April 4, 2023, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:00 PM; it being noted that Mayor J. Morgan and Councillor P. Van Meerbergen were in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Recognitions

None.

3.   Review of Confidential Matters to be Considered in Public

None.

4.   Council, In Closed Session

Motion made by S. Hillier

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That Council rise and go into Council, In Closed Session, for the purpose of considering the following:

4.1    Personal Matters/Identifiable Individual

A matter pertaining to personal matters, including information regarding an identifiable individual, with respect to employment-related matters; advice or recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation, including communications necessary for that purpose and for the purpose of providing instructions and directions to officers and employees of the Corporation. (6.1/12/SPPC)

4.2    Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Litigation/Potential Litigation

A matter pertaining to advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose from the solicitor and officers and employees of the Corporation; the subject matter pertains to litigation or potential litigation with respect to appeals arising out of the Victoria Park Secondary Plan (“VPSP”) at the Ontario Land Tribunal (“OLT”), and for the purpose of providing instructions and directions to officers and employees of the Corporation. (6.1/6/PEC)

4.3    Litigation/Potential Litigation/Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to litigation or potential litigation and advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose and directions and instructions to officers and employees or agents of the municipality. (6.1/6/CSC)

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Council convenes, in closed session, at 1:18 PM and reconvenes at 1:31 PM.

5.   Confirmation and Signing of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting(s)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the Minutes of the 6th and 7th Meetings held on March 7, 2023 and March 28, 2023, respectively, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

6.   Communications and Petitions

Motion made by S. Hillier

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the communications  BE RECEIVED and BE REFERRED, as noted on the Added Council Agenda:

6.1     Consideration of Appointment to the London Police Services Board (15 items);

6.2     Hewitt Street and King Street (1 item); and,

6.3     Infrastructure Update - Thames Outdoor Pool (1 item).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

7.   Motions of Which Notice is Given

None.

8.   Reports

8.1   11th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

2023-03-08 SPPC Report 11

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 12th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by S. Lehman

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.1.2   (3.1) Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan

Motion made by S. Lehman

That it BE NOTED that at the public participation meeting, the following individuals made submissions and oral presentations to the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee, with respect to Council’s Draft 2023 - 2027 Strategic Plan:

  •    a communication dated February 20, 2023 from V. Lubrano lll;

  •    a communication dated February 21, 2023 from M. Prado;

  •    a communication dated February 27, 2023 from A. McClenaghan, Owner, London Bicycle Cafe;

  •    a communication dated February 27, 2023 from S. Climans, Neurologist;

  •    a communication dated February 28, 2023 from M. Quinton;

  •    a communication dated March 1, 2023 from C. McInnis;

  •    a communication dated March 3, 2023 from B. Durham;

  •    a communication dated March 3, 2023 from R. Richards;

  •    a communication dated March 5, 2023 from C. Butler;

  •    a communication from B. Ellis, Executive Director, Urban Roots London;

  •    a communication dated March 6, from B. Samuels;

  •    a communication from T. Smale, Executive Director, London Heritage Council;

  •    a communication dated March 7, 2023 from L. Durham;

  •    a communication dated March 6, 2023 from R. Buchal, Member, Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee;

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

  •    A. Loewen;

  •    M. McCann;

  •    T. Smale, Executive Director, London Heritage Council;

  •    N. Danczak;

  •    J. Look, VP External Affairs Western University Student Council;

  •    M. Cassidy, Interim CEO, Pillar Nonprofit Network;

  •    P. Moore;

  •    E. Yi, Executive Director, London Arts Council;

  •    R. Singh, Western University Student Council;

  •    T. Rutan

  •    L. Patricio Project Co-Lead, Pillar Nonprofit Network;

  •    M. Viczko et al., Orchard Park Bike Bus;

  •    J. Ryan, Indwell Housing;

  •    L. Durham;

  •    J. Idsinga;

  •    V. Lubrano lll;

  •    A. Lei, Western University Student

  •    Resident

  •    C. Butler;

  •    N. Judges;

  •    J. Wilcox;

  •    J. Spence;

  •    Resident

  •    B. Whitaker;

  •    C. O’Neill;

  •    B. Ellis, Executive Director, Urban Roots London;

  •    Resident;

  •    T. Smuck, Executive Director, Changing Ways;

  •    M. Baobaid, Muslim Resource Centre;

  •    B. Williamson;

  •    S. Climans, Neurologist;

  •    C. Niche et al., Girl Guides;

  •    T. Collins;

  •     L. Grushka;

  •    M. van Holst;

  •    J. Martino, Executive Director, Crouch Neighbourhood Resource Centre; and

  •    M. Wallace, Executive Director, London Development Institute (LDI).

Motion Passed

8.1.3   (4.1) Developing Council’s 2023-2027 Strategic Plan: Community Engagement Update

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the report dated March 8, 2023 entitled “Developing the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan: Community Engagement Update” BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.1.4   (4.2) Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect to developing the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan:

a)    on the recommendation of the City Manager, the report dated March 8, 2023 entitled “Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan” BE RECEIVED for information; and

b)   that consideration of the remaining portions of the Draft Strategic Plan, BE REFERRED to the next meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee.

Motion Passed

8.2   12th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

2023-03-28 SPPC Report 12-Complete

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 12th Report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee BE APPROVED, excluding item 5 (clause 4.2).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.2.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by S. Lehman

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.2.2   (2.1) Music Incubation

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the report dated March 28, 2023, with respect to Music Incubation, the following actions be taken: 

a)    the above noted report BE RECEIVED;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to develop a Creative Sector Incubator proposal; and,

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to continue discussions with provincial and federal decision-makers to explore investment opportunities.

Motion Passed

8.2.3   (2.2) 3rd Report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 3rd Report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on March 9, 2023 BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.2.4   (4.1) Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan:

a)    the staff report dated March 28, 2023 entitled “Council’s Draft 2023-2027 Strategic Plan” BE RECEIVED for information;

b)    the attached revised “Council’s Draft Strategic Plan 2023-2027: Strategic Areas of Focus, Outcomes, Expected Results, Strategies and Metrics” BE REFERRED to the April 17, 2023 meeting of Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a staff presentation and a communication dated March 24, 2023 from C. Butler with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

8.2.6   (4.3) Request for a Shareholder’s Meeting - London & Middlesex Community Housing

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 2022 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder for the London & Middlesex Community Housing:

a)      the 2022 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder for the London & Middlesex Community Housing BE HELD at a meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee on June 20, 2023, for the purpose of receiving the report from the Board of Directors of the London & Middlesex Community Housing in accordance with the Shareholder Declaration and the Business Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. B.16; and,

b)      the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to provide notice of the 2022 Annual Meeting to the Board of Directors for the London & Middlesex Community Housing and to invite the Chair of the Board and the Executive Director of the London & Middlesex Community Housing to attend at the Annual Meeting and present the report of the Board in accordance with the Shareholder Declaration;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated March 15, 2023, from P. Chisholm, Chief Executive Officer, London & Middlesex Community Housing, with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

8.2.7   (5.1) Request to Declare a State of Emergency regarding Housing

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect the Request to Declare a State of Emergency Regarding Housing:

a)    the presentations from Claire Wittnebel and Jeff Hanks, Co-organizer, London Regional Social Forum with respect to declaring a State of Emergency Regarding Housing BE RECEIVED; 

b)    Council recognizes that there is an untenable emergency in our city related to housing and homelessness.  Therefore, Council remains committed to addressing this significant issue, and the following concrete actions BE ENDORSED:

i)    supporting the Whole of Community System Response, including allocating $2.8 million to kickstart work and committing to future funding;

ii)    advocating to the provincial and federal government for more funding and support in building affordable housing and to provide increased levels of healthcare to assist with mental health and addiction;

iii)   achieving our Roadmap to 3,000 affordable housing units by 2026;

iv)   achieving our Housing Pledge of 47,000 in the next decade;

v)    working with and supporting non-profits who are providing housing and support services; and,

vi)   other opportunities to find housing and homelessness solutions.

Motion Passed

8.2.5   (4.2) Consideration of Appointment to the London Police Services Board

At 1:55 PM Deputy Mayor Lewis places Councillor A. Hopkins in the Chair.

At 2:00 PM, Deputy Mayor Lewis resumes the Chair.

At 2:22 PM, Deputy Mayor Lewis places Councillor A. Hopkins in the Chair.

At 2:27 PM, Deputy Mayor Lewis resumes the Chair.

Motion made by S. Lehman

That Ryan Gauss BE APPOINTED to the London Police Services Board for the term ending November 14, 2026.

Motion made by Mayor J. Morgan

Seconded by S. Franke

That the matter of an appointment to the London Police Services Board, including all fifty-four applications received, BE REFERRED to the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee in order to determine a shortlist of 5 candidates for interviews; it being noted that interviews will be conducted by the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee.

Motion made by S. Trosow

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the proposed referral BE AMENDED by adding the following to the end of the clause,

“it being further noted that this process will be with regard to the Reconciliation, Equity, Accessibility and Inclusion Strategic Area of Focus in the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan and the Municipal-focused Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action.”

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

Motion made by Mayor J. Morgan

Seconded by S. Franke

That the referral, as amended, BE APPROVED.

That the matter of an appointment to the London Police Services Board, including all fifty-four applications received, BE REFERRED to the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee in order to determine a shortlist of 5 candidates for interviews; it being noted that interviews will be conducted by the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee;

it being further noted that this process will be with regard to the Reconciliation, Equity, Accessibility and Inclusion Strategic Area of Focus in the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan and the Municipal-focused Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action.

Motion Passed (13 to 2)

8.3   5th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee

2023-03-30 PEC Report 5

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 5th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee BE APPROVED, excluding item 9 (clause 3.2).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.3.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by S. Lehman

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.3.2   (2.1) Building Division Monthly Report - January 2023

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the Building Division Monthly report for January, 2023 BE RECEIVED for information.  (2022-A23)

Motion Passed

8.3.3   (2.2) 3rd Report of the Ecological Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 3rd Report of the Ecological Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on February 16, 2023 BE RECEIVED for information. (2023-C04)

Motion Passed

8.3.4   (2.3) 4th Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 4th Report of the Community Advisory Committee on Planning, from its meeting held on March 8, 2023, BE RECEIVED for information. (2023-C04)

Motion Passed

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the Wellington Corridor Secondary Plan Terms of Reference, appended to the staff report dated March 20, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE ENDORSED. (2023-T05)

Motion Passed

8.3.5   (2.4) Wellington Corridor Secondary Plan - Terms of Reference

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the Wellington Corridor Secondary Plan Terms of Reference, appended to the staff report dated March 20, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE ENDORSED. (2023-T05)

Motion Passed

8.3.6   (2.5) 19 Blackfriars Street - Heritage Alteration Permit Application (HAP23-011-L)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking retroactive approval to replace the siding on the dwelling located at 19 Blackfriars Street, within the Blackfriars/Petersville Heritage Conservation District, BE APPROVED. (2023-R01)

Motion Passed

8.3.7   (2.6) 864 Hellmuth Avenue - Heritage Alteration Permit Application (HAP22-081-L)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, notwithstanding the previous recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the application under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act seeking approval to pave a portion of the front yard for parking on the heritage designated property at 864 Hellmuth Avenue, within the Bishop Hellmuth Heritage Conservation District, BE PERMITTED as submitted in Appendix C with the following terms and conditions:

a)    consideration be given to the use of permeable pavers for the paving material to reduce the landscape impact of the new driveway; and,

b)    landscaping be planted adjacent to the driveway to visually screen the parking area, consistent with the parking policies and guidelines included within the Bishop Hellmuth Heritage Conservation District Plan;

it being noted that the proposed portable, temporary accessibility ramp does not require a Building Permit or Heritage Alteration Permit. (2023-R01)

Motion Passed

8.3.8   (3.1) 455 Highbury Avenue North (Z-9564) (Relates to Bill No. 111)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by Highbury Self Storage Equities Limited, relating to the property located at 455 Highbury Avenue North, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated March 20, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016) to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a General Industrial (GI1) Zone TO a Light Industrial Special Provision (LI1(_)) Zone;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    T. Brydges, Zelinka Priamo Ltd.;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the policies of The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions and Light Industrial Place Type;

  •    the recommended amendment would facilitate the reuse of an otherwise underutilized industrial warehouse within an existing area that already facilitates industrial uses; and,

  •    the proposed amendment will assist in transitioning the area to lighter industrial uses which are appropriate for the existing mixed-use landscape. (2023-D14)

Motion Passed

8.3.9   (3.2) 247 Halls Mill Road - Demolition Request to Remove Heritage Attributes

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the request to remove heritage attributes from the property at 247 Halls Mill Road, pursuant to Section 34(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act, BE APPROVED subject to the following terms and conditions:

a)    the use of machinery be prohibited in the demolition or removal of the accessory building’s debris;

b)    the existing brick and rubble stone foundation shall be retained and be protected in situ until Municipal Council decision following receipt of the recommendation of the Conservation Review Board; and,

c)    the removal of the debris be completed in accordance with the demolition plan on file with The Corporation of the City of London;

 

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    J. McLeod; and,

  •    D. Park. (2023-R01)

Motion made by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by S. Hillier

That clause 9, item 3.2, BE AMENDED to read as follows:

That, notwithstanding the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the request to remove heritage attributes from the property at 247 Halls Mill Road, pursuant to Section 34(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act, BE APPROVED.

Motion Failed (7 to 8)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the Committee recommendation BE APPROVED.

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, with the advice of the Heritage Planner, the request to remove heritage attributes from the property at 247 Halls Mill Road, pursuant to Section 34(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act, BE APPROVED subject to the following terms and conditions:

a)    the use of machinery be prohibited in the demolition or removal of the accessory building’s debris;

b)    the existing brick and rubble stone foundation shall be retained and be protected in situ until Municipal Council decision following receipt of the recommendation of the Conservation Review Board; and,

c)    the removal of the debris be completed in accordance with the demolition plan on file with The Corporation of the City of London;

 

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    J. McLeod; and,

  •    D. Park. (2023-R01)

Motion Passed (13 to 2)

8.4   6th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee

2023-03-27 PEC Report 6 - Full

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 6th Report of the Planning and Environment Committee BE APPROVED, excluding item 9 (clause 3.7).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.4.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by S. Lehman

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.4.2   (2.1) 4th Report of the Ecological Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by S. Lehman

That the 4th Report of the Ecological Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on March 16, 2023 BE RECEIVED for information. (2023-A02)

Motion Passed

8.4.3   (3.1) 6019 Hamlyn Street (Z-9565) (Relates to Bill No. 112)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, based on the application by The Corporation of the City of London, relating to lands located at 6019 Hamlyn Street, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated March 27, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a holding Residential R1 Special Provision (hh-100R1-3(24)) Zone TO an Open Space (OS1) Zone;

it being noted that no individuals spoke at the public participation meeting associated with this matter;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended zoning by-law amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement;

  •    the recommended zone conforms to The London Plan, including but not limited to the Neighbourhoods Place Type, Environmental Review Place Type, Our Strategy, City Building and Design, Our Tools, and all other applicable London Plan policies;

  •    the recommended zone conforms to the policies of the Southwest Area Secondary Plan; and,

  •    the recommended zone is appropriate and will permit open space/park uses consistency with the planned vision of the Neighbourhood Place Type and built form that contributes to a sense of place, character and connectivity.   (2023-D04)

Motion Passed

8.4.4   (3.2) 1154 Hamilton Road (Z-9569) (Relates to Bill No. 113)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, based on the application by Lynphyl Homes Limited, (c/o Monteith Brown Planning Consultants), relating to the property located at 1154 Hamilton Road, the proposed by-law appended to the staff report dated March 27, 2023 as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Neighbourhood Shopping Area Special Provision (NSA4(4)) Zone TO a Residential Special Provision (R5-7(_)) Zone;

it being noted that the following Site Plan matters have been raised through the application review process for consideration by the Site Plan Approval Authority:

i)    provide pedestrian connections throughout the site and wrought-iron fencing (or similar fencing type) and a gate along the area nearest the Hamilton Road and Gore Road intersection to access the sidewalk connections at the intersection;

ii)    provide a minimum driveway length of 6.0 metres where a driveway abuts a sidewalk, and a minimum of 2.1 metres where a barrier-free parking stall abuts a sidewalk; and,

iii)    consider alterations to current parking space configurations to provide a more substantial and usable amenity space and better screen any parking exposed to the public street;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    J. McGuffin, Monteith Brown Planning Consultants;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The PPS directs municipalities to permit all forms of housing required to meet the needs of all residents, present and future;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the policies of The London Plan, including but not limited to the Key Directions, City Building policies, and the Neighbourhoods Place Type policies;

  •    the recommended amendment would permit an appropriate form of development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and the surrounding neighbourhood; and,

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates the development of a vacant, underutilized site within the Built-Area Boundary.   (2023-D04)

Motion Passed

8.4.5   (3.3) 955 Commissioners Road East (Z-9572) (Relates to Bill No. 114)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by 2833257 Ontario Inc., (c/o Siv-ik Planning and Design Inc.), relating to the property located at 955 Commissioners Road East:

a)    the proposed, revised, attached, by-law as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023, to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject lands FROM a Residential R9 (R9-7*H43) Zone TO a Residential R9 Special Provision (R9-7(_)*H46) Zone and an Open Space (OS5) Zone; and,

b)    the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following design matters for 955 Commissioners Road East through the site plan review process:

i)    a variety of amenities in the outdoor open space to serve various populations;

ii)    additional tree plantings on site;

iii)    incorporate low walls, railings and/or landscaping to delineate private amenity areas from common outdoor spaces;

iv)    consideration of no fencing between the building and public pathways to maintain sightlines;

v)    consider including green infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations, green or cool roofs and/or solar panels;

vi)    consultation with the Ministry of Environment Conservation and Parks regarding development on lands previously used for waste disposal, and,

vii)    incorporate mitigative measures for methane gas venting & control mechanisms;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received a project fact sheet;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    M. Davis, Siv-ik Planning and Design Inc.;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the in-force policies of The London Plan, including, but not limited to the Neighbourhoods Place Type, the High-Density Residential Overlay (HDR) policies, City Building and Design, Our Tools, and all other applicable policies in The London Plan; and,

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates the development of an underutilized lot within the Built-Area Boundary with an appropriate form of infill development.   (2023-D04)

Motion Passed

8.4.6   (3.4) 376, 378, 380, 382, 386 & 390 Hewitt Street and 748 King Street (Z-9576)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by East Village Holdings Limited, relating to the properties located at 376, 378, 380, 382, 386 & 390 Hewitt Street and 748 King Street:

 

a)    the application BE REFERRED back to the Civic Administration to report back at the next meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee to allow a temporary zone on the subject property for one year; and,

b)    pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, no further notice BE GIVEN;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communications with respect to these matters:

  •    the staff presentation; and,

  •    the applicant’s presentation;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    B. Blackwell, Stantec Consulting.

Motion Passed

8.4.7   (3.5) 161 Bonaventure Drive (Z-9574) (Relates to Bill No. 115)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Planning and Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by Bonaventure Crossings (London) Limited, (c/o Effort Trust), relating to the property located at 161 Bonaventure Drive:

a)    the proposed, revised, attached, by-law as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM Highway Service Commercial/Restricted Service Commercial (HS1HS4 /RSC2/RSC3/RSC4) Zone TO a Residential R9 Special Provision (R9-7(_)*H30) Zone;

b)    the Site Plan Approval Authority BE REQUESTED to consider the following through the site plan process:

i)    reduce the number of surface parking spaces to accommodate more amenity space;

ii)    remove the parking area that is adjacent to Dundas Street and address the corner through a landscape treatment and outdoor amenity space;

iii)    screen any surface parking exposed to the public street or residential units with enhanced landscaping, including low landscape walls, shrubs and streets trees;

iv)    provide a centrally located and adequately sized outdoor amenity space;

v)    consent to remove any boundary trees is required prior to final site plan approval; and,

vi)    differentiate the main building entrance from ground floor units. Incorporate patios or forecourt spaces that spills out into the setback to further activate the space and provide additional amenity space for residents;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communication with respect to these matters:

  •    the staff presentation;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    S. Allen, MHBC;

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The PPS directs municipalities to permit all forms of housing required to meet the needs of all residents, present and future;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the in-force policies of The London Plan including, but not limited to, Key Directions and Urban Corridors Place Type and will facilitate a built form that contributes to achieving a compact, mixed-use city;

  •    the recommended amendment would permit a development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and the surrounding neighbourhood; and,

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates the development of an underutilized property within the Built-Area Boundary through an appropriate form of infill development. (2023-D04)

Motion Passed

8.4.8   (3.6) 1407 and 1427 Hyde Park Road (OZ-9438)

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by York Developments, relating to the property located at 1407-1427 Hyde Park Road:

a)    the application BE REFERRED back to the Civic Administration to work with the applicant to look at design alternatives, to resolve site plan issues related to parking circulation and conflicts, residential amenity space and other related matters; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare an Official Plan Amendment to allow a single storey building on this site;

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the staff presentation;

it being pointed out that the following individual made a verbal presentation at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    S. Allen, MHBC.

Motion Passed

8.4.9   (3.7) 614 Westmount Crescent (Z-9553) (Relates to Bill No. 116)

At 3:00 PM, Councillors S. Trosow and D. Ferreira leave the meeting.

Motion made by S. Lehman

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by LA-Rosa Community Ltd., relating to the property located at 614 Westmount Crescent:

a)    the proposed, revised, attached, by-law as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential (R1-9) Zone TO a Residential R5 Special Provision (R5-5(_)) Zone;

it being noted that the following urban design and site plan matters were raised during the application review process for consideration by the Site Plan Approval Authority:

i)    provide 2-storey townhouses south of the access along Westmount Crescent to provide an appropriate height transition from abutting low-density residential as per the site plan dated February 21, 2023;

ii)    provide lockable front doors and habitable living space on street-facing facades, including direct connections from the front doors to a walkway or sidewalk connection along the frontage of the property;

iii)    no fencing be provided between the buildings and the public street;

iv)    clarify how the disposable recycling and waste is stored and collected on the site plan;

v)    confirm the gross floor area of each dwelling unit and confirm basement ceiling height is 1.8 metres or more;

vi)    provide shared amenity space on site, and consider adding purposeful features to this space for amenity;

vii)    protect and retain as many of the City trees on the adjacent boulevard as possible. No tree removals shall happen until a permit has been issued by Forestry Operations in compliance with the City of London Boulevard Tree Protection By-law. Replacement trees shall be provided in appropriate locations;

viii)    consider offsetting any tree removals with plantings;

ix)    update the tree preservation plan to ensure all required information outlined by the Landscape Architect has been included;

x)    ensure pedestrian circulation and access refinements are done with the Accessibility Review Checklist; 

xi)    identify the location of fire route signage and provide a standard detail on the site plan;

xii)    include enhanced privacy aspects such as 7ft fences and more evergreen trees or cedar hedges; and,

xiii)    the installation of a sidewalk along Westmount Crescent;

 

b)    the proposed alignment of the driveway for the subject property to potentially align with the property located at 615 Westmount Crescent BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration to report back at a future Planning and Environment Committee meeting;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communications with respect to these matters:

  •    the revised by-law; and,

  •    the staff presentation;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    S. Allen, MHBC;

  •    R. Marghella; and,

  •    B. Gritke;

 

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS), which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The PPS directs municipalities to permit all forms of housing required to meet the needs of all residents, present and future;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the policies of The London Plan including but not limited to, Our City, Key Directions, City Building, Neighbourhoods Place Type and will facilitate a built form that contributes to achieving a compact, mixed-use city;

  •    the recommended amendment would permit development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and the surrounding neighbourhood;

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates the development of an underutilized property within the Built-Area Boundary through an appropriate form of infill development; and,

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates a type of residential development that will help to address the growing need for affordable types of housing in London.  The recommended amendment is in alignment with the Housing Stability Action Plan 2019-2024 and Strategic Area of Focus 2: Create More Housing Stock.  (2023-D04)

Motion made by S. Lehman

Motion to approve part a) of the motion:

That, the following actions be taken with respect to the application by LA-Rosa Community Ltd., relating to the property located at 614 Westmount Crescent:

a)    the proposed, revised, attached, by-law as Appendix “A” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023 to amend Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan for the City of London, 2016), to change the zoning of the subject property FROM a Residential (R1-9) Zone TO a Residential R5 Special Provision (R5-5(_)) Zone;

it being noted that the following urban design and site plan matters were raised during the application review process for consideration by the Site Plan Approval Authority:

i)    provide 2-storey townhouses south of the access along Westmount Crescent to provide an appropriate height transition from abutting low-density residential as per the site plan dated February 21, 2023;

ii)    provide lockable front doors and habitable living space on street-facing facades, including direct connections from the front doors to a walkway or sidewalk connection along the frontage of the property;

iii)    no fencing be provided between the buildings and the public street;

iv)    clarify how the disposable recycling and waste is stored and collected on the site plan;

v)    confirm the gross floor area of each dwelling unit and confirm basement ceiling height is 1.8 metres or more;

vi)    provide shared amenity space on site, and consider adding purposeful features to this space for amenity;

vii)    protect and retain as many of the City trees on the adjacent boulevard as possible. No tree removals shall happen until a permit has been issued by Forestry Operations in compliance with the City of London Boulevard Tree Protection By-law. Replacement trees shall be provided in appropriate locations;

viii)    consider offsetting any tree removals with plantings;

ix)    update the tree preservation plan to ensure all required information outlined by the Landscape Architect has been included;

x)    ensure pedestrian circulation and access refinements are done with the Accessibility Review Checklist; 

xi)    identify the location of fire route signage and provide a standard detail on the site plan;

xii)    include enhanced privacy aspects such as 7ft fences and more evergreen trees or cedar hedges; and,

xiii)    the installation of a sidewalk along Westmount Crescent;

Motion Passed (12 to 1)

At 3:02 PM, Councillor D. Ferreira enters the meeting.

Motion made by S. Lehman

Motion to approve part b)

b)    the proposed alignment of the driveway for the subject property to potentially align with the property located at 615 Westmount Crescent BE REFERRED to the Civic Administration to report back at a future Planning and Environment Committee meeting;

 

it being noted that the Planning and Environment Committee received the following communications with respect to these matters:

  •    the revised by-law; and,

  •    the staff presentation;

it being pointed out that the following individuals made verbal presentations at the public participation meeting held in conjunction with this matter:

  •    S. Allen, MHBC;

  •    R. Marghella; and,

  •    B. Gritke;

 

it being further noted that the Municipal Council approves this application for the following reasons:

  •    the recommended amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS), which encourages the regeneration of settlement areas and land use patterns within settlement areas that provide for a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The PPS directs municipalities to permit all forms of housing required to meet the needs of all residents, present and future;

  •    the recommended amendment conforms to the policies of The London Plan including but not limited to, Our City, Key Directions, City Building, Neighbourhoods Place Type and will facilitate a built form that contributes to achieving a compact, mixed-use city;

  •    the recommended amendment would permit development at an intensity that is appropriate for the site and the surrounding neighbourhood;

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates the development of an underutilized property within the Built-Area Boundary through an appropriate form of infill development; and,

  •    the recommended amendment facilitates a type of residential development that will help to address the growing need for affordable types of housing in London.  The recommended amendment is in alignment with the Housing Stability Action Plan 2019-2024 and Strategic Area of Focus 2: Create More Housing Stock.  (2023-D04)

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the Council recess at this time, for 10 minutes.

Motion Passed

The Council recesses at 3:04 PM and reconvenes at 3:13 PM, with all members present except Mayor J. Morgan.

8.5   6th Report of the Corporate Services Committee

2023-03-20 CSC Report 6

Motion made by S. Trosow

That the 6th Report of the Corporate Services Committee BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

8.5.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by S. Trosow

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.5.2   (2.1) 2023 Debenture Issuance

Motion made by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken:

a)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to proceed with the issuance of debentures in the capital markets upon suitable market conditions to provide permanent financing for capital works in an amount not to exceed $21,500,000; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE INSTRUCTED to schedule and convene an appropriately timed special Corporate Services Committee meeting upon successful placement of the City’s debt in the capital markets to ensure adequate time for Council approval while adhering to the necessary financial settlement requirements.

Motion Passed

8.5.3   (2.2) Network Refresh and Secondary Site Portfolio Management Services

Motion made by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Director, Information Technology Services, and with the concurrence of the City Manager, the following actions be taken with respect to the selection of a vendor for the Request for Proposal (RFP) 2022-154 Network Refresh and Secondary Data Center Upgrade for City of London:

a)    the proposal submitted by CDW Canada Corp., 185 The West Mall, Suite 1700 Toronto ON, M9C 5L5 for the Network Refresh and Secondary Data Center Upgrade for the City of London BE ACCEPTED in accordance with the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy; 

b)    the price submitted by CDW Canada Corp. at the proposed fixed cost of $329,196.00 (excluding H.S.T.), BE ACCEPTED;

c)    the financing for the project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report as appended to the staff report dated March 20, 2023 as Appendix ‘A’;

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

e)    approval herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal agreement or having a purchase order, or contract record relating to the subject matter of this approval; and,

f)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract, statement of work or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.

Motion Passed

8.5.4   (2.3) Employee Attendance 2022

Motion made by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Director, People Services and with the concurrence of the City Manager the report regarding Employee Attendance 2022 BE RECEIVED for information purposes.

Motion Passed

8.5.5   (2.4) 2022 Annual Update on Budweiser Gardens

Motion made by S. Trosow

That, the 2022 Annual Report on Budweiser Gardens BE RECEIVED and the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to include the following as part of a future report for Corporate Services Committee for review and consideration:

a)    final approved Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and final agreement identified in the MOU; and,

b)    any amendments to agreement or MOU.

Motion Passed

8.5.6   (4.1) Application - Issuance of Proclamation - BeADonor Month

Motion made by S. Trosow

That based on the application dated February 21, 2023 from Ontario Health (Trillium Gift of Life Network), April 2023 BE PROCLAIMED BeADonor Month.

Motion Passed

8.5.7   (4.2) Application - Issuance of Proclamation - Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) Awareness Month

Motion made by S. Trosow

That based on the application dated February 27, 2023 from GBS-CIDP Foundation of Canada, May 2023 BE PROCLAIMED Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) Awareness month.

Motion Passed

8.5.8   (4.3) Application - Issuance of Proclamation - Apraxia Awareness Day 2023

Motion made by S. Trosow

That based on the application dated March 3, 2023 from Apraxia Kids, May 14, 2023 BE PROCLAIMED Apraxia Awareness Day 2023.

Motion Passed

8.5.9   (4.4) Application - Issuance of Proclamation - BGC Club Day

Motion made by S. Trosow

That based on the application dated March 7, 2023 from BGC London, June 2, 2023 BE PROCLAIMED BGC Club Day.

Motion Passed

8.5.10   (4.5) Application - Issuance of Proclamation - Parental Awareness Day

Motion made by S. Trosow

That based on the application dated March 15, 2023 from Lisa Yvonne Fisher, April 25, 2023 BE PROCLAIMED Parental Alienation Awareness Day.

Motion Passed

8.6   6th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee

2023-03-21 CPSC Report 6

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 6th Report of the Community and Protective Services Committee BE APPROVED, excluding item 10 (clause 2.6).

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

8.6.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.6.2   (2.1) 2nd Report of the Accessibility Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 2nd Report of the Accessibility Community Advisory Committee, from the meeting held on February 23, 2023, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.6.3   (2.2) Integrated Employment Services - Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement - Update (Relates to Bill No. 100)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting being held on April 4, 2023, to:

a)    delegate authority to the City Manager and the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development to approve amending agreements to the Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement – Integrated Employment Services effective as of February 1, 2023, as appended to the above-noted by-law, further agreements with the Province that relate to the above-noted Agreement and to Integrated Employment Services and agreements with existing and new Employment Ontario and Ontario Disability Support Program Services Providers, and other service providers, that relate to the above-noted Agreement and to the Integrated Employment Services on the condition that they are consistent with the requirements contained in the above-noted Agreement, and that do not require additional funding or are provided for in the City’s current budget and that do not increase the indebtedness or contingent liabilities of The Corporation of the City of London, subject to prior review and approval by the City Treasurer or a written designate of the City Treasurer;

b)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development to approve non-agreement documents  that may be required and delegate authority to the City Manager and the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development to execute the above-noted non-agreement documents;

c)    ratify the Transfer Payment Agreement for Integrated Employment Services, with effect February 1, 2023, as appended to the above-noted by-law; and,

d)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, or their written designates, to oversee the design, planning and delivery of Integrated Employment Services as Service System Manager. (2023-S05)

Motion Passed

8.6.4   (2.3) Targeted Expansion of Licensed Child Care Through the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care Agreement

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated March 21, 2023, related to the Targeted Expansion of Licensed Child Care through the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care Agreement:

a)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to append Appendix A of the above-noted staff report to the London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan, 2019-2023. (2023-S01)

Motion Passed

8.6.5   (2.5) London Fire Department Emergency Tanker Repair

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the staff report, dated March 21, 2023, with respect to the London Fire Department Emergency Tanker Repair, BE RECEIVED. (2023-P16)

Motion Passed

8.6.6   (2.7) Infrastructure Update - Glen Cairn Outdoor Pool

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services and the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the staff report, dated March 21, 2023, related to an Infrastructure Update on the Glen Cairn Outdoor Pool, BE RECEIVED. (2023-R05)

Motion Passed

8.6.7   (2.8) SS-2023-089 - Single Source Procurement to Deliver the 345 Sylvan Street Rapid Housing Initiative (RHI) Round 3 Project (Relates to Bill No. 101)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated March 21. 2023, related to a Single Source Procurement to deliver the 345 Sylvan Street Rapid Housing Initiative (RHI) Round 3 Project (SS-2023-089):

a)    a single source procurement, in accordance with s. 14.4(g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy and associated design-build contract, BE APPROVED to EllisDon Corporation (“EllisDon”) for the design and construction of a new multi-residential affordable rental housing development at 345 Sylvan Street at the fixed price of $17,236,735.00 (excluding HST);

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023, to:

i)    approve the CCDC 14 Design-Build Stipulated Price Contract Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and EllisDon Corporation for the New Multi-Residential Modular Affordable Rental Housing Development at 345 Sylvan Street, as appended to the above-noted by-law;

ii)    authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Agreement;

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development to authorize and approve amendments to the above-noted Agreement, including amending agreements, that do not require additional funding or are provided for in the City’s current budget and that do not increase the indebtedness or contingent liability of The Corporation of the City of London; and,

iv)    authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute any amendments to the above-noted Agreement, including amending agreements, approved by the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, pursuant to section 3 of the above-noted by-law;

c)    the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE APPROVED;

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts necessary in connection with this purchase;

e)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts necessary to prepare an Operations Plan and Budget and to align a future building operator to manage the future affordable rental housing development at 345 Sylvan Street; and,

f)    the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development BE AUTHORIZED to approve amendments or amending agreements associated with the above-noted Agreement and future building operator. (2023-S11)

Motion Passed

8.6.8   (2.9) Appointment of Hearings Officers to Property Standards Committee (Relates to Bill No. 102)

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report, dated March 21, 2023, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023, to amend By-law No. CP-24, being “A by-law to provide standards for the maintenance and occupancy of property and to repeal By-law CP-16” to repeal and replace Schedule “A”. (2023-L01)

Motion Passed

8.6.9   (2.4) Unity Project Relocation Capital Support Contract Amendment

Motion made by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken with respect the staff report, dated March 21, 2023, related to the Unity Project Relocation Capital Support Contract Amendment:

a)    a one-time contract amendment, as per The Corporation of the City of London Procurement of Goods and Services Policy Section 20.3.e, BE APPROVED at a total estimated cost of $762,000 to support the Unity Project for the Relief of Homelessness, Temporary Hotel Accommodations, in the amount of $62,000 and the Unity Project for the Relief of Homelessness, Existing Shelter Capital Retrofits, in the amount of $700,000;

b)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to this project, and;

c)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation amending a Purchase of Service Agreement.

it being noted that a verbal delegation and a communication, as appended to the Added Agenda, from C. Lazenby, Unity Project, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-S11)

Motion Passed

8.6.11   (4.1) Subsidized Bus Pass Program

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the verbal delegation and communication, as appended to the Agenda, from J. Salisbury, with respect to a Subsidized Bus Pass Program, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.6.12   (4.2) Support for Resolutions to End Homelessness from OBCM and AMO

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor BE DIRECTED to call upon the Provincial Government to urgently:

a)    acknowledge that homelessness in Ontario is a social, economic and health crisis;

b)    commit to ending homelessness in Ontario; and,

c)    work with the Association of Municipalities Ontario (AMO) and a broad range of community, health, Indigenous and economic partners to develop, resource and implement an action plan to achieve this goal;

it being noted that a copy of this motion will be sent to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, the Minister of Health and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

Motion Passed

8.6.10   (2.6) Infrastructure Update - Thames Outdoor Pool

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to do the following with respect to the Thames Outdoor Pool Infrastructure Update:

a)    provide a report by the end of June 2023 to the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) to identify options and associated costs to re-open the Thames Pool with sufficient repairs for safe operation in time for summer 2024;

b)    conduct a thorough community engagement process starting in Q2 of 2023, and provide the results to Council by the end of Q3 of 2023; it being noted that the engagement process will include soliciting feedback on pool vs. splash pad, indoor pool vs. outdoor, pool size and type etc.;

c)    develop a comprehensive staff report, to come to Council in 2024, including all available options and estimated costs for the future of the Thames Pool if rebuilt or relocated, noting the importance of equitable access across the city, options to include, but not limited to:

  •    rebuilding a pool in Thames Park that can withstand extreme weather conditions;

  •    seeking out a new location for a pool;

  •    future potential uses for the recreational opportunities for Thames Park should Thames Pool be decommissioned; and,

  •    funding opportunities from other levels of government and private fundraising;

d)    after the above-noted staff report has been completed, offer another opportunity for community input via a public participation meeting on the report findings; and,

e)    provide a report back to a future meeting of the (CPSC) regarding the Thames Pool Report that was intended to identify the likely causes of the Thames Pool failure and propose potential solutions to remedy concerns;

it being noted that communications from C. Smith, M. Cooke, J. McCall and N. Philips, as appended to the Added Agenda, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-R05)

Motion made by S. Franke

Seconded by E. Peloza

That part a) BE AMENDED to read as follows:

“a)       provide a report by the end of July 2023 to the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) providing an updated condition assessment and identifying the scope of necessary repairs and associated costs to re-open the Thames Pool with sufficient repairs for the safe operation of same, in time for summer of 2024;”

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by S. Franke

Seconded by E. Peloza

Item 10, clause 2.6, as amended, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Item 10, clause 2.6, as amended, reads as follows:

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to do the following with respect to the Thames Outdoor Pool Infrastructure Update: 

    

    a)    provide a report by the end of July 2023 to the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC) providing an updated condition assessment and identifying the scope of necessary repairs and associated costs to re-open the Thames Pool with sufficient repairs for the safe operation of same, in time for summer of 2024;

    

    b)    conduct a thorough community engagement process starting in Q2 of 2023, and provide the results to Council by the end of Q3 of 2023; it being noted that the engagement process will include soliciting feedback on pool vs. splash pad, indoor pool vs. outdoor, pool size and type etc.; 

    

    c)    develop a comprehensive staff report, to come to Council in 2024, including all available options and estimated costs for the future of the Thames Pool if rebuilt or relocated, noting the importance of equitable access across the city, options to include, but not limited to: 

  •    rebuilding a pool in Thames Park that can withstand extreme weather conditions; 

  •    seeking out a new location for a pool; 

  •    future potential uses for the recreational opportunities for Thames Park should Thames Pool be decommissioned; and, 

  •    funding opportunities from other levels of government and private fundraising; 

    

    d)    after the above-noted staff report has been completed, offer another opportunity for community input via a public participation meeting on the report findings; and, 

    

    e)    provide a report back to a future meeting of the (CPSC) regarding the Thames Pool Report that was intended to identify the likely causes of the Thames Pool failure and propose potential solutions to remedy concerns; 

    

    it being noted that communications from C. Smith, M. Cooke, J. McCall and N. Philips, as appended to the Added Agenda, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-R05)

8.7   5th Report of the Civic Works Committee

2023-03-21 - CWC - Report 5

Motion made by C. Rahman

That the 5th Report of the Civic Works Committee BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

8.7.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by C. Rahman

That is BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.7.2   (2.1) 3rd Report of the Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by C. Rahman

That the 3rd Report of the Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on February 15, 2023, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.7.3   (2.2) 4th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee

Motion made by C. Rahman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 4th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on March 1, 2023:

a)     the Municipal Council BE ENCOURAGED to investigate and consider an update to the corporate definition of the term “smoking” under By-law PH-10 - Smoke Free Public Places and By-law A.-6924(a)-278 - Prohibit Smoking within 9 Metres of Recreation Amenities in Municipal Parks, and Entrances to Municipally-owned Building, to include Parks and Environmentally Significant Areas, as well as vaping, and cannabis use in these areas; it being noted that the Environment Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee received the presentation from L. Stobo, Manager, Substance Abuse Programs Team, Middlesex London Health Unit with respect to this matter;

b)     the Working Group comments relating to the Notice of Planning Application dated January 26, 2023 from A. Curtis, Planner I, relating to the property located at 735 Southdale Road West BE FORWARDED to the Civic Administration for review and consideration;

c)      a Working Group BE ESTABLISHED, to review the Notice of Planning Application for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the property located at 1310 Adelaide Street North and 795 Windermere Road; it being noted that the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee received a Notice dated February 9, 2023 from N. Pasato, Senior Planner, with respect to this matter; and,

d)     clauses 2.1, 3.1, 3.2 and 5.2 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.7.4   (2.4) Contract Award - RFT-2022-319 - 2023 Infrastructure Renewal Program Paardeberg Crescent, Flanders Row and Rhine Avenue

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to the Contract Award for the 2023 Infrastructure Renewal Program involving the Paardeberg Crescent, Flanders Row and Rhine Avenue project:

a)    the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited of $6,767,602.20 (excluding HST), for the Paardeberg Crescent, Flanders Row and Rhine Avenue project, BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited was the lowest of five bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;

b)     Development Engineering (London) Limited, BE AUTHORIZED to carry out the resident inspection and contract administration for the Paardeberg Crescent, Flanders Row and Rhine Avenue project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $589,583.50, including 10% contingency (excluding HST), in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)     the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

e)     the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract, or issuing a purchase order for the material to be supplied and the work to be done, related to the above-noted staff report; and

f)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T05)

Motion Passed

8.7.5   (2.5) Contract Award - RFT-2022-315 - 2023 Infrastructure Renewal Program Quebec Street

Motion made by C. Rahman

That on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to the Contact Award for the 2023 Infrastructure Renewal Program Quebec Street project:

a)    the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited of $6,336,365.87 (excluding HST) BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited was the lowest of seven bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;

b)     Archibald Gray & McKay Engineering Ltd., BE AUTHORIZED to carry out the resident inspection and contract administration for the Quebec Street project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $534,600.00,

including 10% contingency (excluding HST), in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)     the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

e)     the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract, or issuing a purchase order for the material to be supplied and the work to be done, relating to this project; and

f)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T05)

Motion Passed

8.7.6   (2.6) Planned Rebuild of Incinerator Systems at Greenway Wastewater Treatment Plant - Single Source

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to the Planned Rebuild of Incinerator Systems at the Greenway Wastewater Treatment Plant:

a)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to single source certain goods and services required, as described in the above-noted staff report;

b)     the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

c)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations; and,

d)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project. (2023-E03)

Motion Passed

8.7.7   (2.7) Contract Award - Tender RFT -2023-001 - Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Road Roundabout

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to Contact Award Tender RFT-2023-001 for the Southdale Road West and Colonel Talbot Roundabout Project:

a)     the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited at its tendered price of $8,670,199.14 (excluding HST), BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by J-AAR Excavating Limited was the lowest of seven bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas;

b)     AECOM Canada Ltd., BE AUTHORIZED to complete the contract administration and construction inspection for this project, as per the AECOM Canada Ltd. work plan, in the total amount of $517,600.00 (excluding HST);

c)     the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

d)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project;

e)     the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract for the material to be supplied and the work to be done relating to this project; and,

f)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T05)

Motion Passed

8.7.8   (2.8) White Oak Road Upgrades - Appointment of a Consulting Engineer for Construction Administration

Motion made by C. Rahman

That on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, with respect to White Oak Road Upgrades and the Appointment of a Consulting Engineer for the Construction Administration:

a)     R.V. Anderson Associates Limited BE AUTHORIZED to complete the contract administration and construction supervision required for this project, all in accordance with the estimate on file, at an upset amount of $362,043.00 (excluding HST), and in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)     the financing for the project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

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

d)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents including agreements, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-D04)

Motion Passed

8.7.9   (2.9) 2023 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2022 Review

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to the 2023 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2022 Review:

a)     the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED; and,

b)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to initiate a by-law amendment to reinstate the temporary traffic diversion arrangement on Dundas Place as a construction mitigation for the 2023 construction season. (2023-T04)

Motion Passed

8.7.10   (2.10) Contract Price Increase - Infrastructure Renewal Program

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, with respect to a Contract Price Increase for the Infrastructure Renewal Program:

a)         the Lorne Avenue Reconstruction (Tender RFT21-16) consulting contract value with AECOM Canada Ltd., BE INCREASED by $90,000.00 to $479,141.50 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)     the Churchill Avenue and Manitoba Street (Tender RFT21-130) construction contract value with Elgin Construction Company Limited, BE INCREASED by $180,000.00 to $4,266,261.95 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)     the Churchill Avenue and Manitoba Street (Tender RFT21-130) consulting contract value with JL Richards BE INCREASED by $41,000.00 to $395,596.00 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

d)     the financing for these projects BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

e)     the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with these projects; and,

f)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T101L04)

Motion Passed

8.7.11   (2.11) Amendment to Lease Agreement with SunSaver 4 Limited for Public Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations (Relates to Bill No. 99)

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following action be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, with respect to an Amendment to the the Lease Agreement with SunSaver 4 Limited for Public Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations:

a)     the draft amending by-law, as appended to the above noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 4, 2023 to:

i)     approve the Lease Amending Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London (“City”) and SunSaver 4 Limited (“SunSaver”), as appended to the above-noted staff report;

ii)     authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Lease Amending Agreement and amending agreements approved by the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure and/or designate; and,

iii)     delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure and/or designate to approve future amendments of the above-noted SunSaver Lease Agreement;

it being noted that the authority of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure and/or designate to act under section 3 of this by-law, is subject to the following:

A)      such agreements operate to amend only Exhibits “A” and “B” of the SunSaver Lease Agreement for the purposes of changing the location or number of the leased parking spaces described within said exhibits;

B)      such agreements shall not result in an overall increase in the number of parking spaces leased under the SunSaver Lease Agreement to more than 30 spaces total;

C)      such agreements are in a form satisfactory to the Deputy City Manager, Legal Services;

D)      such agreements do not require additional funding or are provided for in the City’s current budget; and,

E)      such agreements do not contain any financial arrangement, guarantee, indemnity or similar commitment that would increase, directly or indirectly, the indebtedness or contingent liabilities of The Corporation of the City of London. (2023-L04A)

Motion Passed

8.7.12   (2.12) Award of Construction Administration Services, Landfill Gas Flaring Facility Replacement at the W12A Landfill Site

Motion made by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect the staff report dated March 21, 2023, with respect to the Award of Construction Administration Services, Landfill Gas Flaring Facility Replacement at the W12A landfill site:

a)     that Comcor Environmental Ltd. BE APPOINTED to carry out construction administration services for the landfill gas flaring facility replacement at the W12A landfill site, in the total amount of $217,520.00, including a contingency of $28,380.00 (excluding HST), in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)     the financing for this project BE APPROVED in accordance with the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

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

d)     the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-L04A)

Motion Passed

8.7.13   (2.3) Hamilton Road and Highbury Avenue Intersection - Safety Review

Motion made by C. Rahman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated March 21, 2023, related to the Hamilton Road and Highbury Avenue Intersection Safety Review;

a)    the above noted report BE RECEIVED.

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to establish appropriate priority of the Red Light Camera installation, pending technical review, and the Pavement Markings be prioritized for early completion in Spring 2023. (2023-C08)

Motion Passed

9.   Added Reports

9.1   6th Report of Council in Closed Session

That it BE NOTED that Councillor P. Cuddy presented the 6th Report of the Council in Closed Session, by noting progress was made with respect to the three items noted on the Agenda.

10.   Deferred Matters

None.

11.   Enquiries

None.

12.   Emergent Motions

None.

13.   By-laws

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That Bill No. 105 BE REFERRED back to the Civic Administration in order to provide for additional consultation.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by S. Hillier

Seconded by S. Lehman

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No.’s 98 to 115, excluding Bill No. 105, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by D. Ferreira

Seconded by H. McAlister

That Second Reading of Bill No.’s 98 to 115, excluding Bill No. 105, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Trosow

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No.’s 98 to 115, excluding Bill No. 105, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Motion made by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Hillier

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No. 116, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 1)

Motion made by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That Second Reading of Bill No. 116, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 1)

Motion made by C. Rahman

Seconded by H. McAlister

That Third Reading and Enactment of Bill No. 116, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 1)

14.   Adjournment

Motion made by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The Council meeting adjourns at 3:35 PM.

Appendix: New Bills

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 (2 hours, 33 minutes)

Councillor van Mirbergen, can you do a sound check for us please? Absolutely, how’s that? Perfection. Good afternoon, colleagues.

I would like to call the eighth meeting of London City Council to order. As always, we would like to start with our land acknowledgement. And we are acknowledging that we are gathered today on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabek, Haudenosaunee, Lene Peiwok, and Adirwanda and Peoples. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home.

We acknowledge all the treaties that are specific to this area. The two-row Wampum Belt Treaty of the Haudenosaunee, Confederacy, the Silver Chain, the Silver Covenant Chain, the Beaver Hunting Grounds of the Haudenosaunee, Nan Van Treaty of 1701, the McKee Treaty of 1790, and the London Township Treaty of 1796, as well as the Huron Track Treaty of 1827 with the Anishinaabek and the Dish with one spoon, Coven Wampum of the Anishinaabek and Haudenosaunee. The three indigenous nations that are neighbors to London are the Chippewa of the Thames, First Nation, the Oneida Nation of the Thames, and the Muncie Delaware Nation. All who continue to live as sovereign nations with individual and unique languages, cultures, and customs.

Colleagues, I would like to now, as is our custom at council, open with the National Anthem. And I would like to take an opportunity to introduce this meeting’s Anthem Singer. With influences ranging from Hank Williams and Elvis Presley to Luke Bryan and Eric Church, the Scott Howarth Band brings a mix of traditional and modern country music with a hint of rock and roll for an uplifting slice of country music with heartfelt lyrics, infectious guitar and catchy harmonies, and anthemic choruses. The Scott Howarth Band was formed by a great group of friends with a passion for making music together.

Having played together on various projects over the years, they felt it was time to pool their creative talents towards a common sound. Through time together on the road and in the studio, the Scott Howarth Band is a group of brothers separated at birth and reunited through music. The Scott Howarth Band has been nominated twice for a London Music Award, the first in 2021, in the fan favorite category, and then again in 2022 as country artist of the year. Four of the band’s releases have peaked at number two on the Canadian country countdown.

And if you have not heard any of them, I strongly recommend you visit Spotify and give a listen to the music made me do it. That would be my personal favorite. I am pleased to welcome the band’s lead singer and songwriter and a personal friend, Scott Howarth, to join us in leading the national anthem. Just a moment so I can present Scott a certificate.

I just wanna share Scott is a much better singer than he is a hockey coach. He and I only shared the bench once this season, but we are proud to say we’re undefeated. Our record was zero, zero and one. We tied.

Before we move on to the agenda itself, I will just remind everyone that the city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communications supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact council agenda at London.ca or phone 519-661-2489, extension 2425. Before we move into the agenda, I will look for any disclosures of culinary interest. Seeing none, our next item on the agenda is recognitions.

We have three recognitions today, and I am going to start by calling on Councilor Raman to join me at the podium. Thank you so much. I’d like to invite our honored guests, Guru Nanak Society, Emission Society, sorry to come forward. Yeah.

So today, set three a call. First everyone in a warm welcome to seek heritage month. A seek is someone who’s committed to learning about their true self and leading a holistic lifestyle, emphasizing equality, treating everyone with kindness and respect, regardless of gender, cast, race or religion. Canada and the Sikhs have a rich history, dating back to the 1800s, making significant contributions to Canada, including the Canadian Pacific Railway, in lumber mills and in mines.

In addition, many served in the British Armed Forces. Racist ignorance of the East meant that Sikhs were met with opposition in the face of racist immigration laws and workplace policies. These policies are behind us, but there’s still work to do. Today, Sikh Canadians make up approximately 2.12% of the total Canadian population.

Canada has the second largest Sikh population in the world. They are leaders in diverse fields, including business, healthcare, education and arts. This month, I encourage you to learn a bit more about the history and the core teachings of Sikhism. The qualities of service to others and treating everyone with kindness and respect.

Upcoming events in our community include opportunities to learn more. You’ll see things like the Turbanup at Western, Biceki Day at Stony Creek Library in Bostwick Library and seek history exhibits. A very special thank you to Guru Nanak Society for your work on organizing community events throughout this month. And I’ll let you speak a little bit more about those.

Thank you, everyone. (speaking in foreign language) Good afternoon, everyone. Firstly, I would like to say thank you, everyone, for inviting me and my team to speak today. Heartful, thank you for our honorable Mayor Josh Mergen, Councillors, Corinne Rehmanne, and all the Councillors and staff members of City of London, who always sport as recognized as a lead our way to spread more positivity, to share our values with the London community and give us reason to be always graceful.

Thank you to each of everyone of youth’s sport proclamation of April as a Sikh Heritage Month. It is important that we recognize the contribution of Sikh Canadians and also to learn more about the background of Sikh religions. Our roots teach us to be a kind humble and love all. It teach us to real values of equality, social justice, service and humanity.

We organize the Sikh Heritage Month with the exhibitions, depicting Sikh values, teaches over the gurus and important contribution of Sikh leaders and women in our history. Those who have not visited exhibition yet, we have sent email yesterday to all the Councillors. Please share in the City Hall and have an opportunity to know us more about us. Again, thank you very much.

(speaking in foreign language) For our next recognition, I will call on Councillor Lehman. Thank you, Acting Mayor. Colleagues, I’d like to take a moment to recognize and celebrate Londoner Jeremy Hanson, who we learned yesterday, was selected by NASA to partake in the first trip to lunar space in over half a century. What’s more when Jeremy and the Artemis II blast off in November of next year, he will become the first Canadian in our country’s history to venture into deep space and traveling farther away from good old planet Earth than any other human before with his three crewmates.

Jeremy’s journey to the stars and beyond began at the age of 12 when he joined the 614 Royal Canadian, Air Cadet Squadron here in London. In the years since, he has inspired and educated countless numbers of Canadians and will do so once more next year as part of this historic mission. Like many others in our city, I was ecstatic when I heard the news of Jeremy’s selection yesterday. It brought back memories of when I was that kid on the living room floor, staying up past my bedtime in my pajamas with my brother, watching Neil Armstrong take the first step on the moon.

And at that time, I thought, by time I get old enough, I’ll be landing on Mars. Unfortunately, I don’t have quite the skill set for that. And the Apollo program was canceled in the ’70s. So I hope that there’ll be some young Londoners that will be watching this, not in their small black and white TV, but on her iPhone probably, that will be inspired by Jeremy over the next coming months.

This excitement will only build in the lead up to next year’s launch date. We’re also serving as a source of substantial civic pride. So on behalf of all Londoners, we congratulate Jeremy on this remarkable achievement, and we’ll be watching with great excitement as he makes Canadian deep space history next year. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Layman. And I will say I’m not old enough to remember that moon landing, but I’m sure I will be inspired by Mr. Hansen’s trip. Colleagues, we do have one more somber recognition that I would like to give today.

And I would like to recognize that last month, friends and family mourned the passing of John Jardine. Foreign in Saskatoon, John came to London as many young people do to pursue post-secondary education at Westminster College, Western University, where he studied to become a civil engineer. And after working for several construction companies in the USA, John returned to London with his wife Lorraine to raise their family. After a stint with Sifton Properties, John joined the city of London family as our water operations manager before ultimately taking on the role of city engineer from 1992 to 2001.

So I ask you now to stand and join me in a moment of silence as we remember John and his service to our community. Thank you, please be seated. While not technically a recognition, I am going to ask one more person to speak before we move on in our agenda. As you can clearly see, I am not Mayor Morgan.

Although the seat is comfortable, I am only borrowing it temporarily. Mayor Morgan is, however, joining us by Zoom to participate in today’s meeting. He is up on the screen and your worship, I will turn to you to let colleagues know why you’re unable to join us in person today. Yes, thank you, Chair, and thank you for chairing the meeting today.

Colleagues, I’m just on my way to Toronto for meetings with the Health Minister on the health and homelessness file. As colleagues will recall, the Ontario big city mayor is called for an emergency meeting between that group and the minister and the government on the significant impacts the cities are facing with health and homelessness, mental health and addictions. And that meeting has been granted, unfortunately, it was today because Mayor Patterson from Kingston and I have taken a lead with OBCM on the health and homelessness file because of the great work that both of our communities are doing. And let me just once again commend everybody involved in the health and homelessness summits for positioning London very well to be a leader on this.

But that leadership comes with a requirement to come and be represented, represent all of OBCM in those meetings with the minister today. And we hope to have a great dialogue and make significant progress. I anticipate, given the timing of the meeting, I’ll be able to participate remotely through the whole meeting. But I will be remote for most of this meeting.

So again, thanks colleagues for understanding and I look forward to participating at strategic points in the meeting. Thank you. Thank you, Your Worship. Moving on in our agenda, item three is our review of confidential matters to be considered in public.

I am aware of none. Item four is our council enclosed session. So I am going to look for a motion to move in camera so that we can deal with those confidential matters. For those members of the public, we will have to ask you to leave the gallery while we deal with those.

I do not anticipate us being in camera, particularly long, but that is always the will of council as they discuss the items that are in confidential session. Once we are done, we will return to public session. We will unlock the doors and invite you back in for the rest of the meeting. So I look for a motion to go in camera, by Councillor Hillier, seconded by Councillor Cuddy, and we will ask the clerk to open the vote on that.

Sorry, Mr. Presenting Officer. I’ll note that there’s a lot of belongings left in the gallery up top. Thank you, Councillor Ploza.

We’ll ask security to go through and invite the members of the public to remove their items from the gallery. Mayor Morgan, how do you vote? In favor. Thank you.

Recording in progress. Ploza in the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. For the benefit of the public, that vote was related to three matters indicated on the public agenda relating to personal matters of an identifiable individual, solicitor, client, privileged, advice, litigation, potential litigation, and another matter related to litigation, potential litigation with respect to appeals arising out of the Victoria Park secondary plan at the Ontario Land Tribunal. All right, the clerk advises me that the live streams are back up as well.

We can proceed. So we will move on with item five on the agenda. That is the confirmation and signing of minutes of the previous meetings. We have two sets of meetings.

The sixth meeting held on March the seventh and the seventh special meeting held on March 28th. I think we can move those together unless anyone feels otherwise. So we’ll look for a mover and a seconder. Moved by Councillor Layman.

Seconded by Councillor ramen. Any questions or comments? Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote. Councillor Trassel, closing the vote.

Motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you everyone. Moving on to item six, communications and petitions. We have several related to a number of different items.

6.1 is related to the LPS board appointment. 6.2 is related to an item on the planning committee. And 6.3 is the infrastructure update related to the Thames pool. I will look for a mover and a seconder to refer all of those communications to the appropriate items on the agenda.

Moved by Councillor Hillier. And seconded by Councillor ramen. Any questions or comments? Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote.

Councillor Trassel, thank you. Closing the vote. Motion carries 15 to zero. Moving on, item seven.

Motions of which notice is given. I am aware of none. Moving on to item eight, reports of standing committees. Normally I would present the strategic priorities and policy committees, but as I am chairing today, and I have asked Councillor Layman to report out on both of these for us.

So I will call on Councillor Layman for item 8.1, the 11th report of the strategic priorities and policy committee. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I’ve had no request to pull any of the items on the 11th report of SPPC. So I’ll turn it back to you.

Look to see if anyone wants anything pulled to be dealt with separately. Seeing none, so Councillor Layman, you’re moving the report in its entirety. And we will ask the clerk to open the vote. Closing the vote.

Motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. Moving on, the next item is 8.2, the 12th report of the strategic priorities and policy committee. So we’ll get Councillor Layman to remain standing and present that.

Thank you. I’ll be pulling number five, 4.2, consideration appointment to the London Police Services Board. I’ve had no other request for any of the items to be pulled. Okay, so you’re moving everything except item five.

Look to see if there’s any questions or comments. While colleagues consider whether they have any questions or comments, I will look to our city manager just to see if she wants to offer any brief update on the strategic plan draft development. As I know that that’s on both of the SPPC agendas. And I think we’re getting close to the finish line.

So Ms. Livingston, did you want to give us just a very brief verbal? Certainly, Mr. Chair.

Council has done a tremendous amount of work over the last number of months. And over those meetings in March, work to make final changes to all aspects of the strategic plan. Staff are working right now to incorporate those and return to council a report for April 17th where you can review the final version of the strategic plan in its totality for any final, hopefully minor changes on the 17th viewing April 25th council meeting to finalize your strategic plan. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Livingston. And I will just say on behalf of all of council, thank you to you and all your staff, particularly Ms. Wilcox and Mr.

Steinberg, who have been asked to make lots of changes, incorporate lots of things on the fly and have just been stalwart in getting things back to us as quickly as possible. So we really appreciate the effort and we look forward to hopefully getting things finalized with you at the next SPPC. So we will call a vote on the 12th report of the strategic priorities and policy committee, all items with the exception of five, which was 4.2 on the committee agenda, the consideration of the appointment to the LPS board. Councillor Trosto, closing the vote.

Motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you, everyone, Councillor Layman. Item five from the strategic priorities and policy committee, the consideration of the appointment to the London Police Services Board. Are you prepared to put that on the floor?

Yeah, so SPPC made recommendation to council and I will put that on the floor, right? And I know that a motion has been circulated by Mayor Morgan and Councillor Frank. So I will look to Mayor Morgan now to put his motion on the floor. Thank you.

And I’m getting a little bit of a challenge with the connection. So let me know if you can’t hear me. I’ll keep my camera off just for this part, just to keep some bandwidth. But I do appreciate the ability to put a motion on the floor.

And I want to thank yourself, Councillor Frank and Councillor Hopkins for having a discussion about the motion for consideration. Let me just read the content of the motion and then I’m happy to provide some detail on why this is an important motion. So the motion is that the matter of an appointment to the London Police Services Board, including all 54 applications received, be referred to the strategic priorities and policy committee, meaning in order to determine a short list of five candidates for interviews, it being noted that the interviews will be conducted by the strategic priorities and policy committee committee. And I will just ask Councillor Frank to confirm that she’s seconding that and I’m seeing nods.

So your worship, we’ve got the motion moved and seconded. If you’d like to speak to it now, this is your opportunity to do so. Thank you and I will. And I know the others who I work with on the motion would be happy to share some context.

So I won’t say anything out, certainly leave some space for them to add their comments. But I want to say over the past week, I’ve certainly been doing a lot of listening, been having a lot of conversations and in really watching the discussion around this appointment to a very critical board at a very important time in our city. I would say there’s been a lot of discussion from my observation in the community about diversity. There’s been a lot of discussion about merit.

And there is another piece to this that I want to add into the discussion. As someone who from the outright on this council has tried to drive a wide ranging consensus on issues to try to pull colleagues together and find a wider general consensus on issues. I think that there’s a piece of this that is really important. And that is there are significant problems with the process that we follow to fill these appointments.

There are systemic issues with the way that our process is designed. It is not leading to results that all members of council are supportive of. And for the second time, we approach a situation where members of council and I think at least half of the members of council are willing to again review and move beyond the process that we’ve agreed to in our policies to try to look at a way to find a better path forward. That tells me that we need to fix that.

And I know Deputy Mayor, you and I have talked about you bringing forward at the next SBBC direction to the governance working group to take a look at that at the way that we fill vacancies on applications. And fix that process so that we can find a generally agreed upon way for council to move forward with these critical vacancy appointments. However, we’re not there yet. And so I believe what this motion does is it is an effort to try to find that greater consensus for council.

When you think about it, we have only expressed to each other our opinions on three candidates with votes. And yet many of us ranked eight, nine, 10 candidates through the process. And yet there’s been no opportunity for us to share those preferences, share the reasons for them, or let the candidates in the process express themselves in a way beyond simply putting words on a piece of paper, which we all know is not the best way to communicate how you want to serve, what you can offer to a board, and what vision you might have for the police service in London moving forward. I’d like us to find someone who has the broad support of council.

It doesn’t do council any good. It doesn’t do the community any good. And it doesn’t do the successful candidate any good. And it certainly doesn’t do the board any good.

If we send them a candidate that is narrowly supported, that is not where we need to be as a council. And I believe an interview process where we have the opportunity to come together, to share our preferences, to put some names forward that we can give them the opportunity to express themselves in the way that they want to express themselves, to share their thoughts on how they can contribute to this board, to share what they feel is a priority for us in our decision making on this. I think provides an opportunity for us to come to a much wider consensus as a council. So I’ll leave my comments at that there.

I know others might have something to add, but I’d really appreciate colleagues for considering this motion. Thank you, Your Worship. I’ve got Councillor Frank and then Councillor Hopkins on the speakers list. If anybody else wants to speak to this, let me know.

Councillor Frank. Yes, and I was happy to second this ‘cause I know that we’ve been getting lots of communication from the public. And I think we’ve heard a lot from the community that they’d like us to reconsider this vote. And I think we owe it to both the candidates and the community to take some time to do a more thorough process that as the mayor said gathers more consensus instead of a split vote.

And I think we need to recognize the current concerns that we’ve been hearing in the community. We’ve been given an excellent slate of candidates, 54 very exceptional and diverse candidates to look through. And I think it’s an opportunity for us to take that pause in the consideration of those various candidates. I didn’t know that in the past, Council has done interviews for various boards and commissions.

I didn’t know that was an option. So when I heard that was a possibility, I think it has merit because I think that a lot of candidates might shine in an in-person interview situation as opposed to just on paper, which is only one way of trying to get to know someone. So I’m interested in pursuing that. And I think this will give us all an opportunity to reflect on this very important decision as we can tell it is very meaningful to the community and also very meaningful to the work that we’re doing.

So I think that with some open minds and a bit more time and consideration and discussion, we might be able to come to more of a consensus on where we’re heading. So I’m happy to second this and I hope some colleagues will be interested as well. Thank you, Councillor Frank, Councillor Hopkins. Yes, thank you, Acting Mayor Lewis.

I just wanna start off with the way our council meetings started. We do a land acknowledgement. We single Canada. We support the Sikh community and other members in our community and it reminded me of the diversity in our city.

And even though I don’t think this referral back is perfect, in fact, if it’s not supported, I’ve got another referral back, but I do think it’s really important that for me, this referral back is a compromise. It is giving us an opportunity to start all over again. And I think we need to do that, to pause, I think it is a compromise that we can start all over again. We need to do that.

We need to rectify, I think, the damage that we have caused in the community. So to me, I am hoping that we can get consensus on this council ‘cause it is a compromise for me as well to get this referral supported. I would encourage each and every one of you to do so. And let’s take another stab at this.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins, Councillor Trussow. I’m going to limit my comments now to the amendment that’s on the floor. I’m very skeptical that this council is going to be able to reach a consensus on this issue as I do think we’re deeply divided.

And it’s just not a question of going through the applications. Again, it’s a question of there is a, there’s a worldview, there’s a mindset, there’s a set of values that’s very, very deep. I believe that if we do this, if we do this, we’re going to, in all likelihood, wind up with the same two candidates or some group. It’s very close and we’re going to be right back.

We’re going to be right back where we are here. Now, I’m willing to let this play out ‘cause I think this is probably one of the most important discussions that this council’s going to have during this term. So I want to do this right. I know where I stand on this, and I know what the votes are on this council right now from what I’ve read.

While I’m skeptical of this amendment, I appreciate the mayor and councilor Frank for trying. And I don’t want to obstruct that. I would, however, like to offer an amendment which I hope will be taken as a friendly amendment. And it reads, and I have this written now, it further being noted that this process will be with regard to the reconciliation, equity, accessibility, and inclusion strategy, inclusion strategic area of focus in the 2023, 2027 strategic plan, and the municipal focused truth and reconciliation commissions pull out the action.

And I’m hoping that that will be accepted as a friendly amendment. So our mover is not in person. I’m hesitant to go back and forth on multiple amendments, whether they’re friendly or not. I’m simply gonna ask if you have a seconder for that, and then we will vote on it accordingly, unless the mayor, I can’t see if the mayor has his hand up on the screen at the moment, but councilor ramen has indicated that she’s willing to second it.

So now we have an amendment to an amendment, and we’ll look for questions and comments on the amendment to the amendment. The clerk is typing that up as quickly as possible so that we can get that wording for everyone to see. And I did say an amendment on the amendment. I should have said an amendment on the referral.

Okay, the clerk has said it is now in eScribe. If you want to refresh your screens, you should be able to read the language. I’ll look for any speakers to the amendment. Councilor Hopkins requests.

I’m just gonna ask the clerk to read out that language just so everybody hears it again. Through the chair, the amendment reads as follows, that the proposed referral be amended by adding the following to the end of the clause. It being further noted that this process will be with regard to the reconciliation, equity, accessibility, and inclusion strategic area of focus in the 2023 to 2027 strategic plan. And the municipal focused truth and reconciliation commissions calls to action.

Councilor Frank. Thank you, I’m happy to have this on the amendment. Any other speakers to this? Councilor Hopkins, can I ask you to take the chair?

I would like to speak to this. Actually, I’m gonna seek some clarity. So if I can pass the chair to you. Deputy Mayor or Acting Mayor Lewis.

Thank you, Councilor Hopkins. So I need some clarity from the mover and seconder on this. It is a being noted clause. I think that when we are talking about areas of the strategic plan, all areas of the strategic plan are always on the table.

So I’m quite honestly looking for Councilor’s clarification on what this it being noted purpose is in this motion. I mean, I think we’ve all listened to concerns about diversity and inclusion. I think that many of us, a great many of us around this horseshoe both in the last term and in this term already have demonstrated through various actions, willingness to work with different communities on all sorts of issues. So I’m trying to sense like is the Councilor’s intent that we are only going to include candidates from the 54 candidates who have identified with a diversity group?

Are we? I’m just wondering through you, Madam Presiding Officer, if we can get some clarity from the mover on the intent of the being noted. Councilor Tresault, if you can go through the chair please. Respect, I believe it’s very clear in terms of what I’ve written, but I’ll go back and do it again.

By the way, the words it being further noted can be removed if that’s what’s causing the confusion. I think it’s important to say this because I want the committee to know that they’re not just starting over, they’re starting over with a particular lens. And I would think that that lens would be present anyway. I don’t think it’s redundant.

I don’t think it does any harm, I don’t think it does any harm to repeat this. But I think that these two points, number one, we have a very, very strong, well, we have a very, very valid and strong. We put a lot of work into the reconciliation, equity, accessibility, and inclusion strategy. And I think it’s worth acknowledging that.

And also, again, there are several municipal-focused aspects to the truth and reconciliation commissions called action. So I don’t think this is redundant. I don’t think it’s contrary. I don’t think it takes away anything that the committee can do.

And no, it doesn’t mandate the selection of who’s on that final list. But what it does do is it says, this is a lens. We’ve acknowledged that we need to fix our process, and we’re gonna do that through the governance committee. I don’t want to wait for the governance committee to deliberate in terms of what that lens is gonna be.

We’ve heard a lot from the community on that. So I think putting this in here right now, foreshadows, I think, quite correctly, the fact that there is going to be further guidance coming from the governance committee. But we want these points to be regarded here. Acting Mayor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. I just wanted to get that clarity. I appreciate it. I don’t have any issue.

The it being further noted was not the problem for me. I just wanted to understand that we were not removing any of the 54 candidates from the list that will go to PACTAS PPC by applying this particular lens. I agree that this lens has to be applied, just like it should be in any decision. I just wanted to make sure that we weren’t doing it to the exclusion of anyone on the list.

But hearing the councilor’s response, I’m fine with this. So thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. I’ll return the chair back to you. I have no speakers.

Thank you. And I did have councilor Pribble on the main motion. Councilor Pribble, I don’t know if you wanted to speak to the amendment to the motion, or if you wanted to wait until we return to the main motion. I’ll wait till the main motion.

Okay. Oh, Mayor Morgan, you have your hand up on Zoom. Go ahead. Yeah, thank you.

And I apologize for the road noise if it’s loud. I just want to echo what the deputy mayor just said. I don’t think a statement of values and priorities that we’ve committed to in the strategic plan and other motions of council has, is anything to be concerned about? I think that this is additive to the motion and it’s fine if being noted clause.

So I’ll be supporting Councilor Trozas addition. Okay, so we have no other speakers that I’m aware of, Councilor Cuddy. Thank you, Acting Mayor Lewis. I’d like to speak to the main motion unless you’d like me to speak now.

No, we will. If you’d like to wait and speak to the main motion, I have no other speakers on the amendment. So I was prepared to call the vote on the amendment and then we will return to the main motion as amended. Thank you.

So seeing no other speakers to the amendment, I will ask the clerk to open the vote. Close in the vote, the motion carries 14 to one. And just so folks know, I’m gonna just wait a few seconds when the results of the vote come in so that people have an opportunity to see them on the screen before. So now we are to the main motion as amended and I have Councilor Pribble and then Councilor Cuddy and then Councilor Palosa and then Councilor Ferrer.

Councilor Pribble. I would just like to say that even though I’m a person who doesn’t like to delay things, I really think that the motion will help us as a Council and to the public. I did have a detailed conducted interior with the two candidates, both of them over one hour long. And I have to tell you that I believe truly that this is the best way to do it.

And at the end, we will make the best decision for what I always call half a million people of London and everything will be helpful. So thank you for the motion. I will certainly be supporting it. Thank you, Councilor Pribble, Councilor Cuddy.

Thank you, Acting Mayor, Deputy, sorry, Acting. Here, Lewis, I just want to speak to my colleagues that I will be supporting this motion, but I want to make a comment. I understood that this was a job interview and I understood all of these committee appointments were job interviews. And over the temper of years that I was in business, I’ve done a lot of job interviews and candidates have reached out to me by phone to sell themselves, to make a better presentation than just merely a resume that I’ve received because I really don’t know anything about the candidate when they get a resume.

But of the 54 candidates that applied for this position, one reached out to me and that meant something to me because that meant they wanted the job ‘cause they wanted to sell themselves to me. And I have, that meant a great deal. And I didn’t want to go and chase down other candidates to speak to them, to have them convince me that they were the best person for the job. So I have no reservations about supporting this motion, but I do think, as the Mayor has suggested, that we have an issue with the way that we are selecting candidates for some of these committees.

And I would go back to the library board as one. I’m sitting on, I currently sit on that committee and I think we had a problem with that one. I know we did and we all recognize that. So I think we need to take a long hard look at how we select candidates in the future.

And with that, I’ll complete my remarks. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Caiy. I have Councillor Palosa next.

Thank you, Mr. Acting Mayor. I’ll start with the question to the Muberant and Seconder asking if they’d reached out in advance to the Indigenous leadership circle or namarin as they both submitted communications, looking for feedback on their motion prior to it being tabled here today. Thank you, I don’t know if Councillor, sorry, Mayor Morgan is with us on Zoom.

I know he sent me a text to home. I’m gonna go that he was having signal issues, but if he’s there, we’ll go to the mover. Yes, I hope you can hear me okay. I did not reach out to the two particular groups that Councillor Palosa mentioned.

I did have a brief conversation about this with our staff and the anti-racism anti-oppression division. So that was the conversation that I had as well as the conversations with the other movers. I’d let Councillor Frank add anything ‘cause I’m unsure if I’m coming across clear at this time ‘cause the meeting is a little bit choppy to me. Thank you, you came across fine.

So any segoli, I wanna start by thanking Ms. Morris and the work that she’s done and stay staff have done in the work that Council sent out and we made a priority in engaging communities who aren’t traditionally engaged, who feel underrepresented or not represented at all in this space, recognizing as well that the government systems itself is set up on a colonial system. And traditionally, they’re not in this space and they’re not seeing this place and perhaps sometimes feeling that they’re not welcome here that they don’t know our processes. So perhaps that’s why some of us only heard from one candidate ‘cause they didn’t know they could reach out one-on-one when their application, that was maybe missing a resume portion that came to us that they didn’t know they can come one-on-one to ask for our time behind the scenes and if that was appropriate.

I wanna thank the allies in the gallery today, those who have sent letters and phone calls, social media messages, asking for us to do better and to keep listening to our community. In 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Report came up with 94 calls to action. Five of those specifically deals with municipalities. In 2015, the Federation of Community Municipalities also issued a report to help municipalities navigate these.

London was featured in it with the work we were starting to do on diversity inclusion in our staff. The first pathway within this report mentions fostering communities, alliances and hope. Out of this process, I’m wondering how much hope there really is. We had 11 applications in the past for London Police Services Board in 54 this time and to me the difference in outcome didn’t seem that much different.

If we’re talking about merit, I do believe that Joseph, already having police service board experience was a valid and excellent choice. Not taking anything away from Mr. Goss as he’s also an excellent person and dedicated to serving the community. Just I felt this was an opportunity to do better.

In the Truth and Reconciliation for municipalities, reconciliation requires political will, joint leadership, trust, building, accounting building and transparency. In April 2022, that’s when Council directed that we start bringing forward a land acknowledgement at the beginning of our meetings. We say those words whenever we meet in these chambers, but do we actually make space, brothers? Are they just hollow words with no actions to back them up?

I believe someone bringing the indigenous aspect to the space of intersectionalities, identity and understanding the intergenerational trauma of generations caught in the justice system but the correction system and what’s happening with the indigenous children over generations of those who were caught up in the residential school system and those who avoided it but still had impacts that it takes a leader from the community for nothing about them, without them. And I would say that indigenous leadership circle has spoken out that communications in our docket today. I’m also disappointed that this last minute circulation of this motion only within half an hour prior to today’s meeting as we’ve been hearing from the community for weeks or since the last week’s meeting. I will say I am not in favor of supporting this referral today.

I appreciate perhaps where some are intent to go with it. I believe unless those here are actually willing to change their vote or be open for consideration to please just vote against it ‘cause you’re putting hours of work before us and fake hope for a community that’s hoping to have impact in the community and actually be heard. So if this is more virtual signaling versus work to actually be done and hearing an unbiased opportunity, that’s why I’m asking of you before you cast your vote. Whichever way you go, it’s fine.

It’s our decision. We all come with different experience but if you’re not open to actually having that change vote in an impact, vote accordingly. So Miigwech, yeah, cool. Thank you.

Good Councilor Palosa, Councilor Ferreira. And thank you, Acting Mayor and through you. I have a question but I’ll leave that to the end just for the way the motion sits right now. But I just first wanted to say thank you to the community for actually coming up and speaking up and engaging.

We have a fresh election in our mind where the turnout was quite low and it is a big thing that we speak about in the halls, our concern with that. So when we have the community speaking to us, we need to start listening to show that we do listen. The more we listen, the more engagement we get, the better things are. So I feel like that is a good process moving forward.

Speaking to the candidates, we have two good candidates in my opinion, one better than the other just because he has more relevant qualifications. He’s on a police board as we speak when compared to the other candidate who does have police experience on the HR side, but that is a few years back. And we can fit that diversity and inclusion lens with that. So I do think that that is the correct way to go.

I have chosen my candidate and I would like to keep that choice moving along. So it kind of leads into the question. So I see there’s five recommendations or five candidates for interviews and I just wanted to have a little bit of extra clarification on how that process actually works to select those five. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Ferrera. I’m going to turn to Mayor Morgan to see if he would like to provide some clarity on the five selection process. I did speak to him about it earlier today. So if he’s, if he does break up, I will offer some comment myself, but I will turn to him first as the mover.

Mayor Morgan, are you still with us? Yes. And I can certainly comment on that. We are, it will be up to SBPC to determine the process for the five.

You know, we do have the technology system available to us. I will say where it has failed when we have a single candidate. It has been actually quite helpful when there are multiple candidates. And so, you know, if you have five, each person has five choices that they can board in and then you find, you know, the top choices and that’s where you see where the consensus is.

The idea about this is to try to find that wider consensus for Council. And I just want to comment, if you’ll allow me, I want to be clear, I am willing to move my vote. I ranked, you know, eight people. And I think there are excellent people within that group.

And I think a process such as this allows for the space for those who may not have heard or have the ability to express their preferences on those beyond, you know, where the process landed us, have an opportunity to, you know, express their support for those candidates as well. So I’ll leave it at that. Thank you, Mayor Morgan. I’m just going to turn back to Councillor Ferreira and see if he’s comfortable with that answer in terms of the reason for the five for now, knowing that this will go back to SPPC.

And there can be some more debate about the five, the process, but as I think Mayor Morgan was indicating, as we have with other boards and commissions, rather than just having one vote, we would each be able to put our top five and that would hopefully give us a list of five for a short list after that. Thank you, and thank you, Acting Marion, through you. So, like, ‘cause we’ve done a lot of the work and we have selected a couple of the candidates, I would feel a little bit more comfortable in supporting the motion if we did have some language that kind of spoke to that just so we can not waste any work that we’ve already done, just ‘cause I do see consensus on two candidates, the one candidate that I obviously want to see be put into that seat. That’s really what I’m kind of vouching for.

I would like to see some type of language that does show the work that we’ve already done. If that is a possibility, that would make me support this motion just a little bit more. So, I’m going to seek some clarity from you, Councillor Ferreira, and I think that the question that I asked of Councillor Trussow earlier on his addition was relevant to that. My understanding is, and certainly, the mover of the amendments’ comments were that absolutely those two candidates who were in the runoff election already, we are certainly free and open to put their names forward for that short list.

I suspect, given the level of support that they both had, that there would be people ranking one or both of them potentially in their top five, I can only speak for myself in terms of, I actually did rank five when I was reading through the resumes, and both of them were in my top five. So, both of those would be names that I would be selecting when this goes back to SPPC. I don’t know if other Councillors are necessarily finding themselves in the same position, but I think that given the level of support we saw for both, that both of those two names would be amongst the five short listed. And I’m just going to see if, I’m going to turn back to you, Councillor Ferreira, and see if that’s, is that helpful for you, or is there something further that you are looking for on this?

It’s helpful. I am hopeful that the candidates that we, or the candidate that we’ve looked out to right now does sit at the top of the list. I’m just a little worried just ‘cause the language doesn’t specifically say that. So that’s just really what my concern is at this point.

I’m not sure how the language would actually look, because I did see this motion a little bit last minute, so I didn’t really have some time to think about how that would correct for that, but that is a concern that I just wanted to bring to Council here. Thank you. And I think I would say as with all of these things, ultimately we’re in each other’s hands when this goes back to us PPC to put those names forward. Looking for any other speakers on this motion.

Oh, Councillor Van Wierbergen. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. Couple of points here.

Just a short time ago, Council sitting as a committee did its job and did it by the rules, and we had a winner fair and square from that committee. Now today it comes to Council and Presco Bamel, it’s not good enough. It’s basically inferring that we did not do our jobs, that it needs to be reconsidered and why? Because the wrong candidate in some minds was chosen, even though that was a minority position.

The majority of Councillors voted for a candidate, and as I stated, he won, and he won fair and square. Now again, it comes before us today, and it’s laced with things like identity politics, racism. We only have to remind ourselves that it was just a short time ago when we appointed a person to the police board, and she took that position, and after we had selected her as a committee and as a council, there was no Pella Baloo, there was no hue and cry, it was accepted, and everything moved on. The rules were fine at that point, and again, that was just a short time ago, but clearly, quote unquote, the correct person won.

Now this person decided, for reasons only she knows, to vacate that position, and now we find ourselves in a position to replace, and we’ve done it just exactly the same way we did it before. We came up with it with a name, that name clearly is not good enough in some eyes, and so we’re working with these contortions to try and shoehorn somebody else. So I am not going to support this motion. As stated, we’ve done our job, some don’t like it.

Well, that’s democracy, that’s how democracy works. And democracy does not require unanimity, so I reject that argument that we have to go towards a unanimous configuration, or quote unquote, more consensus, when in fact, that’s not how our system of governance works. So I will not support this, thank you. Thank you, Councillor van Mirbergen.

Looking for anyone who has not spoken to the main motion as amended, Councillor Hopkins, and then Councillor Hopkins just to advise you, when you’re done speaking, I’m gonna ask you to take the chair again so that I can speak to the main motion too. Thank you, thank you, Acting Mayor Lewis. I am going to repeat what I said on the amendment. We have to rectify the damage that has been done in the community.

This is a start, and I think it’s very, very important to know we started off looking at staff, reaching out to stakeholders in the community, getting 54 applications, we were off to a great start. I had a number of qualified applicants to choose from on the list, but I do think we need to rectify the damage, and this is a way of resetting. To me, it is a bit of a compromise. I wish we weren’t here, but we are here.

We are having a conversation around this horse you right now, which is what we didn’t do at the beginning. We needed to do that. So thank you to each and everyone for your perspectives. We don’t all have to agree.

It’s just having a conversation and understanding. The community has responded, “How do we move forward?” I think we need to do that, and looking forward, as this goes back to SPPC, where we will have a further conversation on how we are going to address the five moving forward and the interviews. So with that, again, I appreciate having this opportunity to speak to the main motion, and with that, I will now go to the Deputy Mayor Lewis for his comments. Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer, and I will try and be brief.

I’m not going to repeat things that everybody has already said so well. I will, however, say the reason I’m supportive of this is because I am open to changing my vote. As I said, I ranked five candidates when I was reviewing the applications. Both of the two candidates who were in the final vote were in my top five.

There’s also a woman who’s a person of color who attracted my attention very strongly and was ranked third for me. I’m going to put her name forward when this goes back to SPPC, if that’s approved too, because I think there were individuals, not a number of individuals, with lots of merit in this process. I am not going to go into this process, presuming who the successful candidate might be at the end. I’m going to commit to reviewing the five applications and sitting through the interviews of the five individuals that we as a collective group choose as our top five at SPPC.

And I hope that that’s the process that all members will go into this with. I will say that I think some of the divisive language that we’ve heard out in the community has not been particularly helpful when you look at the fact that no one vote can project a set of values on a person. There is a continuum. I think about how the last council in feeling of vacancy for a seat at this horseshoe, put the first hijab wearing Muslim woman on this body to make decisions on behalf of the people of London as a representative of the Muslim community.

Not all members of council at the time supported that, but I certainly did not question any of their commitments to diversity because they weighed those candidates who we had to choose from based on a set of criteria that they had for themselves. I know that diversity was part of their decision-making factor. I don’t question that at all, but they chose at the end of the day to support another person. And that is fine because we, to Councilor Van Mirgen’s point, we don’t have to agree.

But I do think that there is a process here by which we can come to a broader consensus. And to Councilor Frank’s point earlier, I genuinely believe that when we have an opportunity to sit down face-to-face with the human beings behind these resumes, we can learn more about what they may offer to the police services board. And I am working, and I will say I am working, and I’ve had a conversation written ‘cause we didn’t have time to talk in person this morning, but I had a conversation with Councillor Plaza about bringing forward some recommendations to the next SPPC to refer the entire process to the governance working group for a review and some recommendations to improve the process moving forward. The mayor said it earlier in his comments.

Twice already in this term of Council now, we’ve seen that the process has left us with the result that we as a Council as a whole are not satisfied with. That tells me that we need to look at the process, take ownership of it, and make changes that we can all believe in to make the process better. So, I hope that colleagues will support not only the motion before us today, but hopefully we will, and I certainly hope that we won’t be circulating it at the last moment. We plan to have it on the agenda in time for you to see the motion to refer this to governance working group too, but I hope colleagues will support that as well because I think we have identified that the process needs some improvement.

The police services board needs a member, so we can’t wait for governance working group to perhaps take six or eight months to really go through the process and fine tune it. We do need to fill this position sooner than later. So, in the spirit of that, this interim motion is hopefully going to add a new step that we can consider at governance working group as well, but I do think that this is a path forward that is worthy of all of our support because I think that we’ve identified a problem, and while we may not have the perfect solution yet, what we are potentially going down the road on today is a solution to better outcomes in the long run. Thank you, Madam Providing Officer.

I have no other speakers, and I will return the chair back to you. Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. I’ll resume with the chair, Councillor Layman. Thank you, I just want to follow up on what the Deputy Mayor touched on.

And that is this, with regards to personal attacks that I have read in the last couple of weeks, has been very disturbing. Other Councillors have mentioned participation in our process. We were fortunate to have 57 applicants apply for this job. My concern is that next time around we won’t because when they see attacks on themselves personally and on their families, they’ll think twice before putting their name out in the public session.

These are volunteer roles to participate. These are not elected roles, like we knew that going into our jobs, that we would get this, and that’s fine. That was our choice to run and get into public service. But we have so many volunteer agencies in our city that require private citizens to step up and give back.

And what I’ve seen in the last few weeks and read, if I was out there considering putting my name forward, I would definitely think twice. So I caution those that talk about this process. By all means, talk about the process, talk about pros and cons, et cetera, but please lay off personal attacks on the candidates. It’s not healthy for democracy.

It’s not healthy for our city, and it’s not healthy for the boards and commissions that we hope to populate. Thank you, Councilor Layman. I have Councilor McAllister and Councilor Raman on the list next, Councilor McAllister. Thank you, Acting Mayor.

One of the things that I’ve heard this afternoon that I think is very important is, there’s an acknowledgement around the horseshoe that our selection process is flawed. And we need to take the opportunity to speak with the candidates directly. Not everyone is aware of the processes that are part of this selection. I know that work needs to be done on the selection process, and I know that we will work on that in governance.

This is an important decision, and Council really should take the time to consider the candidates and do these face-to-face interviews. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor McAllister, Councilor Raman. Thank you, and through you, Acting Mayor.

This is a tough conversation to have, and I want to start by saying, sometimes you leave meetings with regrets, and I left XPPC the last time with the regret that I hadn’t spoken up. And I thought long and hard about why I didn’t comment that day. And I felt I didn’t comment because sometimes I feel like the conversation about diversity sometimes is a very challenging one to have in this horseshoe sitting where I sit in the body that I sit in. So I just want to say first, you know, that that was my regret, and I wish I had spoken up, but I do feel like if I had spoken up, I would have known how that conversation would have went, and that’s an unfortunate feeling as well.

And it, to me, speaks to some of the work that we, as individuals in the roles that we took on, have to do, and I’m being blatantly honest. I mean, I think that we, in the roles that we have taken on, the decision-making that we are committing ourselves to, the strategic plan that we are committing ourselves to, and with all the other committees, boards, that we sit on, that we are committing to, that we have to be willing to do the work necessary to make sure that we’re taking into consideration and bringing to the table the lenses that are necessary. And when we can’t bring those lenses, we are appointing people to these roles that can. We reached out to the community, we got 54 applications, tremendous, and I’m so pleased to see so much willingness from the community when it comes to these appointments.

But today we’re having a conversation around process. Yes, this is a process conversation, but it is also a lens conversation. So when does that conversation come in? When do we have more conversation with the community, be it the work we need to do, to be able to not have to continue to come back and look at our decisions and say we missed something, to be reminded that we missed something.

So yes, process, and I’m thankful for my colleague, Councillor Troso, for bringing up the importance of adding that amendment in to include the lens, but that means that we are signing up, we are agreeing today that when we meet at SPPC, that that lens is part of the work we’re going to bring to the table again. So that’s what we’re signing up for, by voting for this today. We’re signing up to agree that this is the world view that we’re going to put towards this process. And so I agree with Councillor Palosa.

If we’re not there, if we’re going to take the time, if we’re going to again raise the expectation in the community that things are going to change and our committees and our boards are going to look differently, then yes, absolutely, let’s go back, let’s do the process again, let’s do the work necessary. And I’m still conflicted about where I stand on that. And hope is a difficult thing to keep going back. But I want to be hopeful and I want to be hopeful that we can make a different decision and make a decision that we can broadly all support.

So thank you for your time. Thank you, Councillor ramen. I’m looking to see if there are any other speakers, there can’t be too many more because most of us have spoken. I am not seeing any further speakers, so I’m going to ask the clerk to open the vote.

Opposed in the vote, motion carries, 13-2. Thank you colleagues. That concludes the 12th report of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee. And moving along to item 8.3 in our standing committees is the fifth report of the Planning and Environment Committee.

We may have to call a recess soon just so Councillor Layman’s legs get a break, but I’m going to call on him as the chair of Planning and Environment Committee to present that report now. Thank you. I haven’t heard of any items wishing, or any people wishing to pull any items, I came there. Okay, so I am looking to colleagues to see if there’s anything from the agenda that they want dealt with separately.

And this is on the fifth report of the Planning and Advisory Committee. This will be followed by the sixth report. Councillor Van Mierbergen. Thank you, Mr.

Presiding Officer. With regard to number nine on the agenda, 3.2 from Planning, Paul’s Mill Road. If that could be called separately, so I can vote on that. I do have a question and that is, is it possible to vote for the preamble motion and not the ABC?

Can they be split and called separately? Well, Councillor Van Mierbergen, I’m going to rely on the clerk’s wisdom for that. But since we’re going to have it pulled to be dealt with separately, perhaps we could give them a moment to discuss that and we can deal with the remainder of the agenda. That’s fine, thank you.

Okay, so we’ve had a request to pull item nine. That’s 3.2 from the committee agenda with regard to 247, Paul’s Mill Road. Looking to see if there’s anything else, colleagues wish to have dealt with separately. I’m not seeing any.

So Councillor Layman, you’re prepared to move items one through eight. I’ll move items one through eight, yes. Thank you. And I will look to colleagues for any questions or comments on items one through eight of the fifth report of Planning.

I’m seeing none, so bear with us for just a moment while the clerks are doing their work and we will get the vote opened on items one through eight of the fifth report of the Planning and Environment Committee. Councillor Frank, closing the vote. Motion carries 15 to zero. Thank you colleagues.

Okay, we’re going to go back to item nine. This is the Hall’s Mill Road. Councillor Van Mierbergen, I just want to advise you that the clerks have looked at your request. Well, we can call A, B and C separately.

There is not a vote on the preamble itself. If you wish to change conditions of the recommendation from committee, you would have to propose an amendment to the conditions. First of all, preference, and I can move this, is that it proved in the main part of the motion before the subsections, eliminate subject to the fall in terms and conditions, including the A, B and C. So the motion would be up to the approved period and the rest of it would be deleted.

Give me just one moment. I’m just going to check with the clerks on this, but I believe it would not be on the recommendation of the director of Planning and Development. It would be contrary to the recommendation of the director. Okay, so in conversation with our clerks on process Councillor Van Mierbergen, I think what you’re proposing is that not withstanding the recommendation of the director of Planning and Development and the advice of the Heritage Planner that the request to remove the heritage attributes from the property at 247 Halls Mills Road pursuant to section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act be approved with, and then we would have no conditions.

There would be no subsections. Is that the intent of what you’re seeking? That’d be the intent. Do you have a seconder for that?

Okay, I see Councillor Hillier is prepared to second that. So I’m just going to bear with us for a second here. I need to check with the clerk because the committee recommendation was to support the recommendation of the director. I think the amendment you’re proposing is contrary to the committee recommendation.

So I think that we have to, and I’m just going to consult with the clerk here for a moment, but I think we have to defeat the committee recommendation first before we can put an alternate motion on the floor. Okay, the clerks in their wisdom have provided some further advice on this. It is still an approval. So it’s not directly contrary to the motion approved at committee.

So the clerks are advising that it can be moved as an amendment, that would be in order. And then if the amendment is approved, then the approval would be granted without conditions. If the amendment is defeated, then we would revert to the main committee motion. So we have a mover and a seconder in Councillor van Mirbergen and Councillor Hillier looking for questions and comments on the amendment.

And I will give folks a chance to just quickly read that so that they can double check the language. But I have Councillor Frank first on the speaker’s list. Thank you, and through you, I’d like to ask a question of staff if possible. And I’m hoping that they can refresh my memory as to why we are requesting that the resident remove things by hand.

I understand it’s to preserve the foundation. So I guess I’m requesting through the chair for their information and a reminder as to why maintaining the foundation is an important thing. So Mr. Mathers, are we going to you on that?

Or to Ms. McNeely? Through the acting mayor. So we are currently going through a conservation review board process.

So maintaining the remaining portion that may have some historical significance would be important to be able to continue to pursue that process. Thank you, Mr. Mathers. Councillor Frank.

Thank you. And if possible, I do know that most of the courts are somewhat backed up. So I’m just wondering what is the timeline overall, if you know about that process, how long would it take for that to be resolved? Thank you.

Well, let’s ask our learned staff if they have a crystal ball that could ballpark a timeline on that for them. Through the acting mayor, we don’t have a time. It would be up to that board to be able to reestablish this file. So we don’t have a time.

Thank you, Mr. Mathers. Councillor Frank. Thank you, that’s all.

Councillor McAllister. Thank you, Acting Mayor. Through you, further to Councillor Frank’s questions. I don’t know if it’s possible to have a supervised removal, but does seem, I mean, I believe the individual question is in his 80s, I understand we don’t want people to do demolitions without approval, but it does seem a bit heavy handed.

And I’m just wondering if there’s any other alternative that we could work with under the Ontario Heritage Act. Thank you. And we will go to staff on that. We’ll give Mr.

Mathers and Miss McNeely just a moment. Mr. Mathers. Through the acting mayor, this plan is actually was developed working with the owner of the property and it was their proposal and went through some discussions between our legal staff and their lawyer.

So this is something that they brought to us. So maybe that would be something that was important as part of the consideration. Thank you. And I just want to make sure Councillor McAllister did that answer your question.

So just to confirm, it’s already through the acting mayor, that this was done in consultations ‘cause my confusion lies with the owner seems to have come out quite vocally saying that it wasn’t. So I’m just confused as to what’s to say. He said, he said the situation or I mean, is this actually a plan that was developed with them or is this us having to follow the heritage act to the strict letter of the law? Mr.

Mathers. Through the acting mayor. So this is their attempt to align with the heritage act and what they’ve suggested their approach would be to be able to align with those requirements. Thank you.

I’ve got Councillor Hopkins next and then Councillor Trussow. Yes, thank you. And I would encourage my colleagues not to support this amendment. And one of the reasons why I would encourage you not to support the amendment, that there is a long history on this one.

And the history I will just start with where it is at now. I’ll speak to the main motion later on. Right now, this is a demolition permit request. It is at the conservation heritage appeal board.

And for the appeal board to go forward, the debris that sits on top of the foundation needs to be removed. The removal is to have a plan with the owner and with the city of London to come up with a plan to remove it not using machinery. Obviously, if the machinery goes on top of this foundation, to remove the debris, the damage will be caused with the foundation, which is to be determined if it is going to be of heritage significance. But the reason this permit is being requested is to move forward to determine that.

And that is what is in front of us. And that needs to be done. And I would encourage committee council to support staff’s recommendation who have a plan and will be working with the owner to come up with the plan. I have heard lots of misinformation in the community that we are making an 80-year-old man remove the debris by hand.

The plan is still to be determined. The recommendation is not to use machinery. So again, colleagues, I would ask you not to support the amendment. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins, Councillor Trussow.

I’ll keep this really short because I just want to support what was just said. I’m going to support the staff report. I’m not going to support the amendment. There is nothing in here that says that this particular gentleman has to go out and do this himself.

And to read some of the comments in the public, well, I think it really doesn’t understand the difference between a property owner acting in their individual capacity and a property owner acting in their relationship to the property, where is the property owner? They can cause somebody else at their expense, but they can cause somebody else to go out and do the physical labor. So I think a lot of the suggestions that we’re being retributive to an elderly gentleman, I just think it’s wrong. And I fully support the staff report here.

And I hope Council rejects the amendment. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Trussow. Any other speakers?

Seeing none, then I lost the clerk to open the vote. Oh, Councillor van Mirbergen, you’ve introduced this motion, but you haven’t actually spoken to it. So I will give a little leeway in your rationale behind your motion if you want to speak to it now. Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Presiding Officer. I would like to speak to this. It just seems reasonable as has been stated, the owners are in their 80s. Their intention for this piece of property was to subdivide the land and actually use it for infill housing, and yet we seem to be caught up in this crumbling foundation.

I don’t know for what purpose or what the end goal here is. Perhaps there are some that think that this rivals Hadrian’s Wall, and maybe we’ll have blocks and blocks of buses, tour buses lined up to see this crumbling foundation, but I highly doubt it. So again, we need to say to ourselves, it makes sense here, saving a foundation, and then again for what purpose on private property, of course. So I would urge people to take the common sense approach, counselors take the common sense approach and vote for this amendment and certainly vote against the main motion.

Thank you, Councilor. I have no others, Councilor Pribble. I would just like to support this, and I will be supporting this motion. I’m a guide at tremendous beliefs in history and heritage.

I will always support it, but this in terms of the common sense, I don’t. I will support this motion. Thank you. Any other speakers to the motion, to the amendment?

Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote on the amendment. Close in the vote, motion is lost, seven to eight. Okay, that brings us back to the committee recommendation. Councilor Layman has put that on the floor.

I’ll look to any speakers to the committee recommendation before we call the vote. Councilor Hopkins. Yes, thank you. So I would like to speak to this.

I am the Council of the Board. There’s a lot of history on this site, but I’ll just start with 2019, leading to this demolition permit. And I would like to start off saying that we are not making a decision here on the foundation and the determination of the foundation. That is going to be decided in the court where it’s at right now.

So starting in 2019, and I’m doing this, just so Council is a little bit familiar with a bit of history on this property. So in 2019, December, a demolition request came forward from LAHCH, which is the Heritage Advisory Group, former LAHCH, CACP. They were consulted and they issued an intention to designate. Council advised to designate, and in January 2020, Council supported intentions to designate.

January 2020, the accessory building on the property known as the Red Barn was demolished by the owner without municipal council’s approval. The appeal received by the city in February 2020, and referred to the Conservation Review Board on March 2020. And that’s where it is at the moment. May 2020, the owner and the city agree that the debris on the site would need to be removed in order to identify the extent of the remaining foundation.

And that is really important to understand because that is what we’re allowing this permit for. We are not making any decisions. We are trying to assess the determination of if it is of any heritage significance so it can proceed in the appeal process. So, and here we are today.

The owner was fined. That was already taken care of. So we need to go forward with this. I would think it’s in the best interest of the community and of the owner if we proceed with this recommendation.

And I’m hoping it can get support here to proceed. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Any further speakers to the motion?

See none. So I will ask the clerk to open the vote. Councillors Pripple and Ferreira closing the vote. Motion carries 13 to two.

Thank you, colleagues. Councillor Layman. That concludes the fifth report, the Planning and Environment Committee. And I’d like to, with your permission, continue on to the sixth report of the Planning and Environment Committee.

Is anyone on the agenda? Thank you. Councillor Layman. I’ve had no request to pull any of the nine items on the committee agenda.

I’m just going to look briefly to colleagues to see if there are any items that you wish dealt with separately from the sixth report of the Planning and Environment Committee. Councillor Van Mierbergen. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer.

Number nine, 3.7 from Planning, dealing with 614 Westmount Crescent. If I could have the A portion and B portion separated out on a separate vote. Well, how about we deal with that when completely separately, Councillor? And then we can have a divided vote on those two sections.

That’s fine, thank you. Okay, so we’ve had a request to have number nine pulled any other items. I’m not seeing any other takers. Councillor Layman, are you prepared to move the balance report?

I will put one through eight on the floor. Okay, so we have one through eight of the six report of Planning and Environment on the floor, looking to see if there’s any speakers. I see none, so we will ask the clerk to open the vote. Councillor Van Mierbergen.

Thank you, closing the vote. Motion carries 15 to zero. We’ve had item nine requested to be pulled for a separate vote. And Councillor Van Mierbergen, I’m gonna go back to you and just clarify, you are looking for part A and all of its numbered sub clauses and part B dealt with separately.

Can we call A and B separately? Okay, we can do that. We just need to give the clerks a moment to separate those out. And while they are doing that, I will look for any speakers on the motion.

Okay, I see none. So we will start with section A of the committee report. We will ask the clerks to open the vote for that. Bear with us for just a moment.

Councillor McAllister, Councillor Ferrera. Councillor Ferrera had to take a biobryk. Thank you, closing the vote. Motion carries 12 to one.

All right, and we will now, Councillor Layman’s prepared to put part B on the floor. I’ll put B on the floor. And we will look for any questions or comments on that. And I will share, I know a couple of Councillors have needed to step out, take a quick break.

It is three o’clock. We have been at this for about two hours now. Councillor Layman in particular has been standing for about two hours now. So after we conclude the sixth report of the planning and environment committee, I am going to ask Council’s indulgence for a quick 10-minute recess.

And we will get right back to it and hopefully finishing good time. But we have the sixth report of the planning and environment committee, nine part B, and we’ll ask the clerk to open the vote on that. Councillor Trosto, Martin Q. absent.

Closing the vote. Motion carries 14 to zero. Councillor Layman. And that concludes the sixth report of the planning and environment committee.

And I will now take my chair. Chair. (laughing) Thank you, and thank you for the stalwart work today in presenting all of those extra committee reports that normally would fall to me. I appreciate you standing in my stead.

Colleagues, as I indicated, I know that we’ve been at this for a little over two hours. I know we have some members in the gallery who are here to hear a discussion around the community and protective services agenda. We still have the corporate services committee agenda to get through as well. So I’m gonna look to see if there’s a willingness for a 10 minute recess.

I’m seeing some nods from Councillor Hopkins, Councillor Hillyer. So we will, Councillor Hopkins, are you okay to move that? And Councillor Hillyer, you’ll second. We can do this by hand, all those in favor?

Motion carries. So to members of the public, we appreciate your patience. We’ll be back in 10 minutes to resume the rest of the agenda. Friends.

All right, colleagues, it’s 3.13. So I’m gonna ask Councillors to return to their seats so we can resume our meeting. Okay, so we’re gonna call the meeting back to order and I am going to ask Councillor Trussau as the Vice Chair of Corporate Services to present the sixth report of the Corporate Services Committee. The meeting of the Corporate Services Committee was held on March 20th.

There were no items coming out of that committee that have been pulled. Every item at that committee was not controversial and was passed unanimously. I don’t think I’m gonna take a lot of time on the committee report other than to put the entire committee on the floor and ask if any other committee members wanna add anything or if anybody has any questions. Thank you, Councillor Trussau.

I will look to colleagues to see if anyone wants anything pulled from Corporate Services. I am seeing no hands up and a shaking of heads. So I think we will open the vote on, oh, Councillor Palosa. Thank you, nothing I wanted pulled, just an opportunity to speak to 4.2 in the insurance of proclamation for GBS, realizing you hear from me every year on this.

So for those who are new, GBS is extremely rare and it’s an autoimmune disorder. When your body’s done fighting a cold, it’s your cold’s gone, but it’s still looking for something to fight. So it eats the coating off your nerve system, which will eventually shut down your respiratory system and be fatal. Potentially, it can be reoccurring.

My son had this a couple years ago when James, you know, he’s still in high school and London Health Sciences did a wonderful job in treating him so forever grateful for their staff. But even more so, the care for GBS is human plasma. So I always do a shout out to Canadian Blood Services. We have a wonderful plasma location right here in London on Warren Cliff Road in Ward 12.

And you can make a convenient appointment to go in and there’s only, I believe, three plasma locations now in Ontario to donate. So we’re extremely lucky to have one in London and just that is one that is rare in life-saving and it really is a gift of life. So thank you to donors and for our health care professionals and for colleagues for hearing us today. Thank you, Councillor Palosa, Councillor Hopkins.

Yes, thank you. And I just would like to speak to number five, 2.4, which is the 2022 annual update on budget gardens. I understand we are just receiving a report. We are not, and maybe through you two staff, just to make sure, I understand what we’re doing here today, we are not approving anything going forward renovations or anything other than just receiving the report.

Ms. Barbone. Thank you, Chair. That is absolutely correct.

This is the annual report that reports out on the progress and based on the net cash flow the city receives in annual amount. So this is our annual report that brings that forward and shows what the annual amount is that the city has received. And the report highlights that there has been discussion about an expansion for a number of years. That will be the subject of a future report and information would be brought forward for a council decision and information supporting that in the future months.

Councillor Hopkins. I’m satisfied, thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor. I have no one else on the speakers list, so I will ask the clerk to open the vote.

Councillor Brian Mirbergen, closing the vote. Motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. And I will advise council that the mayor no longer with us as he’s now in his scheduled meetings with the ministers around the Health and Homelessness Summit results.

So moving on, our next standing committee report is the sixth report of the Community and Protective Services Committee. I will call on Chair Palosa to present that report. Thank you, I’ve been given notice to pull item 10, looking to council to see if there’s any others. Are there any other items councilors wish dealt with separately?

I see none, Councilor. Thank you, so item 10’s been pulled being the infrastructure update for the Thames outdoor pool as there is a motion coming forward. In regards to items one through 12, excluding 10, I will put them all on the floor, noting that all votes were unanimous at midi. Item 4.2 is a resolution to end homelessness and dealing with work on the Ontario big city mayors and AMOs, so thank you to Councilor Hopkins and Mayor Morgan for the work on that file.

And the subsidized bus pass program, we did receive a delegate and their request is gonna be coming forward to you in the multi-year budget process via a business case. And everything else was a wonderful conversation as always. Thank you, Councilor. And I have Councilor Hopkins on the speakers list to your report, Councilor Hopkins.

Yes, if I may, I would like to thank the committee on supporting 4.2, the resolutions to end homelessness from OBCM resolutions, as well as AMO. As you know, it is a challenge within many, many municipalities in Ontario. And I wanna give my hopes and wishes for a successful meeting that the mayor is going to have with the minister right now as we talk about homelessness and healthcare and how the two are combined. But I also wanna acknowledge the provincial government and the budget coming out over a week ago, putting out some money to support homelessness in municipalities, as well as for mental health.

So again, I think sometimes it’s these little baby steps along the way, so thank you to the committee for supporting the resolutions, thank you. Thank you, Councilor Hopkins. Any other speakers to the community and protective services agenda with the exception of item 10? Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote.

Opposed in the vote, motion carries 14 to zero. Councilor Palosa. Thank you, I’m putting item 10 being 2.6, infrastructure update of the Thames outdoor pool on the floor, realizing Councilor Frank has an amendment she would like to put forward and the clerk has the wording for that. And we will go to Councilor Frank to introduce her amendment.

Thank you. Thank you, I want to start off by welcoming the folks in the gallery from Old South. As you can see, they are enthusiastic in ensuring that we are continuing on with this process. And I appreciate them showing their support for the Thames pool, as we all heard from the numerous emails over the past couple of weeks.

And as I’ve heard at my town hall that I had over the weekend, and at a meeting I had directly with the Old South community organization, the Thames pool remains top of mind for residents in Ward 11 and I’m sure across the city. If you’d like to purchase a shirt to support the pool, you can buy them at Shashua, which is a store in Wartley village. So, and check out some of the other nice stores we have in the village. The reason why I’m bringing this up is I’ve spoken with staff and they’ve informed me that it will take until July to get the results back on the scoping work, which we have in part A of the motion.

And so just to make sure that we’re not setting unrealistic deadlines for staff, I wanted to amend the June to the July. And then they added clarifying language that that will be providing an updated condition assessment to identify the scope of the repairs, as well as the associated costs to reopen the Thames pool for next summer. So just hoping to seek your support on that amendment, as well as just overall hoping you support and continue to support this recommendation as the Thames pool, again, is incredibly important for this community. And I think we need to do our due diligence and community consultation as well as looking under all the stones for any solution.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor and Councillor Palosa as the committee chairs indicated she’s seconding your amendment. So we’ll look for any discussion on that. See none.

So I’m just going to make sure that the clerks have the language in the system. And then we will get the vote open on the motion as amended. Miss was like power in her infinite wisdom has advised me. First we have to vote on the amendment and then we’ll vote on it as amended.

So we’ll open the vote on the amendment first. Wasn’t the vote motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. And now we will entertain any discussion on the main motion as amended.

And seeing none, I will ask the clerk to open the vote. Wasn’t the vote motion carries 14 to zero. Councillor Palosa. Thank you, Mr.

Acting Mayor. And that concludes the six or four of the community security services committee. Thank you. And I will now call on Councillor Raman for the Civic Works Committee.

Thank you and through you, Acting Mayor. We dealt with the, we had, sorry, the Civic Works Committee on March 21st, the fifth meeting. We discussed items that are before you, item 2.1 through 2.13. Item of discussion for the day.

We talked a lot about the Hamilton Road and Highbury Avenue intersection. And you’ll see before you the amendment that was put forward and passed at committee. Happy to take any questions from Council. So first we will see if anybody wants anything pulled to be dealt with separately.

I’m seeing none. So now we will look to Council for any questions or comments. I’m seeing none. Councillor Raman, I think you and Ms.

Chair get off with the shortest report award today. I will ask the clerk to open the vote. Thank you. Opposed in the vote.

Motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you for that concludes the report. Thank you, Councillor Raman. Moving right along to item nine added reports.

I will call on Councillor Cuddy to report out on closed session. Thank you, Acting Mayor. And through you, Council went into closed session and the report is as follows. The progress was made with respect to items four, one, four, two, four, point three as noted on the public agenda, 6.1, 12, SPPC, 6.16 PC, and 616 CSC.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Cuddy. Moving on, deferred matters, item 10, there are none. Item 11 is inquiries, not been made aware of any.

Item 12 is emergent motions. We have none, but before we go into 13, which is by-laws under emergent motions, we do have an added by-law with regard to bill 105. That is 13.8, and I am going to call on Mr. Mathers to just give us a brief update.

This was related to a communication in regard to bill 105. Mr. Mathers. Through the Acting Mayor, this was a request made by a developer to have a change made to a by-law, and we are in concurrence.

There is some a little bit more work to do, so we would recommend it being referred back to staff. Thank you for that, Mr. Mathers. So I’m just looking to see if we can have a mover and a seconder to refer that back to our staff.

Moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Cuddy. Councillor Trussa. I just wanna make sure that this is without prejudice to our timelines, and the developer has agreed to that explicitly. Mr.

Mathers. Through the Acting Mayor, yes, it is without prejudice to the timelines. It’s not gonna have any other impact. Any other questions or comments?

Seeing none, then I will ask the clerk to open the vote on the referral. Councillor Roman. Thank you. Close in the vote.

Motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you, colleagues. That moves us along to by-laws. I have had a request from Councillor van Mirbergen to vote on for 116, by-law number 116 separately.

Does anyone want anything else voted on separately in by-laws? Seeing none, then I’m gonna look for a mover and a seconder for by-laws, and this is bill number 98 through 115 inclusive. Moved by Councillor Hillyer, seconded by Councillor Layman. There’s no discussion at first reading, so we will open the vote.

Close in the vote. Motion carries 14 to zero. And looking for a mover and a seconder for second reading of bill 98 through 115 inclusive. Moved by Councillor Ferrera, seconded by Councillor McAllister.

There is discussion at second reading, if anyone wishes to have some, now is the time. Seeing none, so we will ask the clerk to open the vote. Close in the vote. Motion carries 14 to zero.

And looking for a mover and a seconder for third reading of bills 98 through 115 inclusive. Moved by Councillor Pribble, seconded by Councillor Trussow. There’s no vote on third reading, so we will ask the clerk to open the vote. Close in the vote.

Motion carries 14 to zero. Thank you colleagues. That just leaves bill 116 to be dealt with. This is the by-law to amend the rezoning at 614 West Mount Crescent.

So I will look for a mover and a seconder for by-law 116. Moved by Councillor Hopkins, seconded by Councillor Hillier. We will ask the clerk to open the vote. Close in the vote.

Motion carries 13 to one. Thank you colleagues. And we will look for a mover and a seconder for second reading of bill number 116. Moved by Councillor Frank, seconded by Councillor Cuddy.

Any discussion? Seeing none, we will ask the clerk to open the vote. Close in the vote. Motion carries 13 to one.

And looking for a mover and a seconder for third and final reading of bill number 116. Moved by Councillor ramen. Seconded by Councillor McAllister. And we will ask the clerk to open the vote.

Close in the vote. Motion carries 13 to one. Thank you colleagues. That concludes by-laws.

We have just one item left on the agenda. That’s item 14 and that’s a motion to adjourn. Moved by Councillor ramen. Seconded by Councillor Hillier.

And we can do this by hand. All those in favor. Motion carries. Thank you everyone.

Thanks for your patience. Good conversation today. Thanks as always to our fantastic staff for their hard work and their patience with us. And we look forward to seeing you again all soon.