Open Council

Community and Protective Services Committee

Open Council

Community and Protective Services Committee

July 27, 2021, at 4:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Items 2.1 and 2.2 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   6th Report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee

2021-07-08 AWAC Report

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the 6th Report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on July 8, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.2   Middlesex-London Paramedic Service - 2020 Performance Report

2021-07-27 Sub. MLPS Annual Report - Part 1

2021-07-27 Sub. MLPS Annual Report - Part 2

2021-07-27 Sub. MLPS Annual Report - Part 3

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the communication, dated June 23, 2021, from K. Bunting, Middlesex County, as well as the 2020 Performance Report for the Middlesex-London Paramedic Service, as appended to the agenda, BE RECEIVED. (2021-P16)

Motion Passed

2.3   Special Events Policies and Procedures Manual – Deferred Matters File No. 2

2021-07-27 SR Special Events Policies and Procedures Manual - Deferred Matters No. 2

Moved by M. Salih

Seconded by S. Lewis

That NO ACTION BE TAKEN with respect to the staff report dated July 27, 2021, related to the Special Events Policies and Procedures Manual – Deferred Matters File No. 2 with respect to limiting amplified concerts on weekdays after Labour Day between the hours of 9:00 AM and 9:00 PM for 2021; it being noted that the above-noted staff report, with respect to this matter, was received. (2021-M02)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   3rd Report of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee

2021-06-24 CSCP Report

Moved by E. Holder

Seconded by A. Kayabaga

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 3rd Report of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on June 24, 2021:

a)     a Working Group BE ESTABLISHED, led by T. Khan, to undertake a review of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee (CSCP) and to report back at the August 26, 2021 CSCP meeting; it being noted that the CSCP held a general discussion and heard verbal updates from C. Smith, Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, B. Westlake-Power, Deputy City Clerk and M. Schulthess, Deputy City Clerk, with respect to the Advisory Committee Review - Interim Report VI;

b)     a Working Group BE ESTABLISHED consisting of B. Fragis, D. Luthra and B. Madigan, relating to two components of the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Advisory Committee (CSCP) Terms of Reference, as follows:

i)     developing, encouraging and promoting activities and education programs for Londoners of all ages on safety in the community, such as (but not limited to) injury prevention, pedestrian safety, traffic safety, bicycle safety, water safety and fire prevention; and,

ii)    developing, encouraging and promoting activities and education programs for Londoners of all ages on the prevention of crime in the community;

it being noted that the contact and coordination with departments, agencies, community associations and boards and commissions BE POSTPONED to the August 26, 2021 CSCP meeting;

c)     Councillor Jesse Helmer, Chair, Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) BE REQUESTED to attend the August 26, 2021 Community Safety & Crime Prevention Advisory Committee (CSCP) meeting to discuss various initiatives of the CPSC and to recommend how CSCP may contribute as a resource for the CPSC as described in the CSCP Terms of Reference; and,

d)     clauses 1.1, 2.1 and 4.2 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.2   6th Report of the Accessibility Advisory Committee

2021-06-24 ACCAC Report

Moved by E. Holder

Seconded by A. Kayabaga

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 6th Report of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on June 24, 2021:

a)     the following actions be taken with respect to E-Scooters in the City of London:

i)     the revised attached comments, outlining the opinions of the Accessibility Advisory Committee with respect to E-Scooters in the City of London BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration for consideration; and,

ii)    the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to engage in external feedback acquisition in a public forum to solicit feedback on this matter;

b)     the attached comments, outlining the opinions of the Accessibility Advisory Committee with respect to Accessibility Advisory Committee Terms of Reference, BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration to be considered as part of the Advisory Committee Review; and,

c)     clauses 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1 to 3.3 and 4.3 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.3   Property Standards By-laws CP-16 and A-35

2021-07-27 Sub. Property Standards By-laws CP-16 and A-35 - J. Thompson and M. Lalaberte

Moved by E. Holder

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the communication, dated June 8, 2021, from M. Lalaberte, Neighbourhood Legal Services and J. Thompson, Life*Spin, with respect to Property Standards By-laws CP-16 and A-35, BE RECEIVED. (2021-C01)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.4   Recognizing the Impact of Hosting the COVID-19 Assessment Centres at Oakridge Arena and Carling Heights Optimist Community Centre

2021-07-27 Sub. Impact of COVID-19 Assess. Centres at Oakridge and Carling Heights - Helmer

Moved by J. Helmer

Seconded by E. Holder

That the following actions be taken with respect to the communication, dated July 6, 2021, from Councillors S. Lehman and J. Helmer and Mayor E. Holder, related to Recognizing the Impact of Hosting COVID-19 Assessment Centres at Oakridge Arena and Carling Heights Optimist Community Centre:

a)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult residents, especially those close to the COVID-19 assessment centres, about priorities for new recreational amenities or upgrades to existing recreational amenities in the general area; and,

b)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to explore potential provincial and federal funding opportunities for recreational infrastructure and to report back with recommended new or upgraded recreational amenities in the general area of both testing centres, along with a recommended source of financing;

it being noted that the above-noted communication, with respect to this matter, was received. (2021-S08)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.5   Business Case Request for Agricultural Transitional Housing Project

2021-07-27 Sub. Business Case Request for Agricultural Transitional Housing Project - M. van Holst

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the communication, dated July 15, 2021, from Councillor M. van Holst, with respect to a Business Case Request for Agricultural Transitional Housing Project, BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration for consideration with the Housing Stability Plan. (2021-D04)

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   Deferred Matters List

CPSC DEFERRED MATTERS as at July 19, 2021

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the Deferred Matters List for the Community and Protective Services Committee, as at July 19, 2021, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

6.   Confidential

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the Community and Protective Services Committee convene, In Closed Session, for the purpose of considering the following:

6.1. Personal Matters/Identifiable Individual

A matter pertaining to personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees, with respect to the Awarding of the 2021 Queen Elizabeth Scholarships.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

The Community and Protective Services Committee convened, In Closed Session, from 5:01 PM to 5:09 PM.

7.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 5:10 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 (1 hour, 21 minutes)

[2:35] Hey, my go, can you hear us? Yes, I can hear you just fine. Thank you very much. (indistinct chatter) Okay, colleagues, we’re just gonna wait one minute to make sure we’ve got everyone and then we’ll get the meeting underway.

[20:56] Okay, we’ve got Quorum. So make sure you’re signed into the eScribe system and then we’ll get the meeting started. I’m gonna call the 11th meeting of Community and Protective Services Committee to order. This is a virtual meeting during the COVID-19 emergency. Please check the city website for current details of COVID-19 service impacts. Meetings can be viewed by live streaming on YouTube and the city website. The city is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council, standing or advisory committee meetings and information upon request.

[21:32] To make a request for any city service, please contact accessibility@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact CPSC@london.ca. First, I look for disclosures of interest from committee members and guests. Raise your hand on the Zoom, Mr. Sleece. Not conflict or anything, but my eScribe isn’t working, but I’m here for Quorum purposes.

[22:09] Okay, I anticipate a lot of manual votes in the future. Anyone with disclosures? Okay, I don’t see any. It brings us to the consent items. I have been asked to pull item 2.3, but anyone like other of the other two consent items hold for separate discussion? I don’t see anyone who have a mover for those two items. Councillor Lewis, seconder. Councillor Hillier, discussion on 2.1 and 2.2. This is the Annual Welfare Advisory Committee Report and the Middlesex London Paramedic Service Annual Report for 2020.

[22:51] Okay, I don’t see any just on the Paramedic Services Report. I wanted to say thank you very much to the Paramedics who were providing the service throughout the pandemic. 2020 was a real tough year for a lot of organizations and the Paramedics among them. I think that did really well, you can see in the report that kind of service they’re providing during a really difficult time. So thanks to the chief and all the Paramedics over at Middlesex London Paramedic Service. I’m gonna open that up for a vote. Councillor Slee, is that you saying you’re in favor?

[23:52] If you aren’t able to log into eScribe, we can take your vote manually. This is on item 2.1, the Annual Welfare Advisory Committee Report and the Middlesex London Paramedic Service Report for 2020. Councillor Caiabaga. Chair.

[24:38] Councillor Caiabaga. It looks like I’m struggling with my eScribe. I’m gonna go yes. I think the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Wrapped up consent items 2.1 and 2.2, since we had a couple of folks join late, I both just provide an opportunity for any disclosures. That’s my hand, that’s my attention if you have one. Don’t say any, okay.

[25:11] Item 2.3 was pulled by Councillor Lewis. I’m gonna go to Councillor Lewis. This is the special events policies procedure manual. There’s been a recommendation from staff about that. I’m gonna go to Councillor Lewis. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Colleagues, I asked for 2.3 to be pulled. This is the special events procedures and policy and procedures manual, deferred matters item. And it was specific to Thursday night performances of the Rock the Park Festival. This proposal suggests that we should limit those Thursday night performances to 9 p.m.

[25:51] Frankly, I will not be supporting this. This is London, not Beaumont. And especially as we come out of the pandemic recovery, I think our job is to be a little more Ren McCormick and not so much Reverend Moore. We want people to go downtown and cut foot loose a little bit on the evenings when they’re able to do so. I’m also mindful of the fact that not very long ago, we applied for a UNESCO designation as a music city. Now we wanna start restricting musical performances to 9 p.m. on a Thursday night.

[26:32] So I will not be supporting this. I hope committee agrees with me and puts this one away. I know that there are some individuals in the downtown who will not be happy if we do that. Frankly, they’re not happy with us that Rock the Park happens in the first place. Some of these individuals, frankly, have made complaints about every festival and every time regardless of the restrictions we have in place, I think the current special events, policies and procedures are fine.

[27:06] And I hope the committee turns this one down. Hey, it looks like I’ve got a bit of a speaker’s list here. I’m gonna go to Councillor Caiabaga and then Councillor Saleh and let me know if you want to be on the list. Could we get Councillor Caiabaga? Thank you, through you, Chair. I just wanted to ask staff a few questions. I also will not be supporting this proposal from the staff because it did not reflect the discussion that we had when I was wondering this motion.

[27:40] I just wanted to clarify as Councillor Saleh, sorry, not Saleh. I obviously miss Councillor Saleh to be mentioning his name but Councillor Lewis just mentioned Rock the Park. This was not relative to Rock the Park, was this was, anyway, you can remember in 2019, was another concert that was two weeks long and had caused quite the complaints in the community as it was going on for two straight weeks. And I think I remember when I moved this motion, I was looking to see what kinds of bylaw we could look at to protect also Harris Park as it would be used for two weeks straight and around the sound system.

[28:29] So this, to me, does not sound like it reflects any of the conversation that we had two years ago when we’re bringing this forward. And I had not seen any mention of the bylaw around the protection of the park, just like any parks that we have, their city owned have protection around. So I would like to know the logic behind that and the logic behind the 9 p.m. Sure, I’m gonna go to the staff just to answer how this fits into the direction. It is mentioned in the report that this is just an interim suggestion as the review is continuing.

[29:06] So can I go to city staff just to respond to how this fits in? Thank you, through the chair. So you’re correct, there were three, the deferral had three pieces to the recommendation and we were responding to recommendation number one, specifically dealing with limiting amplified concerts on weekdays after Labor Day. And we already have this in our special events manual for Victoria Park. So this recommendation as identified in the recommendation from council addressed Harris Park too, as well as all neighborhood parks.

[29:45] With respect to the remaining parts of the recommendation, we wanted and we recommended coming back in 2022 because we wanna do a thorough review of the special events policy due to COVID and not having really any events for the past two years. We were unable to do any specific community engagement, particularly with our stakeholders. So it is our intention to do a fulsome review of the policy, to look at what other municipalities are doing to really update the policy and bring that forward along with the public participation meetings.

[30:20] So the community can have, you can hear what the community has to feel about our proposed changes to the revised special events policy in early 2022. Okay, I’m gonna go back to Councillor Caiabaga and then I see Councillor Van Holst, so you’re next after Councillor Sleece, go ahead Councillor Caiabaga. Thank you, three Mr. Chair to Mrs. Smith on that update. I just still feel like as the person who had moved this motion, it doesn’t reflect the needs that we had expressed at the time. And I will vote against it and wait for the holistic part.

[31:00] Well, there’s no motion just as Councillor Lewis and Caiabaga Booth indicated they’re not gonna support the recommendation. There’s actually no motion on the floor yet. So if someone’s looking to make a motion to receive, we can get to that. Councillor Sleece and then Councillor Van Holst. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I’ll make the motion to take no action if that’s appropriate on this recommendation. And I guess I’ll echo the comments from Councillor Lewis. And my comments that I’ve made over the past six years, if not more in relation to some of these events, I recognize the balance that we need to strike.

[31:38] I think Council has done that in the past. And I think the reality is is we need to find more opportunities to allow our entertainment and music sector to thrive in this community. It’s a big economic engine in our city and we need to do everything we can to support it. And I think we need to stop with creating more barriers and more challenges. I recognize that for some it’s difficult and the noise can be of a nuisance for some for the vast majority of Londoners. It’s something they enjoy and something that they look forward to especially after a long month of winter.

[32:13] So I wholeheartedly encourage my colleagues to support the motion, it’s take no further action. I don’t wanna speak for Councillor Lewis, but I’m sure he’ll be happy to second that. And hopefully this is the last time I speak on this special events and things related to the music sector in London. In this light, I think we need to bring forward more and more emotions to help support them and help them create more opportunities for our community. So I encourage everyone to support the motion that I bring forward to take no further action on the staff recommendation.

[32:47] Okay, so just to be clear, the item you don’t wanna take action on is the changing the hours to be from nine to nine for 2021, right? Right. Okay, so we’ll get the clerk to try and draft that the language that I see Councillor Lewis wants to second that. I’m gonna go to Councillor Vanholz next. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to speak at this committee and I also appreciate the comments that have been made so far. I have a couple of questions through you to staff.

[33:22] The first how often do we have events after Labor Day in the parks? Smith? Sorry, thank you, through the chair. I’m gonna turn that over to John Paul for the details on that, noting that for the last two years, we haven’t had any, but we can let you know. I think we’ve had Park Jam for the last three years prior to that, if I believe. Mr. Regano. Thank you, and through the chair, we have about seven to eight amplified concerts after Labor Day in Harris Park.

[34:02] I do note that 2019 was the first dates where they requested back to back weekends, along with Thursday evenings. But that was approved because it’s still within the 12 days of amplified concerts a year. So it’s generally rock the park in Park Jam that make up the majority of those 12 days in total use of seven or eight days that follow Labor Day. Thank you very much. Yes, and how often do those events start at nine a.m.

[34:38] or before nine a.m. I see this is say not before nine a.m. When would those events typically start? Yeah, thank you, and through the chair, those events do not generally start at nine a.m. We just don’t wanna see amplified concerts before that. So nine a.m. is just at start time, but you definitely don’t see amplified concerts at start until about four or five p.m. in the day. Okay, thank you. I guess one comment I was making is this is more or less an interim approach, like a little band-aid approach, which are good sometimes I have a band-aid on right now.

[35:22] But I also think like Councillor Karymba, I’d prefer to see the more wholesome or more fulsome report. And then look at it that way rather than deal with each one individually. So thank you. I see a number of hands up. Would people like to speak again? Councillor Karymba, do you wanna weigh in again? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[35:54] I just had another question for staff around the policy of the park, the use of the park. Last time we had this discussion, there was no policy, just like how Victoria Park has a policy on how long the park can be used and how much room does the park need in order for it to recover from a big event, such as a concert. And my understanding from the last conversation we had was that there wasn’t a policy for Harris Park.

[36:27] I’m curious to know when we would be receiving one as that was one of the items that I had requested that we move forward with. Ms. Smith? Through the chair, I’m gonna ask John Paul. I’m still learning about this special lens policy. So I’m gonna turn it over to him for the details. There are some policies with respect to Harris Park, but it’s not as fulsome as Victoria Park. Thank you. And through the chair, as the Councillor stated, we generally strive for 10 days in between major events at Victoria Park.

[37:05] There currently is no rule for a 10-day break for Harris Park, generally because seasonality of Harris Park is not limited to June to Labor Day. So we tend to give 10 days for Victoria Park because it has a shorter eventees and then Harris Park. But we’re happy to bring back that option in consideration to give the park a rest as part of that poll as a policy review in (indistinct) Thank you, Mr. Chair, just to clarify, is there a policy?

[37:42] Does that mean that you generally go off of the Victoria policy or is there a specific policy of the Harris Park? Thank you. And through the chair, there is a specific policy clause within the special event manual for the use of Victoria Park. It is a council policy and the policy state we will strive to provide 10 days in between major special events at Victoria Park. That is a policy clause within Council’s policy for permitting a special event. Thank you.

[38:14] May I ask what’s the, when was the last, this policy was updated? Thank you. Through the chair, the policy has gone through numerous smaller updates over the last four or five years. Some do provide exemptions to major events that have been requested. It has been some time, I would say longer than six years since there has been a holistic special event review. So we tend to make some policy revisions as items come up but the whole issue review is due and that’s why.

[38:58] Thank you. My final comments around that would just be that I look forward to seeing the holistic report coming forward. And as I mentioned, this does not reflect the direction of the last conversation we had. And I’m going to wait to get the holistic report. Okay, we’ve reached the end of the speaker’s list. There’s a motion to take no action on the specific staff recommendation. We will be talking about this issue again when the review comes back. We seem to all be in agreement.

[39:30] So I’m gonna call the vote. If you need to vote verbally, raise your hand on the Zoom. I see Councillor Saleh or unmute and let us know your vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries six to zero. Colleagues, there’s no scheduled items.

[40:06] That brings us items for direction. There are a couple of advisory committee reports. I wonder if we might be able to deal with them together. If there’s any objection to that, I don’t see any. There are a couple of items in there that are prior approval from us. One of which is to request me to come to a committee meeting which I’m happy to do. Is there a mover for those recommendations? Mayor Holder, any seconder? Councillor Caiabaga, any discussion on the advisory committee reports which is 4.1 and 4.2?

[40:42] Councillor Caiabaga. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I did wanna bring us up again. We did talk about it a couple of minutes ago around community and safety and crime prevention on the engagement that this committee or any working group from the city level would be willing to do to connect with community associations to make sure that whatever community associations are doing is also keeping people safe because there were some initiatives that some community associations were willing to take that I thought were not safe and I had recommended that they work with the city of London.

[41:25] I’m wondering if there’s any update on that? I’d like to handle that question. Through the chair, it’s a storage process. I’m an apologist, but I don’t believe anybody on the call here has an update for you at this moment.

[42:01] Yeah, I don’t think it’s something we can look into. Certainly don’t see any discussion about it at the advisory committee meeting in the report. Perhaps we’ll see if we can get an answer for a council. Councillor Caiabaga. Please, this would be the second time I raised this issue at the committee level. So I would appreciate if we could have some discussion around that. Thank you. Any other discussion? If not, we’re gonna put that up for a vote personally. Seeing the vote, the motion carries, six to zero.

[43:00] Brings us through the liberty for neighbor legal services and Jacqueline Thompson from Lifespin. I’m just gonna look to committee members to see how you’d like to handle the communication from the two groups that we have in front of us. Chair Holder, I’m having a little bit of trouble hearing you, very quiet.

[43:39] Not your usual mode, so. Is that any better? Can you hear me now? We can hear you, but it’s still quiet. Because that’s what these headsets are designed to do, chair, is to make me sound that much more voluminous. That’s better. So what I’m wondering is, I appreciate the work from the light spin and the athletic community advocacy networks. As a starting point, I would motion to receive their letter.

[44:17] I don’t want to take no action because my sense is that, is that staff are taking action, but to receive the file would be my permission to do. Chair, and then we can get into any other discussion that might emanate, that might emanate come back. So to receive and file their letter. Is there a seconder for that motion? Is there a seconder by Councillor Hill your discussion on the letter or the motion?

[44:53] Thanks very much. During the staff, I know that we had requests from my, from my spend and neighborhood legal service with regard to these various units. We also know that we’re also, our staff are trying to respond in a world with COVID through this pandemic, but I’d like to try to understand is that through the staff is, is there anything that they’re requesting that we are not currently doing as it, as it impacts effective households and apartments?

[45:35] Seconder, Chair. Thank you. Well, let’s go to staff to let me want the answer. Let’s go ahead. Through the chair, we have been working on a number of fronts with respect to what’s addressed in the letter on property standards, enforcement and vacant buildings. But I’ve also had Heather Chapman, who is our manager following enforcement. I can give you some more details if you would prefer. Through the chair, I will do, through the chair, I will do my best to answer Mayor Holder’s questions, although I did have some difficulty still hearing the bulk of it.

[46:23] I will try and hit the high points and hopefully answer that question. And so we have worked on amending the bylaw, which Council approved amending the hearings process. And updating our orders as well. With regard to the letter specifics, I just have some points here I’ve made, appreciating all the work that went into the study that the Western students did. It wasn’t by the time it was received in real time. So a lot of the vacant buildings have been updated since then in some ways.

[47:04] Some have been demolished. Some actually received building permits and upgraded and are active housing again. Many are still vacant, but we’re managing that list as best as possible. We have also moved to the AMP system under the property standards bylaw, which gives us another means to enforce where we’re not getting compliance from property owners. And the fact that we’re working during COVID, the letter states that there’s been no enforcement for two years, which there has been enforcement.

[47:38] We had to shift our enforcement out of interior inspections for the safety of all, including the occupants, not just the inspectors, but we still reached out to tenants and to property owners via phone call, written communications and email. And we did resolve as many issues as possible. There will be some in the backlog that we are now able to start moving forward with again, given that COVID is getting better and we are rolling into second vaccinations and where necessary, where we haven’t been able to obtain compliance through the means we’ve been using.

[48:19] We will return to interior inspections, but I do see the AMPs that took effect in May as being something of a good enforcement tool to entice property owners to do more. And we do anticipate issuing some AMPs in July, which means that property owners will receive those fees in August and hopefully proceed to making some improvements with those buildings. Thanks, Chair, that’s those are my questions for now.

[48:57] I have Councilor Van Holst next, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And through you the communication, just above the final conclusion paragraph, talks about the costs of ongoing inspections for unsecured properties. And I wondered if our staff could just address that, maybe provide some insight into how that happens or how often how those might be paid for.

[49:31] And what’s planned for that, given the new AMPs that are available? For the Chair, I would break it into two pieces. The vacant building on cost recovery, any work that the city undertakes is recovered through a like manner as taxes. The inspections that are taken monthly are during a timeframe where the internal partners are out and can do this work.

[50:12] So I see no additional cost there. With regard to the actual occupied buildings and cost recovery, we do have a number of mechanisms when there’s non-compliance. So before AMPs, there’s what we use as an inspection fee. And that inspection fee is applied on a return visit where non-compliance is found. So we have inspection fee and now we have administrative monetary penalty. So I do think that there’s cost recovery in place.

[50:51] Okay, go ahead, Councilor. Thank you very much for that answer. And also through you, Mr. Chair. And to you, in the last number of months, I’ve received a number of communications asking about what we’ll do about buildings that seem to be having big property standards. And I’ve written the people and said that as Council, we’ve actually taken some pretty substantial actions recently, but it’s a matter of reporting the particular building.

[51:31] So we’ve got, we’ve put policies in place to take action against numerous things, even bed bugs and roaches and those kinds of challenges. However, they can’t be addressed to us just generally, we need a specific complaint. So I’m wondering how we’re communicating that. And if we need to do something more or something different so that people know they need to simply provide us with the address and the details in order to see action on those particular sites.

[52:20] Councilor and who else is that a question for staff? Perhaps the question could be how, how are we communicating our new property standards tools? Ms. Chairman. For the Chair, the communication piece between a constituent or a complainant and the city remains in place. We use enforcement@landin.ca that public service representatives will respond to any questions and guide people through the process.

[53:00] If they’re not using email, then it would be through the phone number that those same public service representatives respond to. And they can advise people in person as to how to enter the complaint. Mr. Reynolds. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m gonna go to Councillor Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to follow up on something that’s in the letter here and it’s specific to, and we heard this at the public participation meeting when we were discussing updates to the property standards by-law as well.

[53:35] The request that notices of violations, notices of orders to repair be provided to tenants as well as the landlords. Now, I know that there are obviously pieces of privacy legislation that we have to respect in terms of city enforcement, but through you to our staff, Mr. Chair, I’m just wondering if they can comment on providing those violation notices to tenants as well. Mr. Chairman, on the issue of providing the notices to tenants?

[54:12] When I read the letter, I reached out to Wade Jeffrey, who is a manager in our office as well. He took part in those public participation meetings as did Mr. Kletolik. And I was a little bit surprised by the terminology in this letter because it is not the norm that we be able to provide a tenant to an occupant with a copy of an order. There are legal ramifications around that. So the norm is through the INPAPA process with the City Clerk’s Office, that a tenant or anyone for that matter make a request to obtain documents.

[54:51] And then they are filtered and redacted for any privacy reasons by the City Clerk’s Office. And the other means in which we are able to produce work orders is through the court processes or the residential tenancy tribunal hearings. So the officer would need to be summoned to court with their documents and present them. But as for being able to provide them directly to an occupant or a tenant, I do not believe there’s means to do that. Even in posting, which we sometimes do will post in order, I believe that it is our obligation to redoubt any public information with regard to the owner of the building or property.

[55:41] So in follow up to that then, Mr. Chair, and I recognize that this may not be Ms. Chapman, but rather perhaps somebody in the clerk’s office. I know that INPAPA requests typically have a cost associated with them in a situation like this where tenants may be in very low income situations. Are there considerations or opportunities for the fee to be waived for an MPIPA on a particular property, around property standards? I’m gonna go to Mr. Shultes to see if he wants to answer that. And if anyone else wants to jump in, feel free.

[56:17] Through the chair, the application fee for an MPIPA request is $5. The head does determine the release of those records and under the access and privacy policy, the application fee is mandatory and the head cannot waive it. That’s right in the policy. Okay, thank you for that. That was not something I was aware of. So I wanted to have that opportunity to ask and clarify. I appreciate that $5 is a pretty low fee, but it could still be the difference between somebody getting a bag of milk that week for groceries or not.

[56:53] So I can see how that’s a barrier. But I don’t pretend to have a solution for it today. I did want to just take an opportunity chair to offer a couple of comments as well. And I’ve certainly had some very good discussions with Ms. Thompson at Lifespin about some things that we could realistically be undertaking as a municipality. But I also have some concerns about some of the suggestions that the city will make the repairs up to code and then register it on title and perhaps carry those costs until the sale of the property in the future.

[57:30] I’m not sure that that’s something that we can financially undertake. And even in terms of if a tenant has to leave their rental unit for a repair to be made, there’s actually provisions under the Residential Tenancies Act for the tenant to receive compensation from the landlord for that. I don’t think that that’s an area where the municipality can get involved in providing replacement accommodations. I mean, I just want to remind colleagues that our waitlist for affordable units, security income units in the city is thousands of residents long.

[58:08] We can’t move people into those locations who are already on the waitlist. So moving people in temporarily while a repair is made, I think becomes a logistical nightmare. And really at the end of the day, we do have to recognize that some significant pieces of this are out of our jurisdiction as a municipality. When we talk about the landlord tenant tribunal and the Residential Tenancies Act, we need to see some action from our provincial counterparts in terms of not just affordable housing, but the housing crisis that’s in place right across the province and the skyrocketing rents from speculation.

[58:47] We can’t control who buys and holds a property. We can’t impose rent controls locally, but there are things that the province could be looking at. And I hope that we’ll, as members of council, continue to have conversations with our MPPs when the opportunities present themselves to do that. And I would encourage advocates to do the same thing. Any other discussion from committee members? If not, I want to say thank you to Mr. Lilliberte and Thompson for the letter.

[59:22] I’m still thinking over myself what I think we can do. And I would expect to see some kind of communication from me and perhaps others at our next meeting with some ideas because I think there’s a lot of good, a lot of good ideas in the letter, even if they’re not actually all the way that they’re phrased right now. I think providing more information to people about unsafe conditions is a good way of leveling the playing field in terms of information and making people aware. We had a discussion a few years ago about fire code violations.

[59:55] Councilor Slee and I were pretty firm in our desire to see that kind of information shared so people know what they’re dealing with when they’re getting into a rental situation. It was a pretty close vote and it didn’t go through and perhaps it’s time to bring something like that back. I’d like to see something like that happening. But I think for to now we just have a motion to receive it and we can deal with a future discussion at a different meeting. So I haven’t anyone else on the speakers list. We’re going to open up the motion for voting. Posing the vote, the motion carries six to zero.

[1:00:49] Okay, that’s 4.4, which is a letter from Councillor Lehman, myself and the mayor. So I think the appropriate thing to do would be to pass the chair over to Councillor Hillier. And I imagine I see Councillor Lehman who’s here as I guess to the committee would like to weigh in but I’ll pass it over to you, Councillor Hillier. You could chair this section. Thank you very much. I have the chair. Would anyone like to speak on this on 4.4? No, so I see Steve, thank you.

[1:01:23] And the mayor is next. Councillor Lehman. Thank you and thank you members of the committee for considering this motion. Hori, almost a year and a half ago, this new deadly virus was sweeping the planet that we didn’t know a lot about. The medical community quickly established that the first line of defense was the importance of testing and they quickly identified Oak Ridge Arena and Carling Heights quickly after that as the first two places for testing.

[1:02:11] As with anything, this major, there was consequences and primarily for those that lived in the vicinity. Residents of both around both centers welcomed thousands of people into their community and into their neighborhoods despite the severe unknowns about the effects and contagiousness, if that’s a word, into the neighborhoods where there’s families and children, et cetera.

[1:02:48] They did their part in this fight against COVID. From the beginning, there were security concerns, logistics with handling the number of people coming in that was magnified in the fall for my ward in the Oak Ridge area around the optimist Oak Ridge Park Arena when they allowed people to line up queue up without appointments for well over a month.

[1:03:23] Long lines of cars snaked down over a kilometer long into the neighborhoods from morning to night. These are neighborhoods where there are two schools. So school children were walking to and from school with families through idling cars that were slowly moving their way through. I know firsthand of the psychological and emotional, mental toll that it took on a number of my constituents that lived in the area.

[1:04:04] So I want to thank city staff for working with me primarily Ms. Livingston and Mr. O’Brien mitigating as best as possible. The dangers and organization and effects of having this assessment center opened in my ward. And I also want to thank the chair, Councillor Helmer. You know, I was thinking of a way that these folks could be recognized and in his wisdom, he actually initiated this motion which I think is very appropriate way to acknowledge the sacrifice that these folks have made on all of our behalf, acknowledge the fact that while the rest of us could go home at night, they went home to where the effect of COVID was in their face constantly day after day.

[1:05:11] So I think this is a good way to say thank you. I think it’s great that we can listen to what they would like to see done as a way of some improvements to their park and being aware that we do this within budget and seeking, you know, provincial or federal funds if needs to be. So I thank the committee for considering this. I think it’s a very appropriate way to say thank you on behalf of all of us.

[1:05:46] As we’ve had to say, thank you to many groups from, you know, frontline workers, essential services staff and other folks that have really done their share on behalf of all of us to get us to this point. And a final beat note, ‘cause I think this is a good news story is now we’re seeing ways that we come out of the COVID time into a sunnier days. I just like to say for those that are listening and by ward that we’re looking at firing up our pool tomorrow and barring any unforeseen issues.

[1:06:28] I’m looking forward to some announcements tomorrow as when we can be back up in operation. So thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mayor Holder. Thank you, Chair. I’m exceptionally mindful of the legitimate sacrifice that residents have made in Oak Ridge and continue making curly heights to fight this pandemic. And I think this is a modest way to say thank you.

[1:07:05] You heard Councillor Lehman be quite clear on this. And that’s really what this is. It’s a small way to acknowledge the sacrifice that we ask neighborhoods to make from time to time. It can’t always do something, to the extent that we’re able to do this and just show a mindful recognition. We even heard from individuals being interviewed about the subject that they don’t expect anything necessarily. They were pleased to do their civic duty.

[1:07:37] I think it’s great. And that’s why I salute the initiatives of Councillor Lehman and Hummer to put this forward and why I was glad to add my name to it because they’ve got a bub beyond it. And sometimes when somebody goes in love beyond just saying thank you, isn’t quite enough. If we can demonstrate something very specific in a demonstrative way, then I think that that’s and something that goes beyond mere thanks but can support the community longer term.

[1:08:12] I think that’s the greatest tribute of all. So please accept these communities. Please accept our genuine appreciation as we do, by the way, to those current facilities that are supporting our fight against COVID by giving up their current facilities and arenas for the COVID vaccinations. It really does matter what you’re doing and we’re very grateful. Thanks, Chair. Any other speakers on this motion? Councillor Hummer?

[1:08:45] I think Councillor Lehman and the Mayor have really covered it pretty well. I don’t have much to say, but the motion hasn’t been moved yet. So I’m happy to move the motion and see if there’s a seconder. I see the Mayor. Just to tack on, I would say I didn’t get a lot of complaints from people in and around Carling Heights about the assessment center. I think everybody understood that it needed to be set up and it’s one of these things that’s really inconvenient and it’s in your face and it’s not something you really enjoy, but it’s necessary and it had to be done.

[1:09:19] And I think when you saw reactions from people saying, “No, we’re not looking for anything to make up for that.” I think that speaks to the character of the people in the neighborhood. They know that it’s their part to do this part for the community and they’re not looking to be recognized for that, but I think it’s appropriate and hopefully you can find something that’s needed in the community to be a lasting kind of contribution. I think putting in some kind of asset that has long lasting value, especially a recreation amenity, we found out how important those were once COVID hit and people started to use parks in ways that they hadn’t in the past.

[1:09:55] There’s a lot of usage of outdoor recreation facilities in particular how important those are. So I think it’s an appropriate kind of thing and hopefully through the consultation with the neighborhoods, we can find something that really works for that area and not just drop in something in both places that seems appropriate. So I think that’s the right way to handle it. Hopefully we can find some federal printer funding to cut the costs down for property taxpayers and I hope the committee will support the direction. All I will add is I think it’s the least we can do for seeing this neighborhood step up the way they did.

[1:10:30] The splash pad is the very least we can do. And let’s vote on this and I return the chair to you. Using the vote, the motion carries six to zero. Okay, that brings us in holes.

[1:11:03] The business case request for agricultural transition housing project. Now I’m going to turn it over to Councillor van Holst and just before I do that, I do want to say Councillor van Holst, we have the housing stability plan, which has already approved and has updated every once in a while. And also the direction from the mayor around the creation of 3000 affordable housing units, which was supported by council and staff have a direction to come back about how we’re going to do that exactly already. And I wonder if this is something you’d like rolled into either of those two processes, perhaps the letter could be referred to both of those things, one of which gets updated and one of which is already underway as a way of handling the recommendation.

[1:11:45] I’ll go to you to see what you think and then I’m going to go to Councillor Lewis. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I do think that might be a fine approach. Pointing out that this is more of a transitional than an affordable housing project, but the, I think that you’ve read the letter, it’s fairly clear, certainly providing people with an activity when they’re in affordable housing, that’s, that provides value to themselves as well as to others in their situation.

[1:12:23] And I think food is, of course, becoming more and more significant in food security. So allowing people to have the opportunity to participate in that is also very significant, especially when we see the kinds of droughts that are happening, the impact to our food chain. And of course, there’s also concerns about supply chain problems coming up. And in that kind of event, we’ll see a much less of an ability for the averages to help out and donate.

[1:13:01] So I think this is a good approach. And I would like to see that happen in a rural area where we’ve got some transitional housing that people can occupy and then get involved in those kinds of things. So thank you, I’ll leave it to Councillor Lewis to make some comments as well. Okay, I’m gonna go to Councillor Lewis next and then I’m gonna go to Councillor Hillier, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:13:33] And I had an opportunity to speak to Councillor Vanholst ahead of the meeting. And I indicated to him that I would happily be willing to put a motion similar to what’s in his letter to us on the floor. And I think your idea of referring it to the housing stability plan makes a great deal of sense because the intent behind this, and if I’m putting words in Councillor Vanholst’s mouth, I apologize, but my understanding is that as we develop new housing opportunities and really of a transitional as well as a more permanent affordable nature, that we look for opportunities to provide agricultural or food production community garden spaces in these locations.

[1:14:22] And I am supportive of that idea because I garden and grow my own food myself and I know what a valuable opportunity that is for my personal growth. But I know that in other communities, these have been included as considerations around affordable housing and transitional housing developments. And the feedback from respondents and I will grant you that these are American examples, but I think that they apply equally well here in Canada is that it does give the residents a sense of pride of ownership and a sense of self-esteem that they can participate in growing some food and being able to go out and pick that fresh tomato for a sandwich or that bit of lettuce or whatever.

[1:15:06] And so I do see value in this. So I am sort of at your discretion here, Mr. Chair, just in that the motion as drafted said that civic administration be directed to review and include opportunities for appropriate scale food production or agricultural activities and then in a future business case for transitional housing. I’m wondering if building off of your suggestion if after agricultural activities, it just says in the development of future affordable housing and transitional plans through the housing stability plan.

[1:15:47] Or even just in future developments through the housing stability plan. Yeah, I’m just going to weigh in very briefly and I’m going to come to you, Councillor Hillier. But I think what we could do is refer the whole letter to civic administration as part of the housing stability plan update, which is an ongoing process. And also the report back about the affordable units. I take Councillor Van Holst’s point that transitional housing is different from affordable housing. But it may be that in that plan to get to 3,000 units overall, part of it is we need some kind of transitional housing piece. And if that’s the case, then this could come back on that direction.

[1:16:24] So I just think referring the whole letter might be the easiest way, rather than getting very specific about business cases for what kind of housing developments. So that’s just something for you to consider. I’m going to go to Councillor Lewis, and I’m going to go to Councillor Hillier. Because eventually we do need to get a motion on the floor. And I’m sure the clerk was trying to keep up with what word smithing on the flag. OK, so to hopefully make this simple, I will move that the communication be referred to civic administration for consideration in the housing stability plan. Is there a seconder for that idea?

[1:16:59] Yeah, Councillor Hillier. OK, I’m going to go to Councillor Hillier now. Well, I agree with everything that was said. And I’m looking forward to the discussion with committee because transitional housing interests me. My only concern about is getting people to and from it, because we can’t use any of our transit systems, obviously. But I am all in favor of the food preparation greenhouse, pretty much all of it. So I look forward to see it, and I will be voting in favor. Can you have further discussion? Maybe I’ll just go in to check when the staff to see.

[1:17:32] We know we haven’t had any questions yet for them, just to make sure that this makes sense to refer it into the housing stability plan update. And we’ll get a report back on that and do course. Maybe we’ll just go to Mr. Dickens. Thank you. And through you, Chair, we appreciate this coming forward. Certainly when we try to approach the scope of the housing stability action plan, we always try to take a portfolio approach looking at transitional housing temporary accommodations, shelter services, and of course, permanent affordable housing.

[1:18:10] So I think from a principled approach or in theory, transitional housing fits nicely with our housing stability action plan. Certainly, there would be a lot of exploratory work required to look at creating a site-specific transitional housing program that includes some of what is proposed, least of which would be looking at how such a location would be delivered in terms of a service delivery partner, and of course, funding and land acquisition. That does not preclude us from doing the work to explore those things and to make that part of our ongoing reporting back on the housing stability action plan.

[1:18:52] We will undertake that work with that council’s direction. It will take some time, however, to bring back something that feels relatively tangible and hopefully suitable for council’s desires. Thank you. OK, I see Councilor Renhol so to stand up. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you to our staff— gratitude for your willing to look at some innovative things along this line. We might find some assistance by looking at some working projects in and around this area.

[1:19:29] For instance, the Teen Challenge Farm does an excellent job, and they’re of incorporating agricultural components into what would be maybe a one-year transitional housing approach. And I would also note that we do have agricultural lands in our possession, and so we might be able to make use of some of those. So those are my comments.

[1:20:01] And thank you to the committee for their consideration and support. OK, we’ve reached the end of the speakers list. Let’s open up the vote. It’s got it. Good to everyone. We’re voting. Posing the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0. The deferred matters list.

[1:20:41] Do I have a mover for that? Councillor Lewis, seconder. Councillor Hillier, any discussion on the deferred matters list? OK, if not, we’re going to open up the vote. Key Councillors. Posing the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0. OK, that brings us to the confidential section.

[1:21:14] So I need a motion to move into closed session to discuss the personnel matters, personal matters, identifiable individual that is listed on the agenda related to the awarding of the 2021 Queen Elizabeth Scholarships. Councillor Lewis, seconded by Councillor Hillier. Open up that vote. Posing the vote, the motion carries 6 to 0.

[1:21:52] Once for us to change over, close live stream, and then we’ll be into closed session. So you’ve probably got—