5:15:42] the impact on the wetlands, not only for today. But

[5:15:45] also for future generations. Therefore. I feel like we need

[5:15:49] to take our time, get the environmental assessments right, and

[5:15:54] follow due process. And so at this point, I would

[5:15:58] not be in favor of the Avenue properties m sale

[5:16:01] request. At this time. And I don't need all of

[5:16:05] my five minutes. So someone else can follow. Thank you.

[5:16:11] Well, thank you. I appreciate. I will ask questions to

[5:16:17] be directed. So. Just a sec, Councilor Guido. Not a

[5:16:21] question, just. A comment. Thank you very much for that.

[5:16:24] I appreciate it. Thank you. Does anyone else have any

[5:16:28] questions? Ms. Bryce? Seeing none, thank you. Moving on to

[5:16:35] delegation nine. Larry corrigan.

[5:17:05] Welcome and go ahead to Mr. Corrigan. Thank you, madam

[5:17:09] chair and members of council. For allowing this

[5:17:18] senior to come back to the place that he spent

[5:17:23] ten years. And it's ten years today. If we're talking

[5:17:26] time sensitivity that I was sitting where you were. Councilor

[5:17:31] Cohen, just for a little information, and based on what

[5:17:34] I've heard tonight. I'm here to speak. To the correspondence,

[5:17:40] so I submit it, so. I don't want to repeat

[5:17:44] what I've heard. I'm going to take what I've heard

[5:17:48] tonight. And go right to the back. Of where I

[5:17:53] am right now. And to suggest the following. To address

[5:18:01] this issue. My motion if I were where I was.

[5:18:10] Ten years ago would be. That council. Considered the formation

[5:18:18] of an ad hoc committee. Ad hoc. Consisting of representation.

[5:18:27] From avenue properties. Regional and schoolgog planning. Representative from the

[5:18:34] conservation. Authority. Scoogog Lake stewards. Mississaugas. Of Scogog.

[5:18:46] Representation. From Castle harbor residents. And the word five, counselor.

[5:18:55] And their mandate would be to address the concerns of

[5:19:00] the local. Body politic, which we have heard tonight. And

[5:19:06] review the requested reports of planning staff. And the development

[5:19:13] of a site plan. And necessary legal documents to address

[5:19:20] the concerns. References. Evening. Which would include. An adr.

[5:19:31] Alternative dispute resolution clause. To address. What will

[5:19:41] happen when you have a development. Problems in the implementation.

[5:19:48] The other point I want to mention, when we're speaking

[5:19:51] of history. And what the developer was. Hanging their hat

[5:20:01] on was the official plan. Now the official plan. If

[5:20:07] my memory and I can be corrected. Has to be

[5:20:11] reviewed every five years. By provincial mandate. And the question

[5:20:17] I ask myself. Was. How long ago? Was the original.

[5:20:27] Plan. That everyone's hanging their hat on to promote this

[5:20:32] development. I would say it's beyond five years. I would

[5:20:36] say it's probably around seven. So therefore. That is something

[5:20:44] that has to be considered. Because a lot of technology,

[5:20:48] a lot of. Insight regarding environmental concerns has happened since

[5:20:56] it was originally developed. And I also referenced.

[5:21:08] As the closing point. From jfk. Never fear to negotiate.

[5:21:19] But never negotiate out of fear. I am willing to

[5:21:24] take questions with respect. To. The other two points. That

[5:21:31] I reference in the correspondence, which, by the way, Was

[5:21:37] supported by the retired teachers of Ontario Durham chapter. Political

[5:21:45] advocacy committee membership, which includes representation from this community outside

[5:21:51] of the teachers. And the president. Thank you, madam. Thank

[5:22:01] you. Mr. Corgan, are there any questions? Or anything for

[5:22:06] Mr. Corrigan? Seeing none, thank you very much. Thank you,

[5:22:12] Madam Mayor.

[5:22:26] Okay. Delegation ten, which is a delegation from Alison Elwood.

[5:22:42] This is a fancy chair. Welcome elephant. And please go

[5:22:50] ahead. Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor Wanton. Counselors,

[5:22:55] delegates. Neighbors, friends. Thank you for your great support for

[5:23:00] those events that we heard around town this morning. Or

[5:23:03] rather, at the start of the meeting. And thank you

[5:23:07] to our good work on our finances. I can't believe

[5:23:10] we're actually doing really well with our increase in revenue.

[5:23:13] It's really exciting. I noticed I'm in here this evening.

[5:23:17] A lovely plaque of the land acknowledgment. Mentioned earlier here

[5:23:21] as well. Also a flag representing the Mississaugas of Cuga

[5:23:26] Gyle and First Nation. I know marijuana and council. You

[5:23:30] value your relationship with the nation, whose land we're on.

[5:23:33] Here in Scogog. It's evident here. And another effort such

[5:23:37] as. The efforts last week to commemorate National Indigenous People's

[5:23:42] day. I'm not a member of Scubog Island, First Nation,

[5:23:48] nor am I here to. Speak on their behalf, but

[5:23:50] as a resident of Port Perry, I'd like to ask

[5:23:52] the mayor if the meaningful consultation process with our treaty

[5:23:56] partners has begun and at what stage it is at.

[5:24:00] I saw some notes of attempts to reach out by

[5:24:02] avenue, but the developers. But nowhere near fulsome consultation. And

[5:24:07] in truth, And Zeto's ought not Trump treaty rights. As

[5:24:12] you are well aware, the duty to consult on such

[5:24:14] a development on a provincially significant wetland is outlined in

[5:24:17] the canadian constitution. Our legal obligations under the United Nations

[5:24:21] Declaration for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and, of course,

[5:24:24] our moral obligations to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and

[5:24:28] to our neighbors, friends and treaty partners, the Mississaugas of

[5:24:32] Scuga gala First Nation Municipalities and Provinces act on behalf

[5:24:36] of the Crown and it is, in fact, the rule

[5:24:38] of counsel to consult. I would like to know where

[5:24:41] they are in the process and with consultation and whether

[5:24:44] or not you can tell us their thoughts on the

[5:24:46] matter. It's my understanding that mississaugs of Scuba island First

[5:24:50] Nation have not received an official project package from the

[5:24:53] developer nor the town. I'm actually just wondering if they're

[5:24:56] waiting for the environmental assessments after listening tonight. I look

[5:25:01] forward to your public notice of your consultation process. I

[5:25:05] trust you will act on our behalf with honesty, integrity

[5:25:08] and with the thoughts of our children. Grandchildren and the

[5:25:11] great grandchildren in our heart. In your heart, actually. Thank

[5:25:15] you. And go, oilers, go. Thank you very much. Allison.

[5:25:19] Are there any questions or comments to Allison? Seeing none,

[5:25:25] thank you very much. Sorry, Councilor MacDougall. You got to

[5:25:30] get in there quicker, Mr. McDougal. Madam. You're getting quicker

[5:25:35] and quicker. As she said. Go. Oilers, I think. Question

[5:25:41] for you, Allison. We heard earlier that. Tension. Viscog does

[5:25:47] not have a legal obligation to consult. With Mississaugas of

[5:25:52] Kugog Island's first Nations and or any other treaty signatories.

[5:25:58] Does that absolve us of our responsibilities, in your opinion,

[5:26:02] to do that consultation? So are you talking about your

[5:26:08] legal obligation or your moral obligation? I would consider it

[5:26:11] to be. Both, but I'm just. A humble resident of

[5:26:15] moral corporation. But yeah. So you're asking me if I

[5:26:20] think you have a moral obligation? Yeah, I think that's

[5:26:24] probably why I'm here. But I also know that. You

[5:26:27] could probably talk to Chief laraka. She would probably be

[5:26:29] able to fill you in on your legal obligations, but,

[5:26:32] yeah, I do believe. We have a moral obligation. That's

[5:26:36] all. Thank you. That's the end of our delegations.

[5:26:50] Okay. We will now entertain a motion, please.

[5:26:59] To let me get myself organized. That the presentation. From

[5:27:08] avenue properties be received. That all the delegations. Be received.

[5:27:17] And that all the correspondence. Listed and that would be

[5:27:23] 10.3.1. Which to Allison. There is correspondence included in the

[5:27:30] agenda package. With feedback from the MSIFn after consultation. Just

[5:27:39] to share that little information. That is, our correspondence is

[5:27:45] 10.3.1 through two. 10.3.14. So if I could have

[5:27:55] a mover and a seconder, Councilor McDougall. I will gladly

[5:28:00] move that, madam. Please, Councilor Laurie. Thank you. Are there

[5:28:04] any questions? Councilor McDougall. My question, Madam Mayor, is you

[5:28:09] mentioned questions of the delegates be recorded. And I'm asking

[5:28:14] if that can be added to this motion. Do you

[5:28:23] know what he means? The questions have been posed. We'll

[5:28:29] have them on tape. The questions. We have recorded this

[5:28:34] entire meeting. So the questions. Are already recorded. I just

[5:28:40] asked for them to be submitted as well, so I'm

[5:28:44] not quite sure what you're asking. All right. Thank you,

[5:28:46] madam. Councilor rock. Thank you, Madamor. So, in taking a

[5:28:53] look at the resolutions, the resolutions themselves, I have no.

[5:28:56] Issues with any of them. I guess what I'm not

[5:28:58] seeing is an answer to the question that has been

[5:29:02] posed to us.

[5:29:13] And. I presume the question. About. Whether. That's two

[5:29:22] point or nine point. Whatever it was. Nine point. Three

[5:29:27] point. Two? Is that what you're referencing? I

[5:29:37] guess the question is, do we want that to be

[5:29:41] included in this resolution, or do we. Want that to

[5:29:47] be deferred or do we want to have that as

[5:29:50] a separate resolution? Well, I'm happy to gauge in a

[5:30:00] conversation, but. I think at some level it needs to

[5:30:04] be addressed. A question has been asked for us. Absolutely.

[5:30:07] Of us. A sample resolution has been supplied to us.

[5:30:12] So are they going to agree with the sample resolution?

[5:30:15] We're going to make a referral for that resolution or

[5:30:18] we're going to deny it, but at some point we

[5:30:21] have to address it. So I do agree with you,

[5:30:25] councilor, and I would like to suggest that the resolution

[5:30:28] that was put before us. Be voted on, and then.

[5:30:35] The other resolution. Can come forward for discussion. So we'll

[5:30:41] deal with that separately and accept all of the delegations

[5:30:44] and presentations. In a separate assessment. As long as that's

[5:30:50] okay with the clerk. My left hand man. If I

[5:30:54] may, madam Mayor, in the draft resolution that you have

[5:30:58] before you, there's a reference under number two that the

[5:31:01] correspondence from Andrew Bigert on behalf of avenue properties be

[5:31:05] received. Right. It is both the letter and the motion.

[5:31:12] Okay. What I understand, the intent is that you would

[5:31:17] withhold dealing with the motion so that you. Can have

[5:31:20] some deliberations about it this evening and whether. You're going

[5:31:25] to move and second it, or what am I to

[5:31:28] do with it? So I guess the correspondence. The resolution.

[5:31:36] This resolution should read. That the correspondent 9.3.1 from Andrew

[5:31:44] Biggert on behalf of Avenue be received.

[5:31:58] So then, if I'm clear, we're just receiving that one

[5:32:01] piece of correspondence and. Again. In a separate motion, we'll

[5:32:05] address. 9.3 point. That is what I understand. That's fine.

[5:32:11] I just wanted clarity. Thank you. Yes. So these resolutions

[5:32:16] before you have been moved by councilor McDougall and councilor

[5:32:18] Leroy. Is there any further discussion wanted of. These resolutions.

[5:32:26] Seeing none. All in favor? Thank you.

[5:33:06] Okay. So if we are going to have a discussion

[5:33:14] regarding the motion or the ask for the mzetto I

[5:33:19] need a mover and a seconder to put that on

[5:33:22] the floor. Councilor rock. And councilor McDougall? Yes. No. You're

[5:33:30] seconding it or no, I was. Going to put motion.

[5:33:33] Different than the one. That. What's in front of us.

[5:33:41] Sorry. Different than the one that's in front of you.

[5:33:44] 1.3.2. Oh, yes. Different than that. Thank you. Okay. So

[5:33:49] we need a second or for nine point. 3.2. The

[5:33:55] one. Councilor Wright. Okay. So it's now on the floor.

[5:33:58] The motion that was received. From outlined from avenue. Properties.

[5:34:07] Is there any discussion? Or anything with regard to that

[5:34:12] motion.

[5:34:24] Is everyone clear? Do we need to have a short

[5:34:27] break to figure that out? What we're? Doing? Okay.

[5:34:42] This is the motion regarding avenue properties and federal requests

[5:34:46] that was proposed by the applicant. Councilor Rock and councilor

[5:34:51] Wright have moved it. So there can be discussion.

[5:35:02] Councilor ruck. Thank you, madamir. I appreciate everyone being here

[5:35:08] today, and I know that some or all of us

[5:35:10] may agree or. Disagree to a variety of different things,

[5:35:14] but. I believe what we're being asked. Is a very

[5:35:18] straightforward. Very small, defined question. Is, should we set the

[5:35:25] density on this? What I've heard through the delegations, what

[5:35:28] I've heard through. Reading 300, 450 pages of information at

[5:35:35] that point is I've still yet to hear a reason

[5:35:38] why we would not. Move to set density. It is

[5:35:42] not going to remove anything else from the development process.

[5:35:46] It will not remove the onus of all of the

[5:35:49] assessments that need to be done to ensure and protect

[5:35:52] that this is going to be done appropriately, and it

[5:35:55] does not mean that shovels are going to be in

[5:35:57] the ground anytime soon. This will come back before. Us

[5:36:01] once we have all of the appropriate information. To make

[5:36:05] any final decisions. It will not remove this council's responsibility

[5:36:10] in my mind. From giving a full assessment of this.

[5:36:14] This is a simple step forward for this company to

[5:36:19] continue. To explore all of those things. And if it

[5:36:22] does not add up, then I will be the first

[5:36:24] one on council to speak against this, but at this

[5:36:28] point I haven't heard personally. A credible reason why we.

[5:36:32] Wouldn't start that process moving forward to be able to

[5:36:36] get all of the additional information. That we will be

[5:36:39] requiring to make. A very clear, very definitive future decision.

[5:36:45] Thank you, council. Are there any further comments or questions

[5:36:48] from any of council? Can you ask them to clarify

[5:36:57] that? He's moved to daunt. The clerk has asked if

[5:37:01] you are moving forward for adoption of that resolution, if

[5:37:05] that's what you were speaking to. I am. Okay. That's

[5:37:11] what I thought. Thank you. Okay, further questions. Councilor Leroy.

[5:37:18] Yes. Thank you. Madamarin, through you, I'd like to take

[5:37:20] this opportunity to ask. Staff for. Their opinion. I realized

[5:37:27] that had much time to look at this either. However.

[5:37:32] I actually value. I probably don't say that often enough,

[5:37:34] but. I would like to have some sense of. Your

[5:37:39] thoughts, whether that's director Henry or director heritage. Understanding. You

[5:37:43] may not have really given this a whole lot of

[5:37:45] attention yet. Hopefully. There's some preliminary. Viewpoints you may have

[5:37:53] or wish to share on this topic. Three. You met

[5:38:02] a mayor to the councilor. You're correct. Staff hasn't really

[5:38:09] had an opportunity to review all this material that's before

[5:38:12] us. It came in the middle of last week. And

[5:38:16] we've been dealing with other priorities at that point in

[5:38:18] time. So I love the opportunity to go through the

[5:38:21] material. And provide counsel with an opinion. I think this

[5:38:25] is one of the first times I've ever appeared before

[5:38:28] council with no staff report and no recommendation on the

[5:38:32] item that is before council. So I think it would

[5:38:36] be premature at this point in time to provide an

[5:38:38] opinion. For council's consideration.

[5:38:48] Sorry. Anything further? Yes. I would like to propose a

[5:38:55] motion that we defer this to staff for evaluation. Well,

[5:38:59] the other motion is currently on the floor. Is it

[5:39:06] a referral? It would be both. Ashley. Okay? Do you

[5:39:13] want to do that right now, or do you want

[5:39:15] to listen to the rest of the comments and questions

[5:39:19] from council. I think we should hear the rest of

[5:39:22] comments from council. Thank you council. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[5:39:28] Just sort of a summation of what we've heard tonight.

[5:39:33] Please speak into your mic. Sorry, madam Mayor, of the

[5:39:37] summation of what we've heard tonight. And the last comments

[5:39:41] from director heritage, I think, summed it up quite well.

[5:39:45] This is very early stages of this game, nothing has

[5:39:48] come to. The staff at the municipality for approval. And

[5:39:54] to councilor Rock's point, we're looking to get. A number,

[5:39:58] identity numbers. So we can look at this and see

[5:40:00] what can be built and see. What we can do

[5:40:03] there and preserve the quality of the lake. This council.

[5:40:09] Is very committed to preserving a lake. It's not development

[5:40:13] at any cost. I myself sit on the courth conservation

[5:40:20] authority and realize what it means to preserve the quality

[5:40:24] of the lake for the ongoing. Well being of this

[5:40:29] community. And like Mr. Masurvey said earlier, there were things

[5:40:34] that were learned from. The lessons. At Canterbury Common and

[5:40:39] those things will all be taken into account. As this

[5:40:44] goes forward, if it does. But this is very early

[5:40:46] going. Staff have not seen anything. That's going to be

[5:40:50] proposed. What we need to do now is get. A

[5:40:55] number so we can see if this is possible to

[5:40:58] do it. And if it is feasible. If the system

[5:41:04] is what it says it is, it's great. I think

[5:41:07] everybody here would rather have a self contained sewage system

[5:41:10] holding all the effluent back. Then 20 septic beds leaching

[5:41:14] into the lake. I think it is prudent that we

[5:41:18] give this a good look at and see if it

[5:41:21] is feasible to bring it into this community. It is.

[5:41:26] A world. Leading technology. In the future of housing, and

[5:41:32] I think it would be a great mark for Port

[5:41:35] Perry. And Skewog Township to put this in the port.

[5:41:40] If it could be feasibly. Done. And maintain the quality

[5:41:45] and health of the lake. It would show the world

[5:41:49] that it could be done. People could live beside the

[5:41:52] lake. With the rest of their lives and for the

[5:41:55] rest of time. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you, councilor.

[5:42:00] Councilor Guido. Thank you, madamir. Just a question for you

[5:42:04] to direct your heritage or manager Hendry, whoever. Wants to

[5:42:07] take the question. Can you walk us through if you

[5:42:11] have the knowledge? How mz o's work. If it's endorsed

[5:42:18] and forwarded to the minister's office. Do they have any

[5:42:23] responsibility to not just look at our official plan, but

[5:42:26] do they consult with municipal staff. On any of their

[5:42:31] thoughts, opinions or comments, or is it strictly they will

[5:42:35] look at the information provided by the submitter and then

[5:42:39] go based on. What our documents are that are available

[5:42:42] to them on a website. Through you. Madam Mayor. Councilor,

[5:42:46] my understanding is that. Ministry staff will consult with local

[5:42:53] staff and regional staff on the proposed MZO before them

[5:42:57] and have further discussions on it. So they're not just

[5:43:01] making a decision in isolation. So at that point, Staff

[5:43:07] would be providing an opinion to the minister which may

[5:43:11] not have been shared yet. With council. Is that how

[5:43:15] it would typically work? There wouldn't be a report that

[5:43:18] would come to council prior to you providing that comment

[5:43:22] to the ministry. Madam Mayor to the council? I guess

[5:43:26] it depends on the request for information. If it's a

[5:43:32] factual piece of information, we can certainly provide that to

[5:43:36] ministry staff. If its opinion, that's something different. I'm just

[5:43:43] trying to figure the timeline in my head. The minister

[5:43:48] may or may not reach out to local staff or

[5:43:52] the region, and then you may or may not be

[5:43:55] required to provide a report. Rather opinion or, pardon me,

[5:43:59] just fact. Through you. Madam mayor to the councilor. It's

[5:44:03] solely at the ministry staff's. Discretion and the minister's discretion

[5:44:06] on how they want to proceed with the request. Thank

[5:44:09] you. So that answers my question. They may or may

[5:44:11] not consult directly with the township of Scoogog. Staff. Okay.

[5:44:15] Thank you. So I think what we've heard tonight. From

[5:44:20] the residents, from. The correspondence that we've received. It seems

[5:44:27] to be that. The common concern is the rush. I

[5:44:33] really, truly hope that. If a deferral happens and staff

[5:44:38] is able to review and provide their comment, or if

[5:44:41] the minister comes back because we've endorsed this, and they

[5:44:45] say that these studies are required. The questions of the

[5:44:50] residents will be answered through facts, not. Through any other

[5:44:57] means other than facts that would be provided by whatever

[5:45:00] studies avenue would be required. To provide. While I represent

[5:45:05] more two, I hear concerns from all of the community,

[5:45:10] and oftentimes in my ward. There is great concerns about.

[5:45:17] Develop. Development. No matter how small or large the developments

[5:45:21] are, there's always concerns about development war. Ii has been

[5:45:25] living through developments since as long as I've been a

[5:45:27] counselor, and I think that's about eleven years. Almost ten,

[5:45:32] Mr. Corrigan. But I believe it's been eleven years now,

[5:45:35] so there's always going to be the concerns about. Development.

[5:45:39] I would like to reserve any of. My comments or

[5:45:42] thoughts. For once, we have actual facts provided to us

[5:45:46] from whatever type of reports or studies are required. But

[5:45:52] I will wait and see where council is going with

[5:45:54] their decision making, and we'll see from there. But thank

[5:45:58] you, director heritage, for answering that question for me because

[5:46:01] I was kind of unsure how that would work with

[5:46:04] the ministry. Thank you, Councilor Guido. Councilor Coyne. Thank you,

[5:46:09] Madam Mayor. I don't think I've done as much reading

[5:46:14] or as much research on any file since I've been

[5:46:16] on council, as I have on this particular file. And

[5:46:23] I came into council tonight. With my mind basically made

[5:46:26] up as to how I was going to proceed. And

[5:46:34] at this point in time, I have more research to

[5:46:36] do, in my view, so that I can make a

[5:46:39] logical decision. As councilor Guido says, based on fact. Which

[5:46:46] will bear itself out in time. So I guess it

[5:46:50] was just a statement more than a question. Thank you.

[5:46:54] Thank you, councilor cohen. Councilor mcdougall. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[5:46:59] And thank you to my fellow councilors. Thank you to

[5:47:02] Mr. Medhurst. In this group for his enthusiasm and interest

[5:47:05] in our community. To our staff, I'd like to ask.

[5:47:11] If this, instead of a yay or an a is

[5:47:14] referred to staff, does that prevent us from. Staff. Recommending

[5:47:21] to council that an MZ O is the best way

[5:47:24] to proceed with this. Process. Through you, Madam Mayor. Through

[5:47:31] you, Madam mayor to the councilor. No, it doesn't prevent

[5:47:34] staff from. Providing an opinion or recommendation to council on

[5:47:42] whether an mzido would be an appropriate course. Of action.

[5:47:45] Okay, very good. So, knowing full well that. The region

[5:47:51] of Durham at best, given. This u shaped proposal for

[5:47:55] water because they won't allow this many units dead ended

[5:47:59] on one water main has to go down. A new

[5:48:02] road constructed across the wetland is at very best five

[5:48:07] years away. If this is referred to stuff and it

[5:48:11] becomes five years and two months or three months, I

[5:48:14] don't think. It will really change the outcome as to

[5:48:18] how soon this project can be constructed. At this point

[5:48:23] in time. I wouldn't support moving ahead on an MZ

[5:48:28] O. I would support referring this to staff to come

[5:48:33] back to council with a fulsome recommendation. Thank you. Thank

[5:48:39] you, council mcdougall. Councilor mark. I appreciate all of the

[5:48:44] feedback that I've heard from all of the various counselors.

[5:48:47] I don't find myself in an unusual position of being

[5:48:50] the only one on one side. Of an issue. But

[5:48:53] very clearly. Again, I will reiterate, the question before us

[5:48:58] is around the Evans Eto and the only thing that

[5:49:02] the MZ O is talking about is density and land

[5:49:06] use. Nothing else, nothing more, nothing less. Nor does it

[5:49:10] preclude any other ongoing assessments in all of the normal

[5:49:15] process. So beyond this mz o that will outline density

[5:49:20] and land use. Staff will be fully engaged in this

[5:49:25] process as they go through site plan. And subdivision. So

[5:49:31] the staff will not be without full. And ongoing. Inclusion

[5:49:37] in this process. So just to be clear, The question

[5:49:44] before us is around density and land use. And I'm

[5:49:49] not sure. What benefit we have. From putting this project

[5:49:55] back, from simply having. That question answered. By deferring this

[5:50:01] to staff and this coming to us in September or

[5:50:04] October or November. Whenever we will have that report. To

[5:50:08] simply talk about the one issue of density and land

[5:50:13] use. Staff will be engaged in all other aspects of

[5:50:17] this development. Thank you, Councilor Rock. Councilor Dougl.

[5:50:25] Douglas. I have noted that, though.

[5:50:34] So I have several questions of staff as well. And

[5:50:40] perhaps. You could clarify. Why we haven't had. Any.

[5:50:50] Why we haven't done any of. The studies and so

[5:50:53] on and so forth. Do they normally come after? Site

[5:50:58] plan, application. Does it come into play that it's required

[5:51:02] after a site plan application, I guess is. What I

[5:51:05] mean. Madam mayor. Typically through a rezoning application. Studies are

[5:51:14] submitted in conjunction with an application. Staff, hold a pre

[5:51:19] consultation meeting and identify what the requirements are of the

[5:51:22] applicant when they're considering submitting a rezoning application. And those

[5:51:28] studies are required to be submitted in conjunction with the

[5:51:32] set application. Okay. So, considering this. Has been. You've had

[5:51:39] consultation with the proponent and you've had discussion. Have these

[5:51:45] things been clarified to them that this needs to be

[5:51:48] and is what they have submitted? Part of what would

[5:51:54] be expected. Given that you haven't had a chance. To

[5:52:00] go through the entire thing, but there are several studies

[5:52:02] and so on and so forth that have been submitted

[5:52:05] along. With the. Msetto, and I believe there was also

[5:52:11] a planning justification submitted. So help me understand. If these

[5:52:17] reports, the ones that we have received, Are part of

[5:52:24] what we would normally ask for. Through rezoning. To you,

[5:52:29] Madam Mayor. No, we haven't had a chance to fully

[5:52:32] review the document submission. So I can't confirm if it

[5:52:35] includes everything. That. We required, as we outlined in our

[5:52:40] pre consultation meeting that we had with the applicant last

[5:52:43] summer. What is indicated tonight is that further environmental studies

[5:52:48] are still to be undertaken, so that would not. Be

[5:52:52] a full, complete application. We would still need those studies

[5:52:56] to review. To be deeming it a complete application for

[5:52:59] zoning. Bile. That's just one example. Is that what you

[5:53:04] have noted from what's been presented? In the documentation received

[5:53:09] from avenue. It's from the information from tonight as well

[5:53:13] as. My quick review of the document book that environmental

[5:53:18] studies are forthcoming. Okay. So correct me if I'm wrong,

[5:53:24] and I also spent much of the weekend going through

[5:53:27] the documentation. And to councilor Rock's comments. On the Ontario

[5:53:37] site where it speaks about the msetto orders. It explicitly

[5:53:45] says that. Zillowing orders addressed the soning of the site,

[5:53:51] but they do not provide a proponent with approval to

[5:53:54] start construction and do not exempt them from getting other

[5:53:59] downstream approvals, such as plans of subdivision approvals. Environmental approvals,

[5:54:05] building permits, any other applicable permits. Director heritage is not

[5:54:11] a correct statement as far as you know. Yes, that's

[5:54:15] what's outlined on the provincial website. If nothing else is

[5:54:21] achieved. Through this evening's presentations. The

[5:54:31] public can rest assured. That even. If council were to

[5:54:38] support an mzto. That the approvals. The requirements, everything. Will

[5:54:46] still remain within. This municipality's oversight, is that correct? Madam.

[5:54:55] Site plans are delegated to staff. Subdivisions are also a

[5:54:59] delegated staff, but would come before council for approval. They

[5:55:03] do not require a public meeting through an MZO, as

[5:55:07] the presenter has outlined for you is that. There is

[5:55:11] no public commenting available. Once it goes to the province.

[5:55:18] For public consultation. There is a 30 day consultation window

[5:55:23] that they will put on the environmental registry before they

[5:55:26] make a decision. So correct me if I'm wrong. I

[5:55:30] understood all along. That we couldn't hold a public meeting

[5:55:35] because we didn't have anything to hold. It for? Madam

[5:55:39] Mayor, I understand correct. From the request in December that

[5:55:46] they wanted to go through. The community housing accelerator, or

[5:55:50] the Chia, as it's referred to. And council's direction at

[5:55:54] that time was. For staff once we received the documents,

[5:55:59] including a planning justification report from the applicant. Staff would

[5:56:03] review that with agencies as well as hold a public

[5:56:06] open house because it's not statutorily required for Chia, and

[5:56:11] then we would provide a recommendation before council to make

[5:56:14] a decision as to whether they support the chia, a

[5:56:17] similar process could happen, perhaps with them. Decides to do

[5:56:21] that. But we did receive a planning justification, but we

[5:56:25] did not hold a public meeting, correct? So, yes, we

[5:56:28] have not held a public information session. With the public

[5:56:34] from this request. Okay, thank you. I will probably go

[5:56:39] out on a limb. And I know many people have

[5:56:45] said many things about. This council and about myself. And

[5:56:50] a lot of it is not pleasant. And. A lot

[5:56:58] of it is falsehoods. And as councilor Wright said, we

[5:57:02] do have. The best intentions and the best.

[5:57:12] Heart. We have the best intentions for the best of

[5:57:16] this community. And I don't think that any single one

[5:57:20] of us would ever want to jeopardize. Our lake or

[5:57:24] our environmental wetlands. But we also do have. Medical associates.

[5:57:31] Who are saying. We can't bring doctors because we have

[5:57:35] nowhere for them to live. Again.

[5:57:46] We have had several meetings. With mr. Steve gray. And

[5:57:52] if you want to call me on that, perhaps you'd

[5:57:53] like to reach out to. Him, but I take offense.

[5:57:57] That you think I would make that up? The people.

[5:58:03] Of the grand mushroom farm. They have to truck their

[5:58:05] people in because there is no affordable housing. Within this

[5:58:08] community. I talked to the owner of the Tim Hortons.

[5:58:12] On each street, he bustes his people. In as well,

[5:58:17] because. There is no affordable housing. It's great. We live

[5:58:23] in a fabulous community, but we have to look beyond.

[5:58:28] What we have today. If we can't get in place

[5:58:32] to come and work in our stores. If we can't.

[5:58:39] We can ask you all to leave. Okay. We'll take

[5:58:45] a ten minute reset. Thank you. All in favor?

[6:14:34] Thank you, everyone. I'd like to call this meeting back

[6:14:37] to order. And I will just finish. What I was

[6:14:42] going to say is that I have always been an

[6:14:44] advocate for affordable, attainable housing from 2010. That was part

[6:14:50] of my campaign. I have not changed my opinion, but

[6:14:53] I have given much to this community in the way

[6:14:56] of trying to do our best to serve. Everyone well?

[6:15:01] But we have to look beyond what we have today

[6:15:04] and. We have to be looking forward. Is.

[6:15:14] Past, deferred or defeated. I want you guys all to

[6:15:18] know. That and to appreciate all the work, the time,

[6:15:22] the consideration that goes into these meetings. And. I find

[6:15:28] it offensive that you would question our integrity. On that

[6:15:32] note. I appreciate all of you that have come here

[6:15:37] to express your concerns. But you need to understand. That

[6:15:42] we do understand your concerns. But we also have to

[6:15:45] look at a big picture. Thank you. Okay, having said

[6:15:51] that. I believe. The. Motion on the floor

[6:16:01] or councilor Mariah has a motion to put on the

[6:16:04] floor. For deferral. Which or referral. I'm sorry, not deferral.

[6:16:12] Referral. And he would be looking for a second or

[6:16:17] for that. And the referral. I asked the court to

[6:16:21] walk all of us through. What this whole process means.

[6:16:27] So that everyone in this room is clear on that.

[6:16:32] So council currently has a motion moved by Councilor Rock,

[6:16:37] seconded by Councilor Wright, which. Is to adopt the draft

[6:16:41] motion that was provided on the agenda. Under nine point.

[6:16:48] 3.2, which is to seek an MZ O counselor. Leroy

[6:16:54] has moved. A motion of referral, which would refer that

[6:16:59] motion to the Planning and Development Committee for review. With

[6:17:04] a request for a report back to the first meeting

[6:17:07] of the planning committee. In September. Councilor Leroy. You need

[6:17:12] a seconder. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Is there anyone who

[6:17:17] will second counselors? Referral to the motion. Councilor

[6:17:27] MacDougall. Thank you. Are there any further comments or questions?

[6:17:33] Do we have that on referrals or no? Mr clerk.

[6:17:39] Can you have questions on referral? Yes. Okay, council guido.

[6:17:47] Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'll start my question with a

[6:17:52] comment. I live in a house that was built in

[6:17:55] 1873. I'm sure not everyone in this room can say

[6:17:59] the same thing about the date of their home. At

[6:18:02] one point, everyone's home was built. On land. And I'm

[6:18:06] sure at that point there is always someone that was

[6:18:08] not looking forward to a house being built on that

[6:18:11] piece of land. Now for my question. Director Heritage. If

[6:18:18] this referral passes. At that point, will it still be

[6:18:25] the conversation about the MZO? So when the referral or

[6:18:29] the recommendation report comes to us. In, I believe the

[6:18:33] September date. Will this question of the Mzeto still be

[6:18:38] what we will be debating on. Through you, Madam Mayor

[6:18:41] to the councilor. That's my understanding is that if it's.

[6:18:44] Referred back to staff, and no decision is made tonight

[6:18:47] by this council that the issue of the MZO would

[6:18:51] come forward at that time. There are a couple of

[6:18:56] issues, though, that need to be considered. One is that.

[6:19:00] Staff would engage. A public consultation or a consultation with

[6:19:05] the agencies. We'd like to circulate this. Material to get

[6:19:08] comments back. From the MECP, the region of Durham and

[6:19:13] so on, as well as I guess there's. An issue

[6:19:16] too. Do we hold further public consultation with the residents

[6:19:19] in the area once we receive these comments back? From

[6:19:22] the agencies. If I may, madam mayor. The further public

[6:19:29] consultation with the community. Would that be specific on the

[6:19:33] MZO topic and not all the other. Topics. That may

[6:19:38] be a concern. Through you, Madam Mayor to the councilor,

[6:19:41] that's my understanding, is that it would be. Specific to

[6:19:44] the Mz O and bringing that forward. Okay. Thank you.

[6:19:48] And for the September time. Frame that would allow. For

[6:19:56] two months. For staff to do whatever circulation they need

[6:20:01] to do. In an absence of replies from those agencies.

[6:20:07] We would still meet our September deadline for a return

[6:20:10] back to council. Through you, Madam mayor, to the councilor.

[6:20:14] Staff could bring a report back to council for consideration.

[6:20:18] At that point in time, but we may be missing

[6:20:21] a number of comments from the agencies that have been

[6:20:23] circulated. On the request for comments. Fair enough. Thank you.

[6:20:28] Thank you, madamir. And I will just conclude. With one

[6:20:30] further comment. I'm a parent of a 19 and a

[6:20:34] 16 year old, and I truly fear that. When they

[6:20:40] finish their post secondary education. That they won't be able

[6:20:44] to come back and call Scoogog home. I want them

[6:20:48] to come back and call Scoogog home, but right now

[6:20:50] they can't. Afford a 2000 square foot home or a

[6:20:53] 5000 square foot home or 1000 square foot home at

[6:20:57] that matter. We need to find a way. To have

[6:21:01] our future generations. We heard that this evening. For our

[6:21:04] kids, our grandkids, our great grandkids. We need a way

[6:21:08] to house that generation as well as the generation of

[6:21:12] those who no longer are able to look after their

[6:21:15] own home. But I'm not ready. To go anywhere else

[6:21:17] yet. I am proud to call Scoogog home. I truly

[6:21:22] am proud to call Scoogog home. And I want my

[6:21:25] children, should they choose to want to live in Scoogog.

[6:21:28] To be able to call Scoogog home as well, just

[6:21:30] not maybe under my roof when they return, but under

[6:21:34] their own roof. So. Madam Air, thank you for allowing.

[6:21:38] The further comment on my part, and thank you, director

[6:21:41] heritage, for the answer. Thank you, Councilor Gurdo. Councilor. Well,

[6:21:47] thank you for the personal. Reflection, councilor Guido. I have

[6:21:52] four children in their twenty s and I know none

[6:21:55] of them. Currently live in Scogog because. There is no

[6:21:59] affordable housing and nearly no affordable rental units for them

[6:22:03] to stay here. I know. One of the four desperately

[6:22:06] would like to move back here, and there is literally

[6:22:08] nothing for him. To move back to rent to be

[6:22:11] here. I find that we do desperately need affordable housing

[6:22:16] and rental units. To keep the younger generation here. And

[6:22:23] I will now ask a question. Through you about a

[6:22:26] merit to director heritage. What are the questions that we're

[6:22:31] going to be asking all of these agencies, will they

[6:22:33] be limited and focused on the specific question around density

[6:22:38] and land use. Madam Mayor to the councilor some of

[6:22:47] the questions we'll be focusing on density and land use.

[6:22:49] Other questions we'll be dealing with. Servicing. Servicing is a

[6:22:54] major issue. For this development if there's no communal servicing.

[6:22:59] My understanding is the development doesn't. Proceed. So there are

[6:23:03] other issues that need to be addressed and what is

[6:23:06] being requested in the mz o as well is that

[6:23:09] you're looking at density, you're looking at housing. Form. You're

[6:23:11] looking at all the performance standards as well. In the

[6:23:15] zoning bylaw in terms of building height, lock coverage, building

[6:23:18] setbacks, and so on. So it's far more than just

[6:23:23] simply density and housing form. So if we were to

[6:23:28] say yes to this tonight, We would be saying yes

[6:23:32] to the very specific question on density. And land use.

[6:23:38] And the rest of those questions would we dealt with

[6:23:41] to my understanding and please correct me if I'm wrong

[6:23:44] would be dealt with down the line in the process.

[6:23:48] As site plans and development plans came to you for

[6:23:51] review, is that correct? Of the councilor? Partially. We're still.

[6:24:00] Looking at density. I agree. We're looking at housing form,

[6:24:02] we're looking at all. The performance standards. As I said

[6:24:05] in the zoning bylaw, there are a number of performance

[6:24:07] standards. That have to be abided by, and that's what's

[6:24:10] being included in the MZO building heights, lock coverage, building

[6:24:14] setbacks the amount of landscaping associated with development. Commercial development.

[6:24:21] Maximum gross floor area for commercial development. Parking requirements, buffer

[6:24:28] areas. Because. The entire developable portion of the land at

[6:24:35] this point in time is unknown. It's subject to further

[6:24:40] review. But that would ultimately be included within the MZO.

[6:24:47] Right. So, again. Just for clarification, you said partially. What

[6:24:53] part wouldn't you be able to review? If they were

[6:24:58] granted the mzeto, what would you be losing and what

[6:25:01] wouldn't? You be losing before this council made a final

[6:25:05] decision. Before shovels went in the ground. What? Would you

[6:25:08] be losing in the process? From a control perspective of

[6:25:13] you in your role. Three. A madam mayor to the

[6:25:17] councilor. I think I indicated that in terms of. What

[6:25:24] would be included in the MZ O, which would be

[6:25:28] approved by the minister if it goes that far. I

[6:25:32] would just be repeating everything in terms of. Individual. Or

[6:25:41] density housing forms and that kind of thing. We wouldn't

[6:25:44] be specifying that that would all be included within the

[6:25:47] MZO. Right. So if they were to receive it at

[6:25:52] the end of the day, though, they would still have

[6:25:54] to come back, and they would have to prove that

[6:25:57] all of those things were reasonable, feasible. And achievable. Before

[6:26:02] shovel went in the ground through your department, is that

[6:26:04] correct? So while you might not be participating, With the

[6:26:09] choice of some of those performance factors, you would ultimately

[6:26:13] be reviewing the documentation which proved that they were reasonable,

[6:26:18] feasible and achievable. Through you, Madam mayor, to the councilor.

[6:26:23] The staff would be reviewing those documents as part of

[6:26:27] a site plan application or a draft plan. A subdivision.

[6:26:30] Correct. So at the end of the day, whether you

[6:26:34] had this level of input ahead of time. Or at

[6:26:38] the end, you would still have control of this, but

[6:26:43] the project would be moving forward. Were they to get

[6:26:46] an MZ O to be able to gather all of

[6:26:50] these information with a very definitive target in mind, is

[6:26:53] that correct? Mayor to the councilor. One of the considerations

[6:26:58] we'd like to have. That staff would like to bring

[6:27:04] forward is some consultation with our legal counsel. To see

[6:27:08] what actual commitments are being made through the MZO process

[6:27:12] and what we're actually losing. I want to fully understand

[6:27:16] that through our legal counsel before I can give you.

[6:27:20] A response. So I will direct my final question to

[6:27:25] Councilor Leroy. Hearing that. They will ultimately be responsible for

[6:27:32] saying yes or no to any of these things in

[6:27:34] what they're received. I really struggle to understand why this

[6:27:39] is going to be referred and why we're not. Making

[6:27:42] a simple decision on a very straightforward. Very defined and

[6:27:46] limited question tonight. Councillor McDougal.

[6:27:59] Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm just pulling up my spot.

[6:28:05] So should this be referred through Madam Mayor to Director

[6:28:09] heritage? Should this be referred to staff? The Ministry of

[6:28:14] Municipal Housing Affairs. Has. Submission expectations. So if this Mzo

[6:28:24] is submitted by the township of Skugog, it is expected

[6:28:29] to meet those submission expectations. Is that correct for you?

[6:28:32] Madamir to Director Heritage. Through you. Madam Mayor to the

[6:28:36] councilor. That's correct. The submission expectations are outlined on the

[6:28:41] ministry's website. And I can read some of them for

[6:28:45] you, if you wish. For. Certainly, Madam Mayor, such as

[6:28:52] anticipated timelines related to applying for downstream approvals. For example,

[6:28:57] site plan a subdivision building permit. Thanks. Servicing may be

[6:29:01] in there as well. The right spot. Correct. Justification for

[6:29:08] the exemption of the application of provincial and local land

[6:29:11] use policies to downstream approvals anticipated timelines, anticipated timing for

[6:29:16] project completion, justification for the use of any of the

[6:29:20] enhanced authorities. Which is not relevant. Information related to how

[6:29:27] and when servicing wastewater water will be addressed. And the

[6:29:32] commitment that if the zoning order is made, the landowner

[6:29:33] notify the minister 30 days. In advance of the sale

[6:29:36] of any land it applies to. So further through you,

[6:29:39] Madam Mayor. Question to Director heritage, I believe. The question

[6:29:43] at hand before the deferral was placed before us. Was

[6:29:47] is the township of Scoogog going to make application for

[6:29:51] this MZO on? Behalf of Avenue properties. I think that's

[6:29:55] how it's structured. Is that correct to you, Madam Mayor.

[6:29:59] Three. Madam Mayor to the councilor, my understanding is that

[6:30:01] the applicant is requesting council to support. Their application for

[6:30:05] an MZO to the minister, okay. And then further through

[6:30:11] you, Madam Mayor, in supporting their application. Are we content

[6:30:15] that all these things are contained within their application. To

[6:30:19] Director heritage. Mr. Ca.

[6:30:27] Cadamair, it's my understanding that the applicant is asking us

[6:30:33] to apply on their behalf from the MZO, not just

[6:30:37] to support the MZO. Thank you through your madamor and

[6:30:41] as Mr. Cao. We heard earlier. Are you content that

[6:30:48] all of these things are in the application should we

[6:30:51] decide to move ahead? In supporting the mzto. I cannot

[6:30:57] comment on whether everything is or is not. At this

[6:31:04] point. Okay, that's all. Thank you, madam. Councilor rock.

[6:31:14] I just wanted to address. The question before by Councilor

[6:31:17] McDougall, I would presume that. The quickest way to this.

[6:31:22] Not moving forward would for it to be not complete.

[6:31:27] So if we submitted a not complete report on their

[6:31:31] behalf, this would go down in flames. Pretty quickly. Council

[6:31:35] liber. Liberty. Yes. Thank you, Madam Marin. I will reply

[6:31:45] to Councilor Rock's question to me. I believe in a

[6:31:49] certain amount of process, and what I'm looking for is

[6:31:52] merely two. Months, which. Isn't a lot in the scope

[6:31:57] of a development application of this scale. Honestly, we've seen

[6:32:02] more input from staff on surplus farm severances than we

[6:32:06] have. For this 600 unit development proposal. In it. I

[6:32:11] am entirely in favor of affordable and attainable housing and

[6:32:14] actually quite supportive of many of the ideas in this

[6:32:16] plan, but I do think it behooves us to. At

[6:32:20] least take a few minutes to have staff look at

[6:32:23] it. Every proposal that has come to us has come

[6:32:26] with a staff report. I value what that insight might

[6:32:30] produce. It could be that the recommendation is to support

[6:32:33] the Mz. O it could be. The recommendation is that

[6:32:36] we need a further study in order to get to

[6:32:38] that support. I don't think this is something that's going

[6:32:41] to be decided tonight, but. A two month delay in

[6:32:46] this project I don't feel will be unduly onerous. To

[6:32:50] the proponent and it might give us a bit more

[6:32:52] information. That would be beneficial for the development as a

[6:32:56] whole. So this is my thought process behind that. Request.

[6:33:00] Others may disagree. But to Councilor Rock's specific question. It's

[6:33:07] procedural for me. And also informational is kind of what

[6:33:10] I'm looking to receive from staff in this matter. Thank

[6:33:13] you. Thank you, Councilor Leroy. Are there any further comments?

[6:33:20] Thank you. So. The question is or the referral is

[6:33:28] on the floor. That the motion be referred. And. Staff.

[6:33:37] The planning and development staff report back to the planning

[6:33:41] and community affairs meeting in September 2024. If there are

[6:33:47] no further comments, then we will call the question. For

[6:33:53] this. Sorry. Yes, it is recorded. Not on this. No,

[6:34:01] it was on the other. Sorry. So I will call.

[6:34:05] All in favor of. The referral motion. All in favor?

[6:34:13] That's for. That is Carrie. Okay, so we

[6:34:22] can expect that we will have a report back at

[6:34:25] planning and community affairs meeting. In September. Thank you very

[6:34:29] much. And we will move on now to our consent

[6:34:32] agenda.

[6:34:50] Okay, sorry. We'll just wait till the chamber clears for

[6:34:57] those that want to leave.

[6:35:33] Or whatever. Just speak to them for a moment.

[6:35:57] Okay. In the interest of moving forward. We do have

[6:36:05] a consent agenda before us. And at this point in

[6:36:10] time, We have 10.1.4 and 10.1.8. Pulled.

[6:36:22] 10.2.6 and 10.2.7. Are there any others that you would

[6:36:30] like pulled? Anyone.

[6:36:41] 10.1. Point 410.1 .8.

[6:36:49] 10.2.6 and 10.2.7. And we will.

[6:36:59] Yes. Specifically.

[6:37:09] 10.1.4. So that councilor McDougall has declared on that report,

[6:37:16] so we are pulling that, so. That he can vote

[6:37:19] on everything else. And what are these ones? Which.

[6:37:31] In turn. Maybe not. Maybe I got that wrong.

[6:37:48] Okay. All the bylaws are fine as well. So if

[6:37:54] there are no further polls, we'll. Have a mover and

[6:37:57] a seconder for the consent agenda, please. Councilor larry. Councilor

[6:38:03] guido. All in favor?

[6:38:17] Thank you. And that is carried. Okay. So we will

[6:38:22] now do 10.1.4. And. That is the minutes of the

[6:38:28] gpna, june 3. Save an exciting section 9.4. Section 9.4.

[6:38:40] He's going to skip the whole thing. Okay, so. We'll

[6:38:48] just vote on 10.1.4. Do we need to move her

[6:38:52] in? A seconder. Sorry I asked that. I should have.

[6:38:57] Okay. Thank you. That was Councilor Wright, Councilor Guido. All

[6:39:00] in favor? Sorry. We're doing 10.1.4. We pulled that individually

[6:39:10] because councilor McDugal had a conflict. Did you want to

[6:39:13] speak? To it. Sorry. Yeah. I have one question. It

[6:39:21] was my understanding that coming out of the GPNA meeting,

[6:39:26] That. Information would be disseminated. On the basis. Of our

[6:39:33] approval. Just wanted to ask manager Hendry. Have we started

[6:39:38] sending the documentation around? Sorry. I'm trying to remember what

[6:39:42] exactly. We had promised to begin circulation.

[6:39:51] Of the circulation. Yes. On Birchwood. There was a question

[6:39:57] of. At the end of the meeting, there'd be circulation.

[6:40:05] In a 20 day appeal. Have we started that? The

[6:40:06] circulation of the documentation coming out of that. The mayor

[6:40:11] to the councilor. We are very close to circulating the

[6:40:14] site plan application. I just. Received. The bila has to

[6:40:17] be passed tonight for approval, but I will be circulating

[6:40:21] the site. Plan application. This week. To receive agency comments.

[6:40:29] So just a quick follow up question, I guess. Why

[6:40:31] have we lost a week? What was missing? Over the

[6:40:34] last week. Married to the councilor had a meeting on

[6:40:38] Friday with the applicant to discuss the matters that we

[6:40:41] discussed on Monday night what would be required to make

[6:40:43] a complete application. In the meeting, we included regional works

[6:40:47] as well as our peer ecologist, and it was understood

[6:40:50] as to what their requirements were, be one of them

[6:40:53] included the draft 40 r plan. And. We have since

[6:40:58] received that. And so late this evening as well, we

[6:41:03] did receive some additional information that would deem the application

[6:41:06] complete, so we'll be processing. That. Should council approve the

[6:41:10] application tonight? Sure. So that application will be. Circulated. So

[6:41:16] when does the 20. Days clock start? Did it start

[6:41:19] last week or is it starting now? Because again, these

[6:41:23] people want to get open. So I just want to

[6:41:26] make sure everybody has a definitive understanding of when the

[6:41:30] clock is starting. Because they have a lot of work

[6:41:33] to do to be an opening. So through the mayor

[6:41:36] to the counselor. It's a 20 day appeal period after

[6:41:39] council makes a decision, so it's. 20 days after the

[6:41:42] clerk sends notice when that clock will start ticking, so

[6:41:45] it'll be up to. The clerk to send notice of

[6:41:48] that. That is, when? If council chooses to approve it

[6:41:50] tonight and. There's no appeals. Then the decision will be

[6:41:53] final. We still need to work through the site plan

[6:41:56] agreement. It's a letter of undertaking. So we're going to

[6:41:59] be starting that process ASAP. And then after. Staff and

[6:42:05] the applicant. Have the signed letter of undertaking. They still

[6:42:11] need to complete their building permit process. Finalize that before

[6:42:16] they can start occupying those units. Anything further, Councilor Rob?

[6:42:27] Yeah, I guess what I just heard was not my

[6:42:30] understanding coming out of GPNA, and it seems as though

[6:42:34] a lot more time has been added to the clock

[6:42:36] for them. So that was not my understanding. My understanding

[6:42:39] is we were going to be trying to execute the

[6:42:41] letter of understanding. In the same time frame as the

[6:42:44] 20 day appeal period. So I guess I'm really. Concerned

[6:42:48] is when are these people going to be able to

[6:42:51] open. I really think we all need a very clear

[6:42:55] answer to that question. Should. The matter of the councilor.

[6:42:59] Can I just ask for a clarification? Are we. Talking

[6:43:01] about Birchwood right now? Because right now we have general

[6:43:05] purpose and administration meeting minutes. I'm sorry. I thought we

[6:43:08] were on planning. My apologies. I'm so sorry. May I

[6:43:11] suggest we continue on rather than start over? We thought

[6:43:16] already consented. That one was already consent. Sorry we pulled

[6:43:20] the wrong one. My apologies. It's done. That's fine. Okay.

[6:43:29] Councilor ruck should have picked up on that as well.

[6:43:32] Okay. 10.1.8 councilor Guido, you pulled that.

[6:43:42] Second. Replace first. Councilor Lorraine. Thank you. Go ahead, councilor

[6:43:49] Guido. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Through you. To. Acting director

[6:43:56] Frasco. In the minutes it speaks to. And I'm sorry,

[6:44:00] I don't have them up. Yes. It speaks to the

[6:44:03] automated cart collection. Pilot that is due to take place

[6:44:07] in a particular route in Scoogog, do we know which

[6:44:12] route that is. And have those residents been notified yet

[6:44:15] that they will be part of? This pilot. Through you,

[6:44:24] Madam Mayor. I don't know if they've been consulted yet.

[6:44:29] Or. If the region has reached out to them. But

[6:44:33] I do have the map location that I can't put

[6:44:37] up, but I will. Physically. Or I can tell you

[6:44:40] where the borderlines are. And the region is looking to

[6:44:46] run the one year pilot on the regional road 21

[6:44:49] as being the limit south to Townline Road. And lake

[6:44:55] ridge road. East to Simcoe street, so that's the quadrant

[6:45:00] that they'll be working on. Old Simcoe will only be.

[6:45:05] The only part of the pilot will be from Simcoe

[6:45:08] street. To scoop line four. That last piece to King

[6:45:14] street is not included. So that is the quadrant area.

[6:45:20] I have found some information that we received from the

[6:45:22] region. As a letter, and I can read some of

[6:45:25] that to you. That would answer your question. The Waste

[6:45:30] Management Services branch of the works department, in participation with

[6:45:33] Miller Waste systems, is conducting a pilot project to assist

[6:45:37] with the impact of an automated cart based residential garbage

[6:45:40] collection program. As per the works Committee report 2024. WR

[6:45:46] four and approved from regional council on May 29, 2024.

[6:45:52] The pilot project will commence in the township of Scoogog

[6:45:55] on July 12, 2024, and will run for a period

[6:45:59] of one year. Over the coming weeks, the residents in

[6:46:02] the pilot project area will receive an information package from

[6:46:06] the region, including them to the pilot, providing details about

[6:46:10] the automated cart collection and how to participate in the

[6:46:14] pilot project Miller waste system will also be delivering a

[6:46:18] one wheeled. Sorry, one wheeled gar. Garbage cart to the

[6:46:22] resident. On the resident's regular garbage collection day. Each participating

[6:46:27] household will be asked to roll the cart to the

[6:46:29] curb with the garbage inside for the collection. I've been

[6:46:33] told the cart size can hold up to four regular

[6:46:37] garbage bags. And. They wheel quite easily to the end

[6:46:44] of the curve. Wonderful. Thank you for that information and

[6:46:47] my assumption would be that there is no additional cost

[6:46:50] to the residents to participate in this, that their bin

[6:46:53] will be provided to them from Miller through you. Madam

[6:46:57] Mayor, I'm under the same. Assumption. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank

[6:47:02] you. Moving on to 10.2.6. Count adopted. Oh, sorry. We

[6:47:07] need a motion. To. Adopt. So, all in favor?

[6:47:18] Thank you. Moving on to 10.2.6. Finance 2024 00:27 the

[6:47:27] 2023 operating surplus councilor Leroy. You asked to have this

[6:47:32] poll. Could we have a seconder, please? Councilor McDougall. Thank

[6:47:37] you. And councilor Laroy, did you have questions? Yes, I

[6:47:42] do. Thank you, Madam Director Barda. When the strategic review

[6:47:51] was discussed last day, counsel and we discussed. Various investments

[6:47:56] that would be required. Most of them were related to

[6:47:59] human capital, so hiring people and almost all of them

[6:48:02] were covered by anticipated revenues, with the exception of the

[6:48:07] communications hire and the human resources higher. So I'm not

[6:48:12] sure I understand. Why we want to allocate a million

[6:48:16] dollars of the surplus. To the review objectives. When I

[6:48:22] thought most of the objectives were already being financed. Through

[6:48:26] you, Madam Mayor. The service delivery and organizational review was

[6:48:34] done partway through the year. So the balance of the

[6:48:38] requirement for the staffing was not included in the 2024

[6:48:42] budget. The additional fees that we anticipate collecting. Are. May

[6:48:52] cover part of that cost for 2024. But we are

[6:48:56] not positive that we will have enough. Earned in fees

[6:49:00] in the latter part of the year to cover all

[6:49:03] of the costs. So we need some flexibility. Within. The

[6:49:08] reserve to offset the difference in that area. There are

[6:49:14] also other initiatives that were mentioned in the service delivery

[6:49:19] review that staff are pursuing. With council's authorization that there

[6:49:24] is a cost to such as. The review of salaries.

[6:49:31] For all staff and council. There will be a cost

[6:49:36] for that. And there are other initiatives that are planned

[6:49:39] that there will be costs, and we wanted the fees

[6:49:43] to be. In the municipal projects reserve or the surplus

[6:49:48] to cover. Any of these program costs once they come

[6:49:53] to council for approval. Thank you. Direct barter. I believe

[6:49:58] RCAO has something to add. Go ahead, Ken. Thank you,

[6:50:03] Madam Mayor. We did talk about them being the majority

[6:50:06] of positions being fully cost recovered in the next year's

[6:50:10] budget. We needed to gap this year to get there,

[6:50:14] and I believe. I can't remember the exact words, but

[6:50:16] I believe it was gap. But I just wanted. To

[6:50:19] indicate that the full million. Is not for the service

[6:50:22] delivery review. It's also modernization initiatives and setting some funding

[6:50:27] aside, so that we can continue with technology enhancements over

[6:50:32] the next while if we don't. Set it aside. We

[6:50:37] have to either not do technology enhancements in the future

[6:50:40] or raise it through taxes. So this gives us the

[6:50:44] opportunity to do that. So it's not all related specifically

[6:50:47] to the sdor. I'm still not sure I entirely understand.

[6:50:54] Because. It's a significant amount of money. And I don't

[6:50:57] recall having discussions when we were looking at the service

[6:51:01] delivery review. That amounted to this figure. And my understanding

[6:51:07] from the report is, should it be distributed as would

[6:51:10] normally be, it'd be 20% to roads, 25% to vehicles,

[6:51:13] 25% buildings and facilities, 25% to municipal projects reserve fund.

[6:51:20] So. I may be misunderstanding, but when I look at

[6:51:22] this, it seems to me we're allocating. A million dollars

[6:51:25] to the municipal projects reserves fund instead at 25% of

[6:51:30] that figure. But perhaps I'm misinterpreting this. I'm open to

[6:51:34] clarification on that. That's a correct interpretation. It's being put

[6:51:40] there because we believe the need. For modernization is going

[6:51:45] to require. Some additional funds. That. For the future. I

[6:51:53] don't know if director Barto wants to add any more,

[6:51:56] but I think your. Comment is exactly correct. I would

[6:52:01] agree. The policy does state that the surplus should be

[6:52:05] split based on the percentages. That you quoted. And I

[6:52:10] have put 200,000 towards that. It was suggested that. A

[6:52:18] substantial portion of the surplus be allocated to cover the

[6:52:22] initiatives for the service delivery review. And the modernization, the

[6:52:30] continued modernization of. Our technical area. I'm open to suggestions

[6:52:37] if you would like to see it go. Otherwise. But

[6:52:43] keeping in mind that if we have a problem, With

[6:52:47] the service delivery, it would come back to council to

[6:52:49] be funded from another source. Yeah. Sorry. Don't mean to

[6:52:54] drag this out, but can you tell me what is

[6:52:58] the. Current amount in the municipal projects reserve fund. If

[6:53:02] we're proposing to add a million dollars. To it. What

[6:53:04] is it currently standing at? I have to look that

[6:53:08] up. I don't have an Andy story. A lot of

[6:53:13] it is already committed to other projects. But if you

[6:53:16] give me a couple of minutes, I'll see if I

[6:53:18] can sign in. And sign up. I guess, generally. My

[6:53:22] point is, we have many needs and we have quite

[6:53:25] a few reserve funds. And I'm surprised that of this

[6:53:30] recommendation to allocate the entire balance of this fiscal year

[6:53:34] as surplus to one account for something that I thought

[6:53:37] was already mostly costed out. I'm just kind of surprised.

[6:53:59] Director brighter, do you have any idea? Of cost for

[6:54:07] the modernization that we are hoping to achieve moving forward,

[6:54:12] that we are putting that in. Perhaps that could help.

[6:54:16] A little bit. With. Why we're putting so much into

[6:54:22] that resurfone. Or even a past example. Of modernization costs.

[6:54:31] Sorry. You, madam Mayor, I'm not aware of anything. Specifically

[6:54:36] planned that is not currently in the capital budget. But

[6:54:41] DCAO may have. Okay, Mr. Nicks, I think one of

[6:54:46] the challenges. That raised our eyebrows is with the CRM.

[6:54:52] We were looking for some integration with the current. Work

[6:54:55] order management asset management system that would allow the end

[6:55:00] of flow from end to end and we're still waiting.

[6:55:05] For quotes for it, but. We have the understanding it

[6:55:09] could be upwards of 200,000 for that one integration, so

[6:55:12] that's why we were being cautious in putting some money.

[6:55:17] One final question, then. I guess I'm Leery. Of perhaps

[6:55:24] explains me. If this amount is assigned to the Municipal

[6:55:28] Projects reserve fund, does not mean it is inaccessible for

[6:55:32] other purposes. Should we determine other uses for this fund?

[6:55:38] This revenue or is there another reserve account that is

[6:55:42] general purpose where we might consider allocating? That surplus. Realizing

[6:55:48] that we're going to be going through a budget process

[6:55:50] fairly soon again, and we have this surplus. That may

[6:55:56] play into considerations to decision making for 2025. I think

[6:56:02] this is the general one. Is it the general one?

[6:56:06] For example, I recall we were locked into certain uses

[6:56:09] for development. Exactly. Okay, that clarifies. Then, for me, that

[6:56:18] gives me more reassurance that. This isn't just been decided

[6:56:23] that we're spending a million dollars on a CRM. System.

[6:56:27] Okay. Thank you. Are there any. Are there any further

[6:56:32] questions for this report? Then I'll call the question. All

[6:56:36] in favor? And that's carried. Thank you, Director Barda. Moving

[6:56:44] on to 10.2.7. And that's the capital project status report

[6:56:50] as of May 31, 2024. Councilor Wright. You wanted this

[6:56:55] polled. And is there a seconder, please. Councilor McDugal. Thank

[6:57:00] you. And go ahead, Councilor Wright. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

[6:57:05] And thanks for the. Capital reports update on what's happening.

[6:57:11] In township with all the projects. As I drive around

[6:57:14] my ward, I see a lot of things. Starting to

[6:57:16] happen. See, Nestleton Road has got ground off and gravel

[6:57:19] laid down and been being restored to a great shape,

[6:57:23] but as a drive down job road, I do not

[6:57:25] yet see a new bridge. I was just wondering. How?

[6:57:31] The tendering is going on that. And the timeline is

[6:57:34] when we'd be able to see construction started on that

[6:57:37] project. If I could. Through, madam there. To acting Director

[6:57:41] Fraska. Through you. Madam Mayor to the councilor. We will

[6:57:50] begin mobilizing to the job road bridge. In actually the

[6:57:54] second week of July. So it's coming up very quick.

[6:57:59] Through our permits. We can't break ground before July 15,

[6:58:02] so the preparation is going to be more of. The

[6:58:06] soil and erosion control, that sort of thing. Prepping the

[6:58:10] site, but they will be breaking ground very shortly. Very

[6:58:14] good. Thank you. And actually, there's another one very, quite

[6:58:18] close to that, too, as you just back up the

[6:58:19] hill a little bit, back up to the township yard.

[6:58:25] There is a project on for the rehabilitation of the

[6:58:27] sand dome this year. Is that still going? Ahead, or

[6:58:30] is that based on capacity? To you, madam, there. Through

[6:58:36] you, Madam Mayor, to the council that is still going

[6:58:38] ahead. We've. Had to rewrite the RFP based on the

[6:58:43] consultant's findings. When we did examine the dome, so it

[6:58:46] took a little bit more time. But I'm hoping to

[6:58:50] proceed this summer. Okay. And if I could finish it,

[6:58:54] does that mean there's more work to be done? Is

[6:58:56] it more than just reshingling the dome? Is there structural

[6:58:59] problems with that structure through you, Madam Mayor? Yes. We

[6:59:02] found some concrete concerns. Some holes in the concrete that

[6:59:06] we're still not sure if they can be repaired. Which

[6:59:11] is why we're going to put the RFP out to

[6:59:13] see. What kind of response we get from contractors and

[6:59:19] what can be repaired. And then I'll have to report

[6:59:22] back to council if it can't be done. Okay. Thank

[6:59:27] you very much, director. Mayor. Thank you, Councilor Rock. Thank

[6:59:35] you, Madamarin. Through you. To manager Frosco. I just wanted

[6:59:41] to see if I could get a quick update on

[6:59:43] second access. It was originally in the planned. Second axis

[6:59:48] design would be wrapped up by the end of this

[6:59:50] year, and hopefully we'd have shovels and ground by the

[6:59:52] end of this year or spring of 2025 is the

[6:59:55] last update I've gotten on the timeline. Where are we

[6:59:58] at on that? Because I not heard anything. Just wanted

[7:00:01] to see. So, you mad? Mayor to the councilor. We've

[7:00:06] received our comments from Msifn. We are looking to set

[7:00:11] up a meeting to have consultation with them to go

[7:00:13] through. Some of their comments. Okay.

[7:00:25] Again, though. I think we still have a lot of

[7:00:27] elements, such as design. Location. Land acquisition. Soil studies, all

[7:00:36] of which were supposed to be completed by the end

[7:00:37] of this year. Are we on track for that? I

[7:00:40] appreciate that. We got comments back from the MSiFn. But

[7:00:44] that seems to be the smallest part of many, many

[7:00:49] way more important things that need to be done. Not

[7:00:52] that it isn't important, but we have major things still

[7:00:54] outstanding. Through your matter, mayor to the councilor. I don't

[7:01:00] have dates right now in terms of how we're going

[7:01:02] to proceed. It's under my assumption that we're going to

[7:01:06] meet with MSIfn first. To discuss. The. Different options we

[7:01:16] have. For the roots. And we're going to move forward

[7:01:21] after that. Mr. Cao has something to add. I think

[7:01:30] councilor Rock is correct that it will not be according

[7:01:34] to the original schedule. I'm convinced we'll be delayed in

[7:01:38] terms of moving forward. Anything further, Councilor Rock? Yeah. I

[7:01:48] appreciate that honesty. But if I look at the capital

[7:01:53] projects, the budget year for second axis was 2019. We're

[7:01:57] five years on. From this process. Of when it got

[7:02:02] budgeted. And this has been talked about since 20 years

[7:02:07] in second access. 20 years. 25 years. And to

[7:02:17] the other strategic documentation and updates on strategic plan. Second,

[7:02:23] access was very high on our strategic priorities, and I

[7:02:27] feel as though. If we are not going to meet

[7:02:30] these deadlines, we really need to figure out. The deadlines

[7:02:35] and reiterate that to people who have been operating under

[7:02:39] the expectation that this was going to get going later

[7:02:42] this year or early next, especially. If we're wildly behind

[7:02:46] those timelines because some people have been waiting for 20

[7:02:48] years. For this, so I would appreciate. Us figuring this

[7:02:52] out. And building. Some achievable timelines and making sure that

[7:02:57] this is still moving forward. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor McDougall.

[7:03:05] Sorry. Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. Briefly, it's late. One

[7:03:09] I'd like to thank. Director Barda for assisting me. I

[7:03:13] asked many questions on this report earlier. In terms of.

[7:03:20] I was going to sort it and just see. How

[7:03:23] old our projects were. There's a lot of. Monetarily value

[7:03:27] speaking wise on this project. It's a large amount in

[7:03:31] the capital status report, and I think this represents a

[7:03:34] lot. Of projects that we haven't seen. To your point,

[7:03:37] councilor Rock, a lot of projects. That are in the

[7:03:40] pipe that are budgeted to be done but are not

[7:03:43] done yet. And I'm looking at Mr. Fosca and Dan

[7:03:47] in here as well. And I'm appreciating how hard and

[7:03:52] how difficult all of these projects are. And I'm looking

[7:03:55] forward to the future. When. We have more resources that

[7:03:59] we can get these projects moving. So thank you to

[7:04:02] everybody for their assistance on this report and bringing. It

[7:04:05] forward. Thank you, Councilor McDougall. So are there any further

[7:04:11] questions or comments to this report? If not, we'll call

[7:04:15] the question. All in favor? And that is carried. Thank

[7:04:19] you very much. That is the end of the. For

[7:04:24] this evening. And. There's no items for separate discussion, no

[7:04:30] notices of motion, no new business. Any general information. Anybody

[7:04:36] forgot to impart this evening? No. Okay. I don't know

[7:04:42] what to score it, okay? So we'll have a motion

[7:04:47] for the confirming bylaw 30 24, please. Councilor Rock, councilor

[7:04:55] McDougall, all in favor? Thank you. And that is carried.

[7:04:59] And a motion for adjournment. Councilor Guido. Councilor. Rock. Thank

[7:05:04] you. Anyone not want to adjourn? All in favor? And

[7:05:11] that's Jerry. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Have a good

[7:05:15] evening. What's left? Of it.

Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript