Open Council

The 1st Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

Open Council

The 1st Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

November 29, 2022, at 4:00 PM

Original link

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 C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That Councillor D. Ferreira BE APPOINTED Vice Chair of the Community and Protective Services Committee for the term ending November 14, 2023.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.   Consent

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That Items 2.1 to 2.4 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   2021 Ontario Works Participant and Service Delivery Profile

2022-11-29 SR - 2021 Ontario Works Participant and Service Delivery Profile - Full

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report, dated November 29, 2022, with respect to the 2021 Ontario Works Participant and Service Delivery Profile, BE RECEIVED. (2022-S11)

Motion Passed

2.2   Award of Request for Proposal 2022-232 Group Purchasing Organization Services for City of London Long Term Care

2022-11-29 SR - Award of Request for Proposal 2022-232 Group Purchasing Organization Services for LTC - Full

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, with the concurrence of the Director, Financial Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated November 29, 2022, related to the Award of Request for Proposal 2022-232 for Group Purchasing Organization Services for City of London Long Term Care:

a)    the submission from SGP Purchasing Partner Network (SGP), owned and operating by Extendicare (Canada) Inc., 3000 Steeles Ave., Markham, Ontario, L3R 9W2, to purchase, at the City’s sole discretion, required items for the Dearness Home, City Golf courses, City Hall Cafeteria, Storybook Gardens, Senior Centres and other Life Stabilization areas such as Discretionary Benefits, BE ACCEPTED  for a contract term of two (2) years beginning January 1, 2023, with the option to renew three (3) additional one (1) year terms, in accordance with Section 12.2 b) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13, 2022, to:

i)    approve the Purchasing and Revenue Share Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between Extendicare (Canada) Inc., carrying on business as SGP Purchasing Partner Network (SGP) and The Corporation of the City of London, commending January 1, 2023, for the purpose of participating in a Purchasing and Revenue Share Program to receive a share of rebates received by the SGP on volume purchases of food products and other related services and products;

ii)    authorize the Civic Administration to undertake all the necessary administrative acts in connection with this matter; and,

iii)    authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Agreement. (2022-S03)

Motion Passed

2.3   2022-2023 Winter Response Program and Action and Accountability Working Group Update

2022-11-29 SR - 2022-2023 Winter Response Program and Action and Accountability Working Group Update

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report, dated November 29, 2022, with respect to the 2022-2023 Winter Response Program and Action and Accountability Working Group Update, BE RECEIVED. (2022-S11)

Motion Passed

2.4   London Fire Department Automatic Aid Agreement with Central Elgin Fire and Emergency Services

2022-11-29 SR - London Fire Dept Automatic Aid Agreement with Central Elgin Fire and Emergency Services

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Acting Fire Chief, with concurrence of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report, dated November 29, 2022, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13, 2022, to:

a)    approve the Automatic Aid Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between The Corporation of the City of London and The Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin regarding the provision of certain fire protection services by Central Elgin to specified areas withing London; and,

b)    authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted by-law. (2022-P16)

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   4th Report of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee

2022-11-03 AWCAC Report

2022-11-03 Sub - Sub Committee 2022 Budget Recommendations

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 4th Report of the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on November 3, 2022:

a)    the following actions be taken with respect to the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee (AWCAC) 2022 Budget:

i)    M. Blosh, Acting Chair, BE GRANTED delegation status at the November 29, 2022 Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) meeting to advise CPSC on the AWAC request for the expenditure of it’s budget; and,

ii)    the full 2022 Budget expenditure of $1,500 BE ALLOCATED for the purchase of bird-friendly window collision tape;

it being noted that the AWCAC received the attached Sub-Committee Report with respect to the review of the 2022 AWCAC Budget; and,

b)    clauses 1.1, 2.1 to 2.3 and 5.1 to 5.6 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   REQUESTS FOR DELEGATION STATUS - Animal Control By-Law

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare a staff report to be brought forward to the January 2023 Community and Protective Services Committee meeting with respect to a potential amendment to By-law PH-3, the Animal Control By-law, to permit the keeping of class 7 animals within the City of London, under such requirements as are recommended by the Civic Administration; it being noted that a draft by-law will be included with the staff report;

it being pointed out that the following individuals gave verbal delegations, with respect to this matter:

  •    B. Child, Reptilia;

  •    L. Longo, Aird & Berlis LLP;

  •    Dr. R. Murphy, Reptilia;

  •    M. Hamers, World Animal Protection;

  •    M. Blosh;

  •    J. Van Daele;

  •    F. Morrison;

  •    J. Woodyer, Zoocheck;

  •    Dr. C. Warwick;

  •    S. Tinney, Animal Justice;

  •    A.E. Nash, Colorado Reptile Humane Society;

  •    C. Kuijpers;

  •    R. Laidlaw, Zoocheck;

  •    M. Markham; and,

  •    M. Lerner, Lerners Lawyers;

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

  •    M. Lerner, Lerners Lawyers;

  •    B. Child, Reptilia;

  •    L. Longo, Aird & Berlis LLP;

  •    Dr. R. Murphy, Reptilia;

  •    M. Hamers, World Animal Protection;

  •    M. Blosh;

  •    J. Van Daele;

  •    K. Lomack;

  •    F. Morrison;

  •    J. Woodyer, Zoocheck;

  •    Dr. C. Warwick;

  •    S. Tinney, Animal Justice;

  •    L. White, Animal Alliance Canada;

  •    A.E. Nash, Colorado Reptile Humane Society;

  •    C. Kuijpers;

  •    R. Laidlaw, Zoocheck;

  •    M. Markham;

  •    Councillor P. Van Meerbergen;

  •    K. Smith;

  •    D. Brooks, Ontario SPCA and Humane Society;

  •    L. Jackson;

  •    S. Baisley;

  •    J. Winston;

  •    K. Sussman;

  •    B.K. MacKay; and,

  •    W. Brown. (2022-P14)

Motion Passed

Voting Record:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Stevenson

Motion to approve the delegation requests, as appended to the Agenda and the Added Agenda, to be heard at this meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by E. Peloza

Motion that the delegations and communications BE RECEIVED and NO ACTION BE TAKEN with respect to this matter.

Motion Failed (2 to 3)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare a by-law to BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13, 2022 to amend By-law PH-3, the Animal Control By-law, to permit the keeping of class 7 animals within the City of London under such requirements as are recommended by the Civic Administration.

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by E. Peloza

That the above clause be amended to read:

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare a staff report to be brought forward to the January 2023 Community and Protective Services Committee meeting with respect to a potential amendment to By-law PH-3, the Animal Control By-law, to permit the keeping of class 7 animals within the City of London under such requirements as are recommended by the Civic Administration; it being noted that a draft by-law will be included with the staff report.

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

4.2   Councillor E. Peloza - Renaming of Paul Haggis Park

2022-11-29 Sub - E. Peloza - Renaming of Paul Haggis Park

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the communication, dated November 21, 2022, from Councillor E. Peloza and Mayor J. Morgan, related to the Renaming of Paul Haggis Park:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to begin removing Paul Haggis’ name from the city park located at 2875 Bateman Trail and to remove all related references from the City’s website; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to subsequently begin the process of renaming this location, including consultation with residents in the vicinity;

it being noted that the above-noted communication from Councillor E. Peloza and Mayor J. Morgan, as well as the communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, from J. Dunn, London Abused Women’s Centre and K. O’Brien, with respect to this matter, were received. (2022-M04A)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.3   2022 Parkland Conveyance and Levy By-Law CP-9 Update

2022-11-29 SR - 2022 Parkland Conveyance and By-Law CP-9 Update

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken, with respect to the staff report, dated November 29, 2022, related to an update on the 2022 Parkland Conveyance and Levy By-law CP-9:

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13, 2022, to require the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of the development or redevelopment of land within the City of London, or the payment of money in lieu of such conveyance (the “Parkland Dedication By-law”); it being noted that the by-law will come into force and effect January 1, 2023;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake a comprehensive review of the Parkland Conveyance and Levy By-law, as required by the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 and the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022; and,

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake the next bi-annual Parkland Conveyance and Levy By-law CP-9 land values update to be completed by January 1, 2025;

it being noted that the delegation request from M. Wallace, London Development Institute, as appended to the Added Agenda, was withdrawn by Mr. Wallace. (2022-C01)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

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

6.1 Personal Matter/Identifiable Individual

A matter pertaining to identifiable individuals with respect to the 2023 Mayor’s New Year’s Honour List – “Sports” Category.

(ADDED) 6.2 Solicitor-Client Privilege

A matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose regarding an exemption to the Animal Control By-law.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

The Community and Protective Services Committee convened In Closed Session from 6:08 PM to 6:58 PM.

7.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 8:19 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 (3 hours, 46 minutes)

[4:21] Best, best. We can hear you. Thank you. Welcome, this is the first meeting in the Community and Protected Services Committee.

[18:22] The city of London is situated in the traditional lands of the Nishnabek, Horoshone, Linapak, and Adewandran. We honor and respect the history, language, and culture, the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nation, Métis, and Inuit people today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory, Miigwech. As this is our first committee meeting of the Corporate Community and Protected Services Committee, short-form desk caps. I’m your chair for this evening and this year, welcome.

[18:58] Counselor, Stevenson, Pribble, Ramen, and Ferreira are the other counselors. They are all here present tonight, fronting when zooming in with us. And Mayor Morgan will join us at some point, I believe. Visiting counselors will join us on Zoom and in-person as well. The city of London is 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 CPSC at London.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. Calling this meeting to more order, and I’m looking to committee members for any disclosures of pecanary interest.

[19:43] Seeing none, first up is the election of Vice Chair. Is anyone interested in serving as Vice Chair for the one-year term for Community and Protected Services Committee? Councilor Ramen. Thank you. I’d like to make a motion to put Counselor Ferreira as the, to elect. Counselor Ferreira is Vice Chair of CAPS. Would there be a seconder for that motion? Seconded by Councilor Stevenson, and just as importantly, Councilor Ferre, would you accept that?

[20:18] I’ll accept, thank you. Hey, looking for any other questions or comments or anyone else would like to put their name forward for this lovely opportunity to be my Vice Chair. You are all missing out, and I will call the question in E-Scribe, your screen will open for voting purposes. Posing the vote, the motion carries. Five, two. Thank you to my Vice Chair of what will surely be a wonderful learning opportunity, and thank you for being willing to serve in that capacity.

[20:54] For our consent items, we have four items before us this evening. I will look to committee to see if anyone would like anything pulled separate. If you would like anything pulled separate, or you would like to vote differently on that item, pull it, and it will move to the end of our agenda, and we will deal with it then. But anything on consent that we move in seconds, if you still have just questions of staff or would like more information, we can still do that without pulling the item. So looking for if anyone would like anything, pulled different separate from consent? Yes, Chair, I would like to pull out 2.3, please.

[21:38] Is there anything else anyone would like pulled separate? And then just for everyone’s knowledge, item 2.3 will, if you’d just had questions, you could ask all the questions we wanted now that for a separate vote on it, it will then flow until the very end of the evening. Just Councillor Pribble. I prefer to ask the question now. I thought it would be the not at the end of the evening. I just have a couple of questions, so I can maybe address it, right? Okay, perfect. So before we get to that, we’re gonna move all of consent as 2.1 through the 2.4. Looking for a move and a seconder, and then I will start my speaker’s list.

[22:16] Moved by Councillor Raman, seconded by Councillor Stevenson, and starting questions with Councillor Pribble, please proceed. To the chair to the staff, I have a question regarding the Ventress Ponce, and in terms of the agencies, I just wanna make sure that we are on track, and then if there is a certain mechanism in place that we are full of as the agencies, that they are fulfilling the commitment what they have committed to the city. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dickens. Thank you, Chair, and through you, thank you for the question.

[22:52] What’s different this year, if I’ll take a step back on the winter response, what’s different this year is that the winter response is really community led, and community informed. And so a number of working groups have been established in the community reflective of the organizations that deliver this work on a daily basis. And through those conversations and through those working groups, they’ve all made their shared commitments, and they’ve all made their insightful inputs into designing what the winter response looks like based on what they can deliver.

[23:26] And so with that process in mind, we feel very confident that the agencies that have stepped up to be a part of the winter response are doing so with full understanding of their capacity and with full understanding of the commitment that they’re making to deliver on the winter response. So that avenue and that aspect this year makes us very excited that we’re in good hands in the community. That being said, there are absolutely some final details. You will see that some organizations have made the commitment to staff up, and they’re receiving the financial support early from the city to be able to do that staffing.

[24:08] It remains to be seen. Do they feel every position possible? How close do they get? Do they achieve their staffing targets? Some organizations have lease agreements that they are finalizing with third parties to use their locations, which is great. Have they signed on the dotted line? Not as we sit before you, but they’ve made that commitment that they’re going to do that. And it’s part of the plan that we support is having those locations. So to answer your question, yes, we believe that the community is making an informed decision about what they can commit to.

[24:44] We feel that the checks and balances in place with London Cares example, for example, as a lead agency and with that LOSA are appropriate, and that the measures that those organizations and their boards have taken to come to this position leave us with great assurance that they’re able to deliver on their commitment. Follow-up, Councilor Pervil? Just to follow-up, thank you very much, and I’m glad to hear that. I’m just hoping that us, as the city, they will be in contact with them. And just in case they are not on the right track to fulfill their requirement, that it will be there for them to lead them and to give them a hand to make sure that the results of having enough beds for our homeless population is in place for this winter.

[25:30] Thank you. Mr. Dickens? Thank you, Chair, and through you, I appreciate that follow-up. And we do, as part of our civic administration duty, similar to other years when we were more directly involved, we participate in any frequency of briefings that we need to have. So they start out as scheduled, regular, weekly check-ins, that type of thing. If we have a location that perhaps is presenting more challenges or more volume than we expected, then the team can respond accordingly and have daily briefings if they need to, to make sure that we’re managing the delivery of those services accordingly.

[26:09] So absolutely, our team, Mr. Cooper, is here tonight to answer questions as well. We will be in lockstep with the community and keeping a very close eye on how things roll out in terms of being on time, on budget, and making sure our spaces and the people we’re supporting are as safe as possible. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you very much, Mr. Dickens. No more questions. Thank you, looking to other committee members, if they have any questions or comments of staff, prior to going to guest Councillors. Yeah, true. It’s good to be one of the cool kids on the committee.

[26:42] Hey, Councillor Troso, you were next. Yes, thank you very much. My first question deals with timing. So it’s, we’re receiving this report, it’s November 29th. We’re very close to the winter. What could be done in future years to try to move this process along so we’re able to sort of look at these plans earlier than the end of November? Mr. Dickens. Thank you, Chair, and through you.

[27:14] Thank you for the question. In previous years, we were working against a, unknown funding situation where we had not received any provincial social services relief funding until very late in the fall. So we’re often scrambling to put together a winter response, looking for appropriate locations, appropriate partners, staffing plans. This year, the work on the winter response actually began in August with the community. And the community were having those discussions about what they would like to see be part of a winter response.

[27:52] Again, we’re always in a position of not knowing exactly what the final bill will come to and where the funding will come from. But we were in a better position to make those calculations this year. As far as future year goes, I think what you’re seeing from the community this year is that the bulk of what’s being proposed is semi-permanent in terms of the response. And it’s also building on existing conversations and planning that are happening through our healthcare and homelessness summits, but also through these working tables that designed the winter response, they’re also working on permanent solutions.

[28:28] So our hope is, is that this year is our last year for a winter response. And then what we’ve built are the building blocks to sustain this response all year round with the flexibility to scale up if needed in extreme weather events. Follow-up? Thank you very much for that. I recently saw on the news, and I don’t believe it’s referred to in this packet, that there would be certain designated parks where encampments would not be allowed. And that apparently, according to the news story, would have the effect of pushing encampments further out.

[29:08] Was that accurate? Mr. Dickens? Thank you, Chair, and thank you for the question. So I don’t know if our by-law friends are on the call to answer some of these by-law questions, but I’ll give my best effort. So we have a parks by-law that prohibits overnight camping in all city parks. And there are over 500 city parks. We recognize that on the onset of the pandemic, there were a lot of organizations and services that were forced to close their doors or reinvent their services or minimize the number of people that could access their spaces.

[29:47] And as such, and knowing the housing crisis we were in, we took a compassionate approach when it comes to supporting encampments, understanding where encampments were, what the alternatives to being there were, and trying to really support individuals where they were at. In reality, there are some very high-profile, very busy, high-activity parks in our community that require proactive surveillance and proactive visits to ensure that the public and their intended use can do so safely.

[30:23] It can happen safely. That means there are a number of parks that we respond to on a complaint-driven basis. And so that’s what you saw on the media, is that there are a number of parks, given their locations, their activities, and the intended use of them, are proactively enforced to the best of our resources will allow us. And the remaining parks we respond to on a complaint-driven basis, and we support the individuals where they’re at, making determinations with the support of our outreach partners in the community to determine in real time someone’s safety, either the safety to them being there, due to the environment, their surroundings, or the safety to the general public in using that space.

[31:03] And at that time, after many considerations, would we look to remove an encampment? I hope that answers the question. I still would be looking— Through the chair, please. Through the chair. Sorry, through the chair, I’m still wondering how these determinations were made, because it does appear at first glance that they all bear resemblance in terms of being close to the court. Now, the concern I would raise about that is, how would that affect your ability to deliver services, since we know that many of the people who are gonna be coming for your services are in encampments, yet they’re being pushed further into other neighborhoods and perhaps other dangerous situations.

[31:49] How does this affect your operational plans? Mr. Dickens, we also have Mr. Catolek on the line with us tonight. I don’t know if you would like to go to him first, and then you or just let me know. Okay, Mr. Dickens first then. All right. Thank you, chair, and through you, I will answer the first part of that question in terms of how it impacts people accessing services. So as it relates to the winter response and that plan that you see before you today, the bulk of the service is being offered to individuals as part of the winter response or in the core or adjacent to the core.

[32:31] So the services will be available to people who are spending their time in the core. The inability to set up encampments in those downtown parks should not prevent people from being able to access 24/7 overnight drop-in spaces or daytime programming spaces, as they are all located in the core area or very close to the core. Mr. Catolek, would you like to add anything to this conversation this evening? Yes, and through the chair, when we respond to complaints regarding encampments in parks, we used very much of a phased response approach.

[33:08] Our partners in London cares attend first and speak with the inhabitants to see what needs they require to achieve possibly full-time housing, what medical needs they require. And they do an assessment of the location to identify any dangerous situations, number of tents, are there sharps being littered throughout the area? Is there evidence of fires? Is it a situation that that park area could flood?

[33:46] And in certain circumstances, and also taking into consideration the complaints from the public that may be backing onto these parks. At times, we are put in a situation to work with our operations folks and remove these encampments. So each site is evaluated on its own merits, recognizing that there have been no by-law changes made to the park’s by-law to allow full-time encampments in the over 500 city parks. Councillor Trosto, a follow-up, but if you can just try and summarize whatever follow-ups you have in one, that’d be perfect.

[34:24] I’m gonna just, I’m gonna try to ask one more question. How could, how could, Councillors, be more closely brought into these decision-makings about which encampments to shut down, because it seems to me as if when the city shuts down a particular park, as a matter of enforcement, there are certain regulatory and perhaps legal issues that arise, and I think members of this council want to be part of that loop.

[34:56] And I was just surprised to see so many downtown, similarly situated lots. So how can we become more aware of the nature of the complaints that apparently were being made, and how we might talk about this? Thank you to staff. Through the chair, it is very much of a operational enforcement matter, and each site is evaluated on its own merits. But certainly we’ve had many situations where parks are very close to, for example, soccer fields that are actively still being utilized by the public, so in those situations, those encampments have to be moved a little quicker than perhaps a smaller encampment located in a wooded park away from residential areas.

[35:45] Thank you, Mr. Catolic. Mr. Dickens, do you have anything to add? Thank you, Chair, and through you, I will just add that there is a Parks By-law review process that would be undertaking here in the upcoming year. And I think those type of conversations could be considered as part of the Parks By-law review. But certainly, as Mr. Catolic said, we make any decision we make around encampments being relocated or cleaned, come after very careful consideration around the safety, environmental impacts, the public usage, and any other mitigating factors that might contribute to someone’s inability to stay in that space in a safe manner.

[36:25] Thank you. Thank you. Looking to other visiting committee members, or visiting counselors or committee members for their question or comment on either any of the four items on consent, put forward already? Seeing none, calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries, five to zero.

[37:08] Moving on to scheduled items, item 3.1. It is past the posted time that we were not to hear this item before. Ms. Bloch is the Vice Chair of the Animal Wear for Community Advisory Committee, and she’s here to speak on the fourth report, the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee with a request for CAHPS. Please proceed, and you have up to five minutes. Sorry, just a second, your mic’s not on it, if tech could put the gallery microphone on. Is it on?

[37:41] Wonderful. Ah, okay, I don’t have much of a voice, so that’s a good thing. I’m getting over being sick, so I’ve got a little bit of a raspy voice. So, again, my name’s Marie Bloch, I’m the Vice Chair at the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, and my congratulations to all the newly elected counselors. I’m here to ask you to approve our proposal to spend our advisory committee budget, which is $1,500, on bird collision tape. We have a project in mind where we would acquire the tape and then get it out into the community.

[38:17] Just to back up a little bit, I hope you are aware, that London is a bird-friendly city. It was certified as such by Nature Canada last year. The Animal Welfare Advisory Committee was a part of obtaining that certification. It does require certain standards and commitment by reducing threats to birds, protecting natural habitat, and engaging the community in these actions through education and outreach. And it’s that third point that we think we can be really helpful by buying these bird collision tapes and getting it out into the community.

[38:52] If you’re not, I did on, there is a report with some photos of what the tape is. This is sort of the, I don’t know if you can see it. This is a kit that you can buy. It’s deceptively simple, it’s little bits of tape that goes on the exterior of the window. You don’t really see it from the inside, but it’s very effective to birds. I have some in my house. It’s been there through two winters. Says it lasts up to 10 years, and I do believe that to be true. The collision tape is recommended on the city’s website, so that’s already in place.

[39:30] There’s also a pamphlet, which I hope you’ve seen, and if you haven’t, the London is a bird friendly city pamphlet. It’s readily available, and it sort of recommends the tape as well. Since the time of this report that’s in your packet, we’ve done some additional work on this, and I’ve talked to Brendan Samuels, who’s the chair of the Environmental Stewardship and Action and Community Advisory Committee. And that committee is very excited as well about our project, and they want to join forces with us.

[40:08] So if you see a project proposal from that committee, it’s not in competition with ours. It’s actually in cooperation. We hope to work together. And also, since then, while the tape retail prices run about $20 to $25, we’re going to be able to get this at a non-profit rate of $10. So we’re looking forward to getting quite a few boxes of this tape to get out into the community. And the public library has already agreed to do some events where we can promote it.

[40:45] We’re hoping to do it through Acorn. Get it into the hands of people that might not otherwise know about it or have the money to afford it. And certainly, I would encourage you, if you have any constituent meetings, we welcome to take a few boxes. Someone from our committee or the environmental committee or the London bird team would be happy to go over it with you or go to the meeting with you. So I’m just asking for a motion from you to approve our project so that we can get this money spent in this project off the ground.

[41:21] So I thank you for that. And of course, if you have any questions, I’ll be happy to answer them. Excellent, thank you so much for joining us this evening in your work on the committee and for the birds. In East gripe, a motion is loaded as from the committee. It would be to receive, obviously, our delegation, which we’ve done tonight, any of the correspondence from the committee, and let the full 2022 budget expenditure of 1500 be allocated to the purchase of bird-friendly window collision tape. Would anyone on committee like to move that? Moved by Councillor ramen, seconded by Councillor Pribble. Looking for any other questions or comments in regards to this item.

[41:59] Seeing none, looks like he did an excellent job and calling the question. Seeing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you for being with us, you’re most welcome. And just for the new Councillors, each advisor committee gets a budget each year that they can spend for training or other materials such as we heard tonight.

[42:35] So you hear that coming through other committees as well throughout your council term. That concludes our schedule items. And our items for direction, we have menu quests for delegation status in regards to a conversation that was started around. Reptilia, it is up to committees prerogative if you want to receive the delegations. Some are physically in person with us in chambers, some are on Zoom joining us. There are also a number of added communications of just people who have submitted letters as well. Mr. Catolic is available.

[43:10] To answer questions you have is, as is Mr. Card for any legal advice you need, those are available to you. Each speaker, if you receive a delegation, is granted ideally no more than five minutes of time. I do time everyone equally. And after the delegation is when council members would ask their questions, unless you don’t want to receive the delegations, in which case we would just go to questions. So looking to committee, would you like to receive the delegations listed on the agenda this evening? Or questions or comments to that effect?

[43:47] I know if it’s part of a motion or should I make a motion and be voted on it? I certainly would like to make a motion. Yes, I would like to make a motion to receive the delegation as listed. As listed, okay. And a seconder in councilor Stevenson. And just to clarify, to be heard right now or at a future meeting. Looking for their questions or comments on that, saying none, calling the question.

[44:34] The motion carries five to zero. So for your information, I think we have around 16 people looking to speak at five minutes each and maybe some transition time that could be up to about two hours. If we do take that full amount of time, I will certainly stop for a bio break for everyone, just for our knowledge. Ideally, we can be succinct with our comments. Just for the everyone’s knowledge here this evening, I do plan on going in order that people are listed on the added agenda. Just give you a sense of when your timing’s coming up.

[45:09] Anyone in the gallery, the microphone will be placed on for you and we’ll make sure that it’s working. So make sure that we can hear you. Everyone has no more than five minutes. I do time and just for clarity that Reptilia does have a provincial license, they are already building. So it’s not the question of, should we have them in town? They are here and the building’s going up and they have a provincial license. So just help us. If you haven’t seen them going up in West Mount Mall, that’s where they’re located, just to help keep our conversations focused. So I will interrupt as need be as we go, but I prefer not to.

[45:47] So we will start with Em Lerner, who has joined us on the screen. So anyone in the gallery, you can watch the Zoom screen up top. Please proceed and you have five minutes maximum. Madam Chair, I would prefer to defer until Mr. Child, Dr. Murphy have had an opportunity to speak. No, sorry. We have 17 people tonight and if everyone decides to start turning their orders, it’s gonna get really— Well, this might make it unnecessary for me to speak.

[46:24] That’s why I was asking that Mr. Child and Dr. Murphy go ahead of me. Okay, just for clarity, are you giving up? You’re giving up your opportunity to speak? I’m asking that they go before me and I can determine whether or not it will be necessary for me to speak. Mr. Childs, you have five minutes, please proceed. But you’re muted. Mr. Childs, you’re muted.

[46:59] Is this an issue on our tech end or his? Okay, Mr. Childs, it’s a tech issue on your end. Okay, I’m gonna proceed. I think he’s good now. - Okay, perfect. You’ve allowed me to speak. So that’s wonderful. Thank you, Madam Chair and guests. I’d start off by just giving a little history. We did submit a two-pager that listed what Reptilia is about and licensing and all of that.

[47:37] I presume most people have probably got a peek at that. But I’ll start off with the history. Reptilia was founded in 1996 and the purpose of the founding was to work with the education community. And that has been our focus ever since. In 1998, in conjunction with the GTA School Boards and the Province of Ontario, we wrote the life strand section at no cost to anyone except ourselves. The life strand section of the Science and Technology curriculum, which has now been taught in more than 7,000 Ontario educational institutes, schools, private school, community centers.

[48:20] It’s probably closer to 8,000 but 7,000 was the last number I checked, so I’ll use it. The company started in a small premises and grew as the education requests accelerated. Eventually it got to the point where we had to do something because we just couldn’t handle a volume of educational requests that we received. So in six years, we went to the point of being able to make a decision to build a larger facility.

[48:54] We cast a vote for such and we eventually ended up in law on Rutherford Road for the 25,000 square foot facility, which has been there since 19, sorry, I guess it’s 2005, roughly, it opened. So the demand for our education programs was the deciding factor to open the larger facility. So London, I guess, heard of this facility. An LEDC in downtown development called us to have us send us a delegation, which we were happy to chat with, we visited, their enthusiastic book facility.

[49:32] There was another delegation this time with some counselors and they had the same reactions so shortly thereafter, I received an invitation from the city, took them over for three days at their expense and looked at different sites that would be of interest to us in locating a facility in London. So we were quite pleased that London took this initiative and we responded accordingly. So it was our first step away from the GTA and we made a deal with Westbound long-term needs, 20 years plus 20 years and that should help them.

[50:11] And we were guaranteed by Westbound that the zoning hasn’t existed permitted such a lease and such a use, I guess, something happened on the way to the bank, I’m not sure. But so we submitted our plans to the city permits for issue and then since that time we’ve had delays. We’ve coded, they were just the territories, but now we’re just about finished and ready to open. So when this all came to be too independent and highly experienced lawyers, they’ll find that we hardly will operate as we do in other municipalities, which I believe is under a provincial license, you may not think they’re right.

[50:57] But a long time ago, our board, which includes the retired executive vice president of operations for Disney Orlando, decided that they would like to locate in facilities where we were encouraged to locate such at what London had done. So that was our reason for choosing London for our first one and it’s gone on since. And so I think we should make a point that this has all been done without 10 cents being asked for by the company for the city.

[51:35] And it’s a good tourist attraction. It’s a strong education business. We’ve cooperated with every city we’ve been in. We have, in Tuesday, ask the letters of support from those cities of all the things we’ve done. We’ve won the best corporate citizen award for the city of Pawn in the region of New York. 30 seconds. Okay, thank you. I’ll wrap it right up. So just in wrapping up, London did a great job in getting us to come. And we’re happy with what we see in London as soon as we get over this little bump, hopefully.

[52:10] West Mount’s got a lot of vacancies. We can help with that. And we built out facility, which is a several million dollar facility on good faith based on what the city has said. And so we’ve experienced a lot of guests that come from London to Vaughan and they were good for tourism. So thank you very much. I look forward to any questions. Thank you, Mr. Child. And there is no questions with delegations. Moving on to El Longo, who is just joining us on Zoom. Good evening, Madam Chair.

[52:55] Perfect, thank you. Please proceed and you have up to five minutes. And I ask any speaker, if something’s already been said that you’ve been thinking, feel free not to repeat it. Please proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair and committee members. I represent Mccore Management East, Inc. Mccore is the manager of West Mount Shopping Center. I have five points to make to the committee this evening. The first deals with the reptilia zoo. It’s self and it’s use.

[53:30] The use complies with all applicable zoning bylaw provisions. Building permits have been issued, I think a couple of years ago, and the work as you’ve heard is near completion. So the use of this mall for this zoo, it has been deemed to comply with your bylaw. Point number two, with respect to the city’s animal control bylaw, I have provided an opinion to the city manager dated June 10, 2022, in which I provide an opinion that reptilia is currently exempted from the animal control bylaw by operation of section 3.6 of the bylaw, as it operates under a provincial license.

[54:28] Our opinion remains the same today. Reptilia is currently exempt under the bylaw. Reptilia has, however, requested that this existing exemption be made patently explicit. And without prejudice and reserving our rights of the opinion we’ve already expressed, our client fully supports this request of reptilia as it would be useful in preventing unnecessary and costly litigation.

[55:07] My third point is you’ve heard from Mr. Child, and I understand you’ll be hearing from Mr. Lerner and others from reptilia. I’ll just simply note that our client concurs with the positions that they raised. The fourth point is that since acquiring the mall in 2018, Macore has been diligently leasing and establishing new tenants at the mall and improving the mall’s overall occupancy and vitality.

[55:43] That work isn’t done, it continues, but we view this reptilia tendency as being a positive for the mall and the city. So my final and fifth point, Madam Chair, is that Macore supports reptilia’s request and encourages committee to endorse it and recommend it to full council. I’d be pleased to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you. Thank you for joining us.

[56:15] Any questions committee has will be raised after, at the end, after all speakers have had a chance. Next speaker, Dr. Murphy, you’re up in the gallery. So just making sure from staff that the gallery microphone’s working. There it is. Perfect, thank you. Please proceed and you have up to five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. And new councilors, congratulations on your wins. My name is Dr. Robert Murphy or Professor Robert Murphy. I got my PhD at UCLA in 1982. Then post-doced in cancer diagnosis and conservation genomics until I was hired in 1984 as the curator of reptiles and amphibians by the Royal Ontario Museum, which I retired from in August.

[57:04] I also hold a faculty appointment in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Toronto, which as you may have recently read is the second ranked public institution globally, primarily based on research. And I’m glad to have contributed to that as I’m the most frequently read member of our department at the University of Toronto on a software base called Research Gate. I began working with Reptilia on their education board for a while and then after my retirement for the ROM, I became the Director of Animal Welfare and Conservation.

[57:44] I’m also elected to the Executive Council of the World Congress of Herpetology, which has about three to 4,000 members. I don’t remember how many there are. With your committee, I assume is primarily concerned with safety, so please let me speak to that. The animals that we have in our facility are 80% of them are surrendered or confiscated animals. We purchase animals only from licensed breeding facilities when that need arises.

[58:20] None of our animals are wild caught. We don’t condone the wild catching and wild removal of animals for the pet trade. We would only condone that for research or for special species conservation programs, like the removal of all California condors that were taken from the wild to breed them artificially, and they’ve now been reintroduced that are doing quite well in California, of course. Our animal control and safety and animal welfare is actually controlled by the PAWS, the Provincial Animal Welfare Act that goes through their very strict.

[59:02] We are proactively with them. We have called PAWS in for inspections to get their feedback to make sure that we comply with what the laws are, and we bring in other zoo curators to look at our collections and our animals to get feedback from them over how we can enhance the habitat of the animals. There’s also concern about people. The first concern that I’ll address is the concern about the keepers of the animals that come through.

[59:36] We have training protocols in place that no individual can go through and feed any animal at well. And in fact, I’ve instigated a double lock system where no person has both keys to keep people away from dangerous animals. So because of this, London will have no venomous reptiles for three or four years, because we’ll have no one trained that we’re comfortable with who can handle these animals with great confidence and great security. There’s also concern about public interaction with public safety.

[1:00:19] The doors to all potentially dangerous animals open and back corridors that are locked by steel doors. These corridors have a wire mesh roof on the top so that any animal that might escape cannot escape beyond that secondary barrier. And it’s those areas that the double locks go into place. So for example, if someone wants to work with a large python, it takes two people to work with a python, one for safety and the primary handler that goes through in case of an accident.

[1:00:55] Although we’ve never had an accident of that nature and we’ve never had a venomous snake bite in the 26 years of operation. Another concern that’s frequently raised is about zoonotic diseases. 30 seconds. And this was raised at the last council meeting. And so I ran the numbers on that. If you go to CDC and you actually look at the real numbers for the past five years, it turns out that people with reptile companions and comfort animals are 40 times less likely to get salmonellaosis than the general public.

[1:01:31] So if you want to be safe, get a reptile. Or at least be careful in terms of how you prepare food. Thank you, Dr. you’re at your five minutes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next attendee is on Zoom. Em hammers, world animal protection. Please come on screen and unmute yourself. Perfect, we can hear and see you. You have up to five minutes, please proceed. Thank you so much.

[1:02:05] Good afternoon, good evening everyone. On behalf of World Animal Protection and more than 160,000 supporters in Ontario, I would like to register our opposition to reptilia and the proposed by-law exemption. World Animal Protection is the largest international animal welfare organization in Canada. We are science based and work on project with local governments and partners to find practical solutions and long-lasting solutions to animal welfare issues. My name is Michelle Amers. I’m the wildlife campaign manager. I have a master’s in animal welfare and biology from Essex University in the UK.

[1:02:40] I specialize in captive wildlife behavior and welfare. I’m a member of the Royal Society of Biology and hold the designation of European professional biologists. And I’ve conducted extensive research into the issues associated with keeping up with wildlife in zoos, private miniatures and the exotic pet trade in Canada. There are a couple of claims that have been made about reptilia that I would like to discuss today. First, the idea that the reptilia is exempted or should be exempted from the current by-law. It is well known that Ontario is one of the last jurisdictions in Canada that doesn’t have regulations for zoos and zoo type facilities or individuals that keep exotic wild animals.

[1:03:18] The only licensing that exists is for native wildlife. MNR or Ministry of Natural Resources provides these licenses according to regulations which define a zoo as a place where a game wildlife or especially protected wildlife is kept in captivity for display. The list of game and specially protected wildlife only includes native wildlife. So no crocodiles, large constrictures, nakes, et cetera. The continued claim by reptilia that their native wildlife license provides the exemption for exotic animals is just not true.

[1:03:54] It would mean that anybody in the city of London with a native wildlife permit could own lions, tigers, and monkeys and all other exotic wild animals you can think of. Second, the reptilia would be an attraction for a lot of visitors and bring a lot of economical prosperity. There was something mentioned about half a million visitors that would be attracted. I don’t know where these estimations come from, but from my experience, visiting zoos and research in zoos all over the world, I think this claim is very questionable.

[1:04:26] For example, Toronto Zoo attracts about 1 million visitors per year. This zoo with hundreds of species and crow pleasers like lion’s tigers and gorilla. And they are even struggling to keep visitor numbers up because public sentiments towards zoos and the keeping of exotic wildlife are changing. Third, the reptilia is a rescue. If reptilia was indeed a rescue, the animals their facility would have would be full of ball pythons, bearded dragons, or red-eared sliders.

[1:04:58] Because these are the animals, currently an exotic pet trade, kept unmasked by people, and being disposed of unmasked by people. You can ask any sanctuary throughout our shelter, throughout Canada about this. And also just a comment about licensed breeders that was mentioned by the previous speaker. I didn’t know what this means. This concept doesn’t exist in Canada nor the US. Since breeding of reptiles is completely unregulated in North America. So the idea that animals are coming from licensed breeders— yeah, I don’t know what that means.

[1:05:31] So unfortunately, what it comes down to is that the word sanctuary or rescue can be used by anybody, really. Well, it might be challenging sometimes to recognize what is a true sanctuary. There are some tools that exist. There is a global federation for animal sanctuaries or GEFAS that has standard credit sanctuaries around the world. And there are checklists like the ones my organization has developed. And that state thinks like a good sanctuary does not breed animals, it can be released in the world, does not engage in commercial trade of animals, so buying or selling, use animal for commercial gains, so taking animals off-site, for example, for birthday parties, and discourages the keeping of all the animals as pets.

[1:06:10] To this last point, reptilia actively promotes the keeping of exotic pets through the sale of husbandry equipment and feet at their zoos and online store. This is unthinkable of if you look at other professionally run zoos or wildlife facilities. You can’t go into— [INTERPOSING VOICES] gift store and say, give me some monkey chow for my pet monkey, that just doesn’t happen. Reptilias messaging on this is exceptionally odd. In closing, global protection strongly opposes to the idea to provide reptilia with an exemption under the current bylaw.

[1:06:45] I hope that my delegation together with the others that will follow will give you all the information to make an informed decision on this issue, and I am here for any questions that might be written later. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Ms. Hammers. Up in the gallery, a microphone to come on, Ms. Blosch. You have up to five minutes, and as always, if something’s been said, feel free to just make new points. Thank you. I will. OK, thank you again very much. First of all, I’m not here to speak on behalf of the Animal Welfare Committee since this issue came up we did not— very quickly, and we haven’t had a meeting.

[1:07:20] However, we certainly have spent a lot of time on this issue when it came up in 2018. And I would ask you to please look at the letter that you’ve received in your added packet from Wendy Brown, who’s the chair of our committee, who gives the position that we had at that time. And I’d like to address a couple of comments that I’ve heard. One is that reptilia was invited to come. Well, that— reptilia came in 2018, and City Council said no. And then if the LEDC then went to them and invited them, well, who’s speaking for the city here?

[1:08:01] Is it an affiliated group, or is it the City Council that’s setting the policy? And it was the City Council that set the policy, not LEDC. And LEDC should be. And I would hope that you would insist that they follow your policy, not that you follow theirs. And it certainly, reptilia was here in 2018 prior to being invited by LEDC. They certainly could have said, well, what’s going on here? And in fact, I think they did. And instead, they just came along and set up shop. And now here they are saying, well, we’re here too bad.

[1:08:35] Just go ahead and give us our exemption. So I really find that rather awful. The other thing I want to— another point I want to mention is captive bread. What on earth does that mean? Well, it could mean that the mother was caught, a wild mother caught, and forced to give birth. And then those offspring are captive. Or maybe someone went out in the wild and got turtle eggs. Well, now they’re hatched in captivity, aren’t they? So this idea of wild versus captive, it’s a very fluid line.

[1:09:09] And certainly, any captive animal is going to suffer if they can’t exhibit their natural habitat, natural behaviors. It’s not as if they’re suddenly tame dogs or something. They’re still wild animals. There’s a comment made in a letter from John Winston saying, reptilia is provincially licensed and regularly inspected by pause. Well, pause is the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act. They replace the OSPCA Act. And it sets minimum standards of care and prosecutes cases of animal cruelty.

[1:09:47] It does not license zoos. It does not license anyone. So it’s very misleading to say reptilia is provincially licensed and inspected by pause. That’s just not true. They do have a provincial license, I understand. But it comes from the NDM NRNF, which, as the previous speaker explained, covers native wildlife only. Their jurisdiction is native wildlife, not non-native. I would say that in his letter to you, Mr. Winston on page two, on paragraph three, well, in my mind, threatens a lawsuit.

[1:10:28] I mean, that’s bullying. It’s just bullying behavior to say, give us what we want. You said, no, it came anyway. Give us what we want, or we’ll sue you. Well, the tiny town of Lamston Shores was faced with a very similar situation. And they stood there ground. And they won. And if Lamton Shores can say no to a zoo and go ahead and accept the threat of a court action and deal with that, I think London can as well. So please don’t be intimidated by that. One minute warning.

[1:11:03] OK. Again, reptilia can’t open. They just can’t have the perturbated animals. We’re not saying they can’t open in West Mount Mall. They can. They just have to do it in compliance with the bylaw. And finally, they’re not a sanctuary. And they do say, well, we will take unwinded pets. But look at their website. And it says, we can’t take every pet. Turtles live a long time. They don’t really fit into— some pets don’t fit into our collection anyway.

[1:11:36] And you know what they tell pet owners to do with an unwinded reptile? They tell them to sell it on Kijiji and Facebook. And if you don’t just look at their website, it says right there. Sell your pet on Kijiji and Facebook. So they come in here, and I just asked you to really look through some of these statements, which I believe are very misleading. And I ask you to stick with the previous decisions of council. They were here just months ago in May of this year.

[1:12:11] Thank you, Ms. Bloch. So please stick with that. Thank you. Our next speaker is joining us on Zoom. Jay Van Dale. Hello. Can you hear me? Yep. Just one second. And then just for everyone’s information, K. Lomack is not with us. And the next speaker on Zoom after this individual will be F. Morrison.

[1:12:46] Joris, please proceed. You have up to five minutes. Hi, I’m sorry, I can’t seem to find my video on. But my name is Joris Van Dale. Hello, Madam Chair. I’m the former chair of the London Humane Society. I was also a director of the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. And I worked on the committee updating provincial standards defining what animals and distress means. And I have firsthand experience dealing with zoos in the area. I also was here in May speaking against reptilia.

[1:13:25] I’m a citizen of London. I’m a taxpayer. I’m just annoyed as I’ll get out. That reptilia is making claims that are dubious. And in some cases, untrue. They’re misrepresenting who they are. Zoos are a pain for humane societies because they have a poor record within their own organizations of adhering to their own poor standards.

[1:13:59] And they come across with a great story and a great piece of marketing. And in this case, a very able lawyer. And they talk the talk. But it actually comes down in the end to does London, Ontario want a zoo, yes or no? I understand that they don’t. I understand that Council has said and spoken on this. There’s been debate about this for years. The people involved in reptilia are calling themselves a zoo. This is a zoo.

[1:14:34] Zoos have issues which other people have spoken to, particularly Ms. Hammers, who I think really sums up the misrepresentation that reptilia and their speakers are making. But, chairman, I am just upset that this process is happening again and that it seems to be couched in language that springs so untrue. I hope that this committee checks out the facts carefully and looks at both sides of it because Londoners have spoken.

[1:15:12] We don’t want a zoo. Thank you very much. Thank you, Joris. Kay Lomack is not with us. Our next speaker on Zoom would be F. Morrison, followed by Jay Woodier of Zootrack, also on Zoom. Just so you can prepare yourselves. F. Morrison, if you are able to put your camera on and you’ll have up to five minutes as well. You’re by phone, so we should be able to hear you if you start to speak.

[1:15:51] Hello. Hello, Florine. You have up to five minutes. Yeah, we can hear you perfectly. You have up to five minutes. Please proceed. OK, thank you. Thank you for hearing me speak today. I recently sent this committee an email. I’m not lying my concerns regarding what to be as late as separate to get an exemption to our by-law. I just have a few points I would like to reiterate starting with the fact that they applied under the guise of entertainment, not education or anything else.

[1:16:33] So that tells you where they stand on that. Counselors exercise do the lunches where they create a by-law and try to skip for things that have already been said. For reptile, to bring this to a new council is extremely unfair. Without knowing the whole story, there’s no way they can make an informed decision. I think we heard that last day Paul Barricar made it abundantly clear that exotic animals are not exempted from the by-law since they are not subject to the provincial license held by reptilia.

[1:17:09] And this is consistent with the opinion provided by Zuchek, who wear folds, for the most esteemed national law firms in Canada. Toronto has issues with reptile’s public safety and through freedom of information, I learned that there are orders issued by the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Authority regarding serious animal neglect. We have heard this not a rescue. They do high-profile animals to breed for profit.

[1:17:44] Rescues do not have petting zoos or send their animals in schools, retirement homes, events or parties for a fee. They do not refer to their volunteers as cast members or compare themselves to major, major attractions like Disney World. Sanctuarys and rescues rarely cage their animals. Most are free to exhibit their natural behavior and even those considered dangerous are shown respect and as much freedom as possible. Reptilia keeps their animals in cages so the public can feel safe coming to their business.

[1:18:19] That alone should raise concern about the type of animals they have on display. Reptilia forces exotic and dangerous animals to the living and artificial environment, artificial light and behind glass. Their natural behavior and instincts are stifled, which must be frustrating and boring beyond belief. These are not home enclosures, they’re prisons. When an animal is captive or born free and no way changes their needs, reptilia claims that their animals are comfortable with humans.

[1:18:53] We really don’t know. And probably many of the reactions they exhibit are more at a fear and stress than affection. All animals deserve to be treated with dignity and give them the freedom to choose, to be present for us to admire or to leave and hide if they feel afraid or stressed. Reptilia does not get that choice. They are forced to be on display and be handled by adults and children of all ages with no escape. Lastly, I want to repeat that no laws have been changed since reptilia applied for their building permit.

[1:19:28] They knew about the city by law and when the head thinks things, they could change it. There’s nothing stopping. Reptilia, from opening their facility with native animals listed on their provincial license and any that are not otherwise prohibited or restricted under London’s bylaw. If reptilia is allowed to bring in restricted animals, it not only creates a welfare issue, but for the animals, but raises a dangerous precedent that may result in a very expensive enforcement challenge for the city. As a property owner in London, I strongly urge you to consider the many hours that previous councils have spent on this issue and support the existing bylaw that prohibits animals like reptilia from coming and setting up in London.

[1:20:16] Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Morrison. At this point, we are halfway through our speakers list and just in my mind or to all speakers remaining if the point you would like to make has already been said, perhaps allocate your time a little bit differently. Next on Zoom, we have Jay. So Julie Woodhier and the next speaker following that will be Dr. Clifford Warwick. Ms. Woodhier, please proceed. You have up to five minutes. Thank you, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you.

[1:20:47] I’m Julie Woodhier. I’m the campaigns director for Zuchek. I’ve worked on captive wildlife issues for nearly 25 years. Prior to that, I was an Ontario SPCA inspector. As such, I’m very familiar with the laws impacting captive wildlife and other animals in the province. I also worked with the city of London on a few things, including relocating several of the animals to sanctuaries from the city’s former zoo. I’m focusing my comments regarding new issues around the provincial license and how it relates to the bylaw. First, I want to be clear that I have communicated with Tamara Gomer.

[1:21:24] She is the wildlife policy analyst with Fish and Wildlife Policy Branch for the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development Minds, Natural Resources and Forestry. She is the person responsible for the zoo permits in Ontario. She clarified that the limited scope of the provincial license that reptilia holds and several other zoos in the province is limited only to animals under the Ontario Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act. That is native species only.

[1:21:56] And she specifically notes that it is not applicable to any other species that may be kept in the same facility. No other provincial or federal authority issues any licenses for captive wildlife in Ontario. So there isn’t even a possibility for reptilia to obtain a provincial or federal license to keep the exotic species. The assertion that the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act is in any way connected with the Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act is false. The Provincial Animal Welfare Services Act deals with animal cruelty and has no licensee regime of its own.

[1:22:37] And as the province’s own analysts said, their license does not extend beyond the native species listed into the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act. When I contacted Pause to try and get some details around additional investigations that have been ongoing at reptilia, they told me they cannot release them yet because the facility is still under investigation by their department. It was mentioned earlier that the organization that I work with engaged werefold, which is an esteemed law firm to do an opinion on this issue, legal opinion.

[1:23:17] That opinion is in your package. Essentially, the key piece is that reptilia cannot rely on the exemption in section 3.6 of London’s Animal Control By-law to keep animals beyond those that are held under the Provincial License, meaning they cannot rely on that exemption currently to keep the exotic species. Furthermore, in February 22, Mr. Cotsavis, a deputy city manager for planning and economic development in the city at that time, noted that the native animals covered by the Provincial License will be the responsibility of the province, but any matters outside of that license for the non-native species will be subject to the Animal Control By-law.

[1:24:04] Later in April 2022, and this matter was discussed yet again, the London City Solicitor Barry Card noted that none of the exemptions under section 3 of London’s Animal Control By-law will apply for reptilias class 7 exotic animals. Therefore, they will not be permitted in the city of London. All of this just says that it’s very clear that city of London staff and legal advisors concur with rear folds regarding the issue that the Provincial License will not exempt the keeping of crocodilians and other dangerous species such as spitting cobras, black mambas, large constricting snakes, et cetera.

[1:24:45] One minute warning. Thank you. Finally, one new piece of information that has emerged since April when this was last discussed is that reptilia is no longer accredited by Canada’s accredited zoos and aquariums. They are no longer listed on the CASA website, and I contacted the executive director of CASA, Jim Fassette, and he confirmed that reptilia is not an accredited zoo. Under their organization. I urge you not to amend your by-law or make any new recommendations, and certainly do not attempt to go the route of trying to regulate zoos.

[1:25:23] I’ve seen so many incidences and municipalities all across the country that have created huge burdens for themselves financially and on their enforcement staff and create a far more problems by trying to regulate zoos than they could possibly solve. Thank you. Thank you for your time joining us this evening. Our next speaker on Zoom is Dr. Clifford Worwick, followed by Scott Tinney. Dr. Worwick, you have up to five minutes. We can see you. Please proceed. Thank you. Do you have audio fine? You sound wonderful.

[1:25:55] Great. I know that. Thank you, Councillors, and City staff. I’m Dr. Clifford Worwick. By way of very brief background and interests, I qualified in medical science with an advanced degree, specializing in diseases that are shared between animals and people and the associated risks. I also have a doctorate in reptile welfare science, along with four additional advanced postgraduate scientific qualifications in reptile biology. I’ve produced over 150 peer-reviewed scientific publications, specifically in reptile biology and related subjects, as well as I’ve edited two scientific reference volumes, the definitive ones on reptile welfare.

[1:26:33] I’ve also produced around 50 peer-reviewed publications in human medicine, zoonotic risk infections, as animal risks to humans and public health and safety issues relating to captive wild animals. Much of my work involves the research development and publication of scientific protocols for assessing reptile welfare, protecting public health and safety, and preparation of advanced guidance for both governments and facility inspectors involving zoos, pet shops, and the interactive itinerant animal experiences. I’m also a regular independent consultant too, and contract T4 governments globally on all of the aforementioned.

[1:27:10] I’ve also conducted numerous training workshops for the Ontario SPCA, Canadian Enforcement Officials, public policymaking staff, sorry, veterinarians, and others across Canada. My recommendation is that the City Council denies a site-specific exemption for reptile or zoo, with particular concerns regarding any mobile live animal programs. As part of my duties, I have visited reptile or site with the SPCA, as well as viewed numerous films, images, and reports relating to their operations. During my inspections of reptilia, I’ve noted numerous significant issues of concern on both public health and animal welfare fronts, including miseducation on issues regarding infection risk.

[1:27:53] For instance, contrary to reptilias claims today, salmonella infections are actually far greater in people who keep reptiles than a regular population. Miseducation on reptile handling, even to very young children at their events, general lack of staff knowledge regarding disease transmission factors, numerous examples of stress-related behaviours amongst the reptiles, notably the larger animals, evidence of chronic stress behaviours in a variety of animals, and low awareness of staff knowledge regarding the evidence-based science of stress in the animals.

[1:28:26] Modern science has demonstrated that reptiles have physiological cognitive behavioural needs and many others that are far greater than we previously thought. Indeed, often those will exceed the same kind of criteria that we know for birds and mammals. And far greater are these needs that can be accommodated by facilities such as reptilias, which is why we see so many signs of stress among reptilias animals. Now, so as a city staff may wish to also bear in mind that even a single direct contact source, such as salmonella contaminated handrails, have resulted in over 300 people becoming sick from one single place and mobile animal events, especially associated with high-risk public health concerns.

[1:29:13] Importantly, major concern is now being voiced by the international veterinary scientific and public health and safety communities that express these states that especially off-site interactions between people and exotic animals should not be permitted because safe regulation is effectively impossible. Finally, of note, and hopefully some assistants, numerous colleagues and I have recently completed a major independent scientific veterinary and human medical investigation of mobile live animal programs, including reptilia, in which we currently have this report appending with a leading science journal.

[1:29:50] We expect this report will be published in the next few weeks. I hope this so far is of assistance. Any questions, of course, just feel free to ask. Thank you so much for that. Any questions can be held at the end or people can research and find everyone offline for specific directed questions to the leaders in their fields. Moving on, Scott Tinney will be our next speaker. Hello, Scott, and just for everyone’s information, Elle White is not attending and it has submitted their thoughts in written correspondence, and so then the next speaker will be A.E. Nash.

[1:30:28] Scott, welcome, please proceed. You have up to five minutes. Great, thank you, good evening everybody. So just to introduce myself, my name is Scott Tinney and I’m a staff lawyer with Animal Justice, a national animal law advocacy organization focused on preventing cruelty to animals through, among other things, the enforcement of existing municipal, provincial, and federal laws. Our organization is located in Toronto, Ontario, and many of our thousands of supporters are closely following the city of London’s decision in this matter, and as such, I wanted to thank you. I want to take this opportunity to thank the committee for giving me the time to speak on such an important issue and for taking the time to consider our position on the proposed exemption for reptilia to operate in the West Mount Mall.

[1:31:04] So it is Animal Justice’s position that the city should not grant an exemption for reptilia to operate and keep prohibited animals at the West Mount Mall, nor should it grant an exemption for reptilia to use exotic animals for offsite activities such as mobile live zoo programs. There are a variety of reasons why we believe that this exception would not be beneficial for the city of London, many of which have already been outlined by the other delegates, including for public safety and animal welfare reasons, but I’m going to focus on a few more technical points which I’ll go through in turn. So first, overriding the current bylaw for reptilia by providing exemption risks opening a door that cannot be closed in London. More specifically, if the city of London is to allow reptilia to possess and display a variety of exotic species and to keep these animals for offsite programs, it would be extremely difficult to come back and restrict this facility in the future if there are any problems or if reptilia seeks to expand beyond its current scope.

[1:31:48] For example, if a sweeping exemption is granted and reptilia chooses to expand their facility to incorporate new dangerous animals into their display and their offsite programs, including big cats, monkeys, or any number of exotic species, the city may be left without any option but to allow for the growth of facility based on its previous decision to grant an exemption. The reality is that reptilia is a for-profit business and they will continue to operate in a manner that prioritize making money over the welfare of animals and public safety. And this poses a significant problem for the city if an exemption is granted. This stands in stark contrast to well established and accredited facilities like the Toronto Zoo, for example, who have clear plans for their facility and a direction to move towards.

[1:32:22] Established facilities like the Toronto Zoo, while they still have their own problems, accept responsibility for animal care and enrichment and have a number of individuals and groups who they routinely consult with in crafting future plans. These controls are not in place to the same extent for a facility like reptilia. As such, allowing a broad exemption for this facility in the short term could lead to significant repercussions in the long term. The second point that I’d like to raise is the fact that the perspective exemption stands against the current federal push for heightened exotic animal regulations across Canada in the form of Bill S-241 or the Jane Goodall Act. The Jane Goodall Act, which is currently being debated in the Senate, would amend the criminal code and other federal laws to regulate the keeping and showcasing of exotic animals across the country.

[1:32:58] Relevantly to our discussion here today, the changes in the Jane Goodall Act would set groundbreaking new standards across Canada by phasing out the importing, keeping and breeding of hundreds of species of wild animals in Canada, including numerous reptiles like crocodiles, certain large lizards and several snakes. The Jane Goodall Act is designed to address the current lack of regulation at roadside zoo operations like reptilia. In the interest of protecting health and safety, the health and welfare of countless animals, as well as protecting public health and safety. The Jane Goodall Act has received ample support from zoos, including the Toronto Zoo, Calgary Zoo, the Granby Zoo, the Montreal Biodome, and the Asinobwine Park Zoo, as well as leading Canadian animal advocacy organizations and appears to be on track to become law.

[1:33:32] By granting reptilian exemption, the city of London could be moving in a direction opposite of the Canadian government on this issue. With that said, the city should not take a wait and see approach with this federal initiative. The reality is that circumstances can change quickly in federal politics and we might not have this national protection on the books to protect animals or it may take years to pass. London should be actively ensuring that it is not allowing potentially dangerous businesses to operate in the interim. One final point I wanted to quickly address before my time is up is reptilia’s claim that they currently meet provincial licensing requirements. I know plenty of delegates have already addressed this tonight, but I simply just wanted to address that this position is not tenable.

[1:34:05] A wide variety of the animals, kept at reptilia are non-native animals and therefore beyond the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act and thus not the subject of the existing provincial license, which has been brought up a few times. I encourage the city to review the submission from Weerfold’s LLP, which is included in today’s agenda, as has been pointed out by previous delegations. One additional item too, but just before I wrap up in line with a lot of the previous delegates have been saying, is that granting this exemption also brings within a host of animal welfare issues and public health and safety issues. I strongly encourage the committee to review the City of Toronto’s report recommending against reptilia, granting a reptilian exemption in the City of Toronto, which I believe is also included in the agenda today before making a decision on this matter.

[1:34:45] Thank you once again for taking the time to consider my submissions, that’s all I’ve got to say, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Tiny. As I said, Al White has submitted a correspondence and writing, our next speaker is A.E. Nash on the Zoom screen, followed by Carla, who is supposed to be up in the gallery, just for you can prepare yourselves. Anne Elizabeth, please proceed. You have up to five minutes, and welcome. Thank you. I’m Dr. Anne Elizabeth Nash and I reside in Colorado in the United States.

[1:35:19] I received my doctoral degree from the University of Northern Colorado concentrating on the natural behavior of lizards, for which I was awarded the Dean’s citation for excellence. I have published in Perpetology, Animal Behavior, and Animal Welfare Journals. I have experienced working in a venomous snake laboratory with species from around the world, and I also hold a part-time faculty position at a local community college. Currently, I’m Executive Director of Colorado Reptile Humane Society, which I founded in 1999, and we provide sheltering, adoption, and training, and are also licensed to rehabilitate native Colorado reptiles and amphibians.

[1:36:00] And the shelter also conducts box turtle research on our native species. Over the past 20 years, I’ve trained county staff on safety protocols for venomous snakes, emergency first responders on reptile-caused injuries, state inspectors who license pet facilities, animal control officers, and animal welfare organizations. I’ve provided expertise for animal cruelty seizures, working with attorneys on case preparation, to managing staff during actual animal removal and subsequent care.

[1:36:33] In my expert opinion, the request from Rotilia for an exemption should be denied by the committee. Let me clarify that captive bred animals that we’ve heard before are not genetically different than their wild counterparts, and to be labeled captive bred, the animal only needs to be born in captivity. It does not mean the reptile is selectively bred for tolerance to human interaction, or for a life in captivity. And certainly we know that captive bred animals also suffer. Reptiles are complex animals with specific thermal regulation, light, heat, and humidity requirements, as well as dietary needs.

[1:37:12] Each species has specific conditions necessary for their well-being, including large amounts of habitat space or privacy, or avoiding being on view. And what I term animal agency, the ability to decide where to bask, when to move, and for how long, when to eat and drink, when and where to retreat, and so on. And research has also demonstrated that reptiles are social animals, so housing these animals in the deprived enclosures that I’ve seen from photographs from Rotilia, with a large reduction in their natural space and without cons specifics, denies these captive reptiles most opportunities for natural behavior and contributes to their stress.

[1:37:54] And one example is a box circles about the size of a hamburger and uses two to five football fields worth of space in the wild, but when individuals see a small animal like that in a small habitat, they walk away with the impression that everything is fine, and those deprived setups are copied by individuals, and people think they’re providing a good habitat when those habitats are actually grossly inadequate. Regarding reptile entertainment shows, whether it’s onsite or mobile shows, that give the impression to the audience that reptiles don’t mind such events, these reptiles are pulled out of transport boxes and bags into lights and amplified sound with noisy audience members and handling.

[1:38:39] Natural behaviors are not observed during these events, as animals are held aloft, something that would never occur for these animals unless they were being predated on. And they’re subject to all this petting and groping. And then these reptiles and word transports back to their holding cage, missing optimum feeding and basking regimes, only to get put through this again and again and again. Now reptile facts may be delivered during these entertainment events, but research shows that little information is retained in such venues.

[1:39:14] And research also shows that these events increases the public’s desire to own reptiles. So reptilia is actually contributing to a potential new burden on your shelters because these animals have very long lives. They’re going to get released or surrendered and animal agencies and staff are going to have an additional burden. Reptilia is a venue that demonstrates deprived habitats through a great reduction in space, in complexity and social encounters, and subjects reptiles to stressful entertainment events.

[1:39:52] And by selling cages and supplies and marketing itself as a rescue, reptilia implicitly encourages private ownership of these reptiles. Reptilia’s business model is not in the best interest of animals nor your community. And in order to support the actual animal welfare needs of reptiles, I strongly encourage you to deny the exemption that reptilias seeks. Thank you very much. Thank you Dr. Nash for being on with us this evening, going to the gallery, Carla, perfect.

[1:40:30] I assume you’re Carla, one of you’s Carla. Can you hear me? Yes. We can hear you and you have up to five minutes. Please proceed. Thank you. Good afternoon, members of the committee. My name is Carla Karpus, and I’ve been a resident of London for most of my life. I’m 70 years old, a retired educator with the Thames Valley Board of Education, and I would like to express my serious concern about reptilia requesting an exemption to the present by-law, which came into existence for very good reasons.

[1:41:07] Excuse me. I’m asking that a city of London maintain their 2018 decision to reject reptilias requests to expand here into London. As an experienced educator of more than 30 years, I see no value at all in the exhibition of exotic animals as an educational tool as suggested before. It is through excellent movies and videos and science classes that my students successfully learned about animals, their way of life, their habitat, their food, and their social behavior.

[1:41:42] Animals in cages or behind glass do not exhibit natural behavior. They would simply do their best to hide from being touched and prodded from the light or from the ticking or knocking on the glass or cage by visitors. There’s nothing natural about watching animals in cages and glass containers. As well, as an experienced mother of more than 30 years, I see only danger in the handling of exotic wild animals. I wouldn’t take my children there nor my grandchildren. These are not pets, but various reptiles, including crocodilians, venomous snakes, and other currently prohibited animals.

[1:42:24] Please note that these animals may be very poisonous and would very likely bite when being handled. As well, reptiles can spread serious pathogens, such as E. coli or salmonella. For the past two years, we have been living in the midst of a worldwide pandemic, originating in the exploitation of wild animals. Are you ready to battle another one? Animals belong in their natural settings. Being caged places enormous stress on them unnecessarily. They’re taken from their natural habitat and are forced to exist in very reduced ranges.

[1:43:02] They suffer a lack of enrichment and are prevented from performing natural behaviors. Many of them die while being transported or due to being handled. In short, exemption to the existing by-law would ultimately undermine the welfare of these exotic animals and the health and safety of those who interact with them. And heaven forbid, open the door to more exemption requests by additional unscrupulous zoos who are out to make a quick profit.

[1:43:35] A by-law is a by-law is a by-law. No is no is no. Please, I’m asking this committee, do not concede to obtain his demands. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Cooper for joining us. On Zoom, we have three final speakers. It’ll be our lay-law and Markham and then Mr. Lerner. If you would like to make any comments, I will go to you. So, Rob Laidlaw, if you want to put your camera on, if not, that’s fine too.

[1:44:09] There you are. You have up to five minutes, please proceed. We cannot hear you. Is that any better? That is wonderful, please proceed. Okay, sorry about that. Good afternoon, Chair and members of the CAPS committee. My name is Rob Laidlaw. I’m Executive Director of Zuchek, a wildlife protection organization based in Canada. We’ve been around for 40 years. I’ve been working professionally in the field of animal well for in wildlife protection for the past 43 years, specializing in wildlife and captivity.

[1:44:49] And that work has taken me throughout Canada and around the world. I’m also a chartered biologist, the former Humane Society Inspector and the author of 12 Children’s Books on Science and Animal Welfare. I’m surprised we’re actually here today to discuss this request by Reptilia for Amendment to Animal Control by-law PH3 as this issue has been dealt with previously last April and back in December 18. I know because I was at that meetings and involved in them. I also wanted to say that, just to make a point about what some other speakers have said, that the provincial permit, I think that issue has been resolved.

[1:45:26] We in the animal welfare community are very familiar with it. There’s been 14 separate initiatives at the provincial level to try to obtain licensing. None have been successful yet. So we are very, very familiar with the landscape of that issue. And I just wanted to provide one little point that I noticed is that I think that the lack of any expert support from Reptilia is really telling as to what kind of support they have outside of their own business. Throughout the years, I’ve been involved in writing animal control by-laws and providing input.

[1:46:03] And generally speaking, when you look at animal control by-laws, they’re intended to protect human health and safety, address nuisance issues and animal welfare and other concerns. And amendments to animal control by-laws should not be considered through an exclusively economic lens, like it’s being now, but should carefully consider and examine more directly relevant issues, including animal welfare, public health and safety, local environmental impacts, municipal resource and capacity issues and even conservation.

[1:46:38] And local by-laws, when they’re being developed and when policy is being made, should also take into account evolving public attitudes and changing values regarding the possession display and use of wild animals. And of course, as other speakers have said, they should be informed by the veritable avalanche of new science that says, we have to give these animals better consideration. If economics is the driver in making changes to London’s animal control by-law, in this case, so one small business can set up a shopping mall zoo and sell offsite exotic animal activities throughout the city, then one could argue that others use an exotic animal should also be invited into the city.

[1:47:19] But we all know that what’s good for business or for a single business isn’t necessarily good for the city, London residents or the animals. And past councils have known that and repeatedly rejected private zoo uses in the city as far back as 2011. Now, I’ve read comments and heard statements referring to reptile as a great asset to the city, a win-win proposition that reptilia is world-class. Why wouldn’t we want them? That there have been comparisons to Ripley’s Aquarium in Toronto. I have to respectfully disagree with these statements and the glowing comments regarding this imaginary economic benefit.

[1:47:58] I’ve been to zoos, aquariums, sanctuaries, rescue centers, conservation breeding centers and wildlife parks throughout the world, hundreds of them. I’ve seen the good, the bad, and the ugly of those worlds. In the case of reptiles, I’ve seen some fantastic facilities and exhibits like the Detroit Zoo, the Oakland Zoo, Wildlife Park in England and the Wildlife SOS Sanctuary in India. I can tell you because I know reptilia is not a Ripley’s, nor is reptilia like any of the other facilities I just mentioned. It’s a for-profit commercial business that is currently trying to expand the number of its zoos to multiple cities across Canada.

[1:48:39] 30 seconds. It’s seeking an exemption to lend its animal control by law because they think their business will do better if they have prohibited animals. I don’t have time to particularly articulate other concerns, but I will simply ask you to think about the animals. Think about a four-meter crocodile, an intelligent, highly social, wide-ranging animal with exceedingly complex systems of communication that actually sing to each other, who cooperate, who speak and take care of their babies, stuck in London, Ontario, decade after decade after decade, unable to do anything natural, never seeing the light of day in the tiny exhibit in the shopping mall.

[1:49:18] Thank you, Mr. Leylaw. I urge you to defend your own by-law and its integrity by rejecting the letter of request. Thank you. Emma Markham, you are our next speaker on Zoom followed by Mr. Lerner. Thank you. Please proceed, you have up to five minutes. Thank you. I’m Mo Markham, a member of the public and I have many concerns about this request as well. As others have said, animals don’t belong in captivity, wild animals belong in their native habitats and taking them out of their native habitats, which this organization would be doing, whether they say that it’s mostly rescues or not, they would also be encouraging people to do this and this is of concern.

[1:50:05] Some of these animals have been driven to extinction and certainly they are not able to live normal lives. Nobody belongs in a mall, nobody should live in a mall, no animal, no wild animal, no one. It’s completely unacceptable. The issue of zoonotic diseases is also one that is being glossed over. We say that we have all these biohazard protocols and all these protocols around the concern around escaping, et cetera.

[1:50:41] Those exist because of problems that have been created in the past. We’re still in the midst of a worldwide pandemic that we cannot contain. Many animals carry diseases and biohazard protocols are hopeful but rarely effective. As we know, we wouldn’t be in the midst of this pandemic if they were effective. The bird flu would not be being spread across the world if they were effective and they’re simply not.

[1:51:19] So we know that this doesn’t work and the exceptions are the things that we need to pay attention to. There’s no reason to allow a private business to put the public at risk. There simply isn’t any reason. Also, I would agree with other speakers and add to it that having an animal, seeing an animal in captivity is not educational for a child. What it teaches a child is that it’s acceptable to exploit someone else for profit and for entertainment. And that simply isn’t okay.

[1:51:56] That’s not what we want to teach children. That’s not what we want children to learn. We want them to learn that we all deserve to be free. We all deserve to have the lives that we want to interact with others as we want to be in our native place where we feel comfortable. And I’ll just, because many of the things that I was gonna say have already been said, but I will say that these sorts of displays have been shown over and over again to encourage people to buy, whether legally or illegally, animals, exotic animals, and bring them here.

[1:52:43] And that’s simply unacceptable. And the exotic pet trade is dangerous and it’s also cruel. And environmentally, it’s not a good thing. I will just give you an anecdote before I go. As an adult, I was reading about point Peely and how amphibians had been exotic amphibians that are not native to Canada had been introduced into the ecosystem there and were affecting the ecosystem there.

[1:53:23] And I was shocked by this because as a child, I went with my mother and a friend of hers to point Peely to release some frogs that their family had bought. They were moving and they needed to get rid of them and they thought this would be a nice thing. The public doesn’t have enough information about— One minute. - Thank you. The public doesn’t have enough information about these animals. They don’t know what they need. They don’t know what they need on a day-to-day basis and they don’t know the danger that they can cause to native ecosystems, the danger of what happens when they’re taken from their own ecosystems.

[1:54:04] Thank you for your time. Thank you for joining us this evening in your comments. Mr. Learner, I’m circling back to you to see if there was anything that you wanted to add to this conversation that you feel had been missed earlier. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to take the opportunity to at least make some comments. I would like to remind everyone of Mr. Learlongo’s comments at the beginning of our session this afternoon where he said, conclusively in his opinion, that reptilia is already exempted under the existing by-law.

[1:54:50] I noticed that none of the speakers made any specific reference to the by-law provisions as it relates to the current situation that confronts us. There is no doubt that reptilia is provincially licensed. I would say that with regard to exotic animals it neither permits nor denies the ability to have those, it’s neutral, it’s silent and to interpret it one way or the other, especially to interpret it as a restrictive rather than inclusive is wrong.

[1:55:28] It’s just simply not the way it should be interpreted. I’m a lawyer, but I don’t intend to deal with legal issues. There have been a number of opinions expressed in writing by various parties and it’s not unusual for there to be different opinions. What I would like to emphasize is some of the things that both Mr. Child and the Dr. Murphy mentioned. Safety is obviously an issue and a concern to the committee. It is an express concern of almost every one of the speakers who have spoken here today.

[1:56:05] I stand on 26 years record where there has not been an incident that required intervention. It’s important to note that reptilia is the go-to agency with regard to first responders. Unfortunately, a number of people buy these animals and think that they can look after them. They quickly outgrow their environment and they abandon them. And it’s reptilia who’s prepared to take in these animals recently at the request of the Toronto Zoo. A reptilia was prepared to take in a turtle that they could no longer care for because of its size.

[1:56:43] A reptilia has formed associations with the University of Toronto with the Toronto Zoo. It is in the process of developing a research relationship with the University of Western Ontario. It has approached the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority and has provided space in the facility solely for the use of the Conservation Authority to display indigenous endangered species. It has a track record leading back to 1998 with the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto Catholic District School Board.

[1:57:20] And Mr. Child made reference to that. I think that the references to danger, to health dangers, to the safety have all been adequately addressed by Dr. Murphy and more importantly, notwithstanding anything that Dr. Murphy may have said, there have been no incidents. I think it’s somewhat disrespectful to Dr. Murphy for one of the speakers say that reptilia has not produced a soil expert to support its position.

[1:57:57] You heard Dr. Murphy’s credentials. He is a highly regarded and highly respected in the area in which he speaks. Someone used the word with regard to pause that they are conducting an investigation. That word is misused. They have come and they have inspected those facilities that exist in London. They have said that the facilities in London are well beyond their standards and they have been invited to return once the construction is complete to conduct a further inspection.

[1:58:34] That’s not an investigation and not should be, it should not be construed as that. It’s simply at the invitation of reptilia, they have been invited in to comment so that if there are ways in which we can enhance the environment for the animals that will be housed there, we want to do it. 30 seconds. One of the speakers commented that it’s important for the committee to check out the facts. And I encourage you to do that. I know that some of the members of the committee and some of the members of council have had an opportunity to tour the site to see exactly what is being proposed and what exists.

[1:59:15] Mr. Longo has talked about the economic benefit to the Westmont Mall. We all know the situation of the Westmont Mall. They believe that this is the catalyst that will bring it back to life, revitalize it and encourage tenants to come back in and make it what it was several years ago. Thank you, you’re at your five minutes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Learner. So that concludes our request for delegations this evening. Have you registered in advance?

[1:59:57] Speak, I did register, but unfortunately, the request did not go through. And the fact that some speakers have not been able to tonight. My name is Diane Sourtney. Just once again. And I’m asking if I can have the five minutes please. It’s the committee would allow me the five minutes to speak. I have spoken to some of them. And as I said, my request, it was only at four o’clock yesterday afternoon that I received a notification that the request for delegations that is to go through.

[2:00:40] Being as this isn’t a public participation meeting, I’m going to respectfully decline your request tonight. I will ask that absolutely corresponds. If you want to put, if anyone in public wants to play anything in writing, to send it to the committee clerk, as this item will come before council on December 13th for a final decision in a final vote. And everyone will have lots of time to read your correspondence and reach out directly if they may follow up. But thank you so much for being here tonight. Thank you. Okay, so that concludes our delegates that had registered in advance this evening in person on the phone and on Zoom.

[2:01:18] We do have nine added communications in your package this evening. And a few others have the added that have come in. At this point, it is committees direction for us to discuss. If you would like Mr. Catolic to answer questions, Mr. Carr to answer questions. If you have questions of anything that you’ve heard this evening, or if there’s a motion that you would like to bring forward to help direct a conversation of where we’re going. Councillor Ferrera, I saw your hand first. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I just first like to thank everybody who’s came out full delegation, everyone who’s came out in person.

[2:01:53] You’ve obviously done a lot of research. You’ve obviously looked into this very deeply and for everybody online back at home. But I would like to pass a motion that is appropriate time right now for the motion. So I’d like to move that we’d receive the delegation, but take no action. Okay, so that would be just receive the delegations we had and the communications in our package as well. Yes.

[2:02:27] Hey, we’re just typing that up. Would there be a seconder for the motion of receive all the information before us and the people who have spoke, but to take no actions that would mean no by-law changes this evening. What goes before council on December 13th, if that’s? So I could turn it to the clerks for clear wording, or I could ramble through it, I’m good either way. Just for you know, if the motion on the floor, if the motion does get a seconder and it fails, we’ll have to come up with another suggestion to put to council.

[2:03:07] Council, as it’s a, everybody can always vote down and overturn what committee did, or they could proceed with the direction that committee lays out before us this evening, as were the ones who received the delegations and the information. But just to be clear, no further action means no changes to the by-law, is that what? Yeah, we proceed as we have been operating and no changes to the by-law. I have a nod and we’ll still have an opportunity if there is a seconder to ask questions and comments of staff if we feel it’s needed.

[2:03:43] A follow up, Councillor Stevenson? Oh, I just wanna make sure there is time for questions and comments. Yeah, we would still do questions and comments and I would still proceed to get questions and comments from committee first, and then our visiting Councillors who have joined us this evening. But there is a motion that Councillor Ferrer put on the floor of that the delegations and communications be sure received and that no action be taken with respect to this matter. Would there be a seconder before that proceeds? I will second it.

[2:04:19] I can do that as chair without vacating chair. So I’m seconding it and I will start a speaker’s list. Sorry, it’s been a long night. Yes, a speaker’s list, Councillor Ferrer, did you wanna finish introducing your motion of your logic of why or just skip that and go to other people? And thank you through the chair. The logic would be like this has came council before. Within the last year, I believe, and in 2018.

[2:04:53] And I’m just worried about the precedent that it would set if we were to have an exemption to this by-law and just what we would see come through. So I’m worried about the precedent. I’m also, I’m basically, for the zoo aspect of it, council has already made their decision. We’ve had delegations before come through and speak to this. So I would just like to follow with that precedent and not break that. Okay, I have started a speaker’s list.

[2:05:25] If anyone would like to join it for clarity, I’ll just add in that they did come before us in April, which is still in this calendar year. Just, it was a decided matter of council, but that was the last council and now we’re two weeks at the new council. So they’re back ‘cause it’s a new council. So as we decide on this matter, it would be a year before they can come back unless there’s a 75% change at some point. I’m getting an eye roll from the clerk ‘cause two thirds, we’re just going two thirds.

[2:05:58] So that’s where we’re at and that’s how the procedure is going forward and that’s why it’s back within a calendar year because it’s a different year of a council, we’re a new councilor. Any other speakers on the motion that’s on the floor? Councilor Stevenson and just for committee, once again, I try to do up to five minutes, but it’s committee so we can come back unlike at council. So don’t be worried by that. I’d just like to say that I think we get to acknowledge the fact that a several million dollars has been invested into this location that it’s wanted by the landlord.

[2:06:39] One of the delegates said, “Does London want to zoo?” And I mean, I would say I knocked on doors all summer and I wasn’t elected by the animals, I was elected by the people of London who I experienced want tourism to expand in London. They want our businesses to thrive. They want teachers to have exciting field trips to take their kids. They want accessible entertainment that’s educational and affordable.

[2:07:12] Parents want new daycamps, people want jobs. I went to Sea Reptilia in I think 2008 or 2009. It was incredible, it was amazing, it was educational, it was affordable, I think Londoners deserve that. I think our local hotels and restaurants want the tourists that would come to the city to see something that is that incredible. And I think West Mount Mall deserves to have this amazing tenant and to just dismiss this and say take no action, I think is really sending the wrong message to London’s businesses and to the families who are struggling financially maybe can’t afford to take trips, maybe can’t even afford to drive to Toronto and could have something this great in London.

[2:08:10] So I am 100% behind Reptilia coming to London. I have experienced it, I’ve been told that Vaughan was nothing in comparison to what London is gonna get. And I think we get to really hear what has been said about what it brings in terms of jobs, education, potential research for medicine, for support for our first line people too in terms of handling snakes and reptiles. The London plan, the vision statement is exciting, exceptional and connected.

[2:08:48] And Reptilia is in my experience, exciting, exceptional. It will connect us with other areas of the province. It will connect our tourist businesses, our hotels, our businesses, our restaurants. And I think with all due respect to the people who, I love how they care so much about the animals and the animal welfare. But Reptilia is a Canadian company that has operated for 26 years. And if it’s good enough for Vaughan and for Whitby, why is it not good enough for London?

[2:09:24] Why can’t Londoners have this incredible asset as well? And I think we also get to acknowledge if they were invited to the city and we get to acknowledge the fact that we are where we are, we can talk about the problems that maybe exist in that. But the fact is they are here, as somebody said. They are here and they have invested millions. And London has the opportunity to, now what are we gonna do? Are we gonna allow it to be something amazing? Are we gonna make the best of it? And allow Londoners and our businesses and our people to have that? Or are we gonna say no based on some old rule that somehow we here in London, it’s not good enough for us.

[2:10:08] What’s good enough in Vaughan and Whitby? I saw something on Facebook the other day and I think it’s relevant. And it said that we need both pessimists and optimists. We need both. Because the optimists invented the airplane and the pessimists, the parachute. And I would invite those who care so much about the animals to focus more on parachutes than protests. How can we come alongside and make reptilia even better than it already is? That’s all I have to say, but I’m 100% behind it. I really do think we as council, do we support our London plan to be exciting and exceptional?

[2:10:50] If reptilia isn’t that, I don’t know what that is gonna say to future businesses, tourist attractions, businesses and Londoners as to what they can expect. Most of us were elected because people want something new from council. They’re tired, they didn’t like what they were getting. 30 seconds. And so I invite us to be new, to be renewed and to renew this city the way it deserves to be. It deserves to be a leader in Southwestern Ontario. And Londoners are asking that from us, I believe. Our businesses and our people want London to be exciting and exceptional.

[2:11:28] And I would like to see us support reptilia in doing what it does best. Thank you, looking to Councillor Raman and then Councillor Privel. And then I will look left after that. Please proceed. Thank you and through you. I’m only going to speak to the motion at this time, but I want to say just based on Councillor Stevenson’s comments as well, that at this time, I will not be supporting the motion to just take no action. To me, the work that we do as a committee is in committees as a council, we do our work at council.

[2:12:09] I think there’s an opportunity to have some robust conversation right now about what’s on the table. And I do believe that it’s important to not take no action at this time, but to provide council with some direction coming out of this committee. So I won’t be supporting the motion, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Privel. I would agree with both previously spoken Councillors. I do think that there is a certain opportunity for us for London. If we start with the first aspect of the animal life and when I look at from this perspective, the species that we are talking about and the organization that has invested all the money in terms of the asthma and mold development, those are the species that they would be somewhere else in the same environment.

[2:13:03] So if you look at really protecting these species, kind of in the other jurisdiction in Ontario, Canada, they would be in the same environment. If I look at the business case, I do see a great opportunity. London, as we all know, hasn’t been a great leisure destination. These are the things, you know, like potentially, like this organization together with Kellogg’s 100 together with Mason of all more entertainment, et cetera. Those are the things that can really put us more as a destination place and help us economically.

[2:13:42] If you look at what’s coming from above us, provincially, fairly, we will have more and more challenges financially. And we will have to depend a lot on our own initiatives, on our own thinking outside the box. And I think this potentially is one of the initiatives that could certainly help us. So in terms of the business case, I do think it is positive. In terms of the motion, I agree with that part as well, because actually, if I were the first one to speak, I did want to go in camera and get advice from our solicitor on certain points.

[2:14:27] But I do think that we should not close this opportunity. I do thank everyone who wants to invest in London and thank you for believing in London. And again, I don’t want to make this as an example, but the image of London on the outside has been and we all know that as not the most welcoming, as the most receptive, as the most, yes, we can community. And I would like us to become more like that because we will need to become, yes, we can community, because the challenges are very strong out of us.

[2:15:08] And I do know that this directly doesn’t resolve all the issues we have, including the social issues, but indirectly, it honestly does, because it opens up a lot of gates and London is in there to play, London is there with warm welcome, London is, yes, we can. Thank you. Thank you, looking to, we have one question that’s being looked up through the clerks to come back with an answer about legal advice if we can go into closed session. Now to get it while emotions on the floor, if we have to wait to something’s resolved, then go into closed session.

[2:15:44] So that answers coming back shortly. Hold tight for that. Looking to visiting counselors, if anyone would like to speak to the motion on the floor of receive and take no action. Okay, I will start with Councillor Troso. I’d like to urge my fellow counselors here to vote for that motion and really think about what we’re doing. And I wanna lay out a few reasons for that. This is not the first time that this issue has come before council.

[2:16:18] Historically, there have been a number of instances where this city has said no to zoos. This is not something that one council alone determined. This would set a precedent. This would set a precedent that anybody that wants to engage in the showing of, for example, class seven, class seven animals, which is what’s an issue here, could do it. Because once you grant this exception, you’ve granted an exception.

[2:16:50] And I think that that is going to create a situation where any roadside zoo type operation, regardless of whether, regardless of whether they are accredited by a group like CASA, which this zoo is not, would be able to come in and say, look, you gave them an exemption. You gave them an exemption for venomous snakes and crocodiles and alligators. And we want an exception for monkeys or whatever it is that’s coming next.

[2:17:23] You can be setting a dangerous precedent. And I think what is on the floor right now is wise. And it’s prudent because we don’t need to have this exact same discussion again. And I think that we should. We should ask some questions of staff and we should probably go into closed session. May I ask a question of enforcement staff here? Or would this not be the time? I will interject that an answer just came back that if we would like a committee to go into closed session to get legal advice at this time in regards to the motion on the floor, that that is properly in order.

[2:18:05] As for Orest or Mr. Kootolik is on the phone. So while you think if you want to go on camera, what would your question to Mr. Kootolik be? My question would be how is London by law enforcement staff? Given your current constraints and the current demands that are on your agency, going to protect the human and animal health and safety concerns that would arise from the granting of such an exemption from our animal control by law.

[2:18:40] And do you feel you are equipped to have the expertise to be making those types of determinations? Thank you, Mr. Kootolik. I’m hoping you heard the entire question about staffing levels and the training of your staff if you’re prepared. Yes, and through the chair, thank you for that question. We have already received a complaint regarding reptilia. It has been investigated initially by our animal control officers. That service is a contracted service.

[2:19:15] It’s a tendered service and every five years, plus some extra years for extensions is a goes out to the general public in terms of a RFP and then council, we come back to council with a recommendation on the service provider. So the one complaint has already been investigated by our animal control officers. It has been deemed invalid because there were no animals on site. So it was somewhat of a premature complaint.

[2:19:50] However, once the facility is open and we receive further complaints, we will engage and forward those complaints to the province because the enforcement and terms of the conditions of the provincial license is the responsibility of the province and any allegations of nonconformity could be subject to a provincial investigation. However, if there are any matters outside of the license, they would be subject to an investigation of our under the animal control bylaw.

[2:20:24] In terms of staffing, once again, it’s a contracted service and I have no concerns in terms of responsibility and workload of those staff to investigate under our city bylaws. Through the chair, to be clear though, does your current staff have any expertise in dealing with class seven animals? And in particular, the class seven animals that are proposed to be housed in this facility. Mr. Catolic? Through the chair, thank you for the question.

[2:20:58] Our current ACO staff do not have the expertise as high as the province in terms of investigating the animals that are on site. Should there be any concerns of animal abuse, we would also refer that to the province, to the provincial animal welfare services, the pause investigators. Thank you. Hey, Councillor Hopkins. Yes, thanks Madam Chair. I’m just trying to understand the order here.

[2:21:32] I know there’s been a motion to note or to receive the delegation and I understand that’s quite normal. When we have delegations like this at committee, we can receive that’s not, not an ordinary. My question is about going in camera. I don’t know if that’s going to proceed before we decide and take a vote on the motion and given that, I may be a question through you to staff, given that we previous council and its public record, what the city solicitor has given council and information, is there any new information that we would have to go in camera for or can the legal questions be asked on the floor?

[2:22:28] I’m just not sure ‘cause I’m gonna caution the committee about going in camera. Public legal advice that we received in camera is not part of the public record, but is there still a will of committee to go in camera? I’m seeing some nods so we can certainly go in camera. Would there be a motion to go in camera to receive legal information?

[2:23:04] I have a mover and Councillor Stevenson, seconder. Oh, yeah, I will take care of that too. Okay, so if you wanna go in camera to ask any questions about legal, it would take a mover and a seconder and a vote a majority to go in in closed session to ask questions. So I’ve been mover and Councillor Stevenson. If there’s no seconder, we move on with my speaker’s list. Are you seconding? I will second it. Okay. - To go in camera. Okay, so we’re gonna go in camera to, since we’re in camera, we’re gonna make use of our time to receive the legal advice in regards to reptilia, the motion on the floor before us.

[2:23:49] And while we’re in there, there’s one confidential matter being 6.1 per personal matter identified by an individual, a matter pertain to identify individuals with respect to the 2023 Mayors New Year honor list in the sports category. If committees amenable, we’ll take care of both in there if we don’t need to come out and back and forth. Okay, this item’s not debatable, so calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

[2:24:38] This means for everyone in chambers. Councillors will stay put. Our senior leadership team will take a bio break as will our media friends. Anywhere up in the gallery will be dismissed, while we discuss these items in closed session, and then the doors will reopen to let you back in. I don’t know how long it’s gonna take, so you can certainly use the washroom or come back or watch it from home as well. So apologies, but it is the process. So just a few minutes here as we secure chambers for legal advice, as Mr. Card has joined us virtually already.

[2:25:21] For our Zoom friends, you will be put into a waiting room and then be allowed back in virtually once we come back into public session. So they’ve got more channels.

[2:27:11] Okay, I’ve been advised that our stream is back up. Council gallery doors are open. We’re back in public session. I will call on the vice chair to report out. Thank you. I can report that progress is made on the matters that we spoke about in closed session. Thank you. So we’ve come back into public session. I will fully admit that between closed session and open session, I don’t know who was next in the speakers list. So I had Anna, Councillor Hopkins written down and then Councillor Stevenson, I still don’t, that’s true.

[2:27:50] But Councillor Hopkins, all you, if you would like to proceed? Yes, thank you for recognizing me. And I wanna thank the committee for listening to the public and for the public for coming out. This has been three times in the past four years. And obviously with a new council, we have a discussion about reptilia. I’m not gonna say too much now at the committee other than to encourage you to receive the information. For sure, I will be speaking to this at council.

[2:28:29] And I’m sure there will be another conversation happening at council. But I would definitely encourage the committee to receive the delegations that we have heard tonight. Is there any other for anyone on committee? Hey, Councillor Ferrer as vice chair, if you don’t mind taking the chair for a moment and recognizing me just for I can give the chair and speak to this motion freely. Thanks, I have the chair, I recognize Councillor Palosa.

[2:29:04] Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. And thank you to the residents who showed up online and in the gallery this evening. And thank you to reptilia for their time. I did take the opportunity to go out on site and spend some time learning about their business, their operations, and the species and their care for them. And I appreciate those times with regards to my stance on this issue. I do understand that they have a financial vested interest in the community, in their site, in their build. And it’s coming along well.

[2:29:40] I know that their opening date they’re hoping for is January 1st, and they do have $2 million invested already. For me, I was a know when this came forward in 2018. I haven’t changed my stance. I’ve been steady in that. I know it’s before us ‘cause it’s a new council and it’s been set about the old ways. The old ways were in operation seven months ago and longer when they decide to come and start setting up, even though there seemed to be potentially still some questioning over the class, seven animals being an issue.

[2:30:15] Yes, the business zoning is okay. Absolutely, they have a provincial license. For me, it was always an issue of what kind of businesses I saw London supporting in the best interest of the community in this. For me and Zeus was not one of them. I am worried about if we allow one more welcome, realizing I was always a no thank you to all of them. I do have issues and concerns about potentials surrounding other animals that kids potentially go and not everyone is a responsible pet owner despite reptilian’s best effort to educate the public on how large animals will grow, how much care they will take, how much veterinarian costs might take, that people still see it, they want it.

[2:30:59] It’s something different and the Humane Society is not prepared to take on the influx of animals. Currently, when they do come in, they are matched up with another for-profit animal business like the, to help rehome the animals. Our current by-law staff have no training right now to take care of this. Absolutely, reptilian has experts in world renowned and certainly in Canada, so thank you for your time and expertise. But our own staff isn’t prepared for this right now. So for me, as I said, it’s come and it’s new, a new discussion here, but I was on this committee in 2018 on my first term of council and heard this information.

[2:31:44] I still have the same concerns about the by-law amendments and what we’re talking about. And for me, my family, I do, I think I would be a primary target as a scouter, as a parent with three kids. And for me, I know this business isn’t what would make London exciting or not for me. We have other great investments in the city going on for sports tourism, 100 Kellogg space, museums and other cultural and art attractions for me. This is just a no, but I really appreciate the conversation in all lenses and for educational purposes in informing me on their business model.

[2:32:26] I really do sincerely thank reptilian, their staff for having to take that time. We did have great conversations that if they move forward, always of service to our community, to find ways to do things together. But for me, I’m still a no on this one. Thank you. And I’ll yield the chair back to Councillor Plaza. Thank you, looking for other questions or comments. Okay, I will recognize Councillor Ferrera and then if anyone else wants to raise their hand, please do so.

[2:33:01] Thank you and through the chair. So I just wanted to point out like this, we’re speaking about like what’s new and what’s old and what’s the way forward for London. I heard some comments on the new way of how we should be doing things, but the way I see it is like this is a zoo. It’s been branded as entertainment, but it is a zoo. So what new and what is the way forward is not rebranding something that’s old with a new word, with a new flashy word. The city has said several times and Councillor said, you know, in the past that basically said no to zoos.

[2:33:36] So and I fear of what kind of message this will send. What is animal cruelty? It’s really hard to really understand when you walk in to a facility and you have, you know, animals in enclosures and you see that it’s a very big space and it looks pretty big to them or to yourself when you see that but you’re unaware of really how much space an animal will need. Or basically, you know, it looks flashy to you or, you know, how you would think it would be nice that you know, you’re protected from any type of predators or anything like that.

[2:34:08] But in the end, you know, you don’t really know. So if you were to, you know, if you were to see that and have no other experience to see otherwise, you wouldn’t know that this is necessarily wrong. So I’m fearful of that. I’m also, as Councillor Palosa spoke, it does open the doors and sets a bad precedent. If we were to grant an exemption for this by-law to allow reptilia to basically hold plastar category seven animals, where does that stop?

[2:34:44] And who will be coming in after the fact? How will we know and how we’ll be able to say no to other areas of entertainment coming in, looking to have similar types of business models? How are we supposed to say no to that? All of a sudden, we would be starting to look in a more of a discriminatory way and say no to that. And we would lose our argument for that. So we need to be protective. We need to protect ourselves for the future. And basically, yeah, I’m just worried about the example that we would set moving forward.

[2:35:20] We need to protect ourselves. We need to think about this kind of stuff. And we need to know that if we were to open the door for something like this and set the exemption, we don’t know really what’s going to come. If you see a huge success story for reptilia because we gave them the exemption, other entertainment industry, other individuals trying to start entertainment, regardless if it’s a zoo or not, they’re going to be coming in and they’re going to be opening the floodgates. So we have to be cognizant of that. And I am against it as well.

[2:35:54] I will be saying no to the exemption. Thank you. Okay, Councillor Stevenson. I just want to say a couple of things. One is in support of what Councillor Rahman said earlier about letting this go to City Council. I mean, we do have a new council. There’s eight new members, only four are here. I think this is important enough that City Council should get a look at it. I also feel that, and I do thank all the public for coming and sharing. I think all the voices are important.

[2:36:28] But when we get into the animal issues, we allow birds to be in cages and hamsters to be in cages and fish and tanks. And I think, specifically being negative on the zoo, I think is an issue. Certainly there are always bad apples and bad cases. Reptilia has a 26 year history. And I think that we owe them something for that, or we at least get to acknowledge that the fears that are being spoken about have not happened in 26 years with reptilia.

[2:37:02] So they may be valid, but there’s no evidence to support those fears here, either with human injury or with animal cruelty, and as far as other zoos and us opening up Pandora’s box. Again, maybe it’s something we get to look at, but did that happen in Vaughan over the last 26 years? Has it happened in would be the last few years? I think we need to be more like what Councillor Perble said about, yes, we can. How can we in London welcome new business, things that will add excitement, not for all, but there’s a lot of things that come to London that I don’t find exciting.

[2:37:42] And this is something that’s very exciting to people. Of all ages, of all abilities, people can be in a wheelchair, they can be seniors, they can be toddlers, they can take in nature that they might not otherwise be able to experience. So I’d like to see this go to city council to give a true answer that all of London can speak on. Okay, thank you and just for procedure regards to what community decides tonight in regards to this issue, full council on December 13th votes on everything we’ve done and can overturn or make their own amendments and motions there as well.

[2:38:20] Looking for further speakers before I call the question, before we vote, so currently the motion on the floor having been moved and seconded is that the delegations, communications be received and no action be taken with respect to this matter. And then should this motion, if it passes, it goes to council on what happened that council happens and should this motion fail tonight, another motion needs to come forward a way forward ‘cause we have to do something with what we’ve done tonight.

[2:39:04] Okay, so looking for a committee for other questions or comments, then ideally councilor Vamer we’re gonna be the last one. Thank you chair. I have to urge the committee to turn this motion down. There is another motion that I have circulated that hopefully one of the members will put on the floor and hopefully second and there’s a very good reason for that. We in London have been presented this wonderful opportunity with an organization that is top notch.

[2:39:44] As most of you know, where they’re setting up the operation for London is right in the middle of ward 10, my ward. I’ve had the opportunity to visit this site to meet with the principals and with the handlers who will be working at this site. It is first class all around, as has been pointed out by the committee members themselves, a 26 year track record.

[2:40:24] They started off from an educational background and they continue that education focus. And that education focus has been committed to for London. Think about our children, our grandchildren, the smiles on their faces when they go for day trips and field trips like they’re currently doing in Vaughan, like they’re currently doing in Whitby, which they’ll soon be doing in St. Catherine’s, soon be doing in Berry, but somehow in London, Ontario, there’s this dark cloud of negativity and oh my, the sky will fall.

[2:41:02] I mean, I’ve been through this facility and it is a veritable spa, a veritable spa for reptiles. That’s how well they’re treated. These animals are not despite what we’ve seen from special interest groups. Councilor, oh, I’ll caution you. No, these reptiles are not mistreated. They’re not abused. It’s quite the opposite. And so why can we not speak out against when we hear untruths? Because that’s, I’ve heard a lot of untruths here today.

[2:41:39] And the fact of the matter is, again, this is first class, they wanna come to London. Other municipalities, including Vancouver, Calgary, the list goes on and London, Ontario deserves it. Why shouldn’t London, Ontario have this reptilia exhibition and education center for all of us to enjoy? So I usually turn it down and let’s put on a different motion. Thank you very much. Calling the question.

[2:42:35] Calling the vote, the motion fails two to three. So with that being said, for those in the gallery, the motion has failed. So we’ll need to seek another way forward. At this point, we’ve been sitting here for over three hours without a washroom or any kind of break. So I’m gonna look to committee for, I do not have dinner for you tonight. Maybe I should have said that before we started, we might have been faster. So would 20 minutes be adequate or 30, how much do you need to do input output?

[2:43:11] 20. Okay, so for those online and those in the gallery, we’re gonna take a 20 minute break and then we’re gonna come back and resume and look for another motion. Okay, so if someone has a motion, they’re gonna put forward after break. Please work with the clerks, make sure they have the wording to help us facilitate that conversation. 20 minute break, looking for a motion to take a recess. Councilor Raman moves it.

[2:43:45] Councilor for our seconds it. Can I do a hand vote? A hand vote of a 20 minute break. Okay, thank you. So we are on a break for 20 minutes and then we’ll be back to find a way forward. Okay, so we’re back.

[3:03:29] When we had departed for break, the motion on the floor had failed. So looking to committee for any alternate motions, realizing we could also do receive the delegations and the communications and put this item forward to council without a recommendation, realizing even if we do have a recommendation, chances are we’re gonna have this discussion at full council anyways, referencing our points and potentially going in closed session there for more legal advice. So it will be Groundhog Day, regardless of what we do in my experience.

[3:04:04] So I’m just hoping to keep this next part more concise as we’ve already had a full conversation. Was there a motion or questions? Okay, Councillor Stevenson, would you like to introduce a motion? I’d like to introduce a motion. Do I just read it out? Does the clerk have wording in advance? It’s the one Paul van Mereberg input. Okay, so she’s gonna pull that up, but yes, you can certainly read it out with those in the gallery and those on Zoom. That the civic administration be directed to prepare a by-law to be introduced at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 13th, 2022 to amend by-law PH3, the animal control by-law, to permit the keeping of class seven animals within the city of London under such requirements as are recommended by civic administration.

[3:04:59] Is there a seconder for that motion? Councillor Pribble seconds it. So the motion’s on the floor. I will just ask a quick question of staff. As there is a specific date in there of December 13th, which is our next council meeting, is that adequate time for staff to prepare the necessary amendments to bring back for council’s consideration? Madam Chair, I can’t speak for the by-law enforcement staff, but certainly the wording of an exemption itself is not something that will take a great deal of time.

[3:05:48] It’s the requirements that have to be identified by enforcement staff and put into the draft that will be a little more challenging. So I wonder if it might be possible, given the chair’s earlier comments about the matter of being discussed again at council, if the presentation of the by-law could be subject to the council direction and return to the first meeting in January in that event, that would give staff more time to prepare the requirements that the council would like to have included in the draft.

[3:06:27] Okay, I can appreciate those comments. Mr. Catolic, would you like to add anything for committee’s consideration in regards to the motion that’s on the floor? I think through the chair, certainly could come back in January with half the amendment. We are of ministers looking at their control by-law and some that have recently also considered amendments, so we certainly could come back in January. Okay, so just in conversing with the clerk, realizing that committee could pass the motion on the floor tonight, in which case it’s discussed at council, and then once council approves or declines it, at that point, that’s when staff would work on the by-laws, so staff would currently, even after committee tonight, if this passes, have to the clerk.

[3:07:37] With apologies and through the chair, as the chair was alluding to, generally speaking, the recommendation of the committee would be considered a council, and then once council enacts the recommendation, then the action would be taken. In this case, we would do it in parallel, which is to use the expression, a bit of a sticky wicket. It’s not a preferred process, but it could be done, and then it would be up to council whether or not they enact the by-law that is circulated at that time.

[3:08:16] So checking with committee members, is it the December 13th meeting you want, or the January one that staff was saying that they could collaborate on? With staff saying they can do January, is that them saying they can’t do December? There is a January first opening scheduled for Reptilia, so. Just through the chair, if I may clarify, I’m in the committee’s hands. If the committee requests a by-law amendment, we can certainly create a draft amendment for the December council meeting.

[3:08:55] Okay, it was also my understanding that Reptilia doesn’t have the exotic animals on site right now either, or staff trained for the London facility, as they would need two staff, to even consider those right off the bat for opening day. It’s in your hand, so my understanding is, you want to keep the December 13th date. Councillor Stevenson. Yes, please. So we have a mover and a seconder. Staff have said they can make it work and do things in parallel, but going to council, starting my speakers list. I will note, we’ve already had extensive public engagement tonight, and robust discussion around council.

[3:09:36] If it’s a specific question of staff, please ask it. If it’s just reiterating a point you’ve already had, I would encourage you to keep it, because we have this discussion anyways at council, and we’ve already know how the last vote went. So with those remarks being made, does anyone feel the need to add comment to the motion on the floor? Councillor Troso, I’m gonna be inclined just to deny you. Realizing we have a full voted council, and I think we already know how this vote’s going, and I don’t believe anyone else’s open to persuasion this evening.

[3:10:19] I don’t believe, okay, Councillor, so just really brief remarks. Really brief remarks is this is a very backward way to be making policy. We should be doing committee work at committees. If you wanna draft, if you wanna put a motion on the floor to ask for a full staff report, that gets into the kind of criteria that we would need in order to make a sustainable by-law that can stand up and withstand the test of time, then you can’t be, we need to put this out here now because they need to open January 1st.

[3:10:54] They can open January 1st. They just can’t have the exotic animals. And the point I wanna make is I would urge you not to do it this way because what’s gonna end up happening is we’re gonna get into a lot of discussion at council where we’re gonna be doing committee work. People are gonna get frustrated, it’s gonna get late, and it’s gonna get referred right back here. Do it right the first time and ask for a staff report, and ask for a staff report that will be able to, they’ll need some time in order to, they’ll need some time in order to deal with what are the kinds of criteria that we would need in order to be able to make this by-law work, which doesn’t say a lot of us would, you need to be more careful than what you’re doing here right now.

[3:11:36] This is reckless what you’re trying to do. Thank you, if you drop your mic, that’s perfect, Councillor Hopkins. I’d just like to support Councillor Tresault’s comments to the committee, I think, if we’re gonna be setting policy in place, this is not the way to do it, and encourage you to get some information, staff report back. Councillor Van Merbergen? Councillor Van Merbergen?

[3:12:10] No, I’m Councillor Van Merbergen? Thank you, Chair. I, staff are no strangers to this issue. They’ve written reports for council, and they’re not too distant past, also in 2018, so they know what they’re dealing with. I think we’ve heard from Mr. Catolic, and I’m gonna ask him one more time. Mr. Catolic, is December 13th doable and in a responsible way?

[3:12:48] Mr. Catolic? Through the Chair, civic administration is in your hands. If that is the direction, then we will produce a draft by-law for the December council meeting. And that will give you enough time, and we’ll have a responsible draft, obviously. Is that correct? Through the Chair, that’s correct. Okay, thank you. Councillor Stevenson? Yeah, I just wanted to clarify.

[3:13:20] I don’t know when the opening is, so I probably spoke out of turn there. I just know that it’s relatively urgent or coming up, and I’m not feeling pressured. As you guys said, this has gone through council before. Staff has been through it. I heard staff say that they have several cities they can look at in terms of wording for exemptions, so we’re not on new ground here. We’re not, like it’s on a new frontier. I think this is reasonable. Councillor Ferrera? Thank you, through the Chair.

[3:13:53] Is it possible to move an amendment to the motion on the floor? You can say what the clerk wants to give the proper procedure, but it depends what your amendment is if they deem it friendly or not, if they want to accept it versus having a vote on it. Is that through the Chair, the City Clerk’s office is not a fan of the expression friendly amendments, so we’ll make a determination once we hear from the Councillor.

[3:14:29] That’s acceptable, thank you. So I just wanted to move an amendment for the current motion on the floor, basically referring to what Councillor Troso and Hopkins was speaking about, and taking the motion back to staff for a full report. Is the mover and a seconder amenable, sorry, the night grows long, amenable to Councillor Ferrera’s potential amendment, in which case it would just be changed in the wording here, and if not, there’s a different process.

[3:15:18] I’m not sure that I’m clear, a staff report, is that what you’re saying? I’m just looking for a full scope of the impacts that any type of exemption would bring along for the City for the future. I think just going right to the amendment, or sorry, going right to the exemption, I just think would be harmful without actually properly delving into it. Okay, so my understanding is, versus just bringing forward simply the by-law with it, you would like to know the scope of other implications that might have for the Corporation of the City.

[3:15:57] Thank you, sir, the chair. Like I would like to, if possible, scrap the by-law amendment, and refer back to staff for a report to find out the scope. Okay, where’s the mover? Okay, we’re just typing some wording, and then we’ll proceed. We’ll start with, is there a seconder?

[3:16:40] Well, you said it was the first and seconder amenable to that, and I’m not, because then we’re asking staff then to come up with all kinds of work in the period, and that’s not the request. If we’ve circled around this and everyone knows, and other cities have done this, and they can look at several other cities and see, I don’t know that things have to do that in the next week or two is reasonable. So my motion was this by-law amendment, or this as it’s worded here. Okay, so they’re not open to having that wording changed, so let me just get the clerk to comment.

[3:17:26] The amendment would read that the clause be amended to read as follows, that the civic administration be directed to prepare a staff report, to be brought forward to the January CPSC meeting, to amend by-law PH3, the animal control by-law, to permit the keeping of class seven animals within the city of London under such requirements as are recommended by the civic administration. So in essence, this amendment to the motion on the floor would result in a staff report coming back to this committee prior to council considering a by-law.

[3:18:06] And Councillor Stevenson, you’re- Well, I don’t know, has staff changed such that their staff report would have changed from the last time they looked at it? I mean, we were gonna look at it new ‘cause it’s a new council, but is this gonna be new? I know you would raise questions of asking staff if there was other circuses and things that had popped up in other jurisdictions, or the other animals were added to those lists before, after the section seven amendments, if other animals came before after reptiles, which I don’t think was in prior staff reports, which staff commented on, or knowing if other zoos and stuff, if there was that influx of people coming to those cities after amendments were made versus not, which I don’t believe staff had.

[3:18:49] If there is a staff person to comment on those two items, if that would be new information that we’ve brought forward that was questions unanswered at committee. Yes, through the chair, I don’t believe we did that for some review in 2017, 2018. So just to clarify that civic administrations in your hands, if council wishes to have a draft bylaw, we could have a draft bylaw for the December council meeting. If council wishes report back with a look at all these other options, that is unlikely a wholesome review could be undertaken for the December council meeting, it would likely come back in January or February of next year.

[3:19:43] Okay, I believe I was with councilor Stevenson still. Can we vote on this motion? And if it doesn’t happen, we can try something else? Okay, looking to see if there’s a seconder for the motion put forward as by a red by the clerk. Thank you through the chair.

[3:20:18] There is a motion on the floor that is loaded into your eScribe and it’s also displayed here in the chambers, but if you refresh, you’ll see it in the eScribe and that was the motion moved by councilor Stevenson and seconded by councilor Pribble. Subsequent to that, councilor Ferrera has proposed an amendment to that motion which we have read aloud and we would be looking for a seconder to that motion. If there’s not a seconder, then we will go back to the main motion for a vote. I think does everyone have the wording that we’re currently discussing on their screens in eScribe?

[3:21:05] Okay, so someone, the member committee’s still refreshing and I’ll second that motion. Hey, so councilor Ferrera, did you get eScribe to do what you want it to do? Head nod, yes. Okay, councilor Raman, please proceed.

[3:21:39] Thank you and through you. Okay, so now I’m a bit confused on process here. So am I dealing with the motion that was put forward in order by councilor Stevenson and Pribble? I understand there’s an amendment, but the amendment is not being deemed friendly. Therefore, it’s a separate motion. So now we’re dealing with the first motion, which should be dealt with ‘cause I’d like to speak to the first motion, if that’s okay. The amendment would be on the floor first and then it would be incorporated into the main motion.

[3:22:15] But the clerk will clarify, which is on the floor. And I know as frustrating as this is, I assure you it is more painful at council when you have 15 of us confused versus five of us. Thank you through the chair. I will concur with what the chair has indicated to you right now, what is now on the floor is the amendment. It has been duly moved and seconded. So it’s now loaded into E-Scribe. If you refresh, you will see that. So the amendment would propose to change the motion that was previously on the floor. And committee will vote first on the amendment.

[3:22:51] And if that fails, then you would revert back to the main motion. Councilor Raman? Thank you and through you, I really appreciate that we are getting to a point of clarity. I am supportive of this motion as read. I do believe that there are some unanswered and lingering questions that need to be fleshed out. And instead of on the council floor, it needs to come back to committee to do so.

[3:23:24] A staff report will help to shape any direction that we take. I think we ask staff to prepare a bylaw. We’ll be wordsmithing a bylaw on the floor of council on the 13th. And I don’t think that’s fair to anyone. I also do think that the staff report allows the public to then review said report and then provide comment on an updated report versus just seeing a bylaw that could then be amended and take different shape at the December meeting.

[3:23:58] So that’s what I’m considering at this point. Thank you. Other committee members? Question or comment on the amended motion that’s on the floor before you? Is committee clear on the amendments on the floor? You have it loaded in e-scribe and you have no questions of staff at the moment.

[3:24:35] Okay. Councilor Van Merbergen, a brief comment on this? Speaking to the amendment, I would certainly urge that this amendment be defeated and just then return to the main motion as moved and vote in favor of that because we’ve heard from staff, we’ve heard from Mr. Catolic that he can bring a bylaw, a revised bylaw back for December 13th.

[3:25:09] Easily enough, the previous reports could be part of that package. And I’m sure there’ll be some form of report that comes with that revised bylaw. Would that be the case, Mr. Catolic? There would be the previous reports plus some form of report with the revised bylaw? Through the chair, once again, I’m in your hands, if the committee wishes this, then I can. But if the committee wishes to have a larger review to look at a number of different options, that will take longer.

[3:25:48] And so today we’re on November 29th, I believe the committee deadline or council deadline would be December 5th. So it would not be reasonable to get a full sum review done in a few days and have it for a council. So that’s why a full review would be in January, February, back to a CAHPS committee. Mr. Catolic, just to follow up. To the chair, please. To the chair, please.

[3:26:22] Follow up. Follow up. Mr. Catolic, just wondering the amount of time, so December 5th, I’m not sure if this is a fair question to ask you or not, but do you think this requires a given the amount of time and effort that’s been placed by staff and frankly council on this issue, that it needs weeks of additional investigation from our, for example, sister municipalities around Ontario.

[3:27:05] Mr. Catolic. Yes, through the chair, if committee requests a by-law amendment, yes, we will be discussing it with our partner municipalities. If the committee requests a by-law amendment and looking at other options, enforcement processes, that is a longer process and that’ll require a longer time period to report on and therefore it would likely happen in January, February.

[3:27:38] I hope that answers your question. Thank you, yes, thanks. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. And I would urge the committee here to support the amendment to have a report come back. The reason I am urging you to do this is as Councillors, we are obligated to the Corporation of the City of London. We have not received a report on opportunities for the exemption. We do need to review it.

[3:28:14] I think our obligation is to the Corporation of the City, not to reptilia, to have it the exception, exemption for them for opening day. I think I just wanna caution you here where your obligation should be and really encourage you to support more of a report coming back to Council. Thank you, or to committee. I’m gonna ask Councillor Stevenson, please proceed. It’s just a quick comment.

[3:28:52] But just to say to the 100% report to the Corporation of the City of London. And I think we get to look too as to whether we wanna ask staff to do a report and to do all of that effort to look at different options when it’s our decision. If we say, if we’re saying yes to this, then let them do the work to get it done correctly rather than do a report to then see what our decision is gonna be.

[3:29:24] I think we know, right? I think most of us know and we’ll have an interesting discussion at Council to find out is the city open to the new exciting tourist attractions? Yes or no? And then we can do the by-law and get the wording done in the best way that protects the City of London. But I think to ask the staff to do a report is just adding work that I think there’s a lot to do already. And this is our decision to make. Councillor Ferriar, can you take the chair, please?

[3:30:04] And thank you, Madam Chair. I have the chair, I recognize Councillor Palosa. Thank you. Though I’ve already raised my concerns about this in the direction we’re taken with the by-law and it does feel rushed. I know that I’ve heard that we’re saying we’re not in a rush, but they’re opening January 1st. This is my concern of potentially passing a by-law. That’s gonna be guaranteed to be wordsmithed on the floor at Council in addition to the conversation we already had tonight.

[3:30:37] Like this much time again. Plus wordsmithing. And then potentially realizing we didn’t quite get the wording right or accidentally left a loophole for others to come in that we weren’t aware of. That’s my concern. And giving staff the time to finish looking into those neighboring municipalities now that they have been open for a while, like what changes have they seen and using that different lens to bring us back information. Even if it’s not a conversation, like something that I’m interested in supporting, I’m definitely interested in knowing any liabilities that come with that that we could potentially be owning ourselves to for whatever decision it is that Council makes, whatever direction it is that we take, that we do so with eyes wide open and we know exactly what we’re getting into.

[3:31:22] I know that some people might be thinking they opened January 1st, why we’re having this conversation now, but this conversation has happened before with the prior Council and this was a direction they took, that they felt was insulating the city of the best in an interest of Londoners at that time. Absolutely, it’s a new city council, but I still have those concerns of if we are moving down this path and that is Council’s decision that we will find out about making sure that we have the proper information to make those decisions with in regards to, is there a way to restrict some of the animals coming in or once you do section seven, we’re gonna have tigers, monkeys and everything else in the city of what, is there any way to protect ourselves and limit what we’re exposing ourselves to?

[3:32:09] So I’ll leave my comments with that. Thank you, Councillor Palosa. I yield the chair back to you. Thank you, realizing at this point in the conversation, we probably all think what we think. It might not be open to much more persuasion. I will ask committee members and anybody else speaking just to be as brief as possible, as I think we’re close to calling the question again. Sorry, Councillor Ramen, I looked at you in blank, but that means nothing publicly, so please proceed. Thank you through you, I was reading your blank as you were going, so thank you for that.

[3:32:43] I just want to be clear on the intention of the motion with the mover of the motion, because the way that I’m reading the intention of the motion is to prepare a staff report to be brought forward to amend the by-law. So we’re moving in a direction in the staff report that would flavor the conversation around amendment. So I just want to be very clear and transparent that that’s how I’m reading this motion at this time. And so to me, it’s quite prescriptive in where we’re going, thank you.

[3:33:21] I believe you’re reading that correctly, as it’s asking for a staff report to come back in the way it’s gonna amend the by-law, as that seems to be the will of committee from the vote we already had prior. Councillor Ferriere. Thank you through the chair. That wasn’t my intention on prescribing the way the amendment should be read. I was hoping for more of a report on the impact of making an exemption to the by-law for class seven animals for the city. Just one moment.

[3:34:52] So Councillor Ferriere, they’re gonna read some stuff out for you for us. I’m just gonna say that I think part of it is that this committee itself is kind of split on the direction we wanna take in realizing this conversation has been long and intricate that regardless of how it goes at council, we have a certain base to cover off our concerns of a little bit of by-law, a little bit of potential staff report, and then a person wants to throw everything out the window and just go with, give me something immediately. We could fly that way too.

[3:35:25] So the committee clerk’s gonna read the wording. Sorry, is this in e-scribe two? We’re gonna upload it and they can do the refresh thing. And e-scribes refreshing at the same time that she’ll be reading. That the clause be amended to read that the civic administration be directed to prepare a staff report to be brought forward to the January CAHPS meeting with respect to a potential amendment to by-law PH3, the animal control by-law, to permit the keeping of class seven animals within the city of London under such requirements as are recommended by the civic administration.

[3:36:14] It being noted that a draft by-law will be included with the staff report. Councillor Ferrera. Thank you through the chair. So I do see the change here for the potential amendment for the by-law, which is okay. It being noted that a draft by-law will be included with the staff report.

[3:36:48] So that’s just an attachment to the staff report at this moment and I’ll be okay with that. Thank you. And the seconder’s okay with that. Does committee have any questions or are we calling the question? Give you a moment to finish reading and contemplating. Councillor Stevenson, I don’t know if that’s a way that you’re good or a way that you have a question.

[3:37:27] Well, just a question is that is it fear and is the direction clear enough that staff would know the limits on this report? Yes, to staff, do you need any more direction than this? Or is it, you understand that we wanna staff report back with potential by-laws to accompany it for our consideration at committee? Just through the chair, if the clerk wouldn’t mind, if they could email me what’s on the floor and I will give it a very quick read and respond back.

[3:38:10] Mr. Card will send that to you too. We don’t like to play favorites. Yes, thank you. Okay, Mr. Card and Mr. Catolic, it has been sent. We’ll give you a moment to review it while I ask committee if there’s any other questions or comments while we’re waiting to hear back from a nod from staff. Chair, that’s clear to me, thank you.

[3:38:53] Thank you. And to me as well, Madam Chair, thank you. Perfect, thank you, Mr. Card. Councillor Stevenson, are you satisfied with staff’s response? Yes, although I do have one question as we’re learning this process, this seems quite different than my emotion that I put forward, so just a little unclear on, I went from proposing a by-law amendment to be ready and then now it’s a staff report and a draft by-law.

[3:39:28] So just clarity on this amendment process. Yeah, so it’s been amended if this fails before us, it goes, reverts back to what you put on the floor and then we start the conversation again. Okay, and that process I understand, but it’s just, this is to me a large step away from the initial motion. Yeah, Ms. Westway, powers will speak to that. Thank you, through the chair. Because you are sitting as committee, this is procedurally correct.

[3:40:04] It would probably not be considered procedurally correct at council, so it’s a little bit different as you work through the committee process where this is helping to get to the point of consensus with the committee. So I hope that’s helpful. Councillor Stevenson, I follow up before I go to councilor Pribble. Okay, thumbs up, councilor Pribble. Just to reconfirm then, then motion four and the council would have been first loaded down before we came up with five, correct?

[3:40:37] At the committee meeting, it is okay procedural wise. Thank you. Okay, and there are questions or comments further from committee. Staff is good with it. I’m gonna call the question if we’re good. Okay, I got nods from committee, calling the question. The amendment passes four to one.

[3:41:25] Okay, so that’s the recommendation of that wording that will go for committee council on the 13th. For the public, that concludes that item with the report potentially coming back. We’ll know on December 13th at council how they process that and what comes out of there. So it’s not done, but it is out of committee’s hands at this point. We’re not done at committee yet, but anyone here just for that one item virtually on screen or in chambers is welcome to depart. The next item is mine.

[3:41:57] I don’t know who wouldn’t want to stick around for a renaming of Paul Haggis Park. At this point, as it is my motion, I’d like to table it. Councillor Ferrer, can you please take the chair? Thank you, Madam Chair, and I have the chair and I recognize Councillor Palosa. Thank you to committee. What I’m requesting this evening is your support for park renaming. It’s a park that bears Paul Haggis’ name and I’m requesting that the name be removed and staff bring forward in a future report, a replacement name as we do through our naming process.

[3:42:34] Recently after the court stuff in a civil lawsuit, Mr. Haggis was found guilty in a sexual assault in New York. He also has accusations on another continent as well. As you are aware, the former city council made a commitment to creating a safe London for women and girls. And this, in my opinion, definitely does not feel to be connected with that and goes against that policy. So it’s two parts that I’m moving, that staff be redirected to begin removing Paul Haggis’ name from the city park located at 2875 Bateman Trail and to remove all related references from the city’s website.

[3:43:20] And that staff be directed to subsequently begin the process of renaming this location, including consultation with residents in the vicinity. This park is within my ward of ward 12. Staff have assured me that there is a location of 2875 Bateman Trail. So if there’s any first responders or issues with the park that the street address itself is sufficient, so that is what I’m putting on the floor and I’m looking, or the chair will be looking for a seconder. Thank you, Councillor Palosa, that’s a motion.

[3:43:54] So do we have a seconder and Councillor ramen is seconding that. Any speakers to this motion? No one, last call, okay. So I see no further hand, so we’ll call the question. Closing the vote.

[3:44:36] The motion carries five to zero. Thank you, excellent job getting us through that so quickly. And I’ll take the chair back if you allow it. Thank you, Councillor Palosa, I yield the chair to you. Thank you, I should have stayed out of it and maybe you could have just done 4.3 just as quickly. Item 4.3 is 2022 park land conveyance and levy by-law CP9 update. I would need a mover and a seconder to put this one on the floor, moved by Councillor ramen, seconded by Councillor Stevenson.

[3:45:11] There is a delegate request from Mr. Wallace of the London Development Institute. He has withdrawn that request and had submitted in writing his feedback instead and said that he, LDI is in full support of the staff recommendation. So we don’t need to receive that delegation this evening and looking for any questions or comments in regards to item 4.3, seeing none, calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

[3:46:04] Deferred matters in additional business. I’m not made aware of any, but do we have any? And no, perfect. We had confidential matter that we’ve already taken care of in closed session. At this point, our time together has come to an end and I’m looking for a motion to adjourn moved by Councillor. Food by everybody. I’m gonna take Councillor Pribble and Councillor Ferrer on that, a hand vote of all those who’d like to part ways. Moved, thank you so much. Thank you to everyone in the gallery who stayed to the very end and for everyone online and to staff for a long night and I’m sorry, next time I’ll do better and provide snacks.

[3:46:41] We’re adjourned and I’ll see you on the 13th for sure.