October 19, 2021, at 4:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that the following pecuniary interests were disclosed:

a)   Councillor J. Morgan discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 4.1 having to do with an appointment to the University of Western Ontario (UWO) Board of Governors, by indicating that UWO is his employer;

a)   Councillor J. Helmer discloses a pecuniary interest in clause 4.1 having to do with an appointment to the University of Western Ontario (UWO) Board of Governors, by indicating that he is employed by UWO.

2.   Consent

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Items 2.1 to 2.5, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

2.1   Master Accommodation Plan Update for Alternate Work Strategies

2021-10-19 Staff Report - MAP Update for Alternative Work Strategies

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports with the concurrence of the City Manager, the following actions be taken with respect to the Master Accommodation Plan Update for Alternative Work Strategies:

a)    the report dated October 19, 2021, titled “Master Accommodation Plan Update for Alternative Work Strategies” which reviews the potential for alternative work strategies including the update report from Mayhew Inc. BE RECEIVED for information;

b)    the integration of Alternative Work Strategies BE ADOPTED as part of the implementation of the Master Accommodation Plan guiding overall space needs; and,

it being noted that the Civic Administration will proceed with a competitive procurement process that incorporates the update of the Master Accommodation Plan (MAP) for Alternative Work Strategies (AWS) and will report back to the Municipal Council on next steps.

Motion Passed

2.2   2021 Service Review Initiatives Update

2021-10-19 Staff Report - 2021 Service Review Initiatives Update

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, with the concurrence of the City Manager, the report dated October 19, 2021 regarding the 2021 Service Review Initiatives Update BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.3   London Community Recovery Framework

2021-10-19 Staff Report - London Community Recovery Framework

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the following actions be taken with respect to the London Community Recovery Framework:

a)    the London Community Recovery Framework, as outlined in the staff report dated October 19, 2021, BE ENDORSED;  

b)    the London Community Recovery Network members, as identified in Appendix A of the above-noted report, BE THANKED for their time and effort in developing the London Community Recovery Framework; and,

c)    the Mayor BE DIRECTED to share the London Community Recovery Framework with local Members of Parliament, Members of Provincial Parliament to inform the development of federal and provincial pandemic recovery plans and strategies;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received additional letters of support with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

2.4   6th and 7th Reports of the Diversity Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Advisory Committee

2021-10-19 Submission - 6th Report of DIAAC

2021-10-19 Submission - 7th Report of DIAAC

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the 6th and 7th Reports of the Diversity Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Advisory Committee, from its meetings held on September 24, 2021 and October 1, 2021, respectively, BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.5   Confirmation of Appointment to the Argyle Business Improvement Association

2021-10-28 Submission - Argyle BIA

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Robert Aiken BE APPOINTED to the Argyle Business Improvement Association for the term ending November 15, 2022;

it being noted the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated October 4, 2021 from R. Sidhu, Executive Director, Argyle Business Improvement Association with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Public Participation Meeting - Amendments to the Various Fees and Charges By-law

2021-10-19 Staff Report - Amendments to the Various Fees and Charges By-law

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by M. Cassidy

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, with the concurrence of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to proposed amendments to the Various Fees and Charges By-law:

a)    the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated October 19, 2021 as Appendix “A” being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges and to repeal By-law A-56, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges” to add and adjust certain fees and charges for services or activities provided by the City of London”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 26, 2021;

b)    subject to the approval of a) above, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated October 19, 2021 as Appendix “B” being “A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-3, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for the Regulation, Restriction and Prohibition of the Keeping of Animals in the City of London” to remove all references to fees and charges related to services provided for in the by-law”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 26, 2021;

c)    subject to the approval of a) above, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated October 19, 2021 as Appendix “C” being “A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-4, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for the Regulation, Restriction and Prohibition of the Keeping and the Running at Large of Dogs in the City of London” to remove all references to fees and charges related to services provided for in the by-law”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 26, 2021; and,

d)    subject to the approval of a) above, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated October 19, 2021 as Appendix “D” being “A by-law to amend By-law No. PH-5, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for the Appointment of a Poundkeeper and to Regulate the Public Pound to remove all references to fees and charges related to services provided for in the by-law”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on October 26, 2021;

it being noted that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions regarding these matters:

M. Wallace, Executive Director, London Development Institute

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by E. Peloza

Motion to open the Public Participation Meeting.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by E. Peloza

Motion to close the Public Participation Meeting.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   University of Western Ontario Board of Governors

2021-10-19 Submission - Western

Moved by M. Cassidy

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Michael Lerner’s term BE EXTENDED to June 30, 2022 and future appointments by the City of London to the University of Western Ontario be made effective as of July 1, rather than December 1.

Motion Passed (10 to 0)

4.2   Vacancy on the Covent Garden Market Board

2021-10-19 Submission - Covent Garden Market

Moved by M. van Holst

Seconded by S. Lehman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Covent Garden Market Board vacancy notification:

a) the communication dated October 7, 2021 from S. Hillier, Board Chair, Covent Garden Market Corp. BE RECEIVED;

b) the resignation of Councillor S. Hillier from the Covent Garden Market Board BE ACCEPTED;

c) the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to:

i)  contact current applications on file, to confirm that those individuals remain interested in consideration for appointment;

ii) seek additional applications to fill the vacancy on the Board;  

iii) bring forward applications, noted in parts i) and ii), above for consideration at a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee; and

iv) bring forward Councillor’s names interested in appointment to the Covent Garden Market Board.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Adjournment

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by M. van Holst

That the meeting be adjourned.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourns at 5:06 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, 9 minutes)

Colleagues can ask for screens on, please. I just wanna go to the clerk to confirm we have quorum. That is confirmed. Thank you, colleagues.

I am, I’ve been made aware that Councillor Turner may not be, he certainly not here at this point, may not be able to attend, but we’ll make best efforts to attend at some point during the meeting if he is able. So welcome to the 14th meeting of these strategic priorities and policy committee. This is a virtual meeting held during the COVID-19 emergency. We would invite the public to 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 to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for council standing or advisory committee meetings and information upon request. To make a request for any city service, please contact accessibility@london.ca or 519-661-249, extension 2425. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact SPPC@london.ca.

Colleagues, I look for disclosure of pecuniary interest. Any disclosures? I see Councillor, no, I don’t. But I just see Deputy Mayor Morgan.

Go ahead. Thank you on item 4.1, which is a letter considering an appointment to the University of Western Ontario’s Board of Governors. The University of Western Ontario is my employer, so I’ll declare conflict of interest on that appointment. Thank you.

Any other disclosures of pecuniary interest? Thank you very much colleagues. We have five items on the consent agenda. Does anyone wish to have any one of these items voted on separately?

We’re always able to discuss any and all. I see none, so I will look for a motion to accept the consent agenda. Moved by Councillor Van Hal, seconded by Councillor Hill, your comments or discussion on any of the consent items. I see Councillor Silly and then Councillor Hopkins, go ahead Councillor Silly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to thank staff for the report regarding the Master Accommodation Plan, our alternate work strategies. It’s much appreciated looking forward to the next steps.

And again, just thanks to staff for that quick turnaround, and I know it’s a very new endeavor. So that’s all I had to say. I look forward to supporting the motion. Thank you very much.

I have Councillor Hopkins, please. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. I would like to make a comment on 2.3, which is the London community recovery framework. And of course, giving my personal thanks to staff, Mr.

Adam Thompson and his team for creating the framework. I am very supportive of this initiative and really support the importance of continuing to serve, that this framework served the community as we go through the process of identifying issues and sharing details and recovery strategies and initiatives. And I am very much supportive as well of the recovery areas of three that are outlined in investing in people and driving prosperity and fostering community. I think very supportive of that as well as the eight other shared commitments.

I do have a quick question through you, Mr. Chair, two staff. I understand this framework will be extended for the next three years. Just would like to know how this will come back to council.

Perhaps I could ask Mr. Thompson to respond. Is Mr. Thompson there?

Perhaps the city manager would make a comment, please. Yes, Mr. Mayor, our plan is to report annually to council on the progress we are making as a community together against the measures. I would also suggest that where we have innovative ideas, we may take the opportunity to bring those ideas forward ahead of an annual report.

But at a minimum, you would hear from civic administration an annual report on the progress against these metrics and how we’re doing as a community. I don’t know if Mr. Thompson’s been able to connect and if he has anything to add. Mr.

Thompson, anything to add? Councillor Roberts. Yeah, I appreciate that. It’s good to know that we’ll be getting in an annual report and also information shared with us with new initiatives coming forward.

I know the ones that we’ve already recommended through our CRN have been quite effective as well. So thanks again to staff. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Rangelos, please.

Thank you, Your Worship. And I was very pleased to read our agenda. Lots of great news in here. And one of the really significant things was the climate change impacts on the master accommodation plan, suggesting our emissions would be cut 40% annually in comparison to the original plan.

So that is really encouraging. And I also found it very heartwarming to see how many groups wrote in in support of the London Community Recovery Framework. So it’s nice that we go out, engage the community and they’re very supportive of what we’ve done. So I think there’s some congratulations to all the people involved in that for such a supported piece of work.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Loesch. Thank you, Your Worship. First, I want to comment just very briefly on 2.5.

This is the appointment to the Argyle Business Improvement Association. Unfortunately, Dan Emager, who did represent Tin Factory on the board has had to resign. And Robert Aiken has put his name forward. Robert has actually already assisted with a number of events that the BIA has done over the course of the last few years.

He’s quite active as a participant already. And so I am confident that he will be a great replacement on the board there. And I’m happy to support that when it comes forward. My second comment or actually question through you is related to 2.1, the master accommodation plan update.

And I wanna preface this by saying I’m very supportive of what’s laid out before us in the alternative work strategies document that we’ve received in our report. But I do have a question and I know it was communicated to us in a couple of communications today about how we are balancing this with measurements around productivity. And I know that in particular, we heard from the London Home Builders, their concern about the building division and planning division getting permits through quickly. So I’m just wondering if staff can comment as this moves forward how we will be measuring productivity along with the staff satisfaction with work at home arrangements and other considerations that we’ll be looking at.

Ms. Barboon, thoughts around that? Yes, thank you through your worship. So on page six of the report under this section 2.3, the Transition and Implementation Plan.

As we move forward, our next steps are certainly going to start to look at, this was done at a very conceptual level. So now we’re moving forward should counsel approve it to look at how we might start to define what that’s going to look like and measure how it would move forward. So certainly one of the things we’re looking at is looking at pilots, where we can begin the work to see how it works and test out a couple of different scenarios. And certainly one of the most important is as we engage all the stakeholders who deliver and receive the service.

So that is certainly one of the items we flagged in our report that is an important measurement to look at the customer service aspect of this and how we’re meeting the expectations and needs of the community. We’ve had lots of really positive remarks so far about the pivot to remote work at this point in time, but this is looking at a permanent strategy and ensuring that we have all of the things in place that might differ depending on how we consider the customer’s expectations. So certainly part of our plan and something that we look forward to including into our transition plan. Councillor Loesch.

Thank you. I think that’s really helpful for people to hear. I know that it was certainly raised with me where was the stakeholder consultation? Yes, you did internal, but there are the external stakeholders as well.

And hearing that that will be coming as we develop some pilot projects is good to hear. And look forward to seeing where this goes. I too am very happy that in addition to our accommodation needs, this also has the opportunity to make an impact on our greenhouse gas emissions and reducing those through lower numbers of commutes to and from workplaces. Thank you.

I know of Deputy Mayor Morgan. Yes, I have comments on two items. The first is on the master accommodation plan and I will pick up where the previous speakers left off within my first question for our staff. Within the next steps and I know the treasurer articulated some of the next steps in the process.

Is there any sense on the timeline? So my understanding is you’re going to update the master accommodation plan with alternative work strategies, do some consultation with some stakeholders. At what point do we anticipate seeing an updated version of the master accommodation plan and proceeding from the space needs in that plan into some sort of RFP process? Ms.

Provon. Thank you through your worship. So that’s something that we’re going to anticipate as we work through the transition plan. So we are trying to develop at a high level right now to kind of look at a work plan in terms of how that would unfold.

So there’s certainly, we’ve done this at a high level to look at conceptually what can be done, but now this will be looking at various service areas, what can be done remotely, what does that look like in terms of potentially starting from the work that Mayhew has identified to start to categorize staff. So we don’t know exactly what that’s going to look like. So one of the next steps we’re going to do is to identify what those potential timeframes would be as we start to get, knowing council supports this. If we achieve approval, then we would be working on the transition plan and certainly putting together a process to see what needs to be done.

With respect to the procurement pieces, there are some key next steps that we would need to bring forward to council that I anticipate we would probably hopefully try to do before the end of the year to at least get some preliminary steps and some decisions to be able to start to inform that process. So as soon as we’re able to put a plan, we can certainly bring that forward to council that’ll have a little bit better timelines as we’ve had some chance to map that out. Deputy Mayor. Thank you.

And so some general comments, and I know a couple of my colleagues have said this. I’m pretty excited to see this initial report back. I know we have a ways to go before we see what this actually looks like on the ground, but I think this is a good example of us taking what has been a very difficult situation through COVID, taking some of the learnings that we’ve had, update a really important document on the city space needs in the future, move towards updating it, and potentially shaving thousands of square footage off of our future space needs. Well, at the same time working towards some of our climate, climate emergency and climate impact goals as a corporation.

So I know that there’s still much more work to do, but to me initially, this seems like us turning what was a very difficult and challenging situation into a potential positive for both the employees, the corporation, and of course the citizens of London. So I’m happy to see this work and support that report. On the 2.3, the London Community Recovery Framework, I want to appreciate what Councillor Hopkins said, thanking Mr. Thompson and his team.

I would add to that that the generation of the components of the framework is also the work of dozens and dozens of community partners and organizations who give their feedback into this. And that is important because as we move towards the shared vision of recovery, it will be work that is not only done by the corporation, but by not for profits, the private sector and other levels of government, and for them to have contributed to these shared metrics is an important component because they will be contributing to the recovery in a way where it will not matter if it is the city of London doing the work or not for profit for a private sector business. We will have measurable results that we can show that we’re all pulling in the same direction and we can rally around as organizations develop their future strategic plans and develop their budgets, a framework of metrics by which they can rally behind around recovery and all pull in the same direction, I think is a real positive for our city and the structure. So congratulations not just to the staff team who worked on this, but also the dozens of community partners who contributed to developing the framework to the stage right now.

And I know that work will continue into the future. So I wanted to add that to Councillor Hopkins comments. Thank you, other comments or questions on the consent agenda items. Councillor van Merbergen, please.

Thank you, Mayor. Jim Plan, I think some people take it now. I might, Councillor van Merbergen, you’re breaking up. I don’t think I even call it every seventh word.

Do I try that again? Okay, can you hear now? Much better, thank you. Okay, so part C on the accommodation plan.

I’d like to follow up the risk of maybe some duplication, but a competitive procurement process. Sorry, Councillor, we’re kind of losing you again, bits and bytes. No, I would just like a more fulsome answer. When we say we’re going forward with a procurement process, does that mean in any way that at this stage, we’re going to the marketplace, the source contractors?

Well, let’s ask Ms. Barbone. Thank you through your worship. So the part C refers specifically to the competitive procurement process that we would be looking to write an RFP in the future and then it refers to the report that we provided last November to council where the resolution was to lay out a plan for how we would look to support our future space needs.

So that procurement plan would be to go to the market, to look at based on the square footage that the city of London requires to either build new administrative space to replace our existing space or to potentially retrofit the existing space that we have to consolidate the seat of administration fully. So that process will follow separately and specifically to actually go forward and look at that. So we’ll have more information that will come forward to council, specifically on that process when we have other decisions that need to be done that will start to inform it. Council member.

  • Council member. Okay. - Thank you. Thank you very much.

Pleasure. Other comments or questions? I see Councilor Lehman. Thank you, Chair.

Make a few comments on a couple of these items. Starting with a 2.1 master combination plan. I think this is a very good measured approach on tackling what is a very challenging future. And I don’t mean bad challenging.

It’s dynamic, maybe that’s a better word. I think we can all agree that the workplace has changed and permanently has changed. But how it’s changed, I think that has yet to be seen. I like the use of pilots to test the waters on such things as employee satisfaction, productivity, cost savings, et cetera.

So I applaud staff for going down this road in this very measured way. Like to comment on 2.3 London Community Recovery Framework. I remember when COVID hit and it was great to see how staff responded very quickly. To helping individuals and organizations and businesses, et cetera, as quickly as possible.

But then to see it evolve into the London Community Recovery Network. And gradually during that evolution involve many organizations and stakeholders across the city as alluded to by the Deputy Mayor. And I think this is a great evolution into a framework. So I really applaud staff on taking a really unprecedented time and responding in this way.

So to Mr. Thompson and his staff and the city manager, great work. I do have a question through you, Chair, to city staff. As we’ve seen with programs from the federal government, et cetera, when the time comes to wind these programs down, it can be very challenging.

So I’d like to ask the staff through you, Chair, what has the discussion been for exit strategies? Again, I’ll presume you’re referencing 2.3, Councilor. So yeah, I said that. Turn that either to certainly to Mr.

Thompson, if his network is online. I’m here and apologies to members of Council for a little technical snafu there. Thank you for the question, Councilor. Yeah, certainly we know that we’re in the middle of, we’re still in the middle of the fourth wave.

So so much about the future is uncertain. This is why the approach we brought forward with Council’s direction back in May, really emphasized an nimble approach. So we are focused on outcomes with this report and should significant issues change, federal or provincial supports wind down as we expect they will eventually. We’re going to be looking for, we’re still going to be looking for opportunities to add value on London’s recovery.

In terms of an exit strategy, we’ve put a three or horizon on this. COVID has had, as everyone around the table knows, significant impacts on our community. So it will take a number of years regardless of circumstance, even in the best circumstance, to address a lot of the measures and the indicators that community has indicated are valuable. So either way, there’s a lot of work to do over the next number of years to power a strong recovery for London.

I hope that answered your question. If it didn’t, let me know and I can add some more to that. Councilor Lamont. Thank you for that.

Yeah, I just, I understand the challenges and the uncertainty of COVID. How many more waves are down the road? We don’t know, but at some point, we have to transition back to normalcy. How that looks, again, I don’t know.

So I just wanted to raise that to, oh, I guess to encourage conversation at some point to look at how we transition back to normalcy. When that is, I can tell you. Thank you. Thank you.

I have Councillor Cassidy. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanna talk about two reports and actually how they might overlap.

And it’s the service review as well as the master accommodation plan. And they’re both luckily coming to us from Ms. Barbone. So hopefully she’ll be able to help me here.

It’s been a long time, actually, since we’ve talked about the Lean process or Six Sigma. We used to talk about it a lot on the last term of council. And I’m wondering if you see an opportunity that you’ve already identified an opportunity with this alternative work strategy and how it might fit into those Lean and Six Sigma philosophies and ways of finding efficiencies. Do you see some overlap there?

Have you recognized that? And you’re applying these policies to the alternative work strategy part of it? Ms. Barbone.

Thank you, through your worship. So with respect to the Lean processes, I mean, that’s really something that we’ve embedded in everything that we do. So as we look at any new processes and as we do the pilots and look for ways for efficiencies, that’s something that every opportunity we have to kind of look at the process that we will absolutely embed in. The master accommodation plan does speak more to the where you do the work as opposed to the how.

But there could be a potential overlap as we start to look at that in different ways that through our technology potentially and some of the other tools that come forward that, and again, a lot of that’s been implemented very, very quickly over the last year to be able to do things effectively and efficiently from home the same way you could if you were connected to your workstation at an office. So there is an overlap and where there is an opportunity that we can look at through that lens, particularly as we review the pilots or just as a very simple methodology to ensure that we are trying to always do as everything as efficiently as possible. It’s something that we will embed in. So there is an overlap that it may not be a specific project, but that’s really the, I think in terms of the philosophy we’ve tried to embed through service review and everything that we do in all, using all of those lenses.

So it’s a very good question, Councillor. Councillor Cressy. Thank you, Your Worship. And thank you, Ms.

Barbone. It’s sort of a follow up to that. When we were first implementing the lead and we talked a lot about Six Sigma way back when I’m not, we’re not necessarily seeming to talk about that as much anymore. But I know in the alternative work strategies it talks about approximate savings of 20% potential.

Back when we were beginning to talk about the lean policies, the other jurisdictions, manufacturing in particular, but we also talked a bit about the city of Fredericton and the kind of savings they realized and they had dollars attached to it for implementing these lean policies. Will we see future reports like that as we continue not necessarily on the master combination plane, but in service review and implementing lean policies. And maybe again, all of it together. Do you foresee some reporting in the future to talk about savings that actually have been realized?

Ms. Barbone. So through Your Worship, just to make sure I’m clear with the question because really what we’ve tried to do is to, with the service review report, is to focus on all of the different initiatives that we’ve done at a high level to report out to council. So lean is one component that from, is really more a tool to ensure that we’re using our resources most effectively, but it doesn’t necessarily always produce savings that are going to lower, say for example, the budget.

It really may mitigate potential and create a little bit more capacity to deal with issues that we otherwise wouldn’t have had an opportunity to do. So certainly, we’ve been on this service review process for a while, we’ve shown you a number of ways of how we’ve tried to embed it. We’ve really tried to use it as a toolkit that as we look at anything that we do, what are the different opportunities we could evaluate it with to ensure that again, the effectiveness and efficiency does translate into being most cost effective at the end of the day. So specifically with respect to map, I think as we look to go forward and there are administrative policies and decisions that we’re going to have to make that may have financial costs and other things that as when we bring everything together, we’ll be able to show the entire picture at that point in time.

So we know that other municipalities that have gone this route have realized savings. There’s a number of municipalities that are looking at it right now. So we’re following also what they’re doing very closely to learn from them and also see if there’s other things that we can do differently to accommodate and also to report out. I think that answers your question.

If I haven’t quite touched on it, please advise. Councillor Cassidy. Yes, thank you. That is an excellent response.

I appreciate that. Thank you through you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you to Ms.

Marphone. Thank you. Any other comments or questions? The consent agenda, I might turn it then over to the deputy mayor for a moment.

Yes, and I’ll go to the mayor. Thanks very much colleagues. I’m just going to focus. I think a lot of comments have been made about the master accommodation plan and I certainly appreciate the work that’s gone into it.

I know we haven’t had much discussion or any on the service reviews and the other reports at this stage, but I know with the exception of the London Community Recovery Network and that’s where I’m just going to place a couple of thoughts. Sometimes when we receive reports like this, it may appear to be, you know, another report within a context of a series of reports received through our staff. This is unprecedented. This particular report for a lot of reasons, but I would say the number one point is that the pandemic created phenomenally, as they say in the report, unprecedented challenges, demanding an unprecedented response and we had dozens and dozens of community groups, both business and social groups, people who care about our community and what the recovery is going to look like post-pandemic.

In fact, I would say to you, this work is unprecedented in the country and so I need to do a shout out to those community leaders that throughout this process have participated and made commitments and comments and helped make this the document that it is today and we’ve acknowledged Mr. Thompson and our own other city staff and they deserve all the accolades that allowed this report to be possible. Unprecedented as well because for this disparate group, whose primary focus was the recovery of London to come together with a common vision, to come together and provide shared measures that are standardized, that we can look to review, that commit to a regular reporting back to us because their commitment doesn’t stop with this report. In fact, we have expectations of them as we work through this economic recovery.

One thing I heard Councillor Layman say, which I found interesting, he said as we transition back to, and I almost wanted to say normal, I don’t think there’s such a thing anymore, I don’t know what normal looks like, but as opposed to transition back, I’d say transition two ‘cause I think it’s whatever that new normal is gonna look like and I think the work that is currently being undertaken by the participants of the LCRN in providing this framework is something that I think we, I can’t say thank you enough times to everyone that’s had a part in this and I predict that this particular document and I’m gonna recommend we all keep it and we will get revisions and updates as you know we will, but we can look it back on this day and say we have received information that will change London for the better and because you know what, we’re nimble, we’re resilient, we go forward and again, heartfelt thanks to everyone involved for this powerful document as we take it forward. So with that, I have no other, back to you, sorry, Deputy Mayor and I’ll turn the chair back to you. Thanks, I have no other speakers, this has been moved and seconded, so with that, let’s call the question. On the consent agenda.

Seeing the vote, the motions passed, well to zero. Thanks for which colleagues were very lucky, not able to hear the participation, any participation or have any of that until 405. So the good news is it’s at least 405. So that means we can have our public participation meeting.

You’re allowed to smile at that poor humor. So what we have here though, I do believe we have someone who’s looking to speak to this but I will turn your attention to page 127 of our package which involves the amendments to the various fees and charge bylaws. And with that, because we do have an opportunity to hear from the public, I’ll look for a motion to open the PPM. I see Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Palosa.

We’ll call the question. Wasn’t the vote, the motions passed, 12 to zero. And I wonder, Clerk, can you confirm if we have attendees? I see one so anxious he’s already standing but perhaps you can just confirm.

Thank you through the chair. There are no virtual participants only in the committee rooms. So from the committee room, can I ask the person who is masked and standing to identify himself and his organization and you will have five minutes, please? Well, thank you, Mr.

Mayor and members of Council. My name is Mike Wallace. I’m the Executive Director of the Development Institute. Our office is just up the road at 562, Wellington.

And the one reason I came is I wanted to make sure nobody on Council was missing me because, you know, it’s been a while since I’ve been in front of you. But I’m honored to be here to talk about the fees and charges by all that’s in front of you tonight. First of all, we want to thank George Costribas and his staff as deputy manager. He held a number of meetings with us to explain the changes that are happening in the fees component to the planning division.

So we do appreciate the effort that they went to and engaging us as an industry on the changes that they were proposing. I do want to remind Council that this is a 15% increase in most areas of the fees. We garbage disposable of fire services and I think animal services with any other four areas that are having fee increases and I don’t know what the fee increase percentages in those areas are. But 15%, you know, we were happy with the explanation of why we’re there, we’re fully supportive of engaging with the consultant with the full review of the fees in this area that is coming forward that had just got started as said in the report but due to COVID got put aside and we’ll be starting up again in here.

But 15% is significant. So you’re not going to have us come here and say, yay, but we do understand where that number comes from. We do want to remind Council, though, however, that we are the industry during this last year and a half that has been really the only other contributor to the revenue, new revenue to the city of London. Whether that’s true, a new assessment that has come on board because of development or through fees or development charges that are paid during the process.

I know the city planning from other levels of government to assist in the budget deficits that were resulting from lack of revenue due to COVID being shut down. But I guess, frankly, when we talk about affordability and Council talks about affordability almost weekly on certain topics that come in front of them, that this all adds up. And so we are looking forward to the review and our participation in that. But every fee counts.

I know lots of times people say, well, the development community will absorb it, well, they have a performance on their business. It is a business. And just like you and your house, there may be some significant mortgage financing piece, but you still have to pay the hydro bill and the gas bill to keep the house in good shape. And if it was going up 50% a year, you might be calling hydro and saying what the heck’s going on.

But anyways, so this is fundamental to our business. It’s not like it’s a fees, these fees can be avoided by our industry or anything. We can’t take another process to change these fees. These are fundamental base fees that we pay.

And that in the end, we’ll get passed on it to the consumer. So we just wanted to be here tonight to say, thank you to the staff for their commitment to engaging our industry on issues that come forward, including on this one. And just a reminder that we play and continue to play as you saw from the reports at PAC last night, a significant, significant role in the financial stability of this community. And that is a slightly minor for future conversations.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Clerk, do we have any other speakers? The chair, we do not.

I look for a motion to close the public meeting. I see Councillor Layton seconded by Councillor Palosa. Thank you very much. We’ll call the question.

Closing the vote, the motion’s passed. Well, to zero. Thanks very much. Just a brief comment to our speaker at the PPM, I would mention that I just came back from Burlington for the entire big city mayors.

You’re terribly missed there, where you hail from. And I’m glad to hear that the industry that you represent is doing so exceptionally well. So that’s all good news around. So thank you very much for your participation, colleagues.

I’m going to turn your attention now, the amendments to the various fees and charges. We have got four components for appendices that staff are recommending be introduced. And what I’d like to do is enter so that we can put on the floor for discussion. I’d like to have a motion to put those on the floor.

Councillor Layton seconded by Councillor Cassidy. Colleagues, comments or questions? I see Councillor Hummer, go ahead, please. Thank you.

I wanted to ask through the mayor to staff about the two areas where we’re seeing so much growth or related impacts on the staff in those areas. How the fee increases that are proposed will help us on the capacity issues that we’re experiencing. So specifically around building approvals and through that area. And then secondly, the planning area that’s looking at all the applications for amendments and changes to other official planners owning.

I just wanted to hear from staff about how you think the relatively modest increases in those areas are going to help with an area that is partly user fee paid. Why don’t we refer that over to Mr. Cott’s face, I think? Thank you, Your Worship, through you.

So there’s two parts to that. And on the building side on the rates and fees that are being proposed changes here are not affecting the building department because these are focused on planning fees alone. Through the building by-law, there’s a separate fee schedule in the by-law that we monitor and have adjusted accordingly over the past few years to stay abreast of the, because it is a cost neutral operation, particularly user, it’s all based on user fees. On the planning side, we are, if you recall when we participated in the multi-year budget discussions, we had built in some proposed fee increases to for additional staffing.

And as part of that, there was to be a service review undertaken corporate life to deal with the planning fees, basically across the board. We did increase our staffing compliment at the time, but we deferred the service review and the fee increases because of COVID. There was a request from the industry not to increase fees at the time and not to undertake the service review. So we didn’t do that.

So from a costing perspective, our costs have gone up, but our revenue set materialized. And this adjustment was primarily made or recommended to bring us back to where we had anticipated being the service review is still to be undertaken. We are also recommending that that continue, we engage the industry to advance that for next year. Paul Yolbe is also on the phone who’s done a lot of the analysis.

And if you have any specifics regarding that, you can assist as well. Mr. Yolbe, anything to add? Through you, Richard, but I don’t have anything to add to Mr.

Costfuss comments. That was your honor. Thank you. I expected that the building code order registration, the registration wouldn’t really have a material impact.

I support those new fees. I just wanted to check about that because they do apply to that area. And on the planning application side, glad to hear Mr. Costfuss put it into context because I think sometimes we expect when fees go up, there’s gonna be more people that are gonna be on staff to help with some of this work and that the speed of application processing might improve.

And I think because we brought the staff on first and then we’re doing the fee increase later, it’s important to put that into context so people don’t have expectations that probably won’t be met. I do think we’re gonna have to have more conversations about this area in the future. I would say sometimes you pay with a fee and sometimes you pay with your time and time costs a lot of money, especially in the development of new housing. And I think this is an area where making sure the fees are appropriate and are providing for the staff that are needed to process applications in a timely fashion.

That’s a really critical thing, especially as we’re dealing with a period of really high growth. We need to make sure we’ve got the staff complement to keep up with the work that needs to be done. And we could have really low fees and a big long queue of things that need to be done and people are just waiting around. And I think that’s actually the worst outcome, is really long delays.

So obviously it’s a balance of between those things, but I think we are gonna have to have some more conversations about the fees in this area and then also in the building area around permits. Good, thanks. Thank you, Councillor Slee. Sorry, my hand was up in here.

Thank you, I have Councillor Van Halst. Thank you, worship. And so first, let me say I was very pleased to see so many unchanged fees in there. I think that’s encouraging to everyone.

Now, with respect to the building division, perhaps through you, I can ask if the service review is likely to turn up some opportunities for automation, ‘cause it seems to me that might be our chance to have the fees go down or at least remain the same for longer and speed things up. So that would be my question. What do we see in the future of that service review? Mr.

Scott’s question. Sure, your worship. The service reviews typically are focusing on costs and revenues associated with the work, but it also focuses on effort. And so as part of that, certainly efficiencies are looked at because you wanna show you’re getting the best value for your dollar as well from a customer service perspective.

So yes, although it is primarily financially focused, it does focus on effort to process applications. I’m not here to preempt the council’s question, but I thought there was a reference to technology. Perhaps I could ask Councilor Van Holst, if that was your intent, that’s what I heard. But did you wanna re-ask that or to clarify that?

Perhaps I could then do we see a possibility based on what other municipalities are doing or some of the new offerings that are coming to us for speeding things up using newer technologies? Is there some opportunity you see on the horizon? Scott’s question. Through your worship again, yes.

So back in the multi-year budget, if you recall, we did actually have a business case for automation of our development application, for a development application tracking system. That is currently working its way through the process. And we will be bringing something back to you in the near future, but that is absolutely the intent is to improve our, through the use of technology to improve our productivity. Councilor.

Okay, thank you. That’s encouraging. Thank you. Before I call on Deputy Mayor Morgan, just for the benefit of the public, I wanted to acknowledge that we do have some revised pages on the added agenda, appendix to the bylaws, and these are administrative changes, in some cases, corrections.

So I know that council is looking at all of that as they ask these questions. I just wanted to make the public aware, Deputy Mayor. Yes, so I’m very comfortable with most of the changes in the fees and charges bylaw. I do have one question for our staff, where we are holding fees steady in so many components.

There is one area under environmental services, garbage collection, recycling, and composting, where in the report it articulates an increase in some very specific fees related to renovation materials because of inflationary costs and pressures. And I wonder what are the inflationary costs or pressures there that warrant the increase, given so many different fees that are kind of holding the line. So it just seemed like it stood out to me as a little bit odd compared to the rest of the report. So I’d like to understand that better.

Ms. Burban? Sorry through your worship. I’m trying to find that fee and to see what area it’s for.

I’m not sure I’m the right person to provide that answer ‘cause it’s not a fee that we charge for service. And maybe Ms. Cher. All right, so why don’t we, sorry Ms.

Cher, can you be specific again, then if you’ve got the reference item, Deputy Mayor, and then we’ll let Ms. Cher respond. Yeah, it’s actually a specific item in the content of the report under environmental services, garbage and recycling where it articulates the changes in those areas. And it summarizes four fees increased based on inflationary cost pressures proposed for 2022.

So it’s not buried in the fees by lots, right? Actually in the content of the report as well. Ms. Cher.

Thank you, Your Worship. So there are four fees there that are cited for an increase. One of them is recycling carts that is strictly a straightforward manufacturers increase that we were seeing. We’re seeing some similar increases actually in a number of our capital projects related to those sorts of composite plastic materials as well.

The other three are related to the management of our actual, of our landfill at W12A. And we have seen significant increase in pressures there with respect to the operation of that facility, particularly when it comes to handling some bulkier materials that are coming in for renovations, demolitions of that sort of work. Largely it pertains to the cost of the vehicles that we’re using to manage those sites, as well as some additional costs we’re seeing with respect to clean cover fuel and the management of our own waste collection systems for liquid and gas. Definitely.

Well, thank you for the answer. That seems well justified to me. It just stood out as a little bit different from the rest of the report. So I just wanted to get that additional context and I appreciate that.

Thank you. Next I have Councillor Hopkins. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And I want to thank staff for the report. I know this is an annual report that comes to us and it’s always interesting to look at the fees from Spectra. I do have a question just following up on Councillor, how much questions around the increase of fees in planning and I hear from staff that we’re going to have a service review which will continue and we’ll get more information coming back with that service review. Are we going to be looking at what other municipalities charge in particular, are increasing in planning fees without review?

Mr. Cott’s first, I’m thinking you might be the one. Through your show, yes, we do. We do actually look at the surrounding municipalities as well as the large municipalities because it’s always good to know what is actually our rates are in comparison to others to make sure we’re not really kind of pricing ourselves out of the market as well.

So yeah, that is undertaking as well. Councillor I appreciate that and I just want to make a quick comment on the schedules and thank Mr. Wallace for coming out. I think it’s really important that we hear from the industry.

It’s very different in the schedule and it’s very clear and you can see that we haven’t increased a lot of our fees as we go through the schedule, obviously in animal services, environmental services and of course planning. One of the things, I just want to make a quick comment about the increases and how we see them and it would be nice to see what that increase looks like when we do those increases in fees. I know we can always do the follow up but when we look at schedules, it’s really good to see that but I do like this new format. And again, thank you.

Thank you very much, Councillor Palazzo. Thank you, Your Worship and just in regards to a follow up to Deputy Mayor Morgan’s comments. Realizing W12A is within Ward 12 and that majority of the fees have not changed for garbage collection and disposal of loads. It just seems to be the renovation materials.

Just through you to staff looking to see if the drop off and disposal fees for the depots are in line with industry standards of neighboring places, always concerned about people deciding just to leave their waste in the agricultural areas heading out to the landfill and dumping. So just making sure those fees are in line with other industry fees. I’m gonna take a flyer and I hand it over to Ms. Chair.

Thank you, Your Worship. Councillor Palazzo is quite correct. It’s always a tricky balance between setting the fee that truly covers our costs and people deciding that they wanna just leave things in ditches. We are well aligned with municipal landfills and the immediate vicinity.

So I think we’ve found a good balance here that we shouldn’t see this as a trigger for people to litter in our ditches and agricultural areas. Councillor Palazzo. Thank you, I know that staff is so great to go up and clean up for a legal dumping that’s happened and residents certainly appreciate that. So thank you to staff for that.

I guess just one of our comments and a question in regards to the recycling and composting composters and digesters fee being reduced in 2022 from $35 down to 20 as part of the city’s 60% waste diversion action plan. Just three to staff, I’m wondering how that’s gonna be communicated to residents and where they can get them as it actually is questions already received this year. So I know residents will welcome that one and be happy to participate. Yeah, sure.

Thank you, Your Worship. We are still working on the communication strategy. We’ll be bringing that back to your waste management working group and ultimately to council, but we will make sure that that information is well available to record. Councillor Plaza.

Thank you. I look forward to seeing it the waste management working group and that concludes my questions. Thank you very much. I know Councillor Lewis, please.

Thank you, Your Worship. I’ll be brief ‘cause colleagues have done a great job of addressing some of the changes in planning and building as well as in waste. So I won’t repeat those. I just want to highlight particularly for members of the public the great work that our parks, recreation and neighborhood services teams have done and particularly I want to just thank Ms.

Smith and her team for keeping our recreation fees unchanged in this schedule. Particularly after the last almost two years of this pandemic situation, having affordable access to recreation remains a really important thing for everyone’s mental health and wellbeing. And I know that certainly costs have risen as we’ve had to put in protocols around COVID and safety and cleaning protocols that go with that. I appreciate it has not been easy on our team, but I do know that residents certainly in ward two and I suspect in wards across the city will appreciate that there’s not gonna be any fee increases for our aquatics, programs, our arenas and other great recreation opportunities that are available to them.

Thank you, Councillor Lewis. I know this is a little off the mark here. When is East Lions Community Center opening up again? Well, Your Worship, thank you for asking.

You may want to ask your admin assistant to put a save the date in December because as I shared at my town hall meeting last Thursday, we plan to open in the month of December. So hopefully we can deliver a little bit of an early Christmas present. So colleagues, that was a shameless plug that I was not prompted by the Councillors, so you know. Thank you very much.

Any other comments or questions for staff or with respect to this particular report? I’ll expect I see none, but I’ll bring your attention back to page 127. The recommendation is that Appendix A, B, C, and D with the added included, be introduced. This municipal council meeting.

And for that, it has been moved and seconded. We’ll call the question. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed, 12 to zero. Thanks very much, colleagues.

We have no more scheduled items, but we have a couple of items for direction. One relates to Western’s Board of Governors, and we’ve received a communication. This is on page 324 of your package, where Western has requested a slight change to the appointment timeframe of the city’s appointee, that the individual cited specifically, but it’s more term-oriented, but this is Michael Lerner’s second term on the board. Set to end on November 30th.

This is all in the last paragraph of the letter. And they’ve asked respectfully that the term be expended in June 30th, and that the city’s new appointee began their term July 1. Now, just to what I understand is that when we make various citizen appointees and we try to have a common timeframe, we can certainly do the decision-making at the time that all decision-making is done, but they have been very specific on this that run to July 1 so that as they do their various appointments, it does tie in and they’re able to do their board training and their committee scheduling consistent with that. So that’s a request to SPPC.

And for that, I would look for a mover to support this. I see Councillor Cassidy, seconded by Councillor Van Mirberg, and thank you. Comments or questions? Councillor Helmer.

I just wanted to say similar to Councillor Morgan, Deputy Mayor Morgan. I have a continuity interest on this one. All right, so noted, thank you very much. I see Councillor Van Hoss, please.

Thank you, Your Worship. So I’m happy to support this. I think that the appointing those university directors at that time seems to make a lot of sense. When we were discussing the appointments for boards and commissions, we did consider having those happen at times other than the beginning of the term.

And so this might be a great opportunity to begin doing that for Western. So happy to support it. I’m assuming that there’s the clerks have prepared some motion. I’m sure they have, but I’ll look for your first for any other comments or questions.

I see none clear, I’ll presume that’s up. Thank you through the chair. That motion should be viewable on e-scribe. You need no moment to review that.

And just to be sure, it’s clear. The letter was clear, but having said it, please take a look. Is everyone comfortable with what’s in front of us? Councillor Vanholst, very much.

I see no other comments for questions. We’ll call the question. Acknowledging that we have two declarations of conflict of interest in the deputy mayor and in Councillor Alma. Posing the vote, the motions passed 10 to zero with two recues.

So we have the second item for a direction which involves not one but two vacancies on the Covent Garden Market Board. The first that was originally in your package relates to a board appointee, Melissa Reed. And her departure will create a vacancy. And the second is from our own Councillor, Steve Hillier, board chair of the Covent Garden Market.

And his letter is in the add-ins that he must submit his resignation as a member of the Covent Garden Market Board. So I think the first steps we need to do, so we have this right, I think, is we need to accept the two determinations or can we do it all at once, Clerk? Through the chair, there is a motion available for review in Eastcribe that covers all of the steps in one motion. All right, so let’s take a look at that right now.

All colleagues, because the clerk is wiser than me and is able to do such things in a single bound. So you’ll see there in Eastcribe that the communications be received on the two resignations and that the clerk be directed to contact current applications on file to confirm those individuals remain interested in consideration for appointment, seek additional applications to fill vacancies, bring forward the applications for consideration of future meeting of SPPC and bring forward Councillor’s names, interest and appointment to the Covent Garden Market Board. So with that all the firm will replace Councillor Vanholz, does there a seconder, Councillor Lehman? Comments or questions, Councillor Lehman?

Thank you, I sit on this board. I just want to thank Councillor Hillier for his time served as chair through a very challenging times. The market has had to deal with the repercussions of COVID. Councillor Hillier is a very impassioned, was a very passionate chair and big believer in the market.

So his participation at the board will be missed, but I want to thank him again for his service. Thank you, I think we all echo that. Any other comments or questions? Motion has been duly moved and seconded.

So with that, we will call the question. Councillor Van Merebergen? Oh yes. Opposing the vote, the motion’s passed, 12 to zero.

Colleagues, there are no deferred business to attend to. Prior to adjournment, as is my custom, but my sincere custom when we have this SPPC mean, what I affectionately call committee of the whole, and also council meeting, I have the opportunity to thank our staff. And it’s interesting now that we’re now starting, now that we’re starting to get together to some extent in some physical sense in different venues and the like, I think that certainly has added to much of the pressures and the work that has to be done by our staff to keep things organized and running well. So Ms.

Livingston, I would ask on behalf of our council that you pass on our thanks to our staff. We’re a major city, sometimes we have major issues, but we have major benefits. And so again, our sincere thanks to all of our staff for the work that they do. Colleagues, it’s that time.

So with that in mind, I’ll look for a motion to adjourn. I see Councillor Van Merebergen, Councillor Van Hoel, seconding, let’s do a hand vote on this, if you choose to leave. All those in favor, go of hands. That motion’s carried.

Thank you, colleagues meeting adjourned.