Open Council

1st Meeting of the Corporate Services Committee

Open Council

1st Meeting of the Corporate Services Committee

November 28, 2022, at 12:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 12:00 PM.

1.   Call to Order

1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

1.2   Election of Vice Chair

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That Councillor S. Trosow BE APPOINTED Vice Chair for the term ending November 14, 2023.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.   Consent

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That consent items 2.1 to 2.8, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.1   Authorization for Temporary Borrowing

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Authoritzation for Temporary Borrowing

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 28, 2022 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting on December 13, 2022, to authorize the temporary borrowing of certain sums to meet current expenditures of The Corporation of the City of London for the year 2023.

Motion Passed

2.2   Amendments to the Travel and Business Expenses Council Policy

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Amendments to the Travel and Busienss Expenses

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 28, 2022 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13, 2022 to amend By-law No. CPOL.-227-479 being “A by-law to revoke and repeal Council policy related to Travel & Business Expenses and replace it with a new Council policy entitled Travel & Business Expenses” to repeal and replace Schedule “A” to the by-law.

Motion Passed

2.3   2021 Annual Reporting of Lease Financing Agreements

2022-11-28 Staff Report - 2021 Annual Reporting of Lease Financing Agreements

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the 2021 Annual Reporting of Lease Financing Agreements report BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.4   Expropriation of Lands - Wellington Gateway Project Phase 1

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Expropriation Wellington Gateway Project

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, with the concurrence of the Director, Construction and Infrastructure Services, and on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, approval be given to the expropriation of land as may be required for the Wellington Gateway Project, and that the following actions be taken in connection therewith:

a)    application be made by The Corporation of the City of London as Expropriating Authority to the Council of The Corporation of the City of London as approving authority, for the approval to expropriate the land required for the Wellington Gateway project;

b)    The Corporation of the City of London serve and publish notice of the above application in accordance with the terms of the Expropriations Act;

c)    The Corporation of the City of London forward to the Chief Inquiry Officer any requests for a hearing that may be received and report such to the Council of The Corporation of the City of London for its information; and,

d)    the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 28, 2022 as Schedule “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Council meeting on December 13, 2022 to authorize the foregoing and direct the Civic Administration to carry out all necessary administrative actions.

Motion Passed

2.5   Declare Surplus - City-Owned Property - Part of Emerson Avenue at Baseline Road East

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Declare Surplus-Emerson Ave at Baseline

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to City-owned property described as a portion of the cul-de-sac at the south end of Emerson Avenue at Baseline Road East, described as the cul-de-sac fronting on 229, 230, 233 and 238 Emerson Avenue, Plan 914 London / Westminster, more particularly described as Parts 1 and 2, Plan 33R-21319, in the City of London (the “Subject Property”), the following actions be taken:

a)    the subject property BE DECLARED SURPLUS; and,

b)    the subject property BE TRANSFERRED to the abutting property owner, London Youth for Christ, in accordance with the City’s Sale and Other Disposition of Land Policy.

Motion Passed

2.6   Declare Surplus - City-Owned Property - Part of 181 Hamilton Road

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Declare Surplus-181 Hamilton Rd

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to City-owned property legally described as Part Lot 28, S Hamilton Road, N/E Grey Street, Plan 176 (E), in the City of London, County of Middlesex, being part of PIN # 08313-0062, municipally known as 181 Hamilton Road adjacent 580 Grey Street, the following actions be taken:

a)    the subject property BE DECLARED SURPLUS; and,

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

Motion Passed

2.7   Declare Surplus - City-Owned Property - Part of 108 Clarke Road

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Declare Surplus-108 Clarke Rd

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, on the advice of the Director, Realty Services, with respect to City-owned property legally described as Part Lot 17, Plan 761 designated as Parts 1, 2, 5 and 6, Plan 33R-11453, S/T Ease over Parts 1 and 2, Plan 33R-11453 as in LT361005; London Township and Part Lot 18, Plan 761 designated as Parts 9 and 10, Plan 33R-11453 London Township, known municipally as 108 Clark Road, the following actions be taken:

a)    the subject property BE DECLARED SURPLUS; and,

b)    the subject property (“Surplus Lands”) BE TRANSFERRED to the abutting property owner in accordance with the City’s Sale and Other Disposition of Land Policy in exchange for lands required for road widening along Clarke Road.

Motion Passed

2.8   Human Resources Information System (HRIS) Implementation Partner Successful Proponent – RFP 2022-080

2022-11-28 Staff Report - HR Implementation Partner Successful Proponent

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Enterprise Supports, with the concurrence of representatives from Information Technology Services and Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to the SAP SuccessFactors, Human Resources Information Systems (HRIS) Implementation:

a)    the proposal for implementation partnership, submitted by Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP (PWC), 99 Bank Street, Suite 710, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1E4 BE ACCEPTED in accordance with the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report as appended to the staff report dated November 28, 2022 as Appendix “A”;

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

d)    the approval hereby given BE CONDITIONAL upon the City of London (The Corporation) entering a formal contract, agreement or having a purchase order relating to the subject matter of this approval.

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Not to be heard before 12:05 PM - Tribunal - Development Charge Appeal

2022-11-28 Submission - DC Charge - 2365 Innovation Drive

2022-11-28 Staff Report - Development Charges Complaint - 2365 Innovation Drive

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, after convening as a tribunal under section 26 of By-law C.P.-1551-337 to hear a complaint under section 20 of the Development Charges Act 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 27, by Neil M. Smiley, Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP of the property located at 2365 Innovation Drive, regarding the development charges being appealed, as the amount should be adjusted to reflect the Industrial Development Charge rate and not Commercial on the subject property, as detailed in the attached Record of Proceeding, on the recommendation of the Tribunal, the complaint BE DISMISSED on the basis that the Tribunal finds that the amount of the development charge being applied were correctly determined and no error occurred in the application of the Development Charges By-law.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by S. Trosow

That the Corporate Services Committee now convene as a tribunal under section 26 of By-law C.P.-1551-337 to hear a complaint under section 20 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 and provide the complainant an opportunity to make representations.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the meeting of the Tribunal, under Section 26 of By-law C.P.-1551-337 BE ADJOURNED and the meeting of the Corporate Services Committee BE RESUMED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential (Enclosed for Members only.)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That the Corporate Services Committee convenes in Closed Session to consider the following:

6.1. Labour Relations/Employee Negotiations

A matter pertaining to reports, advice and recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation concerning labour relations and employee negotiations in regard to one of the Corporation’s unions including communications necessary for that purpose and for the purpose of providing instructions and direction to officers and employees of the Corporation. 

6.2. Land Disposition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

The Corporate Services Committee convenes in Closed Session from 1:07 PM to 1:39 PM.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 1:42 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, 18 minutes)

[1:46] I just clean my glasses. That does a world of good for my resolution. Good afternoon everyone.

[9:16] Welcome to colleagues, the public staff, to the first meeting of the Corporate Services Committee and the first standing committee meeting of this new term of council. Please check the city website for additional meeting detail and information. Meetings can be viewed via the live stream on YouTube and the city website. I would like to acknowledge that the city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabic, the Haudenosaunee, the Lene Paywalk, and the Adawanda and peoples.

[9:49] We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, and Inuit people today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we’re grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. The city of London is also committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact csc@london.ca or phone 519-661-2489, extension 2425.

[10:30] So as we call the meeting to order, I will look to committee members for any disclosures of pecuniary interest. I see none. So we will move on to the first item on our agenda, which is the election of a vice chair for this committee. I will look to see if there are any nominations or volunteers. Councillor McAllister. Thank you chair, I’d like to nominate Sam Trussell.

[11:07] Thank you, Councillor Trussell. Will you let your name stand? Are there any other nominations for vice chair? Seeing none, then I will just check with the clerk. I think we still need to vote on that. So we will need a mover and a seconder. And was acknowledged Councillor McAllister as the mover? We have a seconder, Councillor Ferrero. Thank you, we get the clerk to open the vote. Councillor Trussell, I know you said you’re just getting logged in there.

[12:02] Can you just verbally into the microphone vote yes so that the clerk can record that? Vote yes. Visiting the vote, the motion’s passed six to zero. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Moving on to the portion of the agenda. And I’ll just draw the colleague’s attention first before we move into the consent items themselves.

[12:39] The clerk has circulated a notice to members. There’s going to be a slight change in how consent agenda items are dealt with. This is actually proper procedure and it’s a little bit of a correction from how the last term of council was dealing with it. But if an item is pulled from consent, we will not deal with it after we’ve dealt with the rest of the consent items. It will actually be moved to deferred matters and dealt with at the end of the committee meeting. This allows for committees to stay on track with timed items, which members of the public may be here for.

[13:10] It’s also proper procedure in terms of committee process. So just to let everyone know, if you do pull an item, we will deal with that at the end of the meeting, not at the end of the consent agenda. With that, I will look to see if anyone wants anything pulled from the consent agenda to be dealt with separately. Seeing none, then I will look for a mover and a seconder for the consent agenda. Moved by Councilor McAllister, seconded by Councilor Trussow.

[13:43] Any discussion on the items on the consent agenda? Seeing none, I will have the clerk open that for a vote. The clerk has not opened the vote yet, so yes, Councilor Perble, if you have a question or comment on the consent agenda, you can. If I have a specific question to certain points will be the time as I’m not an official member, can I ask at this time?

[14:18] Yes, non-voting members of the committee can always put their name on the speaker’s list to ask questions or share comments on an item. They’re just not eligible to vote. So if you’d like to go ahead with your question now, now’s the time to do that. The questions I have are actually directly to the point 2.1, temporary borrowing, and I don’t, is there any other staff available or are they online? Yes, Ms. Barbone is with us, so she’ll be able to address those questions for you. Oh, perfect. So I just want to ask a few specific questions to the borrowing, and I just want to make sure that this borrowing, it could not be just from the reserve fund.

[14:56] It could also be line of credit, correct, if passed by the committee, and we’ll look to Ms. Barbone for an answer on that. Yes, thank you through the chair. So the way that this by-law works is this is a requirement of the Municipal Act to have the by-law in place. Should we require it, this would be, if the city of London requires temporary cash, that would be needed on a temporary basis throughout and during the year. So a particular example would have been through the COVID pandemic.

[15:31] Should the city have experienced cash flow issues, it would have the ability to draw either on its reserve funds or on an external line of credit. We have not had to make a draw on an external source since 2012. That was the last time. So this is put in place as a precaution and not something that we anticipate needing to use. And if so, we would certainly bring that forward to council to advise if that has happened. Thank you, Ms. Barbone.

[16:03] Councilor Perbal, any follow-up? Yes, I do. If the reserve fund would have sufficient funds, would we take it all from there or would there be, would there always be a priority to take it from the reserve fund or would there be a combination of both Ms. Barbone? Thank you through the chair. So certainly we would look to our reserve funds first. I think it would depend on the amount of borrowing that is needed. I think we would only go externally if there was not enough balance to maintain our balance. If there wasn’t enough, that would certainly be the first option and to go external if we had to, but we would certainly look to minimize that.

[16:45] And our hope is not to need it at all. So certainly we believe the reserve funds have sufficient balance that we would go there first. And I think COVID was the first test where we didn’t need it through that. So my hope is that if it was ever needed, it would only be temporary through the reserve funds. Thank you, Ms. Barbone. Does that answer your question? Oh, you’ve got another one, Councilor Perbal? I have two more, but thank you very much. Yes, it certainly did answer my question. If this would be done in the last quarter four, would we have to repay by year end, correct? Through the chair, I have to look and see because we haven’t done it, I can’t be a hundred percent certain, perhaps it’s actually Mr. Murray’s on the line.

[17:27] He has the answer to that. So I’ll defer to him. Thank you. And through the chair, yes, that is correct. The inherent intention behind internal or temporary borrowing, excuse me, is until taxes are collected. So the expectation would be that that would be dealt with by the time you’re enrolled. Thank you for that, Mr. Murray, Councilor Perbal. Thank you very much. And last question, I think it was mentioned that it was last time done in 2012. I was just wondering, what was the amount that it was done last time, the limit?

[18:03] I don’t know if Ms. Perbal might have that off the top of her head, but we’ll see. I’m hoping Mr. Murray has that handy. I don’t have it in front of me. Through you, Mr. Chair, I do in fact, the last time it was done in 2012, it was a maximum amount during the year of $11 million. So a relatively minor, but yes, that was the last time it was utilized. Thank you, Mr. Murray. Thank you very much for all your answers. And I’ve got Councilor Trussow on the speakers list next. I wanted to ask a general question about surplus property, could I do that now?

[18:43] Yes. We have two surplus items on the consent, so yep, that would be a fine. Yeah, yes, and I have no issue with these, but through the Chair, if I may ask, is there a particular fund where that money goes when we get money for a surplus property? And I will look to either Ms. Barbone, or I don’t know if Mr. Warner is more appropriate for that one, but we’ll start with Ms. Barbone. Thank you through the Chair. So when there is the surplus lands that are funds, so we have a couple of policies that govern that.

[19:18] So there is a reserve fund where we use for land acquisition, and when there are proceeds, typically they are returned to that reserve fund to support future land acquisition. In other cases, we have a disposal of city assets policy that would guide if there are other parameters that we would look at depending on the extent of those funds, that would go to potentially look at paying down debt, and there are a number of priorities that are outlined in the disposal of city assets policy as well.

[19:53] Thank you, Ms. Barbone. Councilor Truss, how did you have a follow up? I know. Great, thank you. I’ll just look again to see if there’s anyone else who has questions or comments for our staff. Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote on the consent agenda. Closing the vote, the motion is passed, six to zero.

[20:35] Thank you, colleagues. Moving on, we have no scheduled items. We have one item for direction on the agenda. Colleagues, we only did this once, last term, right at the end of the term. So you’re going to get an experience as a tribunal, right out of the gate at our first meeting. So we do now have to convene our committee as a tribunal under section 28 of by-law CP 115, 337 to hear a complaint under section 20 of the Development Charges Act, 1997, and to provide the complaint and an opportunity to make representation.

[21:13] I’m going to look for a mover and a seconder to convene as the tribunal. Moved by Councilor Stevenson and seconded by Councilor Trussow, and we’ll call, we’ll get the clerk to open the vote on that. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed, six to zero. This is a hearing of a complaint made by Faskin, Martyno DeMolan LPP on behalf of Unifers Canada Limited under part four of by-law CP 115227 as amended, the Development Charges By-law.

[21:58] In respect to the Development Charge imposed by the Corporation of the City of London in connection with the development on the land known as 2365 Innovation Drive. I will start the tribunal process by asking colleagues if there are any declarations of pecanary interest. Seeing none, I will ask now who is representing the complainant and who is representing civic administration. It’s Neil Smiley on the line.

[22:30] I’m representing Unifers, the complainant. Thank you, Mr. Smiley, and who’s representing civic administration. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s Peter Kokoros, Director of Building and Chief Building Official. I’m representing civic administration along with Kyle Wilding, our Manager of Planning and Examination. Thank you, Mr. Kokoros. I will now advise the committee and the parties attending the hearing that the lawyer from the city solicitor’s office is here to answer any legal questions that the Corporate Services Committee may have. The hearing shall be conducted as follows.

[23:06] Certain documents will be identified for the record. The Corporate Services Committee will hear any oral evidence, receive any further documents, and hear any submissions on the matter in public. The order of the proceedings is the complainant first, civic administration second, and then the complainant responding to any new issues raised by civic administration. No party to the hearing may cross-examine or question the other party on either any written document or oral evidence. The city clerk acting as a Registrar for the Corporate Services Committee will keep a written record of this hearing.

[23:42] The Corporate Services Committee may decide by resolution to go in closed session to receive any legal advice. Neither the complainant nor civic administration with the exception of the clerk acting as a Registrar may be in the hearing room if the Corporate Services Committee moves in camera to receive legal advice. If the Corporate Services Committee goes in closed session to receive legal advice, it will reconvene in public to deliberate the merits of the complaint and make its recommendations. After hearing evidence and the submissions, the Corporate Services Committee will either adjourn the hearing or make a recommendation with reasons to municipal council on the merits of the complaint.

[24:22] And the municipal council will make the final decision on the complaint under section 32 of the bylaw. And that is, municipal council may dismiss the complaint or rectify any incorrect determination or error that was the subject of the complaint. And I will now ask the clerk to identify and mark any documentation for the record. Thank you through the chair. The exhibits are as follows.

[24:54] Exhibit number one, the notice of the hearing. Exhibit number two, the written complaint. Exhibit number three is the report from civic administration responding to the written complaint. And exhibit number four is the presentation from the complainant. Thank you, Madam Clerk. So colleagues, the first three items will have been in your package and we will now ask the complainant to make presentation. Mr. Smiley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the administrative tribunal now constituted to hear this development charge objection of Unifers Canada regarding the development of its uniform processing and cleaning plant at the location of 2365 Innovation Drive.

[25:40] My name is identified as Neil Smiley of the Faskin law firm. I have online or the virtual line with me. I say that hopefully, ‘cause I’m not sure if this all works. Unifers Project Consultant, Will Shafer of EEC Environmental and Unifers Kurt Wagner Project Manager. It’s important as the chair is identified to highlight for members of the decision-making body that you’ve now constituted. And I understand some of you may be new to these positions that the decision you’re being asked to make today or consider today is actually quite different than the decisions you have made or will make as members of city council going forward.

[26:19] As a member of city council, you’re charged in the municipal act to make decisions of policy day in and day out that are to be in the best interest of your electorate and the municipality as a whole. And in making those decisions, those municipal counselor decisions, for if you will, you typically would hear from staff, consider their recommendations, consider the benefits, the merits of proposals before you, offset the costs and risks perhaps and come up with a policy decision. Today, however, you have a different job, an interesting one.

[26:54] While you have a staff report before you, you’re in fact making a decision, essentially on a question of law by way of an administrative tribunal decision, not a policy decision per se. The question of law before you today is whether the 63,000 square foot industrial laundering and cleaning plant that Unifers is building on lands that the city itself had initially acquired some years ago for industrial uses as part of the city’s industrial land development strategy, on lands that are designated by the city’s official plan and in the zoning by-law as industrial, specifically a dry cleaning and laundry plant in your zoning by-law, whether those lands in its development should be considered industrial development for the purposes of the specific charge that you’re going to impose under the development charge by-law or you are being asked to, whether it’s to be considered as commercial development, which is the substantially higher amount of development charge that Unifers was charged and paid under protest in order to proceed with its development.

[28:05] My submissions to you today will be that from a plain and literal reading of your DC by-law, development charges by-law when I say DC and having regard to the contextual setting in which the property is situated, that the appropriate classification of Unifers building is that of industrial development and that a classification as being commercial development is paintly incorrect and contrary to interpretation of the legal question before you. Accordingly, what I’m done, I’ll be respectfully asking you members of committee now in administrative tribunal to make that finding that in fact, the development that’s before you is that of industrial development.

[28:45] I hope that introduction is helpful. You should have a copy of our objection letters and I understand they’re now as exhibits as well as the city manager’s position. Of course, respectfully, we don’t agree with their conclusions and I will address why during my presentation. What are development charges supposed to do? According to section two of the Development Charges Act, the purposes of a DC by-law is to help you raise money for growth related capital costs resulting from development. And it was in the late 1980s, I think ‘89, DC’s development charges first came about and that was because municipalities across Ontario were having serious challenges paying for development and all the costs that was resulting from it.

[29:30] So the government came up with development charges to help you budget your books and cause the development industry, if you will, to pay for development capital costs. But of course, one size, like in shoes, don’t fit all. No single charge, development charge, would be appropriate as the framers of the legislation appreciated that different types of development gives rise to different levels of the burden on the capital infrastructure costs, hard and soft costs, that you painfully have to decide how to make from year to year over a five year period.

[30:06] So it’s no by no mistake that municipalities are given the power to impose higher or lower charges depending on the kind of development. And these charges are recalibrated, as some of you might know, every five years after a development charge study is completed, which essentially determines the growth related capital costs and where such pressures are going to be coming from. It’s by no surprise, members of Tribunal, that the DC rates, the development charges rates, applicable to commercial development are substantially higher from those of industrial development.

[30:43] Commercial development typically requires far more municipal resources, such as fire, policing, transit, and road related expenditures, just for a simple example. Given the high usages, visits by the public to these facilities and the iterative nature of such commercial businesses. On the other hand, industrial development does not create and it’s recognized it doesn’t create the same burden on growth related capital costs. They have typically far less need for policing services, fire services and transit, and post less demand on typical infrastructure, such as roads, for example.

[31:23] Our position, respectfully, of course, is that Unifers and its industrial laundering and cleaning plant falls squarely without ambiguity in the DC bylaws definition of industrial development. And not within, as staff have suggested, the definition of commercial development. And with that introduction, if I could try to share my screen and run through these slides, and I’m hoping I can do this. We’re gonna make sure that the clerks can provide that. Yep, we can see your screen. Oh, fabulous.

[31:56] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let’s just see if I can get it to go. You are sharing your screen. There we go. So I believe the first slide is really where most, if not of our attention, should fall. And the other slides are for contextual and intention or for exercising a decision based on what we think council’s intention was. The definition of commercial development in the DC bylaw is broken for commercial development.

[32:32] And I’m starting with commercial development because I’m starting with what we don’t believe we are. And we’ll follow up with what we certainly believe we should be characterized. The definition of retail purposes, and I don’t know if you can see my red cursor, but retail purposes are stated to be such things as being for sale, I’m just screening articles for things. The sale wears merchandise substance articles for things for sale or rental directly to the public. And then it goes through a long laundry list, up to 50 uses that are suggested to be retail purposes that would include but not limited to.

[33:18] In my view of in statutory interpretation, you need to give a purposeful view and plain reading and meaning of what you see before you. You do not get members of the committee tribunal to the laundry list here unless you can come to the conclusion that the we’re offering wears merchandise substance articles or things for sale rental directly to the public and so on and so forth. And we can all visualize restaurants, nightclubs, theaters, shopping centers, fuel stations, dealerships, shopping centers, all the things listed in here as being an offering for sale or rental directly to the public of such wear services and goods.

[34:01] I think the answer to this development charge can place lace straightly and squarely in this definition that we respectfully submit does not cover the operations of what universe is doing and going to be doing up on innovation drive. We are not and will never be open to set for sales for rentals to the public. And we will never be a commercial facility that all of these uses, and if you can imagine for a moment, the cars coming in, the iterative commercial activity that traditionally happens in all of these commercial moniker type uses.

[34:39] People coming, going employees, staff employees, patrons and the like, the retail purpose open for sale directly to the public would include all of this heavy users. And if you remember, I said a few moments ago, the development charges are intended to cover the costs, capital costs of development. And these type uses and my estimation are the type of uses that garner the heaviest of costs, yet we are not all purposes selling anything or renting anything directly to the public.

[35:11] Where my friends have indicated is that retail purposes shall include but not be limited to these items. This sentence, retail purposes shall include to not be limited to falls after the operative part of the section that tells you that retail purposes are for sales or rental directly to the public. We do not fall within this definition and I’ll tell you why in a moment. What I do believe is that we fall within the definition of industrial development. And the problem is we all use, and I’m guilty of this as well, 1970s or 80s view of what industry is and what processing is.

[35:49] And as we know with the computer age, technology, fabrications and the like, the definition of what processing has changed over the years. And what I highlight for you in the definition of industrial development is processing of goods where the physical condition of such goods is altered to produce a finished or semi-finished tangible product. That is what Unifers does, and I will show that a little bit more clearly in a moment. What you have to come to grips with is that we’re processing garments that are coming in an unusable condition and are going out the door back in a finished and usable condition.

[36:29] And in that type of processing is where the operation in an industrial part is where Unifers is essentially an industrial launderer and processing everyday goods that cannot be used and cannot be worn in the setting in which they are typically worn. Imagine hospital garments, other high-risk type employment areas to which uniforms are provided, they cannot go back out the door unless they are appropriately cleaned. And I’ll get to that in just a moment, but we believe that it’s patently clear that there’s processing of this good every time it comes into the door to make it potentially able to be re-worn.

[37:12] What does Unifers do and why should it be classified as industrial development? I can go on at length and I do feel that perhaps staff, if not had the benefit of a detailed summary of what in fact is going to go on in this premises, but there’s the hygienic laundering and finishing of clothing. What does that mean? Does that mean putting in the washer and throwing it on the shelf? Hygienically clean processing. This quote comes right from Unifers Canada’s website. It’s not been altered in any way. This has always been there. Hygienically clean processing includes textiles laundered and finished with appropriate green detergents, high temperatures to a point where biological contaminants, bioburden, have been removed to an exceptional level that they can be used without fear of risk of being a source of contamination.

[38:00] The word processing is right here and we are hygienically laundering and finishing goods 24/7 at the amount of 50,000 pounds of uniforms per day. That isn’t a laundry service or a laundered at the corner that’s doing a fraction of that. There’s regular scheduled uniform deliveries and product replenishment. There’s more than just hygienic cleaning. There’s inspection of each and every garment and uniform that comes in for rips and flaws and missing buttons. And what happens?

[38:33] They are repaired. And so as part of this industrial processing, those garments are repaired and they’re automatically replacing overly worn or damaged garments. And lastly, there is a form of manufacturing going on there whether you’d like to consider it or not. There is dyeing and labeling and adding all the fancy product logos and employment logos and staffing logos that you would see when you walk into a hospital, a Canadian Tire or any other facility, there is that type of workups processing, if you will, going on to the products here at this facility.

[39:10] Why is the classification so important? And you’ll be hearing this through your 10 years of counselors, but I said to you before and I’ll just zero in on this and this number. This is the charge for commercial development per square meter. That is the amount. Million 897 is the amount that uniform paid, universe paid, excuse me, to have its building procured. So it could continue with its development and that payment of course was made under protest. The industrial charge is 40% less than that and the payment would have been 1,352 and change.

[39:49] And the differential is nearly $545,000. And why is this difference between commercial and industrial? This wasn’t just made up overnight. You had good people create your development charge study and they ascribed, if you will, to each of these types of services, fire, police, library and all the rest, what they felt the component or share of those costs should be. And I’ll just highlight, for example, fire for a commercial facility is nine times higher than industrial.

[40:23] Policing is 10 times higher, 3.69 versus 0.35. Transit, for example, is five times higher than industrial. Roads related services to roads, that is approximately two times higher. The others are pretty consistent, except for one anomaly here, which is where I think I’d like to hook something, is that the industrial wastewater, or sorry, the wastewater charge for commercial facilities is actually nearly 50% less than what the industrial operator pays.

[40:58] And why is that? Because industrial processor is going to be using a lot more water. Right here in the industrial development charge is a recognition that the plant that I’m gonna show you in a moment does not need and it does not ascribe the typical commercial per square meter charges that staff have come up with and council has adopted for commercial development. Quite the contrary, the type of operations that you’re going to see here is industrial and it should garner the lower charge.

[41:31] I just wanted for help from the wings, so to speak, to identify for you, just so you know, I’m not telling a fancy story. There are well-recognized international classifications for businesses and the universe business has an SIC code. You see it here as 7-2-1-8, it’s an industrial launderer. And perhaps a little bit better known is the NICS Association Industrial Codes that if you see here, universe corporation is identified as an industrial launderer with the same code number.

[42:05] This is what we are members of committee. We are an industrial operator that is essentially processing under the definition of industrial development. With all respect, we are not what I’m going to show you on the next three slides. We are not a commercial retail laundry facility that’s in a plaza or standing alone that garners the type of attraction and commercial activity that the higher charges were intended to apply to. Here’s Belmont Laundry on Belmont. Here’s the House of Landry on Palm All Street, lovely place, but commercial.

[42:43] Here’s PJ’s Launderet on Adelaide Street. These are examples, members of committee, of what a commercial laundry facility that staff have identified as being applicable to what universe is doing. And what is universe doing? It’s building an industrial facility. This is the project as we see it that will mature to look exactly like this on Innovation Drive. It has all the hallmarks of an industrial operation and industrial building with the types of deliveries that you would expect to see in an industrial operation and the big and small trucks.

[43:20] And in other locations, similarly, universe is located in industrial campus-style buildings. Here’s one in Canada, and here’s one in Mississauga, clearly the same type of expanded campus-style industrial building. And just the last slide before I get to my submissions are here’s the context within which the site is located. And I don’t know if all of the counselors are familiar with the Innovation Drive or the Hamilton Road and Venture location, but as you can see, the uses that surround us are industrial to the max.

[43:59] We’ve got tube form, Hyundai, the original bakery, automotive tubing, et cetera, and et cetera. This is your industrial clean park, this is designated and zoned industrial, and our zoning is Li2. Not Li3, Li4, and Li5, the staff report referred to, is only in respect of typical industrial operation. So what I’m going to do now, members of the committee has stopped the share, and I will let you know that regarding the city’s manager report, their conclusion as to uniforms falling within the definition of commercial development is respectfully incorrect.

[44:36] And it fails to consider the real function of the industrial plant and fails to recognize the lead in to the description of the retail purposes and the definition of commercial development that qualifies all that follows. And it has to be for the sale or rental to the park, to the public in my estimation. And the staff report fails to consider what the intention of people like you counselors were when it referenced laundries, in the member I mentioned 50 other uses, when it referenced laundries and 50 other uses in the retail purposes list, they’re clearly of high value type activity, open or accessible to the public.

[45:22] Did council intend to include the industrial laundering plant? I just showed you is what uniforms is proposing to be in the commercial development category? Respectfully, surely not. We just haven’t had the opportunity to consider this before, and that’s why it’s unfortunately incumbent on me to try to show you the distinction. In concluding that the definition of industrial development does not apply to universe facilities, staff have aired in its characterization of what goes on the plant.

[45:54] And it may be because of just the lack of knowledge available to them. They are effectively saying there’s no processing going on and that’s not accurate and it’s not correct in law. There’s processing of goods within the meaning of industrial development on a day in, day out and likely evening basis. Staff may not be aware of that. When the operational attributes of the laundering plant, they may not be aware of, but goods are coming in unusable and soiled and they’ve lost their finished and usable characteristic and they must be high, genetically cleaned under extreme heat to remove biological contaminants.

[46:37] In many cases, goods that need to be repaired, some need to be dyed in logos, as I said earlier, this is processing to create the usable finished product. What I’d like to just quickly summarize is that universe members of committee now tribunal and its universe operates as and is internationally recognized as an industrial launderer where its premises will receive bulk soiled uniforms, industrial wares and other related products, up to 50,000 pounds a day.

[47:09] Universe plant is not and will never be commercial development as the building will in no way be used with all respect for retail purposes. You can’t get past the second line of the definition of commercial development to cherry pick with all respect the words laundries at the end of the paragraph and consider that the operation that’s not open to the public and not selling to the public is in fact commercial. And universe use falls within the definition of industrial development as I indicated a few moments ago because it is processing goods day in and day out.

[47:48] It is not just simply washing and folding and putting things on a truck. That is a mischaracterization of what these companies do with all respect. In looking at the words and in conclusion, of course, in looking at the words of the DC bylaw, it’s up to you to be viewing those words in the entire context. And there’s case law from the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Rizzo and Rizzo that you look at the entire context harmoniously with the scheme of the bylaw that councils before you have passed, the object of the bylaw and the intention of council in passing it.

[48:27] With all respect, it’s my submission council would not have intended to characterize as commercial development, the uniform or the universe facility where it is a typical industrial user. The type of things that we’d like to attract to a municipality, not open to the public, not creating the same type of burden on growth related capital costs as not needing, for example, fire, policing and the same type of transit coverage that commercial development does. With all respect, it simply cannot follow that the industrial plant I’ve shown you today that universe is building wholeheartedly in the city of London will attract a commercial development charge as, for example, the PJ’s launderet that I showed you a few slides ago.

[49:12] In my submission, those laundries are the ones that council intended to be commercial, not industrial processing observations. And in closing, we respectfully request this newly constituted decision-making body to conclude that an error has been made in the application of the DC by-law, particularly that the amount of the DC charge was incorrectly determined as being commercial and that the differential between what was paid under the commercial charge and what would appropriately be chargeable under the industrial charge be refunded to universe.

[49:47] Mr. Chairman, those are my submissions. I apologize for the delay, but I thought, or the link, but I thought because it was the first sitting of this council, I thought I’d give them enough to understand what we’re up against. Thank you, Mr. Smiley. And I will now look to the tribunal members to see if they have any questions of the complaint. Councilor Trussow. One of the things that troubles me about your— He’s still talking.

[50:38] The meaning of the, but not be limited to part one, section one of the DC by-law for purposes of this hearing. If we could, I’m not sure we can get that back on the screen, one more minute. Well, and I would just say that that might be a question to direct to civic administration after their presentation. Certainly if the complainant’s representative wishes to make a comment, I’ll allow that.

[51:13] But I think that that might be one that staff needs to respond to as well. If you don’t mind, Mr. Chair, or through you, Mr. Chair, if I could try to respond, and certainly it’s open to staff to respond as well, the use of the words counselor for retail purposes shall include, but not limited to, it falls after the gate, let’s say call it the horse race, it falls after the gate of the description of what retail purposes are. And it lists 50 things, upwards I counted them as best as possible, but recognizing that there could be a new or different retail purpose that would follow that could be such a facility open for sale or retail directly to the public.

[51:56] So my answer to that question is the wording is in there for a purpose to allow other retail purposes to find their way into staff’s consideration and council’s consideration for retail charge. But my submission to you is the second line of that definition cannot be overridden by the fourth line, which is there needs to be a sale retail directly to the public. Thank you, Councillor Trussa. Yeah, but the first sentence includes the word including. So even if you want to remove the importance of but not be limited to clause, you’ve still got language in that very first sentence which you’ve just referred to that leaves it open-ended.

[52:44] What is the word including me in the first sentence? If I could respond, Mr. Chair, the word including is the descriptive ring fencing in my estimation. It doesn’t say but not limited to there. And it would have to have said but not limited to in that first sentence to have us ring fence all the other uses from it. And because it says including without the words in that first sentence, but not limited to a plain and literal reading of this section would have me determined that I need to fall through the gate of having a sale or rental or activity directly with the public.

[53:22] The list that follows has the words but not limited to only to suggest that those lists may not be exhaustive and there may be other retail uses, technology type uses that will come down the pipe that would fall in that definition. Thank you, Mr. Smiley. Councillor Tressa or, sorry, Councillor Stevenson. I was wondering if we could hear why it doesn’t fall under commercial under A rather than B. Mr. Smiley. Oh, yes, through you, Mr. Chairman.

[53:54] I hadn’t proffered through A only because whereas there are ancillary and tangential offices, it’s not the primary use, there’s clearly not, its primary purpose is clearly not for office or administrative uses that you would typically see in an office environment and the names of lawyers, unfortunately, dentist, architects, engineers, those are typical office arrangements. The any office and/or administrative use would be ancillary to the primary use, which is industrial development. We do not fall within A or B.

[54:30] Thank you, Mr. Smiley. Councillor McAllister. Thank you and through the chair, I wonder if you could speak a bit more to the clientele of Unifers, you had mentioned in terms of it not being a retail space, so as your clientele then predominantly or exclusively just large industrial operations. Thank you. I think the simple answer to that, sorry, through you, Mr. Chair, I think the simple answer to that is clearly they’re industrial users, but I do have people in the trenches who happen to be on the virtual line, and I’m not sure if that’s best to be answered by Mr. Shafer or Mr. Wagner, ‘cause I know they could tell you what type of industrial users there are.

[55:16] Would you mind if they could speak up? If one of Mr. Shafer or Mr. Wagner can expand on that, certainly they’re welcome to do so. Welcome, Mr. Shafer, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, the primary customers of Unifers are local industries. Thank you. Councillor McAllister, did you have a follow up to that? Yeah, could you, would you say local industries, could you give me in terms of the size of the operation?

[55:54] Like, you’re not doing business necessarily with retail, or is it just primarily industrial if you could speak to the actual companies that you’re doing business with? Thank you. This is Kurt Wagner. It’s exclusively industrial. You or I could not show up at this facility and drop off some goods to have them cleaned. We go out and sell to the range of the size of our customers might be a tire shop with five employees to a big industrial operation of some sort that might have several hundred employees or textile needs that they are dropped off in the industrial development description.

[56:43] We, our distribution of these, our goods are exclusively by trucks going out on the road. Some of these trucks might be semi-trucks, but they’re all commercial trucks that facilitate our goods coming and going. Thank you, Mr. Wagner. Councillor Stevenson. I did have a follow up to my question, and I did wonder, is this the time to ask questions, or should we be hearing from the city as well? This is the time to ask questions of the complainant.

[57:18] There will be an opportunity to ask questions of civic administration after the evening of their presentation. Okay, I could be incorrect, but when I looked at A, when you presented it on the screen, I understand there was a lot of professional services there, but I thought, are you able to pull that up? Again, your definition of commercial development, ‘cause I feel like we’re using the word industrial and it means different things in different contexts. What was it?

[57:53] Let me see if I can get it up. So where it says, we’re carrying on of a business or occupation, or where most of the activities in the building provide support functions to an enterprise in the nature of trade. Yes, but you look at that, and the intention of that commercial development charge is to capture my office and business professional offices that are in an enterprise in the nature of trade.

[58:28] So then they go on and list, and again, use the word, but not limited to, in that scenario, to types of offices that they would monitor as being commercial development. But this is not universe, universe is industrial development. This would apply to the offices of Faskin, the offices of Cushman Wakefield. These are, albeit you have veterinary surveyors, appraisers, but not industrial operators. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Stevenson, Councillor Perbault. So Chair, Mr. Smiley, I have a question, and I do know the NAICS and SIC codes, they do put you in the industrial area, you are absolutely correct, but you have other developments and operations throughout Ontario.

[59:15] How were you classified there in the Atobecox and in Mississaugas? How were you classified when you started your development plans? I would expect, yes, through you, Mr. Chair, if I could ask Will or Kurt Wagner to respond, I would assume it’d be the exact same characterization or classification code. Can one of the gentlemen respond, please? Yes, Neil, that’s correct. They are always listed under those SIC or NAICS codes. Sorry, the codes within the industry organization, I totally understand, but for me, the question was in terms of the municipality.

[59:54] How were you classified with the development charges in other Ontario jurisdiction as commercial or industrial? I’ll see if Mr. Wagner or Mr. Shafer can comment on that. Mr. Smiley, I assume you wanna pass it on to the applicants. I would, but it might be a difficult question, Councillor, for them to answer, if they haven’t built from scratch, a building from scratch that they chose to build in London. So they may not have an example. I’m not sure. This is Kurt.

[1:00:25] I cannot, like Neil just said, answers specifically on the Mississauga operation that was built many years before my involvement. I’ve been in this industry for 30 years for three different operators in this industrial environment, and they’ve always been under these SIC codes. I can tell you from my experience, never once have I built the facility that did not fall into that category. Thank you, Mr. Wagner. Thank you. Seeing no other questions from the Tribunal members at this time, I will now ask the representative from Civic Administration to make their presentation and identify any documents that they wish to draw our attention to.

[1:01:16] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can you hear me first of all? Loud and clear, Mr. Kacoros. Okay, thank you very much. I’d like to start off with a brief introduction, and then Mr. Wilding will take it from here. I want to say first of all, that the administration of the Development Charges By-law sits with the Chief Building Official. And as we always do, we try to use as much information as is available to us as possible during the permit processing so we can make fair and equitable decisions when it comes to administrating the by-law.

[1:01:52] In this particular case, our position is very clear that this facility, this use does not fall under industrial. You will note that the industrial definition of the Development Charges By-law is rather clear, succinct, and not as lengthy as commercial. And when I speak to that, I’m referring to the fact that a product needs to be produced or manufactured. To bring in a product that is in disrepair and not usable and render that product usable does not mean you are producing a new product.

[1:02:26] As I mentioned, that product is already produced somewhere else. We see that all the time. We see that with appliance repair, with automotive repair garages. There’s a product produced somewhere else. It’s in disrepair. It needs fixing to put it in simple terms. And that’s what happens to it. And then it’s rendered usable again. No matter what type of highly scientific process is used. The other thing I wanted to note is that the members of the Tribunal, I’m sure most of you may be aware, but there was a time where industrial development charges were zero.

[1:03:07] There were no development charges for industrial uses. Why? Because Council wanted to attract manufacturing entities such as Dr. Otker, Maple Leaf Foods, Hanwa, and so on. Those facilities are producing something. And I will talk briefly about the commercial use definition in Section A. And I believe Councilor Stevenson alerted to that with respect to A speaking to a business, providing support with respect to functions to an enterprise in the nature of trade.

[1:03:41] So I don’t want to steal Mr. Wilding’s thunder. I will leave it at that for now. And again, our submission is that this does not fall under the industrial use. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Kukaro. So we’ll pass it over to Mr. Wilding. Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to speak here today. I’m here to discuss the complaint regarding how the corporation of the city of London interpreted and applied the development charges by law with regards to the building located at 2365 Innovation Drive for universe Canada Limited.

[1:04:19] It’s been claimed that universe operates, universe, sorry, operates as an industrial launderer. The building does not conform to the definition of a commercial development. A minor variance was processed to conform to light industrial zoning designations. Universe provides services to industry and not the general public and to no retail activities by way of sales or retail happen within this property. At the root of this complaint, we have our definitions of commercial and industrial developments that we’ve heard up until this point.

[1:04:56] These full definitions as we’ve currently discussed or we’ve previously discussed are available within the documentation that has been provided to the corporate services committee. Although universe is defined as an industrial launderer under the NAICS and the SAC codes, the definitions of industrial development within the development charges by law is quite clear in its restrictions. And it should also be noted that neither of the above regulations are associated with the development charges by law as it is independent of any other legislation.

[1:05:32] It should be noted that the definition of commercial development specifically mentions laundries within its definition and although universe argues within its complaint that these would specifically be public related sales laundry mats, the by-law also states that retail purposes shall include but not be limited to. Meaning the definition of commercial developments is meant to provide examples of uses but is not limited to just the uses specified. The industrial developments definition within the DC by-law on the other hand is quite restrictive in nature.

[1:06:10] To fit the description, the physical conditions of materials, goods, parts, or components are altered to produce a finished or semi-finished tangible product. In this case, there are no raw materials changing their physical condition within this development. They are laundering products produced elsewhere. Within the minor variants, sorry, with the minor variants being specific to light industries, we should also note that other light industrial permitted uses are daycare centers, private clubs, restaurants, convenience stores, and many other that would be defined as commercial developments within the development charges by-law.

[1:06:52] It is the administration’s belief that the definitions contained within the development charges by-law and the by-law itself, in this instance, were correctly interpreted, applied, and the complaint should be dismissed. Thank you, Chair and Committee for your time here today. Thank you, Mr. Wilding. Now I’ll look to members of the Tribunal for any questions of civic administration. Seeing none, which usually means that the presentation was very clear and easy to understand, so thank you, gentlemen.

[1:07:27] We will now return to the complainant, provide any oral evidence, make any submission and reply to new issues raised by members of the civic administration. Mr. Smiley, do you have any new evidence or reply to the issues raised by civic administration? Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman, and I will be very brief. I just trying to maneuver my screen for some reason. It’s a little slower than I’d like. Just give me one moment, my apologies. I’m sure why it’s not letting me do that.

[1:08:15] There we go. So what I heard from both Mr. Kakorus and Mr. Wilding, and with all respect, they have only the information they have, Mr. Kakorus said they’re not producing anything and they’re not manufacturing anything. And I’d like the members of the Tribunal to look at the words producing and manufacturing. Arguably, maybe we’re not manufacturing or producing anything, but to limit the purview of staff’s review and it’s epiphany that we are commercial, it would be diverting your attention from a totally different head of what industrial development might be.

[1:08:57] It says, or here, processing of goods. I don’t have to manufacture or produce anything from scratch to it being new. And it’s by not giving amplification or meaning to the words processing, you’re leaving off the table a definition or a host of processing operations that your development charge by law by using this wording are intending to address. My friends have said, you’re not manufacturing, you’re not producing.

[1:09:30] And I’m saying, maybe I agree with that. But we are certainly processing goods where their physical condition of the goods is being altered. I’m taking a rug rat, a uniform that is incapable of being worn again in the workplace because it doesn’t comply with either business or health and safety requirements. It’s essentially, for all intensive purposes, a dead product, a non-usable product. And what am I doing to it? I am cleaning it, not in the washing machine of my house on the second floor.

[1:10:05] I’m using hypoallergetic materials and I am cleaning it at temperatures such that I am giving life, re-life, altering to produce, again, that finished product by not giving amplification or any meaning to the word processing with all respect members of the tribunal. That’s a failure in the interpretation of the city’s own by-law. And otherwise, by not looking at processing, you’d be boxing out a whole host of other activities. Imagine, if you will, a computer that requires a software upgrade or some kind of, in the industrial shop, they’re replacing something.

[1:10:42] Well, they’re not making anything brand new. They’re processing that product. And that’s exactly what Unifers is doing. And this definition must have meaning. And if I was to go back to the page before and people are saying that it lists laundries here under retail, I am going to say it again. And I disagree with Mr. Wilding. That is in the context of all these 50 open to the public high user activities that is not for sale or rental directly to the public. And lastly, Mr. Krakors rightly says that at times council has passed, or at times, very many municipalities had a zero charge for industrial users.

[1:11:27] But such municipalities have added costs and percentages over time because of the frustration that the municipality can’t pay necessarily for, write a blank check for the capital costs of infrastructure that industrial development causes. And that’s why municipalities such as London has imposed a charge. But I went line by line through the charge to show you why I don’t believe it would ever have been council’s intention to include PJ’s laundries as part of an to include universe with the commercial activity of a PJ’s laundries.

[1:12:03] We don’t get to this part of the definition ‘cause we’re not selling or renting directly to the public. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me that opportunity. Thank you, Mr. Smiley. Committee members, I will now advise you that we do have legal counsel from the city solicitor’s office here. Ms. Anderson is the lead on this. And so I will now ask if committee members feel there is a need to go and close session to receive legal advice. I’m not seeing any interest in doing so. So we will move along.

[1:12:40] Having heard the evidence and submissions in public session, the corporate services committee now has at its decision point options to one of the following. Pass a motion to adjourn the hearing to a fixed date and time to receive further information or submissions on an issue or issues, factual or legal, as identified by members of the committee, be pass a motion to adopt the recommendation to municipal council on the merits of the complaint with reasons or see pass a motion to municipal council to dismiss the complaint.

[1:13:18] And so I am now in your hands committee as to what direction you wish to pursue. Councilor Trussow. I would like to make a motion to dismiss the complaint for the reasons stated in the Stanford. Thank you, Councilor Trussow. And we have a seconder I see in Councilor Stevenson. And we’ll look for any discussion on this. Seeing none, I will ask the clerk to open the vote on that. And the clerk will just need a moment to get that ready.

[1:14:15] That vote is now open, colleagues. Closing the vote, the motion is passed six to zero. The recommendation that will be we’re forwarded to municipal council is to dismiss the complaint.

[1:14:52] We’ll now look for a motion that the corporate services committee adjourn as the administrative tribunal’s corporate services committee. We need a mover and a seconder for that. Moved by Councillor Ferrera, seconded by Councillor Stevenson. And the clerk will get that vote open for us. I’ll vote yes.

[1:15:47] Closing the vote, the motion is passed six to zero. Thank you colleagues, moving on in our agenda. No items under deferred matters and additional business. That moves us to item six, which is confidential matters. So I will need a motion to go in camera. The reason for going in camera will be related to labor relations and employee negotiations, land disposition, solicitor client privilege advice, land acquisition, client solicitor privilege advice for the remaining four items on the agenda actually.

[1:16:24] So one item for labor relations and four items on land disposition. And I’ve see Councillor Stevenson moving, seconded by Councillor Ferrera, and we’ll get that open. Councillor Picasso and Ferrera.

[1:17:13] If you’re having difficulties with E-Scribe, just manually imbue the mic vote yes. Yes. Can you just use the mic, Councillor Ferrera, so the clerk can move on it. Closing the vote, the motion is passed six to zero.

[1:17:53] Thank you, colleagues. We’ll just need a moment to prepare for in camera. The clerk will need to make sure that the right people are in the Zoom meeting and then we’ll be ready.