Good evening, chair members of council. Members in the gallery.
Have an echo on my computer. Chair whenever you're ready.
Thank you, clerk Power. We'd like to call the committee
the whole to order, please.
Perfect. Thank you. So. Thank you. Chair. Before we begin,
are there any announcements? Announcements. Yes, Councilor Pascalino.
Mike. Yes, absolutely. I will be having my award meeting.
On June 26 at 07:00 p.m. At the kinsman center
on james street. And I also will be discussing on
topic. Will be the parquet decision this evening, whatever way
that goes. And also the decision on some homelessness and
whatever people bring up. So thank you very much. And
hopefully we can all attend. Further. Now, further announcements. Councilor
Chun. Thank you, chair. I wanted to recognize councilor, our
counselor. Sorry, Elder John Ganiel, who did the opening ceremony.
At the marina for Indigenous People's day, which it was
attended very well, and there was a lot of activities
during the day. He just did such a great job
opening up and really made us feel welcome and included.
And it was amazing. Second thing, I also want to
say thank you to everyone who's organized a pride event.
During the month. It was spectacular array of events from
dance off, singings, marches. I held my own event. It
was very well attended, and kudos to all of the
organizers and people who attended. Thank you chair. Thank you.
Mayor Boschkov. Indeed, I do have an announcement. And members
of council, administration and public. After more than 40 years
in the public service. Norm Gale is retiring tonight. Is
his final meeting of council. He is now the longest
serving city manager for the city of Thunder Bay, serving
almost nine years. Prior to that posting, he held many
positions with the superior North Ems. Including paramedic for twelve
years. Manager of quality assurance and training for four years.
And ending as the chief from 2007 until 2015. Norm
was also a member of the Canadian Armed Forces for
23 years. During his tenure with the city, Norm held
positions on the Thunder Bay Board of Health, the Ontario
association of Paramedic Chiefs, the Emergency measures Steering Committee and
the Thunder Bay United way. He was also a contract
professor at Confederation College. In their paramedic program. As city
manager, Norm has provided guidance and advice. To three main,
please try again. That's a very interesting technical glitch.
Did someone in telecommunications? No. Okay. Let's go back and
just make sure that we understand the seriousness and appropriateness
and dignity of this event. Norm has provided guidance and
advice to three mayors and 25 counselors. He has led
his administrative team through nine annual budgets, several emergency weather
events and. The Covid-19 pandemic. He is looking to forward
to his retirement very much looking forward to spending more
time with his family. His wife Michelle, daughter Aaron and
son Devon. In addition to staying actively engaged in the
community and no doubt catching up on his reading. Thank
you, Norm, for your service and commitment to our city
over the past three terms of council. As well as
our community as a whole. Congratulations and best wishes on
your retirement.
On behalf of city council, we would like to present
you with this gift. A token of appreciation. For your
years of service.
Thank you, mayor, for those kind words and presentation on
behalf of council. And thank you, Norm. Our city manager,
Gail. Thank you. I'm quite happy with Norm. I've always
preferred that. Mayor Boschkoff. Thank you for those words. They're
meaningful, and I appreciate it. Almost nine years. And it
ends tonight, and I am really happy. And. It's on
the docket for you to approve a bylaw tonight that
will appoint John Collin as the next city manager as
of 801 tomorrow morning. And I really hope you do
that. And I look forward to 801 once this meeting,
eds, whatever it is, please leave me alone. And wait
till eight. One. For whatever is going on. Chair. I
would like to make very brief remarks. First. I want
to acknowledge the people who work for the city of
Thunder Bay, especially those people who work on the front
line who deliver service and programs. That every single one
of us rely on, and we can trust that they
get the job done. There are accidents. There are omissions,
of course, but we, our city workers, have set a
very high standard of service. I know. And my son,
when he was very young. Knew exactly when the garbage
truck would come by the house every single week. 20
years later, that garbage truck comes by my house at
the same time, same day, every single week. I know.
And I know you know that the impact of city
workers on our quality of life and our public safety.
And the quality of our community is very important, and
I appreciate them. I also appreciate. Greatly. The people that
I work directly with, the executive management team of the
City of thunder bay. Leaders, all who are doing difficult
but terrific work. They do it with energy, enthusiasm, and
they do it well. Clerk Christopho power for her commitment
to governance. And transparency. Solicitor Robinette for her passion for
the files that she deals with and her logic. HR
director Carrie Arkies for her ethical compass and her ethnicity.
Treasurer Carey Grieves for his responsibility and his precision and
attention to detail. Director Cynthia Olsen for her empathy and
her compassion. General manager, Kelly Robertson, fitness and energy and
looking out for the needs of youth in our community.
General manager Kerry Marshall. Logic and strength. And general manager
Lewis. Strategy. And action and getting things done. It has
been my great privilege to work with these leaders. And
I have learned from every one of them. And I
have personally benefited from being in their company, and I
thank them. Mayor mentioned. I've served a city manager under
three successive councils and three mayors. And it has always
been, despite bumps. My pleasure to work with three mayors
and three successive councils. These chambers are hollowed. Hollowed? Those
words have meaning. Your work is very important to the
people that live here and visit here, and when you
do that with dignity, kindness, respect and compassion. You're doing
good. You're doing right by the people who live and
work here, regardless of whether they agree. With your decisions.
Finally. Chair. The mayor also mentioned my 40 years of
public service in different capacities. I consider that an honor
and a privilege. And it has been my honor to
do different types. Of service, and I have benefited personally
from that, and I have learned every step of the
way. It has been a career. One like no other.
And I am grateful to the elected officials and the
people I work with. For helping me along the way.
I'm leaving. I will not be a burr in your
saddle. You will not read a letter to the editor
from me. But I'll be watching. This is my hometown.
I'm staying here. My kids are returning here. We love
Thunder Bay. And that's why I'll be watching. Thank you,
council, for your service and thank you for everything. Thank
you, chair. Thank you for those parting words. City manager
Gail much appreciated your service. Very well. Done. We'll miss
you. Next item, please. Thank you, chair. Are there any
disclosures of interest? Seeing none will go to the next
item. Next is the confirmation of the agenda mover in
a second or, please. Move by Councilor Chung, second by
Councilor Pascalino. On that item, Councilor Agawal. I was hoping
that we could amend the agenda. I know everything on
the agenda is very important. And not one thing should
overrule another. However, item number 9.7. Is quite important. It's
a report that came to us quite late. In the
week. So the community, in order to have a higher
rate, Of participation and viewing on the community's behalf. I
would like to. Move. That. Behind. The deputations that we
have on the surplus properties. And the reason for this
is we all know that today is a very big
hockey game. For our nation. Right. And we want to
make sure. That before 08:00 we try to get. This
point brought to the table if it wasn't for that
engagement that we're going to lose. To our competing interest.
I wouldn't have asked for that today. Had we got
the report sooner that the public could have engaged, then
I would have not. Again, it would not have brought
that forward, but we received the report late in the
week and there are a lot of people. We'll look
for a seconder for that. Councilor Ella will second. Any
speakers to the agenda change. Yeah, we're changing the agenda.
We're moving it after the deputations. Clerk power. I know
you wanted to speak to this, so I'm going to
ask you to certainly. So the chair and I had
discussed this when the request came forward. So just as
a general reminder to members of council, and the chair
certainly stated it. So did the member. All of your
items are important. You have consultants attending this evening? On
your investments. You have the multi year accessibility plan. Significant
items that are coming forward as well. Certainly we do
acknowledge the lateness of the time frame of which the
report was released on Friday. That was also related to
the time in which it was assigned. So appreciating. All
of the things are in play as well as a
sporting event. That's happening this evening that many of you,
I'm sure, will wish to see. It would not be
my advice as your clerk to change the order of
the agenda that gives the public the idea that potentially
some items are more important than others, and therefore you
can flex and pivot your agendas as you see fit.
So certainly up to council and the wish of council
is how this will proceed. By providing that for your
advice. Councilor Gretuga. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, we've done
this many times. To me, this is such a significant
issue in our community that people want to see, and
I think it should be moved up. It is very
important. It is affecting so many people. So I have
no problem with being moved up, and we've done this
so many times. And it doesn't mean when issues more
important than others, it's just a matter. Of people being
here for deputations or whatnot. Thank you, Councilor Hamilton. Yeah,
chair. I often look at the city website, I look
at the agenda. I kind of position for council. Watchers,
they may be looking at where things rank in the
agenda and when they're going to turn on the tv
or when they're going to tune in, I think for
transparency's sake. I think shuffling things around so that people
that are planning on tuning in an hour into the
agenda. Now that that item is going to be gone
or 2 hours in, I think, for transparency's. Sake. We
have to have a consistent layout with the agenda. And
even though I've supported actually shuffling things around. In the
case of, I think we had, like, a whole gallery
full. Of children here recently, and we did some shuffling
for that. But in this case, I think people are
looking at the agenda. And for transparency's sake, I think
it's very important to keep it in the order so
that people could plan their nights accordingly. And they could
actually attend the meeting as presented. Thank you. Okay. Seeing
no further, I'm told that this will ratify in the
15 July as well, just for public information. Seeing. No
questions. We'll call the questions. All in favor of moving
that item up in. The agenda. 123-4567 any opposed?
One, two, three. So that would be carried. The agenda.
Has been modified slightly. Next item, please. So, chair, we
do need to call for a vote on. The confirmation
of the agenda. I will also note there are two
items that have been withdrawn from the agenda. The first
is the council composition review update. There is also a
report that has been withdrawn as well. And that relates
to. Sorry, chair that relates to energy conservation and in
demand management that has also been withdrawn from the agenda.
So noting that in the confirmation and amending of your
agenda. Okay. So we will vote. On the amended agenda.
All in favor? Any opposed? Carried. Next item. So thank
you, chair. Under deputations, we have surplus properties. Holly Crescent,
thistle, Crescent, Crescent and. Thorn low drive. There are five
deputation requests received on this matter. This relates to an
item that is being confirmed this evening at city council.
The first deputation request was received. From Nathan Hewitton and
dated June 13, requesting to provide. An opportunity to appear
before committee. So chair Nathan Hewitton and Kevin Ramsay are
the first two deputies. Yes. If you could come up
to the seating there and you could address us, I
believe. Prior to our deputations, city manager Gail, you wish
to speak? Yes, thank you. Chair and thank you for
the opportunity to provide some context. For both you. The
concerned persons that are here, the deputies and for the
public that may be watching at home. Tonight you are
considering another important report in the city's response to encampments
and. Unsheltered homelessness. Since the pandemic. There has been a
growth in encampments, in temporary shelters, not only in Thunder
Bay, but across Canada. There is also growing recognition. Mr.
Chair, are we speaking to the right item here? I'm
confused. Surplus. Surplus property here. Yeah. I thought I missed
it. Chair. I thought you were tying it into the
park cats personally, but. I wasn't sure, okay? 801 can't
come soon enough. I know. All right. So the deputies
are with us. Kind of relevant it was. You were
throwing me off there. Welcome. You will have ten minutes
to speak with council, and then. We'll follow up with
questions, if there are any, and if you could introduce
yourselves, please. Thank you, members of council, for having us
this evening. In 2022, there was a broad rezoning of
lands that occurred in the city of Thunder Bay. A
lot of it involved parks, green spaces, open spaces, as
they were technically designated. And they've been rezoned. To what
would be called ul urban low rise suited for residential
construction. I understand that the city's plan, this was in
the news. From speaking to people directly affected. There seemed
to be no direct consultation regarding this rezoning. Fast forward
to about a month ago, and we learned that the
city is proposing to declare eight pieces of property, green
spaces and neighborhoods surplus. And with the intention of placing
them for sale to develop housing on. Last week. The
deadline drew close for people to apply for deputations. Or
really express any resistance to this plan. To council. But
we learned that councilor Hamilton wants to disregard the voices
of 100% from people. I've spoken to anyway. Of directly
impacted stakeholders and sell these spaces out from under us.
Some of the people here tonight have been dealing with
this repeated meddling. In policy regarding green spaces, keeping them
versus selling them for several years. From my understanding. We've
been told. In my discussions with public servants about this
on Thornlow Drive. That the lot? That is, Councilor Hamilton
proposes to have added to the surplus list. Is the
only one the city is interested in our neighborhood. With
that said, the park on the other side of the
neighborhood with playground equipment was rezoned for residential construction. The
park behind St. Francis school was rezoned for residential construction.
I doubt most people in Parkdale, on Balsom street near
Dees park, are aware that those parks were all rezoned,
designated ul, suitable for resident. Residential. Construction. So we noticed
that. Certain untouchable area. Hillcrest Park, Vickers park. None of
these were rezoned. So I hope council will understand if
people outside of these four walls are fairly skeptical about
intentions. It seems like selling park space. Is kind of
the low hanging fruit, the quick way to hit a
quota. It's the easy thing to do, but that's not
always the right thing to do. As I'd mentioned earlier,
on Thornlow Drive, I went door to door. I canvassed
neighbors. This had 100% opposition from those directly affected by
this proposal. As in many cities. We
have no shortage. Of less visually appealing areas, buildings, properties
around town. It would seem. To me. That selling parks
should probably be a last resort. Where abandoning some areas
of the city to try and stuff other ones, and
it doesn't. Make sense. In a community of this size.
There's a lot of good reasons to keep that green
space. I'm sure many people will touch on them this
evening. One interesting one is health. As we just put
the pandemic in the rear view mirror, we've been told
for a few years to follow the science. Well, the
science study involving almost 300 million people done out of
the United Kingdom found that people who live around green
spaces have reduced risk of type two diabetes, heart disease,
premature death, stress, and hypertension, amongst others. Interesting to note
that Thunder Bay has all of these happening at higher.
Occurrence rate than the province or the country as a
whole. On the other side of Thorn low Drive, there's
another small park. People have put it to me that
there's two parks in the neighborhood. What's losing one. They
kind of serve very different purposes. There's a park on
Thornlow Drive that has some playground equipment, and it's on
a big slope. It's not terribly suitable for children running
or engaging in any type of sports. Catching a ball,
you can easily end up tumbling down a hill. There's
also the good risk of hitting toddlers on playground equipment
and swing sets. So what we typically see in the
neighborhood is parents with younger children go to one area
and older children that are just old enough to be
unsupervised in the immediate vicinity. Of their home. Go to
the other area and there's room there they'll play. Baseball,
football practice, golfing. I've seen people doing yoga. Any number
of activities taking place there. There's also a small park
behind. St. Francis school. As I've been reminded, however, for
a lot of the children on Thornlow Drive. 1.2 km
is a bit of a hike to send them unsupervised.
When you can send them to a field and look
out to your living room window. And watch them. I
can only speak. With direct experience about the property on
Thornlow Drive. It's where Ken and I live. The site
does not go to waste. Thornlow Drive is a particularly
active neighborhood. I've been woken up at five in the
morning, gone to the window and seen somebody. Walking a
dog down the street. Their people are running. They're playing.
They're taking their pets out. There's green space does certainly
get used. Thornlow is also becoming a rapidly younger street.
Which demands an increase in play space. What was once
an established neighborhood for established families to buy homes. In
the 1970s, due. To the age of the neighborhood, the
green space and the amenities. Is now affordable housing for
young working families. There's another issue. That Ken will likely
elaborate on more, and that is that much of Thornlow
is curved there's. A lot of folks that park on
both sides of the road at the same time. There
are safety issues with increasing the traffic load on this
street. We already see close calls with collisions involving other
vehicles with pedestrians, with kids on bikes. As I said.
It's a curved street with a lot of people parking
on both sides of it. There's. No sidewalks and where
you're proposing to add development to the neighborhood. Is already
the worst spot on that street. I've had several close
calls with collisions driving through that part. There's also the
suitability of building there. The city proposes to sell a
lot that's approximately 100ft deep. Councilor Hamilton's memorandum says that
whatever is built there will conform to the built form
of that neighborhood. The built form of that neighborhood has
a setback of 40ft from the. Curb for the front
of houses, and the average depth of a house on
that street is 35. To 40ft. So whatever you build
on this lot is left with a 20 foot backyard
that slopes into a ravine at the back. Doesn't sound
like ideal. Development potential. With those points in mind. I'd
like to. You have two minutes left, and I'd like
to turn over. To Ken Ramsey. Thank you. Thank you.
Nathan, can you hear me? No. Okay, so I have
a great deal of. Concern about the safety as an
owner and as a leader. In the private business. I
believe council has an opportunity and an obligation to ensure
the safety of the residents and the citizens of the
communities. And I believe what Nathan has said is to
be very true. That creep cutting a multi residential complex
on that corner. Is sure to create serious safety issues,
and I believe that the people here that don't. Realize
that. Need to take a drive down that street. When
it's active, not 10:00 in the morning or 02:00 in
the afternoon when their kids are in school, but when
the playground is actually being used, they around supper. Timer
in the evening, and you'll find that. You used to
be able to walk on that street with the dog
or your family, and there was no problem. You didn't
have to worry about the sidewalk. You just walked in
the street. Now you're taking your life in your hands,
especially at that end, because there is a boat. And
if you realize. It's a more affluent neighborhood than most.
Some neighborhoods in the city, most people would agree to
that. And I don't care how you build, whatever you
build, it will not be to the same level. Or
appearance as what is presently there. And my logic is
that you will therefore reduce the value of the properties
there. That will reduce. The assessments for tax purposes, and
the city will actually end up with a less income
from property. Tax revenue than they presently have now. You
have 15 seconds to wrap up, okay? So I think
that, first off, you got to look at the safety,
and secondly, you got to look at the revenues. There's
a fallacy that you're going to improve the neighborhood. By
putting these units in, you are not going to improve.
Farnells drives neighborhood by putting multiplex units in there. I
have to say, we appreciate you coming out this evening.
We'll see if there's. Questions from counselors councilor Pascalino. Thank
you very much. And through the chair, can you describe
the changing demographics that's on Thornlow drive and how the
sale of this field will impact these residences. What we're
seeing again, I'd mentioned due to the age of the
neighborhood and the affordability of the homes. Is. A rapid
transformation to younger families with children and a greater demand
for play space on the street. I personally only resided
on Thornlow Drive. For seven years. The amount of change
in home ownership that I've seen on the street. Seems
considerable for that period of time. When we moved in.
It was a quiet. Neighborhood with, shall we say, typically
more mature demographic. Every day I drive home from work
with my windows open and I hear children screaming, laughing,
playing. I see them on a field, I see them
in a park. My generation, I guess. Parents with young
families. We got to see a generation raised on cell
phones and Facebook. And we don't care for what we've
seen. So you're starting to go back to the days
of driving down the road and. Hearing kids yelling car
and moving the hockey nets. Basketball nets are full time,
set up on the side of thorn low drive. We're
kind of back to get the kids outside. Get them
running, get them playing baseball, playing hockey, being active in
the outdoors. And we see more young people moving onto
the street, more young people having families, more young people.
That intend to have families or grow their families. So
the demand for play space in this neighborhood. Is absolutely
not shrinking. It's only increasing. So that piece of property
is very valued and. Well appreciated, Councilor Pascalino. Further. Yeah,
I was just wondering. What? Your major. Safety concern is
for the increased traffic on Thornlow Drive. Again. That part
of the street. Is quite a curve. Visibility is obstructed
by some forested area. Part of which. Is protected. When
you're coming around that bend, there's often vehicles parked on
both sides. Children are active on bicycles. As I said,
it's a very active street with people out walking, running.
With their dogs. They've got kids. You see close calls
in this. It's kind of a choke point. And you
frequently see close calls with vehicular collisions. This area is
right where this lot is proposed to be sold, so
there's a natural concern for people on the street. That
I don't know exactly what it's going to look like,
but if you parcel that into two lots and build
two fourplexes. You've got eight houses with two vehicles per
house. So you've added 16 cars to a congested stretch
of a little street. And then when they entertain, you've
got more people parked along the road. So the safety
perspective is largely focused just around the traffic density on
that area of the street. With poor visibility. For my
last question. I was just wondering. About snow plowing and.
They're rarely, I think, in that area there's any cars
parked on the street. For when the plow comes by,
I guess. That on street parking versus off street parking.
It's mostly in that area. It's all off street parking,
I would imagine, anyway. Or unless somebody comes over, right?
Yeah. Do you have anything to add in that? Respect,
in the wintertime, most of the residents want to get
their cars off so they can get the street plowed.
There are no sidewalks. So they've got these big banks
along each side of the road that are six, 8ft.
High. And you can't even see your car sometimes that's
parked in front because. Of the banks. That means that
the road is even narrower. In that case. Thank you.
And appreciate the answers. Councilor Aguilar. Thank you very much.
And through the chair. Mr. Ramsay, you've lived in the
area for. A little bit more than seven years. Can
you tell me, in your words how the demographic, why
you moved to that area and how. The demographics are
changing from when. You probably built. I bought the property
in 1979. We built in 79 and moved to 1980.
We had a fair to young family. As I mentioned
earlier and my other correspondence, there was two lots that
were vacant that are now being desired to be built
on. I tried to buy those lots because I want
to have a nice house and a nice view. And
the field would still be there if I was on
one of them. What happened was I was told that
the green space was compulsory the way it was set
up with a developer ltl there had to be so
much green space for so many houses, and so that
was a plus for me, we're going to have green
space. I managed to buy a lot privately. And built
where I built, which is right next to where you're
going. To put a sixplex or an eightplex or a
ten plex or whatever the city wants to do, which
will have a devastating effect on the value of my
land. I've read or heard that some of the counselors
believe that by building. I believe the question was demographics.
Okay, so how have you seen the demographics change over
time? Well, the demographics have gone from me being one
of the youngest people on there with young kids to
one of the oldest people on there with grandchildren using
the area, and there are many people as a matter
of fact, the house at the end of the street
was just sold to the grandson. Of the past owner
who passed away. I know that there are a number
of new people on the street that did not live
there. Before. And. They are a lot younger than the
people that used to be there. We've lost a lot
of old timers, but we've got a lot of young
people living on the street. Now, right across from you,
there's a families come in with two kids. They've got
the basketball net out in front, and it's great to
see that again. We haven't had that for a few
years. Thank you. So would you then concur that the
area is in an area of transition from the people
who didn't want to move from there, and they're now
aging out because the house is too big or two
stories. They don't want stairs and they want to. Go
to more of a one level living. And now two
young families once again, that went there. For the same
reason that you initially went. In 1979. Keep in mind
that a lot of the reason that the people, the
young people are coming to this area is because of
the green space, because they have an area that kids
can play and because it's quiet. To me, it's a
very desirable area. Under me. There are a few very
desirable areas in thunder b, and this is one of
them. And. I think that it attracts young people with
rejuvenates the community. And it improves. The atmosphere, if you
like, because you got kids running around and you've got
people that are out and about, especially walking dogs, walking
kids, walking families. It's good to see that. And thank
you. My last question. I'll address it to Mr. Hewitton.
When you chose to move there seven years ago, Did
the idea of a crescent be more appealing rather than
a straight thoroughfare due to the traffic calming. Certainly, yes.
We found the shape and layout of the street in
the neighborhood to be very welcoming, quiet. And the green
space certainly was attractive. In fact, in our particular case,
I had property on the north end of the city
and was about to construct a new house. We heard
about this property on thorn low drive. After saying, where
the heck is thorn low drive? And looking it up
on Google maps. We went to have a look. And.
We quickly abandoned our plans to build a house where
we were going to and purchased. An as is house
for a bit of a project on Thornlow Drive just
to get into. An area like that with green space
to start a family. And yes. The low traffic flow
was certainly appealing. Thank you very much. Councilor Trini. Then
councilor guru. Oh, I thought you chimed in first. Councilor
Gartuga. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Councilor trini. Are
you aware that previously. When developer. Would. Do a development.
They had to give 5%. Of the property to greenspace.
Okay. So that probably was the case here. I don't
see that we've changed our policies to this point. I
think that. We still. Require the developers to give 5%
green space. I just want to know if you knew
that. So that's why you have that park. And the
idea behind that was so that the parks were associated
with the development and so that you didn't have to
go too far. So that's why that park gets there.
And other little parkets are all around the city, so
thank you. Councilor Trini. Thank you. Through the chair. I'm
finding it interesting as people send us emails about the
development and the parquet pieces. How we've gone from a
duplex to a six. Plex to a twelve plex. These
pieces I don't believe would be supporting that. And there
are guidelines within the city. Building that require parking spaces
for each unit, and I'm not sure if you're. Aware
of that, councilor Trini. My question is about parking. You're
talking about parking and people being on the street and.
You're concerned about plowing and more people on the street
and the dangers of that. But there's a requirement for
parking spaces, and I wasn't sure if you're. Aware per
unit. And so that would alleviate that because people wouldn't
be on the street. The other question that I had
kind of for you. You're nodding your head yes. Actually,
I got a lot for admin on this topic, but
I'm also getting emails. From people talking about nimbyism, not
in my backyard pieces. And while I appreciate that, I
don't think that's what's happening when we're having all these
people here to talk about parquettes. I think there's a
different piece here. In the. Documentation that we were sent.
Because you've talked about Thorn Low, the number of people
who've actually responded to quite a process. In getting consultation.
Their main concern. The majority were concerned with the type
of housing being permitted in an area consistently mainly of
single family homes. So I think we need to get
to the heart of the issue. And these other pieces?
Well, yes, they are a piece, councilor Trinity. We're supposed
to be asking questions. I am. Yeah, but I'm not
here. It is about the multifamily home. Let's just ask.
Is that the real? Well, I want the public to
know that I've read the information. I've heard you. I've
heard other people who've emailed me. I appreciate those pieces,
but the multifamily home seems to really be the key
piece here. And we're getting mixed up with parking, which
shouldn't hopefully be an issue, so. I'd like you to
expand a little bit more on the multifamily home. Concerns,
please. To be perfectly honest, that's something I've heard fairly
little of going door to. Door. Speaking directly with residents
on Thorn low drive. I can't speak for everybody on
the street how they feel about multifamily. Single family. I
personally, whatever. You build a 711 on it, it's a
green space that's gone whether it's a house, whether it's
a castle, whether it's an apartment building. It's lost green
space that can never be recovered. Fair. Thank you. So
my next question about the green space piece, then we
were also instructed about. Green space piece and I have
driven the area. I did some, quite a bit of
research. The green space. The Neibing river buffer is a
substantial amount of space around the river. Including bike paths
and pieces like that. The thornlow buffer also has. A
retained city lands. Of. The. Ravine piece, which is substantial
city lands to still continue. With forestry and surrounded by
trees and those pieces. So you really feel that this
piece of thornlow would completely change the neighborhood in regards
to those pieces. Yeah. Through the chair.
That retained land isn't really ideal for any practical usage.
I mean, if I see kids playing soccer on that
field, they're not going to do it on a forested
ravine edge. So I don't see a lot of use
coming. From that space as an alternative. In fact, one
thing that concerns me is with the back of the
land you propose to sell? Kind of sloping off into
this ravine. Any work that somebody would undertake to shore
up or stabilize the back of that property would require
destruction of that forested area. In order to. Perform the
work. You just can't run excavators in dense Bush. Okay,
thank you for that. And my third question. The money.
That would be. I think you've asked three. Really? Okay.
I'll go in the second round, then. So there's only
one round. I think I asked. Parking and multi use.
I'm sorry. I counted three. I could stand corrected, but
I think I'm seeing nodding. Yeah. I would ask all
members to not preface questions when it comes to deputations.
We're just to ask questions, not to inundate them with
opinion and other things. Just questions, please, Councilor Johnson. Thank
you. Chair through you gentlemen. Thanks for coming tonight. I.
Voted for selling the surplus lands. I don't mind putting
my cards on the table, so. It's not just on
Councilor Hamilton. Mainly because of. Well, one reason is I
get asked a lot. From people that resided the needing
ward and asked this question of all other neighborhoods around.
Other parks aren't looking so good. Holes and slides. No
places to play. So, as I understand it from administration
thus far, some of the monies here can go to
other parks nearby, and I'm hopeful that they'll go even.
Further to maybe. Councilor, we need to get to questions
quick. We have five deputies. Don't talk over me. Please,
just. We need to get to questions, and we have
five. Deputations. We have a lot on the agenda tonight,
so I don't want to spend hours and hours on
these deputations. And get to the meteor items, if you
will. Not that this isn't meaty, but. We have a
lot of things, including homeless. So I've asked many times.
So I'm going to keep cutting in when we don't
get to questions. I was 3 seconds. Away from. I
know, but we were 15 seconds in. That regard other
areas, other parks throughout the city can benefit from the
sale of this land. I'd like to know. Your thoughts
on that with respect. Again, it's something that others are
chiming in about. And trying to attain. Through the sale
of this particular land and others. Well, while I agree
that. Probably a lot of cases. Consolidation. Of resources or
amenities can often make sense or be efficient. These are
places where young children go, so I can't tell my
six year old go. 1.2 couple of blocks over and
go play in the field there instead. They added. A
new picnic table or something? It's one of those things
that there's a reason you have to put 5% green
space in the subdivisions. It's because you have space for
children to play or the community to use as they
see fit immediately nearby. So, I mean, I'm aware that
there's an intent to use revenue generated by. The sale
of these lands to improve other play facilities. But nobody's
asking for improved playground equipment or additional money to be
spent anywhere. They just want a field to play on.
Okay. I appreciate your response, and good luck. Good luck.
Thank you. Thank you. Chair. Thank you. Further questions to
this deputation? Seeing none, I was hoping we could save
all questions to admit after the five deputies, since they're
all related. Would that be okay with council? Okay, so
I'll put you down, Councilor Gurtuga. It's unlimited. There's no
emotion. But again, they get five rounds. I guess you'll
get five. Rounds if you want it. So some of
your questions could be answered in these deputations. So thank
you very much. For coming forward this evening. You can
retire back to the gallery and we'll invite our next
people up. Chair, our next speaker. We receive correspondence from
Ronald Portland dated June 20, again requesting an opportunity to
speak before council. We do have three speakers with that
group. Ronald, irene and tracy. We'd welcome you to come
forward. And if it's only one of you, that's fine
too. Okay, that's fine too. So welcome. And if you
could just ensure when you're speaking that you press the
on. Button on your microphone and you'll have ten minutes
and we'll go to questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
thank you, members of council, for hearing us tonight. My
name is Ron Portalance, as the deputy says. I'll be
presenting our deputation tonight together with my co presenter, Irene
Miln. Here at my side. We are both long terms,
and I stress long. Term residents of Thistle Crescent and
represent the Thistle Crescents neighborhood group. All right. We are
here tonight to ask you for. A simple. Simple action.
We're asking you not to approve Mr. Hamilton's motion to
put the parquet back into the system. You've already made
a report to take r three out, and we would
like you to. Continue with that and pass that to
council. So that's our ask tonight. But to give you
a little history because it's been seven years since we
were here before we're. Going to give you just a
little history of thistle crescent to tell you what's all
about. The lot 2628 is the law in question. Tiffan
Crescent was entrusted in stewardship. By the gateway corporation to
the city of Fort William on December the 23rd, 1955.
For the humble sum of $1. For public purposes. Our
parquet, or green space, was mandated by the construction codes
of the day, and I'm not sure if it's 5%,
but we've been tossing that figure around. Tonight. And it
could possibly be, I don't know. The codes then is
now dictate that a percentage of the subdivision land is
to be set aside as green space as the city
does today. Our parquet has been part of that green
space and an important part of our neighborhood for the
past 69 years. It has served our neighborhood in many
ways over the years, changing and evolving with the needs
of the residents. It has never been just a vacant
lot. Seven years ago. The city questioned our parquet's value
to our neighbors and to the city. The thinking of
the day was to surplus the taut lot as we
knew it. And sell it off to acquire revenue for
the city of Thunder Bay. On October 30, 2017, the
residents of the Thistle Crescent made a deputation to council
of the whole to advocate for our parquet. We presented
our reasons for keeping the parquet much as Thornlewell has.
Done tonight as green space and. After hearing our presentation,
the council voted eleven to one in our favor to
retain the park at his green space. About one year
after that, and I can't be exact. And about that.
The city planted. 20 new trees in that parquet of
various kinds. This action was the first substantial upgrade to
that park camp in 69 years. In addition to that,
last week, two beautiful benches have been delivered to that
parquet. First time. We've ever had any. And guess what?
I sat down there and enjoyed it. When the young
trees mature. Our park had will evolve into a wonderful
place to walk, spend quality time with our family, and
pets. Thistle crest and residents are aware that the federal
government, through the provincial government and the municipalities, have created
a program to build more housing to ease the housing
shortage in Canada. The city's goal of 2200 new homes
by 2031 is ambitious and it will be hard to
achieve. The practice of infill housing on unused tracks of
land in the city to help reach this goal is
innovative and good planning. On the other hand. Cannibalizing the
parquet in the city to achieve this goal is short
sighted and will ultimately degrade our city and lower the
quality of life of the residents. The fact that these
park lands are easy pickings does not mean. The ideal
solution to fulfill. Housing quota. In our opinion, this nearsighted
policy will adversely change the nature of our neighborhood and
our city forever. Finally. We want to leave the council
of the question to ponder. If the city of Thunder
Bay today demands a percentage of green space carboats in
new planned subdivision as a condition of construction. Why is
it acceptable in 2024 to destroy the previous green space
car votes which were condition of construction in legacy subdivisions.
Thank you for hearing our presentation. Thank you for that.
We try to refrain from applause and booing in all
sorts of mode of outbursts in the crowd, so I
hope. You can abide by that. City manager. Gail. You
were motioning to me chair. We'd like to offer a
point. Of clarity. That will help you moving forward. We
need to clear we need to clear something up, and
I. Would like to go to director to pewter for
that chair, Mr. Chair. And that's why I wanted questions
for administration. I guarantee is going to be. In relation
to the Greek. Okay, well, they're stepping in. So accounts
are gratu, if you feel that your question needed to
be asked up front. You can certainly let me know
that I have no problems with that. Just want to
speak briefly to some of these points and questions that
are being raised about the 5% parkland dedication subject. So
it's a case currently. That. In Parkland, or 5% of
the cash equivalent for Parker land, where it's let's say,
for smaller subdivisions where it wouldn't be practical. To. Take
the land itself. Some of these subdivisions. These neighborhoods are
rather old and I can't really speak to exactly. What
the policy framework was at the time. We've noticed just.
Within the files that at times lands were dedicated. For
park purposes. With the intent that they be sold and.
That generated funds for the purpose of Parkland. So this
is embedded within. The Parkland Reserve Fund policy. That indicates
that when Parkland is sold, the proceeds would be used
for the purpose of Parkland. So I just want to
clarify that particularly. I can primarily want to clarify what
the case is today. Right. So today, if a smaller
subdivision is applied for, it's very unlikely that 5% of
the land would be used for parkland. Rather, there would
be a cash in lieu of parkland dedication, and that
would be used for neighborhood parks or similar. Okay. Councilor
Gatuya on this item. Yes, go ahead. So if there
was a new. Smaller subdivision, Mr. Pewter, through you from
the chair. Can you repeat the question? Sorry. Yes, sorry.
So if there was newer, smaller subdivision today. That was
come forward and there was no parks. Within a kilometer
or two. Would that go into the green space? Reserve
fund. Or would it perhaps there be a park there,
a green space there? I'll refer that question to supervisor
shore that's on the line. It's through the chair. It
depends a bit on the context and the exact size.
Of that newer subdivision. If it's really small. And I
don't know what number that might be. Under ten, under
twelve, lots, something like. That. Then the residual 5% is
not small enough to do. Anything useful. In terms of
play equipment or active recreation, so we would take the
cash in lieu. In the case of a smaller subdivision
that was part of a larger plan of subdivision, but
being done in stages. We may take a small lot
in land. In the short term, and then. When. The
larger development is done. Take the 5%, land in a
more central location because that will be a benefit to.
The larger development and give back the single lot again.
We have done that in a place like maple view.
Subdivision, so. There isn't, I think one answer to that
question, it really depends on the exact size. And. The
future plans for that area as well. And does not
distance. Factor into that just to other parks in the
area, would that not factor in as well? Yes, through
the chair. It would. We strive to have a park
land within. Roughly 400 meters of a person. However, if
that land is so small, The 5% is so small
or of a size or shape that really can't be
utilized for active recreation. It is often better to. Take.
The cash in lieu and use that to develop a
park that may not be exactly close by. But the
nearest one to improve that. Thank you. I just wanted
to not wanted that clarified because I spoke to Mr.
Deputor. There, director. Deputy part of me. For the deputation.
Yeah. So we'll go back to the deputy. Sorry about
that. Administration want to hop in with a clarification. Hopefully
that now we can ride through all the deputations before
we go back to admit. But thank you for your
deputation very much. We'll see if there's questions, Councilor Pascalino.
Actually, I had Councilor Gertuka. Was this on what we
just did or on the deputy? Councilor Victor Tucas first.
Thank you. Good. I just missed that. Could you clarify?
The property was donated, you said? The property was turned
over from Gateway. Corporation that built the green Acres area
to the city of Fort William. As maybe a 5%
carve out. I don't really know what the percentage was.
But it was definitely a green space car. Vote for
that subdivision and was turned over for one. Dollars, which
is what they had to do to turn property over.
Even today, you have to spend one dollars. And yes,
it was turned over 1955. Okay. Thank you for that.
Last week, we made a decision to keep these three
parquets in, and we knew all about the housing accelerator
fund. We knew everything. Can you tell me, in your
opinion, has anything changed? Since last week? No. And the
reason we're here tonight, of course, is because of alderman.
Hamilton's motion to actually overturn that decision. So on the
fourth, we were notified that you had pulled our parkets
out, and we were. Quite happy with that decision. But
then we found out about Alderman Hamilton's motion tonight. To
actually amend that decision, if you want to call it
that. So we had to come here. Tonight at least
to speak to you anyway and tell you that we
would like you to go. Back to your original motion,
which was to take the three park s out of
the sale. That's why we're here tonight. Okay. I see
no reason to change my vote, so. Thank you. Yeah.
Just so we all understand how the procedures work here.
When we made that initial decision that was at a
committee meeting and all committee meeting decisions, even though we're
all around the table. Have to come to a city
council meeting where we're all around the table again. So
when they come to city council, any member of council
can look to revoked or re debate. The item, and
that's what's occurring here tonight. Later on. So just you're
aware this will occur at city council much later tonight?
No. We're aware of that. We're just. Because of the
motion. We were notified because. Of Alderman Hamilton's. Okay, just
so everyone's aware of the timing, councilor training. Thank you
through the chair and thank you for your presentation. Were
you aware that Green Acres park fits within that 400
meters radius from this park? No. Okay. Thank you. Councilor
Pascalino. Thank you. Through the chair. I actually grew up
in the area. I lived on Wall street, across from
Linwood Crescent long long time ago, and I was just
wondering if you can. I don't know how long. You've
been there. But when I was there. My parents bought
the house 1968. And I moved out in 1980 when
I bought my own place. So I was wondering how
well are they been used since 1980? For when? I
remember them. I remember you brought up the term. I
think tautlot. That's what they used to. And I would
play at that one. And also on thistle crescent, quite.
Often, so I was just wondering how well they're used.
And. How are the families doing them and how are
they using them? Well, let me answer your question a
little differently, but I'll get to your point in a
minute. First of all, Parkland doesn't have to have a
purpose. It's already purposed as Tark Land. That's its purpose.
But to answer your question, I've been living on thistle
for 67 years. I've been there rather a long time.
And the street started off as wall to wall kids
because it was a brand new subdivision. Well, that has
changed over the years. The people that now live on
Thistle, for the most part, are seniors without children. But
we are getting more families in as the older people
move out with kids. And that park, for the longest
time was not heavily used because the kids were gone.
There was no benches, no trees. It was a flat
piece of land, but now. With the 20 trees and
the two benches. The kids that were before not able
to use the park could now come and use it
and we were getting more families. As you would suspect,
the neighborhood is turning over. It's taken. A long time
because, frankly, people that live on thistle crescent don't want
to leave that's the truth. So that's your answer? It's
being used more. In fact, tonight I saw two. People
walking their dog in there and they were eyeing the
benches and they were saying, I think we should try
one. So I'm happy about that. Thank you for that
answer. Okay, any further questions? Seeing none. Thank you for
coming forward this evening. Thank you. Next deputation, please? Chair.
We received correspondence from David Barrow again requesting an opportunity
to come. Forward. We welcome David to come forward. Welcome,
sir. Thank you. You'll have ten minutes and we'll go
to questions if you're talking on the same topic and
you want to just kind of briefly agree with what
they've said. That's an option as well, but I'll leave
that. Up to you. So your microphone is on, and
the floor is yours. Thank you. My name is Dave
Barrow. I'm here to represent the people in Grandview on
the Woodside park yet. I didn't see it on the
agenda listed as that, but I assume that we're here
to speak about. I attended a quickly arranged neighborhood gathering
at the parquet. Of approximately 50 residents. I agreed, along
with Kevin Green, who is here tonight to speak on
their behalf to stop the sale of the park. This
meeting was attended by a 50 50 mix of long
term residents living near the parquet for over 25 years.
And new family residents. My wife and I, with our
two young children, first moved into grandio back in the
mid 80s, it was our second home as we climbed
the real estate ladder. And shortly after, we had a
third child. And we remained in that home for over
eight years. We enjoyed the area with the school options,
the amenities to Grandview Mall and the wonderful mix of
neighbors. At this time, the residential mix was about 25%
new families, the balance being original owners from the 60s.
While living in ground view. Like many home new home
buyers, we did substantial renovations and additions. My wife and
I enjoy renovating and building, and eventually moved on to
build two more homes in Parkdale and. The second redevelopment
of a property in Oliver Road. Our family was grown,
we decided to retire and dollar size we first choice
after living in various parts of the city was to
move back to Grandview. In September of 2022, we purchased
our current home on 158 Hogarth. As we got reacquainted
with the neighborhood. I noticed the woodside par. Park yet.
I saw a lumpy grass lot that was underutilized. To
build a developer and me thought, I wonder if I
could buy this lot. I could build a retirement home
for my wife and I. A few days later. We
received a letter from the neighborhood indicating an invitation to
meet at the park. So I went to attend for
curiosity, to see what was the conversation going on. At
the meeting, I heard numerous ideas. Of things to do
at the park. There was about a 50 50 mix.
Of original residents and new families. The original demographics. Of
the older couples there talked about raising their families. And
enjoying the park. And it had amenities on it over
the years. The amenities? Slowly disappeared as they became unmaintained
and were abandoned basically by the city and were removed.
One of the parks down the street from us on
Hookarth was redeveloped into a small, younger person park. The
other one, Woodside, was left basically abandoned. Demographics in the
Grandview area changing if I count ten homes around my
home. Approximately 50% are original residents in their. The other
50% are new families with young children or early teens.
If you apply the demographics to the entire subdivision, it
would be conservative to suggest 40% of the homes in
the area. Will change hands in the next five to
ten years. This will bring hundreds of new families and
millions of dollars in renovating, spending. Grandview area is not
a sleepy retirement subdivision. Woodside Firecat is not underutilized it
is underdeveloped. Grandview is a lively, growing neighborhood with new
families and with many more to come. The city has
done well in developing and promoting high rise rental development
throughout the city. In my work as a financial advisor.
Many seniors I worked with spoke of being stuck in
their family homes as there was nowhere suitable and affordable
for them to move. As the city continues to encourage
development, high rise multiples. This will free up hundreds of
homes. In the Grandview area and greatly help the current
housing challenges. If the Grandview subdivision was being built today,
it would have a city and province mandate to provide
park land within it is a large subdivision. It is
not a small one, so. It would have the 5%
land. Dedicated to parkland. To remove parkland from Grand View
subdivision is wrong. It does not make any sense. I
was uninformed when I first looked at that lot and
had dreams of perhaps buying it and building on it
now that I saw. The history design with the land.
And the need in the area and the changing demographics.
I've changed my thoughts. I want to rescind my letter
of support that I sent in, and I think. It's.
Short cited to. Sell public land or parkland. Woodside Parquet
needs to remain and be redeveloped. Our ask today is
that council delayed the decision on the future of the
park at for six. Months. This will allow the resident's
time to meet, assess the needs of the neighborhood, and
format a plan for a presentation back to city council.
We believe that with minimum capital and maintenance, cost. The
parquet would be well served and unmasked to the Grand
View area. To summarize we request a motion that council
delay the proposed sale that was site part set for.
Six months. Thank you. Thank you very much for your
deputation. Go to questions, Councilor Zizino. Thank you, chair. What's
your vision for the parquet? Well, we have the one
park that in the area. Is really a very juvenile
park. It's designed for probably children up to eight, six.
So what we see in the neighborhood are lots of
basketball hoops being pushed out to the street and kids
playing on the street. Young teens, early teens. So. I
would think one of the avenues that we would explore
would be to turn that parquet into a young teen
parquet, basically, where they would have a space to gather.
A small basketball court or half court type of thing.
A small structure to sit under and get out of
the sun or the rain. And just to congregate, basically.
So, nothing extravagant? Nothing of $100,000 playground or something? It
basically just needs to remain a park and a place
for teens to gather. I think would be one of
the avenues that we would explore. Okay. Thank you. One
other question. What are your thoughts on a community garden?
Certainly. I listen to the details, my concern would be
the maintenance of it. And the long term appearance of
the garden. What I've seen around the city, some have.
Done very well at keeping their volunteer base and maintaining
them. Others, not so much. So that would be. My
question is, who's going to maintain it? And what assurances
are going to be there for so, like, a mixed
use, perhaps. It doesn't mean that that couldn't be incorporated
into a teen park or something. Like this. Okay, well,
thank you very much. Councilor. Thank you. Through the chair.
According to the information we have, and I kind of
know the area, a bit. Within a 400 meters radius.
We have Junott park, which is a very big park.
Grab you park Holgarth parquet and hinton Parquet. Do you
see an excess of parquets and parks in this area?
That's one of the pieces that we look at is
the number. Again, I think if you go back to
the 5% of the size of the subdivision, we are
underserved. By parks, basically. The Hinton parquet has again, nothing
really on it. It has an old rusting structure. On
it. The Hinton. The Hogarth parquet is the juvenile park,
so fits for a very small group of people very
actively used lots of families down there with young children,
but is not conducive to young teens and whatnot. The
Junot barquette is quite a distance. Away and there's conversations
and. Concerns of safety there. There have been incidents there,
and people are reluctant to let their children go. Off
by themselves to that park. Okay. Thank you for that.
The information that we have on this parquet as well
is concerns about multi residential housing. Would you like to
comment to that? I think that's one of the things
that. What I'm here tonight is no one has much
information on what is being proposed, so. Then you get
all this hypothetical talks and all that. In my letter
that I had supported the sale of the park. It
was specific that it would be a single family home.
But now I think it's much more valuable as a
park, at least to become a city that we are
giving up on Parkland is a bad direction. I watched
an article last night on tv about great parks and
city and the redevelopments of urban spaces and whatnot. So
I find it totally out of whack that we're considering
selling Parkland. Thank you. Thank you for that. Seeing no
further questions. Thank you for coming forward this evening. Thank
you. Appreciate it. Next deputation. Please. Thank you. Chair. The
next reputation. We received correspondence from Kevin Green. This was
dated June 20, requesting to appear before committee.
Welcome. Well, we asked that your microphone beyond if you're
speaking. And maybe turn it off if you're not speaking
and you'll have ten minutes. And we'll go to questions.
Thank you. I want to thank everybody. For taking the
time and all the support we have. In the gallery
today. So I won't take up too much of your
time, because. We're dave barrow. And our group have come
together. And are asking. For a six month delay in
the decision about Woodside park for the same reason. So
we can have a chance to come together as a
neighborhood to look at it. We had said the surplus
land in Thunder Bay is a treasured resource, and it's
of a vital importance to our community. And the mental
and physical well being of our children. We strongly urge
City of Thunder Bay Council to defer the vote on
selling off this precious surplus land. The opportunity to use
this land for public amenities should not be lost. We
call upon our municipal leaders to proprietary long term benefits.
For our children over short term fiscal gains. Let's please
take a moment to reassess the potential benefits and implications
and involve our neighborhood more broadly in a decision making
process. I. Have about approximately 150 names on a petition
here. That support. This delay in a decision. We know
that there's close by parks. But. There's so many benefits
to leaving it even as a green space for the
amount of families that have moved into our neighborhood. Similar
to. What our first gentleman spoke today. And with Ron
Fort Lance and Dave Barrow, same thing. Our neighborhood has
gone through. My wife and I have been there for
24 years now. We moved back from the states. On
a work assignment, and I came back, and we really
wanted to live in Grandview because. Of its reputation of
being a great neighborhood and a great place to raise
kids. And we've done that successfully, but now. Their kids.
Want somewhere to play? They're coming back to the community
and a lot around us. Pat Slavensky, my neighbor. We
bracket the lot on each side, so we're always watching
what happens in the park. And that's the big thing.
Is. The eyes on the park. That the adults around
the park can give is tremendous. So we used to
have a rocket ship there that was taken away some
years ago, but. It was in a state of disrepair.
And I've rescued more than one kid out of the
ball of the rocket ship. And because I'm looking, doing
dishes out my window. Of course, there's many things. I
can quote. I've got. Four citations that I've learned about
today. But. What was said by the first three deputies
here. Is very similar to what. We want. The reason
we want the delay is that we came together as
a community. One of the first times that we've all
been together and we realized how many actual kids there
are in this neighborhood. Now, we had thought that there
was a lot of retirees. But there's more kids than
there is retirees now, so it's fantastic. And. Kenzie Belial,
who's in the gallery here today, he had recommended. To
have a community garden. In this lot and. It's a
great idea. It's something that we need to investigate as
a community. As a neighborhood. That's what we want, and
that's what we're requesting. From council. That concludes your deputation.
Yes. Okay. Thank you. Please. My name is Pat Zelensky.
I was born in the neighborhood. I grew up there
as a kid. We use the tot lot every day
because it was the meeting place after supper. Or in
the morning. And we played baseball there, soccer there, hockey
and winter on the little rink. They poured that all
kind of went away when they took down the. Rocket
ship with the promise of new equipment. That was over
20 years ago. And it never materialized. Then they came
up with the parquet name and. Hurley landscaped a little
bowl to put a rink in, but it sloped to
one side most of the water drained out. It would
take all winter to fill it up. To have an
actual rink. There was no benches or anything very poorly
set up for kids to actually go skating. There, so
it was very underutilized as a ring. But we need
time to figure out and maybe lobby to get a
basketball court. Not only would the teenagers be able to
use it? Us older people who would be able to
go and shoot some hoops and get some exercise. It
would be good for a lot of classes. But the
sale of this 5%, and it's r 5% for our
neighborhood that. Was set aside when gateway built our development.
I believe in 65, 64, they set aside 5%. So
now you have to make a decision on getting rid
of the 5%. Now, wait a minute. That was mandated
back then, it's still mandated today. How can you justify
selling it? When you require the developers to set aside
5% today. Where's my 5% for my neighborhood? Right now?
You say it's the park? Down the street. Well, no,
that's their 5%. So I find a hard time. You
have to make a decision either way. But how you
would decide to get rid of my 5%. When you
demand the developers today to set aside 5%, so can
they ignore your rule? I think you guys should be
following your rules before you make a decision. That's all
I got to say. Thank you. Thank you very much
for coming forward. We'll see if there's questions from council
or, I believe councilor Aguilar. Has one. Thank you very
much. And through the chair. Mr. Green, you made a
comment? That this was one of the first times in
a while that you've got that whole community together. And
you got to see how many kids and how many
adults. Did you find? If we go back to 2019,
that you saw more people? There's a big gap in
between here with Covid-19. Do you find that you've got
that opportunity now everyone's kind of going, wait. What did
we have before and what do we have? What can
we bring back? Yes. Thanks for the question. The park
has always been used on a steady basis by a
lot of people, a lot of kids, a lot of
adults. They'll take their dogs there just to let the
dog run. Around. On a long leash, mind you.
The park is not really for one thing. It's for
multitude of things. But when this happened, We had a
flyer go around. We had people. Putting pieces of paper.
In our mailboxes. We'd like to get together as a
meeting, and we all got together as a neighborhood, which
was fantastic because. We never did that before. So I
have to thank this process for getting me to learn
about my neighbors a little bit. More than I had.
So. I don't see much difference as it is today.
As in 2019, per your question. But. It's a constant
thing. On a Tuesday, it's empty. But the next Tuesday,
there could be five people in the park. Ten people
I don't know. I hope that answers your question. Sort
of, but not fully through the chair. What I was
asking is. When we have developments, we look at neighborhoods
and community building. This opportunity created, was it an opportunity
to create community building, as you mentioned? Your community got
together. Right to work together. We lost a lot of
that due to Covid. Do you find it was very
beneficial to your community? Very much so. Because what we
see. In the last five years. Maybe three to five
years. That a lot of families with young children. Three
or younger have moved into this neighborhood. And because they
run their family lives and everything else, we don't get
to see them. Very much. But we got to see
them in the last two weeks. And they came out
and. We were all happy to see them. But we
see that now because. Of this process. But. In 2019.
It was a little different because there wasn't as many
young families as there is today. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Councilor Hamilton. Yeah. Thank you, chair. Well, thanks
for being here. For sure. It's like takes a bit
out of your schedule to come and talk to council,
and I appreciate all the deputations. There's no question about
the value of the park. But the reason why we're
here tonight is because of housing, really, ultimately, and housing
goals. And I'm just wondering if you can just elaborate
on your experience with the housing crisis and maybe some
of your struggles in attaining housing. Housing for yourself and
your family right now. Well. My wife and I moved
from Ohio back to Thunder Bay. In 2020. Sorry. 2000.
When we did that. It was sort of difficult to
find a home. But we really wanted Grandview because of
its reputation. Today it's a bit different. The housing prices
have skyrocketed. To buy a used home and to retrofit
that home. Is even at times more expensive, depending on
what you need to do. So I'm not sure I'm
really answering your question. But. The mere fact that. Every
dollar that we make is stretch so far. Then. Everyone
at the park for the last two meetings that we've
had. They all understand why. The city wants to do
this, and as I do. We understand that we need
housing. We need more roofs over people's heads. That's the
reason we're asking for six months. So we can do
a little bit more homework and some of your homework
to go and look. At other places. Where these places.
Could exist for these homes. Okay, I appreciate that answer.
And through you, chair. I hate to be at peeping
Tom, but. I'm looking actually on Google Earth and. There
is a lot of green space aside from. Just in
people's yards, naturally, and I'm just wondering. What transpires, and
I honestly, I feel, like, pretty bad. But there's gardens
there's. Play sets. There's all kinds of amenities in people's
own yards. So I guess there's no question it's just
like. There's no question. Can we get to one? There
does seems to be an abundance of amenities in people's
personal yards currently. I think as a community, we pride
ourselves on green space. And people not. Putting giant garages
in their back of their yard. That there's green space
for kids to play and come and go. I don't
know. How many seating that I did in my backyard
because my kids were always running over by grass. Which
is fine. But the fact is that my home, I
don't have a sump pump. And what does that mean?
What does. So what it means is that the green
space around homes. As well as that taut lot. Next
to 166 wood site. It absorbs a lot of water.
It's green. The grass grows, the dandelions go. And convert
our nice lawns into a lot of weeds, which is
fine. But I don't own sump pump, and I've never
had a flood in. My home. And a lot of
people can't say that because. In your densification of homes
and roofs. Over. A space. The green space has to
absorb. That water. And in our neighborhood it does. And
I don't own a sump, so I'm. Pretty proud of
that. Thank you. Further questions of the deputy? Seeing none.
Thank you both for coming forward tonight. Thank you. And
we'll go to our next deputation. Thank you. Chair. Our
next deputy. We received correspondence from KeviN ManN requesting to
peer this evening. So if deputy man is here,
It was. Oh, I'm sorry. It's a written deputation. My
apologies. So. Your counsel has received the written deputation. So
there is no one here this evening to present. Okay.
That concludes our deputations. Chair. So we would now, due
to the change of the order, and the agenda, we
would be moving to item 8.7. We? Questions of administration.
Prior councilor Gurtuga, you were first on the list. Thank
you. Through you, Mr. Chair. How many? Vacant lots. Do
we have buildable lots in the city? Through subdivision? And.
Lots. We do not have a figure of the specific
number of vacant lots that are. In the city. There's
the housing study that was recently presented to council suggest
that. There is a good amount of supply. For intensification
over time. We do not have figure for how many
vacant properties there are. Right now. Okay. Properties or how
many new houses would the sale of these three parks
generate? Through the chair. It does depend somewhat on how
the proposals that we receive in for specific lots but
for the eight presented, the total was estimated at about
45 units. And eyeballing the three brought forward. I would
say between. 15 and 20, depending on. Okay, so that's
multi, that's more, that's not single detached. That's fourplex is
six plexus, perhaps eight plexus. Going on these units? On
these lots not necessarily conducive to. The current. Atmosphere or
the current. Look there of that street. Last question. I
counted on Thornbow. 84 houses and Stratton. Which is in
between. Thorn low in the middle is over 30, so
that's. 114 houses, and we heard that. The next green
space is 1.2 km as a crow flies. So just
looking. I have it pulled up here as well. It
looks like this thornlow, at least, is servicing probably 500
households. Is that correct? I guess that's not fair because
you don't have a map in front of you. But
anyways, I've counted over 84 outdoor and 30 on trashet,
and we heard from. Manager. Sure as manager shore. I
think it's a magic shore. That we wouldn't pretend. Units,
but in a new subdivision. But I'm sure in a
new subdivision. Of over 100 units, we'd have at least
a little park space for them to this. Date. Through
the chair. If it's proper, solicit to the clerk. We
can share maps. That show. The buffer that surrounds existing
parkland and how it affects these properties. Anyway. I just
did the math here quickly, and from what Mr. Schwartz
said earlier, that it sounds like a subdivision of this
magnitude. Hundreds of houses in the area. Would at least
have a little parquet or green space. The service objective
that was applied to identify these lands for a potential
surplus was that. Most residents be serviced within 400 meters
of parkland. So we do have maps available that show
how that objective is met, if that's helpful. To council.
Okay. We heard 1.2 km today from the deputation anyways.
Later on, I won't support. Selling these slots. Thank you.
Councilor Trini. Thank you. Through the chair, we've heard language
like untouchable. Areas. How did administration pick the surplus lands?
The 40 surplus lands that will be coming forward. Through
the chair, a multidisciplinary team was established to review city
owned land. It certainly wasn't an exhaustive search, but we
paid close attention to vacant lands. Parking lots and parkland
as directed by council last year. In that review, we
primarily looked. For infill lots, meaning lots on existing servicing
and existing neighborhoods that could support housing. And we compiled
that list and brought it into three categories for council.
So that list is comprised of city owned land, vacant
land and parkland, and we separated those. As I said,
into three categories, the ones that were most easily brought
to market for the purpose of housing and then others
that required a little bit of work to get them
to market and others that were the long term plan.
And the ones recommended. The eight brought to council on
June 3 are among the first lists the ones that
are most easily brought to market to support housing. Thank
you for that whole summer. Sorry. If I could just
add. I just want to do a point. To clarify
something earlier. Just the eight properties that we're talking about
today. They could accommodate up to six units. Not eight.
Up to six. Thank you for clarifying that. My next
question. Could the money from the thorn little parquet sale
be used to fix the thornlow park to make it
flat and more even, so that it was more of
a usable park. As mentioned by one of the deputies.
Yes. We'll refer this question to supervisor Shore. Who's online.
Through the chair. I would have to look at that
closer, but that would be a possibility, yes. And I
may also point out that. There is existing field space
between. The existing houses on Thornle and the Neebing river.
There is quite a bit of open green space to
play. In close proximity to that area as well. So
that would be looked at at the same time. Thank
you. That's what I saw as well. Thank you for
those answers. Mayor Boshkoff. Thank you, chair at one time.
Thunder Bay was rated number one for a percentage of
parks and parkland in Canada. Out of 5200 municipalities. Where
are we now? With our ratio. Of parks. To population.
We had. Supervisor Shore has this information. Yes. So it
depends on. What type of park land in the 2017.
Yardstick study. That was the last benchmarking we participated in.
We were second in terms of overall parkland. And. They
divided out into overall Parkland, and then. Into maintained parkland.
So we were somewhat lower on the list on that.
And I can't. Remember the exact number on that. I
believe. Remember that the average parkland per thousand was 3.5
and in maintain parkland. We were at 2.8. Sorry, could
you elaborate on that? 2.8 versus 3.5. Again, a little
bit clear. Because we just had a bit of. Noise?
Sure. So, through the chair. The benchmark study divided the
parkland into overall parkland and into maintained parkland. So. That
would be more what people would consider active Parkland, where
it's either mode or there's infrastructure on it. And the
average. Of the municipalities that participated in the study. Was
3.8. Population. Our number at that time was 2.8. Population.
We're not sufficient in terms of. So what is the
difference? That. Puts us 0.7 behind or below average is
what I'm getting at. Yes. So that does not mean.
We're in physician and Parkland, it means that slightly less
than the average of the participants. In actively maintain parkland.
Thank you very much. Councilor chunk. Thank you. Chair. Chair.
What I would like to know. I know this came
forward. As a way to find these lands for infill.
But I am quite concerned that. The parquets and parks
are quite well loved and well used. This has come,
I think, on every term of my council, these parquettes,
and each time. It's been turned down. I don't see
the appetite changing in the community. But what I would
like to know chair is. Where's the list of serviceable
lens that are not parquet and when? Can we expect
that to come to council? Because I think in my
mind, This is too soon to bring this forward. We
just had struck the mayor's task force for the housing
advisory. I'd like to see what their opinion is. Because
maybe these lands aren't really what they're. Looking to develop.
So, like, some commentary on that? I'd be interested in
other lands that might be equally. Controversial, but not necessarily
parks. Chair.
Through the chair administration of its green council, a range
of. Plans for potential. For potential surplus. This group of
properties that we're discussing now is the second batch of
property. So. The first batch of properties. Did not include
park land and were street ends. So I think we've
gone through, we have gotten through most of the lands
that are not arc land in terms of numbers. And
just prior to passing over to manager Walker to provide
some additional detail to that answer. The merits task force.
Did discuss this issue and pass the resolution supporting. The
recommending to council that all eight properties be surplused. Over
to manager Walker. Thank you. Through the chair. In addition
to what director deputy had suggested, We did bring ten
properties that were not parkland to council in February. We
are working, diligently. To bring those to market. In fact,
I believe the bylaws closing those street ends. The majority
of those properties are street ends. Closing those street lands
will be before council. This evening and. We are very
close to finalizing our agreement framework and scoring matrix to
receive proposals on those properties. These parquets, as well as
the other lands brought forward on that list of eight
in our second batch. And I believe there's one or
two that are in addition to that. We're all in
the schedule a properties presented to council in the fall.
And those, again, were the properties identified as most readily
available to bring to market. All things considered. Being the
servicing. Park service objectives. And those were included in our
review. There are additional properties on the schedule B list
which we've been working through as well. To work out
some of the issues with those properties. A few of
those. Are not classified as any type of green space,
but many of them are. Chair. I guess my concern
is that. Well, I appreciate that. These lots take time
to parcel together and bring to council, but I feel
like we are doing this in sections, and I really
don't know. What the future lists are going to look
like. Is there a big plot of land that might
be treed, for example. That can satisfy our building requirements.
I don't know this, and right now. I don't really
think it's fair for me to sell off the Parklands.
In these smaller subdivisions that are well loved and well
used. Because I really don't know. I mean, the question
was asked earlier, how many lots we have in Thunder
bay. And, well, a member of administration sent an email
saying there was 700 tonight. The answer. Is there could
be a number of them. So I'm really confused how
much property we actually have. I want to see a
full list. I don't want to be having a big
fight with constituents each time. And I'd rather see it
prioritized. And I'm sorry if it actually. Exists, and I'm
just not seeing it. But. I would rather see a
big list. And I get why administration is piecing it
out like this. But I just don't see it. Chair.
So I won't be supporting selling off. The parks and
parklands. Although I understand the value. And I think we
can meet our target goals with the numbers that have
already been told. So. Thank you, chair. Councilor Pascalino. Thank
you very much. And through the chair, my question is.
That. It appears to me that. Green space. Has become.
Less important. Like. These spaces that they were talking about.
The 5% was back in 1955 to 1972. Those are
the dates that were brought up over at the time.
Why does it seem to be less important? I mean,
I lived through, well, most of those years. I was
born in 58. I remember burning barrels in the backyard.
Cars had big engines. They weren't an environmentally friendly time.
In the times between 1955 and 1972. Why is it
with all the environmental things that we're doing, we're going
to zero net and all these other things. That now.
This. Things that have been there forever. Are being considered
for sale. You have to realize, every one of these
mayors represented a city council. That's since 1970. And nobody
decided at that time that these parks would come up
for sale. Chair. I'd like to jump in here and
director to Pewter may want to respond. Directly to councilor
Pascalino, but I'm going to make some general comments, and
I hope you'll find helpful. And also in response to
councilor Chung and other discussion that's been happening around the
table just to bring us back a bit. You've made
this decision already. You've decided to sell these surplus lands
now. Councilor. Bentz. The chair said it nicely. There's a
process here, and when it goes to council, you are
absolutely able to reconserve that decision. But recall that you've
already made this decision and you've already had significant debate.
On this matter. The decision was based. To surplus these
lands, including the Parklands. Are directly consistent with your strategic
plan. And several other strategies and plans that have already
been adopted by council, including getting more homes in our
city. These strategic goals include the planning and delivery of
cost effective services supporting urban density and growth, and responding
to climate emergency. Chair. What I want committee to know
is that. You have already directed us to do this.
You've debated these matters already. The priority of the Surplus
Lands Review was a financial benefit to the corporation. You
gave us direction. You expect results? The next round of
lands that are coming are more difficult than this round.
It will be tougher for you to make these decisions
downstream. The decision you make today in council later tonight
is very important and will affect how we move. Forward
on these matters. This decision will impact progress towards housing
targets. Council, you have administration's advice. And that advice? Is
consistent with direction that you've given to us, specifically through
resolution and through strategic plans. And the housing accelerator planning
and the mayor's task force on housing. I look to
director to pewter chair through. You, if that's okay. If
he wishes to make any further comments. To add some
additional detail. To. The direction that's been given through the
surplus process. So council did initially receive a list of
all 40 properties that. Were being considered for surplus. That
list was considered in closed session. It participated in separating
these properties into batches and directed that we bring the
schedule a lands. Which these are included first, prior to
some of these larger properties that are more complicated. And
require more time and work. To unlock lands for housing
is a fundamental pillar of the housing accelerator strategy to
make lands available. For housing each year during this very
compressed window between 2024 and 2027. So there was an
open session component as well. All 40 properties were not
listed to the public. However, there was a process memo
that did go to open session and reiterated this approach.
That council had directed that these properties be brought forward
in batches, largely based on complexity and time to market.
So we hear from the development community. We hear enthusiasm.
We also hear that. It is difficult to find these
infill properties that can support. More dense housing, and for
that reason, these properties are a priority. I. Appreciate.
City manager Norm Gail's answer. He's corrected that. I just
like to say that. It was the majority of city
council. Not everyone on city council. So it would be
fair. I guess that question could be shut back to
city council itself. Thank you. Councilor hamilton. Yeah. Thank you,
chair Benz. So I guess a question for manager Schwar.
How did the park gets in question because there's other
park ets throughout the city that are not on the
list? How do the ones in question end up on
the list? And how did we evaluate. Why they're there.
We looked at it in different ways. So the first
one was that in general, There were other park facilities
in the neighborhood. It doesn't always work quite cleanly with
that 400 meters general guideline. But sometimes it's a bit
more. Sometimes it's a bit less. And then we also
looked at what investments we had in the park. So
if there were. Any hard infrastructure, such as playgrounds, that
sort of sports fields, court amenities. They were automatically taken
off the list and things. Like, perhaps, like in the
case of Holly and Thessal, we're tree planting. What? Had
taken place. We looked at those, and the opportunity, if
there was. To transplant those if they would be. If
it was surplus. So it was more looking at. What
infrastructure we did or did not have. In the parquet.
Okay, so thanks for that. And just while the deputies
are here and there's so many people in the gallery
and supportive, and I know I'm kind of in the
hot spot. Right now, and I'm not coming for your
parks. That's not the case, however. There's a lot on
the line here. Right. My guess is through you, chair
is that. A lot of people own homes. They're not
aware of the housing crisis, so it affects each and
every one of us differently, and indeed everyone here on
council. So to that end, I would ask that these
three years are important. So I just want to ask
through you, chair, just on. What's on the line? We
got an allocation of almost $21 million through the half,
potentially 5 million through the building homes. Faster through the
province. We have housing targets set. So what's on the
line financially for the city? It's under bay. If we.
Fail to reach those targets. So the housing accelerator.
Agreement includes that should the targets be met in 2017,
an additional $5 million would be awarded which could be
used for eligible expenses and offset various cost of various
projects. Beyond that. The land sale revenue associated with these
eight properties. Would be approximately $1.5 million. The land sale
revenue associated with all 40 properties. Would be several million
dollars. There is an ongoing tax benefit. So with respect
to these eight properties, that's estimated at $120,000 annually. And
that would be achieved with the municipality taking on no
additional costs, no additional. Driven by no additional infrastructure. There
are also financial benefits to meeting the province's targets. So.
The amount. Which is approximately $1 million per year in
funding. Should the city be able to meet those targets.
Chair. And I do have one more question. I knew
there was going to be headwinds. It's not easy. This
has changed. This is definitely swimming against the status quo.
But I produced this motion anyway in a really thoughtful
way, given some of the points that we heard now
about asset management revenue and reaching critical housing targets. That
may be some accounts, if they own their own homes,
are not aware of. Acutely, like some of us are.
My last question through you, chair. Is on what's next
right for surplus lands, because even some of the deputies
here, they're very mindful of their parks. These community spaces,
there's value. I certainly recognize the value. I used to
live at 647 thistles, my first house. In 1993, I
think. But anyway, so what is next? Because. If we
exclude these from the list, they're not coming back. Are
we going to have to dig deeper into forest lands.
We're talking a lot about green space. We're talking about?
Wilderness territory. What's next? You said it's not going to
be easy. If you could just. Put a finer point
to that. That might be helpful. All of these lands
are important to meet the housing target. So many of
the first. The schedule a properties. Are of smaller scale
and would support that six unit. Range of development. There
are additional properties that are coming forward that may support
multiple. Larger forms of development, however. Our targets are so
ambitious that it requires all sectors to be running full
steam. So it is. Different developers that develop these different
scales of housing, and so we need high performance. Across
this entire group. In order to meet these very ambitious
targets that have been set. Okay? If you'll permit me,
just because the deputies are here, it's my motion that's
going to affect them. They're not going to be around
for the debate further. I just want to thank everybody
for coming. We're here. We're listening, and I hope you
could appreciate that it's. A complex issue, and we're really
trying to balance a lot of needs in the community.
And thank you for being here. I appreciate it. Okay,
second round, we had Councilor Gertuca to admit. Thank you.
Just really quickly, I. Just wanted to clarify. The city
manager said that this was our direction and we debated
it, but. We debated it and we removed these three,
so that's why we're here now. So I just wanted
to clarify that. We had. Councilor Agarwal had wanted to
speak. Is there anyone wishing to speak prior to her
return? Mayor Boshkov. I think it must be said, chair.
That. These decisions before us tonight are probably the easiest
that we will be presented with. And what we're faced
with. Is. That? Because it won't affect our percentage of
being the city with the highest percentage of Parkland. Because
we still be providing parks and recreation opportunities for the
areas that. Are directly affected. The opportunity for us to
use infill. The next set of decisions I could only
say will be more difficult that we have to face.
So I would. Think that. I'm as a former environmental
planner, Convince that these neighborhoods will not be severely impacted
by neither traffic nor congestion. And that the space occupied.
Will be of minimal impact to the community. So. If
it was otherwise, it wouldn't even come close to supporting
it. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor back to first round.
Councilor Aguilar Aguwal, you're the last. Speaker at this point.
Thank you very much. Through the chair. Can you please
to administration. Can you please remind us what the lot
size frontage? Of thornel Thistle and Woodside are place. Frontage
and depth. Through the chair. If I may just have
one moment. So take a look here. One moment.
Through the chair. I'm able to provide the total area
of these lots, but not the frontage and the depth
collector separately. Sorry. The reason I'm asking for a frontage
is because frontage will be making. A very big determinant
on. How many units can be built on? A lot.
As opposed to. Square meters because a depth is different
than the frontage. But we build. You're saying, okay, you've
got ten meter frontage, you got. 30 meters. Frontage, whatever
it may be, determines the quantity of unit allowable on
a setting. Lot. Maybe we can get that for city
council later. When this actually comes up for a decision.
Okay, then. If I could make a comment here. The
concern I have is we heard earlier that one of
the maximum number of units could be built on Thornlow
would be eight units, approximately. Six units. Was it six
or eight? What was brought forward there? If I'm not
mistaken. Through the chair. Six units on one lot if
it remains one lot, up to potentially eight if it
were to be split into two. Some of these do
depend on how we split up the lots, or rather,
leave them whole. Therefore, the concern that is brought forward
by our deputies today is how many? Lots. And what
kind? Of insole we're going to do on a curved
road in a predominantly single family. Residential neighborhood. When you
do with frontage, and it was 150 foot frontage, you
can put up. An easily. With allowable parking on site.
A low rise condominium or apartment. We're doing questions to
administration. That's why it needs regarding. This stuff you're saying
is valuable for city council during the debate portion. Thank
you. Unfortunately. We have to do that. I know people
in the gallery would probably like to see this resolve.
But it's got to go to city council, which comes
after a number of business items. Tonight, and I appreciate
that very much. That's why just the frontage would have
been quite beneficial here to be able to give people
a true understanding of what size of building would be
able to be. Constructed. In the parquettes that they are
asking about and they're concerned about, well, hopefully by city
council will have those numbers. We can all go on
Google Earth and use a little ruler there and get
a pretty good idea. Well, that doesn't work on a
curved road as easily as it does on the straight.
Road. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. So my second
question then would be, To. Manager Schwartz in regards to.
Climate change. Our city manager brought up that our strategy
is on climate change. Would the elimination and removal of
these parquets to be sold. In these neighborhoods. Affect any
climate change or biodiversity in the park. Systems that we
have and your overall plan. So through the chair, if
I may. I'm supervisor Schwar, not manager Schwarzene. That's okay.
It's. Just been a few times, so I just wanted
to correct that. So again, it depends on the lens
you're looking at. The reason we are looking at Parklands
as infill is so that. We don't further do urban
brawl outside of the city. When we do urban sprawl
outside of the city, we are generally removing forested lands
or wetlands, which arguably have a greater environmental benefit than
a moan lawn park that currently exists there. If you
look at it that way, if you look at it
in terms of the fact that we have less hectares
of green space. Within the city. Proper. Than there is
somewhat a reduction in benefits, but I believe that there
is greater benefit to not developing outside of the city
than developing within. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Just on titles. I've just been informed by the city
clerk that we can. Reference everyone as city official and
their name. I can't remember all the different titles. So
I'm going to start using city official with the name.
So I share that with you, because I know a
lot of you are struggling with that tonight. Okay, we're
done. Next item. Thank you all for coming out. By
the way, appreciate your engagement. So chair the next item.
Ask for the change in the agenda is. Item 8.7,
report back response to unsheltered homelessness designated encampment. Framework at
the April 22, 2024 committee of the whole meeting, a
resolution was passed recommending administration report back to city council
and to provide recommendations on the consultations that occurred relative
to unsheltered homelessness report number two. 52 City manager's office
strategic initiatives and engagement provides a recommendation relative to this
matter for council's consideration. This was distributed separately on Friday,
June 21. Further, he received a memorandum from Director Cynthia
Olsen requesting an opportunity to provide a presentation. This was
also distributed on Friday, June 21. We do have two
deputations chair prior to getting to the presentation and the
two deputations it's my understanding that city manager Gail now
would like to provide some opening. Remarks. Is this the
right time, Jerry? Yes. You're safe. For takeoff. I'm going
to start again, chair, and thank you for your indulgence.
Tonight you are considering another important report in the municipality's
response to encampments and unsheltered homelessness. Since the pandemic, there
has been a growth in encampments and temporary shelters not
only in Thunder Bay but across Canada. There is also
a growing recognition, led by the federal housing advocate, of
the imperative to uphold the dignity and human rights of
people living in encampments. In her recent interim report, the
advocate noted that municipalities are, quote, The first line of
response, but often not empowered and generally not adequately resourced
to meet the complex housing and public health crisis growing
in their communities. This is absolutely the case in the
city of Thunder Bay. In fact, Housing and all matters.
Homelessness are not even the city of Thunder Bay's responsibility.
You have no lawful authority in this domain, but that
doesn't mean you can't dip. Your toes in and there
is stuff you can do. And that'll be shown in
the report. In presentation. A few key facts, chair, that
puts us in the city between a rock and a
hard place. Experiences of homelessness. Encampments and temporary shelters are
growing across Canada. We are, and we must take a
human rights approach. We have competing needs as temporary outdoor
shelters affect the perception of other residents of their neighborhoods
and city. Unlike other municipalities, the Province of Ontario does
not provide funding directly to our municipality to address homeless
homelessness. And our work is done at the corner of
our desk. That's been a big corner. It's a lot
of work that's been happening there. Provinces designated and funds
the district of Thunderbased Social Services Administration board as the
housing service system manager. The city has influence, but not
decision making authority on which priorities those funds are to
be allocated. The province has recognized a significant and complex
homelessness situation in the municipality, and they have responded by
more than tripling the amount of funding to the DSAB
from 5.3 to 16.5 million annually beginning in 2023. Chair
administration is not well positioned to respond to questions about
what the DSAB may or may not be doing and
how they are doing what they're doing. D seven does
have a board, however, and six members of council are
members of that board, including the chair is here, and
they are best positioned to respond to any questions about
the DSAP. The city does, however. Have a responsibility to
all of its citizens in Thunder Bay, including residents of
encampments. Do keep that in mind, please. In this very
challenging environment. Director Olsen and analyst Willanen. City officials have
prepared a thorough report on what we can do now
as a municipality, what we can do. That is lawful,
what we can do, that accepts we are part of
the solution, which I know. To be your desire. What
we can do to move forward in a good way.
Long term solutions will only be achieved through true collaboration
with our community partners. Director Olsen and. Analyst Willingan are
a small but mighty team. They do not have the
benefit of provincial resources to address homelessness. They are smart.
They are dedicated and they are looking for concrete solutions
to present to you. Chair. This is an extraordinarily difficult
file for all the reasons I've stated. I ask, request
that as you explore this further tonight, That we all
take special care to focus discussion on the issues and
solutions in a way that is respectful of individuals experiencing
homelessness. And our professional staff, who are working very hard
in good faith. Chair, I'd like to do I go
to director Olson now? No, chair. Back to you. Yes.
We're going to the presentation next, I believe. Through the
chair. I thought the deputations were next, but we're going
to do the. Just one moment while we pull this
up. Thank you, chair.
Thank you, city manager Gail. And through the chair. Good
evening, council. We are grateful for the opportunity. To present
administration's recommendations on designated encampment sites in Thunder Bay. We
bring you this report under very short timelines, as we
were just before council at the end of April. This.
Year. In devising our recommendations, we considered three critically important
factors. We recognize the need to balance the human rights
of those living in encampments with broader community concerns. We
conducted an environmental scan of approaches from other Ontario municipalities.
We looked at their experiences and sought professional guidance to
inform our strategy. And in relation to municipal jurisdiction and
capacity. The city of Thunder Bay does not receive provincial
or federal funding directly aimed at addressing unsheltered homelessness. We
present you efforts which align with our jurisdiction and our
capacity. Please note that we bring you our best recommendations
tonight. In a landscape that is largely unknown, there are
no quick fixes and no single response will address everyone's
needs. Our recommendations were informed by the factors that I
just outlined, and they were not developed to include or
exclude any current encampment. I will now pass the presentation
over to analyst Willan. Thank you, Director Olson. What these
factors in mind, let's look high level at administration's. Recommendations.
The first recommendation is to adopt the distance guidelines, establishing
clear distance guidelines that balance public concerns and the needs
of encampment residents. Our second recommendation is identifying land for
a built structure. Pilot and also provide a letter of
support from the mayor on behalf of city council to
potential external funders. And our third recommendation is around advocacy,
urging the Government of Ontario to match federal contributions under
Canada's. Housing plan, increased social assistance rates and fund 24/7
crisis stabilization spaces there's. Also an additional advocacy piece to
the canadian government to establish a national encampment response. Plan,
which was a recommendation from the Office of the Federal
Housing Advocate. We'll now explore our first recommendation to adopt
distance guidelines. Permissible and sanctioned encampment sites are broadly defined
as areas on municipally owned land where encampments are allowed
as determined by a set of criteria. In adopting such
criteria, it also creates areas where encampments are not allowed.
The goal is to balance public concerns. With the needs
and rights of encampment residents. The guidelines rely on voluntary
compliance, which requires trust and cooperation between encampment residents and
the people who support them. Historically, nearly all residents that
have needed to be relocated have done so willingly with
support from an external partner. Additionally, we expect success with
compliance because we've. Received input and buy in from encampment
residents. Next, let's take a look at the proposed distance
guidelines. So these guidelines were adopted from other municipalities that
are taking a similar approach. Administration first used their professional
judgment to adopt the guidelines to be appropriate for our
community. Those guidelines were then reviewed collaboratively with individuals living
in encampments. And we also heard from those folks that
they want the guidelines and that they were generally well
received. Where appropriate, their feedback was incorporated into the guidelines.
For example, residents advised that the distance guideline relating to
private property, which was initially presented at 10 meters, should
be doubled to 20 to respect privacy, security and to
keep the peace. The amended guidelines were then reviewed with
the response to unsheltered homelessness task force and their feedback
was incorporated where appropria. Appropriate. For example, the distance from
highways was suggested to increase from 10 meters to 20
meters for safety reasons. Other notable aspects of the guidelines
include expert guidance to cap the amount of temporary structures.
At 25 structures or 30 individuals, which overcomes first identification
of area susceptible to erosion and flooding. Via the environmental
protection zone, and that structure should aim to be freestanding.
So I'll just quickly go over the guidelines. So encampments,
which are defined as locations where one or more people
live in an unsheltered area in temporary structures are not
to be located on or within 100 meters of a
playground, a school, or licensed daycare. A pool or a
splash pad on or within 50 meters of any lake,
beach or pond. A boat. Launch a multi use sports
field or golf course which is inclusive of hockey rinks
on or within 20 meters of any highway or private
property line on or within 10 meters of any public
transit stop or formal heritage property designation on or within
5 meters of any off leash dog area. Community garden,
cemetery, sidewalk or. Trail, fire route or blocking a fire
hydrant, a bridge or parking lot, an accessibility entrance or
ramp and an entrance, exit or doorway and not to
be located within the environmental protection zone and to be
assessed on a site by site basis. The recommendation is
that there'd be no more than five tenths per cluster
at one location. With 10 meters of separation, up to
a max of five clusters per site. So 25 temporary
structures also, please keep in mind that this infographic is
not a comprehensive summary of all of the distance guidelines
that are further outlined in the report. Sykes found to
be in violation of these guidelines would be subject to
health and safety reviews as determined by the task force.
Where such a review is required, the task force would
determine who should be involved. The professionals conducting the review
would use their professional opinion and a risk assessment tool
to examine the severity of risks. Those who do not
pose a serious health or safety risk would be subject
to the planned relocation prot. Protocol, which is attachment B
in the report. Whereas those who are determined to be
at serious risk. Of injury, illness or death would be
subject to the emergency relocation protocol. Also attachment B. And
this brings me to our next recommendation. Built structure sites.
Some communities have successfully introduced various models of built structures
for transitional sheltering. There is interest from external partners to
explore a pilot project at this site. The project has
received conceptual support from infrastructure development and operations and in
keeping in line with our municipal jurisdiction and capacity, the
city would work in partnership with. An external partner to
help them secure capital and operating funding. To assist administration.
Suggest council provide a letter of support to external funders.
An administration is committed to collaborating with partners to identify
or apply for appropriate funding sources. The city can support
this endeavor. By identifying a piece of municipality online for
this project. The proposed site at present is an underused
parking lot approved for closure by council earlier this year.
It's been identified as a good location for a few
reasons. Its proximity to essential services such as the DSAB
TBD. Shelter house pace and public transit. The pave law
is also suitable for quicksite preparation. It has convenient access
to water and sewage hookups, and the site does already
permit emergency shelter as an appropriate use of zoning, so
we believe this would align with the designation. I'd also
like to make note that due to time constraints, there
was no opportunity for any consultation to happen on this
site. And we'll now consider our last recommendation, which is
advocacy. Encampments are the result of systemic failures that require
policy reform and steep investments into a suite of upstream
midstream and downstream interventions for upstream. An example is as
the cost of living increases, social assistance rates have not
adequately increased alongside it. And while the Ontario government has
taken actions to improve this. There is a dire impressing
need to increase ODSP and Ow rates to prevent people
from becoming homeless and to support those in transitioning out
of homelessness. A midstream intervention. Is the matching. Sorry. Urging
the provincial government to match. The cost. To match the
commitment in Canada's housing plan for $250,000,000 through budget 2024
for communities that are responding to unsheltered homelessness from a
human rights perspective and an example of downstream is to
recognize that there is often an overlap between people experiencing
unsheltered homelessness and people with poor substance use health. We
are recommending that advocacy efforts be directed towards the. Government
Ontario government to fund low barrier crisis stabilization spaces for
people with mental health and or substance use related issues
that operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
To close. It's important to note that our recommendations are
not long term solutions. They are interim measures to best
respond so that our community, including businesses housed and unhoused,
residents have an effective response and support in our community.
Our recommendations are to implement the distance guidelines, identify land
for a pilot project featuring a built structure and provide
letters of support. For external partners and external funding opportunities
and to do advocacy with other orders of government. We
would like to leave you with this final consideration. While
the federal housing advocates office has recently released its final
report. The office's work has not stopped. They continue to
monitor and will likely provide further recommendations. Administration maintains ongoing
communication with the federal Housing advocate's office and have been
invited to. An update meeting in the coming weeks. We
must, and we are. And we must follow a human
rights based approach as a municipality with human rights obligations
to all citizens. Thank you, and we are happy to
answer any questions members of council may have. Thank you,
council. I was hoping we could go to the deputations
and come back. To administration once the report is on
the floor. Kind of wrap it all up into one
package rather than doing. Two essentially question periods. Okay, consensus.
Okay, so we'll go to deputation first. So. Thank you,
chair. We do have two requests for deputation. The first
was received on June the 20th, requesting an opportunity to
come forward this evening as Andre Ganier. Deputy Ganye is
in the gallery. We welcome him to come forward. Welcome.
You'll have ten minutes for a presentation over to questions.
Please pull it up. Okay.
Hello. My name is Andre Ganier, and I am a
resident here to urge you to refrain. From designating. Homeless
encampments. And to comment on the process as I've observed
it generally, as some of you may already know, I
strongly oppose allowing homeless individuals to monopolize our shared public
spaces. Historically, if you were homeless. You had to reside
where you were not bothering anyone. Nobody had special rights
to any of our shared public lands and service providers
adjusted to that reality. However, since our charter was upended
in 2019 to introduce a right to housing and with
the recent Hamilton provincial court decision, we find ourselves in
a legal limbo where enforcement parameters are poorly. Defined on
this frontier. There exists potential enforcement avenues that can be
explored in our city. For example, The Municipality of Kingston
is currently enforcing daytime bans on encampments within parks. There.
The bylaw officer writes the ticket and the police enforce
it. Kingston has committed to investigating. Human rights violations on
an individual basis. The ruling from the Hamilton decision clearly
prevents removing overnight in gamuts with insufficient shelter space available.
However, it is less clear why in Cambett's people. Why?
Encampment people? Should be allowed to use the park all
day. Why aren't we doing this? Many of you know
the answer. On April 24 of last year, in a
committee of the whole, you adopted a human rights based
approach that I argue many of you did not fully
understand the consequences of. At the time, strategic director Olsen
explained it best to. A response to Councilor Chung about
the implications of this approach. In her words, the human
rights based approach is, quote, to not err on the
side of enforcement. Again to not err on the side
of enforcement. In fact, the report. On the human rights
based approach explicitly prevents counsel or administration from even considering
enforcement approaches to this issue now. I've just told you
what Kingston is attempting. Your staff are forbidden by you.
Since last year from exploring that avenue because it includes
an enforcement approach. You are handcuffing your wrists to your
ankle and trying to do a backflip. What your administration
instead is doing is softly suggesting to encampment people at
the discretion of the task force to relocate. With inconsistent
success. You have poisoned the well of information that administration
can even present to you. What you can do, and
you should do is reconsider the vote you cast in
favor. Of this approach. I will help you. Because I
went back and watched the beating you all voted. For
it. Two thirds of you have to agree with a
motion to reconsider. Minutes to eliminate the approach. You don't
have to replace it with any new restrictions. You just
have to eliminate it. Then ask administration to consider approaches
to the issue, and they will if they are unbiased.
Present enforcement options, especially if directed crucially tonight before you.
Tonight. Before you next consider sending administration to do another
second of work, you need to unbind their hands. You
need to let them explore the breadth of a complicated
issue to which many communities are attempting different approaches. If
you choose not to do this, then. Whenever anyone in
the public asks you why you can't remove an encampment,
you need to tell them because you have forbidden yourself
and the corporation from considering enforcement options. Now look at
the report before you report. Two five two. 2024. There
are distance guidelines and. Yet because of last year's self
restriction, they are not enforceable. See page 68 in the
last paragraph. It lets you know in plain English. English.
It's ironic English that the quote. Distance guidelines are not
enforceable regulations. Now, these are to be administered by the
task force through gentle suggestions at the discretion of the
strategic director and her task force. I don't want discretionary
guidelines. I want robust policy that administration must follow and
that police will enforce within legal. Boundaries. Many of you
are under the misapprehension that if you had. A designated
encampment location, you would be able to allocate problem individuals
and other encampment people to that one area and provide
better services. This misunderstands the legal framework. We are actually
operating under. You cannot enforce any approach. And even if
you ignore your own removable. Self restriction. You cannot make
a homeless person stay in a designated encampment, so. You
would expand your liability and your costs for nothing. Director
and Olsen and I fundamentally disagree on our perspectives, our
respective preferred approaches. And to be clear, this is her
preferred approach. In the April 24 report from last year.
It mentioned the intention was to formalize what was already
happening under her guidance. That said, despite. Our fundamental disagreements
about servicing the homeless. We both agree that designated encampments
are a horrible idea. I am also concerned about the.
Ambitions of our director of strategic engagement to massively expand
staffing under her direct control, which started as a $250,000
in new homeless worker staffing for budget year 2025. Deceitfully
passed at the tail end of the 2024 budget process
as a 2020. Mr. Ganye, I'd rather you not suggest
that staff are doing things. For purposes that. Are not
honorable. Honorable? Is my perception. I know. I'd rather you
not err those perceptions publicly tell us. What you would
like us to do. Okay, I'll withdraw. My deceitful characterization
and apologize. But I will point out the 250,000 passed
introduced and let me restate it. What started as a
250,000. Yeah. I apologize to Director Wilson. I don't know.
It's a clumsy, I guess. Temperatures are high with this
topic, so I would just ask all to be respectful.
Actually, I've spoken to her about the issue. She's a
likable person and very knowledgeable. We appreciate your apology and
your acknowledgment. Yeah. So what started is $250,000. In new
homeless worker staffing for budget year 2025, which is passed
at the tail end. Of the 2024 budget process as
a 2025. Budget direction has now ballooned. I hope to
450,000 in the report in front of you shown on
page 72, paragraph two. Why I say I hope is
because I sincerely hope that this 450,000 is in fact
cumulative, with the amount suggested earlier this year and not
in addition to that amount. I am worried this significant
staffing expansion is duplicating services that are under the jurisdiction
of the DSAB. The state of purpose of this additional
staff is to manage the unenforceable guidelines it should be
that we have enforceable guidelines with the bylaw, officers handling
notices of violation of our minimum distance guidelines followed up
by police enforcement, if that is what you choose to
do and not homeless agents working under the director. Skip
that part. Yeah, making a permanent homeless bureaucracy that is
bridged to nowhere where that, I believe is a bridge
to nowhere. As proven by western canadian models of endless
homeless intervention to the. Perpetual inconvenience of residents with little
to no improvement. That I'm worried. We are in the
early stages of. In conclusion, we must redefine. Our approach
to managing homeless encampments by removing self imposed restrictions that
have led to inefficiencies and public confusion by reconsidering our
current human rights. Human rights based policy which inhibits actual
enforcement and. Establishing a task force to coordinate. With successful
models like Kingston, we can balance compassion with practical governance.
This new, more balanced task force, with streamlined efforts, reduced
redundancies, and ensure both the community safety and respectful treatment
of the homeless. Let us empower our administration to act
decisively, creating a sustainable solutions that benefit our residents. Thank
you for considering my perspective. And thank you for coming
forward tonight. We appreciate your input. Questions to the deputy.
Yes, mayor Bolshekov. In your review. Have you come across?
Workable solutions. Because, as you know, The whole world essentially
is trying to deal with this issue at this point.
So when you put it to North America. Canada, ontario,
zunder bay. It's part of a problem. With addictions and
other issues. So I'm interested. You seem to know about
some other communities where they have had. Some attempts at
finding solutions. But. I've seen some of those cities where
they're supposed to be. And they're not. I guess I
would say. I would just refer. To early on because.
I guess. Two part answer. The Hamilton decision prevents. Overnight
encampments. Overnight encampments. From being evicted or removed. But less
clear is during the day. Right. So that's one approach
that Kingston is actively trying. And they have some municipal
legal advice that is headed by expert municipal lawyers. I
mean, they have a lot more funds down there. And
to your second point. If you look at the west
coast, it's a nightmare. Like, if you look at, like,
I mean, I don't want to bring up the states,
but Los Angeles is just like. A post apocalyptic nightmare.
There's drug use everywhere. All across the streets but western
Canada, British Columbia. There's these industries of servicing the homeless.
I don't think homeless experts exist because you can't find
a homeless expert that's ever actually solved the problem. It
just. Creates a bureaucracy. That just. It feeds on itself
and it just never goes away. And then the final
component to my answer is that. Obviously, addiction is a
horrible thing. It absorbs, like it eradicates your personality or
your connections. It codomates your life. You're just oblivious and
wasting away, but. I don't want to sustain. That behavior.
Or lifestyle longer. And if you make it more comfortable
to do drugs and you make it more easier with
all your services provided. I worry that rock bottom you
don't hit it for. Much longer, and people are stuck
in that cycle for much longer. But that's what I'll
say to that. Yes. And while you may not have
intended this, not all homeless are drug addicted. But. A
lot of stereotypes are going to come out tonight and.
We're trying to ask people to be respectful. Of people
in this predicament as they discuss what they would like
us to do in terms of policy. Can I just
say one thing to that? No, I'm just making a
statement too. You said about me that I had said
is only. No, it is something that was said that
I'm just reminding everyone in the gallery. I don't want
to debate that point. Councilor Chung. Thank you. Chair. Chair.
I heard the deputy say? He does not want encampments.
No permissible sites. Our shelters are full. He wants us
to use police enforcement to arrest ourselves out of the
situation. My question through you, chair to the deputy. Is.
If we remove these people and have police enforcement like
you suggest, where do they go? Okay. Just to characterize
my argument. I'm not saying nothing should be done. I'm
saying the extent of responsibility for the city. Is whether
our shared land should be used for makeshift encampments. I
think this falls under the DSAB and the provincial government
to service the many reasons people are homeless. We know
that there's mental health concerns where they struggle and they
can't really hold down. A different lifestyle or drug use.
Or. Just hard. Luck circumstance, but I think for the
city. To take on this mission. As to your question,
where they should go. Where did they go, historically? Where?
They weren't bothering anyone, basically, and it makes it harder
for the service providers, but there are. I think residents
concerns are more important. I mean, I was just at
Cam River park. It's a nightmare yesterday. There's garbage everywhere,
and they're tapping into the power. Free power. I mean,
if you guys approve that, that's fine, but I don't.
Think you guys approved them to use free power. Unless
you did, and I don't know about it. But, yeah,
I just think. I don't want to see a bloated,
homeless bureaucracy that doesn't actually solve anything, and I'd like
to see, like, actual, measurable goals instead of just bottomless.
Allocation of money because you could spend endless amounts of
money to not solve anything. Sorry, chair. I just want
to ask a follow up question. I just want to
ascertain where you're coming from with this. I think I
heard you say this, and correct me if I'm wrong.
That the people who interact with homeless people. Their rights
are more important than the homeless people's housing rights. Is
that what I just heard you say? No. Well. I
think this full extent of the housing rights isn't clear
like we know that from. The Hamilton decision, where we
don't even know what enforcement measures we can use. And
you look at Kingston, they're trying daytime bans of parks,
shared public spaces. I don't know. The full consequences of.
How the federally decided. Like housing rights. So I don't
know, maybe. I'm completely wrong. And everything goes a different
way. I believe in a liberal democracy, so I'm just
voicing how I see things, right? Now. Yeah, sorry, chair.
I don't really understand what the ask is, so I
don't. Have any more questions. Thank you. We will go
to Councilor Dirtuga next. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you
for coming. For Mr. Ganye. I certainly agree with you.
That. I believe. We should revisit the human rights approach
and consider a compassionate approach. Now, I did try to
bring that forward, just so you know, but back in
January, but because. I wasn't present for that vote. I
was told I couldn't bring it back. For reconsideration. I
have tried to do that, and I mentioned other counselors
that if that's where they want to change. That's what
they should do. But until we do that, do you?
Have any suggestions on where we could go, though? Some
solid suggestions from where we can go other than. If
we can't get that reversed. You can go. With the
human rights based approach. You just can't use enforcement. I
mean, the guidelines for the distances between that you're. Looking
at tonight. Those aren't enforceable. It's just. Your task. Maybe
you can make the task force more balanced. That's one
thing, because. There's, like, the Lakead Conservatory board membership and,
I mean, There should be some kind of. Resident representation
on the task force to at least bring the resident
perspective to the team that's. Solving this problem under the
current framework. But barring. And that's what I was asking
for, was. A removal of the framework, the rum and
rights based approach, which limits what you can actually do.
About the problem. Just to clarify from the last questioner,
Okay. So just my final question then. If we continue
on this path and approve the recommendations tonight, As. Recommended
by administration. Do you see anything really substantially changing at
all as far as the accountants in Thunder Bay. What
are the deliverables of this approach? It's common thing across
a lot of social issues the city chooses to fund,
which. Are very well. Founded. Reasons. That. Are very relatable
to a lot of people, but we're not quantifying success.
We have no idea what success even looks like. We're
talking about these clusters. We're going to put clusters, people
together. I don't know. I just think you're going to
spend a lot of money. You're going to have to
spend 450,000 on staffing, I guess. To not. Enforce. The
guidelines. And then it's just going to be expensive. You're
going to keep spending money. And then. You're going to.
If there's any results, tell me. I would love to
just. Know what? The success looks like. But I don't
know what it even looks like. It's not defined. That's
how I see it, I guess. If I read between
the lines you're suggesting you don't see really any real.
Substantial changes. Correct. In the current framework. You can't even
hear the full suite of information from your administration. You're
going to give them an advice. They can't come back
to you with enforcement approaches, so. You're going to get
the housing advocate. When you guys took on the housing
advocate approach, from the federal body that was created, like,
5 seconds ago. Who's never solved homelessness anywhere. And you
took on that guideline. They knew. Exactly. What they were
setting you up to do. They put you on some
rails and you're. Just on the journey. Now you're going
down one. Singular approach that you can't ever touch. That
I don't think you knew you. Were accepting at the
time. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you for
coming forward. Thank you. Councilor aguwal. Thank you very much.
And thank you, Mr. Ganye, for being here again today.
He always bring another perspective to coun? Counsel and bring
a lot of good thought. In your presentation. You bring
up? The unhoused. We all are very concerned. We all
want housing. Is there another approach, other than enforcement. Let's
put a forcement aside. Because. That may not be. The
enforcement is not always the solution. Is there another approach
that you can see and feel that might work. Well,
one, actually. That's a good question. One cost effective approach
that I see, and this. Is stepping outside of what
I consider the city's responsibility. But if you want to
take it on. One thing is, you see a lot
of despair. In encantment residence and a lot of the
philosophical ingredients that make up their character. Are not as
complete as what we've experienced in our lives. I'll say
that's. Polite way of phrasing it, and this is pretty
cost effective. But if you just connect them with people
who understand their struggle and can introduce them to alternative
ways of thinking. I think that would really broaden their
horizons in a cost effective way, because you just have
to find the people that have experienced it and connect
them as a mentorship or something. And. You can give
them, I don't know, some kind of hope or some
kind of. Something, just something different. I'm not religious. Even
religions, like religions work for free. Is it really that
much worse? And I'm not religious, like I said, but
in religions. There's a lot of that moral character strewed
along the myths. So is it? Really that bad of
someone I don't know donates to a church? If they
are able to donate to a church. You know what
I mean? They've found this new meaning in their life
that's separate from the despair of just like wasting away
on drug use. And. I think that's something you could
do under this approach. I realize you got a similar
answer to Councilor Gertrude. Just maybe the way you asked
it, I don't know. Or. Maybe I just thought of
it, I don't know. Mr. Ganye, we know that homelessness
and unhoused are for various factors. One is cost of
housing or lack of affordable housing. Another is mental illness.
And another might be addictions. Some are all combined and
some are individual. So would it not be more appropriate
than to look at it in a broader perspective rather
than a blanket perspective. I agree. But then that's why
I'm coming at this. From? What's the city's responsibility? Should
they be at the full holistic approach, or are they
just looking at the issue of the shared public lands
and the consequences to residents. The provincial government are trying
to solve those elements. That you're referring to, and there's
a lot of programs and a lot of efforts to
do that. What I just don't want to see is
us try to do that have no results and have
a bloated bureaucracy. And then we won't be any further
ahead. Residents will be angry and the homeless won't. Be.
Like they won't be serviced in a way that I
don't know, but I could be wrong. What do I
know? That's just what I think. Okay. Through the chair.
My last question through you. Chari is. You brought up
the different orders of government and having. Them have. Take
some responsibility. And are you aware that. Councilor, have you
not expended your three questions? This is. My third. This
is your third. Thank you. Are you aware that the
provincial government. Has increased their funding by $90 million. To
our area and also $16 million to DSAP for their
housing. So an increase of a total of $106,000,000 just
to Thunder Bay and area to help. For this situation.
Yes. Good news. Thank you. Seeing no further questions. Thank
you for coming forward. We appreciate it. Council, did you
want to go to questions of administration on these specific
items? Because the next deputy is a little bit different.
I think they're more focused on a lot. What's your
preference? Do you want to wait? It is. Unlimited rounds
with the report. So we'll ask questions of the deputations
during that time. So we'll go to the next deputation.
Thank you, chair. So we receive correspondence from Aldo Roberto
Fort. William Business District improvement area, dated June 21. Requesting
an opportunity to come before this evening. Thank. You. It's
a pleasure to be here. Mr. Mayor, councilor's administration. Norm,
congratulations. Your retirement, that's for sure. I'm here tonight. As
the intern chair of the BIA. We're trying to get
someone else in there. So I'm just there to help
them and pass it on to somebody else. I hope
tonight when I'm speaking. I don't want to be disrespectful
to anybody. I'm just trying to tell the truth and
just mention facts. That's it. So. However the facts come
out. That's the way it is, and I'm doing it.
From the BIA perspective. Okay. We would ask you not
to identify. Individuals or individual. Encampments? No. We can speak
to a high level. Absolutely. And if you see me
hearing, of course, please. Rein me in because I do
get emotional when I'm speaking about these things. Are there
enough of us to do that? Could use a few
more. So I'm going to start out about how I
found out about this report. Normally, Thursday. The media gets
the information, gets all the reports. Lets the public know
what's going on, et cetera, et cetera. I got a
phone call. About 930. 10:00 on Saturday night. Had plants
do something Sunday. So when I get to spoke up,
the gentleman's back there. Actually, he bought a building. Right
across the street from this location. You're thinking of. Okay.
He just bought it. He had no idea. That it
was going to become an encampment. The gentleman that's adjacent
to that building. Is from out of town. He just
bought that old audience theater or storage place. Right now
he was going to spend up to a million dollars
in renovations and he wanted to buy the parking. Lot,
but was told it's not available. He wants to buy
the parking lot so he could do demonstrations, et cetera.
Now. I haven't even met the gentleman. I don't know
if he's. In town. Out of town. He doesn't even
know what's going on, so I'm. Going to just jump
around a lot, because even today I didn't get a
chance to go to my computer till today to start
writing things down, and this is such a complex issue
that I'm just going to go eclectic jumping from one.
To another. To another. So just try to follow me,
okay? So I want to mention those businesses because that's
so important, because we're trying. To revitalize the area. The
BIA is spending $120,000 or more of a reserve to
enhance the area. This year alone, we've hired our own
security. We've hired junk await to clean up the area.
We've ordered, like, tons of banners, new banners, et cetera,
to make things exciting. We've ordered twice as much flowers
for the area, and we're getting more pots. Potholders, et
cetera. We're getting more garbage cans. We're. Trying to get
the area revitalized. And we have a big event coming
in September. Guess where it starts. The corner of Simpson
and Victoria. The exact corner where. Your supposed encampments going
to be, and the gentleman that bought that building was
going to. Do. Like a museum. Pieces outside of motorcycles,
et cetera, bikes, et cetera. Anyway, I'll leave that part
there for information for you, okay? And when they said
about consultation. In the report, it's mentioned that they consulted.
The people that are affected, the homeless people. They consulted
this task force, which has no business on it and
no homeowner that lives. In this area. They did not
consult. Any homeowner in the downtown area. If you look
out the window, there's three. Big apartment buildings that has
a ton of seniors in there. There's tons of businesses
downtown. Not. One was contacted. And as chair of the
BIA, I wasn't contacted. Nobody. Okay, now. I was told
that there was no time for consultation. This morning we
had a letter printed up. By our coordinator. She went
around to every business in the area, handed in the
area. They're. Starting to freak out. You'll probably get a
lot of phone calls and messages. Angry people because. This
is their investment and. They. Respect to be approached and
say, hey, what do you think? Now, when we do
consultations, correct? Me if I'm wrong, because I've been here
16 years as a counselor. We should talk to everybody
that's impacted. Everybody's impacted, not just one group. Because you
want to get a broad sense of what's going on
and. Thank you, Manager Norm. For saying you base your
decisions on information. But from what I'm reading, the report,
you're getting limited information, and it's. Not to be disrespectful
to anybody in administration, but you're not getting all the
information. That's why it's hard for you to make a
decision sometimes. And I don't say it happens all the
time, but it does happen because there's so much information
on this that was not in the report. If I
asked you. Was it cost for those? Houses, those little
houses they want to set up. Nobody knows, but I'll
tell you because. I looked it up. And don't be
fooled. They say this is a pilot project. You know
and I know pilot projects will be there forever. Once
you're there, you're. There forever, and this will affect the
rest of the city. Because this is only going to
take care of 25 to 30 people. What about the
other people? That are out there, where are they going
to go? They're still going to have encampments they're still
going to have tents. They're still going to be wherever.
The solution tonight or the direction tonight? From what I
listened to the last council meeting. Council Pascalino. Councilor Benz.
A few others were talking about. Hey, when you come
back with a report. There should be a report with
a location where we could put just about everybody there
with security. A cleaning company. All the services there, that
minimal impact on the rest of the people. That was
the direction I didn't see a direction saying permanent site
with buildings, et cetera. And in the downtown areas. Okay,
so I'm going to jump around. So follow me. This
is going to be. Fun. We have. 29 empty spaces
in the BIA right now, business basis that can be
rented. 29. And about a five, six block radius. Do
you know much taxes that would bring in if it
was rented? You know what the values of those properties
would be if they were all fully rented, the values
would go up. There's also around that area on Simpson.
In those areas, there's 22 empty spaces. For a total
of about 51 empty spaces. Now, we have an encampment
there. Let's. Bring more people downtown. That's really going to
help. Those empty spaces that's going to attract new businesses.
It's not going to happen. So my questions are, and
I'm going to ask you to defer this report. My
questions will be, and I'll start asking the questions. Tell
me how this encampment is going to enhance the area.
Tell me how it's. Going to bring new business. Tell
me how it's going to make it more comfortable for
people shopping, working and especially. Living in the area. Those
people. Are going now. And there's also people in that
district housing there, seniors that are scared. To go out
at night. How's this going to help them? And I'm
not? Trying to be disrespectful, but I know that encampments,
when you have encampments that are mentioned in the report
itself. There was violence, there was fights there. Was murders.
Everything goes on in there because there's no rules, there's
no security. None. Okay. I called Peterborough and I talked
to the mayor, the mayor's assistant, Jeremy, to. Get information
about. These so called. Pallet facilities. It's located. 1.2 km
away from the downtown. 1.2 that wasn't mentioned in the
report. I didn't see that anywhere. The cabins cost 2.4
million. For 50 people. 2.4 million. Operating costs were 1.9
million a year. 1.9 million. The province gave them 2.5.
Which leaves about 1.8 million. Dollars in operating for the
city to take on. 1.8 million. So when you get
information, you should have got this information too. I have
to phone Peterborough, get to hold the person. I tried
to phone a few other cities that are dealing with
this. I already talked to people in the past because.
I was on the poverty reduction committee and on district
social services, so I've had a lot of conversations. Two
minutes. How many? Two minutes. Pardon me. Okay, I'm going
to try to be as fast I possibly can. DSAP.
I want to talk about DsAP just a little bit,
and it's already. Been mentioned. I won't go over too
much, but I want someone to ask me after. To
expand on that question. Dsap has been doing this job
for years. They created about 170 something spaces in the
last five years. 140 are occupied, 30 more are being
built. There is a transitional housing coming up by the
indigenous. Society closer to the boys and girls Club, which
will have about, I think it's 51. More spaces, and
there's other organizations out there that are looking to provide.
Housing for these individuals. Why are you taking on that
responsibility when you don't have to? That's a question I
don't understand. Okay, finally I'll say that the drug strategy.
Belongs at the health unit. We're dealing with mental illness
and we're dealing with addiction. That's not. The cities. As
manager McGill pointed out, that's not the city's responsibility. Those
are. Health issues. Why are we dealing with it? And
as you said, our administration is, Mr. Alberto, we're not
discussing the health strategy. Okay. Sorry. I was just throwing
that in there. Okay. And when you look at other
countries, other cities in Europe, there's no encampments. Downtown. In
the downtowns in Europe, they're located further out. Halifax is
in a strategy right now, where they're moving their encampment
or people who are in the downtown areas out because
it's affecting their tourism, their business, et cetera. I'll wrap
it up there. I am requ? Requesting that. Council deferred
this issue. Until the businesses, the homeowners and the rest
of the city, the chamber included, get a chance to
read the report and respond to report. Thank you for
that. And if there's any questions, happy to answer. And
just on that. Ratification is on the 15 July? Yes.
Okay. So there is time for members wishing or citizens
wishing. To. And could you mention the process of people
at home could listen to this. The process will. Be
that tonight we're at committee and we make a decision
at the committee level. And that committee decision goes up
to city council on the 15 July. And it can
be redef or revoted or there's all sorts of things
that can occur. So it's a two stage process. The
committee and then city council. Okay. And can someone. Ask
me a question about distances when you get a chance.
Sorry. We have questions for you. We have Councilor Gurtuga.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you to Mr. Roberto. Thank
you for coming forward. I appreciate it. You talked a
little bit about DCEp. Can you just expound a little
bit about what DSAB's? Role is. With homelessness. Thank you
for asking. You have the chair of dsap over there?
I asked councilor Hamilton to look up some information for
me, but I never received it, so. I asked the
chair myself. I reached out and here's what I asked
them. I said, When all the shelters are full. What
does Dsap do? What do they do? Mr. Roberto, I
think we have the chair of dsab here. Yeah. So
any matters pertaining to DSAB, I think we will defer
to that. Yeah, but I don't know if I've got
the answer. From the CEO of DSAP. I think it's
important that I read it to you. Because it contains
information that think it's pertinent to this discussion. So he's
asked me the question. I think I have the right
to respond. And you could defer. To the chair after
and say, hey. That'd be great if you have an
answer from the d shop. Yes, I do. Yes. Then
go ahead. So when emerging shelters are full. Dsap will
pay for hotels. It is also to note that some
organizations that provide outreach services have also been paying for
hotel stays using their funding for those people do not
wish to stay at a shelter, I. E. Couples. Due
to human rights. It is my understanding that they have
received funding under the federal research. Researching home program. Now,
I don't know if you knew that or not, but
there it is. Here's the other part. Capacity, right. In
the last few years, we have 173 transitional supported housing
units funded by DSAP. In the last five years, 130
an hour in operations. 41 more expected emergency shelter capacity
in Thunder Bay has also increased this past winter. And
more supported houses is in place. So this app is
doing a great job. Okay, they've got people at Shelter
House. They got people in outreach programs going to the
tents, talking to the individuals, trying to get them into
housing. Let them do their job. Let them partner with
organizations. Let them build these facilities, save the city millions
of dollars. Why are we getting involved? We could support
them. We can lobby for them. We could do everything.
For them, but we shouldn't be doing their job. And
they have been doing a good job in the last
couple of years. I know that because I know that
at least 252 people have been placed. And I know
that our count for homelessness went from Ford. 75 about
five, six years ago, to 225 now. And according to
DSAP, in the last ten days, dated account of the
tents that are out there. There's 70. Ten. And not
one person in a tent. There might be two or
three, but they said there's. 70 tents out there. Unfortunately,
some have been sold in the last little while, and
I can't say what's happened in the last ten days.
And more tents have come on. Board. I don't know
if you got that information, but that's important information to
know. Okay, I'll wait for next question. Sorry. Thank you.
Councilor Gretuki, you still have the floor. Yeah. Thank you
very much for that answer. With this new proposal tonight.
Do you see? I guess. Any change? To be any
impactful change. For people on the McVicker area, for other
areas of city. I guess. Ask the last. Dedication of
the same question. Do you see any change with this
coming forward? Yes, I do. Right. Now. There's 33 social
agencies, at least in the downtown Fort William area. 33.
We, as a city are doing amazing work trying to
help people. Okay. On this side of the city, the
downtown. Have a tent city already. We have encampment, and
we're doing all we can. To assimilate it, work with
it. Now you want to throw more people on? You
want to throw more and more people. And permanent places.
You want to make them permanent? I don't understand that.
Because you could locate them in other areas. And I'll
give you an example. The bus. Station on Fort William
Road that's fenced in. They fix the buses, et cetera.
That doesn't affect very many people because it's, fenced in.
It's on Fort William Road. You got people working there.
It's? Close to down. As close to the city, as
close to the part. You're right. There by the bus.
So there are other locations. Why were they not brought
forward? Why didn't we partner with the conservatory area or
some other area? Why are we only getting. Two choices,
and we don't even know what the second choice was
that they refused. I still don't know where it is.
It wasn't mentioned. So those are the things. Mr. Roberto,
the question was, do you think this is going to
aid absolutely. Has been affected downtown? To answer, no. My
question was, do you think that if we go with
administration's recommendations tonight. That there are any positive change will
come forward as far as the housing and accountment issues
in the thunder bay. Long term, I think this is
going to destroy our city, not make it better. Any
encampment. Any. If you look at any city with encampments
in core areas, you destroyed the core. Area and they're
doing everything they can to reverse their decisions. What we
should be looking for is supporting shelter house. Supporting grace
place supporting. Salvation army, supporting the services that are already
there. Give them more money. Let them do their job.
They've been doing it up to this point. You've answered
the question. I answered the question. Sorry. I just want
that little more because. I think it's pertinent. Sorry. Thank
you, Mr. Chair. And my final question. I plan to
put forward a referral tonight. Because we've only had this
report since Friday, and, of course, there's been absolutely no
consultation with the community, the business sector. You're coming from
the BIA. I know. It's been suggested it'll be ratified
on the 15th, which is less. Than three weeks away.
That doesn't give it ample time for any consultation, and
I don't see any change coming forward. With. These recommendations
tonight, so. You're comfortable with the referral at this point?
For consultation, I guess, is my question. Absolutely. Would you
prefer. Yeah. Okay. I thought I heard you mention that.
Okay. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. For doing. I heard you
mention. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, councilor. Agarwal. Thank you very much. I'd like
to also mention that I sit on the Fort William.
BIA. And when we found out about the report. The
immediate reaction. Was quite chaotic. I'm going to ask you.
As our chair. Interim chair. Interim chair of the BIA.
How much progress have you seen? And what has been
the feeling amongst business owners within the last six months
in the BIA. Wow. Good question. Excellent question. I'm going
to tell you. There's renewed hope. There's renewed hope. People
feel more optimistic as. I said, two buildings just got
sold to young man back there who's eager, and then.
Obviously another person from town does. So people are starting
to move in, new ideas are coming, and they're looking
to say to us as a BIA, hey. What are
you doing for us? And we've done things because actions
speak louder than words. So we've got events, we got
security, our own security you have to go pay for.
Security. I got to say one thing while I'm here.
We had a good meeting with the police chief. Excellent
meeting. Very responsive. He's a fantastic chief. And then we
had a meeting. With our officers that walked the beat
around super people. We're very happy to have them. And
we just thanked them so much for what they're doing.
So their presence has really helped our area. Our events,
our flowers. The cleansingness of the area is utmost important.
So before people come, do their drugs, throw things around
or empty garbage cans or start graffiti, et cetera. These
type of things have been happening. Now we've got a
program to start cleaning that up. We actually applied for
a spray to get rid of the graffiti. Now, so
we don't know. Where that is. Hopefully you will get
the money to do it and keep cleaning up the
point. Is. You because you pay half. The citizens and
the businesses who pay their half are putting money in.
To fix the place up, make it better for everyone.
Everyone is the key. Not for this person. Not for
that person. For everyone. And as a counselor, there's one
question I always ask. Myself, does it? Benefit all or
one group or one person? Does it benefit all? Anyway,
I hope I answered your question. Thank you. Now, the
BIA. Border only goes to Main street. To the west
side of Bay street? Yes. We are reaching beyond Main
street as a BIA. These two businesses, one that was
purchased just recently by the gentleman behind us. And the
other business? Which is an individual, local individual. Local physician,
actually. Investing. He wanted to invest over a million dollars
to revitalize that building he had closed. On June the
19th. His realtor, which is not me. Approached the city
to buy the adjacent lot. The adjacent lot. Was to
be used. To. Don't just do motorcycle demonstrations. He's making
a motorcycle museum. Out of his own. I don't want
to beleague the point, but. We still have the motion
to put on the floor and lots of discussion yet.
We've asked to get to question. Thank you. Thank you.
So being that they have reached out to the BIA.
Our bordering neighborhood. Is it because. They can see the
difference in our own BIA, which is right, actually. If
we look out the front door here. The opposite side
of Donald street is the BIA. You don't find garbage
right on our doorstep any longer. Are the neighbors reaching
out now because they see a difference? Yes, and thank
you for that. We are getting more and more people
outside our boundary asking us how they can join, because
there are so many benefits to joining. You get a
garbage kind in front of you, you get flower. Pots,
you might get a bench. You got security, you got
lighting programs, you got camera programs. The BIA is offering
$250 to anybody that wants to put a camera up
or a light. Up for security, for safety, et cetera.
So these type of initiatives that we're trying to put
in are there to benefit all. So, yes, more and
more people. And we are going to do a program.
When we finish what we're doing, we're going to reach.
Out to more businesses to come and join our BIA.
Now, my last question, thank you. Through the chair is,
are we not? Under the adage of basically, you're looking
at the model of show and tell. Let's show everybody
what we can do to grow and build. Business, hope,
prosperity and growth in that neighborhood. Absolutely. I won't add
to that because you said it all. That's perfect. Yes,
thank you. Thank you. Mayor Boshkov. As you have gone
through. So much organizing and pulling people together. It's been
quite commendable. As not a ray of sunshine, more like
a spark plug. 24 watt. Cases, spark plugs. Are you
optimistic? Do you see hope? You talk to other communities,
business areas that can tell you success stories that actually
workable first of all I want to say. It's not
just one person. It's a board and it's people that
volunteer. And no one person could take credit for that.
We have fantastic people on the board. We got a
great coordinator, and we've pulled together. And one of the
things I've learned is when you go do a strategic
plan. You do all action items. You don't do theory,
you don't care about. You do all action items in.
The first week, I asked if I could do a
strategic plan with the board, and they said, okay. What
do you want to do? And then we put all
our stuff we want to do. Optimism. Is getting there.
We, as a board, have to show them first. And
that's why we're cleaning up, putting the flowers, getting the
security, getting laid. Once we do that. Then we start
reaching out from our border and start saying, hey, come
on in. Come on in. And you know what? There's
only one thing that drives. Areas. That are don trodden
when I was in Yorkville, when I went to Greenwich
Village. Those two areas were the worst areas in Toronto
and New York, that because the prices came down so
low because the opportunities were there. That's when you got
investment, and that's what's happening now? We are getting a
lot of people from out of town come. In and
look at the Thunder bay saying, hey, I could buy
a building here for this much. Money and I can
fix it up and I could do things, but we
have to support these. People. We have to encourage them.
We have to say to them, yeah, we'll help you.
So, yes, optimism is there. But we need your help.
We need the help of council to support. Us and
to back us up. When these things happen. Well, I'll
just say you are appreciated for your energy. Thank you.
And I'm trying to get you to be more enthusiastic.
You really must speak up. We can barely hear you.
Listen, I was resting at home on Saturday. Night. I
didn't want to be here tonight. Trust me. Councilor Trini.
Thank you. And thank you for your deputation tonight. You
indicated that you researched the pallet homes and the pallet
village? I did as well. Okay, but I. Don't think
the public has. And I'd really like you to explain
the palate. Homepiece. This is important. Talking about, for example,
the fencing, the security. What it looks like those pieces,
because it's not the encampment that we see today, and
I really want people to really visualize what that would
look like. Thank you. That's a great question. And I
was surprised that tonight. There wasn't some pictures for you
to see. I said to myself, there should been pictures,
so people, I got the pictures here. Okay. Yeah, it
looks pretty nice right now. They've had challenges. When I
talked to the mayor's assistant, they said they had challenges
in the beginning, and they're trying to fight their way
through it. You know what? I'm trying to say. They're
trying to fight their way through it to get on
the right track. It's a lot better than a tent.
I'll agree 100%. But again, if you're going to create
a village, that's what you want to. Do? Create a
village. I spoke to the head of the tiny homes,
the president of tiny homes. Canada. He was on my
committee. My tiny home committee. When we were a property
reduction, he wanted to build 220. Units. Outside the city,
its own village with common kitchen, common showers, everything. Their
consultants, nurses, all the programming outside the city. And I
thought at the time I said, why? Do you want
to go outside the city? And he said, Because you
get the people in a place where they don't have
the distractions. They don't have their triggers. When they walk
down the street, there's a trigger that person. I used
to buy my drugs there or I get intimidated, et
cetera. The point is, when you build something like this,
it has to be in an area that is unobtrusive.
And does not impact home. Homeowners. Who are there 24/7
or businesses you're working for the community. You're going to
try to help the homeless. We're all trying to do
that. So that's the approach I think you should take.
There's nothing wrong with this. As an intermediate step, but
the long term goal is to get them where they're
supposed. To go, and I think DSAP is going to
do that. You don't have to. Go here. You don't
have to spend $1.8 million in operating a year. Or
2.5 to set it up. Thank you for that. I
appreciate that answer. In the report, it actually indicates that
council in the city would not be actually funding it,
that it would provide a letter of support for potential
funders so it wouldn't be taking on the onus and
responsibility. Basically, it's providing the land for it to go
on, and it's a pilot. Project, so I don't believe
the numbers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think
it was like. 23 for a pilot project. I don't
think it was the numbers that you are 22,000. Units.
Units. Okay, so it'll be less than 4.2 million. You'd
be about probably two point something million total costs, operating
and buying it. Now, your question was? If not the
city, providing that it would be the partner. Some partner.
Partner. Yes. Okay, so there's nothing wrong with partnerships, and
there's a ton of partnerships right now in the city.
That's great. But. Why is the partner and the city
get together, find a piece of land and say, here,
this. Is a better piece of land. Because. It's got
its own area. It's not intrusive to anybody else. It's
not impacting businesses, it's not impacting homeowners. But then someone's
going to say. Wait a minute. What about our services?
You know what they do, right? Now they got outreach
workers that go to the tents that will bring them
their food, water. They got health workers that go there
all the time. What's wrong with having a place that's
nice? Place, getting the people to commute. Provide free busing
if you want. Can you free busing? It's not a
big deal. Let's make everybody happy. Not just one group.
Thank you. And thank you for that answer as well.
I will be supporting the referral because I don't believe
there was enough consultation to the site itself, but recognizing
that this palette home piece is nice to look at,
and the actual program itself is wholesome, with security, lighting,
fencing and those pieces. So I do recognize that. And
you mentioned as well, not. Requiring. Its separate sewer services
doesn't require sewer hookup or water hookup because. They're separate
entities in that pallet village program. I still have one
more question. Chair? Yes, please. If you can ask the
question, I will. So you indicated about supporting our community
partners. We do have a community partner that does not
operate. Year round, and I think that would help alleviate
if we supported that. That group. As we all know,
we can't paint a brush to everyone that's encampment. The
same brush. And do you see the reason why we
don't provide hotels for those who don't? Fit within. Those
support services that exist now, the community partners that exist
now, and why we're not providing hotels for those people
in the summer? Well, my answer to that would be
I was going to say the winter, right? You didn't
have an issue in the wintertime. Everybody found a place.
And one of the organizations that was the first one
to lobby and say, hey, we need to get these
tents up because. It's dignified, it's human rights, et cetera.
When winter came, said to the city. You guys got
to help us, because now we got winter coming. He's
going. To be run into problems. I won't mention the
organization, but the point is, organizations come. And go. It's
always going to fall in the city of responsibility when
they can't. Get funding, because what these organizations do, they
get their funding from the government governments change fund. Funding
changes, as you all know. So am I going to
rely on an organization, or am I. Going to rely
on the city. It's going to fall on your back.
And the point is, you don't have to do anything.
DSAP is doing it. Thank you for that. Thank you
for the questions. Okay. That exhausts our speakers list. Thank
you. For coming. Thank you for having me. And I
apologize to anyone if I've offended anyone. I didn't mean
to do that, but I hope I got the point
across. Thank you. Okay. Good night. You as well. So
I think it's time to put the motion on the
floor. So chair. We do need to move her in
a seconder, please. Move by councilor Johnson. Seconded by councilor.
Yes. Now you can ask about anything you'd like. Presentations,
deputations, report. Councilor trainee will second. I do now, Councilor
Chung. Councilor Gratuka is next. Okay, I've got the floor
right now. You do? Thank you. I did have a
number of conversations. With community members. I did ask them
to submit their questions to me. So a number of
these questions do come. From a number of the community
members, including those in my neighborhood, which. Has about, there's
at least three encampments within, say, a block block and
a half radius of where we live. So the first
question. What happened with the plan that the city would
propose, the three year pilot project that would choose. The
24 to 48 people in the pallet houses. The commentary
in the community is that the partners are taken aback.
That they see their like it's going to be on
them when. They thought, I think in their mind, that
it was to be the city. So maybe if you
could shed some light on that. Through the chair. We
have been in discussion with community partners who have expressed
interest in us. The city not operating and an external
partner operating. The recommendations before you tonight are not for
the city to fund it, but. We are within our
municipal jurisdiction and capacity recommending identifying a piece of property.
That could be adequately used. We know that the property
in question. Appears to have appropriate zoning. That this type
of use could fit. And that we would support with
letters of support on behalf of the mayor. From the
mayor on behalf of city council for us to be
better positioned to secure. External funding. This wouldn't be. For
a community partner to fund on their own, but we
would be there to support. Application writing, letter writing. Proposal
development and coming together in partnership. Thank you. My next
question. Can you tell me how you came to the
20 meters? Property lines? Other municipalities, such as London. Have
a much higher density than we do and have 100
meters. Through the chair. The examples that we did look
at were municipalities that had much more public facing documentation
about their distance guidelines. We not only looked at municipalities
in Ontario, but there have been some counselors that have
referred us to the work that's occurring in BC, for
example, in Victoria. Their distance in Victoria is 4 meters
from a private property. The other communities that we looked
at in Ontario are in the range of five to
10 meters. And so we went with the. High range
of 10 meters, based on what we had seen. And
we did bring that out to folks. Who would be
most impacted as far as being required to move if
these were to be adopted? By council this evening, and
they were the ones that actually suggested that. A more
distance would be preferable. That they felt that this would
give some safety, would help. Keep the peace. And so
that's where we ended up with 20. We also did
examine because there were questions from council the last time
we brought a report. Around 100 meters, buffer. And that
almost eradicates any potential location other than moving completely outside
of the city. Where services. Are supported. Analysts will and
may have additional information to add. Thank you, director Wilson.
Through the chair. I just would like to note that
London's original proposal is 10 meters from a private property
line, and it was a decision of their counsel to
increase the distance to 100 meters. And that was only
last week. The guidelines that we were working under and
that had been vetted with the people living in encampments
and the unsheltered. Homelessness task. Force were already created at
the point that those came out. Thank you for that.
I appreciate that. Answer. The third question I have is
we have lakes, ponds and beaches listed. As areas. That
an encampment would not be permitted. But would this mean
that creeks and rivers are excluded? Or have they been
included? But just the language is not clear. Through the
chair. Not including rivers or creeks. The rationale for that
is that people do rely on the water. Sources for
fire safety purposes. The water bodies that are identified in
the guidelines generally have competing public use, whereas rivers do
not have that same degree, and many rivers are also
covered by the prohibition. To be within an environmental protection
zone. Excellent. Thank you so much. Chair, can you put
me on the second round, please? Will do, councilor. Gretuga.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, I guess. The 20 meters
buffer. That's 60ft only. I mean, really think about that.
That's 60ft only. From a residence or a property line.
I mean, that's not far at all. I think people
were expecting results from this report. Especially the McVicker people,
which this will do nothing, absolutely nothing for them. At
all. First off, before we go through a lot of.
Debate. I'd like to put a referral resolution on the
floor. We're going to ratify this on the 15th, which
is only less than three weeks. To have any meaningful
public consultation. I hear everyone around the table talk about.
Public consultation and how important it is. And yet we
had no consultation with the stakeholders. In the BIA. Surrounding
businesses before we're going to present this. As a spot
where we're going to. Have. The encampments here. I just
think it's unfair to the people. And we just got
this report on Friday. Reported this magnitude, and something is
so impactful on the community. As it is seen in
other communities, I believe. It warrants. Some time to breathe
this in and hear what the people are saying, because
I'm telling you people in McVicker area are not going
to be happy. Many people are not going to be
happy with this. So rather than spend 2 hours debating
this, It'll give a few weeks or. Say a month
to refer this back and have some meaning for public
consultation. On these recommendations. Not just wait three weeks until
we ratify, because then we potentially will change. Our decisions
again, like we potentially may on parquette's right. Public consultation.
Is paramount here. So if I could get a second
or. I'd like to put that. On the floor right
now. Councilor Gretuga. Did you have a date in mind,
like the 22nd meeting or July? Yeah. I think we
need to ask administration, but how much time do we
need to do meaningful consultation? With the residents in the
area, the businesses in the area. How long? Generally, it's
about a month. Okay, and so. I think the city
clerk is asking what type of consultation would you like
to see, because that's going to determine what administration is
able to do and what timelines. City manager. Thank you.
1 second. Councilor Gutuga, this may help clarify. This is
an effort to help. It's also an effort to manage
expectations, because we've heard that. Some of you are disappointed
in what administration has brought back. First of all, we've
brought you our best work. It doesn't get better. For
public consultation. There is perhaps an opportunity. But the opportunity
is not what many of you might be thinking and
that is, we're not going to go out. Well, if
we do public consultation, if the referral pass. We're not
going to find a place in the city that both
meets. The needs of under housed people and meets. The
needs of business people or else others in the area.
There is no place. That does both. We're not going
to find that, but where the opportunity may come in
public consultation is an education process. Where we inform stakeholders
and neighbors of what this actually means. And that could
indeed be helpful. Finally, this site that we're talking about
tonight that's recommended. Is actually, if someone was to build
a shelter there today. They wouldn't need to come to
you. That area. Is eligible for a shelter house to
be built. And council would have no say in it
unless you change your zoning bylaw or change your official
plan. Thank you, chair. Councilor Gretuga. Yeah. Thank you. I
could tell you of a few spots, some along Cumberland
street. Park there. There's so. Many other areas of the
city that I think consultation first off, let's talk to
the BIA we heard tonight. We didn't even talk to
them. They had to find out. Through the news today.
I mean the fellow who purchased a building next door.
Just don't send an email today. So I'm talking about
public consultation. At the minimalist. We haven't done any here,
so let's do something at least. I don't know. I
hear everyone around the table talk about consultation. A public
consultation here. We have not even consulted anyone, but yet.
We're going to prove this as a site, potentially. So
that's why I'm asking. For minimal consultation. Let people know,
find out what their thoughts are as we do at
normal consultations. I mean, it shouldn't take more than a
month at all. Well, can I get a response from
administration? Yes, that's what I was just about to ask
them. Is July 22 even an option, or does it?
August through the chair. I will remind counsel that we
did public consultation on the feasibility of designated locations. We
heard from community that vacant lots were the most desirable.
And so we brought you forward a vacant lot. We
also did consultation. Where the BIA would have been welcomed
to participate. It was an online survey that was open.
For several weeks. We worked with indigenous leaders in the
community. We worked with community partners. And we met with
individuals who have experience of living in encampments. We brought
you all of that information. Two months ago. In order
to do effective consultation, we will likely get, as city
manager, Gail said. No solid answer that's going to meet
the needs of individuals who are unhoused. As well as
meet. The perceived concerns. Of businesses. I was asking for
community members. We can potentially do. Some. Our report tonight
is also not to actually action. Anything on that lot.
It's to hold the lot at this point and to
write letters. Of support. We can bring further information on
that, but I do urge counsel to consider and adopt
the distance guidelines and not to refer those back, nor
refer back the areas for advocacy. Mr. Chair the question
was how long? That was simply the question, how long
for consultation? Okay. And how much consultation have we done
with this site. Zero. Okay, well, city manager Gail will
address that chair. I know what the question was, and
we do, but we need to provide context when we
give an answer. Simply providing a date is insufficient. For
you to make an informed decision. And as a city
manager, I do have the right to. Speak, and that
right to speak is delegated, and we want to provide
you that information to help you make good decisions. Did
you want to add anything? About timeline. About timelines, yes.
So through the chair in order for us to actually.
Design public engagement in order. To set dates, invite participants.
We would need several months to actually do all of
that work and bring back. A robust report on what
we heard. So this would push things back, at least
until the end of August. If not September, for us
to bring back enough information for council's consideration. I was
just looking at consulting with the BIA, the immediate business
people, to find out what their thoughts are than residents.
I mean, I wasn't looking for. A complex consultation. We
said we've done it before in a month, so I
just don't understand. This. It certainly won't support this, and
I think the public. Is. We deserve to the public.
They're not. Fast track this based on administration's recommendation. Here.
Councilor, are you? Consultation on the one lot and not
the residential aspects. Is it the downtown lot that you're
most concerned about? No one has been consulted on this
lot. Everyone found out today, we found out Friday. How
was that consultation? No, I'm just asking like you're okay
with the setbacks. And the other aspects of the report.
You just want consultation on the lot on Victoria at
Simpson. Constellation that, and I would like to amend the
setback for residential. But for now, yes. Yeah, well, so
you want to refer the setbacks as well? No. I
would like to amend the setbacks for residential to 50
meters. But that's when that happens, okay? So. We have
a motion to refer. City clerk power. I'm a little
confused. Do we refer just one portion of this? And
amend the other. So, through the chair, what I'm hearing
from councilor Gretuga. Is specific consultation on the Vicount lot,
including the FW, BIA and relevant business owners. Again, this
recommendation simply holds that lot. It does not start the
process. It does not start the work. This is still
subject to ratification. In whatever decision you make as well.
So it's important to consider that. That certainly could be
done. As a referral on the vicount lot. On the
other matter, chair I would ask to speak to that
when you're closer to that, as we may need to
bump into closed session, okay? It appears that we're speaking
on a referral for the vicount lot. Consultation with businesses.
Seconder councilor Agarwal will second. So that motion is on
the floor. Referral for consultation there and I'll start a
new list. I've got councilor. Hamilton. Councilor. Agarwal. Report back
date. Did we settle on something? End of August council.
July 22 I think whatever consultation we could talk to
the BIA and the businesses in that time frame. It's
not comprehensive. We're being told that's not achievable. But that
was for a comprehensive consultation that included everything. In city
or incoming city manager Colin Mr. Chair, forgive this interruption.
I know I really don't. Have standing here until the
bylaw passes later on this evening. But in the optimism
that that will pass. I will inherit this come tomorrow
morning. My concern with just focusing any further consultation should
this council decide to do that, just forwarding it just
doing that consultation with the BIA on the lot that
is being suggested. Will result in us, obviously, providing. Feedback
to you that they're not supportive of it. I mean,
it's clear we heard from their chair this evening. So
we'll come in on 22 July with that feedback. And
we'll be no further ahead. We'll then be having to
do additional consultation and. Additional reviews and analysis, I would
suggest that if this council wishes us to consult more
than we already have. That we be afforded the time
to do so. Exhaustively and explore other options and possibilities
within the city in the same breath. Because we're going
there no matter what. Come 22 July would be my
prediction. Okay, mr. Chair. My initial wish was to refer
the entire thing for a consultation. We're just here and.
Able to setbacks on Friday, the communities that you're able
to setbacks today. So I was trying to refer the
whole thing back for consultation, but it was administration's request.
That we passed the setbacks tonight. But again, the residents
just found out tonight what the setbacks are. I mean,
what kind of consultation is that? We're pushing things down
people's throats here. The people that are impacted, they want
input. And who are we to deprive them of? That
input, so I would refer. The entire package back for
the complete consultation at the end of August or whatever
administration says. Because to push this through, even the guidelines,
when. No one's even seen what the guidelines are. It's
just ridiculous. So if counter Aguilar would second that we
referred the entire thing, then that would be. Fine. Okay,
so we're referring the entire report back. Until the consultation
on setbacks. On setbacks. And vi count? Yes, please. Okay.
Is that still. Seconded. Okay, so it's on the floor.
Seconded. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. We will go to
speakers list. Councilor Hamilton, I had first. I've got lots
of people here. All right. Well, chairs. So much to
unpack here. I kind of wish you would have come
to me. First. I probably had some useful information. On
the role of the DSAB in the community, what we're
doing, what's happening? What's not happening. I'm not going to
support the referral. We literally just had the BIA, the
chair do an hour long deputation, and we peppered them
with questions for an hour. He went into great detail.
The most comprehensive. Deputation of all time. No consultation required
here. Talkable consultation. I'm the McKellar ward. City counselor. I
visited the encampments. Today. I visited the businesses regularly. I've
sat on the Fort William BIA. We are all elected
people if you're not connected with the communities that you
represent. Why are you here? We are the people. So
I get that you want to kind of reach out
to the BIA incoming city manager. Colin already reflected exactly
what I said. We just had the chair of the
BIA 20 minutes. Ago, sitting right in front of us
here saying they don't agree with the law. I would
much prefer. And I got a ton of different information
on what the DSAB is doing that I would be
happy to touch on if someone just asked the question.
That is absolutely relevant and pertinent to this conversation. Why
I can't support the referral is because I think that
this is important to get these guidelines out the door.
This is important to the community. There's great information there's.
A very thoughtful approach here that we really need. To
adopt. And address. And again, and I think it was
already reflected by the clerk and the chair. Ratification isn't.
Scheduled for a couple of weeks, and I don't think
there's any really. Contentious issues. Councilor Gautuga is going to
bring up distance guidelines. Let's debate that later. My move,
which I would rather do, to be honest, is to
just eliminate the whole notion of the pallet village because
that was in there. We didn't ask for that. We
asked. For designated sites. I'm fine that it's in there.
It's exploratory, but the guidelines, I think, is really important
because that has everything to do with the situation at
the ground level. The pallet village is interesting. I think
realty services put it up because it was zoned. Correctly,
it met all the guidelines, and I think our staff
and I would support them that I understand the rationale,
why it's there. I'm not super supportive of the pallet
village at this time, to be honest. So I don't
want to really refer it back if we wanted to
look for other places to do a potential. Pallet village
or support one. I don't know if I'm interested in
this. Location as clearly identified by the BAA as not
being supportive. I don't like the location myself. To be
honest, I think that there could be potential. I would
rather referral go. Back to administration saying identify places throughout
the city, not just focus on that lot. In coming,
city manager Colin said, very rightly, we're going to be
in no further. Ahead. If we're just focused on this
lot that already has shown negative support in the community
that could tell you it's not going to pass. The
business community is not going to in any way that
you package. That is not going to support it. I
just really wanted to. Just mention one other thing too,
because it has to be mentioned. The DSAB currently has
an EOI process out right now and expressing of interest.
The deadline is on Friday. Anybody, any organization out there
could fill out the application, submit a proposal. It's not
that hard. It's. A bunch of paragraphs. Submit your proposal.
It'll be evaluated. In the coming weeks. And that could
be a pallet shelter. It could be any kind of
things, but it's evaluated against other proposals. With. A limited.
Financial capacity available. There might only be $10 million in
funding in this next allocation. The reason why I like
that approach is because it's going to be weighed against
the dollars and cents of a bunch of other proposals.
Council Roberto or Council Roberto? Pardon me, deputy Roberto. Rightfully
brought up the point that. Long term housing solutions are
where we need to be going as a community. Let's
just speak to the referral, but. There's a big reason
why. I think it's a very bad idea to support
the referral. I would rather edit. The draft resolution, and
it's my hope that we don't send our staff off.
On a wild goose chase. We are busy. Council knows
that. We just heard the deputy. I don't need any
more consultation. We just. Had it. Okay, so you don't
support the referral? Of course they don't. Share. Thank you
for your latitude, but there's rationale on why we need
to make this decision here. Now, I'm happy to edit
the resolution, but I don't think the referral is the
way to go. Thank you. Okay, well, there's some. Procedural
issues that we should all be aware of. This would
not be ratified until the 15th unless. We have a
super majority tonight, so there's some complications. The clerk has
asked for a five minute recess. To consolidate some of
the requests that are there and make sure that we
are on a good path here. Things can get very
complicated with complicated files like this, so I would recommend
we recess. And so with that, we get some advice
on how to move forward and. What's the most efficient
way to move forward? We're currently discussing a referral to
the 22nd. And we may or may not have any
more information. We have to understand the intent of the
referral. And. What we're actually trying to accomplish. So let's
take a five minute recess. Do I need a mover.
Seconder mover. Mayor Boschkoff will move. Councilor Trini will second.
All in favor? Okay, that is carried. We'll come back
in five. Minutes.
We will reconvene. If all members could come back.
To other desks.
Online in postcard. Okay? So, clerk power, you have consulted
with administration and. You have some advice for us? So,
chair, I will start and then certainly ask to pass
it. Over to my colleagues in administration. The recommendation from
administration is with respect to the distance guidelines that they
be adopted subject to ongoing review, and it's important to
note this is something that is being done in other
municipalities. Again. Director Olsen can speak to it. The second
recommendation is that paragraph two be removed. So the VI
count lot simply be removed at this time. And then
again, we'll come back to you with potential options. The
referral is duly. Moved and seconded. Therefore, it does have
to be voted on in order to entertain those changes.
But that's what administration recommends. Chair referral is still on
the floor. Yeah, the referral is on the floor. So
we will speak to the referral if. You like what
you'd heard? About. I'm not sure what that was. I
believe he turned his microphone off. So we'll speak to
the referral with the idea that. If you like, passing
what has been presented for setbacks with the understanding it'd
be. Ongoing review to remove the vicount lot with the
understanding that options would come forward at another time. Then,
I guess. We shall defeat the referral. And. Pass this
amendment. If you want to refer everything and come back
in July or August on the bycount. Lot. Getting consultation,
then you would pass the referral, okay? So, councilor Hamilton,
you had spoken. First round, Mayor Boschkov's next. I only
question. A way of trying to find. To make this
more expeditious so we could move. On it quicker, it
seems like. By the time. The reports come back. And
the end of the fiscal encampment season. Will be coming.
To. An end as opposed to right now. It's in
its maximum growth period. So I was hoping that. We
could do something now because it's affecting people. This is
the most poignantly difficult time for the community as the
influx starts to peak. So my conclusion may be that
in listening to everyone. That. Will lose this year to.
Another season. Of encamping. And that we'll be more prepared
for the fall or the winter. But thank you, chair.
Thank you, Councilor Aguilar. Thank you very much. Just to
clarify, you're suggesting that we just removed the vicon lot
so that we. Have proper consultation. And alternate sites that
come up. So, chair. Procedurally, I can't recommend that to
you because the referral is still. On the floor. What
I'm providing you with is an alternate option should the
referral. Not pass. The council could consider that has been
recommended by administration. Okay, so that means once we adopt,
should we accept this? Then we would accept all the
other terms of the report. And the distancing would not
have any further consultation. So chair through you what has
been again suggested. We're not entertaining it at this moment.
Is that there be subject to ongoing review. So you
adopt again. There's been consultation, especially. With residents of encampments
to say they're open to these guidelines and these distance
requirements. Starting there and then looking again for there to
be ongoing review to come back to you to say,
how is it working? Okay. Can I have a question
to administration? Pertaining to the referral. To the referral. Please.
For the referral, for the distancing. Did we consult with.
Anybody. Other than. The unhoused and the service providers to
the unhoused through the chair. No, we did not. We
did not have the time frame in order to do
that. We were requested to bring options back to council
within two months. Okay, I'm going to have a challenge
supporting something that didn't have any other input. From other
stakeholders that are in the neighborhood. Of the encampment. We've
only consulted with one side. And we haven't heard from
the other side. We need both sides to make a
calculated educated decision. I know this is a good first
step, what's being recommended, but I don't think. We've had
the opportunity, not even the five days that we normally
get for the public. To have their input. This is
where the challenge comes. It's very difficult because I would
love to take this report and say yes, except for
Vy count. However, if Mrs. Jones calls and says she's
disgruntled because she didn't, get to have a say because
it wasn't fair for her. Then what? So the question
is, will the public have a say? And we have
until the 15th. Right. This is now going to be
in the community. These setbacks. Until the 15th. They can
have a say if on the 15th, any member around
the table. Feels that hasn't been sufficient or you want
further consultation? That can come up at ratification. Thank you.
Okay, one last question, then. For administration, there was something.
Mentioned about London changing their setbacks, and we didn't incorporate
that because it was so new. Through the chair. Yes,
that's correct. There are distance guidelines. They were not changed.
They're new. They were released after our distance. Guidelines had
been devised. Through the chair, if I may. This also
gives us an opportunity to continue benchmarking against what other
municipalities are doing. We didn't just blindly bring these recommendations
forward. And these setbacks as council is describing them today.
We did look at what other communities are doing? And
this is based on the only type of evidence that's
really out there. This is new grounds for municipalities to
undertake, and we see this as an opportunity to actually
be able to start to action with some clear guidelines.
Continue the communication and we do commit to ongoing review.
And bringing additional information back. Should multiple municipalities go with
100 meters distance guideline we would bring that forward to
council for your consideration. Through the chair. I'd also just
like to add that Hamilton's newly revised distances did not
adjust the 10 meters away from a private property line,
so that is still their current guideline. Thank you. At
no point did I think this was not a robust
report. I really do like the report. I did not
like the fact that the BIA, the businesses, the immediately
abutting neighbor, nor the fact there was no signage on
that lot, there was no consultation on the lot that's.
Where I had my biggest issue. The rest of it.
There's a lot of work done there, and I appreciate
that work. That's been done and brought forward to try
to find a solution to a very challenging problem. There's
one major piece I didn't like, but now I'm just
questioning. The others. Because of what's been brought forward. That's
all. I thank you for what you've done except that
one piece. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Chung. Thank you
very much. Chair. I'm not sure. I think we might
be confusing consultation. With getting feedback from constituents after a
report comes out. From my understanding, consultation was done with
a number of people, not to the extent that maybe
we would like it because we changed the timeline on
that. I'm a little bit concerned about consulting on the
property use, because we are not. Changing any zoning for
it, which is why I think. In my recollection, why
we would actually consult as if we're changing zoning and
property use. But this wouldn't be changing property use, which
is why it came forward. Having said that, somebody could
actually purchase. This property or put an encampment, a private
encampment on it, and we would have no say because
that's what it's zoned for. I'm satisfied with. The work
that administration has done in the time frame that we've
given them. I live on McVicker Creek area and have
spoken at length with my neighbors and other residents. I
asked them to submit their questions. Which I've done. I
have almost a dozen questions to bring up to administration.
However, I don't think that's going to require. Referral back
to administration when I could easily take these questions offline
and get my answers. Between now and July. If this
report passes tonight, when would it come back for ratification?
For the referral that came? Forward from councilor Gautuga was
July the 22nd. No, sorry. The original report. If we.
Just passed the report tonight. It's the 15th. For ratification.
Yes, ratification. Okay. That would give constituents a few weeks
to. Three weeks to message, to talk. I could email.
Manager Olsen, who have no problem working these things out
with. So chair, I'm hesitant to support. Actually, I wouldn't
even support this. But I do have a question. If
we go an alternative route. Can we change the guidelines
as we go, or do we need to notice a
motion so it's more of a technical question. So chair
through you. Based on the recommendation from administration, you wouldn't
need a notice of. Motion to change the guidelines because
they would be subject to ongoing review. So as information
is collected again. We know that there is case law
that is emerging. As those things change, administration would bring
you that information. Okay. I'm very satisfied with the guidelines
I've been brought forward. We won't get this perfect. It
won't be perfect. And I'm quite happy to actually support
the report tonight. But understand that there's some other things
at place, so. I won't be supporting the referral. Thank
you, chair. Thank you. We have Councilor Trini next. Thank
you to the chair. Similar. I will not be supporting
the deferral, the referral, the distance guidelines. I think is
a good start. We needed something. And something's better than
nothing. And as we've already been told, that we can
modify this as we go along. I think administration did
an excellent job of looking for best practice. There is
very limited best practice, but they did go out there
and look for that and produce. That for us, the
July 15 date is our consultation from now till then
and recognizing that we can change those and recognizing the
communities are changing them as required by the community. So
I am fine with that piece. The distance piece altogether.
The property suggestion, I kind of a little bit more
hesitant on, I think. We're giving a message to people
in the Fort William area. That. This is more than
just a potential that we're saying that this is it.
And so I would like to see that off of
the motion myself. I think we can deal. With that
down the road, if a community partner comes forward and
says, we're interested, but I think we're putting the cart
before the horse until that actual time comes, so I
will not be supporting this referral. Thank you. Councilor. Thank
you. Through the chair. So, in regards to the distance
guidelines, Just on the sheet that we have. Where would
business be? Would that be within the 20 meters? As
well, because there's no picture of a business or it
doesn't state business. On here. So where would that be?
Through the chair. I would put that under the entrances
and exits cannot be within 5 meters of. An entrance
nor an exit. And I also believe that a business
is considered a private property. Well, then, is it 20
or is it five? It would be the one that's
sorry. Through the chair, it would be the one that's
more. So 20 meters. Okay, so business. Would be considered
a private property even though it's public business. Is for
the public, is it not? Through the chair. Businesses are
privately owned, so we would anticipate that it's also in
that. Thank you for that clarification. And then just on
page five of the report, it says the task force
exemplifies a collaborative approach coordinated by the city and includes
representation from. There's no indigenous agencies on this list. And
I find that odd. Since. We talk about homelessness and
stuff, I believe. It's. 70. Percent up. Or greater. Involve
indigenous peoples. Is that something? Hopefully down the road. We
can maybe visit. So through the chair, we would certainly
welcome an indigenous organization who responds to homelessness. The task
force isn't an advisory, so I will just caution. Committee
that perhaps there might be some misperception as to what
the task force is. It really is a coordinating body
to better understand the response measures that are required and
make assessments. On risk mitigation. And individual site needs. I
will also share that. Many of the indigenous organizations in
our community are tapped to attend multiple meetings and may
not. Have the resources or the time to afford. And
sit at biweekly meetings with us, but they are absolutely
welcome and we will continue. To explore that. Okay, but
the invitations go out, obviously inviting everyone, correct? Through the
chair. The invitations go out to the members that have
been listed on there. It is a very small task
force. It requires. What we generally call our enforcement partners,
and that's largely police, fire and the health unit. And
the LRCa. And we did have membership with the CP
police. However, the individual who was in that position in
Thunder Bay did relocate, so we don't have a new
member at this time, and then it's multiple organization representatives
from within the city who are directly impacted. For example,
parks, municipal licensing enforcement because. They field a number of
calls. DSAB and the two partners that actually provide. Warming
and cooling shelters in the community, as well as do
some direct response in the encampments I appreciate that. Thank
you. Next we have councilor Pascalino. Thank you very much
for this report. And thank you. And through the chair.
What I am concerned about is, first of all, The
first inkling that I got as a city councilor, and
I realized it was just elected. February, March of 2023.
So shortly after I was elected, that's when we decided
to go on this route. And then it got delayed.
It was supposed to be in the first quarter of
2024. Now we got that report. In April. So that
was past the first quarter. And now we got this
one. And now we're talking about delaying it further. So
my problem is I really don't want to. Delay it
much further. I want some action taken on it, however.
There are a lot of things on here I'd like
to change. I'd like. To see maybe better enforcement on
the distant guidelines that we hear. And I'd like to
see more of them and see them also increase. But
we are talking about that at a different time right
now. We're not there, right? Now. Right now, we're only
talking about. The depth. The change of the report back.
So. I'm going to go ahead and say that. I
will support. Not support. The thing to bring it back.
Later on in July. And I'd like to work on
this. The guidelines to make sure that they're stronger. And
perhaps more enforcement. And then there's other things we can
talk about. But my concern is that what happens? Because
nobody said this yet. What happens if this whole thing
gets rejected, then? Where are we? Are we back to
square one that we were back in 2023? Well, if
it gets rejected. Yeah, it gets rejected. But. I don't
see that happening around the table. I mean, we're all
wanting to. Get to a solution. Okay. So. My final
thought on this is to bring it forward and hopefully.
We can get something solid in the guidelines that are
going to meet everybody's needs here. At the table today.
Okay. And we have councilor Zizino. Okay, so we'll call
the question on the referral with the knowledge that we
have. An alternate, if that's your preference. So all in
favor of the referral? Oh, Councilor GrT, did you wish
to speak on the referral second round? Sorry. Just really
quick, did I hear that correct, that we consulted with
the people that are living with the encampments, and they're
okay with the guidelines, the distance guidelines, but. We didn't
consult with the surrounding residents. Did I hear that correctly?
Yes, through the chair. That's actually. A significant tenant of
a human rights based approach. Wow. I can't wait to
tell residents that when constituents that would they call me
tomorrow. Thank you. Okay. So. We are going back to
the vote on the referral. All in favor of the
referral? We have one. And any opposed? Okay, that did
not carry so the referral. Is. Off. The floor, I
guess we'd say. It would come down to somebody moving
and seconding, I guess the alternate, if they're interested. Councilor
Adriani. You are. Any seconders for Councilor Ayello? Let's read
the alternative. It's on the floor. So the alternate option
as provided. By administration. Is to again adopt the distance
guideline as outlined in the report, subject to ongoing review.
Understanding that administration will continue to report back to you
as the landscape changes. Also to remove the reference. To
the vicount lot from paragraph two. Or remove paragraph two
completely. And the reference to the viacount law in paragraph
three? So it removes the VI count lot again. Administration
would report back on a future site and then those
guidelines would be subject to review. All of this would
be subject to ratification on the 15 July. The reports
on the floor. Ask questions in its entirety. And of
the deputations at this point in time. Did I? Counselor
Trinity, did you have your hand up? I was just
going to verify. Part of the initial resolution was to
continue the advocacy. That's correct. So none of that would
be removed. So again, you're talking about. City council advocating
to the Government of Ontario of Canada, copy of this
resolution, once ratified, being sent to all of the partners
you see in the recommendation. Thank you. Councilor Johnson. Thank
you. Chair through you. So we're back on the original.
Yeah, but it is amended. Yes, right. But I mean,
the contents of the report are all open for discussion.
Just clarifying. The report. Mentions. The ongoing issue, if you
will, asks for an additional supervisor and two outreach workers,
as well as $450,000. In the next year's budget. Just
wondering. Was there, thought or was. There. Ideas put forward
to give that monies instead to stakeholders. Say like the
DSAb being that they're the lead on this issue. Through
the chair. Those funds represent. Administration's ability to actually direct
administration work. So right now we work in good faith
and in collaboration with community partners. But there are times
where we are getting multiple report. Reports of encampments of
concerns in the community, and we aren't adequately resourced. To
effectively and immediately respond, go and do the engagement. Potentially
support individuals with relocation. Our community partners have given a
substantial amount of. In kind staffing support to. This and
to other community safety and well being initiatives in our
community. And in particular this response as a community collaborative.
Our main community partner. This is a stretch of their
mandate. It aligns with it, but it is a stretch
and when we're talking about the ability to do community
cleanups, to work with external partners. External vendors to do
garbage collection, portable toilets. All of that costs additional funds
and. That's part of this. So in previous reports, we
did bring forward recommendation for budget in the range of
$20,000. That's when we were working with about 30 people
living in encampments. We are triple that. And in order
to effectively respond and manage the amount of calls that
we are getting, from the community. Should council wish us
to implement. And while. These aren't legal guidelines. The enforceability
would be the ability to develop and maintain relationships. With
individuals to help support those voluntary relocations as outlined. In
the relocation protocol. Okay, we have a lot of information
here tonight, and certainly we have this platform. The video
exists. Online for quite some time. But how is administration?
's rollout. For communicating what we're doing tonight and what
their plan going forward. What does that look like? As
you know, I'm big on how we communicate to residents.
What's the plan going forward? To blast this out to
those that are interested or not. Even interested, but just
in general, to get to sell to everybody. So through
the chair we've. Already amended the city's website so previously.
On the report a problem page. Within the city's website
that lists a whole bunch of different areas. Encampments was
never listed there, so that already exists now. The number
still goes to 24 hours. Dispatch, you can do an
online reporting. We are also working behind the scenes to
establish. A specific area within the city's website to clearly
outline the response protocol update. The timelines, how city would
effectively respond. We do plan to share this information further
out on our social media channels, we can share it.
Through our podcast. And we will continue to. Do. A
media release post council decision as well. Additionally, I think
the other component that is required is communication for individuals
living in encampments. And that will come by word of
mouth. That will be relationship dependent. Yeah. Very good. I
would also like to acknowledge that there's a proposed 68
people currently experiencing. Less. Currently experiencing homelessness that will be
added to the advisory table. So I think that's a
great idea as well. Share councilor Chung's enthusiasm for the
work that the team has done, and I'm happy to
support it. Mumbling my words. It is getting late. The
11:00 resolution. Soon to come, so thank you. Chair. Thank
you to the team. Thank you. It's coming up. Next
on the list I have councilor Hamilton. Yeah. Thank you,
chair and. I'm glad. The almost former city manager Norm
Gail used to talk about standing your lane, right. And
it's important to recognize that we have a role. Where
it put the DsAb hat on. These are DSAB clients,
many of them, but these are city residents. Right? So
that's the overlap. So we have a duty. To, I
think, mitigate some of the concerns around. Our residents about.
Litter disruption. In general. But, I mean, this is a
DSAB issue, like the province has come to the table
with. A generous portion of funding that is getting rolled
out the door. We added 52 new transitional beds. Just
in this last batch of homeless prevention funding, and presumably
the same over the next two years. So I think
it's important to actually just stay focused on the long
term. That's. What we're at the DSAB doing and how
we could support them is good. We don't need to
be creating redundancies where. We are. Giving that organization dollars
to do this work, and then we're just kind of
getting, we're just kind of like, muddying the waters. That
said, I do appreciate that. We do. Intersect. And have
cooperative relationship with the DSAB. But anyway, that's all I'm
going to say. I definitely support the resolution in this
moving forward. Thank you, Councilor Oliver. Thank you. I hope
you can hear me. We can. Okay, great. So just
a couple of things, like, sort of building on both
councilor Johnson and. Hamilton. We're just saying with regard to.
The education piece. I think that there's some value and
maybe even trying to explain to the community. What appellate
village looks like. And just to give that overall view
of what people could expect to see. With that type
of service delivery and program delivery. Because I think that
there's just this misconception of what it actually is. And
I don't think that the community has a full time
understanding of the benefit of that type of strategy in
terms of helping people that are currently unhoused. So that's.
Just one point that I wanted to make. And I
think the other thing is, too, when we're having our
conversations with the community and our constituents. I know that
they're looking at comparing us with other communities. Who often
have their own autonomy in terms of how their housing
programs are rolled out. And so we don't have that
same level autonomy here in Thunder Bay. Obviously, we're part
of the district Social Services Administration board. Who has the
mandate. To run and provide the leadership on this. But
I do see that we have a value. We do
bring value and opportunity to the table as well, too,
to bring that local lens to those conversations. And I
fully understand that we have six members of council who
do sit on the DSAT. Board, but I think it's
by extension that the community has. A lot to offer.
And I mentioned this last time, my last word meaning.
A fairly robust conversation and the encampments, and I would
say that everyone that was approaching this conversation had compassion,
empathy and certainly want to see. A better outcome for
people that are living it rough. And also recognizing the
comments made by one of our service delivery partners the
other day. That we're at least a year out from
seeing. Anything monumentous change in terms of having some transitional
housing or some affordable housing in place for people that
are currently experiencing a crisis. And I'm also cognizant of
the fact that there's been three home last month that
have passed away. So to me that seems like we
should be moving fairly quickly because. Obviously, we know we
have a huge issue here, but we don't want to
see more. Deaths as a result of an action. So,
taking that all into consideration, I do like this new
proposal. I think that. It helps build that flexibility. Looking
at what other communities are doing, how we can. Take
that as best practices and roll something out. But better
yet, I want to see us also. Implementing something where
we're the ones that are instituting some best practices. And
I am confident that administration does have their finger on
the pulse on this, and. We'll continue to leverage every
opportunity they can to build capacity and bring those recommendations
to council. So. I just wanted to take a minute
to express my appreciation for this new recommendation. Thank you.
Thank you. It's that time again. Thank you, chair. With
the hour being 11:00 that we continue with the business
of Han. Mover. Councilor Chung. Councilor Hamilton will second. All
in favor? Any opposed? Appears to be carried. So we'll
go to the next speaker as Councilor Gurtuga. Thank you,
Mr. Chair. So I guess now that what's left in
this resolution is that we have distance guidelines. That we
can enforce and that we're going to lobby. The other
orders of government, right. Is that pretty much all that's
left in this now? That we took out the vicount
lot. Chair through you to clarify. What has been proposed,
moved and seconded is adding to paragraph one subject. To
ongoing review, which again would be the district distance guidelines
outlined in the report, removing paragraph two the lands municipally
known as the Vi count lots. And from paragraph three.
The reference to the Vi count lot, so the advocacy.
All of the other items remain. In the resolution. Okay.
Yeah. So the lobby of the government and the district
guidelines would be, can enforce. Okay, well, I will amend.
The distant guidelines for the homes. But I'll wait until
we ratify this because I want to hear from the
community via my own consultation that I'll do. But. Mark
my words. Next summer we'll be in the same position
with nothing changed, and I. Said it last year. I
tried to bring forward the notice of motion to reconsider
our human rights approach and make it a capacitate approach
back in January, but I was told I couldn't. As
I wasn't present for the vote, and it needs to
be someone who voted in. Favor of the human rights
approach to bring forward that notice of motion to reconsider.
So I guess. But I said last year we'll be
in the same position this year. And next year I
will be in the exact same position again. We have
people. In the cabinet saying that they're okay with. These
distance guidelines, but we haven't talked to the residents about
them. And people could say whatever they want. They could
go 10 meters, they can go 5 meters, and we
can force it so it doesn't matter. I'm not going
to support this. I'll try to change the distant guidelines
when it comes to ratification, but. I think we're just
spinning our wheels again. Once again, thank you. Okay. Thank
you, councilor. We've got Councilor Chung next. Thank you. Chair.
Chair. What I would like to know. Is that communication
with the public can be quite difficult. Even if citizens
do have access to the Internet and computers and houses.
The unhoused population might not necessarily have access to the
new guidelines. So what I'd like to know is how
the city will successfully communicate with the unhoused population as
to where they may be permitted to put up a
shelter. And the guidelines and so forth. So through the
chair. We would rely on our community partners at this
point in time. We are not directly doing work in
encampments. That being said, we have held focus groups and
we have outlined that we are committed to establishing an
advisory committee, and so we will work with the advisory
committee of people with experience in encampments on how best
to continue to communicate and. Share anything that's adopted this
evening, as well as any additional changes that may be
made. In the future. As far as guidelines go, thank
you for that. Analysts will and has further to add.
Yeah, thank you. Through the chair. I also just want
to point out the infographic attachment a that can be
distributed to people who are living in campbellments that's a
bit more digestible than just a bunch of bullet points.
Excellent. Thank you. My next question, chair, is that we
have in the past spent a considerable amount of time
and resource. Resources protecting McVicker Creek. And I understand, I
think that's part of the environmental protection zone. I'm sorry.
I can't find a map anywhere what this looks like.
So can you tell me what rivers are in this
environmental protection zone, and if there's going to be some
sort of mapped out area where sites are permitted, or
at least not permitted. So through the chair. There are
parts of McVicker Creek that are within the environmental protection
zone. There are other locations within the community that. Are
also within that zone. And so we will work with
the Lake Regional Conservation Authority, who provided that information and
provides it. To our mapping. At this point in time,
the mapping would be internal facing for us to really
be able to do the nuances, especially if we continue
to change and modify what the distance guidelines are. That
would be a continuous amount of work for administration to
continue. To update a public facing mapping that. Is better
situated for internal use and response. Okay, so I take
it that's going to come at some point? I would
just assume. That we would need to know. If people
are not allowed or permitted to set up an encampment
within the environmental protection zone, but I don't even know
where that is, to be totally honest. But you're? Saying
that's to come at some point in the future. So
through the chair, it is something that we can use
internally. So if something was identified, we have a general
sense of where those locations are right now based on
some preliminary mapping. And using our gis system. I will
share that. That's not my area of expertise, so. I'm
not the most positioned to fully respond to that. Our
intention was to actually use that internal facing. It's not
required for public to understand where people can or cannot
be. They can continue. To call in if they have
any concerns. Administration and our community partners will investigate and
make the determination if it falls within the guidelines that
we've established or that should counsel adopt these guidelines or
any future changes to guidelines, chair I guess. My concern
is. With someone. Sets up an encampment, a tented area,
and they're told it's an environmental protection area. They have
to move somewhere else, so they pack up their stuff,
often using just the tools of expediency around them. A
shopping cart or what have you. I've seen all kinds
of things. It's very difficult for people to move locations.
Only to find themselves set up. Maybe. In another environmental
protection, and then it goes on and on, causing more
stress and harm. I'm hoping that maybe the LRCA can
provide some guidance and some help. With tracking and all
the mapping stuff that I also have no clue what
that looks like. But I'm just concerned that we might
be making things more difficult for people. Or I could
also be misunderstanding this. I see a lot of chatter
over there. Thank you, Councilor Chung. So individuals found to
be in violation of the distance guidelines, should they be
adopted, would be subject to a planned relocation unless there
was imminent risk of injury, illness or death. And so
part of those planned relocations involves working with the individual
to identify a site that is compliant with those guidelines
and helping them situate themselves. There. So it would not
be a matter of grabbing a shopping cart and just
moving their stuff. To wherever they think they might be
compliant. They would be supported to find a location that
is compliant. Okay, I guess we can't be a little
more proactive on that front. Through the chair. That's part
of the guidelines or the relocation protocol that was part
of attachment b. I believe in your report, which really
demonstrates. The value of. Connection and relationship development, better understanding,
trust, and then you identify the locations and. We would
actually support individuals to move. To a suitable compliant location
that is within those guidelines. Should council adopt those this
evening? Awesome. Thank you. All right. We're going to councilor
Pascalino and then to councilor Agarwal. Thank you very much.
And through the chair. I'd like to speak a few
of my thoughts. On this report. I just want to
say that most of my career as a union president,
I've always tried to bring the two sides closer together,
where we can actually discuss things and become productive. I'm
finding that really difficult because. We have people that are
in the public that basically want the people that are
homeless kicked out. To the city limits. And they're quite
happy. Don't care about the person's well being at all.
And then there are other people that just care about
homeless people and not anybody else's. View. And I'm trying
to get something together. At least with a plant we
understood. That we needed to have work. So that the
plant can work, so we can make money. Because if
the employee made money, the company made money. At least
that was the goal. I don't know where we are
with it because. Like I said earlier. That Susan Lester
and her crew came on earlier. Last year when I
was just starting as a city counselor. I don't know
what we've done for her, really, up to this point.
This works a bit. Because the guidelines are there. That's
the first thing that I saw in this, and I
really, really like the guidelines. I don't agree. That. They're
far enough. I don't agree that there's nothing about being
away from a river. And I don't agree that it
doesn't say that you have to be away. From a
railway. I believe those are two big hazards. For. The
encampment people. And especially with our history of our city,
with so many people drowning. In the river, so I
really believe that that's an important thing. I was hoping
for 100 meters away from residents. And probably in business.
But maybe I'd be happy with 50. I don't know.
But. I think also I'm happy with this report that.
It doesn't agree because that was my initial thought when
we were talking at the time. At Susan Lester's time
is that. Well, we'll put up some sites and they
can all go there. And have a washroom, a shower
and a few other things. But. It's really not cost
prohibitive. It is cost prohibitive. It's like you're talking $2
million for the first year. It's almost $50,000 a person.
It's better maybe to give them that much money and
tell them to have a good time. Rather than to
do this. And I believe that because you're going to
have. Six or more sites. You're going to have a
lot of trouble with that as well. And let's face
it, I don't know whether that necessarily helps them with
this. I don't know whether any of this stuff helps.
People not to be in trouble. To the point of
where. They don't need to have some assistance for a
living. And I think it's really important that everybody understand
that. Everybody that is in an encampment isn't there for
the same reasons there are. Some people that are there
for drug addiction. There's people that are there because they
have mental health issues. There's some people that are under
severe financial stuff. And quite frankly, there are some people
that, and they say, well, why aren't they there? In
the winter. Well, there just might be. A young woman
who. Has been abused by somebody and says, I can
handle being abused when it's 40 below. Because there's no
other option, or that's their least damaging option. And then
when the weather warms up. They're going to go and
try and be in an encampment. I mean, all these
things are terrible. Okay? Drug addiction is terrible. Being abused
is terrible. Mental health is terrible. These are all the
things that we have. So I'm trying to figure out
to get to the two sides together. I really do
believe that. It is not. We don't have the ability
nor the responsibility to do it. As a city, this
is a provincial and a federal thing more than anything
else. And I believe that the advocacy part of this
is probably the most important part of this because we
need some action. It's up. To the well, I'll just
use the province. For an example. The province. Does the
health care. So when somebody goes to hospital, the province
pays. When somebody goes and needs mental health. The province
pays. The province is the one that deals with the
housing and the province. Is also the one that deals.
With the legal or the federal government probably does with
that too, is talking about terms for people that have
gone to prison and all of that. So I believe
the advocacy part is very much important. But when it
comes down to the city of Hamilton is the one
that they use the example on this. I see that
the city of Hamilton. I looked it up. Is less.
Than well we are. Twice as. Let me rephrase that.
The city of Hamilton is twice as dense. The population
is thunder bay. Actually, more than that, and. I think
that if we're using their guidelines, we should actually be
increasing them to be able. To. Keep it away from.
5 meters away from a sidewalk or trail. I don't
believe that. That's five. Steps. If somebody. Is going to
walk to a trail. And I know that there are
fact that there are people that are walking across the
street, so. That they're not by homeless encampments. There are
people that aren't walking. Away from. They're walking on those
trails. They're walking away from being on those trails because
of that. So I'm looking to increase these numbers. Of
distances. I'm looking for them. To be somehow enforced. But
I don't know whether we as a city have the
ability to do that at this time. So these are
my concerns with this. I really feel. Frustrated with this.
I feel that the sides are getting further and further
away. Quite frankly, if we don't. Deal with the drug
problem that is happening. In the city and in fact,
all over our nation. And the seeds of destruction are
there already. I'm hearing just outside of city hall, people
are being stabbed regularly with needles. Those aren't the cities
that people want to live in, too. So I'm really.
Hoping that. We can build on this. I don't want.
To just pass something that has no teeth. I want
to actually be able to measure our progress. And see
that we are actually doing something better. And if it's
not done by the province or by the federal government,
and if we did do a great job of settling
all the homeless people here. Well, really? Then they'll just
buy the bus ticket that's under bay to take. Care
of it so it may increase our homelessness. So those
are my thoughts on this. I don't know really the
best way of getting. To the goals of trying to
clean things up. Here I am having. My ward meeting
on Wednesday, so if somebody has some good ideas, this
thing is not going to be passed. It'll be brought
tonight, but it's going to be ratified at the next
meeting, so it's really important to speak. To the counselors
and come to ward meetings and try and give us
some advice. And if you just want to complain and
tell them all. You can be on both extremes. None
of those are going to work. I'm hoping that we
can get something in the middle and come up with
some advice that actually would work that's workable. There's some
solutions to. And so that. We can somehow be able
to go forward with this, but I'm very frustrated because
I believe that up until tonight. We've done nothing for
the McVicker Creek encampments. And haven't done much for any
of the other ones, and I really hope to. Prove,
councilor. Gretuga wrong and that actually things are going to
be better next year. But I don't understand the path
or know the path of what that's going. To be.
I'm hoping that this is going to be some of
it. But I can see lots of problems. But clearly
there's no simple solution to this problem. At all. So
thank you for letting me speak on this for a
while. But that's my thoughts on that. Thank you for
that. We'll go to councilor. Agarwal. Thank you very much.
There's one other issue in this report that I'm quite
concerned and councilor. Brought it forward. That no one on
the task force is indigenous. One of our top pillars
in our strategic plan. Is diversity, equity and inclusion, reconciliation.
And if we don't have an indigenous partner to speak
with to be at the table. On the task force.
It's challenging. We also heard today from administration that. The
only reason. Maybe we could get a response. Like you're
asking why there wasn't indigenous representation. I think it's been
asked. But you asked it again, so I think maybe
we will. Reiterate. So through the chair, I would caution
against making sweeping generalizations that nobody that's a part of
the task force is indigenous. And further to that, there
is a representative on the task force who is also
a part of the Outreach Workers Network and the Outreach
Workers Network has representation from indigenous organizations and the information
that's earned at that network is fed up through to
the task course, so we are. Hearing from some indigenous
organizations indirectly through the Outreach Workers Network. City manager Gill
yes, chair and further to that. The task force is
not a construct of the city of Thunder Bay. It
is a volunteer group of like minded individuals from organizations
that happens to be chaired by our own director, Cynthia
Olsen because of her talent. They selected. Her to tear
that task force. Thank you, chair. Councilor. Microphone, please. Thank
you for that, too. I thank you for that. However,
I think it's really important that we reach out even
to fort Williams first nation. That is our immediate abutting
neighbor. Ask them because we heard earlier today. That the
information goes out to the members of the task force
only. And then somehow, by default, it's going to reach
through one or two of the representatives. Into the indigenous
organizations. We need them at the same table, and we
should have them. There. If we reach out. Counselor, the
task force isn't our responsibility. It's a group. As city
manager Gail said, like minded individuals. Which. City official Olsen
house. I only believe like minded individuals. Would be our
indigenous partners as well. Right. And I think that message
has been delivered. We need to sit as a council
and demonstrate clearly and show clearly that we're all together.
No, we don't control the task force. City manager Gail
chair. It's not council's. Call. It's not administration's call. It's
not the city of Thunder Bay. But your point is
well taken. You want indigenous representation on all sorts of
committees, I think. That has been. Heard. I'm sorry. I
just need one point of clarification. City manager Gill just.
Mentioned that it's not counsel, not administration, not the city
of Thunder Bay. Then why is there a task force?
Responsibility. Chair. The task force arose from Covid-19 the vulnerable
populations table it exists because it's a combination of efforts
by agencies and like minded people to do some good
work. This is not a construct of the city of
Thunder Bay. No. I think it should be amended, but
that's beyond the point. If we're not going to be
able to change it. My voice has been heard. I
think it's very important. And we've all talked about last
week we heard that we haven't had a meeting with
the indigenous relations in about a year. The committee hasn't
sat together for about a year. It's very important we
do this. I'm a bit challenged on this. But just
to move it forward so we do something so we
have something to work with. I'm going to support this
very hesitant, with great reservations. There's a lot of empty
housing that we have as well at DSAP. That we
don't see what's happening with those empty units. It's concerning.
Did you want information regarding that? Because I thought. That
was suggested. We speak about that out here. Wasn't it?
Yeah, because you asked the question in Canada. I did.
There's like. 60 empty units sitting on Court street that
are owned by DSAP that have been vacant. They were
used during Covid-19 to house people, to separate them, and
they've been vacant. For almost five years or four years
now. We'll put that question. To councilor Hamilton, who chairs
the DSAB. I think he's prepared to respond. Thank you
chair for an opportunity to respond, and I'm not going
to get into the details. This is DSAT business. Councilor
Agarwal did pose that question to myself, to our CEO.
She was provided a response, and if she's not satisfied
with that response, I really don't know what to say,
but we have plans for that particular site and. The
details of which are not yet public. But. To kind
of insinuate. That. Somehow the organization is sitting on how
empty houses. Is wrong. But anyway, that question has been
asked, and it's already been answered by our leadership. Thank
you. I want to just comment on that. The question
was asked. We're talking about the report. Right, the city
council report. And I don't think we should be commenting
on DSOP. I think that now is the time to
question the report. And to give your opinions on the
report. We're talking about housing. Housing that we say we
don't have sufficient housing. Well, we're talking about a strategy.
We talk about dsab running it? Dsab is at the
table. We have the housing, and if we're not filling
empty spots or bringing them forward, saying, we have to
fix them or we're selling them or doing whatever. People
out there know there's empty spots, and we have people
living in substandard conditions right now in our community. That's
the concern here at our table. You're basically suggesting that
the d sub. No, I'm not suggesting. That's what I'm
hearing. No, I'm not suggesting your question has been. Asked
and answered. I think we should move off of the
topic and get back to our report. And you can
follow up with d sub tomorrow. I was given an
answer. That wasn't. I'll share that answer. Yes, share it.
But I don't think this is the forum to make
those types of comments. Well, we just need to know
what we have and what we're not using. Thank you,
chair. On a point of order, yes. To make comments.
That have just been. The facts have just been given.
Is disingenuous to this community because. We have many, many
organizations working to address this problem. And Councilor Aguwal, I
think you do disservice to the DSOB by insinuating that
they're not looking for the highest and best use of
that property as soon as possible. So I think that
would be a fair way to say that we're trying
to do as much as we can. We have a
task force. And in fact, this council and its administration
have been working extraordinarily hard along with other organizations. I
think perhaps you want to temper that. We'll move on
to Councilor Zuzino. Thank you. Chair, just one quick question.
With this distance guideline, what would happen with the encampment
at Freedom park relative to Franco superior school. I went
on Google Maps today, and I just kind of roughly
as the crow flies. Would that have to be moved?
Just curiosity. Through the chair at this time. I thought
we weren't speaking of a very specific locations.
It appears that there's consensus around the table. We not
speak to specific areas due to. Potential risks. Of those
types of conversations in public. And point of privilege here.
Yes. Thank you for recognizing. It's 1130. And I'm not
saying, hey, we can't do business. This is literally the
first item. The first item in our agenda. We still
have city council. Council? Point of privilege. Well, my point.
Of privilege is. This is just getting. I'd like counselors
to maybe be a little. More cognizant of time, myself
included. Chair, that's not a point of privilege. Point of
privilege is when you feel. Others have been offended by
comments, and that is a point. What's that? I feel
you haunt and bothered. Join the club. Okay. So not
everyone has spoken. Are you wanting to call the question?
Okay. Well, I haven't spoken all night, so I've got
a couple of questions. If you'll allow me. Yeah, exactly.
Okay, I'll make these quick. Given the governance realities, should
Thunderbay be getting into pallet homes or is that DSAB?
They have access to funding and lobbying efforts and partnerships.
So through the chair, our recommendation was never for us
to get into that business. That was very clear in
the recommendation that it would be externally operated that we
potentially could provide land. That would be suitable, that would
meet planning and zoning requirements. And that external funding be
sourced in order to implement a pilot project. I appreciate
that, but our involvement was at arm's length. And what
I'm suggesting. Should we leave it to the housing authority
to create housing? Through the chair council directed us to
bring back recommendations, including sanctioned sites, and so we felt.
That a pilot of a pallet shelter was the better
of the options since we are actually recommending against sanctioned
sites in the general sense and way other communities have
done them other than potential pilot. Of cabin like structures.
That are well supported. Would have staffing requirements. And met
some of the other. Questions that council wanted to see.
Should sanction sites be approved? Things like power, water, access
to laundry. Wifi, all of those types of things. Chair.
May I add that we're here tonight because of a
series of decisions by council. Those decisions made in good
faith by council in an effort to make the situation
better in an effort to make the community better. In
fact, chair, you are one of the leaders that was
pushing for this. And the direct answer, in my view,
and my advice to you is that housing. Is absolutely
the responsibility of the DSAB and the city should not
venture into that to any degree. That's what I was
leaning from the reports and commentary, although I appreciate that
you are tasked with coming back with recommendations, and that's
why we're seeing it and that's still to come. By
the sounds of this amended recommendation, The human rights approach
is coming up. And there's some claims that had we
not gone with the human rights approach, we would have
been able to enforce. Is that a correct assumption given.
The laws that. Have been coming out of these judgments.
In other communities. Through the chair would not make a
difference. The laws in the communities as have been recently
established. With other precedent court cases. Really dictate. No forced
evictions. Just calling it a human rights based approach. Or
not doesn't preclude us from not actually doing what is
lawful in our community. So even if this council wished
to direct you, To enforce evictions based on these new
guidelines. You could not, given that it's contrary to law.
Is that correct? Correct. Chair, we would view that as
unlawful direction. We would not comply. That's a really important
facet for the community to understand. I mean, we've got
a report in front of us that is a step
towards helping people in uncharted. Waters. The legal precedents are
still being set. We don't know where it's going to
end up, but we're taking the steps that we believe
that will help people. And all our residents in the
city. These setbacks. Are a way for us to communicate
with people. About. What people in the community have agreed
to. The people. In the encampments have agreed to these.
Hopefully, it will also help business owners and residents. We
can have constructive conversations. With people. That are in this
predicament that none of us would want to be in.
So. It's easy to. Not be empathetic because you're angry
about something. But we have to be, empathetic. We have
to work towards a solution. And I think the Waterloo
decision. Was based. On. Look, Canada, you're a wealthy nation.
Why don't you have enough supportive hosting? For people. And
until you do, They're going to be able. To. Seek
shelter. And it's protected by the charter. So this is
a much more complicated issue than we all hoped it
would be. It's due to legal precedents that are being
set in Ontario we have to follow. Them. We're coming
up with a plan that we feel. Is going to
make things better, although. It's a work in progress. I
think we can all agree to that, but for anyone.
In the community that thinks that. These setback limits. Are
the answer. We can't enforce them. They are a tool
which we can use to help people get to the
places that are good. For them and good for the
community. But it's a collaborative effort. I know many of
you out there would like enforcement. It's just not possible.
With the framework that we are operating under. So with
that, I will be supporting this, and thank you everyone,
for your time. Any other speakers. Councilor Hamilton. I know
after what I said, but I just wanted to just
share. Hey, enough. Of that in the gallery. You said
something that was important, and I think, if anything, I'd
like to close with. This. You said something about empathy
and compassion, and that's good that we have that and.
I plead for a little bit of patience, and in
the meantime, organizations are working tirelessly behind the scenes to
build capacity in the system for housing. So even though
it doesn't look like. We're that further ahead. We are.
And capacity is building in the system to support these
individuals. So the work is ongoing. Thank you. Okay. With
that, we will call the question. Everyone understand? The amended
motion. Can you have it read out again, please? Certainly.
So chair through you. It is paragraph one, adding. The
wording and subject to ongoing review. So that, again, that's
adopting the distance guidelines. Subject to ongoing review. Removing paragraph
two, the Lands municipally known as the vi count lot.
And in paragraph three, removing the reference to the by
count lot, everything else remains. That is the amendment that
is on the floor. All good. Okay, we'll call the
question. All in favor? Opposed. That is carried.
Next item, please. So, chair. Yeah. That's an amendment. That's
an amendment. Yes, on the amended motion. As amended, please.
So the next item would be the motion, as amended.
Is that correct? All those in favor. Any opposed? That
too is carried. Mr. Chair recorders appoint. Okay. As opposed.
Julie. Noted. Thank you, chair. So now, because it's late
and I know you're all paying attention, we're. Going to
go back in the agenda from where we started before
we change the order of the agenda. To. Following the
deputations, which was 5.1, we are going to item number
six. Which is items rising from closed session. So, continuing
on with our agenda. So the first item arising from
closed session is committee and board. Appointments, Community Economic Development
Commission. You received a memorandum from my office dated June
3 relative to the appointment of two individuals to the
CEDC. That's Eric Tribe and David Bruno. Council requires a
mover and a second. Or please. Councilor Hamilton will move.
Councilor. Or Mayor Boschkoff will second. All in favor? Any
opposed? That's carried. Thank you. I do want to note
that there are two terms. Of four years and that
this item is scheduled for ratification and will require two
thirds vote, you do have a series of minutes. Accessibility,
antiracism, clean, green, and beautiful. Coordinating committee, Heritage advisory, Intergov
and Thunder Bay Police Services Board. All of those are
provided for information. Chair questions on any of the minutes.
Councilor Hamilton. Yeah. Just one on the IGA minutes. The
items for advocacy, I believe at Amo. Is that the
finalized list? And I believe it was from, like, may
minutes, and I'm glad chair Oliver is here. It was
in the minutes. Under the advocacy items. I think there
were six or seven items in there. Yeah. Those were
the items that were being brought forward to the Amel
conference, recognizing that there was still an opportunity for a
number of other discussions that we had at the Roma
conference. This past January. So we tried to identify our
best effort. To. Engage the ministers, knowing full well that
we'll likely be able to get those meetings, so. Those
are the items that were put forth for the August
conference. Okay, excellent. Thank you. Further questions. I had one
on the police services board. I was wondering if police
services board members or maybe. The admin could update us
on the police campus. In terms of timelines and or
revised cost estimates. Chair. I have no update to give
on either. I can tell you that work will proceed
in earnest once there's an agreed two memorandum of understanding
between the corporation, the city of Thunderbay. And the Thunderbay
Police Services Board. And that memorandum understanding is being worked
on. Now. Once that's finalized, then the next steps will
be taken. We don't have any confirmation of costs or
timelines at this time. Okay. Thank you. So we'll go
on to the next item. Thank you, chair. The next
item under reports. Of municipal officers is investment of municipal
funds and investment policy statement. Update report number 149 2024.
Office of City Treasurer provides a recommendation relative to the
approval of investment policy statement as appended to this report
for council's consideration. Council requires a mover in a second
or, please. Move by Councilor Chung. Second by councilor Zazino
on the floor. I believe that Treasurer grieves did want
to provide some introductory comments. Chair. So through
the chair. There are two reasons for this report. One,
to present the results of the 2023 investment activities for
the city, and two, to approve the amended investment policy
statement. The investment policy statement. Review is a requirement, and
it's through this policy that council exercises. Its fiduciary responsibilities
over the city's investments. There are no significant changes being
recommended in the investment policy statement. And as for the
2023 performance. The plan performed exceptionally well, with money not
required immediately returning 10.9% in 2023. And money required immediately
returning 5.2%. Good returns. Any questions? Okay, we'll go to
the vote. All in favor? Any opposed? That is carried.
Thank you, chair. The next item is 2025. Budget calendar
report number two. Two seven. 2024. Corporate Services Office of
City Treasurer recommends the proposed 2025 budget calendar and the
associated timelines mover in a seconder is required. Move by
councilor Trini, second by Mayor Boschkoff again. I believe that
treasure agrees. Interested? In providing. Pardon me. The treasurer grieves
is interested in some introductory comments here on the budget
as well. So, again, thank you. Through the chair. Might
be a few minutes longer than from this one, so.
The bunch of calendar as presented is consistent with recent
budget eras with the Committee of the whole debating the
budget starting at the end of January. Four sessions, four
plan sessions, with ratification scheduled before February 10. Administration has
already started preliminary work on the 2025 budget and is
working towards presenting. A report with budget directions in July.
New in this year's process, we conducted a pre budget
survey to gauge public opinion on the 2025 budget. The
results are provided in the attachment. Unfortunately, we only received
219 returns, so we can't necessarily extrapolate. The results to
the entire population without a significant margin of error. However,
as city treasurer, the message I received is a the
public engagement in the budget process is low and b
for those that are engaged, the budget isn't necessarily easily
digestible. While this isn't ideal, this information will help our
team moving forward as we know we need to do
a better job of educating and communicating with the public.
Community. Engagement is a key component in accountability of public
resources and is something we're committed to. Improving. Thank you.
Thank you for that. Questions? On the budget calendar. Councilor
Hamilton. Yeah, chair. There seemed to be a little bit
of pushback on the pre budget consultation meeting the last
time, but it came up really weak in the survey.
As not very important to people. And just like, I
mean, we heard from the chamber. Council. Or. People told
us they want that back, but then it's not reflected
in the survey. Could you just corroborate that evidence? Through
the chair. It might be confusing the pre budget survey.
With some of the other options that were in the
survey. Ask policy analyst Vadode to comment on that question.
Through the chair, we found that there was not a
lot of appetite. In the respondents to the survey for
public deputations. I'm assuming that's what we're discussing. With this
question. Again. We also had such a small sample that
it's really hard to extrapolate to the greater population. We
did notice that the trends don't follow the city of
Thunder Bay. Population. It's obviously people who are more engaged.
In. City affairs and things like that. So we do
have to. Take those results with a grain of salt.
But it seems the people who are invested. In the
budget process. Are more interested in in person Q and
A's and surveys. Thank you. Councilor Hamilt or councilor Johnson.
Thank you, Chad. Just on the final summary report. Presented
at the February 10 meeting is that, if I understand
that correctly, just to clarify that's? Taken everything. The process
and what council has done. And just throwing it into
a report. For residents to see. Is that essentially what
that is? So. The February 10 would be the ratification
vote, so. You would receive. The package, the binder. I
debate it over four days, make amendments, approve those amendments,
and then on February 10, you would. Receive the corporate
report would be represented and voted. And approve that. Day
on February 10, the 2025 budget would be approved. Okay.
For some reason, I guess my mistake. I saw it
as a report being broadcast to show. Residents, everything that
we've done in my bet on that. Okay. Sorry. Through
the chairs. That is another enhancement that we are suggesting
for 2025 budget is. That last year. We ran. A
budget survey at the same time as deliberations. And as
results came in, those results, those surveys were actually forwarded
to council members throughout the budget deliberations. What I were
suggesting this year is that in addition to doing that,
we would bring forward a report. On ratification that summarizes
all the budget survey responses. Survey responses. Sorry. Very good.
Thank you. Thank you, chair. Councilor gertuga. Thank you, Mr.
Chair. And just looking here at the capital and budget
package delivered to city council. January 10, 2025 and then
the capital and the operating package. Posted the city website
January 17 I thought we were trying to move. Our
ratification. Closer to January. So that we're not voting on
a budget that we were already two months into. So
I was wondering, why could we not? Post the deliver
the budget to council and post to the city website
on the same time. Same date, January 10, and then
move everything back one week, and then we would be
ratifying. It February 3. Bring us closer to that January
ratification date. That other community. Other communities ratify way before
we do so through the chair. During last year's budget
discussions with some of our Ontario. Regional and single tier
community. Groups. We did do a survey. Of when municipalities
were bringing forward their 2024 budget. 19 of them participated.
Nine of them brought forward their budgets in the first
quarter of the budget. Year, including Hamilton and Toronto and
Hall. Amand all were. In February as well. The reason
why we want to bring forward or give counsel. The
budget ahead of time is so. You can read it,
digest it, and when it becomes public, you have an
opportunity to have a discussion with your constituents. If the
city clerk has anything to add. Anything else to add
on that schedule? So through the chair, I would just
note that it is our practice that, again, council members
receive. Information from a city administration prior to public release.
So that that way you are fully informed and able
to answer your constituents questions. Well, I would like to
see us work towards getting into that January date. I
know other communities. Isn't it, subbury? I believe that. One
of the things that ratifies before December so that, you
know, that's the way budgeting should happen before you get
too much into the year when you've already spent the
first two months of the proposed budget. So I would
like to see. I'm not going to propose anything in
the amendment tonight, but I like to see us continue
to try to work. As was committed. By City manager
Gail previously many years ago. Thank you. Okay, we have
Councilor Agarwal next. I need to respond to that. The
commitment I made many years ago was to move the
budget. Process from March to earlier in the year to
February. And that's what we achieved. I think we did
that seven years ago or something like that. I don't
remember exactly. And what we have here is what we
think the sweet spot is for the right time to
do the budget. Remember, the earlier you do the budget,
the less certainty you have as to especially external factors,
and that increases risk. And if we do it in
January and February, it does not. Impact contracts. It does
not impact capital projects adversely anyway. So my advice over
the past few years has been where we need to
be now. And my advice has been, it doesn't need
to change. Thank you. Okay. Sorry. I know. What? I
spoke to it years ago that we were trying to
get towards closer to January, so. That was my recollection,
so I guess we differ. Okay. I have counselor or,
pardon me, Mayor Boschkoff, then councilor Agarwal. Thank you. And
I appreciate the survey results because they're quite interesting in
terms. Of the split. This survey is provided as a
direction for council politically in terms of. Seeing. What
preferred types of increases would be done to what extent?
Does the administration take? These survey results in terms of
constructing. Their mathematics. I'll ask policy analyst Lovato day to
comment as well. But unfortunately, because these survey sample is
so low, it's difficult. To use these results. It does
give a glimpse of what the public is thinking, but
only a small portion of the public. I think. The
results are important. But. I think the biggest story for
administration is how can we get more involvement with the
community? How can we get? The survey numbers up so
that we can use this as more of a barometer
as to what the municipality as a whole. Mistaken. Policy
analyst Lovato day has anything to add to that. Through
the chair. I agree with city treasurer grieves when it
comes to these results. We had such a small amount.
Of the resident population. That responded that what we really
need to do is try to increase our engagement more
than apply. These specific answers to our budgeting process. So
it would be really nice to see more public engagement,
and maybe we need to do more. Advertising or come
up with some more ways to reach out to more
people, like more residents of the city so that we
can get a better idea of what people are actually
looking for. Thank you for that. Councilor Echo. Thank you
very much. My question that I was going to have
in regards to the survey has been answered. But one
thing that we were tossing around before was a multi
year budget. You had mentioned that you were maybe looking
at it. Or are we looking at it? Yes. So
through the chair, we do have council's endorsement to move
forward. With a multi year budget in the 2024 capital
budget. There was some money put aside. For software to
facilitate that move. The plan right now is to go
to RFP. In the next few weeks. Most likely, we're
going to have to bring that to council to be
approved just based on the dollar amount and. With that
I intend on bringing forth. Some options for council. So
once that you're budgeting is being done throughout other municipalities
across Ontario, To vary. Varying extents. Some do a two
year operating, two year capital, some do a four year
operating. Four year capital. Recently I've seen one that one
municipality that does a two year operating and a four.
Year capital, which. Is intriguing. Basically. What we would want
to do is, in the last year of a term
of counsel, have that council approved at least a two
year budget so that the first year of a new
council. Aren't faced with having to learn. The entire municipality
and. Approve a half billion dollar budget. So that's where
I'm looking at bringing it. And you should be receiving
more information. Most likely in August, September on that. Thank
you very much. Further questions. I had a couple. Just
to pick up on councilor Hamilton's comments. We did get
feedback last year. The public deputations in advance of the
budget. Were different than a Q and a session. In
that people were in a public forum being heard by
the public. Were they eliminated due to time constraints? Or
just they weren't best practice. I think they were eliminated
because, first of all, a general desire to shorten the
budget process. And have fewer meetings, and that was probably
the lowest hanging fruit in order to achieve that. And
also a sense. Of fine to have deputies here and
say their speak. But the deputies are also free to
speak. To you and they're free to speak to administration,
and that was the purpose of that. Consult that night.
I recognize that some people wanted their public word and
wanted to be seen publicly. Giving you their advice, but.
They were not stopped, nor were they constrained from giving
you their advice and their thoughts that's. The general feeling
and approach to and you and I worked on this
pretty well together for a long time trying to figure
out how to improve the budget process. That's where we
led it, okay? So. Are individuals allowed to give a
deputation if they wish? At other committee meetings prior to
budget or during budget sessions. So chair through you are.
Procedural bylaw prohibits deputations that relate to the budget process.
Because you have removed that. In the past again, we've
created engagement opportunities that didn't have a barrier where someone
needed to fill out a form and come and sit
before council that people had the opportunity. To come in
off the street, go to a board meeting, call a
member of council, connect with administration. We were trying to
be all encompassing. Okay? So in the Q and a
session, Would allow them to interface with staff and or
counsel. On that. You've included three options right now, none
of them brought up as of yet. Or have they?
So through the chair, option three is included in the
recommendation. Okay. Option three is. Included. Okay, I must submit
that. And let me just see what option three is.
Or maybe you. Can through the chair. I can just
maybe save a few seconds. The option three is really
the status quo is to repeat. What we did last
year with a few enhancements that I've mentioned earlier. All
right? Lastly. Is the meeting times? Are we to assume
they're 05:00 p.m. Or. Is there some movement on that?
Since we're streamlining, I'm just thinking about. People that work
and people at home that don't tune in at 05:00
that maybe. Would if we started our meetings at 630.
So through the chair. I don't believe we've set the
time on the public. Council. Would like to entertain. But,
Jerry, you're correct. The meeting start times where budgets are
05:00. P.m. And have been for years. And I think
there's good reasons for that. And one of them is,
sometimes these nights run long. Like we're doing tonight. So
05:00 p.m. Is a tool to get out of here
earlier, okay? Yeah. There doesn't seem to be any real
push to move to 630. Okay. Thank you for those
answers. I guess it's time to call the question. Okay,
all those in favor? Any opposed? That's carried. Thank you.
Chair. The next item. Is. To 2029. Report number 231
2024. City Manager's Office of City clerk recommends the approval
of the multi year accessibility plan. The recommendation as contained
within this report requires a mover in a second or
chair. Move by councilor training, signed by councilor Hamilton.
Questions. Councilor Ayello. Thank you. And through the chair. In
this report. Basically, the majority of what you do is
legislated and there is no leeway on legislation. Is that
correct? So chair through you. That's our municipal accessibility specialist,
Scott Garner, who has been here since. 630. So I
appreciate him being here. He can certainly come to the
podium to answer your question. And yes, you are correct.
It is significantly regulated. Yeah. So it is regulated. So
in putting. This report together is just a matter of
updating. The report with new legislation. And the new guidelines.
So through the chair. So, Scott, if you do want
to jump in, you're welcome to turn on your microphone.
It's important to note that there are requirements for the
multi year accessibility plan, which certainly Scott can speak to
further, if that is your question, please. Through the chair,
too, if you don't mind me jumping in. Thank you.
Just to add. On to what clerk power has mentioned.
There were some updates that we did provide in the
multi year plan for. 2024 to 2029, including things like.
Emergency maintenance of accessible features which are required to be
included. That has been an updated. Piece of information. That's
required under the Accessibility Frontarians with Disabilities act to be
included in the multi year plan. So that is the
piece that has been included? Yes. That would also be
included in our asset management plan, I'm assuming as well.
These considered capital type of assets. This equipment. Chair through
you. Yes, the city would consider all of its infrastructure
assets. Certainly smaller assets would be pooled, but there is
a capital threshold, generally above $10,000 per item to be
included. Thank you. Any further questions? Mayor Boschko. Is
there a final process involved in terms of ensuring that
our materials are made accessible, like in terms of. Braille
or fonts, that type of thing. Is there a standard
procedure? That. Happens throughout the organization uniformly.
Well through the chair. Our communications policies. All of. Our
materials. That are put out are put out in an
accessible format. Our website. Is the city of Thunderbase website
has gone through. Extensive. Rectification. It's almost midnight.
So my words. Are. Remediation. Thank you, clerk power. Our
print materials. I know that. Our office. City clerk's office.
Reviews many reports weekly to ensure accessibility. For example, the
multi year accessibility plan, which is being produced. Will be
produced after tonight. We'll ensure that. It is fully accessible
too. If anything is required in an accessible format by
a member of the public or by staff member. We
can certainly look at doing that. And typically it would
be myself that we're our office. That the person would
contact. To receive something in an accessible format. The legislation
says timely and reasonable. Manner to receive that and no
cost. Or no more than what the cost of the
document would typically be. So if it's a free document
that's posted online. There would be no cost to make.
It accessible for that person requesting it in an accessible
format. So as things move through, The system. Does everything
have to go through your office to ensure that it's
compatible? Through the chair. I'm a resource. To all city
departments, so we have a number of resources online. Through
our intranet to ensure that. Staff know how to create
accessible documents. I'm there as a resource. If staff have
questions, all staff across the corporation have received. Training on
what's required. On accessibility. Through. All the integrated accessibility standards,
regulations. Of the Accessibility Frontarians with Disabilities Act. So that
includes accessible customer service. That includes information and communication. There's
general requirements under training. There's all sorts of different just
to finish that. Train of thought. There's transportation, employment, design
and public spaces standards. So under information and communication and
general requirements. And accessible customer service. Our staff. Would know
and have received training. How to create accessible documents. And
if they don't, they certainly know where. To find the
information they can always contact myself to. Thank you very
much. Good explanation. No further questions. We'll call the question.
All in favor? Any opposed? That is carried. Thank you,
chair. With the time being twelve 06:00 a.m. Would ask
for a mover. And a second or please to continue
with the business at hand. Any takers? Councilor Oliver. Councilor
Oliver. And councilor Gurtiga. Thank you. Moved and second all.
In favor. 123-4567. Any opposed?
Okay, that's carried. Welcome to Tuesday. I will say, just
for fun, folks around the table and anyone still with
us watching at home. When we wrote the bylaw for
the new city manager. It's one of the for the
800 and 01:00 a.m. Because we wondered whether or not
midnight we would be pushing it. You'd have a change
of guard at a meeting. So continuing on chair, Norm
could have been leaving. Next, we do have the accessibility
advisory committee. Terms of reference, report number 231 2024. This
is the city manager's office recommending the amended terms of
references appended to the report. A mover and a seconder
from council. Please move by councilor. I also seconded. By
councilor Zazino. Any questions? Comments? Councilor Trini, thank you. Through
the chair. Reading this terms a reference, am I understanding
there's 16 people on this? Or am I just reading
it incorrectly? Chair through you. I believe that there are
16 people. Yes. And most of the folks on the
accessibility advisory committee are all folks have lived experience. So
again, people living with disabilities in our community. So the
change that we brought forward was to change some of
those members. Currently allocated to specific sectors, to being three
citizens at large. Again, individuals that represent those living with
a disability or having lived experience. Thank you for that
clarification. Seeing. No other questions. Yes, Councilor Aguilar, thank you.
Just an elaboration. Some of the people that may have
disabilities. Would their parent or guardian or somebody who's your
support worker be able to be on the committee representing
because they personally may not have the disability, but they
take we do have a spot chair through you. For
a parent or a caregiver of someone with a disability,
we also have a service representative as well, someone from
a service organization. Who works with individuals with disabilities. The
other thing I will note is we do have individuals
on our accessibility advisory committee with developmental disabilities, who often
have a support worker with them or those with a
mobility disability who require some assistance with transport, and again,
their support worker would attend with them. But they would
be the voting member. With a disability would be the
voting member. And in the off chance that that person
with a disability wasn't able to fully comprehend. Would their
guardian. Or their parent be able to be the voting
member through the chair. We don't transfer voting membership. What
we do is we work with our members. So again,
the individuals on that committee we take extra time to
work with them on the items on the agenda, we
have a vice chair who has a developmental disability, and
she's doing an absolutely amazing job because we. Take the
time to work with her to ensure that she can
bring things forward to the committee. And present them in
ways that are of her understanding and her level of
comprehension. That's great to hear. Thank you. No further questions.
All those in favor? Any opposed? That is carried. Next
item, please. Next chair. We have landscape architectural services award,
prime consultant for City of Thunder Bay Waterfront Festival Area
renewal report number 235 2024. Infrastructure development and operations recommends
a request for proposal for prime consultant for this work
be awarded. This was distributed on Thursday, June the 20th.
It is scheduled for ratification. Tonight. It would require a
two thirds vote. The recommendation as contained within the report
does require a mover and a seconder and general Marshall,
general manager Marshall would like to provide some opening. Comments,
please. Thank you. Chair, actually. I'd like to invite Director
Dixon to make those remarks. I know it's late. It's
okay. Thank you. So this report recommends the award of
prime consulting work to be completed for the detailed design,
preparation of tender packages and construction administration of three phases
of work planned to update the festival. Area at Prince
Arthur's Landing. This work is funded 73% through the. Isop
investing in canada infrastructure program. This large three year project
will reorient the festival site to relocate the stage area
to the north end of the field and enhance back
of house and stage support, including servicing that will benefit
all events hosted in the festival area. Awarding the design
of the full renewal project, rather than individual phases will
result in efficiencies as well as a site with a
unified field and integrated servicing. Tenders will be designed and
issued by the consultant each year for three years to
complete the full project that will improve audience experience and
allow for more efficient events set up for. Organizers and
support higher level events and concerts. Happy. To have any
questions. Thank you for the overview, Councilor Ellen. Thank you.
And through the chair. Oh, hang on. Procedures. Councilor Hamilton
moved. Who's our second? Councilor trainee will second. Thank you.
We're good to go. Thank you. For the next three
years. Will there be? Large periods of time. Where the
park will not. Be functional, be used. Through the chair.
I believe that. Landscape architect Guy Walter is available for
answering questions. And if not? Then, yes.
Manager Halberson may be able to add to this, but
yes, we are looking to work. Around events that are
scheduled in the park to make sure that we're impacting
those as little as possible during construction over the next
three years. That's good. Thank you. Councilor Agarwal. Thank you
very much. Through the chair. The preliminary funding is asking
for $741,000. Can we have a breakdown of all the
costs that we're anticipating over the next three years as
it's a three year project. So through. The chair. The
project right now is budgeted for $5 million. Of which
I believe it's $1.3 million that will be funded by
the city. That's for the entire project. That was the
original budget for the project. In the application for the
ISA program? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Councilor. I'm sorry. I
forgot to ask one question. So on that budget, The
HST rebate. I believe it was $73,000. An HST rebate.
Does that go back into the next, like the following
year? Where does that money go? Because it shows that.
It's there, it's spent. But then we're getting it back.
So where? Does it go? So through the chair. When
we budget and when we compare actuals to budget, it's
net of the HST. Rebates, so it's already factored in.
How would you show that? On. I want to ask
that question. In the corporate report, page 19.
Where we deduct the HST rebate of 73,000. So the
total cost. To the city for this project would be
$667,000. If the budget. Was $700,000. So the total gross
cost with HSD is 741. But because we get? A
portion of the hse back. We are able to, I
guess, technically invest that money. In capital projects, rather projects.
So it goes back into capital? Well, that's through the
chair. I should have specified. It's not just capital where
we get the HST rebate. We get the HST rebate.
Being a municipality, we get. The full federal portion of
the HST back and 78% of the provincial portion. So
it's on all operating, all. Shouldn't say all because. Hscs
are complicated. Tax. But generally. We get most feedback. Okay,
appreciate. Thank you. I don't see any further questions, so
call the question. All in favor? Any opposed? That is
carried. Next item. Thank you, chair. The next item on
the agenda was withdrawn. That was the city of Thunder
Bay. Energy conservation, demand management. Report. This item was noted
earlier today that it would be withdrawn from tonight's agenda.
Following that item. You will skip past our unsheltered homelessness
report and move to petitions and communications. Which we have
an appointment of city manager chair. Memorandum from Kerry Orki's
director of human resources and corporate safety, also scheduled for
ratification. Again, effective at 08:00 a.m. Tomorrow morning I'm over
in a second, please move by councilor ellow. Seconded by
Mayor Ballchoff. Any questions? All those in favor? Any opposed?
None. Good news. Okay. Chair. I do want to note
that this item is scheduled for ratification as the bylaw.
Will be presented at city council immediately following this meeting.
Now that we've appointed a city manager. Also to appoint
a fire chief. A memorandum from Carrie Marshall, general manager
of infrastructure development and operations, also scheduled for ratification. The
appointment of David Paxton mover in a second, or please
move by councilor Chung. Second by councilor Pascalino. Any questions?
All in. Favor. Any opposed? That is carried. Next item,
please. Next, we have transit and municipal fleet zero emissions
transition plan. Memorandum from Kelvin Jankowski. Manager of capital facilities
construction. This was dated June 14, providing a revised presentation
date for this report for council's consideration. And moving it
from July 15 to July 22. Mover in a second,
or please move by councilor Agowal. Second by councilor Zazino.
Questions? Councilor Ayello? Thank you. Through the chair. So when
reading the report, it talks about. Savings and potential savings
or realized savings. There's not really actually a dollar amount.
To that, so. Basically, what can we expect in the
way of savings? Yes, we will reduce carbon emissions, for
example. Greenhouse gases. But considering the amount of money we're
putting into a lot of these projects, because not everything
is 100% funded. What sort of really? The return on
investment for us. If it's going to cost us. A
million dollars. This is basically just a rescheduling, is it
not? We should probably wait until it comes forward. Save
that one. Okay? It's a question you can ask in
July. Okay. So any other questions? Comments? All those in
favor? Any opposed? Carried. Chair through you. The outstanding list
is provided for information. Following that, we have the establishment
of closed session on Monday, July 15, at 05:00 p.m..
Mover in a second, or pleased to establish that meeting,
councilor Pascalino. And councilor Johnson. All in favor? Any opposed?
That's carried. Next item. Motion to adjourn would be an
order. Motion to adjourn. Council. Johnson. Seconded by councilor Pascalino.
All in favor? Excellent. Don't get up and move. For
those watching still at home, if you're still with us.
Congratulations that you're still with us. We are going to
move to city council. Which is going to follow, so
please refresh your screens should you want to stay with
us. At home. Congratulations. Let me say congratulations.
No. I know.