May 4, 2021, at 4:00 PM

Original link

The meeting was called to order at 4:03 PM, with Mayor E. Holder in the Chair and all Members participating, except Councillor M. Salih; it being noted that the following Members attended the meeting remotely:  M. van Holst, M. Salih, J. Helmer, M. Cassidy, J. Morgan, S. Lehman, A. Hopkins, P. Van Meerbergen, S. Turner, E. Peloza, A. Kayabaga, and S. Hillier.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Councillor S. Turner discloses a pecuniary interest with Item 7 (5.1) of the 8th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Report, having to do with an update on City services during COVID-19, by indicating that he is an employee of the Middlesex-London Health Unit.

Councillor S. Turner also discloses a pecuniary interest in Item 5 (2.6) of the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee and related Bill No. 191, having to do with the amendments to the Open-Air Burning By-law F-7, by indicating that his employer, the Middlesex-London Health Unit have some involvement in the enforcement of the by-law.

2.   Recognitions

None.

3.   Review of Confidential Matters to be Considered in Public

Motion made by M. van Holst

Seconded by E. Peloza

That pursuant to section 6.5 of the Council Procedure By-law, the following changes in order BE APPROVED:

a)      Stage 4 – Council, In Closed Session be considered after Stage 13- By-laws, with the exception of Bill No. 176, being a by-law to confirm the proceedings of the Council Meeting held on the 4th day of May, which will be considered, prior to Stage 14 – Adjournment; and

b)      Stage 9 – Added Reports –Item 9.1 – 7th Report of Council, In Closed Session be considered after Stage 4 – Council, In Closed Session.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

5.   Confirmation and Signing of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting(s)

5.1   6th Meeting held on April 13, 2021

2021-04-13 Council Minutes 6-Complete

Motion made by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by S. Lehman

That the Minutes of the 6th Meeting held on April 13, 2021, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

6.   Communications and Petitions

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the following communications BE RECEIVED and BE REFERRED, as noted on the Added Agenda:

6.1     Update - City of London 2020-2021 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals (Refer to the Community and Protective Services Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 7(2.3) of the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee);

1.      J. Baskey

2.       A. Oakey

3.       Councillors M. van Holst and S. Lewis

4.       E. Blaney

6.2     Homeless Prevention Funding Received in 2021-21 and COVID-19 Response (Refer to the Community and Protective Services Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 8 (2.5) of the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee);

1.        A Badillo, ACORN London

6.3     Animal By-law PH-3 (Refer to the Community and Protective Services Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 12 (4.1) of the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee);

1.       L. Poynter, Paws United Dog Rescue

2.       P. Armstrong

3.       D. Harris

4.       C. Hueston

5.       S. Leckie, Animal Outreach Cat Rescue

6.4     Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area - 1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Killally Road (OZ-9275) (Refer to the Planning and Environment Committee Stage for Consideration with Item 8 (3.3) of the 6th Reprot of the Planning and Environment Committee)

1.       L. Kirkness

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

7.   Motions of Which Notice is Given

None.

8.   Reports

8.1   7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee

2021-04-20 CPSC Report

Motion made by J. Helmer

That the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee BE APPROVED, excluding Items 5 (2.6) and 7 (2.3).

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

8.1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by J. Helmer

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.1.2   (2.1) 3rd Report of the Accessibility Advisory Committee

Motion made by J. Helmer

That the 3rd Report of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on March 25, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.1.3   (2.2) 3rd Report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

Motion made by J. Helmer

That the 3rd Report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on April 1, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.1.4   (2.4) Coordinated Informed Response (CIR) Spring Update

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Managing Director, Housing, Social Services and Dearness Home, the staff report dated April 20, 2021 with respect to the Coordinated Informed Response (CIR) Spring Update, BE RECEIVED. (2021-S12)

Motion Passed

8.1.6   (2.7) Fire Safety Grant Transfer Payment Agreement (Relates to Bill No. 180) 

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Neighbourhood, Children and Fire Services, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021, to:

a)     authorize and approve the Fire Safety Grant Transfer Payment Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Office of the Fire Marshall and The Corporation of the City of London;

b)     authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Agreement;

c)     delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or written designate, to approve and execute any further amendments to the above-noted Agreement, if the amendments are substantially in the form of the above-noted Agreement; and,

d)     delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or written designate, to undertake all the administrative, financial and reporting acts that are necessary in connection with the above-noted Agreement. (2021-F11)

Motion Passed

8.1.8   (2.5) Homeless Prevention Funding Received in 2020-21 and COVID-19 Response

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Managing Director, Housing, Social Services and Dearness Home, the staff-report dated April 20, 2021 with respect to the Homeless Prevention Funding Received in 2021-2021 and COVID-19 Response, BE RECEIVED. (2021-S08/F11)

Motion Passed

8.1.9   (2.8) Security Video Cameras on Private Residential Property

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Development and Compliance Services and Chief Building Official, the staff report dated April 20, 2021 with respect to Security Video Cameras on Private Residential Property, BE RECEIVED; it being noted that a verbal delegation from D. Johnstone, with respect to this matter, was received. (2021-P00)

Motion Passed

8.1.10   (3.1) Swimming Pool Fence By-law - Proposed Amendments (Relates to Bill No. 206)

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Development and Compliance Services and Chief Building Official, the revised proposed by-law, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law No. PS-5, being “A by-law to provide for the owners of privately-owned outdoor swimming pools to erect and maintain fences”;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being further noted that the communication from B. Robertson, Pool and Hot Tub Council of Canada, as appended to the Added Agenda, was received with respect to this matter. (2021-C01)

Motion Passed

8.1.11   (3.2) Administrative Monetary Penalties - Application to Municipal By-laws (Relates to Bill No’s. 181, 183, 192, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, and 218)

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Development & Compliance Services and Chief Building Official, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the Administrative Monetary Penalties System:

a)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law A-54, as amended, for the purpose of applying the Administrative Monetary Penalties System By-law to various municipal by-laws;

b)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PH-12, referred to as the Pit Bull Dog Licensing By-law, to add a new section in Part 6;

c)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PH-3, referred to as the Animal Control By-law, to add a new section in Part 15;

d)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PH-4, referred to as the Dog Licensing and Control By-law, to add a new section in Part 9;

e)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PH-7, referred to as the Dog Off-Leash Areas By-law, to add a new section in Section 7;

f)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PS-6, referred to as the Fence By-law, to add a new section in Part 17;

g)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PS-5, referred to as the Swimming Pool Fence By-law, to add a new section in Part 7;

h)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law B-1, referred to as the Naming of Highways and Numbering of Buildings and Lots By-law, to add a new section in Part 7;

i)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PH-18, referred to as the Public Nuisance By-law, to add a new section in Part 7;

j)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PW-12, referred to as the Sound By-law, to add a new section in Part 7;

k)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PR-2, referred to as the Parks and Recreation By-law, to add a new section in Part 7;

l)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law S.-5868-183, referred to as the Sign By-law, to add a new section in Section in 3.12;

m)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law L.-130-71, referred to as the Vehicle for Hire By-law, to add a new section in Part 18;

n)      the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PW-2, referred to as the Abandoned Refrigerator, Freezer and Containers By-law, to add a new section in Part 3;

o)      the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law WM-12, referred to as the Municipal Waste & Resource Materials Collection By-law, to add a new section in Part 12; and,

p)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law S-1, referred to as the Streets By-law, to add a new section in Part 9;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter. (2021-C01)

Motion Passed

8.1.12   (4.1) Animal By-law PH-3

Motion made by J. Helmer

That the communication, dated April 1, 2021, from Councillor M. Cassidy, with respect to By-law PH-3, being “A by-law to provide for the regulation, restriction and prohibition of the keeping of animals in the City of London”, BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration for review and a report back at a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee related to revisions or updates that could be made to the by-law; it being noted that a communication from K. and K. Beattie, as appended to the Added Agenda, with respect to this matter, was received. (2021-P14)

Motion Passed

8.1.13   (5.1) Deferred Matters List

Motion made by J. Helmer

That the Deferred Matters List for the Community and Protective Services Committee, as at April 12, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

At 4:10 PM, Councillor M. Salih enters the meeting.

8.1.5   (2.6) Amendments to the Open-Air Burning By-law F-7 (Relates to Bill No. 191)

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Neighbourhood, Children and Fire Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021 related to Amendments to the Open Air Burning By-law F7:

a)     the above-noted staff report, BE RECEIVED; and,

b)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, being “A by-law to provide for the regulation of open air burning in the City of London and to repeal By-law F-7”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council Meeting to be held on May 4, 2021. (2021-P01)

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

8.1.7   (2.3) Update - City of London 2020-2021 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals

Motion made by J. Helmer

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Managing Director, Housing, Social Services and Dearness Home, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021 related to an Update on the City of London 2020-2021 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals:

a)     the above-noted staff report BE ENDORSED and BE APPROVED;

b)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to the above-report; and,

c)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to the Community and Protective Services Committee, as soon as possible, on additional actions that could be taken after the end of June, building on what we have learned from the temporary winter response, to support people who are experiencing homelessness;

it being noted that the following communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, were received with respect to this matter:

  • A. Luis;

  • C. Scott;

  • I. MacLean;

  • C. Davis;

  • A. Oakey; and,

  • E. Blaney. (2021-S14)

At 4:35 PM, Mayor E. Holder places Deputy Mayor J. Morgan in the Chair and takes a seat at the Council Board.

At 4:36 PM, Mayor E. Holder resumes the Chair and Deputy Mayor J. Morgan takes his seat at the Council Board.

Motion made by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Item 7 (2.3) of the 7th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee BE AMENDED by adding the following new part c), and by renumbering the remaining parts of the Item accordingly:

c)      for those warming centres that are to remain open in 2021, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to make the necessary arrangements to, where permission is granted, regularly sweep for needles in the area within 100 metres of the warming centre and when requested to do so, to undertake a sweep for needles within 300 metres of the warming centre; and to report back to a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee on the implementation of similar actions for future warming and cooling centres; and,“

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lewis

Seconded by J. Helmer

That Item 7 (2.3), as amended, BE APPROVED, excluding the reference to the property located at 525 Hamilton Road location, as follows:

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Managing Director, Housing, Social Services and Dearness Home, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021 related to an Update on the City of London 2020-2021 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals:

a)      the above-noted staff report BE ENDORSED and BE APPROVED;

b)      the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to the above-report;

c)      for those warming centres that are to remain open in 2021, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to make the necessary arrangements to, where permission is granted, regularly sweep for needles in the area within 100 metres of the warming centre and when requested to do so, to undertake a sweep for needles within 300 metres of the warming centre; and to report back to a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee on the implementation of similar actions for future warming and cooling centres; and,

d)        the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to the Community and Protective Services Committee, as soon as possible, on additional actions that could be taken after the end of June, building on what we have learned from the temporary winter response, to support people who are experiencing homelessness;

it being noted that the following communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, were received with respect to this matter;

  • A. Luis;

  • C. Scott;

  • I. MacLean;

  • C. Davis

  • A. Oakey; and,

  • E. Blaney (2021-S14)

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lewis

Seconded by J. Helmer

The motion to approve the endorsement and approval of the staff report as it pertains to matters related to 525 Hamilton Road is put.

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

Item 7 (2.3), as amended, reads as follows:

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Managing Director, Housing, Social Services and Dearness Home, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021 related to an Update on the City of London 2020-2021 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals:

a)      the above-noted staff report BE ENDORSED and BE APPROVED;

b)      the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to the above-report;

c)      for those warming centres that are to remain open in 2021, the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to make the necessary arrangements to, where permission is granted, regularly sweep for needles in the area within 100 metres of the warming centre and when requested to do so, to undertake a sweep for needles within 300 metres of the warming centre; and to report back to a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee on the implementation of similar actions for future warming and cooling centres; and,

d)        the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to the Community and Protective Services Committee, as soon as possible, on additional actions that could be taken after the end of June, building on what we have learned from the temporary winter response, to support people who are experiencing homelessness;

it being noted that the following communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, were received with respect to this matter;

  • A. Luis;

  • C. Scott;

  • I. MacLean;

  • C. Davis

  • A. Oakey; and,

  • E. Blaney (2021-S14)

8.2   7th Report of the Corporate Services Committee

2021-04-19 CSC Report 7

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That the 7th Report of the Corporate Services Committee BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.2.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.2.2   (2.1) Integrity Commissioner Agreement

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of an Integrity Commissioner for The Corporation of the City of London and local boards:

a)      the staff report, dated April 19, 2021, entitled “Integrity Commissioner Agreement” BE RECEIVED; and,

b)      the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to bring forward to the May 10, 2021 Corporate Services Committee meeting, a draft Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Gregory F. Stewart for the provision of services as The Corporation of the City of London’s and local boards Integrity Commissioner for the term ending as determined by the Municipal Council; it being noted that the draft Agreement will include additional provisions which speak to anticipated timelines for responding to complaints and enquiries in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Members of Council.

Motion Passed

8.2.3   (2.4) Declare Surplus - Portion of City-Owned Property – 2846 and 2870 Tokala Trail

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, on the advice of the Manager of Realty Services, with respect to a portion of City-owned land, being part of an undedicated road allowance fronting on 2846 Tokala Trail, closed and designated as Parts 4, 6, 8, 9, and 20, Plan 33R-17911, the following actions be taken:

a)      the subject property BE DECLARED SURPLUS; and,

b)      the subject property (“Surplus Lands”) BE TRANSFERRED to the abutting property owner, in accordance with the City’s Sale and Other Disposition of Land Policy.

Motion Passed

8.2.4   (2.5) Report of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Board of Directors -Virtual Meeting - March 9-12, 2021

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That the communication from Councillor J. Morgan regarding the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) update on board activities from the virtual meeting held on March 9-12, 2021 BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.2.5   (2.2) Year 2021 Tax Policy (Relates to Bill No’s. 177 and 178)

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the following actions be taken with respect to property taxation for 2021:

a)      the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 19, 2021 as Appendix “A” being a by-law to set tax ratios in the various property classes, in accordance with Sub-sections 308(4) and 308.1(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021; it being noted that the 2021 Municipal Tax Ratio By-Law has been prepared reflecting no change to tax ratios;

b)      the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 19, 2021 as Appendix “B” being a by-law to set municipal tax rates for the various property classes, in accordance with Sections 307 and 312 of the Municipal Act, 2001 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021; and,

c)      the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to take no action in 2021 with respect to the adoption of a small business property sub-class, to undertake the necessary policy and financial impact analysis including local consultation following release of the regulation by the Province, and to report back to the Corporate Services Committee with recommendations regarding the potential adoption of a small business subclass for the 2022 taxation year and subsequent taxation years.

Motion Passed

8.2.6   (2.3) Year 2021 Education Tax Rates (Relates to Bill No. 179)

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 19, 2021 as Appendix “A”, being a by-law to levy education tax rates for 2021 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021.

Motion Passed

8.2.7   (4.1) Application – Issuance of Proclamation – World Migratory Bird Day

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That based on the application dated March 30, 2021 from London’s Bird Friendly City Team, May 8, 2021 BE PROCLAIMED World Migratory Bird Day.

Motion Passed

8.2.8   (4.2) Advisory Committees

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the current Advisory Committee appointments:

a)      the current term for the City of London Advisory Committee appointments BE EXTENDED, until December 31, 2021;

b)      additional appointments BE MADE for the identified Advisory Committees, whose voting membership is well below that number identified in each of the respective Terms of Reference;

c)      the following BE APPOINTED as Voting Member at Large for the term ending December 31, 2021:

i)       Accessibility Advisory Committee (Requires up to 4 Members of which a minimum of 1 must have a disability)

Bonnie Quesnel

Dianne Haggerty

Jill Teeple

Katya Pereyaslavska

ii)     Cycling Advisory Committee (Requires up to 4 Members at Large)

Marieke Mur

Trevor Wade

Irina Chulkova

Dan Doroshenko

iii)    Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Advisory Committee (Requires up to 7 Members at Large)

Melissa Allder

Hetham Hani Jamel Abu Kakry

Nour Al-Farawi

Wajdi Khouri

Krista Arnold

Citlally Maceil

Beverley Madigan

iv)    Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (Requires up to 7 Members at Large)

Samjhana Thapa

G. Paul Nicholson.

Motion Passed

8.2.9   (5.1) Corporate Services Committee Deferred Matters List

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That the Corporate Services Committee Deferred Matters List as of April 12, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.2.10   (5.2) Application – Issuance of Proclamation – Apraxia Awareness Day

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That based on the application dated April 14, 2021 from Apraxia Kids, May 14, 2021 BE PROCLAIMED Apraxia Awareness Day.

Motion Passed

8.2.11   (5.3) Board of Directors – Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Motion made by M. Cassidy

That the following actions be taken with respect to the communication dated April 15, 2020 from Councillor J. Morgan regarding standing for re-election to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ Board of Directors and his associated expenses:

WHEREAS the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) represents the interests of municipalities on policy and program matters that fall within federal jurisdiction;

WHEREAS FCM’s Board of Directors is comprised of elected municipal officials from all regions and sizes of communities to form a broad base of support and provide FCM with the prestige required to carry the municipal message to the federal government;

WHEREAS an election of FCM’s Board of Directors will be held this year;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of The Corporation of the City of London endorses Councillor Josh Morgan to stand for election on FCM’s Board of Directors for the 2021/2022 term;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Councillor J. Morgan be reimbursed by The Corporation of the City of London, outside his annual expense allocation, for his campaign expenses in seeking re-election to the Board of Directors, in an amount of up to $500, upon submission of eligible receipts; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council assumes all costs associated with Councillor Josh Morgan attending FCM’s Board of Directors meetings, the FCM Annual Conference and AGM and the Trade Show, during the 2021/2022 term.

Motion Passed

8.3   6th Report of the Civic Works Committee

2021-04-20 CWC Report

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 6th Report of the Civic Works Committee BE APPROVED, excluding Item 11 (2.5).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.3.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.3.2   (2.1) 3rd Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 3rd Report of the Transportation Advisory Committee held on March 23, 2021 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.3.3   (2.2) Appointment of Consulting Engineer for Construction Administration Services - 2021 Infrastructure Renewal Program: Regent Street and Maitland Street Valve Chamber and Instrumentation

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the appointment of consulting services for the construction administration of the 2021 Infrastructure Renewal Program Regent Street and Maitland Street Valve Chamber and Instrumentation project:

a)      Dillon Consulting Limited, BE AUTHORIZED to carry out the resident inspection and contract administration for the Regent Street and Maitland Street Valve Chamber and Instrumentation project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $349,499.76, including 10% contingency, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)      the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

c)      the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

d)      the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract; and

e)      the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2021-A05)

Motion Passed

8.3.4   (2.4) Amendments to the Traffic and Parking By-law (Relates to Bill No’s. 202, 203, and 204)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend By-law PS-113, entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London”. (2021-T07/T08)

Motion Passed

8.3.5   (2.6) 2021 New Traffic and Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers (Relates to Bill No. 205)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the planned 2021 signal and pedestrian crossover installations:

a)        the installation of the following traffic signals BE APPROVED:

i.          Edgevalley Road at Highbury Avenue North;

ii.         Gainsborough Road at Coronation Drive (west intersection);

iii.        Huron Street at Vesta Road;

iv.        North Routledge Park at Hyde Park Road; and,

v.         Sunningdale Road East at North Wenige Drive;

b)        the installation of the following pedestrian signals BE APPROVED:

i.         Commissioners Road West at West Springbank Park Entrance; and,

ii.         Springbank Drive at Quinella Drive; and,

c)        the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021, to amend By-law PS-113, entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London”, as it relates to the above-noted installations. (2021-T07/T08)

Motion Passed

8.3.6   (2.7) Greenway Wastewater Treatment Plant UV Disinfection - Equipment Single Source

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to upgrades to the UV disinfection system at Greenway Wastewater Treatment Plant:

a)        the contract for purchase of a UV disinfection system BE AWARDED to Trojan Technologies as a single source procurement for a total value of $1,154,700.00 plus HST in accordance with Sections 14.4 (d) and (e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)         AECOM BE APPOINTED Consulting Engineers in the amount of $206,639.40, including 10% contingency, excluding HST, in accordance with 15.1 (b) and 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)         the financing for the project BE APPROVED in accordance with the “Sources of Financing Report”, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)         the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

e)         the approvals given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract; and

f) the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2021-A05)

Motion Passed

8.3.7   (2.8) Victoria Street Pumping Station Class Environmental Assessment - Notice of Completion

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the Victoria Street Pumping Station Municipal Class Environmental Assessment:

a)        the preferred alternative, identified through the Class EA process, as the replacement of the Victoria Street Pumping Station BE ACCEPTED, in accordance with the Schedule ‘B’ Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process requirements;

b)       the Notice of Completion BE FILED with the Municipal Clerk; and

c)       the Project file for the Victoria Street Pumping Station Class Environmental Assessment BE PLACED on public record for a 30-day review period. (2021-E03/E05)

Motion Passed

8.3.8   (2.9) Supply and Delivery of Traffic Paint SS21-17

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the supply and delivery of traffic paint:

a)        approval hereby BE GIVEN to enter a three-year (3) contract for the supply and delivery of traffic paint with Ennis Paint Canada ULC at the quoted price of $123,562.00 per year, excluding HST; it being noted that the pricing was provided through participation in the Elgin/Middlesex/Oxford Purchasing Co-Operative (EMOP) and made in accordance with Section 14.4 g) Single Sourcing of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy which states, “It is advantageous to the City to acquire the goods or services from a supplier pursuant to the procurement process conducted by another public body”;

b)        Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this contract;

c)        approval hereby BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation negotiating prices, terms and conditions with Ennis Paint Canada ULC to the satisfaction of the Manager of Purchasing and Supply and the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer; and,

d)        approval hereby BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract or having a purchase order relating to the subject matter of this approval. (2021-T06)

Motion Passed

8.3.9   (2.10) Contract Award: Tender RFT21-23 - 2021 Infrastructure Renewal Program and Mornington Stormwater Management Pond Expansion

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the award of contracts for the Mornington Stormwater Management Pond Expansion Project:

a)        the bid submitted by Bre-Ex Construction Inc. at its tendered price of, $4,347,747.11, excluding HST, for the Mornington Stormwater Management Pond Expansion Infrastructure Renewal Project, BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by Bre-Ex Construction Limited was the lowest of six bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;

b)        the engineering fees for Stantec Consulting BE INCREASED to account for the additional contract administration days for the required oversight for the said project in accordance with the estimates, on file, by an upset amount of $124,423.20, excluding HST, from $633,183.39 to a total of $757,606.59, in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)        the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)        the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

e)        the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract, or issuing a purchase order for the material to be supplied and the work to be done, relating to this project (Tender RFT21-23); and,

f)         the Mayor and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2021-E05)

Motion Passed

8.3.10   (2.3) Sewage Overflows and Bypasses Into the Thames River

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the staff report dated April 20, 2021, with respect to Sewage Overflows and Bypasses Into the Thames River, BE RECEIVED for information; it being noted that a presentation from S. Mathers, Director, Water and Wastewater, A. Rammeloo, Division Manager, Sewer Engineering, and K. Oudekerk, Division Manager, Wastewater Treatment Operations, with respect to this matter, was received. (2021-E05)

Motion Passed

8.3.12   (3.1) Street Renaming Portion of Blackwater Road (Plans 33M-764 and 33M-787) File MN-9313 (Relates to Bill No. 213)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021, to approve the renaming of a portion of “Blackwater Road” from “Sunningdale Road East”, northward to Block 5, Part of Lot 13 Concession 6, on Registered Plan 33M-764, and northward to Block 11, Part of Lot 13 Concession 6, on Registered Plan 33M-787 shall hereinafter be called and known as Appletree Gate, and the name of the said street is hereby changed accordingly; it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter. (2021-T00)

Motion Passed

8.3.13   (3.2) Amendments to Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law (Relates to Bill No. 182)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, on the advice of the Director, Environment, Fleet and Solid Waste, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, being “A by-law to amend By-law A-56 being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” by adding fees related to the London Hefty® EnergyBag® Pilot Project and the Bike Lockers Pilot Project”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021; it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter. (2021-P01)

Motion Passed

8.3.14   (5.1) Deferred Matters List

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Civic Works Committee Deferred Matters List, as at April 12, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.3.11   (2.5) Update on Resource Recovery Strategy Including Mixed Waste Processing

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20, 2021, related to the update on Resource Recovery Strategy including Mixed Waste Processing:

a)        the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED for information;

b)        the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to take no further action on the Unsolicited Proposal dealing with mixed waste processing; and

c)        the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to develop details and a background business engagement document to initiate a two-step public procurement process (Request for Qualifications followed by a Request for Proposals) for a resource recovery facility or facilities (including mixed waste processing, mechanical-biological treatment and waste conversion technologies), pilot project or commercial scale, and report back to Civic Works Committee by December 2021 with details on how the process will occur; it being noted that Civic Administration already have direction to examine the potential for small scale, demonstration facilities for resource recovery facilities as part of the London Waste to Resources Innovation Centre, subject to Municipal Council approval. (2021-E07)

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.4   6th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee 

2021-04-19 PEC Report - Full

Motion made by P. Squire

That the 6th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee BE APPROVED, excluding Item 8 (3.3).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.4.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by P. Squire

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed

Motion Passed

8.4.2   (2.1) 3392 Wonderland Road South - Removal of Holding Provision h-17 (H-9298) (Relates to Bill No. 219)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, based on the application by Wonderland Business Centre Inc. and Old Oak Properties, relating to the property located at 3392 Wonderland Road South, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 19, 2021 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Holding Light Industrial (h-17LI1LI7) Zone TO a Light Industrial (LI1*LI7) Zone to remove the h-17 holding provision

Motion Passed

8.4.3   (2.3) Annual Report on Building Permit Fees

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Development & Compliance Services & Chief Building Official, the staff report dated April 19, 2021 entitled “Annual Report on Building Permit Fees”, with respect to building permit fees collected and costs of administration and enforcement of the Building Code Act and regulations for the year 2020, BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.4.4   (2.4) Building Division Monthly Report for February 2021

Motion made by P. Squire

That the Building Division Monthly Report for February 2021 BE RECEIVED for information. (2021-A23)

Motion Passed

8.4.5   (2.2) Recovery Grant Program (Relates to Bill No’s. 186, 187, 188, 189, and 190)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the Recovery Grant Program:

a)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “A”) being “A by-law to amend C.P.-1467-175, as amended, being “A by-law to establish financial incentives for the Downtown Community Improvement Project Areas”, by adding in its entirety Schedule 3 - The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021;

b)     the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “B”) being “A by-law to amend C.P.-1468-176, as amended, being “A by-law to establish financial incentives for the Old East Village Community Improvement Project Area”, by adopting in its entirety Schedule 2 - The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021;

c)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “C”) being “A by-law to amend C.P.-1481-176, as amended, being “A by-law to establish financial incentives for the SoHo Community Improvement Project Area”, by adopting in its entirety Schedule 2 - The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021;

d)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “D”) being “A by-law to amend C.P.-1527-248, as amended, being “A by-law to establish financial incentives for the Hamilton Road Area Community Improvement Project Area”, by adopting in its entirety Schedule B - The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021;

e)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “E”) being “A by-law to amend C.P.-1539-220, as amended, being “A by-law to establish financial incentives for the Lambeth Area Community Improvement Project Area”, by adopting in its entirety Schedule 2 - The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021;

f)       the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to transfer $6,000 of the $250,000 program funding to the Old East Village Business Improvement Area (BIA) to fund graffiti removal across multiple properties;

g)      the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to transfer $5,000 of the $250,000 program funding to the Hamilton Road Business Improvement Area (BIA) to fund graffiti removal across multiple properties;

h)      the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to accept retroactive applications commencing May 4, 2021 if immediate repairs to damage by vandalism are necessary for securing the premises; it being noted that the revised by-laws noted in a) through e) above, provide for retroactive applications to be submitted;

it being further noted that funding for the program is accommodated within the Economic Development Reserve Fund as approved by Municipal Council at its January 12, 2021 meeting.

Motion Passed

8.4.6   (3.1) Demolition Request for Dwelling on Heritage Listed Property at 88 Wellington Road

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the property located at 88 Wellington Road BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources; it being noted that the two stained glass windows pictured in Appendix B of the staff report dated April 19, 2021 should be salvaged prior to the building’s demolition;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter

Motion Passed

8.4.7   (3.2) Demolition Request for Dwelling on Heritage Listed Property at 92 Wellington Road 

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, that the property located at 92 Wellington Road BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter.

Motion Passed

8.4.9   (4.1) 2nd Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee

Motion made by P. Squire

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2nd Report of the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee from its meeting held on March 24, 2021:

a)      the following actions be taken with respect to the Notice of Planning Application, dated February 10, 2021, from S. Meksula, Senior Planner, related to a Draft Plan of Subdivision Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for the properties located at 14 Gideon Drive and 2012 Oxford Street West:

i)       the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to provide the Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC) with the Tree Preservation Plans for the following properties:

  • 1478 Westdel Bourne; and,

  • 3095 and 3105 Bostwick Avenue;

ii)      the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to provide TFAC with the Tree Preservation Plans for any Notice of Planning Application that is sent to the Committee;

iii)      that Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to clarify with the applicant for the above-noted Notice the status of the woodlot located to the east of the turning circle, as illustrated on the Notice;

iv)      the above-noted notice, with respect to this matter, BE RECEIVED;

b)      the following actions be taken with respect to the Neighbourhood Street Renewal Program:

i)       the item BE DEFERRED to the next Trees and Forests Advisory Committee (TFAC) meeting; and,

ii)      D. MacRae, Director, Roads and Transportation, BE INVITED to attend the next TFAC meeting, to provide information regarding the program; and,

c)      clauses 1.1, 3.1, 3.3, 5.1 and 5.2 BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.4.10   (4.2) 3rd Report of the Advisory Committee on the Environment

Motion made by P. Squire

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd Report of the Advisory Committee on the Environment from its meeting held on April 7, 2021:

a)      the following actions be taken with respect to the National Earth Day Event and the 2040 Film:

i)       Asha Hodura, London Chapter of the International Circular Economy Club, BE INVITED to a future meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Environment to speak to the above-noted film and the activities of the International Circular Economy Club; and,

ii)      the communication, movie poster and discussion questions, as appended to the agenda, BE RECEIVED

b)      a representative of the London Environmental Network BE INVITED to a future meeting of the Advisory Committee on the Environment (ACE) to speak to the Green Homes London program; it being noted the ACE held a general discussion with respect to the ACE work plan;

c)      a Working Group BE CREATED to review the Notice of Planning Application, dated March 31, 2021, from C. Parker, Senior Planner, with respect to Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments related to Encouraging the Growing of Food in Urban Areas city wide and report back to the Advisory Committee on the Environment; and,

d)       clauses 1.1, 2.1, 3.1 and 3.2 BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.4.11   (4.3) 4th Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage

Motion made by P. Squire

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 4th Report of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage from its meeting held on April 14, 2021:

a)      a Working Group BE CREATED to review the Notice of Planning Application, dated March 10, 2021, from M. Corby, Senior Planner, with respect to a Notice of Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments related to the property located at 850 Highbury Avenue North, as appended to the Agenda, and the Heritage Impact Assessment, dated January 2021, from Zelinka Priamo Ltd., with respect to the property located at 850 Highbury Avenue North, as appended to the Added Agenda, and report back to the May meeting of the London Advisory Committee on Heritage;

b)      on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the property located at 88 Wellington Road BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources; it being noted that the two stained glass windows pictured in Appendix B of the staff report, dated April 14, 2021, should be salvaged prior to the building’s demolition;

c)      on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the property located at 92 Wellington Road BE REMOVED from the Register of Cultural Heritage Resources;

d)      on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking retroactive approval and approval for alterations to the heritage designated property located at 16 Cummings Avenue, within the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District, BE APPROVED with the following terms and conditions:

-      the existing faux wood shakes on the gables be painted;

-      the Heritage Planner be circulated on the Building Permit application to verify consistency with the alterations proposed to the porch; and,

-      front yard parking be prohibited and the front yard restored to landscape;

e)     on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking retroactive approval for alterations to the heritage designated property located at 574 Maitland Street, in the East Woodfield Heritage Conservation District, BE APPROVED with the following terms and conditions:

-      exterior grilles be added to the double-hung windows to create a simulated divided lite pattern on the exterior of the windows; and,

-      the Heritage Alteration Permit be displayed in a location visible from the street until the work is completed; and,

f)     clauses 1.1, 2.1 to 2.3, inclusive, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 4.1 and 4.6, BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.4.8   (3.3) Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area - 1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Kilally Road (OZ-9275) (Relates to Bill No’s. 184 and 220)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of the City of London relating to the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area (1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Kilally Road, excluding 2065 Kilally Road):

a)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “A”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend the Official Plan to:

i)       change Schedule “A” (Land Use) on the subject lands FROM Urban Reserve Community Growth, Multi Family Medium Density Residential and Environmental Review designations, TO an Open Space designation and FROM Low Density Residential TO an Environmental Review designation;

ii)      change Map Schedule B1 (Flood Plain and Environmental Features) TO apply an Environmentally Significant Area delineation to the lands identified as the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area that are designated Open Space as amended above; and,

iii)      change Map Schedule B1 (Flood Plain and Environmental Features) TO add Unevaluated Wetlands and Unevaluated Vegetation Patches that are designated Environmental Review as amended above.

b)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “B”) BE INTRODUCED at a future meeting of Municipal Council after the London Plan maps are in force and effect following the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal Hearings;

i)       change the Place Types on Map 1 - Place Types - FROM Neighbourhoods and Environmental Review TO Green Space, and FROM Environmental Review TO Neighbourhood to align with the limits of the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area;

ii)      change the Place Types on Map1-Place Types- FROM Neighbourhood TO Environmental Review; and

iii)     change Map 5 - Natural Heritage - FROM Potential Environmentally Significant Area, Unevaluated Vegetation Patch TO Environmentally Significant Area; and,

iv)     change Map 5- Natural Heritage TO add Unevaluated Wetlands and Unevaluated Vegetation Patches;

c)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “C”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan as amended in part a) above), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone TO an Open Space (OS5) Zone and FROM an Urban Reserve (UR2) Zone and Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone, TO an Environmental Review (ER) Zone; it being noted that the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment for the lands located at 2065 Kilally Road will be returned to the Planning and Environment Committee for consideration no later than July 1, 2021;

it being pointed out that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received communications dated April 15, 2021 and April 16, 2021, from S. Stapleton, Auburn Developments, with respect to these matters;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves these applications for the following reasons:

●      the proposed amendments are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 as diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features;

●      the proposed amendments conform to the policies of the 1989 Official Plan; and

●      the proposed amendments conform to the policies of The London Plan.

Motion made by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Item 8 (3.3), Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area, BE REFERRED back to the Civic Administration in order to allow an opportunity for the Civic Administration to meet with adjacent property owners and provide additional information, with respect to this matter.

Pursuant to section 11.6 of the Council Procedure By-law, the motion moved by Councillor S. Lewis and seconded by Councillor S. Hiller is withdrawn at the joint request of the mover and seconder and with the consent of the Council.

Motion made by P. Squire

The motion to approve the recommendation is put.

That, on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner, the following actions be taken with respect to the application of the City of London relating to the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area (1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Kilally Road, excluding 2065 Kilally Road):

a)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “A”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend the Official Plan to:

i)       change Schedule “A” (Land Use) on the subject lands FROM Urban Reserve Community Growth, Multi Family Medium Density Residential and Environmental Review designations, TO an Open Space designation and FROM Low Density Residential TO an Environmental Review designation;

ii)      change Map Schedule B1 (Flood Plain and Environmental Features) TO apply an Environmentally Significant Area delineation to the lands identified as the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area that are designated Open Space as amended above; and,

iii)      change Map Schedule B1 (Flood Plain and Environmental Features) TO add Unevaluated Wetlands and Unevaluated Vegetation Patches that are designated Environmental Review as amended above.

b)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “B”) BE INTRODUCED at a future meeting of Municipal Council after the London Plan maps are in force and effect following the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal Hearings;

i)       change the Place Types on Map 1 - Place Types - FROM Neighbourhoods and Environmental Review TO Green Space, and FROM Environmental Review TO Neighbourhood to align with the limits of the Kilally South, East Basin Environmentally Significant Area;

ii)      change the Place Types on Map1-Place Types- FROM Neighbourhood TO Environmental Review; and

iii)     change Map 5 - Natural Heritage - FROM Potential Environmentally Significant Area, Unevaluated Vegetation Patch TO Environmentally Significant Area; and,

iv)     change Map 5- Natural Heritage TO add Unevaluated Wetlands and Unevaluated Vegetation Patches;

c)      the attached, revised, proposed by-law (Appendix “C”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan as amended in part a) above), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone TO an Open Space (OS5) Zone and FROM an Urban Reserve (UR2) Zone and Urban Reserve (UR3) Zone, TO an Environmental Review (ER) Zone; it being noted that the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment for the lands located at 2065 Kilally Road will be returned to the Planning and Environment Committee for consideration no later than July 1, 2021;

it being pointed out that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received communications dated April 15, 2021 and April 16, 2021, from S. Stapleton, Auburn Developments, with respect to these matters;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves these applications for the following reasons:

●      the proposed amendments are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 as diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features;

●      the proposed amendments conform to the policies of the 1989 Official Plan; and

●      the proposed amendments conform to the policies of The London Plan.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.5   7th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee

2021-04-26 PEC Report - Full

Motion made by P. Squire

That the 7th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.5.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by P. Squire

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed

Motion Passed

8.5.2   (2.2) 3700 Colonel Talbot Road and 3645 Bostwick Road - W-3 Farms Subdivision - Phase 1 - Special Provisions (39T-17503-1)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, the following actions be taken with respect to entering into a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and W-3 Lambeth Farms Inc,. for the subdivision of lands bounded by Bostwick Road to the east and Colonel Talbot Road to the west; mid-block between Pack Road and the planned Kilbourne Road extension; it being noted that the subject sites, approximately 53.0 ha (130.9 ac) in size, are generally described as Part of Lots 74 and 75, Concession East of the North Branch of Talbot Road (Westminster):

a)      the Special Provisions, to be contained in a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and W-3 Lambeth Farms Inc., for the W-3 Farms Subdivision, Phase 1 (39T-17503) appended to the staff report dated April 19, 2021 as Appendix “A”, BE APPROVED;

b)      the Applicant BE ADVISED that Development Finance has summarized the claims and revenues appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “B”;

c)      the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “C”; and,

d)      the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute this Agreement, any amending agreements and all documents required to fulfill its conditions.

Motion Passed

8.5.3   (2.3) 3493 Colonel Talbot Road (H-9284) (Relates to Bill No. 222)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, with respect to the application by York Developments, relating to the property located at 3493 Colonel Talbot Road, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Holding Residential R1 Special Provision (hh-100R1-8(5)/R1-8(8)) Zone TO a Residential R1 Special Provision (R1-8(5)/R1-8(8)) Zone to remove the “h and h-100” holding provisions.

Motion Passed

8.5.4   (2.4) 1635 Commissioners Road East and 2624 Jackson Road - Extension of Draft Plan Approval (39T-06507)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, with respect to the application by Drewlo Holdings Inc., relating to the lands located at 1635 Commissioners Road East and 2624 Jackson Road, the Approval Authority BE ADVISED that the Municipal Council supports issuing a three (3) year extension to Draft Plan Approval for the residential plan of subdivision SUBJECT TO the conditions appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” (File No. 39T-06507).

Motion Passed

8.5.5   (2.5) 2015 Shore Road - Removal of Holding Provisions (H-9251) (Relates to Bill No. 223)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, based on the application by Sifton Properties Limited, relating to lands located at 2015 Shore Road, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Holding Residential R6 Special Provision/ Residential R7 Special Provision (h-h-206- R6-5(42)/R7(22)- D115-H30) Zone TO a Residential R6 Special Provision/Residential R7 Special Provision (R6-5(42)/R7(22)-D115-H30) Zone to remove the h and h-206 holding provisions.

Motion Passed

8.5.6   (2.6) 3924 - 4138 Colonel Talbot Road - Heathwoods Subdivision - Phase 2 -Special Provisions (39T-12503-2)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, the following actions be taken with respect to entering into a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Auburn Developments Inc., for the subdivision of land over situated on the east side of Colonel Talbot Road, north of Lambeth Walk, municipally known as 3924-4128 Colonel Talbot Road:

a)      the Special Provisions, to be contained in a Subdivision Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Auburn Developments Inc., for the Heathwoods Subdivision, Phase 2 (39T-12503) appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A”, BE APPROVED;

b)      the Applicant BE ADVISED that Development Finance has summarized the claims and revenues appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “B”;

c)      the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “C”; and,

d)      the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute this Agreement, any amending agreements and all documents required to fulfill its conditions.

Motion Passed

8.5.7   (2.1)  420 Fanshawe Park Road East (H-9320) (Relates to Bill No. 221)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, with respect to the application by 2431602 Ontario Limited, relating to the property located at 420 Fanshawe Park Road East, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a holding Residential R1 Bonus (h-5R1-7B42) Zone to remove the “h-5” holding provision;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received a communication dated April 12, 2021, from F. Sun, by email. (2021-D09)

Motion Passed

8.5.8   (3.1) 3rd Report of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee

Motion made by P. Squire

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd Report of the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on April 15, 2021:

a)      the 3095 Bostwick Road Working Group comments, appended to the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee Agenda, BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration for a consideration

b)      the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to consult with the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC) on the location of the proposed pathway from the storm pond to White’s Bridge; it being noted that the EEPAC reviewed and received mapping from S. Levin, with respect to this matter;

c)      the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to report back at a future Planning and Environment Committee meeting with respect to the feasibility of continuing with the homeowner education package as part of Special Provisions or to replace it with a requirement to post descriptive signage describing the adjacent natural feature; it being noted that the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC) was asked to undertake research on best practices of other municipalities to assist in determining the best method(s) of advising new residents as to the importance of and the need to protect, the adjacent feature; and,

d)      clauses 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 4.1 to 4.5, inclusive, BE RECEIVED for information;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee heard a verbal delegation from S. Levin and reviewed and received aerial maps relating to these matters.

Motion Passed

8.5.9   (3.2) 526 Oxford Street East (OZ-9303) (Relates to Bill No’s. 185 and 224)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, City Planning and City Planner the following actions be taken with respect to the application by 2773070 Ontario Inc. and The Corporation of the City of London, relating to the property located at 526 Oxford Street East:

a)      the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend the Official Plan for the City of London (1989) to ADD a policy to Section 10.1.3 – “Policies for Specific Areas” to allow the site to develop with a personal service establishment with a maximum floor area of 140m2;

b)      the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, in conformity with the Official Plan as amended in part a) above), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential R3/Office Conversion (R3-1/OC5) Zone TO a Residential R3/ Office Conversion Special Provision (R3-1/OC5 (*) Zone;

it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with these matters, the individuals indicated on the attached public participation meeting record made oral submissions regarding these matters;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received the staff presentation with respect to this matter;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

-       the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 which promotes an appropriate range and mix of uses in a settlement area;

-      the recommended use conforms to the in-force policies of The London Plan including but not limited to, Our City, Key Directions, and City Building, and will facilitate the development of a mix use building in the Urban Corridor Place Type;

-      the recommended amendment conforms to the in-force policies of the 1989 Official Plan, including but not limited to, Chapter 10 – Policies for Specific Areas, which allows Council to apply specific policies where the change in land use is site specific and located in an area where Council wishes to maintain the existing land use designation while allowing for a site-specific use: and,

-      the recommended Zoning By-law Amendment implements an appropriate use and intensity for the site which is compatible with the surrounding area.

Motion Passed

8.5.10   (3.3) 1701-1737 Richmond Street (Z-9291) (Relates to Bill No. 225)

Motion made by P. Squire

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Development Services, with respect to the application by Richmond Hyland Centre Inc. c/o Westdell Development Corporation, relating to the property located at 1701-1737 Richmond Street, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated April 26, 2021 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 4, 2021 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Associated Shopping Area Commercial Special Provision (ASA1(5)/ASA2(3)/ASA3) Zone and an Associated Shopping Area Commercial Special Provision (ASA1(5)/ASA2(3)/ASA3(1)) Zone TO an Associated Shopping Area Commercial Special Provision (ASA1(5)/ASA2(3)/ASA3(_)) Zone and an Associated Shopping Area Commercial Special Provision (ASA1(5)/ASA2(3)/ASA3(1)) Zone;

it being pointed out that at the public participation meeting associated with these matters, the individuals indicated on the attached public participation meeting record made oral submissions regarding these matters;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

-      the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment;

-      the recommended amendment conforms to the in-force policies of The London Plan, including but not limited to the Transit Village Place Type and Key Directions; and,

-      the recommended amendment conforms to the in-force policies of the 1989 Official Plan, including but not limited to the Enclosed Regional Commercial Node designation.

Motion Passed

8.6   8th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

2021-04-27 SPPC Report 8

Motion made by J. Morgan

That the 8th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee BE APPROVED, excluding Items 4 (4.2) and 7 (5.1).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.6.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by J. Morgan

Councillor S. Turner discloses a pecuniary interest with item 5.1, having to do with an update on City services during COVID-19, by indicating that he is an employee of the Middlesex-London Health Unit.

Motion Passed

8.6.2   (2.1) Update – Development of the Climate Emergency Action Plan

Motion made by J. Morgan

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Environmental and Engineering Services and City Engineer and the Managing Director, Development and Compliance Services and Chief Building Official, the staff report with respect to the development of the City’s Climate Emergency Action Plan BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.6.3   (4.1) RBC Place London – COVID-19 Financial Impacts

Motion made by J. Morgan

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the following actions be taken:

a)      the staff report on RBC Place London COVID-19 Financial Impacts BE RECEIVED for information; and,

b)      RBC Place London BE REQUESTED to review their 10-year capital plan to re-assess priority needs and to mitigate potential capital budget requests through the 2022 Annual Budget Update process.

Motion Passed

8.6.5   (4.3) 2020 Year-End Capital Budget Monitoring Report and COVID-19 Financial Impacts

Motion made by J. Morgan

That on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2020 Year-End Capital Budget Monitoring Report:

a)      it BE NOTED that the City Treasurer, or designate, will undertake the housekeeping budget adjustments identified in the staff report dated April 27, 2021, in accordance with the Multi-Year Budget Policy adopted by By-law No. CPOL.-45-241;

b)      the following actions be taken with respect to the completed capital projects identified in Appendix “C”, as appended to the above-noted report, which have a total of $14.4 million of net surplus funding:

i)       the capital projects included in Appendix “C” BE CLOSED;

ii)      the following actions be taken with respect to the funding associated with the capital projects approved for closure in c) i), above:

Rate Supported

A)      pay-as-you-go funding of $213 thousand BE TRANSFERRED to capital receipts;

B)      authorized debt financing of $2.5 million BE RELEASED resulting in a reduction of authorized, but unissued debt;

C)      uncommitted reserve fund drawdowns of $5.2 million BE RELEASED back into the reserve funds which originally funded the projects;

Non-Rate Supported

D)      authorized debt financing of $2.7 million BE RELEASED resulting in a reduction of authorized, but unissued debt;

E)      uncommitted reserve fund drawdowns of $2.8 million BE RELEASED back into the reserve funds which originally funded the projects; and,

F)      other net non-rate supported funding sources of $883 thousand BE ADJUSTED in order to facilitate project closings.

Motion Passed

8.6.6   (4.4) Greater London International Airport Authority (GLIAA) Board of Directors

Motion made by J. Morgan

That the communication dated April 8, 2021 from Michelle T. Faysal, Chair, Board of Directors, Greater London International Airport Authority (GLIAA) BE RECEIVED and the GLIAA BE AUTHORIZED to leave the aforementioned position vacant while undertaking a review of the size and composition of the board.

Motion Passed

8.6.4   (4.2) 2020 Year-End Operating Budget Monitoring Report and COVID-19 Financial Impacts

Motion made by J. Morgan

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2020 Year-End Operating Budget Monitoring Report:

a)      the 2020 Year-End Operating Budget Monitoring Report for the Property Tax Supported Budget, Water, and Wastewater & Treatment Budgets BE RECEIVED for information. An overview of the net corporate positions are outlined below:

i)      Property Tax Supported Budget surplus of $22.3 million prior to the recommendations listed in this report and contribution to the Operating Budget Contingency Reserve, noting a balanced budget position after factoring in these items;

ii)     Water Rate Supported Budget surplus of $5.0 million prior to the contribution to the Water Budget Contingency Reserve;

iii)     Wastewater and Treatment Rate Supported Budget surplus of $3.9 million prior to the contribution to the Wastewater and Treatment Budget Contingency Reserve;

b)      the following contributions to reserves in accordance with Council direction from the Mid-Year Report BE RECEIVED for information, noting the contributions were endorsed as funding sources to offset potential financial impacts of COVID-19 on the City’s 2021 Budget:

i)       $12.3 million to the Operating Budget Contingency Reserve, noting the year-end contribution takes into account the contributions listed in items c) and d);

ii)      $5.0 million to the Water Budget Contingency Reserve;

iii)     $3.9 million to the Wastewater and Treatment Budget Contingency Reserve;

c)      the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to make the following contributions from the Property Tax Supported Budget surplus:

i)      an additional $5.0 million to the Economic Development Reserve Fund to support social and economic recovery measures, it being noted the total 2020 contribution for these purposes would be equal to $10.0 million;

ii)      Fleet Management net operational savings of approximately $1.5 million from the Property Tax Supported Budget be contributed to the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Reserve Fund to offset increasing vehicle costs, and to mitigate potential near-term budget increases due to these cost pressures;

d)      the following allocations from the Property Tax Supported Budget surplus BE APPROVED with respect to RBC Place London:

i)       a one-time grant to support RBC Place operations for the remainder of 2021 in the amount of $2.5 million;

ii)      a one-time contribution to the RBC Place Renewal Reserve Fund to ensure funding for the current RBC Place capital plan in the amount of $1.0 million;

e)      the summary of anticipated COVID-19 impacts on the 2021 Budget BE RECEIVED for information, noting these represent updated forecasts and may vary as the impacts of the pandemic and recovery continues to dynamically evolve; and,

f)      the presentation providing an overview of the 2020 Year-End Budget Monitoring and 2021 COVID-19 Impacts (Appendix “C” of the staff report dated April 27, 2021) BE RECEIVED for information;

it being noted that the reported year-end position is subject to completion of the financial statement audit; and,

it being further noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated April 22, 2021 from C. Butler with respect to this matter.

Motion made by J. Morgan

The motion to approve clause 4.2, excluding part d)i) is put.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by J. Morgan

Motion to approve part d) i) is put:

d)      the following allocations from the Property Tax Supported Budget surplus BE APPROVED with respect to RBC Place London:

      i) a one-time grant to support RBC Place operations for the remainder of 2021 in the amount of $2.5 million;

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

8.6.7   (5.1) COVID-19 – City of London Services Update (Spring/Summer2021)

Motion made by J. Morgan

That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the staff report dated April 27, 2021, entitled “Covid-19 – City of London Services Update (Spring/Summer 2021)”, BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

10.   Deferred Matters

None.

11.   Enquiries

None.

12.   Emergent Motions

12.1   (ADDED) Councillor M. Cassidy - Proclamation Request - Day of Action Against Anti-Asian Racism

2021-05-04 Emergent Motion - Proclamation Request - M. Cassidy

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Turner

That pursuant to section 20.2 of the Council Procedure By-law leave BE GIVEN to introduce the following emergent motion related to a request for support from Councillor Maureen Cassidy of the application from Stop Asian Hate London, submitted on May 2, 2021, to proclaim May 10, 2021 “Day of Action Against Anti-Asian Racism”.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

At 6:01 PM, Mayor E. Holder places Deputy Mayor J. Morgan in the Chair and takes a seat at the Council Board.

At 6:05 PM, Mayor E. Holder resumes the Chair and Deputy Mayor J. Morgan takes his seat at the Council Board.

Motion made by M. Cassidy

Seconded by J. Morgan

That, notwithstanding Council Policy “Issuance of Proclamations Policy” which requires requests for proclamations to be submitted at least six (6) weeks in advance of the requested issuance dates, that based on the application dated May 2, 2021 from Stop Asian Hate London,, May 10, 2021 BE PROCLAIMED “Day of Action Against Anti-Asian Racism” day.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

13.   By-laws

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No’.s 177 to 225, inclusive, BE APPROVED, excluding Bill No. 191.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by M. Cassidy

That Second Reading of Bill No’.s 177 to 225, inclusive, BE APPROVED, excluding Bill No. 191.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by E. Peloza

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No’.s 177 to 225, inclusive, BE APPROVED, excluding Bill No. 191.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No. 191, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by J. Helmer

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That Second Reading of Bill No. 191, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by E. Peloza

Seconded by J. Helmer

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 191, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

4.   Council, In Closed Session

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by E. Peloza

That Council rise and go into Council, In Closed Session, for the purpose of considering the following:

4.1      Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality. (6.1/7/CSC)

4.2      Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality. (6.2/7/CSC)

4.3      Personal Matters/Identifiable Individual

A matter pertaining to personal matters about an identifiable individual with respect to employment-related matters and advice and recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation, including communications necessary for that purpose. (6.3/7/CSC)

4.4      Litigation/Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose from the solicitor and officers and employees of the Corporation; the subject matter pertains to litigation or potential litigation with respect to litigation currently before the Superior Court of Justice, Court files No. 7132/12, 1235/13, 1294/13 and 2438/15 affecting the municipality and for the purpose of providing instructions and directions to officers and employees of the Corporation. (6.1/6/CWC)

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

The Council convenes, In Closed Session at 6:11 PM, with Mayor E. Holder in the Chair and all Members participating.

At 6:38 PM, Council resumes into public session, with Mayor E. Holder in the Chair and all Members participating.

9.   Added Reports

9.1   7th Report of Council in Closed Session

Motion made by P. Squire

Seconded by S. Lewis

1.      Canadian Pacific Railway, Encroachment Agreement – West London Dyke Project

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, with the concurrence of the Division Manager, Stormwater Management, on the advice of the Manager of Realty Services, with respect to the property owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company (CPR), located north of Oxford Street West at the Thames River, further described as Lots 8 and 9, PL 64(W), in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being part of PIN 08247-0154 (LT), as shown on the location map attached as Appendix “B”, for the purpose of constructing a retaining wall and pathway improvements to accommodate the West London Dyke Project, the Encroachment Agreement, substantially in the form attached as Appendix “A”, submitted by Canadian Pacific Railway Company (the “Grantor”), to grant a portion of the subject property to the City to construct the improvements BE ACCEPTED, for the sum of $12,000.00, subject to the City holding a Commercial General Liability insurance policy with a limit of not less than Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) for any one loss or occurrence for personal injury, bodily injury, or damage to property including loss of use thereof.

2.      Offer to Purchase Industrial Land – 1649304 Alberta Ltd. – Innovation Industrial Park, Phase 1

That, on the recommendation of the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, on the advice of the Manager of Realty Services, with respect to industrial land located in Innovation Industrial Park, Phase I, containing an area of approximately 5.47 acres and municipally known as 2415 Innovation Drive, legally described as being Part of Block 3, Plan 33M-544, designated as Part 7, Plan 33R-20553, being all of PIN 0818970293, in the City of London, County of Middlesex, as outlined on the sketch attached hereto as Appendix “C”, the following actions be taken:

a)      the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (the “Agreement”), attached as Appendix “B”, submitted by The Corporation of the City of London (the “Purchaser”) to repurchase 5.47 acres of the subject property from 1649304 Alberta Ltd., for the sum of $344,862.00 BE ACCEPTED, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the agreement; and,

b)      the financing for the acquisition BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report attached hereto as Appendix “A”.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by E. Peloza

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No. 176 and Added Bill No.’s 226 to 242, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

At 6:47 PM, Councillor P. Squire leaves the meeting.

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by M. Cassidy

That Second Reading of Bill No.’s Bill No. 176 and Added Bill No.’s 226 to 242, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

At 6:48 PM, Councillor P. Squire enters the meeting.

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No.’s Bill No. 176 and Added Bill No.’s 226 to 242, inclusive, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

The following are By-laws of The Corporation of the City of London:

Bill No.

By-law

Bill No. 176

By-law No. A.-8095-131 – A by-law to confirm the proceedings of the Council Meeting held on the 4th day of May, 2021. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 177

By-law No. A.-8096-132 – A by-law setting tax ratios for property classes in 2021. (2.2a/7/CSC)

Bill No. 178

By-law No. A.-8097-133 – A by-law levying tax rates for property classes in 2021. (2.2b/7/CSC)

Bill No. 179

By-law No. A.-8098-134 – A by-law levying rates for 2021 for school purposes in the City of London. (2.3/7/CSC)

Bill No. 180

By-law No. A.-8099-135 – A by-law to approve and authorize the Fire Safety Grant Transfer Payment Agreement between Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Office of the Fire Marshal (the “Province”) and The Corporation of the City of London (the “Recipient”). (2.7/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 181

By-law No. A-54-21005 – A by-law to amend By-law No. A-54, as amended, being “A by-law to implement an Administrative Monetary Penalty System in London”. (3.2a/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 182

By-law No. A-56-21001 – A by-law to amend By-law No. A-56 being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” by adding fees related to the London Hefty® EnergyBag® Pilot Project and the Bike Lockers Pilot Project. (3.2/6/CWC)

Bill No. 183

By-law No. B-1-21006 – A by-law to amend By-law No. B-1 referred to as Naming of Highways and Numbering of Buildings & Lots By-law, to amend Part 7. (3.2h/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 184

By-law No. C.P.-1284(vw)-136 – A by-law to amend the Official Plan for the City of London, 1989 relating 1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Kilally Road excluding 2065 Kilally Road. (3.3a/6/PEC)

Bill No. 185

By-law No. C.P.-1284(vx)-137 – A by-law to amend the Official Plan for the City of London, 1989 relating to 526 Oxford Street East. (3.2a/7/PEC)

Bill No. 186

By-law No. C.P.-1467(k)-138 – A by-law to amend C.P.-1467-175, as amended, being “A By-law to establish financial incentives for the Downtown Community Improvement Project Areas” by adding in its entirety, Schedule 3 – The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines. (2.2a/6/PEC)

Bill No. 187

By-law No. C.P.-1468(f)-139 – A by-law to amend C.P.-1468-176, as amended, being “A By-law to establish financial incentives for the Old East Village Community Improvement Project Area” by adding in its entirety, Schedule 2 – The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines. (2.2b/6/PEC)

Bill No. 188

By-law No. C.P.-1512(a)-140 – A by-law to amend C.P.- 1481-176, as amended, being “A By-law to establish financial incentives for the SoHo Community Improvement Project Area” by adding in its entirety, Schedule 2 – The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines. (2.2c/6/PEC)

Bill No. 189

By-law No. C.P.-1527(a)-141 – A by-law to amend C.P.- 1527-248, as amended, being “A By-law to establish financial incentives for the Hamilton Road Area Community Improvement Project Area” by adding in its entirety, Schedule B – The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines. (2.2d/6/PEC)

Bill No. 190

By-law No. C.P.-1539(a)-142 – A by-law to amend C.P.- 1539-220, as amended, being “A By-law to establish financial incentives for the Lambeth Area Community Improvement Project Area” by adding in its entirety, Schedule 2 – The Recovery Grant Program Guidelines. (2.2e/6/PEC)

Bill No. 191

By-law No. F-9 – A by-law to provide for the regulation of open air burning in the City of London and to repeal By-law F-7. (2.6/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 192

By-law No. L.-130(b)-143 – A by-law to amend By-law No. L.-130-71 referred to as Vehicle for Hire By-law, to amend Part 18. (3.2m/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 193

By-law No. L.S.P.-3491-144 – A by-law to enact a Heritage Easement Agreements of the property at 39 Carfrae Street, pursuant to the provision of the Ontario Heritage Act. (Heritage Easement)

Bill No. 194

By-law No. PH-3-21016 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-3 referred to as Animal Control By-law, to amend Part 15. (3.2c/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 195

By-law No. PH-4-21029 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-4 referred to as Dog Licensing and Control By-law, to amend Part 9. (3.2d/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 196

By-law No. PH-7-21005 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-7 referred to as Dog Off-leash Areas By-law, to amend Section 7. (3.2e/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 197

By-law No. PH-12-21004 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-12 referred to as Pit Bull Dog Licensing By-law, to amend Part 6. (3.2b/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 198

By-law No. PH-18-21005 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-18 referred to as Public Nuisance By-law, to amend Part 7. (3.2i/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 199

By-law No. PR-2-21005 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PR-2 referred to Parks and Recreation Area By-law, to amend Part 7. (3.2k/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 200

By-law No. PS-113-21064 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London. (2.17/5/CWC)

Bill No. 201

By-law No. PS-113-21065 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London. (2.17/5/CWC)

Bill No. 202

By-law No. PS-113-21066 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London (2.4/6/CWC)

Bill No. 203

By-law No. PS-113-21067 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London (2.4/6/CWC)

Bill No. 204

By-law No. PS-113-21068 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London (2.4/6/CWC)

Bill No. 205

By-law No. PS-113-21069 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-113 entitled, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London (2.6/6/CWC)

Bill No. 206

By-law No. PS-5-21006 – A by-law to amend By-law PS-5 entitled “A by-law to provide for the owners of privately-owned outdoor swimming pools to erect and maintain fences.” (3.1/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 207

By-law No. PS-5-21007 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PS-5 referred to as Swimming Pool Fence By-law, to amend Part 7. (3.2g/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 208

By-law No. PS-6-21003 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PS-6 referred to as Fence By-law, to amend Part 17. (3.2f/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 209

By-law No. PW-2-21002 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PW-2 referred to as Abandoned Refrigerator, Freezer & Containers By-law, to amend Part 3 (3.2n/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 210

By-law No. PW-12-21005 – A by-law to amend By-law No. PW-12 referred to as Sound By-law, to amend Part 7 (3.2j/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 211

By-law No. S-1-21015 – A by-law to amend By-law No. S-1 referred to as Streets By-law, to amend Part 9. (3.2p/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 212

By-law No. S.-5868(b)-145 – A by-law to amend By-law No. S.-5868-183 referred to as Sign By-law, to amend Section 3.12. (3.2l/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 213

By-law No. S.-6123-146 – A by-law to rename a portion of “Blackwater Road” from “Sunningdale Road East”, northward to Block 5, Part of Lot 13 Concession 6, on Registered Plan 33M-764, and northward to Block 11, Part of Lot 13 Concession 6, on Registered Plan 33M-787 to “Appletree Gate”. (3.1/6/CWC)

Bill No. 214

By-law No. S.-6124-147 – A by-law to lay out, constitute, establish and assume lands in the City of London as public highway.  (as part of Paulpeel Avenue)  (Chief Surveyor – plan of subdivision requiring 0.3m reserve on abutting plan, 33M-691, for unobstructed legal access through a subdivision)

Bill No. 215

By-law No. S.-6125-148 – A by-law to lay out, constitute, establish and assume lands in the City of London as public highway. (as widening to Fanshawe Park Road East, east of Jennifer Road)  (Chief Surveyor – for road widening purposes, registered as ER1354410, pursuant to SPA20-029 and in accordance with Zoning By-law Z.-1)

Bill No. 216

By-law No. W.-5672-149 – A by-law to authorize the Dearness Home Auditorium Expansion (Project No. DH1100) (2.5/6/CPSC)

Bill No. 217

By-law No. W.-5673-150 – A by-law to authorize the Road Networks Improvements (Main) (Project No. TS144621) (2.5d/5/CWC)

Bill No. 218

By-law No. WM-12-21017 – A by-law to amend By-law No. WM-12 referred to as Municipal Waste & Resource Materials Collection By-law, to amend Part 12. (3.2o/7/CPSC)

Bill No. 219

By-law No. Z.-1-212924 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to remove holding provision from the zoning for lands located at 3392 Wonderland Road South. (2.1/6/PEC)

Bill No. 220

By-law No. Z.-1-212925 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to rezone 1918 to 2304 and 2005 to 2331 Kilally Road, excluding 2065 Kilally Road. (3.3c/6/PEC)

Bill No. 221

By-law No. Z.-1-212926 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to remove holding provision from the zoning for lands located at 420 Fanshawe Park Road East. (2.1/7/PEC)

Bill No. 222

By-law No. Z.-1-212927 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to remove holding provisions from the zoning for lands located at 3493 Colonel Talbot Road. (2.3/7/PEC)

Bill No. 223

By-law No. Z.-1-212928 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to remove holding provisions from the zoning for lands located at 2015 Shore Road. (2.5/7/PEC)

Bill No. 224

By-law No. Z.-1-212929 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to rezone an area of land located at 526 Oxford Street East. (3.2b/7/PEC)

Bill No. 225

By-law No. Z.-1-212930 – A by-law to amend By-law No. Z.-1 to rezone an area of land located at 1701-1737 Richmond Street. (3.3/7/PEC)

Bill No. 226

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8100-151 – A by-law to authorize and approve an Encroachment Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Canadian Pacific Railway Company, with respect to the property legally described as Lots 8 and 9, Plan 64(W), in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being part of PIN 08247-0154 (LT), for the West London Dyke Project, and to authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement (6.1/7/CSC)

Bill No. 227

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8101-152 – A by-law to authorize and approve an Agreement of Purchase and Sale between The Corporation of the City of London and 1649304 Alberta Ltd. for the purchase of industrial land located in Innovation Industrial Park, Phase I, containing an area of approximately 5.47 acres and municipally known as 2415 Innovation Drive, legally described as being Part of Block 3, Plan 33M-544, designated as Part 7, Plan 33R-20553, being all of PIN 0818970293, in the City of London, County of Middlesex, and to authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the Agreement. (6.2/7/CSC)

Bill No. 228

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8102-153 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-7499-37 entitled “A by-law to appoint Barry Card as Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Solicitor” and to appoint Barry Card as Deputy City Manager, Legal Services. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 229

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8103-154 – A by-law to appoint Kevin Dickins as Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 230

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8104-155 – A by-law to appoint George Kotsifas as Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 231

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8105-156 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-7563-166 entitled “A by-law to appoint Anna Lisa Barbon as the Managing Director, Corporate Services and City Treasurer, Chie Financial Officer of The Corporation of the City of London” and to appoint Anna Lisa Barbon as Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 232

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8106-157 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-7488-14 entitled “A by-law to appoint Kelly Scherr as Managing Director, Environmental Services and City Engineer” and to appoint Kelly Scherr as Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 233

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8107-158 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-7899-285 entitled “A by-law to appoint Cheryl Smith as Managing Director, Neighbourhood, Children and Fire Services” and to appoint Cheryl Smith as Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 234

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8108-159 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-7631-514 entitled “A by-law to appoint Scott Stafford as Managing Director, Parks and Recreation”. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 235

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8109-160 – A by-law to repeal By-law No. A.-6627-82 entitled “A by-law to appoint John M. Fleming as City Planner”. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 236

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8110-161 – A by-law to delegate to the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development or their written designate, to undertake all the administrative, financial and reporting acts, including approval of Registered Early Child Educator Service Provider Exemptions and approval for Serious Incident reporting, with respect to the approval processes under the EarlyON and Family Centre Program under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 237

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8111-162 – A by-law to appoint Shirley Glover, Director, Life Stabilization, as Administrator pursuant to the Ontario Works Act, 1997. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 238

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8112-163 – A by-law to appoint Barry Card as the City Solicitor. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 239

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8113-164 – A by-law to appoint Anna Lisa Barbon as the City Treasurer. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 240

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8114-165 – A by-law to appoint Peter Kokkoros as the Chief Building Official. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 241

(ADDED) By-law No. B.-98-166 – A by-law to appoint the Chief Building Official and Inspectors under the Building Code Act, 1992, S.O. 1992, c.23, as amended for the purposes of enforcement of said Act. (City Clerk)

Bill No. 242

(ADDED) By-law No. A.-8115-167 – A by-law to transfer delegated authority to reflect organizational changes. (City Clerk)

14.   Adjournment

At 6:49 PM, Councillor S. Lewis leaves the meeting.

Motion made by P. Squire

Seconded by S. Turner

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 6:50 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (2 hours, 30 minutes)

colleagues could ask screens on please. Welcome to the seventh meeting of city council. This is a virtual meeting during the COVID-19 emergency. We would ask that you check the city website for current details of COVID-19 service impacts.

Meetings can be viewed via live streaming on YouTube and the city website. The city of London is committed in making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council standing or advisory committee meetings and information upon request. Make a request for any city service. Please contact accessibility@london.ca or 516-661-2489 extension 2425.

Colleagues, I look for any disclosures of pecuniary interest. Professor Turner. Thank you, Your Worship with respect to item 2.6 in the community and protective services. The outdoor burning bylaw declare a conflict as one of the teams in my division at the health unit provides routine advice to council and to the city on this matter.

And there’s a couple of identifications of potential funding impacts the Middlesex London Health Unit, this SPPC agenda. There’s no funding implications directly in that. So there’s no conflict, but I do raise it just so that I identify what there might be an issue with them at some point. So noted, thanks very much.

Any other disclosures? You’ve seen none. We do have a recognition. I’d like to call on councilor Palosa, please.

Thank you, Your Worship. Ramadan is an Islamic holy month, which runs from April 12th to May 12th this year. Ramadan is a time for daytime fasting and spiritual reflection and a chance to spend time with family and friends. Once again, this year, we can’t do that with COVID-19 stay at home orders.

This past Friday, many of our community, interfaith leaders and members from our political community gathered on behalf with Muslims, the London and Forest City Muslim magazine, and we held a virtual if-tar dinner. Following that dinner, we broke the fast together and this was an opportunity to come together and celebrate the common heritage of three Arabic-faced Judaism, Christianity and Islam and taking advantage of being together well apart. So to our Muslim friends, neighbors, brothers and sisters, Ramadan Mubarak. Thank you, councilor.

I am not aware of any confidential matters to be considered a public, but if I turn your attention then to item four, the council closed session. As we do in these meetings, we will move that to after stage 13 bylaws. So for that, I would like to change the order that I would require a motion to move item four and seven to port a council to after stage 13, move by councilor Van Hoel, seconded by councilor Palosa. Thanks very much.

Let’s call the vote. Councilor Halmer. A vote manually, yes. Opposing the vote and the motion carries 14 to zero.

Thank you, colleagues. I’ll look for a motion to be held April 13th, 2021 and put that on the floor. Is there a mover please, councilor Van Mirberg and seconded by councilor Lehman. Any questions or comments?

Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Opposing the vote and the motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. We have that we’ll deal with in one motion because we’re going to move them to the appropriate committee under 6.1, four items relating to item seven, 2.3 of the seventh report of community protective services committee, the 2020, 2021 winter response program for unsheltered individuals.

One related item eight, just 2.5 of the seventh report of community protective services committee having to do with homeless prevention funding received in 2020, 2021 and COVID-19 response. We have five items related to item 12, 4.1 of the seventh report of the community protective services committee relating to the animal by-law of PH3. And we have one item related to item eight, which is 3.3 of the sixth report of the planning environment committee having to do with the addresses 1918 to 2304 and 2.005 to 2331 clearly road. I’ll look for a mover to put those in the appropriate areas.

Thank you, Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Hillier. Any discussion? Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 to zero.

There are no motions to which notice has been given. So we’ll now turn to item eight, which are the reports. And we start with the seventh report of community protective services. Councillor Halmer, please.

I’m happy to put the whole report on the floor with the exception of the items that colleagues have indicated they want to have pulled. So Councillor Turner indicated some conflicts and Councillor Van Halst and Councillor Lewis had circulated a motion. So if we just pull those items, the one that they circulated the motion on is the winter response to support people experiencing homelessness and the hazard terms conflicts. All right, so again, I’m just looking at the items under the agenda and wanted to be sure that we have those items that are so noted if I could items five and items seven.

Thanks very much, anyone who wish to deal with any other items separately to Councillor Halmer. And just what I want to say in general about these items is draw your attention to the administrative monetary penalties by law. That changes, there’s a lot of bylaws there that are impacted by adding administrative monetary penalties. I think that’s going to be a good step forward in terms of the efficiency of that area and taking a bit of the burden off the provincial offenses court where otherwise these kinds of fines and charges would go for resolution.

And that’s a big step forward. I want to commend Mr. Catola and his area for bringing that forward after many years of working on the administrative monetary penalties. You’ll see there’s lots of substantial progress reported out in many of these reports which are to be received for information, especially when it comes to the coordinated reform response.

We’ve started a couple of years ago and that has, yes, you read the numbers, the scale of that program and the amount of work that’s being done by the individuals who are working in that area every single day of the year, definitely to be commended and lots of great work in that area. Thank you. Any other comments on all of those non-pulled items? Seeing none, we’ll call the question.

Using the vote in the motion carries 14 to zero. Back to you, Councillor Omer. Yeah, I’ll put the amendments to the open by-law on the floor, this is the one that Councillor Turner had declared a hearing interest on. Comments for questions?

Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Posing the vote in the motion carries 14 with one word cues. Thank you, back to you. Yeah, I’ll put item seven, which is 2.3 from the committee report.

This is the update on the winter response to support an unsheltered individuals, basically from Christmas until the end of April. And the recommendation is to extend a couple of those locations until the end of June. Committee had a good discussion about that, support of that recommendation. With some direction added on to staff to come back with a report about what’s gonna happen after June and what can we, what have we learned from the winter response that we might wanna continue past June 30th.

So that’s the recommendation from the committee. I do wanna say that although there certainly were some difficulties in rollout of the overall program and not everything was perfect, overall this response over the winter was very well done and has resulted in dozens of people making their way into housing and finding some stability over the time that the winter response was up and running. So I think it’s very important that we take a stock of that program. I know that was a lot to mobilize in a very short period of time, both for the staff and the city who are working on it and mobilizing off the trailers and the physical locations and all the staff who are working at the community level in the Wish Coalition and other partners to make those spaces, get them up and running, staff them and have them be as successful as they were.

One of those locations was in my ward, not too far from where I am sitting right now. And I know that there were some challenges in terms of some of the impacts on the neighborhood, but I think even among folks in the neighborhood, there were a lot of people very happy to see that people were getting the transition they’re making from that location that was mowed down was into a more stable housing situation and not back out onto the street. So I think that was very well done by everybody involved on that front, put it on the floor. Thanks very much.

I’ll invite any questions or comments colleagues might have. Councillor Hunt-host. There we are. Thank you, Your Worship.

And I direct colleagues’ attention to the motions of the amendments that Councillor Lewis and I prepared for the agenda package. It’s on 118 of the original agenda package. And I’d like to put that amendment on the floor. But before I do, I’ll note that B, which is to endorse the extension of the Hamilton Roads Senior Center, although that could be approved so that it’s going forward for another eight weeks or could be not approved.

So that means go forward for zero weeks. I just wanted to, through you, to go to staff to see if there might be another option. Before we do that, you’re looking to put a motion on the floor. Do you have a seconder, Councillor Lewis?

I’ll come back to you now, Councillor, we’re gonna also specifically ask again, please. Okay, so I would put these on the floor, but I wanted to check before I do, if there might be an option other than B, that I could also put on. So just through you to staff who have a good ask if there might be another option there in terms of the extension of the Hamilton Road Warming Center. I actually would think that that would come from you, Councillor Van Holst, as opposed to from staff.

So I might ask you perhaps to be a bit more prescriptive in either what you’re asking or what you’re proposing, please. Okay, your worship, then, if that’s the case, the Warming Center is intended to be extended until June 30th, but I would note that the lockdowns are intended to end on May 20th. And the, of course, the activities of the senior center are important as well. So my question to staff is, is it possible to reopen the senior center for its regular purposes at the end of the lockdowns?

I think that might go to Mr. Dickens. And through you, your worship, the staff recommendation, as you’ve noted. Ms.

Mr. Dickens, I’m getting tremendous feedback from your presentation. You and everyone is speaking. It feels like either lower the volume or there may be some adjustment might need to be made at your end if you would, please, sir.

So your worship, is it any better? Modesty, whispering may have the same effect, I’m not sure. Time to do that through you, your worship. Now we can’t hear you, I didn’t mean that, actually.

So you might just speak up a touch, please. Thank you, and through you, your worship. Thank you. Staff recommendation is to continue the Hamilton World drop-in day space through to the end of June.

Should council wish not to extend it for that period of time? That is certainly their decision to make. To the question from Councilor Van Halst, there certainly is a provincial state who order that is in place. And if council is directing this to change the length of time at the day space, we could make that consideration.

Councilor Van Halst? Okay, thank you, Your Worship. Well, that means, I’ll put on the plan for then the motion that the length of the extension be tied to the length of the lockdowns. And if there’s somebody that would second that motion, that could replace B.

I’m gonna go to the clerk. Here, Your Worship, the recommendation from the committee was to extend for Hamilton Road. When I spoke with the councilor about this motion, I separated Hamilton Road out so that if you wish to vote against it, he could. But to put, that’s what you’d have to do at this point because the recommendation from the committee is to extend for Hamilton Road.

So to be clear, Clerk, what that would mean is that even though we can vote on it, I’m separately, it would have to be defeated to consider an alternate, to remove Hamilton Road from the committee recommendation. Back to you, Councillor Van Halst? Okay, thank you. Well, that’s clear and of course that’s the process that we’ve seen many times.

So anyway, we understand that there may be a motion at this point, I think that would be part of the main motion. So the amendment that’s being put on the floor is essentially D, which is directing staff to do some, extended cleanup of needles in the area in support of the community. I just wanna be clear, Councillor, if Councillor Lewis, is that clear from your understanding? Go ahead, please.

Yes, Your Worship, that was the, my intent in seconding was that part D would be added as an amendment for the expanded cleanup area for these warming centers. Thanks very much, Councillor and Halst, you still have the floor if you wish any other comments. Okay, well, thank you, Your Worship. And so the issues needles become quite a large concern to the community in as much as it’s, this is located very close to a school.

And the community themselves has had put together a team to go around and do the cleanup that was happening on the specific site was not happening where there are many, many needle hundreds of needles in the surrounding area. And since this was considered by them to be the source, at least a major source of the challenge, we’re looking to support the community by extending the sweep of the needle cleanup that’s being done by staff. Thank you, Councillor Square. Thank you, Mr.

Chair, I’ll be happy to support the amendment, it makes sense. But I just wanted to ask staff about a broader sort of concept here. And it pertains to what will be done under clause E, which is looking towards the future. And it would seem to me that part of the learning process from how a warming center is working in a given community would be to talk to the community, hear back from the community and interact with the community as to what they thought worked really well, what they think didn’t work well, changes that could be made.

And it seems to me that’s what the community is sort of reaching out for and hoping for, is that there will be some kind of interaction both ways so that we can continue on with the valuable resource that a warming centers are, while also making sure they work well with the community. And I think if they do work well with the community, then they’re going to get community support. So for my clarity, I just wanna see what we’re looking at going forward in terms of reviewing what we’ve learned, interacting with the communities, and seeing if we can do even better next year than we did this year. Mr.

Dickens. Thank you and through you, your worship. We appreciate that question. Certainly we have learned lots during the winter response, certainly what location means for those surrounding the winter response and what location means for those accessing the winter response.

When we move forward with what a community plan looks like beyond the month of June, certainly we will be consulting with our many service provider networks. And if we were to look at something that’s more long-term in nature, again, reflecting on the winter response, being an emergency response, get something up quickly, do it well, keep people alive during the coldest month of the year. If we were to do something more calculated, strategic, and longer-term, absolutely, it starts with community consultation. And we’ve learned that the community can be very supportive for emergency responses, but we also know that we ask a lot of our community when we perform those type of services.

So to answer your question, yes, as we move forward, as we do with all of our plans, the community engagement and consultation is critical to the long-term success of those plans. Thank you, Councillor Square. And I think that certainly should be comforting to the people who live in the area, who I can see from their correspondence, want to support what we’re doing, but also want to raise their concerns. And I think that’s entirely possible, and that’s something we should be doing.

And it looks like Mr. Dickens is committed to doing that. So good work by staff, and thanks to the community for bringing those concerns forward, because I think they’ll just inform what the response is going to look like in the future. Thank you, Councillor Turner.

Sorry, you’re worse if I don’t think I had my hand up. I see a little hand on your screen. I don’t know, it’s just to, when I look at this to your left and to me, it’s to the right. I’m going to get the clerk to confirm my eyesight.

That’s your cursor. We’re going to ignore, you didn’t hear that, did you? Councillor Turner, that’s enough. Thank you.

If we can’t bring a little levity to these. Okay, I’ll see if I can get my cursor closer to someone else next time. Anyone else for discussion? Councillor Lewis, please, without a cursor.

Thank you, Your Worship. And after we adjourn, if you want me to adjust your cursor settings for you, so they don’t appear as a hand, I’ll happily do that. I seconded the amendment proposed by Councillor Vanholz because I think it is an important acknowledgement on our part to the community that we’ve heard their concerns and that this has been an emergency response. This response was not something that we had a lot of time to put thought into in location choices and the other locations that we did consider weren’t appropriate and we’re going to require quite a bit of work to make them appropriate.

It just wasn’t going to fit within the emergency response parameters. But what we’ve done is we’ve located a resource that is needed, but we’ve located it in an area that was not sort of purpose designed or built for it. And so that has created some spillover beyond the property itself into the community. And so I think it is important that we do acknowledge those concerns and that we do give our administration some direction to take some extra steps to address those with some additional sweep for needles and other paraphernalia that’s spilling over into the neighborhood and creating some community concerns.

So I hope people will support this. I think we did the best job that we could have in a situation that required an immediate response. However, I think there have been some learning opportunities through this. And I think that this is one of those is that when we locate these centers and I heard Mr.

Dickens reference that location means different things to both the neighborhood and the clients utilizing the space. And so I will take that lesson forward as we look at longer term solutions. But I think that this is a good way to recognize the community’s concerns and take some action that will give them some reassurance that they’re being heard by us as well as addressing the need to keep the warming center going for a little while longer. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions? If you could ask the, oh, Councillor Hamer, go ahead, please. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify something.

So I think reading the language and the motion that this would be not just on public property but also on to private property. And I’m sure many colleagues have experienced this kind of problem in different parts of the city. Certainly I have in various parts of word four where the issue of discarded syringes is not a new one nor is the issue of it being discarded inappropriately on private property. And I can imagine that if we start doing this sort of thing in around the day space here, that there will be no shortage of other requests for the same kind of service in other parts of the city.

And one of the reasons I know that is because I talked to staff about this regularly and this is something that is an ongoing issue for business owners and property owners all over the place. And so I wonder if we can just clarify, we are talking about with permission going on to private property and how will we, ‘cause I support the idea in this specific circumstance, I think it’s needed and I think it’ll be helpful. But when we have other requests, how are we gonna handle those as they come in for other areas? Mr.

Dickens. Thank you, Your Worship and through you. I believe the question was to clarify if the motion is speaking to private property cleanup. So I might go to the mover to answer that question first.

Now, let’s go to the mover, Councillor Godholst. Thank you, Your Worship and the answer to that is yes. So that sweep of around 100 meters would cover the area, which is really the heart of the Hamilton Road urban regeneration. And it’s where the majority of the concerns would be.

And I think if staff took on those sweeps, which some community members are doing now because they feel it’s important to protect their young ones, I think that would be an excellent gesture on our part. So that’s what I’m looking for. And where it says undertake a sweep within 300 meters, essentially if there’s problems with needles in a particular place, we have, for instance, Smith Street has become a rope between the senior center and the river and the Thames Valley Parkway. And that’s a place where people are experiencing an added amount of these discards.

And I think it’s reasonable to help them with those as well. So that would address many of the community’s concerns. And I think that addressing in this way would be well worth it. Councillor Hummer.

Yeah, I guess my remaining question is just for Mr. Dickens, which is when other requests come in for similar kind of service and other parts of the city, how would you like us to handle those? Mr. Dickens.

Thank you, Your Worship, and through you, I will actually ask Mr. Cott’s of this to answer this question. This falls within the by-law team and the contracted services they use for public and some private property cleanup and needle sweeps. So he’ll be in better position to speak to that question about what happens when requests come in across the city.

Let’s go to Mr. Cott’s question. Through Your Worship, I think in this particular instance, there could be a council direction for us to do so, we could do it through the council direction. And what it would likely be is a program where we might sweep that just out limited area a few times a week and it would be primarily public property, but we’re private property where there’s needles visible through the sweep.

So we won’t be necessarily going onto every private property in their backyards and things like that. It would be just where it’s visible from the street where we can do the pickups. But again, this would be through a council direction. And I think that would probably the most appropriate means for future requests.

Councilor. Said for me for now. Thanks. Councilor Hopkins.

Yeah, thank you. I do have a couple of questions just for further clarification. And this is on the D and just the better understanding. Trying to understand if we are just speaking here to Hamilton Road specifically and only as it relates to D picking up the needles, I would like clarification on that.

And I’d also like to, I have a better understanding if we do go forward with the, if it’s just relates to Hamilton Road in D, and I think it’s fair to say that this area may need some extra help in getting everything cleaned up. The concern is around the private property part. And if I appreciate Mr. Costa for his comments that if they see it, they will pick it up.

But what are we specifically doing with D? Are we asking for further information for staff to report back on public and private property? So two questions. D doesn’t relate just to Hamilton Road.

And are we also looking for a report for all areas in communities that may need cleaning up with a report back? I’ll go back to the mover on that, but it seemed to me D was dealing specifically with Hamilton Road. But go ahead to Councilman Hoffs, please. Yes, Your Worship.

Although the motion does say it’s those warming centers that are to remain open in 2021. And I think there are, I believe I can check with staff, I believe there are two. And so if that’s the case, the goal is to provide that similar service there as well. I can let staff talk to that.

And then of course, this is just for two months. And then after that, we’re looking for staff to come back with, it could simply be part of the report that they had intended to bring back on learnings as a part of E. But there we are looking to tell us what specifically they would be doing for future warming centers or cooling centers. Councilor Hopkins, does that answer your question?

Just a quick follow up. May I have the other location that we are speaking to in D other than Hamilton Road? That would be Talbot Street. Talbot Street.

I’ll let staff give the exact address on that. Go ahead. Thank you. Mr.

Dickens. Thank you to you, Your Worship. I believe the mover is referencing the extension of the York Street overnight space as the additional daytime space that we’d be referring to in this motion. I may stand corrected, Councilman Hoffs, that was your recommendation?

Yes, those that are remaining open as warming centers. I apologize, Councilor for that confusion. Other questions for me? Not for now.

All right, thank you. Other comments or questions? I’d ask the Deputy Mayor to take the chair please. Yep, and I have the Mayor on the list.

Thanks very much. I’m prepared to support D and I appreciate Councilman Hoffs and Councilor Lewis and working through some of the machinations associated with this. I’d like to pay tribute to our staff. Mr.

Dickens, your team has been exceptional in handling what has always been, I think, a trying circumstance which has been compounded by COVID. And to deal with all of this, with the pressures that and responsibilities that you have, please, I know I speak for Council when I say how important it is the work that you do. And yes, there will be lessons learned. Yes, there will be things that will be done as we approach our next winter and how we deal with resting spaces and how we deal with other sites as those circumstances come up.

But I think right in the here and now, I think it’s appropriate that we say well done under very trying circumstances. That’s it for me, Deputy Mayor. I’ll pass the chair back to the Mayor. I have no one else on the speakers list so far.

Thanks very much. I don’t see anyone else on the speakers list. So we are dealing with the amendment as indicated. Councillor Hopkins, you have a question about the what we’re voting on?

Yeah, I’m always looking for some clarification here. Fortunately, I didn’t watch the committee meeting. So I am trying to understand what the committee is. No, that’s fine.

Recommendation is. So if what you’re asking is, is what it is that we’re voting on, ‘cause you have had the opportunity to speak, I’ll go to the clerk and just clarify precisely what it is that we’re dealing with. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, the motion that’s on the floor is to mend item 2.3 by adding a following new part D.

For those warming centers that are to remain open in 2021, the civic administration be directed to make the necessary arrangements to wear permissions granted regularly sweep for needles in the area within 100 meters of the warming center. And when requested to do so to undertake a sweep for needles within 300 meters of the warming center and to report back to a future meeting on the community and protective services committee on the implementation of similar actions for future warming and cooling centers. Thanks very much. Colleagues.

Your worship, if I may, just please follow up. Well, if it relates specifically to clarification, what we’re voting on, go ahead, Councilor. So I have a proposed amendment that is A to E that I’m looking at. And I do appreciate the clarification given that we are just dealing with D at the moment.

So thank you for that. Clerk, I wonder if that requires any clarification. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Just to clarify, the communication from the Councilor, I believe in Councilor Van Halso, if I’m misinterpreting, I believe that you’re now just moving forward with adding a part D and that is all you’re doing at this point and that you’re not completely, you’re not doing A, B, and the others that are in there at this point that you’re just amending the clause to add the new part D. Clerk says this is primarily a renumbering Councilor just for purposes of, but the primary change based on this amendment is that it’s been directed and moved by Councilor Van Halso, second by Councilor Lewis. Councilor Lewis only, Councilor Van Halso, no commentary on the, please, on the, but if you want to bring a little bit of clarity to what we’re voting on, I thought it was clear, but go ahead and please be precise. Yes, thank you.

So A, together with B are the committee recommendation. It’s just they’re separated into two spots. So during the main motion, we could separate B out later but it really doesn’t have an effect on the amendment. The only thing that’s being done sustainably here is that we’re adding B.

Thanks very much, we’ll call the question. So that’s Lake Power, just to clarify, we’re just looking for the vote on the new part D to be put on the floor. Closing the vote and the motion carries 15 to zero. The original motion now is amended.

I’ll need a mover, please. Councilor Lewis, seconded by Councilor Helmer. Any comments or questions? Councilor Van Halso.

Thank you, Your Worship. So I’m going to ask that part B, which is the endorsement of the extension for the Hamilton Roads Center to June 30th, be separated out for individual vote. So noted, any other comments or questions? So if the mover and seconder are good with all of the items for the exception of B, that’s the item, all those items for the exception of B are what we’re voting on now.

So with that, we’ll call the question. Councilor Helmer, you had a question before we vote? I just want to make sure everybody’s referring to the same thing. Councilor Lewis and Councilor Van Halost and the amendment that they circulated, they had a part A, which was everything except Hamilton Road and a part B, which was just Hamilton Road.

Committee recommendation has one recommendation, which is just part A. There is a part B, which has nothing to do with it’s the administration executing all the things they need to do. So I want to make sure we’re voting on, I think what Councilor Van Halso is asking for us for A to be separated into A and B so he can then vote against that new B. I just want to make sure that that is what is happening.

That’s correct. So clerk for the benefit of all of us, just clarify for this purpose here with that separation has been noted. We just clarify for the benefit of Council, the items we’re dealing with right now, please. Mr.

Mayor, I believe, and I’m speaking with Ms. West like power, who’s remote in another room. My understanding is what we’re going to be putting on the floor is the lead-in. It might be easier if I just read it.

So what would be on the floor is that on the recommendation of the acting, managing director, housing, social services, and dearness home, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report date at April 20th, 2021, related to the update on the city of London’s 2020-2021 winter response program for unsheltered individual. What would be on the floor with that is A, that the above-known staff report being endorsed and be approved with the exception of matters related to the Hamilton Road Senior Center located at 525 Hamilton Road. And then the next part would be that the civic administration be directed to undertake all administrative acts, which are necessary in relation to the above-noted work. And then the civic administration be directed, report back to the community and protective services committee as soon as possible on additional actions that could be taken after the end of June, building on what we have learned from the temporary winter response to support people who are experiencing homelessness.

That’s what would be on the floor currently. Any comments or questions about what is on the floor now? And then I’ll have the clerk take us through the other items as well as we vote on them to be sure. Councillor Hopkins.

Thank you. I’m looking for clarification again. So if I’m not supportive of, I understand there’s another amendment coming forward here. So not supporting A, would that be contrary?

Mr. Mayor, any member of council has the option of voting against motion that’s on the floor? If that’s what the question is. Is that your question, Councillor Hopkins?

Yes. Thank you. Councillor Cassidy. This is not the recommendation that’s coming from committee.

Is this a brand new motion? I’m extremely confused now. Go to the seconder, but actually then I’m gonna go to Ms. Westlake Power ‘cause we’re making this a little more confusing than we need to be colleagues.

But go ahead, Councillor Lewis. Thank you, Your Worship. Hopefully I can make this really clear for folks. What we’re doing is supporting the committee recommendation as amended, however, Councilor Van Holst would like to be able to vote against the extension at the Hamilton Road Senior Center.

So he’s asked for that to be separated into an A and a B so we can support the rest of the extensions. Then if you want to support the Hamilton Road extension, you support B as well. A contrary motion would not be able to be brought forward unless B is defeated. So if you want to support the whole thing, support the whole thing, if you want to not support the extension of the Hamilton Road Senior Center, you would vote against B.

Sure. Through Mr. Mayor, I understand the concern that the Councillor is raising. So it would be best to put all of it on the floor so that when they’re voting, it’s clear that the Hamilton Road is also on the floor.

And then the Councillor can ask for that part to be just called separately. And then so A and B together would be the same as what the committee had recommended. Is that helpful? Well, I was kind of with you for a moment there, Clerk, but Ms.

Westlake Power, can you bring clarity, please? Thank you. Through you, your worship, I cannot bring clarity. I just wanted to indicate that what is loaded into E-Scribe and the members should be able to see on their screen is a motion that is the approval of clause 2.3, excluding the Hamilton Road location.

And then another motion, which would be subsequent to the one that’s currently on the screen in the chambers, that would be to approve the part B of clause 2.3 as amended. If there’s something different, then I will revise what’s entered into the system. So Ms. Westlake Power, you’re talking about two votes then for clarity.

That was my understanding of the intent of separating at the Hamilton Road location. Do you have a comment, not a comment, a question on what it is we’re voting on? Your worship, I could myself try to provide some clarity to the council if since I’m the one who requested the difference. So looking on the page that Councillor Lewis and I had forwarded the staff, the clerks were kind enough to separate it into an A and B already.

So that those two things together are the staff recommendation. And then when we got to this point, it would be a simple matter of looking at these two and realizing that if you vote for A, you’re supporting all the great work that has been done except for the Hamilton Road. And then after we vote on this, we’ll take up B and then that will be just for Hamilton Road where I’d like to make a little change. So I would vote against that and make a change.

But if you vote this vote and then in the next opportunity, vote for B, you will have supported the entire committee recommendation. But at any point I can ask to have something separated out for a different vote, that’s what I’ve done. So we have A through E, we have B to be dealt with separately. And if you’ll note what we approved was indeed the amended motion or the amendment or the motion that was put forward by Councillors Van Holst and Lewis.

So we’d be voting on all of that with the exception of B unless there’s any comments or confusion about what that is that we’re voting on. It helps if you’ve got that all in front of you, obviously on page three of our report and also the Councillor’s letter that went with this. So seeing none, Clerk, are we good with voting on this? A through E with the exception of B.

Your Worship, I think it would be a lot easier if I read what’s on the floor, just so people are clear. Why did you do that? Okay, so currently what’s on the floor and if you refresh your screen, you’ll see it. It’s that clause 2.3 as amended be approved, excluding the reference to the Hamilton Road location as follows, that on the recommendation of the acting, managing director, housing, social service and dearness home, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated April 20th, 2021, related to an update on the city of London 2020-21 Winter Response Program for Unsheltered Individuals A.

The above note at staff report be endorsed and be approved with the exception of matters related to the Hamilton Road Senior Center located at 525 Hamilton Road, part C. The civic administration be directed to undertake all administrative acts that are necessary in relation to the above note report and D is because it’s the amended motion, it’s the D part that you’ve already approved. And then after this one, then we’ll go back to the Hamilton Road clause. Any other questions?

Effectively voting on everything except B. So with that, we’ll call the question. Excuse me, Mayor. Before we go.

I do have a question on Part A of the motion as to why it refers to not voting for the Hamilton Road part. If we’re just separating it, it’s that the castor who wants to vote against it can vote against it. I don’t see why we have to have a language that says that we’re not voting for it. I’m not sure that we’re saying that, but the clerk, do you want to add anything to that?

And by the way, the vote is open. So colleagues, I’ll just bear your indulgence on this. Through your worship. In order to allow for a counselor to vote separately on Hamilton Road, we have to separate it.

If we left clause A the way it was, that would include Hamilton Road, which would not allow the counselor to vote separately on Hamilton Road. The vote is open. Councillor Karygiannis. Yes, I just have one last question.

Does this mean that it’s going to come back as a motion that we can vote on it? Clary, do you mean, will there be another vote on a Hamilton Road with the Hamilton Road in it? Yes, it’ll be the next vote that goes on the floor. Using the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero.

It’s going to be, the vote is now open. Councillor Van Halcy have a question. About the, there’s no comments here now, because this is, we’re now in the voting stages. We’ve already had our discussion on this.

So do you— Point of order, I separated this out. So I could— What’s your comment? Well, thank you, thank you, worship. And so I wanted to say first that it’s great that the Warming Center was able to achieve its primary objective of people warm during the winter months and regarding the extension for the location.

You’ve heard from the residents, you’ve heard from the VIA, I’ve spoken to some people personally. So we don’t really need to rehash the issue. However, what I would like to do in support of the residents who are involved in this and have been helping out to quite a degree. And I think we’re maybe experiencing a bit of caregiver burnout.

So what I would like to do instead of extending this to June 30th is to simply have it extended to the end of the lockdowns. And then that provides them the opportunity to have their senior center back and move forward with the opportunities that would be available to other centers in the city. I understand that, Councillor, that is contrary to the motion that’s on the floor. And so you’re worshiped.

So that is, that’s why I’ll info against the extension. Because I’m representing the people who have asked us to find a different approach. And so with that. I have a point of order, Councillor Square.

Councillor Vanholst almost finished, but let me just make it clear. Just because you pull a matter and ask to speak to vote on it separately does not give you, in my submission, another opportunity to speak. It just doesn’t. And so to allow Councillor Vanholst to say, well, because I pulled this matter to vote on it separately, I want to speak on it again, is out of order.

Okay, well, I will vote in support of Councillor Square’s comments. So that’s it then for you, Councillor Square, thank you. Any other comments? No other comments, this is on the floor, colleagues.

This is a very clear yes or no vote. Pic, we need you on mute if I could, Councillor Vanholst, I hear some tapping. Sorry about that. Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 to one.

Thank you, Councillor, how— That’s it for me. I think it is. You need to do it all together, but I don’t think we did since we did all the component parts. That would be correct.

So thank you for that, colleagues. Thanks for your indulgence. I know that was a little bit confusing, probably on me, but there was some twists and turns on that. So I appreciate your indulgence, all of you.

So thanks very much, colleagues. We’ll now look to the seventh report of the Corporate Services Committee, Councillor Cassidy. Thank you, Your Worship. I’m not aware of any items that need to be pulled.

Nobody has advised me. Does anyone wish any item to be dealt with separately? Back to you, Councillor Cassidy. Thank you, Your Worship.

Two important parts in this, more of the tax policy and the education tax rates. We discussed both of those things in the past and staff had recommended no changes to the tax ratios, which is what is in this by-law going forward now today. Staff, Civic Administration, and specifically the City Clerk’s Office had asked us to fill some of the, or to extend the terms of the advisory committees while that review is still ongoing to the end of December of this year. And that’s what we did.

And a number of the committees had vacancies. So we did fill some of those vacancies back committee and those names are on this agenda. This report right now, the final important thing was all very important. But the final thing that I would comment on is that Councillor Morgan’s letter is in here asking for support and endorsement from City Council to run a game for the Board of Directors at FCM.

There’s a deadline that has to be met. And that’s why Councillor, sorry, Deputy Mayor Morgan’s letter is on the added agenda for the Corporate Services Committee. That’s all on the report for Council’s consideration. Thank you.

Any comments or questions on Councillor Cassidy’s report? Then as we wish, good luck to Councillor Morgan. Let’s call the question. Fosing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero.

Thank you. And Deputy Mayor, Councillor Lewis would have said if had I not preempted him as we all wish he lucked me the fourth be with you. And if you look at his t-shirt, you know what that means. I’ll now look to the 6th of Port of Civic Works and call on Councillor Ploza.

Thank you, Your Worship. We had a very productive meeting. We discussed sewage overflows, waste, EAs and pond expansions. The only item I’ve been asked to pull so far is number 11, being 2.5 update on resource recovery strategy, including mixed waste processing, unless there’s others.

Does anyone wish anything else dealt with separately? I see none. Councillor Ploza, back to you. Thank you.

I’ll just have it noted as well to a thank you to staff on item 2.3 sewage overflows and bypasses into the Thames River, staff did present at committee a 15 minute report, very in depth about what we do and why, as well as our water treatment facilities and UV disinfectants. So great conversation. And I’ll speak to item 2.5 when we get there. Thanks very much.

Any other comments or questions from colleagues? I see Councillor Turner with his hand and it is not a cursor. Go ahead, please. All right, this one’s really a worship.

Thank you. I just wanted to speak with respect to the number 2.3 presentation and very informative presentation from staff and helpful to provide some context to where we’re at in the sewage overflows and bypasses work. You can see through some of the graphs in the presentation and in the report that we’ve actually over the past period of time shown there, I’ve seen almost a 2/3 reduction in the amount of bypasses in untreated effluent that goes into the Thames River or partially. So that’s a significant amount of work.

There’s been a number of things that have gone into that including some of the sanitary and stormwater sewer separations pumps battery or, sorry, generator pump backups to the electrical systems on the pumping stations and things like that. But there’s still a lot of work to do and the report highlights one of the large contributors is the remaining unseparated sanitary storm system downtown. It looks like we’re going to be a little bit behind in that. What was supposed to be nine and four years sounds like it could be double, maybe eight or nine years instead of the four years on the horizon identified there.

And the Weeping Tiled Disconnect program, there’s 50,000 connections and we’ve allocated about a million dollars a year to this which disconnects about 30 homes a year. So on 50,000 that’s, well, that’s about 1,700 years before ahead of us. You may recall during budget, I’ve talked to the storm or the sanitary sewer rates and when we set them each year, the challenge of dropping them below that 3% increase means that we kind of short our funds and ability to be able to pay for a lot of this work that needs to be done. So we’ve got a lot of work ahead of us.

It’s good to have this report in context when we start talking about the budget in the coming year and we take a look at the funding that we need to be able to support the sanitary and water charges. And but again, I just wanted to highlight that and thanks to after a very informative report to us. So noted, thank you, Councilor, any other comments or questions? Councilor Cassidy.

Thank you, Your Worship. At the meeting, I had asked the staff for more information on how much of a contribution the Steve London makes to the phosphorus loading into the, eventually ends up in Lake Erie. And the information that I got back from staff was that what they identify is about 15% of the phosphorus loads are thought to originate from all of the urban sources along the major tributary and the base year being 2008, London’s five watershed tributaries contribution was about 43 tons a year or 12.7% of the total phosphorus load. So I just wanted anybody that might have been watching the committee meeting and heard that question asked.

That was the answer that I received from staff. So not insignificant and as much as there is a lot of pollution happening upstream of London, we still have to do all that we can here in the city to keep it out of the Thames River as much as possible because it is affecting not just our community, but especially the three first nations who draw their drinking water from the Thames River, but all the way down into the communities in the U.S. that are in the lower Lake Erie area. Thank you for that, Councilor, any other comments or questions, Councilor Halston?

Yes, thank you, Your Worship. And regarding item 11 or 2.5 the update on resource recovery strategy, including mixed waste, processing, a couple of things to ask about that. First though, there was quite some detail gone into— Your brush up, 2.5 was pulled for the Councilor to speak to next. Oh, okay, I’m sorry, I missed that.

Thank you. No, we’re good. Any other comments or questions, colleagues? So you know, we’ll call the question.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Councilor Flousen. Thank you. Item 11 being 2.5 was the update on resource recovery strategy, including mixed waste processing.

There was an A, B and C in this report. We also dealt with an unsolicited proposal. This is looking to city’s long-term resource recovery strategy regarding mixed waste processing, advanced resource recovery, and the long-term resource recovery strategy. And it was Councilor Vanholz, who requested to have this one pulled.

I’ll put it on the floor. Thank you, Councilor Unholz. Thank you, Worship. And also let me provide a belated thanks to staff for including the pedestrian crossings on Hamilton Road that are happening this year in their report on number five.

I think that’s what I’d hope to comment on previously. But regarding this item, I wanted to quite a bit detail on the procurement policy. And I know that the province is putting some attention to that as well. And it seems like there may be some confusion in terms, certainly in my mind, in terms of what a staff always means by a procurement.

So will there be a time where that’s defined a little better? There’s the idea of procurement in general, and then particular procurement policies and where we should and shouldn’t be involved. So I wonder when, you know, is there a time when some clarity to that will come forward? I’ll ask you to make sure to comment on the question.

Thank you, Your Worship. And I’ll start and Ms. Barbong, I have something to add with respect to our general policies. With respect to this particular issue, we have issued in the House a request for an interest, sorry, a request for expression of interest and did receive, I believe was around 28 expressions of interest.

Based on that, we believe there’s market demand from a number of potential suppliers. And we would recommend that we come back to you by the end of the year with a two-step public procurement process. So an RF call followed by a request for proposals that would specifically identify London’s future relationship with the mixed waste processing service provider. In terms of the council role or in with respect to procurement, I would suggest that Ms.

Barbong and our friends in purchasing would have the best advice. Councillor Reinholz, any other comments? No, Your Worship, I think that would be fine. I appreciate the information.

The only other point I wanted to make is with regarding some of the discussions on composting. And I think it’s important to realize that there’s multiple ways to use different technologies. And that’s an example of one, just because it’s a separation strategy. It’s not necessarily a final product.

It’s interesting in my discussions with elements of the community and looking for a circular economy. Speaking to the people who purchase composting, they said there’s a use for any kind of compost. So although we think it needs to be A or double A or triple A, there are things that their uses for compost that aren’t necessarily for food. And so they can be of lower quality.

And I recall maybe a similar situation of only thinking along one line. And that was back with one of our first urban agriculture initiatives. We were looking to use some land near an industrial space in the East End, there’s about 25 acres. And then the question came up, well, what if it was somehow contaminated?

And then there, all of a sudden, became the burden of doing environmental assessments and soil testing, which would have caught a lot. So the project didn’t go anywhere. But when in reality, we had people and there was the possibility of simply doing some tree nursing there. So whether it was contaminated or not, growing some steed or shrubs on there, as a means, another means of urban agriculture, might have been a possibility if we’d thought about it.

So I hope going forward, we keep some other, other possibilities open in our mind. And thank you. Thank you. Any other comments or questions?

I see no one on the list. I will call the question. Let me leave out the motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you, Councillor Biles.

That concludes the sixth report of the Civic Works. Thanks very much. It’s been a sixth report of the Plan Environment Committee. I’ll now turn it over to Councillor Squire.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. The first report and the council have the pleasure tonight of me presenting two reports, which I know is exciting. But the first one is the sixth report of the Planning and Environment Committee.

The only matter I’ve asked to be, that’s been asked to be pulled is item number A 3.3, which is clearly Southeast based in environmentally significant area. And some of my colleagues will know we received some correspondence on that that I will be asking staff to address. Thanks very much. And anyone wish anything else dealt with separately?

Turn it back to Councillor Squire. I will put the balance other than item number A 3.3 on the floor. Comments or questions? Seeing none, we’ll call the question.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Councillor Squire. The item goal is number A 3.3. With your indulgence, the question was circulated to council in the form of an email that they were asked to review.

I took the liberty of forwarding that email to staff. And I wonder if they might now provide their response to that email to the council so that it can be part of their consideration going forward, Mr. Chair. And I think Mr.

Barrett’s prepared to do that. Mr. Barrett. Thank you, through your worship.

I’m not going to go to each of the points in the letter that’s been added to your agenda. Probably just speak in general. I believe that there’s a little bit of confusion in the nature of the letter when it’s brought forward in requesting the deferral. The reason why staff recommended the deferral on the Auburn lands was because they have us, or there’s a site specific London plan appeal on those lands.

And there isn’t a similar appeal on the Furry lands. Also, so for that reason, there would be no basis for the referral. Many of the points that they’re making in their letter and the matters that they’re asking would in fact be addressed through an AIS that would be submitted as part of any future development application. And there is a present no application on these lands.

The recommendation in the staff report is to identify and zone the lands as environmental review, which in fact indicates that the evaluation has not been done to confirm the significance or not of those features and to establish the boundaries of the features, which is exactly what they’re asking for. So at this point, it wouldn’t be appropriate to be taken a position on that because none of that work has been done. So for that reason, this request that’s in front of you is not at all like the request that came from Auburn. And the reason why staff had recommended the deferral on those lands, it was because the Auburn lands are subject to a site specific London plan appeal.

And the environmental matters would be something that would be addressed in addressing and dealing with that appeal. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m happy to put that matter on the floor.

I hope that was of assistance to council. Comments for questions, customers? Thank you, Your Worship. And through you, I do need some additional clarification from staff on this because maybe if I’m missing something, hopefully staff can help clarify that.

So whether there’s an appeal or not an appeal on a site specific London plan application, that would not change whether or not there is an environmental value that may be discovered through the environmental review. So how is the deferral that’s been granted on one property changing the recommendation for the zoning and environmental review, but not changing the recommendation on the other property? And I asked this in part because it’s also important to note that the last that when this item came before the planning and environment committee, staff actually changed their own recommendation, the day of the meeting. And originally the lands that were deferred by the committee were not recommended for deferral and then they were.

So I’m not sure why we’re, I mean, I understand that there’s an appeal on one piece of land, but if there’s a communications problem, if there’s confusion as a result of some of the communications, and it seems to me that the property that was not deferred certainly has some confusion over that, why would it not be acceptable to simply refer this back, have staff meet with the applicant on the other piece of land and go over this with them before we proceed? ‘Cause I don’t see how one is different from the other in terms of there’s either an environmental value or there’s not regardless of the site-specific plan. Mr. Barrett.

Thank you, through your worship. The councilor’s right, there’s no difference in the environmental value on the lands. And the lands were identified on both parcels as environmental review and to be zoned environmental review as a result of the work that was done through the environmental impact study for the Clayley Southeast Basin ESA. The reason why staff brought forward that amended recommendation at the committee was to defer the consideration on those lands, again, because of the site-specific appeal.

It was as a result of communication between the solicitors involved in the London plan appeals that noted that the lands, the Auburn lands, were subject to that appeal. And so the recommendation to apply the environmental review designation on those lands and to zone them environmental review was not appropriate given that outstanding appeal. And so because there is that appeal, there is that opportunity to sit down and work with the landowners to determine what the actual ecological environmental significance is of those features. The issues that were identified by Mr.

Fari on those lands were actually the same as the issues that were identified and part of the report by other adjacent landowners. In other words, they felt that more work should be done to determine the actual limits and significance of the feature. What staff’s recommendation was, was that that work had not been done. And that’s why staff were recommending that the lands be identified as the unevaluated patches and be left as environmental review for that subsequent work to be done.

So that’s what the recommendation was. And that’s what the recommendation was for all of those lands, were it not for the appeal on the Auburn lands. That recommendation would still have been and was the recommendation that was brought forward. It was as a result of the appeal being identified that staff brought forward that changed recommendation.

What the council is asking for that additional study, that in fact is what is done by having the lands identified as environmental review and is zoned that way. That future work will be done. And it would be done appropriately when there is a development application made on those lands. As I indicated, there isn’t an application on those lands at this time.

Councillor Lewis. So in follow up to that then, I wanna understand Mr. Barrett correctly. When the appeal, whatever the result of the appeal is, is finalized, then staff are gonna be bringing forward another recommendation on that particular land to assess the environmental potential value on that site as well.

Mr. Barrett. To the mayor, no, in fact, we won’t. The board will have decided what that is.

So that’s why those lands are under appeal. So it’s out of council’s hands as it relates to those lands. They have appealed. Part of their appeal relates to the environmental significance and the nature of the environmental features on those lands.

That’s what we dealt with at the board. So it’s actually the board will decide we will not be bringing it back to council on those lands. Councillor Lewis. Okay, I appreciate that.

The reason I’m struggling with this is to me, I wanna make sure that we are treating all the property holders in this area fairly. And I’m getting the sense that there’s a lot of confusion around the process. And I’m not laying blame for that in any way, shape, or form. It’s not quite as simple as it seemed.

Even the answers that I’ve gotten from Mr. Barrett tonight are helpful. However, I can understand why there’s some question going around on the adjacent property right now. So I don’t know if I have a seconder, but I think I would like to move a referral just for one cycle.

Ask staff to meet with the adjacent property owner. Go through the process with them, make sure that they’re clear on what that is, and then come back to us. And certainly, I’m supportive of an environmental review going forward. I just wanna make sure that the property owners are all treated fairly.

So I’ll see if I’ve got a seconder for a referral. I know folks want to not send back things to staff too many times, and I share that view. But I think that there might be just an opportunity here to provide clarification and remove any confusion before things move forward. I see Councillor Hilliard is seconding.

Let’s open this up to any comments or questions. I’m sorry, Councillor Lewis, I’ll let you sit. Okay, great. Thank you.

I have Councillor Lehman and Councillor Turner. Go ahead. Thank you. I think this should have been dealt with that committee level, but here we are.

Through you, Chair to staff, would the result of the appeal have any effect on the process started for the adjoining lands? And could it lead to further action by the adjoining lands that we did not give them due process if we were to, if the applicant was successful in their appeal on the other property? Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, through your worship, a couple of things. First of all, I want to clarify, we have actually already met with representatives of the adjacent landholders and explained the situation, notwithstanding that, they said that they would be communicating with Council, so they did tell us that this would be going forward with Council. Also, there is no, the concern of due process, I think is a little bit of a concerning term. Notice was provided, notwithstanding that they have said that notice was not received.

We have records that the notice was sent. It was also published in the civic corner as is the standard practice. And the matter, the EA matter was actually addressed by Council last year. So notice has been provided in this instance.

We did hear from adjacent property owners who expressed the same concern. As I said, notwithstanding those concerns, what’s in front of you is to actually put them in environmental review, which is where those concerns would be addressed. The adjacent property owner also in their letter, and that’s why I said I wasn’t going to get into it, but also indicates that in fact, permission to enter the property was not provided. And in fact, we do have a copy of the permission letter signed by the landowner to provide for the access.

So there’s probably records issues all around, but I can assure the Council that notice was provided, notice was provided in the paper, which is the legal notice as well as the mail out notices that were given. Sitting down with the property owners for one cycle is not going to provide sufficient ecological and environmental information where we would be changing our position. Our position is that that information has to be provided through an EIS and we’re not going to get an EIS done that would change that position in one cycle of Council. As it relates to the actions of the board, the actions of the board are limited to the appeal that’s in front of them.

And that appeal that’s in front of them is limited to the adjacent lands on the Auburn property. And the outcome of that could identify and confirm the significance of the feature and the limits of the feature as it relates on that property. But that would then just be applied to that property. Subsequent environmental work would determine the limits and the extent of any ecological feature on the adjacent lands when that work was done.

That’s for lemon. Well, thank you again, through you, Chair. Well, studies on the Auburn property still have to be done once the appeal process is finished. Like I’m just having trouble understanding the need to expedite this thing is what are the time constraints because if we’re going to have to do a study anyway on the Auburn property, these properties are side by side and it’s essentially the same property.

Why is, why would we want to proceed until we are sure that we have the grounds to go ahead on the whole property as a parcel? So it’s not to duplicate efforts. Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Chair Worship. Again, just to clarify, we won’t be doing any study. Any study would be have to be done by Auburn to support their position before the board. So we’re not compromising any timeline through this process.

Auburn has the site-specific appeals. None of those appeals, the dates of those appeals have not yet been set. So Auburn, the timing of that is completely in their hands. So this is not tying up anything or speeding anything up or slowing anything up.

The Auburn has an appeal on those lands, the work that they would need to be, that they would do would be work that they would need to do to support their position at the board. And that would be the environmental work to confirm the significance of the feature and the limits of the feature on their lands. But that’s their timing and their job, not the city’s job. And this action of council is not compromising or changing that on any of the parcels.

That’s what I’m doing. Okay, I’m done. Thank you, Pastor Turner. Thanks, Your Worship.

Perhaps I don’t know if this will be helpful or not. And I’m just going to phrase this a little bit and perhaps through your worship, Mr. Barrett can confirm whether I’m writing my interpretation of this or not. Mr.

Farri has an adjacent parcel, but doesn’t currently have an application in front of council to develop those lands. He has designations on the land use of those parcels. And if he contested the designation of those land uses, especially the part that might be identified as ESA, it would be his responsibility to provide an environmental impact study that delineated the limits of the environmental feature and what the developable limits of that parcel would be in a completely separate process from an application that’s being brought forward by Auburn. Is that correct?

Mr. Barrett, thank you through your worship. Yes, that is correct. So here’s the challenge.

We’re getting a letter from an adjacent property owner claiming me to, but he has the opportunity to do that when he puts an application forward to develop his property. He has to do the studies. The city’s not doing the studies. The applicant makes the studies.

And in this circumstance, during the review, those studies that sounds like will be heard by the board rather than by a council at this point. So it’ll allow that part to occur there. But each parcel has their developed. Those property owners are responsible for their own studies.

And so it’s inappropriate for us to entertain the request that’s being asked by Mr. Farri and Mr. Constance because we don’t have anything in front of us yet. When it comes in front of us at the planning committee, that’s the opportunity to have that discussion but not right now.

Thank you. Councillor Hopkins. Thank you. Your worship just on a point of order.

Go ahead. Sorry, I want to thank Councillor Turner for helping frame that because it was helpful. I also want to just, I don’t want to sound like I’m correcting staff. I just want to communicate to Mr.

Barrett. I wasn’t expecting that an EIS would be back in one cycle, simply an opportunity to meet with the land owner who communicated with us. But he is indicated that that has in fact happened. So based on those two points of information, at this point, I’m going to withdraw my motion to refer.

Thanks very much, Councillor Hopkins. Yes, thank you. Sorry, Councillor Hopkins. Apparently I need confirmation from the seconder.

Councillor Lehman, or pardon me, Councillor Hillier. Excuse me. I see a thumbs up. So, concerns were recognized to confirm.

Thank you very much, Councillor Hopkins, please. Yeah, thank you very much, your worship. And thank you, Councillor Lewis, for pulling back your deferral. I just want to make a few comments about the public participation meeting and you’re right, Councillor Lehman.

This is committee work, and we did have a public participation meeting where staff did refer the Auburn Lands back because of the Alcat appeal that’s ongoing. I want to bring your attention as well to my colleagues that may not have watched the planning meeting, that there are also lands east of Auburn that are owned and are under the same review responsibilities as the lands to the east or to the west of the Auburn Lands too. So, I think we have to be very careful if we start to pull and just support one owner in the area that we aren’t really taking into account the whole area with the exception of the Auburn Lands. I want to thank staff.

I thought this was a positive recommendation coming through mainly because this came through civic. This is a result of the storm water management plans. No development will take place until we do the storm water management plans. And that was a direction given from civic last year.

And we had consultants come out and it is our policies to implement the recommendations. And that’s exactly what we’re doing with the official plan amendment as a result of the EA and putting the lands into environmental review. So I will encourage everyone to support the staff recommendation. Thank you.

Any other comments or questions? Councilor Morgan. Yes, thank you, Your Worship. And I’ll just make some comments.

I know the referral has been withdrawn, but I would say it is concerning, you know, sometimes when we get letters from landholders who have some confusion with either the process or what staff have said. And I know that the referral has been withdrawn. I appreciate what Councilor Lewis was trying to do to say, let’s have our staff meet and clarify some of these. Sounds like Mr.

Barrett has done that, but I think we should endeavor to do that whenever possible. And I know our staff is always willing to go out there and do that. So I think Mr. Barrett, I appreciate that you’ve spent the time to try to clarify some of these points, some which, you know, may have been, you know, notices missed or notices in the papers missed, but also the access to the land thing you pointed out.

So, you know, I’m, I kind of always see these when someone is saying, I don’t think I, you know, I want another chance to clarify some of these points. And so what I wanted to say is I appreciate that you’ve done that and I would certainly support you continuing to do that with both this particular landowner as well as any other in the area who wants to know exactly what is going on, what the process is, and when they might have the ability to access some of the rights that they might want to access when an application has come forward. So I will just say thanks for your work. I’m glad that the suggestion was made.

I’m thankful for the discussion. I have a much better viewpoint on what’s going on in this part of the city than I did before tonight’s discussion. So I saw great value in this discussion. Thanks to my colleagues.

Well, thank you. Any other comments or questions? Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Kaya Bhagav.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Councillor Square. Takes the report of the Planning Environment Committee. The next is the seventh report of the Planning and Environment Committee.

I haven’t been notified of any matters to be pulled, so unless we do, I’m happy to put the entire report on the floor. Does anyone wish any item to be dealt with separately? I see none, Councillor Square. Just put the entire report on the floor.

Comments or questions? Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Those are both of the planning reports, Mr.

Chair. Thank you, Councillor Square. I’ll now turn this to 8.6, the eighth report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee. I’ll call on Deputy Mayor Morgan.

Thank you, Your Worship. I have the eighth report of SPPC. I’m not aware of any items to be called separately, but I would look to colleagues to point that out to me now. Otherwise, I’m happy to put the entire report on the floor for consideration.

Does anyone wish any item to be dealt with separately? Councillor Van Merebergen. Yes, thank you, Mayor. I’d like to vote on 4.2D1 separately.

Be clear, that’s the one-time grant to support RBC place operations for the remainder of 2021 in the amount of $2.5 million, Councillor. Right. Thank you very much. That’s a G1, 4.2.

So noted. Councillor Turner. Your Worship, just in reflection, it looks like I actually recused on 5.1. So I’ll ask for that to be called separately.

My apologies for not identifying it at the beginning of the meeting. And my apologies for missing that count from Turner, usually I noticed those things. So I’m happy to the clerks to bear a motion that excludes both those items and put that on the floor. Thanks very much.

So we have two items that have been pulled, anything else that colleagues would like to have dealt with separately. So we’re dealing with all issues with the exception of 4.2D1 and 5.1. Comments or questions on all but those two items? Terry Clerk.

On the advice of the clerk, we are going to vote all of item four. Comments on the items that have not been pulled. Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Opposing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero.

Deputy Mayor. And I’m happy to put the rest of 4.2 on the floor with the exception of 4.2D1, which is the one-time operating grant to support RBC Place. We’ll leave that off for now. Put everything else on the floor in 4.2.

Thanks, so noted. Comments or questions on all, but the one item pulled 2.21D1. I see no comments or questions. We’ll call the question.

Opposing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Deputy Mayor. Yes, and I’ll now put 4.2D1, which is a one-time grant to support RBC Place operations for the remainder of 2021 in the amount of 2.5 million to be funded from the surplus. I’ll put that on the floor.

Comments or questions? Be none, we’ll call the question. Opposing the vote in the motion carries 14 to one. Deputy Mayor.

Yes, and I’ll put 5.1, which was an added item at the committee on the City of London Services Update on the floor for Councilor Turner’s refusal. Any comments or questions? You see none, we’ll call the question. Opposing the vote in the motion carries 14 with one more cue.

Yeah, that’s it for the committee report. Thank you very much. Colleagues, I’ll turn you item 10 deferred matters. There are none, no inquiries of which I’ve been made aware.

However, it’s been brought to my attention. There’s an emergent motion from Councilor Cassidy with respect to request to have May 10, 2021 proclaimed day of action against anti-Asian racism. So colleagues, we’ll look for a mover and a seconder. I will tell you this is neither amenable nor debatable.

Is there a mover? Councillor Hopkins, seconder by Councillor Turner. We’re voting for leave. We’re not voting for the amendment just to be clear.

So we’ll call the question. Opposing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you, Your Worship. And my apologies for bringing this matter up at the last minute, but it was something that was brought to my attention on the weekend.

And I did, I was asked if I would bring this forward to Council. There are May, for example, starting with the month of May is Asian Heritage Month. And so it makes sense that May 10th then would be declared this day of action against anti-Asian racism. Various Councils across the country have declared this day.

And this local London group has asked me to bring their application forward, which I have done for consideration by Council because the next Corporate Services Committee meeting is not until May 10th. So there is no chance that this proclamation could make it to an agenda in time hence the emergent nature of this motion. This is a day to bring awareness to this issue. It is a current and ongoing issue that unfortunately has been taking place across North America for sure.

And around the world as well, in Canada itself, there has been an alarming increase in the number of incidents against Canadians of Asian Heritage. And it’s linked back to the COVID-19 pandemic, simply because the first case has been traced back to China. And so unfortunately, we are seeing some of this backlash hitting our Asian Canadian community and this proclamation would show London City Council’s commitment to an inclusive society and especially to see, to show our stand against this kind of anti-Asian hate. So I hope that City Council will support this motion.

So you’re moving this Councilor Cassidy? Yes, your worship. Do you have a seconder? I, thank you.

I think we have Deputy Mayor Morgan seconding. colleagues, comments or questions on this, Councilor Morgan. Deputy Mayor. Yes, so I’m obviously a seconder supportive of this motion.

I did wanna say the organizers who brought forward this proclamation reading Councilor Cassidy’s correspondence are the same that organized the event on March 26th. And I will say, I wanted to take a moment to compliment them on the event that they organized. This was just a couple of weeks after a large event in Victoria Park, of which the owners are the organizers of which had since been charged for violating COVID rules. The organizers of this particular event did it in a small group in Victoria Park properly distance with a large digital presence.

And I think really set a good template for those who want to express and gather and support important issues like this in a responsible way that is much safer than a mass gathering. And so I wanted to not only support the motion but compliment the organizers of that event on March 26 because I think they did it well and they did it right and they did it within the rules. And they contributed to a very important cause at the same time. So I wanted to add those comments today.

So thanks to Councilor Cassidy for bringing this as an emergent motion. I think this was a great idea. Any other comments or questions? Councilor Lewis.

Thank you, Your Worship, through you to I guess our staff or if Councilor Cassidy is able to respond as well. My concern with this is not the principle behind it because I think that the principle behind it is quite sound. My concern is that it’s circumventing the process. And through you, I’d like to know if this organization has been vetted through the process that we would normally put proclamations through in the vetting process because I’m concerned that when we haven’t done the vetting we may appear to be supporting something that’s very worthwhile, but there may be things that an organization is doing in the background.

And I’m not saying that that is the case in this situation but conducting themselves in ways that we might not be as supportive of. And so I’m very cautious that we’re doing this without going through the proper process. Has the vetting process happened? As I asked Councilor Cassidy, probably the most appropriate person to respond to this, I would remind the Councilor and perhaps colleagues that the vetting process is on us.

As you know, it goes through the clerk typically. And then from there, it’s the onices on council members to do whatever appropriate, do diligent subject to the terms of reference of the application process that does typically go through the clerk. Councillor Cassidy, go ahead. Thank you Your Worship.

I did not spend weeks looking into the group. As I said, it came to me on the weekend and it was the, I was introduced to the group by another Londoner who has been quite active in our community. I looked into the group, they have an Instagram account, they’re called Stop Asian Hate London. They are a group of young people in London who are trying to do the right thing around an issue that is timely at the moment and occurring not only in London but across the country.

Professor Lewis. - Thank you Your Worship. And through you, I think this one might be to our staff, but have we had other proclamations come forward or proclamation requests that came forward that we have said no to because they didn’t meet the deadline for them to go through the process with the clerk’s office? I’ll ask the Councilor for a clarification.

Are you looking for a timeline on that? Well, I’m just wondering if we’ve had other applicants for proclamations who’ve been advised that their application was too late to make this year’s deadline. Let’s go to the clerk. Through you, Mr.

Mayor, yes, there have been some. If we were able to process it within an added deadline, added agenda deadline for corporate services, we do our best to process them quicker than the six week but yes, we have had some occasions where they’re past the deadline and unfortunately the date that they’re asking for proclamation would have asked by the time Council dealt with it. Cause who’s? Thank you.

So really my concern here is a process one. It’s certainly not the intent. I believe that the Councilor and the people who are seeking a proclamation have good intent, but we have a proclamation process that we haven’t even completed our initial review on. And I’m concerned that we’re gonna start circumventing that process before we’ve even reviewed it.

When there are other ways to recognize items like this, for example, we had a recognition at the start of this meeting from Councilor Plaza on Ramadan Barak and I think that that’s another option that we could pursue. So again, I appreciate the intent, but I’m really uncomfortable that we’re circumventing the process here because it sets a precedent for other groups to say, well, ours is timely too. And so we don’t wanna go through the process. We just wanna Councilor to bring this forward as an emergent motion.

So this isn’t reflective of the individuals who are asking for this or on the Councilor for her intent in bringing this forward, but I’m really reluctant to support something that’s not gonna follow through on the process. Thank you. I have next on the list Councilor Squire. Thank you very much, Mr.

Chair. And I’m also concerned and again, it has nothing to do with merits of the application. In fact, I’m sure if this was brought in a timely manner, would have gone through staff, would have come to us and would have been approved. But I think we have to be very cautious when we set out procedures and rules for doing things.

And that’s just a six week period because a couple of weeks ago, Councilors were talking about rules and we may not be personally happy with the way a decision went, but the rules were really important and the process was really important. And if something checked all the boxes, that was really important. And I took that to heart and actually voted a different way than I had a committee because I accepted that argument that although I had a personal view on something in terms of a development that I was going to stick to the rules. So what I don’t want to see happen is that we started a process now where people are going to Councilor saying, I’ve got a proclamation and I want to do it next week.

And I want to take it through, I want to go outside of that administrative process and take it right to Council. So in this particular case, I’ve been able to read the material. And so I’m satisfied, I think that this is okay. I’m breaking a rule, but I’m not as uncomfortable with that as perhaps some of my colleagues are.

But I will say this, that others who come forward in the future and say, well, you did this in this case. So I’d like you to do it in this case. It shouldn’t have to do really with whether we like the proclamation or we don’t like the proclamation or what our personal feelings are. And so I think for me, what I’m going to do is probably support this today, although I’m very uncomfortable with it.

I will be happy to see that some of my colleagues are now rule breakers along with me. So I’ll know that going forward, I kind of like that. But I’m not, I don’t want anybody to take this as the general idea that I’m just going to say, you know what, you got something you want to get on the Council floor real quick, bring it to me and I’ll get it there. I’m not going to do that.

And my worry is that a proclamation will come forward. Someone will try to shorten the process and we will get ourselves in trouble. We will issue a proclamation for a group that we will find out is not a group that we should support. So this is a good cause.

I appreciate that going forward. But I don’t think any Councilor who votes against this and says, look, I’m voting against it because I don’t like the procedure. It should be assumed for one minute to not be in favor of diversity, not in favor of any of those principles. And I hope and I know that none of my colleagues would ever say that because of course we’re all in support of these type of causes and this type of diversity.

Thank you, Councillor Criba. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay, through you, I just wanted to thank the Councilor for moving this motion.

I did also receive it as in the same email as she did and I understand my colleagues are uncomfortable with the overall in this process. But I just wanted to remind us that we did do that with a couple of other proclamations. And if there are any other suggestions to put out a communication that would speak against NT Asian hate, I’m happy to support that as well. But as we don’t have anything else that the Councillors have proposed, I’m happy to support this motion that the Councilor has before, because it’s important and something that’s been ongoing in our community for a while.

The outcry has been coming to us for quite some months now. This isn’t the first time that I’ve received communications around this specific issue where the Asian community is targeted for hate during the pandemic. So this is where we come in and we take the leadership and we stand with the communities that are being targeted and we support them. So I understand where the uncomfortableness is coming from from our colleagues, but I haven’t seen any other suggestions.

I’m gonna support the motion that’s being tabled right now. And yeah, I also was invited to their protest and I read that they did a good job in respecting the roles that were in place. But again, a protest to advocate for people’s lives doesn’t matter which shape or form it takes. It’s important and this is the work that we do as leaders to continue to support different community members who are being targeted for hate, for any other specific singleing out.

So happy to see Councilor Cassidy bring this forward and Councilor Morgan seconded it. So I’ll be supporting this motion. I hope my colleagues will be supporting it too. Thank you, Councilor Omer.

Thank you. I think it’s a good idea to support the proclamation. This is why we have a section on the agenda for emergent motions, things that can’t be fit into the normal timeline because we just found out about them now and they’ve just been raised at the last minute. And I think this is the appropriate way to handle it.

We have lots of Council policies and we do make exceptions to them. The ones that I have very strenuously objected to our official plan policies and secondary plan policies and they’re actually quite a bit different than a regular Council policy, which I mean, there’s a very long list of times we’ve gone around and changed Council policy in particular circumstances sometimes with very good reasons. And I think this is one of those good reasons. We set out the six week timeframe so we’d have time to consider these things.

Because it’s a new process, people don’t really know about it. It’s the first time they’re applying in many cases, right? This is really the first few months where you’ve had it go up and running for more than a year. And so it’s really the first time people have had a chance to apply for a second time through the process that we’ve established.

And I think people are going to, especially new organizations like this one, the difference enough to meet a particular challenge, they’re not going to know what the rules are when they’re supposed to come in and how far in advance they’re supposed to know. So I think this is a good example of where you want to be accommodating. I recognize that the proclamation makes sense and just support it because it’s an important way we can show people that we’re standing against this kind of anti-Asian racism. So, you know, I’m a stickler over process, but I also think that we need to be reasonable about these things.

This is very clear of the benefit. I think greatly outweighs the minor inconvenience on the process side. And I’m happy to support it. I’m glad Councillor Cassidy brought it forward.

Any other comments? I have my hand up. Councillor Sallie, I didn’t see you there, but please go ahead. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. So I wholeheartedly appreciate this motion coming forward and I strongly encourage you to recommend all my colleagues today, vote decisively and vote unanimously in support of this. I think I can understand sometimes the need for process and procedures, but when it comes to anti-racism or racism or human rights, we need to be decisive and we need to be clear. You know, I’m glad Councillor Squire talked about breaking the rules on this.

I think, you know, this shouldn’t be a rule that needs to be broken when it has to do with standing with those in our community who are hurting right now. The hurt isn’t new. The hurt has been renewed in the past year, but Canada has a long, long and painful history of anti-racism against the Asian community. So we need to be decisive today.

We need to stand unanimous today, regardless of the procedure. And I understand that there will be a time for us to talk about the policy down the road. And these are the conversations that could be had at this point. But today, the comments today, our goal should be to stand with the Asian community and say to them that we hear you, we stand strongly with you and we’re going to do whatever we need to do as a community to stomp out racism.

And in particular, this case here today, stand with the Asian community. And I want to thank the mover and seconder for bringing this forward. And I want to thank those in the community for bringing this to our attention and doing the groundwork and doing the legwork. And again, to all Londoners listening, you know, I stand with you.

And this is something that we need to end in anti-racism. Anti-Asian racism is a real thing here in London. It’s unfortunate, but we need to do a lot of work. And I think this is the beginning of some work on this front.

So I hold honorably support this motion. And I encourage everyone to support it. And hopefully this could be a unanimous decision of council today. Thank you, councilor, councilor Vanholz, did you have your hand up?

Good. Yes, thank you, worship. I’m happy to support this too. And I hope they have a great deal of success in making a difference and helping people realize that they may have frustrations, but there’s no Canadian of any dissent that is really responsible for things that happen on the other side of the oceans or the political ideologies or actions of the rulers of countries that those people might come from.

You know, we really have to look at ourselves and make sure we’re not projecting those things on there. And I understand people get frustrated when they get frustrated. I think of order, your honor. Go ahead, please, councilor.

I just think that the comments are, the comments that the councilor is making are not relative to the motion and are getting into other people’s politics. And I don’t think that’s what we should be discussing right now. He should go back to the motion. Thank you.

I’m sure the councilor will come back to the motion as we speak. Thank you very much. So there we are, you know, I encourage all monitors to, you know, have a look when they’re getting frustrated and you think someone else is to blame for someone, you know, think through that twice and you realize that it may not be the case and there’s so any more compassion that there’s lots room for compassion. And I think that will help.

Thank you. Any other comments or questions? They call me Deputy Mayor, please. Yes, I’ll go to the mayor.

Well, thanks very much and colleagues. There is no one around this horseshoe that would disagree about ending racism both within this city across the country and around the world who wouldn’t. I’ll be supporting the motion because I think the challenge is that in opposing it, one gives the impression that we support racism. But I do want to comment on the process and this is, I think, where Councillor Lewis was going.

In part, he talked about timing and yet I can understand why sometimes in some situations, timing can be problematic. You and I know that at some point we are going to review this process because this has been our pilot project a year and a bit now. And we’re learning from this and, you know, it’s interesting that this has happened because we’ll add this to our mix of experience as well. Here are the challenges I have and it does, to this respect, do with timing.

We know that issues around doing our due diligence in support of any proclamation and this council has supported every proclamation that’s come in front of it. And some may be more worthy than others and that’s not my place to make that comment. But what I would say is that when it’s this last minute, the challenge is that we don’t get to do our appropriate due diligence. And so I did have a chance to speak with the mover on this earlier today.

And we spoke about two things. There are two groups that are requesting this. One is a local group and that gets great. But it’s co-requested by a group from British Columbia who I have no idea who they are quite frankly and I did not have an opportunity being council day to do any due diligence on that.

I’m not casting any dispersion, I just don’t know anything about them. And I’m going to guess those of us who are voting to support this would say the same thing. Second part of that is that as I look at this, it isn’t a normal proclamation. This is the first I think that I have seen where the proclamation supports a day of action.

So you know what that means? I think by supporting the day of action is that de facto we own all the actions that are associated with that. Bad, good, let’s say they’re all good, let’s say they’re all well intentioned and they’re all positive and I’m going to have to presume at this stage that they are. But by supporting, this is more than just a proclamation when we support their day of action.

So we own it all in my view. And so to me, the broadest issue is the ability of us in terms of our own collective responsibility to do our due diligence. So I’ll be supporting this because even though the process is flawed because we haven’t had a chance to do the due diligence, I agree with Councillor Saleh and all the others who have talked in terms of us taking appropriate steps to end racism in our community and across the country. Thanks, Deputy Mayor.

Go ahead Councillor Square. Mr. Mayor, I can’t remain sitting. In the beginning of your room in the arts, you’ve said that if someone did not support this motion, they could be assumed to be supporting racism.

I can’t remain seated when someone says that. To suggest that someone, and it’s not going to be me, I’m going to support the proclamation, but for the mayor of the city of London to suggest that if someone does not vote a particular way, they might be seen as a racist, is not something that should be said. So noted and withdrawn. Thank you.

Other comments or questions? Thanks very much, we’ll call the question. I was logged out of the system, but I’m voting yes, Councillor Saleh. Thank you, Councillor.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Very much, now turn to the bylaws colleagues. And as you know, and for the benefit of the public, one of the things we’ll be doing is after these bylaws have been dealt with, we will then go into closed session, return back to public session and complete the meeting. So with that colleagues, we have bills numbers, 177 through 125 inclusive, with the exception of bill 191, which is a conflict as declared by Councillor Turner.

So what I’ll be looking for is a mover and seconder for an introduction in first reading of those bills. Is there a mover please? Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Van Merebergen. We call the vote.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. colleagues, I’ll look for mover and bills, 177 through 225 with the exception of bill 191. Councillor Lehman moved, seconded by. Anyone?

Councillor Cassidy, thank you very much. Any discussion? I’ll call the question. Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero.

I’ll now look for a mover and seconded enactment of bills, 177 through 225, exempting bill 191 moved by Councillor Palazzo, seconded by Councillor Van Merebergen. Thank you, we call the vote. Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. colleagues, I’ll now turn.

I’ll look for mover and seconded for introduction in first reading. Councillor Lehman, seconded by Councillor Lewis. Call the vote, please. Councillor Turner, thank you.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 with one more cue. For second reading of bill 1 and seconder, please. Mover by Councillor Helmer, seconded by Councillor Hopkins. Thank you very much.

Any discussion? Call the vote. Councillor Lehman. Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 with one more cue.

colleagues, third reading an act when to bill 181 moved by Councillor Palazzo, seconded by Councillor Helmer. We’ll call the vote. Councillor Hellman. Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 with one more cue.

For going to go into closed session, deal with some items and then return back to public session. For this purpose, I’m going to ask the clerk just to indicate the items that we’re going to deal with. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

We’re going in the closed session to discuss four matters, three of which, two of which are property acquisition matters. One is a personal matter about identifiable individual. And the last is litigation, a litigation matter. So I’ll look for a mover and seconder going to closed session.

Moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Palazzo. Thank you. We will call the question. Councillor Karynga.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. So I’ll ask for your indulgence rearranging to move into closed session. Thank you. colleagues, I’ll ask for screens on place.

Thanks very much. We’d like to welcome the public back as we return from closed session. And in the added reports, 9.1 on the agendas or 7th of port of council closed session, I’ll call on Councillor Squire. Thank you very much, Mr.

Chair. Your council enclosed session reports that on the recommendation of the managing director corporate services and city treasurer, chief financial officer, with the concurrence of the division manager, stormwater management on the advice of the manager of Realty Services, with respect to the property owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, CPR, located north of Oxford Street West at the Thames River, further described as lots eight and nine PL64, Bracket W Bracket in the city of London, County of Middlesex being part of PEN08247-0154 Bracket LT Bracket, as shown on the location map is at Pendix B for the purpose of constructing a retaining wall and pathway improvements to accommodate the West London Dyke Project. The encroachment agreement substantially in the form of Pendix A submitted by Canadian Pacific Railway Company, Bracket, the grantor to grant a portion of the subject property to the city to construct the improvements be accepted for the sum of $12,000, subject to the city holding a commercial general liability insurance policy with a limit of not less than $10 million, $10 million in numbers for any one loss or occurrence for personal injury, bodily injury or damage to property including loss of use thereof. Offer to purchase industrial land, 164-9304 Alberta Limited Innovation Industrial Park Phase 1, that on the recommendation of the managing director of corporate services and city treasurer, chief financial officer, on the advice of the manager of Realty Services, with respect to industrial land located in Innovation Industrial Park Phase 1, containing an area of approximately 5.47 acres and municipally known as 2415 Innovation Drive, legally described as being part of block three, plan 33M-544 designated as part seven, plan 33R-2053, being all of pin 0A18970293 in the city of London County of Middlesex as outlined on the sketch here to his exhibit C, the following actions be taken.

A, the agreement of purchase and sale bracket, the agreement as appendix B submitted by the corporation of the city of London bracket, the purchaser, to repurchase 5.47 acres of the subject property from 164-9304 Alberta Limited for the sum of $344,862 be accepted, subject to the terms and conditions set out in the agreement and B, the financing for the acquisition be approved to set out in the sorts of financing report here to his exhibit A. And are you prepared to move that, Councillor Square? I am. Do I have a seconder, please?

I have Councillor Lewis, thank you very much. Any discussion? Seeing none, we will call the vote. Councillors please vote in manually, yeah.

Thank you. Mr. Palosa? - Vote manually, yeah.

Posing the vote in the motion carries, 15 to zero. So colleagues, this takes a 15 the bylaws phase two, and that means we are dealing now with bills 176 through added bills 226 through 242 inclusive. So I look for a mover and seconder introduction in first reading of those bills, moved by Councillor Lehman, seconded by Councillor Palosa. We will call the vote.

Annual vote from Councillor Selyee, yeah. Posing the vote in the motion carries, 15 to zero. So colleagues, I look for a reading of bills 176 and added bills 226 through 242 inclusive, moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Cassidy. Thanks very much, any discussion?

Councillor Morgan, Deputy Mayor. Yes, I wanted to comment on bills 228 through 220, which sounds like a lot of bills to comment on. Don’t worry, I’ll do them all at once. These are essentially the execution of the Council directed reorganization, including not only job title changes for the senior leaders of the organization, but also portfolio changes in some cases and some shifts in those responsibilities.

And I thought this be a good time to make some comments briefly about our senior leadership team, who I think have done a phenomenal job of working towards executing Council’s vision under a strategic plan. I fully support Ms. Livingston in the reorganization. I think that this is a smart way to organize the corporation and a way that will give you the maximum capacity to deliver on Council’s vision through that strategic plan.

I wanna say to the senior leaders who are on this list, I know many of them are for all intensive purposes staying in basically the same portfolios, although some are shifting. Thank you for the work you and your teams do each and every day to serve the citizens of London. It’s not easy work, particularly through a pandemic, but when we have these opportunities to do some formal appointments and formal bylaws and formal changes to your duties, I think it is a good opportunity to stop, reflect, and thank you for the work that you do. I know that the team has changed over time over the last couple of years, and I believe it is strong and capable and ready to move the city forward.

So I just wanted to pause and make those comments ‘cause often these bylaws happen to go through and second reading is often an opportunity to stop and note some significant changes as they happen. So thank you. Thank you, and as the Deputy Mayor knows, it’s the only opportunity really as we go through the bylaws. So any other comments or questions?

Thank you. Seeing none, we’ll call the question. Voting yay manually, Councillor Sleeff. Thank you.

Closing the vote in the motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues now for reading and enactment of reading bills 176 and that it bills 226 through 242 inclusive of what Councillor Hopkins was seconded by Councillor Lewis. Thanks very much. Let’s call the vote.

Yay from Councillor Sleeff. Thank you. Closing the vote in the motion carries 15 to zero. Before we adjourn, you know, it’s very fitting that the last comments who were from the Deputy Mayor talking about how this organization will provide maximum capacity for staff to deliver on council’s vision.

I think that’s a great quote. I think it’s really true, but it really gives me an opportunity, Ms. Livingston, to say thank you to you and the team. Folks were in the third wave in the heat of it.

You know that this past week more than we hit the 10,000 mark in terms of COVID diagnoses in London Middlesex, and we also hit 200 deaths. So very solemn, sobering statistics and we’ve exceeded those already. So with that, we’re asking for people to continue the cautionaries, but today is the day to say to staff, thank you for helping us get to the right place. We couldn’t be there without you.

So thank you very much, staff. On behalf of all of council, and with that, I’ll look for a motion to adjourn. Councillor Squire, seconded by Councillor Turner with a show of hands. All those in favor?

Motion carries. And that’s unanimous. Thanks very much, folks. So we’ll see you soon.

Night, everyone.