[0:32] There's another junior.

[0:37] » Thank you. So, we will call this special

[0:40] meeting of council for Tuesday, June

[0:43] 23rd to order. Please could I just

[0:46] remind everybody to silence their

[0:48] devices if they haven't uh done so

[0:50] already. And also just a reminder that

[0:53] uh today's meeting is livereamed on the

[0:56] municipal YouTube channel for members of

[0:58] the public to view either live as it

[1:00] says or at a at a later date right

[1:02] there.

[1:04] Uh adoption of the open session agenda.

[1:06] to be resolved that the council of

[1:07] corporation town of bankrupt is hereby

[1:09] approved of the open session agenda as

[1:13] amended uh dated June 23rd 2026. Uh it's

[1:17] amended just for the order today. So

[1:20] councelor Leman and councelor Lawrence

[1:22] all in favor please. Thank you.

[1:26] Is there any declaration of pecuni? Just

[1:30] seeing none. So today we have a

[1:33] delegation uh from Mr. Brian Lawrence

[1:36] over the walkway access over the

[1:38] municipal property being the prominad.

[1:40] So Brian, if you'd like to come to the

[1:43] front. Thank you.

[1:48] And you'll need to push the button there

[1:50] so you get a red light on on your mic

[1:53] there.

[1:55] >> That one.

[1:56] >> You got it.

[1:56] >> That puts me on.

[1:57] >> You're on.

[1:58] >> Perfect. Thank you very much.

[2:00] >> And just Sorry. You're going to Yeah,

[2:02] we're just going to put your sketches up

[2:05] so we can all see here.

[2:06] >> Great. Except that I have to make a

[2:10] comment on that. Okay. Um, so I want to

[2:13] start off with two apologies. One, I

[2:15] forgot my hearing aids. So if you have

[2:16] to yell at me, that's one thing. Uh, the

[2:18] other is, uh, we just found out about

[2:21] this whole thing about very short, not

[2:24] very long ago. I understand that the

[2:25] decision was made back in May, but we

[2:27] heard nothing about that. So, it wasn't

[2:29] until uh I met with Jake a few not long

[2:32] ago that I was presented with this. This

[2:34] was totally new to us. The reason I

[2:37] mention that is that we um have been

[2:40] making some I have Shannon with me too,

[2:42] Shannon Moore, who runs the spa. She's

[2:45] the one that's most affected by this.

[2:46] She's more affected by it than I am. And

[2:49] uh so if there's some questions that

[2:50] pertain to that, then she'd be here to

[2:52] answer them. But uh so we've been

[2:55] talking up until 10 minutes ago and

[2:57] making some changes. So Amber, I'm sorry

[2:59] that that's not the most upto-date. So I

[3:02] wasn't aware that I that that was going

[3:04] to be used as such. Um but anyway, so I

[3:07] have a handout that's got the update

[3:09] one. Is that okay?

[3:10] >> Sure.

[3:10] >> So I can hand that out. Okay.

[3:12] >> I have a few handouts.

[3:22] Take your time.

[3:24] I only have three hours. You just take your time.

[3:34] » Yeah.

[3:35] >> My fault. This is this sad.

[3:37] >> That's okay. Take your time.

[3:43] Right.

[3:53] » See, it always shows you who knows

[3:55] what's going on.

[3:57] >> That's why I brought her along, too.

[4:00] >> That's right. [laughter]

[4:03] » So, yeah. You don't mind taking one

[4:05] passing along because your face is what

[4:07] I I am. Okay. You're okay with that?

[4:10] >> Yep.

[4:12] Wow, that was

[4:16] [laughter] I tried to call you. That's

[4:18] right. Okay. So, uh yeah. So, I

[4:22] apologize that didn't get sent to Amber,

[4:25] but to say we've been just working on it

[4:27] up. They're both the same. They're just

[4:28] coming from two different directions.

[4:29] >> Yeah. I'm thankful. I think

[4:32] >> so. If I may folks uh give you a very

[4:35] Oh, the other handout I have is a

[4:37] written handout to uh text to go with

[4:40] that. Just a word of explanation because

[4:44] I think there are some things that uh

[4:46] many of you may not be aware of with

[4:48] respect to the project. Uh so I'm trying

[4:52] to make this as brief as possible but at

[4:55] your leisure there is um there is uh

[5:00] opportunity to to get a little bit of

[5:03] background. So if I may very briefly

[5:07] I would like to just address

[5:11] the the property. So the property we're

[5:13] talking about of course is 45 Hastings

[5:15] Street North. Royal Leage is in the

[5:18] front. Shannon has her spot at the back

[5:20] and we have an apartment upstairs.

[5:23] So we bought that shortly after my

[5:25] father passed away. We used some

[5:27] earnings to buy a rental property and uh

[5:32] so that's what uh what we have. So when

[5:36] we purchased that as you can see on that

[5:38] the text uh when we purchased 45 the

[5:41] eastern property line extended about 30

[5:44] ft past the neighboring property. So if

[5:48] you go to the diagram

[5:50] that I handed out, that 30 ft is that

[5:55] blue box.

[5:57] Why that property line extended that

[5:59] far, I don't know. I wasn't part of

[6:01] that. We we just bought the property.

[6:03] Okay. So

[6:06] forever since we bought it, we've had

[6:08] that that blue square. So it's about 30

[6:10] by 30, so about 900 square ft.

[6:14] And historically we got limited use of

[6:17] it. Uh the town would often put snow on

[6:19] there and that kind of thing. So but we

[6:22] did have parking behind it etc. Okay. So

[6:27] when uh we had that um when 41 collapsed

[6:33] when the um Victorian lady collapsed it

[6:36] was as you know it was sitting there for

[6:38] some period of time in a bad state of

[6:40] repair. So Tyler, my son, if you know

[6:42] Tyler Lawrence from Lawrence Electric,

[6:44] who was with at Dolia now, keeping your

[6:48] water and sewer together, um he and

[6:52] Jeremy and Jason White from Beacon

[6:54] Construction bought the property. They

[6:57] didn't want it, they didn't need it, but

[6:58] it was an eyesore and so they they

[7:00] elected to buy it

[7:03] and uh and tore it down. And I won't get

[7:05] into all the details, but they went

[7:07] through various phases with that. But

[7:09] they brought the property right off the

[7:11] bat. It was obvious that there was a

[7:13] storm sewer went through that property

[7:15] and that that storm sewer was in bad

[7:17] state of repair. It was all undermined.

[7:18] There was huge cavities. So they

[7:21] couldn't build while that storm sewer

[7:24] was in that condition.

[7:26] And uh so we had some discussions with

[7:29] various people over the time about about

[7:31] rerouting that uh because the main uh

[7:34] portion of that the largest portion of

[7:36] that water came from clique. There was a

[7:39] culbert that ran along the bell property

[7:42] and discharged uh right right uh to the south of us behind the

[7:48] neighboring property. And that huge

[7:50] volume of water went through there every

[7:53] spring.

[7:55] It also impacted us because at the back

[7:57] of 45

[8:00] uh with all that snow melting etc we

[8:02] ended up with huge quantities of runoff.

[8:04] So we end up with quite a pond at the

[8:06] back of 45 over a foot deep. And so it

[8:09] affected uh plowing, it affected

[8:12] parking, it affected everything. So we

[8:14] in the spring would have to my son and I

[8:16] would have to get in there with shovels

[8:18] and dig the ditch out that got filled

[8:21] with snow to get the water to run

[8:23] through and it ended up going through

[8:25] that culvert too. So we had two

[8:27] problems. The the the runoff gave us a

[8:30] big pond and the boys couldn't build.

[8:34] After the building was removed, there

[8:37] was a bell box on the side of the

[8:39] building and uh the boys put up a wooden

[8:41] stand and attached that box and it was

[8:44] there for some period of time. Suddenly

[8:47] one day out of the blue, if you look at

[8:49] the diagram that I handed out

[8:53] on the lower left corner,

[8:56] Belle put up a box, a standing box that

[9:00] stands about 2 ft high or whatever and

[9:02] foot square

[9:05] right in our driveway. As you can see,

[9:07] that's the driveway. We own that

[9:08] driveway. That's part of our property.

[9:11] We didn't normally use that pime that uh

[9:14] driveway because at that for a long time

[9:16] uh where the prominad's going was open

[9:18] to vehicular traffic. So we would just

[9:20] drive in there. When construction

[9:23] started uh then we no longer had access

[9:28] to drive there. So we ended up talking

[9:30] to Dwayne Sutherland at um at McDougall

[9:33] and Dwayne agreed to let us use his

[9:36] driveway to get back there. In exchange,

[9:39] we have since then given his staff

[9:42] several parking spots so that they are close to the building. So many of

[9:47] them park there every day now and walk

[9:49] to the business.

[9:52] In conjunction with that, their neighbor

[9:55] building, we call it the Henderson

[9:57] building, I believe it's number 51, has

[9:59] two apartments upstairs. When the

[10:01] construction fences went up, there were

[10:03] no parking for them. So, we were asked

[10:06] by them if we could provide them with

[10:08] two parking spots. When we had the blue

[10:11] square, there was no problem. They

[10:13] typically park behind there and and all

[10:16] was good. So, that's that's the uh the

[10:20] history.

[10:23] So,

[10:25] and uh [sighs and gasps]

[10:27] um I tried to get I tried to contact

[10:30] Belle to get them to move that box and

[10:32] they just kept dragging me and dragging

[10:35] me. Anyway, I finally got a hold of a

[10:36] Bell person on and uh I don't know his

[10:39] name off hand, but he said uh I I

[10:41] explained the situation and he says, "We

[10:43] don't have anything that you can drive

[10:46] over." Okay. [laughter] So I said,

[10:50] "Well, Tyler and I have been talking

[10:52] about it and it's something called a

[10:53] handwell. It's like a short piece of

[10:55] culbert with a steel top on it that you

[10:57] that's intended to be driven over." So

[11:00] [snorts] he said, so we said we would

[11:01] talk about doing that. He said, "Go

[11:03] ahead and do that, but don't tell me

[11:04] about it or whatever." [laughter]

[11:06] So at our expense, and it was in the

[11:08] neighborhood of $300 or $400, uh, we

[11:10] bought this handwell. It's sitting on

[11:12] the property now. If you look, it's

[11:14] sitting in behind the u the privacy

[11:17] fence there. So, it's sitting there

[11:18] waiting and Tyler hopefully in the next

[11:21] week or two will will be able to install

[11:24] that so that then we can open that

[11:27] driveway. So, the only access we have to

[11:30] the back of 45 is through McDougall

[11:33] parking lot. Okay. All right.

[11:36] [clears throat]

[11:37] A couple of winter before last, uh we

[11:41] went to Florida for a while and before

[11:44] we left the the uh tarp, the the

[11:48] insulated tarp was behind 51. Our

[11:51] understanding was that they the reason

[11:53] for that is to minimize frost so that

[11:55] you could dig in early spring. So when

[11:58] we left uh for Florida, that was the

[12:01] understanding the building was going

[12:02] there. The other thing I talked to hydro

[12:04] and if you look on the on the left side

[12:08] of the of the blue square you'll see

[12:11] that there's a hydro pole. Again this is

[12:13] uh please don't the the dimensions

[12:16] aren't necessarily accurate because uh

[12:18] it's for illustrative purposes only. I

[12:21] talked to a lady from Hydro and she said

[12:23] that they hydro was going to move that

[12:26] pole and move it further south on town

[12:30] property because the power was going to

[12:33] come from Clique Street because there's

[12:35] power coming to that from uh from the U

[12:38] pub area there now. So the that hydro

[12:41] line would have gone right into that uh

[12:45] through the had to be removed because of

[12:47] the building. When we were in Florida,

[12:49] Jake text me and and said, "Uh, we've

[12:52] moved the location of the uh the NIP

[12:55] that the the HIPP [laughter] the uh the

[13:00] uh library building to where it is now."

[13:02] And uh he wondered if we would be

[13:04] willing to sell the black the blue

[13:06] square. And I said I talked it over with

[13:09] Tyler. He said, "We would really like to

[13:11] keep it. We we like the we like the snow

[13:13] storage and we like the extra parking."

[13:16] Um anyway, then after a few discussions,

[13:19] I found out that Janet was the

[13:21] developer. I didn't know anything about

[13:23] that till that point. And so Jake turned

[13:25] me over to Janet because she was going

[13:27] to be dealing with with the issues at

[13:30] that point. Uh Jake and I talked about

[13:32] some other things that we can talk about

[13:33] later if you wish. But anyway, bottom

[13:34] line, we started dealing with Janet. So,

[13:39] she

[13:41] sent me

[13:43] a a offer to purchase

[13:46] the blue square

[13:48] for $2. [snorts]

[13:51] Okay, we still haven't seen the $2, but

[13:53] that's either here or there in exchange

[13:56] because we said, "Okay, if we if we uh

[13:59] agree to sell the property, and by the

[14:01] way, if we'd left that, that would have

[14:03] a major impact on the property. that

[14:05] would it wouldn't go all the way to the

[14:07] building, but it would sure have a big

[14:09] impact. Uh so there were we asked we

[14:12] ended up getting three condition three

[14:15] um things that she agreed to. One was

[14:18] that the sewer line would definitely be

[14:21] a realigned so that it went across the

[14:25] back of the properties and out through

[14:27] the prominad area which as we all know

[14:29] is has been done. The other thing was

[14:33] that she would agree to put a catch

[14:35] basin on behind 45 so that we would

[14:39] never have a ponding issue again. And

[14:41] the third thing she agreed to was that

[14:45] she would haul our snow for up to up to

[14:48] three times a month. So if you look at

[14:51] the diagram,

[14:53] the the yellow box is where presumably

[14:58] the snow would be piled. And Shannon

[15:01] looks after the snow plowing. Uh she uh

[15:04] that's one of her jobs. And so uh in our

[15:08] rental agreement, she looks after the

[15:09] snow plowing. So the snow would be

[15:12] stored there and up to three times a

[15:14] month hauled away at the developer's

[15:17] expense.

[15:19] So although the storm sewer through 41

[15:22] didn't affect me directly, it certainly

[15:23] affected my son and the boys so that

[15:25] they could build. By the way, they ended

[15:26] up buying a bunch of steel for that

[15:28] property because uh it was just about co

[15:31] time and they knew the price was going

[15:32] to rise. So they have stockpiled a bunch

[15:34] of steel at Tyler's place waiting for

[15:37] construction. So now that that cover the

[15:40] midarity of the water no longer passes

[15:42] through there, they would now be able to uh to build what their plans are uh

[15:48] and have been approved. Um commercial on

[15:51] the main floor, three apartments

[15:52] upstairs. Okay. So that pretty much

[15:57] brings us to uh uh close um back a few a

[16:05] while ago um we heard through the

[16:08] grapevine that the prominad was on hold

[16:10] until next year.

[16:13] So current or up until recently, the

[16:17] people that from 51 in the apartment in

[16:21] order to access access the apartment

[16:23] have to Oh, by the way, the privacy

[16:25] fence I opened it up a little bit too

[16:27] just so there's foot traffic so that uh

[16:30] spa customers and the people from 51 had

[16:34] better access. Otherwise, they also have

[16:36] to walk around and go down the McDougall

[16:38] driveway as well. So in order to get

[16:41] access to the back of the property, I

[16:43] moved the end of the fence just a couple

[16:44] of feet just so that there could be foot

[16:46] traffic. Although we can't have

[16:47] vehicular traffic obviously till the

[16:49] bell box is moved, foot traffic is

[16:52] possible.

[16:53] So when I had heard that that fence was

[16:56] going to be remain to the north of us

[16:59] for at least till next year, first of

[17:01] all, there was a couple of concerns. One

[17:03] was the garbage. Somebody left an old

[17:05] chair there and

[17:07] >> [laughter]

[17:07] >> uh there was a couple of real estate

[17:09] boxes that they used for the the

[17:11] pamphlets were there lying on the

[17:12] ground. There was there's still to this

[17:14] day a a a drum there with a garbage dome

[17:18] on the top. So I just saw a guy today

[17:20] putting garbage in there. So So

[17:22] [laughter]

[17:23] it looked it looked and and grass was

[17:25] growing up and and it was looking pretty

[17:28] ugly. So um I I contacted uh Janet and I

[17:33] said is there any way that that privacy

[17:36] sorry the construction fence could be

[17:37] moved so that first primarily the

[17:41] tenants from 51 it would be closer for

[17:44] them cuz that's their part that's where

[17:46] they park currently to bring their

[17:49] groceries to bring their luggage if

[17:51] they're going somewhere. It made it that

[17:52] much shorter. It clean gave us an

[17:55] opportunity to clean up the mess and

[17:57] we're not going to deny it. It did make

[17:59] it a little easier for people off the

[18:01] sidewalk to come to to Shannon Spa

[18:04] because that's where the main entrance

[18:05] is on that side of the building. Okay.

[18:10] [clears throat]

[18:11] So, uh, when, uh, Shannon, sorry, when

[18:14] Janet agreed to that, then the fence was

[18:16] moved and I brought in some gravel just

[18:19] to make it easy for on the short term

[18:21] to, uh, to walk from the sidewalk to the main entrance on the north of the

[18:27] building. Never intending it to be

[18:29] anything permanent. It was just to make

[18:32] it easier for the tenants and to and to

[18:34] clean up the area.

[18:37] So, that brings me to the point where we

[18:39] are today. So when Jake showed up, he

[18:42] called me and and said he wanted to meet

[18:44] me at 45 and he handed me the the lease

[18:47] agreement form. Well, this was a total

[18:48] shock to me as was the layout of the u

[18:52] of the prominad um so the sidewalk and

[18:56] the whole prominad area. So that's when

[18:59] we uh got in touch with um Amber and

[19:03] asked if we could be here. And thank you

[19:06] Amber.

[19:06] >> [laughter]

[19:07] >> We were pleasantly s we're very happy

[19:09] that when you agreed and and uh and so I

[19:12] immediately put those diagrams together

[19:14] that I emailed you so that you could as

[19:16] required to confirm that I wasn't aware

[19:18] that that was going to be they were

[19:20] going to be used here. I guess it makes

[19:21] sense but I understood we had to bring

[19:23] 12 copies so I didn't of whatever it was

[19:27] we were presenting. Okay. So now if we

[19:30] can go to the diagram please.

[19:33] So J Shannon and I had discussions

[19:37] ongoing but we had more discussions this

[19:41] morning and until we met at 45 before we

[19:45] came here. So we have so right off the

[19:49] bat she does not need the sidewalk. The

[19:55] sidewalk that it was proposed is not

[19:58] necessary at all for her business. the

[20:03] vast I'm a large person and she can um

[20:07] reply to this or comment many of her

[20:11] customers park at the back and walk from

[20:14] the back of the building down the side.

[20:17] So,

[20:19] currently, if you were to go there right

[20:21] now, the fence is moved away from the

[20:23] building, and I put in some patio

[20:26] stones. When we got looking at the um uh

[20:31] the uh stakes, the the the property

[20:34] stakes, we was we knew it. And on your

[20:38] on their diagram, if you notice there, I

[20:41] show the property line on the north side

[20:43] of the building. So the the property

[20:45] line is really close to the front part

[20:48] of the building. There is a little jog

[20:51] where the spa is and but the property

[20:54] line continues on past the building. I

[20:57] have one more handout for you

[21:00] now that I know where they are.

[21:11] This was taken

[21:14] this morning.

[21:24] So, this is the back of the spa, the

[21:27] norththeast corner of the spa.

[21:31] The current patio stones are what being

[21:33] used as the as the main

[21:37] uh entrance access to the side entrance.

[21:41] If you

[21:43] Yes.

[21:45] Looking towards the sidewalk

[21:47] >> towards Hasting Street.

[21:48] >> To lower tasting towards Hasting Street.

[21:50] Yes. Okay.

[21:53] So, as in front in the lower corner down

[21:57] here is the property

[22:00] marker, that little orange square.

[22:03] So, what Shannon and I discussed, and

[22:07] it's actually her suggestion, is that

[22:10] let's just move the patio stones right

[22:14] to the building. Now, we're on our

[22:16] property

[22:18] now. And by the way, if you want to

[22:20] bring up one of those other rooms,

[22:22] Amber, that I showed previously, I had

[22:25] suggested Oh, sorry, Jake.

[22:29] We got extra.

[22:31] Um,

[22:33] sorry. Do you have all three?

[22:37] Uh,

[22:39] keep going. Okay, that one. Yes.

[22:50] » She did move the patio stone back on

[22:52] another picture and it's real close.

[22:55] Sorry.

[22:56] No, no, less than that. That that's I

[22:58] think maybe I don't know what the size

[23:00] of that I could have measured that was

[23:03] going to

[23:06] >> No, that's only 6 in. basically 10 in

[23:12] >> um to the building

[23:18] » right here is is only about 10 in

[23:24] » the patio stone was about that much

[23:26] wider. I can show you the picture. Okay.

[23:28] Do you mind?

[23:28] >> Yeah.

[23:30] Um Shannon took another picture

[23:34] and um

[23:42] if anybody want to see sorry

[23:46] there's the

[23:49] » so what we have decided

[23:51] >> let let me just ask a question here for

[23:53] some clarification. So,

[23:56] um, sorry, uh, Jake, you made a comment

[23:59] there about that distance between the

[24:00] marker and the building was 10 inches.

[24:02] >> Yes.

[24:02] >> Yeah.

[24:03] >> Okay. So, 10 in is obviously not wide

[24:06] enough for a

[24:08] >> I don't know what that number is, Paul,

[24:10] but you're I hear what you're saying. I

[24:11] was there a few minutes ago. I cleaned

[24:13] that area. Okay. But here's the other

[24:15] thing too is that

[24:17] >> the gist of of this is sorry is

[24:21] >> and what we're governed by

[24:23] >> through our insurance companies is li is

[24:25] liability.

[24:26] >> Okay.

[24:26] >> We have I hear you

[24:27] >> we have to do everything to mitigate uh

[24:30] to to mitigate liability.

[24:31] >> Yes.

[24:32] >> We would in a case like this where even

[24:35] say you said you did not want to use

[24:36] that site at all. we would still

[24:38] probably be obligated to put up either a

[24:40] fence or something of that nature there

[24:43] to uh to prevent that access from

[24:46] happening

[24:46] >> at 10 in.

[24:48] >> Yes.

[24:49] >> Whatever. I mean, you obviously can't

[24:50] get beyond.

[24:50] >> So So again, 10 in I can't see is is not

[24:54] a probably a a safe walkway. Uh

[24:57] >> I believe accessibility is in

[24:59] >> Yeah,

[24:59] >> we're not concerned about accessibility

[25:01] because we have other instances, but go

[25:02] ahead.

[25:03] >> Right.

[25:06] » Oh, yeah. But it's not on your property.

[25:08] >> Nobody.

[25:08] >> I mean, as far as the the walkway, is

[25:09] that what we're talking about?

[25:10] >> Yeah. But bottom line, and I hear what

[25:12] you're saying, Paul, carry on if you

[25:13] wish.

[25:13] >> No, I'm just saying is that uh Hey, if

[25:16] this was at 2 ft, then you could make it

[25:18] fine. But I I don't believe you don't

[25:20] have enough you don't have enough room

[25:22] there. And to for anybody to access

[25:25] municipal property uh on a regular

[25:27] basis, we have to have an we have to

[25:29] have an agreement indemnifying us from

[25:31] liability. That's that's the the rules

[25:33] that we have to follow.

[25:36] So this proposal that came forward to

[25:39] put the sidewalk on both sides because

[25:42] we have to treat all property owners the

[25:44] same. If we do want something for one,

[25:45] we have to do it for other. We have to

[25:47] treat all property owners uh the same

[25:49] because there's access, you know, as you

[25:51] pointed out on both sides here. So the

[25:54] plan that was came up which we thought

[25:56] was a fairly generous plan uh to provide

[25:58] you with good access to your uh to your

[26:01] door um to your side door from either

[26:03] the front or the back you know from the

[26:06] front or the back there. Um

[26:10] uh that's why the plan was developed in the form that it was in. And then as

[26:14] part of that again um we have to have

[26:18] some type of an agreement in place which

[26:19] is the lease document and and that it

[26:22] and insurance is you know is being

[26:25] provided etc. So I'm sort of having a

[26:28] hard time seeing how I I'm sort of

[26:30] thinking the sidewalk is of great

[26:32] benefit to you uh for access from both

[26:35] ways to the uh to the side of the

[26:38] building.

[26:39] >> Good point.

[26:41] So, we're I wouldn't say I was there

[26:43] today. I started cleaning that area

[26:45] because instead of putting patio stones,

[26:47] we were planning to go with gravel as I

[26:49] mentioned on on on the current one.

[26:51] Okay. It is tight. There's no question

[26:54] about that.

[26:55] >> But it puts all the all the access and and as you know, there is a sec a

[27:00] back door as is shown on here, right?

[27:02] That that is not the only access to her spa.

[27:05] >> I just have a quick question.

[27:07] >> Sure. On the diagram that was proposed

[27:09] to us, the sidewalk was only going at

[27:12] the front of the building and we were

[27:14] told that the fence is actually going to

[27:17] go down over and then back. So that

[27:20] means I have no access from the back of

[27:23] my building to my door. And and that's a

[27:26] point that uh we can look at again that

[27:30] part of that part of it

[27:31] >> because yeah I was told that the fence

[27:32] was going to be pretty much whatever 10

[27:35] inches or whatever that is from the back

[27:37] of my building or Brian's building. So I

[27:39] from the back of his building it was

[27:41] going to be right there. So none of my

[27:43] customers.

[27:44] >> Right. So as I sit here I I don't know

[27:45] what the implications of us trying to

[27:47] provide a little bit more room. So, I'm

[27:49] not going to say that I'm going to

[27:50] promise anything, but I'm just saying is

[27:52] that we could certainly look at that

[27:54] >> and and I appreciate what you're saying,

[27:55] Paul. On the other and on the other

[27:57] hand, too, as well, we would have really

[27:59] liked to have had this conversation

[28:01] before that got into print and then we

[28:03] could have been aware of some of these

[28:05] options. This was a total surprise to us

[28:08] the other day.

[28:09] >> Again, it's a tough one because

[28:10] technically it is our it's our property.

[28:13] you know, you know, it's it's our

[28:15] property that's being accessed and just

[28:17] with so many changes in insurance, etc.

[28:20] Uh, over the years, um, we're basically

[28:23] forced to do everything to mitigate risk

[28:25] to the municipality.

[28:27] >> I debated about whether reading this out

[28:30] or not.

[28:32] Property owners or their representatives

[28:34] on both sides of the prominade were

[28:36] aware of access encroachments before

[28:38] site development began. They

[28:40] participated in discussions

[28:43] uh where these challenges were discussed

[28:45] and interimm pathways were subsequently

[28:47] implemented when construction fencing

[28:49] was erected in 2024. These owners were

[28:52] aware of the development plans although

[28:54] the final prominad design had not been

[28:56] completed at that time.

[28:58] >> I don't remember that discussion.

[28:59] >> I've got emails between you and I where

[29:01] we've been talking about this you know

[29:03] about the whole development. But I'm

[29:04] saying I had no idea that that that the um the uh

[29:09] >> no sidewalk was

[29:11] >> as it says right what you've just read

[29:12] there the prominad design was not

[29:14] finalized

[29:15] >> right I I appreciate that but we knew

[29:16] nothing about that I would have I'd have

[29:18] loved to have these discussions before I

[29:20] even put all this effort into into

[29:21] making these things the other thing if

[29:23] you'll notice on the other ones for a

[29:25] long time people walked from the from

[29:29] the vehicle driveway into the site

[29:33] Right. Uh that was traffic constantly.

[29:37] People actually park there and walk in

[29:39] and that kind of stuff. So when I

[29:43] understood there was some liability

[29:45] issues. So if people walk through a

[29:48] garden

[29:51] as as part of the town

[29:54] and trip over a shrub, can they sue

[29:59] the the town over that? because I we

[30:01] talked now. The reason I asked is that

[30:03] because at one time I suggested a

[30:04] shorter sidewalk straight out, but I

[30:07] understand that's still a a uh

[30:10] >> liability

[30:10] >> a liability issue. So, uh the other

[30:13] thing and and Shannon and I just talked

[30:15] about a half an hour ago is the very

[30:19] real possibility

[30:21] of realigning her uh the business

[30:24] inside. and that door would strictly be

[30:27] a fire escape, making her reception area

[30:31] at the back door rather than the side.

[30:35] So, what what I had proposed on here,

[30:37] and I I totally understand if if this is

[30:39] a no, I I'm it is what it is.

[30:43] Um

[30:45] if there was any chance of moving the

[30:47] fence, as you can see on the diagram,

[30:49] say two options, moving the fence

[30:51] further north

[30:56] and and then that would mean that we

[30:57] would have have have space

[31:01] uh to to go down that path or if the

[31:05] path if if the fence has to stay where

[31:07] it is sorry in that alignment moving it

[31:10] a foot.

[31:13] So I think it's Shannon's respons

[31:15] Shannon's

[31:17] responsibility

[31:20] uh I assume now correct me if I'm wrong

[31:22] that she can tell her customers

[31:27] whether or not they want to walk down a

[31:29] 10 or 12 inch path or whether they want

[31:31] to use the other entrance. Is that

[31:34] correct or that gray? [laughter]

[31:37] >> Well again let's address your first

[31:40] question.

[31:41] >> Sure. Could we realign the fence at the

[31:44] back so that you could go from the

[31:45] parking lot and make your way around?

[31:47] That's what I'm gathering is the issue

[31:49] at the rear.

[31:51] >> So just just

[31:52] >> Yes. So I'm just saying we can look at

[31:54] that. You know, it might only be you

[31:56] need a couple feet to

[31:57] >> Exactly. That's more than

[31:59] >> Yeah. So we we could look at that. That

[32:01] still leaves in play uh the fact that 10

[32:07] in is probably is not going to do you to

[32:09] do have a walkway. Again, I believe it's

[32:11] more than 10, but I'm not going to swear

[32:13] to anything until we go out and measure.

[32:15] >> And I guess I'm having a hard time

[32:17] because I'm thinking this is a very

[32:18] generous offer by the town to provide

[32:20] you with a very nice walkway and access

[32:23] to the door. And the other thing too is that just for you to think about, you

[32:28] may not own this building forever. And

[32:30] to have that side access open, uh, you

[32:34] know, with an agreement is probably to

[32:36] your advantage as well. it uh it was not

[32:39] being used when I bought the building.

[32:40] It was a insurance at the time. They

[32:43] didn't use it. It wasn't until I rented

[32:46] out the front who then rented out the

[32:48] back unknown to me by the way. I said,

[32:50] "Here's your subtenant." Right. Okay.

[32:51] [laughter] Anyway, they started to put

[32:54] the spa in because the the original

[32:55] tenant rented the whole floor.

[32:58] >> Yeah.

[32:58] >> Um and again, as I say, you can see

[33:04] I I said from the from the photo. Yes,

[33:07] the the the the

[33:10] width is not as wide as that patio

[33:14] stone. I totally agree cuz we have a

[33:16] photo saying that.

[33:18] But when I started clearing there, I

[33:21] walked that and I could

[33:23] >> like how would you clear snow in 10 in?

[33:25] >> That's a Shannon's problem.

[33:26] >> Well, I know like a shovel is lighter

[33:28] than 10 inches.

[33:29] >> No. And she wants to in the winter use

[33:31] the rear entrance. That's her call.

[33:33] >> Yeah. So, the two options I was hoping

[33:37] for. Sorry, Council Wiggins has a

[33:38] question.

[33:40] >> Just uh

[33:40] >> Deputy Mayor, I'm sorry.

[33:41] >> No problem. Uh like your driveway on the

[33:45] uh side that you're dancing with, Belle.

[33:47] That's a that's an issue you're dancing

[33:48] with. How wide is that driveway? Is

[33:50] vehicular wide?

[33:51] >> Oh, absolutely. So, like if she moved

[33:53] her main entrance to the back and put

[33:56] signage here, you would not need that on

[33:58] the north side. You'd be able to walk

[34:00] down the driveway and in the back.

[34:01] >> That's what they're doing now.

[34:02] >> Perfect.

[34:03] >> Okay. However, uh people h want to

[34:07] normally park there and they're hesitant

[34:09] to use McDougall's driveway. There's a

[34:12] fair bit of traffic coming and going.

[34:14] The restaurant is there. Uh all that and

[34:16] then when F41 gets built, it's going to

[34:18] Well, by the we we hope to have that

[34:20] driveway open in weeks. Oh, yeah.

[34:21] >> If I can get Tyler at it. But I hear

[34:23] what you're saying. And people can do

[34:25] that now by walking.

[34:26] >> Yeah.

[34:28] >> They put a sign up on the on the privacy

[34:31] fence there to indicate that. Well, to

[34:32] me it just seems the simplest way to to

[34:35] solve all your problems was change the

[34:36] door they come into.

[34:37] >> Uh, sorry to come in the back entrance.

[34:40] >> Yeah, that that is is a is a

[34:42] possibility. The way it's set up now,

[34:43] the reception areas there that they're

[34:46] tanning beds and the controls are all we

[34:48] discussed

[34:49] >> an hour ago and that is within the

[34:51] realms of possibility.

[34:52] >> You only have to realize if you insisted

[34:54] on remaining with your 10 in that the

[34:56] town's probably going to have to put up

[34:57] some type of barrier.

[34:59] >> We if she does that, we wouldn't do

[35:00] that. We wouldn't bother with the 10

[35:03] inches,

[35:04] >> right? But

[35:05] >> we would just

[35:06] >> we would have to sort and I'm not again

[35:09] this would have to go to staff is that

[35:11] there would have to be some asurances

[35:12] somehow that that side door is not going

[35:14] to be used because when you step out of

[35:15] that side door, you're going to be on

[35:16] town property.

[35:17] >> Not quite.

[35:18] >> 10 inches.

[35:18] >> 10 in.

[35:19] >> Yeah.

[35:19] >> No. Is as I said, if you lose it, it'll

[35:22] be strictly fire.

[35:24] >> The fire exit. The second exit.

[35:29] » See?

[35:33] Yeah, I guess I guess I'm still at a

[35:35] loss. Why you would not want a nice

[35:38] walkway?

[35:39] >> Why would you walk on five feet when 10 ft over you about 20 ft?

[35:44] >> Well, that's our property. We can't have people accessing that

[35:48] through our property. This comes down to

[35:50] the liability issue again.

[35:57] » Yes.

[35:59] Yeah.

[36:00] >> My question, Brian, would be if we go

[36:03] back to the original plan where we

[36:05] offered the sidewalk and agreed to that

[36:08] lease um agreement that the town has

[36:10] proposed

[36:11] >> and we could short not necessarily move

[36:14] the fence in, but shorten a small piece

[36:17] off of it. And I'm again, I can't

[36:18] promise that we can do that. I'm not the

[36:20] developer. I have no part of the

[36:21] building of it. if that fence could be

[36:24] shortened a small amount to allow you to

[36:26] access there. [snorts]

[36:28] >> Trees are missing.

[36:29] >> That's basically what we were saying

[36:30] before about investing the rear fence.

[36:32] >> So rather than move the fence there,

[36:34] >> yeah,

[36:35] >> take a piece off the end.

[36:36] >> Well, yeah.

[36:36] >> So now you can access and get up, would

[36:38] you be willing to take the sidewalk?

[36:42] >> A different sidewalk. The back sidewalk

[36:44] is 10 times more valuable than the front

[36:47] side.

[36:48] >> But what's the issue with having a

[36:49] sidewalk? And I don't know if fire would

[36:52] if that would meet fire requirements

[36:54] even to have 10 inches of sidewalk. Yes,

[36:56] Jay.

[36:56] >> There's also two H5.

[37:02] » Oh, sorry.

[37:04] >> The coming in off the the main sidewalk

[37:07] off of Hastings. There are also two HVAC

[37:10] units that are on town property that

[37:12] supply Brian's building as well. So that issue still needs to be whether

[37:17] there's a lease for those units on our

[37:20] property or they're removed. That that

[37:22] that's another issue that needs to be

[37:23] addressed.

[37:24] >> But if we had the 5ft sidewalk with the

[37:26] lease and the indemnity, what he does

[37:28] with his units would be up.

[37:29] >> He could leave them there and and people

[37:31] have to walk around them or not, but

[37:33] because we would lease them 5T out from

[37:35] the building. Right now the the the

[37:37] units are on our property outside the

[37:39] building. So that has to be addressed

[37:40] one way or another.

[37:41] >> Can I ask a question? And you're exactly

[37:42] right, Jake. Um, if we mount them on the

[37:47] wall

[37:49] because the the top floor over like the property line is real close all it's less than 10 in I'm sure up there.

[37:56] If we mount them on the wall,

[37:59] does that have any difference? Because

[38:01] we say the the back sidewalk would be 10

[38:04] from the back is is as I think that's

[38:07] what you're referring to, Tracy. A

[38:08] sidewalk where the 10 inches are at the

[38:10] back be

[38:13] many times more valuable than the front.

[38:15] >> Right. But if you have these a if these

[38:17] units are still on the town property and

[38:19] somebody gets injured through them, they

[38:20] can sue everybody,

[38:21] >> right? So what if we mount them on the

[38:23] wall? Again, I'm not a I'm not a I'm not

[38:27] an expert on anything.

[38:28] >> Yeah. I I think I I think if you if if

[38:32] we were to look at it and do the the

[38:33] sidewalk from the back parking lot to

[38:35] the side entrance by just adjusting the

[38:37] fence a little bit, um I I think we we

[38:40] would still be in a lease agreement

[38:42] situation that we wouldn't have to have.

[38:43] >> Yes. I think um provided you know like

[38:47] we had talked like some kind of blind

[38:49] around these heater units and abandon

[38:52] the front sidewalk they could just stay

[38:54] where they are now and we include where

[38:56] they're located on the lease for the

[38:59] back area and leave them where they are

[39:01] and then put like a

[39:04] >> So would the cost of the sidewalk be

[39:06] borne by the project or

[39:09] >> Yes. Yeah. We we we were planning to

[39:11] include this the cost of the sidewalk,

[39:13] the installation.

[39:14] >> That's why I'm a little buffaloed here.

[39:15] You're going to have a great sidewalk

[39:17] that I can access it from either way. Uh

[39:20] we'll have a look at the rear fence and

[39:22] see if there's some adjustment we can

[39:23] make there to make the access from the

[39:25] rear parking lot better.

[39:27] >> And um at at that point, those units are

[39:31] your will be your responsibility that

[39:33] are sticking out onto the property that

[39:35] you're leasing from the tenure. Am I

[39:36] correct in that? Could we could the lease extend all the way along

[39:41] the whole building then rather than just

[39:43] to the door?

[39:46] >> I guess that would be something we'd

[39:48] have to look at.

[39:48] >> Then we would have wide open access all

[39:51] the way through. No. [laughter]

[39:53] >> Well, I mean it it could, but I mean

[39:57] uh

[39:59] like either you're going to have access

[40:00] from the front or access from the back.

[40:02] Um, now you're looking for access from

[40:05] the front and the back.

[40:07] >> As I said, the back is more interest

[40:08] more. We have virtually other than the

[40:10] HVACs, we've Shannon has we we lived

[40:14] without the front for forever.

[40:15] >> Well, and that's and that's what I'm

[40:16] saying with the compromise like I mean,

[40:18] you know, to what what you know has been

[40:20] offered um to do a sidewalk the whole

[40:23] distance doubles the cost essentially if

[40:25] not. Well, no, it's but but if we if we

[40:28] were to do a sidewalk like let's just

[40:29] say we could manage to get it from the

[40:31] back the side door and leave the HVAC

[40:34] where they were but include the HVAC in

[40:36] the lease that they're part of the lease

[40:37] agreement

[40:39] and so it's not

[40:40] >> double I'm going to have to interrupt

[40:42] here. Okay, sorry. Um we've got to get

[40:45] moving on. We got a lot of other

[40:46] business here. So, uh, we have a staff

[40:48] report that's coming right after this

[40:50] and then I I think then then staff can

[40:52] go back and have a look at a few things

[40:54] that have been mentioned here today and

[40:56] get back to you.

[40:56] >> That's my Sorry, that's my next

[40:58] question. Is there an opportunity to

[40:59] meet with decision makers like this

[41:02] before we finalize things? Is that a

[41:05] possibility?

[41:06] >> Yeah, we we most certainly can't. I'm

[41:09] not saying that we what we can do or

[41:10] can't do.

[41:11] >> No, no, I hear you. So I want to point

[41:13] out that's the only difference that

[41:21] » but the door is definitely closer to the

[41:23] back than it is to the front. Okay.

[41:27] >> Okay. Hang on a sec here.

[41:28] >> Sorry. And one more last.

[41:30] >> Yeah. Quickly.

[41:31] >> Yeah. Um I'm not adverse to leasing. All

[41:33] right. It's a little bit of a hassle

[41:35] with insurance. $600 isn't going to make

[41:37] us or break us. I just jack up Shannon's

[41:39] rent to cover that. But uh

[41:43] >> okay

[41:44] >> and I want to thank you for your time.

[41:45] >> Thank you. Okay. I'm I'll let you read

[41:47] it then. Okay. So we have sort of a bit

[41:50] of an amended resolution here. So I'm

[41:51] going to let uh Amber read it.

[41:54] >> So somebody will be in touch with us as

[41:56] a

[41:56] >> Yeah.

[41:57] >> Perfect. Thank you very much.

[41:59] >> Um okay. of the draft resolution is be

[42:01] it resolved that the council of the

[42:03] corporation of the town of Braftoft has

[42:05] hereby received the presentation from

[42:07] Brian Lawrence regarding their concerns

[42:10] related to the prominade development and

[42:12] the proposed walkway access adjacent to

[42:14] their property located at 45 Hastings

[42:18] Street North and their proposals as

[42:20] amended to remediate the walkway access

[42:24] concerns for information purposes.

[42:26] >> Can move her in a second, please.

[42:28] Councelor Lawrence, Deputy Mayor, all in

[42:30] favor, please. Thank you.

[42:33] Thanks.

[42:35] You You may want to listen to the second

[42:37] one part here. This is sort of a this is

[42:40] a staff report on this topic. So, yes.

[42:44] So, you may want to take just a couple

[42:46] minutes here.

[42:49] Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. Okay. Under

[42:52] six item a business, Hastings Street

[42:54] North Prominent delegation staff

[42:56] comments. The resolution before us says,

[42:57] "Be it resolved that the council of the

[42:59] corporation of town of Bangkok receive

[43:01] the staff comments regarding the

[43:03] Hastings Street North Prominadet

[43:05] delegation for information purposes."

[43:06] Kevin Mover and a second councelor

[43:08] Eastman and Councelor McGibbon and Andre

[43:11] I'll let you go. So this is basically a

[43:14] little bit of the background to this

[43:17] whole thing etc. And and again we've had

[43:19] some more discussion so that doesn't

[43:21] affect uh the fact that we'll get

[43:24] together again and chat about this.

[43:25] Anyway,

[43:26] >> I believe before I present my report, we

[43:29] need a mover and seconder for the motion

[43:31] that Amber read.

[43:33] >> Oh, you did get Okay.

[43:35] >> All right. We both missed that note. So,

[43:37] thank you. [laughter]

[43:40] » All right. My apologies. Uh, thank you,

[43:43] Mayor Jenkins. So, this was just um

[43:46] staff comments based on the initial

[43:48] delegation documents that um Mr.

[43:51] Lawrence provided for consideration.

[43:54] So, the purpose of the 5- foot wide

[43:56] walkway was to recognize that there are

[43:59] um HVAC units and access issues to the

[44:02] building. Um we didn't want to issue a

[44:05] letter that says you have to spend tens

[44:07] of thousands of dollars moving your HVAC

[44:09] equipment and and changing your exits

[44:12] and um re realigning your building. We didn't want to do that. So, um, since

[44:18] we were constructing anyway, we thought

[44:20] this was a a pretty good way to

[44:23] basically continue to do what you've

[44:24] been doing for the last two years with

[44:26] that that walkway provided. So, that was

[44:29] kind of the rationale. Um, the key need

[44:31] and driving factor, as Mayor Jenkins

[44:33] mentioned, is liability. So, when

[44:36] there's any kind of incident, accident,

[44:39] um, trip, fall, slip on town property,

[44:43] unless the town can demonstrate that it

[44:46] has, um, released relieved itself of the

[44:50] liability and responsibility, we are

[44:52] responsible.

[44:53] And um one of the sad things about

[44:56] municipal government is that if we're 1%

[44:58] responsible um we are 99% responsible uh

[45:02] in a court of law and end up paying 100%

[45:05] of the costs. So um that is really the

[45:08] driving intent of the agreement um is to protect the town from future

[45:13] liability uh when the access has no

[45:16] value or benefit to taxpayers. So that

[45:19] is the the purpose as far as the

[45:22] proposals that you just provided. Um we

[45:25] have

[45:27] um written in I guess to the the one on

[45:30] the other side because their access is

[45:31] at the back that it would go right to

[45:33] the back. So um we can we can look at

[45:36] pushing that fence a couple feet to give

[45:38] you enough room uh to bring that access

[45:41] all the way through. Um, but I think it

[45:44] would be difficult for both of us to

[45:46] officially um identify the exact

[45:49] pinpoints where those HVAC units are uh

[45:52] and and where they might pose a hazard

[45:55] for an insurance document. I think that

[45:57] would be a headache for both of us

[45:58] honestly.

[46:02] » But when she's done a report, okay,

[46:06] >> um but there is absolutely some room to

[46:08] discuss there. So, um, we have been

[46:12] working with the developer. We've been

[46:13] getting some costing and some design

[46:15] things. Um, as you noted, this is all

[46:18] moving pretty quickly. So, until council

[46:21] provided us with a preliminary approval

[46:23] of a design, um, we couldn't engage with

[46:26] other people about what council was

[46:27] going to do because council hadn't even

[46:29] seen the proposal. So, there is an order

[46:31] of operations that needs to occur when

[46:34] we're doing developments as well. So,

[46:37] um, that's that's basically where we

[46:39] are. As soon as that decision was made,

[46:41] the draft lease was floated through

[46:43] insurance and then, uh, Jake provided

[46:45] that to the, uh, affected properties.

[46:48] So, um, our proposal at this point would

[46:51] be to continue with some kind of lease

[46:53] arrangement to protect both you and the

[46:55] town, uh, from the liabilities that

[46:58] could arise and ensure that you can

[46:59] continue to use your property, um, the

[47:02] way that you have chosen to use it for

[47:04] the last couple years, uh, during the

[47:07] construction period.

[47:09] >> Thank you. So, one quick comment, do you

[47:11] guys?

[47:12] >> Sorry. I was under the impression that

[47:14] HVAC had to go from there either up and

[47:18] we did have one mounted on the wall.

[47:21] >> I think the bottom line is with the five

[47:22] foot lease, it's on you what you want to

[47:25] do.

[47:26] >> We didn't know that

[47:27] >> what you want to do.

[47:28] >> Yeah,

[47:29] >> that makes a big difference because

[47:32] >> Yeah, because then the liability is on

[47:35] you, not us.

[47:36] >> And the need to cover them for aesthetic

[47:39] reasons. That's

[47:40] >> Yeah. Okay.

[47:43] Thank you very much.

[47:45] >> Okay. Um

[47:49] so we have the um general manager's

[47:52] report. Is there any comments or

[47:53] questions on that from members of

[47:54] council?

[47:56] Seeing none, all in favor, please. Thank

[47:58] you very much. Okay.

[48:02] Item B, Municipal Waste Association

[48:05] annual workshop summary report.

[48:07] Uh I'll put the uh well I I'll just give

[48:10] you the floor. We'll do the motion at

[48:12] the end. So yes, please give us all the

[48:14] background etc. So and your push your

[48:16] button. Thank you.

[48:18] >> Afternoon council and Mayor Jenkins. Um

[48:21] I put together a report about the

[48:23] municipal waste association annual

[48:25] workshop that uh uh Christine and I

[48:28] attended in uh May. I've kind of

[48:30] summarized it was a really good

[48:32] workshop. Um from May 26th till the

[48:35] 28th, the waste department supervisor

[48:37] and myself attended the 2026 Municipal

[48:39] Waste Association annual workshop. This

[48:42] workshop focused on numerous areas of

[48:44] waste management included a trade show

[48:46] featuring the newest technologies in

[48:48] this sector. Over the course of two and

[48:50] a half days, the following workshops

[48:52] were attended which I listed uh all the

[48:54] workshops that we attended. Um while

[48:58] there are many topics to discuss there

[49:00] were four common subjects that were

[49:02] brought up in almost every presentation.

[49:05] Um these four subjects are also included

[49:07] in our optimization report. Uh the first

[49:10] one was waste uh waste diversion. The

[49:13] importance of waste diversion was

[49:14] emphasized throughout the workshop. Uh

[49:17] without focus on maximizing waste

[49:19] diversion the state of landfill capacity

[49:21] across a province will be depleted in

[49:24] record time. construction, renovation,

[49:26] and demolition waste is one of the

[49:28] biggest contributors to the depletion of

[49:31] landfill capacity.

[49:33] Surprising number is the average

[49:35] landfill in Ontario only has 8 years of

[49:37] capacity left. If you took all the

[49:38] landfills, that's what's left for

[49:39] capacity. Um, private landfills account

[49:43] for 51% of the uh remaining landfills uh

[49:47] capacity in the province is private.

[49:50] um Ontario waste, 73% of Ontario waste

[49:54] is ending up in our landfills and 27 is

[49:57] being uh exported to the US. If the US

[50:00] were to close the doors to that 27%

[50:03] uh the fellow said it would be by 2035

[50:05] we'd be completely out of room in

[50:06] Ontario for capacity. So it is important

[50:09] that we are still taking um diverting to the US. uh with the with the

[50:14] construction renovation and demolition

[50:16] waste um only 20% of it is being

[50:19] recycled recycled and 80% is ending up

[50:21] in landfills. With proper diversion 75%

[50:24] of that waste can be diverted. So it's a

[50:26] huge killer of landfills is the waste

[50:28] construction. Uh another big point that

[50:31] they brought uh up was it was stressed

[50:33] that the communication with stakeholders

[50:35] is an important part of operating an

[50:37] efficient successful landfill operation.

[50:39] The experience shared confirmed that

[50:41] clear communication resulted in cost

[50:42] savings for municipalities

[50:44] um because the time spent dealing with

[50:46] the complaints and inquiries was greatly

[50:48] reduced. The city of Kingston's

[50:50] presentation on implementing automated

[50:52] curbside

[50:54] um covered the communication mistakes

[50:56] during phase one, how they were

[50:58] corrected in phase two, and how much

[50:59] time was saved. They no longer had high

[51:01] volumes and inquiries and complaints. It

[51:04] was it was a it was a huge factor. So

[51:06] communication was was um was stressed.

[51:10] One of the one of the um points they

[51:13] brought up was using a digitalized

[51:14] platforms like apps or a website. But um

[51:18] they showed with the apps that you know

[51:20] if if we offered an app with people that

[51:22] you know our garbage truck broke down

[51:24] rather than having to try to get the

[51:25] radio to to advertise it or you know put

[51:28] it on Facebook Facebook plus um people

[51:31] could simply download the app and we

[51:32] could instantly update. they would get a

[51:34] notification garbage trucks broke down,

[51:35] you won't be getting picked up today.

[51:37] They'll know right away. Um, it's also

[51:39] good for reminding about hazardous place

[51:41] stays. Um, the the app is just a good

[51:43] communication tool. There's a there's a

[51:45] few companies out there that are secure.

[51:47] Um, so so that was one way. Um,

[51:52] it's um, good communication increases

[51:55] call volumes by 40 to 50%. And one thing

[51:57] they stress is communication should be

[51:59] short, clear, and concise, not long. and and with with longer messages it's

[52:04] better to spoon feed people. So that was interesting. Um a lot of a lot

[52:08] of the pres presentations

[52:11] uh reviewed the importance of scales. Uh

[52:13] the health and safety of workers is one

[52:15] strong reason for installing the scale

[52:17] system. The other reason uh for the

[52:19] importance of the scales is knowing

[52:20] exactly how much waste is being received

[52:22] every year. This allows for much more

[52:24] accurate volume calculations and ensures

[52:27] that future plans are made with accurate

[52:30] information to maximize cost savings and

[52:32] efficiencies. It uh they were we were we

[52:35] were uh the one landfill uh once they

[52:38] installed skull or uh scales uh they

[52:40] reduced the negative staff stakeholder

[52:43] interactions by 95%.

[52:45] Um accurate information for future

[52:47] planning and it ensures fair tipping for

[52:50] both stakeholders and the municipality.

[52:52] Everybody knows exactly what they're

[52:54] paying for. It's not a judgment call. Um

[52:57] it goes both ways. You might lose, you

[52:58] might win on some, but at the end of the

[53:00] day, it it gives an accurate um costing

[53:03] to the to our rateayers. Um and the

[53:06] other one surprisingly was waste audits.

[53:09] Uh many presidents spoke about the waste

[53:11] audits audits and the changes they were

[53:13] able to make to create more efficient

[53:15] diversion programs. By knowing exactly

[53:19] what is entering the landfill,

[53:20] municipalities can customize their

[53:21] diversion programs to ensure maximum

[53:24] capacity is achieved. Most

[53:26] municipalities are shocked after

[53:28] completing one of these programs at how

[53:30] much waste is entering the landfill that

[53:32] can be diverted. Um the importance of

[53:35] this is every area has different

[53:37] demographics. Therefore, what goes in

[53:40] the landfills is unique to each area.

[53:43] Diversion methods used in urban

[53:44] landfills may not be the most efficient

[53:46] for rural landfills. Um, knowing the

[53:50] exactly where is going going or exactly

[53:52] what is going into your landfill and

[53:54] adjusting diversion programs can can

[53:56] significantly extend the life of the

[53:58] dump. Overall, this was a very

[54:00] informative and educational workshop to

[54:02] attend. The networking and shared

[54:04] experience from other municipalities

[54:06] will go a long way to ensure that we can

[54:07] manage one of our most important assets

[54:10] in the most effect efficient manner. to

[54:12] ensure maximum longevity is achieved. Um

[54:16] the financial implications, we'll see

[54:18] that in the next report with the

[54:19] optimization and uh that's that's

[54:22] basically summary of what we learned

[54:24] over the course of three and a half days

[54:25] at the conference. So I'd be happy to

[54:27] answer any questions. Um, so I just from

[54:31] reading some of the other stuff in your

[54:32] report here, was there a lot of

[54:34] discussion on like what it crystal

[54:36] balling down the road or new things that

[54:39] might be coming or diversion things that

[54:41] might be happening or

[54:43] >> is are we still sort of walking step by

[54:46] step? It it was it were talking about

[54:48] like the auditing was a big part on how

[54:51] to do it like G did they do audits all

[54:53] the time now um because seasons change

[54:56] and that and um what they found was and

[54:59] that's where a lot of the construction

[55:00] debris and and what's being uh put in

[55:02] landfills and construction debris is is

[55:04] just filling up. So they've really

[55:06] intensified their their um um separation

[55:10] requirements for the construction debris

[55:12] and the recycling right up to 75% now.

[55:15] It's something they um but as as far as

[55:17] like new stuff like brand brand new

[55:19] stuff, it wasn't really covered. It was

[55:20] more sharing experiences of problems we

[55:23] face today.

[55:26] Um other questions or comments from

[55:29] members of council?

[55:31] Seeing [snorts] none, thank you. I'll

[55:33] read the motion. Be it resolved that the

[55:35] council of the corporation of town of

[55:37] bankrop is hereby recommend that council

[55:39] receive and file the municipal waste

[55:42] association annual workshop report as

[55:44] presented by the manager of

[55:45] infrastructure and capital projects for

[55:47] information purposes only. Could I have

[55:49] a mover in a second? Deputy mayor and

[55:52] councelor Miles. All in favor please.

[55:54] >> Yes. I'm not going anywhere.

[56:00] » I kind of just waiting for the motion to

[56:02] be on the floor. Um, was anybody else

[56:04] from here with you?

[56:05] >> Yes.

[56:06] >> Who?

[56:07] >> Uh, Christine was with me. Our operation

[56:09] supervisor was

[56:10] >> Okay.

[56:12] >> Oh,

[56:13] >> none of our counselors were there.

[56:14] Nobody

[56:14] >> before. Were you Could you just second

[56:16] that to put it on the floor?

[56:18] >> I'll second that.

[56:19] >> Yes. No. Yes. Now, go ahead.

[56:22] >> I just wondering if I I'm not sure what

[56:24] you attended. I just wonder if any of

[56:25] our counselors were there.

[56:27] >> No. No counselors attended this one.

[56:28] >> Thank you, Jake.

[56:29] >> Thank you.

[56:31] All in favor?

[56:34] Glad I remembered that. But okay.

[56:37] Um, next we have item C is the landfill

[56:41] optimation study. We also we have a

[56:43] staff report with this. So, I will uh

[56:45] let Andre present that and we'll put the

[56:46] motion on the floor at the end.

[56:51] » Thank you, Mayor Jenkins. Uh, what I

[56:53] will do is I'll go through my report.

[56:56] It's it's kind of section by section as

[56:58] each different topic comes up. So maybe

[57:00] we'll review a section and then if

[57:02] there's questions related to that

[57:03] section, we can address those then move

[57:06] on to the next section. Of course, we

[57:08] can come back to things at the end as

[57:09] well, but it it may flow better if we

[57:11] kind of deal with things in little

[57:13] snippets. So at the May 23rd, 2026

[57:17] council meeting, uh we all received a

[57:19] presentation from John Watson, our

[57:21] environmental engineer of record for the

[57:23] waste site from Cambian, Inc. uh to

[57:26] review his optimization proposals for

[57:29] the Dungan and waste site. Uh the intent

[57:31] of the study was to review the current

[57:33] operations, policies, processes and

[57:36] procedures at the Dungan landfill and

[57:38] provide recommendations for council's

[57:40] consideration which would address among

[57:42] other things potential health and safety

[57:44] risk to SA staff and visitors. Provide

[57:47] modernized waste site operations through

[57:50] improved layout and traffic flow to

[57:53] identify and capitalize on cost-saving

[57:55] operational efficiency opportunities.

[57:58] and to explore opportunities for revenue

[58:00] generation from site operations now and

[58:03] into the future to reduce the impact of

[58:06] escalating costs on taxpayers

[58:08] year-over-year.

[58:18] The report was also accompanied by a

[58:20] staff report that contained additional

[58:22] supplemental information for council to

[58:25] consider during that meeting. At the

[58:27] meeting, a number of questions were

[58:29] posed which I recorded and have

[58:31] attempted to provide explanations for in

[58:33] this very long, I apologize, staff

[58:36] report. Um, there was also an email that

[58:38] was sent to all of council 2 days after

[58:40] the meeting asking them to ensure that

[58:43] any questions they had were submitted

[58:45] for consideration by June 10th. I did

[58:48] receive a number of questions from Mayor

[58:50] Jenkins, some of which I understand you

[58:52] sent to him uh on your behalf. So all of

[58:55] those questions have also been answered

[58:57] in the report. Uh otherwise I did not

[58:59] receive any direct questions from other

[59:01] members of council.

[59:05] So the first part I want to address is

[59:06] the ongoing operational deficit for the

[59:09] waist site. As described in the initial

[59:11] report, the need to undertake the study

[59:12] was supported by the ongoing and

[59:14] increasing operating deficits associated

[59:17] with landfill activities.

[59:20] So um I've provided a graph in the staff

[59:23] report showing that uh each year our

[59:25] expenses rise significantly which is

[59:28] expected. Uh cost of living increases,

[59:30] cost to maintain equipment increases,

[59:32] cost of hydro increases, cost to procure

[59:36] services associated with the waste site

[59:38] increase. So our costs are going to go

[59:40] up year after year unless we can find

[59:43] ways to reduce them. and the majority of

[59:45] costs associated with the waste site are

[59:47] completely and totally out of our

[59:49] control.

[59:52] Nonetheless, um as a result of

[59:55] decreasing revenues uh of significant

[59:58] amounts between in 2024, we received

[1:00:01] $210,000 to support our recycling

[1:00:03] initiatives. In 2026, we received zero.

[1:00:07] So, in three calendar years, we lost

[1:00:10] over $200,000 of revenue, which helped

[1:00:12] support our landfill costs as a result

[1:00:15] of the province taking responsibility

[1:00:17] for recycling. For this year, we were

[1:00:20] able to capture that loss by eliminating

[1:00:23] the recycling truck and eliminating the

[1:00:26] recycling truck driver, reducing our

[1:00:28] staff complement by one permanent

[1:00:30] full-time person. That person is gone.

[1:00:33] That truck is gone. So those savings are

[1:00:35] not going to be recreated and and

[1:00:37] regenerated year-over-year. So the

[1:00:39] baseline for this year is the baseline

[1:00:41] moving into future years where all of

[1:00:44] those cost escalations from additional

[1:00:46] contract costs, additional gas costs,

[1:00:48] higher hydro costs, higher disposal

[1:00:51] costs that we have to pay all come into

[1:00:53] play.

[1:00:56] I also want to clarify the difference

[1:00:58] between an operational deficit and an

[1:01:00] unfunded deficit because there was some

[1:01:02] concern that we weren't properly funding

[1:01:05] our wayside operations. Our waste site

[1:01:07] operations are fully funded through

[1:01:10] earned revenues and through taxation. So

[1:01:13] there is no unfunded

[1:01:15] negative balance in our waste department

[1:01:17] at the end of the year.

[1:01:20] An anticipated and funded operational

[1:01:22] deficit is funded through taxation.

[1:01:24] That's why you pay taxes is to pay for

[1:01:26] the things that we don't get money to

[1:01:29] pay for otherwise. So the waist site

[1:01:31] doesn't work any different than our

[1:01:32] roads department or any of our other

[1:01:34] departments. What we know we aren't

[1:01:36] going to get for revenue, we generate

[1:01:38] through taxation.

[1:01:40] In contrast, an unfunded deficit means

[1:01:42] we spent way more money than we thought

[1:01:44] we would and now we owe ourselves. We're

[1:01:46] short 250,000 and where are we going to

[1:01:48] get it? So, we do not have an unfunded

[1:01:51] deficit. We just have an operational

[1:01:54] deficit which we pay for through

[1:01:56] taxation. And for clarity, when we

[1:02:00] budget taxes to pay for operations and

[1:02:02] we don't spend all of that money, that's

[1:02:05] why we generate a surplus. So, we did

[1:02:07] have a surplus in our waste department

[1:02:09] last year because our operational

[1:02:11] expenses were not as high as we thought

[1:02:13] they would be. So that excess tax

[1:02:15] revenue goes into the reserves to be

[1:02:18] used for future projects to offset

[1:02:20] future costs.

[1:02:22] Any questions about that? Perfect.

[1:02:26] There was a uh conversation at the May

[1:02:29] 26th meeting about the cost per

[1:02:31] household for our residents compared to

[1:02:32] the cost per household for non-resident

[1:02:35] users uh currently one neighboring

[1:02:37] township.

[1:02:40] While while it's true that per capita

[1:02:43] the neighboring township pays much less

[1:02:45] for waste services than our residents

[1:02:48] do, that's because our residents get a

[1:02:51] lot more waste services that that those

[1:02:53] neighboring municipalities don't have.

[1:02:56] Um h household hazardous waste days, for

[1:02:58] example, come with a price tag of

[1:03:00] between 25 and $30,000 for one day. Uh

[1:03:04] and we host we used to host three a day.

[1:03:06] We three a year. We've reduced it to two

[1:03:08] a year to try to manage that expense.

[1:03:11] Curbside garbage collection is estimated

[1:03:13] to cost between 150 and $200,000 per

[1:03:16] year. Our resident neighbors don't pay

[1:03:19] for that service. They don't get it.

[1:03:21] It's not part of their uh their costs.

[1:03:24] associated with bulky waste. We

[1:03:26] don't take bulky waste or construction

[1:03:28] and demolition debris from our

[1:03:30] neighboring municipality at this point.

[1:03:32] So, we have to pay to dispose of that.

[1:03:35] They don't have those costs. So the the

[1:03:37] cost discrepancies between neighboring

[1:03:39] users and our users are because our

[1:03:41] users are receiving many many more quite

[1:03:44] expensive services for their waste

[1:03:47] disposal.

[1:03:51] And there's a whole list of them.

[1:03:52] There's there's several more in there as

[1:03:54] well.

[1:03:56] We recover some of our costs through

[1:03:58] user fees, tipping fees, bag tag fees.

[1:04:01] Um, but many of the things that we do

[1:04:03] provide, we don't have a cost recovery

[1:04:06] model for, such as those household

[1:04:08] hazardous waste days or curbside garbage

[1:04:10] collection

[1:04:12] or the expenses that we do charge for

[1:04:14] those, like our $150 tag, are not

[1:04:16] sufficient to fund the full program just

[1:04:19] to help offset the costs of those

[1:04:21] programs.

[1:04:23] While it's recognized that the contract

[1:04:25] that we entered into with our neighbor

[1:04:27] in 2021 is not reflective of current day

[1:04:31] operational costs that would be

[1:04:34] reflected in a newer agreement with with

[1:04:36] a new partner should we choose to embark

[1:04:38] on that at some point. They were the

[1:04:41] fair market costs at the time. So very

[1:04:44] similar to many other things in the

[1:04:45] municipal world, COVID changed the face

[1:04:47] of waste management in Ontario. Waste

[1:04:50] sites filled up quicker. government has

[1:04:52] since enacted various pieces or proposed

[1:04:55] to enact various pieces of legislation

[1:04:58] uh to free up landfill capacities

[1:05:00] because landfills filled up much faster

[1:05:03] uh than we expected. So the agreement

[1:05:06] that we have right now was reflective of

[1:05:09] market costs and expectations at the

[1:05:11] time, but those are not reflective of

[1:05:13] today's costs. And when that agreement

[1:05:15] comes up for renewal this year, we will

[1:05:17] be looking at what current market costs

[1:05:19] are and have already put that

[1:05:21] municipality on notice that they should

[1:05:23] expect increases to their contract

[1:05:25] costs.

[1:05:28] >> If you're going to uh your mic, if

[1:05:29] you're your mic, please.

[1:05:31] >> Yes.

[1:05:31] >> When is the Boston contract expire?

[1:05:34] >> Year end.

[1:05:35] Okay. Thank you.

[1:05:41] » All right. Any other questions about

[1:05:43] that?

[1:05:45] Okay. Way scales. So again, we had a a

[1:05:48] very lengthy discussion about way

[1:05:50] scales. And although our tipping fee

[1:05:52] schedule is very descriptive, very

[1:05:54] comprehensive,

[1:05:56] it's multiple pages long, uh, I think it

[1:05:59] probably covers every possible scenario

[1:06:02] that someone could come to the waist

[1:06:03] site with. There is still a lot of room

[1:06:06] and requirement for our attendants to

[1:06:08] make a judgment call. So, we have a fee

[1:06:11] for a 40 yard bin, for example, but that

[1:06:13] 40 yard bin may come in and only be 2/3

[1:06:16] full. And the person hauling it says, "I

[1:06:19] don't want to pay for a 40-yard bin

[1:06:20] because I only have 20 yards of

[1:06:22] garbage." We create a conflict situation

[1:06:24] for our staff and for that resident

[1:06:26] because we force our attendants to make

[1:06:28] a decision on the spot about what's fair

[1:06:31] in that situation. The installation of

[1:06:34] waste scales will completely eliminate

[1:06:36] those conflicts. you have 1 kilogram of

[1:06:38] waste, you will pay for 1 kilogram of

[1:06:40] waste. If you have 1,00 kilograms of

[1:06:42] waste, you will pay for 1,00 kilograms

[1:06:44] of waste. And it will be a specific

[1:06:47] calculation. How that figures into um

[1:06:51] you know what someone what a resident is

[1:06:53] allowed to bring or not, like a bag of

[1:06:55] garbage or two bags will be determined

[1:06:57] in the final tipping fees that have to

[1:07:00] be determined uh to support the scales.

[1:07:03] But everyone will know exactly what

[1:07:05] they're bringing and exactly what the

[1:07:07] expectation will be before they leave.

[1:07:10] >> Is the plan to charge for waste uh yard

[1:07:13] waste? It'll be it'll be in a vehicle

[1:07:15] going down over the scales. Right now

[1:07:18] there's no charge.

[1:07:19] >> That is still the plan moving forward.

[1:07:21] So, there'll have to be a system where

[1:07:24] if you I'm making this up, that if you

[1:07:26] went to the burn pile, uh you might get

[1:07:29] a ticket that allowed you on the way out

[1:07:31] to, you know, to go in and get out free.

[1:07:34] So, it'll be a system developed to

[1:07:36] accommodate the things that are free now

[1:07:37] to be to continue.

[1:07:38] >> So, we're not going to increase

[1:07:41] the chargeable items

[1:07:44] >> at the present time. No,

[1:07:46] >> we we haven't looked at tipping, but

[1:07:48] >> the vehicle going in that's got scales

[1:07:50] that

[1:07:51] >> that would be this.

[1:07:51] >> We we'll have the same issue with scrap

[1:07:54] metal. Um what we'll know is how much

[1:07:56] scrap metal is coming in, but we we

[1:07:58] would

[1:07:58] >> they'll have to be given a ticket to get

[1:08:00] out at no charge.

[1:08:01] >> The trouble is it's usually going to be

[1:08:02] a mixed load. So, it's going to be quite

[1:08:04] a nightmare.

[1:08:05] >> Yeah. And that's a problem that we run

[1:08:07] into now even with some of the

[1:08:08] commercial operators is bringing mixed

[1:08:10] loads. So, uh then we have to charge

[1:08:11] them for sorting. So there'll be an

[1:08:14] education process uh required and people

[1:08:17] it'll have to maybe even within your

[1:08:18] trailer to separate it out.

[1:08:20] >> So I Yeah, there's obviously details to

[1:08:23] be

[1:08:23] >> Oh. Yeah, we just as long as we don't

[1:08:25] have to put bows on it. That's all.

[1:08:26] >> Yeah,

[1:08:28] >> you can.

[1:08:31] » Yeah, I was just I was going to say,

[1:08:32] yeah, there's no plan to change our

[1:08:35] tipping fees and what we charge for.

[1:08:36] It's just a a system to allow us to be

[1:08:39] more accurate of, you know, you actually

[1:08:42] are paying for what you're bringing in

[1:08:44] rather than a judgment call. It's it's

[1:08:46] not about changing the costing that

[1:08:48] we're doing on what we're taking in now.

[1:08:50] We wouldn't charge for tires or steel or brush as well. Like that's not the intent of the scales.

[1:08:59] » Yes, Council Lawrence. uh in other

[1:09:02] municipalities that have moved to this,

[1:09:05] does this mean an increase in waste

[1:09:08] coming to the facility or essentially a

[1:09:12] net decrease or is there any way of

[1:09:14] knowing?

[1:09:15] >> Well, there there isn't really a way of

[1:09:17] knowing that um because we don't know

[1:09:19] exactly how much is coming in now. We

[1:09:21] use estimates based on an average 40

[1:09:24] yard bin contains this much waste and

[1:09:27] that's how we calculate volumes of what

[1:09:29] are coming in right now. So um it's

[1:09:32] possible that the amount of waste could

[1:09:34] decrease but still be exactly the same

[1:09:37] as it is right now because right now we

[1:09:39] say it's 40 metric tons and it's

[1:09:40] actually only 36.8 metric tons. Um it

[1:09:44] could go the other way too. We could be

[1:09:45] saying that bin weighs 40 tons and it

[1:09:48] actually weighs 43 tons. Um, so it it'll

[1:09:51] probably balance out pretty much in the

[1:09:53] end, but we'll have an exact number to

[1:09:56] know what's going in instead of

[1:09:58] estimates based on average volumes.

[1:10:03] The report also contemplated a two-scale

[1:10:06] system. uh staff are recommending that

[1:10:08] we implement a single scale system but

[1:10:12] build it in such a way provide the power

[1:10:14] and the infrastructure for it so that if we determined in the future a second

[1:10:19] scale was required we could bring that

[1:10:21] back to council for consideration. At

[1:10:24] this time we don't feel there's enough

[1:10:26] traffic in volume at our waist site to

[1:10:28] warrant a two scale like a dedicated in

[1:10:31] andout. We think we can manage traffic

[1:10:33] with a single scale. Um the report also

[1:10:36] contemplated the construction of a full

[1:10:39] fully built fully equipped scale house

[1:10:41] which we don't think is required either

[1:10:43] in further discussion. Um we may be able

[1:10:46] to what our preference is and what's

[1:10:49] reflected in the report is to look at a

[1:10:50] fully automated system first. Uh similar

[1:10:53] to what you would have when you go to a

[1:10:54] parking lot at a hospital. You know you get your ticket when you go in, it

[1:10:58] would give you your weighin amount. You

[1:11:00] stick it in the machine when you leave.

[1:11:01] It tells you what your way out amount

[1:11:03] is. And if you only had brush and tires,

[1:11:06] the attendant gave you a get out free

[1:11:08] parking card like they sometimes do at

[1:11:10] the office when you know your machine's

[1:11:12] taking their money or or whatever. So

[1:11:16] >> booth,

[1:11:18] >> no, the booth will be automated.

[1:11:21] >> Automated charge.

[1:11:24] >> When you go to the location,

[1:11:26] >> you would still the the attendant would

[1:11:27] still be down at the the house at the

[1:11:29] bottom to tell you where to put your

[1:11:31] brush and where to put your recycling.

[1:11:32] So, you're going to weigh in and it'll

[1:11:34] give you the total weight for your

[1:11:35] vehicle when you weigh in. On your way

[1:11:38] out, it'll give you the tear weight of

[1:11:41] your vehicle. But if you only had stuff

[1:11:43] that there was no charge for, the

[1:11:45] attendant would have given you a ticket

[1:11:46] when he saw you at the bottom that you

[1:11:47] feed in instead of putting your credit

[1:11:49] card in or your debit card in or or

[1:11:51] paying for your your waist.

[1:11:54] >> Same as we do now. if you have a mixed

[1:11:57] logo like

[1:12:02] » so if an automated system wouldn't work

[1:12:05] or would be cost prohibitive because

[1:12:07] that is a potential that we need to

[1:12:09] flush out then we would be looking

[1:12:11] probably more at a construction trailer

[1:12:14] as an interim um uh scale house as

[1:12:18] opposed to a fully built with water heat

[1:12:21] hydro service. I mean, we'd still have

[1:12:23] hydro and heat, of course, but rather

[1:12:25] than having a fully built, fully

[1:12:27] constructed building, we would have a

[1:12:29] small construction trailer that would

[1:12:31] solely function as the take your ticket,

[1:12:33] leave your ticket, admin piece of

[1:12:35] things, remembering that in the report

[1:12:38] it was noted that on quiet days there

[1:12:40] are less than 20 vehicles a day

[1:12:42] accessing that site. So, um, having the

[1:12:45] attendant work with those folks, uh, who

[1:12:48] are the ones that typically have those

[1:12:49] mixed loads or those bigger volumes, um,

[1:12:52] is not as ownorous as it may seem like

[1:12:56] it might be. And then if for some reason

[1:12:58] there is absolutely no reason we

[1:13:00] couldn't scale back the scale house, the worst case would be a full built

[1:13:05] scale house. But that is not our

[1:13:06] intention.

[1:13:10] » Yeah. Most way scales do not have a

[1:13:12] fully built house. It's always a

[1:13:14] trailer. And um now with this automated

[1:13:18] system, if that doesn't work and we have

[1:13:20] to go the other route, are we looking at

[1:13:22] more staff members or are we able to

[1:13:24] manage this as we are with with the two

[1:13:27] full-time staff that are at the site? We

[1:13:30] believe it's quite manageable. They're

[1:13:31] already looking at every building or

[1:13:33] every load and every trailer and

[1:13:35] checking people in on the tablet to make

[1:13:37] sure they're town residents and telling

[1:13:39] them where to go. So instead of doing

[1:13:41] that at the bottom of the hill, one of

[1:13:42] them would do it at the top of the hill.

[1:13:43] It

[1:13:44] >> we could do that with existing staff.

[1:13:46] >> Perfect.

[1:13:48] >> And then I also provided a bit of a site

[1:13:50] sketch about um where staff and and the

[1:13:54] consultants have contemplated uh putting

[1:13:56] that scale house and it would kind of be

[1:13:58] at you know as you enter the waist site

[1:14:00] kind of at the top of the hill on that

[1:14:01] bit of a plateau. So there's lots of

[1:14:03] room once you're on the site to move

[1:14:05] around. It wouldn't impede drive aisles.

[1:14:08] Um there there was conversation about

[1:14:10] putting it right down at the existing

[1:14:12] garage building, but then somebody's got

[1:14:14] to figure out how to turn around and

[1:14:15] come back around and and we saw some

[1:14:18] challenges with traffic management by

[1:14:20] having it right down on the site. But if

[1:14:22] we have it at the top, it eliminates

[1:14:24] that bottleneck and that gooseseneck uh

[1:14:26] and keeps those open drive paths so

[1:14:29] people can move around to the different

[1:14:30] spots of the tipping face where they

[1:14:32] need to be. And trucks would appreciate

[1:14:34] that. So I think up above is definitely

[1:14:36] the best way to go for sure.

[1:14:38] Um on this because we're there, I've

[1:14:40] also noted the proposed new location of

[1:14:43] the burn pile, um which is up to the top

[1:14:47] in the yellow boxes.

[1:14:50] So folks would be able to drive straight

[1:14:52] down there from the current existing

[1:14:55] pathways um to to get rid of brush on

[1:14:58] days that were not burning without

[1:15:00] having to drive across the tipping face

[1:15:02] and risk getting nails and whatever else

[1:15:05] in their tires. On days that we are

[1:15:07] burning, the second yellow bubble to the

[1:15:09] left would be the location of a bin or drop spot. Um, so if we were burning

[1:15:17] a controlled uh allowable burn, people

[1:15:20] would not be able to put their brush in

[1:15:22] that burn area. They would leave it

[1:15:23] further up. And once the fire was

[1:15:25] extinguished and the ashes were all

[1:15:27] cool, staff would move that burnable

[1:15:30] debris down to the pile uh to be

[1:15:32] disposed of once there was enough

[1:15:34] accumulation for the next controlled

[1:15:35] burn.

[1:15:38] That addresses the health and safety

[1:15:39] issue of exposing our our visitors and

[1:15:43] staff to um potential smoke if the wind

[1:15:46] is blowing the wrong way on one of those

[1:15:49] um controlled burn days.

[1:15:52] >> Question about the burns. Do we post

[1:15:54] when we're burning so that the public do

[1:15:56] know that we are burning on a certain

[1:15:58] day?

[1:15:58] >> We don't know when we can post. The

[1:16:00] weather conditions have to be right. It

[1:16:02] has to be damp. There can't be any wind.

[1:16:04] The wind can only come from a certain

[1:16:05] direction. And

[1:16:07] >> I mean a minute from now the weather can

[1:16:09] change. Sometimes we light a fire put it

[1:16:11] out because the wind the weather changed

[1:16:13] and we weren't expecting it. So

[1:16:14] >> that's perfect. Um, we did talk about

[1:16:16] having designated burn days and staff

[1:16:19] did observe as things were coming in if

[1:16:21] we couldn't burn on that day and and we

[1:16:24] would very quickly run out of capacity.

[1:16:26] Um, if you know if we said it was every

[1:16:28] Thursday we're going to burn and we

[1:16:30] missed three Thursdays, we wouldn't have

[1:16:32] any left and then we'd be turning people

[1:16:34] away and we don't want to do that

[1:16:35] either.

[1:16:37] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:16:39] >> Any other questions about scales or

[1:16:41] burning?

[1:16:43] All right, moving on to remaining

[1:16:45] landfill capacity.

[1:16:47] So, there were some concerns expressed

[1:16:49] about the long loss of long-term

[1:16:51] landfill capacity if we accepted

[1:16:53] additional waste from other sources. Um,

[1:16:56] the report clearly demonstrated the

[1:16:58] impact to the town of AC accepting

[1:17:01] 5001,500

[1:17:04] uh metric tons of waste per year uh as

[1:17:07] three different scenarios.

[1:17:09] Looking at the 1500 metric tons per

[1:17:11] year, which is three times more than

[1:17:13] what we're taking from Wallist right

[1:17:15] now. Um our gross revenues based on

[1:17:18] current pricing would be approximately

[1:17:20] $300 or $300,000 per year. Um now that

[1:17:25] is straight like for like. If we

[1:17:28] continue doing exactly what we're doing

[1:17:29] today at the higher $200 per metric ton

[1:17:34] cost, then we would have $300,000 of

[1:17:37] revenue and we would lose over the

[1:17:39] remaining life in the current cells 22

[1:17:41] years of time.

[1:17:43] That doesn't consider any of the other

[1:17:45] things proposed in the report like

[1:17:48] improving diversion, like improving um

[1:17:51] other options uh for recycling,

[1:17:55] looking at um better hazardous waste

[1:17:58] management, um better public education,

[1:18:02] food cyclinger campaigns, all of those

[1:18:04] kind of things. So all of those will

[1:18:06] reduce the volume going in which

[1:18:08] increases life. You may recall that last

[1:18:11] year's report, I believe we had 57 years

[1:18:14] of remaining life. And this year, we're

[1:18:16] up to 63 because we did a really great

[1:18:18] job of getting rid of bulky waste and

[1:18:21] reducing the amount of construction and

[1:18:22] demolition debris coming in from um

[1:18:26] different locations. So, um as a result

[1:18:30] of those things, we actually increased

[1:18:32] our capacity by eight years with a full

[1:18:34] year of landfilling with our waist and

[1:18:36] wallist from one report to the other.

[1:18:38] Those numbers don't include the

[1:18:40] additional capacity that we have.

[1:18:41] >> They do not,

[1:18:42] >> which is roughly 100 years,

[1:18:44] >> another 100 years over and above what

[1:18:46] we're currently working in right now are

[1:18:48] already approved at the site. So, um, we

[1:18:51] currently have, you know, 150 to 160

[1:18:54] years of life. If you look at the whole

[1:18:56] site, the implications of taking 1,500

[1:19:00] metric tons reduce that initial phase by

[1:19:03] 22 years and then the secondary phase

[1:19:06] probably by about the same. Um so we

[1:19:08] still would have more than 100 years of

[1:19:10] capacity in the site uh even if we

[1:19:13] implemented a 1500 metric ton per year

[1:19:17] um approval. And of course all of this

[1:19:19] is assuming that the ministry will even

[1:19:21] allow us uh to look at or do any of

[1:19:25] these things.

[1:19:29] We would also propose that a portion of

[1:19:31] every invoice include a search charge

[1:19:34] for future cost and postclosure

[1:19:36] responsibilities. Uh we currently carry

[1:19:39] a postclosure expense liability as a

[1:19:42] result of ARRO legislation of $166,000

[1:19:45] a year in addition to estimated

[1:19:48] postretirement and postclosure cost

[1:19:50] obligations of $730,000

[1:19:53] a year. Um, if we stopped landfilling

[1:19:56] today with just what's in the ground

[1:19:58] today, those would be the costs that we

[1:20:00] would have uh over the next couple of

[1:20:02] decades, uh, if we just stopped taking

[1:20:04] waste today and shipped it all away and

[1:20:06] closed our landfill. Um, we have no

[1:20:09] money in the bank to pay for any of

[1:20:11] those expenses right now. We do not have

[1:20:13] a future closure or postclosure and post

[1:20:15] monitoring uh, reserve. We do have

[1:20:18] landfill reserve funds, which we're

[1:20:20] going to talk about a little later in

[1:20:21] this report. So, I don't want it to

[1:20:23] sound like we haven't done any planning

[1:20:24] at all, but we have not specifically

[1:20:26] allocated funds for postclosure and

[1:20:29] future monitoring costs. So, staff would

[1:20:31] propose that there be a search charge on

[1:20:33] every invoice to reflect those future

[1:20:36] costs based on the the amounts of waste

[1:20:39] that we're taking from someone else,

[1:20:41] which alleviates them of that future

[1:20:43] cost because they're not putting it in

[1:20:45] their landfill sites. and that that

[1:20:47] money go to a dedicated reserve

[1:20:49] specifically for postclosure and

[1:20:51] monitoring.

[1:20:54] Questions about landfill capacity.

[1:20:59] All right. Waste audit options.

[1:21:02] So Cameian provided two options. A

[1:21:05] single event in one three-month period

[1:21:07] or a one season event or four events,

[1:21:11] one in each season of the year. staff

[1:21:14] feel that initially a one season audit

[1:21:17] will give us a much better understanding

[1:21:19] of what's going into our way site than

[1:21:21] we have right now which is just what we

[1:21:23] see with our eyes. Um, while there is

[1:21:27] probably benefit to doing a four-season

[1:21:29] audit in the future, we think initially

[1:21:31] the single season audit will give us a

[1:21:34] ton of information to work with and

[1:21:36] implement to make improvements. And then

[1:21:39] later once we maximize those potentials,

[1:21:41] we could look at doing another season

[1:21:43] audit, a different season to see if

[1:21:45] things have changed and see if there are

[1:21:47] tweaks required uh to any of those

[1:21:49] diversion programs. But we feel that the

[1:21:52] biggest bang for our buck, so to speak,

[1:21:54] is with that single season audit because

[1:21:56] right now we have no baseline to work

[1:21:58] from to know what's actually going in

[1:22:00] our trash beyond what our attendants see

[1:22:02] at the gate.

[1:22:05] Uh each audit is approximately $25,000.

[1:22:08] Um and that is actually people taking

[1:22:11] samples of garbage. I believe it's 100

[1:22:13] households. They collect the garbage

[1:22:15] from directly. They physically open

[1:22:18] every bag and sort everything. This is

[1:22:21] green. This is recyclable. This is just

[1:22:24] garbage. This could be diverted. And do

[1:22:27] an audit and calculate, you know, how

[1:22:30] much of what was in that bag that still

[1:22:32] goes in the dump when they're done. Uh

[1:22:33] we don't keep any of it. We're not

[1:22:35] looking at personal identifiable

[1:22:36] information if someone threw it in their

[1:22:38] waste. It just is to sort the different

[1:22:41] streams. And if we find that, you know,

[1:22:43] 50% of household garbage is actually

[1:22:45] recyclable, then we target an education

[1:22:48] campaign about, hey, did you know that

[1:22:50] those Tim Hortons cups actually are

[1:22:52] recyclable now? Please don't put them in

[1:22:54] your garbage anymore. Uh to reduce that

[1:22:57] volume and reduce the amount that we're

[1:22:58] landfilling.

[1:23:03] Does season virtually mean spring,

[1:23:05] summer, fall, winter? And uh have you

[1:23:07] sort of navigated what feels like the

[1:23:09] best season? I mean,

[1:23:11] >> we we haven't we haven't had that. I

[1:23:14] mean, there's values to different ones.

[1:23:16] Christmas, there's a lot of paper waste.

[1:23:17] It was something that uh John initially

[1:23:20] mentioned. He said in the spring, people

[1:23:21] are spring cleaning and throwing out

[1:23:23] things that could potentially be

[1:23:25] repurposed. So, each season has its own

[1:23:28] intricacies.

[1:23:29] >> Yeah. A lot of our non-permanent

[1:23:31] residents contributed in the summer,

[1:23:32] too, right? So, yeah, each one of them

[1:23:34] does. I just wonder if you navigated

[1:23:36] what was the best choice. haven't and we would take the guidance of the

[1:23:39] municipal engineer um if we embark on on

[1:23:43] an audit in the future.

[1:23:46] >> Mayor, that's you.

[1:23:47] >> Okay. Sorry. [laughter] Sure. Kev,

[1:23:49] that's a a question on that was like so

[1:23:53] if we have to do an audit that means

[1:23:55] that we don't feel they're doing a good

[1:23:57] job uh uh sorting their garbage. So that

[1:24:01] means that our bag tags really haven't

[1:24:03] done what they were supposed to. and the

[1:24:05] employee that picks the garbage up to

[1:24:07] put it into the bag isn't looking at to

[1:24:08] see what's in it because if there's

[1:24:10] recycle in it, he's not supposed to take

[1:24:12] it. So that's to me is $100,000 that

[1:24:15] we're just throwing up in the air. The

[1:24:17] other thing is is it our employees going

[1:24:19] to do the audit or is it some company

[1:24:22] comes in?

[1:24:23] >> No. Is the waste engineer that would do

[1:24:25] the audit? Go ahead.

[1:24:26] >> Just to clarify, it's not 100. The

[1:24:27] recommendation is the $25,000 option.

[1:24:30] >> The single season.

[1:24:31] not the four season.

[1:24:34] What's uh in your resolution read or not

[1:24:36] saying 343,000

[1:24:39] >> that's

[1:24:39] >> you'll see that at the end

[1:24:41] >> the end but the this section here on the

[1:24:44] um this particular audit

[1:24:47] >> one shot by

[1:24:49] >> yeah Jay yeah they Wayne what they do is they come in and they take the 100

[1:24:55] households and they go through it and we

[1:24:58] may find that food waste is 50% of

[1:25:00] what's going into our our landfill and

[1:25:02] it may justify by opening a composting

[1:25:05] green box program here. Um,

[1:25:08] and and you know, putting it on our guys

[1:25:11] to to look in every bag, the thousands

[1:25:13] and thousands and thousands of bags that

[1:25:15] they're they're throwing in those trucks

[1:25:17] every day. Um, it's just it's not

[1:25:21] realistic for our guys. I mean, if they

[1:25:23] get a a garbage bag full of water

[1:25:26] bottles, of course, they would be able

[1:25:27] to identify that. But I mean, if

[1:25:29] somebody dragged a bag out and there's a

[1:25:30] water bottle in the side of it, I

[1:25:32] wouldn't expect our guys to leave it on

[1:25:33] the side of the road. We don't know if

[1:25:35] that's been contaminated or what. Um,

[1:25:37] this would just give us a lot better

[1:25:38] idea on on the diversion that we can we

[1:25:42] can make most efficient with our dump

[1:25:45] site and the the type of garbage that

[1:25:46] we're receiving. And you were mentioning

[1:25:49] from your conference that when they did

[1:25:51] this, there was lots of surprises or

[1:25:54] >> that Yeah, that's that's everyone were

[1:25:56] just astonished by what they thought

[1:25:58] would be normal garbage on what they

[1:26:00] found was just it was incredible and

[1:26:03] they were able to make the adjustments

[1:26:05] to their diversion programs and they've

[1:26:08] actually um the one municipality out of

[1:26:10] uh mil I believe it was um are doing it

[1:26:13] yearly now just because it changes with

[1:26:15] the seasons like and and it's just It's

[1:26:17] just about making your landfill as

[1:26:20] efficient as possible and by knowing

[1:26:23] exactly what's going in is the only way

[1:26:26] to do that.

[1:26:31] » Yeah. So that's that's all we had for

[1:26:33] the audits is that we would propose one

[1:26:35] and then build on a program from there

[1:26:37] depending on [clears throat]

[1:26:38] what that looked like. Um, on the green

[1:26:40] bin, I do also want to mention that

[1:26:43] while we are not legislated to have a

[1:26:46] green bin program right now, if our

[1:26:49] population grows a whole lot more, we

[1:26:51] will be required to have a green bin

[1:26:53] program. Um, so it it would be good to

[1:26:56] have some baselines to know what we may

[1:26:59] encounter in the future in that regard.

[1:27:04] Moving on, this was included in the last

[1:27:07] report and I did just do a cut and paste

[1:27:09] because I thought it was important to

[1:27:10] mention again that there are proposed

[1:27:12] provincial legislation legislated

[1:27:15] changes to municipal waste operations

[1:27:17] which streamline a lot of the processes

[1:27:19] that we're talking about today. Right

[1:27:21] now, we are looking at, you know, tens

[1:27:23] of thousands of dollars for an ECA

[1:27:25] application to change our design and

[1:27:27] operation plan and get amendments

[1:27:29] approved to an ECA if we move forward

[1:27:31] with these recommendations.

[1:27:33] However, under several of the proposed

[1:27:36] changes, um those costs would be

[1:27:38] significantly reduced and the processes

[1:27:40] would be streamlined as the province

[1:27:43] recommends that um you know, we are good

[1:27:45] stewards and we are doing a good job and

[1:27:47] if they've approved a 100red years of

[1:27:49] landfilling capacity, what they found is

[1:27:52] that changing the ECA to allow you to

[1:27:54] take 500 tons from a neighbor, you're

[1:27:58] still managing a 100red years of

[1:28:00] capacity. it it doesn't change how how

[1:28:03] well you're doing or what your

[1:28:04] requirements are to manage that waste.

[1:28:07] So the the getting approval doesn't

[1:28:08] affect the outcome is is ultimately um

[1:28:11] what they found in in some of those

[1:28:14] legislative positions. So, I just wanted

[1:28:16] to reiterate that the province

[1:28:18] recognizes that things need to change in

[1:28:20] landfill worlds and we can either manage

[1:28:23] that change on our own proactively the

[1:28:25] way that works for our community or we

[1:28:27] can have them tell us that you're going

[1:28:29] to do XY Z. Uh, and we've been on the

[1:28:32] receiving end of that in the past as

[1:28:34] well.

[1:28:36] So, proposed summary of actions,

[1:28:38] timelines, and expenses. So, in the

[1:28:41] optimization report, there was a request

[1:28:43] to pull all of the costs together into a

[1:28:45] consolidated framework um because they

[1:28:48] spread over I believe it was eight pages

[1:28:50] in the report and each one contained a

[1:28:52] fairly detailed explanation. Basically,

[1:28:55] what I've done is pulled those eight

[1:28:56] pages together into a couple of smaller

[1:28:59] charts without the explanation. If you

[1:29:01] want the explanation, go back and look

[1:29:02] at the original one. Um so the the first

[1:29:06] costs are costs that we believe can be

[1:29:09] uh covered through the operating budget

[1:29:11] that don't require reserve allocation

[1:29:14] and the timelines or years when those

[1:29:16] things would happen. So disposal ban on

[1:29:19] some items um you know the the one that

[1:29:22] comes to mind uh most often is the uh

[1:29:25] the binding and the twines and the the

[1:29:27] tarps. um you know not accepting those

[1:29:30] and using the existing recycling

[1:29:32] programs uh in place to help commercial

[1:29:35] generators of that waste that is not

[1:29:38] manageable at the landfill site um get

[1:29:41] rid of that waste. Public education

[1:29:43] campaigns uh textile drop off program

[1:29:46] establishing a reuse center with lots of

[1:29:50] guidelines. Um we've done some research

[1:29:52] and and have some guidelines in that

[1:29:55] others are using for those. They don't

[1:29:57] accept any electronic appliances, for

[1:29:59] example. Those all go to the electronic

[1:30:01] recycling bin, and it eliminates the

[1:30:04] risk of a electrical hazard or a short

[1:30:06] or a fire. Um, it would only be for

[1:30:09] things that could be easily and safely

[1:30:12] reused. So, no dirty mattresses, um, no

[1:30:15] pillows, no blankets, that kind of

[1:30:17] stuff. It would be, you know, dishes or

[1:30:20] windows that could be repurposed for a

[1:30:23] shed or a greenhouse or a screen door

[1:30:26] that doesn't fit the aesthetic of the

[1:30:27] cottage anymore and is just going or

[1:30:30] those types of reusable items that still

[1:30:33] have lots of life in a different

[1:30:34] application. Um, that don't pose a risk

[1:30:38] or a safety liability concern for the

[1:30:40] town.

[1:30:42] >> I always understood once through the

[1:30:44] gates couldn't remove it. That's how it

[1:30:46] is because we don't have a reuse center.

[1:30:48] If we had authorization for a reuse

[1:30:51] center with parameters about what could

[1:30:53] go there, then it could leave. It could

[1:30:55] go to that center and leave.

[1:30:58] That would be one of the changes that we

[1:31:00] would put into our ECA is for approval

[1:31:02] to do that. But you're absolutely right.

[1:31:04] If it comes through the gate right now,

[1:31:06] it's garbage. Even if it's perfectly

[1:31:08] useful. Yeah.

[1:31:11] So, total costs are between5 and $10,000

[1:31:14] a year. the $10,000 a year in 2027 is

[1:31:18] the highest because that would include

[1:31:21] the establishment of that reuse center

[1:31:24] if the ECA amendment to allow that is

[1:31:26] approved. And that's just the cost of a

[1:31:29] uh a prefab shed or a shipping container

[1:31:32] um that would house those things uh in

[1:31:34] the short term. So that's a one-time

[1:31:36] expense. So, it's roughly $5 to $6,000 a

[1:31:38] year for operational things to continue

[1:31:41] with our food cyclinger program, to

[1:31:43] continue with our composter program. Um,

[1:31:46] all of those things would fit into that

[1:31:51] costing. So, that's specific to the

[1:31:53] three Rs, the reduce, reuse, recycle,

[1:31:56] all of which would be covered by

[1:31:57] operations. site operation

[1:31:59] recommendations included um both

[1:32:03] operating and reserve allocations. So

[1:32:06] improving on-site signage. We currently

[1:32:08] do have a line in our budget for

[1:32:10] signage. Um a small increase to that

[1:32:12] would allow us to cover these expenses

[1:32:14] as part of the operating budget. Moving

[1:32:17] the brush pile and burn pile, we can use

[1:32:19] our own resources to do that once

[1:32:21] approved. Um so there is no capital

[1:32:23] allocation for us to be able to do that.

[1:32:26] installing a single way scale as per the

[1:32:29] recommendations here is estimated to be

[1:32:31] about 138. We did put the 140 in for the

[1:32:37] scale house as a worstc case scenario

[1:32:40] with the note that we would first look

[1:32:42] at um an automated system and then a

[1:32:46] trailer and then go to the scale house

[1:32:49] if all other options failed. Um, to be

[1:32:52] frank, I don't know why a construction

[1:32:54] trailer would not work. So, I I don't

[1:32:57] ever see us building this. Um, but it

[1:33:00] was the proposal contained in the

[1:33:01] original report. So, we've reflected

[1:33:03] that here as a worst case scenario.

[1:33:07] Um, and then a construction and demol

[1:33:10] demolition waste diversion recycling

[1:33:12] strategy won't cost us anything. We just

[1:33:14] need to change some processes that we

[1:33:16] follow to do things. and then

[1:33:19] construction of a household hazardous

[1:33:20] waste containment structure. So, uh I

[1:33:24] want to chat just a bit about the

[1:33:25] household hazardous waste. So, we

[1:33:26] currently run two events per year, one

[1:33:28] in the spring, May, I think, and one in

[1:33:31] the fall, September. Cool.

[1:33:35] They are extremely well attended. Um as

[1:33:38] I mentioned, they do we we pay to the

[1:33:41] hauler for the cost of the materials

[1:33:43] they the hazardous materials they take

[1:33:45] away. That includes paint, aerosol cans,

[1:33:49] old gas, um light bulbs, um you know,

[1:33:54] batteries, uh like car batteries,

[1:33:57] uh yeah, all of those kind of things

[1:33:59] that we generate through our daily life

[1:34:02] that shouldn't go on the tipping face.

[1:34:05] What happens is household hazardous

[1:34:07] waste day is May 20th, and on May 25th,

[1:34:10] somebody comes in with a half a can of

[1:34:11] varnish and says, "I don't want this

[1:34:13] anymore." more and we say, "Oh, you have

[1:34:14] to take it home and keep it till

[1:34:16] September and then bring it back." And

[1:34:18] they come back tomorrow with a bag of

[1:34:21] garbage with that wrapped up in a bag

[1:34:23] inside the bag and they throw in the

[1:34:25] landfill site. Those are the chemicals

[1:34:27] that cost us hundreds of thousands of

[1:34:29] dollars to manage 20 years from now. So

[1:34:32] having the containment facility to put

[1:34:34] that can of paint in safely that's

[1:34:36] fireproof and uh weather resistant and

[1:34:40] rodent proof so that when that day comes

[1:34:43] around in September we can safely

[1:34:45] dispose of it and keep it out of our

[1:34:47] landfill provides a convenience to our

[1:34:49] residents and ensures that we're not

[1:34:51] putting long-term hazardous substances

[1:34:54] into the ground that we're going to have

[1:34:55] to manage for decades to come. It's a

[1:34:58] onetime expense of create building that

[1:34:59] shed. It's actually already approved in

[1:35:01] our ECA. So that is something that we

[1:35:03] could move forward with without an

[1:35:05] amendment.

[1:35:07] >> Yes, council

[1:35:14] » didn't take I'm concerned about spillage

[1:35:16] like I

[1:35:18] we start collecting the stuff and if

[1:35:21] they're going to only collect it every six months per se. Um, and by the

[1:35:26] way, I was there in in the May day they

[1:35:28] had it and they did an excellent job.

[1:35:29] Like very efficient. But if we start

[1:35:33] collecting it ourselves, I'm really

[1:35:35] concerned about spillage and what

[1:35:37] hazardous problems we'll have with that.

[1:35:41] And that's why it needs to be

[1:35:43] constructed in the building that is very

[1:35:45] specifically outlined the the

[1:35:47] characteristics of the building, how it

[1:35:49] has to be constructed. Um what the

[1:35:51] containment is and the sealants and

[1:35:53] stuff so that if a can of paint does tip

[1:35:55] over, it doesn't create a problem is is

[1:35:58] clearly laid out and identified in the

[1:36:00] existing ECA requirement.

[1:36:02] >> Good. Thank you.

[1:36:04] >> And just as uh Andre mentioned, we

[1:36:07] actually have approval to do that right

[1:36:09] now. we just haven't done it. So, it

[1:36:11] isn't our current ECA.

[1:36:14] >> Are our staff uh trained to handle

[1:36:17] hazardous waste on a continuous basis?

[1:36:20] Cuz when they come in, uh I know our

[1:36:23] staff helps them, but we have experts to

[1:36:25] come and take it away. It causes 25,000

[1:36:28] run for the day. I'm assuming that's our

[1:36:30] staff wages also. So, that word is 25.

[1:36:35] So what would the savings be if we've

[1:36:37] already got it collected? So they only

[1:36:39] need to be here for a half a day instead

[1:36:41] of a day.

[1:36:43] >> We would collect it if someone brought

[1:36:45] it to the site on a day that wasn't the

[1:36:48] hazardous waste collection day. So if

[1:36:51] they missed it and they were going to

[1:36:52] throw it in the garbage and they already

[1:36:54] brought it and they were throwing it

[1:36:55] over the hill and we said, "No, no, you

[1:36:57] can't do that. That's what we collect.

[1:36:59] We wouldn't be advertising that you

[1:37:00] could bring your waste here every day

[1:37:02] and we'll we'll take it every day." Fair

[1:37:04] enough. Um, all of our operators have

[1:37:07] C12, I think it is, training, which

[1:37:09] allows them to handle and haul hazardous

[1:37:12] waste and we have a CBOR that allows

[1:37:15] that to be in our vehicles and and all

[1:37:18] that kind of stuff as well. And that is

[1:37:19] a requirement of the environmental

[1:37:22] u approvals that we have in place to

[1:37:25] operate a municipality as well.

[1:37:27] >> Councelor Mouse,

[1:37:28] >> I think you've half answered my question

[1:37:30] in some of the conversation there. So we

[1:37:32] would still have our two hazardous days

[1:37:34] of the year that company would arrive.

[1:37:36] We could still do all of our drive-thru

[1:37:38] everything, but all the rest of the days

[1:37:39] we collect and then on those days they

[1:37:42] remove that hazardous waste. So we're

[1:37:44] not accumulating it nec we're we're

[1:37:46] storing it, but then they take it away

[1:37:48] from there. Do we have any financial

[1:37:51] benefit whatsoever or we're just happy

[1:37:52] that somebody's taking it all away and

[1:37:54] it doesn't go into the landfill? That's

[1:37:56] the financial benefit is the tens of

[1:37:58] thousands or hundreds of thousands of

[1:37:59] dollars we'll save in the future not

[1:38:02] monitoring for mercury poisoning and and

[1:38:05] uh those those toxic hazardous

[1:38:06] substances. Do those companies have a

[1:38:09] process of to councelor Eastman's point?

[1:38:12] Um, do they have I mean, if something

[1:38:15] happens to be spilled over, and I'm

[1:38:16] assuming some type of a metal building

[1:38:18] is what we're looking at, or some type

[1:38:19] of containment, do they go through a

[1:38:20] cleaning process of that actual building

[1:38:22] when they take away all the hazardous

[1:38:24] waste? So, we start fresh each time they

[1:38:26] empty it, do you know?

[1:38:28] >> Uh, no. They're they're responsible for

[1:38:30] anything that they do while they're on

[1:38:31] the site. Um, so they would take it away

[1:38:35] if the building needed to be cleaned and

[1:38:37] we probably would give it a quick clean

[1:38:38] after we emptied it out. We would we

[1:38:40] would do that.

[1:38:45] » Okay.

[1:38:48] » All right. Emerging trends in waste

[1:38:50] diversion. So, if you're into some

[1:38:52] interesting reading, just Google um new

[1:38:56] and groundbreaking waste diversion

[1:38:58] activities. There's some stuff that you

[1:39:00] would expect to see there, but there's

[1:39:02] some really cool, awesome stuff that

[1:39:04] people are working with as well. Um,

[1:39:06] mining is becoming more and more of a

[1:39:09] thing, but not in the traditional way

[1:39:10] where you bring in and you dig up your

[1:39:12] whole site and then you have to uh

[1:39:15] reprocess all of the waste that's there

[1:39:17] after you take out recyclables.

[1:39:19] um they have ground radar machines that

[1:39:22] will identify that that's a tire and

[1:39:24] here it is and automatically plot it on

[1:39:26] a map and you just go dig up the tire

[1:39:28] and now you have another two feet that

[1:39:30] you can fill. Um so there's there's some

[1:39:33] really cool stuff out there in the

[1:39:35] future. So these calculations, this

[1:39:38] report, these estimates are based on

[1:39:39] what we know and what we do today. You

[1:39:41] know how quickly the world of technology

[1:39:43] changes 10 years from now. some of the

[1:39:45] technologies that'll be available to

[1:39:47] manage what's already in the ground and

[1:39:50] get capacity back. Especially since we

[1:39:52] know that in the 2030s we're going to

[1:39:54] run out of landfill capacity as a

[1:39:56] province and and subsequently as a

[1:39:58] country. Those technologies are going to

[1:40:00] be developed super fast and that the

[1:40:03] chances of us being able to utilize some

[1:40:05] of those at some point to get back

[1:40:07] capacity we've already used also exists.

[1:40:09] So this report is contemplating status

[1:40:12] quo, what we do today, what we know

[1:40:14] today, how we've always operated. It

[1:40:16] doesn't consider any of those future

[1:40:18] technologies or efficiencies. So if

[1:40:20] you're into some interesting reading,

[1:40:21] just uh Google that. There's some pretty

[1:40:23] cool stuff out there. Um already talked

[1:40:26] about the year- round hazardous waste.

[1:40:30] So financial implications. So this is

[1:40:33] your summary, Wayne, of your $343,000

[1:40:37] uh summary. So for 2026, we don't expect

[1:40:40] any costs. In 2027, we would have site

[1:40:44] preparation and improvement um that we

[1:40:46] would fund um you know to to make to

[1:40:50] make the site ready to accept all of

[1:40:52] these changes to operations. If we're

[1:40:54] moving forward with our ECA, we would

[1:40:57] also have the costs of the ECA and the

[1:40:59] design and operation plan application as

[1:41:03] detailed on page 27 of the report. And

[1:41:06] then the $10,000 to construct the

[1:41:08] hazardous waste storage building

[1:41:11] in 2028. site preparation and and

[1:41:14] alterations is going to be ongoing as we

[1:41:16] implement all of these changes and

[1:41:18] diversion activities along with the

[1:41:20] single way scale and only if required

[1:41:24] which I don't expect the scale house

[1:41:27] construction uh for 288,000 that year to

[1:41:32] a maximum and then $10,000 in 2029 for

[1:41:35] final site preparation and improvement

[1:41:38] and then it's just regular maintenance

[1:41:39] beyond there and those totals altogether

[1:41:42] including that scale house that pretty

[1:41:46] confident to say we don't need um are

[1:41:48] $343,000.

[1:41:51] We propose that those funds would come

[1:41:53] from the reserves which have a balance

[1:41:56] today of $71,47260

[1:42:01] as needed though. So they wouldn't all

[1:42:03] come out in 2026 or all come out in

[1:42:05] 2027. it would be as those activities

[1:42:08] were implemented and we would continue

[1:42:10] contributing to that reserve through our

[1:42:12] regular budget activities uh each year

[1:42:15] as well to to keep that balance up. So

[1:42:18] um the total balance wouldn't bring the

[1:42:20] reserve to 350,000 because we would have

[1:42:22] additional several years of additional

[1:42:25] contributions to that reserve as well to

[1:42:27] support other and ongoing not yet

[1:42:30] identified activities that may need to

[1:42:32] occur at the site.

[1:42:34] So when all of these factors are

[1:42:36] considered and the subsequent

[1:42:38] modifications and proposals and

[1:42:40] clarifications from this report, staff

[1:42:43] recommend that we be provided with

[1:42:44] direction to engage Cambian to

[1:42:47] immediately maximize site efficiency by

[1:42:50] introducing new or amended diversion

[1:42:52] programs and policies that are not

[1:42:54] subject to an ECA amendment.

[1:42:57] that they compile and submit an

[1:42:59] application to amend the ECA and the

[1:43:02] design and operation plan to implement

[1:43:04] the recommendations above and contained

[1:43:07] in this report. To implement revenue

[1:43:10] generation tools as described in the

[1:43:12] report to reduce the annual operating

[1:43:14] deficit and begin to prepare for future

[1:43:16] closure costs. Investigate and bring

[1:43:19] forward the required policies and

[1:43:20] procedures as recommended in this report

[1:43:22] for council approval to reduce risk and

[1:43:25] liability to the town while maximizing

[1:43:27] site life and providing public

[1:43:29] information and education as well as

[1:43:31] improve communications.

[1:43:34] implement new revenue generation tools

[1:43:36] and sources, including acceptance of

[1:43:38] waste from other municipalities as

[1:43:39] outlined in the Cayman report to offset

[1:43:42] continuing annual cost escalations and

[1:43:44] future closure and post-closure

[1:43:46] monitoring cost as required by approvals

[1:43:49] as they are granted and install a single

[1:43:52] waist scale to create efficiencies and

[1:43:54] provide uniform, consistent, and fully

[1:43:56] transparent waste disposal services as

[1:43:58] approvals to do so are received from the

[1:44:01] Ministry of the Environment and Parks.

[1:44:04] And I just want to point out the the the

[1:44:06] summary note in the Keian report because

[1:44:07] I I do think it's really reflective of

[1:44:09] the whole thing. So the Dangan waste

[1:44:12] disposal site is a vital municipal asset

[1:44:14] that plays a central role in supporting

[1:44:16] the town of Braftoft's long-term waste

[1:44:18] management needs. With substantial

[1:44:20] remaining capacity and strong regular

[1:44:23] regulatory foundation, the site presents

[1:44:25] an opportunity not only to ensure

[1:44:27] environmental stewardship, but also to

[1:44:29] unlock greater potential and financial

[1:44:33] value for the community.

[1:44:37] >> Thank you for an excellent report and an

[1:44:39] excellent presentation. And you actually

[1:44:42] did breathe once in a while in there.

[1:44:44] So, thank thank

[1:44:45] >> did I?

[1:44:46] >> Yeah. Uh I'm just going to put this

[1:44:48] first. We've already done this, but I'll

[1:44:50] put the resolution forward. The first

[1:44:51] one was, be it resolved that the council

[1:44:53] of the corporation of town of Bankro

[1:44:55] receives a supplemental information

[1:44:58] staff report regarding the landfill

[1:44:59] optimization study report for the Dunan

[1:45:02] landfill for information and discussion

[1:45:04] purposes, which is what we have done.

[1:45:06] Yes, sorry. Um, I just I just want to

[1:45:09] mention in in the report there, um, and

[1:45:11] I believe we can do it within the

[1:45:12] 343,000,

[1:45:14] we didn't mention doing an audit, a

[1:45:16] waste audit in that report. I think we

[1:45:18] need to include that wording in there so

[1:45:21] we can move forward with that. I don't

[1:45:22] believe we have to increase 343 because

[1:45:24] we have so much in there for the scale

[1:45:26] shack which I've never seen a scale

[1:45:29] house actual concrete. It's always a

[1:45:31] construction trailer. So I believe we

[1:45:33] can do do it within that money. I just

[1:45:35] think that we should add that verbiage.

[1:45:37] >> Yes. Okay.

[1:45:38] >> In the resolution. That's all.

[1:45:39] >> Okay. Thank you. Uh so that's the motion

[1:45:42] to do the discussion which we've already

[1:45:43] done. Could I have a mover and a

[1:45:44] seconder for that please? Deputy Mayor

[1:45:47] and Councelor Lawrence. All in favor,

[1:45:49] please. Thank you. The second

[1:45:52] resolution, be it resolved that the

[1:45:54] council of the corporation, the town of

[1:45:55] Bankro, hereby direct staff to engage

[1:45:57] Cambium, Inc. to implement all the

[1:46:00] recommendations contained in the

[1:46:01] landfill optimization study report as

[1:46:03] amended by the modific modifications

[1:46:06] contained in this report, including the single waste audit. Thank

[1:46:13] you, Jake.

[1:46:16] and further the capital allocations

[1:46:18] outlined on page 11 of this report be

[1:46:21] approved up to a maximum of 343,000

[1:46:24] if required and further the council the

[1:46:27] corporation the town of Bankro direct

[1:46:29] staff to execute a service contract with

[1:46:32] Camian Inc required for this purpose

[1:46:34] because I have a mover and a second

[1:46:36] please councelor Lawrence and councelor

[1:46:38] Miles all in favor is

[1:46:50] » you can make a motion to amend that

[1:46:52] resolution. Um, you would need a

[1:46:54] secondary for the amendment.

[1:46:58] >> Can I have your mic, please?

[1:47:00] >> Sorry. Yes, I would like to amend that.

[1:47:03] Uh let me just find

[1:47:06] amend it to say be it resolved that the

[1:47:08] council of the corporation of the town

[1:47:10] of Braftoft hereby direct staff to

[1:47:12] engage Cambium Inc. to implement all but

[1:47:17] accept waste from other municipalities.

[1:47:19] So that's the only one I want pulled

[1:47:21] from that.

[1:47:23] >> So that's your motion needs to be sorry.

[1:47:26] Yes.

[1:47:29] >> If I can just make a comment um

[1:47:31] excluding that or

[1:47:32] >> sorry excluding that. Yeah,

[1:47:33] >> excluding that and moving forward with

[1:47:35] everything else would duplicate your ECA

[1:47:37] fees. If there was a decision to move

[1:47:39] forward with that in the future, you

[1:47:40] would have to submit yet another design

[1:47:43] and operation plan and another ECA

[1:47:45] amendment to make that change later if

[1:47:48] it wasn't included with the first

[1:47:51] suite of changes.

[1:47:54] Just a

[1:47:58] » So, the motion's on the floor. Looking

[1:48:00] for a seconder.

[1:48:03] Council Eastman seconds. Um,

[1:48:07] >> can I just speak to why I want to do

[1:48:09] that?

[1:48:10] >> Uh, it's pretty evident. Do you want to?

[1:48:14] >> Well, I would like to say something if I

[1:48:15] can.

[1:48:17] >> I'm not saying that I'm opposed to it. I

[1:48:19] mean, at the end of the day, it's a

[1:48:20] $700,000

[1:48:22] operational cost to all of our

[1:48:24] taxpayers. Now, when you take off, like

[1:48:26] Andrew made a good comment about

[1:48:28] curbside. So, when we're bringing in

[1:48:29] revenue from other municipalities to

[1:48:31] bring to offset our costs, so we're

[1:48:34] going to bring in bring in other dollars

[1:48:37] from them, um our costs that our people

[1:48:40] incur that anybody from other

[1:48:42] municipalities wouldn't, such as

[1:48:43] curbside and um our hazardous waste and

[1:48:46] such, they don't benefit from that.

[1:48:48] That's our our people only. But still,

[1:48:50] when you look at the difference, you're

[1:48:52] still looking at a $450,000 difference.

[1:48:55] So, yes, it would be great if we could

[1:48:58] bring in enough revenue from other

[1:49:00] municipalities so that we run it

[1:49:04] where we don't have to like there's not

[1:49:05] a big chunk coming off of our taxpayers.

[1:49:08] But at the end of the day, I really

[1:49:09] don't want to see the lifespan of our landfill um lesson. I think back of

[1:49:15] when we were, this is a positive note

[1:49:18] though, when we were first elected in in

[1:49:20] 20 uh 2014, there was an expected life

[1:49:24] expectancy of 160 years and we're still

[1:49:27] sitting at that. So over 12 years, we

[1:49:29] haven't lost, we've gained, which is

[1:49:31] great, but I just think we need to do a

[1:49:34] little more exploring on that. Um, we've

[1:49:36] got our residents who are dead set

[1:49:39] against it. many are and I just

[1:49:43] I don't want to see the greatest asset

[1:49:45] that we have deplete. That is one thing

[1:49:48] that every municipality,

[1:49:51] you know, we're we're one of the rare

[1:49:52] ones that have that kind of life

[1:49:53] expectancy. And yes, the $700,000

[1:49:57] that we we incur the cost of our

[1:50:00] landfill, we bring in a little bit of

[1:50:02] revenue from elsewhere, but we're look

[1:50:04] that's a 10% in our taxes. If we can

[1:50:06] eliminate that by half, then that's 5%

[1:50:10] off of our taxes. So, I I get that and I

[1:50:13] understand that and I understand the

[1:50:15] money part of it and how wonderful that

[1:50:16] would be. But at the same time, I just

[1:50:19] why do we have to make this decision

[1:50:21] right now? Can it not wait? I mean, a

[1:50:24] few months later, we've got potentially

[1:50:26] a new council coming in and I just think

[1:50:28] that it could sit on that council table

[1:50:32] as opposed to right now.

[1:50:35] comments from the floor.

[1:50:38] Councelor Miles,

[1:50:40] >> um I'm not in support of the amendment

[1:50:42] because I feel that the opportunities

[1:50:46] here, well, first of all, the extra cost

[1:50:48] to going back to the ECA again. That

[1:50:50] does make some sense. We are already

[1:50:53] accepting garbage from another

[1:50:54] municipality. We're just not getting

[1:50:56] enough for it, but we're going to

[1:50:57] correct that. I don't see this as a

[1:51:00] floodgate um uh presentation. I think it

[1:51:04] will be managed clearly. I think I could foresee a future where we we

[1:51:12] don't we have we can't cut off our noses

[1:51:14] despite our face. uh you know so the

[1:51:16] report does sort of talk about what are

[1:51:18] some limitations about how much we

[1:51:19] should accept

[1:51:21] and I think

[1:51:24] I have a responsibility to say to every

[1:51:27] constituent you are the highest taxpayer

[1:51:31] almost in the province based on our mill

[1:51:33] rate and if I could say to you I can

[1:51:36] find a way to generate like what's

[1:51:39] $300,000 5% of tax base

[1:51:43] >> if I can say we're We have found a

[1:51:45] program that, you know, it's not going

[1:51:46] to happen tomorrow, but maybe over the

[1:51:48] next 5 to 10 years, we know we can

[1:51:50] generate some revenue to help with that

[1:51:52] with proper control. I think we should

[1:51:56] be taking those opportunities while

[1:51:57] they've been presented to us by the

[1:52:00] people who do garbage best. Um I I think

[1:52:03] they're they're the pros. They're the

[1:52:04] ones who've paid attention to what is

[1:52:06] here. And so I think missing that

[1:52:08] opportunity to stay to say to a

[1:52:10] constituent, I can help find some

[1:52:11] revenue for the taxes here because we're

[1:52:13] already so high. I have a responsibility

[1:52:16] I feel to a constituent to find a way to

[1:52:18] do that. That that's that's why I would

[1:52:20] be opposed to the amendment.

[1:52:22] >> Any other comments on that, Council

[1:52:24] Lawrence?

[1:52:27] I guess I see the length of time that

[1:52:30] the um landfill can operate as an

[1:52:35] opportunity and an asset like you you

[1:52:38] pointed out, but uh an asset that

[1:52:40] remains in the ground and doesn't

[1:52:43] generate revenue for us. Uh I would not

[1:52:47] support. I see this something like the

[1:52:52] excess capacity we have with the sewage

[1:52:55] treatment plant, you know, uh treating

[1:52:57] leech from other municipalities.

[1:53:01] Um now in that case, I don't think it's

[1:53:05] something that goes away. It it

[1:53:08] um but I I would welcome the opportunity

[1:53:13] to reduce taxes of our taxpayers and

[1:53:15] make us more affordable.

[1:53:19] So comment that I have is is that um to

[1:53:22] delay this to another council, this

[1:53:25] council has has a lot of uh education

[1:53:28] and expertise on this matter that

[1:53:29] they've acquired and there's going to be

[1:53:30] a large turnover. So to put this to a

[1:53:32] new council who have really no

[1:53:34] background information is going to

[1:53:35] extend this out far enough. And we were

[1:53:38] elected to make decisions, you know, we

[1:53:40] were elected to make decisions as

[1:53:41] councelor Miles said in the best

[1:53:43] interests of our taxpayers. we don't

[1:53:44] have very many opportunities

[1:53:47] uh for revenue generation and I think

[1:53:50] that we know that there are a whole

[1:53:51] bunch of other costs that are uh on the

[1:53:53] horizon uh for um that we have no

[1:53:57] control over you know every we've seen

[1:53:59] 10 plus% in the last few years I think

[1:54:01] it was 18 one year for the policing etc

[1:54:04] we still don't know where that's going

[1:54:05] so there are a lot of other expenses the

[1:54:07] only thing that we can do to offset them

[1:54:09] and still be responsible with the way

[1:54:11] site and I think 100 plus years of

[1:54:12] capacity

[1:54:14] uh with upcoming changes probably of

[1:54:16] technology uh that it's our duty to uh

[1:54:20] in the best interest of our taxpayers to

[1:54:22] move forward with this. Uh deputy mayor.

[1:54:24] >> Yeah, just a couple of comments if I

[1:54:26] might. Uh uh first of all, the these

[1:54:30] other municipalities have as far as I

[1:54:31] know have not approached us about

[1:54:33] coming. It's all hypothetical. And if if

[1:54:37] it came back to the local council at the

[1:54:39] time uh to accept or reject each an

[1:54:42] individual uh proposal uh as a revenue

[1:54:47] base, there might be other ones. There

[1:54:48] might be other municipalities uh that

[1:54:51] are out there that are uh really

[1:54:53] desperate. We might be able to uh uh

[1:54:56] generate a whole lot of money in a hurry

[1:54:57] and and even less garbage. But that

[1:54:59] that's part of it.

[1:55:01] The one thing I don't like about I'll

[1:55:03] speak to the to the resolution is that

[1:55:05] we accept all all his recommendations

[1:55:10] and I'm afraid I don't agree with them

[1:55:11] all. I agree with some but not them all.

[1:55:14] So if we have to accept them all, it's

[1:55:16] going to be difficult.

[1:55:18] >> Council Miles,

[1:55:19] >> uh just one more uh followup comment. I

[1:55:22] have some thoughts also that we put

[1:55:24] ourselves in a really good standing with

[1:55:26] the province. I think that when we start

[1:55:28] talking about how the the the the

[1:55:30] condition of dumps throughout the entire

[1:55:33] province, the province is going to start

[1:55:35] having problems and they're going to be

[1:55:37] municipalities going to the province and

[1:55:38] saying, "Help us, help us, save us, save

[1:55:40] us." If we are super proactive about

[1:55:43] finding ways to help some of our

[1:55:46] municipalities, it wouldn't shock me if

[1:55:48] when the time comes and we're ready to

[1:55:50] put this way scale in that we send for a

[1:55:53] grant to the province and say, "Oh, and

[1:55:55] by the way, we've taken every step

[1:55:57] that's been reported by the people that

[1:56:00] know this best. So why don't you help us

[1:56:02] because we're trying to put our foot

[1:56:03] forward to be able to maybe help with

[1:56:06] this massive garbage problem that's

[1:56:08] coming down the chute." And so I wonder

[1:56:11] this if taking the resolutions from or

[1:56:14] the recommendations also puts us in

[1:56:16] really good standing with the province.

[1:56:20] >> Council Eastman,

[1:56:22] >> I I guess my my concern is that are we

[1:56:24] committing future councils to accept

[1:56:28] automatically this or will will they

[1:56:30] have a say on who they accept and when

[1:56:33] uh what the scales is of the time? like

[1:56:36] a like I mean we're we're putting it in

[1:56:40] out there uh not knowing what one of our

[1:56:42] neighbors that we have pending uh

[1:56:46] decisions on. Um so again I I just have

[1:56:50] a concern that that so so the study

[1:56:53] doesn't specify the who's all it's

[1:56:56] specifying is a quantity

[1:56:58] >> but it says all.

[1:56:59] >> Pardon me.

[1:57:00] >> It says all.

[1:57:01] >> Sorry but what's the all part?

[1:57:04] I understand it says all

[1:57:07] the motion is to accept all

[1:57:08] municipalities garbage.

[1:57:10] >> No, no, no, no. All all the

[1:57:12] recommendations in the report, not all

[1:57:14] municipalities garbage. There's a cap on this of 150,500

[1:57:21] metric tons. Whether that comes from our

[1:57:24] neighbor X, Y, or Zed, um is to be deter

[1:57:28] is to be determined. So, no, not all

[1:57:30] municipalities.

[1:57:32] So,

[1:57:34] Jake, you had a comment.

[1:57:35] >> I I just I think I need like I'm

[1:57:37] listening to everybody's questions. I

[1:57:39] think what the resolution is is like

[1:57:41] what Andre had mentioned that moving

[1:57:43] forward is to get to permission to do

[1:57:45] this. Um whether future councils decide

[1:57:49] to accept ways from other municipalities

[1:57:52] will be up to them, but this just puts

[1:57:55] us in a position in the future if that

[1:57:57] is an option. It wouldn't be

[1:58:00] >> is that is that the way I understand it?

[1:58:02] No, this is to take 1500 metric tons.

[1:58:05] >> Okay. Then I was I thought this was just

[1:58:08] for the ECA

[1:58:08] >> up to a maximum 1500 metric tons. That's

[1:58:11] what this resolution Okay.

[1:58:13] >> And that's because we need to identify

[1:58:16] that volume for the ECA amendment. The

[1:58:18] ECA is very specific about how much

[1:58:21] waste we can take from outside of our

[1:58:22] municipal boundaries. So, um we're we're

[1:58:26] saying 1500, but you know that that may

[1:58:28] not happen all at once. it it could be

[1:58:30] 500 the first year and maybe somebody

[1:58:33] else comes forward with another 500 and

[1:58:35] will we get to 15? I I think there's

[1:58:37] absolutely um no doubt that the demand

[1:58:40] is there. Um but that won't happen in

[1:58:43] 2026 or 2027 and is probably um you know

[1:58:47] not even something we would start to

[1:58:49] implement until 2028 once we had the

[1:58:52] ECAs and the design and operation

[1:58:53] approvals in place to do so.

[1:58:57] >> So I forgot what I was going to say. Oh,

[1:58:59] you got your hand up. Sorry.

[1:59:01] >> So, I was just thinking

[1:59:03] >> Oh,

[1:59:03] >> sorry. I just very quickly I did

[1:59:05] remember you you only want to do one ECA

[1:59:07] amendment because

[1:59:08] >> Right. Yeah. So, you you don't want to

[1:59:11] keep going peace meal because it's very

[1:59:12] expensive. Sorry. Thank you.

[1:59:14] >> It would it would allow like what what

[1:59:16] Tracy's concern is is is allowing the

[1:59:18] next count, but

[1:59:19] >> you're still you're still capable of

[1:59:21] >> Well, you're still capable. What I'm

[1:59:22] saying is you're putting it as a rider

[1:59:23] basically that's gonna if in the future

[1:59:26] you want to. Was that not?

[1:59:27] >> No, this is to accept the 1500 tons in a

[1:59:30] manner that staff probably sees fit and

[1:59:32] from who in the future.

[1:59:35] >> Yeah. Sorry, Tracy.

[1:59:37] >> So, yeah. So, it's not that we're

[1:59:39] capable and ready to do it if we choose

[1:59:42] to. We have to do it.

[1:59:45] >> No, it gives us the license to do it

[1:59:47] over.

[1:59:49] >> So, we have the license to do it. We

[1:59:51] could have a a a shop that has a license

[1:59:53] to do whatever we're licensed to do, but

[1:59:56] then if nobody ever brings that in or we

[1:59:58] choose not to do that, we're still

[1:59:59] licensed to do it, but we just choose

[2:00:01] not to at that time. So that's all I'm

[2:00:03] saying. It's not like we're like, "Oh,

[2:00:05] yeah, we're we're licensed to do it, so

[2:00:07] therefore we absolutely have to bring in

[2:00:09] all of that." No, we don't have to. We

[2:00:11] can just be licensed and set up for the

[2:00:13] future, but we don't have to do it.

[2:00:15] >> That's why the

[2:00:16] >> Go ahead.

[2:00:19] I I think you just spoke for voting

[2:00:21] against your amendment. Well,

[2:00:23] >> I was thinking more

[2:00:25] >> this gives us the it's a cost a partial

[2:00:28] cost recovery model, you know, as

[2:00:30] outlined in the report. We know our

[2:00:32] costs today, but they're going to

[2:00:33] continue to escalate. We got closure

[2:00:35] costs coming. We have many other costs

[2:00:37] coming and this is a manner to uh to

[2:00:39] address some of these and hopefully even

[2:00:41] reduce our operating deficit. Yes. If I

[2:00:44] can, I can give you two examples from

[2:00:46] our existing ECA on the shelf right now.

[2:00:48] One is that municipal hazardous waste

[2:00:50] collection depot. We are already

[2:00:52] approved to do that. We just haven't

[2:00:54] yet. And we've had that approval for

[2:00:57] upwards of 10 years now. I think that

[2:00:58] was the 2018 approval. Um, and we just

[2:01:01] haven't yet. We also have approval to

[2:01:04] run a full composting facility at the

[2:01:06] site right now, but we haven't looked at

[2:01:09] doing that and the costs associated with

[2:01:11] doing it and the infrastructure

[2:01:12] required, but it's already approved

[2:01:14] because when we open that ECA, we put it

[2:01:16] in there because it might be something

[2:01:17] we want to do. Um so so the approvals

[2:01:20] can be there but like you said it

[2:01:22] doesn't mean absolutely the minute you

[2:01:24] get the approval you have to start doing

[2:01:26] something anything but you can that's

[2:01:31] but you can and I and and I guess my my

[2:01:34] other part B to that question is so yes

[2:01:37] right now we have roughly 160 years

[2:01:39] which could be depleted down to 100 but

[2:01:42] Jake in your professional opinion and I

[2:01:45] know that you can't say like I know we

[2:01:47] can't end up at a net zero where we can

[2:01:50] bring in all this and not deplete our longevity of our dump by by

[2:01:56] anything. But do you think if if we do

[2:02:00] diversion properly and our our taxpayers

[2:02:03] who don't want to lose the longevity of

[2:02:06] our dump do their part to make sure that

[2:02:08] they're not throwing stuff in our

[2:02:10] landfill that shouldn't and they step up

[2:02:11] and do what they should. Do you foresee

[2:02:13] that 100 years being more than 100?

[2:02:18] >> 100%. I believe that. I believe that um

[2:02:21] you take, you know, you take say we have

[2:02:24] 150 years. Go back in time to 1875 from

[2:02:27] now and how far we've come. Think think

[2:02:29] of how far we're going to be ahead in a

[2:02:30] 100 years. Uh diversion methods, methods

[2:02:33] to to break down garbage to to do

[2:02:36] everything. And I I believe the future

[2:02:38] holds lots of opportunities for us to

[2:02:40] regain capacity and um and I I I'm full behind all these

[2:02:46] recommendations because um they're just

[2:02:49] going to lead to extending the lifespan.

[2:02:50] Look what we've done in the last few

[2:02:52] years. We've brought life back to that

[2:02:54] landfill just by better practice with

[2:02:56] our operations and and and I do believe

[2:02:58] we can that that [clears throat] 22

[2:03:00] years um that they're saying that we

[2:03:02] would lose. I I believe we can shave

[2:03:03] that down with better diversion models

[2:03:06] 100%.

[2:03:09] » Sorry, somebody take their mic off. Try

[2:03:11] now.

[2:03:13] >> So, further to that, I'm going to pedal

[2:03:14] backwards. I just felt we needed to have

[2:03:16] that discussion and that conversation.

[2:03:18] Um, my my big thing is, hey, at the end

[2:03:22] of the day, yes, we are responsible to

[2:03:23] our rateayers. Um, and if we can lower

[2:03:26] our taxes and not decrease the longevity

[2:03:31] of one of our greatest assets by too

[2:03:33] much and I don't want to close the door

[2:03:36] in an opportunity for the future. Um, so

[2:03:40] I will pull my

[2:03:44] >> and I think you're right. The the goal

[2:03:46] is and I you know I think this report

[2:03:48] was very conservative. I and to Jake's

[2:03:51] point and other discussions I've had, I

[2:03:53] think we still want to try to achieve

[2:03:55] more capacity and uh and through all of

[2:03:58] these programs. So that would be the

[2:04:00] ultimate goal is exactly what you said

[2:04:02] and I would

[2:04:03] >> we can't sit here and guarantee.

[2:04:04] >> No, no, but but even to cap it. Okay. So

[2:04:06] that's what that's what is in the report

[2:04:09] suggested cannot be capped. We're not

[2:04:11] going to take any more than this.

[2:04:12] >> That's the cap.

[2:04:13] >> That's the actual cap.

[2:04:14] >> That's what's going to go forward in the

[2:04:15] ECA and you cannot deviate from the ECA.

[2:04:18] Okay.

[2:04:23] » On the first motion,

[2:04:28] » but I I don't think it was seconded, was

[2:04:29] it?

[2:04:30] >> Yeah,

[2:04:30] >> it was. Yes.

[2:04:31] >> Oh, I'm sorry. I I missed that. I missed

[2:04:33] that. Okay. So, we have to vote on the

[2:04:36] uh on the amendment. So, all in favor of

[2:04:38] the amendment, please raise your hands.

[2:04:41] All opposed.

[2:04:43] Thank you. Okay. Thank you. You sure

[2:04:47] can.

[2:04:48] uh on these proposals that we're saying

[2:04:51] that we're going to accept all of them

[2:04:52] on this report.

[2:04:54] Will they come back to the existing

[2:04:56] council at that at that time for new

[2:04:59] plans or is this just letting staff go

[2:05:02] wild to do what they want?

[2:05:04] >> As far as what?

[2:05:05] >> Well, for example, like the hazardous

[2:05:07] building, I I don't personally think we

[2:05:09] should be into that. So, that's part of

[2:05:12] the uh scenario. So like if they come

[2:05:14] back will staff come back and say the

[2:05:16] hazardous buildings don't cost us

[2:05:18] assist. This is how it's all planned

[2:05:19] out. Uh we got into this with the uh

[2:05:22] workshard we had a a Taj Mahal idea and

[2:05:26] they just kept growing and growing and I

[2:05:27] got a feeling that the same thing could

[2:05:29] happen here quite readily unless they

[2:05:32] come back with individual like for

[2:05:33] example the scales and so yeah okay the

[2:05:36] scales are this is what's going to cost

[2:05:37] da da da go for it or we saying today go

[2:05:41] for it and not worry. So there is a

[2:05:44] budget cap in this report of the 343,000

[2:05:48] that anything in exceeding in excess of

[2:05:51] that would have to come back for sure.

[2:05:52] You you can't go over that. That's what

[2:05:55] the recommendation is.

[2:05:57] So

[2:05:58] >> is that budget cap now at 363

[2:06:01] with 38?

[2:06:02] >> No. Um um no. But

[2:06:06] >> Jake's comment was is that uh we can do

[2:06:09] it right within I think the big thing in

[2:06:11] that report is 140,000 for the scale

[2:06:13] house. I don't think anybody thinks that

[2:06:14] we're going anywhere near that, but that

[2:06:16] was what was in the consultants report.

[2:06:18] So

[2:06:18] >> yeah, that that that's what I meant was

[2:06:20] the the waste audit. I believe we can

[2:06:22] contain it within that 343,000.

[2:06:25] Um I just wanted to make sure it was in

[2:06:26] the verbiage that

[2:06:28] >> that we were going to do that as well,

[2:06:29] but there's no price increase with that.

[2:06:31] We can work within that budget.

[2:06:33] >> Okay. Um, okay. I have a second

[2:06:36] recommendation. I make sure I'm on the

[2:06:37] right item here.

[2:06:40] Second resolution. Be it resolved the

[2:06:42] corporation of the town of Bankrop here

[2:06:44] by direct staff to engage Cambium Inc.

[2:06:46] to implement all of the recommendations

[2:06:49] contained in the landfill optimization

[2:06:51] report as amended by the modific

[2:06:53] contained

[2:06:56] in this report being the staff report.

[2:07:01] » Yes. including a single season waste

[2:07:03] audit. Thank you.

[2:07:07] And yes, and further the capital

[2:07:11] allocations outlined on page 11 of this

[2:07:13] report be approved up to a maximum of

[2:07:16] 343,000 if required. And further the

[2:07:20] council of the corporation of town of

[2:07:22] bankrooft direct staff to execute a

[2:07:23] service contract with Cambium Inc. as

[2:07:26] required for this purpose. Could I have

[2:07:29] a mover in a seconder, please?

[2:07:32] No, this is a separate motion.

[2:07:36] Oh, I do.

[2:07:41] Well,

[2:07:43] it's a long

[2:07:47] >> Yeah. long. Okay. All in favor, please.

[2:07:55] Okay. So, we have four. One, two, three,

[2:07:58] four. Yes. So passed.

[2:08:03] Let's have everybody put their hand up

[2:08:05] so that the clerk can please say it for

[2:08:07] approval. Thank you.

[2:08:10] Okay. Thank you. So So pass. Thank you.

[2:08:16] Let's take a 10-minute prayer.

[2:08:20] Thank you.

[2:18:48] Okay, thank you. We'll reconvene at this

[2:18:50] time. Next on our agenda, item D,

[2:18:53] ventilation and thermal load assessment

[2:18:54] reports addressing uh identified worker

[2:18:58] health and safety issues. And this is

[2:18:59] for portions of our uh current

[2:19:01] workshard. Uh the motion before us is be

[2:19:04] it resolved that the council of the

[2:19:05] corporation of town of bankrock receives

[2:19:07] this staff report and the associated

[2:19:09] attachments for information and

[2:19:10] discussion purposes and further that

[2:19:13] council direct staff uh to procure and

[2:19:16] install components for a compressed air

[2:19:18] system for the trucks in the cold

[2:19:19] storage bay and to engage the services

[2:19:22] of a wildlife management pest control

[2:19:24] company to remove the pigeons from the

[2:19:26] cold storage truck bays and complete

[2:19:29] remediation of the space as a result of

[2:19:31] pigeon activity. ity to a maximum amount

[2:19:33] of $30,000 $30,000 total cost with funds

[2:19:37] to be allocated from the corporate

[2:19:38] services reserve health safety and

[2:19:41] accessibility initiatives fund. Could I

[2:19:42] have a mover and a seconder please? Uh

[2:19:45] councelor Eastman and councelor Miles

[2:19:48] and Andre I will call on you again to

[2:19:51] present this please.

[2:19:53] >> Thank you Mayor Jenkins. So you have a a

[2:19:56] number of reports in front of you. Um, I

[2:19:59] did reattach the building envelope

[2:20:01] assessment summary from last uh last

[2:20:04] fall for the initial assessments of the

[2:20:07] buildings. We've also attached a summary

[2:20:10] document uh compiled by our manager of

[2:20:13] infrastructure and capital projects with

[2:20:16] regard to the newest ventilation and

[2:20:18] thermal load assessment reports. Um

[2:20:21] we're still working through the details

[2:20:23] of those for longer range things and and

[2:20:26] there is some information in them that

[2:20:29] um would have required a significant

[2:20:32] amount of redacting to be included on

[2:20:34] this agenda. Um serial numbers and

[2:20:37] identifiers of critical equipment for

[2:20:39] example. So um we we didn't get that

[2:20:43] process complete and that's why those

[2:20:44] reports aren't attached but the summary

[2:20:46] is there so that you at least have that

[2:20:48] information to refer to uh until we can

[2:20:51] get the reports in a publicly

[2:20:53] presentable uh fashion. So the intent of

[2:20:57] those reports was to evaluate the

[2:21:00] ventilation um and heating and cooling

[2:21:03] systems in the two buildings the parks

[2:21:06] and wreck building and the public works

[2:21:07] building. I'm probably going to refer to

[2:21:10] cold storage. That's the parks building.

[2:21:13] Um, that's where we park our snow plows

[2:21:15] in the winter to keep them out of the

[2:21:17] snow. It's an unheated, unserviceed

[2:21:19] building with the exception of hydro.

[2:21:22] Um, but it does keep the snow off the

[2:21:24] vehicles in the ambient temperature in

[2:21:26] the bay. Keeps the temperature close to

[2:21:29] zero, which makes starting the trucks a

[2:21:31] little bit easier than they would if

[2:21:32] they were parked outside at minus40. We

[2:21:35] also can't park our snow plows outside

[2:21:37] because they are ready to plow when

[2:21:39] weather starts. So, they're filled with

[2:21:41] uh sand or sweet mix or salt or a

[2:21:44] combination thereof. And if those are

[2:21:46] outside and they get wet, they turn into

[2:21:48] cement in the box and then we can't uh

[2:21:50] actually spread anything. So, we do need

[2:21:52] to keep those vehicles inside so they're

[2:21:54] ready to roll. So, if you have questions

[2:21:57] about the actual report findings in

[2:22:00] detail, I'm sure Jake would be happy to

[2:22:02] entertain them. The main purpose of

[2:22:04] today is to get approval to uh complete

[2:22:07] some immediate uh remediation to the

[2:22:11] spaces to ensure that our workers are

[2:22:13] safe in those spaces while future

[2:22:14] decisions about public works and parks

[2:22:18] uh continue to be contemplated.

[2:22:20] So both buildings miserably failed

[2:22:23] ventilation assessments. There is

[2:22:25] inadequate ventilation uh for staff in

[2:22:28] both buildings when there are vehicles

[2:22:30] running in those buildings particularly

[2:22:32] in cold startup conditions.

[2:22:36] The uh public works building or the

[2:22:38] garage uh does have a ventilation system

[2:22:41] although it is not appropriately sized

[2:22:44] for the use that we have in the

[2:22:46] building. uh and a couple components of

[2:22:48] that system have failed. But there is a

[2:22:51] ventilation system there which can

[2:22:53] safely allow workers to work in that

[2:22:55] space providing that a number of other

[2:22:57] procedures are put in place such as

[2:23:00] keeping certain doors closed at all

[2:23:02] times. So um exhaust fumes from one area

[2:23:06] can't get into another area of the

[2:23:08] building because of the door stops and

[2:23:09] the and the seals around the doors. So

[2:23:11] we will be working with our joint

[2:23:13] occupational health and safety committee

[2:23:15] to uh identify those business procedures

[2:23:19] to ensure um that staff can safely work

[2:23:21] in that building and we aren't

[2:23:23] recommending any immediate remediation

[2:23:25] in that building beyond those procedure

[2:23:27] procedures at this time. However, the

[2:23:31] cold storage building has zero

[2:23:33] ventilation and there is absolutely no

[2:23:35] way that we can put enough worker

[2:23:37] controls and safety procedures in place

[2:23:40] to allow trucks to run in that space in

[2:23:43] the cold to um air up so that they can

[2:23:46] be moved, which is the practice now. You

[2:23:48] have to start a diesel truck and let it

[2:23:50] run for a number of minutes um to en to

[2:23:54] allow the air tanks to build up enough

[2:23:56] pressure so that you can engage the

[2:23:57] drive system and move the vehicle out of

[2:23:59] the garage. Um so while that's happening

[2:24:02] all the exhaust from those trucks is

[2:24:04] accumulating in that building um with no

[2:24:06] ventilation.

[2:24:08] So, our proposal for that issue is to

[2:24:12] install a a self-contained um or not a

[2:24:15] self-contained, but an air system um an

[2:24:19] independent air system independent of

[2:24:20] the building. Um, that will allow us to

[2:24:23] hook each of the trucks to an air

[2:24:25] compressor system through a through a

[2:24:28] hose and a connection to the air tank to

[2:24:30] keep the air tanks in the truck full

[2:24:32] enough that someone can get in, turn the

[2:24:34] key, put it in, drive, and drive out of

[2:24:36] the building and close the door,

[2:24:38] minimizing the amount of exhaust that

[2:24:40] accumulates inside that building to keep

[2:24:41] it at a safe level for workers. Once the

[2:24:44] trucks are out of the buildings, then

[2:24:46] workers can complete any remaining

[2:24:48] safety check things, um any adjustments

[2:24:51] that they might need to make, um any

[2:24:54] improvements that can all be done

[2:24:55] outside the building safely where there

[2:24:57] is fresh air, which provides adequate

[2:24:59] ventilation and uh minimizes or

[2:25:02] eliminates exposure to um diesel

[2:25:05] emissions uh from those trucks. So, the

[2:25:08] cost to do that includes a compressor, a

[2:25:12] large compressor, as it will have to

[2:25:13] service a number of trucks, the hose

[2:25:15] reels that will allow the hoses to uh be

[2:25:19] pulled out and retract when they're not

[2:25:21] needed so they aren't in a way causing

[2:25:23] another health and safety issue, and

[2:25:25] then the fittings that those hoses

[2:25:26] connect to the vehicles to to allow the

[2:25:28] air to remain in those tanks. This is

[2:25:31] not a new system. It's not something we

[2:25:33] made up. Uh the fire departments use

[2:25:35] those to keep those fire trucks so that

[2:25:37] when they get a call, they can jump in

[2:25:39] them and hit drive and go. They don't

[2:25:41] have to wait 10 or 15 minutes for the

[2:25:43] trucks to warm up before they can

[2:25:44] respond to a call. So basically, we're

[2:25:46] going to implement the system that fireh

[2:25:48] halls use to make sure that those trucks

[2:25:51] are ready to roll as soon as someone

[2:25:52] gets in them and turns a key.

[2:25:55] Uh the other issue is our pigeons and we

[2:25:59] love our pigeons and we don't want any

[2:26:01] harm to come to the pigeons but they

[2:26:03] cannot reside inside the building. Um

[2:26:06] the pigeons pose a significant health

[2:26:08] and safety risk not because of the birds

[2:26:12] themselves but because of the things the

[2:26:14] birds leave behind. Um so we need to

[2:26:18] remove the birds from the building.

[2:26:20] however, a pest control company does

[2:26:23] that and then clean up the mess that the

[2:26:26] birds have left behind and cover the um

[2:26:30] points of entry. So, there are some

[2:26:32] windows up high that are broken or

[2:26:35] accessible that will need to be closed

[2:26:36] in. Um, we'll probably need to put some

[2:26:38] kind of bird stopper devices on the

[2:26:42] ledges and the sills so they can't land

[2:26:44] and sit there and and basically do

[2:26:46] everything that we can to encourage them

[2:26:49] not to come back once we evict them. Uh

[2:26:52] so again that will [clears throat]

[2:26:54] require the services of a professional

[2:26:57] pest control company and we would like

[2:26:58] to engage that immediately to get the pests out of the building uh as

[2:27:03] quickly as we can uh in the most

[2:27:05] appropriate manner to do that. So those

[2:27:08] are the two recommendations in my

[2:27:10] report. I am happy to answer questions

[2:27:12] if you have any. We have met with our

[2:27:14] joint occupational health and safety

[2:27:16] committee um and shared these health

[2:27:19] concerns or worker risks with them as we

[2:27:22] are obligated to do when we become aware

[2:27:24] of a risk. They are aware of these two

[2:27:26] recommendations coming forward today and

[2:27:28] are supportive of these interim measures

[2:27:30] until we can identify a permanent

[2:27:32] solution for the um myriad of challenges

[2:27:35] that those buildings are providing right

[2:27:37] now. Just a point of clarification, this

[2:27:40] compressor can be relocated in the

[2:27:42] future to another facility. Okay.

[2:27:44] >> It can. It's not installed as a fixture

[2:27:47] in the building. It's a standalone

[2:27:49] component. So, it's as simple as taking

[2:27:51] the screws out of the hose reels and

[2:27:53] putting the compressor on a probably

[2:27:56] heavy duty dolly. It'll be a big

[2:27:57] compressor and moving it out of the

[2:27:59] building.

[2:28:00] >> Councilman, you had a question.

[2:28:01] >> Not a question, but a comment. I I just

[2:28:03] think the health and welfare and safety

[2:28:05] of our staff is utmost.

[2:28:07] I think that's a no-brainer.

[2:28:11] All in favor? So pass. Thank you very

[2:28:14] much. Yeah, many things.

[2:28:15] >> Just a a sidebar comment on this is that

[2:28:18] we uh have been working with our MPP

[2:28:22] uh and with staff from um Infrastructure

[2:28:25] Ontario to try to finalize something

[2:28:28] with either we have potential to stay

[2:28:31] here under favorable circumstances or to

[2:28:34] uh to leave the building. Um and it's

[2:28:38] been a very long drawn out process. Um

[2:28:41] even um our MPP thought there was a

[2:28:44] resolution and it didn't uh turn out

[2:28:47] quite the way it didn't even turn out

[2:28:49] never mind turn out the way there was a

[2:28:52] some communications error. So uh we're

[2:28:54] still dealing with that on that front

[2:28:56] there. And part and parcel of the

[2:28:57] original report that came through was on

[2:29:00] the uh uh the fire side as well. And uh

[2:29:03] currently the uh fire service review is

[2:29:06] underway and I would imagine that it'll

[2:29:10] come sometime before the end of third

[2:29:14] hopefully in August council. So we'll

[2:29:16] have a bit a bit bigger picture on that

[2:29:18] as well. So yes,

[2:29:21] >> what has the cost of all these

[2:29:22] assessments been to date?

[2:29:25] >> Was it in there? I missed it.

[2:29:30] Um

[2:29:31] >> I don't have it handy. I do think that

[2:29:33] uh the initial costs of this one were in

[2:29:36] the 2025 report when you approved moving

[2:29:39] forward with them.

[2:29:44] Uh $13,350

[2:29:47] for the first building envelope

[2:29:49] assessment summary reports. I don't have

[2:29:52] the amount of these newest uh reports

[2:29:56] in the report. So, um I I I can't

[2:30:02] confidently

[2:30:02] >> No worries. I just was curious if we

[2:30:04] were kind of within

[2:30:08] » Yes.

[2:30:08] >> Okay. Yeah. That but I mean all the

[2:30:10] >> in the report he keeps referring to

[2:30:13] 2025.

[2:30:14] >> Did they do this study a year ago? I

[2:30:16] thought they just did the initial. I

[2:30:18] believe

[2:30:19] >> the building assessment reports were

[2:30:21] done in 2025 and the ventilation reports

[2:30:24] were completed this year based on those

[2:30:26] 2025 building condition assessment.

[2:30:28] >> Yeah, after we got the first report, we

[2:30:29] asked them to go back and provide us

[2:30:31] with further information on the air

[2:30:33] quality. Okay, we did vote on that.

[2:30:36] >> Okay, thank you. Item E, recreation and

[2:30:38] data project community survey results.

[2:30:41] So the resolution before us is be it

[2:30:43] resolved the council of the corporation

[2:30:44] town of bank for office by received this

[2:30:46] report and presentation for information

[2:30:48] purposes only. Could I have a mover in a

[2:30:50] secondary to put it on the floor please?

[2:30:51] Deputy mayor and secondary councelor

[2:30:53] Eastman Sarah the floor is yours.

[2:30:56] >> Good afternoon your worship and members

[2:30:58] of council.

[2:31:00] I'll just wait until uh our clerk can

[2:31:02] get the presentation up on uh on the

[2:31:05] wall here.

[2:31:07] So, I'm here today to provide you with a

[2:31:09] summary um the initial summary of the

[2:31:12] recreation and data project that we put

[2:31:13] out to the community. Um the

[2:31:16] presentation that we're going to go

[2:31:17] through uh undertake undertake kind of

[2:31:19] the key findings, community input and

[2:31:21] outlines and next steps and supports and

[2:31:24] directing staff to advance

[2:31:25] implementation, further engagement and

[2:31:28] priority actions.

[2:31:30] So, we took this on as part of I think

[2:31:33] it was uh Andrea's in February 2026 when

[2:31:36] she kind of brought it forward to kind

[2:31:37] of undertake sort of initial data

[2:31:40] collection around our park and rec

[2:31:42] facilities and culture plan. Um we're

[2:31:44] kind of in phase one of collecting the

[2:31:46] information. So, we launched the public

[2:31:47] anonymous survey um to gather input from

[2:31:50] residents, seasonal residents, visitors,

[2:31:52] anyone who would scan our QR code and do

[2:31:55] the survey. Um, so if we can flip to the

[2:31:58] next one and our five key insights that

[2:32:00] we found from our 206 survey respondents

[2:32:04] were

[2:32:06] I know thank you councelor Miles it was

[2:32:09] very good that we did get engagement um

[2:32:12] that our system is widely used and it

[2:32:15] matters in our everyday life. Our

[2:32:17] strongest assets are our parks, our

[2:32:19] gathering spaces, events, trails and

[2:32:22] outdoor experiences. The public is not

[2:32:25] calling for wholesale change. It they're

[2:32:28] asking it asking the town to strengthen

[2:32:30] what we already have. The biggest

[2:32:32] barriers are practable, solvable, cost,

[2:32:36] communication, seasonal limits, and

[2:32:38] program availability. And that our

[2:32:40] recreation and culture system serves

[2:32:42] more than our town residents. It

[2:32:44] functions as a broader regional asset.

[2:32:46] And I'm sure nothing there surprises

[2:32:48] anyone around the table or anyone behind

[2:32:49] me. Um, it's just nice to hear it from

[2:32:52] the community that everyone's kind of on

[2:32:54] the same page. So, this was exciting for

[2:32:57] myself who normally has been doing

[2:32:58] surveys and normally our demographics,

[2:33:00] we usually get a lot of response that

[2:33:03] matches our regional demographics, which

[2:33:05] would be our senior population, but we

[2:33:06] took a very targeted approach and

[2:33:08] ensured that we emailed it out to our

[2:33:10] partner agencies, emailed it out to our

[2:33:12] user groups, making sure that we got

[2:33:14] some responses. So you will see that the

[2:33:16] majority of our responses have come from

[2:33:18] our 25 to 50 year old age range which we

[2:33:21] definitely got a great response cuz

[2:33:23] those are the people with family with

[2:33:25] children. So that was a great response.

[2:33:29] So you'll see kind of we did um kind of

[2:33:32] broke it up around who is here. Most

[2:33:35] respondents were year-round residents,

[2:33:37] 63%,

[2:33:39] but 33% did live outside of Braftoft,

[2:33:42] but use our parks regularly and our

[2:33:44] cultural spaces and showing that's just

[2:33:46] showing that we're using both the local

[2:33:48] and regional users. So, we also asked to

[2:33:51] break it down by our regional townships

[2:33:53] and around the area. So, um nonraftoft

[2:33:57] residents, the largest shares, no

[2:33:59] surprise, came from Hastings Highlands,

[2:34:01] 45% and Faraday, 32%. So, we all know

[2:34:05] how close those are as our neighbors.

[2:34:07] Um, so of course they're utilizing our

[2:34:09] assets on a regular ongoing basis.

[2:34:14] Pardon?

[2:34:17] [laughter]

[2:34:19] >> So, this was another great one that we

[2:34:21] got. We got some information around

[2:34:23] families and children with children with

[2:34:25] youth or caregiving. So, it was a nice

[2:34:27] kind of cross range of information. um

[2:34:30] basically a 50% breakdown of who had

[2:34:32] children, who didn't and we also

[2:34:35] captured around whether there was doing

[2:34:36] we were doing the people were doing

[2:34:38] caregiving within their household to

[2:34:39] capture that different demographic.

[2:34:43] So the why people are coming to

[2:34:46] Braftoft, why are they coming to our

[2:34:48] area? Um basically was like people come

[2:34:52] every day for living, events,

[2:34:54] recreation, and access to the facilities

[2:34:56] and programs that we offer within our

[2:34:58] community. This shows that our community

[2:35:00] serves both local daily life and as a

[2:35:03] destination for activity, connection and

[2:35:05] experience.

[2:35:08] So why are people using our places? Why

[2:35:11] are they coming here? Why are they using

[2:35:14] our parks, recreation and culture

[2:35:15] spaces? Our spaces are most used for

[2:35:18] events and festivals, specific

[2:35:20] facilities, and time outdoors. The

[2:35:23] strongest reason that came out on top

[2:35:25] was events, facilities, and our outdoor

[2:35:28] experiences, which shouldn't surprise

[2:35:30] anyone either. So, what spaces are used?

[2:35:33] Our community parks and gathering spaces

[2:35:36] are used most. We have a fair amount of

[2:35:38] them. So, those would be things like

[2:35:39] Millennium Park, our community center,

[2:35:42] any of those type of community areas.

[2:35:44] Um, and then followed by a strong use of

[2:35:46] trails. Um, I will at some point present

[2:35:48] the data compared to other

[2:35:49] municipalities, but I will let you in

[2:35:51] that we have a higher proportion of

[2:35:53] trails than any other municipality of

[2:35:54] Ontario. So, multi-use trails, just the

[2:35:57] amount of kilometers that we have and

[2:36:00] waterfront spaces. So, frequency of use.

[2:36:03] Um, I think this one kind of surprised

[2:36:05] me that people were actually using our

[2:36:06] spaces like weekly, like a lot weekly

[2:36:10] and monthly. That's a lot of people

[2:36:11] using them every day in whatever whether

[2:36:13] that's Millennium or Eagle's Nest um the

[2:36:16] arena any of those kind of location

[2:36:18] active and everyday part of life.

[2:36:24] So we also looked at kind of um events

[2:36:27] and event attendance. Um we know that

[2:36:29] we've been there's been many more events

[2:36:31] happening in our local parks in our

[2:36:32] local areas and they're attending

[2:36:35] frequently occasionally. They love to

[2:36:36] come for the farmers market, um,

[2:36:38] community markets, things like that.

[2:36:41] They also like to come for our seasonal

[2:36:42] events, indigenous expo, jamberee, rally

[2:36:45] of the top lines. They're a major draw,

[2:36:47] but also Canada Day and Santa Claus

[2:36:50] parade. Definitely something else that

[2:36:51] our residents and beyond our residents

[2:36:54] attend.

[2:36:57] So, we also asked why, like what would

[2:36:59] make you come out more? Um, of course,

[2:37:02] everyone's saying more variety. we can't

[2:37:04] keep everyone happy. So, more variety,

[2:37:06] also more rear

[2:37:08] year yearround options. Um, a few

[2:37:11] comments kind of like why can't Eagles

[2:37:12] Nest be open in the winter and all those

[2:37:14] types of things. Better affordability

[2:37:16] would drive higher event attendance.

[2:37:20] So, I did do one on the trails cuz we

[2:37:22] asked specifically because we do have a

[2:37:24] very high proportionate amount of

[2:37:26] kilometers. Um, you know, most people

[2:37:29] are walking on them or hiking on them,

[2:37:31] running, cycling. Um, what I will worry

[2:37:34] about in this particular slide is I

[2:37:37] launched this in the summer. So, I maybe

[2:37:40] didn't get those winter snow, you know,

[2:37:42] snowshoeing or winter ping. So, it is

[2:37:44] kind of not really confident in this

[2:37:47] when they weren't here. I mean, it'd be

[2:37:49] neat to kind of launch it again in the

[2:37:50] winter season. I mean, I did send it out

[2:37:52] to our partners that, you know, snow

[2:37:54] riders and those types of things, but

[2:37:56] they're not as active in June. Yes,

[2:37:58] >> I actually think

[2:37:59] >> Oh, Mike. Um the the stewards for the

[2:38:03] Eagles Nest actually did a survey I

[2:38:05] don't know 10 or 12 years ago. Chris

[2:38:07] Durst has all that information and I

[2:38:09] think that that would be the same

[2:38:12] >> even in the winter. I don't know that

[2:38:15] there that we there's there's a belief

[2:38:17] that the ATV and snowmobile would drive

[2:38:18] those things up because of wintertime. I

[2:38:21] don't actually think that's the case and

[2:38:22] maybe not. Right. And that would be

[2:38:23] interesting. I mean people still walk in

[2:38:25] the snow, right? So we don't know that

[2:38:27] for a fact but I just wanted to throw

[2:38:28] that out there.

[2:38:30] And

[2:38:32] yes, the Eagle's Nest, they have some

[2:38:33] great data that I'll be able to share in

[2:38:35] another council meeting of kind of what we're seeing in those those areas.

[2:38:39] So, next was the experience that our

[2:38:41] users have. So, how well they function.

[2:38:44] Let's look at the half happy happiness

[2:38:46] there. Over half are saying mostly well.

[2:38:49] We're doing okay. Then we have another

[2:38:51] 25% are doing very well. So, if we're

[2:38:54] looking at 75%, we're doing above board.

[2:38:56] Let's let's let's give ourselves a pat

[2:38:58] on the back. But some are also saying

[2:39:00] that we're doing adequate but we could

[2:39:02] with some limitations. So I think that's

[2:39:04] a very proud thing we can say especially

[2:39:06] without a recreation committee

[2:39:08] especially without any kind of extra

[2:39:11] information. I mean yes we have an

[2:39:13] amazing team of staff here that look

[2:39:15] after these spaces but not a dedicated

[2:39:18] person organizing events. overall

[2:39:21] experience

[2:39:22] functional but aging system with a

[2:39:26] strong foundation clear opportunities

[2:39:28] for targeted improvement. So as I said

[2:39:31] in the beginning we have a great base

[2:39:33] here we just need to maintain it

[2:39:35] increase it and we will have more usage

[2:39:37] and more happiness I guess or

[2:39:39] contentment

[2:39:41] barriers um were practable practical and

[2:39:45] solvable. So yes, user fees came up of

[2:39:48] course, um cost, there was also limited

[2:39:52] program time, lack of awareness, all the

[2:39:56] common um themes that normally come up

[2:39:58] around barriers came up. Transportation

[2:40:00] came up as well and access

[2:40:03] um and another thing it was the winter

[2:40:04] use piece. Um I wasn't sure since I

[2:40:06] launched it in the summer whether the

[2:40:08] four season thing wasn't captured in

[2:40:10] there. So just a thing that you know put

[2:40:13] away in the back of your mind.

[2:40:16] So um the priorities we asked the users

[2:40:18] that did the survey you know where you

[2:40:21] know what input could they give around

[2:40:23] um you know what where should we invest

[2:40:25] our money. So in top top investment pro

[2:40:28] were maintaining what we have looking at

[2:40:30] yearround um use and increasing or

[2:40:34] maintaining our trails and water access.

[2:40:37] Um they want improvements that maintain

[2:40:39] our core while enhancing four season and

[2:40:42] outdoor access. And then the other one

[2:40:45] was strengthen what we have and targeted

[2:40:47] new additions. So don't create anything

[2:40:50] new big and bold just work with what

[2:40:52] we've got.

[2:40:54] So I do have um it was great that half

[2:40:58] of the respondents left comments. Some

[2:41:01] from very simple comments to very

[2:41:03] lengthy comments um very passionate and

[2:41:06] engaged as we found in the last survey

[2:41:08] that we did. Um they reinforced the

[2:41:10] survey findings around facilities, more

[2:41:12] youth and family programs, stronger

[2:41:13] trails, waterfront access,

[2:41:16] um and emphasize making assets work

[2:41:19] better, more affordability and

[2:41:21] accessible year round.

[2:41:24] So I put the uh the foundations kind of

[2:41:26] around the comments and the passion of

[2:41:28] the pe of the people. Um, so we can look

[2:41:31] at removing practical barriers to build

[2:41:33] confidence in our public spaces, unlock

[2:41:36] forces season use and program for all

[2:41:39] ages. Let's just not focus on one

[2:41:41] demographic here. Um, and you'll see

[2:41:43] some of the comments around the outside

[2:41:45] pulled exactly and directly from the users are, you know, kind of

[2:41:49] back those up.

[2:41:51] And the last page is the feeling. Um,

[2:41:54] I'm all about the feeling. the feeling

[2:41:56] about the feedback and the you know who

[2:41:58] filled these out because we don't know

[2:41:59] it's anonymous but there was concern

[2:42:02] there was hope

[2:42:04] there was passion and there was caring

[2:42:06] and I think that echoes um who sits

[2:42:09] around this table who sits behind me who

[2:42:11] works with us every day but it also

[2:42:12] reflects our community that we're

[2:42:14] engaged in what we're doing and that

[2:42:16] they see hope for the future.

[2:42:20] So next steps um would be first off

[2:42:23] sharing with you guys and see where we

[2:42:24] go from there. Um and close the feedback

[2:42:27] loop. So report back um because proper

[2:42:29] engagement in you know is not one way.

[2:42:32] It needs to be two ways. So we need to

[2:42:33] report this back to our partners. Report

[2:42:35] this back to the community um of what's

[2:42:39] needed. Use these to see where we need

[2:42:42] to move forward. So as I said youth and

[2:42:45] family we don't usually get a lot of

[2:42:46] feedback from youth and family but nice

[2:42:47] to reach out and go what does that look

[2:42:48] like? reach out to our senior

[2:42:50] population, reach out to those targeted

[2:42:51] partners that we have. Engage so no one

[2:42:54] can say, "I didn't know." Even though

[2:42:56] they will. [laughter] Um, and ask kind

[2:42:58] of more detailed, deep diving questions.

[2:43:01] Look at comparing our results with other

[2:43:03] recreation plans, how they look. You

[2:43:06] know, Val said we got great at 206, but

[2:43:08] what does that mean? Did West get 500?

[2:43:11] Did we do about right? See what see what

[2:43:14] other communities are doing. And then

[2:43:16] also um I've done a kind of a quick look

[2:43:18] over our comments for quick wins, things

[2:43:21] that we can improve in communication.

[2:43:23] Couple parent I didn't know there was a

[2:43:25] free summer camp. I didn't know that

[2:43:27] Millennium Park was open every day. I

[2:43:29] didn't know. So we can kind of come up

[2:43:32] with those practical fix the foundations

[2:43:35] things. Um people don't know that you

[2:43:37] can, you know, use our sites and for you

[2:43:40] know low or limited cost. Yes, we got

[2:43:41] the money cost, but could be directed to

[2:43:44] one particular asset and other assets we

[2:43:47] have in our community.

[2:43:50] So, I know it's been a long meeting, but

[2:43:53] does anyone have any questions or

[2:43:54] comments?

[2:43:56] >> A comment.

[2:43:57] >> Oh, excellent. Okay. Um back in 2018 we

[2:44:02] did our economic development uh

[2:44:04] strategic plan of making our future

[2:44:08] >> and from the the part that was sort of

[2:44:11] absent from that was on the recreation

[2:44:13] side it wasn't really part of it but it

[2:44:15] was sort of the thing. So when Andre and

[2:44:17] I started this discussion about having

[2:44:20] uh an you know recreation master plan um

[2:44:24] we we grabbed a few examples from other

[2:44:26] municipalities etc. And that's what led

[2:44:28] this backing up this is the first step

[2:44:31] is that survey. So uh I would like to

[2:44:34] see us um you know think about moving

[2:44:37] forward with that sort of master plan

[2:44:39] and a master plan is what it is. It

[2:44:41] doesn't mean you do it tomorrow etc.

[2:44:43] Like we have 35 35 acres up at the

[2:44:45] arena. We have 35 acres up at the arena.

[2:44:48] I believe sometime way in the past there

[2:44:50] might have been one done but nobody can

[2:44:51] find a copy of it because I've been told

[2:44:53] that there was there was

[2:44:55] >> I've searched I haven't found one yet. I

[2:44:56] haven't been able to find it, but I

[2:44:58] think based on this information, it

[2:45:00] targets where you might want to go, but

[2:45:02] uh that would certainly be my desire to

[2:45:04] see that. And uh hey, maybe there's even

[2:45:06] some money out there to do it under some

[2:45:08] stream of uh the provincial government,

[2:45:10] etc. So anyway, that's my comment, but

[2:45:12] excellent. Um I saw it online. It looked

[2:45:15] really great and it invited you to

[2:45:16] participate, which I did. So thank you

[2:45:19] very much.

[2:45:19] >> Thank you, Council Miles.

[2:45:22] um your survey uh results were sort of

[2:45:25] perfect timing because the eagle's nest

[2:45:27] met for the first time last night in

[2:45:29] quite some time and so having data that

[2:45:31] showed us exactly that walking was

[2:45:33] important and that the eagle's nest is

[2:45:35] important and that you know and then the

[2:45:37] I I don't want to talk too much because

[2:45:39] I don't we don't it's not part of the

[2:45:40] agenda and we don't have the actual

[2:45:41] minutes here but uh having that

[2:45:45] information I think will help guide us

[2:45:48] to decide to make decisions regarding

[2:45:50] any of our parks parks or our arenas or

[2:45:52] our our events and things and it it

[2:45:55] already has used the data in a meeting

[2:45:57] last night. So that's it was great the

[2:46:00] timing of having this because it'll then

[2:46:03] allow the eagle's nest to sort of maybe

[2:46:05] bring some recommendations forward and

[2:46:06] hope that council has an opportunity to

[2:46:09] look at how do we improve the eagle's

[2:46:10] nest. It's had lots and lots of

[2:46:12] improvements already, but we know we

[2:46:14] we've we're working towards that piece

[2:46:16] that is the expansion getting done. I

[2:46:19] also want to say the engagement on our

[2:46:21] Facebook if you haven't noticed. Well,

[2:46:24] maybe you're not on Facebook, but I

[2:46:26] really appreciate um what is happening

[2:46:29] in that piece. I think there's lots

[2:46:31] there. There's lots of information being

[2:46:34] posted. There's lots of reminders of

[2:46:35] what's going on and the Eagles Nest will

[2:46:38] be looking to complete part of that our

[2:46:41] project and we will be asking for help

[2:46:43] from the town of Bankrooft's Facebook

[2:46:45] site looking for some volunteers. So

[2:46:47] when those dates come, I'm hoping I just

[2:46:50] forward to you, you share that out. And

[2:46:52] if these pieces that you say are

[2:46:54] important to you, then maybe you have

[2:46:56] the capacity to volunteer because it

[2:46:58] will it meant you didn't have to spend 5

[2:47:00] cents. You just needed to be there,

[2:47:01] enjoy your day of walking, and maybe cut

[2:47:03] some roots and rake. So uh banks, I

[2:47:06] think it's fantastic. Feedback loops are

[2:47:09] extremely important and engagement, and

[2:47:10] that's what proper partnership and

[2:47:12] collaboration looks like. Um, and I'm

[2:47:14] hoping with the next stage of presenting

[2:47:16] user data, usage data that I've

[2:47:19] collected from the partners and we can

[2:47:20] exchange back because yes, you're going

[2:47:21] to apply for grants. KMM might apply for

[2:47:23] grants. We might apply for grants. The

[2:47:25] more we can collate and work together,

[2:47:28] we can do more with less. That's what

[2:47:30] we've always said in this community. Do

[2:47:32] more with less. And if we all take a

[2:47:34] little piece, we'll be able to do a lot.

[2:47:36] So Andre perhaps I could ask you how you

[2:47:38] see us moving forward from here or what

[2:47:40] the practicality is of engaging in a

[2:47:43] master plan etc etc.

[2:47:46] >> So um I I do think that a master plan

[2:47:50] proposal could be something that we

[2:47:51] could look at potentially under a rural

[2:47:53] economic development grant stream uh for

[2:47:56] some strategic design on a higher level.

[2:47:59] Um, I do think Sarah is very capable of

[2:48:03] taking this data though to the next

[2:48:06] stage of data collection and having

[2:48:08] those focus groups and breaking out what

[2:48:10] does low cost mean to the kids with

[2:48:13] families at the daycare center for

[2:48:15] example. what what are the barriers that

[2:48:17] you reflected in your comments and how

[2:48:19] do we make that more cost-effective for

[2:48:21] you and your children or you know

[2:48:23] talking to the seniors to say you know

[2:48:25] there's a lot of feedback that we need

[2:48:27] to improve our spaces what isn't working

[2:48:29] for you in our spaces specifically and finding those quick things one of

[2:48:34] the things while I was reading through

[2:48:35] the comments that I noted is that as

[2:48:38] much as we're sharing sharing sending

[2:48:40] out newsletters posting putting things

[2:48:42] in the newspaper getting radio coverage

[2:48:45] a lot of People said things like, "Well,

[2:48:47] I didn't know that happened. I didn't

[2:48:49] know that existed. I've been here 20

[2:48:52] years. I never heard of this." Um, so

[2:48:55] finding other ways to get those messages

[2:48:57] out, particularly if we can identify

[2:48:59] that specific user groups are missing

[2:49:02] those,

[2:49:03] >> if you can solve that problem because we

[2:49:04] have that issue with everything that we

[2:49:06] do even around this table that because

[2:49:09] news dispersion is so fragmented these

[2:49:12] days. So,

[2:49:12] >> one step at a time.

[2:49:13] >> Yeah. And and I think being able to

[2:49:15] identify some of those challenges like

[2:49:18] kids with or families with children

[2:49:20] communicate this way and seniors tend to

[2:49:24] prefer this communication and maybe it's

[2:49:27] you know instead of just a Facebook post

[2:49:30] we do the Facebook post but we print 20

[2:49:32] copies of it and take it over to the

[2:49:35] active agent center so the people who

[2:49:37] don't have Facebook still have the same

[2:49:39] information and see the same post in a

[2:49:41] format that's comfortable for them. So I

[2:49:43] think just from what we have here, we

[2:49:45] can significantly improve communication

[2:49:49] and connection to the policies or to the

[2:49:52] programs and resources we already have.

[2:49:54] Uh to Val's point, I think this will go

[2:49:57] a long way um to helping identify where

[2:50:01] do we get the biggest bang for our buck.

[2:50:04] And then yeah, I do think there is merit

[2:50:06] to looking at some grant funds for

[2:50:08] strategic development, a strategic

[2:50:10] development plan to put that that real

[2:50:13] long-term what what's the long-term goal

[2:50:16] and how do we get there? And most of the

[2:50:18] plans have done a background what's

[2:50:19] called a background report. Um so there

[2:50:22] are some comparative data that's been

[2:50:23] done. Most of the communities that been

[2:50:25] working with have background reports and

[2:50:27] then that feeds their feeds their

[2:50:30] recreation and master plan and it's

[2:50:32] broken into three phases. So, we're in

[2:50:33] the phase one section.

[2:50:35] >> Great.

[2:50:35] >> And moving forward, phase one. And I

[2:50:37] mean, it's completely all done probably

[2:50:39] could be done with in-house staff, but

[2:50:40] as we move forward, we might want to

[2:50:41] move to phase two with with a grant or

[2:50:43] those types of things, but

[2:50:44] relationships, engagement, and feedback

[2:50:47] loops, treating your partners with

[2:50:49] respect and collaborators.

[2:50:51] >> Great. Thank you. Is there any other

[2:50:52] comments or questions from anybody?

[2:50:55] >> Just a quick comment. I I think the uh

[2:50:57] percentages you uh gathered from in

[2:50:59] town, out of town and using our

[2:51:01] facilities, I think that is the whole ball of wax that pertains to

[2:51:06] employment, recreation, the arena, all

[2:51:09] the rest of it. So, uh if uh I guess I

[2:51:13] don't if something happens at the arena

[2:51:16] uh has to take a little rest, but I

[2:51:19] think your uh numbers are going to jump

[2:51:21] sideways on you. Well, and that data is

[2:51:23] very important and that's one of the

[2:51:25] reasons why we wanted the survey to

[2:51:26] capture a lot of data because it may be

[2:51:29] used for other purposes in the future.

[2:51:32] >> Thank you. That was great.

[2:51:33] >> Thank you.

[2:51:36] >> So, item seven, bylaws. We're Oh, yes.

[2:51:39] All in favor. Did I proceed there

[2:51:41] before? Thank you. It's a long day. So,

[2:51:44] we're bylaws. We're near the end.

[2:51:47] Bylaw's first, second, and third reading

[2:51:48] be resolved that the following bylaws be

[2:51:51] introduced and read a first, second, and

[2:51:53] third time be finally passed at the

[2:51:56] mayor and clerk do sign and seal the

[2:51:57] same any rule of this council to the

[2:52:00] contrary notwithstanding. Bylaw number

[2:52:02] 43, 2026, being a bylaw to authorize the

[2:52:05] corporation of the town of Bankrop to

[2:52:08] enter into a professional service

[2:52:09] agreement with Highland, Inc. Uh, bylaw

[2:52:12] number 44-2026

[2:52:14] being a bylaw to amend bylaw number

[2:52:17] 182024 being a bylaw to support a person

[2:52:21] to perform civil marriage. What is that?

[2:52:24] Solomonizations.

[2:52:26] My good my eye job isn't quite working

[2:52:28] yet. And provide guidelines for such

[2:52:30] services. Could I have a mover and a

[2:52:32] seconder, please? Councelor Miles,

[2:52:35] that's you. And councelor Lawrence, all

[2:52:36] in favor, please. So, uh, because we had

[2:52:40] a question at break and it's not

[2:52:42] formally in our agenda, I will just ask

[2:52:44] if anybody out there has a general

[2:52:46] question that they would, uh, like to

[2:52:48] ask. Um, and if not,

[2:52:52] yes, young man, you can come. You can

[2:52:54] come right. Yeah, you can come up and

[2:52:56] hit the button

[2:52:59] so we can hear you. You may have to bend

[2:53:01] it.

[2:53:03] >> Thank you, worship. Um I just here is a

[2:53:06] uh just a tax uh rate payer and I just

[2:53:10] was curious the tax increment equivalent

[2:53:13] grant program.

[2:53:14] >> Yes.

[2:53:14] >> For new businesses in town or anybody

[2:53:16] that kind of attaches to I think it's

[2:53:18] the municipal water system or sewer

[2:53:20] system. Is that being promoted a lot?

[2:53:24] I've never heard of it. I've just done a

[2:53:26] little bit of research on it, but I'm

[2:53:27] just wondering if it's being promoted to

[2:53:29] assist in reducing the

[2:53:31] uh I guess helping people uh make the

[2:53:34] town look better and add nice things to

[2:53:37] their house and obviously it would help

[2:53:39] reduce the tax uh to the to the

[2:53:42] >> business. So the the one program we have

[2:53:45] which is the tax differential program is

[2:53:47] to encourage new growth because we've

[2:53:49] long identified that to get our tax rate

[2:53:52] down we need to utilize our facilities

[2:53:55] you know we have excess capacities and

[2:53:58] water and sewer etc. So and we we

[2:54:02] recognize for various reasons that we've

[2:54:04] gone over 100 times why our tax rates

[2:54:06] are higher than everybody else. um we do

[2:54:11] promote it to all of the developers and

[2:54:12] builders and who then you know try to uh

[2:54:17] inform their um uh their customers of

[2:54:20] this to try to get them to entice. But

[2:54:22] you do make a good point you know um I I

[2:54:25] was at a conference earlier this year

[2:54:27] and I explained this to EMPAC our

[2:54:29] program and they were really quite

[2:54:31] surprised and uh because I was

[2:54:32] complaining about their assessment

[2:54:35] process etc. So, it it is a a really

[2:54:38] good point and it's like everything

[2:54:40] else. You think everybody knows about

[2:54:42] it, but then you find out that uh that

[2:54:44] they don't. I'm not sure if there's any

[2:54:46] other sections of our CIP that we have

[2:54:48] not fully utilized at this time.

[2:54:50] >> So, we do have a brownfield section and

[2:54:52] a facade uh section as well to increase

[2:54:55] the physical look of buildings, but

[2:54:56] those are currently unfunded. We we

[2:54:59] don't have funds uh available to support

[2:55:02] those things at this time. So would that

[2:55:04] be more like the beautifification bylaw

[2:55:06] so the town kind of flows better as you

[2:55:08] look down the main street that okay

[2:55:10] >> and over time we have implemented

[2:55:12] particular parts of it you know we did

[2:55:13] have facade improvement uh there was

[2:55:16] some uptake but it wasn't really what we

[2:55:18] hope for where we were actually paying

[2:55:19] 50% of some improvements and for some

[2:55:22] reason businesses were not up taking up

[2:55:25] on it. Having said that over the years

[2:55:27] we have seen a number of businesses that

[2:55:28] have done great improvements to their

[2:55:30] property. We've seen it very recently,

[2:55:32] you know, between the brew pub and the

[2:55:33] IDA, etc. And we applaud those folks for

[2:55:36] doing that. And I think it leads to

[2:55:38] their next door neighbor thinking, I

[2:55:39] better get my, you know, up to speed.

[2:55:41] But, um, but yeah, as more funds come

[2:55:44] available then and and we saw a

[2:55:47] necessity and we also in the past have

[2:55:50] worked through with the BIA on certain

[2:55:52] programs as well to to increase that.

[2:55:55] Yes,

[2:55:56] >> I just had one last question u with it's

[2:55:59] a little bit with reference to EMPAC but

[2:56:01] not answering from an EMPAC perspective

[2:56:03] but uh in discussions with EMPAC on on

[2:56:06] my residence I'm currently paying $8,600

[2:56:10] a year and it's to the point where it's

[2:56:12] almost depressing slash unaffordable and

[2:56:15] uh you know having uh doing things all

[2:56:18] above board having a permit go in and

[2:56:20] then getting a phone call from EMPAC and

[2:56:22] you know more discussions um I guess I

[2:56:24] was curious um I can hold on for a

[2:56:27] second. Yeah, I was curious. Um, they

[2:56:30] talked about we're still on the 2016

[2:56:32] rates and when the 2026 rates come

[2:56:35] around, uh, in discussions with some of

[2:56:37] the EMPAC people, they said, "Well, if

[2:56:40] the towns are managing their budget

[2:56:42] right, then you shouldn't actually see

[2:56:44] an increase potentially, but they said

[2:56:46] if your house was to double and go from

[2:56:49] [clears throat] say its value of 500,000

[2:56:51] to a million, then you're going to

[2:56:52] double your your budget." I said, or

[2:56:54] double your taxes. I said, "Well, that

[2:56:56] would mean that the town of Brooft would

[2:56:57] have to increase major capital spending

[2:57:00] and and put forward all these new

[2:57:01] projects." So I guess my question is

[2:57:04] from an affordability slash

[2:57:06] >> I don't know what the right word is

[2:57:07] depressive standpoint of a of a home of

[2:57:10] a taxpayer these new 2026 potentially

[2:57:12] they haven't announced yet but when they

[2:57:14] come out

[2:57:15] >> is the town of Braftoft looking at all

[2:57:17] that to go okay we need to just even

[2:57:19] though houses have went up and

[2:57:21] potentially double or they've increased

[2:57:22] a third like that's pretty scary as a

[2:57:25] homeowner to go I can't even afford them

[2:57:27] now let alone they go up to 11,000 I'd

[2:57:29] have to just

[2:57:30] >> so if everybody's assess value went up

[2:57:33] the percentage- wise the same and the

[2:57:35] town's budget didn't change our mill

[2:57:37] rate would drop down and your taxes

[2:57:38] would not change. Okay. Um so yes the

[2:57:42] fact that they come out with new

[2:57:43] valuations when they whenever they do it

[2:57:46] uh and nobody knows really why they

[2:57:47] haven't done it. Um now there could be

[2:57:50] some because of over as you say 2016 or

[2:57:53] 10 years later now uh they may realize

[2:57:56] that some were terribly underassessed

[2:57:59] which you know we have a feeling that

[2:58:00] there are a lot of those and anybody as

[2:58:02] you said who built new or has permits

[2:58:04] tends to pay the full pay the full

[2:58:07] brunt. So hopefully and theoretically

[2:58:10] there will be some adjustments there.

[2:58:12] But your general question, no, because

[2:58:13] your assessment doubles. If the world,

[2:58:16] if it went equally and our budgets

[2:58:18] didn't change, your taxes should not

[2:58:20] change, you know, so you can sleep a

[2:58:23] little better now. [laughter]

[2:58:24] >> Thank you. Yeah, those are just my

[2:58:26] couple questions. Thank you very much.

[2:58:27] Thank you for today. It's great.

[2:58:29] >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:58:31] >> Um,

[2:58:33] where am I here now? Confirming by

[2:58:37] >> Oh, Andre like to say something. Excuse

[2:58:40] me.

[2:58:42] I know there is not a section on this

[2:58:45] agenda for community announcements. Um

[2:58:48] but since it's not a formal action item,

[2:58:50] I'm going to pop it in there anyway. Um

[2:58:53] I learned last week that Harvest Moon

[2:58:56] will be closing on July 1st after almost

[2:58:58] 40 years in our community. So I want to

[2:59:01] wish the owners of Harvest Moon well in

[2:59:03] this next chapter and adventure and

[2:59:05] thank you thank them for providing 40

[2:59:08] years of service. Um, those of us who

[2:59:10] have been here all of those 40 years

[2:59:12] will definitely notice that they're not

[2:59:14] here anymore. So,

[2:59:15] >> great. Thank you. Confirming bylaw,

[2:59:18] first, second, and third reading. Be it

[2:59:19] reserve uh resolve that a bylaw to

[2:59:21] confirm the proceedings of the meeting

[2:59:23] council held on June 23rd, 2026 be

[2:59:26] hereby given a first, second, and third

[2:59:28] reading be passed final and be finally

[2:59:31] passed, signed, sealed, and numbered

[2:59:32] bylaw 45-2026.

[2:59:36] Could I have a mover in a second,

[2:59:37] please? Councelor Eastman seconded by

[2:59:40] Councelor Lawrence. All in favor,

[2:59:42] please. So, pass. Next uh meeting of

[2:59:46] regular council scheduled for August 11,

[2:59:48] 2026, commencing at 300 p.m. We were

[2:59:52] thinking there was going to be a special

[2:59:53] meeting in July, but we were waiting for

[2:59:55] a zoning amendment uh application to

[2:59:57] come through, and it has not as of this

[2:59:59] time. So, there's still a a very slim

[3:00:02] but far-fetched chance that may happen.

[3:00:04] And um potion to a turn,

Special Meeting of Council - 23 Jun 2026

Transcript