Hey, good evening everybody and welcome to our August uh West Perth Council
meeting. Uh we do have um uh Doug Phelps is away uh at the meeting tonight and
councelor Andrew Fornier is online and I will try and catch him online. Sometimes
I don't always see him so we'll try and catch that as we go. Um, just before we
get started, um, I would ask, uh, council and our guests this evening, if
uh, they so wish that we'll bow our heads for a moment of silent reflection.
Okay, thank you. All right, so we'll call the meeting to order. Um,
there's going to be a few changes. We do have a fairly lengthy uh council meeting
here tonight and we're going to mix things up a little bit. We do have a
close session and we wanted to have the close session earlier on in the meeting
as opposed to later on. So, we're going to go through the agenda and if you
follow along um we're we have close session as agenda item number seven.
We're going to skip that and we're going to go to uh item uh agenda item number
eight and we're going to do 8.1 8.2 8.22 8.23
and then we will uh go for the close sessions. So it kind of gets the drains
and what people have come for out of the road so that they don't necessarily have
to stay if they don't want to. So, uh, with that in mind, um, those are the
changes that we've made, I think, James. So, a motion to confirm the agenda. Um,
and, uh, as I did mention, we have a close session, and it is to deal with
legal updates, property manner, um, u well, various property matters that
we've had uh, for the last little while. So, um, yeah, a motion to accept the,
uh, agenda as amended. Uh, councelor Rose, Councelor O'Donnell, all those in
favor posed, if any, that's carried. Does anybody have a conflict of interest
with anything on the agenda? Councelor O'Donnell.
» I have a conflict on item number 9.4. >> Okay. So, noted.
All right. Okay. Um that brings us down to moving
on here. We do have a delegation. Um we have um Paul Seabbach our um uh auditor
I guess from Seabbach and Company. And uh I would ask Paul to come up and uh
give us the good news. Uh and uh I'll just turn the floor over to you.
Thank you very much. Uh very nice to be here. uh when we go through everything
uh mostly is good news. Uh our report has are the full audited financial
statements and then we also uh provide a two-page uh report for council that has
a little more information. Uh when we did the audit this year, it was all on
site. We did the interm audit in October and the final audit uh first week of
March. Um we received complete cooperation from Wendy Manique and all
the other departments. We try to visit everybody and we were given access to
everything. So, we really appreciate all the cooperation in Wendy's effort to uh
get the statements done. After completing our audit, uh we're our
auditor's report in the financial statements show a clean audit report and
states the financial statements present fairly the financial position of
municipality. At the end of the audit, we you know, it's it seems standard, but
things don't always go good. that uh we can report we did not find any unusual
transactions or sign significant matters to bring to your attention this council
nostanding issues within the council and as I said received uh complete
cooperation um a little bit when we do do the
audited consolidated financial statements the things that are
consolidated the BIA and the library board and your share of the ERT 6.25%.
Um, when we look at the financial statements, the first number that jumps
out at you is the surplus 4,257,000. Um
I think every year I try to explain why when we take our surplus and we're
obligated to use uh provincial standards PAB accounting standards and they just
treat the our statements on more cural basis where when you do your budget it's
more you're trying to raise cash for your capital project uh debt payments
and things like that um reserve transfers. So when we look more on that
basis uh Wendy's report that she had provided earlier shows a surplus of
348,000. So it's important to realize you know you did have a surplus on this
wave 4.4 but when you look at how your budget is presented it's it's quite a
bit less. Uh the big item there is uh capital. Um
you guys when you do your budget, you raise money to expense your capital
where we set that up and depreciate it. Um we only expense the interest on your
debt payments where you have to raise money to pay the actual principal
payments. So that's 425,000. And at the end we show reserve funds as
a part of the surplus but we don't show in ins and outs as income or expenses.
So this year you transfer 2.2 million almost 2.3 million to reserves. So you
have to take that off the 4.4 because we don't show that as a an expense. Um
as I said we use the same uh very very same same information. is just presented
different policies. Consolidated statements are important because uh the
statements and the FIR are presented to the province and that's how they see
your uh financial statements. Um some other key points um you spent 3.3
million on capital you had budget or last year was 5.8 8 you had budgeted 6.1
but uh there's quite a few projects not uh finished um some vehicles not
purchased um in um Wendy's report that that's summarized um at the end of the
year your debt was 66,372,000 down from 6.8 8 million. So you paid
down 425,000 of regular debt payments. There were no new no new loans and you
completed payments on a loan from the pumping station. Um also is when you pro
provides a debt repayment calculation by the province. Uh you're allowed to have
debt repayments 25% of your revenue and at the end of last year you're at 11% of
that. So you're well within that. Uh at the end of the another key part end of
the year your reserves were 24,800,000. They were up 2.3 million. Um part of
that was because you didn't do all the capitals. You didn't transfer the money
to pay for the capital. You had budgeted to have uh 21.5
million reserve. So you finished higher there. You also have some uh gas tax
funding you received but didn't spend at the end of the year. 97,000 and a
provincial roads grant of 136,000 that weren't spent. Um what that all means is
so you didn't do all your capital when we look at the financial position you
have you know more money in the bank and higher reserves etc. Um so the page
titled report to council financial indicators it's basically your income
statement or sorry your balance sheet as of December 31st. Um, first thing you
notice the bank is up uh a fair bit. Part of that is because of the surplus
and part of that is the uh payrolls are lower. Uh things of that nature. So the
balance for your bank was 24.3 million. 15.6 million of that's in your general
bank. Um you have all your water and waste reserve funds of almost 7 million
and all the other reserve funds accounts of 1.6 million. So that's the 24.3
million in the bank. Um accounts re taxes receivable, you did a good job of
collecting taxes, it's down to 2.7% of the total taxes. Of the 933,600
is current. So that's good. More taxes you collect, the more money you have in
the bank. Uh accounts receivable are similar to last year. Uh long-term
receivable is a little higher. There were more municipal drain work that
wasn't build at the end of the year. 961,000 versus 495,000 loss. Um
investments, you did change your investments uh during the year. Uh there
was an unearned there was an earned gain there when you uh transferred the
investments of 1,250,000. Um
a lot of those uh invest investments are wastewater reserve investments. Um the
investment in the government business government government business
enterprise is your investments in the ERT utility. It's made up of note
receivable shares and your share retained earnings and that's 5,44,000
the share or your shares are valued at cost. So they don't reflect the value
true value of the utility just your initial cost. So total assets current
assets almost $42 million. things you owed at the end of the year. Uh the
payables are lower. There were some development charges that were uh paid
paid down. So payables are down 1.2 million. Uh deferred revenue. Uh those
are 2 million up from 1.8 million. Uh we've
talked about that. A lot of that is is um the gas tax and the unspent uh road
grant. Um there's a landfill closure expenditure that we have to set up to
reflect the future cost of closing your landfill site and some of the older
buildings. That's 3,95,000 up 50,000 from from last year. And then
the municipal debt of the 6.4 we talked about that. So the difference between
your current assets and current liabilities is 26.4 million. Uh the
important thing there is that because you all your capital that's up 5.3
million. So you have more money just to uh spend for the current and future
operations. Um capital assets and then the year your book value 1 103 million.
Um then there's some prepaid expenses which is basically insurance and some
inventory items. Um 106,000 land inventory for sale. That's at cost. So
there's no change there. He didn't sell anything. 4.5 million. I know. So when
you take the net financial assets and the 134 million that's your surplus of
134,529 and that's up to 4.2 million of your
surplus. Are there any questions on the balance sheet?
Uh the next statement is the your financial statement. It has the budget
and five years of comparatives. Um
the Canada Community Building Fund is the old uh federal gas tax. You did use
some 285,000. Um the SE grant you received 1.1
million. Uh they didn't spend it all. So you deferred 258,000.
Um some other grants. The other grants are
other municipalities. It's lower 38,000. The provincial offenses act funding was
lower. Um
the other government grants 780,000 that's a little higher. That's the
library uh the drainage superintendent preventing auto uh preventing autothefts
grant and u then we get to other income. When we
looked at investment income, that's higher than budgeted and higher than the
year before, the 3 million. A large part of that is the gain when you transferred
your investments uh for the wastewater reserves. Uh $1.2 million there again.
So, total revenue 25.6 million. Um higher than was budgeted, but a lot of
that is your investment income and some grants. uh your expenditures
policing was higher than budgeted but um you received a grant for uh victim
services so that 115,000 is in there so that is higher than budgeted. Um
planning and uh development is higher than budgeted 311,000 versus 191,000.
That's the interest. There's interest there long-term debt. Um so when you
take the revenue minus the total expenses of 21.4 million comes back to
your surplus of 4.2 million year before 3.3.
As far as the financial statements um the very second page is the auditor's
report as I talked about it. It's a clean audit report. Um note number six
is in your investment in government business enterprise. It shows the
investment of 5 million. Um and as I said the shares are all at cost.
Um note number eight explains uh estimate retirement obligations. That's
the landfill cost we have to set up. Um note number nine shows mis municipal
debt uh and that paid down 425,000 and it also shows that the the loan for the
pumping station has been repaid over 117,000 was paid off. So that frees up
some capital for that department. Uh there is a a whole page on reserves. It
shows how the reserves went from 22.6 million to uh 24.8 million. As I said,
that might have been lower per your budget, but because of some department
surpluses and you didn't spend all the capital, you ended up 2.2 million high
deferred revenue schedule of 2,91,000. that shows a lot of that development
charges and a lot of it is the gas tax and the other deferred is the provincial
road grant that wasn't all spent. Um at the very end of our statements, uh
there's the trust fund and that's basically money set aside for cemetery
uh maintenance and purposes. Uh so in closing I would say that you
know you did finish the year with 4.2 million. A lot of that's because you
didn't do all your capital on a more cash basis. The surplus was 348,000. You
did increase your financial position. I mentioned the 5.3 million. Um you were
able to lead all your 2025 capital without borrowing. Uh this set you in a
you know the end of this year set you in a position to have a large capital
budget for this year. And once again, I'd like to thank Wendy and her
department for all her cooperation. Are there any questions?
Okay, questions for Paul?
No, no questions. Okay. Well, thank you very much, Paul. Appreciate you coming
this evening and giving us the good news. Relatively good news. So, thank
you very much. >> No, thank you. And I hope you have a
good year this year. Thank you. >> Yeah. So do I. [laughter]
Okay. Um, at this Oh, sorry. Question. Councelor Duck.
» Actually, sorry. I just I was making my notes there. We did at the beginning of
your interest. Can I declare for 9.4 as well? I just wanted to make that note
now before we got a little carried away. Sorry about that. Thank you.
» No, that's fine. So, noted.
Yeah. Yep. So, you you got that, James? Yep. Yep. Okay. No, that's good. That's
good. Okay, Wendy, do you want to uh come up and uh introduce uh Loren here?
Lauren, sorry.
So, this is Lauren Tam. She's uh um here on a 12-month contract to uh fill in the
position of deputy treasurer. So, with that, I'll
introduce Lauren to you. She's going to have a few words to to share.
» No, go ahead. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. I just
want to say thank you for the opportunity to work here. When I saw the
job posting, I thought it was a great opportunity to learn more in the
municipal world. Um, I've been here almost a month now and I've really
enjoyed my time here and I'm really looking forward to the next year of
being here. >> So, you're not going to mention who your
dad is? >> My dad's Mike. He was on council for 16
years, I think. So, >> something like that. Yeah, good, good,
good. Well, thank you very much and and I thought it was appropriate right after
we did the auditor statement to bring you up and introduce you. So, thank you
and welcome. And you're welcome to stay as long as you want, but you don't have
to stay through the whole night. >> Thanks.
» Okay. Very good. Okay. Um, we could probably do the consent agenda, couldn't
we? Yeah, I think we can. We'll we'll do the consent agenda here. Um,
» oh, yes. Sorry. Yes. Yes. Recommendation here that uh the council municipality of
West Perth receives the 2025 audited audit uh prepared by Seabbach and
Company as presented. So we have a mover and second councelor Duck uh councelor
Herold. Uh any questions? All those in favor? Opposed? If any that's carried.
Thank you. Thanks. Okay. The consent agenda is there. There's 13 items on the
consent agenda. Is there um anything there that anybody wants clarification
on or would like pull them to deal with separately? Maybe some clarification on
6.6. I was just curious if we ever used pesticides in our parks prior to the uh
ban. >> Um
prior to >> Yes.
» Oh, was that a Nick question? Nick, I don't
know if can you I don't think you can answer that if used them prior to We can
look into that and report back, but I I'd assume so. But I
» I just feel like if we send a letter of support, I think spraying around our
ballparks would be beneficial to make it look cleaner. Causing the grass to grow
up through the gravel doesn't look very appealing. And I think it would just
beautify the space a little bit better if we could spray.
» So, um, do you want to do you want us to pull that and then, uh, move a support
for that? >> Okay. Um, okay, we could we can do that.
Um, that was 8.6. So, um, um, yeah, you pretty well
explained what was in the resolution. And so if you want to move that, do we
have a seconder to deal with that? Uh take your pick. Deputy mayor, uh support
that. Um any further discussion on that? Uh Dan,
» just from an information standpoint, I I'll just noted that that regulation is
2009 regulation. So we'd be we'd be going back pretty far from the staff
standpoint. >> Any other questions or comments? All
those in favor of that? Okay, those opposed, that's carried. Is there
anything else anybody would like um an explanation on or pulled separately?
» Sometimes my hand's not noticed when I'm on Zoom. Mayor,
» you're not noticed, Andrew. I'm sorry. Um but yeah, go ahead.
» Uh I'm going to restrict the number of things that I want to pull from here
because I don't know if anyone else is reading this and thinking, "Oh god,
counselor Fornier is going to talk for a really long time." Um but 6.1 and 6.3 in
particular if you don't mind. Uh emergency shelters serving women and
children experiencing intimate partner violence. Um that is a rather urgent
issue. I have uh several uh exes in my life who have experienced
intimate partner violence from other partners and I know from firsthand
stories of what it's like trying to live in those environments with children. We
need more spaces. We need spaces for longer. We need spaces for more
more types of events. So, that one I straight up want pulled and supported.
And also 6.3, the township of uh let me see if I can even pronounce this. Alwick
and Halddund apology to the British home children and child migrants and their
families. This one again rather in particular. I actually have people in my
own family who were orphaned and had their childhoods ruined by getting
turned into uh laborers of both the farmwork and
housework variety and also used for other purposes. This happens to children
and the fact that our prime minister hasn't issued a formal apology while the
prime minister of Great Britain and the prime minister of Australia has strikes
me as just intolerable. There's not even very many of them left alive in our
country and a thousand of them died in the First World War after being abducted
from their own families and stuck with new families here who used them for
stuff. Um, I want I want that one in particular pulled for support. Thank
you. >> Okay, we will deal with those two first
and then we'll go back to the consent agenda. So, uh, item 6.1, emergency
shelters. U, I take it that councelor Fornier, you will move that.
» Very much so. Thank you. >> Okay. Do we have a seconder for that uh
motion to support that resolution? Uh, councelor Duck. because uh we'll second
that. Any further discussion on that particular motion?
» You got your hand up. Yeah. I was just just for the record, I was just going to
um just make it known that council's previously declared IPV an epidemic
around this table. So just giving you that context here. That's all.
» Uh who? >> That's one of the reasons why I
mentioned it because we already have supported things like this motion.
» Okay. So So we we have supported this
are very similar. Okay. All right. So, we have done it in the past. Um, so it's
moved and seconded. If there's no further questions on it, all those in
favor, two, three, four, five, six, opposed, if
any, that is carried. Uh, moving to 6.3 then. Um, apology to the British home
children and child migrants and their families. Again, uh, councelor Fornier,
uh, you will move that, I take it. >> Yeah, very much so. Yeah. and provide
extra explanation if necessary. >> Yep. Um, do we have a seconder for that
motion to support that resolution?
» Do we have a seconder? >> Councelor Duck is going to second that.
Okay. Um, is there anything further you want to add, Andrew, to that before we
take a vote here? Canada has too long a history on many
different fronts of not being very nice to kids that we don't view as one of us.
Um, and what happened to some of these uh occasionally baby children and you
have to understand that during this program that the actual orphans who are
being taken from workhouses and sent here, bonuses were not paid to the
organizations that took them from those workhouses. bonuses were paid for
children who might actually have living parents, poor parents, parents who could
not provide to them for them, granted, but that's more a case of the the social
services available in the United Kingdom at the time. Um, and instead of
addressing their own issues, Britain sold these children to families
in Canada to work as farm laborers and house servants. Now, that's not every
case, and I'm sure sometimes it worked out better than that. But in enough
cases that it's historically significant, it didn't.
We should not accept being the recipients of sold children, whether now
or in the past. And if we did so in the past, we should hurry up and say sorry.
» Okay. Um any other comments from anybody?
Okay. Um so the um support has been uh duly moved and seconded. Um all those in
favor of supporting this resolution.
Now put your hands up. Don't be afraid. Opposed to this resolution.
The motion is lost. All right. Um then a motion that we um
accept the consent agenda with the exception of 61, 6.3 and 6.6. So in
other words from 62, 64 all the way uh 65 and then all the way from 6.7 to 6.13
would be in order. Do we have a mover and seconder for that? Councelor Rose,
seconded by councelor Foster. Any questions on any of them? All those
in favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried. Thank you. All right. Uh brings
us down to we're moving to uh uh agenda item number eight and uh the planning
department. Uh we have um uh an item here with regards uh uh B1926.
And we have Haley, I believe, with us is going to walk us through this one. Uh
it's with regards to a consent application and as I said the file
number is B1926. So Haley the floor is yours.
» Thank you. The application before you this evening is for a proposal for a
surplus farm dwelling severance located at 5302
line 29 in the municipality of West Perth.
The subject application proposes to sever a surplus farm dwelling lot
resulting in a farm consolidation. The severed lands contain an existing
dwelling, a detached garage, septic, and well. The retained lands are vacant of
any buildings or structures. Additionally, the application proposes
to establish an easement for hydro located on the severed lands in favor of
the retained lands. The easement is proposed to be 4.48 m wide by 6.34 m
long. A condition of the consent has been included that will impose
restrictions on future permitted uses of the severed and retained lots through an
adoption of a required zoning bylaw amendment. The condition requiring the
ZBA has been recommended to satisfy the requirements of the 2024 PPS and the
county of Perth official plan. staff are supportive of the proposed severance and
are of the opinion that the application is consistent with the provincial
planning statement 2024 and conforms with the county of Perth official plan
subject to the recommended conditions of consent approval being fulfilled. Thank
you and I'm happy to answer any questions.
» Okay, any questions with regards to this recommendation?
» Don't see any hands going up. So, we do have a um resolution here. Uh the
recommendation is that the council, Miss Pal West Perth, recommends that the
county of Perth land division committee approve consent application B1926
and that council forward the conditions listed in the staff report dated August
the 10th, 2026 to the county of Perth land division
committee for the property known as 5302 line 29 in the municipality of West
Perth. Do we have a mover and seconder for that? Deputy Mayor and a seconder.
Uh, Councelor Herald. Last call for questions.
All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried. Thank you, Haley.
Okay, moving on then brings us down to uh a couple drain reports. The first one
is the Mela Municipal Drain uh and consideration of the engineers report.
And we do have Chris Dietri with us tonight. And Chris, I'll turn the floor
over to you and you can walk us through that report.
Thank you, uh, Mayor McKenzie and councel.
Uh, the first project that I'm here to present is the Mel municipal drain. Uh,
this takes place uh, within the the town of Mitchell city limits and, uh, it's
basically an enclosure of an existing municipal drain. Some history on this ML
drain. Uh it was originally constructed under a report prepared by Dodson and
Johnson consulting engineers uh that provided for the construction of
the main drain open the main drain closed branch A and branch B. All closed
tile drains were designed to a 5-year storm.
Uh this stream was updated in 1999 under a report prepared by Johnson Engineering
Consultants um that provided for the cleanout at 272
m of open ditch um and the installation of three culvert crossings.
And finally, a portion of the main drain uh closed was realigned under a report
by RJ Burnside and Associates Limited um in 200
I don't have the date on that here. Um might be regardless it was realigned. Uh
we held an information for this enclosure uh back in November of this
year and it wasn't uh basically taken very well. So we were proposing to
enclose the drain from where the main drain closed is all the way down uh in
the uh uh in the Gaffne Industrial Holdings
property which is shown as number one on your plans or sorry number yeah number
one. uh this option was a little too
expensive for the owners. Uh so this report that we're presenting here today
uh includes uh basically we're enclosing 68 m of open ditch
um across lot 15 as shown on our plan. Then it crosses Ellen Street where it
outlets into the existing open drain. [clears throat]
We also um plan on cleaning out 62 mters of the existing open drain uh and remove
one 750 mm diameter corrugated metal pipe. Uh our drain will consist of 750
mm diameter to 900 mm diameter plastic HDP pipes
um and is designed to handle the 100year storm event. We've estimated the total
cost of this work at $115,600
and I'm open to answering any questions from council.
» Hey, thanks Chris. Questions? Councelor
» Mayor McKenzie. Uh Chris, you mentioned uh that that your first proposal wasn't
too amlicable uh to the property owners and the revised
um proposal that you made um that the majority of land owners are on side with
that proposal uh that that you're bringing forward tonight.
» Um there's one sitting in the audience that may have some objections to this.
Um I would let him speak for himself though.
Other questions from council? Is there um a ray pair that does wish to add some
comments?
Thank you, Mayor McKenzie. Council, my name is Jason Hask. I am the owner of
Lewis McNichol Trucking. For the last 25 years, I've been the
largest proponent of the work that Chris is proposing here
tonight. And if you'd asked me a month ago, I was on board.
But situations change. And even though in this report
my property receives the most benefit from the drain being closed, it also
receives the most cost. And at that at this particular time, I'm
not certain that I'm prepared to carry that cost.
All I ask is that you keep that in mind when you make your decision tonight.
Okay, fair enough.
» Other any other comments or questions with regards to this drain now?
» Well, sure the mayor. Uh, who asked for this drain to be closed in and can we
start on the south side of that road to close it in?
I don't recommend that at all. Um, well, basically, it's only enclosing through
one property in a road. Um, there's already a culvert under the road. So, I
would recommend that if we're not closing it through the McNickel Trucking
Incorporated property that we do something else like just basically
maybe scrap the report or something of that nature and then we're dealing with
our 78 costs. It was originally sorry uh originally
signed section 78 form which is improvements to an existing drain by DNR
pole holdings. We held that information meeting and they were Vietnamese or
Vietnamese like uh opposed to what we were presenting. uh we had to design it
to a 100red-year storm to meet the con the conservation authority uh what
they're asking for and and basically we do have all our approvals from the
conservation authority and the department of fisheries and oceans
» other questions so just to clarify Chris this doesn't happen very often but
you're kind of recommending that we don't accept this report
» well that would be up to the McNichol property
Oh, okay. So, we >> Yeah, we're presenting our report as
written. >> Okay.
» Um, so it would be up to council to pass or not pass.
» I'm looking at James here. So, we may have to tweak the resolution here a
little bit. Will we? >> Well, I guess we can get we need some
input from council how they want to proceed here as much as anything. And
I'm looking for
Go ahead, >> Mayor McKenzie. When we're um working
together as a team to uh work on drainage works, I think as a council
that we're looking to all of the properties in that uh in that watershed,
just like we're doing in agriculture. um uh that that um yes sometimes the
cost uh is um felt um that it's exorbitant but uh but we are making
improvements to the wershed. So, so I think as as a council, we're we're
looking at at the whole wershed as a whole um to to to make those
improvements if land owners are asking uh and obviously when they petitioned
for that drainage work, they they were asking um and it's maybe just come down
to uh down to the cost uh portion, but uh but I think out of other respect for
other land owners, we should consider it as a whole project whether it actually
benefits the the wershed or not. Yeah. Thank you, Nicholas. Anybody else?
Uh, Deputy Mayor through >> you. Uh, Mayor McKenzie,
um, just help me try and understand this, uh, whether it's Chris or staff.
So, um, a landowner, uh, Mr. Paul or somebody by the last
name of Paul submitted a section 78 request
um to close the open ditch. Is that >> Yes.
» Correct. >> Yes.
» Okay. And at this time, are they still in favor of
» They're not >> that work.
» They're not. >> They're not. And did they give a did
they give a written reason why or any kind of reason?
» They have not. No. Not Not in my knowledge. No. But they but they've just
said no, we don't want to do it. >> Correct.
» Okay. And to date, uh only Mr. Hasket has provided a a reason an objection
with a reason. Is that correct? >> Yes. Initially at the information
meeting, he wanted to go ahead but at this time he does not.
» Okay. And at the time of the information meeting, Mr. Paul did not want to
» Mr. did not attend the information meeting,
» right? >> And it wasn't until a later date
that they called and said, "We're not in favor of these costs."
» And do we know how much in costs have been incurred to date right now?
» Well, we obviously have prepared this report. This includes us uh going to the
quarter revision if necessary. Um
just I'm just looking for a >> rough idea.
» Yeah. So it would be around $20,000 probably.
» So we're already $20,000 into this work and the people that at least one person
who had petitioned it has now backed out of it.
Correct. We have a second >> and that was the only signature on that
78 form. >> Okay.
All right. So, I guess my question to staff is um are we able to defer any
decision and get a a staff report to try and uh confirm answers to the
questions that I've got that I made because right now the municipality is on
the hook for $20,000 and we didn't and the municipality didn't ask for it as I
see it. So, how do we how do we how do we resolve this because we've got a
landowner that wanted something now they changed their mind. I guess that's their
that's their right to do that. But money's been spent here. So, somebody's
going to get a bill. So, we got to sort this out somehow. Just refer that qu
these questions to staff for further clarification, please. Thank you.
» Yes, I think James is quite prepared to answer that. And I'm sure Chris could
give us the options as well. Um, >> so section 78 is a little tricky. Um,
how to distribute costs when reports aren't adopted. Uh, typically it would
be build under the existing reports bylaw. Uh, so that would be the 1999
bylaw. Obviously since then things have changed as far as lots and what have
you. U, but that would be the most most fair thing to do. Um, so whatever that
maintenance clause says in the 1999 report is how you'd want to distribute
those costs. >> And we can have a look and and give you
an exact number of what we have into it. >> Oh, okay. James, anything further?
» No. Uh, I really don't have much data. I think Chris has given you all the the
important information. Um, I think I would just note that, you know, you've
heard from the land owner with the lion share of the assessment costs here this
evening. So, council does has the option to receive this report for information
and Chris has spoken to how those costs would be distributed should things not
proceed from here. Thank you, >> Councelor Foster. If we to um receive it
for information at this time and not go forward with it, if this comes back in a
few years, it would likely still be easily reused at the time. If the land
owners change their mind and want to come back to it, like is the report
still valid for a few years or how does that work?
» It's a good question. I would have to look into that.
I'll just I think I think Chris has probably given you a fair response, but
anything could [clears throat] happen next year. Regulations could change.
Everything could change. So I I think your line of thinking is likely correct,
but that's not a guarantee if if that helps.
Sir, >> so Mayor McKenzie, when I look across
the wershed, like James said, uh, Louis McNickel Trucking has more than 50% of
the, um, watershed and then West Perth 10% and Mitchell Durasol properties
roughly 10% and um, then the Godidge Railway rough
roughly another 10%. So so I guess 60% um, and then God railway another uh, 10%
70. So, so the rest of the property owners are are each a very very a tenth
a hundredth of a percent on many of these properties. So there there's not
much um value I guess in in the drainage works. So, I I'm I think I'm comfortable
um uh shelving the report based off of the the the value that the if we if we
don't need the value on the vast majority of the of the wershed, I'm
comfortable shelving it because we we have 50% plus us plus the railway that
uh another 10% that um we could quite easily see that don't see the value
tonight to go ahead with the drainage works.
» Okay. I um can't think of an other time that we've
had this happen, but there's always a first time for everything and it's maybe
happened in the past. James >> through the chair. May I ask one more
question? Um is it possible to do a reortionment Chris on the existing
watershed that's there for the purposes of more accurately determining
um a cost distribution that is reflective of today? Am I making sense
with that question? >> And it's just a question of
» for sure. Uh we probably could. I'm not
saying definitively we can but that would be something another thing to look
into because if we need to aortion which
should have been done the old 1999 report
um then that can be done. >> Yeah. Like that would be the fairest way
to to do it, I would think, Chris. Right. If we're not going to proceed any
further, that would be the fairest way to proceed. Yeah,
you would have a minor cost incurred again on top of that. But just just to
be clear, yeah, you're you're looking at the wershed as it fixed today, the
property boundary. So it would reflect accurately for that that cost.
» Just an option. So I I think council can approve, council can receive for
information which in effect is doing nothing. So that kills it. Council could
receive the report for information and direct um we can direct to do the
reortionment as well if you wish. Or if you want to see that come back,
we can do that as well. Couple options. Well, the other option is you go ahead
with the report and then you appeal it to the to the drainage tribunal and they
make a ruling on it, but uh the costs I think are in indicate of of what the
cost is going to be. So, um you know, they might shift it a bit, but uh
basically those costs will be fairly accurate unless the odd time you tender
it out and you get a a quote coming back that is less than what the engineers
estimated. And that sometimes happens too, doesn't it? But uh
» more so these days. >> Yeah.
» Rather than years past. But for sure it they definitely there's a lot of work
out there for contractors and bids are coming in well below our estimates. But
that's just >> me talking.
» Okay. I want to kind of keep moving on here because we do have a fair bit to do
tonight. So we've got several options here. As Dan has indicated, we can uh
basically follow the the suggested recommendation here and and accept the
report. Um and uh you know, you could go as far as give it first and second
reading. Um but then eventually, you know, we're going to end up at a dead
end. I think we can receive the report and that's it. and and then the costs
will be figured out and will be invoiced to the uh to the rateayers involved.
What was there was a third one >> do the reortionment so it's more
reflective of of the land owner >> we would do that anyways wouldn't we
then >> not necessar
if you just don't >> oh
we would use the 1999 >> okay all right yeah okay so those are
our options what would you like to see happening
» uh Mayor McKenzie I think we should uh receive the report and then uh
essentially that's where it stops but then use the 1999 um aortionments to
bill the costs that incurred. >> Okay. Yep. You'll move that. Do we have
a second for that motion? Uh councelor Foster.
Okay. I just want to read that again to make sure everybody knows what we're
voting on here. We were going to receive it. Um
» yeah. Uh thank you through the chair. So, at this time, the motion, as I
understand it, is that council receive the report for information and that the
cost uh for the preparation of the report and cost the date associated with
the project be build to the land owners in accordance with the most recent
assessment schedule, which is 1999. Is that fair?
Good. Okay. Any further discussion on that? Anybody
anything to add? Okay. All those in favor of that motion?
Opposed? If any, that's carried. Okay.
All right. The next one then is um on our agenda is 8.2.2 and that's the Meer
municipal drain and again in consideration of the engineers report.
So Chris, the floor is yours. Yet >> thank you again, Mayor McKenzie and
council. I'm here again to present the Meer municipal drain.
This is a drain uh that was originally built in 1959 and basically it consisted
of the main drain and a drain. Uh that main drain consisted of uh 2587
lineal feet of 6 in uh or 150 mm to a 12 in or 300 mm diameter tile.
Uh Adrian under our report is to be abandoned.
Um and as shown on the screen, that dark double blue line represents our
watershed and it consists of 34.7 hectares.
Um you'll see some of the lots are drained out of this watershed. So they
get a reduction in their outlet assessment. Um
and basically uh our new drains represented by a yellow line there. So
it consists of excuse me 633 m of 300 millimeter diameter to 525 millimeter
diameter concrete and plastic HDP pipes. Um there will be one road crossing under
line 49 with catch basins on both sides as well as catch basins at property
lines. one between I guess that is sorry 32 and 33 and then the next would be
between 33 and 34 of concession 13. Um there's one other catch basin to be
installed and that's downstream of the Jonzi property which is part of lot 33
concession 13. This will be connected to the main drain via a junction box. Um,
and this drain outlets into the gray branch of the northwest municipal drain.
We've estimated the cost of work at $193,800.
And at this time, I'm open to any questions from council.
Okay. Thanks, Chris. Any questions from members of council?
No hands going up. Okay. Um do have a recommendation here uh that
the council municipality of West Perth accepts the report dated June the 1st
2026 from Driidge Engineering Limited for the Meer Municipal Drain and that
council provisionally adopt the engineers report by giving first and
second readings to bylaw number 51 2026 and that the record of revision be
scheduled for September the 8th of this year 2026. Sorry.
» Make sure >> Oh, okay. Um,
questions from any of the rate pairs.
No, we're good.
Go ahead. Yeah. Come on up. If you come up, we can hear you. That's uh better.
» Good evening. Here. Um, this question might be a question for Chris. I'm not
sure. I'm not sure. But question for council or not, but I know I looked at
the first drawing that we met here and one that was mailed. I know it's a
little bit different in design. Maybe you can comment on that or is that a
question outside of this? >> Chris can answer. I'm sure.
» So, what happened at our what happened at our information meeting is that we
had the design in a different area. There was also farms that were drained
out that we did not know of. Um, so we've confirmed all of that information.
We rerouted the outlet more so paralleling line 49 rather than going on
an angle. We used to go on a a south uh easterly direction to the gray branch.
So we shortened up the the drain itself by 67 m. Um, so that affected the cost
as well. So the land being drained out which is shown on our plans uh report
plans uh actually reduces the amount uh of acres that would be contributing to
the drain. So they will no longer be uh assessed for or have the right to
connect to this drain in the future, but they were assessed for the water that
may land on their property that would come this way.
» So I do have a follow-up question. >> Sure. Go ahead. Yeah, my follow-up
question I guess and notice it went straight into the drain rather than an
angle. I guess my question for Chris maybe is will we get as much um guess my
land fills up with water quite a bit in the spring melt? It's I just want to
make sure that we can get as much water going away as possible is my question
with the change. Yeah. So, not mentioned is that this new
municipal drain is designed to an inch and a half drainage coefficient or a 38
millimeter per 24hour. Um, so that's topnotch drain work these days. Uh,
sometimes landowners want more. So, that extra uh design standard would be
ungrantable, but in this case, we're meeting the limit uh of of that train.
So, we're going to have quite a lot of capacity in this new system. Right.
Okay. Fair enough.
Yeah. Okay. Any other questions from either council or right pairs?
Okay. Um
we I didn't do the recommendation. We didn't get that. I We need a move in a
second. That's where we're at. Okay. So, I read it out that we accept the report
and that we give it first and second reading and it'll be bylaw 51 and then
uh quarter revision will be held on September the 8th of this year. So, do
we have a move and seconder for that? Um,
Deputy Mayor Jinkowski and um yeah, I was looking for our Logan
reps there uh but I don't have to. Councelor Duck. Okay, thank you. Last
call for questions. All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried. Thank
you, Chris. >> Thank you very much.
» And uh then we do have another section 78 here, branch A of the Russell drain.
And James, I'll let you talk about that one.
» Uh well, thank you through the chair. Uh yes, this request was received uh by the
Ministry of Transportation who's requesting to remove and relocate a
manhole north of its current location. This is in connection with the Russell
Russell Dale roundabout uh project. Um and they need to remove and replace and
upsize about 60 mters of piping. Uh they have been in conversation with Chris
throughout uh this project um to answer a few questions and fill in some
information on the existing drainage wershed out there. Um and accordingly
we're recommending in that case that uh council go ahead and appoint Chris from
Dietrich Engineering as the engineer to prepare the section 78 report for this.
So happy to answer any questions. >> Okay. Any questions for James on that?
Uh councelor B. >> Mayor McKenzie, how do we get that done
in a timely fashion for the roundabout to be completed uh when it's supposed to
be completed? >> Thanks to the chair and uh that's a good
question. I suppose I probably would push back a little bit if council
recommended we look at a different engineer this evening because I know
Chris has had an opportunity to get uh work essentially underway with this
project here. So although a report has not been prepared nor has he been
formally appointed um we're we're well on the way to seeing that report. So
you'll probably see the section 78 report come back um at either the next
meeting or the meeting right thereafter and the work that does need to happen
can continue to happen while that report's being prepared. So hopefully
that answers the question. Thanks.
Okay. All right. Um so the um the
recommendation that we have here is that the council missp proceed with the
request for the drain manager improvement to branch A of the Russell
municipal drain and that council pursuant to the drainage act to appoint
Chris Dietrich from Driage Engineering Limited as the drainage engineer on a
date 30 days from the notice of upper temp's conservation authority for the
examination of the drainage works and to proceed with the requirements of the
proposed improvement under section 78. 8. We have a mover and seconder for
that. Um, I'm kind of looking. Okay, I'll councelor Duck. I thought maybe
Councelor Foster or Harold would move. Councelor Harold, thank you. In case you
haven't caught on now, I usually look to the to the ward where the drain is. Um,
questions. All those in favor posed, if any, that's carried. We're going to deal
with one more here. Um and u we have Jesse Britain here with us. Um so he's
here uh because of the 8.8.2 the library memorandum of understand agreement.
Sorry I said understand memorandum of agreement. Dan I'll let you uh walk
through that one and uh then from there we'll go into the close session.
» Yeah. Thank you your worship um and and good evening council. So, so before you
tonight is is an MOA, a memorandum of under of agreement uh between the West
Perth Public Library and the Municipality of West Perth. Uh this is
something that's been kind of on the to-do list for the municipality and I
think the library for I don't know quite some time, I'll say. Um we're there. We
are all very happy with with what we have. We think uh it really documents
our relationship which as noted in the report we're really looking to uh find
efficiencies through partnerships amongst the two organizations because
the library is is technically a legal separate entity. Um but as you saw
tonight it's it's part of our audit uh and etc. So uh we provide uh different
services to them and they provide different services to community. Um I'm
sure I don't need to go into full detail with with all of you about what the
library does. Uh but the board has reviewed it and as noted in the report,
they haven't officially adopted it yet because they don't have a a meeting um
well between I guess when they reviewed it and and uh to to date. So we thought
we'd get it here first for any feedback from from council. So I'll maybe stop
there and if there's any questions um and sorry I should just add that we did
slip in a schedule that uh to act as essentially as a lease agreement because
we also didn't have one of those with with the library. So that was something
we uncovered uh through this process.
Okay. Any questions on uh on that memorandum of agreement?
I don't see any hands going up. We're good, Jesse. Yeah. Okay. Um then the
recommendation that we have here is the council municipality of West Perth
approve the memorandum of agreement between the municipality of West Perth
and West Perth public library board and that the mayor and clerk be authorized
to sign and seal all necessary documents. And that's moved by councelor
Fornier. Do we have a seconder for that? Uh councelor O'Donnell.
Last call for questions. All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried.
Thank you. Okay, now we're going to backtrack a
little wee bit here. And uh got to find the right page here again. Um
so the recommendation that we have is that the council municipality of West
Perth proceed in close session under section 239 of the municipal act uh as
amended um at 8:00 right on the button to address matters related to uh
position plan procedure criteria for instruction to be applied to any
negotiations carried out or to be carried out by or on behalf of the
municipality. uh litigation or potential litigation
including matters before administrative tribunals affecting the municipality
um and legal update on a property matter and a property matter with regards to an
OOLT appeal. Do we have a mover and second to go into close session for
that? So, Deputy Mayor and Councelor Foster, all those in favor posed, if
any, that's carried.
Okay, we're uh back out of close session and fairly I guess maybe a lengthy close
session, but we met in close session to discuss the hair and industrial park,
provide legal updates on property matters in Mitchell and in the Hibbert
Wards, uh an OOLT appeal in the Logan ward and some HR matters and direction
was given to staff to deal with that. So that was our close session. Now I got to
find out where we're at here, I think. Yep. 8.2.4
the OP annual operating budget uh cost update and James is going to look after
that for us. >> Uh well, thank you and through your
worship. This record is being brought forward for information to provide
council with a bit of an update on current OP costs and some anticipated
budget budget pressures ahead of the 2027 year. Uh so during the preparation
of our current year budget, we uh budgeted for approximately 1.88 million
in OP costs. Uh following the province's release of the final building
information, our pro our costs were c capped at approximately 1.97 million,
which was an increase of about 91,000 over budget. Um without that 11% cap,
our services would have been closer to 2.24 million. It's important to note
that the 11% cap was calculated excluding costs associated with our
additional services agreement we have with the OP. So the enhanced services
that we receive in West Perth that those costs were not subject to the 11% cost
um cap the 11% increase cap. So those increases do not have an 11% cap and did
not have an 11% cap on them in 2026. All this to say that's what led to your
increase there. Looking ahead to 2027, our base allocation is approximately
about that 2.24 million. So that's our cost without the 11% cap. That's what we
need to plan for because we can't anticipate a similar cap to come forward
in the 2027 year. We've been given no guarantee that there'll be any cap
coming forward um from the province at this time and so this is really just
information for us council to be aware of that budget pressure that's coming
forward. Happy for any questions. >> Thanks James. Any questions for James on
that? Um, no. Uh, oh, sorry. Sorry. Go ahead.
» Through you, Mr. Mayor. So, is the OP prepared to explain why
uh why the increase like what's what's driving this? Do they can they explain
that? >> Um,
» or can they come to a later date, come to this council perhaps and explain
what's going on there? I think through the chair I know what I can say is the
OP detachment board has done some advocacy to the province around these
increasing costs. I really can't say exactly the particulars of what go into
those cost increases. We can certainly request more information from the
province, but I know this is a pressure that all Ontario municipalities are
facing and faced with. So when those increases come across the board, they
come across the board for all Ontario municipalities and they apply to that
that standard contract. So >> Dan, anything to add?
» Um, and I think I think uh James is correct. We can come back with more
information, but looking back uh there certainly was a new agreement signed on
on the labor side with OP. So, I think there's new collective uh new collective
agreements in place and that's led to uh some some of the increases as well.
» Okay, other questions. Phil question through the mayor. When they came in
2024, they laid out their three-year financial plan and those increases were
nowhere near 11%. So, I'm just wondering what changed in year to year to get that
11%. And with the enhanced at 400,000, what does that get you? And what was it
looking like in 2004, for example, or 24, sorry.
» Um, I'll address what I can from that. I might have to get back to you on the
second piece or on your last question there. I'll say the 11% that's a cap.
So, that was a cap that the province placed on saying that we will only
charge you at most the 11% increase. It was more than that that it went up. I
haven't seen the 2024 year contracts, but I would anticipate that it's likely
the former answer that the CEO just gave there. There's been new collective
agreements and cost increases that weren't on the books in 2024 and now
are. And again, we're at we're at the mercy of those increases. Uh yeah,
» uh a bit of clarity on enhanced is essentially what you're getting is
you're getting a sergeant. Um, so you have you have Sergeant Scott Lob here in
Mitchell and you're getting a DAC um, which is a acronym for department
administration. I don't know, clerk technician. I'll
make something up there. I'm not quite sure on that one. Um, and I think the
other aspect that you get uh is if you have a major event in your municipality,
um, you don't get a subsequent bill for for the services. Um so if uh you know I
know there's there's been some events in our past um if those as we understand
happen in a municipality that doesn't have the enhanced services then there's
a bill for for when those those resources mobilize to that area. Um
you're sort of paying insurance for for that at this point. I think the other
thing um too and maybe Steve can give me the number but uh um I think it was in
the police services board there's is it 21 officers work out of that office
right now they don't all work in Mitchell but it draws them and they work
out of that office and around so we do have a fairly large police prevets for
the size of our municipality >> that was disclosed um I think at last
council not the one pract I I I read that and and I didn't realize it was
anywhere near that high but uh yeah yeah answer Phil okay
uh any other questions on that I'm going to try and keep moving here so we do
have a recommendation uh that the council miss receives the Ontario
provincial police annual operating budget cost update report for
information with move and seconded for that. Moved by uh councelor Harold,
seconded by councelor O'Donnell. All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's
carried. Uh the next is uh our director of operations
uh the industrial, commercial, and institutional recycling service delivery
options. And Sean is here going to uh uh manager of the environmental services,
and he's going to walk us through this one. So, welcome
Good evening, Mayor McKenzie and council. Um, so the point of this report
is to provide council with an overview of the upcoming changes to industrial,
commercial, and institutional recycling services and to seek council direction
on the municipality's preferred approach to providing ICI recycling collection
services beginning in 2027. Um, so recent regulatory changes have
removed ICI recycling from the residential blue box program. As a
result, the collection and processing of recycling generated by ICI properties no
longer are covered under the blue box framework. So um, Blue Water Recycling
Association, the BRA established a dedicated ICI recycling collection
system to ensure continued service uh, for the remainder of this year. Um so
BRA has absorbed the incremental costs uh associated with servicing ICI bins uh
during 2026. So this was a temporary measure to uh support a smooth
transition, minimize disruption and uh yeah for the municipality and business
community and then giving us time to uh determine an appropriate long-term
service model. So, effective January 1st, 2027, the BRA has advised that the
annual cost for an ICI uh recycling wheelie bin will be $160
uh per bin per year. So, currently there are approximately $250 uh bins um within
the municipality serviced by the BRA.
So, there are three options uh for the recycling uh collection service delivery
for 2027. So our first option is to maintain the previous service model. Um
we'd continue to provide ICI recycling services and absorb the full cost of the
service within the municipality. Um that would uh the disadvantage would be that
um the services would be paid through the municipal tax levy. Um so that would
be it'd be around $40,000 per year. Uh the second option is to implement cost
recovery through user fees. Um so under this uh option, municipalities would
continue to offer or West Perth would continue to offer recycling collection,
but we would recover some or um all of the associated costs from participating
um ICI properties through a user fee. And then the last option would be to
discontinue services uh completely. Um and then the businesses um institutions
um they would have to uh seek their own recycling collection services. So um the
big disadvantage there would be to it would uh reduce recycling participation
potentially and waste diversion um from the landfill and from that whole sector.
Um so we could see an increase in landfill um disposal volumes. Um staff
is recommending option two. Um, so financially, as I said earlier, um, this
would be, uh, a result of around $40,000 impact on our solid waste, uh,
operations budget. Um, and so currently, just in the residential blue box
program, we're around $15,530 per year for just the residential um,
recycling program. That covers like urban and rural residents within the
municipality. Um, if council approves option two, the
municipality would establish a cost recovery mechanism to recover some or
all of the annual service costs for the participating municipality or
properties. Um, the total financial impact would depend on whether council
wishes to uh recover the full cost or only a portion thereof. So, I'm happy to
uh answer any questions. >> Okay, any questions on that?
Alex, go ahead. If we go ahead with option two at $160
for the wheelie bin, that's the like medium 240s or whatever the standard
mediums are now. >> Correct. Yes.
» Um, so that's effectively the same price as we are for that size of garbage bin.
So wouldn't people be more inclined to buy a garbage bin and not have to care
and just pack it all in and then that's not going to divert it?
» Uh, yes. through the mirror. Yeah. The the hope would be that people would the
commercial businesses would still want to recycle and not pack everything into
the garbage
question that I have. Um, so if we offer them the willie bin, um, and I'm
thinking of some of the large users with a lot of cardboard, uh, you know, I
guess I'm thinking maybe like a Gatlers in Dublin and maybe even the independent
grocery store where they get a lot of stuff, cardboard boxes, they maybe
already have a deal with a with a with a an outfit that would have a bin that
they would be putting this stuff bin. So, do they have to take a wheelie bin
or if they decide they have a bin or want to use a bin that that would be
what they would use? >> Uh, yeah. So, Mayor McKenzie, so they
they may have their own separate um contract with a like a waste management
or or >> That's what I was saying,
» right? They may um there are other uh commercial businesses that have several
wheelie bins already here, so they would have to pay per wheelie bin. But if they
wanted to go to a have a separate avenue where they would um have a different
business come and provide a larger uh a larger bin than they would have to that
would be out of their own pocket, >> right?
» Yeah. >> Well, it's going to be out of their own
pocket no matter what. So So they can opt out of of our really bin if they
wish. >> If they don't want that provided, then
they can go a separate route and then that that'd be something that they'd
have to do on their own, >> right? But they'd have to well they'd
have to notify us. first so that we knew what it was
» and you know when we inform them of this
that's we maybe should indicate that to them like I'm thinking of the larger
users anyways. >> Yeah. So so once we come up with a a
decision then that'll be when we start >> Yeah.
» doing the Yeah. notifying of >> right of our direction. Yeah.
» That's good. Any other questions? Uh council Rose.
So this is just for commercial. This is it residential,
» commercial and industrial, right? >> Industrial. Okay.
» Institutional, industrial, commercial. >> Thank you.
» Anybody else? Okay. Uh we do have a recommendation
here. Um, and I'm assuming this is the one we're going to use that uh the
council municipality of West Perth approve option two uh implement cost
recovery through user fees for industrial, commercial and institutional
recycling collection services identified in the staff report
seconded for that. Uh, Deputy Mayor Tankowski and seconded by councelor
Rose. Last call for questions, comments. Councelor
» Mayor McKenzie, I think it'll be really important uh the communication uh after
this decision if we pass this resolution that that'll be uh very important.
» Yeah. No, I agree. Any other questions? Okay. Ready for the motion? All those in
favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried. Thank you.
» Thank you. Uh, next on the agenda, we have uh
director of community services with regards to the West Peru Center and
donations. So, another good news story, Nick.
» Oh, you left it on. Good evening, Mayor McKenzie and members of council. Uh,
before you is a report of a youth center donation in the amount of $8,500.
We're bringing forward this recommendation to accept these uh
donated funds for youth center equipment. Uh the donations were
generously received from the Lions Club of Monton Camp Kids in the amount of
$2,000, West Perth Community Singers in the
amount of $1,500 and Osborne and Hibbert Mutual Fire Insurance Company in the
amount of $5,000. All three donors have requested that
this uh that their contributions go to equipment for that benefits the youth
center users. Um staff are proposing the funds uh
sorry proposed equipment includes a water bottle fill station, a mobile pool
table, interactive game projector, a rock band game and instruments as well
as an arcade game cabinet. uh no additional funds is required where this
uh donate these donations cover the amount of all these uh donations. Um
all the equipment will remain the property of us at the municipality once
purchased and maintained by us as well. and uh
staff will invite the donating organizations to a recognized event at
our youth center to honor the donation once uh these have been purchased and
installed in place. So again, as staff are recommending that we accept these
donations and direct the usage towards use center equipment. So if there's any
questions, I can take them now. Okay, >> questions for Nick on that.
Don't see any hands going up. So, very good. So, we do have a recommendation
here that uh West Perth accept donated funds totaling uh $8,500 and direct the
treasur to allocate the funds for the purchase of per um uh purpose of
purchasing youth center equipment during the 2026 fiscal year. Moved by councelor
Herald, seconded by um councelor Rose. Uh, all those in
favor posed, if any, that's carried. Thanks, Nick. Um, connecting link
transfer. Dan, thank you, mayor. Uh, before council
tonight, I'm seeking some direction on how to proceed. Essentially, I've landed
at a crossroads and uh, you know, as noted in the report, we've been kind of
dealing with this matter since 2022. Um, and really what it's boiled down to
is that as uh the the urban settlement boundary has changed and and grown
through the official plan, um, the municipality doesn't have jurisdiction
within its quote unquote boundary anymore. Um, and it and it's with MTO.
Um, and that leaves it problematic for us to try to address speeding through
traditional means such as, you know, changing speed limits, signage, and
enforcement as well from from a bylaw standpoint. Um, I think I've laid out
the events that have transpired quite well in the report. Um and the next step
for us is to get a recommendation from council that we start to have some
discussions with the MTO about uh extending the connecting link limits so
they match our urban settlement boundary with our OPA. Um
and I'm happy to have any questions
questions for Dan on that. I Oh, Alex, go ahead.
What would the increased ongoing cost of maintaining that be given what it how
much it costs us to do the other part of our connecting link because we can't do
it in house? >> Um I don't know at this time I don't
know how much they'd be willing to partner with and I don't know the cost
of those assets. So that's that's basically why we need direction. uh they
won't sit down and have these discussions with us until we get this
direction from council and have this motion.
» I think um you know I don't know whether we really need to buy the highway. You
know I think if we can just get them all we really how this all started was speed
signs and we want to move them out. You know um I would like I I'm in favor of
you know what you're wanting but I wonder if we shouldn't be copying after
after our meeting in Toronto. I think we we're we're would be able to copy our
minister and and Matt Ray as well and just show them that it's taken since
1922 or 2022 rather to try and put a speed
sign. And I think the one that comes to mind obviously is the one out by uh West
Perth Village uh because of you know the long-term care facility there and and
the closeness to the schools and it it shouldn't be rocket science to do that
you know so um I don't know if anybody else has any further comments but we
have an issues there and we have issues out at the east end as well at that
part. So the recommendation, if nobody has any other question, the
recommendation is that municipality Westport uh supports uh discussions with
the Ontario Ministry of Transportation regarding the potential transfer and
designation of additional sections of Highway 23 and Highway 8 of the existing
connecting link limits within the municipality of West Perth to align with
the settlement area boundary. and that the clerk be directed to prepare and
submit formal correspondence respecting the proposed revision to the connecting
link limits. So I have a mover and seconder for that moved by Deputy Mayor
Tinkowski, seconded by Councelor O'Donnell. Any further discussion?
Um Dean, sorry. Hopefully this doesn't take
another four years to happen because uh yeah, you're right, Mayor McKenzie. was
a simple petition dealing with traffic speed concerns and this has gone on too
long. So happy to support this recommendation and happy to support
staff and trying to get this figured out. Thanks.
Somebody have a question over here. No, no, we're good. Okay. Um, yeah, like I
like I said previously, I don't know whether we need to buy the highway, but
all we want is just to move it out a little bit and and change the speed
limit a bit. So, okay. Just confirm vote there.
» Yeah, I will. Yep. I knew I had to do that yet. So, all those in favor?
Opposed? If any, that is carried. It never hurts to remind me.
Uh the next item then is 8.8.3, the Memorial Forest Playground. And Dan
is going to talk to us on that one. >> Yep. Thank you. Um kind of a report back
um item here. So, council's seen uh this report before. uh we got direction at
the last time to kind of bring back some information regarding that that natural
playground um as well as some accessibility features and some changes
to the site plan. Um I don't have the site plan finalized at this point in
time. Um but we've also been working with environmental um stewardship at at
the county as well for some some revisions there. Uh but essentially
we're here. We still think the blue imp is the way to go uh based on what you
know you can see from a natural standpoint.
kind of the bang for your buck there and and we have added an accessible feature
into the playground as well and it hasn't had a large impact on the budget.
So, we're looking for a direction to kind of proceed ahead here and uh yeah,
happy to have any questions if there are questions for Dan on that. I know we had
it at a previous meeting. We talked about it. So, we're good. Okay. Uh so
the recommendation here is that the municipality of West Perth approved the
blue rimp playground design for the new memorial forest playground and that
council authorize staff to utilize 110,000 from the parkland reserve to
utilize group buying procurement for the purchase of the blue and uh playground
and that council direct staff to report back with a site plan and sponsorship
agreement for their review. Move her and second her for that. Uh, councelor Duck,
is the councelor Fornier still on? Yep, he's there. Would you like to second
that, Andrew? Yep, he's
» I've been seconding stuff all night. You just never see.
» Okay. Um, last call for questions. All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's
carried. Uh, next item then is Kison Park Pavilion Electrical Repair and
Parking Lot Upgrades. Dan, >> thank you. This is a new one um coming
forward. So I believe council would have received some letters from the uh
agricultural society and uh following that we had a meeting um with the mayor
and some staff with the society and wanted to unpack um just kind of the
content of the letters. Uh prior to that we were aware so essentially I'll get
into the pavilion um the electrical repairs right now. I I didn't know what
to call it, so repair seems like the most appropriate one. But, uh,
essentially the it's all the plugs, receptacles are looped onto to one
breaker. So, during the fair, um, the cattle dryers get plugged in and they
continuously trip that breaker. Um, so what the request is is for us to go in
and essentially just repair that. So, we've worked with uh our electrician
here and we think um obviously adding another breaker into the line is going
to repair that problem. Um, so I will disclose, sorry, this report's changed a
little bit, but I want to disclose that I I authorized that um through uh
through our existing budget um to kind of find the 10 grand in there or or not
proceed with a with a project uh because we wanted to get it done before the
fair. But I'm also bringing it here for council because I don't have authority
to pull from a reserve. So, we we are recommending you pull from a reserve,
but if not, um we I've certainly got a plan for this and I can report back to
what that would be. Um but we wanted that done. And then the egg society is
also looking at doing some paving um in front of Crystal Palace and based on
quotes um we thought it would be a good idea if they're in their paving, maybe
we should see what it costs to pave some of our unpaved parking lot. Uh we've
identified kind of the areas there that we think would be suitable for paving.
At this point, we we recommend just carrying forward with with I'll say
section B right now. Um, and we showed kind of the exercise where we were
looking at doing this and they're in support of it as well. Um, so that would
be our main purpose. It just kind of cleans up the parking lot. It's not
something that, you know, was really part of the arena renovations or
anything. It it came to fruition through through this ask and and a bit of an
idea. um that way as well as they've uh requested
um I believe they requested financial support to the cost of 30,000 and I got
into this and into the report of of kind of the history of that we sorry my
computer just died. We had $5,000 carry forward that we put in the reserve from
I think approximately two years ago. Um and then we're looking at providing an
additional five um in financial support. So, we'd be providing them $10,000 of
financial support towards their projects. And we are currently working
with them on drainage matters as well. Um, I'm sorry, Nick, I don't know if
it's been scoped yet, but we're looking at getting uh some of the drainage work
to figuring out what's happening over there and why we're getting some
ponding. Um, ideally, we can find the solution and fix it internally with our
with our staff here. Um, so happy to have any questions.
» Any questions? I just had one. Um, when we were getting prices for paving,
um, we have Levis kind of lined up. Did we get more than one quote or not?
» We got a quote from Levis and they got a quote.
Nick, can you sorry my but do you remember
they were the company?
Great. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. So, we we did have two. Yeah. All right. Well, I
just I always get another quote. Any other questions? Okay. Uh, I got a
recommendation here then that uh, Miss Balia West Perth approve the new Kerson
Park Capital expense of up to $85,000 to be funded from reserve for parks and
recreation for the pavilion electrical upgrades of $10,000. Uh, parking lot
paving $65,000 and then additional support,
» please. Pardon? Oh, sorry.
» Sorry, my hand my hand my hand has been up the whole time.
» Yeah, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, >> perhaps this is a a silly question and
but if anyone has ever like done the wiring on their own home before, they
would know better than to run everything through one circuit breaker. If the
electrical work on the Keton pavilion, which I could add cost us far too much
than it could have, had been done by somebody that knew that this wouldn't
have happened. I would propose that this extra $10,000 cost comes out of whoever
we had do the electrical work in the first place because they did it wrong.
That's a ridiculous reason to need $10,000 worth of repairs. We spent what
$900,000 on this pavilion and they did the
electrical work wrong. Does that sound sane to anybody else that could possibly
hear that sentence? I guess the only thing that I could say,
Andrew, is uh they probably weren't aware of the usage that was going to be
used there. Like most of that at the uh at the pavilion is basically lights, you
know. Um and the only time that I think we have an issue with blowing breakers
is when the fair is on and we get uh 10 or 15 people with cavs giving them a a
shampoo and a wash and they're drying them. So,
» so presumably whoever was doing the electrical work for our fair pavilion
was unaware of the fair. Again, it seems like a ridiculous reason
to need $10,000 worth of repairs. If I had any recommendation, it would be go
after the people that did the electrical work in the first case and make them pay
for it. They did it wrong. >> We can take your point into
consideration and staff can look into it. I guess, you know,
» I I think I what I can say at this point is 10,000 we're looking at as a maximum
upset in this point. We don't want to have to come back and ask ask for more
money. So, I I'll say that's our maximum upset on on this uh line item. I don't
disagree. There was a mistake and I'm not going to say that, you know, I don't
think any of the staff are still here. Um but I I think staff should have
caught something here and and found that. But you are correct that it only
blows when we have these cattle dryers. So I I can't say whether the
electricians knew or didn't know or what at that point in time. I don't think the
juice is going to be worth the squeeze to go after the contractor for the
$10,000. So >> I don't actually either. I just wanted
to make it clear that when we're approving contracts of this sort, we
need to be a little more careful with the details going forward.
» Understood. Deputy Mayor. Yeah. through you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I seem to recall
that the design on this structure had been changed at least twice. So, um,
it's no surprise that something like this might have happened, um, or has
happened. And I think to uh CEO Hobson's point, the uh parties involved at the
time are no longer here to answer answer for that, whether it's staff or the uh
designer or the uh contractors. So, um unfortunately, we're left with uh having
to make the corrective actions and and move on to uh prevent any further
problems.
Okay. Anybody else? All right. I did read the motion, but I
was looking for a mover and secondary for these uh expenses. So, moved by
councelor Duck, seconded by Deputy Mayor Showski. Last call for questions. All
those in favor? Opposed? If any, that is carried.
Uh, next item then is uh Wendy's report on surplus surplus uh 225 surplus
report. So Wendy, the floor is yours.
» Good evening, Mayor and Council. I didn't bring my mouse, so hopefully
there's no feedback. Um, so the before report before you is
the 2025 surplus report. Um the report kind of outlines how staff came up with
an the surplus of $348,415.
Um staff are recommending that the surplus be allocated to complete
previously budget development project um which would be um two development
projects. uh reduce boring for the arena plant
um project that's ongoing and then to support the park pavilion electrical and
parking lot works that was just just discussed and then hold funds related to
the OP grant reconciliation and so in the resolution it breaks down
each of those and the amounts requested so I'm happy to take any questions
» okay thanks Wendy any questions for Wendy on what we're doing with the
surplus. Uh, Deputy Mayor again
» through you your worship. Um, thanks Wendy for the report on the $100,000
that's being applied towards development projects and transferred to the reserve
for transportation roads. Can you provide a bit more detail about where
which specific projects are being uh tab for that money and why?
» It's cautionary, right? Yeah. Um, so if I can I just I
want to be very clear because I think this is a this is a unique thing in
Wester and I think this is a good thing and it's an economic development thing.
So in the municipality of West Perth it's been standard practice that when a
subdivision comes in and there's a there's a road that would potentially be
shared with a adjacent developer in the future. Um, West the developer at that
time will pay for the road to go in. West Perth will pay the portion
that the adjacent developer would be on the hook to pay. And then that's where
we implement one foot reserves and then we don't remove those one foot reserves
until that other developer comes in, develops that land, and then pays us
whatever that the money is money is owing. And again, that's a very unique
thing to West Perth. It's a good thing and I think it certainly drives
development and we when we get developers in here from Kitchener
Waterlue, they absolutely love this. Um there are certainly some costs and
there's some things that I think as we get our legs under us a little bit more
that we're going to be looking to change um on this structure, but I just want to
be clear that that's how this works so everyone understands because this is c
this is m our cash dollars uh cash that goes into this. So this is residual of
some projects. Um you know there'll be some some wimple cost sharing. Uh
basically any of the roads where you're seeing final lift has not been done
across some of our subdivisions here and putting in a reserve um for those. So, I
know Whimple will be an example um north of the highway there. And then
I think we've got um Henry.
I think it's in Henry. Sorry.
And then, sorry, I can't uh >> I can't pull it up right now, but that's
but that's what it is. Yes. Thank you. Uh there'll be there'll be a Clayton uh
Clayton one as well. Okay.
» Thank you,
» Mayor McKenzie. >> Yeah. So, I I'd prefer that uh with
already over $6 million in in that reserve that uh that uh uh come forward
in the budget process that when we are budgeting for those needs for those
reserves that we that is clearly outlined uh that rather we would use
that $100,000 to reduce the debt. similar to the uh the the next line item
uh on the Arena uh ice plant project that uh that that goes to reducing debt.
And the same thing with the uh the $60,000 um in in tax stabilization. Let
let's uh I if if there was a surplus um for for uh this previous year uh let
let's use it to reduce these debt payments that we have um as opposed to
again putting it into reserves for uh for future use. If we if we if we can
reduce the debt let's uh let's use it for uh that purpose instead.
» Okay. Go ahead. Um so for the uh two
development projects they were on the budget in 2025 and they should have been
identified as a carry forward project um just through the final process. That's
when it got picked up and so that's why you're seeing it here instead of a carry
forward project um being contributed to the reserves. And the op one um it's
pretty much a guarantee we're going to have to pay that back. And so that's
just a timing between uh the province's year end and our year end where that got
captured.
» Okay. Any any other questions, comments? No. Okay. We have a fairly lengthy
recommendation here that Miss Bal West Perth approve the allocation of the 200
2025 surplus revenue in the amount of $348,415
as follows. 100,000 to be applied towards development projects and
transferred to the reserve for transportation roads. 108,415
be applied towards the Arena ice plant project to reduce the amount of external
financing required and transferred to the reserve for recreation and parks and
80,000 be applied towards the electrical and egg society projects and be
transferred to the reserve for recreation and parks and the remaining
60,000 be temporarily retained within the reserve for tax stabilization
pending final reconciliation. of the additional OP funding received in
2025. We have a mover and secondary for that.
Councelor Rose and Councelor Duck. Uh last call for questions. All those in
favor posed, if any. That's carried. Uh a couple items under correspondence
there. Thanks, Wendy. Uh from Mland Conservation Authority and then the
Western Lake Area Regional Conservation Authority. If there's no questions, the
recommendation is that the municipality of West Perth accept correspondence as
information. >> There is a question. Pardon?
» Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Andrew. You need your hand.
» Well, I you know what? I I've gotten tired of using the hand. It doesn't
work. So, I'm just going to talk from now on.
» That's fine. >> Yeah. Uh, we got that letter from the
wards earlier this week, and that was intended to be included in this week's
agenda. I haven't seen it, and that should be
» that letter. We've talked about the letter from wards and that was a closed
session matter and the letter was not addressed to it was addressed to members
of council. >> Is there any chance I can find out the
details of that discussion seeing as I couldn't fi attend the closed session?
» Um I'm sure maybe James or Dan can talk to
you about the closed session. >> Okay. Thank you very much. I I I do uh I
that letters like that concern me, so I'm looking to find out more information
about it. Thank you very much. Sorry for the interruption.
» Okay. No. Well, that's fine. Um
» I need a mover and second here. Did I not get I had Ryan, didn't I?
» Okay. Mover and second. I'll get uh I'll get councelor O'Donnell and and uh and
councelor Foster uh to deal with the correspondence. All those in favor?
Opposed? If any, that's carried. Um, Fullerton Fastball Club Heron County
Fastball League year-end tournament. The recommendation, this is a yearly one
that we get. The recommendation is that the Miss Pal West Perth declare the
Hiron County Fastball League year-end tournament held by Fullerton A's
fastball club. Catter Park on or at Catter Park on September the 11th to the
13th be of municipal significance and advise the Alcohol and Gaming Commission
of Ontario that it has no objection to taking place. Mover and secondary
councelor Harold Councelor Chessel um questions all those in favor posed if
any that's carried. And then a similar letter from the Mitchell Hawks. Uh and
uh yeah, we had two conflicts here.
recommendation uh is that uh the council of municipality of West Perth declare
the Mitchell Hogar and slow pitch tournament held at Kerson Park on August
the 28th to the 30th to be of municipal significance and advise the Alcohol and
Gaming Commission of Ontario that it has no objection to it taking place. Mover
and second for that. Council Chessel, Councelor Rose, any questions? All those
in favor? Opposed? If any that is carried
um council reports uh there's a number of bylaws here um we have uh nine I
guess nine nine bylaws >> 52
for the morel tree. >> Oh that's right we take that one out.
Yeah. Okay. So, um
re um
yeah, I just needed to flip over to the other page here. So, yeah. Okay. So, the
recommendation is the council municipality of West Perth give first
and second reading to bylaw 48 um
through to 55 with the exception of 52. Does that sound okay? [laughter]
and zoning bylaw 327 um on this 10th day of August. So, it's
everything uh all the bylaws except for bylaw 52 because that one was squashed.
So, do we have a mover in second of your first and second reading? Councelor
Rose, um councelor Foster, all those in favor posed. If any that's carried and
then uh the final recommendation is that council give third and final reading to
bylaw 48 through to 55 with the exception of 52 and zoning bylaw 327
this 10th and >> 51 as well is just a
» oh and okay so 5 exempt 51 and 52 um we got that all clear moved by
councelor Rose uh seconded by Uh, Councelor Harold.
All those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried. Um, coming events. I'm
not going to go through them all because there's a number of it's getting late
and there's a number of items here. Quite a few. I do want to mention, I
guess August the 13th, which is uh uh Wednesday, is the Crody Ballpark uh
chicken barbecue, and that's a major fundraising for them out there. Um, I do
want to mention about music in the park. Uh, and this one is going to be at the
Cerson Park again as opposed to the Lions Park. Uh, the other one I think
that I want to mention is, uh, the agricultural fair, the 4th to the 6th,
and I know Lindsay has contacted you about working the booth, uh, in the
arena, and I'll let her look after that. The question that I have, is there
interest to put anything in the parade? Sometimes we do. I think we have the
last four years. We've always had a float in there. Uh, is there interest to
do that again this year or No.
Um, gee, I did know.
» Yeah. Falling into fun. Yeah.
This is the last meeting before the fair or I wouldn't I wouldn't have mentioned
it. So, we we need to get some kind of direction. Phil's saying,
"Oh, Andrew." >> I would love that.
» You're going to fall into fun. >> No, I mean having something in the in
the parade. I don't know about falling into fun. I don't like falling over.
That hurts. >> But a float in the parade definitely.
That representing us in the community, letting people see us do anything is uh
important. >> Okay. Um, so, um,
again, I I need a consensus here. Uh, I've got some that is saying, "No, let's
let's can it." And I've got one definite that we should do it.
Okay. Uh, who wants to kind of oversee it? Um,
like we got to line up a truck or a tractor and a wagon. Um,
right.
council wants to do and stuff. >> Well, staff can can help, but you know,
it it takes a little bit of time to decorate it up. Uh I just, you know, I'm
just looking for somebody that maybe wants to head it. I I don't mind
helping, but um you know, we need somebody responsible to kind of figure
out what we're what we want to do. And uh
» Andrew, >> Andrew's name. Well, certainly. Uh, you
know, usually we get together the day before at the at the township or at the
municipal operations place and get something together. So,
» Oh, I don't care. I I have a trailer that we can pull behind the truck. I
don't mind. >> Oh, okay.
» Okay. >> I will volunteer to do as much as I
possibly can and my kids will help. >> Very good. Okay. So, we'll leave it with
with Nicholas and Andrew. How's that sound? Okay. Um then our our our next
meeting uh here won't be till September the 8th. So that's um notice of motion
and uh deputy mayor has a notice of motion.
» Thank you. Um your worship through you to council colleagues. Um in advance of
the September 8th, 2026 regular meeting of West Perth Council, I'm requesting to
submit a notice of motion that would read as follows. Following the July 13,
2026 BIA delegation that was made before council requesting permanent closure of
Poppy Lane on a year-round basis and following the posting of the BIA
statement of operations as part of the audit report to West Perth Council
prepared by Seabach and Company for the year ended December 31st, 2025.
that council move to request that the BIA provide a budget report to council
for information, sharing with council the BIA financial plan for the yearround
activities they propose to conduct at Poppy Lane. The BIA financial plan will
include a capital spending budget that the BIA intends to follow for capital
improvements such as outdoor furniture, lighting, landscaping, decorations, and
decor. The BIA financial plan should also include an operational spending
budget on anticipated operational costs such as snow removal, portable public
washroom facilities, and all other things that the BIA will deem necessary
to hold their events at Poppy Lane on a year- round basis.
This financial plan should also identify the revenue sources and any donation
program that the BIA intends to utilize to finance the aforementioned with the
appropriate dollar amounts to be raised accordingly
and further that this financial plan be submitted to West Perth Council for
their information no later than the regular council meeting schedule for
October 5th, 2026.
Okay.
» For the next meeting. >> Yes. It's Oh, for the next meeting.
» Yes. >> Oh, yeah. September
» on Oh, yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah. But but not dealt with until October. Right.
» Well, it's a notice of motion first of discussion at that that meeting.
» Correct. There'll only be discussion at the September 8th meeting and council
will be asked to vote on the motion and the motion asks for a report to come
back to the October meeting. So should council vote in favor of that
» would be a timeline for October to report back.
» Question from councelor Foster >> that timeline doesn't have a BIA meeting
in it
for them to respond between the two. They don't have a octo a uh September
meeting.
Then if they if the BIA needs to have a meeting, then they'll have to organize a
meeting. I I I understand. I I'm fully cognizant
that their meeting is on the 7th. But um I would like to if I I well if council
so chooses, then that's the timeline I've set out. I think in the motion
» that's an item that we can discuss at the next meeting when it comes up, you
know, and if we have to tweak it a little bit. We do have two meetings a
month from from then on. So, uh if it has to be tweaked a little bit to
accommodate their schedule, I think uh we can probably do that. Um any other
business? Okay. Uh, next one then is a
confirmatory bylaw and bylaw number 56 being a bylaw to confirm the proceedings
of the council of the corporation municipality west be read a first and
second time this 10th day of August 2026 mover and seconder for that please
um councelor Rose counselor Foster all those in favor opposed if any that's
carried and then um bylaw 56 being read a third time and finally past.
Oh, yeah. Andrew, you you don't have your hand up, but I'll take it as a Oh,
he had his hand up. Okay. All right. Second or moved by Andrew. Do we have a
seconder? Um, Deputy Mayor Tranowski. All those in favor? Opposed? If any,
that's carried. And then the last one, a motion that West Perth Council will
adjourn at uh 10:31. Moved by Councelor Harold, second by
Councelor O'Donnell. All those in favor? Opposed? It's carried. Um, thank you for
your cooperation tonight.