[0:16] Order. And do I need a motion for that? No.
[0:19] Good. All right. And now I'll turn it over to
[0:23] the CAO to provide some opening remarks. Thank you, chair.
[0:28] So welcome to our first special general committee and council
[0:32] meeting of 2025. For the special council meeting. We have
[0:37] two public hearings pursuant to the Planning act. Both presentations
[0:41] will be followed by a staff report. For those viewing
[0:45] us online, the council meeting will begin at approximately 07:00
[0:48] p.m.. At the conclusion of the special general Committee. A
[0:53] presentation by Nagar College will kick off the council meeting
[0:56] followed by five reports by staff. So. Staff look forward
[0:59] to respectful and productive meeting. And an active year ahead.
[1:03] Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Axiak. I call on the
[1:08] city clerk to make any additions or deletions. To the
[1:10] agenda through you chair. There are none. Thank you, Madam
[1:14] Clerk. Having reviewed the agenda. Does any member of council
[1:17] have a need to disclose a direct or indirect peuniary?
[1:20] Interest with respect to this evening's agenda. Seeing none here.
[1:29] And none online. We'll move on, then. Thank you. And
[1:34] the minutes of the General Committee meeting of October 22,
[1:38] 2024. And December 10, 2024, have been distributed. May have
[1:42] a motion to approve these minutes. Councilor van Vleet, Councilor
[1:47] McLeod, all in favor? We have to vote on it.
[1:53] Voting is open.
[2:46] Councilors. Have you tried to vote yet? All right. Well,
[2:53] that passes. Yes, thank you.
[3:05] Hold on.
[3:23] Yes. What's your point of order?
[3:40] Councilor McLeod is first. And then Councilor Demarca. I do
[3:42] see your arm up. As well. Okay? Thanks, Mr. Vice
[3:50] mayor, I voted on both those attempts on the minutes,
[3:54] and it's not registering for some reason. Furthermore, it's difficult
[3:59] to know who is in the meeting and who isn't.
[4:01] Thank you. Thank you, council. We are looking at some
[4:04] of these votes right now, so hold tight and. I
[4:10] will call on Councilor Demarco. Councilor. Yes. Thanks, Vice Mayor
[4:15] Moot. Yes. I vote as well. Okay, thank you. Okay.
[4:20] Thank you. So that carries with eight now. And we'll
[4:24] keep an eye on the voting machine, okay? Thank you,
[4:28] counsel. So now we will move over to the statutory
[4:32] public hearings pursuant to the Planning Act.
[4:43] Okay. There will be one public meeting held virtually and
[4:46] in person this evening in accordance with the Planning act.
[4:50] The public meeting this evening is to consider applications for
[4:53] official plan amendment a zoning bylaw amendment and a draft
[4:56] plan of subdivision. Will the director of plan. Planning and
[5:03] development services. Please explain the purpose of the meeting and
[5:06] detail the nature of the applications. The purpose of the
[5:10] meeting is to provide interested parties with an opportunity to
[5:12] provide input regarding the following applications for zoning bylaw Amendment
[5:17] 2024, six official plan amendment OPA number 23, draft planner
[5:24] subdivision 2016. 1424. Submitted by upper candidate consultants on behalf
[5:33] of Ashton Homes Limited for Lands municipally known as 210.
[5:37] And 276 Quaker Road. The application for official plan amendment
[5:42] is intended to redesignate the lands from low density greenfield
[5:46] residential medium density Residential Environmental Conservation area and open space
[5:51] to low density residential medium density residential environmental conservation area
[5:56] and open space. The application for zoning bylaw amendment is
[5:59] intended to rezone the lands from. Agricultural. A one. And
[6:04] environmental conservation overlay EC, to cite specific low density residential
[6:08] two RL, two site specific residential medium density rm, environmental
[6:13] conservation overlay, EC, and open space. Os. The application for
[6:18] draft plan of subdivision is to create 292 blocks to
[6:22] facilitate a residential development comprised of 263 single detached dwellings
[6:27] and 76 townhost dwellings. The remainder of the Sideria. Is
[6:33] to be used for a zero point, 69 hectare park
[6:35] pedestrian walkway, stormwater management and environmental conservation Area. Thank you,
[6:41] Mr. Monday. Would you, the director of Planning and development
[6:46] services, please advise of the method and date by which
[6:49] the notice of meetings were given. Notice was published in
[6:53] the well in Tribune on November 20, 2024. Hard copy
[6:57] notices were delivered to owners on any lands within 120
[7:00] meters of the subject lands and notification signs were erected
[7:03] on the property. Thank you, Mr. Monday. If you wish
[7:11] to be notified of the decision of the city of
[7:13] Welland in respect of the proposed official plan amendment and
[7:16] zoning bylaw amendment, you must make a written request to
[7:19] the city of Welland at Devserve at Wellen, Ca. That's
[7:24] Devserv. At Welland, ca. First we will hear from the
[7:31] applicant and those supporting the proposal, followed by the presentations
[7:34] from those opposed to the proposal. The applicant will then
[7:38] be given an opportunity to respond. All those making presentations
[7:42] should make all comments through the chair. State their name,
[7:46] address, postal codes, and position so that we may record
[7:48] this information for future reference. Council will now hear from
[7:53] the applicant. Counsel will be then given the opportunity to
[7:56] ask questions of the applicant. Good evening and welcome to
[8:06] well and city council.
[8:16] We're just getting your presentation set up over here, and
[8:21] we'll let you guys. Have at it. Okay?
[8:31] All right, go ahead.
[8:45] Good evening, Mary and council. My name is Nicholas Godfrey,
[8:47] and I'm here with Will Highcoop. I'm a senior planner
[8:50] with Upper Canada consultants in Willa's planning. Manager with Upper
[8:53] Canada consultants. We're here on behalf of Ashton homes, and
[8:58] we're representing them, on behalf of snhomes, representing them to
[9:02] submit this special plan amendment. Zoning bile amendment and draft
[9:06] plan of subdivision. Broadly, the purpose of this application is
[9:11] to bring the zoning bylaw into alignment with the underlying
[9:15] land use designations. I'll give a broad overview of in
[9:19] detail of how that application the current application will achieve
[9:22] that. So the subject lands. The subject lands are approximately
[9:30] 20 ha in area. With the developable area of 16.1,
[9:36] about 318 meters of frontage along Quaker road these lands
[9:40] are part of the Northwest Wellens secondary plan area. And
[9:44] to the north, our agricultural lands. To the east is
[9:47] a commercial corridor along Niagara street to the south as
[9:51] an established residential area consisting of low rise development. And
[9:55] to the west are areas that are slated for development
[9:58] and subject to other planning act applications. From a policy
[10:02] perspective, the subject lands are located within. The well end
[10:05] urban area and within the designated Greenfield area, per the
[10:09] Niagara official plan. They are designated as residential low, medium,
[10:13] dense, low and medium density residential open space and environmental
[10:17] conservation area in the city's secondary plans in northwest Wellland.
[10:21] Secondary plan. They're also zoned agriculture in the city's zoning
[10:25] bylaw. The subject lands are proposed to be developed as
[10:29] a draft plan of subdivision with a total of 339
[10:33] units consisting of 263 single attached dwelling lots, 76 street
[10:39] townhouses, a park, two blocks for. Service and corridor and
[10:49] multi use trails. One block for an environmental protection area
[10:52] and water course, two blocks for a stormwater management facility.
[10:56] Is in pond and one block for a widening along
[11:00] Quaker Road. The subdivision will have a dedicated access from
[11:04] Quaker Road through two new streets, one street on the
[11:07] east side and one on the west side. Connect to
[11:09] goodwilly drive. They'll be serviced by public roadway and public
[11:13] services. Two wet stormwater pond facilities are required to support
[11:17] the development and will be developed as part of the
[11:19] subdivision. The draft plan includes recreation. Excuse me? The Mic
[11:25] salon. The draft plan includes recreational trail connections to adjacent
[11:29] developments through topass. Drain. And the water course, which will
[11:35] provide pedestrian connection to the park and through to Niagara
[11:38] street. The subject lands, as mentioned, are within a designated
[11:47] greenfield area of the urban area boundary, and they're designated
[11:51] as residential low and medium density in part, open space
[11:56] in part, and an environmental conservation area, in part in
[11:59] the city's northwest well and secondary plan. The amendment is
[12:03] required due to the reconfiguration of the tow path drain
[12:06] water. Course, which was based upon the findings of the
[12:09] submitted eis by beacon and through a permit. That was
[12:13] obtained through the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. The land uses
[12:17] are to remain the same. But the location of the
[12:20] open space, parklands and environmental conservation areas are being modified.
[12:25] So this image represents. The modifications that we're just bringing
[12:30] the underlying designations into alignment with the findings of the
[12:36] as and just cleaning up. The design. Designations. To then
[12:42] align. With. The tow path train. So the proposed zoning
[12:48] will bring the lands into conformity with the secondary plan.
[12:56] Designations and proposed adjustment to the water course. Otherwise, the
[12:59] existing agricultural zoning will be replaced by RL two shown
[13:03] in yellow for singles. The RM shown in orange, the
[13:08] OS zone for parkland in lake green and what the
[13:12] watercolor shown in dark green. The supporting studies
[13:22] that were submitted with his application include an archaeological assessment
[13:26] and environmental impact study. Annoys feasibility study a functional servicing
[13:33] report. A traffic impact assessment and environmental site assessment.
[13:43] So, in summary, the application broadly seeks to realign the
[13:48] underlying land use designations that are permitted in northwest Bowen's
[13:51] secondary plan to be in alignment with the Topaz train
[13:54] and Eis. And the official plan amendment, zoning bile amendment
[14:02] and draft plan of subdivision are to implement. These underlying
[14:06] land use designations to permit the construction of 339 dwelling
[14:10] units, which consist of 263 single attached dwelling lots, 76
[14:15] street townhouses, a park, two blocks for servicing corridor and
[14:19] multi use trails. One block for an environmental protection area,
[14:23] including the water course, two blocks for. Stormwater management facility
[14:27] and pond and a one block for widening long Quaker
[14:30] Road. In my opinion, the proposed development balances the accommodation
[14:34] of prescribed growth targets, improves housing choices and is an
[14:38] efficient use of urban lands with access to municipal services.
[14:43] As the proposed plan is within a secondary plan area,
[14:46] it is a warranted and encouraged place. For growth and
[14:48] development. Thank you for time this evening, and we're here
[14:50] to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, Mr.
[14:53] Godfrey. Council will now be given the opportunity to ask
[14:57] questions of the applicant council.
[15:07] Okay, we'll start off with councilor spec. Go ahead. Thank
[15:10] you very much, Mr. Vice. Mayor regarding looking at. The
[15:17] diagram that just went off of our screen. Where the
[15:20] road crosses. The wet area. That pretty much goes on
[15:25] a diagonal. What will happen with the asphalt? Is it
[15:28] a culvert. How is it crossing that watershed, Mr. Godfrey?
[15:34] If you don't mind, Mr. Chair, if I can take
[15:36] this one. Sure. Yeah. So we've gone through an NPCA
[15:39] permit process to understand the floodplain. Associated with that water
[15:43] course. And so as part of the floodplain assessment that
[15:47] we did we've sized a large box culvert that would
[15:50] be installed underneath that roadway and then. Your typical asphalt
[15:55] surface would go over top of that. So your services
[15:58] are underneath. You have your box culvert, and then you
[16:01] have your normal asphalt roadway on top. Councilor. Got any
[16:05] idea of how wide that is? I do have a
[16:09] specific diameter. I don't have that off the top of
[16:11] my head. But that's certainly something we can provide for
[16:14] you, councilor. And yes, familiar concrete box culvert paving over
[16:20] top. The MPCA has given their approval. On the amount
[16:24] of water that can flow under it. 100 year flood
[16:27] event and that sort of thing through you, Mr. Chair.
[16:30] Exactly. Yes. We had to calculate the 100 year floodplain
[16:33] elevation, and we had to size that box. Culvert to
[16:36] ensure that we accommodated that 100 year floodplain. Councilor. And
[16:41] just in case I missed it, this PowerPoint, this presentation.
[16:46] We have various diagrams. Obviously, they're not as colorful as
[16:48] what we see here. That was not included in our
[16:52] council packages, is that correct? I'm not sure. I can't
[16:56] speak to what you received in your package, but. This
[16:58] is something that we did submit with our application. Like.
[17:06] Through you to the clerk. We have this site plan.
[17:10] Appendix four. But not the PowerPoint. Which looks great. It's
[17:17] first time I've seen it on here. Or did I?
[17:20] Miss something. Madam Clerk through you, chair? No. The presentations
[17:24] were not included in the council packages. Councilor. All right.
[17:27] And going from that, and when you said, A park
[17:31] on site. I see the stormwater management ponds on either
[17:35] side of the floodplain. Also, there's the triangle area almost
[17:41] smack dab in the middle of this, is that. Where
[17:43] the park is. Mr. Haikoup? Yes, Mr. Chair. That's correct.
[17:49] We've placed the park alongside the water course. It allows
[17:52] for good opportunities to integrate any pedestrian connections along the
[17:58] drain into the park and enhance that recreational element associated
[18:02] with the drain. And any park facilities. Councilor. That sounds
[18:08] great. Are there any planned amenities that the developer is
[18:11] going to put into the park? Mr. Chair, that's generally
[18:16] something that the city's park department undertakes. So our park
[18:22] here is typically hydro seeded and soted off, and the
[18:26] city's staff decide what type of facilities they want to
[18:29] put. In that after the land gets transferred to the
[18:33] city, they start that planning is my understanding, councilor. I
[18:36] believe we've had, if I'm not mistaken, in the past,
[18:39] some developers may choose to. Maybe it adds to the
[18:44] saleability of the units there. In this case, the answer
[18:47] is they're not. It's basically prepp. Prepped for future amenities.
[18:53] At some point in the future. And both. The last
[18:57] comment is with that park centrally located and obviously. Within
[19:01] walking distance of the residence of the park. There is
[19:05] no vehicle parking for any other well and resident to
[19:09] utilize the park in the future. Just not incorporated in
[19:12] the site plan, is that correct? Yes, that's correct. That's
[19:16] something that typically would be undertaken as part of whether
[19:19] it's playground equipment or pavilion or those things. That parking
[19:25] lot would be determined through that design process. That staff
[19:29] would undertake, knowing my client, that he would be certainly
[19:33] willing to advance that and participate. Through the process. So
[19:38] if there's an opportunity. From that. My clients always like
[19:43] to chip in and try and advance those because, as
[19:45] you say, yes. It's a very nice marketing tool for
[19:48] the development. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. Moving over
[19:52] to councilor green. Go ahead. Yeah. Thank you. Vice mayor,
[19:58] just a question. So. Councilor spec kind of got into
[20:03] a little bit with the channel. So the question I
[20:06] have is just regards to the channel that goes through
[20:10] the property. Is that being rehabilitated? And upgraded, and I
[20:17] just asked because. There is some definite flooding concerns downstream
[20:23] of that. So it's a question I've asked for any
[20:25] of the development kind of happening in this areas. Are
[20:30] we going to be making any upgrades that channel to
[20:32] help water flow and to better hold the water just
[20:36] because it all typically does. Flow towards the tow path
[20:40] drain. So can I get a comment on that? Go
[20:43] ahead. Certainly. The design process. Actually substantially widened that water
[20:50] course right now. I've walked the site several times and
[20:54] been through there. It changes in width. But 510 meters.
[20:59] The width of this channel here is over 30 meters.
[21:05] So it's deepening it, widening it. There'll be substantial plantings
[21:09] associated with it. And a full design package to ensure
[21:14] that all the vegetation and plantings are monitored and kept
[21:19] up to date and if any plants die, that they're
[21:22] replaced. So there's a whole permit package that we've received
[21:26] from the NBCA that allow us to undertake that. And
[21:30] so, really, I think. The big difference? With this exercise
[21:34] that we've gone through is provided an opportunity for all
[21:38] the upstream lands. To ultimately drain into this topath drain.
[21:45] And not result in downstream flooding. So that's why we
[21:49] took quite a substantial amount of time to advance that
[21:53] ahead after the secondary plan was completed, ahead of coming
[21:56] forward with these applications. We wanted to make sure that
[22:00] there wasn't going to be any negative impacts to anyone.
[22:03] Living in these communities upstream downst. Downstream or within them,
[22:07] councilor. Okay, thank you. That's the question I had. Thank
[22:12] you. Councilor Green, Councilor Saturam, go ahead. Thank you. Through
[22:16] you chair. Thank you to the presenters. Great to see
[22:20] a park in the water course there, creating, like a
[22:23] really nice, complete community. My other colleague. You've addressed the
[22:26] question around kind of the floodplain assessment for. The backyards
[22:30] because that's where I've been hearing it more so my
[22:33] two. Questions. Or at least maybe the first one. We'll
[22:35] see if the second one is necessary. Is around the
[22:38] streets and just having a better understanding of what's envisioned
[22:41] for the size. Of. The driveways. And the reason I'm
[22:45] in particular asking is more at the entryways. So at
[22:49] the top there on the left where we've got that
[22:52] kind of t to the intersection. Because in some of
[22:56] the other developments that I've seen in my ward that
[22:58] people have called me out for parking infractions. And safety
[23:02] issues. It's right at that juncture. Where people are parking
[23:07] on the street and then. They're maneuvering. And I know
[23:10] we cannot control human behavior, but we can attempt to.
[23:13] Engineer it out. So that's kind of the basis as
[23:15] to why I'm asking. That question because. I could envision
[23:19] this just in some of those t spots. Where we
[23:22] may have some friction there rather than if those areas
[23:26] had larger driveways and then further in. People were doing
[23:29] street parking. I'm not sure if. You're able to comment
[23:32] on that at this time, Mr. Godfrey? Mr. Haiku. Yeah.
[23:37] So the extent that I can comment. So, of course,
[23:41] we're at a draft plan. State. So detailed engineering design
[23:44] has not been completed at this point, but it's pretty
[23:47] typical. To have on street parking. So as you get
[23:51] into. Those approaches with the t intersections, it's pretty typical
[23:56] that you're not allowed to have on street parking within
[23:59] a 20 to 30 meters distance of that, so it's
[24:03] pretty typical that there would be no parking steins installed
[24:07] in those areas where there's not. Safety components for them.
[24:12] So that's something that, through the detailed design process, we've
[24:15] determined the appropriate location. For those no parking signs, and
[24:19] that's something that would then be installed through that process.
[24:22] Okay, great. And the second one for you, chair. Is
[24:26] again related to parking. And I didn't know this until.
[24:29] It caused some friction within the neighborhood, which I'm trying
[24:32] to avoid. Discord at the stage if we can, so.
[24:36] In the street parking. There's maybe more, but at least
[24:40] one where it can only fit the size of. A
[24:45] smart car, but when people look at it with their
[24:47] eyes, they think a vehicle can fit. There. But it
[24:50] doesn't meet the bylaw on the 1.5 on each side.
[24:53] Causing a bit of a safety issue for both neighbors
[24:55] when they come out. So I'm just kind of curious
[24:59] about that and just kind of. Go forward basis, flagging
[25:03] it to developers. So you're the first one that I've
[25:04] seen in the new year since the issue has been
[25:06] raised to me just around. For us being aware as
[25:09] counsel about that issue that it's something potentially preventative. It
[25:12] may not be, but I want to flag that as
[25:14] well. That whatever parking that we have designed for the
[25:18] street parking can fit something larger than a smart car.
[25:22] And then if it can't. Then maybe we have to
[25:24] consider something else to kind of avoid those neighborhood conflicts.
[25:28] Go ahead. So, generally speaking. As the world evolves and
[25:32] we're seeing. The housing type change to smaller product. There
[25:39] are creative solutions for how we can set up those
[25:41] driveway locations. So, for instance, instead of having the driveway
[25:46] on the right side of every lot. We can alternate
[25:48] those so you get a larger space or gap in
[25:52] between pairs of driveways, which then allows for those larger
[25:55] parking stalls. The way that. This graphic and concept plan
[26:00] shows. It individually. Based on the dimensions. Just doing some
[26:06] math. In my head, there would be just over 6
[26:09] meters. Which is a little bit bigger than or around
[26:13] the average kind of parking stall between the driveways. If
[26:15] they weren't paired. So that's certainly something that is usually
[26:19] dictated from a grading perspective. We try and put the
[26:22] driveway on the higher grade side. So that's something that
[26:26] we can look at through the detailed design that lands
[26:29] fairly flat. Out there. So there should be an opportunity
[26:33] to go beyond just the normal six meter. Length. And
[26:39] if someone has a large pickup truck, if we're pairing
[26:42] those driveways together, it gives better opportunity for some of
[26:45] those bigger vehicles. That. Are causing probably the issue. Okay.
[26:51] Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thank you, councilor.
[26:54] Turning it over to councilor Demarco now. Councilor. Yes, thank
[26:59] you. Go ahead. Yes, thank you, Vice Mayor Moot. Did
[27:05] I hear correctly about the drainage? Being connected to topath.
[27:13] Was that correct? Mr. JeRry yes, that's correct. There is
[27:20] an existing water course that goes through their property that
[27:23] is informally known as the topaz. Drain. So that existing
[27:28] water course is there now, and. What we've received approval
[27:32] from the NPCA to do is substantially improve that to
[27:37] ensure that there's no flooding issues associated with that drain.
[27:42] Thank you. For that response. The reason why I question
[27:48] it, that's probably. A good close to half mile away.
[27:53] If I'm correct. And you're saying. The npca.
[28:03] Has approved that and. Figuring that's going to work, basically.
[28:11] Yes, that's correct. That was certainly in our mind every
[28:17] requisite for understanding where we could build lots and houses.
[28:24] And our comfortability level with coming in with these applications
[28:28] was predicated on our ability to accommodate the necessary flooding
[28:32] controls and come up with a design that was going
[28:36] to accommodate that. The approach that we've taken was to
[28:41] ensure that. That is addressed early and upfront so that
[28:45] we're not going to move forward with the draft approval
[28:49] and get into the rest of the detailed design, only
[28:52] to take a step backwards. And have to accommodate that,
[28:56] so. We've taken a substantial amount of time. And significant
[29:01] cost to advance that, to ensure that this application in
[29:04] front of you doesn't. Have to be revised down the
[29:06] road, councilor. Yes. All right. Thank. Me. That's quite a
[29:12] distance away, and. At the bend at the end, the
[29:17] quaker. And topath. Currently now. There's green space there and
[29:27] there's a park close by. And. I have pictures. Of
[29:36] that. Area, which is also a proposed pathway. Is totally
[29:41] underwater. When we have. A good rainfall. So I hope
[29:49] that. Between tow path and this area. There's no further
[29:57] problems, because you got to understand, too. Partway down Quaker
[30:01] Road. On the south side. There is currently a proposal
[30:05] for development there as well. Anyways, my next question and
[30:10] my last question. Where will the entryways and exits? Be
[30:19] for this entire development? Will there just be? One going
[30:23] to Quaker Road. Go ahead. No, there'll be two. So
[30:29] that you can see on this image up on your
[30:31] screen, you can see. The two gray colors on the
[30:37] south side along Quaker Road. So there's a new proposed
[30:40] roadway. On the east side. That would connect into a
[30:45] t intersection at Quaker, and there's a second access that
[30:49] would. Connect in with the existing goodwilly drive and have
[30:51] a four way intersection there. There is also an allowance
[30:57] for a future connection to the north if the lands
[31:00] in the world were to ever develop. And there's also
[31:03] the allowance for a future connection. To the northwest, you
[31:08] can see on the top left a stub road there.
[31:12] So ultimately, This community will have four access points. Councilor.
[31:18] Okay? So. Yes, thank you. So. The one connecting straight
[31:23] through from goodwilly. And I understand that one. Now, where
[31:27] was the other? One off. Aquaker. I'm sorry. You're very
[31:31] distant and sound. Sorry about that. There's. A second roadway
[31:40] connection farther to the right hand side or the east.
[31:44] That would connect into Quaker Road. So those are two
[31:47] connections that could be made with this application. And then
[31:51] there's two connections, one to the north. The thorald for
[31:55] a future opportunity. And one to the northwest for future
[31:58] opportunities. Yeah. My concern. My main concern is. The two
[32:05] onto Quaker. So that one. Would look like it may
[32:12] be. Behind the current development. Behind. The
[32:22] current housing that is there now. Or still further west
[32:26] of that. Go ahead. The second location that you're referencing.
[32:33] Would be. There's the new townhouse site that was just
[32:35] constructed by centennial within the last couple of years, so
[32:39] it would just be slightly a little bit further to
[32:41] the west about. 100 meters, give or take. Okay. All
[32:45] right. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. And over to councilor
[32:49] McLeod. Thanks, Mr. Vice. Mayor through you. How many parking
[32:54] spots do you, on average, do you believe each dwelling
[32:56] will have. So each dwelling will have a parking spot
[33:01] in the driveway and in the garage. Councilor. That's my
[33:05] only question. Thank you. Okay, great. Seeing no further questions
[33:10] from council. We'll now hear from those in support of
[33:15] the applications. As a reminder, please state your name, address
[33:19] and postal code. And then council will be given the
[33:22] opportunity to ask questions of those in support. If any
[33:26] are here tonight. Through you chair. There are none online.
[33:35] Thank you. Seeing no one in support of the applications
[33:38] will now hear from those opposed to the applications again.
[33:41] A reminder. Please state your name, address. Postal code and
[33:46] council will be given the opportunity to ask questions of
[33:48] those opposed. Any online, madam? Clerk. There are none online.
[33:53] Okay. Seeing none from council. We would normally provide a
[33:57] final response from the applicant, but having no people here
[34:01] opposed or in favor. Will carry this on. So council
[34:06] will consider this matter right now with our report. And
[34:11] then we'll turn it over to. The next public hearing.
[34:16] Through you. Chair. So the item is item number 2.1.1.
[34:21] So application. For draft plan of subdivision for 210 276
[34:27] Quaker Road, and it's automatically removed from block. Thanks, Madam
[34:31] Clerk, I just want to also say this little preempt
[34:34] or note from the Planning act if a person or
[34:38] a public body would otherwise have the ability to appeal
[34:40] the decision. Of the city of well into the Ontario
[34:42] Land Tribunal, but the person or public body does not
[34:45] make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written
[34:48] submissions to the city of Welland. Before the bylaw is
[34:52] passed. The person or public body is not entitled to
[34:56] appeal the decision. And if a person or public body
[34:59] does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or
[35:01] written submissions to the city of Welland before the bylaw
[35:04] is passed, the person or public body may not be
[35:07] added as a party to the hearing of an appeal
[35:09] to the Ontario Land Tribunal. Unless, in the opinion of
[35:12] the tribunal, there are reasonable grounds to do so. All
[35:17] right, so now we're turning it over to the report.
[35:19] Councilor McLeod is first. Go ahead. Thanks, Mr. Vice. You
[35:23] have to move it. I'll move it. Second. I guess
[35:29] we don't need a secondary. Not in committee. All right.
[35:32] Thank you, councilor. Thank you through Mr. Vice mayor my
[35:35] question relates to the 3 meters of road widening are
[35:38] typical. Road allowance is 20 meters. Obviously, we're adding 3
[35:42] meters. What is the thinking behind this and why is
[35:45] it being asked for? Is that a Mr. Monday question?
[35:50] Okay, go ahead, Mr. Monday. Through.
[35:59] Chair. Can the councilor please explain the question again? Where
[36:02] is the road widening? They're talking about? Certainly so typically
[36:05] through you, Mr. Vice mayor. Typical road allowance is 20
[36:09] meters. This is asking for an additional 3 meters. I
[36:11] just wondered what is the rationale for asking for the
[36:14] additional 3 meters. Go ahead. Through you, chair. Well, the
[36:19] normal local road is 20 meters wide, and then. This
[36:23] is a collector arterial, so the road. Width is larger.
[36:28] Councilor, and that's the reason for it. Thank you so.
[36:32] Through you. Do you know then what the total road
[36:34] allowance is going to be with the addition? Of the
[36:36] 3 meters. Mr. Monday, I believe it's 26. However, I
[36:42] believe Ms. Miller is online. She may be able to
[36:45] clarify. Ms. Miller, are you available? All right. We can't
[36:52] hear you, though. Ms. Miller, can you log off and
[37:00] log back in? We can't hear you. Can you hear
[37:06] me now? Yes, go ahead. Sorry, Mr. Chair. Sorry, chair.
[37:16] Through you. If the requested roll allowance width is 23
[37:21] meters, that is the final road width. The final road
[37:26] allowance width. I don't have the pavement width until we
[37:29] get full design. Councilor. Thank you. And through you. So
[37:32] that will help with sidewalks and road expansion as required.
[37:37] Moving forward. Ms miller. Yes, through you, chair. All those
[37:45] things will be considered within the 23 meters right away.
[37:50] Side leg, sidewalks, connectivity, curb and gutter, the whole nine
[37:55] yards. Thank you, councilor. Thank you. Provided that meets our
[37:59] future needs. I'm fine with that. Thank you, Councilor. Councilor
[38:03] Green. Yeah. Thank you. Through vice mayor. So with this.
[38:10] Application before us this evening. And then. We had a
[38:17] previous public meeting for development. First avenue and quaker. Cross
[38:26] from Quake Road public school. So now that we're starting
[38:29] to fill in the pieces, a little bit. When we
[38:35] look at the urbanization of Quaker Road, which is obviously
[38:39] important for these, as we continue to build these developments.
[38:44] We're kind of trapping them in. We're not giving the
[38:45] residents an opportunity to walk anywhere because the road is
[38:49] not urbanized in terms of the timing of that. Are
[38:53] we looking? Is the road urbanization? For Quaker as we
[38:57] start to build out these developments, is that going to
[38:59] be occurring before these developments. Are constructed or is it
[39:04] going to occur after the fact? Just a question of
[39:08] timing, Ms. Miller. Through you, chair. Timing is the million
[39:14] dollar question. So we don't want to get ahead of
[39:19] the developments. So we are working very closely. With the
[39:23] development group. To. Align the urbanization. Of Quaker Road. As
[39:31] I've said many times before, The first step is. To.
[39:40] Set. A horizontal alignment through our preliminary design that we've
[39:44] received. Council's approval for budget wise for 2025. And then.
[39:52] As. We get these adjacent developments formalized, then we can
[39:58] start with the adding. The detailed design of all the
[40:02] infrastructure that's required for said developments. Councilor. Okay, yeah. I
[40:09] appreciate that. I would be concerned. If we started to
[40:16] occupy these developments without having Quaker Road up to. A
[40:21] different standard just for the safety of those residents. So
[40:24] that's my question. That's my comment. It's been well known
[40:29] in the past for some other development. So I'll leave
[40:31] it at that. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Kyokyo.
[40:36] Thank you to Mr. Chair. I guess my question is
[40:41] too similar to Councilor Green is the road and we're
[40:45] talking about? Well, we're going to do part of it.
[40:47] They're going to build and we're going to do another
[40:48] part. We've had to find out some kind of a
[40:51] cost. What's the cost to the city to complete this
[40:55] project. And what are we looking from a timeline for
[40:58] the years I mean, we saw today, and there are
[41:01] concerns. We saw today Niagara street fairground spotted by mountain.
[41:05] View home, so I'm sure there's going to be a
[41:07] development there. There's a grocery store going up on that
[41:10] street. And. There are serious questions of what it's going
[41:16] to cost the city to complete this road. And we
[41:20] need a number. I think that's important to the public.
[41:22] They want. To know where we're at and what it
[41:26] cost us, so. Have we come up with that number
[41:29] yet? So. I'll let Ms. Miller provide a quick response,
[41:34] but we're looking at a planning. Application. Several planning applications,
[41:38] not the development of a road. So, Ms. Miller, do
[41:40] you have a quick. Response on this one. Do you,
[41:44] chair? No, I don't. Well, through you, Mr. Chair. I
[41:46] mean, we're. Looking at development in the city of Wellland.
[41:50] We're looking at urbanizing that road. We're looking at making
[41:52] bigger. Actually, we're looking at an official plan amendment. We
[41:56] want to prove the amendment. To give them the go
[41:59] ahead, and then we're going to ask the taxpayer down
[42:01] the road to cough up the money to finish off
[42:04] the road. I mean, there's got to. Be some numbers
[42:07] calculated with this. And where do we get the money
[42:10] but we're staying. On agenda. And the agenda item right
[42:12] now is the official plan amendment and the zoning bylaw.
[42:14] Amendment. And you want us to support it. Obviously the
[42:18] developer wants us to support it. And I'm here struggling
[42:22] with that. But that's a different agenda item for a
[42:24] different day right now, councilor, I'm telling you, look at
[42:27] the agenda. Where does it say, development or upgrade of
[42:30] the road from a rural standard to an urban standard.
[42:33] Where does it say that in here. No worries. But
[42:35] at what point? That's the point. So I guess through
[42:38] you, at what point do we get those numbers? Down
[42:40] the road a year from now. When is that going
[42:43] to happen? Staff says they don't have it at this
[42:44] time. You can. I'm asking you to ask staff. I'm
[42:47] sorry. And Miss Miller's already responded. She doesn't have that
[42:50] number right now, so you. Could email her tomorrow and
[42:53] we could talk about it offline. Okay. Believe it at
[42:57] that. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Falkins. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[43:10] Through you, I believe to Mr. Brand. It mentions in
[43:13] here about there was enhancing mobility. By improving access to
[43:18] recreation and community events and stuff. So I'm just wondering,
[43:22] in our official plan. When we have such a large.
[43:27] Development going on. Is there any requirements for accessible units?
[43:36] I know. There's a demand for them. Might not be
[43:41] that large, but for those who need accessible. Units. It's
[43:43] very important. So I'm just wondering, do we have anything
[43:48] in our plan that would address. Building some accessible units.
[43:54] When we're building such a large. Mr. Monday large. Three
[44:00] chair. No, that's not something that we can require. The
[44:04] building of the dwellings is dictated by the building code,
[44:07] but my guess. And the developer can confirm is that
[44:11] if you went to the sales center to look at
[44:13] a unit. You could ask them. To make it accessible.
[44:18] I'm sure there would be a cost to it, but
[44:20] the same. As if you want to have granite countertops
[44:21] versus linoleum or. You can have that built, I'm sure,
[44:27] but I would leave that to developer to confirm. Councilor
[44:31] Falcons. Okay, thank you. That was my only question. Okay.
[44:35] Thank you, councilor. Seeing no further questions from council. I
[44:42] will now place a vote to receive this for information.
[44:50] Do I have a mover? Oh, McLeod was there. Yeah,
[44:54] go ahead. Voting is open.
[45:08] Okay, Carrie. Thank you, council. All right, so now we're
[45:12] moving on to. The second. Sorry. I'm getting my notes
[45:20] here. So the second application for a zoning bylaw amendment.
[45:26] All right, so thank you. Yes, we're moving on to
[45:28] the second application tonight for a zoning bylaw amendment made
[45:31] by upper candidate consultants on behalf of BSF communities. So
[45:36] this is now, the second public meeting this evening. And.
[45:46] It's held virtually and in person in accordance with the
[45:48] Planning Act. The public meeting this evening is to consider.
[45:53] Is to consider an official plan amendment, a zoning bylaw
[45:56] amendment, and a draft plan of vacant land condominium. Will
[45:59] the Director of planning and development services please explain the
[46:02] purpose of the meeting? And detail the nature of the
[46:04] applications. The purpose of this meeting is to provide interest
[46:12] to parties with an opportunity to provide input regarding the
[46:14] following applications for zoning bylaw amendment. 2024. Seven official plan
[46:20] Amendment OPA number 54, draft plan of subdivision 26, CD
[46:25] 14240. Zero five. Submitted by upper candidate consultants on behalf
[46:29] of BSF Communities, Inc. For lands municipally known as 450
[46:33] Race Road. The application for official plan amendment is intended
[46:37] to redesignate the lands from low. Density greenfield residential, medium
[46:41] density residential environmental conservation area and mixed use to medium
[46:45] density residential. And environmental conservation area. The application for zoning
[46:51] bylaw amendment is intended to rezone the lands or agricultural.
[46:54] A one to cite specific residential medium density rm and
[46:57] environmental conservation overlay. EC the application for vacant land condominium
[47:02] is to facilitate a residential development comprised of 139 townhost
[47:06] wellings and lands for. Environmental conservation. Thank you. With the
[47:11] director of planning and development services. Please advise the method
[47:14] and date by which the notice of meetings were given.
[47:18] Notice was published in the well in Tribune on November
[47:20] 28, 2024. Hard copies of the notices were delivered to
[47:23] owners of any lands within 120 meters of subject lands
[47:26] and notification signs were erected. On the property. Thank you.
[47:32] If you wish to be notified of the decision of
[47:34] the city of Welland in respect of the proposed official
[47:36] plan amendment and zoning bylaw amendment, you must make a
[47:38] written request to the city of Welland at Devserv. At
[47:42] Wellen, ca. That's Devserv. At Wellon, ca. We will hear
[47:48] first from the applicant and those supporting the proposal, followed
[47:51] by presentations from those opposed. To the proposal. The applicant
[47:54] will be given an opportunity to respond. All those making
[47:58] presentations should make all comments through the chair state their
[48:01] name, address, postal codes and position so that we may
[48:04] record this information for future reference. Council will now hear.
[48:08] From the applicant after wedge counts, will be given an
[48:11] opportunity to ask the questions of the applicant. Welcome back
[48:15] to Wellin City Council. Longtime no c. Thanks for having
[48:20] me. Go ahead. Just going to pull up my presentation
[48:24] here and I'll get started. Yes. Good evening. Thanks again
[48:33] for having me. My name is William Haikup. I'm the
[48:35] planning manager with upper candidate consultants this evening. I'm representing
[48:39] the owner of the subject. Landsat 450 Rice Road, known
[48:43] as BSF Community zinc or Mountain View homes here to
[48:47] provide a presentation for the proposed development consisting of an
[48:51] official. Plan amendment, zoning bylaw amendment and draft plan of
[48:55] vacant land condominium. Here you can see an outline of
[48:59] the northwest well and secondary plane in blue. The subject
[49:03] land. Shown in white, highlighted there for reference within this
[49:08] area. Here you can see a more immediate site context.
[49:15] And basically zoom in. Aerial of the subject land. So
[49:19] it is currently 4.45 ha or approximately ten acres in
[49:24] total area and has about 200 meters of frontage along
[49:29] the east side. Of Rice road. Currently, the topath drain
[49:34] or water course traverses the north portion of the site
[49:38] and has been incorporated into the design similar as the
[49:42] previous project. Here you can see some of the existing
[49:46] and future land uses that will surround the subject lands.
[49:51] Here you can see the proposed plan. It consists of
[49:56] 139 dwelling units, of which 103 are blocked townhouses 36
[50:04] are proposed to be back to back block townhouse units.
[50:08] The subject lands will be serviced through a primary private
[50:11] road access off of Rice Road and will include a
[50:15] secondary emergency access. Again to rice road. The northerly portion
[50:23] of the property that you see in green. Here is
[50:25] the updated and enhanced tow path drain with the proposed
[50:31] multi use trail that traverses along it and. You can
[50:38] see the proposed. Unit layout, along with the associated visitor
[50:44] parking stalls. Here you can see the proposed official plan
[50:48] amendment. Really? The official plan amendment seeks to clarify and
[50:54] consolidate the developable portion of the lands into a medium
[50:58] density residential designation. And. Remaining environmental conservation area associated with
[51:06] that Topaz drain that we have discussed. Similarly, you can
[51:12] see here the zoning bylaw amendment schedule that has part
[51:15] one, the Orange area. For the residential medium density component.
[51:21] And part two, which will be the environmental conservation. Component
[51:26] associated with that tow path drain. So here you can
[51:31] see the draft plan of vacant land. Condominium. So this
[51:36] type of application allows us to implement private tenureship, albeit
[51:40] not on a public road. As previously indicated, this plan
[51:44] consists of 139 dwelling units in total. So. The proposed
[51:50] condominium will implement a condo corporation. That will be a
[51:55] property management and address the maintenance. And tidiness of the
[52:01] common element spaces throughout the property, and this would include
[52:06] typical condo services such as maintenance for lawn care for
[52:11] those common element areas and snow plowing. Those typical services.
[52:17] So following. This process. The area. And prior to development,
[52:23] the site would be subject to a site plan application
[52:26] with the city that site plan application would be dealt
[52:29] with through staff and would address items such as detailed
[52:32] design, landscaping lighting. And all the relevant details that are
[52:38] required to construct the site. Along with the application, there
[52:41] were a number of studies completed. A stage two archaeological
[52:47] assessment, transportation impact assessment, a functional servicing report, and stormwater
[52:53] management plan, environmental impact study. A geotechnical investigation and hydrogeological
[52:59] assessment and a planning justification report. Here you can see
[53:04] the proposed dwellings. BSF communities or Mount View Homes is
[53:10] an active builder throughout the region. They're high quality work
[53:14] speaks for itself, and there are several communities within the
[53:17] city and larger Niagara region. Which you can give you
[53:20] an example of what you can see and expect in
[53:23] this development. Here are some examples of the block townhouse
[53:28] dwellings and back to back dwellings that will make up
[53:31] the community. These proposed plans make up of different elements,
[53:37] including modern characteristics and traditional facades. The proposed dwelling units
[53:43] have been thoughtfully designed and provide a variety of housing
[53:47] types that adhere to various demographics within the area. Ultimately,
[53:52] the provision of a mix in built forms along with
[53:56] appropriate accommodation of the topath drain. Pedestrian infrastructure facilities. We
[54:01] feel the development emphasizes. Its commitment to enhancing the community
[54:06] and providing good development within the city. In summary, the
[54:11] proposed development application seeks for an official plan, zoning bylaw,
[54:15] amendment and draft plan of vacant land condominium for 139
[54:19] dwelling units consisting of 103 block townhouses and 36 back
[54:24] to back town as is. The lens will continue to
[54:28] provide for the topath. Drain, which. Will be a protected
[54:32] environmental area, including a three meter multi use trail. The
[54:38] proposed development balances the accommodation of the prescribed growth targets,
[54:43] improves housing choice, and is efficient use of urban lands
[54:46] and services. Within secondary plan area which is slated for
[54:51] growth and development. Thank you for your time this evening.
[54:53] And I'm certainly here to answer any questions, thank you.
[54:58] Thank you, Mr. Haikoup. I'll now turn it over to
[55:00] council for questions. And we'll start off with Councilor Kyokyo.
[55:04] Go ahead, councilor. Thank you. Mr chair. This does not
[55:09] include the land of the old sovereign club, is that
[55:12] correct? Mr. Chair. That's correct. Separate applications have been submitted
[55:18] that are in process right now, so. I expect that
[55:21] we will be in front of you in the coming
[55:23] months for the soccer club. So you're the developer for
[55:27] the old soccer club, too. Is that correct? Yes, they
[55:30] are. Owned by the same developer, correct? And. So those
[55:37] plans aren't yet finalized to the staff, or you have
[55:40] those plans for the old soccer club. We have submitted
[55:44] applications at the end of last year. And are in
[55:48] process. And as I indicated, I expect to be in
[55:51] front of you in the coming months regarding that project.
[55:55] Councilor to you, Mr. Chair, and just go back. To.
[55:59] We just saw the other development before you. But why
[56:02] so many townhouses or stacked townhouses? There were a time
[56:05] if you go a mile up the road on right
[56:06] road to the left. You see some beautiful homes. I
[56:09] know the home. Single family homes. I know the costs
[56:12] are. A lot more than townhouses, but why is that
[56:15] trend? Where facing developers and builders now just go into
[56:20] areas and build townhouses and stack townhouses. Just feasibility. Is
[56:24] it money? It's just not worth building those beautiful homes
[56:27] anymore. Go ahead. Mr. Haiku. Yeah, so that's a very
[56:31] multifaceted question, and my answer is probably not as simple
[56:35] as the answer. I'll give you but a large part
[56:37] of it. Is due to market constraints. I know. Over
[56:41] the last year, year and a half. There's certainly been
[56:44] a lot of housing affordability concerns. Yet. The land that
[56:50] we have is in limited supply. So as we continue
[56:54] to have to grow and meet the provincial mandate for
[56:59] growth and providing for housing. We also have to, from
[57:03] a market perspective, balance. The price point of those units.
[57:08] So with the price of land being what it is,
[57:10] we're. Trying to come forward with a more attainable housing
[57:14] product that meets a wider income range. And. Is more
[57:19] generally affordable for people. So the second part of my
[57:23] answer really ties hand in hand into your question about
[57:26] the soccer. Club. That development when you'll see it come
[57:31] forward in the near future. But is a freehold development
[57:34] that includes quite a number of singles and freehold towns.
[57:39] So for this side of Rice road, being the same
[57:42] developer, we're not trying to put our eggs all in
[57:45] the same basket, so to say, and have a variety
[57:49] of products that caters to a larger demographic and has
[57:54] more opportunity. There has been a concern recently. About having
[58:00] those large singles and those projects that you referenced on
[58:03] Rice Road. I've been a part of all of them,
[58:05] so I'm very familiar with that. They're multimillion dollar homes,
[58:10] most of them. And so when we're looking at. Okay?
[58:16] What is providing. A more attainable, affordable house to someone.
[58:20] It's using our land more efficiently, so doing more with
[58:23] the land than we were traditionally. And associated with that
[58:28] is providing a built form that's different than historically we
[58:32] always did. Long winded dancer, but I hope that answers
[58:36] your question. It does. I appreciate your answer and your
[58:42] honesty. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Lee. Go ahead.
[58:47] Thank you, vice chair. I'm just looking at the zoning
[58:50] proposal. The green, part two. Could you tell me how
[58:56] wide that would be? Yes, it's 30 meters. 30 meters,
[59:02] correct. And does part two abut the rural property. The
[59:07] first rural property, at 494, is there a lot in
[59:10] between there. No, you are correct. The existing residential dwelling
[59:15] to the north would be abutting that drain. Correct. Okay,
[59:18] thank you. Thank you, councilor. Seeing no further, counselors. Questions.
[59:26] I will now turn it over to hear from those
[59:29] in support of the application. So members of the public
[59:32] if you are in support of this application. Please come
[59:35] up. And voice your opinion. Seeing none. Adam Clerk do
[59:41] we have anyone online? Through your chair? There are none.
[59:48] Thank you. Okay. Council will now hear from those opposed
[59:52] to the applications. As a reminder, please state your name.
[59:56] Address and postal code council will be giving the opportunity
[59:58] to ask questions of those opposed. So if you are
[1:00:01] opposed to the application, please come up to the desk
[1:00:04] here and voice your opinion. Seeing? None. Anyone online through
[1:00:10] you chair? There are none. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Okay.
[1:00:15] Council will consider this matter at a later time this
[1:00:18] evening, which is immediately after I close. This public meeting
[1:00:22] if a person or public body would otherwise have the
[1:00:24] ability to appeal the decision. Of the city of well
[1:00:26] into the Ontario Land Tribunal, but the person or public
[1:00:29] body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting
[1:00:33] or make written sub. Submissions to the city of Welland
[1:00:35] before the bylaw is passed, the person or public body
[1:00:38] is not entitled to appeal the decision if a person
[1:00:41] or public body does not make oral submissions. At a
[1:00:43] public meeting or written submissions to the city of Welland
[1:00:46] before the bylaw is passed, the person or public body
[1:00:49] may not be added as a party to the hearing
[1:00:51] of an appeal to the Ontario land tribunal unless. In
[1:00:55] the opinion of the tribunal, they are reasonable grounds to
[1:00:57] do so. This public meeting is now concluded. And we
[1:01:02] will now turn it over to the staff report for
[1:01:06] the development that we just heard. About. And if I
[1:01:09] could get a counselor to put it on the floor.
[1:01:13] Councilor van Vleette. Any questions? Councilors. Any questions?
[1:01:23] Go ahead, council. Thank you, vice mayor. Through you. There
[1:01:25] is no park in this particular development. How is the
[1:01:30] Parkland dedication? Being dealt or payment in lieu of Parkland
[1:01:36] being handled. Mr. Monday. Through you, chair. In this northwest
[1:01:42] secondary plan area, some developers will be contributing Parkland, others
[1:01:46] will be contributing cash. And Lua Parkland just depends on
[1:01:50] the situation from parcel to parcel. And property owners who
[1:01:56] over contribute. Parkland will be compensated for over contributing on
[1:02:00] their site versus another developer who's not contributing land, but
[1:02:03] rather money. Councilor, thank you very much.
[1:02:13] Councilor Demarco. Go ahead. Yes, thank you. Vice mayor moot.
[1:02:22] Just a question to staff. Maybe Mr. Axiac can answer.
[1:02:27] When are we going to slow things down in regards
[1:02:29] to development in the city and get caught? Up with
[1:02:33] our infrastructure. That's all right here from current residents council.
[1:02:40] That's not a question to the report in front of
[1:02:42] us. That's more of a hypothetical question. And that's a
[1:02:45] provincial mandate, as you well know. Well, no, I know
[1:02:50] that. Mr vice mayor. But. We did. Go. 270%.
[1:03:01] Over what we needed to last year to qualify for
[1:03:04] the few dollars we got. Yes, I appreciate. No, I
[1:03:09] do appreciate that, but that's a drop in the bucket
[1:03:12] compared to the premier. Stated 1 million homes in ten
[1:03:15] years. So if we could stay on topic of this
[1:03:17] opa. And Zba. That would be great. Thank you. All
[1:03:21] right. Thank you. Okay. Seeing no further questions from council.
[1:03:28] We will vote. On to receive the presentation and the
[1:03:34] report. Right, the report. Thank you. Voting is open.
[1:03:44] And that's Carrie. Thank you, councilors. And I've lost my
[1:03:48] sheets. Oh, okay. Here we go. So, seeing no further
[1:03:57] business, I declare this meeting adjourned. And now we'll turn.
[1:04:01] It over to mayor Campion. We're a little late. But
[1:04:06] we'll let him decide. What goes on next. Thanks, councilors
[1:04:11] and staff.
[1:06:10] These are two items this evening for in camera, which
[1:06:12] we're going to move to the end of the meeting
[1:06:14] so that we can start this meeting almost on time.
[1:06:18] So that's just an fyi. Okay, so in the event,
[1:06:23] I guess we already covered that, but most of folks
[1:06:25] weren't. Here at that time. In the event of an
[1:06:26] emergency, please follow direction of the city clerk to. Make
[1:06:29] your way out of city hall using one of the
[1:06:31] exit points communicated to you by the clerk and make
[1:06:34] your way to the gathering location in front of city
[1:06:36] hall, known as Civic Square. By the reflection pond and
[1:06:39] weight. Additional instructions. I'd like to read. The land acknowledgment.
[1:06:46] Well, it is situated on tree land. This land is
[1:06:48] steeped in the rich history of the First nations such
[1:06:50] as the hotawater, the hood, Nashoni and the initiate, including
[1:06:53] the Mississaugas. Of the credit First Nation there are many
[1:06:57] First nations mate and Inuit people from across Turtle island
[1:07:00] that live and working well and today well and stands
[1:07:02] with all indigenous people past. And prison in promoting the
[1:07:05] wise stewardship. On the lands of which we live. If
[1:07:08] you're able to rise, please rise and join. Us in
[1:07:11] the national anthem.
[1:07:50] Holy. Spirit.
[1:08:21] Hold. On.
[1:08:56] Okay, I call this meeting to order. And welcome, everyone,
[1:08:58] to wellen City council. Going to go to.
[1:09:09] See if the CAO wishes to provide opening remarks. I
[1:09:12] know you did that at the very beginning. You're good
[1:09:14] to go. Okay. I have no opening remarks other than
[1:09:18] to say, welcome to city council. And. I'm going to
[1:09:23] go to the clerk to see if there are any
[1:09:25] additions or. Deletions to the agenda. Madam clerk two, are
[1:09:28] you, Mr. Mayor? There are none, thank you. The minutes
[1:09:32] of the regular council meeting of December 17, 2024, have
[1:09:35] been distributed. I'm looking for motion to approve those minutes.
[1:09:39] Anyone. Councilor Moot, seconder, Councilor Van Bleet. Councilor. Councilor Demarco.
[1:09:50] Yes, thank you. I have a question in regards to.
[1:09:56] The. Page six of the minutes. Where it states members
[1:10:02] present. Myself. Virtual until 07:40 p.m. Removed
[1:10:12] from meeting due to comments made to chair. Chair champion.
[1:10:19] Yes. Your question is? That accurately depicts what happened at
[1:10:27] the meeting, I believe, Madam Clerk, through you, Ms. Mary
[1:10:30] yes, that's correct, councilor. No, the minutes are accurate. No,
[1:10:34] Mr. Mayor, the comment that you made. Was, counselor. We're
[1:10:39] just talking about the minutes. The minutes? Yes, well, that's
[1:10:42] what I'm talking about the minutes. Well, I'm talking about
[1:10:44] incorrect counsel. How are the incorrect, counselor. Your comment was
[1:10:50] that. I could remove you from the meeting. And that
[1:10:57] was it, which I did. And we went on a
[1:10:59] recess. No, you were removed from the meeting, councilor. We
[1:11:04] don't want to discuss much because that was in camera.
[1:11:08] No. Your comment, counselor. I'm telling you. For those comments,
[1:11:12] Madam Clerk. Was the councilor removed? The council meeting through
[1:11:15] you, Mr. Mayor? Yes. So, councilor, the minutes are accurate.
[1:11:20] I was not aware until we went into open session.
[1:11:24] Well, and I went to. Doesn't matter, councilor. It happened.
[1:11:29] I don't know if you were aware of. It or
[1:11:30] not, but it did occur. And the minutes are accurate.
[1:11:34] I'm sorry, but they're not accurate. Well, councilor, that's enough.
[1:11:39] So they are accurate. We have a mover. And second
[1:11:42] or so, I'm going to ask the clerk to run
[1:11:45] us through the vote. Voting is open.
[1:12:06] Okay, well, a couple of people have not voted, but
[1:12:09] we'll find that out in a minute. The motion carries,
[1:12:11] though.
[1:12:23] Okay. So there are no items to be brought forward
[1:12:30] from in block at this point, having reviewed the agenda
[1:12:34] to any members of council, I have a need to
[1:12:35] disclose a direct or indirect pecuniar. Interest with respect to
[1:12:38] this evening's agenda. Councilor mood. Thanks, Mayor Campion.
[1:12:48] I have not asked the integrity commissioner yet, but I
[1:12:50] do believe I have a pecuniary. Interest. With the presentation
[1:12:54] tonight from Niagara College, as I've recently been added as
[1:12:57] a part time faculty member, so I'll excuse myself for
[1:13:00] that portion of the meeting. Okay, duly noted. I don't
[1:13:04] see. Anyone. Councilor Kyokyo. I too, mayor camp here. I'd
[1:13:10] like to excuse myself from that part. Does my daughter
[1:13:12] teach us Niagara College. All right, that's your call. Okay.
[1:13:22] So we're going to go to council now to identify
[1:13:25] items to be removed from black. And this evening we're
[1:13:27] starting with Councilor Kyokyo. Councilor Kyokyo. Thank you. Go ahead.
[1:13:36] 5.5. Reduce council size to lessen financial impact. That's it.
[1:13:45] Thank you.
[1:13:56] Thank you, councilor. Next we have Councilor McLeod. Thanks, Mr.
[1:14:04] Mayor. 5.1 reference 25 39. And 5.2 reference 20 515.
[1:14:11] Thank you. Thanks. Councilor. Councilor. Who's here.
[1:14:22] Councilor Demarco. Anything to pull.
[1:14:33] Councilor. 5.3. Okay.
[1:14:43] Is that it? Assuming that's it. Councilor.
[1:14:53] Richard. Thank you. It's already been pulled. Thank you. Councilor
[1:14:58] Gromaldi. I believe. Is online. Councilor Gromaldi.
[1:15:15] Councilor Grimaldi, you're up. If you are speaking, your mic
[1:15:20] might be turned off. Councilor Grumaldi. Do you
[1:15:30] see your mic on?
[1:15:44] Councilor Grimaldi. We can't hear you. I don't know if
[1:15:52] the clerk would suggest you. She has nothing to bowl.
[1:15:57] Okay. Thank you, Councilor Sedaram. Already pulled. Thank you. Thank
[1:16:02] you. Councilor Falcons is online. Go ahead. It's already been
[1:16:08] full. Thank you. It's been full. Thank you. Thank you,
[1:16:11] Councilor Moot Benfold. Mayor thank you. You, Councilor van Bleet
[1:16:18] bin Po. Thank you. Councilor going over to councilor Lee.
[1:16:25] I already been pulled. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you,
[1:16:26] councilor. Spec. Sorry, Councilor Green. Thank you, Merrill. Pull. One
[1:16:34] item is 5.4. I wasn't skipping you over you on
[1:16:39] purpose, so you avoid that. Council. Respect. I'll do 7.8
[1:16:47] of the bylaw, thank you. Okay, mover. And second, for
[1:16:51] the balance of the items moved by councilor Richard, seconded.
[1:16:55] By councilor McLeod. I'll go to the clerk for the
[1:16:58] vote. Voting is open.
[1:17:12] Okay, that is carried. So now we will move on.
[1:17:22] To presentations, and this evening we do have a presentation.
[1:17:26] So I'm going to call upon mark nine tell. Vice
[1:17:28] president, research, innovation and strategic enterprises. And Gord Arbo, Vice
[1:17:33] president, advancement. And Mabel Watt, director of government relations, Niagara
[1:17:37] College, to address council regarding an update on its activities.
[1:17:42] Mabel, are you coming up? Okay. All right. Okay. Well,
[1:17:48] welcome to well in city council. Before we begin, I
[1:17:52] would be remiss if I didn't mention the fact that.
[1:17:55] Mr. Nantel won the Trailblazer award and innovation policy. At
[1:18:00] the 2024 Canadian Science Policy center conference in Ottawa last
[1:18:04] month. So congratulations on that. That's a very significant achievement.
[1:18:08] And we're happy that you were recognized for that because
[1:18:11] we think you're a very innovative person. Okay, so the
[1:18:14] floor is yours. Please proceed. All
[1:18:24] right. Thank you. Thank you for having us. And through
[1:18:28] you, Mr. Mayor. We're happy to be here to present
[1:18:32] to you a little bit of an update on some
[1:18:34] activities at the college. Especially on the well and campus.
[1:18:39] And it's my understanding there was going to be a
[1:18:41] presentation. On the computer there. I see. All right. This
[1:18:50] one. Okay. It's a self bring up. I see. There
[1:18:55] you go. Excellent. Thank you so much. As you know,
[1:19:00] Naga College. Has been a proud member of the city
[1:19:06] of Wellens since 1967 and. Our current strategic plan focuses
[1:19:11] on several areas of importance to us, but also to
[1:19:14] the community, namely, making sure that. We provide a holistic
[1:19:20] student experience. To our community and our students. We engage
[1:19:24] with alumni and also partners in the region. We pursue
[1:19:29] academic excellence in everything we do and making sure that.
[1:19:33] We model. And trailblaze and social inclusion and environmental sustainability.
[1:19:39] We have a global reach, as you know. And trying
[1:19:42] to do all this in the best possible way, which
[1:19:43] is organizational excellence. We're halfway through our strategic plan, and
[1:19:49] we thank you for having. Provided input into it at
[1:19:52] the time. Like to remind you a little bit about
[1:19:57] our college. We have about 10,500 students. Give or take
[1:20:00] every term and employ 1800 people in both our campuses.
[1:20:07] A dwelling campus in particular. The points of interest or
[1:20:11] specific points. We have the applied health institute, which. Has
[1:20:16] all of our nursing, dentistry, personal support worker, and medical
[1:20:20] adjacent programs. I have the honor of having in my
[1:20:25] portfolio the Walker Advanced Manufacturing Innovation center, where we help
[1:20:29] companies develop new products, processes, and then services for the
[1:20:32] market, making them more competitive. And contribute to our economy.
[1:20:38] The Rankin Technology center has a lot of our technology
[1:20:42] programs and our trades programs, including the Green Automotive Technology
[1:20:46] Lab, which is about servicing electric vehicles. It's one of
[1:20:50] the first in the province, and we're very proud of
[1:20:53] it. And, of course, our simply financial aesthetic center. Where
[1:20:57] some of our top teams are playing and represent us
[1:21:01] well at the Ontario College Athletic association. We also have
[1:21:06] what we call learning enterprises, which are ways for students
[1:21:09] to interact with the public. That dental clinic, massage therapy
[1:21:13] clinic and the teaching hair salon are open to the
[1:21:16] public to come. On campus and benefit. From the learning
[1:21:21] of our students. In particular. I'm proud of our research
[1:21:26] and innovation division, which. As again this year hit the
[1:21:31] number one spot of the best funded college applied research.
[1:21:36] Enterprise in country. There are about 150 colleges in the
[1:21:39] country, so being number one is pretty good. We worked
[1:21:44] with companies in the city of Wellin, some of which
[1:21:48] have their logo up there. And you'll notice the city
[1:21:51] of Wellland itself, where we've had the pleasure. Over the
[1:21:53] years. To give your museum a new website in 2015
[1:22:01] to renovate the front doors. Beautiful wooden doors. Last year.
[1:22:06] And a little bit older than that. I think we
[1:22:08] did a whole scan. Virtual reality scan capture. Of the
[1:22:14] square. Town square. Here for your renovation needs. So again,
[1:22:20] we're here to help. The community be more effective in
[1:22:24] how they conduct business and make sure that. The economy.
[1:22:29] Is forwarded by that. I'll now pass the mic to
[1:22:33] my colleague gord. Great. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Thank
[1:22:37] you, councilors. We wanted just to update council on activity.
[1:22:42] That began just under a year ago. As we launched
[1:22:46] the largest fundraising campaign in the college's history, the Together
[1:22:50] campaign, which is a $50 million, multi year project. To
[1:22:56] really help the college. Secure funds to help us address
[1:23:02] the most pressing needs within our community. And so the
[1:23:06] campaign itself. Has a number of pillars, including addressing the
[1:23:10] skilled trades and addressing the health care crisis. We're uniquely
[1:23:14] positioned as our college to help. Fill the skilled trades
[1:23:20] and healthcare workforce gaps. In order to do that, we
[1:23:23] need to expand facilities here in Wellland. We need to
[1:23:26] build a new skilled trade center and. We need to
[1:23:30] expand our applied health institute. Both of those programs are
[1:23:35] highly space. Have high needs for space. And so, in
[1:23:40] order for us to grow enrollments, we need to grow
[1:23:43] those buildings. A large part of our campaign is to
[1:23:47] support. And reduce barriers for students to enter the college.
[1:23:51] And so we are actively raising funds. For student scholarships
[1:23:56] and bursaries, including. A new scholarship fund that we've started
[1:24:00] called strong students, Stronger Futures, which aims to raise funds
[1:24:04] to fully cover the costs. Tuition costs for indigenous students
[1:24:09] from across Niagara and former youth and care as well.
[1:24:14] The other pillars of the campaign. Work that we're doing
[1:24:17] to be more equitable and diverse. And some of the
[1:24:21] equity, diversity and inclusivity projects that we do. We're a
[1:24:25] global college. We think we're Canada's leading global college, and
[1:24:28] so we're looking at ways to help connect students to
[1:24:32] the global economy and to bring some of Niagara and
[1:24:35] some of Wellland to the world as well. And the
[1:24:39] final pillar is to help our applied research activity that
[1:24:43] Dr. Nantel talked about. Amplify that so that we can
[1:24:48] connect with more small and medium sized enterprises across, well.
[1:24:52] In and around Niagara and across the province and country
[1:24:55] to become more productive, more efficient. And to advance their
[1:24:59] goals as well. So that's the campaign. In Welland itself.
[1:25:05] Thank you. There's some capital projects that we're keen on
[1:25:09] helping to advance, and I mentioned two of them. An
[1:25:13] expansion for our applied health institute so that we can
[1:25:16] train and graduate more. Nurses, psws, paramedics, dental practitioners and
[1:25:21] the like. And this is a 75,000. Square foot expansion
[1:25:24] of the applied health institute. We are active in design
[1:25:28] at present, and we hope to break ground on that
[1:25:31] within this calendar. Year, a new center for skilled trades
[1:25:34] so that we can expand programs in the skilled trades
[1:25:38] so we can start offering programs like HVAC and plumbing
[1:25:41] and also to expand current programs and construction. Welding and
[1:25:46] technolog. Technologies. So that's a new building. It's a little
[1:25:49] further down. Our list of projects. And then. To expand
[1:25:55] and build a new student residence on the well and
[1:25:58] campus. I think we've all been seized by housing, by
[1:26:03] a need for expanded housing options and housing within the
[1:26:06] community. And this is a student, a new student residence
[1:26:10] in Wellland in 2022. This council or the previous council.
[1:26:16] Supported a we can advance. Thank you. Supported an investment
[1:26:21] to the college, and we're midway through that investment of
[1:26:24] $250,000 over five years and. We are deeply thankful. To
[1:26:31] council and to the leadership. Of the city. To work
[1:26:36] in partnership with us and to help. Meet the needs
[1:26:40] of our students in the community. We propose that those
[1:26:43] funds, as we collect them over time, will be used
[1:26:45] towards. A capital project. One of the well and capital
[1:26:49] projects. And we are excited to talk to you about
[1:26:53] further about our new residents and using those funds. To
[1:26:57] help that project in particular. There's been a bit of
[1:27:01] news around the college system, particularly around international students, and
[1:27:05] so we thought tonight we'd bring you a bit of
[1:27:07] an update on what's happening. At Niagara college. You'll know
[1:27:13] that the federal government, about a year ago now changed,
[1:27:16] started a series of policy changes. To lower the number
[1:27:21] of international students that come into the country. Some of
[1:27:25] the changes early on were helpful to the system. They
[1:27:30] really targeted. Small private colleges that were not necessarily acting
[1:27:37] in the best interest of students. But over the course
[1:27:40] of the past calendar year, the changes have become deeper
[1:27:43] and much more pronounced. And so they've had a significant
[1:27:48] impact on the college, on the number of international students.
[1:27:52] Who will be coming to Wellland, into Niagara and the
[1:27:54] lake, and to our overall enrollments. We're thankful to you,
[1:27:58] Mr. Mayor, for signing a letter in support of some
[1:28:02] of our advocacy to the federal government on behalf of
[1:28:05] the college. We are, I think, in a stronger position
[1:28:09] than some of our sister colleges who you might have
[1:28:11] read about because we've had a number of years of
[1:28:14] very strong financial results. In very, I think sage and
[1:28:20] strategic financial management. But. No one in the sector in
[1:28:26] Ontario is immune from these changes. And so we are.
[1:28:33] Actively in communication with all levels of government to help
[1:28:37] impress on them the needs of not only the college,
[1:28:40] but the needs of our industry partners who hire our
[1:28:42] graduates. In. A number of essential industries, like skilled trades
[1:28:48] like health care, like hospitality, terrorism management. Industries that are
[1:28:53] of vital interest. In importance import to Niagara to expand.
[1:29:01] And change the rule so that we can welcome more
[1:29:03] students into these programs from around the world. And so
[1:29:06] as we move forward, You'll be hearing, I think, more
[1:29:10] from the college, more from the college sector about how
[1:29:13] we might remedy some of. These challenges. So thank you.
[1:29:18] Thank you for your time tonight. Thank you for the
[1:29:21] ongoing partnership. With Mr. Mayor, councilors and city staff who
[1:29:28] are great allies and partners for the college at any
[1:29:33] time. And I was interested to hear that some of
[1:29:36] the members of councilors have connections. To the college at
[1:29:39] any time. We more than be more than happy to
[1:29:43] welcome you. To campus. To see what's happening and going
[1:29:48] on and to welcome you there. Thank you. Thank you
[1:29:52] very much for your presentation. Very informative, and certainly we
[1:29:57] appreciate. Our partnership with you. I think as much as
[1:30:00] you appreciate the opposite of that, so thank you. Very
[1:30:03] much for your presentation. I'm going to go to council
[1:30:05] now. For questions, and I'm just going to start with
[1:30:09] councilor setter Ram. Thank you very much. Nice to see
[1:30:12] also your moose Hyde campaign there, Button. Sorry. Not button.
[1:30:19] You're insignificant. Yes, thank you. What I was curious about
[1:30:23] was. With the battery separator plant in Port Colburn and
[1:30:28] bringing in those 300 jobs in phase one and then
[1:30:31] up to 1000, they said. In the future years. At
[1:30:35] the economic summit, he was speaking about having direct connection
[1:30:39] with Niagara College. And making sure that we have training
[1:30:43] program certifications, micro learning that will be available. So it
[1:30:46] wasn't spoken to in this presentation, but I'm very curious
[1:30:48] about how it fits. In. Will we see some of
[1:30:52] that learning being done right here in Welland since we're
[1:30:55] obviously well placed with the number of housing units that
[1:30:57] they need to, and then hoping that we can attract
[1:31:00] local residents to be entering into those economic programs. Thank
[1:31:03] you for the question through you, Lord Mayor. Yes. We're
[1:31:08] in close collaboration and discussions with Asai Cassette for their
[1:31:13] needs. Certainly their needs with respect to the graduates that
[1:31:17] come out of our programs, but also. In their specific
[1:31:21] needs. For their actual. Products themselves. And we've been very
[1:31:27] much involved with the recruitment of Hasai Casse into the
[1:31:31] region. They visited the college five or six times as
[1:31:34] they were trying to make up their minds. As to
[1:31:36] where they were going to locate. And so. We're fairly
[1:31:41] closely related to in their plans, and we'll continue doing
[1:31:45] so. Gordy. And I would just say through you, Mr.
[1:31:48] Mayor, to the councilor, that. The programs that they would
[1:31:54] be interested in are based in Wellland. At the technology
[1:31:57] programs, the engineering, technology and other programs are in Wellland,
[1:32:01] and so the base. For those new programs. Micro credentials.
[1:32:06] Others training would be in Wellland, okay? Thank you through
[1:32:10] Mr. Mayor. Just one last piece because there is such
[1:32:12] interest. I'm just asking if you could send us notification
[1:32:16] when that does come, because it's. Quite unique in terms
[1:32:18] of a selling point for us to be advertising and
[1:32:20] helping to make that connection to residents, that what's happening
[1:32:25] in our neighboring towns and cities have an economic impact
[1:32:29] here. And here's how they can get involved. I know
[1:32:31] from speaking to some residents already that there. Is an
[1:32:34] interest, so they don't know how and where they can
[1:32:37] kind of keep connected. Knowing that it's further down the
[1:32:40] road. So we'd very much appreciate that. Thank you. Thank
[1:32:42] you. Thank you, Councilor Green. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[1:32:48] And thank you for coming in. Just to give us
[1:32:50] this overview. So just a couple of questions. First one
[1:32:53] I had. So you mentioned. The expansion. Of the student
[1:32:57] residence. And certainly fair point to note that the housing
[1:33:02] challenges. And having. That expanded student residence. So do you
[1:33:07] have any timing of that? And how many additional units
[1:33:11] are you looking to add to that to your site
[1:33:15] in Welland? Through you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the
[1:33:18] question, councilor. We would anticipate. In the area of about
[1:33:22] 300. Beds. We would expect to break ground on that
[1:33:29] project. Within the next calendar year, within the next twelve
[1:33:33] months. It's one of the projects that. We're advancing. As
[1:33:42] a priority, and so I would suspect that within the
[1:33:45] next year, We'll have groundbreaking. And we're just looking now
[1:33:48] at design of that residence and some other components, but
[1:33:53] it is something that will happen. In fairly short order,
[1:33:57] councilor. Yeah. Thank you. Through your mayor, and I appreciate
[1:34:01] the answer and that's good news, obviously, for you, but
[1:34:03] just also for the community. In general. And the next
[1:34:07] question I have so obviously, you look at the expanded
[1:34:10] student residents, the expanded applied health institute. You are a
[1:34:16] little bit limited in land, so I guess, and I
[1:34:19] don't know if you have an answer to this? Or
[1:34:21] if you're looking 1020 years ahead, but are you getting
[1:34:25] to a point where you may need to acquire new
[1:34:27] land? To continue expanding the college. Through you, Mr. Mayor.
[1:34:35] And Dr. Nantel may want to add to this, I
[1:34:38] think for the three projects that we've identified as the
[1:34:41] priorities for this next phase of growth. We have the
[1:34:46] appropria. Appropriate land resources to do that. We also have
[1:34:52] a campus in Naglan Lake, obviously. Where half of our
[1:34:56] students are located. So for these projects that we've talked
[1:35:01] about tonight, We are able to accommodate those. On the
[1:35:06] current campus footprint. Okay. Councilor. Yeah. So, questions? I have.
[1:35:11] Thanks for coming in and. Giving us an overview. Thank
[1:35:14] you. Councilor Richard. Sorry, Councilor shark. Push your button again,
[1:35:20] please. Go ahead. Thank you. Cubair Campion to our presenters.
[1:35:30] Actually watching the news of Bleat, we're certainly going to
[1:35:33] be experiencing some issues. With the United States and the
[1:35:35] Canada borders. Is the college prepared for training? And obviously
[1:35:42] there's going to be a need for increase in the
[1:35:44] customs officers. Is the college ready to accommodate training or
[1:35:49] do we have such Shetnagra College? Not sure either gord
[1:35:54] or I or the best person to answer the question,
[1:35:56] but I'll attempt something. We do have police foundation at
[1:36:03] the college. One or two programs that address public safety
[1:36:09] and security. And so it's likely possible that if there
[1:36:14] is a need, that we could increase numbers. There. We
[1:36:18] don't have specifically border. Security programs at this time. And
[1:36:24] none immediately plan. You have to remember that the current
[1:36:29] developments are rather recent, so if they get themselves to
[1:36:33] be an extended need. We certainly could look at that.
[1:36:38] Councilor. Thank you for that. I appreciate that. I think
[1:36:40] we're going to possibly be seeing the need. And I
[1:36:45] guess I have no further questions, but. I appreciate they
[1:36:48] would have to possibly take the police courses that you
[1:36:51] have to offer as well. They train in customs as
[1:36:55] well as the police courses as well, so that would
[1:36:58] be a stepping. Stone numbers. The first stepping stone to
[1:37:03] get into that type of career. I guess I have
[1:37:06] no further questions. And I thank you, and I'll see
[1:37:10] Mr. Nantel. And Mr. Urbo for your presentation tonight. You're
[1:37:13] welcome. Councilor mcleod. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Through you. Obviously the
[1:37:20] truncating of international students. Is problematic. From resources. You have
[1:37:27] to come to your college or our college. And you
[1:37:31] do a really good job of connecting with local employers
[1:37:33] and trying to provide. The employees of the future. Is
[1:37:38] there a strategy in place where you're connecting with local
[1:37:41] high schools more vigorously to try. And. Get more interest
[1:37:47] earlier on. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Mayor. As a
[1:37:51] matter of fact, tomorrow morning. A number of us will
[1:37:55] be visiting local high schools and presenting offers of admission.
[1:38:01] To unsuspecting students. One of the recruiting measures we take.
[1:38:06] Through the year to visit students and to present their
[1:38:09] offers in person. It's a bit of a sort of
[1:38:12] like publisher's clearinghouse, if you remember. Those commercials. We have
[1:38:16] a really multifaceted. Recruitment. Strategy. If some of you have
[1:38:23] watched NFL football or hockey or the world junior hockey
[1:38:28] championships, you would have seen Niagara College advertise quite heavily
[1:38:31] during those periods. One of the things we've done over
[1:38:33] the last couple of years has invested more in recruitment
[1:38:37] marketing to introduce. Wellned and Niagara College to. A broader
[1:38:42] audience. We are actively involved. In a variety of recruitment
[1:38:49] initiatives in our local high schools, including around programs like
[1:38:54] skill trades and healthcare to diversify. Applications, so. That students
[1:39:03] from underrepresented groups in those traits who might not think
[1:39:06] that this is a career option for them. Councilor are
[1:39:10] introduced. To those areas, so. It's probably another half hour
[1:39:15] or 45 minutes. Presentation or conversation, one of the things
[1:39:19] we have done, because we've realized. It's a very competitive
[1:39:24] market. For high school students. Is to diversify our recruitment
[1:39:29] strategies. And working with guidance counselors and high schools is
[1:39:33] a central part of that. And it's tough to look
[1:39:36] at you and talk at the same time. You're supposed
[1:39:39] to be looking at me anyway. Okay. Through you, Mr.
[1:39:41] Mayor. Another interesting event that we'll be having in March
[1:39:47] is we're bringing to the well on campus. A first
[1:39:50] robotic competition. Which to describe it is high school students
[1:39:55] in January are giving a challenge to build a 120
[1:39:59] pound. Fridge size robot and to accomplish some goal in
[1:40:05] a game. And teams from high schools throughout Ontario will
[1:40:10] come too well in to see our campus and compete.
[1:40:14] In a three day event. And it's a great recruiting
[1:40:18] opportunity, and I'm very proud that we've been selected as
[1:40:21] one of the first robotic competition sites going forward. So
[1:40:25] just an example. Wow. Fantastic. Councilor. Thank you. I assumed
[1:40:33] you had a strategy. It sounds great. I guess. I'm
[1:40:37] sure you've thought about this. The sooner you can connect
[1:40:40] the better it is. Grade nine, grade ten. My son's
[1:40:45] in green eleven, is still trying to figure out what
[1:40:47] he'd like. To do, which is okay. But getting people
[1:40:51] familiar with college, getting them familiar with you, makes it
[1:40:55] easier for them to consider. It as an opportunity. And
[1:40:59] I really think if you do the legwork early on,
[1:41:01] it's. Great for both, so thank you very much. Okay,
[1:41:05] I don't have any other speakers or questions for you,
[1:41:08] so we do have a motion. I'll go to the
[1:41:09] clerk to introduce the motion, and then I'll also. Ask
[1:41:12] her to execute the vote after that. Thanks through you,
[1:41:16] Mr. Mayor. The motion is that the council of the
[1:41:18] City of Welland receives information the presentation. By Niagara College
[1:41:23] regarding an update on its activities. I need to move
[1:41:26] her and secondary for that. Move by council McLeod, second
[1:41:28] by Councilor Lee. I don't have any comments, so I'll
[1:41:31] ask the clerk to push through the vote. Voting is
[1:41:35] open. Sorry, councilor McLeod, you wanted to comment? I did,
[1:41:40] mr. Mayor. Sorry through you. This is an appropriate time
[1:41:45] for comments, correct? Correct. Fair enough. So that's what I'll
[1:41:48] use the time for. I just like to state that.
[1:41:54] When rents are high. And people are thinking about moving
[1:41:58] away. Do you have a great choice here in your
[1:42:01] local college? If it fits with your ambitions to go
[1:42:05] to a local college, save money, get through college debt.
[1:42:09] Free and. Have a greater opportunity moving forward. For employment
[1:42:15] and starting off on the right foot after you've graduated
[1:42:19] Niagara College is an applied college, meaning you get real
[1:42:23] world skills that are marketable and usable and clients and
[1:42:28] businesses are looking for. And you need to take a
[1:42:31] serious look at your local college as an opportunity to
[1:42:36] give you the skill set to move forward in life.
[1:42:38] Thank you. Thank you. So now I will go to
[1:42:42] the clerk. Voting is open.
[1:42:52] That motion carried.
[1:43:02] Thank you. Thank you very much for your. You can
[1:43:04] just stay there for a while if you feel like
[1:43:06] it. Fest seats in the house. So thank you very
[1:43:11] much for your presentation and thanks for all the work
[1:43:12] you do for our community and for the people of,
[1:43:15] well. He's got the socks. I'm beautiful. Mabel, where are
[1:43:19] yours? Okay. All right, well, thank you for that. So
[1:43:24] we will move on now. And go to the clerk
[1:43:28] to introduce items that have been removed from block. Madam
[1:43:31] clerk through you. Mr. Mayor. The first item is 5.1.
[1:43:35] Pages 19 to 22. It's 2024. Highlights pulled by councilor
[1:43:39] McLeod. Is there a secondary for that? Second by Councilor
[1:43:44] Green. And before we get started, Mr. Axic. Do you
[1:43:47] want to introduce it? Or how do you want to
[1:43:50] handle that? Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the report
[1:43:54] before you tonight highlights some of the 2024 accomplishments. When
[1:43:58] you pause and reflect on these accomplishments. We really have
[1:44:03] done a lot and a lot to be proud of.
[1:44:06] The report provides a snapshot of some of the key
[1:44:08] initiatives, all in alignment with the well and strategic plan
[1:44:12] staff take direction from council and have implemented these initiatives
[1:44:15] at your direction. I can speak for staff that we
[1:44:18] are proud. Proud of what we've done and what we've.
[1:44:23] Accomplished collectively with council. Moving forward. Our continued work on
[1:44:28] cohesion is also mentioned in the report as an opportunity
[1:44:31] for all I look forward to an ambitious and productive
[1:44:35] 2025. Thank you for that. So I'll go back to
[1:44:38] council. McLeod, did you speak to that? Motion. Thanks, Mr.
[1:44:43] Mayor. In brevity, I would just like to state that
[1:44:45] I think Mr. Akshek's articulated correctly. We've had an impressive
[1:44:51] 2024. A lot of it came to completion in 2024,
[1:44:56] but the planning and the vision came well. Before, and
[1:44:59] I guess that's. What I tried to remind myself as
[1:45:03] I looked at them that we need to continue to
[1:45:05] strategically move forward. And continually invest in our community so
[1:45:09] that we can continue to say the great things that
[1:45:12] we've completed. In terms of. Making our community more resilient.
[1:45:20] And better in terms of being able to adapt to
[1:45:24] climate change. What components do we see for that in
[1:45:28] 2025? If any, mr. Axia. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So
[1:45:34] that is definitely part of our strategic plan. We had
[1:45:39] brought forward a request for that type of position in
[1:45:42] the budget process, but prioritized it didn't get prioritized as
[1:45:46] one of those that said, we still want to ensure
[1:45:49] that we are trying to meet any of our climate
[1:45:51] change environmental type targets. So we are looking to implement
[1:45:56] a number of different initiatives, policy type initiatives. Through both
[1:46:01] our planning and our engineering departments, as well as. Through
[1:46:05] community services. So anticipate some of those to come forward,
[1:46:08] and we're going to try to find creative ways of
[1:46:10] bringing those initiatives forward to council. For your review. Part
[1:46:14] of that is also identified there as in one of
[1:46:17] the bullets in 2025. Related to the forest street plan
[1:46:20] that we want to bring forward as well. Councilor. Thank
[1:46:24] you. I look forward to that. Thanks again, Mr. Axek.
[1:46:27] And thank you to. Staff and my colleagues for the
[1:46:30] successes in 2024. Thank you, Councilor Green. Thank you. Three.
[1:46:36] Mr. Merritt, Mr. Axiak, I appreciate your summary here. Just
[1:46:40] a couple of questions. So opening new green spaces and
[1:46:45] amenities. I know there's a project on Mount Wellan that
[1:46:50] we've had some conversations. With in the past. Do we
[1:46:54] foresee any plans? Coming to council in 2025 for Mount
[1:47:00] Wellend and what we plan. And costing and whatnot and
[1:47:05] phasing of that. New amenity or new green space. Mr.
[1:47:10] Axe through Mr. Mayors. So, yeah, the bullet that was
[1:47:13] identified there in terms of opening new green space. It
[1:47:17] is definitely referring to some of our new developments, especially
[1:47:19] in the Dane City area, related to empire development. So
[1:47:23] that's a lot of the green space, as well as
[1:47:25] many of our trail connections throughout the city. More specifically
[1:47:29] related to your Mount Welland Vista park. I've heard a
[1:47:33] whole bunch of different names for this particular project, which
[1:47:37] I do find quite interesting. And part of it will
[1:47:41] be. Our initial discussions with council. Related to the feasibility
[1:47:46] portion of it and is the land ready and when
[1:47:49] will it be ready? So that information will come forth
[1:47:51] to council this year. Councilor Green. Yeah. Thank you, Mr.
[1:47:56] Mayor. And Mr. Axiak. I call it Mount Welland. What
[1:48:01] I continue to call it. My last question. So we
[1:48:04] look at the last bullet point here. Regards to working.
[1:48:09] With Niagara health. Is it safe to say between the
[1:48:14] mayor and our cao that we're still as a city
[1:48:18] advocating for well, in hospital. When I read that, that's
[1:48:23] the first thing I thought of was the well and
[1:48:25] hospital. Site. I know that is a pretty significant concern
[1:48:28] to the community, especially as we continue to add new
[1:48:32] housing and new residents. What the hospital is going to
[1:48:37] look like in the years to come. So it's a
[1:48:39] concern for the community. So I'll take your answer on
[1:48:42] that one, Mr. Axiac, through Mr. Mayor, and feel. Free
[1:48:47] to jump in because I know this is near and
[1:48:49] dear to you as well. I put both of you
[1:48:51] on that? Yes. For sure. And that's why I have
[1:48:54] it on the list, because the partnership with the Niagara
[1:48:57] Health system is an incredibly important partnership for us. In
[1:49:01] many different ways. This doesn't mean for us to necessarily
[1:49:04] take over anything related to health care, but our role
[1:49:07] is advocacy related to what we want and need here.
[1:49:12] In the municipalities. So we will bring that information forward
[1:49:14] to council in terms of partnerships. And what we can
[1:49:18] be doing and what we're advocating for throughout the course
[1:49:20] of this. Year. Just add that to Mr. Akshack. Has
[1:49:25] been very helpful in this particular case. He's always helpful.
[1:49:29] But. Working on the Wellin hospital has been an ongoing
[1:49:33] process for many years, and I'm glad to have Mr.
[1:49:36] Axiak on the team here. Because. He's sort of the.
[1:49:45] Calmer influence in the whole process. So we're working very
[1:49:48] well with the NHs. We're working well with the province
[1:49:51] as well at the same time, and when I'm talking
[1:49:54] about the province. We're working with the NHS, but also
[1:49:57] advocating through different channels. At the provincial level through different
[1:50:02] ministries. If they want us to build more houses, municipal
[1:50:05] housing, we need to have the services available to the
[1:50:09] residents as they come in, so in order for us
[1:50:11] to achieve those objectives that they've set for us, we
[1:50:13] need to be able to service them through the health
[1:50:15] care system. So it's a multi pronged approach, and we
[1:50:18] are making progress. And certainly a lot of things are
[1:50:22] beginning to kind of boil up. As the hospital. At
[1:50:26] the hospital in Niagara fall is under construction. Which then
[1:50:31] allows the province to focus in the NHS to focus
[1:50:34] on this site, which is guaranteed. To be a part
[1:50:38] of the hospital system, but of course, we are looking
[1:50:40] for more and more. Opportunities for that facility within our
[1:50:45] community. So ongoing process, but certainly it's top of mind.
[1:50:48] On every time we talk to the profits and the
[1:50:50] NH. NHS council green okay, thank you both for your
[1:50:53] answers on that. That's the questions I had. Councilor Kyokyo.
[1:50:58] Thank you to Mary Camp and some good points. I'm
[1:51:00] going. To get into the weeds a little bit here.
[1:51:03] To Mr. Axiac. We look at our infrastructure projects that
[1:51:07] are way behind. Three, four, five years that have been
[1:51:12] funded. This past budget, staff has come to hire some
[1:51:18] key positions. We keep hearing that we need those. Positions
[1:51:21] to catch up. Do we have a number or do
[1:51:25] you have a number of how many infrastructure projects we're
[1:51:27] behind in as far as millions and how far back
[1:51:32] they go and what your intentions are. To make sure
[1:51:36] that those get caught up fairly quickly. I'll go to
[1:51:41] Mr. Axia. But I can understand if we are getting
[1:51:43] into the weeds. It's not perhaps prepared for that. But,
[1:51:46] Mr. Axia, comment theory, Mr. Mayor, so. I will keep
[1:51:49] at it a bit higher of a level. I don't
[1:51:52] have a specific number for you, but we have discussed
[1:51:55] in great length the asset management plan. And this particular
[1:51:59] year, we're going to be connecting the asset management plan
[1:52:03] and the gap. In terms of what our needs are
[1:52:06] and what we're able to fund. In our finance plan,
[1:52:09] and that's what's on the docket for this particular year.
[1:52:13] So more of that information again that we've already discussed
[1:52:15] in great length through the consultant we hired to help
[1:52:18] us with that plan. We'll come forward this year. Prior
[1:52:21] to the budget process and then linked nicely into the
[1:52:23] budget process. So, yes, we are, we have a huge
[1:52:27] backlog. Yes. Council needs to prioritize in terms of how
[1:52:33] much we can actually afford every year to go forward,
[1:52:36] then council did a great job. As much as we
[1:52:39] possibly can in terms of trying. To fund those projects
[1:52:42] this year. That said. We always do need more. We
[1:52:46] have to also be creative with this, because if there's
[1:52:50] ways not to just put it on the property tax
[1:52:52] in terms of some of the funding and we can
[1:52:54] find those creative ways, like I've identified in the report.
[1:52:58] Through. Receiving grants or funds from upper level government. Is
[1:53:04] a really important thing that we really need to continue
[1:53:05] to keep our eye on as well. Councilor. Thanks. That's
[1:53:10] not really the question I was asking. What's going on
[1:53:13] in the future? I'm asking projects that are behind, that
[1:53:15] have been funded, that are two, three, four or five
[1:53:18] years. That have been funded years ago that. We're still
[1:53:24] not got the shovels in the ground. We still haven't
[1:53:26] done. Those projects. We can talk about going in the
[1:53:29] future and asset management and what are we going to
[1:53:31] do? Then. But I'm talking about projects, and that's why
[1:53:34] I think I like to see the number. How many
[1:53:36] projects are we behind? I know we don't have that
[1:53:38] right. Now. But can we get an update as far
[1:53:42] as what's behind? How far behind what are those numbers,
[1:53:45] what's been approved. And what are we going to do
[1:53:48] going forward to bring all those projects up to date.
[1:53:53] Three, Mr. Mayor. So that's a fair question. And we
[1:53:55] bring those reports forward as part of our capital backlog,
[1:53:58] and you will be in receipt of those, and we
[1:54:00] bring those forward. Quarterly. So there will be a plan
[1:54:05] going forward on how we can resolve those issues. I
[1:54:09] would think. Mr. Ag? That's correct. Yeah. One more question
[1:54:15] to you, Mayor Campion, and I'm going here on some
[1:54:18] residents. And what they're finding. Through you. Why does it
[1:54:22] take two, three, four business days to get some answers
[1:54:25] from residents or. Counselors on topics. And I'll give you
[1:54:28] a quick example. This week I had an issue with
[1:54:29] a resident with hydro, and I had that result within
[1:54:33] an hour. Why are we looking at. And I have.
[1:54:37] I can bring this up later, but when we have.
[1:54:39] Emails about certain specific things. And we're getting counselor, I
[1:54:43] don't think that's a part of the. Report that was
[1:54:45] brought forward. You're not speaking to the report just before.
[1:54:50] You have issues with something beyond that. Well, it's not
[1:54:52] an issue, it's just. Basically. Well, I'm just saying it's
[1:54:54] not part of the report, so it's. Not an appropriate
[1:54:56] question to the report itself. So do I need to
[1:55:00] email? What Mr. Aksiac has done to provide you with
[1:55:04] an update on sort of what's. Occurred. I'm talking about
[1:55:07] why it takes so long to get answers from residents.
[1:55:09] Well. That's not an appropriate question for this particular item
[1:55:12] that's on the agenda. All right. Thank you. Councilor, focus.
[1:55:20] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for this report, Mr.
[1:55:23] Axac, but I think you did leave. One of the
[1:55:26] highlights off, and that was the overnight emergency shelter that
[1:55:31] the city funded the first quarter of 2024 through partnership
[1:55:35] with Holy Trinity and beyond the streets. And an amazing
[1:55:41] amount of volunteers and the donations of food and clothes,
[1:55:45] I think that was a strong win for Welland and
[1:55:49] what we can do with the city. But looking ahead
[1:55:53] to 2025. There's the introduction of a forestry management plan
[1:56:00] and related bylaws, so I will be asking you. Since
[1:56:05] the outstanding resolution list isn't coming to council anymore, it's
[1:56:09] going through the information packages so we don't get a
[1:56:11] chance to ask. Does that mean? The motion that I
[1:56:16] put through for the tree bylaw in 2018. For addressing
[1:56:21] the urban. Canopy, by law, will be coming through this
[1:56:25] year. Finally. Mr. Aksec through you, Mr. Mayor. So the
[1:56:32] way it was explained previously is that we are working
[1:56:35] on some of those details through the official plan process,
[1:56:38] and from that process, a number of these different bylaws
[1:56:41] and policies will be coming forward for council to review.
[1:56:44] So the bullet that you see there kind of captures
[1:56:46] kind of what we're looking to do. Moving forward. Because
[1:56:50] tree canopy seems to be an important piece for council,
[1:56:53] and as part of our strategic plan, as well, councilor.
[1:56:58] So was that a yes? Mr. Xia? Yes, councilor. Okay,
[1:57:03] that's all I wanted. A yes, sir? No, thank you.
[1:57:08] Councilor demarco. Yes, thank you. On page 21 in the
[1:57:15] first bullet, the creation of a downtown. Revitalization plan. How
[1:57:22] is that going to change? Or how are we going
[1:57:24] to move forward with. This after the unfortunate incident that
[1:57:30] occurred, apparently. Just this past weekend, I think it was.
[1:57:37] And that what we were all informed. Counselor. Sorry, councilor,
[1:57:43] do you have a specific question? I mean, you're asking
[1:57:46] one incident. I'm just trying to clarify. You're asking, Mr.
[1:57:51] Axiac. What is report here? Yes. What changes or how
[1:57:55] can we move forward? After that unfortunate incident a few
[1:58:02] days ago. I don't know that. For changes. Yeah, so
[1:58:10] I'm not sure that Mr. Axiac has an answer to
[1:58:12] that. I can ask him, but something occurred a couple
[1:58:15] of days ago. It's pretty difficult to predict where that's
[1:58:19] going to take us in the future. Mr. Axiac. Three.
[1:58:22] Mr. Mayor. So the downtown revitalization plan. Was scoped out
[1:58:26] as part of the budget process. It's going to be
[1:58:28] coming as phase one. To council for our general committee
[1:58:33] meeting at the end of this month. It's a three.
[1:58:35] Phase process. There's parts of that particular. Plan that do
[1:58:40] speak about safety and security and what that looks like.
[1:58:43] So those items will be incorporated into the plan for
[1:58:46] council to review and comment on. Councilor. Okay? Opening further
[1:58:52] down opening new green space and amenities for the public
[1:58:56] to access. Can you please just elaborate on that a
[1:59:00] bit? Mr. Xac through Mr. Mayor. So, new green. Spaces
[1:59:04] at this time are mainly in the Dane city area
[1:59:08] related to the empire developments, and we have the two
[1:59:11] new large parks that are going into that particular area,
[1:59:13] as well as the adjoining trail system. Anything else, councilor?
[1:59:18] Yeah. The revision of the community services plan. What do
[1:59:25] you have in mind for this? Moving forward. Through, Mr.
[1:59:32] Mayor. So that's part of our parks Rec and Culture
[1:59:35] master plan, and it requires an update on a five
[1:59:38] year basis. It was done in 2019. We're into 2025
[1:59:43] now, so a portion of those years was our pandemic.
[1:59:48] Years as well. So what we're looking to do is
[1:59:51] kind of reestablish many of the recommendations that are noted
[1:59:53] in that particular plan and bring those forward for council
[1:59:57] for review council. Yes, thank you. Seeing we get about
[2:00:04] what, average 1%. Engagement for the launch of a public
[2:00:09] engagement strategy. How do you think? We're going to get
[2:00:18] that number up. So more people than average, usually about
[2:00:21] 1%. Participate is that. A true. How can we. Make
[2:00:29] decisions. And move forward. With that type of. Very low
[2:00:35] participation. How do you plan on. Increasing that. Mr. Axia
[2:00:42] through mr. Mayor. So I'm not sure exactly what you're
[2:00:46] referring to in terms of a 1%. So I won't
[2:00:50] comment on that particular point, but. The bullet that's in
[2:00:54] there about the public engagement strategy is related to how
[2:00:59] we're going to do public engagement moving forward, and there's
[2:01:01] many different methods we can be. Using for public engagement.
[2:01:06] And many of the things that we are currently doing
[2:01:08] and doing quite well. That said, we can be doing
[2:01:11] more of, and this council. Has explained that they wanted
[2:01:15] to do more of public engagement, and that goes to
[2:01:18] everything from our sideage on developments as an example of
[2:01:21] public engagement, letting people know what's happening on a parcel
[2:01:23] of land to bring people. Into actual sessions where people
[2:01:28] can provide input, not just surveys. Surveys is definitely a
[2:01:32] tool, but there's a variety of others. So what we're
[2:01:34] looking to do as part of this is pull it
[2:01:36] all together. Pull together a full engagement plan and bring
[2:01:39] it to council for some broader discussion so we can
[2:01:42] increase our participation rates, councilor. In regards, can you say
[2:01:47] that there's much more we can do? Why have we
[2:01:52] not done it? As of yet. Why do we need
[2:01:57] to. In regards to that 1%, I'm saying that some
[2:02:04] of the surveys that I've seen. We're lucky to get
[2:02:07] 1% of what our total population is responding. So hopefully.
[2:02:16] We can find some method. Of attracting more people. To
[2:02:23] participate, actually. Because we're being called upon to make decisions.
[2:02:30] On 1%. Of our population. We need more input. If
[2:02:38] we're going to go that route. So thank you, council.
[2:02:42] You're at five and a half minutes. You're over your
[2:02:45] time now, so we're going to move on. I have
[2:02:48] one more here. Two minutes over most of the time.
[2:02:57] I got one more question, councilor. You're overtime. Targeting new
[2:03:00] industry for the shipping. We're going to move on. Can
[2:03:04] you give me an update on that? No, councilor. You
[2:03:07] had over five minutes. You have to stop. No surprise
[2:03:11] to everybody here. I give you about 20 seconds, and
[2:03:13] then it's time to. Start. Thank you. Targeting new industry
[2:03:19] councilor. Councilor, would you please stop? Okay. All right. I
[2:03:27] have no other speakers at the moment. You are done
[2:03:31] because now you're. Well over your time limit, Councilor DeMarco.
[2:03:35] Well, we took up a last minute or. So we
[2:03:37] have to move on erupting. Normally do. Councilor, you're overtime.
[2:03:43] Councilor Falkins. Thank you. I believe I have a little
[2:03:46] bit of time left. Almost three minutes, councilor. Thank you.
[2:03:51] So, I will ask a question. Targeting new industry for
[2:03:55] the shipping canal. Can you give a brief on what
[2:03:58] that would look like? Mr. Axiac. Mr. Mayor. So through
[2:04:04] economic development, we're always targeting different types of industry. That
[2:04:07] could be coming to the municipality, of course, bringing in
[2:04:11] industries an important economic and quality of life factor for
[2:04:15] the municipality. We have quite the gem in terms of
[2:04:18] our shipping canal itself and. That has some interest for
[2:04:22] different types of industries. So what this bullet identifies here
[2:04:26] is that we need to pay some attention to that.
[2:04:28] We need to put some thinking towards targeting different types
[2:04:32] of industry that would find good purpose out of the
[2:04:35] use out of our shipping canal and then work. With
[2:04:38] our different partners, whether it be the seaway. Transport canada.
[2:04:43] Whatever regulatory body is part of that, as part of
[2:04:47] what we can actually accomplish. So that's going to be
[2:04:50] part of our work and part of our focus, because
[2:04:52] there's a number of parcels of land that we would
[2:04:54] like to actually explore. With industry councilor. Thank you. So
[2:05:00] does that mean that you're looking to put ports along
[2:05:02] the canal? The shipping canal. Or docking. For new industries,
[2:05:09] Mr. Agj through Mr. Mayor. So when we start to
[2:05:14] actually attract different industry, then we'll bring that information back
[2:05:19] to council for review. At the present time, that's. Too
[2:05:22] premature for me to answer because. There isn't any at
[2:05:26] this point. We're in discussions with. Counselor. Thank you. Okay.
[2:05:35] So we are going to go to the clerk for
[2:05:38] the vote.
[2:05:55] That motion is carried. Councilor Demarco, you have a point
[2:06:00] of order? Yes, I was trying to get in. Before.
[2:06:03] I like a recorded vote on that. Please, Madam clerk.
[2:06:12] Execute the recorded vote. So for the
[2:06:21] vote, Councilor Kyokyo was in favor. Councilor Demarco was. Opposed.
[2:06:25] Councilor Falkins was in favor. Council Green was in favor.
[2:06:28] Councilor Grumaldi? Was in favor. Councilor Lee was in favor.
[2:06:30] Councilor McLeod was in favor, councilor Moot was in favor.
[2:06:33] Councilor Richard was in favor. Councilor Setaram was. In favor.
[2:06:36] Councilor spec didn't vote, and council. Recorded vote has been
[2:06:41] requested so you could ask the counselor for his vote.
[2:06:50] Councilor, are you going to vote, or are we going
[2:06:51] to record that as a negative vote? I'm thinking here
[2:06:58] of a procedural bylaw. You've got a counselor who called.
[2:07:00] We haven't moved on to the next item, so it
[2:07:02] is correct to go into a recorded vote correct, although
[2:07:05] usually the clerk will go through each counselor one by
[2:07:10] one and start the process over again. If a recorded
[2:07:15] vote has been called. In this case here. I see
[2:07:19] we've skipped that. Step and just gone with what the
[2:07:21] voting has. The voting has not been reopened again. The
[2:07:24] voting is closed. I can't vote if I wanted to
[2:07:28] on my panel here, but normally if I'm correct. The
[2:07:31] clerk has. Once a recorded vote has been requested by
[2:07:34] a counselor. The clerk will go through the vote, counselor
[2:07:38] by counselor. Okay, well, if you want to wait, that.
[2:07:40] Way. We have time this evening, so I'll go to
[2:07:43] the clerk to execute the recorded. Vote. So recorded vote
[2:07:48] has been requested and voting is open. So
[2:07:58] for the recorded vote, councilor Kyoko was in favor, Councilor
[2:08:02] Jamarco was. Opposed. Councilor falcons is in favor. Councilor Green
[2:08:05] is in favor. Councilor Gormaldi. Is in favor. Councilor Lee
[2:08:08] is in favor. Counselor McLeod is in favor. Councilor mood.
[2:08:10] Is in favor. Councilor Richard is in favor. Councilor ceteram
[2:08:14] is in favor, councilor. Speck is in favor. Councilor van
[2:08:19] bleed is in favor. Mayor Campion is in favor. The
[2:08:22] motion carries. Councilor DeMarco, you have your hand up. We're
[2:08:31] moving on to the next. Item. Sorry. Okay, so I'm
[2:08:39] going to go to the clerk for the next item.
[2:08:41] The next item is 5.2, pulled by councilor McLeod. It's
[2:08:45] fire protection grant. Agreement authorization, and it is pages 23
[2:08:49] to 49. Councilor. Do you want to move that? Councilor
[2:08:55] indicates he wishes to move that, is there. A second
[2:08:57] for that motion. Councilor Lee, I don't know if the
[2:09:02] chief wants to introduce that item prior to. Discussion. So,
[2:09:07] chief, if you're out there. Hello, Mr. Mayor. I'm here.
[2:09:12] Okay, good. If you want to just introduce that item,
[2:09:15] we'd be appreciative. Through you, Mr. Mayor. I'm happy to
[2:09:20] announce to yourself and the council that well and. Fire
[2:09:23] emergency services. Has received approval to proceed with a grant
[2:09:28] from the Ontario, from the Province of Ontario, specifically the
[2:09:32] fire protection grant for the sum of $24,691, which will
[2:09:37] be used to purchase additional equipment to process our firefighter,
[2:09:41] our firefighters protective equipment, post fire to help. Reduce the
[2:09:46] exposures and ultimately to improve the health and safety in
[2:09:48] our workplace. Thank you. Thank you, chief. Councilor McLeod. Thanks.
[2:09:54] Mr. Mayor, the purpose of me pulling it was because
[2:09:56] it was. A good news story, and I wanted the
[2:09:58] chief to have that opportunity. The sole question I have
[2:10:02] relates. To. I'm assuming this was the number one wish
[2:10:07] in terms of. Having improvements at our fire stations in
[2:10:11] order to reduce carcinogens. What would be the next step
[2:10:16] that the chief is interested in procuring, if, in fact,
[2:10:19] there is something else of this caliber. Sure he has
[2:10:23] a long list, but I don't know if they float
[2:10:25] to the top. Chief. Through you, Mr. Mayor. Our staff
[2:10:29] is working diligently to implement modern practices at our headquarters.
[2:10:34] To, if you will, perfect our decon process to reduce
[2:10:37] those exposures, and our efforts will expand into stations two
[2:10:41] and three. With similar equipment to make a repeatable process
[2:10:45] that's efficient for our staff and keep them in district
[2:10:49] while reducing the amount of cross contamination and cross transit
[2:10:53] as we move between stations. Now. So it's an aggressive
[2:10:56] goal, but certainly something that the industry is promoting is
[2:10:59] that industrial hygiene in all workplaces, all fire stations for
[2:11:03] us. Thank you. Councilor McLeod. Thanks, Chief. I appreciate your
[2:11:08] diligence in this matter. Thank you. I have no further
[2:11:13] questions or comments, so I'll go to the clerk. For
[2:11:16] the vote. Voting is open.
[2:11:31] That motion is carried. The next item is 5.3. Application
[2:11:37] for official plan amendment for 744 1st Avenue. Pulled by
[2:11:41] Councilor Demarco. Councilor Demarco, do you want to move that?
[2:11:51] Okay? Yes. Seconded by Councilor Green. Councilor, do we want
[2:12:01] an introduction to that particular item? No, I'm good. No.
[2:12:07] Okay. If you wish to speak, go ahead. Councilor Demarco?
[2:12:11] Yeah. I have a question in regards to. Page 58.
[2:12:17] The municipal housing pledge. As everyone knows. The Ministry of
[2:12:24] Missile affairs asked the city to demonstrate its commitment, blah,
[2:12:27] blah, so on and so. Forth. As far as I
[2:12:31] know. The housing pledge. We have met. And far exceeded
[2:12:36] our numbers. And we qualified. For 800, 900,000. Plus they
[2:12:43] gave us a little bit of bonus money because we
[2:12:45] went so far beyond what we were expected to. If
[2:12:51] I recall correctly, it was 260. Percent. Over. At that
[2:12:59] time of what we needed. To qualify for. Those dollars.
[2:13:08] Would we have any? Figure currently. Of where we're at
[2:13:16] now in regards to. What we've been asked.
[2:13:26] To commit to by the government. Like I said already,
[2:13:32] we were 270%. 260% over what we needed to. And
[2:13:40] I would think now that number. Has to have grown
[2:13:46] significantly. Seeing all what's being proposed in our city with.
[2:13:53] The development all over the city. I'm just wondering if.
[2:14:00] We have. Approximate. Number, percentage where we're at now. In
[2:14:08] regards to our new bills, Mr. Mondays, do you have
[2:14:11] an idea? Three. Mayor Campion. So far in the housing.
[2:14:21] Target of 4300 by. 2030. We've seen 1929 units
[2:14:30] started, but the funding is done on a yearly basis,
[2:14:33] so you have to meet the target every year. So
[2:14:37] even though we may have been 200 and something percent,
[2:14:39] in 2023. 2024. We're just slightly above the 100% we're
[2:14:44] at. 106%. Right now. But we'll have to meet that
[2:14:49] target for 2025 that year. It doesn't. Matter that. We're
[2:14:56] close to 50% of the overall target. We have to
[2:14:57] meet it every year. To get the funding, and we
[2:15:00] don't know what the targets are going to be from.
[2:15:02] That point forward. So. We can't be turning down developments
[2:15:06] because we think we've met our targets, because near four,
[2:15:09] the profits may increase. Our target, and we have to
[2:15:13] make sure that we have housing and supply to be
[2:15:16] able to meet those targets and also to meet the
[2:15:19] reality that people are moving to Ellen councilor. Yeah, people
[2:15:25] are moving along. Or else they're buying in welling. I
[2:15:31] was just wondering. Because. The number of complaints that I
[2:15:35] get from people. And everywhere you turn. There's proposed development
[2:15:43] or their development. Do we have someone like. How is
[2:15:49] everyone? Why suddenly is well in such a hot spot
[2:15:54] for? Development. Not like it's never been like this before.
[2:16:00] I don't know that anybody can really answer that question.
[2:16:02] Other than that there's a migration from other municipalities into
[2:16:06] our community, which is a trickle down effect as people
[2:16:09] move into one municipality, people move out and move into
[2:16:12] another municipality, et cetera, et cetera. And on top of
[2:16:15] that, we have to look at. The Niagara region as
[2:16:21] a whole. It's also growing very rapidly, so. This is
[2:16:26] sort of the trickle down from the Toronto Hamilton Brampton
[2:16:30] GTA moving down into our neighborhood down here, and it's.
[2:16:36] A natural migration, and pricing has something to do with
[2:16:39] it. So there's no real single answer. I've taken up
[2:16:43] some of your time and. So as Mr. Mike. Sorry.
[2:16:48] You're at your five minutes, so I'll give you another
[2:16:50] minute. Just. Because of the long answer. My greeting. You're
[2:16:55] saying they're migrating here? But like never before. Never before.
[2:17:00] We've had this open spaces, we've had all this. Development.
[2:17:05] All the proposed development. And yet, you know what we
[2:17:10] have. A few that have come to. Council three, four
[2:17:15] years ago. And still nothing. That's got nothing to do
[2:17:20] with us. Or is that all? The. Developers timing of
[2:17:29] all this. Like the city has nothing to do with.
[2:17:35] What's all out there? What's been sold? And like I
[2:17:38] said, everywhere you look. There is development. Development? And a
[2:17:44] lot of this is at the expense that occur in
[2:17:46] residence. So I just want to just ask that question
[2:17:51] in regards to where we are now. And thank you
[2:17:55] for the response grant. Appreciate it. Thank you, Councilor Green.
[2:18:00] Yeah. Thank you. Three. Mr. Merritt to staff. Just a
[2:18:04] couple of questions here. So page 53. It notes a
[2:18:09] holding symbol to be placed in the subject lands. For
[2:18:15] some condition. So when it talks about the stormwater management
[2:18:19] pond, I don't believe there is one for this development.
[2:18:25] So if I'm reading this correctly, this development can't proceed
[2:18:27] until that stormwater management pond is constructed, and that's. For
[2:18:33] the development that we just heard the public hearing for
[2:18:37] earlier in the night. Is that correct? Mr. Monday. Three
[2:18:42] American being. Yes, councilor. Okay. Thank you. And that's through
[2:18:46] your mayor. And that's the, when we, when they went
[2:18:50] through that public hearing, There would be some connectivity between
[2:18:55] this development and that development. With a roadway as well.
[2:18:59] Is that correct? Mr. Monday. By three. Meer Campin.
[2:19:09] Yes, councilor. Okay, thank you. And my final question. Through
[2:19:14] the mayor. Page 65. Engineering. Comments from December 3
[2:19:24] 24 it notes here. This development cannot proceed until the
[2:19:30] works are completed. Construction of a water main. Sanitary full
[2:19:34] road reconstruction. Urbanization of First Avenue. So I assume that
[2:19:41] would be from Quaker to this development or. Where would
[2:19:47] the boundary be for those works? Mr. Monday. Can you
[2:19:52] answer that or should we go to Ms. Miller? I
[2:19:54] have Miss Miller. Sorry I just turned you off, Ms.
[2:19:58] Miller. Jump back in again. Sorry. Ms miller. You want
[2:20:08] to push your speak button again? Sorry. Thanks, Mr. Mayor.
[2:20:13] Through you. So it is from Quaker to the limit
[2:20:17] of the proposed development. Councilor. Okay, thank you. I just
[2:20:25] wanted to clarify that. So those are the questions I
[2:20:27] have. Thank you. Thanks, councilor. Councilor Kyokyo. Thank you. Similar
[2:20:32] to. The other development where we asked the question about
[2:20:37] the roads and who's paying for it. And we proved
[2:20:42] these developments. And down the road, the city pays for
[2:20:44] it somehow. The taxpayer. So my question to you is
[2:20:48] the $1.8 million we received last year. Where has that
[2:20:52] fund gone to? Is it gone to any of these
[2:20:54] projects? Mr. Monday. Three mayor campy no. The building homes
[2:21:01] faster fund. The first amount is being used towards the.
[2:21:07] First. Street water and sewer repelitation. Councilor. Thank you so.
[2:21:15] Through you. And I'll ask this question to staff because
[2:21:17] I asked it to. Mr. Haiku. Before. But all the
[2:21:21] developments we've seen have been the same stack townhouses, one
[2:21:24] on top. Of each other. Small spaces, sardines. And. I
[2:21:33] get the price part of it. Affordability. But there's something
[2:21:36] to be said about people building houses again, single family
[2:21:39] homes that are maybe 2000 with their own yard. It's
[2:21:45] part of the culture. And where do we have a
[2:21:49] say in that to developer and say, hold on a
[2:21:52] minute, we got a lot of stock. Townhouse in Wellington.
[2:21:55] We got enough of those in a little small. Space.
[2:21:58] Why don't you build some nice homes in here and
[2:22:00] market those people? Because we keep saying they're coming from
[2:22:03] Toronto. Well, if they're coming from Toronto, I'm. Sure they
[2:22:04] can buy those houses, too. Well. Where's that balance? Because
[2:22:11] my fear is in 1020 years city is going to
[2:22:14] be used all stock townhouses. And everybody living on top
[2:22:17] of each other. So my question to you, Mr. Mayor,
[2:22:20] through staff, where is our plan and say, well, hold
[2:22:24] on. We want more of a comprehensive look. Whatever Doug
[2:22:28] Ford or whatever the government's asking for today is not
[2:22:30] what they're asking five years from now. So I guess
[2:22:34] I'd like some clarification on that question, Mr. Monday. Three
[2:22:38] Mary Campion. The city is required under the provincial policy
[2:22:42] statement. We have to provide for a mix. And range
[2:22:44] of housing types to meet current and projected needs. And
[2:22:49] when you talk about single, detached 2000 square foot, the
[2:22:51] reality is that house. Is $800,000. It's partially related to
[2:22:56] the cost of land, and then you have the cost
[2:22:58] of construction. And so developers realize that people can't afford
[2:23:02] houses like that. They need to provide a different format
[2:23:05] that is affordable to the public. They're not going to
[2:23:08] build housing that they can't make some profit off of
[2:23:10] it. I mean, that's the reality. And so. Townhouses and
[2:23:13] stock townhouses and back to back townhouses. Are what people
[2:23:17] can afford and what the developers can deliver to them
[2:23:19] at an affordable rate. Mr. Monday, I think, would it
[2:23:24] be fair to see, to wrap that into one thing?
[2:23:27] Is it's very market driven. Yes, councilor. Thanks. I respectfully
[2:23:34] disagree, because there's still people buying eight $900,000 held in
[2:23:37] Niagara. It hasn't dried up. It's not to say that,
[2:23:40] that's all. They're buying townhouses. It's all they're buying. Well,
[2:23:43] take a trip. Across Niagara and well and pork Coburn
[2:23:46] and Wayne Fleet and everywhere else you want to go.
[2:23:48] And pell them. They're still eight. $900,000 homes, I'm saying.
[2:23:53] As a council. And we should project that. We want
[2:23:57] to do nothing wrong with stack townhouses and townhouse. I'm
[2:24:00] just saying, how do we project that to developer? How
[2:24:03] do we market the properties? And say, hey, great. Come
[2:24:06] and build in welling. But this is what we like
[2:24:08] to see. Our city look like in 10, 20, 30
[2:24:10] years, instead of just a bunch of road townhouses. And
[2:24:13] I think that's a lot of frustration. About the public
[2:24:15] are seeing because I think they want to see development.
[2:24:20] But let's talk about mixed development that really gives it
[2:24:23] a sense of. Feel of community. With people growing in
[2:24:26] backyards. I'm just saying that. It just seems that every
[2:24:29] development is the same. Sardines and corners, and that's what
[2:24:33] we're looking at, and it does. Get frustrating from a
[2:24:36] taxpayer and a residence goes forward. That's it. Thank you.
[2:24:39] Thank you, Councilor Falkins. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm going
[2:24:44] to pick up a little bit again. On what councilor?
[2:24:46] DeMarco was talking about with municipal housing pledge years ago.
[2:24:51] There used to be a report available on the website.
[2:24:56] That would give the number of approved subdivisions and what
[2:24:59] ward. That. 's no longer on the website. But that
[2:25:04] gave us a glimpse of what was coming. With the
[2:25:10] new municipal housing pledge that it refers to in here,
[2:25:13] we still don't know. Where we sit with that pledge
[2:25:16] on a regular basis. So I don't know. Is staff
[2:25:21] planning on maybe doing a semiannual report on where we
[2:25:26] stand with our housing? Pledge, because in a lot of
[2:25:29] these reports, it says it goes towards the housing pledge,
[2:25:31] goes towards the housing pledge, but it would be nice
[2:25:34] to see where we stand. On what we've pledged. What
[2:25:40] is going against the pledge? What is outstanding or what
[2:25:44] some divisions have been approved or something like that, because
[2:25:47] it always mentions it, but we never see the numbers
[2:25:49] on it. So is that something that. We can look
[2:25:54] forward to in 2025. I'm going to go to Mr.
[2:25:58] Monday, but we're kind of drifting away from what's actually
[2:26:00] in front of us, which. Is this application as opposed
[2:26:04] to generalities? But Mr. Monday, maybe you could answer that
[2:26:07] question then. We'll get back on track. Yes. Three Mary
[2:26:09] Campion, the Ontario housing tracker, is a website that shows
[2:26:14] all the municipalities that have housing targets and where they
[2:26:18] sit. And it's generally updated monthly by the province. Now,
[2:26:21] the thing is. Those are only units that were the
[2:26:24] foundations complete or actually received a permit. They don't. Count
[2:26:27] the fact that you have thousands of potential housing units
[2:26:30] to be built, they only count them because they want
[2:26:32] housing to actually be built, so they only count them
[2:26:35] once they start construction. So that's all available at any
[2:26:39] time for anybody in the public, any municipality. You can.
[2:26:42] See how we compare, how we compare to our original
[2:26:45] target. And that's done by the province of Ontario. Councilor.
[2:26:52] Okay, so we have to do our own looking at
[2:26:55] that, all right? And then regarding the other report of
[2:27:01] approved subdivisions and the different wards. I'll take that. Up
[2:27:05] as a sidebar with Mr. Grant to see if we
[2:27:07] can have that reinstated. Thank you. Thank you, councilor mcleod.
[2:27:13] Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I do understand my colleagues concerns around
[2:27:18] more townhouses. The reality is, the good news is, in
[2:27:24] a general committee, we had a developer come forward with
[2:27:27] a proposal with 263 single dwelling homes, which is good,
[2:27:32] so. There seems to be a balance starting between developments,
[2:27:37] which is good. The reality is we need choice. In
[2:27:40] housing so that we allow people an opportunity to get
[2:27:44] in at every level of housing. If this is something
[2:27:49] that allows a renter to buy a home, And start
[2:27:54] building wealth that way by owning their own home. I
[2:27:57] think that's a positive. We have to look at that
[2:27:59] from a society as a positive. The concern I have,
[2:28:04] Mr. Mary. Is. And certainly I've amused about this. I
[2:28:08] don't know how far it's. Gotten anywhere. Was. Is there
[2:28:13] a use it or lose it kind of opa zoning?
[2:28:18] Thinking process out there where developers are asking. For density,
[2:28:23] but then we want them to actually put them in
[2:28:25] the ground because that's. The only way people are going
[2:28:27] to be able to move into them. Do you have
[2:28:31] anything, Mr. Mayor? You or Mr. Monday? Is there anything
[2:28:33] out there that says. You've got three years, but you
[2:28:37] got to get building. Mr. Monday three Amir Campion we
[2:28:41] do have that for subdivisions of condominium, so they do
[2:28:44] get draft approval and they get a certain period of
[2:28:47] time to three years. Sometimes they come back to council
[2:28:50] and ask for extensions for various reasons, interest rates, construction
[2:28:54] costs. But we do have that. I don't recommend doing
[2:28:58] that because. You can't force somebody to build. Something if
[2:29:02] there's just no market for it. And so taking away
[2:29:05] approvals isn't? Really moving you isn't allowing you to have
[2:29:08] that supply readily available when the time is right if
[2:29:12] you're planning to take away approvals. Council mcleod. Fair enough.
[2:29:19] I appreciate that perspective. The reality is, like I've said,
[2:29:25] People need places to live. We need to get the
[2:29:26] homes built. I guess one of those ways. Is to.
[2:29:30] Make them provide the flexibility, so. That there is a
[2:29:33] market. For the housing. That's ultimately what they're trying to
[2:29:37] do here. From a further positive note. They've increased the
[2:29:43] OR. They've at least provided for some green space as
[2:29:47] well. As visitor parking. So I'll be in support, Mr.
[2:29:50] Mayor. Thank you, Councilor Speck. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[2:29:55] So I'm looking at page 62, the site plan, and
[2:29:57] I just want to confirm with staff and draw attention
[2:30:00] to the way that the center blocks in this development
[2:30:03] are laid out. The road, which is labeled fire root,
[2:30:07] and the shaded areas, which are I'm going to clarify
[2:30:12] our garages. We can see in the. Diagram. With cars
[2:30:16] in them. The point is that the sidewalk faces a
[2:30:19] landscape area, not a road. So it's almost an alleyway.
[2:30:24] Approach in behind the dwelling units. The sidewalk is. In
[2:30:29] front. The front of the house faces the landscape area.
[2:30:32] Do I have that correct? Mr. Monday. Through Mary camping
[2:30:37] yes, councilor. And so, following with the sidewalk, we can
[2:30:41] see that it runs. Along in the visitor parking that
[2:30:44] are the white areas there. And I was looking for
[2:30:47] where does the sidewalk, come out to the street and
[2:30:51] you can see that. There is one sidewalk. On the
[2:30:56] left side of the page showing pedestrian sidewalk, and I
[2:31:00] had to zoom into it with my phone in order
[2:31:03] to be able to read it there coming out. To.
[2:31:08] Sorry. I'm looking at the future road. Yes. Thank you.
[2:31:15] Thank you, Councilor Green. Having said that, and the point
[2:31:19] I'm going with is first Avenue when we refer. To
[2:31:24] page 65, and it talks about the urbanization which has
[2:31:27] been talked about before. So at the bottom. Of page
[2:31:30] 65 construction of water main, sanitary sewer, as well as
[2:31:33] full road construction. Urbanization from First Avenue. Are required. This
[2:31:38] development cannot proceed until. These are completed. When it says
[2:31:42] full urbanization, does that include sidewalk construction, which will join
[2:31:48] into these sidewalks throughout the development. Mr. Monday. Through mayor
[2:31:55] campaign yes. Councilor. So when it says before this development
[2:31:59] can proceed, So is that to say the sidewalk? Will
[2:32:04] connect to Quaker and run northward on First Avenue to
[2:32:09] this new development before construction will proceed. Mr. Mundy. Three
[2:32:15] mere cap. And I believe that's what Miss Miller said
[2:32:17] earlier. Thank you. That answers my question. Thank you, Councilor
[2:32:22] Demarco. You've already. Spoken once and beyond your five minutes,
[2:32:27] so unless you have a point of order or something.
[2:32:31] You will be out of order. Councilor Demarco, do you
[2:32:39] have a point of order or something? No. Just speak.
[2:32:45] Thank you, Councilor Richard. Thank you. Through Mayor Campion, I
[2:32:52] feel there would be a substantial difference between the taxes.
[2:33:01] On a townhouse versus a single family unit, am I
[2:33:04] correct? On owning a townhouse. Mr. Monday through Mayor Campion.
[2:33:11] It's really based on what impact besides the assessment is
[2:33:13] generally speaking, yes, a single detached dwelling is worth more
[2:33:17] than a townhouse, but it really depends. On the location
[2:33:19] within the city, the type of development, so it's not
[2:33:22] always the case. That a house would be more than
[2:33:25] a townhouse. Like a new townhouse might be more. Than
[2:33:27] an old single. Detached to somewhere else in the city.
[2:33:30] The taxes and the assessed value. Councilor. Thank you for
[2:33:34] that. So if we had a full residential area of
[2:33:38] single family. Units. It may be beneficial to the city
[2:33:44] as far as a tax base, am I correct? Mr.
[2:33:48] Mund. Excuse me, Mr. Monday. Three. Mayor. Can't be. No,
[2:33:51] I've actually. Done that analysis before. And actually, there's more
[2:33:54] taxes collected in the townhouse development. Or the stack townhouse
[2:33:59] development. Councilor. Thank you, Mayor Campion. Possibly. Due to the
[2:34:06] land usage, I suppose. Mr. Monday three. It's essentially because
[2:34:13] there's more units in a given area than a single
[2:34:16] detach. Would take up. Councilor. Anything further? I think I
[2:34:22] may want to make a comment. Hunters. I'm sure that
[2:34:27] they're paying high taxes in that area. Maybe a residential
[2:34:32] area of such in the event. That was my question.
[2:34:35] Thank you. Thank you. I will now go to the
[2:34:39] clerk for the motion. And the vote. The vote is
[2:34:46] open.
[2:35:01] All right. That motion is. That motion is carried.
[2:35:19] Madam clerk. The next item is 5.4. Pulled by councilor
[2:35:26] Green. It's to request to lift the holding symbol for
[2:35:30] lands at 205 Lancaster Drive. Pages 91 to 94. Councilor
[2:35:35] Green do you want to move that? Yes. Second. Seconded
[2:35:44] by Councilor Lee. We don't need an introduction to that
[2:35:48] one. Mr. Monday. Okay. Council Green, you have the flur.
[2:35:53] Yes. Thank you. Three. Mr. Mayor. So we're removing the
[2:35:56] holding symbol from these lands. I see in the discussion.
[2:36:02] That the owners agreed to paying 500,000 to the city
[2:36:07] for community improvement, so. What could that look like? Is
[2:36:13] that an improvement in ward four? Is that an improvement
[2:36:16] in the area? Maybe an improvement to. The local park
[2:36:20] across the street, which will likely get a lot busier
[2:36:24] with children with the new development at the Seaway Mall
[2:36:27] land. So what could that money be used for? Mr.
[2:36:31] Monday. Through Mary camping. It is relatively wide open, but
[2:36:35] it is intended to be spent ideally on something in
[2:36:39] the local community, because the development is in the local
[2:36:41] community. It just. Hasn't been decided exactly what that money
[2:36:45] be spent on, but. It could be the city has
[2:36:49] services within the seaway mall, so it could be sort
[2:36:51] of improving those services. Within the mall. It could be
[2:36:55] parks improvements, trails improvements. That part hasn't been decided yet.
[2:37:00] Councilor. Yeah. Thank you. Through Mr. Marikate. It's good to
[2:37:04] hear that. I may make a recommendation. It might be
[2:37:09] good to look at the small park across the street.
[2:37:12] As again. I'm sure it'll be getting a lot busier
[2:37:15] and. There is no specific park. Playground, right? Some green
[2:37:20] space in here, but not a specific playground. So then
[2:37:23] the last question I have to. Mr. Monday. And I've
[2:37:27] asked this a few times over the months because I
[2:37:30] do hear a lot. Of resident questions, but. Are we
[2:37:34] ready to go with this one? Obviously the target's been
[2:37:37] removed. A lot of questions. They started. They have a
[2:37:43] sales office inside the mall. But are they ready to
[2:37:46] go? Is there further obstacles to work through, or are
[2:37:50] they ready to start going here. Mr. Bundy, perspective. Three
[2:37:56] mere campaign. This was in theory, one of the obstacles
[2:37:59] was getting this agreement in place. But again, it's. Going
[2:38:01] to be up to the. I don't know what the
[2:38:02] developer's plans are when he's going to start. I couldn't
[2:38:05] tell you that today, but we are moving forward with
[2:38:08] the various approvals, but they're the ones that will decide
[2:38:10] when they actually start building. Councilor buildings. Okay, thank you,
[2:38:16] Councilor Demarco. Yes, thank you. To Mr. Monday. Is this
[2:38:23] normal procedure? Like we left a holding symbol? And we
[2:38:29] get $500,000. From a developer. To in this case. Put
[2:38:38] towards. The community. Improvements. Is it the norm? This is
[2:38:48] something. I haven't heard of. Anytime recently? Mr. Monday. Three
[2:38:57] Mary Campion. This one was done before. What they call
[2:39:02] bonusing was sort of prohibited. So it was something that
[2:39:06] was required as part of the original approval of this
[2:39:09] seaway mall redevelopment, and the developer agreed to provide this
[2:39:14] money. Councilor. So, basically. Just sort of a generosity that
[2:39:22] he's donating this $500,000. Mr. Monday. I don't want to
[2:39:29] describe what it is that he's done. The developer hasn't
[2:39:33] appealed this condition, so they are agreeing to pay it.
[2:39:37] So I don't want to characterize it anything more than
[2:39:38] that. The developers agreed to pay it. And that's what
[2:39:43] this is about. Councilor. Yes. And also it states in
[2:39:48] the report here that whatever they needed to do to
[2:39:53] get it removed. All the develop. Development. He satisfied all
[2:40:01] the future conditions? They've all been met. And they're ready
[2:40:05] to go. Is that what this basically, in a nutshell
[2:40:07] means? Mr. Monday. Three of you may, from our perspective.
[2:40:12] Yes, councilor. All right. Thank you, Mr. Monday. If there's
[2:40:16] no further speakers, so I'll go to the clerk for
[2:40:19] the motion. And the vote.
[2:40:33] Voting is open. That motion is carried.
[2:40:50] Through you, Mr. Mayor. The next item is 5.5, pulled
[2:40:54] by councilor Kyokyo. It's a response to notice the motion
[2:40:56] for options to reduce council size to lessen the financial
[2:41:00] impact on the taxpayer. Pages 95 to 106. So, councilor
[2:41:04] Kyokyo, do you want to move that. Yes. Second.
[2:41:14] Seconded by councilor. Lee. I guess that's what we saw
[2:41:19] first. Do I have to move an option first? Okay.
[2:41:25] Just. Councilor Kyoko, when you move that, you need to
[2:41:27] put one of the options in. So just clarification on
[2:41:30] the option one, two and three. It doesn't say per
[2:41:33] ward. Any of them doesn't say per word like it
[2:41:37] doesn't say four part time. Counselors, four awards, six part
[2:41:40] time counselors, six wards. Madam clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor.
[2:41:44] So. No, it doesn't say per ward. That would be
[2:41:50] part if option two allow would be, say one council
[2:41:53] per word for option one. And option three, determining the
[2:41:57] award would be conducted through the award boundary review. So
[2:42:03] we're talking about one person per ward. Amir. Potentially. Potentially,
[2:42:11] counselor. So do you want to put an option in?
[2:42:14] We have to have an option in the motion. That's
[2:42:15] on the floor. Okay. All right, let's go ahead. Yeah.
[2:42:18] So I'll move option three. Eight. Part time counselors, one
[2:42:21] full time mayor, nine. Elected officials. Okay. And second, Councilor
[2:42:27] Lee, are you good with seconding that particular. I just
[2:42:33] wanted to hear what his answer was. First councilor. Yeah.
[2:42:39] Okay, Councilor moot. You have a point of order? Yeah.
[2:42:44] Thanks, Mayor Campion. So just as we are running through
[2:42:50] this, if I'm reading this correctly, To even discuss this
[2:42:55] any further. We have to put an option on the
[2:42:57] floor. But we don't have an option for no change.
[2:43:02] There are options. I did discuss part of this with
[2:43:05] the clerk earlier, in the sense that. In this particular
[2:43:12] case. Vote no would be status quo. And if. This
[2:43:19] particular. Option fails. Madam Clerk, then you could bring. Someone
[2:43:24] could bring forward another option. Is that correct? Through you.
[2:43:28] Through Mr. Mayor. Yes, that's correct. So council would be
[2:43:31] voting on this option three. Then if once the vote
[2:43:34] is taken for that, if the motion is lost, another
[2:43:37] member of council. Can put forward a motion for a
[2:43:39] different option. So say we go through all three options,
[2:43:43] there's. No support for any of them, then we'll be
[2:43:46] remaining status quo or additional. Options if council chooses to.
[2:43:51] Interesting. Okay. Right. Sorry. Go ahead. No. I understand that.
[2:44:01] At any time. If we say we don't like eight,
[2:44:04] can we introduce our own option? You potentially could make
[2:44:09] a motion for status quo. Okay. Thank you, Councilor Van
[2:44:16] Bleet. You're just in the speaking list. Okay. All right,
[2:44:19] so I just going to see if the clerk wants
[2:44:21] to introduce the item. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So the
[2:44:26] original report was prepared in response to the notice. Emotion
[2:44:29] passed on. April 9 of 2024, which directed staff to
[2:44:34] explore options for reducing council size to achieve cost. Savings
[2:44:38] for the taxpayers. Following this directive, council requested public engagement
[2:44:42] on this topic. And to validate the decision making. This
[2:44:48] updated report presents three options for reducing council size, each
[2:44:52] aligned with the findings from the public engagement survey. The
[2:44:56] survey results provide valuable insights into public opinion. So two
[2:45:00] of the main points is a significant portion of the
[2:45:02] respondents, 51.3%, expressed a preference for a coun. Council composition
[2:45:08] of five to seven members, indicating strong support for a
[2:45:12] streamlined governance model. When asked about future growth impacts on
[2:45:16] council size. A majority, 5.1%, favored decreasing the number of
[2:45:21] counselors reflecting an appetite for maintaining efficiency and cost effectiveness
[2:45:26] as the city evolves. The proposed reduction. To seven members,
[2:45:31] a full time mayor and six part time counselors. Aligns
[2:45:35] closely with the survey findings. This configuration balances the need
[2:45:38] for cost savings with the importance of effective representation, ensuring
[2:45:42] the city's government structure is well positioned to meet current
[2:45:46] and future needs. I'm happy to address any questions or
[2:45:49] comments from council. Okay. Thank you for that. And somehow,
[2:45:53] councilor Kyoki, you got bumped down to the bottom, so
[2:45:55] I'm going. To put you back at the top because
[2:45:57] you've turned your mic off. Turn it off. Go ahead.
[2:46:03] Okay, so thank you, Mayor Camping. So it's my 11th
[2:46:06] year on council. I think we talked about this for
[2:46:08] ten years, in my past ten years, about reducing counselors
[2:46:11] and counsel and. It's been a very contagious, I should
[2:46:15] say contentious subject. And I did some reflection on my
[2:46:21] time here. And my ten years. And what works best
[2:46:26] for the city, in my opinion. I think it's time
[2:46:29] to get the pie out and take eight slices and
[2:46:32] divide the city up. Eight ways. And one council for
[2:46:37] ward. And I think the reason being is, I think
[2:46:40] from a perspective, As a resident. I think when you,
[2:46:44] and not just talking about election time. There is some
[2:46:47] confusion when someone's running for a seat or council or
[2:46:52] ward. And you go campaigning or you can vote for
[2:46:57] two people. Well, you can vote for me and. You
[2:46:58] can vote for this person or you can vote for
[2:47:00] this person, and I think that. Really sometimes turns people
[2:47:04] off to voting. We kind of lead them sometimes to
[2:47:08] vote for two people, and not that that's bad. But
[2:47:12] I think. When there's people running in one ward. The
[2:47:18] public has the option to really vent those people that
[2:47:21] are running and pick the one person they feel can
[2:47:24] the best represent them in that ward. And not to
[2:47:28] exclude that if you're. Second or first. Either is more
[2:47:31] important, but. I believe it reflects that taxpayer. That's my
[2:47:37] person. Woman, men, whatever it is, who I'm going to
[2:47:40] go to. And I have a problem. Without cause and
[2:47:43] confusion. So that's my reflection, I think. Taking that pie
[2:47:49] eight ways does a couple of things. It reduces. We
[2:47:54] can talk about some cost. Savings, ensure there is some
[2:47:56] cost savings. But I think. It also. Keys. A counselor.
[2:48:04] Into focused, really focused in the award, and I think
[2:48:08] that helps. Because. You take that ownership of that ward,
[2:48:14] not that two. Don't take that ownership. But it really
[2:48:18] makes you feel like this is my ward and this
[2:48:20] is where I got to. Work for. And these are
[2:48:21] my people, of course, work for allwhelmed, so that's. My
[2:48:25] thinking behind it. I really like to see that on
[2:48:30] top of that, too. There has to be a boundary
[2:48:33] change. There's no question. I don't want. Talk about specific
[2:48:41] wars. But tonight we heard ward four their development ward
[2:48:45] for councilor green and. Demarco is huge. They're going to
[2:48:50] have a lot on their hands if we don't do
[2:48:52] something. Try to change those numbers and mix those numbers.
[2:48:56] We have a big increase. In my word, war iii,
[2:48:58] you see an increased Elson Ward one. In Dane City,
[2:49:03] so somehow. It has to be evened out, and I
[2:49:06] think that's good for the not just good for not
[2:49:09] saying that we can't do it, but I think it's
[2:49:10] good. For the resident. That resident really needs to. Feel
[2:49:15] that this is my representative. And when they go to
[2:49:17] the polls in two years, they're going to pick the
[2:49:21] best person they. Feel we have one, mayor. We have
[2:49:27] five mayors. It's one people go the election to vote
[2:49:31] for one mayor and it should be the same way
[2:49:33] with the ward system. And I just think that the
[2:49:36] two person per ward. Is pass say it's not really
[2:49:41] conducive of what we see in the growth. The city
[2:49:43] is growing eight counts as one mayor focused on what's
[2:49:47] best for the city what's best for the residents. Is
[2:49:51] my thinking, and I hope that we can. Get this
[2:49:55] done tonight. By not doing anything tonight. Not doing nothing
[2:49:58] tonight. We're not doing anything for the public. If we're
[2:50:02] just kicking this down the road again like we have
[2:50:05] been for the past many years. We're not putting the
[2:50:08] best interests of the resident. We all did surveys. I
[2:50:12] did my own survey. Everybody's out there doing surveys, talking
[2:50:15] to the public, but I think that's a good fit
[2:50:18] and it's best for the city of Welland. We're not
[2:50:20] all going to be here. Down the future or down
[2:50:23] the road. But the city has to survive with the
[2:50:28] best representative they can. So that's how I'm stinking, and
[2:50:31] I hope we can get council support. Thank you. Thank
[2:50:35] you, Councilor Demarco. Yes, thank you. And thank you. Councilor
[2:50:41] Kyokyo made some very good points there a lot today
[2:50:45] we don't touch upon. Yes. And. Just. For backtracking a
[2:50:55] little bit here. I brought up this notice of motion
[2:50:58] about eight, counselors. I think twice, and both times they
[2:51:01] were defeated. The way the city is growing right now,
[2:51:05] out of control. I agree with the eight counselors, but
[2:51:10] we need the wards to be reconstructed as councilor.
[2:51:21] Kyokyo mentioned. If we could add this to option three.
[2:51:28] I will address that in a second. And you know
[2:51:31] what the part that, what I read and I just
[2:51:35] shook my head to was about the savings. The savings.
[2:51:43] Are minimal. I could think of a few other ways
[2:51:47] that we can save taxpayers dollars. Would I need
[2:51:57] to amend this to? Add. Number three. But I like
[2:52:06] to amend it and make. It. Also. Ward reconstruction. Make
[2:52:12] eight, counselors. And eight wards. Would that be in order?
[2:52:19] It's not necessary, Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So
[2:52:21] the motion that is currently on the floor is that
[2:52:25] the council of the city of Welland choose option three.
[2:52:27] And further, that well, and city council subsequently directs staff
[2:52:31] to conduct award boundary review only if a change in
[2:52:34] the number of council members is approved. So if any
[2:52:38] of the options this. Evening are approved. We will then
[2:52:41] be proceeding with award boundary review. Okay, councilor, so it's
[2:52:47] not required. It's already in there. Yeah, but it says
[2:52:51] that we are going to look at ward. Boundaries. I'm
[2:52:59] saying. Get it all done. Like councilor Kyoku said, let's
[2:53:07] get it done now. How about we can. So I
[2:53:11] can amend option three? Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor.
[2:53:16] So just to state again the motion. That's on the
[2:53:21] floor currently. Is that well. And city council subsequently direct
[2:53:25] staff to conduct award boundary review. So that is already
[2:53:29] part of the motion for us to proceed. If option
[2:53:33] three, option two or option one is approved. Councilor. I
[2:53:39] would like to amend it. Or how do I do
[2:53:41] it to get it done? Not just. Subclaim drugstaff to
[2:53:47] conduct award boundary review. Well. No, sorry. It is. That
[2:53:57] the number of counselors. And to include. A ward boundary.
[2:54:08] Not a review. A change. Well. The review will result
[2:54:14] in a change. You have to figure out the boundaries
[2:54:18] where they should be, the populations, et cetera, so that's
[2:54:21] the review part. And then they come back with the
[2:54:23] review says that. We need to have changed the boundaries
[2:54:26] in these particular ways. Right? It's included in. So we're
[2:54:30] going to go with eight counselors and have six words.
[2:54:34] How's that going to work? No. Councilor. Madam clerk through
[2:54:38] you, Mr. Mayor. So if counsel this evening. Approves one
[2:54:41] of the options presented to them, a ward boundary review
[2:54:45] will be conducted. So if, say, option three is approved
[2:54:49] immediately, we would be looking into doing the ward boundary
[2:54:52] review. Because we're required to do that by the end
[2:54:55] of the year. So it is part of the review,
[2:54:57] and we will be doing that review, and it'll be
[2:54:59] coming back to council for consideration. Okay, councilor. And. That
[2:55:07] report to come back to council if this should pass.
[2:55:12] Like I said, I just want to make sure that
[2:55:14] if we're going to go with eight counselors. We have
[2:55:18] eight words not to review it, but to do it.
[2:55:23] That's exactly what's before you, counselor. Okay. All right, so,
[2:55:27] yeah, I'll. Leave it at that and I will. Support
[2:55:30] that option three, as long as. The review. Is completed,
[2:55:37] not just review, but actually. It only makes sense if
[2:55:42] we go away. Counselors. You got to go. Eight words
[2:55:46] anyways. Thank you for that. Councilor spec. Mr. Merrill ask
[2:55:51] you a question, seeing as you serve on regional councils.
[2:55:54] Regional council. I just want. To confirm is Niagara Falls,
[2:55:57] the only municipality within the Nagar region that has an
[2:56:00] at large system. Just because I remember the region doesn't
[2:56:04] mean I know the answer to that question, but. They
[2:56:06] might rub shoulders with a few other mayors through you,
[2:56:09] Mr. Mayor. Yes, Niagara Falls is the only one councilor.
[2:56:12] Senate falls is the outlier, and I think we've heard
[2:56:14] the previous two counselors speak. Cautiously here against us going
[2:56:20] down that road. It was mentioned, I believe, in the
[2:56:25] previous. Report that. Was removed from the agenda regarding the
[2:56:30] possibility. What I've heard here, both in response to councilor
[2:56:34] Kyokyo and Councilor DeMarco's question is the wording. Of award
[2:56:38] boundary review is implying that there will still be wards.
[2:56:44] Is that correct? Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. The
[2:56:47] wording in the motion is that. Well and city council.
[2:56:50] Subsequently direct staff to conduct award boundary review only if
[2:56:55] a change in the number of council members is approved,
[2:56:59] councilor. As I'm clarifying, I can appreciate that. I'm on
[2:57:04] board with that, but. I'm just clarifying that. The Ward
[2:57:08] boundary review. Implies that if council approves reducing the size
[2:57:13] of council, that there will still be wards once that
[2:57:17] ward boundary review is completed. Through you, Ms. Mayor. Yes,
[2:57:23] great councilor. When this originally came back as councilor. Sorry,
[2:57:28] originally came forth multiple times as councilor Demarco. Pointed out.
[2:57:32] I've been in favor of it. Then I'm still in.
[2:57:34] Favor of it. Now. I'm absolutely in favor of the
[2:57:37] ward system, which. Gives residents who are interested in politics
[2:57:43] that entry level start. I believe in Niagara falls. Every
[2:57:47] counselor should. Canvass citywide. That's a huge undertaking. Volunteers in
[2:57:52] the expense. It's the same as the counselors, same as
[2:57:55] the regional counselors, same as the mayor. That's not. Getting
[2:58:00] your foot in the door, focusing on your neighborhood, the
[2:58:04] area. That you consider home and want to represent. That's
[2:58:09] the way it should be as far as a ward
[2:58:11] counselor, taking ownership, or should I say responsibility for the
[2:58:16] area that you seek to represent and convincing your neighbors
[2:58:20] that you are their best representative. That's the way it
[2:58:22] should. Start. At this level of municipal governance, so I'm
[2:58:26] strongly in favor of keeping the ward system. I do
[2:58:31] want to say I'd be in favor of option two.
[2:58:34] With the caveat that a number of the other wards,
[2:58:38] not so much ward five, but a number of the
[2:58:39] other wards have grown exponentially and are dominating. The words
[2:58:44] that haven't either. Did not have vacant land to have
[2:58:47] not seen the development. Their numbers have only trickled higher.
[2:58:52] Where? Whereas certain awards have grown by leaps and bounds.
[2:58:58] So to say. It's not fair. Those counselors that represent
[2:59:02] those wards have far more. Constituent than others. So I
[2:59:07] think it's only essential that if we're going to reduce
[2:59:10] the number of counselors. That more wards. A redistricting needs
[2:59:16] to take place between the wards to better equalize. The
[2:59:22] voting population. As I said, I'm in favor of option
[2:59:25] two, reducing it in half, keeping the six. Wards. However,
[2:59:29] with our growth, our lopsided growth, that doesn't seem to
[2:59:32] make sense. And in speaking with a number of other
[2:59:35] counselors, They are not in favor of the six, and
[2:59:39] so I will support what's on the floor, option eight,
[2:59:43] keeping the wards. And instilling. A winner of the constituents
[2:59:51] will place their votes in favor of who will best
[2:59:54] represent them. We will see. Hopefully eight counselors come to
[2:59:58] the table. This next. Term and faithfully represent their constituents.
[3:00:04] I do have one closing question. This is obviously going
[3:00:08] to be. Assuming that a vote hopefully is successful tonight.
[3:00:13] When does, from a provincial standpoint, when does. Our ward
[3:00:17] boundary review need to be completed, voted on, and approved.
[3:00:21] In other words, we can approve. This tonight, but if
[3:00:24] there's extensive delays, whether, and I'm not implying on staff's,
[3:00:28] behalf. It could be on council's behalf with referring something
[3:00:31] back. If that gets bogged down, does that mean that
[3:00:34] this isn't. It seems to be. A two part equation.
[3:00:38] Can I have any rundown or a timeline of when
[3:00:41] that second half needs to be completed and needs to
[3:00:44] be approved by Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So
[3:00:48] if council does approve this. This evening, we'll be moving.
[3:00:52] Directly forward with the ward boundary review. The deadline for
[3:00:56] it is December 31 of 2025 to ensure it's in
[3:01:00] place for the 2026 municipal election, so we would be
[3:01:04] moving on it as soon as possible to allow for
[3:01:06] time, like you said. For it to be considered by
[3:01:09] council and any additional questions. Thank you very much. Thank
[3:01:13] you, councilor. Green. Yeah. Thank you. Through Mr. Mayor to
[3:01:18] staff. When we look at award boundary review. How do
[3:01:23] we look like? How does that work? With the population
[3:01:29] growth is award boundary review based on the population of
[3:01:34] today, is it based on the population of the next
[3:01:37] one year, two years. Five to ten. How do we
[3:01:41] look at award boundary review, Madam Clerk? Through you, Mr.
[3:01:45] Mayor. So. A few years back, I did a review
[3:01:47] into how this would be conducted so they would take
[3:01:50] the current population of the city of Wellland, and then
[3:01:53] they would look at current permits that have been put
[3:01:56] through as well as any future development as well. So
[3:01:59] I believe the time. Timeline that they would look at
[3:02:01] would be. Up until the next ten years and try
[3:02:05] to propose what they intend and where development may be.
[3:02:09] In those areas, and that would help them determine where
[3:02:11] the word boundaries would be. Councilor. Okay, thank you. Yeah.
[3:02:18] I just wanted to, that was a question I wanted
[3:02:19] to ask because I've gone through here and I'll speak
[3:02:23] to ward, for since that's the ward I represent. I
[3:02:28] was able to quickly note 6500 units. Has been approved
[3:02:35] by counsel or has come before counsel. And. That's not
[3:02:43] included. And I just did just some quick math. So
[3:02:45] 6500 and then. There's an additional 1000 plus at Hunter's
[3:02:49] point. We all know. Of the 16 story towers are
[3:02:53] proposing on Niagara Street. We've seen in the media the
[3:02:57] fairground property that has sold. There's likely pushing. To be.
[3:03:08] 8000 new units built in ward four alone. So my
[3:03:11] concern is, and for the record. I do like the
[3:03:15] idea of eight and eight. My concern is. I feel
[3:03:21] like it might be a bit premature, because what I
[3:03:23] don't want to do is, I don't want to change
[3:03:26] words for the 2026 election. And then these 8000 units
[3:03:32] come in to ward four. And ward one have some
[3:03:35] significant development. In the northwest as well. And then in
[3:03:39] the 2030 election, we say, well, we got to change
[3:03:42] this again. Because I did hear that in the 2018
[3:03:46] election, residents saying, what ward am I in? Because you
[3:03:48] just changed it a while ago. I'm a bit concerned.
[3:03:52] It's premature. And I see two camps in this. I
[3:03:56] see those that. Say less. Counselors save money. Well, option
[3:04:00] three saves $170,000, which is zero point. 3% of a
[3:04:07] tax savings. Is that going to be credited? My taxes?
[3:04:10] I don't. Think it will be? I don't think a
[3:04:13] resident will see the savings. And I see the camp
[3:04:17] of residents talking about is that the governance that we
[3:04:20] want in the city. Do we want less voices around
[3:04:23] the table? So for now, I think I'm going to
[3:04:28] support the status quo. I think this is a bit
[3:04:31] premature. With some of the development coming, but I think
[3:04:35] we do need to be looking at the wards. But
[3:04:37] I'm not sure. Are we going to? Six, counselors? Eight.
[3:04:41] Should we stay at the twelve? I'm inclined to stay
[3:04:45] as a status quo for right now. Those are my
[3:04:48] comments. Thank you, councilor. Van Bleet. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[3:04:58] This is actually the 13th time now in the last
[3:05:01] 30 years, we've discussed this. When I first brought it
[3:05:06] up. I was a counselor for Ward one, and at
[3:05:09] that time, ward one was by far the largest. And
[3:05:12] the most populous award of them all. I didn't bring
[3:05:17] it up to. Change the ward boundaries or anything. The
[3:05:22] reason I brought it up is because I've always. Thought.
[3:05:24] I still think the twelve councilors is far too many.
[3:05:30] The original thought process was, when I brought it up
[3:05:34] originally, was that we would go to two wards l
[3:05:37] three C and l three B, which makes it very
[3:05:40] easy if somebody wants to know. What word they're in.
[3:05:43] Just give me your postal code and we've got it.
[3:05:45] L, three c, l, three b. If you do it
[3:05:48] that way, there the population is. Almost split in half.
[3:05:52] And that would make it very easy for staff to
[3:05:55] do the ward boundaries as well. As far as supporting
[3:06:00] three is concerned, it kind of puts me in a
[3:06:02] quandary, because. On the one hand, I don't want to.
[3:06:07] Go to the status quo. But then again, I think
[3:06:10] that. The way that is to increase the number of
[3:06:15] wards to eight is not the right way to do
[3:06:18] it either. I think six is the right way. I
[3:06:22] know in the past I've heard some discussion on. The
[3:06:26] monetary savings is not that great. And I guess if
[3:06:30] you look at it, Whether it be option two or
[3:06:34] option three. Doesn't matter. I mean, you're talking. $150 to
[3:06:40] $250,000. And that may not sound like a lot when
[3:06:44] you have a budget of the millions of dollars that
[3:06:47] we have in our budget. But when you look at
[3:06:50] a median household income here in the city while in
[3:06:53] the $71,000. I can tell you that $150 to $250,000.
[3:06:58] Is an awful lot of money, so subsequently, we need
[3:07:02] to reduce. And like I said, it puts me in
[3:07:04] kind of a quandary. I'm not. Sure whether I should
[3:07:07] support. This eight with the possibility of losing it and
[3:07:11] going back. To the status quo, which I don't think
[3:07:15] is right. But in any case, at this point here,
[3:07:19] I think. We really need to. Look at what the
[3:07:24] numbers were. If you look at the pages here, 51%
[3:07:28] of the population. That did respond. Said five to seven
[3:07:32] was the right number to go with. And if memory
[3:07:35] serves me correct, five. To seven. Six is right in
[3:07:38] the middle of that, so I'll leave it at that.
[3:07:40] There. Haven't decided yet how I'm going to go on
[3:07:43] this here. I don't think eight is the right number.
[3:07:48] But I'll wait and see what other people have to
[3:07:50] say. Thank you. Thanks, councilor. Councilor. Richard. Thank you. Through
[3:07:55] Mayor Campion. I'm certainly analyzing all of this. We're sort
[3:08:02] of picking a number out of a hat. We've got
[3:08:04] poor Colbert. At eat with 20,000 population and you've outlined
[3:08:08] a couple of other cities. It seems to be all
[3:08:11] over the board. Why could we not have the province
[3:08:14] or the government step in with some type of criteria
[3:08:17] based on population. As I said, it's all over the
[3:08:21] board. I would like to see possibly our city being
[3:08:27] take some initiative and recommend the province or government. Looking
[3:08:32] into something that. 's standard so that we don't have
[3:08:35] all these differences. A city right next to us 20,000.
[3:08:39] And they've got eight counselors, and we're looking recommending. Six
[3:08:43] for over 55, so. We're basically picking numbers with no
[3:08:48] criteria. Through our whole budget process. A lot of the
[3:08:55] reasoning was due to our increase in population can exceed
[3:09:00] 80,000. The hiring of staff, the buying of equipment. Based
[3:09:07] on our population increasing. And now, after 45 years, over
[3:09:12] 45 years, I believe. That had twelve counselors for whatever
[3:09:17] reason. I don't know where that criteria came from. We're
[3:09:21] going to reduce it when the population. Staff. Is always
[3:09:27] insisting we're going to increase to 80,000. Now we're looking
[3:09:30] at reducing it. I don't know what the answer is.
[3:09:34] I would like to see this. Pretty consistent across the
[3:09:37] province. I would kind of like to see our city
[3:09:42] take the initiative. And possibly present something, be the leaders.
[3:09:49] Do. I recommend going with option two. No. Would I
[3:09:57] support option eight? I don't know. At this point, I'm
[3:09:59] going to. Be like my counselor, van Fleet. And I
[3:10:03] also liked the comment from councilor moot. We should always
[3:10:06] have an option remain as is, and it's not outlined
[3:10:10] on this report. I know what we can do is
[3:10:13] vote it down, but it should be outlined, should always
[3:10:16] have. A remain as is as an option. So that's
[3:10:20] my comments right now. I don't know what the answer
[3:10:23] is, but. I certainly don't like picking a number out
[3:10:25] of a hat we don't have. Any consistency or we
[3:10:28] don't have any criteria of how to select so many
[3:10:31] counselors. Per city, so I'm going to leave it at
[3:10:34] that. And see what happens with the further discussion on
[3:10:38] this. Thank you. Mr. Axiak, want to make a comment?
[3:10:45] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So maybe just for some context,
[3:10:47] based on what I just heard, I don't foresee the
[3:10:51] province necessarily giving us. Those specific guidelines of saying your
[3:10:56] population. Again, we could ask, but. I don't necessarily foresee
[3:11:01] them actually providing that to us. To that degree, what
[3:11:03] they do have for us is a minimum, which I
[3:11:05] believe is four at this particular time, as kind. Of
[3:11:08] our lowest common amount that we can go to. In
[3:11:15] 2018. 2019 was the time where Toronto, as an example,
[3:11:18] they had that imposed on them in terms of reducing
[3:11:21] their number of council members from 47 to 25. That
[3:11:26] was imposed on them from the province. And that represents
[3:11:30] one council to about 266,000 residents. Pretty significant, right? So
[3:11:37] I wouldn't necessarily suggest that we try to ask the
[3:11:40] province to do that in the event. It becomes unmanageable
[3:11:45] for council members to manage expectations of the public. Is
[3:11:50] there anything further? Thank you for that discussion, but
[3:12:00] I still feel that we need some type of criteria
[3:12:03] with. The different cities having different numbers, and we have
[3:12:08] no reasoning why we need twelve or six. And I
[3:12:13] used population as an example. Some type of formula would
[3:12:18] be wonderful. But it just doesn't make sense that Port
[3:12:21] Colbrand would have eight counselors with 20,000, and we're looking
[3:12:24] at eight counselors with potential of 80,000. It just doesn't
[3:12:29] make sense to me. But I think we should certainly
[3:12:33] pursue that further. Thank you. Thank you, councilor mcleod. Thanks,
[3:12:39] Mr. Mayor. I believe it was council's direction to have
[3:12:43] community input. Into this motion. And here we are tonight
[3:12:49] with the community feedback, although it be very lean with
[3:12:53] 304 respondents on the preferred council composition, and from that
[3:12:58] even the most popular one. We're not currently considering on
[3:13:01] the floor. So are we interested in the public's opinion
[3:13:06] or not? Doesn't mean I support the five to seven.
[3:13:11] The reality is. I don't believe the report is statistically
[3:13:15] significant. I believe 304 respondents out of 57,000. Approximately our
[3:13:23] population. It's not significant. My review of it. Suggests that
[3:13:31] we should have a sample size closer to 2304, not
[3:13:35] 304. That provides you 95% confidence with a 2% margin
[3:13:41] of error. Further to that. When we gave direction, one
[3:13:50] of the directions I gave was that dual serving counselors
[3:13:54] be considered as a way of improving representation. Further to
[3:13:59] that in September when counsel was asked for their input
[3:14:03] into this process. And what should be asked. I provide
[3:14:09] my feedback. To staff, which I'll share with you because
[3:14:14] it articulates what I feel. We should be looking at,
[3:14:17] as well as what I believe to be the facts.
[3:14:21] In this debate. So in terms of facts, no one
[3:14:24] has suggested a way of improving our decision making model.
[3:14:28] Only that reducing counselors will save money, that. Is math,
[3:14:33] not strategic representation. Improvement. Our city is growing quickly. New
[3:14:38] residents need a means of understanding. What Welland is, what
[3:14:42] makes our city function and how they get services from
[3:14:45] city hall. Fewer counselors reduces the feedback problem solving function
[3:14:50] that the public wants of its counselors. Fewer counselors either
[3:14:54] reduces the number of boards and or committees that they
[3:14:57] serve on or increases the time commitment of counselors. The
[3:15:01] result will be underrepresentation or reduced participation on boards, leading
[3:15:05] to increased staff time or less informed decision making of
[3:15:08] boards. Fewer counselors will reduce debate. Fewer counselors can lead
[3:15:14] to easier manipulation of votes based on fewer number of
[3:15:17] people that need to be swayed. Concentration of power does
[3:15:22] not necessarily result in better decision making or democracy. The
[3:15:27] reduction in counselors will increase their workload, committee responsibilities, and
[3:15:31] public appearances. That will reduce the likelihood of younger counselors
[3:15:36] running for office due to increased council workload. And commitments
[3:15:41] while juggling family and work commitments. Which in turn will
[3:15:46] reduce the diversity and points of view at the council
[3:15:49] table. The new council format will likely be limited to
[3:15:53] those of retirement age. Our goal needs to be to
[3:15:56] solicit what the public wants. Examples of what we should
[3:16:00] be asking. What do they want from their representation? Do
[3:16:05] they want it to be diverse in terms of gender,
[3:16:07] age, Ethnicity, experience, background, et cetera. They want to allow
[3:16:12] for the best caliber of residents to want to get
[3:16:16] involved. Do they want it? To provide a counselor to
[3:16:20] listen to concerns and provide a timely response. To their
[3:16:24] concerns. Do they want to maximize involvement in boards and
[3:16:29] committees? Do they want to maximize counselor engagement at community
[3:16:32] events. They want to ensure balanced decision making through vigorous
[3:16:36] debate. So they want improved regional council representation by having
[3:16:41] dual serving counselors around. Wellens council table. Is a good
[3:16:46] counsel, a cheaper council. Do wards matter? Ordiswell. And as
[3:16:50] a whole matter. That was my submission. I will leave
[3:16:56] it at this because I'm running out of time, and
[3:16:58] that is. My suggestion is you either do a referendum
[3:17:03] and ask them what they want, or. We seriously consider
[3:17:09] dual serving counselors. Meaning you have. Twelve counselors at Wellen
[3:17:15] City Council, but two of them are also a regional
[3:17:17] representative and that brings better representation for democracy and better
[3:17:22] decision making at the Wellen Council chamber as well. As
[3:17:24] the regional chamber. As we can talk about policing, we
[3:17:30] can talk about. Transit issues, we can talk about budget
[3:17:33] issues, we can talk about shelter problems and alike right
[3:17:37] here. While having all three regional counselors at our Welland
[3:17:42] table. Thank you. Pretty good timing there, councilor. Councilor moot.
[3:17:49] Thanks, Mayor Campion. I appreciate everyone's points. I tend to
[3:17:55] agree with. This the report? Is not very representative, if
[3:18:00] I'm looking at it correctly. If the clerk or whoever
[3:18:04] designed it could tell me when we see the numbers
[3:18:07] here so we have total visits? 909. We have engaged
[3:18:11] participants 266. Does that mean that that 266 people responded?
[3:18:18] To the information. That's what we're basing. Our assessment on
[3:18:23] here. Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So the engaged
[3:18:28] participants means the number of engage well end subscribers. Okay.
[3:18:35] So. I guess. What number is the right number here?
[3:18:39] When I'm looking at. 57,000 people. What percentage of 57,000
[3:18:47] people do these numbers represent? Is it 5% of the
[3:18:53] population? Is it 1% of the population? Is it less
[3:18:55] than 1% of the population. Do you have a figure
[3:18:58] on that? Can you answer that question, Madam Clerk? Three,
[3:19:04] Ms. Merrill, just look and see to confirm, because I
[3:19:07] don't believe that number was. Included on here, okay?
[3:19:17] So that number is not currently available. Right. And that's
[3:19:20] fine, I guess what I'm. Getting at is that. Even
[3:19:26] if it's 909 people or if it's 266 people. That's
[3:19:32] certainly not a representative size of what the people of
[3:19:35] Wellland actually want. I would say when looking at these
[3:19:39] numbers, Sure. Maybe 1% or less than 1%. Say, yeah,
[3:19:44] we need a change. But I look. At it the
[3:19:45] other way. 99% of the people, even if it's 95%
[3:19:49] of the people knew this was happening, potentially, and. Did
[3:19:53] not worry enough about council composition to log on and
[3:19:57] voice their opinion on this. That's. The way I view
[3:19:59] it. And I will remind council that. In our electoral
[3:20:04] system, the federal government and provincial government, they do have
[3:20:08] a metric, that councilor Richard referenced. However, it's based on
[3:20:14] population, and as population grows, they increase members of representation
[3:20:20] in our federal House of Commons and Queens park. So
[3:20:22] if your population grows by 50%, Your representation also grows
[3:20:27] with it. Municipal government, for whatever reason, is the only
[3:20:31] level of government that seems to want to decrease democracy
[3:20:35] and representation in the community. Now, we've talked a lot
[3:20:39] about, like, maybe this report. Is not the best report.
[3:20:43] I get that there are companies out there that do
[3:20:46] these reports, and they would look. At a lot of
[3:20:49] these factors. They also do. The ward composition study. So
[3:20:54] this is a question for you, Mr. Mayor, to the
[3:20:56] clerk who would be doing the ward composition review study?
[3:21:01] Would it be in house or would we be contracting
[3:21:03] that? Out to a professional agency. Madam Clerk through you,
[3:21:08] Mr. Mayor, we would more than likely be going out
[3:21:10] for a contract, a consultant to do that. From discussions
[3:21:16] that I've had with many city clerks, they find that
[3:21:19] that's the best practice to follow because they have the
[3:21:22] capabilities to look forward into, say, ten and 15 years.
[3:21:26] As well as their expertise in doing the review. Right,
[3:21:29] councilor. Thank you. So our exercise. To decrease costs at
[3:21:34] city hall are actually going to be increasing as we
[3:21:36] figure this out and then we come to the point
[3:21:39] where. What if it does come back and say, You
[3:21:43] probably shouldn't have reduced your counsel because you are growing
[3:21:46] exponentially. We should be. Filling out our city before we
[3:21:49] start deciding how to review that. Then, as councilor Green
[3:21:52] mentioned, we're going to have to go back and redo
[3:21:54] it again. So now we're? Going to have to pay
[3:21:56] for it again. And then finally. I guess my final
[3:22:00] point is. We made a big stink, this council in
[3:22:05] the past two terms that I've been here. About our
[3:22:08] council composition, and we had studies done and we spent
[3:22:12] a lot of time, a lot of effort figuring out
[3:22:15] whether we as counselors get paid appropriately, whether we get
[3:22:18] paid disproportionately and it was contentious in the community. It
[3:22:23] was contentious here at council, and now we're looking at
[3:22:26] this and we're. Going to say, hey, you know what?
[3:22:29] Let's reduce counsel, because. That's going to decrease the cost
[3:22:33] to the citizen. Okay, I understand that perspective. However, as
[3:22:37] we decrease counsel, we're going to increase our workload. So
[3:22:41] now that argument comes back, up again that we're not
[3:22:43] getting paid appropriately. So at what point does the next
[3:22:47] council say, you know what? I am doing a little
[3:22:50] bit more work we need to do. Another study on
[3:22:52] what I should be getting paid, and then we're going
[3:22:54] to go through this whole. Situation all over again because
[3:22:59] we deserve to get paid what those studies say. Councilor,
[3:23:04] if you could wrap it up here. Wow. I don't
[3:23:08] say too much often, and when I do, I guess
[3:23:09] I go off. No, I think everyone gets the point,
[3:23:12] though, that. We're just not there yet. I think that
[3:23:16] the status quo, while it may not be perfect. Democracy
[3:23:19] is not perfect. And I think we. Have a good
[3:23:24] group here, and everyone has a good voice to opine
[3:23:28] here. Thank you. Thank you, councilor Grimaldi. Thank you, Mayor
[3:23:33] Campion. Through you. I would just like to. Caution. My
[3:23:42] fellow counselors. To. Give it due diligence with your answer,
[3:23:48] with what you choose. Because. When you start talking about
[3:23:55] cutting the size of council. You're also talking about the
[3:23:59] possibility. Of less gender equality. Less feedback.
[3:24:09] Less variety of ideas. It's a minimal cost at best.
[3:24:17] And. The public survey. I did take note of it,
[3:24:24] but I also spoke with people in the public. Because.
[3:24:29] Sometimes people want to tell you to your face what
[3:24:32] they think. They want to know what you think? So
[3:24:36] I take more than just the survey. As to. My
[3:24:43] basis for this decision, but I can tell you, when
[3:24:47] I got on council in 2003, I was the only
[3:24:51] woman. When I got back on council, I was the
[3:24:55] only woman. It was not until. 2014. When another counselor,
[3:25:02] another female counselor got uncounsel. And I'll tell you, I
[3:25:07] think that. We've had a wide variety of. Thoughts and
[3:25:14] discussions and came to a lot of good decisions. The
[3:25:19] fact that Wellan is growing so expeditiously. The fact that.
[3:25:27] Now. You shouldn't be looking at cutting your counsel. With.
[3:25:35] All the building that is going on here. You really
[3:25:38] need to think about a lot before you just cut
[3:25:41] and think you're cutting. And you tell the public that
[3:25:44] you're saving the money. Because they're not going to see
[3:25:48] it on their tax bill. It's very minimal. So please,
[3:25:54] I caution you to. Think very thoroughly before you vote.
[3:26:01] To pass one of these options. I myself will not
[3:26:04] be in favor of any option except for the status
[3:26:07] quo. Thank you, mayor. Campion. Thank you, councilor. Councilor Lee.
[3:26:14] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would have said in my
[3:26:17] first year that this council needed to be reduced because
[3:26:20] we always were curfewed. So. I would have never have
[3:26:25] thought, going in a second year, that it would get
[3:26:27] more streamlined and more manageable. But I think that was
[3:26:31] with input to the mayor and the clerk and the
[3:26:34] CaO. That we strategized to get the meetings to be
[3:26:39] run in. I want to say a proper manner. The
[3:26:44] engage. Well and survey. I would think you might as
[3:26:49] well just throw it out with five 1000th of a
[3:26:53] percent. Or whatever it is. There's very little engagement, and
[3:26:59] I'm sure that comes back around to 25%. Voter turnout.
[3:27:05] Even if you take it into effect that. There is
[3:27:10] 50% or 51% looking at. Six counselors. There's 49% saying
[3:27:16] they want more than six. So looking at it that
[3:27:21] way. I could see us using less counselors, maybe to
[3:27:26] streamline meetings more than what we're. Doing right now. But
[3:27:30] regardless of all that, if there is not award boundary
[3:27:33] review, it doesn't. Make any sense to change the number
[3:27:37] of counselors. And if you're going to do award boundary
[3:27:41] review when you change counselors, then we definitely should have
[3:27:44] award boundary review when we have status quo. Because if
[3:27:48] Ward three has 14,000 voters and Ward six has seven,
[3:27:54] Then we need to even it out a little bit.
[3:27:56] Maybe we have to shift the lines a. Little bit,
[3:27:58] but we also have to look at where all the
[3:27:59] building and the growth is. I'm okay with six wards
[3:28:03] and twelve counselors, if we can streamline it, because I
[3:28:06] do not think. The residents are going to see any
[3:28:09] savings at all. So if there is a status quo.
[3:28:13] Motion. Or that's where we're heading. Then I think we
[3:28:16] should still do award. Boundary review. I like having two
[3:28:21] counselors. Per ward for backup. For different opinions, helping residents
[3:28:28] differently or the same working together. Then as a council
[3:28:32] as a whole, I like to see that we all
[3:28:34] stay on the same. Page and work together. So I
[3:28:38] don't know where we're going. If it's eight for eight.
[3:28:42] Or twelve or six. But I think the population, whether
[3:28:46] it be by postal code or by the number in
[3:28:49] the area, I think we need to look either at
[3:28:53] that. And I would never want an at large system,
[3:28:56] but if we could. Look at. If we're going to
[3:28:59] keep six, that's great. If we have to. Do a
[3:29:01] ward boundary review, and we're thinking of a way to
[3:29:04] fix it so that a certain area or geographical area.
[3:29:09] That can accommodate a certain amount and whether. As councilor
[3:29:14] McLeod said, we need to put it on to listen
[3:29:16] to the residents at the 2026 election. It's input. But
[3:29:22] right now, without award boundary review, which I know will
[3:29:25] take, Probably a year by a consultant. At least that's
[3:29:29] what I've been told by. A consultant. If we want
[3:29:33] a ward, boundary review and status quo, then we should
[3:29:36] get. One started now. If we're keeping status quo, then.
[3:29:41] We have more time to do it because. We will
[3:29:44] know where the review or the boundaries need to shift.
[3:29:48] I would assume maybe to the clerk if we kept
[3:29:51] status quo. Do we still have to have award boundary
[3:29:55] review if we want to shift the boundaries for the
[3:29:57] 2026 election. Madam clerk. Through you, mr. Mayor. So if
[3:30:04] the vote is to remain status quo, the motion would
[3:30:08] not include award boundary review, but a member of council
[3:30:11] can put forward a notice of motion for us to
[3:30:13] proceed to do that. Councilor through Mr. Mayor, what would
[3:30:17] be the deadline for the 2026 election is what I
[3:30:19] meant. The deadline for the election would be December 31,
[3:30:24] 2025. Councilor, even just for the review. Yes. Okay. Thank
[3:30:30] you. That is all. Thank you, Councilor falkins. Thank you,
[3:30:35] Mr. Mayor. Through you to the clerk. Could we not
[3:30:39] have split these two motions? And we can amend the
[3:30:44] second one. If the voter status quo. Madam clerk
[3:30:53] through you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, they can do. The members
[3:30:56] of council can do that. Okay. I'm going to be
[3:30:58] done tonight. Thank you, but. I'd like to thank council
[3:31:03] or moot and councilor McCloud for their comments. If you
[3:31:08] just go down to math. Right now we have approximately
[3:31:11] 4700. People to represent per counselor. If we go to
[3:31:16] eight counselors, it's going to go. To 6950% increase. That's
[3:31:23] a status I have a point of order. I just.
[3:31:25] Have to find out what that is. Just a second.
[3:31:29] Councilor Kyokyo, your point of order? Thanks, Kathy. The councilor
[3:31:32] referred to that we. Have an average. Of so many.
[3:31:38] That's not a point of order. Well, point of privilege,
[3:31:40] then. Well, it's not. Point of privilege either, because she
[3:31:42] hasn't said anything wrong. I'm just saying, if somebody's talking
[3:31:46] about. I think what you're trying to do is debate
[3:31:48] her comment, which is not appropriate at this point, counsel.
[3:31:51] Counselor. Focus. Go ahead. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm
[3:32:01] just dividing number of people by number of counselors. If
[3:32:04] we go to 80,000, by 2030, which the next term.
[3:32:09] Will be covering. That's 10,000. Residents, per counselor. As councilor
[3:32:15] Moot said. Your job is increased by 50%. By 100%.
[3:32:21] Eventually, counselor is going to come back and. They're going
[3:32:23] to want to compensate it for it, but regardless of
[3:32:27] the money for myself, it's a representation as we see
[3:32:31] the new people coming in. They need more. Of the
[3:32:35] resources from the counselors. We have a new subdivision in
[3:32:39] Dean City, and I canvassed for the family day, and
[3:32:44] it took me two days to go through 80 homes.
[3:32:47] They had questions. Both the taxes, but what resources? What
[3:32:53] can they do in well end? And they have this
[3:32:55] question and that question. And it takes more of our
[3:32:58] time. To connect with these people, and that's our job.
[3:33:03] The more residents we have, the new homes, there's more
[3:33:06] issues, there's problems with. The development. There's problems with the
[3:33:10] building. There's problems with sewers flooding. And that is what
[3:33:15] we do. We try to be that goal between staff
[3:33:20] and the residents. Now for 2026. We increased. By $1.2
[3:33:30] million additional staff, which is two and a half percent
[3:33:34] increase. Why? Because we're growing. And again, the city is
[3:33:43] growing, and we now want to reduce the counselors. Some
[3:33:48] of the frontline connection. There. And for myself, I don't
[3:33:53] want to reduce. That representation. I want to be that
[3:33:59] voice for the people. And I believe two counselors per
[3:34:03] ward. Does it adequately. I do agree with the boundary
[3:34:10] change because. There's a lot of words that are growing.
[3:34:15] Ward six as well. And we do need to do
[3:34:17] that. I think that should be done tonight to get
[3:34:19] a head start on it, so. I'm going to vote
[3:34:22] for none of these options. And I'm going to ask
[3:34:26] counsel to seriously consider keeping the status quo. Looking at
[3:34:30] it. In 2030. When some of this growth has settled
[3:34:35] down, we've reached our targets, and then we can take
[3:34:38] a look at what's happening. Thank you. Thank you, councilor.
[3:34:43] Councilor van Leed, I think. I was just going to
[3:34:48] tell you that, actually. Councilor van bleed. Thank you very
[3:34:56] much. Okay. I heard a comment here that the Ontario
[3:35:00] government should set standards. I just want to remind. This
[3:35:05] council and mayor Campions, probably the only one that remembers
[3:35:08] it with Mike Harris, premier Mike Harris. We missed the
[3:35:12] bullet by a Harris breath. There we'd have been the
[3:35:14] city of Niagara. We were that close at that time.
[3:35:19] He did a change in Ottawa, he did a change
[3:35:21] in Windsor, he did a change in Toronto. And we
[3:35:24] just barely missed the bullet. Secondly, in 2000, in the
[3:35:28] year 2000, there actually was a plebiscite here in the
[3:35:32] city. And asked whether we wanted to remain as a
[3:35:36] city or go to regional. Go to a regional. Government.
[3:35:39] Go to the city of Niagara and I'll tell you.
[3:35:42] I think we missed it. By about 2%. I think
[3:35:45] it was 48 to 52. That they wanted to stay
[3:35:50] as a city, so it was that close, so. Their
[3:35:54] residents are pretty up on it, but I would be
[3:35:57] very cautious about going to the Ontario government, I would
[3:35:59] not. Want Mr. Ford to make this decision. I think
[3:36:04] we should make it right here in this council. Chambers.
[3:36:06] Let it go with that. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Demarco.
[3:36:10] This is your second time and. You have 32 seconds
[3:36:15] left. Well, you know what? The way I spoke on
[3:36:20] this is the matter of especially what I heard. From
[3:36:25] the initial report. Or when the notice of motion or
[3:36:30] whatever it was. Six counselors. That was. Absolutely no. That
[3:36:37] and now I hear everyone, a good number of counselors
[3:36:41] speaking. To status quo. One way or the other. Let's
[3:36:47] just make up our mind here. And like I said,
[3:36:50] we are growing. But I'm just trying to avoid. The
[3:36:55] six counselors. That's what my main. Concern was. Thank you.
[3:37:02] Thanks. Councilor. Councilor Setaram. Thank you, sir. Mr. Mayor. I
[3:37:08] prefer one person per ward. I kind of grown up
[3:37:12] on that system, but also in a system where your
[3:37:15] regional counselor. Is also more connected to your city councilor.
[3:37:21] Which I know. We're waiting on that regional governance review.
[3:37:25] Has caused us. To go into conversations. And invest resources
[3:37:32] that really belong at the regional level. And then in
[3:37:36] terms of just. What the residents think when they're out
[3:37:40] there. They think it really relies on at our level,
[3:37:43] at the municipal level. So that's also interesting in terms
[3:37:46] of how we come to our composition. I won't go
[3:37:49] too much into the numbers. I think many of the
[3:37:52] other counselors have already spoken about the six eight didn't.
[3:37:56] Hear ten. But those various numbers, but. I do think
[3:38:02] that regardless, a boundary of you is done. I know
[3:38:04] that. It takes time, but it's even just about running.
[3:38:09] In the next election in 2026. When I looked at
[3:38:12] those numbers in Iran, my ward, Ward three, which was
[3:38:16] like one of the largest awards at that time had,
[3:38:18] like, in one instance, I think it was more than
[3:38:20] 3000 votes. Residents over another ward, which that actually adds
[3:38:26] for additional costs depending on if you decide to run
[3:38:29] in the ward that you live in. And if your
[3:38:32] war. Ward happens to have that many more residents than
[3:38:34] others, so there's also certainly an equity component to the
[3:38:39] council work and the growth that we're hearing, and then
[3:38:43] also consideration. For things like when you have a downtown,
[3:38:46] you generally have. More things that are going on, more
[3:38:50] work that's involved, and more expectations, which I knew. When
[3:38:54] I ran, and so I appreciate that, but I'm just
[3:38:56] giving that as a consideration. For when those things are
[3:38:58] reviewed, so I wanted to just. Share a few thoughts
[3:39:02] on that. I know I provided previous thoughts when this
[3:39:05] conversation came to council. In 2024, so I would like
[3:39:09] to. See a boundary review. That includes, like we talked
[3:39:15] about, the growth projections and then also just there's this
[3:39:19] component. Too around. What are the expectations from the public?
[3:39:23] In terms of their counselors. And. It really vastly differs
[3:39:28] because people don't really see a job description. So you'll
[3:39:31] hear people expect that you're coming to their events. Sometimes
[3:39:36] they don't realize that there's policy work involved. That don't
[3:39:40] necessarily look and see how much work was behind the
[3:39:43] scenes when you're reviewing all these documents, all the committees
[3:39:46] that people sit on as well to advance the city.
[3:39:49] So I'm not saying that that necessarily reflects on the
[3:39:52] numbers, but I'm just. Saying that that is part of
[3:39:54] the conversation in terms of the engagement that we want
[3:39:57] and the connection between all the various levels of. Government.
[3:40:02] Within the region, within the province, across Canada, and then
[3:40:04] also here in terms of when we look at. A
[3:40:09] collective perspective on how we're moving well and forward, but
[3:40:12] also the Niagara region, so just leave my thoughts at
[3:40:15] that. Thank you. Thanks. Councilor Richard for a second time.
[3:40:23] And I believe you have 1 minute and 35 seconds
[3:40:25] left. Thank you, Mayor Campion. I think I can do
[3:40:28] that. After reviewing some of the old reports, I just
[3:40:35] want to make a comment that our tax paying residents
[3:40:39] can never be overrepresented, and it was estated as such
[3:40:42] in a prior report. No further comments. I'll be supporting
[3:40:45] the status quo. Thank you. All right. Thank you. We
[3:40:51] exhausted the speakers list here, so I will go to
[3:40:54] the clerk. Right. So the clerk is going to split
[3:40:58] the vote. Counselor, before I call the question. Yeah. Okay,
[3:41:04] so the clerk will split the vote, and so I'll
[3:41:08] go to the clerk. To go ahead and do that.
[3:41:12] According to both been requested, which I would like to
[3:41:15] make a comment since that's been requested. I understand everyone's
[3:41:21] position on this as counselors. As a mayor is a
[3:41:25] group of people that are leading this community, and there's
[3:41:27] a balancing act between representation. And. Basically equity within the
[3:41:36] system so that it works smoothly and gets the job
[3:41:40] done. But also here's what the people have to say
[3:41:43] and represents that at the table. There's no question when
[3:41:48] we look at the numbers that we are over represent,
[3:41:50] Represented in the city of Welling. And. That's not news.
[3:41:57] But depending on who you're comparing it to, you look
[3:41:59] at Ms. Palley, Lake Hamilton or Toronto or much larger
[3:42:03] municipalities. They have far, far more people that they're representing.
[3:42:08] So I think we need to balance that out, and
[3:42:09] I think it's time to make an adjustment. My preference,
[3:42:14] honestly, would be number two, but I will support number
[3:42:17] three. Because it's a step in the right direction. I
[3:42:21] also want to remind you. Talking about going to the
[3:42:25] province. Something we have to be aware of. And Councilor
[3:42:28] van Ville mentioned part of this, but we are still
[3:42:32] under governance review. This is not over yet. They have
[3:42:35] not taken that off the table. They have had the
[3:42:37] meetings. And one of the things that they were looking
[3:42:40] at very early on from the provincial government is that
[3:42:44] in general terms, all of Niagara is overrepresented. And that's
[3:42:50] partially due to the region and the composition and number
[3:42:53] of regional counselors. And when councilor Richard says they should
[3:42:57] come back with a number based on population, That's a
[3:43:01] very dangerous move, because if they start comparing it across
[3:43:05] the board based on the size of municipalities. Sure, go
[3:43:10] ahead. I actually use that as an example, not to
[3:43:15] do that. Oh, no, I understand that. I'm. Just saying
[3:43:19] that. If we did have that. And certainly, if they
[3:43:25] do continue on with. The governance review in Niagara. Part
[3:43:32] of the thought process behind that is to amalgamate which
[3:43:34] would end result in a reduction of counselors. There's no
[3:43:38] question about it. As the amalgamate. Well. Porter, Colburn and
[3:43:45] Pellum together, you're not going to end up with the
[3:43:48] same. Number of councils representing it. So reluctantly, I would
[3:43:53] support the reduction. At the. Option number three, which is
[3:43:57] on the floor right now. Because it shows the province,
[3:44:01] number one, that we are listening to what they're telling
[3:44:04] us. What they're expecting us to. Happen down in the
[3:44:07] region. I have a feeling they may not force that
[3:44:11] yet, but. When we ask. And we do ask. I
[3:44:15] do ask. How's that coming along? What are you doing?
[3:44:19] They say, well, we hope to make some. Sort of
[3:44:22] comments very, very soon. So again, I believe in equal
[3:44:27] representation, and I think that this is a good balance
[3:44:31] by adding. A couple of words and reducing the number
[3:44:35] of counselors. So those are my comments, and I'll go
[3:44:38] back to the clerk to execute the vote. In two
[3:44:41] parts. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So the first vote is
[3:44:45] that the council of the City of Wellland. Choose option
[3:44:48] three. So voting is open. Okay,
[3:44:58] so that fails. And I see that. I think possibly
[3:45:02] in anticipation of that happening comes from. Cloud has put
[3:45:05] his hand up. Councilor mcleod. Your thing
[3:45:15] was up there. Sorry. Okay, so go to the second
[3:45:18] part for the vote. Go for the recorded vote. So
[3:45:24] for the recorded vote, Councilor Kyokio was in favor. Councilor
[3:45:28] Demarco. Was opposed. Councilor Falcons was opposed. Councilor Green was
[3:45:31] opposed. Councilor Germaldi. Was opposed. Councilor Lee was opposed. Councilor
[3:45:36] McLeod was opposed. Councilor moot was opposed. Councilor Richard was
[3:45:39] opposed. Councilor ceteram was opposed. Councilor Speck was in. Favor,
[3:45:43] councilor van bl. Bleet was opposed. Mayor campaign was in
[3:45:45] favor. The motion is lost. Okay, so sorry about that.
[3:45:50] Now we will go to the second part of that
[3:45:52] motion, Madam clerk. Yes. So the second part of the
[3:45:55] motion is that the council of the city of Wellin.
[3:45:57] Subsequently direct staff to conduct a ward boundary review. Only
[3:46:02] if a change in the number of council members is
[3:46:04] approved, the voting is open.
[3:46:20] So what has occurred here is that there was a
[3:46:22] request to separate the vote, which we have. Done. So
[3:46:27] now. We are voting on that. So if you don't
[3:46:29] like the wording of it, you would have to say
[3:46:32] no. And then you could bring back a motion to,
[3:46:35] at some point, probably. As a notice of motion to
[3:46:38] come back and say, we just want to do a
[3:46:41] review and that could be then associated to whatever motion
[3:46:44] comes forward from this, that includes it that is approved.
[3:46:46] By council mad. Madam Clerk. That's kind of sum it
[3:46:50] up through you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, that's correct. Councilor McLeod,
[3:46:54] you have a point of order with regards to what
[3:46:55] I just said? I was actually going to amend the
[3:46:59] motion. I think it's too late for that, because we've
[3:47:05] already gone through the process. Of debating it, and now
[3:47:08] we're in the voting process. Because we've separated them doesn't
[3:47:12] mean that that's still up for debate. Because it's now
[3:47:16] on the floor. And it was on the floor initially.
[3:47:20] Just. We're voting on them separately, madam clerk, unless. I
[3:47:23] could be wrong, Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. No,
[3:47:25] that's correct. Okay. So we can deal with this one,
[3:47:30] because I know what the issue is, but if you
[3:47:33] vote. This down, then you have the opportunity to come
[3:47:36] back with something else. Correct. Okay, councilor spec. Did. You're
[3:47:39] talking to your friends there, but did you have something
[3:47:42] to say to the rest of us. I did, Mr.
[3:47:46] Mayor, and I thought councilor Falcons was going to say
[3:47:49] it, if I recall. Correctly, counselor Falcons asked. Even if
[3:47:53] we don't reduce the number of counselors. She would like
[3:47:58] to see a boundary review, and I believe that that
[3:48:03] would say, well, yes, the term split them. I totally
[3:48:06] understand what you're saying, that splitting them is sort of
[3:48:09] neat. And tidy. However. Part B on its own. Is
[3:48:14] kind of contradictory because we've already defeated the first section.
[3:48:18] I understand the vast majority. Potentially unanimous, will vote to
[3:48:23] support a boundary review. But the line that says only
[3:48:28] if we reduce the size of council. Is contradictory at
[3:48:32] this point. I think the problem with the language in
[3:48:35] it, but I thought that. Councilor falcons. Clearly. Conveyed that
[3:48:41] thought, and that's what I thought she was going to
[3:48:43] speak to, and I see her name there now. So
[3:48:45] I'm going to go to councilor Fulkins. In a second
[3:48:46] here. But we all saw it there, so it really
[3:48:50] becomes redundant. Right now. However, if you do approve that,
[3:48:57] if you do change the number of counselors, then. That
[3:49:00] would automatically kick in if we go back and we're
[3:49:03] going to say status quo. Then another motion would come
[3:49:07] forward saying to do a boundary review. And I think
[3:49:11] that's really how it was explained to councilor Folkins. But
[3:49:13] maybe. We didn't get that through property. So, Councilor falcons,
[3:49:16] you have a point of order. Something. Well, yes. Thank
[3:49:20] you, Mr. Mayor. It's really hard remotely trying to get
[3:49:23] in there to say that you want to amend it.
[3:49:27] Because we went right away. To split the vote. We
[3:49:32] have a chance to do it. But I'm going to
[3:49:36] ask because. It's remote, and at the time, it's not
[3:49:40] very good. Here to get this. In. Can I amend
[3:49:43] that second section? No, because we already had full discussion.
[3:49:47] The amendment should have happened before. We called the vote
[3:49:49] on the entire thing. All we've done is just separated.
[3:49:53] You can vote on one one way and on the
[3:49:55] other way. It's not amendable right now, councilor. You called
[3:49:59] the vote on ox for the first section, and I'm
[3:50:02] trying to get in. For the second one, and he
[3:50:04] can't because it's remote. But, council, my point. Is, it
[3:50:06] should have been amended prior to it being put to
[3:50:10] a vote. So just because it's been voted on separately.
[3:50:12] We moved both of those items to the floor to
[3:50:16] vote on. But all we did was vote on them
[3:50:18] separately, so. You can't amend it. The amendment time is
[3:50:21] gone. My best suggestion is instead of us talking about
[3:50:24] this for 20 minutes, you have an opportunity to. Come
[3:50:28] back with the motion to just simply say, review the
[3:50:32] word boundaries and don't shake. Your head. It's correct. This
[3:50:35] is how the process works, counselor. So we're going. To
[3:50:38] have to proceed with this vote. You can vote it
[3:50:41] down, which is really. Not essential because you can bring
[3:50:44] it back. Even if we change the number of counselors,
[3:50:47] it still can be brought back to review the boundaries.
[3:50:50] I know this sounds like a lot of work. And
[3:50:53] complicated, but it's really not. And I've given you a
[3:50:56] very simple solution. To the whole thing. Councilor spec, you
[3:51:00] still have wanted to say something, and I think we
[3:51:02] should stop dealing with. The process here and get on
[3:51:05] with getting this thing done. No. Very concisely voting yes.
[3:51:09] Or no? What does that mean? Simply, it's very, again,
[3:51:14] straightforward. If you vote yes, it's only going to happen.
[3:51:19] If you change the number of counselors. But secondary to
[3:51:21] that, which is it doesn't. Stop you from coming back
[3:51:24] from another motion afterwards to say that no matter what
[3:51:28] happens, We're doing word review, so it's not off the
[3:51:33] table, it's just. Simply that you have to come back
[3:51:35] with another motion. From what I've heard, if you vote
[3:51:37] no, it's dead. And if you vote yes, it's only
[3:51:41] if it's. Dead too. Because we've already voted not to
[3:51:44] reduce the number. It's dead. Either. Which is why I
[3:51:47] asked the question of five o. Yes. What happens if
[3:51:49] I vote? No. What happens? Essentially the same thing. It's
[3:51:53] all dead, so I don't know. Why? I don't know
[3:51:55] why we're even voting, but anyway. Because it's been asked
[3:51:58] to be separated and we have to vote on it
[3:52:00] that's. Why we're voting on it. I think what you're
[3:52:02] not taking into account is the spirit of the counselors.
[3:52:06] Okay, counselors, it doesn't matter. This is where we're at,
[3:52:08] right? This is. How it works. We're at here. I'm
[3:52:10] telling you, we're talking a lot about nothing because it
[3:52:13] really does not change the outcome at the very end.
[3:52:15] And it's. Not my job to make. Things easier for
[3:52:19] you by not following the rules. My job is to
[3:52:22] follow the rules. So, madam. Clerk, could you take us
[3:52:24] through that second part? Through you, Mr. Mayor. So the
[3:52:28] second part is that the well and city council subsequently
[3:52:31] direct staff. To conduct award boundary review only if a
[3:52:34] change in the number of council members is approved voting.
[3:52:36] Is open.
[3:52:54] Okay, well, that motion fails, and the clerk has indicated
[3:52:58] that that was included as part of the recorded vote.
[3:53:02] So for the recorded vote, Councilor Kyokyo is in favor.
[3:53:05] Councilor Demarco didn't vote. Councilor Falkins was opposed. Councilor Green
[3:53:10] was opposed. Councilor Grimaldi was opposed. Councilor Lee was opposed.
[3:53:16] Councilor McLeod was opposed. Councilor Moot was opposed. Councilor Richard
[3:53:19] was opposed. Counselor Setaram was opposed. Councilor spec didn't vote.
[3:53:24] Councilor van Bleet was opposed. Mayor Campion was opposed. The
[3:53:27] motion is lost. Okay. I have Councilor Demarco. Yes. With
[3:53:34] a point. Order. Mr. Mayor, I did vote. Okay. Could
[3:53:39] you tell us what your vote was? And I can
[3:53:42] see what councilor. Falkins is getting at it. Happens all
[3:53:46] the time with me. So, councilor, your point? Of order
[3:53:49] is you wanted to indicate that you had voted. In?
[3:53:53] Yes, I did. In favor or opposed? Which one? In
[3:53:59] opposition. Okay. Thank you, councilor. So I'm going to go
[3:54:02] back to the clerk for a second here. Okay. I
[3:54:11] just wanted to see what the proper process for this
[3:54:14] was. And I agree with the clerk. So it's now
[3:54:22] open for another counselor to bring forward another option to
[3:54:27] insert in that. First part of that motion, which could
[3:54:31] include status quo or one of the other two options
[3:54:34] that are available. Is there a counselor who wishes to
[3:54:37] do that? So it looks like Councilor green. Councilor Green.
[3:54:43] Yeah. Thank you. I would. Move status quo and award
[3:54:48] boundary review. Okay. And then you could amend that. Not
[3:54:52] even amend it, but also include with that that an
[3:54:54] award boundary review take place. Yeah. Thank you. I said
[3:54:59] status quo and ward boundary review. Okay, so is there
[3:55:04] a second or for that? Yeah. Councilors can split. Folks,
[3:55:11] if there are two options, you certainly can, but we
[3:55:14] need to know. If there's a second or before we
[3:55:15] go that far. Is there second or for that? Councilor
[3:55:18] Lee is seconding that. I don't think that there's a
[3:55:22] requirement for a whole bunch of discussion on this. I
[3:55:24] think we've discussed everything. Extremely. Deeply.
[3:55:34] I don't know if somebody want to comment this, I
[3:55:36] certainly will allow you to do so. But it might
[3:55:38] be best just to go to a vote. But, councilor,
[3:55:41] you have your. Hand up. Yeah. So can we split
[3:55:43] it? Because I'm not in favor of twelve council. I
[3:55:45] am in favor of the boundary review. Yeah, I already
[3:55:47] indicate yes. It's going to be split. Okay. So, madam
[3:55:52] clerk, you ready to go? Okay, so we are splitting
[3:56:02] it with. The boundary review as part of it. The
[3:56:07] second part, Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor. So the
[3:56:10] first motion is that the council of the city of
[3:56:13] Wellen remains status quo as far as. The number of
[3:56:16] counselors. So that's the first one. And voting is open.
[3:56:20] Recorded vote has been requested.
[3:56:33] Someone has not voted. We'll find out. Voting in a
[3:56:40] recorded vote.
[3:56:51] So for the recorded vote, Councilor Kyokyo was opposed. Councilor
[3:56:56] Demarco was. In favor. Councilor Fulkins was in favor. Councilor
[3:56:58] Green is in favor. Councilor. Gormaldi is in favor. Councilor
[3:57:01] Lee is in favor. Councilor McLeod is in favor. Councilor
[3:57:03] Moot is in favor. Councilor Richard is in favor. Councilor
[3:57:07] Sederam. Is in favor. Councilor spec is opposed. Council. Van
[3:57:12] Vleette did not vote. The motion carries. Okay. So that
[3:57:19] is carried. And now we'll have the clerk go on
[3:57:22] to the second portion. So the second portion is that
[3:57:26] the council of the City of Wellan conducts award boundary
[3:57:29] review. And voting is open. Sorry, councilor, you can't
[3:57:38] leave the votes been called.
[3:57:50] So for the recorded vote, To conduct award boundary review.
[3:57:55] Councilor Kyokyo was in favor. Councilor Demarco. Was in favor.
[3:57:58] Councilor Falkins was in favor. Councilor Green is in favor.
[3:58:01] Councilor. Grimaldi is in favor. Councilor Lee is in favor.
[3:58:04] Councilor McLeod is in favor. Councilor Moot is in favor.
[3:58:06] Councilor Richard is in favor. Councilor Sarah is in favor.
[3:58:10] Councilor spec is in favor. Council van Lee didn't vote.
[3:58:13] Mayor camping is in favor. The motion carries. Okay. So.
[3:58:21] We are now in a position to carry on. All
[3:58:26] right. So we will carry on. And I will now
[3:58:33] go to the clerk for bylaws, madam. Clerk. Through you,
[3:58:39] Mr. Mayors. So pulled by councilor spec bylaw 7.8. Councilor
[3:58:48] spec you pulled by law 7.8. Would you like to
[3:58:51] move that? For the efficiency of time. Yes. Second. Seconded
[3:58:59] by councilor Moot. Councilor spec did you want to speak
[3:59:02] to that? Could I have staff. Answer. What exactly? Is
[3:59:08] amended within the bylaw. Three merry campus. This is to
[3:59:12] add additional staff that have been. Recently hired in the
[3:59:18] building division. Councilor. And these are all filling, preexisting positions.
[3:59:27] Mr. Monday through Mayor Campion. Yes, councilor. Thank you. Okay,
[3:59:32] go to the clerk to vote for the first, second
[3:59:34] and third reading of bylaw. Identified in 7.8 bylaw number
[3:59:39] 2021 40. Voting is open.
[3:59:50] Okay, motions carried, and we will now move on. To.
[3:59:59] Sorry, madam clerk. Other ones through you, Mr. Mayor. So
[4:00:04] due to staff reports being pulled by law 7.17.2 and
[4:00:08] 7.3 need to be approved. Great. Thank you. So I'm
[4:00:11] looking for mover and segment with the first, second and
[4:00:13] third reading of those bylaws. It's moved by councilor van
[4:00:16] Leeton. Seconded by councilor Richard. Madam Clerk, if you take
[4:00:19] us through the vote. Voting is open.
[4:00:34] That motion is carried. Okay, so I think we're now
[4:00:39] in a position to move on to section 8.1. So,
[4:00:48] councilor, matters discussed with staff for reporting purposes. And this
[4:00:51] is just to inform the public. That you have contacted
[4:00:54] staff on a particular item and reporting back what the
[4:00:57] answer was, it's? Not for debate or discussion. Just the
[4:01:02] passing on of information again, Councilor Van Bleet. Thank you,
[4:01:06] Mr. Mayor. I have one issue. And I have discussed
[4:01:09] it with staff. In fact, I went to our CIO
[4:01:12] with it. It was over a residential water bill. And
[4:01:16] at the end of the day, all I want to
[4:01:18] do is, I just want to publicly. Thank all of
[4:01:21] staff for the work that they did on this here.
[4:01:23] It resolved the issue. To the satisfaction of the resident.
[4:01:29] And quite frankly, it saved the resident a lot of
[4:01:31] money. Probably saved them $4,000. A year by our staff
[4:01:35] stepping into it and helping out. So I just want
[4:01:37] to publicly thank them. I think they did a great
[4:01:39] job. And too many times. We hear criticism of staff
[4:01:45] that they didn't do it. Well, this time they did
[4:01:47] it. And they did it right. And thank you very
[4:01:49] much. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Sedaram. Thank you, sir. Ms.
[4:01:54] Mayor, just reporting that. Staff are working on safety messaging
[4:02:00] for the coil creek and a retention pond. Another retention
[4:02:04] pond. As there were residents who called in with concerns
[4:02:08] about children who were supervised and unsupervised. Playing on the
[4:02:14] pond, which is a significant safety concern, and that is
[4:02:19] not the purpose it's. Not a recreational pawn. So just
[4:02:21] acknowledging that that has been received by staff and that
[4:02:24] they're working on safety messaging that can be shared to
[4:02:28] help raise awareness. Thank you. Thanks, councilor. Now moving on
[4:02:33] to notice motion. Previously submitted for discussion and Councilor DeMarco,
[4:02:39] you have one listed here if you'd. Like to move
[4:02:43] it, please. Read it and we'll see if there's a
[4:02:45] second. Councilor? Yes, thank you.
[4:02:56] In regard to this notice of motion that has been
[4:02:59] on the last three agendas or whatever. It's been. I
[4:03:04] have right here an email. From dated November 21. To
[4:03:12] the clerk. That clearly states, please remove. The notice of
[4:03:19] motion from the agenda. Okay. When I submitted the agenda
[4:03:26] or the item. First off, I was told that. I
[4:03:33] had to. That's correct. Change it. Move something. And I
[4:03:38] don't know what happened, but I got about three emails.
[4:03:41] Okay, understood. Understood. Thank you. So move on to Councilor
[4:03:47] Setaram. I guess we won't move on to councilor said,
[4:03:52] or am.
[4:04:11] I catch your breath there and I'll just repeat. So
[4:04:14] you have noticed motion on the floor or on the
[4:04:17] agenda. If you wish to move it, please read it
[4:04:19] and we'll see if there's a second or for that.
[4:04:28] Thank you. It's a little bit long, so just bear
[4:04:33] with me. Whereas municipalities face growing infrastructure needs, including roads,
[4:04:40] bridges, public transit, water systems and other critical services, which
[4:04:44] are essential to community well being and economic development. And
[4:04:48] whereas the current sources of municipal revenue, including property taxes
[4:04:52] and user fees are insufficient. To meet these increasing demands
[4:04:57] for infrastructure investment. And whereas the province of Ontario currently
[4:05:01] collects the land transfer tax on property transactions. In municipalities
[4:05:07] across the province generating significant revenue that is not directly
[4:05:11] shared with municipalities. And whereas the federal government collects the
[4:05:15] goods and services tax GST on property transactions, a portion
[4:05:21] of which could be directed to municipalities to address local
[4:05:23] infrastructure needs. And whereas redistributing. A portion of the provincial
[4:05:27] land tax. And GST to municipalities would provide a predictable
[4:05:32] and sustainable source of funding for local infrastructure projects. Without
[4:05:36] creating a new tax burden on residents or home buyers.
[4:05:40] And further, whereas the redistribution of a portion of the
[4:05:43] existing land transfer tax, and GST would allow municipalities to
[4:05:47] better plan and invest. In long term infrastructure initiatives, supporting
[4:05:52] local economic growth and improving the quality of life for
[4:05:55] residents. Now therefore beat resolve that the council, the city
[4:06:00] of Wellin, formally requests the provincial government to consider redistributing
[4:06:04] a portion of the land transfer tax collected on property
[4:06:07] transactions to municipalities. And. That too. That the Wellens City
[4:06:12] Council. Sorry, this word. City calls on the federal government
[4:06:15] to allocate a percentage of the GST collected on property
[4:06:19] sales to municipalities and three, that the redistribution of the
[4:06:22] land transfer tax and GSt should be structured to provide
[4:06:25] predictable and sustainable funding to municipalities, allowing for better long
[4:06:29] term planning and investment. And infrastructure projects that benefit local
[4:06:33] communities. Thus, Ensuring that local governments receive a fair share
[4:06:36] of the revenue to address critical infrastructure needs and that
[4:06:40] four that copies of the resolution before to the prime
[4:06:42] minister Justin Trudeau Premiere Doug Ford, the Ontario Minister of
[4:06:47] Finance, the Minister of municipal affairs and housing, local members
[4:06:51] of parliament and members of the provincial parliament and further.
[4:06:55] Copies of this resolution be forwarded to all 444 municipalities
[4:06:59] in Ontario. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the association
[4:07:03] of Municipalities of Ontario for their endorsement and advocacy. All
[4:07:08] right. Is there a second or for that motion? Seconded
[4:07:12] by councilor moot. Councilor? Said Ram, if you wish to
[4:07:15] speak to your motion. Go ahead. Yes, thank you. I'll
[4:07:17] keep it brief since the motion itself is long. Winded.
[4:07:21] I'm bringing forward this motion that is coming. From the
[4:07:26] town of Aurora through their mayor, who's been contacting councils
[4:07:31] across Ontario. To bring forward this motion for consideration to
[4:07:35] their councils. So far, 80 municipalities have signed on to
[4:07:40] this motion during our budget discussions, we've discussed at length
[4:07:46] the increases to property taxes on residents and that it
[4:07:50] is reaching a breaking point. We also. Just even heard
[4:07:54] discussions around critical infrastructure projects this evening. And those quarterly
[4:07:59] reviews that we're seeing and that we have further infrastructure
[4:08:02] needs that are coming along with our development. So this
[4:08:05] I brought forward as a means to. Kind of look
[4:08:09] at as part of that new funding model that we've
[4:08:12] been discussing at FCM and amo that we've heard about,
[4:08:16] making sure that municipalities have more resources and funding options.
[4:08:21] So this is why I've brought this forward, for your
[4:08:23] consideration, and I hope to have your endorsement. Thank you,
[4:08:26] Councilor Grimaldi. Thank you, Mayor Campion. I just want to
[4:08:32] say that I will support. This. Notice emotion. It's very
[4:08:37] important, and I thank councilor Setaran for bringing it forward.
[4:08:43] Councilor mcleod. Oh, sorry, Councilor falcons. I missed you there.
[4:08:50] Sorry. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you,
[4:08:54] Councilor Cedaram, for bringing this forward in our console. Information
[4:08:58] packages. We have been getting notices since November. On the
[4:09:04] exact same motion by different municipalities, so this is not
[4:09:09] new. We should have all been looking at this, and
[4:09:12] I believe. It's a good tool to have in our
[4:09:16] toolbox for additional funding. So I will report this motion.
[4:09:21] Councilor McLeod. Thanks, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate the motion. I've
[4:09:27] read it a number of times, and obviously now it's
[4:09:29] before us. The challenge I have, Mr. Mayor. Municipality can't
[4:09:35] run a deficit, which is great. Responsible government. Everybody knows
[4:09:39] we have to raise the funds that we spend. Provincial
[4:09:43] government, federal government can run a deficit and have been.
[4:09:47] And now we're asking for some of their revenue. Which
[4:09:50] ultimately. If they end up doing this, they're just going
[4:09:54] to tax at their end to make up what they've
[4:09:56] given us. And so the taxpayer that we represent is
[4:10:01] the same taxpayer that pays the GST is the same
[4:10:03] one that pays the land transfer taxes, the same one
[4:10:06] that pays income tax. So that is the challenge that
[4:10:09] I have with this. It's not the spirit of it.
[4:10:10] It's not that we don't need the funds. We're asking
[4:10:14] funds to be spent on infrastructure and have a steady
[4:10:17] stream. But in the end. We're all paying for it
[4:10:21] anyways. It's just coming from one pocket to. The other,
[4:10:25] so. That is the challenge I have with the motion.
[4:10:29] Not necessarily with the motion. Actually, that's the challenge I
[4:10:31] have with the provincial government running. A deficit and the
[4:10:34] federal government running a deficit. By asking for some of
[4:10:38] the revenue. They run a bigger deficit and we all
[4:10:41] end up paying. More. So if someone would like to
[4:10:45] help me get over that hurdle. That would help. Me
[4:10:50] sign on to this motion. Thank you. Anyone want to
[4:10:54] try to help the councilor leap over the hurdle? I
[4:11:01] don't have any other speakers, so I will go to
[4:11:04] the clerk for the vote. Voting is open.
[4:11:17] Motion is carried. Recorded votes been requested, so.
[4:11:39] Recorded vote has been requested, and we are re voting
[4:11:42] now.
[4:12:05] So for the recorded vote, Councilor Kyokyo was in favor.
[4:12:08] Councilor Demarco. Is in favor. Councilor Falkins is in favor.
[4:12:11] Councilor Green is in favor. Councilor. Germaldi is in favor.
[4:12:14] Councilor Lee is in favor. Councilor McLeod is. Opposed. Councilor
[4:12:17] Moot is in favor. Councilor Richard is in favor. Councilor
[4:12:20] Sederam. Is in favor. Councilor spec didn't vote, so that's
[4:12:24] taken. As opposed. Councilor van Lee is in favor. Mayor
[4:12:27] camping as opposed. The motion carries. Okay. So, moving on.
[4:12:36] Councilor Fulkins, you have a motion or notice? Motion listed
[4:12:40] on the agenda, I believe. You've been advised that it's
[4:12:43] out of order, and I will go to the clerk
[4:12:45] to explain why that's out of order. Through you, Mr.
[4:12:50] Mayor. So information was provided to councilor focus on Thursday
[4:12:54] with regards to the notice of motion. So it being
[4:12:57] out of order. So it's based on section 701. Of
[4:13:00] the community grants policy, which outlines the evaluation and approval
[4:13:04] process, specifically providing ratings for individual applications and evaluator. Comprise
[4:13:11] compromises the integrity of the process. And exceeds council prescribed
[4:13:16] role as outlined in the policy. Okay, so your motion
[4:13:20] is out of order, councilor Falcons, and I say you
[4:13:23] were advised of. That. Sorry. Okay, I can speak.
[4:13:34] I am not sure. Yes, but not to your motion,
[4:13:38] just. If you can comment on it being ruled out
[4:13:42] of order. Yes. I'm not sure what the clerk interpreted.
[4:13:52] This motion to be. I wasn't asking for individual ratings.
[4:13:57] I was asking for the matrix. Of you have five
[4:14:02] criteria here. So I would like to know what weight
[4:14:07] in that decision does. Each five criteria carries is 120.
[4:14:12] Percent. Are they all 20%? Is when? 30%, some 10%.
[4:14:18] That's what I'm looking for, and I do not believe
[4:14:21] that's out of order. I'm not asking for individual rates
[4:14:25] and asking how it says that. It's going to be.
[4:14:31] What's the rule? It says using the following criteria. So
[4:14:38] I'm asking for the scoring. Or the ratings, the grading
[4:14:43] process of each one of those criteria. So when people
[4:14:47] want to apply for these grants, they can say, okay,
[4:14:50] this is 20%, 30%, whatever. We also have a grading
[4:14:55] process for cips because I know that has come to
[4:14:57] counsel before. And whether we're going to prove Cips. Why
[4:15:02] can't we see a grading process or rating? Associated with
[4:15:08] this. The clerk did not reach out to ask for
[4:15:09] a clarification for it. Just said it was out of
[4:15:12] order. So why is that out of order? So, first
[4:15:16] of all, counselor, you were advised it was out of
[4:15:20] order. And your comment with regards to. Further comment, I
[4:15:27] think it would be your best interest to have said
[4:15:30] that when you were ruled out of order by the
[4:15:32] clerk via email as opposed to sort of throwing it
[4:15:35] back at the clerk during a council meeting. I think
[4:15:38] that's. Very unfair for you to say that. So I
[4:15:42] will go to the clerk to see if what you've
[4:15:45] just said makes any. Difference, but. Certainly. You're putting the
[4:15:50] onus on her to ask you specifically. When I read
[4:15:53] it, I. Felt the same way. So you had. Every
[4:15:57] opportunity, and I think a responsibility to have put just
[4:16:01] what you just said in an email. Back to the
[4:16:03] clerk so that she could analyze that instead of her
[4:16:05] perbing on the spot. Rate this evening to deal with
[4:16:07] it, Madam Clerk. Through you, Mr. Mayor, as outlined for
[4:16:11] the counselor. The details that it was interpreted from the
[4:16:17] notice of motion she put forward was provided to her.
[4:16:20] And it's ruled to be out of order. I suggest
[4:16:22] the counselor look at providing working with myself. To clarify
[4:16:28] what she's looking for, and then we can put forward
[4:16:30] a notice emotion that reflects that direct request. Okay, so,
[4:16:33] councilor, focus, as the interpretation was, and I believe is
[4:16:39] it. Remains out of order, but you have the opportunity
[4:16:42] to work with the clerk to bring it back. So
[4:16:44] that she can determine the proper. Wording to achieve what
[4:16:48] you want to do and also to clarify if it's
[4:16:50] in order or not. So I would suggest that. You
[4:16:55] work with the clerk on that to make sure everybody
[4:16:57] understands what you're trying to. Get. So at this point,
[4:17:01] it is out of order. And I have Councilor Demarco.
[4:17:05] First. I'm not sure what Councilor Demarco wants. Counselors. Mark,
[4:17:09] I need a little clarification. I think I heard the
[4:17:12] clerk say. 7.17.1. Is she referring to? Our
[4:17:21] procedural bylaw. No, she's not. She's speaking about something else.
[4:17:26] This motion is now not on the table. It gets
[4:17:29] out of order, and she's been. Asked. But the 7.1
[4:17:32] is all about. Yes, Madam Clerk. She did read it.
[4:17:35] Madam Clerk. Through you, Ms. Merritt. Section 7.0 of the
[4:17:39] community grants policy. Thank you. Okay. So I have a
[4:17:47] notice of motion which I wish to bring forward, so
[4:17:49] I'm going. To ask councilor moot to her vice mayor
[4:17:52] moot to take over for the time. Being.
[4:18:07] All right, I'm back. And I forgot my sheets over
[4:18:13] there. So this notice of motion.
[4:18:23] Councilor Demarco, do you have a point of order? Yes.
[4:18:27] Thank you, Vice Mayor Glute. This was to. Be
[4:18:36] spoken in a very, I guess, short time. Was this
[4:18:40] not in camera information? Are you referring to Mayor Campion's
[4:18:45] notice of motion? Yes. I will have to turn that
[4:18:50] over to the clerk for that. And if you recall,
[4:18:55] there was direction from council that's not being followed here.
[4:19:00] Okay, I'm going to turn this over to the clerk.
[4:19:03] 1 second. All right, thank you. Through you chair the
[4:19:07] information that's included within this notice motion is not information
[4:19:12] from in camera. It is permissible to be public information.
[4:19:17] Councilor. I sort of disagree with that.
[4:19:28] So you could challenge the chair, but you can't challenge
[4:19:31] the clerk. Well, no. The way it reads. We all
[4:19:39] know what happened. No, I understand what you're saying, Councilor
[4:19:46] Demarco. Okay. It's out here now. Right. It's on the
[4:19:51] paper. Not trying to put you on a spot, vice,
[4:19:56] Snyder, but I know this was going to. I tried
[4:20:00] to get answers, but I never got on prior to
[4:20:03] this, so. Okay, let's just. Proceed. Yeah, no need to
[4:20:06] apologize. Just trying to move the meeting along, so thank
[4:20:09] you for that. Counselor. And thank you, madam. Clerk. So
[4:20:15] at this point, I will turn to Mayor Campin and
[4:20:19] ask Mayor Campton to move his motion if he so
[4:20:21] wishes. You have to turn your mic off so this
[4:20:24] one comes on. There we go. Sorry, I didn't see
[4:20:30] that was on. Okay. Yes, I do wish to move
[4:20:32] it and see if there is a second. Whereas the
[4:20:37] public and press are asking for information as to why
[4:20:39] councilor Demarco has not been attending council meetings in person
[4:20:43] in council chambers. And whereas there is an inaccurate. And
[4:20:48] speculative information circulating in the community. And whereas the discussions
[4:20:52] on this matter have been held in camera. Now, therefore,
[4:20:55] it be resolved that the council of city well authorizes
[4:20:58] and direct staff to bring a report on this matter
[4:21:01] in open session to provide transparency and accurate information. Reference
[4:21:05] number 2160. Thanks. Mayor Campion. Looking for a seconder? I
[4:21:14] have a point of order. From Councilor Kyokyo. Thank you,
[4:21:18] Mr. Vice mayor. I believe that would be out of
[4:21:19] order his motion, seeing the fact that the majority of
[4:21:22] information was held in camera. So I've already made a
[4:21:25] ruling on that. The clerk advised from the clerk. I'm
[4:21:28] sorry. Let me just rephrase that. I believe this is
[4:21:31] out of border because the report that should include and
[4:21:35] will. Include all the information in camera is an in
[4:21:38] camera item, so I believe that motion is out. Of
[4:21:41] order. Give me a second. Could I respond to that?
[4:21:59] So speaking with the clerk so. You're quite right, counselor,
[4:22:06] that the information is in camera material. However, a vote
[4:22:10] of this council is bringing it out into public. We
[4:22:13] have to approve it. Oh, sorry. Hold on. So for
[4:22:20] clarification to report that will be put together from staff
[4:22:23] is all the information that was held in camera, every
[4:22:26] bit of it. I'm not sure if it would be.
[4:22:28] Every bit. Well, it has to be if you want
[4:22:30] to report, it's got to be. All the information from
[4:22:32] in camera. Not cherry picking. I don't know everything from
[4:22:36] in camera. I mean everything. Is that a request? Or
[4:22:40] everything. Well, let's get it on the floor first and
[4:22:42] we'll talk about. How? We do this. Okay, so I
[4:22:46] need a seconder, Councilor McLeod. Okay. Counselor or Mayor Campion.
[4:22:52] Go ahead. Yes. Thank you very much. So, nothing in
[4:22:56] this notice of motion? Comes from in camera what this
[4:23:01] notice of motion is going to or trying to do
[4:23:04] if it's supported by counsel is bring out information from
[4:23:08] the in camera sessions, as it might relate to councilor
[4:23:13] DeMarco and not being able to attend. Council chambers. There's
[4:23:19] nothing wrong with that. Council has the ability on any
[4:23:22] item discussed in camera to. Bring it into open session.
[4:23:26] That is a decision of counsel. The majority of council
[4:23:29] will determine if it can come into open session or
[4:23:31] not. That's why I'm bringing this motion. Forward today is
[4:23:34] to seek that approval to direct staff. And authorize them.
[4:23:39] You see the word authorized? So council is authorizing them
[4:23:43] to come forward. With a report. As to some of
[4:23:45] the in camera information. Again, I don't want to get
[4:23:48] into details. Because I can't. Because we don't have the
[4:23:51] authority to do that at this. Point if this moves
[4:23:54] forward. What I'm not expecting. Mayor Campion, can I interrupt
[4:23:57] you for a second? Yes, I do have a point
[4:23:59] of order. Yeah, I guess. We have sort of. Go
[4:24:02] ahead. Councilor Demarco, do you have a point of order?
[4:24:08] Counselor? Yes. Do you have a point of order?
[4:24:21] Do you have a point of order, Counselor DeMarco? Yes.
[4:24:24] Okay, go ahead. Sorry. Yeah. No. Problem. What's the point
[4:24:27] of order? Information. That would be.
[4:24:37] What councilor Kyokio said. It would have to include in
[4:24:41] camera information. Right. So how else could it be explained
[4:24:46] without such. Yeah. So I think I understand the question,
[4:24:52] and I think that's best directed once Mayor campion is
[4:24:55] done. His preamble into the discussion. You could ask Mayor
[4:25:01] Campion that question directly once he finishes off. His introduction.
[4:25:08] Thank you. All right. Okay. We'll get back to you
[4:25:10] in a moment. No problem. Mayor Campion. Okay. So the
[4:25:16] reason I brought this forward is because people want to
[4:25:19] know what's going on. I can't do that. No one
[4:25:23] can do that without having a report come back to
[4:25:27] council, as I was indicating. Yes. That information that I'm
[4:25:32] asking for to come into open session is in camera
[4:25:35] items. That's why I'm here. We can't disclose that. Without
[4:25:40] having council approval. So the majority of council. If they
[4:25:43] approve this, then you can bring it. Out into open
[4:25:46] session, and quite often we do that. If you look
[4:25:48] back. Historically on yes, we're reporting out of the in
[4:25:52] camera. So council has said provide a direction in camera
[4:25:56] to bring this into the open session. Happens all the
[4:25:59] time. There's nothing different about this item than any other
[4:26:02] item like that. So that's why. I'm seeking this approval.
[4:26:09] I think the motion speaks for itself as to why
[4:26:11] we want to bring that. Why I want to bring
[4:26:13] that out is because people are asking, they want to
[4:26:16] know. And there's a lot of misinformation going around. So
[4:26:19] it's a simple matter of here's. The story. Here's what's
[4:26:23] going on. I don't think counsel. Should be worried about
[4:26:27] doing that. Because there's great reasoning behind all of this.
[4:26:33] So I can't imagine why council would be opposed to
[4:26:35] doing that, and I'm sure I'm going to hear why
[4:26:37] from some counselors. But to be open and transparent. With
[4:26:43] the residents of the city, of welling and with the
[4:26:45] press and with anybody that's. Interested. It's generated a lot
[4:26:50] of interest, and so I think an explanation is required,
[4:26:53] and the explanation to thus far is an in camera
[4:26:58] item, so we can't talk about it this will change
[4:27:01] that so that we can. If it's approved. I have
[4:27:04] no further comments. Thanks, Mayor Campion. I have. Councilor Demarco.
[4:27:10] I saw that you so Councilor Kyokyo just. Called a
[4:27:13] point of order, but I did notice you had your
[4:27:15] point of order notice up, so. Councilor Kyokyo will go
[4:27:19] with councilor DeMarco first, okay? Councilor Demarco, you have a
[4:27:23] point of order. Sorry, Vice mayor moot. But. Was there
[4:27:29] not direction. Requested already on this matter. I'm being told
[4:27:35] that that is an in camera item. Unfortunately. Councilor marco.
[4:27:51] In the most friendly manner possible. I just want us
[4:27:54] all to be cautious on what we say. Here. It
[4:27:56] is a cautious topic that the mayor has brought up.
[4:28:00] So I'm probably going to have to. Thank you. No,
[4:28:05] thank you. Thanks, Councilor Marco. I'm going to say that
[4:28:07] to everyone. I'm just going to caution us all on
[4:28:11] how we discuss the items with respect to this notice
[4:28:15] of motion, so councilor Kyokyo. You have a notice. Thanks,
[4:28:20] mayor. Point of order, Mr. Vice mayor. The mayor said
[4:28:24] that council shouldn't be worried about it, but I believe
[4:28:28] all of us know that we should be involved. Worried
[4:28:30] about it, right? He's contradicting us. Because, as you know
[4:28:36] and the rest of my fellow counselors. Know, that's not
[4:28:38] really something that in that, that's not a point of
[4:28:41] order, though. That's a question you can ask the mayor
[4:28:44] directly. Well, let me ask mayor directly that he's saying
[4:28:46] that we should be worried about it. And I believe
[4:28:49] what we were told. That we should be worried about
[4:28:51] it. So I just want clarification from the mayor. Mr.
[4:28:54] Mayor, I can clarify that. You should not be afraid
[4:28:58] of putting this information. To the public. There is nothing
[4:29:03] to worry about because everything is being done properly and
[4:29:06] it's just a matter of sharing that information. So I
[4:29:10] don't know what you would be afraid of. But that's
[4:29:13] fine. That's all I can say. To that chair. Okay,
[4:29:19] sorry. I scroll down. So, Councilor spec. Go ahead. Thank
[4:29:27] you very much. Very much, Mr. Vice mayor. So we've
[4:29:31] heard a lot of clarity here, this discussion that has
[4:29:33] gone on. We've heard the mayor repeatedly say you should
[4:29:35] not be afraid. Part of my questioning is. Was there
[4:29:42] ever a written report? In camera that is being made
[4:29:46] public. The mayor talks about precedents. I believe Isaac during
[4:29:50] my time on council. I believe his previous term we
[4:29:53] pulled. Council does have the authority to take a report
[4:29:56] that is in camera vote and make it public. We
[4:29:59] did that. Is there an in camera report that we
[4:30:03] are making public? Through you, chair. So there's been
[4:30:13] many examples when there's been a report or a memo
[4:30:16] or some kind of documentation that's been presented in camera.
[4:30:21] And then it's become public. No, my question is, was
[4:30:25] there ever a report? Is the mayor referring to any
[4:30:29] written material that has been provided to counsel regarding those
[4:30:33] in camera sessions. Mayor Campion. Yes. There was written material.
[4:30:40] That's what he just said. Okay, I am being very
[4:30:45] cautious. As a counselor, when we talk about, well, we
[4:30:48] can't say this or that because council hasn't voted. It's
[4:30:51] not approved yet. That in camera information. Is not public
[4:30:54] information. And so we are cautioned, as per our code
[4:30:58] of conduct, not to reveal. I believe it's. Section five
[4:31:02] revealing in camera material even after. You're no longer a
[4:31:07] counselor. You cannot reveal that material. So. Is the, the
[4:31:13] mayor has said that there is a report that was
[4:31:16] distributed for in camera is the entirety of that report
[4:31:20] going to be made public. Mayor Campion. Well, that's not
[4:31:25] actually for me to determine, but that would be my
[4:31:27] expectation. I would say it is for the merit determinants's
[4:31:31] point of order. He's the one requesting this information to
[4:31:33] be made public. Well, I can't direct staff exactly what
[4:31:36] they have to write down. That's up to them to
[4:31:39] produce the report. But I've asked, is the preexisting report
[4:31:44] going to be made public? And your answer is yes.
[4:31:47] There's written material from in camera, and my question is
[4:31:50] this. Is going to be made public. I thought I
[4:31:52] heard a yes, but now I'm hearing maybe not, because
[4:31:55] staff have to write a new report. Which is it?
[4:32:00] Mr. Mayor and councilor. Spike, through the chair, please. Sorry.
[4:32:03] So through the chair, in response to the counselor. There
[4:32:08] was a report. There is a report. And all I'm
[4:32:11] asking is that report be brought forward to the public.
[4:32:15] And will the mayor or the CaO through you, Mr.
[4:32:18] Vice Mayor, guarantee that our indemnity to talk about this
[4:32:23] report. Or if we question the contents of that report
[4:32:27] and say that's, not how I recollect it. In other
[4:32:30] words, the mayor has, and I agree with the mayor.
[4:32:33] We seek transparency. And for the public to have this
[4:32:36] information. However, what's contradictory to that is that this is
[4:32:40] an identifiable individual and it always has the possibility of
[4:32:44] litigation or potential litigation. So it's like, well, we're going
[4:32:47] to open it up so you can all talk about
[4:32:49] it. I still fear. The mayor says not to be.
[4:32:52] I'm still very uncomfortable about that because of the subject
[4:32:55] matter, very sensitive subject matter that it involves. Can I
[4:32:58] have the mayor or the CAO comment? Are we all
[4:33:02] protected legally as counselors? To be covered for any potential
[4:33:06] litigation that may arise from this. So I look to
[4:33:10] our Cao and I do not believe he is a
[4:33:12] lawyer actually I know that. He's not a lawyer, so
[4:33:16] he can't make a legal determination right now, then. I'd
[4:33:19] like to refer this back to staff to get a
[4:33:21] legal opinion before we take a vote on it. There
[4:33:23] we go. Do I have a seconder for that? Councilor
[4:33:29] Kyokyo is seconding that. And we will have to take
[4:33:34] that to a vote. Recorded, please. Okay. And the clerk
[4:33:40] is just doing her notes over here. Can I have
[4:33:42] a note for clarity with. That as well. We are
[4:33:45] asking for a vote on a legal comment on our
[4:33:50] legal rights or our. Protection as counselors. Before. In other
[4:33:56] words, this will have to come back. That report will
[4:34:00] come back before we ever take a vote on the
[4:34:03] actual notice of motion. Correct. Got it. Looks like she's
[4:34:07] got it. Okay. Hang tight. Through you chair. So yes,
[4:34:12] council respect. That is correct. That this motion, the notice
[4:34:16] of motion from Mayor Campion, would not come back until
[4:34:21] the legal opinion is received, if that's how council chooses
[4:34:24] to proceed. Open session. So the voting is open.
[4:34:54] So for the recorded vote, Councilor Kyokyo was in favor.
[4:34:57] Councilor Demarco. Is in favor. Councilor focuses in favor. Councilor
[4:35:00] Green is in favor. Councilor Gomaldi. Is opposed. Councilor Leah
[4:35:03] is in favor. Councilor McLeod is opposed. Councilor mood is.
[4:35:06] In favor. Councilor Richard is in favor. Councilor ceteram is
[4:35:09] opposed. Councilor Speck is in favor. Council van bleed is
[4:35:12] opposed. Mayor campaign. Is opposed. The motion carries. Thank you,
[4:35:17] counselors. And I will switch seats with the mayor now.
[4:35:32] Okay, Councilor McLeod of your mics on. Did you? Okay.
[4:35:39] Thank you. All right. So now, do any members of
[4:35:44] council wish to introduce a new notice motion be discussed
[4:35:47] not to. Be discussed this evening, but at a future
[4:35:49] meeting. Councilor McLeod. Thanks, Mr. Mayor, that the council of
[4:35:54] the City of Wellan requests staff provide a detailed report.
[4:35:57] On how to proceed with dual serving counselors for the
[4:36:00] 2026 election. Thank you, Councilor Falkins. Thank you. Whereas generally
[4:36:10] accepted accounting principles, GAAP for municipalities are a set of
[4:36:14] accounting recommendations and guidance for local governments in Canada, the
[4:36:18] public sector or county board PSAB of the Charter, professional
[4:36:22] accountants of Canada. They set the standards for GAEP, for
[4:36:27] municipalities, for the objective of such standards is to meet
[4:36:31] the needs of users of financial statements by providing the
[4:36:34] information. Needed for accountability and decision making. Whereas the city
[4:36:39] does follow GaAp. And as well, the city has acknowledged
[4:36:43] that they use gap gaap analysis and allocating costs within
[4:36:47] the same sub account across different departments to remain within
[4:36:51] departmental budgets. Therefore, be it resolved that the council of
[4:36:55] the city well and direct staff to allocate costs directly
[4:36:58] to the cost. Center to which it applies to and
[4:37:00] that subaccounts are not gap gap analyzed. As a whole
[4:37:05] in order to identify actual shortages or overages in various
[4:37:09] departments in order to allocate or allocate cost to meet
[4:37:12] budget projections. Thank you. I don't see any others. Madam
[4:37:21] Clerk, we do have to go back in camera. So
[4:37:26] I guess this would be the best time to do
[4:37:27] that, and then we can come back. With the reports
[4:37:29] after that. Okay. All right, so we're going to have
[4:37:32] to go in. Camera looking for a motion to go
[4:37:35] in. Camera? For procedural approval of the minutes of the
[4:37:38] committee. Of the whole in camera meeting of December 17,
[4:37:40] 2024. Security property of the municipality or local board, potential
[4:37:45] purchase of land. And we will look for a mover.
[4:37:50] Second or moved by Councilor McLeod? Second by councilor. Lee,
[4:37:53] I'll ask you to vote electronically, or I'll ask the
[4:37:56] clerk to take us through the electronic vote. Voting is
[4:37:59] open. Going in. Camera.
[4:38:15] Sorry. That's approved, and we're just clearing the room. Yes.
[4:38:33] All right, so we're back in open session, and we're
[4:38:36] down at 8.1 mayor activities report. I have none to
[4:38:41] share this evening, so. I will go to the councilors
[4:38:45] for your ward reports, if you have any. So please
[4:38:47] put your mic on. If you wish to speak or
[4:38:50] add anything. So I don't see anybody. I just do
[4:38:59] want to confirm that. Nothing has come forward from the
[4:39:03] in camera session after we rose. So we did rise
[4:39:06] without report. And Noah council activities reports and the CAO
[4:39:11] has informed me that he's very active, but. Has no
[4:39:13] report on that. And I'm going to look for a
[4:39:16] mover. And second or for the first? Second. And third
[4:39:18] reading of the confirmatory bylaw. So that moved by Councilor
[4:39:22] Sidoram. And seconded by Councilor Lee. And Madam clerk, you
[4:39:26] take us through that final vote. Voting is open. That
[4:39:32] is unanimous support. For the bylaws. And seeing no further
[4:39:41] business meetings now adjourned.