[1:35] Hey, good evening everybody and welcome
to our August uh West Perth Council
[1:40] meeting. Uh we do have um uh Doug Phelps
is away uh at the meeting tonight and
[1:47] councelor Andrew Fornier is online and I
will try and catch him online. Sometimes
[1:53] I don't always see him so we'll try and
catch that as we go. Um, just before we
[2:00] get started, um, I would ask, uh,
council and our guests this evening, if
[2:06] uh, they so wish that we'll bow our
heads for a moment of silent reflection.
[2:17] Okay, thank you. All right, so we'll
call the meeting to order. Um,
[2:24] there's going to be a few changes. We do
have a fairly lengthy uh council meeting
[2:29] here tonight and we're going to mix
things up a little bit. We do have a
[2:32] close session and we wanted to have the
close session earlier on in the meeting
[2:36] as opposed to later on. So, we're going
to go through the agenda and if you
[2:42] follow along um we're we have close
session as agenda item number seven.
[2:47] We're going to skip that and we're going
to go to uh item uh agenda item number
[2:53] eight and we're going to do 8.1 8.2 8.22
8.23
[3:00] and then we will uh go for the close
sessions. So it kind of gets the drains
[3:06] and what people have come for out of the
road so that they don't necessarily have
[3:11] to stay if they don't want to. So, uh,
with that in mind, um, those are the
[3:18] changes that we've made, I think, James.
So, a motion to confirm the agenda. Um,
[3:24] and, uh, as I did mention, we have a
close session, and it is to deal with
[3:28] legal updates, property manner, um, u
well, various property matters that
[3:35] we've had uh, for the last little while.
So, um, yeah, a motion to accept the,
[3:41] uh, agenda as amended. Uh, councelor
Rose, Councelor O'Donnell, all those in
[3:46] favor posed, if any, that's carried.
Does anybody have a conflict of interest
[3:51] with anything on the agenda? Councelor
O'Donnell.
[3:55] » I have a conflict on item number 9.4.
>> Okay. So, noted.
[4:00] All right.
Okay. Um that brings us down to moving
[4:06] on here. We do have a delegation. Um we
have um Paul Seabbach our um uh auditor
[4:15] I guess from Seabbach and Company. And
uh I would ask Paul to come up and uh
[4:21] give us the good news. Uh and uh I'll
just turn the floor over to you.
[4:28] Thank you very much. Uh very nice to be
here. uh when we go through everything
[4:32] uh mostly is good news. Uh our report
has are the full audited financial
[4:38] statements and then we also uh provide a
two-page uh report for council that has
[4:44] a little more information. Uh when we
did the audit this year, it was all on
[4:47] site. We did the interm audit in October
and the final audit uh first week of
[4:52] March. Um we received complete
cooperation from Wendy Manique and all
[4:57] the other departments. We try to visit
everybody and we were given access to
[5:02] everything. So, we really appreciate all
the cooperation in Wendy's effort to uh
[5:06] get the statements done. After
completing our audit, uh we're our
[5:11] auditor's report in the financial
statements show a clean audit report and
[5:15] states the financial statements present
fairly the financial position of
[5:20] municipality. At the end of the audit,
we you know, it's it seems standard, but
[5:25] things don't always go good. that uh we
can report we did not find any unusual
[5:29] transactions or sign significant matters
to bring to your attention this council
[5:33] nostanding issues within the council and
as I said received uh complete
[5:37] cooperation
um a little bit when we do do the
[5:42] audited consolidated financial
statements the things that are
[5:45] consolidated the BIA and the library
board and your share of the ERT 6.25%.
[5:54] Um, when we look at the financial
statements, the first number that jumps
[5:57] out at you is the surplus 4,257,000.
Um
[6:02] I think every year I try to explain why
when we take our surplus and we're
[6:07] obligated to use uh provincial standards
PAB accounting standards and they just
[6:14] treat the our statements on more cural
basis where when you do your budget it's
[6:18] more you're trying to raise cash for
your capital project uh debt payments
[6:22] and things like that um reserve
transfers. So when we look more on that
[6:29] basis uh Wendy's report that she had
provided earlier shows a surplus of
[6:34] 348,000. So it's important to realize
you know you did have a surplus on this
[6:39] wave 4.4 but when you look at how your
budget is presented it's it's quite a
[6:44] bit less. Uh the big item there is uh
capital. Um
[6:50] you guys when you do your budget, you
raise money to expense your capital
[6:55] where we set that up and depreciate it.
Um we only expense the interest on your
[7:01] debt payments where you have to raise
money to pay the actual principal
[7:05] payments. So that's 425,000.
And at the end we show reserve funds as
[7:13] a part of the surplus but we don't show
in ins and outs as income or expenses.
[7:20] So this year you transfer 2.2 million
almost 2.3 million to reserves. So you
[7:25] have to take that off the 4.4 because we
don't show that as a an expense. Um
[7:32] as I said we use the same uh very very
same same information. is just presented
[7:38] different policies. Consolidated
statements are important because uh the
[7:43] statements and the FIR are presented to
the province and that's how they see
[7:47] your uh financial statements. Um some
other key points um you spent 3.3
[7:54] million on capital you had budget or
last year was 5.8 8 you had budgeted 6.1
[8:00] but uh there's quite a few projects not
uh finished um some vehicles not
[8:06] purchased um in um Wendy's report that
that's summarized um at the end of the
[8:13] year your debt was 66,372,000
down from 6.8 8 million. So you paid
[8:19] down 425,000 of regular debt payments.
There were no new no new loans and you
[8:26] completed payments on a loan from the
pumping station. Um also is when you pro
[8:32] provides a debt repayment calculation by
the province. Uh you're allowed to have
[8:38] debt repayments 25% of your revenue and
at the end of last year you're at 11% of
[8:44] that. So you're well within that. Uh at
the end of the another key part end of
[8:48] the year your reserves were 24,800,000.
They were up 2.3 million. Um part of
[8:56] that was because you didn't do all the
capitals. You didn't transfer the money
[8:59] to pay for the capital. You had budgeted
to have uh 21.5
[9:04] million reserve. So you finished higher
there. You also have some uh gas tax
[9:10] funding you received but didn't spend at
the end of the year. 97,000 and a
[9:14] provincial roads grant of 136,000 that
weren't spent. Um what that all means is
[9:20] so you didn't do all your capital when
we look at the financial position you
[9:24] have you know more money in the bank and
higher reserves etc. Um so the page
[9:30] titled report to council financial
indicators it's basically your income
[9:34] statement or sorry your balance sheet as
of December 31st. Um, first thing you
[9:40] notice the bank is up uh a fair bit.
Part of that is because of the surplus
[9:46] and part of that is the uh payrolls are
lower. Uh things of that nature. So the
[9:52] balance for your bank was 24.3 million.
15.6 million of that's in your general
[9:58] bank. Um you have all your water and
waste reserve funds of almost 7 million
[10:04] and all the other reserve funds accounts
of 1.6 million. So that's the 24.3
[10:09] million in the bank. Um accounts re
taxes receivable, you did a good job of
[10:15] collecting taxes, it's down to 2.7% of
the total taxes. Of the 933,600
[10:22] is current. So that's good. More taxes
you collect, the more money you have in
[10:26] the bank. Uh accounts receivable are
similar to last year. Uh long-term
[10:32] receivable is a little higher. There
were more municipal drain work that
[10:35] wasn't build at the end of the year.
961,000 versus 495,000 loss. Um
[10:41] investments, you did change your
investments uh during the year. Uh there
[10:46] was an unearned there was an earned gain
there when you uh transferred the
[10:50] investments of 1,250,000.
Um
[10:54] a lot of those uh invest investments are
wastewater reserve investments. Um the
[11:00] investment in the government business
government government business
[11:03] enterprise is your investments in the
ERT utility. It's made up of note
[11:08] receivable shares and your share
retained earnings and that's 5,44,000
[11:13] the share or your shares are valued at
cost. So they don't reflect the value
[11:18] true value of the utility just your
initial cost. So total assets current
[11:23] assets almost $42 million. things you
owed at the end of the year. Uh the
[11:28] payables are lower. There were some
development charges that were uh paid
[11:33] paid down. So payables are down 1.2
million. Uh deferred revenue. Uh those
[11:41] are
2 million up from 1.8 million. Uh we've
[11:47] talked about that. A lot of that is is
um the gas tax and the unspent uh road
[11:54] grant. Um there's a landfill closure
expenditure that we have to set up to
[12:00] reflect the future cost of closing your
landfill site and some of the older
[12:05] buildings. That's 3,95,000
up 50,000 from from last year. And then
[12:10] the municipal debt of the 6.4 we talked
about that. So the difference between
[12:14] your current assets and current
liabilities is 26.4 million. Uh the
[12:19] important thing there is that because
you all your capital that's up 5.3
[12:23] million. So you have more money just to
uh spend for the current and future
[12:27] operations. Um capital assets and then
the year your book value 1 103 million.
[12:35] Um then there's some prepaid expenses
which is basically insurance and some
[12:39] inventory items. Um 106,000 land
inventory for sale. That's at cost. So
[12:45] there's no change there. He didn't sell
anything. 4.5 million. I know. So when
[12:50] you take the net financial assets and
the 134 million that's your surplus of
[12:57] 134,529
and that's up to 4.2 million of your
[13:01] surplus. Are there any questions on the
balance sheet?
[13:10] Uh the next statement is the your
financial statement. It has the budget
[13:14] and five years of comparatives.
Um
[13:20] the Canada Community Building Fund is
the old uh federal gas tax. You did use
[13:25] some 285,000.
Um the SE grant you received 1.1
[13:31] million. Uh they didn't spend it all. So
you deferred 258,000.
[13:35] Um
some other grants. The other grants are
[13:41] other municipalities. It's lower 38,000.
The provincial offenses act funding was
[13:46] lower. Um
[13:50] the other government grants 780,000
that's a little higher. That's the
[13:54] library uh the drainage superintendent
preventing auto uh preventing autothefts
[14:00] grant and u
then we get to other income. When we
[14:06] looked at investment income, that's
higher than budgeted and higher than the
[14:09] year before, the 3 million. A large part
of that is the gain when you transferred
[14:13] your investments uh for the wastewater
reserves. Uh $1.2 million there again.
[14:19] So, total revenue 25.6 million. Um
higher than was budgeted, but a lot of
[14:25] that is your investment income and some
grants. uh your expenditures
[14:32] policing was higher than budgeted but um
you received a grant for uh victim
[14:37] services so that 115,000 is in there so
that is higher than budgeted. Um
[14:45] planning and uh development is higher
than budgeted 311,000 versus 191,000.
[14:52] That's the interest. There's interest
there long-term debt. Um so when you
[14:56] take the revenue minus the total
expenses of 21.4 million comes back to
[15:00] your surplus of 4.2 million year before
3.3.
[15:06] As far as the financial statements um
the very second page is the auditor's
[15:11] report as I talked about it. It's a
clean audit report. Um note number six
[15:17] is in your investment in government
business enterprise. It shows the
[15:21] investment of 5 million. Um and as I
said the shares are all at cost.
[15:28] Um note number eight explains uh
estimate retirement obligations. That's
[15:34] the landfill cost we have to set up. Um
note number nine shows mis municipal
[15:40] debt uh and that paid down 425,000 and
it also shows that the the loan for the
[15:47] pumping station has been repaid over
117,000 was paid off. So that frees up
[15:52] some capital for that department. Uh
there is a a whole page on reserves. It
[15:58] shows how the reserves went from 22.6
million to uh 24.8 million. As I said,
[16:05] that might have been lower per your
budget, but because of some department
[16:08] surpluses and you didn't spend all the
capital, you ended up 2.2 million high
[16:13] deferred revenue schedule of 2,91,000.
that shows a lot of that development
[16:19] charges and a lot of it is the gas tax
and the other deferred is the provincial
[16:25] road grant that wasn't all spent.
Um at the very end of our statements, uh
[16:31] there's the trust fund and that's
basically money set aside for cemetery
[16:37] uh maintenance and purposes.
Uh so in closing I would say that you
[16:45] know you did finish the year with 4.2
million. A lot of that's because you
[16:49] didn't do all your capital on a more
cash basis. The surplus was 348,000. You
[16:54] did increase your financial position. I
mentioned the 5.3 million. Um you were
[16:58] able to lead all your 2025 capital
without borrowing. Uh this set you in a
[17:04] you know the end of this year set you in
a position to have a large capital
[17:08] budget for this year. And once again,
I'd like to thank Wendy and her
[17:12] department for all her cooperation.
Are there any questions?
[17:18] Okay, questions for Paul?
[17:23] No, no questions. Okay. Well, thank you
very much, Paul. Appreciate you coming
[17:28] this evening and giving us the good
news. Relatively good news. So, thank
[17:33] you very much.
>> No, thank you. And I hope you have a
[17:35] good year this year. Thank you.
>> Yeah. So do I. [laughter]
[17:39] Okay. Um, at this Oh, sorry. Question.
Councelor Duck.
[17:44] » Actually, sorry. I just I was making my
notes there. We did at the beginning of
[17:46] your interest. Can I declare for 9.4 as
well? I just wanted to make that note
[17:50] now before we got a little carried away.
Sorry about that. Thank you.
[17:52] » No, that's fine. So, noted.
[18:01] Yeah. Yep. So, you you got that, James?
Yep. Yep. Okay. No, that's good. That's
[18:07] good. Okay, Wendy, do you want to uh
come up and uh introduce uh Loren here?
[18:15] Lauren, sorry.
[18:20] So, this is Lauren Tam. She's uh um here
on a 12-month contract to uh fill in the
[18:27] position of deputy treasurer. So, with
that, I'll
[18:32] introduce Lauren to you. She's going to
have a few words to to share.
[18:38] » No, go ahead.
>> Good evening, Mayor and Council. I just
[18:41] want to say thank you for the
opportunity to work here. When I saw the
[18:44] job posting, I thought it was a great
opportunity to learn more in the
[18:47] municipal world. Um, I've been here
almost a month now and I've really
[18:50] enjoyed my time here and I'm really
looking forward to the next year of
[18:52] being here.
>> So, you're not going to mention who your
[18:57] dad is?
>> My dad's Mike. He was on council for 16
[19:01] years, I think. So,
>> something like that. Yeah, good, good,
[19:04] good. Well, thank you very much and and
I thought it was appropriate right after
[19:08] we did the auditor statement to bring
you up and introduce you. So, thank you
[19:13] and welcome. And you're welcome to stay
as long as you want, but you don't have
[19:16] to stay through the whole night.
>> Thanks.
[19:18] » Okay. Very good. Okay. Um, we could
probably do the consent agenda, couldn't
[19:24] we? Yeah, I think we can. We'll we'll do
the consent agenda here. Um,
[19:31] » oh, yes. Sorry. Yes. Yes. Recommendation
here that uh the council municipality of
[19:36] West Perth receives the 2025 audited
audit uh prepared by Seabbach and
[19:42] Company as presented. So we have a mover
and second councelor Duck uh councelor
[19:47] Herold. Uh any questions? All those in
favor? Opposed? If any that's carried.
[19:53] Thank you. Thanks. Okay. The consent
agenda is there. There's 13 items on the
[19:59] consent agenda. Is there um anything
there that anybody wants clarification
[20:06] on or would like pull them to deal with
separately? Maybe some clarification on
[20:11] 6.6. I was just curious if we ever used
pesticides in our parks prior to the uh
[20:17] ban.
>> Um
[20:21] prior to
>> Yes.
[20:24] » Oh,
was that a Nick question? Nick, I don't
[20:28] know if can you I don't think you can
answer that if used them prior to We can
[20:34] look into that and report back, but I
I'd assume so. But I
[20:42] » I just feel like if we send a letter of
support, I think spraying around our
[20:47] ballparks would be beneficial to make it
look cleaner. Causing the grass to grow
[20:52] up through the gravel doesn't look very
appealing. And I think it would just
[20:56] beautify the space a little bit better
if we could spray.
[20:59] » So, um, do you want to do you want us to
pull that and then, uh, move a support
[21:07] for that?
>> Okay. Um, okay, we could we can do that.
[21:12] Um, that was 8.6.
So, um, um, yeah, you pretty well
[21:19] explained what was in the resolution.
And so if you want to move that, do we
[21:23] have a seconder to deal with that? Uh
take your pick. Deputy mayor, uh support
[21:28] that. Um any further discussion on that?
Uh Dan,
[21:32] » just from an information standpoint, I
I'll just noted that that regulation is
[21:36] 2009 regulation. So we'd be we'd be
going back pretty far from the staff
[21:40] standpoint.
>> Any other questions or comments? All
[21:45] those in favor of that? Okay, those
opposed, that's carried. Is there
[21:51] anything else anybody would like um an
explanation on or pulled separately?
[21:57] » Sometimes my hand's not noticed when I'm
on Zoom. Mayor,
[22:00] » you're not noticed, Andrew. I'm sorry.
Um but yeah, go ahead.
[22:05] » Uh I'm going to restrict the number of
things that I want to pull from here
[22:10] because I don't know if anyone else is
reading this and thinking, "Oh god,
[22:13] counselor Fornier is going to talk for a
really long time." Um but 6.1 and 6.3 in
[22:20] particular if you don't mind. Uh
emergency shelters serving women and
[22:25] children experiencing intimate partner
violence. Um that is a rather urgent
[22:31] issue. I have uh several
uh exes in my life who have experienced
[22:37] intimate partner violence from other
partners and I know from firsthand
[22:41] stories of what it's like trying to live
in those environments with children. We
[22:45] need more spaces. We need spaces for
longer. We need spaces for more
[22:51] more types of events. So, that one I
straight up want pulled and supported.
[22:57] And also 6.3, the township of uh let me
see if I can even pronounce this. Alwick
[23:04] and Halddund apology to the British home
children and child migrants and their
[23:08] families. This one again rather in
particular. I actually have people in my
[23:14] own family who were orphaned and had
their childhoods ruined by getting
[23:19] turned into
uh laborers of both the farmwork and
[23:25] housework variety and also used for
other purposes. This happens to children
[23:31] and the fact that our prime minister
hasn't issued a formal apology while the
[23:35] prime minister of Great Britain and the
prime minister of Australia has strikes
[23:40] me as just intolerable. There's not even
very many of them left alive in our
[23:46] country and a thousand of them died in
the First World War after being abducted
[23:50] from their own families and stuck with
new families here who used them for
[23:54] stuff. Um, I want I want that one in
particular pulled for support. Thank
[23:59] you.
>> Okay, we will deal with those two first
[24:05] and then we'll go back to the consent
agenda. So, uh, item 6.1, emergency
[24:10] shelters. U, I take it that councelor
Fornier, you will move that.
[24:16] » Very much so. Thank you.
>> Okay. Do we have a seconder for that uh
[24:19] motion to support that resolution? Uh,
councelor Duck. because uh we'll second
[24:25] that. Any further discussion on that
particular motion?
[24:30] » You got your hand up. Yeah. I was just
just for the record, I was just going to
[24:33] um just make it known that council's
previously declared IPV an epidemic
[24:37] around this table. So just giving you
that context here. That's all.
[24:41] » Uh who?
>> That's one of the reasons why I
[24:43] mentioned it because we already have
supported things like this motion.
[24:47] » Okay. So So we we have supported
this
[24:53] are very similar. Okay. All right. So,
we have done it in the past. Um, so it's
[24:58] moved and seconded. If there's no
further questions on it, all those in
[25:02] favor,
two, three, four, five, six, opposed, if
[25:07] any, that is carried. Uh, moving to 6.3
then. Um, apology to the British home
[25:13] children and child migrants and their
families. Again, uh, councelor Fornier,
[25:18] uh, you will move that, I take it.
>> Yeah, very much so. Yeah. and provide
[25:23] extra explanation if necessary.
>> Yep. Um, do we have a seconder for that
[25:28] motion to support that resolution?
[25:32] » Do we have a seconder?
>> Councelor Duck is going to second that.
[25:38] Okay. Um, is there anything further you
want to add, Andrew, to that before we
[25:42] take a vote here?
Canada has too long a history on many
[25:47] different fronts of not being very nice
to kids that we don't view as one of us.
[25:53] Um, and what happened to some of these
uh occasionally baby children and you
[26:00] have to understand that during this
program that the actual orphans who are
[26:04] being taken from workhouses and sent
here, bonuses were not paid to the
[26:08] organizations that took them from those
workhouses. bonuses were paid for
[26:13] children who might actually have living
parents, poor parents, parents who could
[26:18] not provide to them for them, granted,
but that's more a case of the the social
[26:23] services available in the United Kingdom
at the time. Um, and instead of
[26:27] addressing their own issues,
Britain sold these children to families
[26:35] in Canada to work as farm laborers and
house servants. Now, that's not every
[26:40] case, and I'm sure sometimes it worked
out better than that. But in enough
[26:44] cases that it's historically
significant, it didn't.
[26:49] We should not accept being the
recipients of sold children, whether now
[26:56] or in the past. And if we did so in the
past, we should hurry up and say sorry.
[27:05] » Okay.
Um any other comments from anybody?
[27:11] Okay. Um so the um support has been uh
duly moved and seconded. Um all those in
[27:18] favor of supporting this resolution.
[27:23] Now put your hands up. Don't be afraid.
Opposed to this resolution.
[27:30] The motion is lost.
All right. Um then a motion that we um
[27:37] accept the consent agenda with the
exception of 61, 6.3 and 6.6. So in
[27:44] other words from 62, 64 all the way uh
65 and then all the way from 6.7 to 6.13
[27:54] would be in order. Do we have a mover
and seconder for that? Councelor Rose,
[27:58] seconded by councelor Foster.
Any questions on any of them? All those
[28:04] in favor? Opposed? If any, that's
carried. Thank you. All right. Uh brings
[28:10] us down to we're moving to uh uh agenda
item number eight and uh the planning
[28:17] department. Uh we have um uh an item
here with regards uh uh B1926.
[28:26] And we have Haley, I believe, with us is
going to walk us through this one. Uh
[28:30] it's with regards to a consent
application and as I said the file
[28:35] number is B1926. So Haley the floor is
yours.
[28:39] » Thank you. The application before you
this evening is for a proposal for a
[28:43] surplus farm dwelling severance located
at 5302
[28:47] line 29 in the municipality of West
Perth.
[28:52] The subject application proposes to
sever a surplus farm dwelling lot
[28:56] resulting in a farm consolidation. The
severed lands contain an existing
[29:00] dwelling, a detached garage, septic, and
well. The retained lands are vacant of
[29:05] any buildings or structures.
Additionally, the application proposes
[29:09] to establish an easement for hydro
located on the severed lands in favor of
[29:13] the retained lands. The easement is
proposed to be 4.48 m wide by 6.34 m
[29:20] long. A condition of the consent has
been included that will impose
[29:24] restrictions on future permitted uses of
the severed and retained lots through an
[29:29] adoption of a required zoning bylaw
amendment. The condition requiring the
[29:34] ZBA has been recommended to satisfy the
requirements of the 2024 PPS and the
[29:39] county of Perth official plan. staff are
supportive of the proposed severance and
[29:43] are of the opinion that the application
is consistent with the provincial
[29:46] planning statement 2024 and conforms
with the county of Perth official plan
[29:51] subject to the recommended conditions of
consent approval being fulfilled. Thank
[29:55] you and I'm happy to answer any
questions.
[29:58] » Okay, any questions with regards to this
recommendation?
[30:04] » Don't see any hands going up. So, we do
have a um resolution here. Uh the
[30:09] recommendation is that the council, Miss
Pal West Perth, recommends that the
[30:12] county of Perth land division committee
approve consent application B1926
[30:18] and that council forward the conditions
listed in the staff report dated August
[30:22] the 10th, 2026
to the county of Perth land division
[30:26] committee for the property known as 5302
line 29 in the municipality of West
[30:31] Perth. Do we have a mover and seconder
for that? Deputy Mayor and a seconder.
[30:37] Uh, Councelor Herald. Last call for
questions.
[30:42] All those in favor? Opposed? If any,
that's carried. Thank you, Haley.
[30:47] Okay, moving on then brings us down to
uh a couple drain reports. The first one
[30:52] is the Mela Municipal Drain uh and
consideration of the engineers report.
[30:58] And we do have Chris Dietri with us
tonight. And Chris, I'll turn the floor
[31:02] over to you and you can walk us through
that report.
[31:10] Thank you, uh, Mayor McKenzie and
councel.
[31:14] Uh, the first project that I'm here to
present is the Mel municipal drain. Uh,
[31:20] this takes place uh, within the the town
of Mitchell city limits and, uh, it's
[31:26] basically an enclosure of an existing
municipal drain. Some history on this ML
[31:31] drain. Uh it was originally constructed
under a report prepared by Dodson and
[31:36] Johnson consulting engineers
uh that provided for the construction of
[31:40] the main drain open the main drain
closed branch A and branch B. All closed
[31:46] tile drains were designed to a 5-year
storm.
[31:51] Uh this stream was updated in 1999 under
a report prepared by Johnson Engineering
[31:56] Consultants
um that provided for the cleanout at 272
[32:01] m of open ditch um and the installation
of three culvert crossings.
[32:06] And finally, a portion of the main drain
uh closed was realigned under a report
[32:11] by RJ Burnside and Associates Limited
um in 200
[32:18] I don't have the date on that here. Um
might be regardless it was realigned. Uh
[32:26] we held an information for this
enclosure uh back in November of this
[32:31] year and it wasn't uh basically taken
very well. So we were proposing to
[32:38] enclose the drain from where the main
drain closed is all the way down uh in
[32:43] the uh
uh in the Gaffne Industrial Holdings
[32:48] property which is shown as number one on
your plans or sorry number yeah number
[32:52] one.
uh this option was a little too
[32:55] expensive for the owners. Uh so this
report that we're presenting here today
[33:01] uh includes uh basically we're enclosing
68 m of open ditch
[33:07] um across lot 15 as shown on our plan.
Then it crosses Ellen Street where it
[33:12] outlets into the existing open drain.
[clears throat]
[33:20] We also um plan on cleaning out 62 mters
of the existing open drain uh and remove
[33:28] one 750 mm diameter corrugated metal
pipe. Uh our drain will consist of 750
[33:35] mm diameter to 900 mm diameter plastic
HDP pipes
[33:43] um and is designed to handle the 100year
storm event. We've estimated the total
[33:48] cost of this work at $115,600
[33:53] and I'm open to answering any questions
from council.
[33:59] » Hey, thanks Chris. Questions? Councelor
[34:03] » Mayor McKenzie. Uh Chris, you mentioned
uh that that your first proposal wasn't
[34:08] too amlicable uh to the property owners
and the revised
[34:14] um proposal that you made um that the
majority of land owners are on side with
[34:19] that proposal uh that that you're
bringing forward tonight.
[34:22] » Um there's one sitting in the audience
that may have some objections to this.
[34:27] Um I would let him speak for himself
though.
[34:33] Other questions from council? Is there
um a ray pair that does wish to add some
[34:39] comments?
[34:48] Thank you, Mayor McKenzie. Council, my
name is Jason Hask. I am the owner of
[34:54] Lewis McNichol Trucking.
For the last 25 years, I've been the
[35:00] largest proponent
of the work that Chris is proposing here
[35:05] tonight. And if you'd asked me a month
ago, I was on board.
[35:11] But situations change.
And even though in this report
[35:19] my property receives the most benefit
from the drain being closed, it also
[35:27] receives the most cost.
And at that at this particular time, I'm
[35:34] not certain that I'm prepared to carry
that cost.
[35:39] All I ask is that you keep that in mind
when you make your decision tonight.
[35:47] Okay, fair enough.
[35:53] » Other any other comments or questions
with regards to this drain now?
[36:02] » Well, sure the mayor. Uh, who asked for
this drain to be closed in and can we
[36:07] start on the south side of that road to
close it in?
[36:16] I don't recommend that at all. Um, well,
basically, it's only enclosing through
[36:21] one property in a road. Um, there's
already a culvert under the road. So, I
[36:26] would recommend that if we're not
closing it through the McNickel Trucking
[36:32] Incorporated property that we
do something else like just basically
[36:39] maybe scrap the report or something of
that nature and then we're dealing with
[36:45] our 78 costs.
It was originally sorry uh originally
[36:50] signed section 78 form which is
improvements to an existing drain by DNR
[36:55] pole holdings. We held that information
meeting and they were Vietnamese or
[37:01] Vietnamese like uh opposed to what we
were presenting. uh we had to design it
[37:07] to a 100red-year storm to meet the con
the conservation authority uh what
[37:11] they're asking for and and basically we
do have all our approvals from the
[37:17] conservation authority and the
department of fisheries and oceans
[37:24] » other questions so just to clarify Chris
this doesn't happen very often but
[37:30] you're kind of recommending that we
don't accept this report
[37:33] » well that would be up to the McNichol
property
[37:36] Oh, okay. So, we
>> Yeah, we're presenting our report as
[37:39] written.
>> Okay.
[37:40] » Um, so it would be up to council to
pass or not pass.
[37:48] » I'm looking at James here. So, we may
have to tweak the resolution here a
[37:53] little bit. Will we?
>> Well, I guess we can get we need some
[37:56] input from council how they want to
proceed here as much as anything. And
[38:00] I'm looking for
[38:04] Go ahead,
>> Mayor McKenzie. When we're um working
[38:10] together as a team to uh work on
drainage works, I think as a council
[38:16] that we're looking to all of the
properties in that uh in that watershed,
[38:21] just like we're doing in agriculture.
um uh that that um yes sometimes the
[38:28] cost uh is um felt um that it's
exorbitant but uh but we are making
[38:35] improvements to the wershed. So, so I
think as as a council, we're we're
[38:39] looking at at the whole wershed as a
whole um to to to make those
[38:43] improvements if land owners are asking
uh and obviously when they petitioned
[38:48] for that drainage work, they they were
asking um and it's maybe just come down
[38:53] to uh down to the cost uh portion, but
uh but I think out of other respect for
[38:59] other land owners, we should consider it
as a whole project whether it actually
[39:03] benefits the the wershed or not.
Yeah. Thank you, Nicholas. Anybody else?
[39:11] Uh, Deputy Mayor through
>> you. Uh, Mayor McKenzie,
[39:16] um, just help me try and understand
this, uh, whether it's Chris or staff.
[39:21] So, um, a landowner,
uh, Mr. Paul or somebody by the last
[39:29] name of Paul submitted a section 78
request
[39:34] um to close the open ditch. Is that
>> Yes.
[39:37] » Correct.
>> Yes.
[39:38] » Okay. And at this time, are they still
in favor of
[39:43] » They're not
>> that work.
[39:45] » They're not.
>> They're not. And did they give a did
[39:48] they give a written reason why or any
kind of reason?
[39:52] » They have not. No. Not Not in my
knowledge. No. But they but they've just
[39:56] said no, we don't want to do it.
>> Correct.
[39:58] » Okay. And to date, uh only Mr. Hasket
has provided a a reason an objection
[40:07] with a reason. Is that correct?
>> Yes. Initially at the information
[40:14] meeting, he wanted to go ahead but at
this time he does not.
[40:18] » Okay. And at the time of the information
meeting, Mr. Paul did not want to
[40:23] » Mr.
did not attend the information meeting,
[40:26] » right?
>> And it wasn't until a later date
[40:29] that they called and said, "We're not in
favor of these costs."
[40:34] » And do we know how much in costs have
been incurred to date right now?
[40:41] » Well, we obviously have prepared this
report. This includes us uh going to the
[40:46] quarter revision if necessary.
Um
[40:56] just I'm just looking for a
>> rough idea.
[40:58] » Yeah. So it would be around $20,000
probably.
[41:00] » So we're already $20,000 into this work
and the people that at least one person
[41:07] who had
petitioned it has now backed out of it.
[41:11] Correct. We have a second
>> and that was the only signature on that
[41:15] 78 form.
>> Okay.
[41:18] All right. So, I guess my question to
staff is um are we able to defer any
[41:24] decision and get a a staff report
to try and uh confirm answers to the
[41:31] questions that I've got that I made
because right now the municipality is on
[41:36] the hook for $20,000 and we didn't and
the municipality didn't ask for it as I
[41:42] see it. So, how do we how do we how do
we resolve this because we've got a
[41:48] landowner that wanted something now they
changed their mind. I guess that's their
[41:51] that's their right to do that. But
money's been spent here. So, somebody's
[41:56] going to get a bill. So, we got to sort
this out somehow. Just refer that qu
[42:01] these questions to staff for further
clarification, please. Thank you.
[42:06] » Yes, I think James is quite prepared to
answer that. And I'm sure Chris could
[42:10] give us the options as well. Um,
>> so section 78 is a little tricky. Um,
[42:15] how to distribute costs when reports
aren't adopted. Uh, typically it would
[42:20] be build under the existing reports
bylaw. Uh, so that would be the 1999
[42:26] bylaw. Obviously since then things have
changed as far as lots and what have
[42:31] you. U, but that would be the most most
fair thing to do. Um, so whatever that
[42:36] maintenance clause says in the 1999
report is how you'd want to distribute
[42:42] those costs.
>> And we can have a look and and give you
[42:46] an exact number of what we have into it.
>> Oh, okay. James, anything further?
[42:53] » No. Uh, I really don't have much data. I
think Chris has given you all the the
[42:57] important information. Um, I think I
would just note that, you know, you've
[43:01] heard from the land owner with the lion
share of the assessment costs here this
[43:05] evening. So, council does has the option
to receive this report for information
[43:10] and Chris has spoken to how those costs
would be distributed should things not
[43:16] proceed from here. Thank you,
>> Councelor Foster. If we to um receive it
[43:25] for information at this time and not go
forward with it, if this comes back in a
[43:30] few years, it would likely still be
easily reused at the time. If the land
[43:37] owners change their mind and want to
come back to it, like is the report
[43:40] still valid for a few years or how does
that work?
[43:45] » It's a good question.
I would have to look into that.
[43:53] I'll just I think I think Chris has
probably given you a fair response, but
[43:57] anything could [clears throat] happen
next year. Regulations could change.
[44:00] Everything could change. So I I think
your line of thinking is likely correct,
[44:04] but that's not a guarantee if if that
helps.
[44:10] Sir,
>> so Mayor McKenzie, when I look across
[44:12] the wershed, like James said, uh, Louis
McNickel Trucking has more than 50% of
[44:18] the, um, watershed and then West Perth
10% and Mitchell Durasol properties
[44:25] roughly 10% and
um, then the Godidge Railway rough
[44:30] roughly another 10%. So so I guess 60%
um, and then God railway another uh, 10%
[44:37] 70. So, so the rest of the property
owners are are each a very very a tenth
[44:42] a hundredth of a percent on many of
these properties. So there there's not
[44:48] much um value I guess in in the drainage
works. So, I I'm I think I'm comfortable
[44:55] um uh shelving the report based off of
the the the value that the if we if we
[45:01] don't need the value on the vast
majority of the of the wershed, I'm
[45:05] comfortable shelving it because we we
have 50% plus us plus the railway that
[45:11] uh another 10% that um we could quite
easily see that don't see the value
[45:17] tonight to go ahead with the drainage
works.
[45:21] » Okay. I um
can't think of an other time that we've
[45:27] had this happen, but there's always a
first time for everything and it's maybe
[45:30] happened in the past. James
>> through the chair. May I ask one more
[45:35] question? Um is it possible to do a
reortionment Chris on the existing
[45:41] watershed that's there for the purposes
of more accurately determining
[45:47] um a cost distribution that is
reflective of today? Am I making sense
[45:51] with that question?
>> And it's just a question of
[45:56] » for sure. Uh
we probably could. I'm not
[46:02] saying definitively we can but that
would be something another thing to look
[46:06] into
because if we need to aortion which
[46:10] should have been done the old 1999
report
[46:14] um then that can be done.
>> Yeah. Like that would be the fairest way
[46:23] to to do it, I would think, Chris.
Right. If we're not going to proceed any
[46:27] further, that would be the fairest way
to proceed. Yeah,
[46:32] you would have a minor cost incurred
again on top of that. But just just to
[46:36] be clear, yeah, you're you're looking at
the wershed as it fixed today, the
[46:40] property boundary. So it would reflect
accurately for that that cost.
[46:46] » Just an option. So I I think council can
approve, council can receive for
[46:52] information which in effect is doing
nothing. So that kills it. Council could
[46:56] receive the report for information and
direct um we can direct to do the
[47:01] reortionment as well if you wish. Or if
you want to see that come back,
[47:06] we can do that as well. Couple options.
Well, the other option is you go ahead
[47:11] with the report and then you appeal it
to the to the drainage tribunal and they
[47:16] make a ruling on it, but uh the costs I
think are in indicate of of what the
[47:22] cost is going to be. So, um you know,
they might shift it a bit, but uh
[47:28] basically those costs will be fairly
accurate unless the odd time you tender
[47:32] it out and you get a a quote coming back
that is less than what the engineers
[47:37] estimated. And that sometimes happens
too, doesn't it? But uh
[47:40] » more so these days.
>> Yeah.
[47:42] » Rather than years past. But for sure it
they definitely there's a lot of work
[47:46] out there for contractors and bids are
coming in well below our estimates. But
[47:51] that's just
>> me talking.
[47:53] » Okay. I want to kind of keep moving on
here because we do have a fair bit to do
[47:57] tonight. So we've got several options
here. As Dan has indicated, we can uh
[48:03] basically follow the the suggested
recommendation here and and accept the
[48:09] report. Um and uh you know, you could go
as far as give it first and second
[48:15] reading. Um but then eventually, you
know, we're going to end up at a dead
[48:21] end. I think we can receive the report
and that's it. and and then the costs
[48:28] will be figured out and will be invoiced
to the uh to the rateayers involved.
[48:34] What was there was a third one
>> do the reortionment so it's more
[48:37] reflective of of the land owner
>> we would do that anyways wouldn't we
[48:41] then
>> not necessar
[48:45] if you just don't
>> oh
[48:48] we would use the 1999
>> okay all right yeah okay so those are
[48:54] our options what would you like to see
happening
[48:58] » uh Mayor McKenzie I think we should uh
receive the report and then uh
[49:03] essentially that's where it stops but
then use the 1999 um aortionments to
[49:08] bill the costs that incurred.
>> Okay. Yep. You'll move that. Do we have
[49:12] a second for that motion? Uh councelor
Foster.
[49:17] Okay. I just want to read that again to
make sure everybody knows what we're
[49:21] voting on here. We were going to receive
it. Um
[49:25] » yeah. Uh thank you through the chair.
So, at this time, the motion, as I
[49:29] understand it, is that council receive
the report for information and that the
[49:35] cost uh for the preparation of the
report and cost the date associated with
[49:39] the project be build to the land owners
in accordance with the most recent
[49:44] assessment schedule, which is 1999.
Is that fair?
[49:50] Good. Okay.
Any further discussion on that? Anybody
[49:56] anything to add?
Okay. All those in favor of that motion?
[50:00] Opposed? If any, that's carried. Okay.
[50:07] All right. The next one then is um on
our agenda is 8.2.2 and that's the Meer
[50:13] municipal drain and again in
consideration of the engineers report.
[50:17] So Chris, the floor is yours. Yet
>> thank you again, Mayor McKenzie and
[50:21] council. I'm here again to present the
Meer municipal drain.
[50:28] This is a drain uh that was originally
built in 1959 and basically it consisted
[50:33] of the main drain and a drain. Uh that
main drain consisted of uh 2587
[50:41] lineal feet of 6 in uh or 150 mm to a 12
in or 300 mm diameter tile.
[50:48] Uh Adrian under our report is to be
abandoned.
[50:53] Um and as shown on the screen, that dark
double blue line represents our
[50:58] watershed and it consists of 34.7
hectares.
[51:02] Um you'll see some of the lots are
drained out of this watershed. So they
[51:06] get a reduction in their outlet
assessment. Um
[51:11] and basically uh our new drains
represented by a yellow line there. So
[51:16] it consists of excuse me 633 m of 300
millimeter diameter to 525 millimeter
[51:25] diameter concrete and plastic HDP pipes.
Um there will be one road crossing under
[51:33] line 49 with catch basins on both sides
as well as catch basins at property
[51:38] lines. one between I guess that is sorry
32 and 33 and then the next would be
[51:44] between 33 and 34 of concession 13.
Um there's one other catch basin to be
[51:52] installed and that's downstream of the
Jonzi property which is part of lot 33
[51:57] concession 13. This will be connected to
the main drain via a junction box. Um,
[52:04] and this drain outlets into the gray
branch of the northwest municipal drain.
[52:11] We've estimated the cost of work at
$193,800.
[52:17] And at this time, I'm open to any
questions from council.
[52:22] Okay. Thanks, Chris.
Any questions from members of council?
[52:30] No hands going up. Okay.
Um do have a recommendation here uh that
[52:37] the council municipality of West Perth
accepts the report dated June the 1st
[52:41] 2026 from Driidge Engineering Limited
for the Meer Municipal Drain and that
[52:46] council provisionally adopt the
engineers report by giving first and
[52:49] second readings to bylaw number 51 2026
and that the record of revision be
[52:56] scheduled for September the 8th of this
year 2026. Sorry.
[53:02] » Make sure
>> Oh, okay. Um,
[53:06] questions from any of the rate pairs.
[53:12] No, we're good.
[53:18] Go ahead. Yeah. Come on up. If you come
up, we can hear you. That's uh better.
[53:29] » Good evening. Here. Um, this question
might be a question for Chris. I'm not
[53:35] sure. I'm not sure. But question for
council or not, but I know I looked at
[53:40] the first drawing that we met here and
one that was mailed. I know it's a
[53:46] little bit different in design. Maybe
you can comment on that or is that a
[53:49] question outside of this?
>> Chris can answer. I'm sure.
[53:54] » So, what happened at our what happened
at our information meeting is that we
[53:58] had the design in a different area.
There was also farms that were drained
[54:01] out that we did not know of. Um, so
we've confirmed all of that information.
[54:07] We rerouted the outlet more so
paralleling line 49 rather than going on
[54:12] an angle. We used to go on a a south uh
easterly direction to the gray branch.
[54:18] So we shortened up the the drain itself
by 67 m. Um, so that affected the cost
[54:26] as well. So the land being drained out
which is shown on our plans uh report
[54:31] plans uh actually reduces the amount uh
of acres that would be contributing to
[54:36] the drain. So they will no longer be uh
assessed for or have the right to
[54:42] connect to this drain in the future, but
they were assessed for the water that
[54:46] may land on their property that would
come this way.
[54:51] » So I do have a follow-up question.
>> Sure. Go ahead. Yeah, my follow-up
[54:56] question I guess and notice it went
straight into the drain rather than an
[55:00] angle. I guess my question for Chris
maybe is will we get as much um guess my
[55:07] land fills up with water quite a bit in
the spring melt? It's I just want to
[55:11] make sure that we can get as much water
going away as possible is my question
[55:16] with the change.
Yeah. So, not mentioned is that this new
[55:21] municipal drain is designed to an inch
and a half drainage coefficient or a 38
[55:25] millimeter per 24hour. Um, so that's
topnotch drain work these days. Uh,
[55:32] sometimes landowners want more. So, that
extra uh design standard would be
[55:37] ungrantable, but in this case, we're
meeting the limit uh of of that train.
[55:43] So, we're going to have quite a lot of
capacity in this new system. Right.
[55:47] Okay. Fair enough.
[55:50] Yeah. Okay. Any other questions from
either council or right pairs?
[55:59] Okay. Um
[56:04] we I didn't do the recommendation. We
didn't get that. I We need a move in a
[56:09] second. That's where we're at. Okay. So,
I read it out that we accept the report
[56:14] and that we give it first and second
reading and it'll be bylaw 51 and then
[56:20] uh quarter revision will be held on
September the 8th of this year. So, do
[56:24] we have a move and seconder for that?
Um,
[56:28] Deputy Mayor Jinkowski
and um yeah, I was looking for our Logan
[56:34] reps there uh but I don't have to.
Councelor Duck. Okay, thank you. Last
[56:41] call for questions. All those in favor?
Opposed? If any, that's carried. Thank
[56:46] you, Chris.
>> Thank you very much.
[56:47] » And uh then we do have another section
78 here, branch A of the Russell drain.
[56:54] And James, I'll let you talk about that
one.
[56:57] » Uh well, thank you through the chair. Uh
yes, this request was received uh by the
[57:02] Ministry of Transportation who's
requesting to remove and relocate a
[57:05] manhole north of its current location.
This is in connection with the Russell
[57:09] Russell Dale roundabout uh project. Um
and they need to remove and replace and
[57:14] upsize about 60 mters of piping. Uh they
have been in conversation with Chris
[57:19] throughout uh this project um to answer
a few questions and fill in some
[57:23] information on the existing drainage
wershed out there. Um and accordingly
[57:27] we're recommending in that case that uh
council go ahead and appoint Chris from
[57:31] Dietrich Engineering as the engineer to
prepare the section 78 report for this.
[57:36] So happy to answer any questions.
>> Okay. Any questions for James on that?
[57:41] Uh councelor B.
>> Mayor McKenzie, how do we get that done
[57:46] in a timely fashion for the roundabout
to be completed uh when it's supposed to
[57:51] be completed?
>> Thanks to the chair and uh that's a good
[57:53] question. I suppose I probably would
push back a little bit if council
[57:56] recommended we look at a different
engineer this evening because I know
[57:59] Chris has had an opportunity to get uh
work essentially underway with this
[58:03] project here. So although a report has
not been prepared nor has he been
[58:07] formally appointed um we're we're well
on the way to seeing that report. So
[58:10] you'll probably see the section 78
report come back um at either the next
[58:15] meeting or the meeting right thereafter
and the work that does need to happen
[58:19] can continue to happen while that
report's being prepared. So hopefully
[58:22] that answers the question. Thanks.
[58:29] Okay.
All right. Um so the um the
[58:33] recommendation that we have here is that
the council missp proceed with the
[58:39] request for the drain manager
improvement to branch A of the Russell
[58:43] municipal drain and that council
pursuant to the drainage act to appoint
[58:46] Chris Dietrich from Driage Engineering
Limited as the drainage engineer on a
[58:51] date 30 days from the notice of upper
temp's conservation authority for the
[58:55] examination of the drainage works and to
proceed with the requirements of the
[58:59] proposed improvement under section 78.
8. We have a mover and seconder for
[59:04] that. Um, I'm kind of looking. Okay,
I'll councelor Duck. I thought maybe
[59:10] Councelor Foster or Harold would move.
Councelor Harold, thank you. In case you
[59:15] haven't caught on now, I usually look to
the to the ward where the drain is. Um,
[59:20] questions. All those in favor posed, if
any, that's carried. We're going to deal
[59:26] with one more here. Um and u we have
Jesse Britain here with us. Um so he's
[59:34] here uh because of the 8.8.2 the library
memorandum of understand agreement.
[59:41] Sorry I said understand memorandum of
agreement. Dan I'll let you uh walk
[59:45] through that one and uh then from there
we'll go into the close session.
[59:52] » Yeah. Thank you your worship um and and
good evening council. So, so before you
[59:57] tonight is is an MOA, a memorandum of
under of agreement uh between the West
[1:00:02] Perth Public Library and the
Municipality of West Perth. Uh this is
[1:00:06] something that's been kind of on the
to-do list for the municipality and I
[1:00:09] think the library for I don't know quite
some time, I'll say. Um we're there. We
[1:00:14] are all very happy with with what we
have. We think uh it really documents
[1:00:19] our relationship which as noted in the
report we're really looking to uh find
[1:00:24] efficiencies through partnerships
amongst the two organizations because
[1:00:27] the library is is technically a legal
separate entity. Um but as you saw
[1:00:32] tonight it's it's part of our audit uh
and etc. So uh we provide uh different
[1:00:37] services to them and they provide
different services to community. Um I'm
[1:00:40] sure I don't need to go into full detail
with with all of you about what the
[1:00:43] library does. Uh but the board has
reviewed it and as noted in the report,
[1:00:47] they haven't officially adopted it yet
because they don't have a a meeting um
[1:00:52] well between I guess when they reviewed
it and and uh to to date. So we thought
[1:00:56] we'd get it here first for any feedback
from from council. So I'll maybe stop
[1:01:00] there and if there's any questions um
and sorry I should just add that we did
[1:01:05] slip in a schedule that uh to act as
essentially as a lease agreement because
[1:01:08] we also didn't have one of those with
with the library. So that was something
[1:01:11] we uncovered uh through this process.
[1:01:16] Okay. Any questions on uh on that
memorandum of agreement?
[1:01:24] I don't see any hands going up. We're
good, Jesse. Yeah. Okay. Um then the
[1:01:30] recommendation that we have here is the
council municipality of West Perth
[1:01:33] approve the memorandum of agreement
between the municipality of West Perth
[1:01:36] and West Perth public library board and
that the mayor and clerk be authorized
[1:01:40] to sign and seal all necessary
documents. And that's moved by councelor
[1:01:45] Fornier. Do we have a seconder for that?
Uh councelor O'Donnell.
[1:01:50] Last call for questions. All those in
favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried.
[1:01:55] Thank you.
Okay, now we're going to backtrack a
[1:01:59] little wee bit here. And uh got to find
the right page here again. Um
[1:02:06] so the recommendation that we have is
that the council municipality of West
[1:02:11] Perth proceed in close session under
section 239 of the municipal act uh as
[1:02:17] amended um at 8:00 right on the button
to address matters related to uh
[1:02:24] position plan procedure criteria for
instruction to be applied to any
[1:02:29] negotiations carried out or to be
carried out by or on behalf of the
[1:02:33] municipality.
uh litigation or potential litigation
[1:02:36] including matters before administrative
tribunals affecting the municipality
[1:02:41] um and legal update on a property matter
and a property matter with regards to an
[1:02:47] OOLT appeal. Do we have a mover and
second to go into close session for
[1:02:52] that? So, Deputy Mayor and Councelor
Foster, all those in favor posed, if
[1:02:58] any, that's carried.
[2:41:32] Okay, we're uh back out of close session
and fairly I guess maybe a lengthy close
[2:41:37] session, but we met in close session to
discuss the hair and industrial park,
[2:41:41] provide legal updates on property
matters in Mitchell and in the Hibbert
[2:41:46] Wards, uh an OOLT appeal in the Logan
ward and some HR matters and direction
[2:41:52] was given to staff to deal with that. So
that was our close session. Now I got to
[2:41:59] find out where we're at here, I think.
Yep. 8.2.4
[2:42:06] the OP annual operating budget uh cost
update and James is going to look after
[2:42:11] that for us.
>> Uh well, thank you and through your
[2:42:13] worship. This record is being brought
forward for information to provide
[2:42:17] council with a bit of an update on
current OP costs and some anticipated
[2:42:21] budget budget pressures ahead of the
2027 year. Uh so during the preparation
[2:42:26] of our current year budget, we uh
budgeted for approximately 1.88 million
[2:42:32] in OP costs. Uh following the province's
release of the final building
[2:42:37] information, our pro our costs were c
capped at approximately 1.97 million,
[2:42:43] which was an increase of about 91,000
over budget. Um without that 11% cap,
[2:42:50] our services would have been closer to
2.24 million. It's important to note
[2:42:54] that the 11% cap was calculated
excluding costs associated with our
[2:42:58] additional services agreement we have
with the OP. So the enhanced services
[2:43:03] that we receive in West Perth that those
costs were not subject to the 11% cost
[2:43:09] um cap the 11% increase cap. So those
increases do not have an 11% cap and did
[2:43:16] not have an 11% cap on them in 2026. All
this to say that's what led to your
[2:43:22] increase there. Looking ahead to 2027,
our base allocation is approximately
[2:43:27] about that 2.24 million. So that's our
cost without the 11% cap. That's what we
[2:43:33] need to plan for because we can't
anticipate a similar cap to come forward
[2:43:37] in the 2027 year. We've been given no
guarantee that there'll be any cap
[2:43:41] coming forward um from the province at
this time and so this is really just
[2:43:46] information for us council to be aware
of that budget pressure that's coming
[2:43:50] forward. Happy for any questions.
>> Thanks James. Any questions for James on
[2:43:55] that?
Um, no. Uh, oh, sorry. Sorry. Go ahead.
[2:44:03] » Through you, Mr. Mayor. So, is the OP
prepared to explain why
[2:44:09] uh why the increase like what's what's
driving this? Do they can they explain
[2:44:15] that?
>> Um,
[2:44:17] » or can they come to a later date, come
to this council perhaps and explain
[2:44:21] what's going on there? I think through
the chair I know what I can say is the
[2:44:26] OP detachment board has done some
advocacy to the province around these
[2:44:31] increasing costs. I really can't say
exactly the particulars of what go into
[2:44:35] those cost increases. We can certainly
request more information from the
[2:44:40] province, but I know this is a pressure
that all Ontario municipalities are
[2:44:44] facing and faced with. So when those
increases come across the board, they
[2:44:48] come across the board for all Ontario
municipalities and they apply to that
[2:44:52] that standard contract. So
>> Dan, anything to add?
[2:44:57] » Um, and I think I think uh James is
correct. We can come back with more
[2:45:00] information, but looking back uh there
certainly was a new agreement signed on
[2:45:05] on the labor side with OP. So, I think
there's new collective uh new collective
[2:45:10] agreements in place and that's led to uh
some some of the increases as well.
[2:45:16] » Okay, other questions. Phil question
through the mayor. When they came in
[2:45:21] 2024, they laid out their three-year
financial plan and those increases were
[2:45:25] nowhere near 11%. So, I'm just wondering
what changed in year to year to get that
[2:45:30] 11%. And with the enhanced at 400,000,
what does that get you? And what was it
[2:45:36] looking like in 2004,
for example, or 24, sorry.
[2:45:43] » Um, I'll address what I can from that. I
might have to get back to you on the
[2:45:46] second piece or on your last question
there. I'll say the 11% that's a cap.
[2:45:51] So, that was a cap that the province
placed on saying that we will only
[2:45:55] charge you at most the 11% increase. It
was more than that that it went up. I
[2:46:01] haven't seen the 2024 year contracts,
but I would anticipate that it's likely
[2:46:05] the former answer that the CEO just gave
there. There's been new collective
[2:46:09] agreements and cost increases that
weren't on the books in 2024 and now
[2:46:13] are. And again, we're at we're at the
mercy of those increases. Uh yeah,
[2:46:21] » uh a bit of clarity on enhanced is
essentially what you're getting is
[2:46:24] you're getting a sergeant. Um, so you
have you have Sergeant Scott Lob here in
[2:46:29] Mitchell and you're getting a DAC um,
which is a acronym for department
[2:46:35] administration.
I don't know, clerk technician. I'll
[2:46:38] make something up there. I'm not quite
sure on that one. Um, and I think the
[2:46:42] other aspect that you get uh is if you
have a major event in your municipality,
[2:46:49] um, you don't get a subsequent bill for
for the services. Um so if uh you know I
[2:46:56] know there's there's been some events in
our past um if those as we understand
[2:47:01] happen in a municipality that doesn't
have the enhanced services then there's
[2:47:05] a bill for for when those those
resources mobilize to that area. Um
[2:47:10] you're sort of paying insurance for for
that at this point. I think the other
[2:47:16] thing um too and maybe Steve can give me
the number but uh um I think it was in
[2:47:23] the police services board there's is it
21 officers work out of that office
[2:47:28] right now they don't all work in
Mitchell but it draws them and they work
[2:47:32] out of that office and around so we do
have a fairly large police prevets for
[2:47:38] the size of our municipality
>> that was disclosed um I think at last
[2:47:44] council not the one pract I I I read
that and and I didn't realize it was
[2:47:50] anywhere near that high but uh yeah yeah
answer Phil okay
[2:47:59] uh any other questions on that I'm going
to try and keep moving here so we do
[2:48:04] have a recommendation uh that the
council miss receives the Ontario
[2:48:08] provincial police annual operating
budget cost update report for
[2:48:12] information with move and seconded for
that. Moved by uh councelor Harold,
[2:48:17] seconded by councelor O'Donnell. All
those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's
[2:48:22] carried. Uh the next is uh our director
of operations
[2:48:28] uh the industrial, commercial, and
institutional recycling service delivery
[2:48:33] options. And Sean is here going to uh uh
manager of the environmental services,
[2:48:38] and he's going to walk us through this
one. So, welcome
[2:48:44] Good evening, Mayor McKenzie and
council. Um, so the point of this report
[2:48:49] is to provide council with an overview
of the upcoming changes to industrial,
[2:48:54] commercial, and institutional recycling
services and to seek council direction
[2:48:58] on the municipality's preferred approach
to providing ICI recycling collection
[2:49:03] services beginning in 2027.
Um, so recent regulatory changes have
[2:49:08] removed ICI recycling from the
residential blue box program. As a
[2:49:13] result, the collection and processing of
recycling generated by ICI properties no
[2:49:19] longer are covered under the blue box
framework. So um, Blue Water Recycling
[2:49:25] Association, the BRA established a
dedicated ICI recycling collection
[2:49:31] system to ensure continued service uh,
for the remainder of this year. Um so
[2:49:36] BRA has absorbed the incremental costs
uh associated with servicing ICI bins uh
[2:49:42] during 2026. So this was a temporary
measure to uh support a smooth
[2:49:48] transition, minimize disruption and uh
yeah for the municipality and business
[2:49:52] community and then giving us time to uh
determine an appropriate long-term
[2:49:57] service model. So, effective January
1st, 2027, the BRA has advised that the
[2:50:03] annual cost for an ICI uh recycling
wheelie bin will be $160
[2:50:09] uh per bin per year. So, currently there
are approximately $250 uh bins um within
[2:50:16] the municipality serviced by the BRA.
[2:50:20] So, there are three options uh for the
recycling uh collection service delivery
[2:50:25] for 2027. So our first option is to
maintain the previous service model. Um
[2:50:30] we'd continue to provide ICI recycling
services and absorb the full cost of the
[2:50:35] service within the municipality. Um that
would uh the disadvantage would be that
[2:50:41] um the services would be paid through
the municipal tax levy. Um so that would
[2:50:46] be it'd be around $40,000 per year. Uh
the second option is to implement cost
[2:50:53] recovery through user fees. Um so under
this uh option, municipalities would
[2:50:58] continue to offer or West Perth would
continue to offer recycling collection,
[2:51:02] but we would recover some or um all of
the associated costs from participating
[2:51:09] um ICI properties through a user fee.
And then the last option would be to
[2:51:14] discontinue services uh completely. Um
and then the businesses um institutions
[2:51:21] um they would have to uh seek their own
recycling collection services. So um the
[2:51:26] big disadvantage there would be to it
would uh reduce recycling participation
[2:51:31] potentially and waste diversion um from
the landfill and from that whole sector.
[2:51:36] Um so we could see an increase in
landfill um disposal volumes. Um staff
[2:51:42] is recommending option two. Um, so
financially, as I said earlier, um, this
[2:51:48] would be, uh, a result of around $40,000
impact on our solid waste, uh,
[2:51:53] operations budget. Um, and so currently,
just in the residential blue box
[2:51:58] program, we're around $15,530
per year for just the residential um,
[2:52:05] recycling program. That covers like
urban and rural residents within the
[2:52:09] municipality.
Um, if council approves option two, the
[2:52:13] municipality would establish a cost
recovery mechanism to recover some or
[2:52:18] all of the annual service costs for the
participating municipality or
[2:52:22] properties. Um, the total financial
impact would depend on whether council
[2:52:26] wishes to uh recover the full cost or
only a portion thereof. So, I'm happy to
[2:52:32] uh answer any questions.
>> Okay, any questions on that?
[2:52:37] Alex, go ahead.
If we go ahead with option two at $160
[2:52:44] for the wheelie bin, that's the like
medium 240s or whatever the standard
[2:52:49] mediums are now.
>> Correct. Yes.
[2:52:51] » Um, so that's effectively the same price
as we are for that size of garbage bin.
[2:52:56] So wouldn't people be more inclined to
buy a garbage bin and not have to care
[2:53:00] and just pack it all in and then that's
not going to divert it?
[2:53:04] » Uh, yes. through the mirror. Yeah. The
the hope would be that people would the
[2:53:08] commercial businesses would still want
to recycle and not pack everything into
[2:53:13] the garbage
[2:53:17] question that I have. Um, so if we offer
them the willie bin, um, and I'm
[2:53:25] thinking of some of the large users with
a lot of cardboard, uh, you know, I
[2:53:30] guess I'm thinking maybe like a Gatlers
in Dublin and maybe even the independent
[2:53:35] grocery store where they get a lot of
stuff, cardboard boxes, they maybe
[2:53:40] already have a deal with a with a with a
an outfit that would have a bin that
[2:53:47] they would be putting this stuff bin.
So, do they have to take a wheelie bin
[2:53:51] or if they decide they have a bin or
want to use a bin that that would be
[2:53:55] what they would use?
>> Uh, yeah. So, Mayor McKenzie, so they
[2:53:59] they may have their own separate um
contract with a like a waste management
[2:54:04] or or
>> That's what I was saying,
[2:54:06] » right? They may um there are other uh
commercial businesses that have several
[2:54:11] wheelie bins already here, so they would
have to pay per wheelie bin. But if they
[2:54:17] wanted to go to a have a separate avenue
where they would um have a different
[2:54:22] business come and provide a larger uh a
larger bin than they would have to that
[2:54:28] would be out of their own pocket,
>> right?
[2:54:29] » Yeah.
>> Well, it's going to be out of their own
[2:54:31] pocket no matter what. So So they can
opt out of of our really bin if they
[2:54:36] wish.
>> If they don't want that provided, then
[2:54:38] they can go a separate route and then
that that'd be something that they'd
[2:54:41] have to do on their own,
>> right? But they'd have to well they'd
[2:54:44] have to notify us.
first so that we knew what it was
[2:54:49] » and
you know when we inform them of this
[2:54:53] that's we maybe should indicate that to
them like I'm thinking of the larger
[2:54:57] users anyways.
>> Yeah. So so once we come up with a a
[2:55:01] decision then that'll be when we start
>> Yeah.
[2:55:03] » doing the Yeah. notifying of
>> right of our direction. Yeah.
[2:55:06] » That's good. Any other questions?
Uh council Rose.
[2:55:14] So this is just for commercial. This is
it residential,
[2:55:17] » commercial and industrial, right?
>> Industrial. Okay.
[2:55:20] » Institutional, industrial, commercial.
>> Thank you.
[2:55:25] » Anybody else?
Okay. Uh we do have a recommendation
[2:55:30] here. Um, and I'm assuming this is the
one we're going to use that uh the
[2:55:37] council municipality of West Perth
approve option two uh implement cost
[2:55:42] recovery through user fees for
industrial, commercial and institutional
[2:55:48] recycling collection services identified
in the staff report
[2:55:53] seconded for that. Uh, Deputy Mayor
Tankowski and seconded by councelor
[2:55:59] Rose. Last call for questions, comments.
Councelor
[2:56:04] » Mayor McKenzie, I think it'll be really
important uh the communication uh after
[2:56:08] this decision if we pass this resolution
that that'll be uh very important.
[2:56:13] » Yeah. No, I agree. Any other questions?
Okay. Ready for the motion? All those in
[2:56:20] favor? Opposed? If any, that's carried.
Thank you.
[2:56:23] » Thank you.
Uh, next on the agenda, we have uh
[2:56:28] director of community services with
regards to the West Peru Center and
[2:56:32] donations. So, another good news story,
Nick.
[2:56:41] » Oh, you left it on. Good evening, Mayor
McKenzie and members of council. Uh,
[2:56:46] before you is a report of a youth center
donation in the amount of $8,500.
[2:56:52] We're bringing forward this
recommendation to accept these uh
[2:56:55] donated funds for youth center
equipment. Uh the donations were
[2:57:00] generously received from the Lions Club
of Monton Camp Kids in the amount of
[2:57:04] $2,000,
West Perth Community Singers in the
[2:57:08] amount of $1,500 and Osborne and Hibbert
Mutual Fire Insurance Company in the
[2:57:12] amount of $5,000.
All three donors have requested that
[2:57:17] this uh that their contributions go to
equipment for that benefits the youth
[2:57:22] center users.
Um staff are proposing the funds uh
[2:57:27] sorry proposed equipment includes a
water bottle fill station, a mobile pool
[2:57:32] table, interactive game projector, a
rock band game and instruments as well
[2:57:37] as an arcade game cabinet. uh no
additional funds is required where this
[2:57:44] uh donate these donations cover the
amount of all these uh donations. Um
[2:57:52] all the equipment will remain the
property of us at the municipality once
[2:57:56] purchased and maintained by us as well.
and uh
[2:58:01] staff will invite the donating
organizations to a recognized event at
[2:58:06] our youth center to honor the donation
once uh these have been purchased and
[2:58:11] installed in place. So again, as staff
are recommending that we accept these
[2:58:16] donations and direct the usage towards
use center equipment. So if there's any
[2:58:22] questions, I can take them now. Okay,
>> questions for Nick on that.
[2:58:29] Don't see any hands going up. So, very
good. So, we do have a recommendation
[2:58:32] here that uh West Perth accept donated
funds totaling uh $8,500 and direct the
[2:58:39] treasur to allocate the funds for the
purchase of per um uh purpose of
[2:58:44] purchasing youth center equipment during
the 2026 fiscal year. Moved by councelor
[2:58:50] Herald, seconded by
um councelor Rose. Uh, all those in
[2:58:56] favor posed, if any, that's carried.
Thanks, Nick. Um, connecting link
[2:59:02] transfer. Dan,
thank you, mayor. Uh, before council
[2:59:08] tonight, I'm seeking some direction on
how to proceed. Essentially, I've landed
[2:59:11] at a crossroads and uh, you know, as
noted in the report, we've been kind of
[2:59:15] dealing with this matter since 2022.
Um, and really what it's boiled down to
[2:59:21] is that as uh the the urban settlement
boundary has changed and and grown
[2:59:26] through the official plan, um, the
municipality doesn't have jurisdiction
[2:59:31] within its quote unquote boundary
anymore. Um, and it and it's with MTO.
[2:59:36] Um, and that leaves it problematic for
us to try to address speeding through
[2:59:41] traditional means such as, you know,
changing speed limits, signage, and
[2:59:46] enforcement as well from from a bylaw
standpoint. Um, I think I've laid out
[2:59:52] the events that have transpired quite
well in the report. Um and the next step
[2:59:58] for us is to get a recommendation from
council that we start to have some
[3:00:02] discussions with the MTO about uh
extending the connecting link limits so
[3:00:09] they match our urban settlement boundary
with our OPA. Um
[3:00:14] and I'm happy to have any questions
[3:00:19] questions for Dan on that.
I Oh, Alex, go ahead.
[3:00:26] What would the increased ongoing cost of
maintaining that be given what it how
[3:00:31] much it costs us to do the other part of
our connecting link because we can't do
[3:00:35] it in house?
>> Um I don't know at this time I don't
[3:00:40] know how much they'd be willing to
partner with and I don't know the cost
[3:00:45] of those assets. So that's that's
basically why we need direction. uh they
[3:00:48] won't sit down and have these
discussions with us until we get this
[3:00:51] direction from council and have this
motion.
[3:00:56] » I think um you know I don't know whether
we really need to buy the highway. You
[3:01:00] know I think if we can just get them all
we really how this all started was speed
[3:01:04] signs and we want to move them out. You
know um I would like I I'm in favor of
[3:01:11] you know what you're wanting but I
wonder if we shouldn't be copying after
[3:01:16] after our meeting in Toronto. I think we
we're we're would be able to copy our
[3:01:21] minister and and Matt Ray as well and
just show them that it's taken since
[3:01:28] 1922
or 2022 rather to try and put a speed
[3:01:34] sign. And I think the one that comes to
mind obviously is the one out by uh West
[3:01:38] Perth Village uh because of you know the
long-term care facility there and and
[3:01:44] the closeness to the schools and it it
shouldn't be rocket science to do that
[3:01:49] you know so um I don't know if anybody
else has any further comments but we
[3:01:55] have an issues there and we have issues
out at the east end as well at that
[3:02:00] part. So the recommendation, if nobody
has any other question, the
[3:02:03] recommendation is that municipality
Westport uh supports uh discussions with
[3:02:08] the Ontario Ministry of Transportation
regarding the potential transfer and
[3:02:12] designation of additional sections of
Highway 23 and Highway 8 of the existing
[3:02:18] connecting link limits within the
municipality of West Perth to align with
[3:02:22] the settlement area boundary. and that
the clerk be directed to prepare and
[3:02:27] submit formal correspondence respecting
the proposed revision to the connecting
[3:02:32] link limits. So I have a mover and
seconder for that moved by Deputy Mayor
[3:02:38] Tinkowski, seconded by Councelor
O'Donnell. Any further discussion?
[3:02:44] Um
Dean, sorry. Hopefully this doesn't take
[3:02:48] another four years to happen because uh
yeah, you're right, Mayor McKenzie. was
[3:02:52] a simple petition dealing with traffic
speed concerns and this has gone on too
[3:02:58] long. So happy to support this
recommendation and happy to support
[3:03:02] staff and trying to get this figured
out. Thanks.
[3:03:06] Somebody have a question over here. No,
no, we're good. Okay. Um, yeah, like I
[3:03:12] like I said previously, I don't know
whether we need to buy the highway, but
[3:03:15] all we want is just to move it out a
little bit and and change the speed
[3:03:19] limit a bit. So, okay.
Just confirm vote there.
[3:03:24] » Yeah, I will. Yep. I knew I had to do
that yet. So, all those in favor?
[3:03:28] Opposed? If any, that is carried.
It never hurts to remind me.
[3:03:36] Uh the next item then is 8.8.3,
the Memorial Forest Playground. And Dan
[3:03:41] is going to talk to us on that one.
>> Yep. Thank you. Um kind of a report back
[3:03:46] um item here. So, council's seen uh this
report before. uh we got direction at
[3:03:51] the last time to kind of bring back some
information regarding that that natural
[3:03:55] playground um as well as some
accessibility features and some changes
[3:03:59] to the site plan. Um I don't have the
site plan finalized at this point in
[3:04:04] time. Um but we've also been working
with environmental um stewardship at at
[3:04:09] the county as well for some some
revisions there. Uh but essentially
[3:04:13] we're here. We still think the blue imp
is the way to go uh based on what you
[3:04:18] know you can see from a natural
standpoint.
[3:04:20] kind of the bang for your buck there and
and we have added an accessible feature
[3:04:26] into the playground as well and it
hasn't had a large impact on the budget.
[3:04:29] So, we're looking for a direction to
kind of proceed ahead here and uh yeah,
[3:04:35] happy to have any questions if there are
questions for Dan on that. I know we had
[3:04:42] it at a previous meeting. We talked
about it. So, we're good. Okay. Uh so
[3:04:47] the recommendation here is that the
municipality of West Perth approved the
[3:04:51] blue rimp playground design for the new
memorial forest playground and that
[3:04:55] council authorize staff to utilize
110,000 from the parkland reserve to
[3:05:00] utilize group buying procurement for the
purchase of the blue and uh playground
[3:05:05] and that council direct staff to report
back with a site plan and sponsorship
[3:05:10] agreement for their review. Move her and
second her for that. Uh, councelor Duck,
[3:05:15] is the councelor Fornier still on? Yep,
he's there. Would you like to second
[3:05:19] that, Andrew?
Yep, he's
[3:05:23] » I've been seconding stuff all night. You
just never see.
[3:05:27] » Okay. Um, last call for questions. All
those in favor? Opposed? If any, that's
[3:05:33] carried. Uh, next item then is Kison
Park Pavilion Electrical Repair and
[3:05:39] Parking Lot Upgrades. Dan,
>> thank you. This is a new one um coming
[3:05:43] forward. So I believe council would have
received some letters from the uh
[3:05:46] agricultural society and uh following
that we had a meeting um with the mayor
[3:05:52] and some staff with the society and
wanted to unpack um just kind of the
[3:05:57] content of the letters. Uh prior to that
we were aware so essentially I'll get
[3:06:02] into the pavilion um the electrical
repairs right now. I I didn't know what
[3:06:07] to call it, so repair seems like the
most appropriate one. But, uh,
[3:06:11] essentially the it's all the plugs,
receptacles are looped onto to one
[3:06:16] breaker. So, during the fair, um, the
cattle dryers get plugged in and they
[3:06:20] continuously trip that breaker. Um, so
what the request is is for us to go in
[3:06:26] and essentially just repair that. So,
we've worked with uh our electrician
[3:06:30] here and we think um obviously adding
another breaker into the line is going
[3:06:36] to repair that problem. Um, so I will
disclose, sorry, this report's changed a
[3:06:42] little bit, but I want to disclose that
I I authorized that um through uh
[3:06:48] through our existing budget um to kind
of find the 10 grand in there or or not
[3:06:54] proceed with a with a project uh because
we wanted to get it done before the
[3:06:57] fair. But I'm also bringing it here for
council because I don't have authority
[3:07:00] to pull from a reserve. So, we we are
recommending you pull from a reserve,
[3:07:04] but if not, um we I've certainly got a
plan for this and I can report back to
[3:07:08] what that would be. Um but we wanted
that done. And then the egg society is
[3:07:14] also looking at doing some paving um in
front of Crystal Palace and based on
[3:07:20] quotes um we thought it would be a good
idea if they're in their paving, maybe
[3:07:24] we should see what it costs to pave some
of our unpaved parking lot. Uh we've
[3:07:27] identified kind of the areas there that
we think would be suitable for paving.
[3:07:31] At this point, we we recommend just
carrying forward with with I'll say
[3:07:35] section B right now. Um, and we showed
kind of the exercise where we were
[3:07:40] looking at doing this and they're in
support of it as well. Um, so that would
[3:07:45] be our main purpose. It just kind of
cleans up the parking lot. It's not
[3:07:48] something that, you know, was really
part of the arena renovations or
[3:07:52] anything. It it came to fruition through
through this ask and and a bit of an
[3:07:56] idea. um that way as well as they've uh
requested
[3:08:01] um I believe they requested financial
support to the cost of 30,000 and I got
[3:08:07] into this and into the report of of kind
of the history of that we sorry my
[3:08:12] computer just died. We had $5,000 carry
forward that we put in the reserve from
[3:08:16] I think approximately two years ago. Um
and then we're looking at providing an
[3:08:21] additional five um in financial support.
So, we'd be providing them $10,000 of
[3:08:26] financial support towards their
projects. And we are currently working
[3:08:30] with them on drainage matters as well.
Um, I'm sorry, Nick, I don't know if
[3:08:35] it's been scoped yet, but we're looking
at getting uh some of the drainage work
[3:08:40] to figuring out what's happening over
there and why we're getting some
[3:08:42] ponding. Um, ideally, we can find the
solution and fix it internally with our
[3:08:47] with our staff here. Um, so
happy to have any questions.
[3:08:55] » Any questions? I just had one. Um, when
we were getting prices for paving,
[3:09:03] um, we have Levis kind of lined up. Did
we get more than one quote or not?
[3:09:07] » We got a quote from Levis and they got a
quote.
[3:09:13] Nick, can you sorry my but do you
remember
[3:09:18] they were the company?
[3:09:23] Great. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. So, we we
did have two. Yeah. All right. Well, I
[3:09:28] just I always get another quote.
Any other questions? Okay. Uh, I got a
[3:09:35] recommendation here then that uh, Miss
Balia West Perth approve the new Kerson
[3:09:39] Park Capital expense of up to $85,000 to
be funded from reserve for parks and
[3:09:45] recreation for the pavilion electrical
upgrades of $10,000. Uh, parking lot
[3:09:51] paving $65,000 and then additional
support,
[3:09:55] » please.
Pardon? Oh, sorry.
[3:09:59] » Sorry, my hand my hand my hand has been
up the whole time.
[3:10:02] » Yeah, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah,
>> perhaps this is a a silly question and
[3:10:08] but if anyone has ever like done the
wiring on their own home before, they
[3:10:12] would know better than to run everything
through one circuit breaker. If the
[3:10:17] electrical work on the Keton pavilion,
which I could add cost us far too much
[3:10:22] than it could have, had been done by
somebody that knew that this wouldn't
[3:10:27] have happened. I would propose that this
extra $10,000 cost comes out of whoever
[3:10:33] we had do the electrical work in the
first place because they did it wrong.
[3:10:39] That's a ridiculous reason to need
$10,000 worth of repairs. We spent what
[3:10:44] $900,000
on this pavilion and they did the
[3:10:48] electrical work wrong. Does that sound
sane to anybody else that could possibly
[3:10:54] hear that sentence?
I guess the only thing that I could say,
[3:10:59] Andrew, is uh they probably weren't
aware of the usage that was going to be
[3:11:03] used there. Like most of that at the uh
at the pavilion is basically lights, you
[3:11:10] know. Um and the only time that I think
we have an issue with blowing breakers
[3:11:14] is when the fair is on and we get uh 10
or 15 people with cavs giving them a a
[3:11:21] shampoo and a wash and they're drying
them. So,
[3:11:25] » so presumably whoever was doing the
electrical work for our fair pavilion
[3:11:30] was unaware of the fair.
Again, it seems like a ridiculous reason
[3:11:35] to need $10,000 worth of repairs. If I
had any recommendation, it would be go
[3:11:39] after the people that did the electrical
work in the first case and make them pay
[3:11:43] for it. They did it wrong.
>> We can take your point into
[3:11:48] consideration and staff can look into
it. I guess, you know,
[3:11:51] » I I think I what I can say at this point
is 10,000 we're looking at as a maximum
[3:11:57] upset in this point. We don't want to
have to come back and ask ask for more
[3:12:01] money. So, I I'll say that's our maximum
upset on on this uh line item. I don't
[3:12:06] disagree. There was a mistake and I'm
not going to say that, you know, I don't
[3:12:11] think any of the staff are still here.
Um but I I think staff should have
[3:12:16] caught something here and and found
that. But you are correct that it only
[3:12:19] blows when we have these cattle dryers.
So I I can't say whether the
[3:12:24] electricians knew or didn't know or what
at that point in time. I don't think the
[3:12:30] juice is going to be worth the squeeze
to go after the contractor for the
[3:12:34] $10,000. So
>> I don't actually either. I just wanted
[3:12:38] to make it clear that when we're
approving contracts of this sort, we
[3:12:41] need to be a little more careful with
the details going forward.
[3:12:44] » Understood. Deputy Mayor. Yeah. through
you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I seem to recall
[3:12:51] that the design on this structure had
been changed at least twice. So, um,
[3:12:58] it's no surprise that something like
this might have happened, um, or has
[3:13:03] happened. And I think to uh CEO Hobson's
point, the uh parties involved at the
[3:13:10] time are no longer here to answer answer
for that, whether it's staff or the uh
[3:13:16] designer or the uh contractors. So, um
unfortunately, we're left with uh having
[3:13:24] to make the corrective actions and and
move on to uh prevent any further
[3:13:30] problems.
[3:13:34] Okay. Anybody else?
All right. I did read the motion, but I
[3:13:39] was looking for a mover and secondary
for these uh expenses. So, moved by
[3:13:43] councelor Duck, seconded by Deputy Mayor
Showski. Last call for questions. All
[3:13:49] those in favor? Opposed? If any, that is
carried.
[3:13:57] Uh, next item then is uh Wendy's report
on surplus surplus uh 225 surplus
[3:14:05] report. So Wendy, the floor is yours.
[3:14:11] » Good evening, Mayor and Council. I
didn't bring my mouse, so hopefully
[3:14:15] there's no feedback.
Um, so the before report before you is
[3:14:20] the 2025 surplus report. Um the report
kind of outlines how staff came up with
[3:14:27] an the surplus of $348,415.
[3:14:32] Um staff are recommending that the
surplus be allocated to complete
[3:14:36] previously budget development project um
which would be um two development
[3:14:43] projects. uh reduce boring for the arena
plant
[3:14:48] um project that's ongoing and then to
support the park pavilion electrical and
[3:14:52] parking lot works that was just just
discussed and then hold funds related to
[3:14:58] the OP grant reconciliation
and so in the resolution it breaks down
[3:15:04] each of those and the amounts requested
so I'm happy to take any questions
[3:15:11] » okay thanks Wendy any questions for
Wendy on what we're doing with the
[3:15:14] surplus.
Uh, Deputy Mayor again
[3:15:19] » through you your worship. Um, thanks
Wendy for the report on the $100,000
[3:15:24] that's being applied towards development
projects and transferred to the reserve
[3:15:28] for transportation roads. Can you
provide a bit more detail about where
[3:15:34] which specific projects are being uh tab
for that money and why?
[3:15:40] » It's cautionary,
right? Yeah. Um, so if I can I just I
[3:15:46] want to be very clear because I think
this is a this is a unique thing in
[3:15:48] Wester and I think this is a good thing
and it's an economic development thing.
[3:15:52] So in the municipality of West Perth
it's been standard practice that when a
[3:15:56] subdivision comes in and there's a
there's a road that would potentially be
[3:16:01] shared with a adjacent developer in the
future. Um, West the developer at that
[3:16:07] time will pay for the road to go in.
West Perth will pay the portion
[3:16:16] that the adjacent developer would be on
the hook to pay. And then that's where
[3:16:21] we implement one foot reserves and then
we don't remove those one foot reserves
[3:16:27] until that other developer comes in,
develops that land, and then pays us
[3:16:31] whatever that the money is money is
owing. And again, that's a very unique
[3:16:36] thing to West Perth. It's a good thing
and I think it certainly drives
[3:16:39] development and we when we get
developers in here from Kitchener
[3:16:42] Waterlue, they absolutely love this. Um
there are certainly some costs and
[3:16:48] there's some things that I think as we
get our legs under us a little bit more
[3:16:51] that we're going to be looking to change
um on this structure, but I just want to
[3:16:55] be clear that that's how this works so
everyone understands because this is c
[3:16:58] this is m our cash dollars uh cash that
goes into this. So this is residual of
[3:17:04] some projects. Um you know there'll be
some some wimple cost sharing. Uh
[3:17:08] basically any of the roads where you're
seeing final lift has not been done
[3:17:12] across some of our subdivisions here and
putting in a reserve um for those. So, I
[3:17:18] know Whimple will be an example
um north of the highway there. And then
[3:17:25] I think we've got um
Henry.
[3:17:31] I think it's in Henry. Sorry.
[3:17:37] And then, sorry, I can't uh
>> I can't pull it up right now, but that's
[3:17:41] but that's what it is. Yes. Thank you.
Uh there'll be there'll be a Clayton uh
[3:17:45] Clayton one as well.
Okay.
[3:17:48] » Thank you,
[3:17:53] » Mayor McKenzie.
>> Yeah. So, I I'd prefer that uh with
[3:17:57] already over $6 million in in that
reserve that uh that uh uh come forward
[3:18:03] in the budget process that when we are
budgeting for those needs for those
[3:18:08] reserves that we that is clearly
outlined uh that rather we would use
[3:18:13] that $100,000 to reduce the debt.
similar to the uh the the next line item
[3:18:18] uh on the Arena uh ice plant project
that uh that that goes to reducing debt.
[3:18:24] And the same thing with the uh the
$60,000 um in in tax stabilization. Let
[3:18:30] let's uh I if if there was a surplus
um for for uh this previous year uh let
[3:18:38] let's use it to reduce these debt
payments that we have um as opposed to
[3:18:44] again putting it into reserves for uh
for future use. If we if we if we can
[3:18:48] reduce the debt let's uh let's use it
for uh that purpose instead.
[3:18:55] » Okay.
Go ahead. Um so for the uh two
[3:19:00] development projects they were on the
budget in 2025 and they should have been
[3:19:04] identified as a carry forward project um
just through the final process. That's
[3:19:10] when it got picked up and so that's why
you're seeing it here instead of a carry
[3:19:14] forward project um being contributed to
the reserves. And the op one um it's
[3:19:21] pretty much a guarantee we're going to
have to pay that back. And so that's
[3:19:25] just a timing between uh the province's
year end and our year end where that got
[3:19:30] captured.
[3:19:36] » Okay. Any any other questions, comments?
No. Okay. We have a fairly lengthy
[3:19:42] recommendation here that Miss Bal West
Perth approve the allocation of the 200
[3:19:47] 2025 surplus revenue in the amount of
$348,415
[3:19:53] as follows. 100,000 to be applied
towards development projects and
[3:19:57] transferred to the reserve for
transportation roads. 108,415
[3:20:04] be applied towards the Arena ice plant
project to reduce the amount of external
[3:20:08] financing required and transferred to
the reserve for recreation and parks and
[3:20:14] 80,000 be applied towards the electrical
and egg society projects and be
[3:20:19] transferred to the reserve for
recreation and parks and the remaining
[3:20:23] 60,000 be temporarily retained within
the reserve for tax stabilization
[3:20:28] pending final reconciliation.
of the additional OP funding received in
[3:20:34] 2025.
We have a mover and secondary for that.
[3:20:39] Councelor Rose and Councelor Duck. Uh
last call for questions. All those in
[3:20:45] favor posed, if any. That's carried. Uh
a couple items under correspondence
[3:20:50] there. Thanks, Wendy. Uh from Mland
Conservation Authority and then the
[3:20:55] Western Lake Area Regional Conservation
Authority. If there's no questions, the
[3:21:00] recommendation is that the municipality
of West Perth accept correspondence as
[3:21:04] information.
>> There is a question. Pardon?
[3:21:06] » Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Andrew. You need
your hand.
[3:21:11] » Well, I you know what? I I've gotten
tired of using the hand. It doesn't
[3:21:14] work. So, I'm just going to talk from
now on.
[3:21:15] » That's fine.
>> Yeah. Uh, we got that letter from the
[3:21:19] wards earlier this week, and that was
intended to be included in this week's
[3:21:22] agenda. I haven't seen it, and that
should be
[3:21:26] » that letter. We've talked about the
letter from wards and that was a closed
[3:21:30] session matter and the letter was not
addressed to it was addressed to members
[3:21:36] of council.
>> Is there any chance I can find out the
[3:21:40] details of that discussion seeing as I
couldn't fi attend the closed session?
[3:21:46] » Um
I'm sure maybe James or Dan can talk to
[3:21:51] you about the closed session.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. I I I do uh I
[3:21:56] that letters like that concern me, so
I'm looking to find out more information
[3:22:00] about it. Thank you very much. Sorry for
the interruption.
[3:22:02] » Okay. No. Well, that's fine. Um
[3:22:10] » I need a mover and second here. Did I
not get I had Ryan, didn't I?
[3:22:14] » Okay. Mover and second. I'll get uh I'll
get councelor O'Donnell and and uh and
[3:22:20] councelor Foster uh to deal with the
correspondence. All those in favor?
[3:22:26] Opposed? If any, that's carried. Um,
Fullerton Fastball Club Heron County
[3:22:33] Fastball League year-end tournament. The
recommendation, this is a yearly one
[3:22:38] that we get. The recommendation is that
the Miss Pal West Perth declare the
[3:22:41] Hiron County Fastball League year-end
tournament held by Fullerton A's
[3:22:46] fastball club. Catter Park on or at
Catter Park on September the 11th to the
[3:22:51] 13th be of municipal significance and
advise the Alcohol and Gaming Commission
[3:22:56] of Ontario that it has no objection to
taking place. Mover and secondary
[3:23:01] councelor Harold Councelor Chessel um
questions all those in favor posed if
[3:23:08] any that's carried. And then a similar
letter from the Mitchell Hawks. Uh and
[3:23:14] uh yeah, we had two conflicts here.
[3:23:23] recommendation uh is that uh the council
of municipality of West Perth declare
[3:23:28] the Mitchell Hogar and slow pitch
tournament held at Kerson Park on August
[3:23:34] the 28th to the 30th to be of municipal
significance and advise the Alcohol and
[3:23:39] Gaming Commission of Ontario that it has
no objection to it taking place. Mover
[3:23:43] and second for that. Council Chessel,
Councelor Rose, any questions? All those
[3:23:49] in favor? Opposed? If any that is
carried
[3:23:55] um council reports uh there's a number
of bylaws here um we have uh nine I
[3:24:04] guess nine nine bylaws
>> 52
[3:24:08] for the morel tree.
>> Oh that's right we take that one out.
[3:24:12] Yeah. Okay.
So, um
[3:24:19] re um
[3:24:23] yeah, I just needed to flip over to the
other page here. So, yeah. Okay. So, the
[3:24:27] recommendation is the council
municipality of West Perth give first
[3:24:30] and second reading to bylaw 48
um
[3:24:36] through to 55 with the exception of 52.
Does that sound okay? [laughter]
[3:24:43] and zoning bylaw 327
um on this 10th day of August. So, it's
[3:24:50] everything uh all the bylaws except for
bylaw 52 because that one was squashed.
[3:24:55] So, do we have a mover in second of your
first and second reading? Councelor
[3:24:58] Rose, um councelor Foster, all those in
favor posed. If any that's carried and
[3:25:05] then uh the final recommendation is that
council give third and final reading to
[3:25:10] bylaw 48 through to 55 with the
exception of 52 and zoning bylaw 327
[3:25:17] this 10th and
>> 51 as well is just a
[3:25:21] » oh and okay so 5 exempt 51 and 52
um we got that all clear moved by
[3:25:29] councelor Rose uh seconded by Uh,
Councelor Harold.
[3:25:36] All those in favor? Opposed? If any,
that's carried. Um, coming events. I'm
[3:25:42] not going to go through them all because
there's a number of it's getting late
[3:25:47] and there's a number of items here.
Quite a few. I do want to mention, I
[3:25:50] guess August the 13th, which is uh uh
Wednesday, is the Crody Ballpark uh
[3:25:56] chicken barbecue, and that's a major
fundraising for them out there. Um, I do
[3:26:02] want to mention about music in the park.
Uh, and this one is going to be at the
[3:26:07] Cerson Park again as opposed to the
Lions Park. Uh, the other one I think
[3:26:12] that I want to mention is, uh, the
agricultural fair, the 4th to the 6th,
[3:26:18] and I know Lindsay has contacted you
about working the booth, uh, in the
[3:26:24] arena, and I'll let her look after that.
The question that I have, is there
[3:26:28] interest to put anything in the parade?
Sometimes we do. I think we have the
[3:26:33] last four years. We've always had a
float in there. Uh, is there interest to
[3:26:37] do that again this year or No.
[3:26:45] Um,
gee, I did know.
[3:26:48] » Yeah. Falling into fun. Yeah.
[3:26:54] This is the last meeting before the fair
or I wouldn't I wouldn't have mentioned
[3:26:58] it. So, we we need to get some kind of
direction. Phil's saying,
[3:27:03] "Oh, Andrew."
>> I would love that.
[3:27:08] » You're going to fall into fun.
>> No, I mean having something in the in
[3:27:12] the parade. I don't know about falling
into fun. I don't like falling over.
[3:27:15] That hurts.
>> But a float in the parade definitely.
[3:27:18] That representing us in the community,
letting people see us do anything is uh
[3:27:24] important.
>> Okay. Um, so, um,
[3:27:30] again, I I need a consensus here. Uh,
I've got some that is saying, "No, let's
[3:27:34] let's can it." And I've got one definite
that we should do it.
[3:27:40] Okay. Uh, who wants to kind of oversee
it? Um,
[3:27:45] like we got to line up a truck or a
tractor and a wagon. Um,
[3:27:52] right.
[3:27:55] council wants to do and stuff.
>> Well, staff can can help, but you know,
[3:28:00] it it takes a little bit of time to
decorate it up. Uh I just, you know, I'm
[3:28:04] just looking for somebody that maybe
wants to head it. I I don't mind
[3:28:07] helping, but um you know, we need
somebody responsible to kind of figure
[3:28:12] out what we're what we want to do. And
uh
[3:28:18] » Andrew,
>> Andrew's name. Well, certainly. Uh, you
[3:28:21] know, usually we get together the day
before at the at the township or at the
[3:28:26] municipal operations place and get
something together. So,
[3:28:32] » Oh, I don't care. I I have a trailer
that we can pull behind the truck. I
[3:28:35] don't mind.
>> Oh, okay.
[3:28:38] » Okay.
>> I will volunteer to do as much as I
[3:28:41] possibly can and my kids will help.
>> Very good. Okay. So, we'll leave it with
[3:28:46] with Nicholas and Andrew. How's that
sound? Okay. Um then our our our next
[3:28:51] meeting uh here won't be till September
the 8th. So that's um notice of motion
[3:28:59] and uh deputy mayor has a notice of
motion.
[3:29:02] » Thank you. Um your worship through you
to council colleagues. Um in advance of
[3:29:08] the September 8th, 2026 regular meeting
of West Perth Council, I'm requesting to
[3:29:13] submit a notice of motion that would
read as follows. Following the July 13,
[3:29:18] 2026 BIA delegation that was made before
council requesting permanent closure of
[3:29:23] Poppy Lane on a year-round basis and
following the posting of the BIA
[3:29:28] statement of operations as part of the
audit report to West Perth Council
[3:29:32] prepared by Seabach and Company for the
year ended December 31st, 2025.
[3:29:39] that council move to request that the
BIA provide a budget report to council
[3:29:44] for information, sharing with council
the BIA financial plan for the yearround
[3:29:50] activities they propose to conduct at
Poppy Lane. The BIA financial plan will
[3:29:56] include a capital spending budget that
the BIA intends to follow for capital
[3:30:01] improvements such as outdoor furniture,
lighting, landscaping, decorations, and
[3:30:06] decor. The BIA financial plan should
also include an operational spending
[3:30:11] budget on anticipated operational costs
such as snow removal, portable public
[3:30:18] washroom facilities, and all other
things that the BIA will deem necessary
[3:30:23] to hold their events at Poppy Lane on a
year- round basis.
[3:30:27] This financial plan should also identify
the revenue sources and any donation
[3:30:33] program that the BIA intends to utilize
to finance the aforementioned with the
[3:30:39] appropriate dollar amounts to be raised
accordingly
[3:30:43] and further that this financial plan be
submitted to West Perth Council for
[3:30:47] their information no later than the
regular council meeting schedule for
[3:30:52] October 5th, 2026.
[3:30:59] Okay.
[3:31:02] » For the next meeting.
>> Yes. It's Oh, for the next meeting.
[3:31:06] » Yes.
>> Oh, yeah. September
[3:31:08] » on Oh, yeah. Right. Yeah. Yeah. But but
not dealt with until October. Right.
[3:31:14] » Well, it's a notice of motion first of
discussion at that that meeting.
[3:31:17] » Correct. There'll only be discussion at
the September 8th meeting and council
[3:31:20] will be asked to vote on the motion and
the motion asks for a report to come
[3:31:24] back to the October meeting. So should
council vote in favor of that
[3:31:28] » would be a timeline for October to
report back.
[3:31:32] » Question from councelor Foster
>> that timeline doesn't have a BIA meeting
[3:31:36] in it
[3:31:39] for them to respond between the two.
They don't have a octo a uh September
[3:31:44] meeting.
[3:31:48] Then if they if the BIA needs to have a
meeting, then they'll have to organize a
[3:31:52] meeting.
I I I understand. I I'm fully cognizant
[3:31:56] that their meeting is on the 7th. But um
I would like to if I I well if council
[3:32:06] so chooses, then that's the timeline
I've set out. I think in the motion
[3:32:11] » that's an item that we can discuss at
the next meeting when it comes up, you
[3:32:15] know, and if we have to tweak it a
little bit. We do have two meetings a
[3:32:20] month from from then on. So, uh if it
has to be tweaked a little bit to
[3:32:24] accommodate their schedule, I think uh
we can probably do that. Um any other
[3:32:29] business?
Okay. Uh, next one then is a
[3:32:33] confirmatory bylaw and bylaw number 56
being a bylaw to confirm the proceedings
[3:32:39] of the council of the corporation
municipality west be read a first and
[3:32:43] second time this 10th day of August 2026
mover and seconder for that please
[3:32:49] um councelor Rose counselor Foster all
those in favor opposed if any that's
[3:32:55] carried and then um bylaw 56 being read
a third time and finally past.
[3:33:03] Oh, yeah. Andrew, you you don't have
your hand up, but I'll take it as a Oh,
[3:33:08] he had his hand up. Okay. All right.
Second or moved by Andrew. Do we have a
[3:33:12] seconder? Um, Deputy Mayor Tranowski.
All those in favor? Opposed? If any,
[3:33:17] that's carried. And then the last one, a
motion that West Perth Council will
[3:33:22] adjourn at uh 10:31.
Moved by Councelor Harold, second by
[3:33:28] Councelor O'Donnell. All those in favor?
Opposed? It's carried. Um, thank you for
[3:33:34] your cooperation tonight.