August 15, 2023, at 12:00 PM

Original link

The meeting was called to order at 12:01 PM; it being noted that P. Van Meerbergen was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That items 2.1 to 2.8 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

2.1   8th Report of the Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee

2023-07-19 - ITCAC Report

That the 8th Report of the Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting July 19, 2023, BE RECEIVED.

2.2   By-Law Update - Vital Services By-Law (PH-6)

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Vital Services By-Law PH Update

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the By-Law Update for the Vital Services By-Law (PH-6):

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council Meeting on August 29, 2023, to amend the existing Vital Services By-law (PH-6); and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this proposed by-law amendment. (2023-C01)

2.3   Greenway and Adelaide Wastewater Treatment Plants Climate Change Resiliency Consulting Fees Value Increase

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Greenway and Adelaide WWTP Climate Change Resiliency Consuting

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Greenway and Adelaide Wastewater Treatment Plants climate change resiliency consultant fee value increase:

a)    the value of the engineering consulting fees for CIMA Canada Inc. BE INCREASED by $949,759.80, including contingency (excluding HST), due to additional scope requests and project consolidation;

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 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)

2.4   Contract Award - RFT-2023-030 Watermain Cleaning and Lining Services

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Contract Award 2023 Watermain Cleaning and Lining

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to RFT 2023-030 Watermain Cleaning and Lining Services:

a)    the bid submitted by Fer-Pal Construction Ltd. at its tendered price of $6,498,810.00 (excluding HST), for Watermain Cleaning and Lining Services, BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by Fer-Pal Construction Ltd. was the lowest of two bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements in all areas and that this is the first year of a five year contract, where the City has the sole discretion to renew the contract for four additional years based on price and performance;

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

d)    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,

e)    the Mayor and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-E08)

2.5   Consulting Engineer Appointment - 2024/2025 Infrastructure Renewal

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Consulting Engineer Appointment - 2024-25 IR

That on the recommendation of Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Consulting Engineer Appointment for the 2024/2025 Infrastructure Renewal Program:

a)    Dillon Consulting Limited BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to undertake detailed design and construction administration services for the Decommissioning of Water Chamber 13 project and detailed design for the William Street Reconstruction project, in the total amount of $413,912.40 (excluding HST), in accordance with Section 14.4(a) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

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

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

d)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract; and,

e)    the Mayor and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T04)

2.6   Amendments to the Traffic and Parking By-Law

2023-08-15 Staff Report -Traffic and Parking By-law Amendments

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to 2022 administrative amendments, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on August 29, 2023, to amend By-law PS-114, “A by-law to regulate traffic and the parking of motor vehicles in the City of London”. (2023-C01)

2.7   Contract Price Increase - Victoria Bridge - Temporary Modular Bridge

2023-08-15 - Staff Report Contract Price Increase Victoria Bridge - Temporary Modular Bridge

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Contract Price Increase for the Victoria Bridge Temporary Modular Bridge:

a)    Victoria Bridge – Temporary Modular Bridge (Tender RFT21-108) construction contract value with Algonquin Bridge, a Division of AIL International Inc. BE INCREASED by $150,000.00 to $380,390.00 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the financing for these projects 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 these projects; 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-T04)

2.8   Contract Price Increase - Churchill Avenue and Manitoba Street

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Contract Price Increase Churchill Ave and Manitoba St

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Contract Price Increase for the Churchill Avenue and Manitoba Street project:

a)    Churchill Avenue and Manitoba Street (Tender RFT21-130) construction contract value with Elgin construction Company Limited BE INCREASED by $50,000.00 to $4,316,261.95 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the financing for these projects 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 these projects; and,

d)    the Mayor and City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, if required, to give effect to these recommendations. (2023-T04)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   REQUEST FOR DELEGATION STATUS - M. Judson, Springbank Park Recreational Dam

2023-08-15 - Delegation Request

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That it BE NOTED that the delegation from M. Judson, was received and no further action be taken.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to approve Delegation Request from M. Judson to be heard at this meeting. (2023-R04)

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

4.2   Green Bin and Collection Program Changes

2023-08-15 - Staff Report - Green Bin and Collection Program Changes

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Green Bin and Collection Program Changes:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a weekly (except for Statutory Holidays) pickup system for Green Bin and Blue Box and a 26 week per year pickup system for garbage collection starting January 15, 2024, that includes a special provision to address the longer garbage collection cycle that occurs because of Statutory Holidays;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to establish an interim Waste Reduction & Conservation Calendar from October 1, 2023, to January 15, 2024, and distribute the Calendar using a combination of on-line tools and hard copies available at City facilities and other locations and not delivered door-to-door as is normally done;

c)    the Garbage Container Limit at the curb remain at three (3) containers or bags BE APPROVED, it being noted that the number of garbage pickup days has been reduced from 42 to 26 pickups;

d)    the Garbage Tag fee for use at the curb for extra bags or containers of garbage or for Bagged Residential Garbage brought to the EnviroDepots BE INCREASED from $1.50 to $2.00 as part of the upcoming Fees and Charges By-law review as part of the multi-year budget development;

e)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a separate large furniture and large bulky items collection program (limit of four items per pickup) that requires booking the pickup service in advance, with collection occurring on a regular collection day starting October 1, 2023, and includes a 3 month grace period; and,

f)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to establish a monitoring system to determine the level of household satisfaction with the Green Bin and collection program changes and report back to Civic Works Committee in July 2024 and at year end, including specific details on managing pet waste and diapers and incontinence products;

it being noted that the presentation from J. Stanford, as appended to the Added Agenda, with respect to this matter was received;

it being further noted that the communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, from M. Hulet, C. Butler and L. McColl, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-E07)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That the following motion BE APPROVED:

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated August 15, 2023, related to the Green Bin and Collection Program Changes:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a weekly (except for Statutory Holidays) pickup system for Green Bin and Blue Box and a 26 week per year pickup system for garbage collection starting January 15, 2024, that includes a special provision to address the longer garbage collection cycle that occurs because of Statutory Holidays;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to establish an interim Waste Reduction & Conservation Calendar from October 1, 2023, to January 15, 2024, and distribute the Calendar using a combination of on-line tools and hard copies available at City facilities and other locations and not delivered door-to-door as is normally done;

c)    the Garbage Container Limit at the curb remain at three (3) containers or bags BE APPROVED, it being noted that the number of garbage pickup days has been reduced from 42 to 26 pickups;

d)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a separate large furniture and large bulky items collection program (limit of four items per pickup) that requires booking the pickup service in advance with collection occurring on a regular collection day starting October 1, 2023, and includes a 3 month grace period; and,

e)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to establish a monitoring system to determine the level of household satisfaction with the Green Bin and collection program changes and report back to Civic Works Committee in July 2024 and year end, including specific details on managing pet waste and diapers and incontinence products;

it being noted that the presentation from J. Stanford, as appended to the Added Agenda, with respect to this matter was received;

it being further noted that the communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, from M. Hulet, C. Butler and L. McColl, with respect to this matter, were received.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

Motion to add the following to the clause as part d):

the Garbage Tag fee for use at the curb for extra bags or containers of garbage or for Bagged Residential Garbage brought to the EnviroDepots be increased from $1.50 to $2.00 as part of the upcoming Fees and Charges By-law review as part of the multi-year budget development BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by S. Trosow

Motion to amend part d) to include an it being noted clause that will delay the increase by 6 months.

Motion Failed (2 to 3)

4.3   9th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee

2023-08-02 - ESACAC Report

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 9th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee, from its meeting held on August 2, 2023:

a)    the Municipal Council BE ADVISED that the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee (ESACAC)

recommends the City of London adopt Option B as outlined in the staff report presented to the Community and Protective Services Committee; it being noted that Option B would allow for permitted display fireworks only to be discharged on specific days in London; it being further noted that this option would restrict use of all consumer (backyard) fireworks, restrict the sale of consumer fireworks in London, and propose an increase to current fines; 

 

b) the Municipal Council BE ADVISED that the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee recommends that the City considers the locations of permitted display fireworks to account for nearby environmental disturbance and to limit pollution from entering sensitive features such as the Thames River, and that the City aim to promote lower-impact alternatives to fireworks for at least some subsidized public events, such as outdoor concerts and light shows using drones.

it being noted that the submission on the fireworks by-law review, prepared by ESACAC, was received; and,

c)    clauses 3.1, 3.2, 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   Referred by Municipal Council on July 25th - Clause 5.1 of the 8th Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee

2023-08-15 - Clause 5.1

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare an information brochure to assist Municipal Law Enforcement Officers to explain the Council Policy on Naturalized Areas and Wildflower Meadows in response to community complaints and with respect to the Yard and Lot Maintenance By-law where applicable; 

it being noted that a verbal delegation from B. Samuels, a communication from L. Johnson and the staff report dated August 15, 2023, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-E07)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the following motion BE APPROVED: 

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare an information brochure to assist Municipal Law Enforcement Officers to explain the Council Policy on Naturalized Areas and Wildflower Meadows in response to community complaints and with respect to the Yard and Lot Maintenance By-law where applicable.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the following actions be taken in regards to the Yard and Lot Maintenance By-law:

a)    the staff report BE RECEIVED;

b)    that the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake a comprehensive review of the Yard and Maintenance By-law that encompasses the by-law provisions, definitions and related policies concerning naturalization of yards, naturalized areas and wildflower meadows, weeds, grass, and what is considered waste; the review should include:

i)    a jurisdictional scan of other municipalities to examine how other by-laws have been updated to account for naturalization.

ii)    to provide information about the enforcement of London’s by-law, including the number of exemptions given for naturalization and the procedures followed by enforcement staff to assess a yard; and,

c)    that a public participation meeting be set to allow the public to assess the by-law and any potential changes.

Motion Failed (2 to 3)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Trosow

Motion to approve the addition of the following clauses:

“that a verbal delegation from B. Samuels, and the staff report dated August 15, 2023, with respect to this matter, were received”

“it being noted that the communication, as appended to the Added Agenda from L. Johnson, with respect to this matter, was received.”

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:36 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (1 hour, 58 minutes)

Good afternoon, everyone. I’ll look to call the 12th Meeting of Civic Works Committee to order. Please check the city website for additional meeting details. Meetings can be viewed via live stream on YouTube and the city website.

The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabeck, the Haudenosaunee, the Lenapeweck, and Adewandran. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory.

I’m joined in chambers by many members of Council, as well as the members of Council that are on this committee. And we also have Councillors online as well joining us. So thanks to everyone. I know we have a lot of items today on the consent agenda.

First, we’ll start with any disclosures of pecuniary interest. Seeing none, we’ll move to item number two, which is the consent agenda. You’ll see items 2.1 through 2.8 on the agenda. I’m looking for a mover and a seconder in any discussion.

Or if there’s any items you’d like, Paul, please let us know. Councillor Callister. Can we do 2.3 the green bit separately? Do you mean for items for direction?

Yes, sorry, I’m ahead of myself. No problem, no problem. So we’re just on the consent items. Anything to pull?

No. Councillor Trossa. Are you looking to pull an item? Or right now I’m looking for a mover and a seconder if we’re not looking to pull an item?

OK, so with that all, Councillor Cuddy, were you going to thank you and Councillor McAllister as a seconder? With that, Councillor Trossa, you had a question? Go ahead. The amendments to the traffic and parking by-law 2.6.

Would the same process be used if somebody wanted to add a no-right turn up provision to an existing intersection? Mr. McCrae. Thank you, through the chair.

That sounds like a very specific request, and it’s something that staff would be pleased to assess the request and provide a response and route through the by-law amendment as appropriate. Thank you. Follow-up? I see Councillor Hilliard’s online, and I do note that yesterday at planning, you may have had some questions for CWC as well on this item, so I wanted to make sure I checked in and to see if you had anything on this item.

Councillor Hilliard, are you good for item 2.6? OK, so on the rest of the consent items, any further questions before we call the vote? OK, so with that, I will open that up for voting. Councillor Trossa.

Vote yes. Closing the vote, the motion carries 4 to 0. OK, thank you. Well, that moved along quite quickly.

We are on item 4— sorry, we have no scheduled items, so we’re moving on to items for direction. So we are now on item 4.1, which is the request for delegation status from Mr. Judson around Spring Bank recreational dam. So I would look to committee for a mover and seconder to accept the request for delegation.

So moved by Councillor Cuddy, seconded by Councillor McAllister, and we will open that for a vote. Closing the vote, the motion carries 4 to 0. Thank you. OK, so I’ll welcome Mr.

Judson to take the microphone, and please give us a moment to get that microphone working for you. OK, so Mr. Judson, you’ll have five minutes, and you will be timed for that five minutes to speak. And then from there, if the committee— if you have any questions, I’ll take those through the chair and then on to staff.

Thanks. You may begin. I apologize for a misunderstanding, but I was of the opinion that when I applied for delegation status and named others in the Thames River Group, all of us would be able to speak for five minutes, learning that I’m only permitted to speak. I have no alternative but to combine their comments into a prepared text, which I’m now going to read.

So Councillors, the Thames River Group is most appreciative of the opportunity to speak to you as members of the Civic Works Committee. May I introduce contributors to this delegation? They are Louise Tamblin, a retired administrator for a large corporation here in the city. Barry Moncrief, a former professor of Environmental Technology, Fanshawe College, retired certified environmental auditor and provincial offenses officer, Ontario Ministry of Environment, and myself, Martin Judson, a citizen of London for 48 years, who has witnessed the losses suffered by this city, in particular, the social and economic degradation of our once vibrant downtown, but most significantly, the dereliction of what was once the jewel in the crown of London, the forks of the Thames River.

We are here to implore you to effectively stop the degradation of downtown London by recommending that City Council revisit the decision to decommission the Spring Bank dam before the gates and mechanics are removed. Over the last three years, we have learned from Councillors and City staff that in essence, there were three prime reasons for not conducting repairs, the cost, the protection of the environment, especially endangered species, and to allow contaminants to flow downstream, I will now profit my opinions. The environmental issues, endangered species have not recovered well. The dam has been down since 2005.

The number of species considered endangered has in fact increased. The Thames water quality was rated D before the failure of the dam in 2005 and was rated D again in the most recent environmental assessment conducted by upper Thames River Conservation Authority, released this year to 2023. There is no evidence that the environment which was meant to be protected by the decision not to repair the dam has in fact been protected. London continues to discharge sewage, stormwater waste into the river within its boundaries.

They are the source of the contaminants. It defies logic to think that removing a small seasonal dam which operated for only five months of the year and created a seven kilogram reservoir from spring bank down to the forks could achieve these goals. Although it is true that contaminants which enter the Thames during a rainstorm, for example, toxic runoff from roads, driveways as well as household waste such as cleaning detergents on which the water treatment plants can’t process will continue to flow through spring bank park, unimpeded into our neighbors to our neighbors downstream, maintaining the illusion that the water quality has improved and now mention economic cost to citizens of London for not repairing the dam. 2008, cost to taxpayers for the rebuilt dam was 6.8 million.

2015, London settled the lawsuit launched over the failure of one of the steel gates and received 3.7 million. Cost of partial decommissioning of the dam predicted to be 360,000. Cost of repair to the dam estimated by a prominent engineering firm in the city of London, $100,000 cost of repair to the eroded banks which were once supported by high water levels is estimated in the millions. Loss of unrealized income and social benefits to the city, loss of recreational boating between the forks and the spring bank, loss of dragonboat races, canoeing, kayaking, rowing and dinner cruises.

The canoe club, once the largest in Canada, had 2,500 members, now 200. The rowing club depleted from 200 members to 60. Regatt has on the Thames sponsored by the rowing club, earned that club $40,000 a year. Loss of accessibility, what remains of recreational boating has moved to Sharon Creek and Fanshawe Lake, which requires private transportation, parking, entry fees, not to mention contamination to the environment.

Loss of opportunities to experience and connect with nature. Loss of business opportunities around the forks for restaurants and hotels, which once catered to attendees of various boat races. Research conducted by the Business Department at Fanshawe College has shown that a more appealing forks has the potential to boost businesses in the area with a gross revenue of up to $70,000 for the city per day while connecting a revitalized waterfront to Dundas Place. Accordingly, we ask you to recommend that Council reopen the debate about decommissioning the dam and reconsider the decision made in 2016 in the light of information gathered since that decision.

It may then be possible to stem the losses and enhance the beauty, the recreational opportunities, and the sustainability and ambience of the forks. Thank you. Thank you, thank you. Okay, so we’ve received the delegation.

I would be looking for a motion to receive the delegation and if there is no further action on this as well to include no further action. Councilor Cuddy? Thank you, Chair, I’d like to acknowledge that we received the letter and thank our guests for coming today, but at this time we take no action. Thank you.

Do I have a seconder for that? I’ll second. Thank you, Councilor Vamereberg and thank you. Okay, so we’re just drafting that motion and we’ll be open shortly for you.

Okay, that’s open. I’ll vote in favor. Thank you. Housing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you and I’ll thank our delegation as well for taking the time to come and speak to us today. Okay, with that, we’re on item number 4.2, which is green bins and collection program changes. I will, as you’ll note, there’s a presentation and then we’ve got some added correspondence in your package. I’ll go to Mr.

Stanford. I’m sure you’re eager to get started with some discussion on this topic and for some background, thanks. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to make sure that the presentation is on everyone’s screen, seeing a nod.

So thank you. Our report before you today includes in the package a overview presentation when I’ll just make a few highlight comments that I made over the next five minutes. There were a number of previously approved decisions that two councils have actually made on this matter. One is how the collection system was to work.

It was an item that was discussed in 2018, budget approved in 2020, and then dialogue in the community again in 2021. And that information is contained in your report today. Just recently, we’ve been before you regarding the purchase of green bin containers for the curb, as well as the kitchen container for under the sink in the home. We’ve also been before you about what will go into green bin.

We are focusing on food waste, food-soiled paper products, and a few select other items. As part of our discussion, of course, we introduced the possibility in the future of pet waste and Committee and Council has accepted that as a future consideration and we have a price should that be decided upon in the future. We’ve also had a discussion before about the notion of can liners be used within the green bin? The answer is yes, not a requirement, but should a householder wish, there are a couple choices that will be available in the marketplace.

There will of course also be some very simple solutions just such as newspaper to help absorb some of the liquid that may occur with some food materials. Recently, there was the approval of where the material would be processed right here in London at a company called Converter’s Canada. The report before you today is, I believe, really, the last piece, the component. In fact, the date of what many people have been looking forward to is when will the green bin program lunch?

We’re suggesting a launch date of January 15th, and that is 2024, about five months from now. And on the screen is basically just a bit of a roll out of what’s required to reach that date. Of course, the green bin container delivery will take a two month period starting in mid-October. Education promotion materials will be included in that green bin delivery.

Every household receives this door to door, so all information associated with the green bin and the new program changes will be delivered door to door. The report today has a number of items for your decision and also highlighting some of the changes just for reference. A couple key ones of note, of course, is the whole notion of what the collection system looks like. We’ve suggested when it should start January 15th, 2024, but the changes that will occur.

Green bin will be predominantly on a weekly basis. The only time that changes is a statutory holiday. Blue box moves to a weekly basis as well. That’s about 20% more frequent pickup of blue box items.

Garbage collection is reduced from 42 pickups down to 26, so that’s about a 40% reduction. But at the bottom of the slide, what you see, and it’s also presented in a report, when we look at the number of containers or pickups at the curb, currently we have 42 times per year for a garbage and three containers per pickup. So essentially 126, plus is the exemption period. So we say 126 plus.

As we sort of come up with a new system, the number of ultimate lifts at the curb remains really unchanged. We have fewer garbage pickups. The ones that are lost are actually now replaced by the weekly green bin. So in fact, we are having really about the same number of pickups, plus the before container exemption weeks as well.

We are suggesting a three container limit, which we currently have right now. Because of the food going into the green bin, can be maintained at three, even under less collection. In your package, we’ve actually laid out how the collection program would work, and how it actually shifts after a statutory holiday. All communities that we examined have some shift in their calendar.

Sometimes they shift the Friday collection to a Saturday when there’s a statutory holiday, which actually requires a shifting of all zones. So what we’re suggesting here for London is that we actually just shift permanently one day forward after a collection. And you see that on the screen right now. This is essentially the month of February for next year.

And D refers to D zone. We currently have six zones in London for collection. We will be going down to five zones, A through E. Zone F will be redistributed amongst all the other zones.

There will be time under the current system where garbage pickup would be because of this shift would not occur for 17 days. We know that is much longer than the biweekly perspective. So a way to handle that is actually to slide in during those statutory holiday weeks, or just thereafter, an extra garbage pickup just for those 500 homes that would not have had service. So that is a way to make sure we’re always 14 days or less.

Essentially, people are going to be asked to hold on to their garbage for four to six extra days compared to the current system. As we move through the report, we have a recommendation dealing with the current bag tag or drop off of garbage at our Enviro depots. It is currently $1.50. It has been that way now since 2012.

We are suggesting that number could move up to $2. Still on the lower end of our comparative municipalities. Pet waste diapers and incontinence products. We’ve looked quite thoroughly at what other communities are doing that is outlined through various appendices to your current report, what other communities are doing, and sort of a sense of what has been done and what has not been done in communities.

I’ve actually been doing some of these programs for much more than five years and some over 10 years. So we’re suggesting now that based on the current cycle, these particular items, pet waste diapers and incontinence products, which have been items that have been brought to our attention, of course, during conversations. These are items that we believe, based on experience in other communities, can be handled within the garbage stream. Should someone have to get rid of something in between a cycle, our Enviro depots are open all year round with winter hours occurring from mid-December to mid-March.

We’re open only two days a week in those months. But it is also the cooler months or the colder months, which does make it easier to hang onto garbage for that longer cycle. With respect to large furniture and large bulky items. Now, I will get to what a small item is, a small item would be a kitchen chair.

That can easily fit inside our new split compartment vehicles. When I say a split compartment, the back end has a size that is about 40% for green bin and 60% for garbage. What it cannot handle are the large bulky items. So examining other cities, there are a couple of solutions that can be put in place.

What we are recommending is a booking system, quite a simple one and a four large item limit per pickup, the interim calendar. Because we’re targeting January 15th, 2024, our current calendar expires September 30th. So we need an interim calendar. It’ll be one that is very, very similar to what we have today.

It’ll just contain the schedule and the very pertinent instructions under the exact same system. So everything in the calendar in the way of information remains valid. It is the new information in the way of collection dates under the current schedule for essentially a four-month period. We’ve identified to save some funds.

We believe a distribution system using on-site access through downloads, through the city’s website, along with what’s a very popular recycle coach application, as well as hard copies being available at city facilities. We’ll be approaching our public library who have assisted us in the past with distribution. That would be a very appropriate way for us to get calendars out for those that do wish the hard copy. And for those situations where someone just cannot get any of those locations, like we do now, we do pop a copy into the mail.

So there’s a number of ways to get that calendar out. It’ll be a very, very short and thin calendar compared to the one that will come with the green bin. The one with the green bin will be very elaborate, contain all the new instructions, and the full program for 2024. And just as a reminder, that would be delivered door to door.

As far as reporting back on all of this, we’re suggesting a report at the end of 2024. As you see on the slide, or sooner if needed, if things are going in the wrong direction, it is very easy for us to produce a report sooner than what we’re recommending in at the end of 2024. One of the key reasons for going to that length of time was just to make sure that we capture the warm summer months and the experience where we know we’ll get a different feel and reaction from residents. Last item in the report as well, just talks a little bit about the multi-residential pilot projects that will be up and running later this fall.

We just have some fine-tuning to go through. We’ll be selecting upwards of 10 buildings across London, a variety of different sizes to really learn and help work with groups like the London Property Management Association, as well as their non-members on the programs that need to be in place by 2025 according to provincial framework and policy. And the last slide is just a few pictures of what the differences that occur when you work in sort of a multi-residential environment. You’re working with a combination of roll-out carts.

You see in the top right-hand corner, or a traditional four-yard or seven-yard bin that’s picked up by a front-end loading truck. And then you see a picture of the green bin, a larger cart that will be made available to the pilot project households, along with the kitchen container as well. And Madam Chair, that’s the end of my presentation. Thank you.

I’ll look to committee members first for questions and then to visiting counselors, Councilor Chaso. Well, I’m so happy we’re finally at the almost the end point here of getting this started. So congratulations for all of your work. I’m not going to ask this Council to revisit, excuse me.

I’m gonna ask this Council to revisit some of the big questions. I think we have a framework that we can work with. I did have a very nice conversation with Mr. Stanford about some of the smaller issues.

And I’d like to just sort of revisit some of those. I see that we already have a motion to change late 2024 to summer. We discussed that and I would support that. I think that’s something that we should change.

I think we’re gonna wanna be looking at this quicker. But the other question I have is, well, it’s a statement really. If we’re gonna be limiting the pickups, I don’t think that’s a good time to be raising the fee for the bag. So I would also like to propose that we defer the increase from $1.50 to $2.

I spoke to you about that and I hope that that can be incorporated into a motion, a slight amendment very seriously. Maybe come back and look at that when we do the review. Let’s not hit the residence with that right away. My bigger question though is the rollout.

Rollout is sort of a good way to talk about this. The rollout of the program. And there have traditionally been bigger problems in the near campus neighborhood in terms of people really understanding what they’re supposed to be doing. And I’m a little concerned about not having the full door-to-door distribution.

Now, I’m hesitant to ask for a special door-to-door distribution in the near campus neighborhood because other areas of the city may want that too. So I wanna know what would be available to a ward counselor to try to help get the word around here. Maybe some additional resources that could be published. I know I would be very happy to go around some of my neighborhoods and I imagine other counselors might too.

But just leaving this the way it is without further assurance about how we’re gonna deal with some of the potentially problem areas which should be good. So that’s, do you wanna answer that? And then I’ll come back to my other questions. Thank you, Mr.

Stanford. Through the chair. Based on our experience with the delivery of the current calendar, we’re well aware of certain areas in the city quite often associated with either the University or the college where we’ve had challenges getting information out. Fortunately, over the last couple of years, we’ve worked very closely with the housing mediation services.

And we’ve been in contact with them as well about them assisting us to get information door-to-door in those particular areas. That will be occurring and we’re just waiting for some final details on how that will work. We’re also aware that there’s kind of a number of complexes out there where just our past experience has been that a door-to-door delivery would be required. Some minor adjustments like that are well within what we have planned right now.

So we can easily accommodate that and have planned to do that anyways. We can also make sure that should counselors or the counselor’s office wish to have extra copies of the interim calendar for distribution to any of its members, constituents. That can also be undertaken as well. So we believe many opportunities.

We also, if I may just one other comment, we’ve watched the movement in a couple other municipalities that have actually gone online completely for their full-scale waste collection calendar. And it appears to be quite successful. It’s a matter of also just having the ability for those that don’t have easy access to computers to have a separate solution as well too. So I think this will actually be a very, very good step for us to test in the future what it might look like.

Nording once again, everything for the green bin will be delivered door-to-door. Okay, well, thank you. Follow up, Counselor? Yes, through the chair, assuring me that I will be able to get additional calendars and leaflets without having to publish them myself helps me a lot in terms of what I’m worried about.

You know, this is gonna cut down on eventual by-law complaints. I think the better we do in terms of letting people know what the requirements are, the less trouble we’re gonna have later on, are mattresses large or small? To staff? Through the chair, most mattresses would be considered large.

Part of our promotion material and education will actually have a size element associated with that because there are some very tiny mattresses that would be accepted. One of the reasons why I’m through the chair, one of the reasons why I’m interested in mattresses is given the concern about bugs, which we have, especially in some of the rental units, particularly in some of the rental units, I’ll leave it there. But I think encouraging people to get new mattresses and put them out on the street is a good approach. And I’m concerned about some of the things that I’ve heard about from some of the landlords recently about telling tenants that they cannot put mattresses out.

Has there been an issue with that in your view? Okay, so Councillor, I understand your question, but I do think we’re leaning into a different conversation. So I’ll go to staff to address it as it relates to the large items, but not further than that, thanks. Through the chair, large items where there may be a problem with the mattress, essentially they have to be packaged up in plastic before they’ll be picked up.

So that information exchange occurs with either the tenant or with the property owner. I think I’m almost done further through the chair. I raised that because I’ve had complaints about London Middlesex Housing Corporation telling tenants that they’re changing their policy and they can’t put mattresses out, which seems like a really bad idea. But I’ll address that separately.

I think my biggest concern is the cost going from 150 to two. I’d like to add that to the amendment, just keeping it at 150 for a year. And also the assurance that you’ve given me, I don’t think regarding additional material, I don’t think requires an amendment. So with that, I’m happy to second Councillor McAllister’s amendment if he would consider the keeping it at $1.50 as a friendly amendment.

Okay, we haven’t started to deal with the motion yet, but thank you for keeping us on track, I appreciate that. Okay, so I will go to Councillor McAllister and then I think that then deals with everyone from the committee that wanted to speak. And then I’ll move to Councillor Hopkins and Councillor Lewis. Chair, if I could speak after we deal with the amendment.

Sure, okay, so I will go to Councillor McAllister first and then we’ll go from there. Thank you and through the chair. Apologies for jumping and getting early on this. I know it’s a very popular topic.

And I just wanna again thank staff for all the work on this. A lot of inquiries in terms of the rollout of this program. And yes, my amendment was for section F and it was to include a report back in July of 24 and a year end report. And this stems from just regular change management in terms of folks wanting to know how the program is rolling out just to get feedback from the public.

I know this is going to be a big change for a lot of Londoners. One of the benefits though of seeing other municipalities roll this out first is that we’ve seen a lot of the issues. And I think in this Folsom report you’ve addressed a lot of those concerns. But like with any program, I’m sure we’re going to receive feedback.

I’m particularly interested in terms of whether the public can find the information, whether they’re aware and just ensuring that we have that good feedback loop for rolling out these changes. So with that, I would like to amend F. I think that could be a separate amendment. I know Councillor Tresshoa had indicated that he wanted to, I believe, amend D.

I think that is a separate one. Okay, so we have in front of us the original recommendation. So are you putting forth to move the recommendation that’s there with a change in language for item F to include your six month report? Yes, that’s correct.

Okay, so I’ve got a motion from Councillor McAllister to move the original and include a change in the language for F. And then I’d look for a seconder and then you’d include your amendment, Councillor Tresshoa, is that Councillor McAllister? I’m happy to include both as one. We can vote on them individually if we need to, but I’m happy to do DN as friendly amendments.

Okay, thank you. So I just need a seconder, seconder. Okay, Councillor Tresshoa, second. Okay, and I did have Councillor van Mirberg in next on the speaker’s list.

And then I’ll go to Councillor Cuddy. Okay, well, thank you, Chair. I’m just not sure a procedure. Yes, I’m in favor of the amendment as proposed.

Can I also speak to the main motion? Yes, we put it all into one main motion. So there aren’t amendments. Okay, fair enough.

Okay, so Mike, thank you, Chair, and through you, I’d like to ask Mr. Stanford, in the interest of clear communication with constituents, it’s my understanding that the current exemption system that we have will apply to the new green bin system. So in other words, there’ll be unlimited pickup for garbage. I believe it’s four times a year.

Is that system the same? Thank you, Mr. Stanford. Through the chair, that is correct.

That’s what we’re recommending for the first year of the program. Okay, thanks for that. Yes, please, thank you. And my next question is if we decide that we want to include, ‘cause I heard from a number of constituents who are very concerned about the whole diaper issue and hanging onto them for two weeks or so, and that’s just too long in many opinions, if we decide to go ahead and include diapers and pet waste, how quickly can we modify the green bin system to change to that?

Thank you, Mr. Stanford. Through the chair, if I may, there’s actually, I’m gonna tackle both items there. Council has endorsed a price, should Council wish to go forward with pet waste in the future.

We have that program price from our contractor. That initiative, probably with an education program focused on that could probably be done within, let’s say a two to four month period. Diapers is quite a different item to be included in the green bin, because that is an item that Council indicated not to include in the green bin program. So we do not have a price for diapers to be included as part of the green bin program.

And at this point in time, there are only two communities in Ontario that I’m aware of that include diapers in the green bin program. So that I think would be quite a different undertaking. Follow up? Okay, my last question then is, would it be possible to at least get a price if we were to go with diapers in the interim period leading up to the first report?

Which I think at this stage is proposed for July. We have perhaps that number for diapers included in that report in July. Thank you. Okay, so in item E of the motion, it includes the pet waste diapers and incontinence products.

As we’ve just heard from staff or from Mr. Stanford, we don’t have a cost for the diapers. We have it for pet waste, less understanding. Thank you, so you wanna add the word cost in there?

Well, it doesn’t have to be in the motion. I’m just asking if staff could have a number for us when the report comes back in July. To staff, go ahead. Thank you and through the chair.

That would be a part of our regular reporting as well. We can provide more information on how diapers have been handled in those communities with special programs as well as the cost associated with that too. So we’re happy to dive deeper in that and report back. I believe in the new, in the amendment would be, I think in June, 2024.

Okay, perfect, that’s great. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, okay. Any other, oh, I have Councillor Cudi up next.

Nope, okay, Councillor McAllister, you’re looking to speak to your motion. Okay, go ahead. Yes, thank you and through you. Two Councillor Truso’s amendment, yes, and D.

I just have questions in terms of how this will impact the multi-year budget, ‘cause I know, obviously, going into 2024, if we did push that a year, ‘cause this will be implemented in January of ‘24. So what would the impacts be in terms of moving this to 2025? Through the chair, based on our experience, when fees go up, there typically is a reaction in the community and less is used. So as part of our budgeting for 2024, we felt that actually we would see a reduction in the number of bags because people will be starting to use the green bin and the higher frequency of service, and any increase would probably be balanced out.

So we have not included in our preliminary estimating for 2024, we’ve considered it actually would be neutral. So now if it stays at $1.50, there may be some loss in revenue associated with the bag tag because of the changes that occur. We’ve always viewed the bag tag as a fee to help with a lender to get over a hurdle, a longer cycle, but at the same time to really encourage change and to further reduce waste. So for 2024, it would be, in our opinion, basically, right now the $2 would be revenue neutral.

Thank you. And so the way that the motion would read is that part D wouldn’t be there because it was to approve the increase. Okay, so we’re putting that up the screen so you can see the language as well. So you can refresh and take a look.

Okay, so I have Councillor Hopkins next, and then Councillor Lewis. Thank you, Madam Chair, for recognizing me here at your committee, and I wanna give my thanks to Mr. Sanford and your team for finally getting us to this point, I’ve been around a long time and it’s been a long time coming. So thank you for all your work and advocacy and dedication to making this happen.

Just to have a couple of questions, more or less following up on Councillor Trussell’s question around the rollout and how we move forward. I know the new interim calendar is going to assist and support the community in maybe taking us through a bit of a change. And I do think that with change always, I always underestimate the challenges with any kind of change. And this is gonna be a significant change and I’m looking at, as a Councillor, how I can assist in giving the information.

So with the new interim calendar, will it be online and will that be accessible? And you had mentioned getting more copies and will there also be information about the new calendar? So it’s really, how do we educate? How do we pass on information?

Reduce our emails that I know we will be getting where we can find things and assisting the residents. But I really wanna know how we can do a better job sort of dealing with the, most likely the complaints and the changes that are about to happen in the community and how we can assist. Mr. Stanford.

Through the chair, the interim calendar will include a space that talks about the upcoming green bin program. The interim calendar really will be an extension of the current calendar. With a little bit of information on the green bin coming and why there’s been this interim calendar, I think that will trigger comments, as such as that you’ve just suggested. That will of course time very nicely with the stuff where we launch on our website as well.

Our goal is to not inundate people right out of the get go. So it will come in with waves of information. The biggest wave will be when we start delivering door to door. It will take two months, meaning person on Elm Street, for example, could get their bin October 15th.

They will have the full information of what the green bin program looks like. And at that point, they might even be quite anxious and even wanna start using it. So these are all the things we need to anticipate and we’re gonna be using as much information online. But at the same time, there are other opportunities that will just have to be capitalized on.

There will have to be stuff in print media. There’ll have to be a little bit of stuff on radio as well. ‘Cause everyone gets their information differently. So that is all part of our rollout.

So it’ll be, I think so many people are waiting for this to come forward, that the conversations will stir in additional conversations and will be very, be able to be very reactive. Fortunately with our communication staff, we’re able to get material online very, very quickly within an hour should something be out there that’s different. During the rollout, the two month period, we anticipate there’ll be opportunities for lots of good discussion. It will be the largest change that London has experienced since 1996 with respect to waste collection.

Hello, Councillor? Yes, and just as a follow up. So will the interim calendar be online and will there be a contact number that we could pass on to residents if they’ve got further questions with the rollout? Go ahead.

Through the chair, yes, we’ll be working very closely with Service London and we know that there’ll be need for increased staff in that area at that period of time for about a six month period. So that is part of our planning and implementation schedule as well. And just following up then with, I was interested about the zones you were saying that we’re going from six zones to five zones. What is the reason for that through the chair to staff?

The reduction in zones is required to get it down to a really essentially a weekly program, five days, where the only change occurs after a statutory holiday. If there were six zones, of course, we’d still be on the regular calendar cycle right now, something that has been in place as we’ve talked about for quite some time. So down to five zones, we’re actually essentially stepping back in time. We’re stepping back to where we were in 1995.

There was five zones in the city at that point in time. Yes, and through the chair again, just to follow up. As we go into the new program next year, are there, is there going to be flexibility as we ease into that program for residents and I can just see we may or may not get the calls while my garbage wasn’t picked up or I forgot or I didn’t know, how are we going to ease into that program? Are there checks and balances or will it just be complaint driven that we can pass on to service London?

Mr. Stanford. Through the chair, functioning with five months to go, we’re able to actually really anticipate that change comes with difficulty, no doubt about it. So we can anticipate the need for more and more information and more and more availability.

To be quite honest, we’re hoping that that becomes our only priority for about a three month period and we’re hoping that there aren’t other items on our plate because we’re going to be shifting a lot of our internal resources over to this one particular program, which is really multi-programmed and is once again to mention a very large change that impacts just about all of our services. So it’ll be all about the customer for the months of January, February and March. And through you, Madam Chair, thank you for everything. Thank you, I’ll go to Deputy Mayor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I’m going to start by saying I’m also very happy to see we finally have a start date for this. If I could sing, I might break into a chorus of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah, but I will happily take the date and not torture you with my singing voice. The first thing Madam Chair is, I think that this staggering of the dates after a statutory holiday, I actually really like this idea.

It makes a lot of sense. It also, I do see the potential for some confusion as well. If people think that their collection is going to be on the same day, all calendar year, and then the stat comes and it moves from Monday to Tuesday and then from Tuesday to Wednesday. So I’m really appreciative of Councilor Trussow making the point that some educational materials that Councilors can distribute in their ward will be very helpful because I think we’re going to not just your resources, but I think Councilors are going to have to devote some of our resources to educating our constituents on this as well.

So I just wanted to share those thoughts first. Now, Madam Chair, through you, I’m going to raise a procedural question around how the motion has been presented because by simply removing the former clause D, you’re actually not allowing Councilors to vote separately on whether or not they support the fee increase. I’m raising this because while I appreciate Councilor Trussow’s concerns that an increase of the fee is piling one other layer onto this, we have a budget that is coming very soon and we’ve heard that the fee increases projected to be revenue neutral. I make no bones about it.

The budget that is coming is very, very tough. And when we have people who are utilizing bag tags to deliver garbage to an Enviro Depot, that is because they’re through, for whatever reason, their home is not able to meet the three bag limit. It is a fee for service sort of user fee. I actually would like to see it even higher than $2.

I think we are under shooting the target range considering what other municipalities charge, but I’m satisfied with $2 as a starting point. However, if we have simply removed that, what Councilors could do by leaving it in is that they can call it separately and vote against it. And if it’s defeated, then it’s defeated. But by simply removing it, you’ve removed the item from the conversation.

I appreciate the Councilor Trussow and I may not agree on this, but I think that the item should be there for a vote and people can decide whether they want to keep it at two or go back to the 150. So through you, Madam Chair, just as a procedural matter, I’m actually suggesting that Dean needs to be in there so that colleagues can then call it separately, vote how they see fit, and then deal with it appropriately that way. Thank you. I’m comfortable with that.

I’ll go to Ms. Westlake Power for a comment. Thank you through the chair. The motion that is before the committee at this point in time is not out of order.

While the information raised by Councilor Lewis is procedurally correct, what is before you at the present time is not incorrect. So it’s up to this committee, whether or not they want to, at this point, it would require an amendment to add D to the existing motion. Alternatively, if the committee chooses to leave the current motion as it is, D could be introduced as an amendment at Council. Thank you.

Okay, I’ll go back to Deputy Mayor Lewis, but just a reminder, I’m in the committee’s hands if they’d like to address this in any other way. Go ahead. Yeah, so not to get into a deep procedural debate with the clerk. However, what Removing D does is it fails to record if there is a divided vote on the matter.

And so you get a recommendation that goes forward to Council without any record of there being a divided vote, whereas if you leave it in and call it separately, then that information is shared with Council as well. Thank you. So would someone like to put forward an amendment to put that back on the floor? Okay, I’ve Councillor McAllister and Councillor Trosto to include item D.

Councillor Trosto? I just wanted to say, I appreciate that it should be called separately. It is an item that there’s some disagreement on minor, but it could be called separately. So I made a suggestion for a friendly amendment.

It was accepted, and then the clerk changed that. I’m wondering if there’s just some simple way without getting bogged down in procedural issues to just sort of call it separately, and that way the Council will know. And if it goes back to $2, it goes back to $2. And if it comes down to one stays at 150, it stays at 150.

Give a second. Councillor McAllister? Thank you and through you. I think there is a bit of confusion too, because I was only in the impression that Councillor was requesting a delay in the fee increase, not a removal.

So that’s my issue is that I don’t want it completely gone. Okay, thank you. So we’re looking to put that back in. So we’ll work on that right now.

Okay, so what we have crafted here is the original part D back in as a separate vote that we would deal with for a separate matter. But it is as it was originally written. Councillor Trostle. If it helps, how about if we leave D in?

And then it says at the end of the D, it being noted that the imposition of the 50 cent increase shall be delayed deferred for period certain of six months. And that way that’s still in there. There’s an amendment and people can pull that separately. The other thing is it deals with the question of whether it interferes with the four year budget, because it’s just a temporary stay of the increase.

Sorry, just following up the clerk here on the next step. So we would be first voting on this amendment to decide to put it back into the main motion and then to deal with it separately. And then you would be looking to then amend that further to include the opinion being noted. Okay, so I suggest we deal with D first and the vote on that, and then we go from there.

So, Councillor McAllister. This is to add D back into the motion, correct? That’s correct, yes. So that is open in E-Scribe for you.

Chair, I vote no. Thank you. Sir Trasso. What am I voting on now?

You’re voting to item D back into the motion. Yes. Losing the vote, the motion carries four to one. Okay, so now we’re back to the main motion.

We’ve debated this motion. We’ve had some conversation about a further amendment. So I’ll look to you committee to see if there’s anything else that’s required. Madam Chair, I’d just like to clarify.

With regard to D, is it, if being noted included in that, that this will be delayed? As of right now, it hasn’t been, but if somebody would like to move it, they can. Okay, so right now it’s just going ahead to a $2 increase right away. I would move a motion to delayed by six months, but an if being noted clause, part D.

Okay, thank you, Councillor. Let me just confer that that language is correct for what we’re looking to do, and then I’ll look for a seconder, okay? Fine, thanks. So we’re looking at an amendment to the main motion, for part D, to include that it being noted, not for six months?

Yeah, the increase be delayed for six months, yes, correct? Yes, and so I’ve got Councillor Troso as a seconder for that. Okay, so you’ll see the language refreshed in E-Scribe for you. It reads that part D be amended to read, okay, so that part D be amended to include it being noted that a delay of the increase by six months.

Councillor McAllister? Just through you and speaking on the amendment as it stands, I didn’t previously have the information in terms of what Mr. Stanford had put forward in terms of it being a revenue neutral increase. And personally, I just think if this is a huge change for Londoners, and if we’re going to do the increase, it’s revenue neutral, I say we just do the 50 cents at the get go and just leave you a confusion, ‘cause there’s gonna be a lot of confusion with the program as is, and personally, I just think that’s adding an extra layer, and if we’re trying to change behavior, I think that was the time to do it.

Thank you, do I have any other speakers on the amendment? Councillor McAllister, if you take the chair? If you’re not saying I have the chair, go ahead, Councillor Rama. Thank you so much.

Well, thank you to committee for the debate on this topic, and with regard to this amendment, I am personally in favor of seeing the increase through at $2, and the reason for that is, again, as you spoke to as Councillor McAllister just mentioned, that we are trying to change behavior, and I do believe that the educational component of this is key. I do believe that we have an opportunity to go out to the public with some clear messaging at the beginning, and that fee increase, if we’re going to do it, whether it’s six months from now or later, that fee increase piece is really important too, or what the fee is to get out front of and be consistent with, so I’m not going to support the it being noted amendment. Any further speakers on the amendment before we call the vote? I recognize the amendment pass, and the chair back to you, Councillor Rama.

Thank you for doing that. Okay, with that, we’re calling the vote on the amendment of the it being noted clause. I’ll vote yes. Councillor Trosto.

Councillor Trosto. Closing the vote, the motion failed two to three. Okay, so we are back to the main motion now, and we’ve debated the main motion a bit. Is there any further comment or discussion on the main motion?

Okay, so we are looking at the main motion and all items under the main motion open for voting. Vote yes. And the motion carries five to zero. Thank you, and I wanted to say thank you to staff, thank you to Mr.

Stanford and your team for the work that you’ve done, and it’s so exciting that our community now has a date to work from. I know that I joined the rest of the committee and council in saying thank you for the efforts that you’ve put forward, and that we support your desire to move forward and educate the community on how to do this right in our community, so thank you for that. Okay, with that, we will look to item 4.3, which is the ninth report of the environment stewardship and action community advisory committee, which is under items for direction. We’re just gonna put that up on the screen so everyone can see it.

Okay, so that should be open for you, and it has the municipal council be advised that east of Keck recommend the city of London adopt option B as outlined in the staff report presented to CAPS if being noted that item B would allow for permitted display fireworks only to discharge on specific days in London. It being further noted that this option would restrict use of all consumer backyard fireworks, restrict the sale of consumer fireworks in London and propose an increase to current fines. B, the municipal council be advised that the committee environmental stewardship and action community advisory committee recommends that the city consider the location of permitted display fireworks to account for nearby environmental disturbance and to limit pollution from entering sensitive features such as the Thames River and that the city aim to promote lower impact alternatives to fireworks for at least some subsidized public events such as outdoor concerts and light shows using drones. It being noted that the submission on the fireworks bylaw review prepared by East Keck was received and clause 3.13.2, 5.1, 5.3 and 5.4 be received.

So you’ll see that in front of you. It’s be advised of the committee’s recommendation or the committee’s thoughts on those two items. And so we would look for a mover and a seconder on those. Okay, I’ve got Councillor Cuddy and Councillor McAllister.

Welcome. Oh, yes? I was gonna vote the motion carries five to zero. Okay, thank you.

We are on to item 5.1 and I’d like to thank Mr. Samuels for his patience as we’ve worked through the rest of our agenda. So item 5.1 was a deferred matter that was from our last meeting. And it references the July 25th clause 5.1 of the eighth report of the environmental stewardship and action community advisory committee.

You’ll see in your package the staff report, not sure if staff is looking to speak to that in advance of hearing a delegation. Mr. Councillor, through the chair, I can give a summary. Staff’s position is that the bylaw is well balanced in recognizing natural areas, permitting natural areas and wildflower meadows on private property while also addressing public nuisances in response to complaints and in response to proactive enforcement actions in specific areas of the city.

At the last council meeting, the natural garden policy was approved and that is the policy that we will continue to follow. And I just like to state on a yearly basis, this bylaw is one of the busiest bylaws that we deal with. Year to date, we are currently addressing 2,400 complaints with respect to this bylaw. And the issue of natural areas is very, very low in terms of complaints with respect to the entire bylaw.

Thank you. Thank you. So we have a delegation request from Mr. Samuels regarding this bylaw.

And so I’d like to open, look for a mover and seconder to receive the delegation. So I have Councillor McAllister, Councillor Trosto to receive that delegation. We’ll open that up for vote. Opposing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you, Mr. Samuels. I will welcome you to the microphone and as always welcome to the committee. And you have five minutes.

Through the chair, thank you for granting me this opportunity to speak today. I wanna begin by acknowledging this discussion about the bylaw is also about conserving biodiversity and restoring parts of the indigenous landscape on private land during a human-caused mass extinction event. London is within the Carolinian life zone, a region with the greatest species diversity found anywhere in Canada. Our advisory committee began looking at this bylaw in response to community concerns about disputes that attracted the attention of local media where pollinator gardens were deemed in contravention of the bylaw and destroyed.

This led to negative publicity for the city with potential consequences for meeting its other objectives. Many Londoners are fearful of bylaw enforcement and discouraged by the risk of neighbors calling the city to complain about their naturalized yard. Most land owners do not understand this bylaw, complainants do not understand it, and bylaw enforcement staff do not seem to consistently act according to the stated purposes of the bylaw. There are ways that the bylaw and its enforcement could be adjusted to improve how the city deploys its limited resources.

However, it is not enough to just create a pamphlet. Communications will only help if the bylaw is made to align with the city’s objectives and is confirmed to be legally sound. The recent amendment discussed in the staff report does not address our concerns. I understand that the city receives thousands of complaints related to yards and property standards.

Bylaw enforcement is an expensive part of running a city and limited resources are stretched thin. To be clear, I agree this bylaw must continue to be enforced in cases where yards pose demonstrable risks to human safety, health, the environment, and adjacent lands. For example, I support the need to maintain buffers for lines of sight, but I don’t believe lines of sight conflicts are being characterized correctly. Do all plants that grow above eight inches in height pose a line of sight conflict?

Current enforcement and language in the bylaw suggests yes. Does the mandatory cleared buffer extend around the entire property, including the front yard and the backyard, or is it just for roadways and adjacent driveways? When the bylaw order says cut all grass and weeds to below eight inches, what does that mean? The report states concerns about vermin, and as a wildlife biologist, let me say that naturalization does not necessarily produce a vermin.

My impression is that most complaints and the responses to them are information poor. The complainant is not required to identify specific issues with the yard and their impacts, and the enforcement officer is not providing direction that specifically remedies these issues. This is leading to enforcement orders that are literally overkill. In effect, we want to decrease the number of complaints against yards solely about aesthetics issues.

We want the community to understand how to comply. When it is appropriate and not appropriate to be filing complaints about yards, we want to ensure that enforcement staff are basing dispute decisions on evidence, and that orders responding to complaints are proportional to the needs of the situation. We want to empower more Londoners to use private land for naturalization and restoring ecosystems, planting trees and pollinator gardens for growing food and improving resilience of the landscape under climate change. We want the bylaw to be enforced consistently across the city, regardless of whether naturalized yards occur in high income or low income neighborhoods, especially where natural cover is lacking.

Our advisory committee is asking you to consider the risk of the city being challenged in court on account of the bylaws language being too vague to be reproduced in enforcement, or running afoul of the charter of rights and freedoms, section two guarantee a freedom of expression, which the Ontario Divisional Court has ruled includes yards. This type of legal conflict has arisen in other municipalities. For instance, referring to the staff report, what is considered a maintained natural yard? This is subjective and it is not legally defined.

Naturalization is a process that can take several years and looks different everywhere. It can be messy and does not necessarily produce pretty flowers all year. The city’s bylaw references weeds and grass, but these are broad categories of things that include many species. A list of specific noxious weed species are provincially restricted under the weed control act, yet in London, the bylaw officers are apparently free to consider anything to be a weed.

Under the current bylaw, if people want to naturalize their yard, they’re required to seek an exemption. In contrast, if their neighbor has a monoculture turf lawn, that is considered legal compliance by default and no exemption is required. I question whether this approach to enforcement is accessible or sustainable. In order for a naturalized yard to be considered legal, its owner would need to read the bylaw and its policies and grasp their nuances well enough to request an exemption.

Even if they read the bylaw, it’s likely they will face difficult understanding. I think you will find the vast majority of naturalized yards do not have an exemption. In closing, I do not have all the answers about this bylaw. I believe we need to have a community conversation about this, such as through a public participation meeting, and I would encourage us to look to other municipalities so as to not need to reinvent the wheel.

Thank you. Thank you. At this time, I will hand the chair over to Councillor McAllister. Recognizing the chair, go ahead, Councillor ramen, and then I have Councillor Trusso next on the list.

Thank you. And I appreciate the opportunity here from the delegation today. If Mr. Samuels, you by far have the most experience and knowledge on this topic.

And so I appreciate hearing from you as well as the submission from that was received from another individual. I have prepared a motion that I have submitted and that motion requests additional education for the public on this matter. From what I read in your submission, I read a lot of this has an educational component to it. So personally, I’d like to see us move forward with an educational component, provide more opportunities for compliance through providing some more clarity through our education.

I think that there’s an opportunity for the committee to provide more input based on that educational component as well so that we can try that approach to see if that helps to address and encourage more pollinator and naturalized gardens and areas. And then from there see if we’ve addressed some of the concerns through that. So that’s why I’m proposing the motion and I’ll go back to Councillor McAllister to look for a seconder. Councillor Trusso, did you want a second?

No. Okay. I’m willing to second that. - I will second chair.

Yeah, okay. We’ve got a few seconders. I’ll go with Councillor Van Rigenberg. We’ll second that.

And noting that Councillor Trusso, Councillor Cutty, do you want to speak as well? No, I was going to say. Okay, I’m going to pass the chair back to you. No, I’m going to hold on to it in the chair then.

And Councillor Trusso, you’re next. I too submitted an alternative motion. I don’t think the staff report is at all adequate for not only the reasons that Mr. Samuel set out, but also the very thoughtful letter from the expert, Elle Johnson.

I don’t think this by-law is at all reasonable. And I think it’s susceptible to challenge it. I’m not proposing any textual amendments to the by-law right now. I think we really need to look at this.

And what I’m proposing, do you have my amendment up on the screen that I submitted? Which includes, by the way, Councillor Ramen’s suggested for a brochure. Like my time is running while I’m waiting. Could you stop it?

Thank you. And just procedurally, sorry, are you looking to have a combined motion with Councillor Ramen’s or is this a separate motion? Yes, good question. My motion includes her motion.

It includes a couple of other things that I think are very important and speak to the delegation. And when it’s appropriate, when we clear through this procedural issue, I would like to speak to the merits of my motion. Okay, and just looking to the clerk. Because these are, one motion has the other one in it.

Do we still have to vote? Because this has been put on the floor. We have to still have to vote on this motion first before we go to the next one. Yes, so this can either be an amendment to Councillor Ramen’s motion, or it can be a separate motion, just like you said.

Okay, so, yeah, one moment. I’m gonna email you and comment. Yes, so I’m just gonna offer some procedural hopefully assistance based on my own reading of the policies and procedures bylaws and how to proceed. This is where we get into some complications when we start adding things into an existing motion.

I would suggest through you acting chair to the Councillor and to the committee that perhaps the first thing to do would be to dispense with Councillor Ramen’s motion and then a separate new motion by Councillor Trussau would be in order to come onto the floor as a second consideration. And then Councillor Trussau would just be able to remove that part that’s already been voted on from his motion. So then you can have the debate on the educational brochure piece, and then you can have a second debate on the more substantive motion that Councillor Trussau circulated. Okay, thank you for those comments.

And with that in mind, so we are on Councillor Ramen’s motion. Are there any further speakers to just the educational component? Okay, seeing none, I will put that motion to do well. Oh, yes.

Using the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, now that we’ve dispense with Councillor Ramen’s motion, I will then pass the chair back to her. Thank you. I appreciate that Councillor McAllister.

Councillor Trussau, you’re on the speakers. Let’s go ahead. Yes, could you put my motion, which I submitted to you up on the screen? And I wanna, I know I’m limited to five minutes.

Am I limited to five? Am I limited to five minutes, okay. So I think this is something we need to do. I do not think that the current by-law is appropriate given the tensions that we’ve seen and some of the conflicts that we’ve seen in the community between the different types of ways of presenting the front of your yard.

My goal here is to encourage people to use environmental friendly gardens, which some people are doing. And I want to make sure that the by-law does not create a chilling effect on people’s ability to adopt these new approaches, which I think are consistent with our policies. Now, I’m not gonna get into a long discussion about the constitutional case law because I think it’s very clear and it can’t be disputed that presenting your garden in an alternative way to the community standards is expressive activity. It is expressive activity.

And to the extent that a by-law has the potential to limit that expressive activity, then it has to be justified. And part of the justification is it not be vague, it not be over-broad. I think where the discussion and where the disagreement will come in is what constitutes over-breath, what constitutes vagueness. And I think that’s why we need to sort this out.

I would like to see a staff report that includes the elements in my motion, which pretty much reflects what the advisory committee has asked us to do. It also reflects what expert Ms. Johnson asks us to do. I am not asking for any resolution of this matter today because I imagine quite a bit can be said on all sides.

So what I’m asking the committee to do today is to adopt my motion, which will set into motion a review of this by-law followed by a public participation meeting. And I think the points that I’m making there go into a little bit of detail to help the people preparing for the public participation meeting and the staff report to understand what the parameters of my request start. What we have right now is an unacceptable situation. And I don’t think it’s really anybody’s fault.

I’m not blaming code enforcement here, but I think times have changed and people’s sensibilities have changed and the desire of more and more Londoners to do different things with their front yards have changed. And I want to accommodate that in a way that is consistent with our practice of requiring that people not allow noxious wheat and other waste to interfere with the visuals or the sidewalks. So I think that this is a good motion. It really defers the question for more study, but I think this is study that we have to have.

It could be said that we have more pressing matters in London. And indeed we do, indeed we do, but we could say that about anything. We could say that about anything that comes to our table in light of some of the problems we’re facing in this city and in this world. And I think it’s only fair to give people that have made a decision to either invoke their expressive rights to have a different front yard or people who are considering doing it.

And I don’t think it’s going to take away from anybody’s ability to have that perfect law and if that’s what they want. Because this and this by law is not about taking away anybody’s choice, this by law would be amended to give people more choice. I don’t believe I have anything else to say on this other than to really urge you to read Elle Johnson’s added communication. Because she’s one of the world’s leading experts on this.

And this is exactly the kind of information that we need to be having here in London. And I should also mention before I turn this back, this is absolutely consistent. This is absolutely consistent with the direction that we’re going. So thank you very much and please support this motion.

Thank you. So I’ll look for a seconder, Councillor McAllister second. Okay, Councillor Vameer-Burgen, go ahead. Yeah, I was just going to say Madam Chair, I didn’t think there was a seconder yet so that the motion would not invite any commentary because it wasn’t on the floor.

I’m certainly against this motion. I thought the previous motion was very germane and productive, but this motion, including going through the time and where with all of having public participation meetings, the simple fact is, and I think, Councillor Trostle touched on this himself, there are far more important things that are on our plate right now than this. In all the years that I’ve served on council, I’ve never had one complaint about this by-law going too far in terms of impeding naturalized loans. It’s simply not an issue.

This motion is akin to watching a hamster going around in a wheel. It simply has no real positive effect because there isn’t a problem. We’re trying to find a problem and find a solution for it but it doesn’t exist. So again, I would have to say, and I think staff would concur on this with all the complaints with regard to yard problems and yards that are not complying to the by-law, very, very few are charged with improper naturalization.

Perhaps we could non-staffed me to give us a stat on that. Thank you, Mr. Catolic. Yes, thank you for the question.

Year to date this year, we’ve had around 2,400 complaints for the PW9 by-law. And out of those, we’ve had three complaints with respect to natural gardens and indigenous gardens, and we have taken no enforcement actions on those complaints. Well, I think that is pretty cut and dry. The best thing we can do here is just simply bolt this motion down and proceed from there.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Any further speakers? Councillor Cutty.

Thank you, Chair. I concur with my colleague, Councillor Ben Mirberg and I won’t be supporting this motion. Thank you, Councillor McAllister. Thank you and through you.

I’m actually in favor of doing this review. I think, as Councillor Trust pointed out, we do have some by-laws that need to be revisited. I think what he’s asking for is fair in terms of just reviewing it. I do hear what other Councillors are saying in terms of time, but I do think that it’s pertinent to review this when we have the opportunity to, and I think this is a good opportunity to do so.

Thank you. Thank you. With no further speakers, I’ll look to call the question. Sorry, Councillor Frank.

Thanks for joining us. Go ahead. Yes, thank you. Sorry.

I did come a little bit late, so I did want to ask a question, but I have already been asked. So feel free to tell me if it has, and then I will rescind it. But I was wondering from staff if there was any hesitation towards moving forward with the motion is drafted by Councillor Trossa. Thank you.

And by hesitation, I mean, staff are at the will of council in terms of that. So I’m not sure what a question about hesitation would help to garner. Yeah, sorry, happy to reframe it. I’m just curious if staff had had an opportunity to look at the motion that was put forward.

And if now would be an appropriate time as Councillor McAllister mentioned, of reviewing the by-law, I personally don’t see a harm, I guess. So I’m just trying to understand why there would be a disinterest in not having a quick review and then having a discussion about anything that could be adjusted. To staff, Mr. Kritolik?

Through the chair, we’re in your hands. So whatever council directs us to do, we will do so. Thank you, follow up? Sure, yes.

I know I don’t have a vote at this committee, but I did also want to echo support for having a review of the by-law and making any adjustments if needed. I don’t necessarily think it has to be a strenuous or overtly lengthy process. I’d be fine with a review and then any tweaks and additions. So I’m fine with if this comes to council supporting the request to have a review and make any edits to the by-law.

Thanks. Thank you. Okay, any further speakers? If I could, Madam Chair, just.

Okay, Council, have you spoken to this motion already? Okay. I just have one quick question for staff, is that allowable? Okay, I’ll allow a quick question.

Okay, so as we know, there’s really no public push for this, but I will ask staff, when was the last time this was completely reviewed this by-law? Mr. Catolic? Through the chair, we reviewed the by-law in 2020 and reviewed it this year in preparation for the council policy.

Thank you, so last month. That’s pretty clear. Thank you, thank you to staff and thank you chair. Thank you, okay.

Seeing no further speakers, seeing no hands up online, I will call the vote. All vote, no. No clarification from Councilor Vam, we are bringing us to his vote. Oh, did it not come true?

Like I stated I vote no for this motion from Council. Thank you. Using the vote, the motion failed two to three. Okay, so thank you for to our speaker and thank you for the discussion that we had today on this item.

We do have one more item related to that item, which is the motion to receive. So I’ll be looking to committee for a motion to receive the delegation as well as the staff report and the communication. Councilor Cuddy, Councilor Trossa. Yep, you can speak too, yes, go ahead.

I know that this motion is just a routine motion that we’re going to accept, but I really wanna urge people to read that added communication very carefully. It is one of the world’s leading experts on this subject, which is in concurrence with what our advisory committee has asked us to do. So please, yes, we’ll receive it, but please read it. Thank you.

All vote yes to receive. Thank you, and that’s open for voting. Closing the motion carries, five to zero. Thank you.

There are no further items under deferred matters in additional business. We’ll look to item number six, which is the adjournment. Motion to adjourn from Councilor McAllister and Councilor Cuddy. Hand vote for those that are in favor.

Vocal for Councilor Vameerbergen. I vote yes. Thank you, everyone. Have a great rest of your day.