We'll start back there, Ashley.
Okay, we'll call the meeting to order, welcome everybody this morning.
And for the council meeting February 3rd for the West Great Council.
If you could, please rise and we'll take a moment of reflection before we begin the duties of the day.
Thank you.
Again, Ms. Noble, can you give us any updates on anybody that is joining us virtually or how they may join us virtually?
Please.
Thank you. And three numeracles before I begin at any point. If you had disconnected, you can dial 1647-558-0588.
And I'm to the ID for this meeting, which is 891-56262480.
For members of the public, if you require any technical assistance, please send a chat message to our screen communications and I will tap to assist you.
Thanks.
Thank you very much, Ashley.
Number four, is there any decoration of interest?
Very early, why is for many members of the council?
Seeing none, but does rise can be declared at any time, regardless.
And delegations, presentations, and not where that we have any this morning, Jamie.
They're now bringing us down to public meetings, which I don't believe a third of any.
And comment period.
At this time, we offer a chance for anybody. Is there anyone online? There's no.
No.
And we have nobody participating in the audience today.
So I guess that will public comments.
And the biggest public comment was yesterday from White and Willy.
And he's gone back in, so we'll leave that one closed.
Adoption of minutes.
Number seven.
We have two sets of minutes from the council meeting on January 13th.
And the public planning meeting held on January 13th in the afternoon.
Do I have somebody that would like to move those?
Deputy Mayor Hutchison and Councillor Townsend.
Thank you.
Any comments on the motion?
There are some missions.
Ask.
We'll vote on that. All those in favor.
Any opposed?
That is carried.
Next we have committee and board reports.
We've been to minutes of the West Creek Public Library in November of the 12th.
So being a conservation authority in November of 20th.
So being mobility on December of the 19th.
And so being in a spot there for it on January the 21st.
Can I have a mover to receive those?
Councillor Hutchison and Councillor Forster.
We've been second.
Any comments?
Call the question.
All those in favor?
Any opposed?
That is carried.
Thank you, Jim.
What are your long number nine correspondence?
And in the correspondence package.
We have a number of items there.
But two of them that required direction.
The first one is nine point one point.
One correspondence from the county of Grey.
A really team green.
Memorandable.
Understanding.
If we want to make a comment on that or.
Move it.
We sign that.
Memorandable.
Councillor Hutchison Doug.
I have a couple questions.
This is the final answer.
Let's begin.
So my first question has to be with.
I'm gonna refresh my room.
So, cost involved.
Obviously, this, a lot of areas have economic development.
People, we have a COO who is our economic development person, I guess.
I guess. So I'm just wondering, is there a cost of this program to us? How does that, like in the past, I know
county gave us some money toward our facade program, but this is obviously a little bit different to
a mad, is there going to be a cost factor in this? Thank you in command and council. No financial
outlet at this point for this. They want staff time and the intent of this is one this entire
MOU is to define roles and responsibilities so that everybody has a clear understanding of the
expectations of both parties. Any lower tier municipality who signs on to this, I would argue,
will get as much as they put into it. So at this point, most of it is staff time. As most of
you know, I participate as to other economic development staff from other municipalities in regular
meetings with county staff. We collaborate on projects. If there is a specific initiative that the
county and or the member municipalities are interested in exploring that has a cash outlay, they may
ask us to say, and they used the example of here of in Veronica's data, you know, this is a project
we're exploring. Do you think there's value? If we could get a group buying deal and everybody could contribute
a thousand dollars, is this something you would be interested in? But there's always an opt-in option as
opposed to an expectation that there's money. So signing this MOU has zero financial implications
other than the intangible staff class time. Further note? So one of the things that came to mind when
I was reading this was the at one point in time we asked the county or the county was involved in an
inventory of development, employment, lands, commercial businesses and so on. I don't know where we are
not. Is this something that could come out of this because I know there's always been this discussion
about who's got what ready what do you have in here municipality that could be invested in and so on.
So do you see that maybe this would be an area that we can get some kind of inventory and going forward
so that we have a better idea where we're at. Thank you for the question. Well I'd like to say yes,
I'm going to say no. The idea here is that that is the role of the lower tier municipalities. The lower tier
municipalities are intended to be the boots on the ground who have the relationships with their local
businesses, et cetera. We would then take whatever we have, feed it up. You know, maybe at some point
if they had a summer student, we might be able to tap into that but that is not the intent of this
MOU it. There's clearly defining that the local municipalities are doing the day-to-day
relationship building and feeding into the broader opportunities that we can work on collectively at a county level.
Okay. Anything further? I'll say. In the cover letter it says that the vanermyers at the
county is available to explain this or present this information to us. Is this the what we've received?
Is this the explanation or should would there be any merit in having her come and explain it in more detail?
Sure. Thank you. This is the background to this. If council wanted the director of
economic development from the county to come and speak, she would be more than happy to. We recently had
a county CAO as meeting as well and the county broadly has been putting that off or to build that relationship
with lower tier municipalities. For any of you who have attended the series of leadership forums,
what you would hear from Savannah if she came here today would be what we've been building on for the
past number of years at those leadership forums. This is sort of the the embodiment and the formal
agreement to sort of say we're all committed for this joint effort but it's what we've been leading to
for the past two years through these leadership forums. But if it's council's wish to have Savannah
further come to talk about this, certainly I'm sure she wouldn't be more than happy to. We could make those
arrangements.
Well, I'm happy getting the news from you. So that's that's fine. I just noticed that they were offering
I just wondered if they had a package that they expected to deliver to us but okay. They say that the
on page two the guiding document is the economic development tourism cultural master plan which has
already been developed. This is going to be the guiding document to the demo you. This master plan seems to have
been developed by the county unilaterally. Know that was with input from the lower tiers. Okay.
Thank you. We are into I believe you're two or three, 2026. I think might be your three of this demo
it had been a joint effort and prior to my employment here where I used to work we were very
involved in this and this was built. It's probably the best example of strategic plan that has been
looked at at the county level but built with the input of every single member, municipality, they engaged
staff members, they engaged stakeholders and it was truly a collaborative effort and what you're
seeing here. This demo you sort of formalizes some of the relationship but you can start to see
on I think on page two of this it says the scope. This is what we're doing but we've already worked on
priority one, the leadership and collaboration. We've worked on priority two investment readiness and we
will continue to work on those but we're building on this but I can assure you that this was probably
one of the most collaborative strategic plans I've ever been involved in.
All right anything else?
So what we're looking for here is the motion recommendation is to work us to sign and I think
as we have all of you as Michelle has said it's been something that has been worked between
the two minutes of power they're the nine minutes of abilities in the county for a number of years.
It just doesn't have any formal so it's more like an auditor game and said what you're doing all of
this but where's the direction from council there? So that's what it's really here for.
Move. Deputy Mayor Alchison. Thank you. Seconded by Councillor Townsend. Any further questions or
comments on the motion? I'll call the question all those in favor. The opposed that's carried. Okay.
And the next piece of correspondence that needs oh sorry that was the one that needed direction
the next one nine point two is there.
There's a number of other correspondence in the package, but they've already been either dealt with or just be seen for information.
Unless somebody wants to pull one or two of those, one of those, two, three.
Councillor Hutchison, you would like to call a couple of those.
How does it to pull and support one, five, and ten?
All right.
And Mr. Faye, you have.
And say, all right.
So that's one, five, six and ten.
Was that what it was for Doug? You have one, five, and five.
All right.
Well, any other ones, under the package?
And we'll start with the ones that have been pulled.
Comments on, and of course, on it's from Ms. Bell, if North Grandville, Merrick Wolford, Lily Joel P.P.
Detachment Board, regarding support for enhanced school bus safety and implementation of stop-arm camera systems.
Yeah.
So, the reason I like to support this is that there was an interesting status in there when you read it.
That even though we, you know, we have stopped stop lights and all kinds of lights to supposed to work that.
Clause people are key people from passing school buses when they're stopped, but it says here that in Ontario, that 30,000 times a day people pass school buses illegally, which is, which is amazing when you think of it.
So, there's lots of potential for a danger there for sure.
So, this, the Grandville is asking that, um, to go up the, the, um, the Grandville Depachment Board,
supports provincial investment in an expansion of school bus stop-arm camera systems, uh, of using on the highway traffic act.
So, it was on to say, we respectfully call on the problems of terror to continue advancing this life-saving work,
um, by providing municipalities with the funding mechanisms, legal legislative support and implementation guidance.
necessary to deploy stop-arm cameras and complementary safety technologies province-wide.
So, I decided it's worthwhile venture and hopefully it will go through, but all as we can do is ask.
So, you're moving to support that.
That's the seconder. I'll turn in. Okay? Any other college questions?
On that.
Seeing none, then I will call the book, all those in favor.
In post, that's carried.
Second one you had pulled up from town of Elmer.
Just as an protection of Canada's children.
So, this one has to do with the protection of children, um, in terms of our, um,
where the safety will be in children fundamentally.
Response will have an involved with sexual offenses against children, um, across Ontario, Canada.
So, look, just wanted to tighten things up so that, um,
more regulations and more visibility in terms of people that commit some of these crimes.
Um, so there's a growing certain gaps in bail, sensing parole, eligibility, and offender monitoring,
allow high-risk individuals to re-enter communities prematurely placing children at a continual risk.
So, they're asking for the, um,
government to review and strengthen legislation and policies related to sexual offenses against children.
Um, and then it was on to list, um, a number of,
uh, ways you can do that have to do with bail and sensing parole, um, monitoring and, um,
victim and community safety programs and so on.
So, thought it was worth all cause and we should support something like that.
Thank you.
How will move that?
Okay.
Uh, seconder by the deputy mayor.
The other comments are questions on this one.
Seeing them call the question of holes in favor.
Post that's carried.
All right.
And then we, we're down to, we're going, going border.
And number six.
Yeah.
Yeah, free.
That one.
Um, this is a request from the library board.
We're going to be included in any discussions about, uh,
considering a county wide library system.
I assume they're already being included in these discussions,
but I did feel that since they presented a formal request that we ought to give them a formal reply.
And just respond to their correspondence saying,
yes, of course, we'll include you in these discussions.
Uh, shall.
Thank you.
That has already been done.
We updated them.
The county has a report going through it.
I believe that their next council meeting,
but it was also presented at the joint service review committee last week.
So, um, the library is made aware of that.
And I've told them that that's the form.
So they are quite pleased with that correspondence.
Just if you're asking, do they participate in those or just,
I made aware of them.
They were made aware of it at this point.
The initiative moves forward at the county.
They would obviously be engaged in those discussions.
They stun what I heard from the joint services working group.
Um, I think the recommendation to county council is going to be that it's not viable at this point.
To look at a county wide.
And that will be before county.
I think next week.
All right.
So as we know that airports and airplanes are very important to the north,
especially in northern Ontario and northern parts of Canada,
we've always crossed.
This, this group is asking that the government.
Help to support airports and being that we're part owner of an airport.
I thought it was sort of timely that that maybe we could also ask for some support to help support our airport.
And it says,
Where as other provinces, including British Columbia,
We've highlighted many other regions of the area.
But we've seen a lot of issues with the European Union,
which is an increasingly important area.
I think it's probably going to be very specifically based on the ongoing shopping
projects and public planning that we need to do.
During the last, let me introduce you to one of the most important suggestions in the region of our country.
I would like to say,
Oliva is a nice medium-time expert at transportation,
and share eligibility of a broad range of capital projects, including safety,
upgrades, equipment, replacement, runway maintenance, and engage in municipalities and design
of these and recognize the essential role of airports in the MetaVAC and emergency services,
especially in remote and northern communities. And we know that even our airport, not in the remote
north, but we do get used for our airport and I thought maybe WMR, HSM would be all over this.
So, you want to move that we support the town of Fort Francis,
and we're ambition to move the province towards that capital funding program.
All right, do we have a seconder for that? No, I'm going to take Councilor Nan.
But if you want to make a comment, Mr. Hatseson, go ahead, down.
Thank radicals for your back to Councilor Hatseson. Yes, so the tricky part there is because the airport
usually fall under the bed of federal legislation, so that's where I agree with this. I'm going to
certainly support it, but the role of what we've found so far we're role with the province is more of
that infrastructure Ontario grants and incentives there with 0% interest, et cetera. So we're tapping
into that with concepts or ideas that we have for our municipal airport, but certainly support this,
and see if there's any other way to generate some interest in revenue for us. That's great. Thank you.
And for your comments, Councillor Shea. Yeah, I just have a question for anyone who might know
that a back is often referenced in these sorts of discussions. Our hospital
heliports regulated under any of this and would hospital heliports be eligible for this sort of funding, do you
think? I'm going out on a limb here and I would say, I don't believe that they will
for the fact that it's a landing spot for orange, which is under the Ministry of Health, so I would
think at the hospital sort of it would be under their capital, although we'll correct me from
around the depth of your mirror. The orange helicopters on a number of locations drop in too. They
being a Soviet medical airport for fuel, and there have been occasions where they have met an ambulance
there and picked up, because of difficulty getting into any of the water to the end or having
for hospital. So, yeah, the use of airports on occasions, if they can, those landing sites at the hospital.
I would doubt if there will go through the helipads at the hospitals into this program.
Okay, we'll have a move in a second to support the Port Francis, a recommendation on a capital
that's a simple grant for airports, any other questions comments? Go question in all those in favor.
To the post, that's carried. Okay, that leaves us with receiving the rest of the correspondence
to the 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 for information. We have a mover move by Councillor Thompson, excuse me,
and second by Councillor Forster. Thank you. Good. It's got any questions on that?
Oh, the question, all those in favor. Post, that's carried. Very good. That's it for your correspondence.
It brings us down to staff reports, and our first staff report this morning is community relations
coordinator. Jessica, good morning. And 10.1.1.225. Summer Aquatics Program Review.
The floor is yours. Okay, good morning, everybody. So, through you, Mayor, close. I'm presenting
the 2025 Summer Aquatics Program Review. So, swimming lessons were provided by the municipality and they
have been a longstanding pillar of recreation programming. In 2025, we hired an aquatic supervisor,
a headguard, and five life guards. So, there were 236 enrollments across 188 individuals
and overall the fill rate was 48% and we do apply for grants. Unfortunately, we did not receive any
in 2025. And our swim lesson fees have not increased since 2021. So, I assume we've all read the rest.
So, our recommendation is that in consideration of this report, you approved the municipality
increasing the lesson fees. Parent and taught, we would like to increase up until swimmer level nine,
five percent. And private and semi-private lessons would be an increase of 10 percent, and then
council would then direct staff to bring forward a bylaw to amend the bylaw number 2025-065 to reflect
the swim lesson fee increase for the 2026 season.
All right, good. Any questions? Just get on this one. Are you willing to take any questions just
again? Yeah, so I'm willing to take any questions.
Thank you and thank you for the report. I guess my question is, I'm not sure what the fees are,
but I wasn't really, um, some-
I'm familiar with what was offered. But I noticed there's private and semi-private lessons. So this is one on one. I guess with our instructors and I feel looking at what the expenses were for 2025. And I realize recreation has never a profit margin.
But in the same token that tax dollar paying for that kind of cost, when we're offering private and semi-private lessons, I was just kind of wondering what kind of revenues we're bringing in for those types of lessons.
Are they paying like 100% of the students or whoever's providing those lessons, or is it being subsidized by the municipality for private and semi-private lessons?
And then through your miracles. So our private lessons in 2025, that was one on one between one-life garden, one child. Those were $130 per lesson. So there were typically nine, 10 lessons in there.
30 or 45 minutes each. So I wouldn't say that that quite covered the staff cost to run all of those lessons.
And then semi-private is typically two children to one lifeguard and that was $90. So that definitely would not cover the staff and cost.
I hope that answered your question.
Okay. Yeah. All right. Then what would the just a regular cost for like, and how many students would be getting lessons at the same time for that lower cost?
So it varies for different lessons. There's different ratios, but one of the ratios would be one instructor for every six children, for example, and you could have the cost at $70.
For example, depending on whether it's somewhere level one or somewhere level nine, so then that definitely helps and provides a bit more revenue than the private and semi-private lessons.
Again, I'm not trying to say don't like to subsidize private and semi-private because all children should know how to swim. It's very important with all the bodies of waters that we have just here and on in West Great, but anyways, thank you for your information.
And also, how's this?
Yeah. So first of all, I'd like to say a supportive, there's sort of a swim program. I think it's something we've offered for a number of years and I think it's a very important program.
But I do see that we're in a deficit of $47,000 and we just cancel the camp program that had a deficit of $30,000.
And I know there's some rumblings out there that people aren't very happy about that, but anyways, came back to the swim program.
My question is, in 2025, program, fill rate of 48% across various swim levels.
So I'm just wondering, how can we, and I don't have any problem with raising the fees, I think we need to do that to help bring the cost down.
How do we make it so that we're running at a 100% fill rate rather than 48?
And I know in the camp, too, that was one of the concerns as we were looking at 40 or 50 or 60% fill rate, remember a number exactly.
But to me, why we build off each year, we build off a program. Why can we not say, okay, we got five instructors this year?
And we take our registration and when it becomes filled, we don't take any more.
So then we're at 100% capacity and if we don't fill it this year, maybe we drop the four and then the three to get a 100% fill rate.
To me, I don't understand how that works, but why are we running at 48% fill rate when we could be running at 100%?
If I'm going to like to fill me in on that one?
I think the CEO wants to stay up at a first. She wants to swim in these water.
Well, Ching, thank you.
We've been talking a lot about this.
We have promoted both the camp and the Aquatics program extensively and not sure what else we can do to promote it to encourage more activity.
I would argue that some of this is simply a case of demographics and supply and demand.
And the challenge we have and it's not unlike any other programming is to engage the students or the people we have for the staff or the summer.
We can't give them ad hoc hours.
We'll give you five hours here when the program is full.
We are required to retain qualified staff to really engage them for the whole summer, which is why to speak to Councillor Newton's point about semi private and private lessons.
When staff have capacity and availability, we're already paying them.
We've committed to whatever period of time they're in.
So if we can utilize, even though the private and semi private are not as, I'm going to say, profitable.
At the end of the day, we're paying the staff anyway, so we'd rather continue to engage and have some revenue opportunity.
So it's a fine balance here on how we do that.
And I think speaking and I don't want to delve into the other summer camp program that we've talked about, but I think Jesse and Carly when they reviewed this.
I mean, there is a very strong with this Aquatics program, particularly a strong, deeply rooted historical.
It's a piece of this, it's entrenched in community and has been for generations.
So I just wanted to pride that little bit of context, but it's a delicate balance.
If we could just say we're putting out this these three weeks and we're going to once it's filled, we'll open up more that would be great, but we've got to engage staff.
Well, to further that.
So since we had five swim instructors, I'm looking back here.
And one had our five life guards swim instructors and we were 48% filled right.
So are we going to go to three instructors this year so that we can get that number higher?
Like, is that how that works?
And so that's my first question.
But the other thing that comes to mind is is like some areas do cut it off once you get to a certain level.
And I think I think I hear rumors that we need to make sure that we get this out early enough that people can make commitments over the summer so that they don't have to start shopping around to try to get.
I don't get positions and that has to do with the camp part two, but but.
So I guess to go back to my question is are we going to do have less staff this year and try to get that percentage up.
I understand what you're saying we need to hire for the summer, but so maybe we hired three instead of five.
I don't know what's that's my question.
And I will defer to Carly and Jesse they've been doing all the analysis on this and that might absolutely be a consideration.
Speaking to getting it out early enough we get it out very early so I I do struggle with that I know and we kept it open all summer and we were pushing all summer.
We did all kinds of promotion around staff so I don't think the promotion is is the challenge and I think certainly if we're looking at this maybe there's an opportunity to.
reduce our staff complement on this and see how that works out and see if we could.
But then we might run into oh my gosh we're full and we'll be disappointing people but it's that balance and I will defer to Carly and Jesse if they have any more specifically to add related to that.
Through you miracles.
Yeah as for the staffing and decreasing the staffing that's something that we would certainly have to look at just based on the swim lessons schedules.
There are typically multiple lessons going on at a time so in 2025 the swim instructors from what I understand they were still very busy even though the fill rate might not reflect that so much this is also.
In consideration of the private and semi private lessons whether it increases it or decreases it I don't know off the top of my head but if nobody registered for a private lesson that would be a zero percent.
But yes we do typically open this when lessons in February so I don't think there's any issue with opening it sooner we can certainly promote as we have been the new setcraft show we ended out flyers and things like that we can also look at schools and see if they'd be open to handing promotional materials out to the students to take home for their parents to look at.
Otherwise we would certainly have to look at what the swim lessons schedules would be and relate that back to what the staffing would have to be as well.
Yeah so realizing that you know we have new staff in this position and you had working from a program that's been there for a long time so I trust that you'll look at it and figure it out and hopefully make it a little more efficient and.
But in the meantime keep keep the program going and maybe we can even have a camp some days so we'll see.
Jeff I'm going to go ahead.
Yeah I think you do a great job and I support you and I'm ready to happy to adopt all your recommendations I just wanted to point out a couple things one.
If there are lessons being offered and they are not full.
Do you could we promote them to campers at the Southern Valley conservation area where people can almost do it as like a drop in like oh we're here for three days sure the kid could go swimming lessons at 11 o'clock two of those days and pay.
No, maybe they're not going to pay for the full five days but could I'm just think we've got a capital audience there who are doors oriented.
I'll leave that with you maybe you've already explored that.
Or okay I'd like to hear you.
Thank you through you, Mary.
That's something that we definitely can explore.
I don't know that we have already last year we did have some interesting doing swimming lessons for only a few days.
That was under the understanding that they would not receive a swimmer level they would not graduate from that swim level because they simply did not have enough time to.
Completed but we could definitely explore something like that.
And the only other comment I would make is on your front page on the highlights you say the.
Twenty twenty five a quarter program operated a loss of forty seven thousand.
I would be face that operated at a cost of forty seven thousand dollars and I don't I'm not comfortable with this profit and loss model.
We don't we don't see we built a road at a loss of four hundred thousand dollars so just a comment.
Point.
I think.
Good.
Joyce.
I'll just further on.
The registrations are they hundred percent west square or do we take some people outside of west square.
And if so.
Because the cost to run the program.
That affects them the tax base was just wondering about maybe additional user fee for additional fees if if the children are outside of west gray.
So it's just kind of wondering if it's limited just west gray or outside of that as well.
We do accept enrollments from anybody, but in the future we can certainly look at having an extra fee for those outside of west gray.
I don't have any figures on me right now, but if you were interested, I could get figures on the percentages of west gray residents and non west gray residents to our.
or swimming lessons in twenty twenty five.
So.
And related to non municipal.
I think we're pretty focused on our useers of our services.
It's a discussion we've had internally I think we've roped it loosely at this council before about that and I think if that something council wants to look at I think that might be something we want to look at comprehensively because.
a new new or correct, when there is a cost to a service that we are providing, and there is
an impact on our West Gray ratepayers, perhaps subsidizing ratepayers from other municipalities.
However, that would have to go across the board. We talked about the fitness center. We talked
about who uses our facilities, and what does that look like, and then there's the whole other
thing that if you start to do that, do you lose your user? So it's a big philosophical debate,
and I would argue that this shouldn't, if we decide if Council would like us to explore,
that probably shouldn't be a one-off or swimming lessons, or any program, but look at it across
the board, and it's something we could consider.
So maybe just investigating with other municipalities, just to get kind of the feeling of how
everyone's treated then. Because again, I don't want to stop these children from learning
out of swim, but I was just thinking because of the impact on the tax dollar, you know, to be equitable.
Thank you. Okay, anything else? If we could, I guess, one of the biggest things obvious,
very obvious, but whatever reason, the summer student program, we didn't get the funding last year.
I, you know, it's one of those flips of the coin type of thing, and that's basically $10,000
right there that affects the bottom line on that cost of what it costs for the program. The other
interesting one was that I'm thinking that what's it in here, yes, but...
The historical factor, the swim lessons were offered as long ago as 1994, and that might have been
when Councillor Hutchison maybe he was in it then. But historical records, if we could find
the historical records, I think even Ms. Might might see that it predates that by quite a bit,
because I had, my sister was a light guard in the program, and that was back in the late 70s.
And we had another counselor here and her daughter was one of the life guards, and I think
that was back into the early 70s, late 60s that Ms. Rayburn was a light guard. So, I don't
know whether 1994 or 1984 might be closer to swim lessons have been had. And one of the
in it was former counselor, Lawrence, that always said yes, and to your point, Councillor Nunn,
with the amount of water bodies that we have in West Gray swimming in open water is dramatically
different in learning how to swim in open water. It's dramatically different than Jet
Climate, Clamp at Learning to swim in a sea map pool, but in our sea map on, and it certainly
is, and I think that being where we are in learning to swim in open water is an necessity as well, too.
So, anyways, I've generated another question from Councillor Hutchison.
Doug, just to go back to the user feed thing, I just cautioned when we look at that. I know there's
historically there's been some issues around user fees with local municipalities, crossing orders,
and using their facilities, and so on. So, I'd say we have precautions on that, but I know
what some areas do also is they do delayed registration program. So, their residents get the first
kick at the cat, and then at two weeks later, non-residents can register for some of the program. So,
I think that's another option that we could use so that you don't stymie, maybe people from outside
there that want to get involved in something, but they don't maybe, they can't take to place of some of
our residents in the program. So, just just something to look at. Thank you.
Priority registration. Okay. All right. I don't believe that it really is, well, there is
the recommendation here is for the increase in fees to get them back up to where they were,
because it hasn't been adjusted since 2021, and we know that inflation is probably greater than the
five percent since 2021. So, the recommendation is there, just anybody want to move that,
but I'll tell you this. Councillor Shea and Councillor Forster. Thank you very much.
Any further questions or comments? Call the question, all those in favor.
Any opposed? That is carried. Thank you. Thank you, just. Carly.
Okay. And according to the groundhog, spring will be here really soon. So, swimming lessons can
start early this year. Thank you, ladies. Down to, that's the 10.1, 10.2 senior planner.
Mr. Rappki. You have a request for land development security.
And point 2.1, Matt. Good morning. We received a request from the owner of the Crawford subdivision.
He would like us to be able to accept lots or land just in general to be conveyed to the municipality
and held as security in the same way we would take cash or letter accredited or bonds.
Got all this detail in the report, but effectively like the concept of security, we take it
because people don't only say they're going to do what they, people don't always do what they say they're
going to do. People sometimes fail unintentionally, especially in the case of a subdivision.
Once you registered that subdivision and it's deposited at the land registry office,
all of those individual lots now become legally conveyable parcels before the road is constructed.
Maybe even before it's even started constructed, certainly before it becomes assumed.
When that happens, that road actually does become municipal property immediately, even if the
municipality hasn't assumed it. So, the concept is if the municipality is clearing those conditions and
allowing that to be deposited, they've taken some security so they can ensure that that road
gets constructed and that anyone who buys those parcels isn't holding a useless piece of land that
you can't develop upon because the road isn't built. So, the request does present some risk.
The value of land lands not as liquid as cash, re-bond or a letter of credit. What is the value of land?
It fluctuates a bit, but when we ponder why we take security and what you could do with land, there is
value in it, you can liquidate it. So, we've thought through the concept and they're proposing that we do
accept that with some conditions. One being that any land that is taken by the municipality
already fronts an improved public highway. So, we wouldn't accept a backlot that will have frontage on an
improved street once the development is built because that's useless as security at the development fails.
This is not worth anything, right? But if a development has lots that already fronts like in this
scenario and Crawford, the front view lock, there's a couple of lots there that are free and clear. They don't
even really the subdivision agreement doesn't hardly pertain to them because they're developable now.
So, those have value, those would be easily sellable by the municipality if they had to be liquidated to
cover costs. So, we could accept that as security provided it is appraised by a professional and then we only
value, give them credit for 50% of the appraised value to account for any fluctuations in costs and
the difficulties in having to liquidate that. I've also suggested to hear that if we're doing that,
we take $50,000 cash to pay for any immediate expenses because you're not going to be able to sell that land
immediately. And then that we have to actually talk to a lawyer and figure out the procedural aspects of
how the municipality takes title and what that agreement looks like that would have a condition on it
relating to when that gets liquidated or how the land is returned to the developer because I do not believe
that the subdivision agreement itself is the right tool. The municipality might have to hold this
and trust somehow for the developer with conditions relating and might be a separate thing registered on
title. And we don't know that yet and we have it looked into it because we wanted to present this to council
for their opinion on the concept in the first place. So I'll stop there and wait for in questions.
And there are there any questions? Councillor Shea. Yeah. Yes, I've got a few. You said the value of the land
is fluctuates. It's not as steadiest cash or a bond or a letter. I would suggest that in the case that
the developer fails in the development service bankrupt, that the value of the land, even the ones
that are facing an existing road, could fluctuate dramatically. People invest in a development pre-building
because they want to be part of the community. It looks like it's going to be a great, attractive
community, but if it's only a handful of houses facing the road and the rest of it's going to be vacant
lots sitting in a bans for decades, you know, the value of the land becomes very unstable.
The, you said that the typical arrangement is cash, bond or letter of surety or letter of
something like that. So those letters or bonds would typically be issued by some sort of a financial
organization, bank or mortgage company or something like that. When they issue that, they generate
profit. They issue that, you know, and get a fee or a percentage from the developer or whoever's
requesting this letter. So that they say, yes, you've got a million dollars worth of land here,
we will say that we would guarantee you for a half a million dollars in cash in the case. You need it,
everything goes fine. The development goes ahead. Nothing is required. The bond doesn't have to ever
come into effect. But they get a profit. They get to generate revenue on that transaction. Is there a
revenue for us to generate, take, we're essentially taking on this bond ourselves. So will we be able
to make a profit on the bond the same way that that bondholder would? It's one of my questions.
That's not what I've proposed here. You could theoretically do that. They're doing that spread across
hundreds of not thousands of properties. They make a risk profile and they collect insurance premium from
a developer. You might pay 10,000 bucks a year on a $300,000 bond. And then sometimes they are having to
liquidate self and pay out. But they're blending it over all kinds of things. It's just us with one
property. So that would get complicated. I mean, theoretically you can do that. The point here is to
I would suggest we either do it or we don't and not get into something like that or you adjust the
value that you're valuing the property at. So if it's valued at 200 grand or only you can grow
and it's worth a hundred that you would tinker with that and then mount your taking as security rather
than lump overlaying another element of where you're going to pay us 10,000 extra bucks every year for
this and that. I think that would complicate it a bit and that we can we can just vary how much we're
actually taking as security. So my overarching perspective is that those companies that do that are relatively
good at what they do. We don't typically do that. Another municipalities according to your report don't
typically do this either. So I'm going to bet we're not as good at doing it. And I like the idea that if they
need that security, they should go to a professional company to secure that. That's the standard practice.
I don't know why we would be getting into this line of business that we're not really
equipped for. I think there's risk in such a financial risk it's the risk of being in a messy
relationship. If that development fails and we're seeing as being a partner on some level or another
in that failure I think that would sort of look bad on us. So my overall perspective is that you've asked
for a go or no sort of response. I would say no.
Any carry? Just to sort of focus the purpose of the money that if we had to sell these lots
isn't to make a profit at all it would just be to complete the road and then the rest of the
development could basically go ahead. Once that once we create that road then those lots could be sold.
So our objective with trying to get security would be if the developer walks away we have enough
funds to complete the road construction. And that's all we're trying to we're not trying to profit laws.
Make money on it on the whole subdivision. We're just wanting to try to ensure we have enough funds
available if we liquidate those lots that we're talking about the that are in front on a road
to complete the road construction. That's just so that that's the what we're trying to mitigate our
risk against is the cost of finishing the road construction and getting the value to put towards that.
Just to try to put perspective on.
Yeah and I didn't include it in this report because it gets a lot longer but
you know it relates to the discussion. The bigger element that we have control over is how much we're
taking as security and the practice has been 40% for a lot of stuff.
I would suggest that that poses a bigger risk than accepting land as security as a concept and if we
want to fully mitigate we crank that up to 100 for the offsite stuff that needs to be done and then this
actually would potentially give you 200% value as security if you're taking land and only valuing
it at 50% and you're requiring a 100% provided the land value doesn't dip. You actually have a pile of
extra equity then if you liquidate it and you don't get to keep it it has to go back to the developer
anything that's left over. But that is a bigger variable than my mind for for
you know mitigating your risk exposure is the amount that you require as security rather than
the. What is provided as security that what is provided is just you know is it is a properly valued
and it's a very liquid right and that's why I have suggested you just go half it's a nice easy number
puts in a big buffer and it makes it easy on the developer too and again it would only be for
lots that are free and clear like I and this Crawford example I don't think that the lots that
would be taken would be impacted all that much by the back part not being developed because they're
just like any other severed lot off of a front of anything right like it has value in and of itself
of being able to put a house on there anyway so those are some extra thoughts on that.
Councillor Hutchison.
Yeah I don't I don't see it as being a big issue. I think I think.
We're being creative for one thing and I think given the economic times right now, it's a way of us encouraging builders to continue to move forward and whatnot.
But I do think that number five and your recommendations that we obtain satisfactory legal advice, I think that's wise that we, you know, we talk to our lawyers and make sure everybody's to think, but otherwise I don't have a problem with it, I think it's, I think it could be a good business force.
You can.
Councillor Nun, try.
Um, they only follow up with Councillor Hutchinson.
The fees and for the lawyer who's going to pick up those because if we're investigating something
not the developers requesting, I think the developer needs to pick up any of those
because associated with trying to put something like this in place.
I, too, I think there's, there's just too many unknowns.
I know when our director of finance said, like, at the developer walks away from it.
So if they walk away from it, we have the collateral from the locks to finish the road,
who happens to all the locks then, like, if the developers walked away,
it happens to all the locks.
Like, I don't understand all the concepts of this.
So I'm, I'm just to share, too, and share about really wanting to support this sort of transaction.
There's just too many unknowns, I feel.
Matt, you want to?
Yes, I think there's kind of two questions in there.
This is number five who pays for the legal advice, and then what happens to the lot.
So in the paying for the legal advice, and I discuss this with Carl, who's obviously not here,
his thought was, this would be like a policy thing.
You pay for it.
That's out of the municipal legal budget as we're developing policy.
I would leave that to Councillor.
We have a strong feeling, out of direction.
If, you know, you provide direction that we build this back to the developer here,
but it is policy that would move forward and apply to everybody, right?
So there is kind of a benefit broader to the municipality here on this.
And then what happens to the locks?
So if everyone can picture the, the Crawford subdivision in your mind, right?
The one's fronting new lock, for example, would be security.
So let's say they only need to give us to provide this efficient amount of security.
And then there's whatever eight more locks that front onto new lock that they own.
And then they own all the ones in behind still.
So when they give us the security, they actually have to do a reference plan.
They give us those two locks.
The other ones still haven't been created yet.
We now have security.
We signed an agreement.
Subdivision gets deposited now because they've got to slide the conditions.
All those other locks get created.
They can now sell those to whoever.
A lot of people don't buy them until they're sufficient.
Development that has occurred to actually make that road.
I wouldn't, I don't know other people might.
They're not worth very much.
Everything's just a promise still.
If that developer went bankrupt.
All of those locks would be owned by whoever owns them at the time.
Some of them might have already been sold.
They might own some of them still.
We liquidate the ones that front new locks sell those.
Get money that is needed to finish that road.
Finish that road.
And now whoever owns those locks can pull permits as needed.
Which may still be the developer.
They've gone bankrupt.
They've probably been liquidated and sold off to whoever else has.
They have liabilities to, right?
But that would be kind of the process there.
So all of those locks could be owned by all kinds of different people.
And then the ones that we would be holding would be sold to whoever.
In order to maximize the funds to the municipality to finish that road.
Just to be clear.
Right now we asked the developer.
When any subdivision to put forward a.
$100,000 line of credit or security.
It's cash up front.
Right on that.
Yeah.
This is seen.
Instead of them having to go and borrow $100,000.
They've got an asset that they can use that we can liquidate.
But it allows the developer to have more cash flow.
So that they won't go bankrupt.
Per se.
It's a financial balance.
And it helping the development community use some of the assets.
Other than instead of having a million three.
They have to give them a municipality.
They're at their development before they even sell a lot now.
Because they have to give us security for 200,000.
They're at a million five.
Certainly ties up their working capital.
This is a way to support our development community.
By taking a very.
And as a finance or said.
Your best investment that it's ever has been is land.
Yeah.
It may go down a few bucks today.
But it will go up twice as many to more.
So it never gets devalued.
It may be not quite as liquid.
But land at 50% can be sold really quick.
They just wrote anybody.
I.
Yeah.
It's.
It's a little bit of a novelty.
But it's not something that hasn't been done in different places to mine.
I don't know which.
I think we're not the first municipality to be able to.
Do this.
Correct.
Amendment.
We have heard that Hanover has done this before.
Yes.
Haven't seen it written on a piece of paper.
But I can confirm that that is what it's done.
In a few other local municipalities.
And it's, you know, a way to support and a way to make housing more affordable.
Within our community, which is a big thing as well, too.
If you don't let the bottle.
400,000 put down on us.
And it can use one of the assets that you have.
From the developer.
It's good business for them when it's good for the municipality.
I'm getting affordable housing.
It's all of a certain pushy.
Whether it's here.
Whether it's a Queen's Barker.
Whether it's on.
Barblement Hill.
Okay.
Any other questions?
Got.
That's of course.
Thank you.
Are there lots so long you lot that the laneways can go on to me luck?
Because I thought they were supposed to go on to the new road.
That's a great question.
The idea would be.
So yes, they they will be front and directly on me luck.
And that's where the lanes will be.
The other road that I don't remember the name of because it's a corner lot, right?
There's a couple of them.
Yeah, so a couple of them front that road.
But they don't really front it.
That's going to be the back of them.
Those I would suggest we would not take a security because if they do front on to the
Concession 10, but if we had to liquidate them, we don't only want the driveway and the house facing the other way, right?
It's got to face the other way.
So it's kind of not fronting.
There's we would only take ones where you're driveway.
You can get a house permit free and clear in your entrance and no problem without the rest of the sub division
Proceeding is the idea and just for clarity.
For example, this developer could give us.
Crawford lots that are free and clear, fronting new lock.
As security for a different development, because it's just like cash that we're holding as collateral and relation to something else,
which would all be specified within the development agreement that would relate to a different property, for example, that could theoretically be done.
Okay.
All right.
Jeff.
That's for sure.
So I don't really know how this whole business works at all that well.
But when a developer typically requests a bond or a letter, I would have assumed they do not need to
give the issuer of that bond the full cash value of the bond.
That's part of the business of bond writing.
If they were giving them the full cash value of bond, they could just.
Give us the cash that we'll put the cash into an account.
So do I have that correct.
Go ahead, Matt.
I've only been kind of sort of involved in this on the private side, but effectively it's it's like when you get a mortgage.
You go to the insurer like trasher as one that issues these bonds.
And they put a charge on your property the same way of bank would as a mortgage.
And they, you know, they do some assessment of if you've already got a mortgage oftentimes a bond then comes in second position.
So it already has more risk associated with it because the mortgage gets paid out first if everything gets liquidated.
The mortgage gets paid out.
Then the bond gets to realize whatever access equity is available in that.
So a lot would be liquidated right for the bond the bond holder pays the municipality.
And then they have to liquidate against the property that they've secured the bond against.
So the bond old older than that lock it sold and the mortgage gets paid out.
Then the bond holder gets paid out for whatever that lock got sold for that was used as collateral for that bond.
And the meantime the person who took the bond to give it to the municipality they're paying that insurer whatever thousand dollars per year is a premium.
For the risk exposure of the bond holder has having issued that bond if any of that makes sense.
So effectively it gets registers equity against a property is how they get their money back out if they need to pay out a bond.
Which is more or less what we would be doing.
Right.
So I don't know why we're doing it when there's commercial entities who are in this business and could do it probably more efficiently.
So in this one and I think you know I just want to go back to Matt's last recommendation on here number five that says that you know this is an idea that we sort of.
Cook forward for council consideration based on wanting to be that municipality that is receptive to development to councilor shays point a developer can only.
Ensure or get a bond on something that they have an asset to leverage against and there comes a point in time where.
They don't have any more assets but the land is the asset and here you go this is yours so.
I think the big thing here is if this is something that council is interested in us considering obviously we're not ready to put it into effect right now we need to get legal guidance but we weren't going to even pursue that path until we got direction from council.
We're going to ask that the legal guidance also include guidance on the basic machinations of the bond.
Market like how this whole thing works financially in the typical scenario.
I know the legalities of you know the transfer this way the transfer that way taxes are doing this case they're not doing that case yes I would like to get that legal advice but I think we should probably be if we're getting into this business.
We should be more informed about what the out the bond market and the surety market works for real estate development general.
Thank you the treachery and I were just chatting about your comment councilor shay and we had a report through I think last year about surety bonds and how those are done and how the province is regulating those.
You all know how our current security cash securities work.
I'm just hesitant to get legal advice on the bond market broadly and how that all works.
I think our biggest thing is how if council wanted to explore this option how we mitigate our risk to ensure that we are protected by if we chose to take land as collateral.
And it opens up I mean it could be a 180 page report on the machinations of the bond market or the surety market and I'm not sure that's a business we need to explore at this point.
Unless we can provide council for further information we can recent the surety report that we talked about that stuff if you want to be informed in that but I'm hesitant to spend.
An hourly rate of legal counsel to explore the merits of the bond market.
Hey maracles is true you I think it's I think it's very cradle and I can certainly support because I think.
I think you know once we get our legal advice on it but I don't think we're really minimize the the risk we're taking the premium lots that we know are.
We're only assessing that 50% so if it's two or three whatever number of problems we need.
That can be developed great well we could we'll say about if you want but I think it's pretty creative and I think it's also it's showing a partnership with.
With this developer and in setting the the path for other ones to come forward to attract more development in West Gray which is desperately needed obviously so I'm going to certainly support this.
Thank you.
Thank you say this all goes the get a agreement in place and security with the legalities and so on so forth so we have these lots what if all of a sudden now there's such a big interest in the lots that we've got secured.
With West Gray and they want to buy them how do you handle something like that and.
Like would it be the municipality selling it or would it be the developer how would you handle that.
So if I understand correctly I think the idea is things are going going sweet for the developer and someone wants to buy those lots so they want them back so and that's scenario they just swap out.
They give us cash the cash value that they always for the security and then they get title back to the.
To the lots would be that that would happen at some point they just kind of like we got to follow up with the lawyer.
Is we're not going to develop those and if everything goes great, the idea is they would go back to them, right? And then they sell them to whoever, right? So that would be how much security is left at that point that we need, because maybe they're done the road by that point. Maybe the road's all done. Everything's good. Okay, can we get our lots of facts? We want to build those once now, right? And maybe there's zero doubt, and they don't, there's 10% holdback or something like that. So then they give us the 10% cash and they get the lots back. We'll kind of be how that goes.
Okay, very good discussion. We've got the motion moved. Let's think that that would be an important note. Councilor Thompson.
I would like to move the recommendations as presented in the report.
Thank you.
Thank you. I have a second.
Deputy Mayor Hutchison, thank you.
Any further questions on the on the motion?
Joyce.
I'd like to support it, but I don't like the way it only if it has council.
That in consideration the staff report developer request land as development security, council direct staff to allow land to be used as security and relation to development group agreements provided that.
It's just the way that's worded there that I'd like to support it that we allow staff to investigate one through five and then bring it back to us to support land as security.
That's my only objection.
And I think it's just a word in clarification. We're wondering if anything. Joyce, my understanding is, yeah, that's the Michelle and Matt will set.
This is what we're going to go forward to the lawyer.
And yeah, none of this will happen until after they get legal advice and bring it back to us that if the legal and it was a positive way, this is what we're going to do to be able to set it in place.
So it doesn't allow it to happen.
We're passing the motion and tomorrow.
But the developer consensus, well, here's three lots. No.
We're going to go to the lawyer and figure it out and would come back to us to show.
Is that that's my understanding of the way this.
Recommendations written up.
And perhaps the clerk can assist here but my thought was this is kind of council saying you're good with all of this provided.
We do have all these conditions and then we go to a lawyer. So we'll go and talk to the lawyer and the lawyer says.
There's no way you can do that with a title instrument. There's this is no goal and we're okay.
Sorry, can't do it come back to you. Hey, for the lawyers is, yeah, it's all good here's how you do it.
At that point that my thought is we wouldn't come back and say, hey, are you still good with it. It's we've got satisfaction opinion from a lawyer that it can definitely be done through this legal instrument.
And we make sure that all these other provisions are contained with the agreement. How we do that.
Yes.
Further to that, though, then there's again still the cost factor that's putting on to the municipality to get this legal advice. I still feel if this is something the developer wants to pursue that maybe they need to pick up some of those costs.
Thank you. If I may respond to that, I think this is part of our overall approach of the municipality to be innovative and correct economic development investment in the community.
And I would suggest that if that's council wants to pursue that this is an investment, the municipality should make in policy direction because that this would be available to any developer who came forward.
And would meet those same criteria and I think it's been an interesting opportunity to work with one specific developer here, but I think the entire community could benefit if we can find a way to move this forward.
And different correct mental wrong career map.
This is the overall, this is what we're going to do when it comes to each individual developer.
They will cover the legal cost of transferring any of those lots that would be covered.
This initial part is this is how it's going to be done.
To the developer, you want to put land up the security.
There's going to be a legal cost to it in a hundred percent of that cost will be to the developer.
Right. That's yeah.
Good.
I don't want to write today.
Okay.
So just to be clear, if we are proving this where it's done, it's not going to come back to council after a legal opinion.
So unless the legal opinion is negative.
But if the legal opinion is as sure this is not a problem, then we won't see it again.
So we're approving it or not approving it today.
And I think as I think you said or maybe Matt, that's this is developer policy.
I think this will become the new norm within Westgate.
All developers will use this method to secure their developments.
Like why wouldn't they?
This is far cheaper for them than getting bonds and leverage gains and other assets that they have.
So I just think we just need to be cognizant that we're sort of switching the way that we support and fund development.
It may be that this one works out fine and next one works at fine and next one works at fine and the next one blows up in our face.
We don't know how that's all going to work because again, we're not really in that business yet.
So maybe after one's blown up in our face, then we will reconsider and see how we think of this going forward.
So I hate things blowing up in my face just to get the record clear and haven't thought through this a lot myself and pondered the same thing.
The way I settled on it is like, how is this any different than if the development fails and we have to use the cash that they've given us right.
And there's a bit more of a pain than liquidating the lot really is what it comes down to and is there enough.
Enough value in that to cover everything and to me again, the bigger risk is on the how much are we actually requiring for the security in the first place and that's the one that you'd tinker with.
So that's my thought there, but I also don't think this will actually be as common as you might originally think like I've looked at the maps of the other one and it's not that often like in the Crawford one where you have so much flankage and frontage.
Touching in a municipal road more often it's like this and the roads here right and you're doing like the cananing one over here.
I don't know if it has any lots fronting on an existing improved public highway right so it's it's not as frequent I don't think as we might originally think some thoughts can.
All right.
Questions.
Call the question all of those in favour.
Can you pose.
So we want it that's carried.
All right.
Can we take a nine minute break that the back at 10 30 sorry it's eight minute break it keep on ours going to be even shorter.
Thank you.
Okay, we're doing pretty good. Back to order.
And I believe we're down to 10.3 and would be tax and borrowing by law implications, rectifier finance.
Are you carry? Miss Maiden.
So we've got the interim tax rate by law. Let's just set the insolment dates.
Our regular line of credit borrowing and then also to secure the construction, some of the construction borrowing from the our local bank.
At this point we were going to look at infrastructure Ontario, but just with the different processes involved.
It's easier for the construction at this point to get it from our local bank and then we'll still find a long term.
Finance and we'll be secured and have a come forward once the project final classroom.
Very good.
Any questions for carry on this?
There is a recommendation there that we've been forward the 2026 in term tax levies and the borrowing and to me currently expenditures of liability.
Move that choice. Thank you, Councillor Nunn and Councillor Hutchison on the other end. Doug.
Any questions or comments on the recommendation?
Call the question. All those in favor? Any opposed? That's carried.
The none brings us down to director legislative services clerk.
Elections report number two.
The key to the exciting stuff.
Thank you, Mayor. Thank you.
And through the next municipal election for those who may not be aware is on October 26th, 2026.
And the new term of office begins on November 16th, 2026.
Candidates can submit their nomination package between May 1st of this year and August 21st.
And voters can confirm at or amend their information on the voters list by visiting register to vote.
The use of municipal resources for election purposes by law is being updated to address weaknesses in the previous version.
And enhanced clarity, accountability and outcomes.
And an election signed by law has been drafted for council's consideration to regulate election signs within West Gray.
So the recommendation of the report is that council directs to bring forward and adopt an election signed by law and to repeal and replace by law 0 9 2022 with respect to use of municipal resources during an election.
If council has any questions, I'd be happy to answer anything.
And are there any questions from anyone?
Councillor Schae?
Yeah.
Somewhere in the report, I don't have a right in front of the new talk about the voter roles being managed differently than they were in the past.
And you talk about here, people having the opportunity to add confirm or amend their information.
Well, with eventual and federal elections, I understand that if you show up to vote and you're not on the voter role and you can demonstrate that you live in that community.
You've got to address on it that you can typically vote anyway.
Will that be the case with our elections?
Three radicals, yes, that certainly will be the case.
This process basically just allows the individuals to register and ensure they're on the voters list so that they receive that voter card in the mail prior to election day.
Certainly anyone can still come out on election day to have themselves added to the voters list.
There are some paperwork steps that need to occur.
However, that's it's not an issue and certainly anyone who wants to vote that is a resident to our electorate in West Gray would be able to.
And further, I scanned the sign by law and it seems to me that it's fairly lenient.
It's not going to be a whole lot more restrictive than past years because of some precedence in court.
I think signs can't be within a meter of the road, but beyond that, I haven't seen too much further restrictions than existed in the past.
Is that correct?
It's three miracles to counsel not specifically.
So West Gray has to the best of my knowledge not had an election sign by law in the past.
So this actually does provide some parameters with respect to election signs by laws.
The case of the township of Russell the Armstrong did provide for some findings that municipalities need to be cognizant of with respect to regulating election sign by laws.
So this by law was drafted to ensure that individuals charter rights were not being infringed upon.
It does regulate the size, the placement duration, things like that, however it's it's in keeping with the charter rights and freedoms to minimize any infractions.
Thank you.
On page two where you talk about the election centers as one here at the municipal office and you're going to do one at news did nothing innate.
You're not going to do anything innate for one day or anything like that.
Thank you for the question that was discussed and contemplated and looking at previous turnout numbers from the previous election and the staffing numbers that we have it made more sense to have it just at the municipal office and of the New State Community Center as kind of that south end of the municipality to capture anyone from the.
A normal in the area and you said that would be interested in coming to those centers to vote.
Anything else.
If I could from the chair is to quick clarification.
On the sign by law number 21, no one official place would be committed to place the election site for municipal election earlier than the nomination date.
So the end of the nomination date or the beginning, which is what I first.
The three miracles nomination day as defined in the municipal elections act is the third Friday in August.
Yeah.
So it's when nominations close.
Then you can put a sign.
Yeah.
Just for clarification there.
Okay.
Any other questions.
Well, I believe the James got a recommendation in there with all of that.
Move by deputy mayor.
Thank you.
And second by Councillor Shay.
Thank you, Jeff.
Any further questions on motion.
Seeing none.
Call the question.
All's in favor.
Let's start.
So we see some.
All right.
That's all for the clerk.
And now down to 10.5.
Keep the minister.
Officer.
And this will airport costing sharing agreement.
Shall.
Thank you.
Before you have a report about the.
I saw a municipal airport cost sharing agreement.
I suspect most council members are more familiar with the history of this than I was prior to this.
But as you know, the municipal airport is a joint asset of the municipalities of West Gray and over and brought in.
A cost sharing agreement has been in place with the partner municipalities since 2005 to support operations of the airport.
The current cost sharing agreement stipulates that each of the three partner municipalities pay a share of the operating costs according to a formula.
Which right now has brought campaign approximately 42.7% and over 31% in the municipality of West Gray just under 27%.
The municipality of Brockton has been having over the past year or so discussions at their council table about the operation of the airport and its value.
And requested all partners meet together and talk about the cost sharing agreement and look at equity transparency and just how it's moving forward.
The there's dates in here, but the CAOs of each municipality along with the mayor's of each of the municipalities and the council appointed reps from each municipality have met over the last number of months.
And to discuss this agreement and all agreed first of all that the goal of the municipal airport should.
To become financially self-sustaining over time and eventually that we want to move towards the municipalities not having to subsidize the airport.
I will digress a little bit from the report and note that as deputy mayor Hutchinson will all likely bring forward.
The airport commission is working diligently on an economic development strategy with the county about future opportunities.
Thank you.
At this time, following our collective meetings, it is proposed that the operation of the airport and the cost sharing agreement be updated, effective January 1, 2027, whereby all three municipalities who own the airport would share equally in the operational cost that have been identified.
I think it is also that I did not mention in the report in the highlights, but you will see it later on.
There are things in the agreement where there are limitations on how much the commission can put forward in their budget.
They can't just start with fairly come forward and say next year, we're going to have a 15% increase there.
There's a more fluid and transparent reporting mechanism between.
So before you today is the proposed cost sharing agreement that would give all three municipalities an equal share in the cost of the operations effective January 1, 2027.
Thank you for sharing any questions or comments.
That's going to be a minute.
Deputy Mayor, that's just going to go ahead.
Okay, thank you, Mayor.
Thank you, too.
Madam CAO and yourself and all the other members that sat in, you know, in those meetings and I think we're going to have a very good spot there.
And I think the, the whole philosophy here is really to continue to move forward and evolve on that strategic plan that we have for development.
And I think the focus is development and to get to.
I don't we're going to try to get to a point it's not going to have overnight as Madam CAO said, but our focus will be to eventually have no levy dollars going towards the airport itself sufficient stands on its own.
And then it becomes.
Obviously a growing asset so it's it's an investment and work work.
I just want to say.
That we didn't have.
After we've done all this in our last meeting, we didn't have an individual come forward.
Which is very interesting and we'll have an information by the end of this month that he's going to be selecting to develop a hanger with a business coming, which is airport related.
So pretty exciting.
And we can do it with the existing with a whole bunch of investment and templates structure one or so.
It looks like we're in the for running a being the selected location for the for that business and we have other opportunities coming so.
Revenue neutral is the whole plan.
No municipal.
Tax.
No municipal support.
It will be a stand along revenue.
Council of shape.
And then.
Yes, I've moved with that mirror.
Yeah, but that only that's on the table.
That's.
I don't have it.
But what's on the table here.
I think is.
A really justment of the percentages and a commitment to seeing likely 3% increases going forward.
Into the foreseeable future plus discussion about.
Capital investment.
Five year capital plan.
I'm assuming that capital plan is going to require some sort of further investment.
Outside of the 3% operating.
So I'm.
I'm.
The existing a cost sharing arrangement was based on a formula that was.
I never studied it, but I'm familiar with the general principle and that is that it was somehow based on usage by.
Citizens within the three municipalities and West grade paid somewhat less because less people was great used it.
I thought that was a sound.
And model and I don't know why we would devate not I understand why Brock didn't want to devate because they are currently paying the highest.
But they also get the property tax from the airport as well.
So I think they're they're coming out pretty sweet under the existing arrangement.
So I would like to suggest that we stick with the existing arrangement until we've seen these business development plans.
Capital five year capital plans and and the move towards.
No, no, minutes full support.
If that happens in three or four years.
Great.
The fact that we're paying 27 or 33 is going to be.
Be relevant.
So I think we should do things the way they are.
And encourage the airport to move as.
As quickly and and as efficiently as they are towards achieving that financial independence.
Go on.
Further.
Go.
How does it kind of can start?
Yeah.
Well, I think what I read here.
I think it's a.
It's well, laid out and I think there's.
Lost potential.
I've always said that the airport.
I think the airport is a bit of a hidden hidden gem for us.
I think there's lots of potential there.
But I like the fact that in the agreement.
There's options for.
Well, first of all, the cost sharing I think it's it's good to get that balance.
But it's also options for if there's a private partner comes once they get involved.
If they decide to sell the airport down the road.
So I think it opens up a lot of different avenues.
Rather than saying this is this is all we're going to do.
We're just going to run the airport and hopefully it becomes self sufficient.
I think there's lots of opportunities to.
To move and to come up with new ideas or.
New growth and so on.
So I like what I see in this and I'd be willing to support it.
I think it's.
It's a good way and I think that hopefully the airport will continue and I think it will become a viable operation as we move forward.
Thank you.
That was a close.
Thanks.
Just just wondering are just questioning.
If all three municipalities are treated as equal partners and.
Are paying the same amount into the airport.
But yet.
Brockton is the receiver of the property tax.
Therefore they're getting.
More money back there.
They're technically in a round of a way.
They're paying less than everybody else because they're getting property tax paid for by by us.
So I'm just wondering if there's a little bit of an offset there.
That's.
That's one of my things in and to cancel the chase point to and a cost sharing.
It to me, yeah, cost sharing is almost similar to what we do with with smart when it comes down to what we get from each in each.
Municipality it's based on the usage within that municipality and whatnot to where.
It it orchestrates how much each municipality has to pay into it.
So just just some thoughts.
Tom.
You.
That big miracles in through you to.
Excuse me, councilor towns.
So that question was raised and it's a great question.
But the response there and we know what we all landed on was that.
Yes, the physical addresses and brought them.
But part of fact.
Levy's that are collected half to one, you know, the hospital.
They have police.
There's all those extra components.
So yeah, it's not that they collected.
It's still part of their whole tax.
Let me system if you won't for collection overall.
So that would you know, we we did talk about that.
Now as far as we can't call development.
The church because there is none at that airport.
So call CIP.
But we we're not to say that DC word there or words, if you will.
So that's another revenue stream or us that we can discuss where that would be self-generated.
So there will be on what that part there that development, any future development.
We're more focused on life leases and not selling the actual land.
And that's how we're going to and that will be an ongoing monthly.
So the whole idea of the three percent in what we're.
What everybody's cost is is to have more businesses come in to develop.
Those life leases will actually minimize.
The cost of the cost of software.
But that's our direction of focus.
But it was a good question.
And we did talk about that.
But I think in essence that was kind of a response.
I'm from the Brockton site and I think we all supported that.
The other thing here is that we're all in line now with this MOU and this new agreement.
And this is going to allow Steve for Nass and Luigi that have been working with us through the.
At the county level.
And we have this, you know, we have an MOU.
This is enabling them to get out and talk to infrastructure Ontario.
And you know, minimize some of the, you know, challenges we have there as well as getting some significant businesses that are very.
And businesses that are very attracted and very.
Very motivated to develop.
And again, it's all around airport related or aviation.
If you will, it's quite a few businesses looking.
So I think there's a.
By landing where we are.
Our focus is to get what we can.
We have a developer land immediately.
And one of the stock would be a lot of rest there, not a lot of investment cost.
You have to take on some of the bigger basics is going to be.
You know, come up with something again, whether it's alone through infrastructure.
So I think to.
I think we're moving in the right direction.
Again, I could say that individual coming to us that the last meeting.
We'll know in a couple weeks that that's a thing that we can step forward from where we were.
And we can attract to our three other ones within what we can currently do.
We're going to have some.
And obviously, long term.
It can't be financially coming to us on a likely concept.
So.
Thank you.
Okay, anybody else.
There is the recommendation there.
And.
So we have to move that.
There.
Thank you.
Back in here.
Don't start.
Just.
There.
Just.
Any further questions or comments.
All the questions.
All those.
Those.
That's carried.
Okay.
That's it for staff reports.
Questions.
Any.
Would notice emotions with you previously given.
I'm not aware that we have any on.
Thank you.
Jamie.
And he noticed emotion.
Down to announcements.
Anyone have any announcements.
Councilor tons.
Both.
Just want to.
Of.
Think the nature landscape bike click for getting on another great.
steak barbecue on Saturday night.
I think the.
The bulk of council was there supporting that and it was a great time and a great meal and it's great to see them carry on a tradition that was started many years ago by the former Lions Club.
Just for everybody that's clear out there, yes, I believe there was at least five council members there, but we did not sit at the same table.
Okay.
No, it was, yeah, they revised the Lions Club down and done a great job for the community excellent.
Councillor Shea. Excuse me, Jeff.
I just wanted to report this. I along with a couple of other council members attended at Roamock a couple of weeks ago.
You know, enlightening as ever. There's lots of information to be greened.
We did see Doug Ford talking about lamenting about the new China Electric Vehicle Deal and didn't think that was a great deal.
I don't know what our canola farmers think of the deal, but Ford did later in his speech say that he understood that it was important to work with the federal government, with the Prime Minister.
And so it was nice to see that, you know, rank, that sort of ranker hasn't crept into our politics.
You know, we can we can disagree, but still be civil. That was encouraging.
I went to a couple of things that were enlightening one on public health that I attended with council Hutchison and the general message was when public health is working.
And so if we're not hearing a lot about public health, that's a good sign.
And so I think it's important to recognize the job that those people are doing.
Another one on rural vitality through our culture, which I've attended almost every year. It's very similar routine every year.
I want to support to that. We presented delegations. The mayor was very capable arguing our case to the parliamentary assistant at M&R about aggregates and the need to improve the relationship between municipalities and aggregate producers and aggregate policy.
We did get a chance to interject about the three, they were aware of the three current applications that are pending and under review.
And we were able to highlight that they are all moved very closely together and close to the soggy river, which is created concerns for residents and they said that they would take that into consideration.
So they wrote it down. So I'm pleased by that.
Minister Jones, Minister of Health.
You know, seems to have a very good handle on the complexity of the health care system within the province.
You know, she, she said, you know, we could solve your your hospital problem in a minute.
We would just have to cut all sorts of other health services through the province.
So she says she's trying to be a balancing act and that she doesn't want to be the minister that is known for closing hospitals.
So I thought that was a quote, worked right in down. She did say that if you.
We want a municipality to be involved in advocating for better health care in your community. You might want to engage with local health hubs.
And I think again, I think that Doug was that thing that we went to up at Walters Falls, was that a health hub sort of meeting.
Yeah, so we attended that at four or five six months ago.
And a lot of health professionals from the region there.
And I think the upshot was the solution to the health crisis is going to be more provincial funding.
So I'm not sure if the minister wanted us to go and hear that message at the health hub and from both that message,
but we're all doing what we can.
Yeah, we also met with the talk about this, this, the conservation authority and the organization, but I'll let anybody else who cares to speak with that.
Thank you.
Now, of course.
Scott.
All right, I want to speak about other issues.
Um, more community dinners coming out that will community service associations.
Wait, first wing night of the season is Friday, February 13th, 537 at the Community Center Basement.
And then the Newstiline Club has a wing night coming up on February 28.
6 to 10 at the Newstil Community Center and Springcraft show for Newstit registration started yesterday.
Is it already sold out?
Thank you. If I may, um, we have actually put in a new process.
I think it was shared with you.
This will be a jury show.
So there will be an intake window.
First priority will be given to local residents, et cetera.
So the rush to first pass the pay plate or or pass the gate poster, whatever was becoming problematic,
because it became a people had technological issues and we're not sure that that was the measure of success that we sold out in 45 minutes.
We want to make sure that given that this is a municipal undertaking supported by community groups that we give first rights.
So there's a very comprehensive and we think a much more fair and transparent approach to this, which I'm quite delighted about actually so all the information on the website, if anybody is interested.
Anything else, Scott?
Oh, good answer.
Any other announcements?
Comments for access to the bill?
Yeah.
I think I've concentrated.
Good job summarizes some things that the Roma conference.
I will I will mention the conservation authority changes coming up.
Our in the works.
I'm sure they're going to go through but there was a lot of discussion at Roma about the
changes to the conservation authorities and there's a lot of issues out there that has to be resolved before this happened.
So stay tuned.
Looking forward to hearing more and and hopefully when it's all set and done, we get it right.
It was right now.
I don't think it's right, but we'll have to wait on that one.
I just wanted to announce that the president's last weekend, family day weekend is coming up.
Not this weekend, but the next 14 to 16 that weekend.
And lots of lots of events to take place.
So hopefully people will participate.
You can sign up for a number of events.
We'll leave the Lions clubs involved.
The VA somewhat, the Chamber of Commerce is sort of the lead on it.
And so yeah, lots of lots of good things, different practices and activities.
So hopefully people will participate.
Thank you.
Absolutely.
Yeah, there's a family dance night on Saturday night.
That's the what's great during wines is hosting as well.
As well as all the other activities of our presence.
Excellent.
Happy to be back.
Thank you, Barrackos.
A couple of things here.
So last Saturday, the conservation is so frustrating.
How they're second full moon walk.
The first one was obviously the last one when they had it.
And that was three.
They had three hundred ten through.
This one here was over 600.
They had to turn people away.
They're just nowhere to part.
So obviously quite a successful event.
So again, that's just to.
There's a sort of revenue driver.
But it's really.
And they were coming as far away.
So we were aware a couple hours away.
So pretty pretty unique.
Interesting in that there.
I.
The last irony was that the T cats held their.
So volleyball and along with minor hockey.
And it was 200 kids that I went and participated.
So I don't like grandson was there.
And it was with the effect 200 kids.
And it was.
First successful event, which is always good to see.
And I see that connectivity with both senior and minor.
Sports like it together.
For those that are not aware I'm I am pleased and I'm honored to be.
I now said I was re-elected the the chair of the SBCA.
For the twenty twenty six term and I'm looking forward to trying to.
Bring as much information and work as hard as it can.
And advocate towards this regional.
So I will try to and just keep you updated and we're fighting every.
Every inch that we can to make to make sure that we keep it as is local as we can.
So we want to bring that to your attention.
I give a stick to him is great.
You've got that on.
Another thing from the Durham hospital.
Very pleased to announce that we're going to actually be hosting a.
Co-end so pitch tournament and it will be held in Durham on June the 20th and June the 21st.
So we do do that level.
To be an a division.
Which would be a little more of the.
I would say more organized and I would say more competitive.
But a little more organized and it's geared towards people that want to.
Play just a little higher than would be would be more of your recreational.
Well, then enjoy and it is what it is.
So that's June 20 and 21st.
I do have a meeting with the Durham Lions with we believe we're going to be a partner and up with them to help from the event.
So June 20 21st and we will get the information.
Through the term hospital.
Foundation website.
And last but not least.
Look forward to December.
And again, that's 2026 is ways away.
But there will be another alumni again coming.
Well, there's a community of that could be the much all Canadians could be.
Tom McLeod or could be both teams playing against each other.
So we're going to be looking at different ways that we can.
They are both committed by the way.
The arena's commit a book now.
It's then endorsed by the board.
We're just looking at different ways of how we can achieve and minimize day.
They actually overhead costs.
So we're going to go through some play systems and whatnot.
But there will be another.
The game coming here retired.
And each other and all those funds will be directed towards this extra suite that we desperately need in our community.
So those are some highlights here.
Thank you.
Councillor Thompson again.
Just just one more thing that was taken up when we were talking about things that came up with
Rona.
Roma and that something that's near and dear to everybody's heart.
Circular materials.
And in the the bearer pit.
Question period with the ministers.
The question was asked.
And the minister did respond and say.
Yeah, they realized they haven't got it quite right.
So.
Expect to see hopefully.
Some more adjustments in that program.
In the not too distant future.
And speaking.
Yes.
Roma was very good.
And thanks.
The council is with there.
It was a very good conference.
You said about the bearer pit session.
Councillor Thompson.
For everybody out there.
It's a session where.
Most of the ministers.
And ministries are represented in the open day.
Any questions from the floor.
This year.
Roma there was the largest.
The conference that they've had.
Twenty.
Three hundred delegates.
In and around that.
The largest one they had.
It's some very interesting questions.
The one that did come up.
And they had two.
One on Sunday afternoon and one on Monday afternoon.
And the minister was.
It was obvious that he was expecting the question from some place somewhere.
And the one part that I thought was very interesting in his answer.
To conservation and new.
Governance structures that they are trying to put into place with.
This oversight and whatnot.
And assured us that there would be no change in funding.
You know.
The minister.
Police.
You weren't going to have to pay any more.
There would be no change in funding.
Well, that's what we were looking for because the province.
Used to at one point in time.
Have somewhere north of.
40% of the funding.
They've been able to cut it down to conservation authorities at the province now.
Somewhere between one and three percent.
Depending on which conservation authority you're in.
What averages out about two percent of the funding for conservation authorities.
And gosh, I was glad to hear that there would be no change in that.
The province is going to stick with.
Two percent.
It.
It's an ongoing thing.
Mr. Chair.
Have fun.
What's that?
Trying to get it straight.
We'll look forward to some information going forward.
This past Sunday.
I was invited to Dundock for the.
Basically the.
Opening of Black History Month.
In great county.
It's been going on for somewhere north of 30 years.
And they have the opening.
And of that in.
Dundock to the United Church.
The Junction.
Organization.
And.
Basically headed by.
Southgate Councilor Joan Johns.
And.
Was at the opening.
So that is the opening.
There's many more functions going on throughout the month of February as.
Black history month is here and going strong.
And one of the interesting things of it was it.
For the township of Southgate with.
A lot of new people coming in.
They recognized in the last year.
How many different countries.
Not just.
Black immigrants but from.
21.
Different 21 or 22.
Just lost track.
They handed out the flags from different.
Individuals who have.
Immigrated to Canada and it shows.
Southgate.
And area.
Or where they have landed and it was.
I'm pretty sure it was 21 different countries were recognized from.
Greece to Nigeria that you make it to.
Poland.
It was.
Even in there.
So we have some of the Italians.
Getting out before the Olympics start.
I guess over there.
So it was.
Yeah.
Good.
And.
Interesting because of.
West Ray and our.
Historic.
With the Black community here and.
Quite frankly the.
Own sound obviously is the end of the.
Underground railroad.
But a number of those individuals.
Certainly during the.
18 hundreds and escaped in slavery.
Right here in great county and some of them go back further than our triple hunter.
In.
In our area of.
So good stuff.
Anything else.
Yeah.
I forgot to mention that.
The mayor gave a very persuasive and passionate.
History of the.
Frasalized situation to a minister.
In German West.
Great.
Anything further to report on that.
There.
Perhaps not.
It's not quite at this time, but we'll certainly be working.
He was very open.
I do have.
Something arranged for a.
Information session with their local MPP.
To.
Generate his history and an understanding of Frasalized.
And the complexities and the cost.
To the municipality.
And so we're following up.
But yes.
Mr. Carthler.
McCarthy.
It was very interested in.
Offering.
Not maybe as much financial but what help could the province.
Give us on exploring different ideas and.
mitigating facts of.
Presalized so.
We will continue as we know this year.
It didn't disappear.
It reappeared.
And we had a bit of problems with it.
But I think there is a solution.
And if we can get the province and the conservation authority.
Everybody together.
And let's.
We can come up with a.
What's the remedy for.
Council.
As speaking.
Frasalized.
Maybe.
And we're making announcements.
Maybe.
Hey.
Yeah.
Thank you.
We can be on our status so.
For example.
We did have some issues to share.
I'm not sure.
Thack where we are at this point.
I'll make it short.
Yeah, yeah.
This is.
Well, we'll put this.
Thank you. We're on your control right now, touch wood. This isn't never over. Two things that I'd like to bring forward last year was a very critical year. And we had some great learnings from last year. The work between the municipality and the conservation area has been exemplary this year. We've got a system in place. We have a team. We have a communications method and there are cameras along the river now that really help us monitor this situation.
When in under announcements.
But once in one's language.
Because of the cold temperatures where you get it is the freezing and falling when the issues come, because we've got cold unfortunately, it's very fortunate for the river because of water, can flow under.
So we're in good shape this year, but we're always at risk given the nature of our river system, but it's been a good example of doing everything we can to mitigate risk both for our right pairs and for the financial implications of the municipality.
If I may one other item related to Rome, I just wanted to put forward in case any of our right pairs are listening.
We advocate regularly our council members at various conferences for the public who wants to know sort of what the issues and what our position is.
We do have a section on our website, westgrade.com slash conferences where the public can view all of our delegation materials and what the key points for bringing forward.
So I just wanted to point that out.
Thank you Michelle. Okay. Let's get back on to.
Get Mr. Clerk happy and I'll get back on to the agenda item.
No close session.
So they'll need to report out by loss.
There are six by loss on the talking today.
We can pass those in one motion if that would be the favor of the council.
Okay. We got 15 more minutes.
Sorry.
Councilor Forster moves that say we cost by loss as presented.
Deputy Mayor, which is a little second that.
Any questions or comments on the motion for the by loss for today.
Go the question on those in favor.
Any opposed that is carried.
And with that, there's all business on the agenda.
Jamie, I have gone to where I will declare the meeting adjourned.
Thank you very much.
And just as a reminder, we usually have a planning meeting.
In the afternoon, but we don't have anything on the agenda.
So there is no planning meeting today. Next one.
Have you read the 17th, when we've correct, we've got one.
Okay. All right.
Thank you everybody.
Good meeting and we'll see you later.