Open Council

6th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

Open Council

6th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

January 17, 2023, at 4:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 4:03 PM; it being noted that Councillor P. Van Meerbergen was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that Councillor S. Trosow disclosed a pecuniary interest in Item 4.3, having to do with consideration of appointments to the Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority, by indicating that one of the candidates is his spouse.

2.   Consent

2.2   1st Report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee

2023-01-17 Submission - DIAAC Report

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the 1st report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee from its meeting held on December 8, 2022 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

2.1   London: A Place to Call Home (London Development Institute (LDI) and London Home Builders’ Association (LHBA))

2023-01-17 Staff Report - A Place to Call Home

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the report dated January 17, 2023 summarizing the City’s response to the London: A Place to Call Home white paper BE RECEIVED for information;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a delegation from M. Wallace, LDI.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the delegation request from Mr. M. Wallace, LDI, BE APPROVED to be heard at this time.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Public Participation Meeting - Not to be heard before 4:05 PM - 2023 Budget

That the following written submissions for the 2022-2023 Multi-Year Budget 2021 Public Participation Meeting BE RECEIVED for consideration by the Municipal Council as part of its 2023 Multi-Year budget approval process:

a)  R. Grant Inglis, Scott Petrie LLP Law Firm;

b)  C. Butler;

c)  Argyle BIA; and,

d)  London Cycle Link;

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

  • J. Lalonde, speaking against Budget Amendment Case P-10 - Reduction to previously approved business cases for Streetlights and Winter Maintenance and  Walkway Maintenance Reductions;

  • B. Mejia, Argyle BIA - speaking in support of Budget Amendment Case P-18 - Streetscape Master Plan for Dundas Street - Argyle BIA;

  • C. Roberts - providing general comments and comments specific to “ESG” evaluations and requesting additional consultation with taxpayers about the application of same;

  • A. Wasylko, London Cycle Link - requesting a significant budgetary commitment to priorities for cycling infrastructure in the city;

  • C. Butler - requesting a more transparent process related to budget surplus use and suggesting that continuous improvement targets be increased;

  • B. Williamson - indicating that Londoners are struggling financially and recommending that budget surpluses be rebated back to taxpayers;

  • C. Luistro, Hamilton Road BIA - speaking in support of Budget Amendment Case P-16 - Funding for the Hamilton Road BIA;

  • S. Ryall, Humane Society London & Middlesex - speaking in support of Budget Amendment Case P-14 - Humane Society of London & Middlesex Animal Campus and noting the urgent critical need for same;

  • A. Valastro - speaking against Budget Amendment Case P14 - Humane Society London & Middlesex Animal Campus, noting that public tax dollars should not be supporting private organizations;

  • S. Brunette - providing comments related to homelessness and housing issues in the city;

  • R. O’Hagan - providing brief comments related to Budget Amendment Cases P-3, P-10, P-12, P-13 and P-14;

  • J. Look, VP External Affairs, University Students’ Council Western - speaking against Budget Amendment Case P-10 - Reduction to previously approved business cases for Streetlights and Winter Maintenance and  Walkway Maintenance Reductions;

  • M. Blosh - speaking in support of Budget Amendment Case P14 - Humane Society London & Middlesex Animal Campus;

  • A. Lei, University Students’ Council Western -  Budget Amendment Case P-10 - Reduction to previously approved business cases for Streetlights and Winter Maintenance and  Walkway Maintenance Reductions; and,

  • M. van Holst - speaking in support of Budget Amendment Cases P-15 - Increase to Neighbourhood Decision Making Program and P-16 - Hamilton Road BIA.

Motion Passed

Voting Record:

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Stevenson

Motion to open the Public Participation Meeting

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to close the Public Participation Meeting

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by S. Lewis

That the following written submissions for the 2022-2023 Multi-Year Budget 2021 Public Participation Meeting BE RECEIVED for consideration by the Municipal Council as part of its 2023 Multi-Year approval process:

b)  C. Butler

c)  Argyle BIA

d)  London Cycle Link.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the communication from R. Grant Inglis BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee BE RECESSED at this time.

Motion Passed

The SPPC recesses from 6:45 PM and reconvenes at 7:02 PM.

3.2   Delegation - Bill Rayburn, CAO, Middlesex County and Neal Roberts, Chief of Middlesex-London Paramedic Service

2023-01-17 Submission - Middlesex-London Paramedic Service

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the presentation from N. Roberts, Chief of Middlesex-London Paramedic Service, B. Rayburn, CAO, Middlesex County and Middlesex Warden C. Burghardt-Jesson, with respect to the Middlesex-London Paramedic Service System Overview, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by S. Franke

That notwithstanding the Council Procedure By-law, the delegation BE PERMITTED to speak longer than five minutes.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Confirmation of Appointment to the Old East Village Business Improvement Area

2023-01-17 Submission - OEVBIA

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the following BE APPOINTED to the Old East Village BIA Board of Directors for the term ending November 14, 2026:

Maria Drangova, representing the London Clay Art Centre

Grant Maltman, representing Banting House National Historic Site

Rob Campbell, Property Owner

Chris Stroud, representing Bread and Roses Books

Kimberly De Sousa, representing Libro Credit Union

Michelle Scott, representing Western Fair District

Kelli Gough, representing The Palace Theatre

Rashad Ayyash, Property Owner

Scott Courtice, representing London Intercommunity Health Centre

Robbyn Lindsay, representing Willies Café

John Young, representing Somerville 630;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated December 6, 2022 from J. Pastorius, General Manager, Old East Village BIA with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

4.2   Consideration of Appointment to the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority (Requires 2 Members)

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the following BE APPOINTED to the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority for the term ending November 14, 2026;

Prabhsimran Gill

JJ Strybosch

it being noted that approval from the Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP) is required.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

4.3   Consideration of Appointment to the Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority (Requires 1 Member)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by E. Peloza

That Marie Blosh BE APPOINTED to the Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority for the term ending November 14, 2026;

it being noted that approval from the Minister of Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP) is required.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Appointment to the Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority

Majority Winner: Marie Blosh

Councillor S. Trosow leaves the meeting at 7:05 PM.

Councillor S. Trosow returns to the meeting at 7:08 PM.

4.4   Consideration of Appointment to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (Requires 1 Member)

Moved by S. Hillier

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That Sandy Levin BE APPOINTED to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority Board of Directors for the term ending November 14, 2026.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Appointment to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

Majority Winner: Sandy Levin

4.5   Committee of Adjustment - Member Vacancy

2023-01-17 Submission - Committee of Adjustment Request

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Committee of Adjustment:

a)    the appointment to the Committee of Adjustment of Mohamed Mohamed El Hadary BE RESCINDED;

b)    a vacancy on the Committee BE DECLARED;

c)    the communication from the Committee of Adjustment BE RECEIVED; and,

d)    the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to advertise the vacancy and bring forward applications to a future meeting of the appropriate standing committee for consideration.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential

6.1   Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee convene, In Closed Session, to consider a matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose, regarding the Humane Society London & Middlesex 2023 Budget Amendment grant request.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

The Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee convened, In Closed Session, from 6:30 PM to 6:39 PM.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 7:25 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, 25 minutes)

[13:32] All right, everyone, I’m gonna call the meeting to order. This is the sixth meeting of the strategic priorities and policy committee meeting. I’d like to start off by making a land acknowledgement. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishnabeg, Haudenosaunee, Lene Peiwach, and Adewandran. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First 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.

[14:10] Also, 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 SPPC@london.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. Colleagues, we have a number of items on the agenda before us today. I will be chairing sections one, two, and then on from four. I will have Budget Chair Palosa chair, the section related to the Budget PPM.

[14:44] So you can expect us to do a little bit of shuffling back and forth there. And I know we have a number of people in the gallery today who are looking to provide feedback. I know Budget Chair Palosa will provide some comments on that process when she takes over the chair at that section of the agenda. But I’d like to start with any disclosures of pecuniary interest that colleagues might have for us today. Councillor Trocelle. I’d like to declare a pecuniary interest on item four, three, pertaining to the consideration of appointment to the Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority as one of the candidates as my spouse.

[15:26] Any other disclosures, colleagues? Okay, seeing none, then we’re gonna move on to consent items and I am going to separate them into two pieces because there is a request for a delegation status related to one of those items. So there’s only two items. So we’ll deal with them right at the back. Given I’m separating them, I’m going to just deal with the second one first, which is a 2.2, which is a report on the diversity, inclusion, and anti-oppression committee advisory committee.

[16:04] This is a report that is before you. You can ask any questions or make any comments on it or we can move a motion to receive. Is there anybody willing to make a motion to receive? Okay, Councillor Palose is seconded by Councillor Hill here. Any discussion on 2.2? Go ahead, Councillor Raman. Thank you and through you. I’m just wondering if perhaps we can comment since this is a PPM on the process by which any new members would be considered based on the resignation that’s included in the report.

[16:39] Thanks. Clerk just missed your comments. Thank you. Item 5.5 in the report, the resignation. I’m just wondering if we can comment on process related to when the resignation comes in. Thank you. I’ll go to the clerk. Thank you through the chair. It would be our intention to be opening up applications for all advisory committee vacancies within the coming weeks.

[17:14] There are vacancies on a variety of the committees and we will just be closing up the current recruitment that’s underway for conservation authorities and for the LMCH tenant position. So as soon as that closes, we would be looking to actively fill vacancies on all of the advisory committees. Through the usual process that we undertake and including the expanded recruitment process that we have been looking at. Okay, do you have any further questions?

[17:47] Thank you. I just wanted to acknowledge and thank the person that had served and will love that for being part of the committee. Thank you. Thank you. If I see no other comments, then this is moved and seconded and we’ll open this for approval. I vote yes, closing the vote.

[18:29] The motion’s passed 15 to zero. Okay, back to 2.1. This is a report from our staff which is responding to both a report from the home builders and LDI that we referred to them for comment and feedback to council. There is a delegation request associated with this. I know that there is no staff presentation associated with this report, but certainly Mr. Mathers and his team are here to answer any questions we have. But perhaps if colleagues are okay, it would make most sense to entertain the delegation request first.

[19:02] I see Councillor Lewis willing to move a five minute delegation. Councillor Stevenson willing to second. Does anybody have any comments on allowing the delegation? Okay. If not, then we’ll open that authorization for voting. Councillor Trosto, closing the vote.

[19:55] The motion’s passed 15 to zero. All right, Mr. Wallace, you have five minutes. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, committee members, members of council for allowing me to speak to this consent item as this is a response from city staff that to a presentation that myself and Jared made from the London Home Builders Association. I’m Mike Wallace for those who don’t know. I’m with the LDI, the executive of LDI. And we’re at 562 Wellington Street, just up the street from here.

[20:27] First of all, let’s start with a big thank you. You know, when you make a presentation to committee, you’re not sure what happens with it. It was referred to staff and staff have engaged heavily on the recommendations that were in the report that we presented both on the policy side and on the administrative process side. So I want to start with a thank you to Scott Mathers, the head of the development and planning area, both staff of the development side and on the planning staff have engaged heavily and consulted with us extensively on a number of our recommendations that we made.

[21:11] They have in this report that you’re in front of you today for you to receive and file is that the progress that has been made thus far. Nothing’s finished yet and we are more than willing to continue to engage with the city staff on the issues that are laid out in front of you. We appreciate the mayor’s comments this morning and his city address, state of the city address, which highlighted some of the housing issues that the city is facing and is part of that white paper that we presented on London, a place to call home.

[21:48] Just a few small comments, we agree with virtually everything that’s in the report except for one area and there are some time frames that we had put forward in the report that are, you know, clearly the staff have indicated are not going to be met, but it doesn’t mean they’re not working on it. And it was the time frames we put forward were a bit of an accountability criteria and try to make things happen and they are happening and we do appreciate the work they’ve done on all the areas, including the policy areas where very interested and active in contributing to the review of the urban growth boundary that is now underway with the comprehensive review.

[22:36] The rethink zoning process can work. I know time-wise, it’s been, it looks like it’s going to be delayed a little bit, but in our view that for you to see less ZBA’s coming in front of you because it meets the London plan but does not meet the zoning because we’re still under Z1, the sooner we get that done, the better for both the development community and for city staff and for council. So we’re working actively on that, as I said before, where the mayor mentioned a number of the housing affordability and attainability and the deep affordability issues that this community is facing and that as an industry we’re happy to participate in.

[23:18] On the administrative side of the process improvement piece, the tracking system is moving forward in terms of review and development. I know in a previous report, you were looking at the one Ontario report that’s being done in terms of a process for applications across the province from the development side that would all be uniform that, no matter where a developer is dealing with it, whatever the municipality is doing with, it’s a very similar process, especially from an electronic perspective.

[23:51] We know bill 23 has caused some issues, whether it’s the dealing with the, filling out the new relationship with the conservation authority, you should know that, as mentioned before, I think from the mayor’s chair before that bill 109 has some changes in terms of process. You should know that I, in conjunction with the city, our industry and the city both agree that there may be some amendments that might be possible.

[24:24] I actually was contacted today by the minister of, I have a meeting with him on the 31st on that particular item, so we’re hoping that we can express our concerns about how bill 109 is being implemented and how it can be worked for both the city or municipalities and for the development committee. So we’re still working on that. The one area where we disagree, and we knew this was we weren’t going to agree on, was the end of my, the finance director’s looking right at me, the issue of policy, how much time do I have?

[24:59] I have like 15 seconds. So we disagree with what the staff say. We understand why they said it about that it shouldn’t be a policy that a department gets money from them. I’m going to be back to you when that report comes. I challenge the development department to put forward business plans of why some of that money should be reinvested. We often hear that people ask city councils to act like a business. We know they’re not a business, but a business would reinvest in the area that revenues generated from. And we just want that to happen here at the city.

[25:33] Thank you very much. Thank you for your comments, Mr. Wallace. So that concludes the delegation. We are now into a question and answers from our staff. This is a report to be received. So I guess I could, I could look for a motion to to receive the report first. Councillor Stevenson, seconded by Councillor Cuddy. Questions? Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, thank you. Your worship and thank you, Mr. Wallace. For being here and updating this new council too.

[26:06] I know it wasn’t too long ago. You came forward with this report to the previous council. It’s important that we’re always updated and and thank you for that. And looking forward to how LDI can contribute to the vitality of the city as well. I know it’s really important partnerships. I do want to make a few comments on this report. There’s a lot in here. And I want to thank staff as well for a number of working groups that have been set up.

[26:41] The rethink zoning, the CIP, the core area vacancy, reduction strategy. And these working groups take a lot of work and time and energy, not only from staff, but working with the stakeholders. And I really appreciate that openness that the city is having and wanting to engage with the community. It’s really, really important and look forward to some of these reports coming back to council. Obviously the core area vacancy strategy plan is something that I know I’d be interested in getting that update and the consultation that’s going on in the working groups.

[27:17] I also want to make a comment regarding the MOU with upper terms too. This is the memorandum of understanding that we have with the CA, and I want to thank staff and upper terms conservation authority for the continued conversations and meetings to come up with this, given the many changes that are going on provincially. It’s a lot of added extra work on top of the work that’s already going on.

[27:49] And I just want to thank everyone involved in really looking forward to these reports finally coming back to us. So we understand what’s going on. And again, thank you. Your worship. >> Councillor Pribble. >> Through the chair to the staff, I just want to 2.3.2 rethink zoning and 4.1 the streamlining. And I just want to know, do we have any deadline right now to complete these two? Or if we don’t, when can we get a deadline?

[28:22] When these two will be completed? What I mean is the rezoning and the application tracker. Thank you, Mr. Mathers. >> Through you, Your Worship, on the rethink zoning, I’ll start there. The next phase will be an engagement on the draft. So our expectation is for that to come forward in Q2 of 2023. And it really will be generated, it’ll depend on how much commentary is generated on that first draft. It won’t be completed. But what our focus is right now is to get that out here to the public, to council and the community to be able to comment on.

[28:57] As far as the streamlining, that’s an ongoing process. So we have, we began to make those improvements and we’re going to keep moving forward that over the next two quarters as well. >> Follow-up, are you good? >> Just a quick follow-up. So the update, we would have, let’s say, before the summer and potentially before the year end completion. >> Through the chair, yeah, we will have an update on the streamlining before the end of the summer, before the summer or began some June, so Q2, and then we also be updating council on an ongoing basis of re-think.

[29:38] So it’s likely that you’ll get more information on that over the next three months. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. I have Councillor McAllister next. >> Thank you and through your worship. I have a question regarding the multi-stakeholder working group on deep affordability. I know the previous council had set a direction that new housing community be developed to assist council. And I’m just curious in terms of the wording in here because it’s saying representatives of London middle sex housing community members are large and relevant not-for-profits organization and industry partners.

[30:18] In terms of who would actually be sitting on that, I just like some more clarity. And also if there’s an opportunity to allow a group, for instance, like Acorn and have tenant representation. So, you know, in terms of the development of housing, we’re thinking also of renters and not just the property owners. Thank you. >> Mr. Mathers. >> Great. Through the through your worship. We’re doing actually a lot of work on developing what that structure is going to look like moving forward. As Councillor Hopkins had mentioned, we do have a lot of existing groups who want to ensure that whatever we do create is something that’s not duplicating the work of others.

[30:55] So we will be coming forward with some future information for council on what that what each of those groups would look at, whether it’s a deep affordability group or one that’s focused on housing and housing supply. So we will be having a future report on that matter. >> Councillor Trozal. >> To follow up on the last question, will this council have the opportunity to look at the list of groups that are going to be on this on this committee before it gets set? >> Mr. Mathers.

[31:36] >> Through the chair, yes, council will have the opportunity to review that and provide any feedback as well. >> Through the chair again, and I think you’ve just heard some very significant feedback that I hope is taken into account. >> Okay, I have myself on the list next, so I’m going to hand the chair over to Councillor Layman. >> Please go ahead, Mayor. >> Yes, through the presiding officer to Mr. Mathers. So this morning, I talked a little bit about incentive programs and in this report, you outlined the process for reviewing our community improvement plan, which are essentially our incentive programs in different parts of the city.

[32:25] Part of my concern with the need to review the incentive programs is twofold, one, we need to ensure that the programs are actually incentivizing the movement of capital and the development into the places that we actually want it in the city. And two, I think we have to be conscious of the changing environments out there that impact the — I can’t think of the word I want to use, but essentially the scope of the incentive program. So, for example, in the downtown development charges waiver program, the money is basically front-ended by the developer and paid back and waived over a period of time with the new taxes coming in.

[33:05] Obviously in an increasing interest rate environment, the value of that incentive erodes if you’re borrowing money. So, I’m not saying it should be one way or the other, but I do think that we actually want to develop programs that actually produce the results that we want to achieve. So, what sort of a plan for consultation with those who may be accessing the incentive programs, are you going to engage in, and obviously I look forward to the process. But I just want to ensure that we’re reaching out to ensure that we achieve the goals of it, and that’s to incentivize the type of development that Council wants in those parts of the city.

[33:44] >> Through the presiding officer, it’s very much essential to a lot of the work that we do in having engagement. This and this specifically in community improvement plans, it’s even that much more essential because what we want to be creating is incentives that are actually meaningful and will cause the outcomes that we want to achieve. So, through this process, we will be engaging — there’s actually a statutory requirement to have a public engagement, but we also want to be engaging the industry directly as well, because that — sometimes you don’t want to provide an incentive that’s going to actually be a disincentive and so on.

[34:24] So, it’s very much important to understand the business practices and to know what’s going to be helpful in generating both new housing and affordable housing. So, that is — will be key to us moving forward with this program, and as mentioned in the report, we’re intending to come back in Q2 of 2023 with a report highlighting what we’re suggesting moving forward for our CIP programs. >> Mayor, that’s all the questions I have. Thank you. >> And I’ll hand the chair back to you with Bandsler Troissau on the list. Okay, Councilor Troissau, again, on the speakers list. Go ahead.

[34:57] >> I have another question about 3.4 that’s similar to the question, the last question that was asked, downtown developers working group formed mainly of its members who are significant landowners or developers in the downtown area. Are any efforts being undertaken to expand out that group to include maybe potential renters or renters who have found a need to leave or somebody besides developers and landlords?

[35:35] Or is it just developers and landlords? >> Mr. Mathers. >> Through your worship, just want to make sure I understand the question. So, you’re asking who are we engaging with or who the CIPs or the community improvement plans will be directed at? I just want to make sure I understand that question. >> I guess the question is about who constitutes this working group and is there more diverse membership on there besides the industry? >> Mr. Mathers. >> Through your worship. So, we actually highlighted the group in a report that was previously submitted to council a year ago.

[36:13] So, the group includes a variety of folks. It includes the public at large advisory committees, the London Economic Development Corporation, Chamber of Commerce, the variety of the major BIA’s as well are included and then does include the London Development Industry and LHBA. So, I don’t see highlighted here anything specifically to a tenancy organization, but through the public engagement we would be open to taking any commentary and happy if there’s a specific group that wanted to meet with us about what incentives might be helpful, we’d be happy to meet with them as well.

[36:57] >> Thank you. Other speakers on this? Okay. If there are no other speakers, this is for receipt. It’s moved and seconded. I will open this for voting then. >> Closing the vote, the motion is passed 15 to 0. >> So, with that, we’ve completed the consent items.

[37:32] That moves us to the scheduled items, which includes two items related to the budget. And for that, I’m going to turn the chair over to budget chair blows up to take us through the next sections of this meeting. >> Thank you, Your Worship. And thank you to all those for joining us this evening in person and virtually just to set the stage of what we’re doing this evening. The city’s lovely property tax waste and water treatment budgets have been tabled. This is what we’re discussing this evening.

[38:07] This is our public participation meeting. We have people join us online to speak this evening and in the gallery. After tonight, after we hear you, ideally, this is an opportunity for council to listen, not go back and forth engaging with those in the gallery, retain your comments. If you feel more comfortable or for those who didn’t participate tonight in the gallery, you can certainly send your comments along to asppc@london.ca and we’ll have that for deliberation as well for the budget process. After tonight, after we receive your feedback and insights, we haven’t deliberated ourselves or discussed any of this amongst ourselves first.

[38:40] We want to hear from you. We will do those talks ourselves on January 26th and council chambers starting at 9.30. If needed, we will continue those talks on the 27th starting at 9.30. And then everything will be finalized on February 14th. So we are spending Valentine’s Day discussing our budget things together, starting at 1 o’clock. So there’s still ample time for the public to give their feedback and council to hear you ask questions of staff and think where we want to go with those items. So that’s what we’re doing this evening for council as we see this committee.

[39:16] We’ll receive the communications at the end, but I’m going to need a motion to open the public participation meeting. I’ll need a mover moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Stevenson. The vote will come up and then I’ll proceed with further instructions. Councillor Hopkins.

[39:54] Didn’t come out, but I vote yes. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 15 to 0. Thank you. My attention is to rotate between the gallery and then someone online to give us a chance to shuffle around. So those in the gallery join us this evening. You’ll see that there’s two microphones up in the gallery for your use. We will not leave before we hear you. So no worries about being the first one to the mic. So you can pick whichever microphone you like and you’ll have up to five minutes to speak. And miss the powers, thank you for seeing the text I just sent you, someone online is asking you a question.

[40:30] So I’m going to start up in the gallery. If someone would like to take the mic, you have up to five minutes. I will be timing you at which point when you get close to five minutes, I’ll tell you about 30 seconds left. If you just want to speak, state your name. I do not need your address. Just give us your name and please proceed with your comments to us. And if you’re speaking to a specific amendment, feel free to mention it and welcome. Please proceed. Thank you. Good evening, maybe late afternoon. Sorry, Mr. Mayor, committee members and city staff. My name is Kelly Klein-Hans.

[41:03] I live in London. When my husband and I were raising our three sons, we tried to adopt a new car policy for many years. We did have access to cars for different things. But I’m also a retired nurse. So to get to work, I opted chose to take the bus, use taxi services, travel with coworkers and walk. So basically, before I retired, it was a 6.4 kilometer walk to University Hospital. Not done every day, but it was an option that I took.

[41:38] I’m here to address the proposed number P10 amendment, specifically part C, which involves reducing the investment in winter maintenance for sidewalks and bus stops. This budget amendment, pardon me, is to produce the previously approved multi-year additional investment. So that was for the year’s 2020 to 2023. In the winter maintenance program, we’re in a 5 centimeter threshold was achieved for the winters of 2021 and 2022. Current provincial minimal maintenance standards for sidewalks is 8 centimeters of snow accumulation before equipment is deployed and it allows 48 hours after the snowfall ends to clear the sidewalk.

[42:20] With this budget amendment, the city of London would revert to the minimum maintenance standard of 8. So currently, we’re at 5 centimeters. The bus stop clearing starts after the end of the snow accumulation by the same resources that perform the roadway and sidewalk plowing. Everyone knows that winter can be weather, can be under predictable, rain, freezing rain, snow flurries, blowing snow and heavy snowfalls. Potentially, a winter can see more rain and less snow and we can have extreme weather events and predicting the weather and the clearing of snow is difficult.

[43:04] Accessibility issues at bus stops most frequently arise during and after, moderate and heavy snow falls. Snow wind rose to positive from a way and sidewalk plowing can further reduce accessibility. Sidewalks and bus stops are necessary as an infrastructure to ensure that Londoners can access destinations in the city. So it makes sense that snow and ice on sidewalks and bus stops make navigating challenging and hazardous. The City of London sidewalk maintenance program is an essential part of making walking practical, promoting year-round exercise and reducing the risks from slips and falls.

[43:46] So as a nurse, we looked at risk management all the time. It was just something that was inherent in our practice. I analyzed my existing practices, identified potential risks and developed in enacted procedures to address them. So the City of London also has a risk management department. And they state that effective risk management is essential to the city’s ability to deliver service. Policy and directors assist in applying best practices within engineering roads, buildings and emergent emergency management.

[44:19] So I contend that the five centimeter criteria adopted for the winter of 2021 and 22 winter maintenance program is an example of best practice. The city note, the city staff, excuse me, note that reverting to the provincial minimal maintenance standard will make it more challenging for sidewalk users that use assistive devices during days with snowfall. They also recognize that the impact could delay the users from even accessing services from outside their homes.

[44:51] In addition to this, I would like to recognize all the residents who seek out, who set out across the neighborhoods in the city to meet their obligations, whether it be work or whatever. So we arrive at the question, what is the reason for the amendment, P10? Well, the reasoning is based on an estimated six sidewalk plows mobilization annually. In addition to this, the corresponding reduction of $140,000 in the coordinated bus stop clearing service provided by the city to the LTC, the London Transit Service, would be measured.

[45:25] So the city’s budgeting involves prioritizing projects, programs, and city service levels in the light of available and potential financial resources. And the staff identify that keeping our roads clear of snow and ice is a priority for the city. So basically, it’s a balance of fiscal responsibility and a balance to meet the needs of Londoners, a few of which can be seen as the most vulnerable. However, we have to look at the needs of every Londoner. So I’m asking the city maintain the current municipal minimal maintenance standards for winter clearance.

[46:03] Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments. Mr. Schultis, we have a speaker online and then we’ll go back to the gallery. We do. Mr. Lalonde is online. Mr. Lalonde, please proceed when you’re ready and you have up to five minutes and we can. Hi there. You can hear me? We can hear you perfectly.

[46:34] Please proceed. Excellent. Thank you. Yeah. I wanted to speak about the same issue actually when I saw that one of the ideas to reduce the budget was to reduce clearing the sidewalk, I thought that was something that should not be approved. We’re having a pretty mild winter now, which is which is good, but just a couple years ago, there was a particularly harsh winter and I remember times when there was slush on the sidewalk and then it froze and it was quite difficult to walk on. I’m able bodied and I was fine, but I had trouble and I, you know, imagine someone who’s has difficulty walking or uses a cane or a walker, it would be very difficult.

[47:14] That same winter, there was someone on a mobility scooter driving down Wonderland Road South on the road and I don’t know that we want to be the city that makes our, you know, citizens who use mobility scooters drive on the road because we want to save some money. Also, I get the impression that could be wrong, but according to the London plan, I think we want to increase walking and cycling and become a walkable city. And if we don’t clear the sidewalks when it snows, we are reduced, we are taking that option away from our citizens. And I think it’s very important that we put priority on walkability and cyclability before other things, I suppose.

[47:57] And so if we want to actually call ourselves a progressive walkable, cyclable city, we have to make choices that lead to that and that would be actually clearing the sidewalk more often than we did in the past few years. So that’s all I have to say. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you for joining us virtually this evening. I’ll go back over to the gallery to the top microphone. Please proceed. If you want to state your name, please do give up to five minutes. Hello, my name is Bethany Mahia and I’m the executive director of the Argyle Business Improvement Association.

[48:32] The Argyle BIA as the heart of East London fully supports the business case P-18 developed by city staff and administration. The staff and the board of directors of Argyle BIA completely agree with the approach to the infrastructure renewal projects and all the considerations expressed by city staff in their report. The Argyle BIA continually advocates for the full implementation of the community improvement plan. This plan was a true community collaboration with the Argyle Community Association, the East Lions Club, the East London optimist, the businesses, the families of Argyle and the youth.

[49:10] They were all consulted in the making of this plan and we thank you for their work. As stated in the multi-year budget update, please reference page 200 to 203. The Argyle CIP prioritizes the creation of a Dundas streets gate master plan and the advancement of P-18 to prioritize the scoping and preliminary design of the streetscape improvement opportunities. Undertaking this work will now allow greater coordination of the infrastructure renewal projects taking place over the course of the next several years.

[49:44] If this budget amendment is not approved, then we believe there may be potential duplication of work or further delays in the renewing of Argyle. Since the origin of the BIA, we have been the primary investor of the public realm. The organization has created the neighborhood’s brand of Argyle teal by painting its crosswalks with this unique color at several key points in the community. The BIA incorporates the Argyle teal brand in the street banners, the pole wraps, the lush plantar baskets that are currently on Dundas street all through the summer.

[50:18] To encourage the pedestrian use of the Dundas street in Argyle, the BIA organizes the annual Santa Claus parade with the Argyle BIA and a Halloween event that brings thousands of Londoners to Dundas street. These public realm investments demonstrate the commitment of the BIA to the economic and social renewal of Dundas street in Argyle, and it is our belief that there is even greater untapped potential in the community. We look forward to working collaboratively with the City of London further as community partners to continue this work.

[50:49] It’s also the hope of the BIA that we will continue to work with the City of London to create the Dundas street skate master plan and to implement the Boulevard enhancements such as street planter boxes, trees, pedestrian scale lighting, increase the number of teal sidewalks, waste bins, benches and other amenities. We sincerely appreciate the time and the steps of the city staff and city council have taken so far with us to assist Argyle BIA to fulfill these recommendations of the community improvement plan and further the creation and implementation of the Dundas street skate master plan.

[51:25] Once again, I appreciate your support and I know the BIA does as well and we will love to continue to work with the city and council in this renewal process. Thank you. >> Thank you, Bethany, and just for council’s information, 3.1 seat today was also an added communication from the speaker as well. I will go to the next speaker in the gallery. I’m going to rotate over to the left side. This lady here above my shoulder, so please proceed if you want to state your name and you have up to five minutes. Thank you.

[51:57] >> Thank you. Hello, I’m Claire Roberts and I’ve been a resident of London Ontario since 2000. On page 4 of the budget, there are remarks concerning the use of by London since 2022 of the environmental, social and governments or ESG considerations. From page 4, civic administration implemented an environmental social and governance ESG evaluation of all budget amendments incorporating important climate change and equity impact assessments, as well as any governance considerations in an environmental, social and governance consideration section of each budget amendment.

[52:35] Now, the ESG guidelines are far more complicated than what the cursory 3 paragraph information given in the budget suggests and they have the roots and policies developed by the United Nations, the nuances of the ESG standardization bring it a special concern to us here on the taxpayer side. What’s more important? Environmental, social or governance? It’s an impossible question to answer on a global level and each municipality has its own special considerations that must be considered when implementing such a broad methodology into our budget.

[53:09] So I have a few questions to consider. What is the cost to the taxpayer to implement this type of credit risk assessment? Who will be considered the experts when developing policies? Are the taxpayers going to be consulted so that the ESG goals are transparent and beneficial to the taxpayer? Will London, having been enveloped into the C40 city framework by Matt Brown in 2015, have the freedom to make decisions based on input from its taxpayers or will the corporation of the city of London be at the mercy of the United Nations based dogma regarding environmental, social and government frameworks and guidelines?

[53:47] What checks and balances will be put into place to make sure that our city policies reflect what the taxpayers are working hard for when giving to you our taxes? Thank you. Thank you for your comments and just for the gallery. We prefer that there’s no yays or nays just to make sure that it’s a safe welcoming space for all as the time will come that someone says something you don’t agree with as well. Also, for those in the gallery with us tonight, you are allowed to eat and drink as you will in the gallery.

[54:23] And I also apologize for the seats not being the most comfortable. I’m not sure if the lady in the black scarf on the side of the room wanted to proceed first as I know you’ve been staying at the back for a while. If not, I’ll take the gentleman. But if you want to go ahead, I saw you staying there. Okay. We’re a friendly bunch. Please proceed. If you want to give your name, you have up to five minutes. Hi. Thank you. My name is Andrew Wassilko. I’m the chair of the board of directors of London cycle link. And I appreciate the opportunity to speak during this meeting. More than half of the current council participated in our ride along campaign before the recent election in which we went for bike rides in your specific wards.

[55:07] And after those rides, we heard support for our four main cycling priorities. Number one is infrastructure. We need a connected grid of safe separated bike lanes throughout the city. It should be possible to bike between any two points in our city without having to go several blocks out of the way or to ride in dangerous conditions. Number two is maintenance. We need those lanes, paths and roadsides maintained all year round. There are people who want and need to ride year round and they shouldn’t be impeded by snow banks, giant potholes and debris.

[55:43] Number three is parking. We need more safe, secure bike parking in all commercial areas. People are much less likely to ride if they think that their bike will be stolen when they arrive at their destination. And number four is bike share. We endorse a citywide bike share program. People who don’t own a bike or our visitors to our city should have access to a bike. These priorities are all important to fulfilling the London plan.

[56:15] They are necessary to reach our climate emergency goal of 40%. Fewer in town vehicle trips by 2030. They require a significant budgetary commitment. We appreciate the progress has been made in the past several years. However, we need to move past the patchy project by project approach of the past as council considers the fourth year of this budget cycle. It needs to think, plan and execute with a complete cycling network in mind. Over the next several months, council will finalize a strategic plan and approve a new mobility master plan and a new multi-year budget.

[56:53] This is the time for bold and transformative leadership toward a healthy vibrant London where it is safe and convenient for everyone to ride bikes and use all forms of active transportation. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I’ll just let committee know that 3.1 D is an added communication from London cycle link as well. I will go to the gentleman in the gallery over here. If you want to state your name and you have up to five minutes, please proceed. Yeah, my name is Chris Butler. I live in Sam Ford in London and council blows it. It’s a chair.

[57:29] And just thanks for the opportunity to speak for five minutes. I’m going to talk a little bit about things you can carry forward to the January 26th, possibly 27th meeting and further meetings as you go forward. A little more on budget process and some key things that I think we should be discussing going into the future. The one is I’d like to see and I’ve been harping on this for about six years. The asset development — sorry, what do we call it now? The asset value growth piece of the budget, which you’ll probably get in late March, brought forge into the normal budget cycle, so it’s concurrent.

[58:07] I think we can all recognize whether it’s a household budget, a business budget or whatever. If we have a budget that’s concurrent and all the information is available at the same time, we get a better quality decision-making process and better public input at that time as well. I’d also like to see that particular process because we are growing inward and upward. I think we’re someplace around 40% now that that situation, essentially, we’re getting asset value growth in about 40% where we’re in filling.

[58:39] Those areas do not tend to take the same load of taxes and the same load of services because they’re already there. You’ve been telling us collectively as individuals in London that it’s better and cheaper and further to go with the infill. And I think it’s a time to walk the talk a little bit. I’d like to see the asset value growth piece a little more focused on new programs. I think we’re missing an opportunity just like business does there. Both new programs introduced and new programs growth as opposed to just rewarding the same programs over and over and over again.

[59:17] We saw a little piece of progress on that last year, but I don’t think it’s consistent enough. So that’s the part there. The other is, and I think it’s normal now, we’ve got about a billion dollar operating budget, whether it’s taxpayer supported or not. So we expect to see about $20 million, 2%, that becomes surplus every year. And that’s a good thing because we’ve got people doing their jobs trying to stay in budget and that sort of thing. But I certainly, both myself and friends were talking about this at a breakfast club this weekend, actually.

[59:53] And we see this is a large piece of money that’s really not supporting taxpayers that well. We’re very quick with that meeting. I think the report comes as consent as opposed to recommended. It would be nice to have that recommended. It would be nice to have taxpayers involved with that. I do like that we have a process, but it would be better if some of that money focused back to taxpayers a little bit. We seem to assign it very quickly with very little, how can I say it? What do we expect from that investment?

[1:00:26] In a good example, and this is not a criticism, we spent about 10, 15 minutes on Councillor, ex-counselor, Cassidy’s letter, assigning $3 million. And we looked at that and we said, where does that go? What do we expect to achieve all the rest of it? And that’s just an example of what sort of we do with that $20 million a year. We’ve had $50 million come in on that line between 2020 and 2022. And I think I’m going to expect the same $20 million a year. So I’d like to see a lot more focus on what we do with that process, maybe alter that process.

[1:01:04] That may be a bylaw thing that you do in the budget meetings and talk, but it’s very important to taxpayers. I think some of that should spill back the taxpayers if it can. One of the last things I’d like to talk about a little bit is we’ve had a program for about six, seven, eight years, spawned in not Brownstown. And at that time, it was called continuous improvement. It’s now called service improvements. And it really doesn’t matter the tag on the program. At this point, that program is only by bylaw offering about .25% of our total operating budget to come back to London as a bylaw increase, essentially.

[1:01:43] So it’s essentially saying we have to come up with savings. The city staff and the city focus come up with savings $1.5 million a year, either in, either in efficiencies or in, I guess, staff avoidance and costs going forward in the future. That’s the way it’s looked at in the industry. I believe very, very firmly that that should be moved up and it should be done at our 26th, 27th January meetings to 20 seconds. Okay, to be 1.5%, which is more matched what goes on in private industry.

[1:02:16] So the best going forward, I really hope you spend a couple of days on January 25th, 26th. We only spent about two hours and ten minutes last year on a billion dollar budget. And there were a lot of tax payers. We’re pretty amazed at that. Thank you very much and wish you the best forward. Thank you for joining us this evening and for Council 3.1 B is Mr. Butler’s added communication just for your reference. Go back up to the gallery. I have a speaker at the microphone. If you want to state your name and you have up to five minutes. Welcome.

[1:02:48] Hello, my name is Becky Williamson. I live here in London. And I’m going to speak to Londoners financially struggling. Londoners have been hard hit in the past few years. More may soon be facing life on the streets with skyrocketing home prices. In 2021, average Canadian families spent 43% of their income on taxes, less than 36% for their own shelter food and clothing. First time visitors to the food bank have increased 64%. One in three never used a food bank before. Landmarks like the London Music Club closed for good.

[1:03:23] November 2022 saw close to 10,000 insolvencies in Canada. Depression and despair climbed in London as did violent crime and homicides. Civil servants sat mostly comfortable in their homes meeting over Zoom. They were not in this together. They kept their jobs and incomes, their homes, their pensions, stayed financially safe. Many others couldn’t. This budget looks too much like a business as usual budget. We are not back to normal. Staff that recommended cuts need to dig deeper and not suggest we cut out hanging baskets of flowers for a small savings.

[1:04:02] How about phasing out some excess city jobs? To counteract the mass of transfer of funds from the poor to the wealthy, citizens deserve the surplus money back. The $19.6 million surplus belongs back in citizens’ pockets. It’s not a usual surplus. Our money was taken in taxes and then we didn’t get the services. Swimming, skating, tennis, music concerts, museum exhibits, live theater, you name it, we didn’t get it. But we all paid while the Bank of Canada churned out so much paper. In the third quarter last year, the bank had a $522 million loss, the first loss in 87 years.

[1:04:44] We may enter a recession. We had seven bank rate hikes last year. So more expensive empty bike lanes, maybe not. New electric bus stations costing $10 million and $25 million every year after, maybe not this year. London has plenty to protect its Moody’s credit rating and must stop filling its reserve coffers containing some $500 to $600 million, while citizens increasingly suffer with rising costs. This budget needs some serious revisions and cuts by a more independent team that understands this year it’s not business as usual.

[1:05:23] Last city councilors did take a salary cut, but where was the cut for city employees with reduced workload? Some of the 567 sunshine salaried who cost Londoners close to $74 million a year. Some working citizens would turn over keys to their homes, some head to the food bank or maybe the mall to get warm, while city bank accounts are full. That can’t happen. It’s a matter of principle. We are a group of concerned citizens in London and we formally request that Londoners receive a tax rebate for the $19.6 million surplus to help them weather the 2023 financial storm.

[1:06:01] Put some meaning back behind. We’ve got your back and give it back. We don’t need individual checks. Just put our 19.6 million towards the 2023 property taxes. It’s the right thing to do because we paid for the service and did not receive. Thank you. Thank you. A reminder about the clapping. Okay. Perfect. I’m going to go back to another speaker at the top. Mike, your name and you have up to five minutes.

[1:06:33] Please proceed. Thank you. My name is Carolyn. I’m the executive director for Hamilton Road business improvement area. Hamilton Road BIA fully supports a multi-year budget amendment P16. Hamilton Road needs equitable treatment. Hamilton Road is a primary artery of the core area. It is a significant thoroughfare that sees international traffic on a daily basis and gives many their first impression of London as a whole. It contains all the important ingredients of an active and vibrant main street.

[1:07:09] This funding will provide the opportunity to bring this main street to life for all Londoners and visitors to enjoy for generations to come. The funding will cover administration and operational costs for member services such as security, beautification, marketing, promotions and events to bring community as a whole together. Hamilton Road BIA and our entire community thank the city of London for their support. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:07:42] And Council, that was just item P16 in your documentation. Mr. Reil, if you would like to proceed, this next speaker is regards to the London Humane Society, which is, you received compliment, not complimentary, it was complimentary, but additional information on your desk as well for the added. So please proceed and you have up to five minutes. My name is Steve Reil, and I’m the Executive Director of the Humane Society of London and Middlesex. Your Honorable Mayor and City Councillors, it is my distinct pleasure to speak with you today.

[1:08:15] From the heart of our urgent and critical need our city is facing. Humane Society of London and Middlesex, HSLM, has proudly served the London community for over 120 years. We’ve been providing temporary shelter, medical care and life saving services to our community’s animals out of the same shelter location for over 120 years. As a registered charity, HLSM has been relying predominantly upon the generosity of individual and corporate donors to fund our mission. Until now, today we are calling on you to financially support HSLM for the very first time. HSLM is in critical time of need and growth. Our age shelter is over capacity.

[1:08:50] Facility limitations are holding us back from providing appropriate care to our community. With today’s economic challenges, Londoners are needing to choose between feeding their families and feeding their pets. Animals are being surrendered to our care at alarming rates, and we’re facing barriers to support the community in this time of growing need. There is no question that a new facility is needed to bring HSLM to a place where we offer industry-standard shelter care to meet the growing demand for our services and to enhance the sustainability of our organization and our footprint. As a population of London is projected to increase by over 210,000 people by 2051, the needs for our services will also grow.

[1:09:27] The comprehensive new animal campus will only be a space to shelter and adopt animals. It will be a community hub where the doors will open to the public for programs that engage children, youth, seniors, volunteers, and support the creation of new jobs. Constructing public spaces like our education, community, and adoption centers, a vet clinic, an ample outdoor space will generate new partnerships that will benefit the broader community. Education for all ages will be woven throughout the programming. With unique experiential learning experiences, aiding in the creation of an attractive and skilled workforce for our community.

[1:10:00] Critically, in our much needed full-service veterinary clinic, also known as a companion animal hospital, will provide life-saving procedures to thousands of animals per year, benefiting shelter pets and supporting Londoners with high-volume, low-cost medical options. This will increase our ability to support those who are facing financial and housing challenges. Our new facility will enable HSLM to enhance and build community partnerships with local businesses, organizations, and anchor institutions. Proudly, Fanshawe College and HSLM have collaborated in developing a unique and innovative partnership to successfully deliver training programs which will offer students an exceptional learning experience, unlike any other seen across Canada.

[1:10:41] Throughout our new facility, rental spaces will generate sustainable revenue for the organization. Inclusive program will increase access for many learners who face barriers to participation. Animals are universal. They transcend language, backgrounds, or beliefs. We have an opportunity to unite our community and the city at large and provide the level of life-saving medical care that our city’s animals need and deserve. Based on national pet metrics, it is estimated that over 116,220 of London households own at least one pet. And 95% of people report they consider pets a part of their family.

[1:11:17] We will engage learners in a community programming and services that families will greatly benefit from. Your Honor Mayor Morgan and esteemed Councillors, on April 13, 2021, Council voted in favor of zoning changes to make the land available for this important project. Today, we are asking you to vote in favor of making this project a reality. A grant of $3 million will be transformational to our campaign. We’ll help HSLM leverage funding from the other levels of government and encourage the public and private sectors to invest in this important work. Please approve our $3 million grant request in its entirety as an investment in the future of animal welfare, community collaboration, and public service.

[1:11:54] This is a once-in-a-life opportunity for the city of London to leave a legacy for future generations who will learn and engage with us. It has been an honor getting to know many of you during the tours at our current shelter. I thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedules to learn more about the challenges we face every day at HSLM and the solution we have in front of us. The solution that will become a reality should you approve our request for funding. We thank you for your consideration and welcome any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you. Questions can be followed up later directly with you and that was Item Budget Amendment P14 in your documentation.

[1:12:30] I will go to the next speaker at the mic. Your name and you have up to five minutes, please proceed. My name is Annemarie Velastro. As a taxpayer, I don’t support using public funds for the London Humane Society. That’s because it’s essentially a donation to a private entity. And we already have a very good organization in London Animal Care, which is contracted by the city of London. And that agency has done amazing work. I’ve had to use it myself with feral cats.

[1:13:07] They have a low cost bay and neuter program for people of low income. They are connected to the foster program, which is a form of shelter in private homes. These are volunteers. They also support volunteer rescue groups. They pick up stray cats through students, employing students through the summer. And they’re fully transparent and accountable. And I don’t think public money should go into a private entity.

[1:13:43] These are tax dollars. These are hard-earned public money from each and every one of us. And we already have a contract. And if they fail in their commitments to the city, we can get rid of them. And we can’t do that with a private entity. But I know that the London Care Center does fabulous work. And if we’re going to expand a sheltering in, that should be done through London Care and through the volunteer system, where there’s dozens of volunteers that already do this.

[1:14:15] And they’ve done innovative adoption centers, like the Catty Shot Shack on Windermere Road. And they just do a good job. So before you start giving away public money to a private entity, you should get familiar, as familiar, with the people that you already contract the service out to, which is London Animal Care. And I encourage you all to go down there and get a tour of that agency, because it’s already accountable to the public. The other thing I want to say is that the $25 million donation that a fabulous family made to the city regarding homelessness, that’s a portion of that money should go to expropriating heritage houses, mansions that are being left to rot.

[1:14:58] There are some that have been empty for over a decade. And those buildings are well suited to house families and children. A lot of them have a landscaped open space, which can be suitable for children, for growing food. And that’s where some of that money should be directed to. I don’t want any more, like, just, there’s been a lot of money dedicated to homelessness. And people feel like there hasn’t been a lot. And there’s been stuff done, obviously. But I think people are getting frustrated with the raising of property taxes to go to programs where it doesn’t seem like it’s effective.

[1:15:34] So you have a large donation. It’s time to amalgamate protecting heritage houses and giving homes to people that need them. And the third thing I want to say is I don’t support the funding of the neighborhood decision making program. This has come up over and over again. It’s because it’s not equitable. So we talk about equity a lot when it comes to, like, representation on committees. But we fall flat when it comes to talking about equity in income disparity. And that program is a competition. And if you’re a low income, you can’t compete.

[1:16:08] If you live in a neighborhood that has a lot of high rises, you can’t compete because you have no access to those residents unless you do a mailer, which takes money. And this has been raised before. Elizabeth Palosa raised it. It was raised again last year during the budget. And that program needs to be reevaluated. And if it can’t be made equitable through a competition, then it needs to go through a submission program. But I don’t think any more public money should go to support that program until this evaluation has been done. It’s been three years now that people have been asking for it.

[1:16:42] And my understanding is it’s never been evaluated. And I can tell you that if you’re low income, you can’t compete in that program. And the other thing I just want to say is I don’t think any more money should go into road widening. If you’re serious about climate change and getting a really good transit system in the city, which is what defines a world-class city as a transit, then you have to stop widening roads and put it in and get people off the road and into buses. And if you don’t ride the buses yourself, then please take time out for a month, two months, and just ride the buses.

[1:17:18] So you have a better understanding of what it’s like to ride the buses and where improvements need to be made. You can’t do that if you don’t ride the buses. Thank you. Thank you. Those comments tended to focus around the budget amendment P-14 and P-15. Thank you for joining us this evening. And the $25 million reference was in the mayor’s state of the city announcement this morning, then that money is currently going to be going through the London Community Foundation. The next speaker, I’m going to go to this side.

[1:17:52] If you want to state your name and you have up to five minutes and welcome. My name is Susan Brunette, and this is addressing homelessness in London. Both homelessness and city spending are major issues in the minds of Londoners this year, with some 400 to 600 people roaming the streets with no home. During the pandemic, the city paid an organization called Impact London, some 2.2 million to help street people. One would think that millions should not be handed over to a very inexperienced woman to run a woman who stated, “I had this idea for a company and the city finally decided to take a chance on me and I had no idea how to run it.

[1:18:41] I had no idea how to run it. I don’t know if the many problems were solved since that organization failed and folded. It seems there were not even WSIB contracts in place, resulting in legal issues. Many people were not paid on time. Clearly, better oversight was needed. Now, we have some five million assigned for helping the homeless. Five million dollars, not decided by City Council, but by city managers, as apparently, past City Council did not have the ability or foresight to get matters in place before that council was dissolved and the new one was sworn in.

[1:19:30] Several of those same counselors are again on City Council, but city management decided to fork over 5 million this time to a number of organizations. Hopefully, with better coordination and accountability this time and oversight, it is encouraging that there is a new facility opening outside the core. As so many Londoners voice, they are afraid to go downtown with the concentration of drug users and people sleeping in Dundas Street doorways.

[1:20:05] I would like to know what oversight and with what frequency will the actions and progress of these groups be tracked. The public wants to know and stay informed of the five million dollars of spending of their tax dollars this time. With what looks like a large funding increase for the homeless, what is there to prevent the growing number of Canadians sliding into poverty? From deciding that London is the best place to go when you lose a job or perhaps when someone becomes totally addicted to drugs and is looking for support.

[1:20:43] What agreement is in place between the cities to ensure they each do their share in providing help for homelessness in their area? With the crisis in homelessness and a shortage of doctors for London citizens, I also ask a related question. What is the current policy in London for accepting and aiding illegal immigrants coming across the border, giving them the right hand of the city staff. We hope the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.

[1:21:22] Thank you very much. Thank you for joining us this evening. Is the speaker the mic above me to the left ready or would you prefer I go? Perfect. Please proceed. Your name and you have up to five minutes. Awesome. Thank you. Hello, Mayor, Councillors and city staff. My name is Ryan O’Hagan. I’ll try to be brief. But there are five amendments that I’d like to address. Before I begin, I want to remind everybody that part of Council’s Strat Plan for 2023 places a focus on building a sustainable city leading in public service as well as anti-racism and anti-oppression. The first amendment that I want to address is P3, which is additional funding for 3,000 affordable homes.

[1:22:01] While this is an incredible step forward, it is not enough. We know that London is the fastest growing metropolis outside of British Columbia in Canada. So including 3,000 new houses sounds lovely. But in a place where we are seeing growth population growth that is unprecedented for London, 3,000 is simply not enough. In regards to P10, my concern with this amendment is that if we are truly aiming to build a sustainable city, then reducing maintenance on walkways, reducing street lighting, reducing things that would make London a walkable city or a cyclable city feels antithetical to the Strat Plan that’s been proposed and that is being worked on.

[1:22:52] For P12, sorry, so P12 after the last three years, this is looking at reducing the amount of money that would go to neighbourhoods. After the last three years, it is imperative that London increase ways to allow students or children to socialize. I have two young kids. They were both born during the pandemic. And the biggest issue that they have right now is that they have no friends because they have not been able to socialize. We haven’t been able to have them out in public and in places where they were at risk of catching COVID or other airborne viral diseases that are going on right now.

[1:23:29] So to me, reducing the amount of money that we are going to put into our neighbourhoods and our playgrounds is a really, really big concern. Regarding P13, I have so many questions about P13. So this is in regards to no longer having printed council materials. While I recognize that it is a significant savings, my concern lies in accessibility. So I’m interested to hear how the city is going to continue to make printed copies of work available for people who may need those for a disability, maybe an impairment with using computers or technology or something on those lines.

[1:24:08] Regarding P14, money for the Humane Society, yeah, this should be funded. And it’s really imperative to point out that this is — the recommendation is that this is coming from the Community Investment Reserve Fund and in doing so would have no tax impact on taxpayers. There would be no tax levy added to budget 23 because of that funding, because of the reserve fund that it’s coming out of. And then finally, I want to touch on the amazing $25 million donation that was made today. And I just want to make my point that I’m really excited to see how that money is earmarked, and I will be very invested in seeing how the city takes that money to really address what is arguably the largest issue in our city, which is homelessness.

[1:24:56] So thank you all so much. Thank you for joining us in person this evening and chambers. As I know, the individual is rushing to get here to be heard. So thank you for accommodating us. I will go up to the gallery on this side. Welcome, your name, and up to five minutes. Please proceed. Good evening to all council members and city staff. My name is Jessica Look, and I am the Vice President of External Affairs at the University Students Council at Western University. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. The University Students Council represents just under 30,000 undergraduate students by advocating for issues important to our student body, and for many years we have been involved in the budget process, providing the student perspective through input and feedback to the city.

[1:25:40] I am here on behalf of Western students to speak on a few key points. Budget Amendment Number P10 proposes reductions in previously approved additional investments in streetlights, winter maintenance, and walkway maintenance. Our concerns mainly surround Part A regarding streetlights and Part C regarding winter maintenance. Part A proposes an elimination of $16,000 for local improvements for streetlights due to a lack of interest in the cost sharing program with owners in the area. However, there is no indication that funds will be diverted to the existing streetlight maintenance capital funds. With London’s engagement in the Safe Cities Initiative, it is critical that the city’s infrastructure reflects this commitment to building a safe city for women, girls, non-binary, and trans individuals.

[1:26:20] The USC recommends that the city continue to install streetlights with the focus on areas identified as unsafe in the 2018 Safe Cities scoping study. Furthermore, Part C proposes a reduction of $740,000 to winter maintenance, as well as a corresponding reduction of $140,000 in the coordinated bus stop clearing service provided by the city to the LTC. This amendment seeks to revert to the provincial standard of snow removal on sidewalks, which is eight centimeters accumulations with 48 hours to clear. London has been maintaining a standard of five centimeters accumulations with 48 hours to clear.

[1:26:53] This reduction is harmful to students and all citizens of London. Student mobility throughout the city is dependent on safe and accessible pedestrian walkways, whether they walk to bus to school, to work, to buy groceries, and overall around London. Decreased winter maintenance renders students travel more difficult and potentially dangerous. Moreover, this poses a risk to individuals with accessibility needs. Ensuring safe commutes for students in London is imperative to facilitating students’ integration into the city. Thus, the USC’s recommendation is to maintain better than provincial requirements for snow removal from sidewalks and bus stops.

[1:27:28] Ultimately, I would like to speak against Budget Amendment P10 and urge council members to vote against this amendment. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you for joining us this evening and all you do in the community. I will look to the speaker on this side five minutes. If you want to state your name, please proceed. Hello, my name is Marie Blush and I’m the Vice Chair of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee. And I’m here today to speak to the recommendation of that advisory committee. We did submit it to CAPS and it was to be forwarded to you.

[1:28:01] So hopefully you have that recommendation with our reasons. But I’d like to go through and highlight a couple of things that we considered as an advisory committee. And the first, you know, we looked at animal welfare. And the city is growing. There’s no doubt about that. It’s grown. It’s growing even more. And the current Humane Society facility just hasn’t kept pace. It’s just not adequate to represent the city anymore. But it really goes beyond creating a facility that’s going to do something nicer for animals.

[1:28:37] And as a committee, we did look at, like, what’s the impact on this city? And, you know, animal advocates like to quote Mahatma Gandhi when he says that the greatness of a nation is, you know, you can see it by how that nation treats its animals. And the same holds do for a city. And this is a compassionate city. It is a thriving city. And that should be reflected in a facility that, like the Humane Society has proposed. But I’m sure today sitting at this committee is financial considerations that are utmost in your mind.

[1:29:15] And if you’d bear with me for a minute, I’m going to go back to 2005. I’ve been working on animal issues in this city for a very long time. And at that time, Mayor Ann Marie Dostico had created a mayor’s task force on companion animal welfare. And I was a member of that task force as a representative of the urban lake. And I can remember really clearly going to the board of control and in the message and making a presentation. And the message from that task force was you’re spending a lot of money, but you’re not getting good value for it.

[1:29:55] And since then, you know, it’s been a lot of years, but there’s been a lot of progress. And we see things in the city now like a low-income spay-neuter program and a clinic and dedicated staff, a city veterinarian, an animal welfare coordinator. These are all recommendations that came out of that task force. And I’m really happy to see them. But the problem is that the need just outstrips what those programs can do.

[1:30:28] And so as an advisory committee, we could come to you and say, put more money into those programs. And that would certainly help. But another way to approach it is to say, it shouldn’t all be the city’s burden. You need a partner. And so when you look at the request that the Humane Society is making, it’s an investment that would take some of that pressure off of the city programs. They’re talking about having a clinic.

[1:31:00] They’re talking about having a dog park and a part of the city that doesn’t have one. And that would be a wonderful thing for the community. So on behalf of the committee, I’d ask you to support the request that they’re making. And you know, I’ve always found that when there’s a will, there’s a will, there’s a way. And so, you know, I really urge you to have the will to do this and find a way. So thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Bloch.

[1:31:33] And that was Budget Amendment case P14 going to the next speaker. Over here, your name. And you’re welcome. And you have up to five minutes. Good evening to all council members. My name is Ann Lay. And I’m a full-time student at Western University. And I’m also the Associate Vice President of External Affairs at the University Students Council at Western. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Alongside Jessica Look, we represent just under 30,000 students by advocating for student issues important to our student body. In addition to the University Students Council’s recommendation on snow removal, we would like to encourage the city to continue to install street lighting across London.

[1:32:12] Budget Amendment P10 Part A proposes the elimination of $16,000 for local improvement for street lights due to the lack of interest in the cost-sharing program with owners in the area. However, we would urge council to vote against this amendment and instead continue to install street lighting across London, specifically with a focus identified in the 2020 Safe Cities London scoping study. As part of this, as part of the study, women were asked to pinpoint locations within the city that they felt unsafe, witnessed, or experienced sexual violence.

[1:32:47] Downtown London and areas around Western campus were frequently identified. A gap in safety throughout the city is the need for adequate lighting at night. As many students spend long days on campus and walk home or to the bus stop late at night, areas of low light may create risks for pedestrians that would otherwise not exist during daylight hours. This is specifically a cause of concern for women who are more likely to feel unsafe after dark. The 2014 General Social Survey by Statistics Canada found that only 38% of women felt safe walking after dark in their neighborhood compared to 64% of men.

[1:33:27] The Safe Cities scoping study suggests that increased lighting is one of many protective factors that can help people feel safe after night. Increased lighting at night helps improve overall visibility which has two major benefits. The first is that pedestrians can better identify potential risks such as obstructions on walkways or if there are people around them. The second benefit is that people operating vehicles can see pedestrians much clearer as well. In alignment with the 2021-2024 Safe Cities action plan and the 2019-2023 strategic plan for the City of London, the University Students Council at Western urges the city to continue to install street lighting across London.

[1:34:10] The City of London should implement more lighting fixtures and low light areas especially in the downtown area. The focus on downtown area is necessary as the study highlighted the location as having a high volume of individuals who felt unsafe and experienced harassment. With many students living in the area and often visiting these areas on evenings and weekends, this is an area that should be prioritized. Thank you very much for your time, Councillors. Thank you and for what you do in the community for being here tonight and for the students.

[1:34:43] I’m looking for the next speaker at the microphone. Okay, welcome, former Councillor Van Holst. You have up to five minutes. Welcome. It’s good to see you and please proceed. Thank you, Madam Budget Chair. And there are two items on the list that I’m encouraging our new Council to support. The first is the increase in the funding for the neighbourhood decision in making program. And I would point out that one way to make this program more equitable is to provide more projects that can be funded.

[1:35:24] And that was the purpose of this investment so that more communities would have an opportunity to benefit and see those benefits every day in their neighbourhoods. The other program that I hope you will support is the funding for the Hamilton Road BIA. Now, I know that Mayor Morgan and Councillor Hopkins were here when we first passed the BIA.

[1:35:58] And this was a little different project than many of the others because it was a recommendation of the community improvement plan. And in that plan, it was seen that the BIA would help with the urban regeneration of that area, which we realized was an important gateway to London that was very visible. And it still needs some work and help. And this amendment will go a long way to assist with that. There’s only one term left to meet the objectives of the community improvement program.

[1:36:41] And I don’t think those will be achieved without this small investment. So I encourage you to make that. And thank you for allowing me to come speak here. Thank you, Mr. Vanholst. And that was in support of business cases P15 and P16. A look to the clerks. Did our other signed up speaker online ever return to us? They did not.

[1:37:13] Okay, looking up to the gallery. It’s a lovely evening together looking to see if anyone else wanted to speak at a microphone. If not, I’ll close the PPM, but I don’t want to rush anyone. It’s lovely to see everyone back in the gallery in person. It’s been a while. Kind of like the bar last call. I know we’re unlicensed. I apologize. I did bring it up at one point and no one went for it. Okay. That seems to be all our speakers in the gallery. So I will look for a motion to close the public participation meeting moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Cutty calling the question, closing the vote.

[1:38:13] The motion is passed 15 to zero. Thank you. We have those communications we discussed as we went through communications A through D. I would need a motion to receive them moved by Councillor layman, seconded by Councillor Lewis. Looking for any questions or comments on them? Councillor ramen. Thank you. And through you, I’m wondering if it’s possible. If committee would entertain going in camera on the communications provided.

[1:38:45] Sorry. Thank you. So for the public, that’s it. You’re free to wander at will and be with and leave your comments there for tonight. January 26th is discussed. We will come back for a full day. You’re welcome to stream it. Watch it. Come back for those who have followed questions of their Councillors of us as the committee in general. Please put them to SPPC. If you don’t know who your Councillor is, please reach out to our offices and we’ll connect you with your local Councillor or if there’s just someone you really would like, that’s fine too.

[1:39:22] So thank you to the public for that. As for reasonings and going in camera. I’ll have to look for wording or guidance on that one. Sorry, budget chair, I happen to be beside the clerk. So I know that they prefer to have the reason as a legal reason to go into cameras and they’ll do that. But also, given it only relates to one of the matters on the communications, we could receive the rest and just deal with that when separate as the matter we go into camera for.

[1:39:55] Okay. So Councillor Roman, I believe it’s A, you had the concern over. Thank you. Yes. Okay. So our movement in second year would be for communications B through D, looking for any questions or comments on those items only. Seeing none, calling the question of receiving communications of B through D. Seeing the vote, that motion is carried 15 to zero.

[1:40:40] Thank you. I’m wondering how to procedurally do this, that if we can make a motion to go into camera for item A, but do it after our delegations who have been waiting with us this evening on 3.2. Councillor Hopkins. Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a question just so I understand why we’re going in camera. So it’s regarding communications 3.1 A and we’re going to receive the delegation 3.2, just what clarification here?

[1:41:17] Through the chair, if it is the will of the committee, we can move to item 3.2 and then circle back to 3.1 A following that delegation, which is I believe what the chair was trying to accomplish. Thank you. Yes. And just for anyone in the gallery, we were at the state of the city address for at 730 a.m. this morning. Councillor Troso, you had your hand up for a comment or a motion?

[1:41:56] I was wondering if we could also deal with consideration of the items under 4.3 first because I don’t have other people watching that. That way we would be done pretty much with our agenda. I’m only responsible for item 3.1 and 3.2. So I’m just keeping my tabs to under wraps. So if committee is okay with it, we will circle back to 3.1 A and deal with Councillor Romans request to go in camera after the meeting.

[1:42:32] So I’m going to start with a couple of delegates who were also up at 730 this morning and have been enjoying their evening with us. For everyone’s information, our delegation involves a presentation and then open in question and answer from committee as well as this relates to budget impacts. Would I need a motion to? Nope. Okay. Does anyone going to go against me on that? And at some point there will be a dinner, a bio-breaker or something. That doesn’t change at some point you will get. Okay. So we’re going to circle back to 3.1 A after we receive our delegation.

[1:43:06] So welcome. Please come forward. We do have our package of information ahead of us in front of us. If technology could just up the mic for it’s at a proper height for you. And in your packages, you do have the information provided. And I will need a motion just to allow them more than five minutes to present with their packages. Moved by Councillor Stevenson, seconded by Councillor Frank calling the question. Sorry, I pulled that one pretty fast on the clerk. Paying the vote is closing the vote. The motion is passed 14 to 0.

[1:44:59] Thank you. You have more than five minutes. So please proceed. And then when you’re done your presentation, we’ll open it up and I’ll moderate a question and answer. So welcome. Thank you, Madam Chair and two members of Council. My name is Neil Roberts. I’m the Chief with Middlesex Line and Paramedic Service. And joining me tonight is Gordon for Middlesex County. Kathy Barker, Jesson and CAO for Middlesex County and Executive Chair for Middlesex Line and Paramedic Service as well.

[1:45:36] So a quick overview. As I present the 2023 draft budget estimate for Middlesex Line and Paramedic Service and a quick overview of our system. So the Middlesex Line and Paramedic Service operates out of 14 stations, eight of which are located in the city of London. Currently we have over 440 staff over 80 vehicles. And at our peak staffing, we are operating 33 ambulances throughout the system that are actively available to respond. In 2022, our system responded to over 111,000 calls for service.

[1:46:17] 85 plus percent of those calls originated within the city of London and over 83 percent of those calls. The patients were transported to either Victoria Hospital or to University Hospital within the Lenny House Sciences system. Our system also operates a neonatal and pediatric intensive care transport ambulance and that is in coordination and collaboration with Lenny House Sciences. That is for Southwestern Ontario and it’s funded 100 percent by the province of Ontario.

[1:46:53] We also operate a system called community paramedics, which is funded through the Ministry of Long-Term Care and Ontario Health, and that is a game funded at 100 percent funding. A couple of the areas that I wanted to go through in 2022 or one of the charts that you’ll see in your package deal with offload delays. And in 2022, you can see the steep rise. So a quick overview of an offload delay. So when paramedics are transporting patients to the emergency department, typically in the past, we would arrive at the emergency department.

[1:47:29] The patient would be triaged and received by the hospital and transferred to a hospital bed within 30 minutes or less. And when offloads started and actually came out of SARS-1, which is in early 2003, 2004, there was a spike in what we saw a delay in the emergency department. So paramedics were not able to transfer their patients right away. And we measure our offload delays after the first 30 minutes. So when we arrive at the hospital, 30 minutes later is when the offload clock starts and that clock stops when the transfer of care or the patient is off our stretcher and onto a hospital stretcher and the hospital has accepted that patient under their care.

[1:48:11] As you can see throughout the graph in 2022, we had 45,764 unit hours. So that is an ambulance unit hour where we have two paramedics in the vehicle that were stuck in offload delay in the emergency departments. What we’re seeing throughout this graph is we’re seeing that our offloads not only are increasing in the incidents, they’re also increasing in the length of time. I’ve been around for 40 odd years. When we first started seeing some of these, we were seeing offload delays of an hour to two hours.

[1:48:48] In 2019, they rose as high as 19 hours that we were stuck. So that would be moving into two shifts. So a paramedics operate under 12 hours shift. So the crews were actually timing out and the incoming crew was going back to the hospital and taking over the care of that patient. So we are seeing an increase in those. One of the areas of note, we continue and have been continuing to work collaboratively with London Health Sciences, I know Mayor Morgan V the COVID along with Warden Bercard Jess and met with senior officials of London Health Sciences.

[1:49:24] We have a collaborative work in relationship, but what we’re seeing with offload delays, we’re not only seeing in the problems Ontario has seen Canada and worldwide. My colleagues in the United Kingdom and Australia are seeing similar patterns coming out of COVID as well. Coupling that as well, if you look at our other chart, which is our increase in calls, the number of calls we did, as I mentioned earlier in 2022, we responded to 111,000 calls. And that is an increase as well. And combining the offload delays with the increase in demand on our system, what we’re also seeing is that the time on task, so we’re seeing sicker patients in the community, which is requiring our paramedics to spend more time on the scene.

[1:50:05] We’re seeing obviously when we do get to the hospital, an increase in the incidence with offload and those offloads are longer. So it’s basically a domino effect of all the areas that we’re seeing coming out of COVID. I’ve noticed well over 111,000 on average, not on average, but we’ve seen about six calls per day on average throughout 2022 where our system could not respond. And those calls were responded by neighboring services. So I’m talking Oxford County, Elgin County, Huron County, Perth County. And at times we are stripping their areas of their vehicles by coming into London.

[1:50:45] So certainly the demand continues to go up. A bit of context on the budget estimate itself. The original 2023 draft budget estimate, which was created four years ago, submitted in 2019, obviously didn’t realize and expect to go through a global pandemic and some of the changes that we’ve seen for the last two and a half years. Health care has and continues to change provincially and worldwide. Middlesex County and the City of London have been advocating for much needed change to modernize not only land animals dispatch, which we do not control.

[1:51:23] It is actually operated by the Ministry of Health and Paramedic Services since 2011. And today’s pressures are a result of the request to modernize, but we haven’t yet seen the realization of those changes that we’ve been asking for. And I know at AMO last year, CEO Livingston was with myself and Warren Barker, Jesson on a joint delegation to advocate for changes to our system before Minister Jones and that was well received. The budget as well did not take into account when it was created to new collective agreements, which are now in place and certainly it reflects those.

[1:52:02] With regards to some of the drivers behind the budget itself, obviously we need to focus on the need to support for the recovery of the current systemic pressures. What we’re experiencing and the pressures we’re facing, again, as I mentioned earlier, are not only being experienced province-wide, Canada-wide, but worldwide as well. So it is just not a London issue. It is something that is going on throughout. The need for additional investments is a result of increased call volume as I’ve indicated coming out of COVID.

[1:52:35] I’ve not seen an increased call volume. My colleagues around the province are seeing the increased demand as well. I think in reality, when we look at that, we’re looking at a system that at times cannot access their primary care or their family physician. They can’t get into a walk-in clinic at times they can’t get into an urgent care. So the fallback is accessing 911. And through legislation, we are required to respond to every call and to transport every patient to an emergency department, which is already understrained. So again, it is a cascading effect.

[1:53:09] Certainly we’re seeing increased mental health and wellness support for MLPS, our paramedics and frontline workers. They’ve been going through the COVID for the last two and a half years. To be quite honest, our team is exhausted. They’re burnt out and it’s been a sustained heavy call volume. And certainly we’re looking to invest in more mental health. Certainly the draft proposal is a placeholder for the City of London. It was presented yesterday to the Middlesex County EMS Authority Board and was recommended for a movement onto the County Budget Review Committee and County Council for further consideration.

[1:53:52] And again, as I said earlier, these draft estimates did not anticipate coming out of a global pandemic. As Council is aware, the proposed budget estimate this year is 61,385,275 dollars, which does equate to a 17.85% increase or an additional $9,297,580. We did, when we created this budget, do it through a zero-based budget. We didn’t say, well, this is what we have in ‘22, so let’s just add on to it.

[1:54:29] We actually go back and rebuild it up. Part of this, as well as we go through and look at our schedules, we look at where we’re staffing, where our call volume is peaking and readjusting to try and gain as much efficiencies as we can out of it. Certainly, as I said earlier, the call volume and the complexity of the calls is driving the strain on our system. The offload delays, which I talked about earlier, are again not helping, especially when we at some of our peak periods have 20 audiences sitting between the two emerges.

[1:55:03] And we also have calls in place at periods we’ve seen 15 calls being held in the queue that are lower acuity, but we still cannot address them until we basically get vehicles off the street. The budget also reflects inflation and supply chain challenges. And this is not just new to us. I’m sure the city is dealing with it. I don’t know what the county is dealing with it. In those areas, such as vehicles, which are part of our capital, for our nine vehicles in 2023, they have risen by just under 600,000 from what we paid for last year.

[1:55:39] And those are areas that we obviously cannot control. We’re seeing increases in insurance, deductibles, and insurance renewals as well. Part of the area as well that this estimate deals with is the ombudsman’s report, which was done about a year and a half ago, where the ombudsman reviewed the Ministry of Health’s investigation into land ambulance services by the ministry, and it does have a cascading effect as to how we operate our service, how we do our investigations, and some of the areas we need to look for. Obviously population growth, and as I mentioned, vehicle and liability and insurance costs.

[1:56:17] Of note, our funding envelope from the ministry is always has a one-year lag. So what we will receive from the ministry is based upon the county council approved budget from 2022, and it will be up to 50% of that amount. So what we’re seeking this year in the increase is born between the city and the county at 100% following year. The ministry based upon their past pattern will come back with 50% of the increase in funding. Training costs related to increase to the number of employees that were increasing as well as regulatory requirements.

[1:56:57] Increase in medical supplies and equipment on average or medical supplies and equipment are rising between 15% and 20% over last year. We’re seeing that. And vehicle costs related to increase in fleet and our fuel costs. Our fuel is purchased primarily from the city itself through your regards, and you get a good deal on bulk buying, but the reality is in 2022, we had over a million dollars in a pressure because of the increase in gas prices. So it’s not only impacting everybody, it’s also impacting us. Obviously, one of the areas that we want to address in this budget is the strategic plan, which was completed last year, and by our consultants to better address the needs of our system.

[1:57:42] A quick overview of some of the areas that are included in the draft estimate are two new 24-hour system enhancements to the system. And as per the last year, we had four 12-hour units that were included, and those were placed in the city of London. So next year or this year, they’ll be placed in the city of London, because that’s our greatest strain and our greatest need. Obviously, increased operational support as well as we grow our staff. We also need to be able to support our staff.

[1:58:15] And a good example recently is when we’re dealing with multi-incidents, whether it be the stavings downtown or the recent building collapse. That obviously has a strain on our system, plus the hospitals are also strained as well. So it’s managing multiple wheels at the time. Obviously, increasing in the payroll as well. I talked about the consumable budget estimate. Again, has increased not only in our coal volume, but also the inflation. And the vehicle operations budget, so that’s maintaining our fleet. That is increased due to the cost to maintain the fleet.

[1:58:52] We have a very strict regimen. Obviously, we don’t want our vehicles breaking down, and we certainly have an increased fleet as well. So those obviously impact. And then supporting through our logistics and support services. The more staff you hire, we need HR. And the ability to service the vehicles through cleaning, restocking to get the paramedics back on the road as quickly as possible. Training as well is also reflected in our budget. As we’re hiring more staff, we need to ensure that those oncoming staff are trained, but also as complexities of paramedic practice continue, because paramedics are not regulated under a college.

[1:59:33] They are actually regulated through a base hospital. And the majority of our training through basic light support is within the service. So for risk mitigation to ensure staff are properly trained and educated, there’s an investment in that as well, because of the work they do. Certainly, the vehicle and equipment lifecycle replacement costs, which is our capital, so our budget being presented to council as it always is, includes our capital. Capital is not separate. There’s no other contingency funds that are included.

[2:00:07] And that includes the purchase of new ambulances, response vehicle, stretchers, laptops, our automatic vehicle location systems, which need to be updated. That’s our GPS, which tracks where we’re going and is tracked by our dispatch center as well, as well as any system hardware replacement. In your package, council, you would have seen a draft breakdown of our budget by category. The majority of that is through operational wages and benefits, which is at 72, and the breakdown is there.

[2:00:39] I won’t go through it for you, but it’s there for your review. Some of the performance improvement and efficiencies, obviously, as I mentioned earlier, the deployment plan, better utilizing our resources where they meet the greatest need, obviously not over-resourcing, not under-resourcing, but trying to ensure that we’re effectively using those. Systemic review and update of our standard operating procedures, obviously staffing and rotational efficiencies, the strategic plan, which I talked about, internal quality assurance and strategic performance programs.

[2:01:15] We also go through a Lean Six Sigma review to ensure, again, that we’re looking at operational efficiencies, as well as I mentioned earlier about ongoing human capital investments. Our team goes through some traumatic calls. We need to ensure that their mental health is dealt with. One of the areas that I did want to talk about with some of the stress and strain, obviously, we’ve been working, as I said earlier, with the AMO delegation, and certainly, we’ve recently been working as well with CEO Livingston, with regards to, obviously, new models of providing care for those that most need within the community, because we’re often seeing it within our system.

[2:01:59] The effects of this, the need to do better, we see this. I know the city recognizes this, and this is part and parts of the impact. What I’d also like to highlight as well is the fact that when we had the delegation with Minister Jones last August, Middlesex County put forward a proposal to better deal with some of these calls, what we call lower acuity calls that are stacking in our queue, to be able to go out and actually respond to them in real time, take them out of the queue, have a paramedic and a single response unit deal with these calls, and try and treat on scene, and then immediately refer these patients if they met the criteria to community paramedic in real time, and therefore take them out of the queue, take the transporting evidence from going to a merge, and then sitting there for upwards of 19 hours.

[2:02:51] So, in other words, certainly, if we can ensure that the best care to the right care to the right patient at the right time, that’s part of our system modernization that we need to do better on, and certainly the dispatch as well, because as I said earlier, every call coming into our current system is sending a transporting ambulance, which is coming into an emerge, and that emerge system is already strained. As part of our package as well are the budget timelines right now with respect to Middlesex County, which I won’t go into, but Madam, a budget year for the most part, that’s a high level, but certainly happy to address any questions.

[2:03:33] Perfect, thank you for your presentation, and just everyone that’s in your original slide deck as well, so you have the copies with you to make notes on or from that your questions off of. As we move into any questions of staff or our delegation this evening, if you’re referring to anything on a specific slide number or page number and a number, please just throw that out to help us all be up with your thoughts. It’s been a long day. I’m starting my speakers list. If you can just please keep your questions as succinct as possible, it would help move us along.

[2:04:06] I will start my speakers list with Councillor Cudi. It’s been a long day. Thank you, and through you, Chair. And thank you for the work that your organization does and your staff members. I recently saw them in action and very impressed and very professional. Thank you. I’d like to refer everyone to the first graph, the historical off-load delay. The spike from 2021 to 2022 is, do you consider that to be an outlier because there’s nothing on that graph from 2013 that’s even remotely close?

[2:04:51] And then by comparison, the other graph, the increase in total call, again, from 89 to 111, that’s a spike. Well, I guess my suggestion or my hypothesis would be that if that’s happening in one year and it’s during COVID, is that likely to go the other direction when you, when you follow that out, when you push that out to 23 and 24? Is that likely to reverse or to fall back? Thank you.

[2:05:28] Thank you, through you, Madam Chair, to the Councillor. So, first of all, this is just showing five years or seven years of off-load delays. Certainly, as you can see, for the most part, the trend is fairly flat, and then you see it taking off. Of note during COVID, when we first hit COVID, I’ll say in March, April, and May, and that was at the peak of COVID, we actually saw a drop in our off-loads and a drop in Emerge Department volumes. And I think that was at a point where everyone was scared to go out. It was sort of the hunker-down type of mentality that we saw.

[2:06:05] But coming out of COVID, the trend line that you’re seeing, certainly I’ve never seen before, and my colleagues, again, throughout the province, and, as I said, throughout Canada and worldwide, are seeing a similar trend. And I think this is an offshoot or coming out of COVID. The hope with respect to the modernization, which Middlesex County is advocating for, so to dispatch the models of care, which I really didn’t touch upon, which is treat and refer on scene, treat and release on scene, and alternative destinations would hopefully help flatten that curve and eliminate some of the challenges that we’re seeing.

[2:06:45] But certainly the increase that we are seeing here is coming out of COVID, is the result of those patients that have not had a primary care. They have not seen their family doctor, their medical conditions have exacerbated. You’re seeing lots of stories almost on a daily or weekly basis of people aren’t able to get in. Keep in mind as well, this trend is well, even in the last quarter of last year, we were dealing with COVID influenza and RSV as well at the same time, as well as the hospitals, and certainly that was cascading and impacting this trend as well.

[2:07:23] Sorry. And just for everyone, as I’m sharing from over here, I can’t cut anyone off with the mic, so I’ll just be yelling about it for a while. So I will go back to Councillor Cuddy. My speaker is listening to go. If you have a long list of questions, maybe just ask a couple and we’ll rotate around, recognizing we’re at committee, and we’ll come back to you just trying to keep us all engaged and going at this hour. Councillor Cuddy. Thank you, Chair. And just to follow up, one last question.

[2:07:58] You mentioned that there was a leg from the Ministry of Health. That’s not just isolated to our case. That’s right across the province. And if that is the case, what’s the answer from what’s the Ministry of Health saying to you? What’s the response time? Thank you, Madam Chair, through you to the Councillor. Historically, the one-year leg is not just with our service, that is a provincial. And the reality is, when ambulance service or paramedic services were uploaded or transferred over to Middlesex County, the total cost of paramedic services is the responsibility of the upper tier.

[2:08:49] The grant or the funding that we received from the province of Ontario is a discretionary grant. It’s at 50%. It has been historic. We have not seen that change, and there is no evidence to suggest. But it’s always a year later because the Ministry of Health collects all the data from the prior year budget in creating their estimates for this year. So 23 would have been based upon financial information submitted by Middlesex County to the Ministry of Health in September of October of 2022 for Minister Beth involving his financial budget that he’ll probably table in April of this year.

[2:09:29] Councillor Cudi. Thank you. Councillor Frank. Thank you. And I also would like to echo Councillor Cudi’s remarks at the beginning. I personally have had excellent service from the EMS staff. I had a home birth and I had a little bit of a quick situation. So I had an excellent pair that came to my house and did a great job. So I’d love if you pass it along to your staff. It’s my understanding, as you’ve explained, that the province is, I don’t know if it’s supposed to pay 50% as the right word, or as you pointed out, it’s a discretionary amount.

[2:10:07] But based on the chart that was provided, it looks like in 2022, the number is 45%. And then in the 2023, it looks like 42.5%. And I noticed in your presentation, you said up to 50%. So I’m just hoping to get clarification if they’re not meeting the 50% target even retroactively. Thank you, Madam Chair, three to Councillor. So it’s up to 50% of the prior years budget. So what you’re seeing at the 42 or less is basically because it is based on a prior year. And so it will never match to date.

[2:10:44] It has never matched the in-year budget. So for 2023, we’re dealing with a $61 million budget. Obviously, it won’t be 50%. They’ll be looking at last year’s budget, which I believe was $52 million. So our expectation is that the province will come to the table this year with approximately $26 million, which should be 50% of last year’s approved budget. Excellent. Thanks.

[2:11:16] And just based on your presentation, the information is being provided. I’m wondering that the city is being downloaded healthcare costs and we’re providing healthcare kind of through ambulatory services. So I’m wondering, given that the request for this is for additional hospital or ambulances who might likely get stuck at offload delays at the hospital. And given the real increase is that these ambulances are getting stuck at the offload delays. I’m wondering when you think they’ll be resolved, because as you mentioned earlier, I know that you said that a variety of stakeholders are working to resolve the offload delay issue. Thank you.

[2:11:52] And again, through Madam Chair to the Councillor. So I know that Warden Burkhardt-Gessin has a delegation with Minister Jones at the upcoming Roma Conference certainly. Middlesex County is looking at opportunities to reduce the burden in the strain on the system to be innovative. And obviously the early adopter proposal that was tabled last August has received a verbal comment by the minister.

[2:12:24] She actually refers as well to the CMHA diversion that we, as paramedic services, do to the Huron Street site. That was one of the first in the province for an alternative destination for mental health, lower-cuting mental health patients. And the minister refers to that as sort of the standard that is leading into alternative methods to try and reduce the strain, try and reduce the burden not only in paramedic services but in hospitals as well, ensuring that, as I said earlier, the right patient is getting the right care at the right time. And not every patient, as I’ve said, as well publicly needs to go to an emergency department, but that’s the backup.

[2:13:02] So the models that care on treat and refer treat and release and alternative destinations, we are awaiting the patient care standards. We’re open for comment at the end of December. And they closed off middle of January. So we’re expecting some good news announcements from the province on allowing paramedics to practice and hopefully provide patients with better alternatives to treatment and options for themselves. Councillor Frank? Thanks. One follow up on this one and then I’ll share with Council to take a turn.

[2:13:38] So just regarding that comment, I am just wondering if we are then increasing the ambulances that are on the road and then the offload delays go down, is there any contingency plans for what those ambulances will be doing or do you think then that we’ll still need them even if we have reduced the offload delay issue? Through you, Madam Chair, to the Councillor. So currently, based upon the current system, we’re still on your strain. And even on these models that care, they’re going to take some time to implement and see the results that we’re expected.

[2:14:13] The reality is working with community paramedicine and more funding at 100% funding levels and more community-based care is part of the area as well that the warden is advocating for changes, but that change is going to take some time. And the budget estimate that’s before this Council and Middlesex County Council deals with the current situation today and trying to ensure that the services are available to the residents when they call. Thank you. Reminder, we are at committees.

[2:14:44] You always jump back in. Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Roberts, for the presentation. Really appreciate it. And thank you for stepping away too. It’s great to see your face. I just wanted to follow up. It seems, you know, with being here, the amount is always high. I’ve stopped myself telling residents now that the province is only responsible for health care. I think municipalities are starting to take on a greater burden. And as we can see, the budget numbers go up and we’re behind. And the responsibilities are more.

[2:15:20] I do sit on the AMO board on behalf of the City of London. I’m really glad to hear that you are having negotiations with the minister. And also pleased to hear that changes most likely will be coming forward. And we still don’t know how that’s going to look like. And we’ll have probably a lag time there to catch up. And it just seems for me right now as we’re in budget, it’s how do we, or how can we support and how can we see the mayor there work together in collaborating.

[2:15:58] It’s a great word. Our mayor used this morning on working with the province. Really having them see the challenges and the burdens of the increase in our budget here. And where are they? I wonder if you can just have a broader conversation about that and what can we do to put those pressures on the provincial government. Thank you. Thank you. Again, through you, Madam Chair, to the council.

[2:16:34] So one of the areas, obviously, that the city has been a great collaborative partner working with Middlesex County on joint advocacy. Not only last year at AMO, but for several years in ensuring that the challenges with regards to Middlesex, London, Paramedic service are heard. You know, with the Minister of Health of the Day in part, that was Christine, Minister, Christine Elliott, certainly last year with Minister Jones. And I know there’s been, again, a very productive dialogue and collaboration between the city and the county on this and that advocacy continues.

[2:17:09] I’m not sure if the warden wants to add anything else. So thank you for that question, Councillor Hopkins. I guess I would say any time that you have the province in front of you to tell our story. And that’s the thing, because it’s just not a Middlesex County story. It’s a city of London story. And in reality, it’s a southwestern Ontario story because the backlogs all of this. It’s a systematic pressure. You get a backlog at ambulance, then it all trickles down. And so that’s what I would ask.

[2:17:44] We have appeared together and that will continue. I have no doubt. But when you have the ability and you have the opportunity to tell the story, that’s all I ask of you. Councillor Hopkins, a follow-up? Yeah, it’s a great reminder. I really appreciated those conversations with the Minister. And you also make me reflect. It’s really a broader conversation within a number of single tier, double tier and all those changes.

[2:18:24] And it’s not going to be sold overnight, but the reality is we are carrying that burden financially. And I think the province needs to know that. So thank you. Thank you, Mayor Morgan. Thank you. So let me start by saying thank you for the presentation and the amount of information you provided us. I know it’s something we’ve asked in the past as a council. And so I want to commend you and the Warden and Mr. Rayburn for coming before us and sharing this information at this stage in our budget process. I certainly recognize that we’re a little out of alignment with your budget process.

[2:19:01] And so for you being able to pull together this data so that we can ask a lot of questions and get this information for our budget process is actually quite helpful. I would echo my colleagues concerns about, and I know they’re shared by you as well, of the acceleration of the offload delay piece. I know having come and sat in on county meetings and heard presentations there. I thought it was a big concerning issue a few years ago, but to see the amount of escalation that has happened recently, I think emphasizes the importance of those efforts that you talked about. And I remember being at the delegation, the joint delegation that we had with the minister.

[2:19:40] And I think that those sorts of collaborations are exactly what we need to do. There’s things that we can talk about about the current budget, but I don’t think we can lose our focus on trying to create those innovative changes that the service has pitched to the to the provincial government with the support of the city of London as a major funder to change the way that the service works to avoid future costs. And so I would certainly commit because I know Councillor Hopkins has mentioned this to that continued collaboration with the Warden and the service to ensure that each and every time one of us gets before a relevant provincial minister that we are arming each other with the information on this issue. So this is not a county issue because they are the service provider, we are the majority funder of this and it is a huge, it is a huge cost that our taxpayers pay and so we have a massive vested interest in the work that you’re doing.

[2:20:33] And so I also want to commend and I don’t have a lot of questions for you. That collaboration that has occurred between our two civic administrations on this issue. I think it was really impressive to see when we did that joint delegation and it was county city land ambulance service in front of the minister and her staff. And you getting peppered with questions and you being saying things like, actually I was on that task force and here’s how it works shows the immense knowledge base that we have on our side on this issue. And I think we need to continue to advocate vigorously with the province to ensure that what is becoming an unsustainable burden I think on our municipal taxpayers is addressed by both the innovations that we want to pitch within the system to avoid costs in the future, and also recommitting to that dialogue about the province’s 50% share, the implications of the delay of the funding coming in, and the burden that puts on municipalities at a time when our budgets are very stretched as well so I don’t have any questions for you.

[2:21:37] I know I peppered you with questions in the past so today it’s more compliments and my commitment to continue to work with you in the warden and the county on doing what we can to change the system and avoid costs in the future. So 11 hours later, that’s when you want to hit. Mayor Morgan up for something. Did you want an opportunity to reply to any of that. Just thank you, Mr. Mayor, and certainly to the city, you know, certainly we’re committed and I know the county is committed to this ongoing collaboration one of the areas as well that we talked last year, as well. Which again, we’ll release some of the pressures on the system so that collaboration, that ongoing dialogue, the ongoing joint advocacy.

[2:22:23] I’m confident will yield results so thank you so much for your support. Councillor Pribble. Thank you, sir, the chair. Do I understand that the biggest delays are in the hospital when the when your teams arrive as the patients and one of the initiatives or the service change in service. Is there something to think about in terms of that one team could take care actually more than one patient. And are there actually hospitals looking potentially making facilities for your teams when they arrive that they will be able to take care of more than one patient. Thank you. Through you, Madam Chair, to the Council, that’s an excellent question.

[2:23:05] So what we’re currently doing right now is a term called batching or doubling up. So we are utilizing all those opportunities. So as Council may be aware that every ambulance transport ambulance has two paramedics, so where we can in emerge. If we’re backlogged, we’ll actually split that crew up. The look after at least two patients or one patient each or sometimes three patients will put them on to hospital beds. If they’re available, because that’s an option because we do need to get our structures back out. One of the programs that we started a couple years ago, which was one of the first out of the province, is a program called fit to sit.

[2:23:47] And so that’s when we bring in patients who are able to sit in our lower acuity and we get we basically clear them off our stretchers and into the waiting room. And that’s a joint advocacy program that we worked with London Health Sciences to try and reduce our offloads and get our vehicles turned around. But certainly the big challenge, as I mentioned earlier on, is that often these patients are taking longer on scene for us. But when we get to emerge, and I was on a ride out last week with one of our paramedic crews, the patients requiring cardiac monitoring, they’re requiring more intensive care by the paramedics and the emergency department doesn’t have the capacity to accept that high level of acuity into their bed at that time.

[2:24:28] So the paramedics are required, especially when they’re a patient’s cardiac monitor to have extended periods. But we’re certainly looking at any and all options. We’ve got a great collaborative relationship with London Health Sciences. I’ll be honest with you. Last night at 12 a.m. I was on the phone to one of their senior presidents problem solving in real time because their system was under strain and so was ours. So that dialogue continues, but certainly we have got a lot more work to do. Follow up, Councillor. Just a comment that, of course, it would be great to have cost savings, but I’m thinking more of the lives of people. And the more you are on the grounds, the better it is, right? So I was just thinking of, again, certainly my expertise is not in this area, but I was thinking of having a facility in the hospital potentially for you before they get admitted.

[2:25:18] So you actually have a closed in facility if there’s one of the options kind of thinking outside the box. That’s all. But thank you very much. And I appreciate that, Councillor. And certainly we are looking at that. I think the models of care, treat and release, treat and refer. But certainly if there’s an opportunity for us to certainly transfer our patient off of our stretcher into the hospital with better care, we’re definitely looking at those options. And certainly, but our primary care, as you’ve already picked up on is looking after the patient, making sure that the patient is receiving the best care possible, and that we’re transferring them at the appropriate time to ensure that there is no lapse in that care, or that that care is not compromised whatsoever. Thank you, Councillor Ferrera.

[2:26:04] Thank you through the chair. I guess first I’ll say thanks for coming out and providing delegation and giving us the budget report in advance and putting it together. So my question, I have a couple questions. They do kind of lead off of some of the past colleagues that they just asked, and it is about the offload delays. So obviously we have that alarming spike for the offload delays. And I see a big number here. And it’s, I think it says 158% increase for offload delay time. So the way I imagine that is the ambulance comes into the hospital and they’re waiting out in front of the hospital with the patient in the back.

[2:26:41] I guess that would be my first question. That’s correct, right? Through you, Madam Chair, to the Councillor. So typically we’re in the back hall. So we’re not in our vehicles. We’re actually in the back hall of the Emerge Department waiting, first of all, to be triaged by the triaged nurse. That looks after our area, and then certainly after that, then they’ll have to be registered, but they’re in the back hall if that provides some clarity. Thank you. It does. So basically, I just, I see like the big delays are coming through and it’s clearly because there’s triaging issues at the hospital.

[2:27:24] So they’re just not able to bring in a patient at the time because they’re, it’s busy. So my question is, if we were to raise, you know, the amount of ambulance we have around to increase the services. When, if the triaging does come up to, to par and is able to accommodate for that, and it goes back to the questions I asked before, we all of a sudden would have these extra vehicles and extra services. So I’m just kind of wondering if this is just a one time spike and I’m, I have concerns. If we were to be bringing in the extra services, extra vehicles, extra individuals to work, what happens? Like, you know, once we have that dip back again, which I would be assuming that we would get. I’m just concerned with the extra surplus that we would have in the end. Thank you.

[2:28:17] And I’m sure to the councilor. So actually the, the request in 2023 is multi layered as I talked about earlier offloads is one of the areas, certainly the call volume has increased dramatically as well. So even with offloads decreasing quite a bit as well, we’re still seeing a demand in the request for service. We’re also seeing as identified earlier as well that when we’re on scene that we’re. Because the acuity of the patients, we’re taking longer on scene to better treat the patients. They’re requiring more intensive care. So that’s longer in time. So it’s, it’s adding up as well. What we’re seeing with the offloads is incidents are increasing and the time is increasing, but the reality as well as it’s a perfect storm of offloads increase call volume increase complexity or acuity of the patients.

[2:29:11] And the demand in our system is not slowing down. And again, it’s, it’s just not like a London issue. It is again, provincially Canada wide and worldwide. And it’s really sort of the healthcare system of what’s happening right now, the increase on demand of emergency services, paramedic services increased. And I don’t really see that when you look at the last couple of years, our increases have outmatched our predictions on it. And every year, I’m basically, we exceed our projections, which typically three to four percent. Obviously, it just keeps outpacing us. And I’d yet to be able to predict this properly. Thank you.

[2:29:55] Thank you, and through you, thank you for the presentation. I wanted to ask first about the pediatric intensive care transport unit. We’ve heard in the media in the last few months, especially about increased needs to transfer between different centers of care. I’m just wondering if you could speak to that increase in volume as well. Thank you. Certainly, I’m happy to and gain through you, Madam chair to the counselor. So there are two areas. What you’re probably referring to is what we call pediatric repatriation. So at the height of RSV, a lot of pediatric patients were transported to a children’s hospital.

[2:30:41] London, we’d be an example, Hamilton, Toronto, and Ottawa, or some of the main areas. And certainly over time, these patients, when they got better, needed to be repatriated back to their home and community hospital. We were involved in some of that. So basically, we utilized our current resources, but through a funding pocket provided by the ministry to cover that above and beyond. Or if we could, we would do it within the allocation to ensure it. The other part of the neonatal pediatric intensive care transport unit, that is a dedicated team that our paramedic staff, the ambulance to actually work with the team that actually, and we did one. I think it was last week where we went from London Health Sciences to Owen sound with the team empty to pick up a premature baby to bring the baby back.

[2:31:32] And that’s what we do. So it could be, you know, as West as Windsor. We’ve gone into Durham as well. It is a provincially funded resource. We will go where the team needs us to go and where the patient is to ensure that that patient receives the appropriate transport and the team itself. That’s 100% funded as well. That’s our follow up. Thank you. Unrelated. But I want to talk about, I wanted to ask about the pressures of the job. So one of the increases you mentioned was for mental strain and supports for staff.

[2:32:12] In a system that seems constantly under pressure and people are constantly pushed to the place where they have to work in a system that is constantly under pressure. I feel like we’re, we’re being asked to provide additional funding, which is absolutely 100% necessary. And, you know, a bit of a comment, but I just feel like. Thank you, but also, you know, this is definitely an extremely pressing issue. We are seeing health care workers burnout. We’re seeing paramedics burnout. And so, yes, absolutely the additional supports are warranted. I’m just wondering if you can speak to to some of that as well. Thank you.

[2:33:00] Through you, Madam Chair and to the Councilor. Thank you for raising that. I’ll be honest with you. When we did the budget this year as well, I’ve seen the strain on our frontline staff and I often say I’m the window dressing. I’m really not one makes this organization great. It is the frontline staff. And over the last couple of years, I have seen our staff under tremendous strain. They rallied to looking after the community and the patients. They’ve missed their meal breaks. They’ve been extended over their shift, not able to go home and see their families. And they literally have run called a call to call to call. And I realize the commitment and what they’ve done. And it’s admirable.

[2:33:45] But at the end of the day, I sympathize. And that’s why you heard me earlier say about investments in mental health and ensuring that we’re supporting them. Because they have been there when the public needed them. And I want to make sure that we’re here to support them as well, whether it’s a traumatic incident or it’s been a bad shift. It is all cumulative. It does have an impact. And we need to be there to support them. So thank you so much for your comments. Thank you. Thank you. Looking to other committee members for any questions or comments looking to the CEO or the board. And if you have anything you would like to add this evening, you’ve sat here all this time. Yeah, it’s never a good thing to ask a politician or the daughter of a broadcaster to say if she’s got any words. But I do want to thank all of you for having us here tonight.

[2:34:47] I think that this is an important discussion to have. These are big numbers. These are big challenges that we’re all facing. And it’s great to have this conversation. So I appreciate the level of questioning that’s been that you’ve asked our chief. Bill and I were just going back and forth about the questions that you were asking. And it speaks a lot to the education that you’ve gone through to learn about the system. And I appreciate that. I really do think that, you know, for all of the pressures that we’ve talked about, and it is that this is a systematic issue. It’s not going to be solved overnight. But a lot of good things have happened. And we have made steps and we have this treat and refer program is huge.

[2:35:35] The diversion program to CMHC on here on street. That’s a big win. And the province is seeing that. And they’re talking about what is happening in Middlesex London. And so I suspect that as we continue to advocate, you will still, you will see positive changes. And, you know, we’ll slowly, slowly get through and be able to make some incredible changes. So thank you for having us here. Thank you. Anything our staff wanted to add tonight before we proceeded saying nothing. Last call for questions. Okay. I will just need a motion to receive the delegation and the information within the package moved by Councillor Cuddy, seconded by Councillor Stevenson, giving the clerk a moment before the question will come up.

[2:36:30] Okay. Call on the question. Please vote. Councillors Cuddy and Van Mirbergen. Oh, yes. Closing the vote. The motion’s a story. I believe I have impaired to Councillor Troso’s ability to vote with the committee’s indulgence. I’d like to cancel this vote and reopen it for everybody. Thank you.

[2:37:28] The vote is open, voting on the, um, receive the delegation that we just received once again. Please revote. So, yes, closing the vote. The motion’s passed 15 to 0. Thank you for our delegation. And I wish you a wonderful evening, as I know some of you still have an evening that’s still going with meetings. Um, for us, that puts us back to 3.1 a realize in the hour, I will look to the mayor and the clerks of do we want to have a bio break now as I know some of us have been already moving in and out.

[2:38:57] Or do we want to go into closed session? If there’s wording of why we’re going into closed session, take care of that and then go on break. So I’m at the hands of council. I would suggest that we go into closed session, take care of that quickly. Go on break. It separates the agenda quite nicely. Okay, perfect. So looking to the clerk to read out the reason why we going into closed session for item 3.1. Through the chair, the motion would read that the strategic priorities and policy committee convene in closed session to consider a matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose regarding the Humane Society, London and Middlesex 2023 budget amendment grant request.

[2:39:47] Looking to committee to see if there’s any questions about it. Kate looking for a move in a second to remove by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor ramen. And thank you to those in the galleries. This does mean that our time together is done at the moment, calling the question closing the vote. The motion’s carried 15 to 0. So just a moment while we do we need to open the gallery doors. You’ve trained me well. Looking for a report out, Mr. Ferra, or Councillor Ferra. Thank you, Madam chair, just reporting that progress is made in camera.

[2:41:56] Okay, that leaves us with item 3.1 a communication for our grant English Scott, Peter LLP law firm, a motion to receive the correspondence as sent in moved by Councillor layman seconded by Councillor Hillier. Questions or comments saying none, calling the question. The system, the vote is now open, though a little bit glitching coming up twice for some of us. Thank you, closing the vote. The motion’s passed 15 to 0. That brings us to our break time. There are things available for us. I did not order them. I’m assuming they’re wonderful. So looking to those, if you’re ready for a break now, I would need to move in a seconder and then I might hand the chair over when we get back to see what you guys want. Moved by Councillor, how long are we going for? 20 minutes. Can we do 20? No, 25.

[2:43:37] I would suggest it’s quarter to seven. I was going to suggest 15, but I’ll look around the table. If my colleagues really want 20, I’m okay with 22, but I would propose 15. Okay, let’s go seven o’clock in the dot. We’ll be back here. And if you’re lingering, well, it’s okay. So moved by Councillor Lewis, seconded by somebody want to go. Councillor ramen, is a hand vote okay, or do we need to do this in the system of hand vote? All in favor of seven o’clock, we’re going back. That motion’s carried. Thank you.

[3:03:10] Okay, welcome back everyone. If you just please take your seats. We’re almost done for the evening. We were heading into items for direction at which point as item schedule items have been concluded. I’ll hand the chair to Mayor Morgan with him to be as efficient as I was. I’ll reluctantly take it. You were doing such a great job. You could have just kept going. But we do have items for direction now. Four point. These are a series of appointments. So I think we’ll deal with them separately, given there’s a conflict on at least one of them. Four point one is confirmation of appointments to the old East Village business improvement area. Is there a mover? Councillor Stevenson, seconder, Councillor Hill here. Any discussion? Okay, we’ll open that for voting. I vote yes, it’s not coming up. Closing the vote. The motion’s passed 15 to 0.

[3:04:32] Item 4.2 represents appointments to the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority. It requires two members and there are two submitted applications. So I would look for a motion if someone is willing to nominate both those individuals. Councillor ramen, Councillor Cuddy. Any discussion on appointing those two individuals to that Conservation Authority? No, seeing none. So the motion will be pending approval from the Ministry because as you recall, we’re seeking approvals subject to the Ministry allowing us to have citizens in these positions. So you’ll notice that in the motion. So don’t go telling them they’re automatically on. If you know them well, but that we’ve got them queued up and should they be successful in this vote?

[3:05:26] It’s just a matter of Ministry approval. So with that, everybody’s clear. Okay, we’ll open that for voting then. Vote yes again. Closing the vote. The motion’s passed 15 to 0. Next, we have 4.3, which is consideration of appointment. The lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority. It requires one member and there are three before us.

[3:06:08] So we can do what we’ve done before and that’s go through our selection process within the system. So assuming colleagues are okay with everybody being on that list, we could just proceed with a selection process on that as we as is per our policy. So we’ll do that. People are allowed to make comments if they’d like before we vote on this matter. Councilor Palosa. Thank you. I would just note that to the members of this list of three have just been appointed to the concrete conservation authority. If we’re looking to share the opportunities around citizens willing to participate point. So remember what we’re about to do is a selection process. It’s not the final process.

[3:06:58] It’ll help inform what the will of the majority of council is through the preferential system. And then we will make a motion to do the appointment. So you’ll see that in your system as we’ve done in closing the selection process and Marie Bloch has received the majority of the votes. So those are some willing to nominate or sorry, introduce a motion to a point Marie Bloch subject to the same conditions as one before. Councilor Hopkins, seconded by Councilor Palosa. Any discussion on that? They see none that vote for that appointment will open in the system.

[3:08:06] I vote yes. Closing the vote. The motions passed 14 to 0 with one recused. Okay, that appointment is complete. 4.4 is appointment to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority. It requires one member. There are four. We will go through the same selection process. And I think as councilor blows a noted, there’s a few people here who’ve been successful in appointments as above. So keep that in mind as you make your selection.

[3:09:22] Councilor Hopkins, he’d like to make some comments on this. Yes, your worship is now is the time if you would allow me just to make some comments as a member of the Upper Thames Conservation Authority Board for the past 8 years. And we sort of find ourselves here because of the provincial changes that have come down to the importance of our boards. And I want to thank this council for allowing a public component to being part of the board. And also to thank clerks. I know it’s a bit of a process in the word that you have to send out notices. And I want to thank all the applicants for applying to the board. But I would like to ask council to support the appointment of Sandy Levin.

[3:10:10] And for those of you who do not know, there are 38 conservation authorities in Ontario. The Upper Thames Conservation Authority has 17 municipalities. We have a very large watershed. It’s a very large board. It’s one of the largest in Ontario. And I’d like to explain a little bit why I am recommending Sandy Levin going forward in the next four years. Upper Thames will have an inexperienced board. With a number of new members. In fact, two of our council appointments are going to be new to the board as well. Board meetings are held on Tuesdays.

[3:10:52] They start at 9.30. They usually end around noon. They are long. They are intense. There’s a number of working committees to the financial audit as well as the hearings committee also need to be filled. I won’t go into all the many changes, provincial changes. But if you’ve been a member of any CA, there have been many challenges, not only the past number of years, but going forward, there will still be very many challenges. So experience will matter. Knowledge will matter and connections to the city of London and other community groups will also matter. All these skills will be lacking on the board.

[3:11:40] Mr Levin has all these skills. But what’s also important? It is the technical knowledge and the leadership skills that are required. For instance, what has Mr Levin done during the past years and I’ve seen for myself. He is a former city councillor. He knows how the city operates. And then he stays up to date with our policies and plans. He is chaired and he is vice-chaired the upper terms board. He is also chaired and vice-chaired both of the working groups. Not only that, he set up the financial and audit committee a number of years ago.

[3:12:28] He’s enabled upper terms to be ahead of the curve when it has come to these provincial challenges. He has stepped up and gone beyond the demands that are required as a board. He’s been part of delegations to the conservation Ontario. He’s been involved with capital planning and by-law changes, working with staff and we have great staff, but he’s gone beyond that making sure and creating. It’s taken a lot of time, effort and energy and he’s gone beyond that as a board member. And he’s stepped up to the task. He’s received the newsletters. He passes those on and he also does give guided tours of a number of ESAs that we have here in the cities.

[3:13:15] I sometimes don’t always agree with Mr Levin, but I do listen to him. I listen to what he’s got to say. He’s dedicated and he is devoted not only to the upper terms conservation authority, but also to the city of London. And I’m hoping he will support his application. Thank you. Thank you. Any other speakers? Councilor Trossaou. I’m relatively new to conservation authorities. I’m currently serving on Kettle Creek. When I can tell you, conservation authorities in Ontario are going through a very difficult period right now, a very difficult period, because there’s a lot of uncertainty about what the new regulations, some of which have not even been completed yet, are going to say.

[3:14:10] Having an experienced person on a board like this, it’s very important. And I know that there’s often a tendency for people to want to think, let’s pass this around and get a new person. I’ve been following upper terms very carefully over the last few years. And I can tell you there’s been staff turnover in a good way. And I think we need to have some continuity on that board. And there’s been continuity on a number of different boards, but in particular, there is a large turnover of not only membership, but there’s a new executive director who’s excellent, by the way.

[3:14:58] But I just, I just do think that this would not be a great time to pull off probably one of the most, and I’m going to say this, one of the most competent, competent, dedicated, knowledgeable people in the province about conservation authorities. This is a very serious matter. And I think we need Sandy Levin representing us on that board. Okay, thank you. Any other speakers? So just remember, we’re opening the selection process. There’ll be a subsequent vote for the appointment. Okay, we’ll open that now then. Mr. Hopkins. I’m now not able to vote for the appointment. I was having problems before. It’s just not allowing me to do it. I don’t know if it’s going to mess up the vote. If I do it verbal, or can I go into the computer?

[3:16:14] Oh, Sandy Levin. Yeah, just do verbal. Yeah, I think you made your attention clear in your remarks before. Wasn’t sure what the process was. Just check it. Make no assumptions. Closing the selection process, and Sandy Levin has received the majority of the votes. With a shocker, if you went the other way, Councillor Hopkins. So that was the selection process. Now I’ll need a motion to approve Sandy Levin as the appointee, and I’ll note this is not subject to ministry approval, so he will be appointed to this conservation authority. Councillor Hillier, seconded by Councillor Ferreira. Any discussion? Okay, we’ll open that for voting.

[3:17:06] If I’ll guess. Closing the vote, the motion’s passed 15 to 0. Okay, number 4.5, right? Yes, 4.5 is with respect to the Committee of Adjustment. And what we have is a communication from the Committee that indicates a member of that Committee has missed for consecutive meetings. And the Committee is requesting that we declare that position vacant so that we can appoint someone new.

[3:17:59] And you can see there the information that the Committee has provided us. So we’ll deal with this one step at a time, and that is motion we can entertain. I’m happy to have people ask any questions, but I think Councillor Lewis, go ahead. Thank you, worshiping through you. As you know, this communication was December 27th from the Secretary on behalf of the Chair and the members of the Committee. I have reached out to members of the Committee and confirmed that it’s not for consecutive meetings. Now it’s actually five. This is an important committee that cannot and no communications have been received to the best of my knowledge from civic administration since their efforts to reach out.

[3:18:44] This Committee has a lot of important work to do. This is in very straightforward language in terms of putting it in simple form. This is almost a junior planning committee, the kind of decisions that are made at this Committee. It needs to be fully, it needs to have a full appointments late at all times. So I’m happy to move the motion that was suggested by the Committee Secretary that the space be declared vacant. And I would suggest that we as part of that motion also include civic administration. In this case, specifically the clerk be directed to re advertise for this position.

[3:19:30] Communicate with those who have applied previously as well and get as many applications in for consideration as we can within the timelines that the clerks can meet. We’re going to pull that together. As I knew the Councillor Stevens and are you seconding? Okay. So I’ll see if there are any questions or any discussion on this. If not, it’ll just take us a moment to put those those three components together. Go ahead.

[3:20:08] And it’s not on the table tonight, but it just, it just seems that the work, the workload on this Committee, they meet every week. And I’m wondering, would it be, is there anything statutorily that would bar us from appointing more people and having a house so they could spread the word, the word out or a little bit or at least have an alternate. Because it’s, it’s pretty bad when you don’t have a full slate there and you need, you need, you need a majority, you need a majority vote. I guess that’s just a question for the future. I don’t know if we have someone who knows the answer to can the Committee be larger or not, but this is essentially what the Councillor’s asking. We might not have the person here to answer that. Yeah, I know.

[3:20:53] But we, if you want to take that up later for sure, we can, we can look into that Council. Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you, worship and through you, while the Council raises a good point, I’d like to offer a second piece of information for consideration for Councilors, which is. This committee, I agree, it does have a heavy workload. This committee also has a stipend for the members who serve. So there would be a budgetary implication to increasing the size of the committee. So that’s something that colleagues should keep in mind before they consider that as well. I’m not sure process wise, how it would go either, but certainly happy to have a conversation with the Council offline about that as well.

[3:21:44] Yeah, I think that’s the most appropriate way is is have a conversation, talk to staff, figure out what’s possible to decide whether or not you want to do something and then you can figure out what committee to bring that recommendation recommendation back to. But for now, we’ll focus on the rescinding of this and getting applications to be populated. So I think we have the motion. I think it has three parts. The rescind, the advertise and the receive of the report or the communication. Okay, we’re going to put that into. Okay, the motions up. It states that the following actions be taken with respect to the committee of adjustment, a appointment to the community of adjustment of Muhammad, Muhammad, El Dara be rescinded be a vacancy on the committee be declared, see the communication from the committee of adjustment be received and the city clerk be directed to advertise the vacancy and bring forward all applications to a future meeting of the appropriate standing committee for consideration.

[3:25:11] Anybody’s good with that. Okay, it’s moved and seconded. Any further discussion. Okay, we’ll open that for voting closing the vote. The motions passed 15 to 0. Okay, deferred matters in additional business. Seeing none, then all we have is a motion to adjourn moved by Councilor Hopkins, seconded by Council Frank. All those in favor by hand. That motion’s carried. Thank you. We’re adjourned.