Open Council

27th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

Open Council

27th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

November 21, 2023, at 4:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 4:03 PM; it being noted that Councillors S. Lehman (10:05 PM), P. Van Meerbergen, S. Franke, E. Peloza, and S. Hillier were in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that Councillor S. Lehman disclosed a pecuniary interest related to item 2.4 regarding the 2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan: Core Area report as it relates to funding for Downtown London Business Association and the Councillor indicated they are a member of the Association.

2.   Consent

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That consent items 2.5 to 2.9 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

2.5   WITHDRAWN - TechAlliance – Grant Agreement (2024-2027)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That it BE NOTED that item 2.5, entitled TechAlliance - Grant Agreement (2024-2027), was withdrawn from the agenda at the direction of Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development.

Motion Passed

2.6   WITHDRAWN - London Economic Development Corporation – Purchase of Service Agreement (2024-2027)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That it BE NOTED that item 2.6, entitled London Economic Development Corporation - Purchase of Service Agreement (2024-2027), was withdrawn from the agenda at the direction of Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development.

Motion Passed

2.7   WITHDRAWN - Small Business Centre – Grant Agreement (2024-2027)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That it BE NOTED that item 2.7, entitled Small Business Centre - Grant Agreement (2024-2027), was withdrawn from the agenda at the direction of Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development.

Motion Passed

2.8   Creative Sector Incubation Hub – Update

2023-11-21 Staff Report - Creative Sector Incubation Hub Update

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following actions be taken with respect to Creative Sector Incubation Hub - Update:

a)    the Creative Sector Incubation Hub - Update report BE RECEIVED; and

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to continue discussions with the Trinity Centre Foundation as the project proponents develop the Creative Sector Incubation Hub business case for Council’s consideration.

Motion Passed

2.9   7th Report of the Governance Working Group

2023-11-21 Submission - GWG Report

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 7th report of the Governance Working Group from its meeting held on November 6, 2023:

a)    on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the attached by-law BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on November 28, 2023 to amend By-law No. CPOL.-228-480, as amended, being “Council Members’ Expense Account” to update various provisions of the policy;

b)    the following actions be taken:

i) the Deferred Matters List dated November 4, 2023, BE RECEIVED; 

ii) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to bring forward the necessary revisions to Council Procedure By-law A-50 sections 9.8, 11.7, 11.10, 11.11, 15.10, 31.8, 33.5, 33.8, 33.9 and 38.9, to reflect no meeting of Council or Standing Committee shall extend beyond 6:00 PM, unless otherwise decided by a 2/3rds vote of eligible members; and

iii) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to schedule a time at a future meeting for general discussion regarding efficient meeting management;

c)    clauses 1.1 and 3.2 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.1   Recruitment, Retention and Accommodation of Planning and Development and Building Staff

2023-11-21 Staff Report - Recruitment, Retention and Accommodation of Planning

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

That item 2.1 and items 6.1 to 6.4 BE REFERRED to a Special Meeting of Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee to be held on Wednesday, December 6, 2023, at 1:00 PM.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

2.2   Update to Request for Proposal (RFP) 2023-199 Hubs Implementation Plan

2023-11-21 Staff Report - Update to Request For Proposal(RFP)2023-199 Hubs Implementation Plan

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken regarding the Update to Request For Proposal (RFP) 2023-199 Hubs Implementation Plan report:

a)    the portion of Request for Proposal 2023-199 awarded to Canadian Mental Health Association Thames Valley Addition and Mental Health Services (CMHA) by Municipal Council at its meeting held October 5, 2023 BE CANCELLED, subject to the execution of a mutual release between the City and CMHA;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake all administrative acts necessary to facilitate the execution of a mutual release between the City and CMHA in relation to the Request For Proposal 2023-199, in a form satisfactory to the Deputy City Manager, Legal Services; and

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide Municipal Council with the option of additional time equal to one committee cycle to consider the results of any future Hubs Request for Proposal (RFP) prior to requesting a final decision;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 16, 2023 from B. Brock with respect to this matter.

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Lehman

Motion to amend by adding a new part c) to read as follows:

c) that Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide Municipal Council with the option of additional time equal to one committee cycle to consider the results of any future Hubs Request for Proposal (RFP) prior to requesting a final decision.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to approve, as amended.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

2.3   November Progress Update - Health and Homelessness Whole of Community System Response

2023-11-21 Staff Report - November Progress Update

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken regarding the November Progress Update – Health & Homelessness Whole of Community System Response report;

a)    the November Progress Update – Health & Homelessness Whole of Community System Response Report BE RECEIVED for information; and

b)    a one-time allocation up to the amount of $251,000 BE APPROVED for Ark Aid’s meal Invoice program from July to March 31, 2024;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 16, 2023 from B. Brock with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

2.4   2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan: Core Area

2023-11-21 Staff Report - 2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan Core Area

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That with respect to the 2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan: Core Area, the following actions be taken:

a)    the 2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan: Core Area BE REFERRED back to Civic Administration;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to undertake a comprehensive review considering current conditions and existing plans. This should involve the removal of outdated components from previous work, prioritizing essential elements. Additionally, the examination should determine the necessity of a new downtown master plan, extending beyond the immediate 2023-2027 City of London Strategic Plan timeline while aligning with its scope; and

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee with a prioritized grouping of next steps including short term actions, a longer-term plan of action, draft targets, metrics and fulfilment requirements to a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee;

it being noted that recent funding approvals by Municipal Council for the Downtown London and Old East Village Business Improvement Associations provides some bridge funding to assist with short-term challenges and needs while this work is being undertaken.

it being further noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 19, 2023 from B. Maly, Executive Director, Downtown London and S. A. Collyer, LDBA Board Chair with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (11 to 1)

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following report presenting the Core Area Strategic Plan actions BE RECEIVED for information; it being noted that the Strategic Plan Implementation Plan will reflect these actions and may be modified based on the final multi-year budget;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 19, 2023 from B. Maly, Executive Director, Downtown London and S. A. Collyer, LDBA Board Chair with respect to this matter.

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to receive a communication dated November 19, 2023 from B. Maly, Executive Director, Downtown London and S. A. Collyer, LDBA Board Chair with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Not to be heard before 4:05 PM - Public Participation Meeting - 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law

2023-11-21 Staff Report - 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges Report

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That, with respect to the 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law, the following actions be taken:

a)    the 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law “Climate Change and Environmental Stewardship, Bike Locker - Hourly Rental Rate” BE AMENDED to allow for two hour free parking for every 24-hour rental period; and

b)    the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 21, 2023 as Appendix, as amended above, “B” BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on November 28, 2023, for the purpose of repealing By-law No. A-58, as amended, being “A by-law to provide for Various Fees and Charges”, and replacing it with a new 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law that lists various fees and charges for services or activities provided by the City of London;

it being  noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 16, 2023 from C. Butler with respect to this matter;

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

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Lewis

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by S. Trosow

Motion to amend the proposed 2024-2027 Consolidated Fees and Charges By-law “Climate Change and Environmental Stewardship, Bike Locker - Hourly Rental Rate” to allow for two hour free bike locker parking for every 24-hour rental period.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to approve item 3.1, as amended.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

3.2   Not to be heard before 4:10 PM - Public Participation Meeting - 2024 Water and Wastewater Rates

2023-11-21 Staff Report - 2024 Water and Wastewater Rates

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by C. Rahman

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment & Infrastructure and the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2024 Water and Wastewater rates and charges:

a)    the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 21, 2023 as Appendix “A”, to amend By-law WM-28 being “A by-law for regulation of wastewater and stormwater drainage systems in the City of London”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held November 28, 2023 to effect rates and charges increases of 4.0 percent for wastewater and stormwater services effective January 1, 2024; and,

b)    the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated November 21 2023 as Appendix “B”, to amend By-law W-8 being “A by-law to provide for the Regulation of Water Supply in the City of London”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held November 28, 2023 to effect rates and charges increases of 2.5 percent for water services effective January 1, 2024;

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

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by A. Hopkins

Motion to open the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by D. Ferreira

Motion to close the public participation meeting.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

3.3   Delegation - Christina Fox, Chief Executive Officer, TechAlliance - Annual Update

2023-11-21 Presentation - TechAlliance

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by C. Rahman

That it BE NOTED that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received the Annual Update from C. Fox, Chief Executive Officer, TechAlliance.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

3.4   Delegation - Kapil Lakhotia, President and Chief Executive Officer, London Economic Development Corporation - Annual Update

2023-11-21 Presentation - LEDC

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by H. McAlister

That it BE NOTED that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received the Annual Update from K. Lakhotia, President and Chief Executive Officer, London Economic Development Corporation.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

3.5   Delegation - Steve Pellarin, Executive Director, Small Business Centre - Annual Update

2023-11-21 Presentation - Small Business Centre

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by C. Rahman

That it BE NOTED that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received the Annual Update from S. Pellarin, Executive Director, Small Business Centre, London.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Committee Appointment Preferences Submitted by Council Members

2024 - Committee Appointment Preferences

2024 - Standing Committee Preference Chart

2023-11-21 Submission - Standing Committee Preferences-Mayor Morgan

That the following appointments BE MADE to the Standing Committees of the Municipal Council for the term December 1, 2023 to November 30, 2024:

a)      Planning and Environment Committee

Councillor C. Rahman

Councillor S. Hillier

Councillor S. Lewis

Councillor S. Franke

b)      Civic Works Committee

Councillor J. Pribil

Councillor D. Ferreira

Councillor S. Trosow

Councillor S. Franke

c)    Community and Protective Services Committee

Councillor D. Ferreira

Councillor H. McAlister

Councillor J. Pribil

Councillor S. Trosow

d)    Corporate Services Committee

Councillor P. Cuddy

Councillor C. Rahman

Councillor C. Stevenson

Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

e)    that the Communication dated November 13, 2023, from Mayor Morgan with respect to standing committee chairs BE RECEIVED; it being noted that the following Councillors were appointed by the Mayor as Chairs of the following committees:

Councillor S. Lehman (Chair) - Planning and Environment Committee

Councillor A. Hopkins (Chair) - Civic Works Committee

Councillor E. Peloza (Chair) - Community and Protective Services Committee

Councillor H. McAlister (Chair) - Corporate Services Committee.

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Appointments to the Community and Protective Services Committee.

Majority Winner: D. Ferreira; H. McAlister; J. Pribil; S. Trosow

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to appoint the following to Planning and Environment Committee:

Councillor C. Rahman

Councillor S. Hillier

Councillor S. Lewis

Councillor S. Franke

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to appoint the following to Civic Works Committee:

Councillor J. Pribil

Councillor D. Ferreira

Councillor S. Trosow

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to appoint the following to Community Protective Services Committee:

Councillor D. Ferreira

Councillor H. McAlister

Councillor J. Pribil

Councillor S. Trosow

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to appoint the following to Corporate Services Committee:

Councillor P. Cuddy

Councillor P. Van Meerbergen

Councillor H. McAlister

Councillor S. Stevenson

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to appoint the following to Corporate Services Committee:

Councillor Rahman

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by P. Cuddy

Motion to appoint the following to Civic Works Committee:

Councillor S. Franke

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by S. Lewis

That the Committee recess at this time.

Motion Passed

The Committee recesses at 6:05 PM and reconvenes at 6:32 PM.

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the Communication dated November 13, 2023, from Mayor Morgan with respect to standing committee chairs BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

4.2   Community Cold Weather Response Update

2023-11-21 Staff Report - (4.2) Cold Weather Response Update

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, that the following Actions be taken regarding Community Cold Weather Response Update Report, that;

a)    the Community Cold Weather Response Report Update BE RECEIVED for information;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED by Municipal Council to proceed with the following contracts for overnight spaces to support the cold weather plan:

i)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $826,686 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 30 overnight spaces at 696 Dundas Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 1, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

ii)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $1,472,739 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 65 spaces at 432 William Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from January 8, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

iii)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $404,323 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 15 overnight spaces at CMHA Coffee House, 371 Hamilton Road for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 11, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

iv)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $335,216 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 10 overnight spaces at CMHA My Sisters Place, 566 Dundas Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 15, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

c)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in connection with the contracts selected in part b); and,

d)    the approval given herein BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation of the City of London amending/entering into all necessary agreements noting that Civic Administration will report back to Council on the outcome of the negotiated agreements and then further report back to Council on conclusion of the cold weather response, with details including the dates contracts are signed as well as the dates and amounts of the payments made;

it be noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee heard a delegation from Sarah Campbell, Executive Director, The Ark Aid Street Mission with respect to this matter.

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by S. Stevenson

The delegation request for Sarah Campbell, Executive Director, Ark Aid Street Mission, BE APPROVED to be heard at this time.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve part b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the following contract for overnight spaces to support the cold weather plan:

i)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $826,686 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 30 overnight spaces at 696 Dundas Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 1, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve part b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the following contract for overnight spaces to support the cold weather plan:

ii)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $1,472,739 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 65 spaces at 432 William Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from January 8, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

Motion Passed (8 to 6)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve part b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the following contract for overnight spaces to support the cold weather plan:

iii)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $404,323 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 15 overnight spaces at CMHA Coffee House, 371 Hamilton Road for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 11, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

Motion Passed (13 to 1)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve part b) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to proceed with the following contract for overnight spaces to support the cold weather plan:

iv)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to enter into a contract with The Ark Aid Street Mission in the amount up to $335,216 (excluding HST) for the provision of all services to operate 10 overnight spaces at CMHA My Sisters Place, 566 Dundas Street for the cold weather response overnight spaces from December 15, 2023, to May 31, 2024, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.2;

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve parts a, c, and d.

Motion Passed (14 to 0)

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the Committee recess at this time.

Motion Passed

The Committee recesses at 8:50 PM and reconvenes at 9:02 PM.

4.3   Asylum Claimants

2023-11-21 Submission - Asylum Claimants

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Impacts of Asylum Claimants:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to Council on the impacts of Asylum claimants on our local shelter system. Based on the findings from the staff report, that staff apply if appropriate for Interim Housing Assistance Program (IHAP) funding if necessary, to address the impacts on local shelters;

b)    the Mayor BE REQUESTED to undertake immediate advocacy efforts with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Ontario Big City Mayors Caucus, and the Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario to advocate for resources for cities to address the influx in asylum claimants; and

c)    the Mayor BE REQUESTED to write a letter on behalf of Council in support of the request by London Cross Cultural Learning Centre (CCLC) in collaboration with Mission Services for funding from the Province of Ontario to support the hiring of staff to provide additional supports for Asylum claimants;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated November 12, 2023 from Councillor Rahman and Mayor Morgan and a communication dated November 16, 2023 from E. A. Ronson, Executive Director, Mission Services of London with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   (ADDED) Request for Term Extension of the Community Advisory Committees

2023-11-21 Submission - Advisory Committee Extension

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That, notwithstanding the General Policy for Advisory Committees is currently under review (including collecting feedback from Community Advisory Committee members related to recruitment and term) the following actions be taken with respect to the City of London’s Community Advisory Committees:

a)    the current membership BE EXTENDED to April 1, 2025 for the following Community Advisory Committees:

i)     Accessibility Community Advisory Committee;

ii)    Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee;

iii)   Community Advisory Committee on Planning;

iv)   Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee;

v)    Ecological Community Advisory Committee;

vi)   Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee; and

vii)   Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee.

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to postpone advertisements for Community Advisory Committee vacancies for citizen-at-large and sectoral Community Advisory Committee members until January, 2025 for the term beginning April 1, 2025, in accordance with the General Policy for Advisory Committees;

c)    auxiliary recruitments BE CONTINUED on an as-needed basis in response to any Community Advisory Committee resignations in accordance with the General Policy for Advisory Committees;

d)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to notify the aforementioned Community Advisory Committees of Council’s decision; and

e)    the Community Advisory Committee structure BE REFERRED to Governance Working Group to review potential redundancies and to review opportunities to improve operations of advisory committees.

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by C. Rahman

Motion to amend part e) to read as follows:

e)    the Community Advisory Committee structure BE REFERRED to Governance Working Group to review potential redundancies and to review opportunities to improve operations of advisory committees.

Motion Passed (12 to 1)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Stevenson

Motion to approve, as amended.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

5.2   (ADDED) 12th Report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee

2023-11-21 Submission - (5.2) DIACAC Report

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 12th Report of the Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee from the meeting held on November 14, 2023:

a)  the request from the Awards and Recognition Sub-Committee for budget allocation of up to $2,500.00 for the 2023 Diversity, Race Relations and Inclusivity Award, BE APPROVED; and

b)  clauses 1.1, 2.1 and 2.2 BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

6.   Confidential (Enclosed for Members only.)

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by J. Pribil

That item 2.1 and items 6.1 to 6.4 BE REFERRED to a Special Meeting of Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee to be held on Wednesday, December 6, 2023, at 1:00 PM.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

7.   Adjournment

Moved by S. Stevenson

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 10:20 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 (6 hours, 3 minutes)

[13:09] Okay, I’m gonna call the meeting to order. This is the 27th meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee. I’m gonna start with the land acknowledgement. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishnabakh, Haudenosaunee, Leni Peowak, and Adawandran. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nation, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to live and work in this territory. Further, I wanted to say that the city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings of buying requests.

[13:48] To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact SPPC@lennon.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. I will start with the disclosures of pecuniary interest. Okay, seeing none, consent items. There are nine of them. I assume that some colleagues will want some of these dealt with separately. And a couple of them have been withdrawn for discussion at a subsequent meeting, although the delegations for those organizations will still happen today.

[14:24] Gives you a chance to hear from them before we deal with the different granting agreements related to them. So I’ll look to see who would like, what items dealt with separately on the consent agenda, recognizing that when you pull them, they do go to the end of the items for direction. So if you have an adjustment or a motion or a chance of questions, I would suggest you might want to pull it. Councillor Ferrer, go ahead. Thank you. I would like to have item for the consent 2.4 pulled. And that would be it for the consent from— Yep, go ahead.

[15:03] Thank you. I have an amendment for 2.2. Others? Councillor Stevenson. I’d like to pull 2.3, please. Anything else? I will just note two. Mr. May, it will be a little bit delayed arriving here today.

[15:36] So if you’re going to ask questions on any of the items related to his, I would suggest maybe we pull them and put them later. If you don’t have questions, that’s fine. Thank you, 2.1. So all this left is 2.8 and 2.9.

[16:16] I will say 2.8 is one that Mr. May, this would make comments on. So if you’ve got comments on that, we should deal with it. So if nobody does, then that’s fine. We can proceed with just those two items. No? Okay, so it looks like we can look for a motion to deal with 2.8 and 2.9. We could do those together as consent. Councillor Cuddy is willing to move. Seconded by Councillor Hopkins. I’ll just ask if there’s any discussion on either of those items. Seeing none, we’re going to open those two items for voting. Councillor Palazzo posing the vote motion carries 15 to zero.

[18:07] Okay, so those items that we dealt with at the end of items for direction, that moves us to scheduled items. The first scheduled item we have is 3.1, which is public participation meeting on the consolidated fees and charges by-law. Colleagues have that before them. So given this is a public participation meeting, we’d first look to open the BPM, moved by Councillor Ramen, seconded by Councillor Stevenson. We will open that for voting momentarily. Councillor Palazzo votes here.

[18:58] Councillor Trossall, Councillor Vameer-Burgan, closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, so I’m looking to any members of the public who are looking to speak on the 2024 to 2027 consolidated fees and charges by-law. Once, vice, last chance to speak, either online or in the gallery.

[19:37] Okay, I’m going to say there’s no public speakers to the fees and charges by-law, so look for a motion to close the public participation, meaning Councillor or Deputy Mayor Lewis, seconded by Councillor Cuddy. We will open the closure of the PPM momentarily. Councillor Palazzo votes yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, I’ll look to colleagues.

[20:12] Someone might want to put the recommendation in the report on the floor, and then we can have any debate. You’re willing to put it on the floor, Councillor? Oh, I have a question. Okay, then let me see, Deputy Mayor Lewis will put it on the floor, seconded by Councillor Ferrera, Councillor Trossall, you’re out first, and then I’ll go to Councillor Stevenson next. I wanted to ask if this would be an appropriate time to make suggestions about how to better alert the public about some of these items in terms of putting additional things on the portal, because if it is, I’d like to make a small, friendly amendment to add some things to the portal.

[20:55] I need to just clarify exactly what you’re asking you to the portal online or get involved. I would like the information about residential rental applications and information to be more visible to the public in terms of where it goes. I would leave that to the portal staff. I would also like to see the same thing for the residential Airbnb license program, which does not currently have a online component at all.

[21:33] Councillor, I think I understand what you’re saying, so I think what we have before us is the approval of the fees and charges. If you want to talk about how we display those in different forums, I think that would be something that we could bring forward at a subsequent meeting. I’m just looking to staff, ‘cause although I see that you’re linking them because we’re talking about the fees and charges, the report before us really isn’t about how they are displayed and where, but I can ask the clerk, which is the relevant committee to bring that forward for consideration, ‘cause I think I understand that you’re looking for some information that in here to be displayed in different ways and publicly available in slightly different ways, so let me find out that information, I’ll tell you where you can go.

[22:32] Councillor, so just chatting with the clerk, I think the best course of action is if maybe you want to, after the meeting or over the next couple of days, consult with the clerk, identify exactly what you’re going for, given the different fees and charges are related to all sorts of parts of the corporation, we can get a sense on where you’re going, help you direct you to the committee and what the letter might look like, perfect. Yes, thank you. My pleasure. I have Councillor Stevenson, and then Councillor Frank, I see your hand up, I’ll add you to the list. Thank you, I think I was dealing with the same thing that Councillor Truss, I was dealing with, was a letter from a constituent who wrote in and it’s attached to this agenda.

[23:09] I was just wondering if staff could comment on their suggestion that we move the residential rental license renewal process to the citizens portal, just like our building license approval process and automate the simple process. If staff had a response, that would be great. Mr. Catolek. Yes, through the chair, we do have a active, IT project specific to that. We also have active projects specific to short-term rentals and other projects that are focused on better customer service and applications and renewals.

[23:46] And I’d like to refer that to Mr. Pritis if he has any further comments on the corporate approach of approving IT projects. Mr. Parity. Through the chair, yes. So anytime we get projects, new projects coming through, they typically have to go through our technology investment strategy and that group prioritizes all the new projects that are coming through and then it goes out for information. Mr. Parity, I’ll just, next time, if you could just tilt your microphone down a little bit it points out, yeah, we’ll just pick up your voice a little better.

[24:22] Go ahead, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, that’s great. Seeing as it’s an active project right now, if I understood you correctly, do you have any estimate on when we would expect to see that or who I could follow up with to have an update on that project? Through the chair, I don’t have an answer tonight ‘cause there are numerous, numerous projects as part of the technology investment program. But we do have active projects and they’re focused very much on our portals.

[24:58] So you can make applications online, pay online. We have numerous business licenses, residential licenses that you still have to come in and pay in person. So we have those improvements in place, but it all depends on corporate priorities. Thank you, so if I understand there’s no need to bring anything through another committee regarding this and would you be the one that I would follow up with to check in to see where we’re at on this particular one that’s been requested by the resident?

[25:34] Through the chair, that’s correct. This is a operational matter that we are very much aware of as an improvement. Good, okay, Councillor Frank. Thank you. I was wondering, so I’ve been chatting a bit with some staff, there’s a section about the bike lockers. And right now there’s two hours that are available for free and the concept in this report was to shift to one hour free. And I was hoping to make a motion to keep it at two hours free, understanding that the lost revenue is about $1,000, but I think that the value for having two hours free secure bike parking downtown is probably more than $1,000.

[26:15] But I’m not totally sure, and I didn’t have enough time, unfortunately, to chat with the clerks because I don’t know if that would be really difficult given that there’s a by-law associated with this. But I was hoping to make a motion to keep two hours free bike parking in this fee schedule. Just give me one sec, Councillor Frank. Certainly that is something that we would do at committee because the direction is bring the by-law forward to council. And so this would be the place to make the change, even if it is a little bit complex, because this is essentially the process by which we recommend the fees and charges by-law to council for final approval.

[26:53] So just let me get a little bit more information for you. I’ll get back to you. Council, we’re just wording the motion for you.

[27:40] So you wanted to remain at the two hour mark for free and not go to one hour is what you’re saying. Correct, unless staff have a better suggested language. I think we’re okay on that, but I have no concern, thank you. Yes, so we don’t have to get this perfect now because we’re going to get the motion. So everybody knows what we’re doing. And then the magic of the clerks will make that just perfect by the time the by-law gets to council. So this is the way it’s worded.

[28:27] I’m just going to see if this makes sense for staff and then the council if you’re okay with it. Motion to amend the fees and charges by-law to allow for two, the proposed, I think it’s just a proposed fees and charges by-law to allow for two hour free bike locker parking. Yes, I see nods from staff. That’s good for you, Councillor Frank. Okay, I’ll look for a seconder for that. Councillor Trostau. Okay, so we’ll have debate on Councillor Frank’s motion now. Any debate or discussion? Councillor Hopkins.

[29:03] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. I just can’t help but ask the question since, I think it’s only fair to have a better understanding why they were reduced from one hour to two hours to one other than just as a cost saving and just a little bit more content to it for you. Go ahead, thank you, Your Worship. As this program is discussed with previous councils and being established, the intent was for us to try to recoup as much cost as we possibly could, knowing that most of it would not be recouped through user fees.

[29:34] So part of it was that direction. The other part was to attempt to encourage turnover so more people could try that hour for free, but what we’re actually seeing is most folks who choose to use it are then paying to extend after the free period is done. Staff have no concerns with extending the two hour free limit through 2024. We can review as the program is reviewed in the future. I don’t see any of the speakers, so we’re gonna open Councillor Frank’s amendment for voting. Councillor Close, votes yes.

[30:21] Voting the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, I need to move her in a seconder for the as amended motion or as amended fees and charges by-law, Councillor Ferris, seconded by Councillor Cuddy. Any further discussion on fees and charges by-law? Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, just a quick comment and maybe a question to, first of all, thanks to staff. It was a big heavy report and I didn’t go through every fee, so just to let you know, but I do appreciate the work that went into it and just glancing through it.

[30:56] I did recognize we’re looking at 420 fees. We’ve just continued a few with added a few and we’re mainly increasing most of them. My question through you is to staff maintaining that 5% that represents the user fees for operating revenue as we go into the multi-year budget. I know that was 2022. Is it fair to say that we’re maintaining that 5% operating revenue for just going forward? I’m not exactly sure if it’s taking into account the new increases, I guess.

[31:43] Go ahead. Thank you through the chair. I’m trying, I’m going off the top of my head. I don’t believe it has materially changed from that number. We’re just working through the documents now, so I know I recently looked at it, I just can’t recall, but I don’t believe it’s a material change from the 5% as a total. Just wanted to confirm that, thank you. It’s moved and seconded. I don’t have anybody else on the speaker’s list, so this is the as amended fees and charges by-law, which we’ll go to council as it says in the report with the one change that we’ve made, so I’ll open that for voting.

[32:33] Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, next we have a public participation meeting on water and wastewater rates. I’ll look for a mover to open the PPM for that. Moved by Councillor Layman, seconded by Councillor Hopkins. We will vote on that momentarily. Councillor Palose votes yes.

[33:42] Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, public participation meeting on water and wastewater rates. I’ll look to members of the public who would like to comment on the proposed water and wastewater rates. No one online, so it’s just people in the room. Second chance, I’ll look for a motion to close to the public participation meeting. Councillor Cutty, seconded by Councillor Ferrera. That’ll open for voting in a moment.

[34:22] To close the votes yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, I’ll look for a mover for the recommendation in the report. Councillor Layman is willing to move seconded by Councillor ramen. Okay, discussion on the water and wastewater rates. Right, so seeing none, we’re gonna open that for voting.

[34:59] Council close the votes yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, now we’re on to our delegations from a few organizations who are here to share updates with us. The first that we’ll deal with is item 3.3, which is a delegation from Tech Alliance, their annual update on their activities.

[35:33] We’ll just get the presentation pulled up and I’ll invite Christina Fox to come up and present to us. Okay, we’ve got that up now. So we’ll let you take it away.

[36:41] And I think you’ve done this before, but just a reminder that turn on the microphone and you had to turn it off for anybody else to be able to speak, but you get it for the whole time during your presentation, but when we have a question and answer, you’ll just have to remember to turn it on and on. So, Troy. - Okay, thank you. And I can be heard, good. Okay, well, good evening, everybody. At Tech Alliance, we’ve earned a reputation for providing deep value to industry leaders who are driving economic growth and propelling ambitious entrepreneurs and tech talent. Today, we’re looking back on the incredible results of our last fiscal year, which ended on March 31st, 2023.

[37:16] Feels like a long time ago. I’ll just get you set. Okay, so Tech Alliance empowers world-class ventures and fuels growth in Canada’s innovation economy. We champion and coach entrepreneurs, amplify and impact businesses while fostering an equitable and vibrant technology community of innovators. As the lead voice for London’s innovation economy and as the centralized resource for London’s innovation economy, Tech Alliance radically eliminates obstacles and increases speed to success for the most promising startups and the highest potential scale-ups generating prosperity right now.

[38:06] The greater London area has what it takes to be among Canada’s top ecosystems. It is a population that’s educated, diverse, technical, as ease of mobility to other parts of the country, the US and the globe, and has investable wealth. Here you’ll see our three strategic priorities. They’re guided by our evolution for the past three years and they will direct us towards the next moonshot. Our city boasts high tech employment rate with over 16,100 jobs in the technical industry last year. Reported by Techna, Canada welcomed record numbers of tech talent migration to this region and London was named number eight for largest in migration by city.

[38:45] London was named twice consecutively on CBRE’s top 10 emerging tech markets in North America, up from 10 last year to the spot number eight this year. This is not by accident. Built by founders, Tech Alliance is the place for dreamers, innovators, and world-changing ideas and forging strong connections with city council and city staff. Our board of directors comprised of passionate industry leaders alongside an accomplished team are joining us in the gallery and on YouTube. Go ahead and give away gang. For the first time, for many of you, I’m presenting to a number of new members of council and I want to thank you for your curiosity and deep appreciation for London’s competitive innovation economy and for your funding as we continue to build momentum as a vital resource in London.

[39:33] I’ve been with Tech Alliance for four years and we’ve worked side by side with you to strengthen our economy, executing against the city strategic plan, and partnering on minister visits and advocacy opportunities. The next few slides are glimpses into our active community collaboration engaging over 5,000 innovators, industry leaders, and entrepreneurs. In the spirit of prioritizing diversity and equity, there are glass ceilings still to shatter for women in tech. So in person, we called more than 125 women and allies to action on International Women’s Day, amplifying London, and celebrating groundbreaking innovation, we hosted our third annual Limitless, a slate of incredible award recipients were awarded that evening.

[40:12] On our list of winners went on to receive investment from Dragon’s Den, landed on the Globe Mail’s top growing companies in Canada and closed a $2 million seed round. Activating funding and co-creating for ventures led by equity denied founders, Tech Alliance flowed $600,000 in cash to ventures focused on the green economy, resulting in 127 FTE, 23 million in combined revenue, and almost 2 million combined capital raised. Our organization focuses on stimulating strong economic returns, and we’ve launched genius economic stimulators within the city, like the London Innovation Challenge, to accelerate companies, tech talent, and industry leaders.

[40:53] This past fiscal with industry forefront runners, we awarded $40,000 each to two companies who bolstered London’s creative industries. With Western, we delivered liberal arts and STEM-related work integrated learning placements that impacted local technology industry leaders, and we collaborated with Fanshawe on about a half a dozen different opportunities with their students, alumni, and startups. Fostering in entrepreneurial culture and natural industry collisions, we had almost 9,000 advisory hours delivered, and that’s up from 2,700 hours when I first joined the organization.

[41:26] That demonstrates the value of our mandate as the place for entrepreneurs. Across 45 different events, more than 5,000 bums and seats, all in all, we bring people together, we facilitate connections, we deliver education, and we publish and amplify compelling stories right here in London. In putting business first, we saw an excess of $106 million in capital raised by technology companies in the forest city. In fact, capital raised by innovative ventures has increased almost 5,000% over the last four years. This is one of our competitive advantages. We saw a 10% increase in the number of new startups, exits, mergers, or acquisitions in the tech sector, and we saw a 79% increase over the last three years.

[42:06] In fact, we had a 30% increase, or we had 30% more new startups than community tech. In collaboration with other folks in the ecosystem, you can see that collaboration truly is in our DNA, and we up that number to 166 last year. We’ve made good on our brand promise, and we’ve made remarkable connections to policymakers at all ranks of government who keep placing bets on made in London unicorns. Prioritizing and widening pathways to critical resources, including talent, we had strong student and professional newcomer interactions and made significant ecosystem referrals.

[42:44] For jobs created, posted, and promoted, we saw 2600 with 143 unique employers posting on our job board. We cultivate and foster a thriving technology community of founders and their teams, industry leaders, capacity builders, ecosystem partners, investors, and tech talent. We are committed to a regional culture anchored in diversity and equity. And in closing, right minds with big ideas come together physically at Tech Lions’ headquarters, with an unmatched spirit for global challenge, problem solving, and putting London on the map. This, indeed, is where innovation thrives.

[43:19] Thank you. I look for questions that colleagues might have, Councillor Lehman. Thank you, Ms. Fox, for your presentation today. I just wanna ask a couple of questions, just to get a gauge of how the tech industry is doing in London right now.

[43:53] Approximately how many jobs would you identify there within that tech industry, within London? And how’s that compare from last year and five years? Where’s the trend going? Thank you, through the chair. We reported 16,100 tech jobs in London. That’s up, I’m guesstimating and going on memory from about 13,100 two or three years ago. That indicator of the 16,100 jobs is actually one of the reasons why London landed on the top 10 emerging tech markets in North America.

[44:26] Yeah, so incredible. Thank you. So if you, we’ve always had a MESI of Waterloo, obviously, right, and they’re the tech hub. And what I’ve always seen as an obstacle is reaching a critical mass. Because if we wanna attract tech workers to this region, but they’re afraid if they leave Toronto or Waterloo, they’ll get out of the loop. Would you have, in your opinion, we’ve reached the critical threshold right now that we are big enough with this industry, within London right now, that that concern of prospective employees might not be as severe as it was a few years ago.

[45:18] Or is this being a sought out place now that we have so many interesting tech companies doing great things? Thank you, through the chair. I would say that maybe 10 years ago, that was certainly a concern, or even five years ago, that might’ve been a concern. What we do know in healthy ecosystems around the world, that it does require a couple of anchor firms to draw talent in. And what they need to know is if that place of employment doesn’t work out for them, can they bounce to another place in that city?

[45:51] So it’s a very good point to make of, would people leave Toronto, Waterloo, Silicon Valley, or other places in the world? And I do believe that that’s behind us, that we are seeing the critical mass of tech talent migrating to this region, and that was reported in tech now, showing it was major entity migration to Canada from the US, and in particular to London landing at number eight on that list as well. And I think it’s one of these things that we certainly should be proud of. One of the things that I observed in the last fiscal was having a number of London area companies named to a two north list, which really is companies that are in excess of a hundred million ARR, or growing at such a rate that they’ll get to that.

[46:33] And it was really easy for us to look at in London companies who should be on that list, and superseded the same kind of performance in cities like Saskatoon, Edmonton Calgary, where it’s really their push for technology and innovation has been well invested in, and you can see the growth. London is also there. I think we’ve just been really modest over the last many years about the kind of growth that we’ve had there, and I’m very confident about the future. Great, ‘cause it’s important that that message gets out, ‘cause it’s a virtuous cycle, right? It attracts people looking to work here, and it attracts capital, quite frankly, and I see here 106 million was raised in capital.

[47:12] Did I hear you correctly? How did that compare with the previous year? I wasn’t too sure if I heard that number correctly. Through the chair, thank you. We reported a 5,000% increase in capital raised, and that is we had a London area, had a really incredible year, the fiscal before, with significant funds raised by a few large companies, and so when we look at the collection over four years, it is a pretty significant amount since we began measuring to what we’re seeing now. I mean, when we see the kind of investment that’s happening in early stage, and there’s that kind of give-first mentality, if you receive investment, then you’re likely to, when you haven’t exit, or a liquidity event, to reinvest in companies, and we’re seeing a lot more of that activity in London.

[48:01] Thank you, and yeah, that’s terrific news, because that’s not present, that’s future, and those investments are gonna lead to further job growth in this industry, which is terrific news, so thank you, Chair. Yeah, other speakers. I have Councillor Stevenson, and then Councillor McAllister. Thank you for being here to share with us. My question is, can you just give me a little history on how long the organization’s been in existence, and if you see that there’s been a shift as the city evolves and becomes a bigger player in this space, if you see a shift, either that’s just happened, or that’s going to happen in the near future?

[48:45] Thank you, through the chair. That’s a really great question. The organization has existed for more than 20 years, and started in its early days, a bit more like a chamber, if you will, bringing together technology, and at that time, we would say high tech, technology together, and really convening people who were building an ecosystem. Over the course of time, the Tech Alliance has attracted other funding sources, including through the Ministry of Economic Job Development and Job Creation and Trade, I’m sorry. And through that investment, about 13 years ago, we became what’s called a regional innovation center, so there’s 17 of us in Ontario, and we don’t normally, as a team, lead with, that we’re a regional innovation center, because we are an awful lot more than just that funding source, but they do provide stable funding to the organization.

[49:34] And I would say, just in my time over the last four years, we have had a pretty massive evolution. I came into the role about four years ago, and a pandemic started about six months into my tenure, and at that point, we were at a period in time where we were really changing the composition of the team, what we delivered in community, the composition of our board, even our location. We’re now located across the street from City Hall, and we originally on the campus at Western. And so getting really serious about who our customer is, if you will, founders, tech talent, industry leaders.

[50:11] It was really easy to sunset things that were no longer serving those folks, and get really serious about the things that were gonna propel London to the next, high ecosystem in Canada. I do think we’re on the way. And of course, I need to be saying that, but I do have that feeling that we’re on that way, and the numbers actually show that. So when we think about the way we show up in community, and how we work one-to-one with companies, and how many companies we work with, and the value that we bring, I think it’s just very different than it might have been even five or six years ago, and particularly in the last three years, as we’ve changed the way that we go to market, and in particular, how we collaborate with others.

[50:49] There is a time, I’m gonna really go on memory here, but I remember reporting at one point that we were working with about 71 collaborators, and then it was 92 collaborators, and this year, 166. We’re able to do that because we are careful about stewarding those kinds of relationships, and while we are headquartered in London, we do serve communities in five counties in total, with a great majority of our work done here in London, which is why we’re quite proud of the outcomes that we’re seeing for London and the tech ecosystem. I hope that answered the question. Okay, thank you. Councillor McAllister.

[51:23] Thank you through the chair, thank you for the presentation today, I appreciate this. I wonder if you can provide some more insight in terms of the employees with these tech firms. What are you finding in terms of what’s attracting them to London, what maybe is still detracting them, just from an attractability point of view for your sector? What can we do as a city to be more accommodating to attract new employees? Thank you. Thank you, through the chair.

[51:55] That’s a really good question. I think that part of the reason why London is attractive and why companies in London are attractive is because we cover a multitude of different sectors. I think I reported in our PowerPoint that there’s 30 different sectors that we support. If you can think of any kind of technology other than forestry and mining, we’re pretty much touching them. With early stage companies, three to enterprise and unicorn companies, I think that’s part of it, is there is a great variety and no specific specialization in London because there are so many strong sectors, med tech, ag tech, food and beverage, advanced manufacturing, certainly EV is on the horizon.

[52:34] But I think that variety is helpful in attracting talent. I do think that when we look at the types of companies who have grown here and how big they’ve gotten, those companies, particularly in gaming, have been a really strong attractor for talent to the community or a retainer for students who are coming at a fan shot and Western University. Those I think are some of the reasons why we’re seeing a different attraction of talent. Another thing that I think is really important to highlight is our organization works regularly with newcomer professionals in trying to do matchmaking with companies in London.

[53:08] So when we think of the diverse opportunities and the interesting companies and really having full sum and equitable organizations, I think that’s also a very significant attractor for new Londoners and Londoners who have gone away and come back. The other thing I would say just in technology across the board, it’s fairly ubiquitous to see people that are more nomadic in nature or working in hybrid capacities. And I think there are still a lot of London companies that offer the benefit of remote work, even when we see lots of companies who thrive when they’ve got their people together in the office. So it’s a number of different factors that I would say a lot of those combined make it a really attractive place to be.

[53:51] Thank you through the chair. Appreciate your answer. And you actually, on the last bit, just touched on my follow up that I wanted to ask in terms of how you’re counting the numbers because we have seen that trend towards more remote work. Are you finding companies that have established themselves in London, are people farther afield? Do you see more remote work? Are they directly based in London or are you seeing a lot of surrounding areas and people just doing their work from remote locations? Thank you. Thank you through the chair. Specifically to companies we work with, there are a lot of companies that might have been in London and started here and have become nomadic.

[54:29] Have either moved to Toronto or Calgary, Vancouver, or have some base here in London or some connection to London, either through Western’s accelerator or Fantas Incubator. There are a number of different connections to London that make a company a lending company. With regards to staff within companies, it really varies. I mean, there are some companies that have staff in five days a week, they wanna be in five days a week. I think there are a lot of companies that have staff in three or four days a week. We have some companies that are thriving incredibly that have completely remote first opportunities, but still have a headquarters in London.

[55:09] It really is different. I feel like I’ve been saying sort of the same thing over the last couple of years. And I think in a couple of years from now, I’ll probably be saying the same thing. Whatever’s working for the company, whatever works for them to be able to retain and attract talent, they’ll continue to do that, whether that’s a four day work week, whether or not that’s paid time off with unlimited, there are a lot of different perks that we see happening in the technology sector that are actually influencing other sectors outside of technology. Thank you and through the chair, once again.

[55:42] The reason why I ask that is just, I know obviously with the tech sector very nomadic, I get that. I think for my point of view, and I’m not sure if my colleagues feel this, but I’m just trying to get more of a real sense for the economic impact, because obviously, we have the tech companies based here, but in terms of where employees are located, are they in our surrounding counties or farther afield? And I don’t know if you have that data, but I just find it interesting for a field that’s traditionally nomadic, to see what those tangible economic benefits are. Thank you.

[56:18] Thank you, through the chair. A great question, I would say, when we think about the support that we provide in the counties, certainly the bulk of service is to London based companies. One of the other things maybe to add to what I shared earlier is we do see a lot of people who are actually living and operating their day job in London, but are working for other companies. So for example, the fellow that is leading startup London, a volunteer organization, they work for Shopify, but they’re located in London. So while they’re earning a paycheck from another city in Canada, their spending is happening here.

[56:51] And I think that for that particular story, there’s numerous other stories, or folks who have the opportunity to be working for a company in the US, but are based in London. I feel like I’m hearing more and more of that over the last couple of years than I ever heard in my first six months to a year when I was at TechLions. Okay, any other speakers? Okay, this is just an update. So I’ll need a motion to receive the presentation. Councillor Cudi, seconded by Councillor Raman. I think we’ve already had the discussion.

[57:25] So I’m going to open that for voting. Councillor Close, the votes yes. Councillor Cudi votes yes. Housing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. And before we go, let me just say I’m a half a council.

[57:59] Thank you for coming today and answering all of our questions for the presentation and, of course, for the work you, your board and your organization does. We really appreciate it. Okay, next we have the next delegation, item 3.4, which is the annual update from the London Economic Development Corporation. To be able to co-tear, we’ll have you come up and present as soon as we get your presentation up on the screen and then we’ll let you let you go at it. Just one sec, I think your microphone’s not on, but you’re projecting as if a microphone was on.

[58:57] Unfortunately, people at home can’t hear you, so we’ll get you to take that. Sorry about that. Good afternoon, and I’m delighted to be here to share some highlights of our work this year. As you know, LEDC contributes to the growth of our economy through new investment attraction, retention and growth of local companies, workforce development and business engagement. And these functions are guided by detailed strategies, such as providing access to capital, talent, space, training, et cetera, and measured by key performance indicators. Our work focuses on developing industry clusters that generate the highest economic activity in the region.

[59:33] These clusters not only create direct jobs and investments, but also drive spin-off economic activity through supply chains, construction, retail, hospitality and much more. We also have referral mechanisms in place, so companies outside of these core areas are also supported by other local agencies. So far this year, LEDC has facilitated close to $145 million in expansions and attractions. Companies making these investments have reported over 1,600 new jobs added to London’s workforce. It’s also important to point out that these figures do not include the major regional investment with Volkswagen, PowerCo, in the St. Thomas EV battery plan.

[1:00:12] While LEDC played a key role in attracting Volkswagen to the region, we only report jobs and investments made in the city. The invest portfolio seeks to attract new investments while accelerate portfolio helps established companies scale and grow. We do this by connecting companies to infrastructure, funding sources, regulatory and permitting processes, research and development, and assistance with talent recruitment and retention. This year, we saw major growth in automation, advanced manufacturing, and food processing areas. We also keep a pulse on companies that may be at risk of closure due to trade issues, loss contracts, or changes in their industry.

[1:00:49] Our pipeline of active attraction and expansion files was healthy as companies continued to invest in industrial lands, automation, upskilling, and diversification. Here are some examples of companies that we worked with this year that are new to London or growing significantly throughout 2023. We’re fortunate to have attracted some high profile investments, including WSIB, Andriani, Amazon, Volkswagen, to name a few. New jobs and investments in food processing, life sciences, and advanced manufacturing have helped us further diversify our economy and helped us withstand the economic slowdown and rising interest rates.

[1:01:27] Access to talent continues to be a major constraint as our region is projecting a need for 40,000 plus workers over the next few years. We continue to help employers with their hiring needs through major job fairs, newcomer attraction campaigns, and post-secondary partnerships. Last year, we integrated London Tech Jobs and London Manufacturing Job Portals with both Western University and Fanshawe College student career pages. So post-secondary students can see far more local job opportunities and have more effective engagement with London companies. This year, we launched London Health Jobs Portal to market opportunities in the fast-growing health care and life sciences sectors.

[1:02:05] In order to raise London’s profile for both investment and talent attraction, we ran major marketing campaigns, such as Don’t Tell Toronto and Choose London, which has resulted in thousands of new inquiries over the past few months. We also collaborated with local partners on initiatives such as Happy Hour, For City Lending Pad, The Grove at Western Fair, Founders Network, Food Pranor, and more. And just in its third year, film London has shown great success in attracting significant productions, including Apple TV, NBC, ABC, and more.

[1:02:39] Recognizable Hollywood stars such as Greg Keneer, Luke Wilson, and Jay Baruchal have come to London for productions that have generated over a million dollars in local spending and created over 200 jobs. We’ve also held industry events such as screen creators, conferences, training for background performers, emerging producers, and location providers. And with that, that’s it for my formal presentation. And thanks again. Thank you for that. I think it’s the first time I’ve been in a photo with Luke Wilson in an London Economic Development Corporation presentation, so that’s the first for me.

[1:03:14] Appreciate the presentation. We’ll move to questions from Collins here. Go ahead, Councillor Hopkins. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here and for the presentation. I can see that our city has attracted a number of large industries, and thanks to LEDC for playing a vital role in making that happen.

[1:03:49] Going forward as a city and keeping these industries going, what do you see is important for us as a city to maintain? Or how do you see that future and the need? What can we do as a city to keep everyone happy? Thank you, through the chair. So one thing London has done really well over the last several years, well over 10 years now, is the diversification in our economy.

[1:04:27] We’re not a one-trick pony. So we’ve attracted companies within automotive food processing, technology, life sciences, pharmaceuticals, and the list goes on and on. What that does is helps us withstand economic cycles. So when there’s a slowdown in the automotive industry for whatever reason, as we signed 2009-2010, food processing was still very active. Similarly, during the COVID years, food processing was quite active. We were able to attract new investments, have lots of local expansions and whatnot. So in order to continue that diversification play in our economy, we need to continue looking at building industrial assets through the city’s industrial land development strategy, which has been quite successful.

[1:05:05] In addition to that, the investments that the city is already making in public transit, core area, and a lot of other elements throughout the city will continue to help us attract more talent and investments. So I think the bottom line here is that diversification of our economy to continue attracting knowledge-based jobs, innovation economy jobs, and further fuel that diversity. Go ahead, Councillor Provost and Councillor Stevenson. Thank you. I have a question regarding what EDC’s focus is on the four core industry sectors.

[1:05:38] Are you exploring to potentially add certain industries currently, or are you looking in the near future? Thank you. Through the chair, so within those four industries, advanced manufacturing, for instance, can be broadened into automotive, defense, aviation, and building materials. So those are sub-sectors within that niche. So when you look at the total package, it ends up being broader than just four, because they have sub-components within that. So I would say those four have served us well in terms of the resources we have to deploy and the successes we’ve had out of it.

[1:06:12] Every few years when we redo this strategic plan, we do keep an open mind to looking at other emerging areas, not just locally, but throughout Canada. We seek consultations with the province, the feds in terms of what are they seeing in economic trends facing the entire province or the country. So we do evaluate that every planning cycle, but for the near foreseeable future, those four have been serving as well. I do have one more follow-up. As you are being successful, attracting honestly of worldwide businesses to London, if you were to come across during these events and abroad, and you find an organization potentially would not fit any of these clusters or wouldn’t fit your portfolio.

[1:06:54] How would you still attract a business to London cooperating with other organizations? So London as a city, we truly maximize our opportunity. Thank you through the chair. So that happens fairly frequently, not just within the industry clusters, but geographically as well. So we have alliances and relationships set up throughout the region, such as Southern Ontario, Marketing Alliance, Woodstock, St. Thomas. This whole Southwest Ontario region, we have a referral mechanism in place for geographical prosperity throughout Southwest Ontario.

[1:07:29] So that’s on areas that may not fit within the city. On sectors itself that are outside these four areas, we have, for instance, tourism comes to mind. We have partnerships with other service providers as well that might be better suited to address those opportunities. So we make sure we are putting London first, and within that team London approach, we can find the right partner to deliver the best service. Thank you, no more questions? I have Councillor Stevenson and then Councillor Trossa. Thank you, my question is, what’s the biggest challenge LEDC faces over the next four years, and what are your plans to address them?

[1:08:09] Thank you through the chair, hands down workforce. No matter which industry sector we look at, and no matter what scale of company, small, medium, large, the number one constraint facing all businesses right now is access to talent. Which is why through the slides, you saw such heavy emphasis on attracting workforce. And workforce development is not a one-size-fits-all. There’s no magic bullet that’ll serve all the different needs of the community and the region. So there are different prongs within workforce development. Attracting newcomers is one, retaining post-secondary students.

[1:08:42] Attracting more students to our post-secondary institutions. Engaging high school students at an early stage. When my colleague just presented to the Catholic school board guidance counsellors just this week on emerging opportunities so students can be steered accordingly. So across the board, there are so many different prongs on workforce development that we’re trying to deploy to ensure that the talent pipeline continues to be stable. And just to follow up to that, is that always been a big focus of LEDC, or is this a shift to meet that current challenge? Through the chair, it has been an evolving portfolio.

[1:09:22] LEDC has been doing workforce development for well over 10 years. Since inception, it was added, I would say 12, 14 years, I’m going by memory, but around that time. And it was always a support function when companies are coming in, helping them recruit and retain, but it’s grown significantly, I would say over the last five years, to the point where our ability to attract more investments and helping local companies grow hinges on our ability to be able to attract talent. And Councillor Trossal, then Ferra, then McAllister. Thank you, I wanted to ask a specific question about the Don’t Tell Toronto, ma’am, whatever you call it.

[1:10:06] Could you tell me more about what the purpose of that is and how that fits into one of your sectors? Thank you, through the chair. So it, while it’s a marketing campaign to market London position if for new investment and talent attraction, it’s a single goal is to attract new talent, just like I said earlier. The partners we’re working with have highlighted areas within Toronto that might be more in sync with the type of opportunities we have in London. So through social media, TTC, billboard ads on the gardener, they are targeting talent that might be looking at options outside the GT, especially in a post-COVID reality where people can work remotely.

[1:10:49] So it’s playing off of quality of lifestyle affordability relative to Toronto and some of those other features to entice talent to look at London. I can tell you since Labor Day, we’ve received over 5,000 inquiries that our staff has been personally responding to. There’s a lot of families that are reaching out with both partners looking for different employment and entrepreneurial opportunities and staff is taking the time to connect each of them with personalized approaches to various employers and institutions in London. I’d like to ask a little bit through the chair, thank you.

[1:11:25] I’d like to ask a little bit more about the program of trying to retain our post-secondary education students here because that’s something I’m very concerned about. Could you talk a little bit more about how you can develop that and how the institutions can help? And especially for those of us who have post-secondary institutions in our words, how we could assist with that? ‘Cause I talk to students a lot and that’s a real concern. I want students to really consider staying here if they can.

[1:12:01] Yeah, go ahead. Thank you, through the chair. So we’ve taken a lot of different steps to engage with post-secondary. Let me highlight a few. The first piece was integrating the portals, London Tech Jobs, Health Jobs, Manufacturing Jobs, two Western and Fanshawe student career pages. And while that sounds simple, the technology behind that was incredibly complex because we’re working with many different back-end technologies and automating the process so that more London-specific job opportunities are shown to students at an early stage. If they’re exposed to more internships, co-ops, summer job opportunities with local employers and have a flavor for not just the job, the company, but also for the community, there’s a higher chance of them staying.

[1:12:43] And some of our employers that have participated with this program have come back and told us more students are interacting with these positions. So that’s one. I’ll give you examples such as the Kings Promise Program, which is at Kings University College, having more regular job fairs and writing employer partners to be present there to talk to students about local opportunities. If you also look at the cross-section of where students are coming from, a lot of it is GTA-based. So these don’t tell Toronto campaigns act as double whammies. They’re also hitting them at home as well, talking about London. So throughout their experience in London, we’re trying to make sure that they’re getting a well-rounded employment prospecting from London companies, whether it’s on-campus job fairs, integrating the technology, as well as cultural and social elements that might help them create a bond with London.

[1:13:34] And sorry, one last piece on that front. With Fanshawe College, for instance, there’s been regular interaction with their academic units to advise them of what areas of the economy are growing so that more student talent can be channeled in those areas. I’ll just so colleagues know that who I have unless, Councillor Ferra, Councillor McAllister, and I have you, Councillor Hillier. I see you online there. So Councillor Ferra, you’re next. Thank you and through you. Some of the questions have been already raised, but I am still just gonna follow up just to get me into a little bit more detail. I will start with, thank you for the great presentation.

[1:14:07] Both presenters, I didn’t get to speak on the last one, but I thought it was a good presentation, very articulate. And you guys definitely have the answers right off the top of your head, so I appreciate that. With respect to the future challenges and the issues with attracting more talent, I do hear that you say, and I see it too. It’s a matter of getting more individuals, more employees, more workers and that. And I just wanted to touch on how can the city help with that? So I would believe that you’re probably getting feedback that affordability housing issues and just the multitude of issues that we see coming before this chamber again and again.

[1:14:44] So I wanna know if you could just maybe expand on that and just give us a little bit more detail, just so we as Council are just a little more informed as what we can do on the city side anyways. Thank you, through the chair. So everybody who’s looking to make a move has unique variables that they’re subscribing to. Employment or intercompany transfer entrepreneurship is part of the mix, but what’s also sticky is culture, recreation, arts. And it’ll be different for everybody. So, and I know it sounds like a very motherhood statement, but any time we have opportunities to invest more in culture, recreation, all of those elements that make it sticky for families when they’re moving to London to subscribe to the community, to plant roots here and not miss back home.

[1:15:31] There’s always that comparison when people move with, we had XY and Z back home, what do we have here in London? When we’re responding to a lot of these inquiries, we’re trying to take that approach and show people the variety of different things London has to offer. So I think from that standpoint, ongoing investments in core areas, in recreation, in cultural attributes, whether it’s dining, entertainment, recreation, all of those elements that make it truly sticky for people when they land here is something that I think will take us far. Now, thank you for that.

[1:16:04] I’ll just wrap this up really quick. I do want to touch on the Don’t Tell Toronto campaign. I have been here in grid buzz on that. It is controversial statement, but at the same time, that has definitely helped and facilitated with that message going through. So I’ve had, I’ve heard good things on that. So I just want to make comment on that. Thank you, but don’t tell Toronto. Okay, thanks. I have Councillor McAllister next. Thank you and through the chair. Also appreciate the presentation, thank you for that. I’m wondering if you could speak in terms of the quality of the jobs that we’ve been able to attract.

[1:16:40] Obviously cost of living is top of mind for a lot of people. And I’m wondering in terms of salaries, are we competitive in that realm? I’m happy to see the province is finally showing what the job offers, salary ranges. I think that’s a good step because you don’t want that mismatch of people coming and realizing, well, the job is not paying what I thought I did, right? So I was wondering if you could speak a bit more in terms of the quality of the jobs that we’ve been able to attract. Thank you. Thank you through the chair.

[1:17:12] I can tell you a lot of these facilities that are coming to London, even the manufacturing ones, have a significant head office component with them as well. So while the volume of jobs within manufacturing are production related, we’re also getting finance, marketing, HR, a bunch of head office functions as well. I don’t have salary data, but what I can tell you is companies have not expressed that they’re not able to attract talent because of competitive wages. I think, and of course there’s been a lot of inflationary pressures over the last several years that that’s well known, but London does compete on the national level in terms of attracting skilled labor as it relates to competitive wage rates.

[1:17:55] Thanks to that diversification that I spoke of earlier, we’ve been able to attract a wide variety of occupations as well. So that’s helped further diversify the knock codes, the national occupation codes. We just recently did four studies with Dr. Mike Moffatt from the Smart Prosperity Institute that broke down a list of occupations within manufacturing, construction, health, and technology. And they came up with a list of different occupations that London needs to grow. And within all the stakeholder interviews and consultations that Dr. Moffatt did, competitiveness of wages was never identified as a leading criteria.

[1:18:38] Thank you for that and through the chair. I was wondering if you could speak a bit more in terms of what you hear from perspective talent or companies in terms of what’s a barrier to establishing in London is would it be infrastructure, housing, transit, like what are the main challenges that we as a city need to do to attract that? Through the chair, thank you. I think on the industrial infrastructure standpoint, companies have really liked this region in general, especially our industrial parks that the city develops.

[1:19:16] Overall, I think the team comes back to the ability to attract workforce. Companies that have chosen to go elsewhere in Ontario have done that for reasons that they thought they might be able to attract talent from other metropolis, whether it’s Toronto or GTA-H as it relates to the Hamilton proximity. So I think it all comes back to the confidence they can develop in terms of being able to attract the type of jobs that they’re looking for. Councilor Hillier. Thank you very much.

[1:19:50] Mr. LaCodia, thank you, first of all, for all the work you guys do, attracting industry to our area and along the 401 corridor into my ward. What I’m curious about is the innovation park and the gap in the urban growth boundary. And I’m wondering if that land is causing an issue for you attracting industry along the 401 corridor ‘cause there is that gap. Thank you, through the chair. There is sufficient inventory in the current industrial parks.

[1:20:25] We have, in addition to innovation park, right at the 401, we also have the new Huron Industrial Park close to the airport along with several other parcels that have recently come on board. And there are further plans to develop innovation park. Phase five is going to come online in the next little bit as well. So I think, I hesitate to speak on behalf of my city colleagues, but I feel from my standpoint, there’s enough existing inventory to suffice the forecast of demand, but maybe I’ll look to Mr. Mathers to add some more color. To the chair and just to add, there is a land need study that’s being, is ongoing for industrial lands to just reconfirm that.

[1:21:05] So of course, like there’s lands for that short term and that’s what LADC is really focused on as well. And then we’re also looking for that long term to make sure that there’s enough for that 20, 25 year period. So that is an ongoing work that we’re at the city is working on. Councillor Hillier. Yeah, so one more. Have you received any inquiries about spaces in the urban growth boundary that we should be looking at or possibly getting an exemption for? We do have received a, not increase from end users, but property owners that have ambitions to develop those parcels.

[1:21:45] But that’s not an area for us. We pass it on to our colleagues at planning. And I guess, again, I might look to Mr. Mathers. Go ahead, Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, yeah, absolutely. So that’s something that we’re actively pursuing. We have various partners across the city as part of our industrial strategic plan. And we move forward with that as these opportunities come up and work very hard on that on a daily basis. Thank you very much.

[1:22:20] Okay, thank you, Councillor Cady. Thank you and through you, chair. I was gonna ask the same question that Councillor Stevenson asked about. So I’ll just make a comment, Mr. Locote. I wanna tell you that I’ve known just by every CEO that’s been with LADC since the beginning, including Mr. John Kaim. And I think you, sir, stand toe to toe with any one of them. Congratulations on the great work. You and I recently spoke about Volkswagen and the new battery plant. And I think we really don’t have a concept of the great downstream effect we’re going to see in our city from Volkswagen.

[1:22:56] And I wonder if you could maybe speak to that a little bit about what we’re gonna see in the future. Thank you. Thank you, through the chair. Through all this year, there’s been a flurry of activity from suppliers that need to supply both Volkswagen as well as Telantis in Windsor. So we’re also seeing some trickle effect for that investment, even though it’s significantly further away than Volkswagen. There are a number of irons in the fire. Several companies have, even this week, there are several that are coming to tour again. There are various different stages of their assessment.

[1:23:31] I’m confident that our area will certainly see some supplier activity is just a matter of companies doing their due diligence. A lot of these things are often at the provincial and federal level in terms of incentive programs and government partnerships as well. So we work hand in glove with those units as well. But based on the volume of interest and activity, as well as our availability of land within Innovation Park and other industrial assets in that corridor, there are good prospects about landing some of these suppliers. Thank you. And just a final comment and it would be referencing Councillor Hillier’s comments.

[1:24:14] I think that anything close to the 401, including Councillor Hillier’s area, is really important as industries look for whatever properties they can get as close as they can to where they’re building. And I think Councillor Hillier has a point that we’ll be looking out in his area for more development. I would also mention that I would like to speak to you in the future about possibly doing some work at Fanshawe as it’s in my ward. And I’m very actively involved with some of the activity going on out there. So we’ll chat about that in the future.

[1:24:46] Thank you. Thank you. Any other speakers? Oh, Councillor Vameerberg and go ahead. Thank you, Mayor and thank you, Capil, for the presentation. I’ve been involved for quite some time in the automotive related exporting manufacturing sector. And I’ve spent a lot of time in Michigan, Ohio, et cetera, speaking with new companies, perhaps to do business with.

[1:25:28] And quite often they’ve never heard of London, Ontario. And when you say it, their eyes kind of glass over and say things like London, Ontario, that sounds like a far away place to do business. Capil, I’m wondering, given that the United States is still the largest economy and it’s just an hour down the road for us to access. Are we actually proactively going into some of these border states like Michigan, like Ohio, the nearby states, with a London plan for them to digest?

[1:26:10] Thank you, to the mayor, to the chair, I’m sorry, which also is a mayor. We follow the lead of the provincial and federal colleagues. So whether straight commissioners or economic officers that are stationed in various areas, including US, to your point, there are some right in Detroit, Ohio, Kentucky, that whole automotive belt. So a lot of their work involves lead generation and activities such as participation at auto shows and other trade related events. We have that mechanism where leads are being generated throughout this ecosystem.

[1:26:48] And when companies are looking at this part of the world, for instance, a couple of years ago, we had Arvin Sango that came from that Kentucky area, which is a supplier to Toyota. So we participate in those type of activities to ensure London is on the radar for companies that are looking at Ontario. All these recent investments, especially in the EV space, from a federal standpoint, has had a lot of emphasis in Europe and Asia, Southeast Asia, especially in Korea and Japan. The trends from the federal level shows that we can expect more investment activity from that part of the world, especially because with the Inflation Reduction Act and some other by America policies, there’s a lot of US investment that’s actually staying in the United States.

[1:27:35] And it’s not just with automotive. We’ve seen that with chip manufacturing and a bunch of other areas as well. So overall, as it relates to deal flow and investment activity, we’re getting more interest from Europe and Korea, Japan area. But to answer the question more directly, we’re relying on that referral mechanism within that trade commissioner set up in the US to ensure that London continues to stay on that radar. Good, thanks very much, Capil. I don’t have any other speakers.

[1:28:08] Seeing no one else looking to add anything, we need a motion to receive the update. Councilor Raman, seconded by Councilor McAllister. I don’t think there’s any discussion on that, so we’ll open that for voting. Those are votes, yes. Opposing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero.

[1:29:27] Sorry for the dramatic pause there, just a little bit of technical issues. I just wanna add, like I said, the previous presenter, please let your board know we appreciate the work that’s being done. We appreciate also you coming and answering very thoroughly all of our detailed questions but with very detailed and relevant answers, it’s greatly appreciated. We look forward to continuing to work with you. With that, we’ll move on to our third and final delegation of this section. We have Steve, the executive director of the Small Business Center, coming for the annual update for that organization.

[1:30:05] So once we get your presentation up on the screen, we’ll get you up to the podium to present. Right, we’ll invite you up now, Mr. Pelerin.

[1:31:00] I have to change my mask there, and there’s a chance of fogging up. So many of you know us as that place that helps people start and grow businesses. That is true, but we play a more significant role than that. We are a public resource for the citizens of London. We work with people from all walks of life, each with their own dream of business ownership. Some are driven to achieve wealth, but most are in pursuit of a better quality of life. They want freedom, they want purpose, and an opportunity to contribute to their community.

[1:31:38] They’re not world-changing innovators, nor are they SMEs with 50 employees. They are your hairstylists, your mechanic, your childcare provider, your fitness instructor, and the hundreds of other businesses that make us a community. Not everyone we work with will start a business, and that’s okay too. We take pride in knowing that we help people make informed decisions that are best for their family. Yes, our goal is economic development, but our passion is people. We want the business community to represent the diversity of our citizens, and we believe everyone should have an opportunity to pursue their goal of business ownership.

[1:32:20] We have a unique relationship with the city. The city was a founding member of the corporation in 1986, and in 1997, when the province rolled out its network of small business enterprise centers, they approached the city who in turn contracted us. I mention this because it makes us unique. In most cities, the public service that we provide is delivered directly by the municipality in partnership with the province. This has created both opportunities and challenges for us. As an independent organization, we have been able to create unique partnerships and explore various program delivery models.

[1:32:57] On the downside, we not have the same access to municipal resources, and we have fallen behind other cities and the support provided. So who do we serve? First point of contact, 23% are at the investigatory stage, 44% are startups, and 32% are existing businesses. Women continue to be the most active demographic, and the percentage of immigrants is growing. The unemployed also represent a notable percentage. You can see our most active business sectors are food related and retail.

[1:33:40] This is a direct result of where we’ve been able to secure additional funding to invest in programming. I’ll skip by slide seven and just encourage you to visit our website to learn more about our services. In slide eight, this is a very high level summary of activity and touch points. Many of the training sessions, and you’ll see we did over 170 training sessions last year, are actually designed to triage and redirect consultation requests, because we simply are unable to meet one-on-one with everyone who requests a meeting with us.

[1:34:21] Now this slide, this is where I start to get really excited. When we’re fortunate, we can direct clients into programs. The vast majority of inquiries we receive will never qualify for program, but for those that do, we were able to offer an enhanced level of service, and that is where our highest impact and value comes from. I’ve only got time to talk about a couple. The Food Printer Advantage program has completed the second year of a four-year agreement, and we are thrilled with the results. We are prospecting for high value food and beverage manufacturing startups.

[1:34:57] We begin broadly with startup sessions to reach as many as we can, and then we identify candidates to participate in our scale-up program, which is designed specifically for high potential consumer packaged goods manufacturers. We’ve had such success that other municipalities have reached out to us. Our Food Printer Advantage brand is now carried in eight municipalities. Recently, we had St. Catharines and Brampton reach out to us to see how they could get involved. Slide 11 is the wrap-up report of the My Main Street Local Business Accelerator program.

[1:35:31] It officially ended in June. As your worship will remember, you led the motion to secure 57,000 in funding that helped us to leverage 630,000 in provincial federal dollars. A total of 400,000 in grants went to 40 businesses. In this past year, we were asked to speak at the EDCO Annual Conference, as well as the Obia Annual Conference, to share our success with that program. That was a notable win for London. Another notable success that came out of the LCRN fund was a small outreach project to connect newcomers to London’s entrepreneurial support network.

[1:36:08] Over a five-month period, we partnered with six agencies to deliver a short startup workshop. More than 500 people registered and 307 attended. One session was actually translated live into seven languages. It was an opportunity for us to better understand the untapped potential and demand from the newcomer population. We were overwhelmed with 19% of attendees engaging our services in the weeks following those activities. Unfortunately, we do not have the capacity to continue that work. We were hopeful our experience will lead to new funding opportunities.

[1:36:42] For the sake of time, I’ll skip slide 13 and jump to 14. Our total economic impact. It’s important to note that this primarily represents the outcome of our program activity with 374 new jobs reported by clients engaged in programs. It does not include the impact of the 1,000 of inquiries, seminar attendees, and consultations that we provide to the community as a public service. And finally, the work we do matters. But don’t take our word for it.

[1:37:15] Enjoy these testimonials and many more on our website. As I’ve said, behind every business, there is a person. Thank you. OK, thank you for the presentation. I look for any questions that colleagues might have. Go ahead, Councillor Troso. Thank you for your presentation. Through the chair, I just want to better understand the relationship between this entity and the Chamber of Commerce and whether there’s any overlap or whether there are any joint programs. Go ahead.

[1:37:54] Through the chair, we consider ourselves to be a farm team for the Chamber. As you know, the Chamber is a membership driven organization. Most of our clients at the early stages are not yet at the point where they would engage in Chamber services. And the Chamber does not engage in that really early startup activity as well. I mean, the people who come to us, they’re looking for the basics. They want to know how to register their business. They want to know what the rules and regulations are. They want to know how they can get access to funding.

[1:38:28] They want to know how to put together a business plan. Those are not activities that the Chamber engages to their members. Councillor McAllister. Thank you, through the chair. Thank you for the presentation. I’m wondering if you could speak a bit more. You mentioned in terms of newcomers trying to start up businesses, and that you didn’t necessarily have the capacity. But I did notice there were some partnership organizations on there in terms of like LUSO, CCLC. Have you been able to maintain any of those partnerships, or is it more of a capacity issue on your side, or have there been the productive conversations about partnering with other organizations?

[1:39:14] Through the chair, it’s definitely a capacity issue. The organizations that were identified there, they have all reached out to us on numerous occasions. They want us to come and speak to their clients. They want us to engage with their clients. We don’t have the capacity to do it, which is why we took advantage of the LCR funding, got a little bit of funding so that we could go out and do that work. It was well received. They would like us to keep doing it. But until we find a new source of revenue, we’re unfortunately unable to do that. There is huge potential there.

[1:39:48] I’ve got to say, I mean, the individuals that we meet through those organizations, they have so much ambition and desire to make a go of it in this country. We’ve got to find a way to tap into that. OK. I have Councillor Pribble, and then Councillor Ferreira. We might just need your microphone there. Thanks. Recent articles stayed during the last 20 years.

[1:40:22] Even though Canada’s population grew over $10 million, we are sorry, 10 million people, population-wise. We actually have 100,000 less entrepreneurs. And we know small businesses are tremendously important to local communities, municipalities. We’re leaving the tax dollars locally at incomes as well. What are we doing? If we look at a CBA coming up, if we look at the economies of scale, a lot of things are going kind of currently against the small businesses. What initiatives are we implementing, introducing, to make sure that we, in these young people, we kind of open up the spirit to be entrepreneurs and to try to stay in the local municipality and open up their own businesses and become entrepreneurs?

[1:41:14] The short answer would be we’re not doing enough. We’re not doing enough initiatives. The fact that the population is growing and the number of businesses is declining does not actually surprise me. And the reason being, we’re losing ground to a lot of big corporations. I mean, Amazon, others, like we’re losing ground there. But when you also take a look at where our population growth is coming from, i.e. the immigrant population, we know that recent immigrants are much more likely than second and third generation immigrants to start new businesses.

[1:41:51] However, they’re even more likely to exit after the first year. And that is because it’s overwhelming, it’s complicated. They may lack the financial resources, the knowledge. And to me, that all comes back to having structured programming in place for them. And it’s just something that we’re not doing enough of. I don’t mean London, I mean generally speaking. We put a lot of emphasis on those high growth, high potential sectors, but we don’t spend enough time thinking about those local jobs, those local community businesses that also need that kind of support.

[1:42:30] Things like the SIBA were great, but as you know, the SIBA only came without because suddenly the world paid attention to the fact that these small local businesses were hurting and suffering. But we’re not out of the woods yet. These SIBA loans are coming due. And many of the businesses that we’re talking to are ill equipped to deal with that, especially at the current interest rates. There’s still a long way to go. But if you’re going to ask me, I’m going to be biased to my answer. But if you ask me what the solution is, it’s going to be more structured programs that reach more people.

[1:43:10] I think it just won’t follow up. More structures than we are not doing enough. Anything else besides resources? Anything else, financial resources and funding? Anything else that come to your mind that would help? Well, not everything within our control. I mean, clearly things like the interest rates, access to labor, some of the labor requirements that make it difficult for small employers to compete with larger employers. There’s a lot of stuff at a provincial and federal level that I understand is not within the realm of maybe a municipality.

[1:43:47] But I do think that people need to start paying attention. And municipalities also need to start advocating with the provincial government and the federal government on these issues that are facing small businesses. We just check your microphone and make sure it’s off for me. I got Councilor Ferra next. Thank you, through you. I guess my questions are kind of similar to Councilor Preble. So I do understand that the small businesses of the city and small business in general are definitely some of the people who’ve definitely felt the biggest impacts during the pandemic.

[1:44:29] And you and I have had conversations about this before. So I know the small business center has been right there, front and center. And you’ve been going through this as well. I just wanted to maybe ask— I know you kind of answered a little bit, but with the structured programs that you were talking about. And what you think would help you move forward, especially with respect to the fact that we’re still feeling the effects of the pandemic. We’re still feeling the effects of the whole economic impact. And I just wanted to know if there’s anything that you could add to what you’ve already said. Through you, Chair, sorry, if you just clarify it, you’re asking specifically what we need?

[1:45:14] Is that what you’re— I’m not sure what the question was. You just need to give the microphone back. Basically, I understand that throughout the pandemic, I know that the small business center had challenges everywhere leading up to even people coming into the building, into the door. So I wanted to know if you maybe could give a better picture of maybe just a summary of where we were to where we are right now, the outlook, and then what you think where we’ll be, I guess, to say it generally in the future.

[1:45:50] I just want to know how— and like I said, it’s kind of speaking to Council of Purple just a little bit. How would we be able to assist the small business center, be able to assist small businesses moving forward, particularly speaking to the effects that are still being felt today? So, Councilor, just let me jump in. Do you mind if we just focus on the second half of your question? I don’t think, given the amount on the agenda, we need the history of where we come from, where we’re going. But maybe the end part of that, just saying, what do you need next where we headed is probably the part that’s best.

[1:46:25] I think Mr. Pearlman is happy to probably meet with you to talk about kind of the past. But I’m just trying to keep the agenda tight if you don’t mind. We’ll focus on the second piece. Yeah, no worries. I was just trying to give like a comparative. You don’t have to go too much into the history, because we have had the conversation before. But I’m just really more interested on just the status, the situation today. Go ahead. OK, and I’m going to take, sorry, through your chair. Again, we can break that into two parts. I believe you’re asking specifically about existing business as opposed to that startup activity. So with regards to the existing businesses, yes, we often hear that the biggest challenge they’re facing is access to capital, access to financing.

[1:47:14] But our experience shows us it’s actually the availability of their time. They don’t have the time to properly work on the business, because they’re too busy working in the business. And it would absolutely amaze you how many business owners out there have really poor, even basic financial understanding of their situation, let alone their operational situations. There’s a lot of businesses that just— they’re so busy. They don’t have time to actually work on the business. So that’s what we do.

[1:47:50] That’s the primary role of the Small Business Center. But to do that, to get a business to take time away from their business, we have to entice them. And we entice them with programs. We entice them with financial offerings. We entice them with leveraged offices, offers through provincial programs, et cetera. That’s what it takes. It just takes more time. That’s the bottom line. It takes more time to spend one-on-one coaching with businesses. OK, other speakers?

[1:48:29] Great, then I need one of those motions to receive the update. I have Councillor Pribble and Councillor Ramen do this one. And we’ll open that for voting as soon as it’s ready. Councillor Posey votes yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0.

[1:49:16] And thank you very much for the presentation as well as to you, the board, and all the staff at the Small Business Center for everything you do to assist important growing segment of our business community and all that you do to help new entrepreneurs navigate the way through the challenges and opportunities of business ownership. So thanks very much, Steve. And thank you for the opportunity tonight. OK, we’re on to committee appointment preferences submitted by Council members.

[1:50:10] So for those of you new to Council, it’s the time of year where you may have loved the committee served on now you can opportunity to maybe continue on or try a new committee. I know everybody submitted their preferences. The chairs are outlined there. So we’re looking to populate the remaining members of the committee. We’ll proceed through this in the order that it’s listed on the agenda with planning committee first. Now, I will say, much like we did the first time through, the clerks have everything kind of preloaded with every member of Council in. So you may have ranked it first, second, third, or fourth.

[1:50:45] You’re not really bound by that. If you’ve changed your mind between now and then you’re looking to do something a little bit different than you’ve written down, just let us know if you want to be considered for that committee. So we’ll kind of put out that open call to see who would like to be where. And if there’s more than four additional members beyond the chairs, fill that committee. Then we’ll have a vote. And the top vote getters will be on the committee and the other ones will not. But don’t be shy about putting your name forward if there’s a committee you’d like to serve on.

[1:51:19] And I think for those of us who’ve served on Council before, all of us have been through this process before. All of us have gotten committees we’d like. All of us have gotten missed opportunities. Maybe we wanted to serve on. So I would say just don’t take offense to the process. It’s there’s always opportunities to serve. And I think we’ve all been on multiple sides of those decisions. So with that, I’m going to start with, I think we’ve got Planning and Environment Committee listed here. So we have Councillor Layman, who’s the chair. We have four members who have submitted their first preference, but that doesn’t mean others can’t add their name to that.

[1:51:54] And I guess if you’re on that first preference list and you don’t want to be on Planning Committee anymore, now’s the time to speak up. So maybe I’ll start with just colleagues to see if who’s looking to serve on that committee and we can populate a list. So this is where— and everybody’s at the meeting, so everybody’s able to participate. So if you want to be on Planning Committee, I know you’ve listed, but I’m not going to presume that that’s the case. Let me know. So Councillor ramen’s willing to. She wants to be on the list of people serving. If you’re online, you’re just going to have to let me know if you’re interested.

[1:52:29] And I know Councillor Frank, Councillor Frank, you have your screen on. You’re interested in planning? OK, Councillor Frank’s interest. Yes, please. Councillor Adep Given that, I actually don’t need to go through a process.

[1:53:04] I just need someone to move a motion to appoint these members as the Planning Committee. I see Councillor Privel, Councillor Cuddy’s willing to second. Anyone in want to discuss? No? OK, so what we’re doing is we’re having a motion to appoint Councillor Frank, Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor Hillier, and Councillor ramen to the committee with Councillor Lehman as chair. Councillor Ploza, I saw that you ended up leaving and then having to come back into the Zoom meeting there for a moment.

[1:54:08] I’ll just let you know before we open a vote that we’re in the process of we’ve got a motion to appoint Councillor Frank, Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor Hillier, Councillor ramen to the Planning and Environment Committee with Councillor Lehman already serving as the chair there. So that’s what’s going to open momentarily. Thank you, I did see that. OK, perfect. OK, so we’ll open that for voting. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0.

[1:54:53] OK, next we’re to Civic Works Committee. Got Councillor Hopkins serving as chair of that. I’ll look to others who are looking to serve on the Civic Works Committee. Councillor Troesau, Councillor Pribble, Councillor Ferrera, at least one more. Anybody online looking to go? I’ve seen this before in a previous council.

[1:55:48] And sometimes people are holding out for a committee that they may or may not get. And sometimes if we can’t decide on one, we could always flip that one down to the bottom as well. Councillor Troesau. I’m wondering if the deputy city manager involved might want to give just a little bit of a promo for how exciting this committee is. I like the idea of putting the deputy city managers on the spot to promo the committees that they serve. It’s kind of like the Don’t Tell Toronto advertising campaign. Don’t tell anyone about how exciting Civic Works Committee is.

[1:56:24] Unless colleagues are looking for a little bit more information on the Civic Works Committee, I certainly allowed both of that. But I’m going to assume that most committee members know what the committees are. I’m just looking for some guidance, colleagues. Councillor Pelosi, you have your hand up. Sorry, thank you. Just a purpose that I’m not at this time able to take on another committee. But I would note that due to our numbers and committee vacancies that some Councillors are required to serve on more than one committee. So if you’re holding that back, some will need to serve on more than one. Maybe I could suggest a process here.

[1:57:07] We get a 0.3 people. We can come back and fill the last spot at the end. Maybe someone has a different thought as we go through the process because they get on a committee that maybe they don’t want to serve or they don’t. Councillor Stevenson. I’m willing to put that motion forward. I’m just going to, with everybody’s unanimous consent, just do that rather than have a motion. OK, so what I am going to take from you is I don’t need the motion to do the rest at the end.

[1:57:42] I am just going to take the motion for you to move Councillor Pribble, Trossaou, and Ferreira to the committee. I’ll look for a seconder for that knowing that we have one more vacancy to fill. Councillor Cutty’s willing to second that. Any discussion on appointing those three members? We’ll open the appointment of those three members for voting. And then we’re going to come back to Civic Works Committee at the end of the whole process and get another member. Opposing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0.

[1:58:45] OK, next we have community and protective services committee. We have Councillor Palosa willing to chair that. I look for members who are interested in serving there. I see Councillor Trossaou, Councillor Stevenson, Councillor McAllister, Councillor Pribble, Councillor Ferreira, I’m looking online. Anybody who can for community and protective services committee online? No, anybody else in the room? OK, that means we get to, we get to do a vote on that one.

[1:59:20] So we will have Councillor Stevenson, Ferre, McAllister, Pribble and Trossaou on that ballot. And we’ll open it up. And then, OK, just, yeah, we’ll let people speak to it for sure. Let me just, while they’re loading that up, I’ll let anybody speak to it who’d like to speak to it. If you’d like to go, Councillor Stevenson, go ahead. Yes, I would just like to request that I get back on this committee for one more year. It’s in line with my police board, paramedic and social services in Old East Village. So one more year on this one, please.

[1:59:55] Anybody else want to speak? Go ahead, Councillor McAllister. Thank you and through the chair. Not only this would be my first time on this committee, I also, I have an interest, actually, more on the community side of it. I think there’s a bunch of issues coming that will affect my ward that I would like to sit on this committee for. Thank you. Councillor Schosel, go ahead. Well, I was disappointed the first time. And I’m just trying again. I want to stay on civic works, but this is— I’m willing to serve on two committees. This corresponds with a lot of my interests in the housing and code enforcement sector.

[2:00:32] And this really corresponds with a lot of the requests that I get in my ward. OK. Anyone else? Councillor Ferrell, go ahead. Thank you. This was my first choice. I know I was on it before, but I have still more work to do. A lot of the items that come to this committee are directly related to things that pop up in my ward. So I do believe that I hope that I get your support for it. I do like this committee.

[2:01:04] It is a heavy workload committee. Sometimes the meetings are long, but they’re very impactful. So I do hope that I get your support for another year. Councillor Privel, you’re the only one left. Do you want to say any words? Do you truly enjoy the one year? And I do think that there are certain open issues that are actually coming back next year. And I think that continuity would be really important in these issues. And again, I think I would be a valid voice to this committee, even though I will still attend it.

[2:01:40] So I just want to let you know that I certainly would still attend it even though I would not be devoting member. Thank you. That’s everybody. I mean, other members of Council can weigh in if they want, but probably probably not going to happen. OK, great. Is we have that set up? OK, so everybody votes for four of the five. Got it.

[2:02:11] So when the vote opens, you’re going to pick four people. Got it. OK, we’re going to open that vote. Closing the vote in the vote is as follows.

[2:03:27] Councillor McAlister, 15. Councillor Stevenson, 8. Councillor Privel, 13. Councillor Trozzell, 9. Councillor Ferrera, 15. So the result is Councillor Ferrera, McAlister, Privel, and Trozzell being appointed to the committee. Well, not appointed yet, because someone has to make that motion to do that. Councillor Ferrera is willing to put those names forward, seconded by Councillor McAlister.

[2:04:01] Any discussion on that? That’ll take a second just to get up. OK, we’re going to open that for voting. Councillor Trozzell, Councillor Ferrera.

[2:06:05] Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0. OK, next is Corporate Services Committee. Requires four members. Councillor McAlister is serving as chair. I’ll look for those who are interested in serving on that committee. Councillor Stevenson, Councillor Cuddy, Councillor Van Mirbergen, one more. Councillor Ramen, anyone else?

[2:06:46] OK, so that means I could just take a motion for Councillor Stevenson, Councillor Cuddy, Councillor Van Mirbergen, Councillor McAlister, or Councillor Ramen with Councillor McAlister serving as chair. Councillor Cuddy’s willing to move that, seconded by Councillor Ferrera. Any discussion on that? OK, we’ll pull that up in a sec, and then I’ll let you know when it’s ready for voting. I vote yes.

[2:07:30] Wait there yet, I’ll let you know when. OK, we’re opening that for voting. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0. OK, and now we get to loop back to Civic Works Committee.

[2:08:20] So after all of that, we need one more person for Civic Works Committee. Councillor Hopkins, you’re the chair. Are you going to make a pitch? I’m going to make a pitch. I have served on Civic, oh, two times in the past. It’s an exciting committee. I feel like spending money on lots of needed infrastructure projects. Please join me. Who’s looking to serve on Civic Works Committee? This is the point where you kind of strong-armed someone sitting beside you.

[2:08:59] Encourage them along. I see Councillor Frank. Are you volunteering? No, your hand’s up. No, I have a quick question. I just noticed the last vote. We appointed Councillor McAlister who’s the chair, and so the four people— and maybe it’s just my voting thing, but I just don’t think it’s correct, so. That’s good catch, Councillor Frank. It was Councillor Raman who got missed, so we’re going to loop back and just appoint Councillor Raman to the Corporate Services Committee.

[2:09:45] So I’ll move her to point Councillor Raman. Moved by Councillor Cudi, seconded by Councillor McAlister. Councillor McAlister, you tried to do it. Councillor Layman did, and that’s get on twice. Maybe two votes, like— OK, so that’s ready. We’re going to open Councillor Raman to the Corporate Services Committee for approval. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to 0.

[2:10:22] Now we’re back to needing someone for Civic Works Committee. This is the point at which, although I didn’t do it before, this is the point where the Deputy City Manager can pitch the upcoming exciting items may be coming to Civic Works Committee this year and see if that entices anyone. Do you want to just highlight a couple of things? Thank you, Your Worship. I am trying not to take this personally, so we take this like a Dragon’s Den opportunity. So Civic Works will be looking at another record construction year.

[2:10:55] We’ll be continuing work on our rapid transit projects. We’ve got some massive expansion work planned to provide wastewater servicing for growth. We’ll be bringing the transportation mobility master plan back through Civic Works. Lots of exciting things. And we tend to run a pretty tight meeting, so usually we’re not there for more than 90 minutes. All right, I’m looking for a volunteer. Councillor Frank.

[2:11:30] I have one quick question. Yes, by me, through you two Councillor Hopkins. I’m just curious if you’ve looked at the Upper Thames Board meeting schedule in Civic Works, because I’d be willing to say in Civic Works, but I’m worried about the conflict with Upper Thames. Some just wondering Councillor Hopkins has already co-related them and identified there is not significant overlap. I’m not sure if you can answer that Councillor Hopkins, but— I have looked into it. Upper Thames will be finalizing the upcoming meetings for 2024 this month, so still haven’t seen those meetings, and they still need to be confirmed.

[2:12:12] I know that they do meet in the mornings, Tuesday mornings, but nothing has been confirmed yet. Does that help Councillor Frank or not? Yeah, I mean, I’m willing to say Civic Works because that pitch from the Deputy City Manager was just too good to say no to. But I just am worried a bit about Upper Thames, but perhaps that’s something Councillor Hopkins and I can speak with Upper Thames about. I think that’s fair, and I will tell you, I don’t think any colleague would take offense, given we really need someone for the committee and getting you on now, and if there’s some sort of conflict and we need to strongarm someone else in the future, we can always make a switch, but hopefully it will all work out if you’re willing to serve on Civic Works Committee.

[2:12:59] Councillor Hopkins had something to add? Yeah, there’ll be two of us that will have a conflict then, but I’ll leave it at that. Sounds to me like you’ve got to flex the voting power at Upper Thames and make sure their meeting schedule aligns with ours. Okay, so that means Councillor Frank, you’re willing to serve, so I’ll look for a mover for Councillor Frank to serve on this. Councillor Ferris willing to move, seconded by Councillor Caddy, any discussion on that? Okay, we’ll open that for voting. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero.

[2:13:56] Colleagues, I wonder if you want to break before or after the next item, because everything is ready for us to break now if you would like, but we could also do it like we could do it after. So if someone wants to break, just move a motion, we’ll vote on it. If you want to continue, don’t move a motion. Looks like everybody wants to do one more item for the break. Okay, we’re going to do item 4.2, which is the cold weather response. Yeah, Councillor, Councillor, sorry?

[2:14:35] Yeah, I think I’m going to change my mind and make the motion to break. You don’t think that one will be fast? No. Okay, how long, so do you want to do 20 minutes? That’s fine. Yeah, okay, Councillor Troose, I was moving a 20 minute break. Deputy Mayor Lewis is seconding, we’re going to do this by hand. Oh, no, we’re not, we’re going to do it in the system. ‘Cause we’re going to do it by hand. All those in favor of 20 minute break. Any opposed? Motion carries.

[2:15:14] Okay, 20 minutes. So for people participating digitally, if you could just flip your screen on or send a hand signals to the clerks can just count you for your presence, your valuable presence.

[2:23:07] I see heart symbols and I-5s and a lot of other stuff. Okay, thank you. So we’re back, we’re back here. I am going to circle back. There’s one thing we missed on one of the items. I had written a piece of correspondence related to the committee appointments. We just have to receive that. So I look for a motion to receive Councillor Ramen, seconded by Councillor McAllister. As soon as that’s ready, we’ll open it for voting. Deputy Mayor Lewis.

[2:23:57] Yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, thank you. And though it’s a long way off, well, I hope not, but it may be. When we get to adjournment, I just, someone remind me that I have something to say before adjournment. It’s just in case I forget it caught up in things. We’re onto the next item, which is a cold weather response update. And so I’m just going to have Mr. Dickens just quickly introduce this item. Thank you, your worship and through you.

[2:24:32] What Council has before them today is a culmination of several months of community planning and a lot of work and discussion on trying to find a number of overnight cold weather options for vulnerable individuals. Presented to council and committee for consideration tonight are four options that the community has brought forward. Right now our planned operating budget to support the combination of these four options is roughly 1.8 million. And while that number may fluctuate as we receive in real time this week, Q2 and Q3 actuals from previous funding arrangements, we don’t anticipate that number to increase significantly at this time.

[2:25:15] Okay, and on this item, I know if I have Councillor Stevenson down as wanting to speak, but maybe before that, there’s a request for delegation status. I’d like to deal with that first. So if there’s a Councillor Ramen, you’re willing to entertain a five minute delegation seconded by Councillor Stevenson. Any discussion before I open that voting? Okay, so this is to allow the request of delegation for up to five minutes. I will open that for voting. Opposing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero.

[2:26:02] Okay, Ms. Campbell, you’ll have the ability to present for up to five minutes, and so you can start whenever you like. And we’ll just maybe just test the mic, I’ll make sure it’s on. Hello? Yeah, perfect, you’re ready to go. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I’m here with other people who are supporting these words. I’m here with Ed Wilson, the chair of our board, David Rather from Warner Place, which is also Bishop Cornyn’s location.

[2:26:35] I have a colleague, Rob here, as well as Carna Trentman from CMHA STV. I’ve met and spoken with Kevin from the Old East Village BIA, as well as our word counselor, Susan. We’ve talked about the plans, and I’m pleased to sort of be here to offer myself really to you, Council. I wanted to speak to you today to share our gratitude in our ability to do this work, to build your confidence in the plan due to our experience, community support, and learning over the number of years that we’ve been offering winter beds, and to offer accountability and the direct opportunity to respond to any questions you may have about this year’s plan.

[2:27:25] Our community needs these services desperately. Arcade Street Mission has been an active participant in the all of community response, health and homelessness effort, and many of our staff, some of our frontline workers, and even some of our community members have had the benefit of sitting in those meetings and rooms. We believe in the work that’s being done, and our board spoke and continues to speak at every board meeting about our role as an organization in supporting the work of the all of community response to homelessness in our community.

[2:28:00] We understood very early on that as we look for system transformation in our city, that arcade would need to continue to provide the winter beds that we’ve been active in serving our community and delivering for the last three years. Our board determined not to put a hub’s plan forward for this year, knowing that we would need to put all of our resources into supporting a winter plan. Never did we imagine that we may be the only service provider adding beds this year.

[2:28:32] I think it speaks to the capacity issue across our sector that arcade is the one organization that will be hiring up to 100 new staff to provide the spaces that are necessary. This is not a small challenge. We’ve been through this challenge before, and we’ve learned a lot. But this time, because of the health and homelessness experience, we have more support. We have support from the police services where we have better communication, and they’ve talked to us about this plan and how they’ll be able to help us with transition times through the core area police officers.

[2:29:11] We’ve talked with LHSC, a partner that we’ve never worked with directly who’s helping us with the HR planning and onboarding. We have the support of CMHA and the work that we’re doing together to make their space available for 24 hour service while they do the day space, and we would operate the night space. And we have the support of our encampment table with all of the folks who have helped us to define the problem and come together with a solution as you see in the report. So we hope that arcade is demonstrating our community capacity and our desire to support this whole of community response in this way.

[2:29:52] So I simply just wanted to bring that to you. We believe that the community needs to understand that this is a realistic view of what system transformation may require. That organizations like the Arc that has been here in the community for 40 years, unfunded, sort of a sideline organization, will need to step up and add capacity to our system in order for the system transformation to take place. That we’re going to need new and more resources to be able to make these changes.

[2:30:24] We’re proud of our colleagues in this work who have opened up supportive housing beds that have put forward hubs proposals. And we hope that this action of adding these beds in a time where the crisis is so dire in our community demonstrates our commitment to this whole of community response. You got about 30 seconds unless you’re done. I’m done, I’m here for your, any questions you may have. Excellent, so I’ll let you sit down for now and we’ll see about that after. I think Mr. Dickens has already said some words so I can move to colleagues on this and Councillor Stevenson, you had had your hand up so I’ll go to you first.

[2:31:08] I did, thank you. I would like to move this motion as recommended by staff here with one small change in addition to D which I’ve provided to the clerk. So at the end of D, it would say with details including the dates, contracts are signed and the dates and amounts that payments are made. And if I have a seconder, I would like to speak to that and ask some questions. So I just wanna be clear on what you’d like to move. I get the addition to D and I appreciate you sending it to the clerk ahead of time.

[2:31:43] We will have that read out. Our, so Mr. Dickens identified that there was about $1.8 million and the motion is actually provide direction in B on which of these we’d like to do. So I don’t know if you wanna be specific in which of the components of B you’re doing or if you’re looking to do all of them, there’s probably some Q and A about where we would get those resources from. I am looking to do all of them and then talk about where we can find the resources. Okay, so you wanna put all of them on the floor with an addition to D and we’re gonna need some sort of direction on source of financing.

[2:32:27] So, but I’ll look to see if there’s a seconder to doing that first. Is it updated? No, it’s not updated ‘cause we’re just, it’s being crafted now. But what the councilors is asking for is there a second or four doing all of the components of B and a small addition to D at the end of it as was articulated. You’re willing to second that. So that’s moved and seconded. We’re gonna have discussion on that. I’ll let councilor Stevenson start with support for your motion.

[2:33:00] Thank you, yeah. So I have to start with a huge thank you to Arcade to the leadership there and to the board because, but for this, you guys offering to do this, we are in a very dire situation in our unsheltered population and all of London. So I have to start with a thank you and I’m saddened in a sense that it’s November 21st that we’re talking about this. And so I really do appreciate the board and the leadership’s willing to dive in last minute and be willing to do four locations and 120 desperately needed beds.

[2:33:38] I also appreciate the use of the infrastructure 24/7 at the locations where we had day spaces. So although I dislike the costs because it’s over $4,500 a month per mattress on a floor and although I don’t like the locations because they’re all in the same places that they’ve been for a long time, the need is there and I would like to speak to staff about what options have been explored in terms of funding all of these locations and all of these beds.

[2:34:11] I know when I quickly looked at it, if we prorate it to the end of March and said at the end of May, we’re within 100,000 of the funding that’s available. That is not my first choice because I wanna see this running until the end of May. The other thing I noticed on here is that with the CMHA funds, I know we haven’t gotten to it yet but we’re looking to do a cancellation on that hub plan and it says at the bottom of page 15 that the funding source for the operating costs of the 556 Dundas Street respite beds at a million, 425, 562 per year for two years was provincial homeless prevention program funding and I’m wondering if there’s any way of making that money available to meet the needs we have for winter shelter beds this winter.

[2:35:08] So that’s just one thing here. So that’s a question for staff on the bill. I know it’s an item later in the agenda but in council would have to make a decision on that at that time but any ability to reallocate that money in a way or any, basically it’s a bit of an open-ended question on is that possible and what would that mean? Thank you Your Worship and through you. That would, those would be pro-rated funds so you’d be looking at a few months this fiscal year that would be available to be reallocated at this time.

[2:35:48] Certainly we could look to explore to do that to put that towards this. I will also note as I hinted at in the opening remarks, right now we are receiving in real time our Q2 actuals from all of our funded organizations including shelters and other operators and we’re receiving some Q3 actuals from last year’s winter response. Those numbers continue to trickle in. Early indication says there’s gonna be some unspent funds from those operators across the shelter system to really to say definitively what that understanding would look like.

[2:36:23] It would require us to reallocate funds mid-year to take that understanding and reallocate it to this temporary measure as well. Could certainly look to do that but it would just be a practice we don’t typically do in terms of that, taking the Q2s and mid-year and reallocating them to another project so quickly. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you, I’ll follow up through the chair. Can you just explain the proration of the homeless prevention program funding? ‘Cause if we had it all to give out for two years I’m just wondering what’s stopping us from committing to the end of May.

[2:37:04] Thank you and through the chair of the HPP or the homeless prevention program funding does operate from April 1st through to March 31st of each fiscal year. So we would be able to pro-rate the amount from January, December to March 31st and then look at the additional two months in next year’s allocation which has not yet been confirmed by the province. Thank you, just to help me understand how we were able to commit to it for the hub but not for this.

[2:37:36] I’m just wondering what the difference is. Thank you and I’m not saying through the chair I’m not saying we can’t commit it in this regard. It’s just that we have an allocation from the province so there’s always a risk that the province may not give us the actual funding. Not ever experienced that before but there is always that inherent risk. Is it safe to say it’s a much smaller risk to extend like to commit to May versus committing out for two years?

[2:38:12] Through your worship, yes. The given it’s the number of months and that direct comparison, yes, it would be a smaller risk. So thank you. So I just want to speak to the, I think we all know, I think, how dire the need is and it is heartbreaking that it is November the 21st and people on the streets don’t know whether there’s gonna be shelter beds or not. And I don’t want to be part of a city that isn’t trying to do everything that we can possibly do to get people inside this winter.

[2:38:53] And so I want to really ask my colleagues to support fully funding everything that’s on the table here and also to explore still how we could possibly use that Bob Hayward YMCA. That is another question I have for staff. I hear residents say all the time, what about this building? What about that building? Can’t we get people in here? Can’t we get people in there? And so we’ve got a staff report coming forward that says, hey, we’ve got this building that could do 100 people, but we are saying no, sorry, you’re gonna have to sleep in the snowbank.

[2:39:28] This winter because of limitations. That’s not what— Oh, no, no, but I’m just saying, I just— No, but no one’s saying no, you have to sleep in a snowbank this winter. That’s not what’s being said. So we know where you’re going, just articulated in a way that is respectful to what people are actually putting forward. That’s not what the staff report says. No, no part of me saying we probably don’t want to house 100 people in that building, but what I’m saying is Londoners are asking me, why are people sleeping outside when we have all these empty buildings? And so I just love staff to help me and Londoners understand.

[2:40:03] So it’s details about the Bob Hayward. You articulated in a report, but can you provide more details on that? Through you, you worship as it is articulated in the report, the rate limiting move on accessing that site was the ability to pull together a staffing model and be able to acquire the necessary staffing services to be able to open that site. We get the same emails all the time. There’s an empty building, I drove past it, why don’t you just put people in it? And it always comes down to who is providing the staffing supports. Council, you got about 40 seconds left on this.

[2:40:36] Okay, so my question is, is there a motion needed here or will staff be continuing to work to find ways to staff that building and to come next month with a solution to that? Because there’s so many people saying I would work it, I would volunteer at it. Is there a ways to put calls out to the community and to this whole of communities? They say, let’s find a way to do this. Go ahead, Mr. Dickens. Through you, Mr. Mayor, I don’t believe we need a motion. We have been actively working to try and find a solution to staff that location effectively.

[2:41:14] And so if there’s an organization that’s willing to come forward to do that, we are very ready to work with them and bring that forward to council. Of course, it would require an additional source of financing to be able to do that, but I don’t believe we need a motion. We have been working 24/7 to try and make that location work. And we do not have an operator. Just to clarify that. So will you continue to work 24/7 between now and next month to see if there’s some way we can get that done? The answer was yes. That they’ve been working on it, they need an operator.

[2:41:47] So people have the ability, if someone knows an operator, like make a suggestion to them to approach the city on that. So, okay, all right. You got just about 15 seconds left, Councillor. All right, I got a bit of a speaker’s list. I have Councillor Pribble, Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor McAllister, Councillor Ferra, and Councillor Frank. So I’ll start with Councillor Pribble. Thank you. I actually, I would like to ask Ms. Campbell from Arcade a couple of questions to the chair. Of course, to the chair.

[2:42:21] Yes, Ms. Campbell said she was willing to answer some questions. Perfect, thank you. So go ahead. So we have potentially four sites for proposals in front of us. And I just want to make sure, let’s say, if it was approved, if the funding was found, are you able to operate it? And what potentially are the biggest challenges that you foresee? Thank you through the chair. And this may also answer some of the question about the Bob Hayward and why it’s difficult to find an operator.

[2:42:54] We are in a difficult position in terms of finding staffing resources. It was great to actually hear earlier with other business sectors saying, yes, staffing and finding, you know, equip people as difficult across employment right now. We believe we will be able to, and the reason that we believe we will be able to is ‘cause we have in the past. So that’s our confidence. Also, we did begin hiring back in September and in fact have opened beds yesterday as part of our training. So we’re trying to get a trained and ready workforce.

[2:43:27] And that’s why we believe we’ll be able to offer the beds for December 1st at the Arc location. And we are continuing to work with our partner at LHSC to do the onboarding. So those are the reasons we have confidence. But I would want to, you know, be transparent that onboarding 100 new staff at any time for any organization is a lot of work. That is more than three times our normal size of an organization. And so the onboarding, in fact, it has a huge cost each year. In this budget, it’s more than $100,000 for the onboarding costs of these new staff.

[2:44:03] And so, you know, I do think that from year to year, and when we’re looking at these types of short-term projects, we do need to think about the human cost, both to the service user and to the staff that we onboard. The insecurity of those short-term jobs is difficult for people. But we are working at building a system. And in fact, one of the things that we’re working at with our colleagues around the table, and again, another benefit of the health and homelessness process is that we’re training to a similar level of other organizations. And as we train people and get them working in this sector, we hope that there will be job opportunities for those who help us this winter.

[2:44:44] Councillor Pribble. Thank you, full-off question. As was already said, these services certainly are not inexpensive in the future. Is there anything that could be, if we were proactive in certain areas that these costs could be decreased? Well, I highlighted one through the chair, sorry. I highlighted one, which is the onboarding cost of staff. I can speak to our own data, which is that we have laid off for lack of 100 staff each year that we have operated the winter beds. So we know firsthand those costs.

[2:45:19] And I believe that by supporting things year-round, that we could both secure locations more effectively. I think that if we wanna see things move or have other spaces available, it’s very difficult to negotiate space when you don’t know what your mandate is or how many spaces or what funding would be available to support those locations. And so those are areas where we could see cost savings. I’m very pleased that this year, we’re using spaces that already exist in our community and maximizing their usefulness. That is actually a very fiscally responsible way of making sure that known, safe, and welcoming spaces to our community are fully utilized.

[2:45:58] And so I’m very pleased that that’s one of the avenues that we’re going with. Thank you very much. I have no more questions, I’d like to certainly thank you and the entire team of Arcade for stepping forward and delivering this great service for us. Thank you very much for having the courage and moving forward. Thank you, I don’t have any more questions. I do have a couple of four staff though. Through the chair to the staff, I just want to make sure. In July, in the July’s report, we had in the HSSI account, allocated funding of 7.3 million.

[2:46:36] And is this the 1.8 million? Is this everything that we have left over from that 7.3? Because I do know that we allocated certain amounts to other initiatives, but is that the account it’s coming from the 1.8? Go ahead. Through you, your worship. What we identified in the July report was the unallocated funds through HPP. Since then, there was a report that Council endorsed to increase operator funding for the shelter agencies and other funded agencies, which was a little over $2 million.

[2:47:13] There were investments made into the first two hubs that have opened. There were investments made into the October cold weather report that came forward, again, roughly $2 million. And there have been additional investments made throughout the year that Council has endorsed around community safety and security in the old East Village and attending to CIR hotspots. So long answer, short answer long. Yes, this is what is remaining out of those funds. Thank you, last question.

[2:47:46] I was thinking if I should let someone else talk but I might as well ask right now to the staff and maybe to Mr. Dickens and also finance. If we were proposing all these four sites, were there in conversations potentially where we could, what amounts funds accounts we could tap into to finance the complete four sites? Go ahead. Through you, your worship. If we look to again, get our actuals, the Q2 actuals from our organizations to commend this week as they are trickling in, we could look to reallocate mid-year, some of those under spent funds to this initiative.

[2:48:29] If we do look to, I know it’s before committee this evening around the CMHA Hubs proposal, if we were to reallocate those funds, we would bring us roughly to about 3.2 million, which would be enough to cover all four locations. It does, of course. You could take money out of what was earmarked for hubs and you put it towards this. It means that if there were proposals coming forward in the new year related to additional hubs, some of those funds would not be available to make those necessary investments as well, which is a strategy. This council has endorsed that we pursue as long-term permanent sustainable programming as Ms. Campbell is alluded to as beneficial.

[2:49:10] Okay, thank you and actually, last, and it’s gonna be more common to my colleagues, just to remind that last year we did approve, there was a $5 million budget for the winter response and we had 143 beds. This year it would be 150 beds and both what we approved last week, or sorry, a couple of weeks ago, and today it would be 4.9 million, so it would be actually within the kind of, just so we know that it’s kind of, we are in the same ballpark as the world previous years. So with these amounts, it’s not like we are going much higher or actually any higher than we did last year.

[2:49:44] Thank you very much for answering my questions. Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor McAllister, Councillor Ferreira and Councillor Frank. So, and Councillor Trosto. Deputy Mayor Lewis, go ahead. Thank you, Your Worship. So I wanna start out by saying one thing very, very clearly. This is not last minute. Staff have been working on this since August with community providers and to characterize it as last minute I don’t think is fair to our staff or to the community partners who have been trying, they’re best to come up with a solution to this.

[2:50:20] I wish that there were beds open now that people were housed in November, but I will also say one of the things that makes me less supportive of these asks before us, is that May 31st to me is no longer a cold weather response. And I have been consistent in this in prior years, cold weather response should be ending at the end of the fiscal year. And I said this when we had the Fanshawe and the Atlas responses with the trailers. I’ve said this every year since we’ve done this. These are not meant to be permanent, ongoing, stable sources of funding for long-term contracts.

[2:50:54] This is meant to be an emergency response only. I want to indicate to you, Chair, I will be asking for all four segments of Part B to be pulled and voted on individually. I served on this council during the first Baptist Church situation across from us in Victoria Park. I will not do that again, and I will not support the 65 beds at William Street. I want to be very clear about that. That is not to me an acceptable site or solution to this situation.

[2:51:28] I will be supportive of the beds at my sister’s place. I think that this is an extension to keep those beds alive after they were lost by the cancellation of the hub proposal. But I am not prepared as staff have indicated to start reallocating funds because I believe there was opportunity still for CMHA or another proponent to still come forward with a revised, unsolicited hub proposal, and I do not want to close the door on getting a third or perhaps even a fourth hub stood up in the next six months as the first two start standing up in a couple of weeks.

[2:52:03] So I’m not going to trade long-term solutions for short-term spending. I will say with the coffee house, I think that this is consistent with moving folks away from now. It’s still in an area that has experienced its share of challenges as we discussed when we were talking about BIA supplementary funding. But I can generally be supportive of trying this location as a spot that’s outside of the OEV in the core as an opportunity for a few beds.

[2:52:40] I’m an East End Counselor. I wish that something had been able to be worked out for the Bob Hayward, but it wasn’t. And if an operator comes forward still, we will have to consider that. But I don’t think at this point we should be counting on that. I think that if we’re going to see providers come forward— and I do want to say thank you to Arcade for stepping up and saying we will do this because nobody else clearly did. And I think that that does speak to capacity issues out there. But I’m aware of another item on the agenda next item, actually, the assailant claimants.

[2:53:21] And I appreciate the letter that we’ve received from Mission Services. Highlighting how many of our shelter beds right now are being occupied by asylum claimants. And I say that because part of this problem is not a problem of our making or of our solution. There are other levels of government who are adding to this challenge right now. And we cannot be expected to backfill that off the property tax rate for London taxpayers. We simply can’t. We have to look at what level of government does what and who should be carrying the ball for their own choices.

[2:53:58] So I appreciate that Councilor Raman’s going to let us have a discussion on that on the next item. I know I’ve only got about a minute left. So I think I’ve covered off most of this, except that I need to emphasize— because I heard people say, well, I’ll volunteer or say that other people have said that they will volunteer. It’s great that people are willing to volunteer. Volunteers are not scheduled paid, trained employees. Volunteers often stick up their hand and say, I’ll help. But then they don’t show up when the shift comes. And then we can’t run a situation like that based on volunteers.

[2:54:29] So I’m open to hearing what colleagues think about the ARK aid location on Dundas Street itself. But I will not be supporting the William Street location. Councilor McAllister. Thank you and through the chair. Yeah, this is a very tough topic for me. I really do feel for everyone in this situation. I really don’t want to see people outside in the winter.

[2:55:04] In terms of what’s before us, I understand in terms of what we’re trying to put together. But I do feel like I need to take the opportunity to provide some context. I need to take this opportunity to speak to my award residents. But first, I want to start by thanking Civic Administration for the work they did in terms of trying to operationalize the Bob. The YMCA for stepping forward to offer a location, I honestly would encourage more people in London to do so. I think location was a bit of an issue in terms of our cold weather response.

[2:55:38] So to those listening, if you do have locations, please step forward. To our community partners, thank you for putting together this plan. In terms of the Bob, I want to start by asking some questions in terms of providing the context around that area. If you’re not familiar with it, I just think I need to do this. Just so my residents understand as well, I think there’s a lot of rumors and disinformation that’s kind of flying around that location. So my first question to Mr. May others is in terms of we have put an offer in on the Fairmont School, which is adjacent to it, and we will be receiving that report by year end.

[2:56:11] Is that correct? Through the chair, we’ve put in an offer. We have not heard back from the school board, so we don’t have a timeline on that. OK. Thank you. In terms of the Bob itself, is ownership still retained by the YMCA? Just one sec, everyone.

[2:57:40] Go ahead. Through you, your worship as it relates to this report, the YMCA of Southwestern Ontario still owns the Bob Hayward facility. And thank you for that. What I’m trying to do is paint a picture and express what’s coming from my ward in terms of that location. I understand it is not currently operationalized for the plan before us. But I would like, from my ward’s perspective, to see a more longer term for use of that land. The Fairmont is currently where we put an offer.

[2:58:14] We’re waiting to see if I have a counselor or just close. I just need to just let me just wrap this up. I will be very concise with it. But I just want you to use your words cautiously about property acquisition. OK. I am just saying, in terms of a long-term solution, we have always said housing is the solution. It is a large plot of land. I do not have a lot of developable land in my ward. Maybe Mr. Mathers wants to speak to this more.

[2:58:48] But that section of East London, the former landfill, not a lot of land. And I hear constantly for my ward housing, we need the housing. And I understand what’s before us in terms of a shelter system. But I just want to make that known and let my residents know that they have been heard in terms of long-term use of that land, that that’s what they would like to see. In terms of the plan before us, I know the coffee house. I’ve spoken with Karna. You do great work at the coffee house. I appreciate that. I won’t speak to the other locations, because I’m just speaking to the one on Hamilton Road. I know the coffee house, you serve a vulnerable population, really good reputation.

[2:59:27] I’m happy to see this. I’m sure you will follow the arc. I’m going to save the last bit of my time, if I do have any other further questions. But I just wanted to comment on those two things. OK, so let me pause for a second. Councillor McAllister, I know this is a little unorthodox. Could you just join me at the front with the clerks for one second?

[3:00:21] OK, the next speaker I have is Councillor Ferreira. Thank you, and through you, I do appreciate the sentiment here of trying to bring as many beds forward as possible. I do know that we need that, and I’m glad to hear that from Council. I also want to look at our looked arcade. I appreciate you standing up and being the lead for this, because we do desperately need it. And to staff, I know you guys have been working 24/7 right into the early hours in the morning, trying to figure out a plan that actually works.

[3:01:02] I do want to say, I am also not interested in taking funds away from monies that is supposed to be intended for the hubs in our long-term plan. And I do see that we got a $1.8 million budget that we have to work with. So I would ideally like to see 696 Dundas 731 Hamilton Road at 566 Dundas be funded. And I’d like to add some things to that as well. But going to the William Street— my big issue with the William Street is number one. It won’t be opened until January 1, and it could be even later, because there’s possible delays with possible code considerations and other delays that are in opening.

[3:01:43] And I fear that if we were to fund it with $1.472 million, I believe it is, and we have those delays, we’ll find ourselves funding a cold weather response and all the money really going there. And opening up maybe midway through the time frame of the cold weather response. So I would like to just ask colleagues here just to step a little bit and be a little cautious on that, because that is a big risk the way I see it. With the other locations, I do see that some of these locations should be ready to start right away.

[3:02:16] I do understand that the coffee house might have some startup issues or startup things that they need to do. But I think that it would be wise to fund these three locations, which would put us under the budget. Because as it is right now, if we were to fund everything, it would be over $3 million. And like I said, we only have the $1.8 million. I do want to ask to staff for the engagement piece. And I just wanted to know, I do see that there’s supposed to be a community engagement from the lead agencies.

[3:02:55] And I just wanted to know, what exactly does that entail? What kind of engagement is that? Is that canvassing? Is that some type of other format of communication with the community? So I was wondering if the staff could give me an update on that. Through the chair, thank you. Through the chair, we would be looking to the lead organization, in this case, the ARC, and undoubtedly with support from CMHA. To ensure that as part of a funding arrangement, that they have a community engagement or neighborhood engagement plan in place.

[3:03:29] The more robust or the more broad that community engagement becomes, probably becomes an issue of resourcing and staffing for these organizations to be able to do that extensive of work on top of trying to stand up and open the spaces to get folks in and out of the cold. So we do not, at this point, have, at least to my knowledge, a detailed engagement plan from these organizations, but they have committed, and the ARC has committed, that that would be part of their onboarding and opening is to ensure they’re engaging with the neighborhood, and also ensuring that they’re accessible if, through their operations, the neighbors have questions or concerns.

[3:04:10] Those are practices that the ARC and CMHA currently also have in place for existing programs. Thank you. With respect to the time going to May 31st, when I originally read the report, I too also thought that maybe you would go a little bit longer, and my original thoughts was perhaps maybe opening at seven, rather than nine, so allowing people to get off the street much sooner when we need it to, and maybe shortening the end date. So I just wanted to ask on the end date, how much is that end date required from the community side?

[3:04:50] Through the chair, the encampment table that is part of our whole of CUNY system response, those organizations, those frontline outreach workers, have made it really clear that that is a big priority for them, is that services do extend into the spring, into the end of May. That’s not a scientific end date, but it is acknowledged that March is fairly unpredictable when it comes to weather, April is often quite wet, and usually quite cold, and as Ms. Campbell alluded to when you’re recruiting staff, you would want to make sure you have some runway for that onboarding and support pieces.

[3:05:28] But primarily, it’s around the services to vulnerable people, and that came out of the encampment table is to have an acknowledgement that some services need to remain in place until the end of May. It’s not really inconsistent from what we’ve done in previous cold weather responses. We’ve been in positions where we extend services because March and April are so wet and cold. In the previous year, the money that was allocated, some services were in place 12 months, for example. But yes, this came out of the community feedback that May was pretty critical. Thank you for that.

[3:06:01] With the consideration from the 9 p.m. to the 7 p.m. start time, is there any issues that might arise if we were to direct for a 7 p.m. start time rather than the 9 p.m.? I do see that if we were to fund the three locations, we’d have an additional, I think, $233,000 left over. So I’m trying to think of, do we have still the funding to do that? Thank you, and through the chair, we’d obviously have to go back to the agencies and find out if that’s even an option, ‘cause they do run other programs during the day at all of these locations.

[3:06:36] So we would make sure that those don’t conflict with what you’re proposing. But I would say it’s something we could have a conversation with your organizations on. Okay, thank you for that. Is there, I saw that there was a motion on the floor, but is that motion been seconded? It has, okay. So I guess I got to wait for that motion to be voted on before I could put one on, or I could make an amendment? Councilor, given some of your comments where you’re supportive of some components to the other, I’ve already been asked by one member of council to divide part B into the segments. So that means some could be approved, some could not be approved, depending on how members of council vote.

[3:07:12] So, so far that seems to delineate it for everybody’s decision-making at this point, but I can certainly divide it further if that’s not compatible with where you’re looking to go. No, that’s okay. We can keep it that way, but I do wanna add an amendment to that, and that would be the amendment for the community engagement part. I would like to see a little bit more of a definitive area that we provide community engagement with, because I do know that just for my personal experience, my workload, I don’t wanna be too biased on this, but my workload will, could skyrocket, or it will go up, and I do have some other areas that I’d like to focus on.

[3:07:52] So I think just to be prudent and look towards the future and be proactive, I would like to put a little community engagement piece into that. I do have some language that I sent to the clerk, so just the heart C of that, and that would be to direct the arc for a community engagement for a 500-metre radius from the location, and I do hope that I would like to see also some type of contact card that the community engagement would give to residents in the area. Just contact cards to be able to contact the arc for anything that may come up, and just to know what exactly is going on within 500 meters of the location.

[3:08:38] Okay, so I’m not gonna make that a new part C, and what you said now is a little bit different than what you sent to the clerk’s. The way to do this would be to amend the thing to add a new part E, because some people may want to vote for C, but not the piece you’re adding, so this would allow it to work both ways. And what you had submitted was that civic administration would be directed to include, in the contracts noted in part B, requirement for community engagement and canvassing to be undertaken by the arcade street mission with the canvassing to include residents. That time you said a 300 meter radius of each service location, and provide a contact card that includes information on cold weather response and contact information for the program.

[3:09:21] That’s what you said before, but I think when you said it just now you said 500 meters, so. I did say 500 meters. That was just a reconsideration, just thinking through it and going, just trying to capture how far I think would be the best use of the community engagement. I am up for consideration on a different radius, so I do wanna start with the 500 meter radius right now. So first, you can make that amendment, like, ‘cause what’s on the floor is the counselor’s put, ‘cause the committee has put the staff recommendation, which has all four of them with the small addition to D, which is fine, so there’s no amended motion, the counselor’s not amending the motion, that’s just the motion on the floor.

[3:10:02] You can amend that to add this part E, and all you’re saying, so what’s the only thing different from what you submitted to the clerk’s, is you wanna say 500 meters, okay, so I need to see if there’s a seconder for that piece. Seconded by Deputy Mayor Lewis, there was a couple of seconders there, so we’re gonna now gonna shift the debate, although I have a speaker’s list, I know Councilor Frank, Trossal, Pribble, and Raman are on it, I’m gonna shift to the, I’m gonna hold that for kind of the main motion, and I’m gonna shift to an amendment list, because the amendment is now moved and seconded. We’re gonna get that up so people can see it, and we’re gonna be just talking now about the addition of E, which is this community engagement piece, and the card, and that, so are you good now, or do you have anything else’s to add, you got a little bit of time left.

[3:10:48] I do have a little bit to add, thank you. It’s with the contact card, so with this type of community engagement, like I don’t wanna be too, I don’t wanna direct too much, but I would like the community engagement to involve clearly the operation, and what to expect, and just being realistic with it, and the contact card I think is very important to providing that piece of literature to residents in the area, so that they know who to contact when they need to, I think would be a good use for the community engagement piece. So those two parts are very important.

[3:11:23] The radius itself, I did say 500, I know I originally said 300, like I said, I’m agreeable to find another radius, if that’s the will of Council, but that’s where I’ll stop for now. Okay, so I’m gonna make this easy, it’s an amendment, you can amend an amendment, so if someone wants to amend the radius, it’s not counter to the purpose here, so I’ll leave that up for someone to do, should they so choose, but I’m gonna continue with the speakers that started, and Councillor Hopkins is first on that.

[3:11:55] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the amendment, I do have a question around the radius, 300, 500, I know we normally do 125 meter radius when it comes to public participation. Planning, I just wanna have a better understanding, ‘cause I would think the radius here is important in terms of expense and the amount of time and effort that goes into that, so I think we need to understand exactly what the Councillor would like to see here in terms of radius, and because that will depend on my support or not.

[3:12:38] Okay, I’ll let the Councillor answer that, and I don’t think we need staff to comment, like the yes, there are official radiuses in the Planning Act, we’re not bound by any of that for something like this, so Councillor Ferrara. So I did start with the 120 meter radius, and then I went to the 500, and then I went to the 500, and my intention just increasing that radius would be to ensure and just kind of hedge our bets, mitigate our risk, just to make sure that we can capture everybody, every party who might be interested in knowing and having that knowledge, so that’s why I just increased the radius, just to have that bigger net to catch, just so I feel more confident that we’ve informed everybody that should be informed.

[3:13:20] So it is the 500 that you would like to see, okay. Yes, that’s what’s in the motion, and if someone wants to change that, they can amend it. I have Deputy Mayor Lewis next. Thank you, Your Worship, and on the amendment, thank you, Councillor Ferrara for bringing this forward, because I concur, it is important for the neighborhoods in the surrounding area to know who to contact, what numbers those are, and that’s not just in terms of the services being offered by the ARC at these locations, but I think that needs to include the service London contact number, the non-emergency police number, those sorts of things, because when we see these sorts of locations established, there are sometimes what I’m gonna call spillages of issues out into the neighborhood, and whether that’s people who couldn’t get a bed that night, whether that is other behavior of individuals who frankly are seeking to take advantage of people who might be seeking shelter spaces, other conditions, some sort of piece where folks know what’s happening here and what numbers to call for what services.

[3:14:39] And I know we have some portals on our website as well, but I concur with Councillor. The people who suddenly get their inbox is filled with questions are the people around this horseshoe, and we are not 24/7, and on a Saturday afternoon, when somebody has a question, they need to know who to reach out to and contact. And it might be on a Saturday afternoon in an urgent situation, so they need to know who to reach out to and contact. And I will say, I prefer the larger radius in this case, because this is not a planning application where a building is gonna be built and then the construction is going to go away.

[3:15:19] There will be a changing dynamic around these sites for a number of weeks, and what that looks like, quite frankly, I don’t think any of us can fairly know. We have some ideas, I’m sure. I’m sure our partners in the gallery have some ideas, but I want the public to know, because it is important that at the end of the day, they know who to reach out to. And a simple postcard in a mailbox is a great tool sometimes when people don’t know where else to turn. I have Councillor Trost out, then Councillor Pribble.

[3:15:58] I have always, through the chair, I always have difficulty with these numbers, trying to figure out where that arc’s gonna fall, and if it goes through someone’s house, so they get to notice, or not. Why don’t we just say what area we wanted to go to? Why don’t we just say the area bounded by the street, the street, the street, and the street, and let’s err on the side of getting some additional notices out, because if we’re doing things like introducing people to service London, there’s positive things for doing that anyway. Is there a neighborhood association there who might help us with the distribution?

[3:16:33] And I’d also say that where do we think, if people are not gonna be able to get in, and they’re there, where are they likely to go? And let’s just figure that out too. Are they gonna go to Meckton Park? Are they gonna go somewhere down central? I don’t know. But I think the important thing I wanna add to this discussion is let’s decide what neighborhood we wanna send it to, and just say it’s the area bounded by, and not worry about the meters. Yeah, I have council approval.

[3:17:11] I would support this if this was kind of a September or October, one thing, and second thing is if this was permanent and not temporary. I actually have a question through the chair to Ms. Campbell. Is this whatever the radius is? Having all these, and again, three potentially four locations, and now you and your staff canvassing all these homes. Is it actually feasible? So go ahead. Thank you through the chair. I’m contemplating that. We do have a robust community engagement strategy that we have employed many times over and have examples of how the community engages.

[3:17:51] This weekend we hosted an open house and had many community members come through from in all these village talking about our winter response plan at 696 Dundas Street. We also, when operating out of first St. Andrews, have learned from that experience to Canvas the neighborhood, it was a one city block radius that we did on all sides. And that was in person, knocking on doors, talking to businesses, offering an outreach card and a meeting. We had a meeting before opening services, explaining what was happening, how we would provide support.

[3:18:24] We also have included in our budgets community safety role that involves those transition times when people are coming in and out of space and being present and visible outside of the space before people can get in. And also anticipating some of the challenges that we see typically, the cleanup in the area, disposal of things, what to do when people can’t come in, redirecting people, those are every year’s challenge. That’s not new for this response. And so we have developed those strategies. Some of that is anticipated.

[3:18:57] I am concerned about like a full kilometer. I’m just kind of picturing like how many, I don’t really know how many houses that is and what that resource would look like. But certainly engaging neighbors is incredibly important to the success of any intervention. And we do already have an outreach card that we give out to our neighbors and do respond in all these village. I think the BAA folks could maybe speak to how we respond to our neighbors as best as we can. I am questioning a number of things, like how quick would you want a response? What does that response look like?

[3:19:30] Am I responsible for the neighbors, yards and cleaning up around their yards as well as sort of our own vocational responsibility, which I’m very familiar with taking care of our own location and making sure that that is clean and maintained. But trying to take care of where any person who may be seeking services or not and all of what may or may not be thought of as part of the consequence of having services in a neighborhood is a little bit out of the scope of what we can do. What we always do and are consistent in doing is responding to a person in distress.

[3:20:05] And that is something that we can do. If that was needed 24/7, like even the overnight hours, my understanding is that we don’t have any outreach teams that operate all the way through the night, that those are emergency services. But if we needed to establish that for this winter response, that would potentially be an additional cost. Thank you. And based on your answer and to being end of November and also this being a temporary measure, I will not be supporting this motion. Thank you. Okay, I have Councillor Ramen next.

[3:20:43] Thank you and through you. Thank you for this discussion, Councillor. And I appreciate that you’re sharing the concern based on the workload that you experienced as well, ‘cause I do know that you’ve shared that before, how it can be considerable, especially when we’re making changes like this, that impact your neighborhood. So I understand that. I just wanna comment on two things. One is we are talking about this being the responsibility of arcade due to the overnight spaces, but most of these places are either operating as day spaces or operating in some other capacity.

[3:21:18] So I think that some of that engagement could maybe be shared a little bit more between a number of organizations and I’m seeing heads nodding up the top. So I do think that there’s a willingness perhaps to explore that on some other levels. And I do see the value of providing the direct neighbors and as many neighbors with information, but again, worry about the 500 meters a little bit more just because I wanna make sure that, I agree with Councillor Trosto that I think it might be better to define neighborhood blocks or streets because I do think that we might be unintentionally, maybe we missed somebody or we missed because of the radius, but we should have gotten to them.

[3:22:03] So I just wanna be a little bit more specific about that. And I think we have the opportunity to do that since we’re at committee, we can be more specific before we get to council. So the intention is that we want to over-communicate how to get in touch with agencies, absolutely agree. Give them good information, absolutely agree. Do we need to get down to the minutiae of how many meters and where exactly today? I think we can straighten all that out before council. So I don’t know that we have to be that prescriptive.

[3:22:35] And I think it allows us to have some good dialogue with the people that are doing the good work in these spaces already because some of this may be some things that they’ve already engaged in in terms of the day spaces or in the other services that they provide. Mr. Stevenson. Thank you and through the chair. Can I ask what the timing expectation is on this? Is this to be done early? This organization has a lot of work to do. There’s no timing in the motion.

[3:23:13] So I’ll look look to Councillor Ferrera to comment on that. Thank you, I had my hand up ‘cause I did want to respond to some questions. So the way I was intending for this would be— So I want you just to respond to Councillor Stevenson’s question, your next on the list to respond to the other ones, okay? For the timing, it was supposed to be for the first point of contact. So it’s not something that I would foresee ongoing continually. It would be something to have a first point of contact. That’s why I would think that providing the contact card would help something like that. The timing on when to get that done, I would believe it would be in the first few weeks depending on how long it will take to Canvas.

[3:23:50] I think that’s as far as your question went. I did want to comment on the other one, but I won’t right now. You’re next on the list, so you can do that then. Councillor Stevenson. Thank you. I’m struggling with this for a few reasons. One is it’s putting the requirement on an organization that is already taking on quite a task. And I think it takes away from the focus, which should be on the people who are in desperate and dire need right now. And as Councillor ramen said, many of these locations are already have daytime programs.

[3:24:28] I’ve not heard this kind of concern when agencies were abruptly put into Old East Village. And to even hear people talk about the concerns about spillage, I’m finding it a little shocking, honestly, to hear people who have expressed moral outrage at some of the concerns that have been expressed. And now all of a sudden there’s a lot of concern when it’s November 21st, it’s winter. These people need beds. And I would like to make a recommendation that if this is something that we want to do, that city administration that we take it on, we issue the contact cards out through some kind of mailing and that we don’t ask the organization to do this.

[3:25:11] So I’d like to put forward an amendment that says whatever it is that Councillor Ferrer is looking for, but that we take it on as civic administration and not this organization. So hold on a sec. So that’s with the utmost respect. That is not what Councillor Ferrer has suggested. That is a very substantial change in who would bear the cost of it. So what I’m going to suggest is you can do that, but you defeat Councillor Ferrer’s motion first.

[3:25:48] And then you can put that on as the alternative because the fundamental difference I see here is who pays, who does the work? Like it is a very different approach. So I’m going to say it’s counter to what Councillor Ferrer, like amending the radius, that’s still within it. But changing who pays and who does it, that’s fine. But the process is defeat the current amendment, propose a new amendment with a different process. Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, then. Can I add to that? I still would like this one to fail and to have civic administration do it. But otherwise can we put something in here that says we will fund arcade to do this? I don’t see that as counter because, you know, unless Councillor, somewhat Councillor Ferrer says, but adding an additional service to the organization, I think is what you’re saying is you would like to add some costs to support them in doing that.

[3:26:49] I would see, I think I don’t see that as counter at this point. So I would see that as a complimentary amendment to the amendment. So that one’s okay. I just, we need to work on some wording on that. Councillor Ramen has a clarification question. Just let me go to that. Thank you and through you. My understanding is this is a procurement and emergency approval. So what’s the difference between a procurement and emergency approval? Why can we add dollars to it? That’s a fair question.

[3:27:26] Go to Councillor, our Councillor, Deputy City Manager, Barbara. I heard the first part about emergency approval. So we’re starting to change the terms and adding like duties and costs. And this is an emergency procurement. So what we need and what the Councillor’s asking for, which I think is a good point, is are we out of line with our ability to do this? Or like should we be doing a different process? Should we want to engage in essentially what we’re starting to discuss now? And that’s with respect to your worship specifically to this motion, right?

[3:28:01] Well, that and the idea like basically the concept that there’s a proposal submitted with costs. We’re now changing the responsibilities and potentially the costs of it or adding our own funding to it. Like we’re changing some terms. So we just want to make sure that under our procurement policy and the way that this is coming forward, can we do that is the question. So thank you for the question through your worship. So because we are utilizing the procurement and emergencies section of that, what that does is it allows specifically the reporting and the work to be able to be done to give staff the most flexibility to go now and finalize the contracts.

[3:28:46] And essentially we’re not getting, Council is directing us to do the work, but the actual approvals of the expenditures themselves will be done through civic administration and then we will be reporting back with that amount. So it buys us a little bit of time in terms of finalizing the information and reporting back to council given the ability to move forward with this. Knowing in advance, the council knows what civic administration will be finalizing. I don’t think that’s clear for where the council is trying to ask, go ahead.

[3:29:26] So through your worship based on that, that would allow this to occur and that direction can be given and civic administration will be able to take that back and finalize based on the direction. Okay, so that’s the answer. So yes, possible. Go back to Councilor Stevenson because you’re looking to make an amendment. Yes, so it could be something like at the end, put in funding for such or be directed to include in the contracts, funding for those things.

[3:32:19] Councilor Stevenson, you want to change this to a mail out because currently the basis of the motion is that it’s canvassing that’s being done. So we’re interpreting you as saying adding the costs is like say we’re paying for the cost of the cards, but you’re saying you want to change it so that it’s now a mail out from civic administration or from the city of London to where the area. Is it easier to say vote this down and do a mail out by civic administration? Then I’ll do that. So to save us this trouble, we have a long night. Yeah.

[3:32:54] My request is that we vote this down and then redo it if Councilor Ferrer wants this information to be a mail out done by civic administration so that we’re not asking or they need to hire 100 people and train them and I really think we get to honor that and set them up to win and take on this responsibility here. Okay, next speaker on this is Councilor Ferrer. Thank you. The report itself did speak to the community engagement component and I’m just going back to Mr. Dickens.

[3:33:28] That involves a canvassing component as well, correct? Mr. Dickens. Through you, Your Worship, where we’ve tried our best is to mimic or align with the Hub’s implementation plan. That’s why these are not recommendations. These are options for Council ‘cause we consider the geographic locations. We’ve tried it in many ways to align ourselves with the community engagement for the whole community system responses looked entirely different.

[3:34:00] It’s been community consultation sessions, open houses, drop-in sessions, launching a website, an online portal, all of those types of things. In this regard, we would be looking at direct neighborhood engagement in that immediate surrounding area. It’s what CMHA and the ARC do currently. The ARC canvases, the city block that surrounds their property, they engage with folks. I can’t speak to its effectiveness or what the response time looks like. But if this motion is to distribute information with contact details, certainly that is a component we can assist with a civic administration without a doubt.

[3:34:42] It would then become clear expectations around should the neighborhood call that contact card? What is Council or this motion anticipating those expected results or response time would look like from the provider? Thank you for that. That’s how I interpreted as well, the direct communication with residents. So that’s why I thought we should be a little more prescriptive on exactly how that community engagement piece exists. I figured it’s in the report, so let’s make it a little more clean and concise because I do understand that other agencies have done canvassing as well, but I would like to know the area that is covered with respect to the radius versus neighborhood streets.

[3:35:26] I am okay with changing a radius component. As long as we do capture the appropriate amount of houses, the reason I went to the radius part first is because the coffee house, if you look at the street, it’s kind of on an angle. So you don’t really get that block. It doesn’t fit very well. So that’s why I did go that route. But like I said, just to have that community engagement piece just so we can be proactive about it, that’s really what I’m looking for. Originally, I thought the canvassing should be done by us, Councillors, ourselves. I know that I can canvas that area in less than a day.

[3:36:01] I know I could do all four locations in a day myself, but I didn’t want to put that on us ‘cause I didn’t think it would be considering the workload that we have already. So that’s why I wanted to bring that into that. But like I said, with the radius component piece, if we do want to change that, we can. And if Council is willing, and if Council wants to do the community engagement piece ourselves, I’m more than happy to do that as well. Okay, I have Councilor Tro sound next.

[3:36:37] Can I ask the deputy city manager who’s in charge of service London, whether the appropriate buttons could be added to service London so we could be using the service London portal to do this work, which has the additional benefit of giving people information about service London? Go ahead. Through the chair, I will have to bring that information back, I’ll have to talk with the service manager of what could be added and how all that would play out. Did you bring that back by the council?

[3:37:11] ‘Cause it just seems to me that if we can incorporate this into something we’re doing anyway, part of a program that we’re trying to do regular outreach for, especially something that Councilors are very keen to promote service London because it does help us when people know how they can use service London. And it helps to frontline staff in the councilor’s office, too, because although those things just get forwarded. So I think by putting some very clear buttons on service London, maybe a little note, we, you know, it’s gonna end up in someone’s mailbox. I don’t care if it’s going through Canada Post or whether a volunteer is putting it in the mailbox.

[3:37:50] The only thing would be apartment buildings. But let’s use service London if we can use service London. Councilor Ferri, you got a tiny bit of time left, but go ahead, oh, and then I’ll go to Councilor Lehman. He’s just holding his pen up, no, sir, you gotta be careful, go ahead. Okay, thanks, sorry, through you. I do see that there is a will to engage with the community, however the form is. So if the councilors who wanna do that can just articulate that a little bit more, I, if the seconder is willing, I will pull that as long as there is that community engagement piece.

[3:38:33] So before I do that, if you would be willing to just speak to that and I do wanna look at the seconder as well to make sure the seconder would be okay with that before anything. So the seconder can agree, but we all have to agree to let you drop the motion ‘cause it’s in the care and control of the committee now that it’s been moved and seconded. So if you’re looking to withdraw that, it’s fine, but you had, what did you ask first? Are you looking to do that now? Before I would do that, I just wanted to know that there is something that is intended to be put on the floor that does do what it is that we’re trying to do, just that community engagement.

[3:39:11] So if I could, through you, to the councilors who are willing to do this, if they could just describe what idea they have for the community engagement part. Deputy Mayor Lewis, then I’m adding myself to the speaker’s list. Yeah, let me try and help here. Can I suggest that colleagues, we are talking about adding some community engagement, some information sharing, but we’re trying to wordsmith it on the floor and we have an opportunity to bring something back at council that gives us all an opportunity to just reflect. So I would encourage the committee to allow the withdrawal, not for none of us to put anything else on the floor with this and to go away and think about it and come back to the council if there is a desire to include a communications contact card strategy of some sort, think about that in the runway we have between tonight and council and just make the decisions on what we are going to fund tonight in terms of beds.

[3:40:10] Okay, I’m gonna ask, I’m gonna speak. So I’m gonna turn the chair over to Councillor Layman. Go ahead, Mayor. So I’ll just be clear. This is part of the reason why we have long meetings. Everybody’s got the same intent. We’re trying to overcomplicate it with a whole bunch of pieces. We have ward budgets. It’s very cheap to print cards. Like I will come and help the Councillors who have this like drop cards in their neighborhood. Like I’m willing to spend some time doing that. Like this is not complicated.

[3:40:42] We can go help with this. So I support everybody just letting this motion be withdrawn. You’ve got colleagues who want to support. We all care about this issue. Print some cards, ask some of us to help. I’m willing to help. So I think that that is a way where we can go out there. I’ll go with Councillor Stevenson. I’ll go with Councillor McAllister. I’ll go with Councillor Barrera. Book some time off, we can work together or get some cards out and information to the public. That’s all we’re trying to do here so people have a contact card. Design something, I’ll help you get it out. I don’t think we need to overcomplicate this and have the meeting go longer than it needs to go. I’ll return to the chair too, Mayor.

[3:41:16] Councillor Ferra. Thank you. You said that on the record, so I’ll hold it to you. If that is the case, then I would be more than happy to do that so we can work offline for that. So just looking at the seconder again, we’re good to pull that. I’ll pull that and I guess we need to vote on that. Okay, so has everybody agreed that the Councillor can withdraw the motion? No, you want? Okay, okay. Okay, so no one objects to the withdrawing of the amendment. So the engagement piece is not going to be extra. Part E is gone. There’s already some engagement built in.

[3:41:47] We’ve had a discussion. People can be held to their public record statements and we can move on. So that brings us back to the main motion that Councillor Stevenson put on the floor of, which I still had people on a list and Councillor Frank, although I’m not sure if you remember, you’re next. I’m here, perfect. So thanks for that debate. I want to start off by saying thank you to our gate for stepping up and showing a lot of leadership, I think in this area.

[3:42:22] I think we would have all loved to see perhaps more services, but again, as everyone has already said, I think this is an indication of a very overly burned and burdened system. So appreciate your leadership in stepping up. And you’d have a couple of questions. So just in regards to hiring so many people so quickly and having to train them all, I was just hoping that either staff or someone from our gate would be able to highlight what training people receive, like crisis intervention and Narcan training and that kind of thing. And if those are written out and planned to roll out with staff. I’m just going to look to our staff first before, do you want me to, you, our gate?

[3:43:01] Okay, I’ll go to our gate. Go ahead. See, we just need to turn your microphone back on. Sorry. Okay, now you’re good. Thank you and through the chair. The standards for training have been set. Like Kevin said, we’ve been trying to follow the hubs criteria and so right in the contracts that we actually already have signed with the day program that we provide, we have a list of training that we are required under contract to provide. That includes, I may not get all of them because I don’t have the contract right in front of me, but it is trauma-informed practice.

[3:43:36] We actually did that this morning at our staff meeting. We do harm reduction. We do Narcan, certainly as part of that. We do indigenous cultural safety. We do training on de-escalation. Right? Yeah, managing aggressive behavior. So we do have NVCI counts with our organization. Everyone has to have first aid in CPR to term of employment. We do provide, and we’ve actually included in our budget as I mentioned, that’s some of the dollars that are going forward.

[3:44:12] Part of the benefit of partnering with CMHA is actually having some of their wonderful training that they do with their staff and having their training team help us to do even more training. And some of that includes assist and mental health for a state and a couple of other things that we’re hoping to provide to staff. So we have some required training. We have additional training. And then we actually have our own empowerment model that involves our community members participating and creating safe spaces and participating in designing our services. And so we’re really pleased to be able to not only provide training for our staff, but our volunteers, our community members that access services.

[3:44:53] And so that helps us to provide those safe places for people. Thank you. And through the chair, I did have one other follow-up question. I just wanted to confirm that I assume this is the case, but I wanted to just triple check that everyone is welcome to use the shelter as long as there is obviously bed and staff available. And that my understanding as arcade is like it’s roots religious based organization, which I think is lovely, but that there’s no like mandatory religious services that people have to participate in in order to gain access to the services.

[3:45:31] Go ahead. Again, through the chair, thank you for the opportunity to answer. We may be motivated by God’s love, but it is certainly not a requirement of service, not even our staff. It’s not a requirement for anybody who works with our organization. What is really critical to note is even though the location on William Street is called Bishop Cronin, which is a church location, the area of the building that we are actually looking at operating is a non-religious space. It was a daycare, a fellowship hall and office spaces. We recognize that there can be some triggering elements, and that’s another reason why we don’t have one location option.

[3:46:09] It is really important that there be multiple options and that people can choose where they feel safe and welcome. There’s a women’s only location at my sister’s place. Coffee House has a well-established relationship with the community they serve, and that will lend itself to welcoming and safe places for people who access that service. Arcade is well-known to the community that accesses that space. And we are aware of the trauma that can be put upon our community members. If we push a religious agenda, that is not the intention in any way, shape or form. Perfect, thank you so much for those answers.

[3:46:44] Yeah, I just want to confirm given that and just that people are able to attend whatever services they need and whatever you are able to provide, people are able to go to. So I appreciate all the information. I’ll be supporting all four locations. And I again echo everyone’s sentiments in saying thank you for stepping up to this plate. Next on the list is Council Trossal. Thank you through the chair. That’s a wonderful segue to what I’m going to say, which is I’m going to be supporting all four of the locations.

[3:47:19] I don’t want to start unraveling this right now. I think they fit together very nicely. There are some problems with some of them, but I think it’s nothing we can’t meet. One question I have is if we go over budget and spend money now that we would have spent on the hubs, and we now see we have an opportunity for the hubs again, that doesn’t preclude us from going back to the source of the hub funding and asking to make up that difference. Does it? So Councilor, I want to be clear about the motion on the floor.

[3:47:52] There is no specific source of financing for this. So essentially what the motion is, is spend more than has been allocated. And that would be a challenge for the end of the year and a surplus option unless civic administration comes back with some of the options that Mr. Dick can suggest. But we have provided no specific direction on the source of financing on this yet, but Mr. Dickons, you can comment. Through you, Your Worship, yes, we would look to find a source of funding to allocate to all four options to fully fund them. If we are required to, as part of that investigative work, to reallocate funding that was earmarked for one of the hubs, that is through our HPP funding.

[3:48:37] And so yes, it would not be available to its fullest extent should another proposal of any kind come forward for a hub. So just to be clear that the funding we’re looking to reallocate was actually through our HPP. Okay, well, through the chair, I’m supporting all four because I think we have an emergency situation on our hands that I know the use of the term emergency can be controversial here. But what were they getting cold and what were people being outside? And I’m looking towards the maximum amount of relief that we can provide right now.

[3:49:11] And I think that these are all issues that can be adjusted down the line. So I would be very hesitant to remove one of the prongs of this very well thought out and consolidated and coordinated approach. So I’ll be supporting the package. I appreciate what was said before about the both from Councillor Ferrera and Councillor Stevenson in terms of additional community outreach, which I think is something that should be done anyway. So that’s it, I thought this was a good discussion.

[3:49:45] And I’m looking forward to these coming online and up and running as soon as possible so people can get out of the cold. Thank you very much. Councillor Pribble, and just so people know then Raman, Hopkins and Lehman. Thank you, Mr. Chair, I do have one more question for Ms. Campbell, a few more. Thank you. You can ask, I’ll direct it. So you’re going through the chair. So to ask the question, and I’ll find you the first answer. Perfect, thank you. I’m just curious if she could let us know why does she believe the location, the site for street tour of William would be beneficial for our community.

[3:50:25] Go ahead. Thank you through the chair. We have looked at that space very specifically. First of all, we know that the number of spaces that we’re recommending or able to provide is not enough for the community that we serve in that area. And when we don’t have spaces available, it does create an unsafe environment for our community members who are accessing services, people vie for the same spaces. It does create sometimes violence, even though we do a referral process, people will try to position themselves to be getting space.

[3:51:03] And it is always a challenge for staff when you’re closing a program or turning over space and not having additional resources to offer to people. And so the walkability of that location, the actual infrastructure that it’s on three separate floors and there’s bathrooms on each floor and there’s accessibility to the outside that is separate, but also fenced off is really helpful in terms of people management. There’s kitchen facilities which allow us to take care of sort of the daily needs of people.

[3:51:37] And with it being a short-term intervention, we also wanted to look at the potential for it to be a long-term location. Should that be necessary? I talked about the costs involved of not having sort of places that you can extend at. And one of the things that came up at looking at the Bob Hayward location is that there was a March 31st end date to that. So to staff up, get that working in and then have to close it, that would be very difficult. Being able to extend service till the end of May per the encampment table, having the opportunity to potentially extend that space if necessary, if it was in service to the community, that location is available for a renewable lease for up to two years.

[3:52:21] The cost of the lease, we were given a list of locations where we could seek locations and the cost per square foot is about 50 cents at this location as compared to locations that we looked at and were turned down for that were about 12 to 18 to $20 a square foot. So it just seemed like a good fiscally responsible location. It’s logistically possible since we prepare the meals and we share resources between our 696 location and this location.

[3:52:54] And we felt that it supported the need of this winter’s response in terms of walkability, getting people out of encampments enticing them to a location that they’re familiar with and supporting safety for that community at that space. Additionally, we didn’t have all the knowledge that we would have needed to make a stronger plan for other locations that have been discussed tonight. And so this was the location that we knew that we had the relationship and that we could put a solid plan together that we felt confident in. That is why it is before you.

[3:53:29] Okay, Councillor Perly, you got a bit of time left. ‘Cause remember, you spoke before although it was a while ago. What were follow up? 30 beds at your current location plus 65 at this potentially, this location would be 95. Is it potentially to, if I were to see that we address the 602 Queens, the people that are outside and the people on the parking lot, that potentially these individuals who have no roof over their head, that they could be actually potentially housed and we would resolve this situation? That’s the hope, isn’t it?

[3:54:04] That’s the hope. I mean, the reality is that the number of beds that are being recommended, including the 65, is a far cry from the demand that we know exists. We need to entice some people from encampments that are not right behind the arc location. We need to entice some people who are not doing well health-wise into indoor spaces. The demand is high and that’s why we’re looking at this whole of community response and that’s why you’re investing so heavily into these long-term solutions. So I don’t wanna pretend like this is the difference maker but this is a difference maker for 65 people.

[3:54:39] That’s the reality. This is the difference maker for those folks. It’s the same answer for, is it too late for beds? No, it’s not too late for beds because there’s so many people who need them. And so for the same reasons, these are really important considerations that are before you and I appreciate the challenge of it but that’s the answer. Okay, thank you very much. Council Raman. Thank you and through you.

[3:55:12] Thank you for the last set of questions because that was actually really helpful in framing some of the conversation and getting some further answers. Again, a big thank you to Arcade for your continued support for the cold weather, winter response and I can’t remember how many years it’s been, I think it was four, this is your fourth year of showing leadership in this area. So thank you for that. I think as a city, we’re grateful for the fact that you continue to step forward. Thank you to your board for taking this time to be deliberate and intentional in the way that you can provide support.

[3:55:49] And I understand that you’re saying to us, here’s what we can do and here’s where we can do it. And here’s where we can do it and we’re the only ones that can do it. So I think that we have to be very careful as well because right now you are the only group that’s able to provide this service like this. And I wanna say that I think it was really smart to go to the existing locations that already were offering day spaces to look for that partnership and that opportunity to provide those night spaces.

[3:56:26] And I see the value in that approach as we move forward. We’re talking about the way this is going to be funded. And I know that in the past, there have been times when perhaps you’ve been waiting for money to come in from the city. And so my thought today is, is there a way that we can make this feel stable for you from now until May 31st that it doesn’t perhaps feel like there is, there’s going to be a second iteration of where that funding is gonna come from.

[3:57:06] So I wanna make sure that whatever arrangement we are looking at that it feels as a stable investment for that time period of which you’re going to be seeking that funding ‘cause I can imagine how difficult that work is. So that’s what I’m looking to do for today. I wanna go back to the location and some of the comments in the report about code issues and potential challenges with the Williams Street location. And I’m just wondering if our staff could help me better understand what that looks like and if the January 8th date is attainable.

[3:57:50] Thank you and through the chair, I will start this conversation and I’m surrounded by colleagues who may be able to chime in, should they feel necessary. But so the point was made in the report that there is still some work from the organizational perspective. Arc has not reached out to the city planning and development department to kind of have this conversation. So that is sort of and still needs to occur. I did speak quite briefly with our planning and development folks and they had identified a few pieces that I have, we’ll be sharing with Ms. Campbell as I make the connection to that team.

[3:58:24] So conversations need to happen. I can’t say exactly what that is going to entail until the planning development team meet with the Arc and understand exactly the proposal. Okay, thank you. And I assume because we would be giving if we were to today and then further on the council be giving this the full support, we would then and thus be giving the full support to try to work very closely in partnership to be able to make that happen within our realm of control. Through you, Your Worship, yes, within the realm of our control.

[3:59:04] So pending council approval on this, we would start to negotiate our funding agreement. We just for clarity on the last comment, we do have a funding schedule for all of our agreements. So the funding is quite stable and predictable for the Arc. The Arc has indicated there are some improvements or changes they need to make to the property. I don’t have that extensive list, but it includes changing our toilets or adding security measures. And if there’s alterations to the building, yes, there would be steps that the planning and building folks would need to take. I think there’s some more investigative work that needs to be done or clarity sought around any heritage designation to that property and if it applies or not.

[3:59:42] So we will leave that to the experts when those connections are made by the Arc. Thank you. And I just had a question regarding the security costs. For the 432 William Street location, the security contract is an up to 46,000 in change. And I’m just wondering, considering the number of occupants at that space, if that was considered and deemed enough in terms of security costs. Yeah, go ahead.

[4:00:19] Through the chair, we’ve done our best estimate. Our agreement with CMHA for security costs at that location, those locations was something that was negotiated as part of using those spaces. And so that’s why it’s a full cost for a security person at each of those locations. Our pattern at as an organization has been to use a community safety approach, which is outreach workers that are trained with some safety protocols that support people outside the building, which we find deescalates a lot of concerning behaviors that can pop up in and around the vicinity of our space.

[4:00:59] We did still include some costs or the potential of an incident or something taking place that would require us to add security from time to time, but not as a regular intervention. We’ve also, as I mentioned, through the health and homelessness table, had great conversations with the police services in the area. And there is a foot patrol in that area that is able to provide support, particularly around transition times. We have a wonderful relationship with the police in OAV and also down in the SoHo area. And they’ve let us know that setting these services up in spaces where they are already frequenting actually allows them to be much more supportive of the work that needs to happen over winter time.

[4:01:42] They also were very supportive of the maximum number of beds as they divert people in their own work to these locations throughout the winter months. Thank you, and I just wanted to conclude by saying thank you to the ward counselors that are included in this report for their support of the locations in their ward. Councillor Hopkins. That was a wonderful way to end a Councillor Ramen and I’ll follow up and also thank the Councillors.

[4:02:19] And if you need some help dropping off flyers, please reach out to me. I will be supporting all four areas. And the reason I’m doing that is because we need overnight beds. It’s that simple, we need more. And I am supportive. I appreciate the questions around the planning for William Street. I would encourage Arcade to start those conversations sooner than later. And really pleased to see my sister’s place keeping the CMHA, keeping that alive.

[4:02:56] Really appreciate that. My thanks to Arcade, the board members here and staff, old East, and of course city staff for all the work. I know it’s been, we’ve all been on tender hooks lately, and it’s really good to see this come ahead and very supportive of going forward and keeping my fingers crossed that it all works out. Thank you. Councillor Layman. Thank you.

[4:03:27] I’ve got a couple of concerns with this. I asked before us today, the first is with the cost. When we were looking at the cost for our hubs, proposed hubs program, Mr. Dickens indicated some comparatives, one being half a million dollars for those beds at LHSC. Down to those shelters, which was $40,000 per bed. What we’re looking at here, we’re looking at around $22,000 to $27,000 per bed for a period of four to five months.

[4:04:12] If I take the annualized cost per bed, we’re looking at $65,000. So I guess I have to ask, why are these shelter beds 60% more expensive than the shelter beds used? In the example we were speaking of when we were talking about the cost of the hubs. Mr. Dickens, you can direct me to where you’d like me to, I don’t know if you had that answer, but that’s an answer for those who submitted the proposal.

[4:04:46] Thank you, Your Worship. And again, just as a reminder to community, we’re in this, in this report, these are options for council to consider. We are reflecting what the community has brought forward. These are the detailed budgets, or these are the budget figures, the estimates that have been provided by the organization. So I would direct it to Ms. Campbell to speak to why the cost. Go ahead. Thank you and through the chair. I think that’s a great question. The cost of these temporary beds is expensive because the whole of community has set some standards around what the staffing ratio needs to be when dealing with high-acuity individuals.

[4:05:27] We don’t know who’s coming through our door on a night-to-night basis. We don’t know what they’re bringing with them. We don’t know what challenges they’re facing. And so because of that and the unpredictability of who’s coming through the door, it’s been recommended by my colleagues in this work. And I’ve been criticized in past for not following these guidelines, that a one-to-five ratio is what’s necessary when supporting high-acuity people in these types of transitional temporary unknown spaces. And so that’s the ratio that we’ve used in the proposal.

[4:06:03] That’s the number that’s before you. One of the benefits of having repeated night stays for the individuals who use those stays, is that they incrementally improve in every way. Their mental health stabilizes. I don’t know if you’ve ever had a sleepless night, how difficult it is to be your best self. These are communal spaces where people are next to each other. And so our necessity to sort of be very present and monitor that space. You don’t know who’s sleeping beside you.

[4:06:36] So for people to be restful, we have to have people watching and present for that to happen. These are mattresses on the floor. They’re expensive, in my opinion as well. And that’s why this should not be our permanent solution. What is necessary is permanent supportive housing. What is necessary is places where people can be. And we’re working towards that. I’m pleased that I’m part of that. But until that happens, this is what people who do this work every day are telling me we need to be working towards, is this one-to-five ratio in supporting these high-needs individuals.

[4:07:13] These are the same people who struggle to be in those very shelters at the ratios that you’re talking about because they require ongoing support. They may or may not be able to come back to that shelter space so they lose that bed. There’s lots of reasons why the people that use the winter response beds, use them as opposed to the services that already exist in the community, not to mention the fact that they are very subscribed to and full, which I know you’re gonna talk about later today. You know, the necessity of these spaces and the costs can be reduced.

[4:07:48] I think an earlier question was, how can we reduce costs over time? Part of that is caring for people over time, seeing their mental health, their addictions, and their basic needs be met so that their physical acuity and needs reduce as well. When that happens, we can see ratios go up. One to eight, one to 10. I believe that some of our shelters, it’s one to 20 at times for staffing. So I know that that is possible. That’s the answer to the question of the cost. Thank you.

[4:08:27] This leads to my next question. This is supposed to be a cold weather response and we’re going now into April and May. And I’ve heard a number of times this evening, references to long-term housing solutions. We already have looked at our extensive housing, potential solutions. We’ve talked extensively and implemented, started to implement our hub plan, which are to address those, and especially those high acuity individuals that was referenced by Ms. Campbell.

[4:09:02] My concern is, is if we start spending money at this cost, we’re going to restrict the funding for those other avenues. And if the goal here is to provide long-term housing, is this the best way to go about it? So what I would like to do, Chair, is I would like to put an amendment on the floor to have the end date March 31st as opposed to May 31st. Before I can allow that, Councillor, that seems like something I noticed staff on, because how that changes the costing or anything like that.

[4:09:59] And I’m not sure, given this, I know this is an emergency RP kind of procurement, not RP, but a procurement process. But I’d like to get some information about what’s possible, how that would proceed, Mr. Dickens. Through you, Your Worship, I can speak to a couple of aspects with that question. So one would be, it’s been made clear to us, both through the encampment table, that have done a lot of this heavy lifting since July, to get here that through services through to the end of May were pretty critical. I was also made very clear by the ARC and CMHA that having services in place through the end of May was mandatory, that was an urgent request, that was something that there was not a lot of flexibility in.

[4:10:40] So adjusting the dates would absolutely adjust our funding. We would need to readjust the numbers and look at if there are cost savings and what that looks like, there should be. But it would also be a matter then for the boards and for the organizational leadership to determine if they’re still providing the service. I would leave it to them to debate their efforts and their desires. So that, so I guess the answer to Councillors, sure you can, but obviously there would be some consequences and uncertainty about it.

[4:11:19] I’d like to make that amendment. So if I couldn’t amend David’s, ‘cause it was material differently, doesn’t this need to be defeated first before that would come forward? So that’s not what Mr. Dickens just said. What he outlined is, yes, under the rules we could do that, there would be significant consequences that we wouldn’t know. But I’m saying my motion was seconded and is on the floor and I think it needs to be defeated before one comes forward that goes to March.

[4:12:02] So I’m gonna take that as you’re asking me to make a procedure ruling and whether Councillor Lehman’s amendment is counter to yours and has to be, yours has to be defeated before his can be put on the floor as an alternative. So give me a second so I can consult before I make a ruling on that. So I’ll make a ruling on this and then there’s always the option to challenge the chair.

[4:13:14] After consultation, I am gonna suggest that the point that Councillor Stevenson has made is valid to me and I will tell you why. The motion on the floor aligns with the bids and the contracts that were put forward. There is an expectation that the service would be provided based on Mr. Dickens’ answer. There could be some risk based on a change to the date that one, the cost will all be different, that’s expected, but that there is a possibility that there would not be service provided in some of these spaces because they may not be willing, the service providers may not be willing to bid or participate under a timeframe of that contract.

[4:13:51] So to me that is fundamentally different. It is something that Councillor could propose but we would have to defeat Councillor Stevenson’s motion on the floor and then put a completely different motion which would be approve all of these probably with a direction to staff to say, we only want to do this to May 31st, we’re willing to approve it but you need to come back with some costs, it would be something different that we would have to get more information on but you could do that and provide that direction to staff after Councillor Stevenson’s motion is defeated. Up to be challenged, but I’m going to rule that that’s a good point of order ask and that your motion Councillor Lamma would be counter to what’s on the floor in a fairly fundamental way, although it doesn’t seem like that, so challenge is okay.

[4:14:40] Good. Do you have anything else? No, I understand your reasoning Mayor and based on Mr. Dickens answer, yeah, I understand it. Probably don’t agree with it but I’m not enough to challenge the chair but I get it. So I find this very difficult for me quite frankly ‘cause absolutely we need people sheltered in the winter. My concerns are this is very costly but this is what happens when you have one person or one organization coming through looking to do fairly substantial work, I mentioned hiring 100 people, a very short period of time concerns me.

[4:15:27] Again, my concerns of overlapping into our other areas of shelter, I think this will impact our hub system quite frankly because we’re starting to get into other areas of financing. So I’m concerned of the ramifications and others housing that this financing will do and I don’t know if it’s the most, I think we can get more bang for our buck. That being said, we do need, there is a definite need for these folks to be housed over the winter.

[4:16:05] So I’ll leave that down. Councilor, I have another speaker on the speaker’s list. But what? Are counselors allowed to say that it’s gonna impact the hub system when that’s not true? We don’t have that information yet. We don’t know how these are gonna be funded. That’s correct, we don’t know how it’s gonna be funded yet. So yes, I think counselors sometimes say things. I’m not gonna, there’s a balance between calling every single thing out that may not be, I think we understand the point.

[4:16:44] Yes, okay, Councilor Ferreira, you’re next. You’ve spoken before, you’ve got some time left but you’re next on the list. Thank you through you. Was it the, I was trying to speak to my men but I guess I was speaking to my main motion. I do have in my notes as well that from the discussion that if we were to go above and beyond the 1.8 million that we would be possibly putting future funding for our hubs in jeopardy. So that’s kind of how I was thinking myself. So I will be clear on this.

[4:17:20] There is a motion on the floor that has absolutely no direction on source of financing. And when you put it in that situation, there’s been some answers from staff about how they could cobble together the money. There may be some surpluses of different pieces. They may have to go to the HPP funding but we’re not, this is one of the situations where we’re not actually providing the direction. So it’s something that we don’t know what the answer to that will be yet. So we didn’t provide a direction if we over fund this.

[4:17:54] We’re also voting on this separately. So we don’t even know if that’s the case at the end of this or not. So I think there’s nothing as part of the motion on this. Ms. Livingston, go ahead. You’re worshiping an effort to be helpful. If this motion passes, we are being directed to figure out the funding, deal with the contracts and report back to you on that. If that requires us having to look into using funding that is currently earmarked for the hub, that would be one thing.

[4:18:28] If we then received an unsolicited proposal because we have direction for council to move forward, we would be back to you on how we should proceed with trying to do both, looking to other sources of funding. So that’s what I would suggest. I don’t know that you need to resolve it this evening. I think if this passes, it gives us the direction we need to be able to move forward with cold weather tonight. And if we are fortunate to receive an unsolicited proposal early in the new year about a hub, then we’ll come back to you on a proposed strategy to address it. Councillor Ferra, go ahead, Deputy Mayor Lewis.

[4:19:12] Thank you. So two quick questions through you to staff ‘cause I recognize I’ve limited time. The first is this is not providing wraparound services. So where did the five to one staffing ratio that is being recommended for the hubs come for temporary shelter beds? Ms. Livingston. I believe it comes from trying to provide the 24/7 on-site supports, basic needs, those kinds of things. That’s what the five to one ratio includes. It does not include the mental health supports and those kinds of things that are provided in a hub through arrangements with other partners.

[4:19:51] This is the base level of service. And if I understood our representative from the ARC, trying to align with the standards that have been set both from a standards of care perspective and also from a staffing perspective, recognizing the high acuity population that would likely be accessing the service. So just to follow up on that and without belaboring the point with staff, have we actually endorsed a staffing ratio through an encampment strategy? I know we endorsed a staffing level through the hubs, but have we actually endorsed that for an encampment standup?

[4:20:29] Your worship not to that degree. We have indicated very clearly from the beginning of the discussions around the approach to the encampment strategy and cold weather, both through daytime, evening, and overnight that we were trying to align with the approach outlined in the hubs implementation plan. But if your point is, is it a hard and fast rule? No, I think the recognition and I would say, certainly from civic administration, we appreciate the effort of the ARC to align to the standards that would be provided in these spaces ‘cause I think those are quite important when you’re dealing with a high acuity population.

[4:21:06] So final point of clarification through you, Chair, to our staff. I’ve heard a number of colleagues refer to this as the whole package, but in fact, I wanna be clear, staff are not recommending any or all of these, they are putting them forward for Council’s choice, not as a package, but as individual options, is that correct? Through you, Your Worship, that is correct. Thank you for that. So again, I’m gonna just very quickly wrap up by saying I’m gonna come back to what I said before. I’m not gonna support William Street. I’m particularly concerned that we don’t know what building code upgrades may be necessary and what capital costs may be involved there in addition to the cost to simply operate the service.

[4:21:50] So I am not prepared to operate outside the budget on this. I don’t have any other speakers now, except for Councilor McAllister. Go ahead. Thank you, and through the chair, I just have a few operational questions, just so in terms of clarity for my community. I know how the coffee house currently runs.

[4:22:24] I’m just curious in terms of how that turnover will look. Obviously the coffee house, CMHA does the daytime programming. I’m just wondering, will those bed spaces be first come, first serve, are they reserved spaces? Just noting that you have a lot of people who come from the daytime program and how that will look. Thank you. Your worship through you given it’s an operational plan. It is a shared space, I’ll start this answer, then maybe direct to Ms. Campbell for creator details.

[4:22:57] So it is a shared space, you write operations, daytime services drop in services through the traditional use of the CMHA coffee house. There would be a break in service while the space is changed over, staffing filter out and filter in. The space is clean, beds are set up, all the appropriate essentials are put in place and then the overnight service would begin. As far as how that plays out and what those logistics look like, I would have to go to Ms. Campbell for those details. Sorry, go ahead.

[4:23:34] This is what happens when people are asking me how much time they have left, go ahead. Sorry, thank you and through the chair. We work with our partners on referral process. The way that the night beds work is that we do a daytime referral into those spaces. So we will work with CMHA to align that their daytime service users would have access to nighttime beds. We have worked in the past with other organizations such as London Cares and the hospital, a couple of other places where we get direct referrals into space.

[4:24:14] So we hold a number of beds for those high acuity really emergency folks who would be extremely vulnerable out on the streets. And as you heard, some of those spaces are actually designated spaces. So for example, at my sister’s place, like those beds are for women. And so we would work alongside the protocols and criteria of who’s eligible for those spaces with that organization. We also hold some space as part of the 65 beds. There’s an anticipated at the William Street location. There’s an anticipated every night stay for some people so that they can have that predictability of coming in day after day and seeing that improvement.

[4:24:55] And potentially, if we’re able to stabilize that group, we would be able to reduce staffing at different times so that we would be able to maybe reduce the cost. One thing I would like to share with you is that if and when we are able to reduce staffing because of whether it’s stabilized programming or otherwise, we have historically and we would again, return any funds that are unspent and we’re very detailed on that. Councilor McAllister. Thank you and through the chair, as a follow up, I don’t mean to get you going up and down, but I’m curious in terms, I know like CMHA day time or night time, but in terms of your staff compliment, is there any opportunity for crossover noting that CMHA have that specialized training or is it a clear cut arcade in the evening and CMHA during the day?

[4:25:52] Go ahead. Thank you, through the chair. We are sharing many resources about how operations work for that seamless experience, but there will be a clear cut delineation. It’s very important that that happen. Our staffing compliments, CMHA runs under a unionized work environment. Arcade works in a very different way. That being said, as you’ve heard, they’re sharing some resources around training staff. We’re sharing some procedural manuals. We’re making sure that this is as good of a reflection of the two organizations aligning in terms of service levels and how we serve that community as possible.

[4:26:33] And so I have great confidence that this partnership will feel to the end user, to the people using services, very seamless, but it is two separate organizations working together to deliver that 24/7 access to indoor warmth and care. Thank you, another follow up and through the chair. So is there an opportunity then, because obviously CMHA operates in a unionized environment, but in terms of providing some of those mental health support during the day, is that a possibility?

[4:27:11] Go ahead. Thank you. Yes, in fact, we have a longstanding relationship with CMHA. We have worked together across the four winters. So this is the fourth that we would be working together in various capacities, whether it’s sharing like physical resources, such as like donated items, food, clothing, like the basic needs that are needed in both of these locations, or like you said, the more specialized services. CMHA is a regular partner. They do many of our assessments that are necessary for folks that are looking to go into treatment.

[4:27:44] They take referrals for folks who are in acute mental health distress. We have their crisis team in our space quite regularly, and they are a wonderful partner. And I believe that that’s actually how the trust level has been built to the point that we’re willing to operate each other’s space and share in this capacity. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you, and through the chair, another question in terms of staffing. Noting that those other two locations, it’ll be 15 and then 10, is that still operating on the five to one model, or one to five?

[4:28:19] Yes, through the chair it is, and also part of the agreement in using that space. So just speak to sort of that standards of care component. That was important when we were negotiating space that we would follow that same standards of care practice for CMHA, and of course, the security component is separate from that. And so I think just again, thinking about the costs of these beds, there’s the ratio of caring for people in space, but as you’ve spoken about already, the community engagement piece, the safety components, the exterior work, those all have a cost component built into the budget as well, and I believe that that does impact the bottom line in terms of service delivery.

[4:29:02] Thank you and through the chair, just a final comment, I do just wanna thank the staff, CMHA, the ARC as well, for all the hard work that’s gone into this. It’s not an easy task, and I really do appreciate all the work that’s gone into this, thank you. Councillor Ferra, you have a tiny bit of time left here on the list. Councillor Pribble, you asked beyond, you’ve got like 20 seconds. Are you still on one on the list? Okay, so then you’re next. Councillor Ferra, you got, you’re very limited here. Thank you, through you.

[4:29:35] So I do like the intent of everyone trying to get as many beds as quick as possible, and that is something that I am also forward to, but I do say that we need to be measured in our approach on how we do this, and there are some good items, but there is one item that I have trouble with, and that is the William Street Church location. It’s, we don’t know how long it’s gonna take. We have the building issues that may come up, that may delay, I understand that, you know, the bed’s late, late, late, is still good than no beds at all, but there’s other issues as well.

[4:30:07] It’s the budget piece as well. Are we, we don’t know where that money’s gonna come from? It’s gonna blow us very high, well and above and beyond our budget too. You wrap it up? Yeah, I’ll wrap it up. The thing that I really gotta point out is across the street is 601 Queens. It’s London Cares, and we have said here on council that we should not be concentrating services near each other because it’s not safe to the people that we’re serving. It’s not good for the residents in the area. We need to be measured with this type of approach. We need to understand that. Councillor, your time’s pretty much up. I’ll leave it there.

[4:30:41] And by pretty much, I mean, it is. Councillor Preble, you got 20 seconds, it’s all you’ll have. Based on being so late, I will support all four, all four locations, and I hope the audience will as well. We don’t have, we can approve the money if the organization doesn’t fulfill, we don’t pay, or if they could deliver partially, we will receive a refund or we will not give the entire amount we have done that before, thank you. Okay, that exhaust speakers list that I have.

[4:31:15] Now, this has been asked to be divided up so people can vote on the four options and be separately, which we are going to accommodate. Just going to just clarify the order of that vote. And then I am gonna ask that we take a short recess after this has been a few hours through this item. I wanna figure out how to approach the rest of the agenda given there’s some substantive portions, and I’m gonna have a bit of a plan for that for colleagues after. Yes, go ahead, Councilor Roman.

[4:31:51] Sorry, through you. I just remembered a question I had. It was related to the wording of the Williams Street location where it says 65 spaces versus the other ones that say overnight spaces, and if you can just provide that clarification on why one says spaces and one says overnight spaces. Mr. Dickens. Thank you, and through you, Chair, these are indeed 24 cents, thank you. So the other sites are overnight spaces because there’s spaces being used for different functions throughout the day.

[4:32:32] The church, the 65 spaces are 24/7. That’s why there’s a distinction. Go ahead, Councilor Roman. Thank you, and through you, so I guess, so where I was struggling with this one is just in terms of how we split out our costing and how we then comparatively cost, because when we looked at our day spaces and our drop in spaces, we had those costs. And then when we had our overnight spaces in the rest of the report, we have our overnight costs. So to me, this looks promising because it’s 65 spaces that are both day and like that are 24/7.

[4:33:12] So to me, that actually strengthens the proposal itself with having those as 24/7 spaces, especially around this stability piece. And again, part of the reason why I think this is a different proposal than we’ve even seen in the past is again that you re-utilization of some of our spaces as day and night spaces. It allows for some more continuity. So I’m very hopeful that this continuity allows for more stabilization. Thank you.

[4:33:46] Okay, so how we’re gonna approach this is we’re gonna do B first, because depending on what happens in all of B, we still do C the same way, and then D can be done at the end, tying them all together. So I’m gonna do the components of B first, and I’m gonna do them in order. So, so Stephen, Councillor, Stephen, and Councillor Pribble, you are the mover of the original motion. I’m gonna assume you’re willing to move all the pieces all the way through. So we’ll just use these as the mover and seconder for all these parts, right?

[4:34:18] Okay, good. Okay, so the first one is B, I, which is the 30 overnight spaces for $826,000 on Dundestry. So we’ll open that for voting. Fosing the vote, the motion carries 14 to zero, noting Paul, and Councillor van Mirbergen has left the meeting.

[4:35:11] The next piece will be BII, which is the 1.4 million for the 432 William Street, 65 spaces, and that’ll just take a minute to get ready. Fosing the vote, the motion carries 8 to 6.

[4:36:13] Okay, the next one is part BII, which is the 15 overnight spaces at CMHA Coffee House 404,000. Fosing the vote, motion carries 13 to one.

[4:37:07] And finally, the final part of B, which is BIV, which is the 10 overnight spaces at CMHA, my sister’s place, 335,000. Mr. Trossa, closing the vote, motion carries 14 to zero.

[4:38:17] Nobody needs A, C, and D, dealt with separately, do they? No, we can do all those together? Okay, we’ll put them all together. Mr. Stevenson, Councillor Pribble, Councillor Layman, closing the vote, motion carries 14 to zero.

[4:39:40] Okay, that items done, I know that there’s some people still here, but for other items, but I think given the time we had on that, and it’s been a few hours, I would like to take just a 10 minute break, because I also wanna talk to staff about seeing how we can manage the rest of the agenda, given there’s a lot of items left, and I might be some things that we can push off, but I’m gonna talk to staff about that, so I need 10 minutes. So I’m gonna ask if we can have a 10 minute break, but we’ll keep it really, like we’re not gonna do the 10 that becomes 15, we’re gonna do 10 minutes. So 10 minute sharp break, moved by Councillor Ferra, seconded by Councillor Cuddy, all those in favor, by hand, any opposed?

[4:40:16] Motion carries. Okay, that means we’re back at nine. I know, that’s what I’m saying.

[4:41:03] Me? I don’t have as much as you close, a lot of officials till next week is mine. That’s right, so you don’t start hiring until then. Yeah, well, you should do this pretty close. Yeah, and it could still go the other way it comes. Just the chambers, I think a microphone’s on, up in the gallery.

[4:46:02] Okay, I’m calling this meeting back to order. Going to let colleagues know that it’s my intent to call a special meeting of SBPC as the chair on December 6th at one o’clock. I’m gonna ask if colleagues are willing to refer 2.1 and all of in camera, which I conferred with staff, all can be dealt with on that timeframe at that meeting, and we will attempt to deal with the rest of the agenda item that we have, so 6th, December 6th at one.

[4:46:42] So we’ll deal with 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, the 4.3 and 5.1, 5.2, but the rest will refer to a special SBPC. I see nods at one o’clock, Councillor Trostoff. No, I will defer it later if we run out of time. Like, I’m just saying, I’m deferring the substantive items. If everything goes really smooth, then that’s fine.

[4:47:19] If we need to refer 5.1 and 5.2, we can still refer those, but we’ll do that later. Yeah, we’re not talking about this anymore. Unless anybody has a substantive objection, that’s what we’re gonna do. But I am gonna need a motion to refer those items now, because if we move that now, we let some people who are waiting go, when we probably won’t get through their items anyways. So Councillor Stevenson is willing to defer item 2.1 on the public agenda and all of in camera to the special meeting that I’ve just called on December 6th at one. Seconder for that, Councillor Pribble.

[4:47:53] We are gonna do that in the system. Is there any debate on that? Seeing none, we’re gonna open that for voting. Frank votes, yes? Opposing the vote in the motion carries, 13 to zero. Noting that Deputy Mayor Lewis has left the meeting.

[4:48:38] Okay, so we’re still under items for direction. We haven’t completed those yet. The next item for direction is on asylum claimants. This is an item that I can go to Councillor Raman first on the correspondence that was brought forward. And I’ll just say to colleagues, there’s a lot of stuff to go. We had like a really long debate on something that had very broad agreement from Council on the last one. So we could try to keep it like tighter, especially if it seems like everybody’s in the same place. We can kind of move along hopefully a little quicker, but recognizing that people do need to have the ability to say their words.

[4:49:14] It’s just, sometimes we are in wider agreement than maybe we realize and we spend a lot of time convincing each other when we may already be convinced. So, but Councillor Raman, I’ll let you go ahead. Thank you and through you. I will be brief with my remarks just to tighten up our time for the meeting. I want to say thank you to colleagues for first taking the time to review the letter before you. I want to say thank you to Ms. Iola Ronson and Mr. Mushak, Ms. Mushak of Mission Services and CCLC. They are on the front lines of doing exceptional work in our community and it is important that we understand the many pressures on shelters and services in our city.

[4:49:58] This motion today asks for more information to come to us and our partners to frame what we are seeing or what they are seeing. You’ll see in your added package a letter for Mission Services and in the letter it states on November 15th, 40% of their beds, the men’s mission and eight of 20 other family spaces at the Roth home were occupied by refugee claimants. They have a responsibility to provide support on a first-come, first-served basis. And I continue to support their work they’re doing there. What we’re seeing is similar to what other big cities are seeing, additional pressures on emergency shelters, transitional beds and services.

[4:50:35] And this letter suggests unifying our message with the Ontario big city mayor’s caucus and AMO to advocate for additional supports. CCLC emission services have already begun some of this work. They’re seeking funding through the province of Ontario and this letter requests the mayor to support the request for resettlement supports to be offered by CCLC at Mission Services to help address the unique needs of asylum claimants in our shelters. Thank you. So I’m looking to move the content of my letter sign, and I’d like to thank the mayor for his support as well and for also visiting the shelter and seeing and hearing also what’s going on at big city mayor’s caucus.

[4:51:22] I know that there’s been some good conversations already around what types of supports are needed. So I want to move the letter that’s provided in the package. Okay, moved by Councillor ramen. I’ll look for a seconder. Councillor Caddie’s willing to second any discussion. Go ahead Councillor Stevenson and then Councillor Troso. Thank you and through the chair. I’ve got a couple of things. One is the data that is here. We’re informed that 40% are newcomers and 50% of that are refugees.

[4:51:59] It wasn’t that long ago it was in the newspaper where deputy mayor Lewis was saying that we had X number of people who were coming from outside the city. And I get a lot of requests for data, right? People want to know what is going on in our city and what is going on with the homeless. So I’m wondering, where is this data available? And is there a way to have it shared more frequently with staff and with the public? Or sorry with council and with the public? That’s really your worship, thank you. Council has directed staff to report back to a future meeting on a homelessness data report that gives council and the public a significant snapshot of homelessness in London, stemming from previous council motions around where folks are coming from and what their demographic looks like in London.

[4:52:49] So that is planned to come forward in January. I would propose that I look to Mr. Cooper’s team to include a section in that existing report that has been prepared to include a specific section around the impacts of asylum and refugee, asylum seekers and refugee claimants. As far as the data goes, we collect data through our high-fist data system. That is a shared database through the community. We make that information public through reporting. It is information that we would really seek council direction on in terms of sharing more of it.

[4:53:28] We do try to treat it with some sensitivity. We have been pretty forthcoming around the number of individuals experiencing homelessness in London and what those trends look like from years past. I will share on this file, our team was able to pull that from May 1st to November 20th, there was 100, 168 unique people falling under high-fist categories such as refugee, refugee claimant, undeclared and not reported status that stayed in emergency shelter and transitional beds at shelters during that period.

[4:54:05] So again, that’s from May 1st to November 20th. There was 168 unique individuals under those categories that stayed in emergency shelter for at least one night. And when we look at that, that is broken out across the center of Hope, men’s mission, Roth home, the YOU shelter, London cares, resting spaces, men’s mission, transitional beds and Holly’s house transitional beds. So just for some context. Go ahead, Councilor. Thank you.

[4:54:36] And we counsel said that London was a sanctuary city in January of 2017 and then that was removed in 2018 and it was the free of fear services for all city. What impact is that had? And is this a consequence of those decisions? Go ahead.

[4:55:11] Your worship looked to others the way in here but the previous council decisions around those items that are referenced would have no correlation here in terms of an influx of those seeking asylum from other parts of the world. The federal government’s been pretty clear with municipalities around the impacts of Roxham Road and this is a lot of secondary migration. Okay, go ahead. And are these because the asylum seekers aren’t coming directly to London and according to the report they’re coming from Toronto or other cities.

[4:55:46] Are they being picked up as well as people who’ve come in from other cities? Are we counting them that way as well? Is that what may be part of the number was in the spring or summer? Mr. Dickens. At this time your worship and through you I wouldn’t have that level of granular data in terms of… So when folks show up they’re showing up at one of these shelters looking for a space to sleep and they will indicate or they will not report a status or they will indicate their status. Some while they’re there for a space to sleep will try to file for emergency service or supports through the Ontario Works program and others will not.

[4:56:26] So well, we don’t have the specificity in terms of people declaring I’m coming straight from London or straight to London from this point of border crossing. But we do know that through our conversations with the federal government and through our conversations with other municipalities there have been a lot of movement between communities. I think that’s widely or widely publicized and shared through a number of channels. Go ahead. Thank you and I had another question on that but I’ve forgotten.

[4:57:01] The other thing I was looking for was clarity on here it’s asking that the mayor be requested to write a letter and to undertake advocacy efforts. And I just wondered if I could get clarity as a new counselor as to when the mayor needs direction to do something and when not because we’ve had mayors, the mayor and counselors making a number of statements on a daily basis and recently the mayor issued a statement on the Middle East. And I’ve been getting a lot of emails asking, there seems to be some confusion. Was that a council endorsed statement or was that directly from the mayor and it was directly just from you specifically but could you maybe provide clarification there on when you would come to council prior to doing something and just clarity on that statement?

[4:57:47] Sure, yeah, happy to. Although I’m often— I do a point of order, sir, before you go. Yeah, go ahead. Sorry, how is this relevant to that matter at hand? I’m answering the part about the direction in the piece about directing the mayor to do advocacy. I’m sorry, is that related to anything on the agenda? Just a general question. It’s related directly to the motion that’s on the floor that the mayor be requested to undertake immediate advocacy efforts with the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, et cetera, et cetera. Okay, thanks.

[4:58:20] Okay, so I will say on the advocacy piece, there are many ways that advocacy happens. It happens directly from me. It happens through the organizations that we’re with and in this case, advocacy on this has already happened through the Ontario big city mayors, initiated by mayors who may have first had the pressure in their systems like Mayor Chow and others, and then others as that pressure caused more movements across other cities kind of joined and supported, but often you’ll have a group start to advocate and we lend our voices to these organizations we’re a part of.

[4:58:56] So I can take positions myself. I can join positions and we support the positions of our organizations, but from time to time, we reinforce that work with statements of council like in this case. Now, I will say I’m already part of the work that the Ontario big city mayors is doing on this. I will say I’m not aware of any work that the Association of Municipalities of Ontario is doing on this, but certainly this direction would say, branch that out a little bit and I would, I would basically reinforce, but it’s always be requested. You can’t direct me.

[4:59:28] So that’s why it’s worded that way. And in this case, I’m very happy to take the request. It’s work that we’re already underway on. So much like other members of council too, can make statements on their own. So can I, but this is a request for me to do this and I’m happy to take the request from councilors. Councilor Trossa. Thank you very much through the chair. I’ll certainly be supporting this. I really want to point out that I thought the letter from Mission Services was done in a very tasteful, sensitive and positive way.

[5:00:07] This is, no claims are being made that people were, anyway, this was done in a very positive way. And I was really glad to see Councilor and the Mayor pick this up in the form of a resolution, which really is geared towards trying to make the situation better for the very people who are staying in these shelters. So this is a very positive resolution. I’m happy to support it.

[5:00:41] And I hope that we just do this because this is a situation that is way beyond our control. We can’t do something about the rent levels as much as we would like. The province is going to have to do that. I don’t want to get too far off of the agenda, but it is mentioned in the letter. And we’ve got some agencies that are really stretched and are really going out of the way to do the right thing. So good permission services. And thank you, Councilor and Mayor for putting this on our agenda.

[5:01:15] Any other speakers? Okay, seeing none, that’s moved and seconded. We’ll open that for voting. Councilor Hillier. Yes, it’s not loading.

[5:02:02] Closing the vote, motion carries, 13 to zero. Okay, now we’re onto the things that we have left from the consent. We’ve already referred to 2.1, so we have 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4. I’ll deal with those separately. The first is 2.2, which is the update to the request for proposal hubs implementation plan. You’ll see the staff report with some suggested actions there based on the request from CMHA.

[5:02:37] I’ll look for someone who wants to put that on the floor. And then I’ll open it for questions. Councilor Trosa moves, Councilor Raman seconds. Any discussion? Councilor Raman. Thank you and through you. I have an amendment for 2.2 that I wanted to introduce. I did circulate the amendment, but I wanted to just make sure that I touched on it and spoke to it here as well.

[5:03:13] But I’d like to, well, I wanna make sure I have, do you want me to read it and then? Yes, I’d like you to read it because although you circulated it, people who may be watching may not have access to it, so. Okay, thank you. So this is an amendment to 2.2 to include a C, that civic administration be directed to provide municipal council with the option of additional time equal to one committee cycle to consider the results of any future hub requests for proposals, RFPs, prior to requesting a final decision.

[5:03:54] Okay, I’ll look for a seconder for that. Councillor Stevenson seconds. Discussion? I did have a seconder. Yes, sorry. Councillor Lehman, sorry. Councillor Lehman, you wanted to, sure. Apparently there was a seconder lined up. Councillor Lehman, you can have it. Any discussion, go ahead. Thank you. The amendment in front of us today is here to allow us more discussion between administration and council regarding the timing of making a decision about future hub RFPs.

[5:04:29] What we heard as we considered the proposal for CMHA was that even though it was possible to allow for more time, we were still under, not from staff, staff were very clear that we had more time to consider that as we were working through it. However, we defeated a motion to put a 30-day distance between our discussion at SPPC and our decision on that proposal. Listening to the debate again last week, I heard colleagues state that time was an important consideration in not supporting the referral to allow more time.

[5:05:03] And in hindsight, I asked myself, what can we learn from this experience? We need to ask ourselves those questions. We need to be a learning organization. We need to build into our process opportunities to course correct, to take more time for careful thought and evaluation. And in this process, what I needed was time to consult with residents of the ward. This amendment supports the addition of time between our decision points, to allow for conversations with our constituents, to follow up with questions, and frankly, to learn more before we make a decision.

[5:05:38] And I think as we’re doing something for the first time, all of those things are really important. This doesn’t mean that we will always need that time, but it means that when we do, we have it. And I think that it’s important to be able to engage in that kind of discussion when we need it. Thank you. Any other speakers? Sorry? Yes, just on the amendment right now. Councillor Joseph. Could I, through the chair, could I ask Steph, if this mandatory language civic administration be directed to provide, not to seek to provide, but to do it, could there be time scenarios where that creates some issues or problems in terms of being implementing it in a timely way, or do you see a problem with this?

[5:06:52] Thank you, through the chair. So the way I understand the motion is it allows Council the option to exercise that cycle. So if there was a time urgency, I believe Council could choose to waive that. However, from a procurement perspective, what we would need to do based on this direction is build in that time with the irrevocable timing of the funding or the cost of the RFP as part of the RFP process. So with this direction, we can absolutely include that in any future RFP so that time would not be a challenge to allow this to proceed.

[5:07:29] Go ahead, Councillor Lehman. Thank you, and when we went down this road, we said that we would need flexibility as we learn from our experiences. And I think, well, it was asked for more time, but the RFP went out with those certain parameters that we had to respect. And I think this is a classic example of something that we have learned, that we can use in future RFPs as Ms. Barbone has indicated a proper way to go. So that’s the way I’m supporting this motion. Anyone else on the amendment, Councillor McAllister?

[5:08:07] Thank you and through the chair. Just a comment on this. I think it was a lesson learned in terms of that location. I would say one of the things I learned from that, which might be beneficial in the future is, and I don’t know if this necessarily falls into our RFP process, but I do think it’d be beneficial for the community to have a better understanding of the organization which is putting forward their proposal. I found after this fell through that I was fielding a lot of questions in terms of the organization itself, and I’m not an employee of CMHA.

[5:08:43] I can’t feel a lot of those questions. Obviously, I do have one of their locations in my ward, but I was doing my best in terms of trying to defend an organization and really had no insight into that. And I think this would give us some time to perhaps have a public engagement session and perhaps have our organization come forward, have that public dialogue, ‘cause I do think there’s just a lack of knowledge in our community necessarily. We might know of the organization, but not necessarily what they do and how they operate. So I do think that this would be a valuable tool for us. Thank you.

[5:09:17] Councillor Stevenson on the amendment. Yeah, thank you. I will just say that I do support this, although for me, it wasn’t a hub. Safe Space was just a winter response, but to have it come out through rumors in the neighborhood and have no opportunity for community feedback was difficult. So I do support this. I think the more community engagement we have and time to talk to our communities is a good thing. So I appreciate this amendment. Anyone else?

[5:09:50] Okay, it’s moved and seconded. It’s an amendment to the motion to add a C. Everybody’s aware of what it is. So we’ll open that for voting. Opposing the vote, motion carries 13 to zero. Okay, now I need to move on to seconder for the as amended report, which is all three pieces. Councillor ramen, seconded by Councillor McAllister.

[5:10:24] We will have discussion now on the as amended report. Go ahead, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, I just have a quick comment on this one. It bothered me throughout the discussion on this particular hub, the sort of dismissive notion about calling everybody Nimby’s anybody that wasn’t in agreement with it without really listening to the concerns. There’s a huge difference between a three story walk up or affordable housing in a neighborhood and a site that allows drug use. It didn’t need to be that way.

[5:10:59] We could have chosen to have drug free spaces and I don’t think we should cast aside concerns of illegal drug use. People have a right to voice their concerns and we don’t get to demonize people as Nimby just because they are saying no. Even here tonight we’ve had people say no to certain locations and that should be allowed. People get to express their concerns about changes that are coming to their neighborhood and I just wanted to be a voice for that, but we get to be careful, we don’t completely label people right away without listening to their concerns.

[5:11:33] Any other speakers? This is the whole thing. Councilor McAllister, go ahead. Thank you and through the chair. I take issue with what was just said in terms of, I completely agree. People have absolutely the right to voice their opinion, but I take issue when I receive correspondence that essentially says let’s dump it all on the east and be done with it. So I do think that there is space for that dialogue, but I don’t agree when people take shots at parts of the city, which I think are unfair and unjust. Thank you.

[5:12:08] Any other speakers? Councilor Ferra. Thank you. With the sentiments that we just heard, I don’t stand up for Nimby’s and myself and I wouldn’t be calling anyone else, Nimby’s with certain issues. With respect to downtown, it’s just, we have a lot going on right now. I have two extra items on my plate after the last couple items ago. I had three service depots as well. I do accept that ‘cause I understand that we need to put our all hands on deck forward, but as I said, I don’t stand up for anything like that.

[5:12:46] So when I do have an opposition, my opposition is for reasons that are rational and I spoke to those. Okay, so we’re gonna, so kind of getting off the report here. So let’s kind of keep it tight to, we’ve got three items before us. Councilor Ramen, go ahead. Thank you and through you and on the report. I just wanna say, I have deep respect for CMHA for the willingness they were, they expressed in identifying and speaking to the information as they learned it.

[5:13:29] And I think that as a community, we have to be willing to have those brave conversations. When we learn new information, when we see things going in a direction that we hadn’t intended, that we can say it wasn’t what we intended and we need to pull back. And I think that I have to take that time to say thank you to CMHA for having that look at this and then furthering that conversation with staff. And I wanna say thank you to staff for engaging in that dialogue and giving CMHA an opportunity to find options. So I know that for all of us, there was a desire to move forward and a desire to see council’s direction fulfilled.

[5:14:15] So this is something that, again, we all have to learn to, but we also all have to take responsibility for. And one of the things I think that it’s important to learn from the work that we’re doing here is that we’re very knowledgeable about our wards and we’re taking the time that’s needed to understand those issues. And so when we come here and we’re speaking from our wards perspective, I think it’s really important to hear each other, even when those conversations are difficult. And so sharing the experience of residents, no matter where they live is important and we need to value and honor that at this table and in this room.

[5:14:58] Thank you. Okay, thanks. Any other speakers? No, seeing none. Okay. It’s the whole thing, the parts A, B and the added C. I’m gonna open that for voting. Voting the vote, motion carries, 13 to zero.

[5:15:49] Okay, next item is 2.3, which is the November progress report for the Health and Homelessness Whole Community Response. It’s got two items associated with it to receive the report and then a one-time allocation approval for Arcade’s meal invoice program for a period of time there. I will look for a mover for the staff report recommendations. Councillor Ramen, seconded by Councillor Trozau. Any discussion on this? Councillor Stevenson. Thank you. Any questions?

[5:16:21] On page 20 under strategy and accountability or I’m assuming that’s where it would be, I’m wondering if it would be possible to get a financial update with the cost to date, the those that we’ve spent and those that we’ve committed, we’ve approved consultants, lived experience payments, encampments, hubs, supportive housing, all kinds of things. And I know as we’re coming up on a year to the announcement of the $25 million donation and a lot of people are asking, how we spent it, how much has been spent, it would be nice to have some wondering if that’s coming or if we can make a request for it.

[5:16:58] Your worship there, are we being asked to request from the fund, how much has been allocated from the fund? I think there’s two questions here. One would be, I guess, a request with London Community Foundation on the fund, which is not held by the city if they could provide an update on the expenditures there. And this second part of the question I hear is some sense of our expenditures. Are not sure what the other piece is. Sure, so we can undertake to provide what has been spent in July Council received a report on the allocation of funding to support a communications plan.

[5:17:40] And we can, we indicated with respect to the hub proposals, what was being supported out of the fund from a capital perspective, so we can put that all in one place, certainly. So yes. Thank you, I’d appreciate that. As I said, there was a lot, it’d be nice to see what the costs are. And that same page, under sustaining the sector, there was talk of addressing funding shortfalls with some of the shelters and some of the low staffing ratios. There was also the talk with arcade about possibly like doing more long-term contracts with them as we stand up the hubs.

[5:18:22] It talks about transition funding supports for up to 24 months. So I just wondered if there was some details on what we can anticipate coming for that? Mr. Cooper. Thank you, and through the chair, we’re meeting with organizations in the coming weeks to talk about kind of what their needs are for the sustaining of the sector. And we’ll be looking to bring something to council early in the new year for any contract amendments or new contracts that are necessary. Give a few more questions. Okay, go ahead.

[5:18:58] Under the hubs implementation, so just in the most recent audit committee, we were advised that there were not problems, but areas to improve in terms of the vendor risk management. And with us spending so much money on the hubs right now, I wondered if we were factoring some of those in in terms of vendor risk profiles or audits of service to make sure that we were getting the services that we’re contracted for. Worship, I just want to be clear with respect to a comment like so much money.

[5:20:05] So one hub is starting at 1.3 escalating to 1.9 over two year periods. The second hub is 2.1 million. These are well within the estimated range of what hubs we’re going to be. We are using our standard contracts to manage that funding relationship with both of those organizations. There are things that came through the vendor management audit that under Ms. Berbon’s leadership are being implemented across the organization. And as those things are implemented, certainly they’ll be reflected in future contracts.

[5:20:38] I don’t know that they’re going to be reflected specifically in these immediate contracts. Thank you. I didn’t mean anything by so much money. A lot of people would consider 1.5 million a lot of money. My question is, and I’ll just make it a comment, is that we through, especially the cold weather response, we do have contracts with a nonprofit organization that we haven’t dealt with before. It was highlighted in the audit committee report about risk, vendor risk profiles and making sure they’re compliant with their taxes and all that kind of thing.

[5:21:15] What it is in the report, and I’m just assuming having that information, I’ll assume that civic administration is going to not wait for the new changes that are coming, but are going to take a look at that to ensure that the taxpayers and those in need of service are getting the best possible care. So on page 21 under the encampment response, it says that we’re winding down these services as they stand up the cold weather response. And I just was looking for a little bit more information on that because the cold weather response, we did drop in and outreach, the last SPPC.

[5:21:52] There was also 100,000 for unsheltered, but I don’t recall seeing any details on that. And we are being asked here to fund 251,000 for meals. So I’m just wondering how we’re providing the meals if we’re standing winding down the service depots. Mr. Dickens. Through you, worship, I’ll start this response on passing Mr. Cooper for additional commentary. So what we’re looking to do with the encampment table is understand what council’s committee’s decision was tonight and what council’s decision will be on the number of indoor spaces that would be provided.

[5:22:32] Pending council’s decision, we will then understand what the gap is in the community for those that we need to support that are gonna remain unsheltered. Committee endorses 120 beds in addition to every other bed that’s already been tabled to be open this winter. Then we’ll have a far less gap to address in terms of unsheltered homelessness. That would indicate that the depots are going to look different and some based on locations and where individuals are being housed and brought indoors from would shift, either shift to different locations or shift out and wind down entirely.

[5:23:09] We still know, and Ms. Campbell alluded to this as well, that there are still going to be individuals that will be experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Maybe throughout periods of the winter, maybe throughout the entirety of the winter. And so the last report was to get ahead of that and be proactive as staff to say, we’re gonna need some money to help these folks that are gonna be outdoors until all the spaces come online or as they remain unsheltered for different reasons. What we’re saying here is that part of that support is to administratively write size and continue to invoice through an invoicing model, the food provision of the ARC.

[5:23:52] If it’s found that we have fewer meals that need to be provided to encampments or to individuals, I’m not saying that’s likely, but if that were the case, then the cost of that would go down and there would be unspent funds. So I hope that sort of paints the picture. This is not a, we opened up 120 beds tonight. That’s great, there’s no more people outdoors. We need to continue to do this. So we’ve been trying to be as proactive as we can. And understanding that unsheltered individuals will require different supports and different needs. And what that looks like will be determined based on council’s decision.

[5:24:29] Thank you, I appreciate the proactive. And yet, my question was the meals, 120 meals per day. Is there, are we handing those out through outreach instead? Or it may still be service depots. You haven’t worked that out yet. Mr. Dickens, go ahead. Thank you. The encampment tables are still actively represented by outreach and frontline workers. And they will still have spaces that for the time being will be populated with groups of encampments and groups of individuals.

[5:25:02] So we’ll continue to administer those meals through those methods. And while we open up new spaces throughout December and January, and as those folks transition, then we would look to reposition those depots to tell you how many people are coming out of Cavendish today or out of Watson Park today to end those spaces I would not know. So we are saying we are going to need to continue to provide meals in those depots until we can wind them down or transition them to other spaces to meet the needs of the vulnerable people. Some of those spaces that people are currently in become very difficult to serve in the winter months.

[5:25:38] There’s not a knock on our snow clearing friends and other departments, but travel paths of footpaths and the ability to set up a table and administer provisions looks very different in June and July than it does in January February. Thank you, fair enough. At the bottom of page 22, it talks about the business reference table and it refers to the granting agreement for the 500,000 and the 1.16. It doesn’t refer to the 250,000 for Argyle and Hamilton Road, but I’m assuming it’s going to be treated the same. Can I get that question repeated?

[5:26:20] It’s where we are competing page number, so you’re my apologies. I can just prepare. So the council is saying staff brought forward a recommendation to give some funds to downtown BIA and all these BIA, there’s some parameters under which you’re going to govern those. Council then of their choice added some other BIA’s into it, is it going to operate generally the same way as the structure here? Yes, your worship, we will. One last question then.

[5:26:52] Under the indigenous led response, I know we approved 18, I believe, transitional beds with the previous winter response ‘cause it was going to go for two years. So, and then with the hubs, we’ve got another 18. So I just wanted to confirm that, that we’re going to end up with 36 this winter. And there was no talk about cold weather beds, although there was in last years and they weren’t able to provide the 10 beds for cold weather, but I wondered if that might be part of this year? Mr. Dickens.

[5:27:26] Thank you, Your Worship. And LOSA is as approved through the hubs plan, we’ll be bringing on a total of 28 beds, the 10 respite and the 18 transitional, those 18 transitional beds will look different than what is there now. As those beds now, we’re actually set to end this month. So the 18 beds that they are creating through the pallet structures and the 10 respite beds that they’re creating in the existing space will look and act quite differently than what has been there at this point and what was there prior to that through previous winter response.

[5:28:01] So it is 18 transitional beds and 10 respite beds. Go ahead. Was last year’s winter response, did it not include two years of funding for those beds? Go ahead. Thank you and through the chair, there was a two year allocation. We have signed a one year contract with that organization and we will not be renewing that contract, given the direction that that organization has taken to apply for the RFP for the hubs. Okay, thank you. That’s good to know.

[5:28:32] And will that not mean a lot more money available potentially than? Go ahead, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the chair. I’m thinking it’s around $600,000. We were waiting for that organization’s current contract to end and then get a final accounting of the dollars to understand where they’re at and if there’s savings in addition to the second year piece, we would look to recoup that and then obviously go into the housing stability services general budget. I have myself on the list and then Councillor Hopkins.

[5:29:07] I’m gonna hand the chair over to Councillor Raman. Thank you. I have the chair recognizing the mayor, go ahead. So I’m on this report, which is yet another update on the work as well as the other item. I just want to say to our staff that this is like, this is very helpful, detailed work. And I want to say on the questions and answers that you get from us, not just on this, but many topics related to this field. I am always very impressed with your top of mind and quickly accessible, detailed and thoughtful answers to those questions, even your engagements, a knowledgeable ability to pull up information about service providers who may not be directly under your sphere or your department that you work on.

[5:29:50] But I think you face a lot of questions from us, which is our right to ask and rightly so as we provide that oversight. But I just wanted to provide a comment that I find the report very helpful. I continue to find it helpful, but I am always very impressed by how quickly you can answer some very detailed questions off the cuff with accurate and helpful information. So I just wanted to add that context and I’m supportive of the direction that this report brings forward. Returning the chair to you and Councillor Hopkins is waiting to speak.

[5:30:25] Councillor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair, for your comments. I too want to give my thanks to staff for the work in this report. I’m always amazed at how much work is going on before these reports come to me. And I really do appreciate this information. It helps me decide on how to proceed. I do have a quick question around the housing implementation table. Is that going to continue?

[5:30:57] Just help or it’s going to continue. I would assume, I just want to make sure. Mr. Dickens. Through you, Your Worship, absolutely, yes. These implementation tables will continue and as they work towards various milestones, they will continue to adapt to where they need to focus on next. Good to know that that’s going to continue. I’ve met a number of members and I know we’ve got a few colleagues here on this table and there’s a lot of work that’s going on around those tables.

[5:31:29] So I do really appreciate all those individuals that are involved. I’m so forward, I’m so looking forward to the highly supportive housing strategy coming forward with these hundred units with that information coming to us as well as the other report. I think that’s the only report that’s coming back to us on December, but I think that is going to be important information for us to have because for me, the hubs are temporary.

[5:32:04] It’s going forward and how this is all going to be implemented is what I’m looking at and I just want to make sure it’s just that report that’s coming to us in December. Through you, Your Worship, if I could respond to that, go ahead, through you, given the agenda for the December 12th SPPC and through conversations with our strategy accountability table and with our housing co-chairs, we’re going to be actually bringing that housing plan forward in January so that we actually have time to have it prepared and then have attention at committee when it comes forward.

[5:32:44] Good to know that. I know it’s going to be a busy month and we’ve already got busy agendas happening. So good to know that that will be happening in January and thanks very much. Okay, that’s all the speakers I had. It’s moved and seconded. So we’ll open this for voting. Closing the vote, motion carries 13 to zero.

[5:33:22] Okay, on to 2.4, which is the 2023 to 2027 London strategic plan core area. There is a report as well as an added piece of correspondence. So I’m happy to, hold on, I gotta. Okay, so this is to be received and with an it being noted. So I don’t know if someone wants to put that on the floor first before any subsequent action, someone to put it on the floor, especially if you want to take some sort of different action with it, Councilor Freire willing to put it on the floor.

[5:34:07] Seconded by Councilor Stevenson. Okay, now I can open up as we use this. I saw Councilor Freire put your hand up, go ahead. Thank you, through you, colleagues. It’s the War 13 Councilor representing downtown again. Just trying to figure out a way to make our downtown more resilient. I have a very overworked when it comes to this ward, especially with downtown. And my resilience will not go away. So I’ll keep on coming back.

[5:34:39] But I would like to see downtown also be resilient as well. I would like to ensure that beyond this term, we are able to know that the direction that’s going forward continues on. So we’ve seen many plans and programs created in the past and past Councils. And I see that as puzzles towards a grander vision. But we need to figure out a way to put these pieces of the puzzle together. And we need to figure out how to prioritize which puzzles we do first. So I have a motion that I’ve circulated out to everyone. And that motion is basically trying to is asking for your support so that staff can go through all the reports and programs that we have in the past and look at it through a contemporary lens and prioritize what elements of those reports and programs through that contemporary lens of the issues of the situation that we see on the ground right now.

[5:35:34] And how to move forward. And that would be something that I would ideally like to see for a long-term strategy. I am not going as far with this motion as I would like to because I think that I would like to pace myself and I would like staff to be able to pace themselves as well. But I’m just looking for a little bit more of a refinement of our position on how we look to the future. I would like us to, when we’re done here, like when all of our time here on Council is done, however many years down the road that we’ll be able to go downtown and we’ll be able to see that momentum that we could start today still continuing on for our enjoyment of the downtown.

[5:36:14] So I’m looking for your support. I’d like to add my amendment to the motion or to the staff recommendation that was already on the floor. I don’t want to take anything off the staff recommendation. I just want to stick that in there and I’m hoping that I can get your support. So my understanding of your motion that’s been circulated and I’ll say that the clerks took it in just kind of change it into the language that we use at the meetings is that you don’t need to do, it’s not an amendment because it’s, the basis of this is a referral back with a number of pieces associated with it.

[5:36:48] So given, I know you circulated it, it’s probably best for me to maybe, even I can just read it out. That way we can make sure you’re good with the language that’s just been adjusted from what your correspondence was and then I can look for a seconder and then we can have a discussion. So here’s how it reads now. That was respect to the 2023-2027 city of London strategic plan core action plan, the following actions be taken. A, the 2023-2027 city of London strategic plan core area report essentially be referred back to civic administration. B, the civic administration should be directed to 100, take a comprehensive review considering current conditions and existing plans that should involve a removal of outdated components from previous work, prioritized essential elements.

[5:37:38] Additionally, the examination should determine the necessity of a new downtown master plan extending beyond the immediate 2023-2027 city of London strategic plan timeframe, while aligning with its scope and C, civic administration be directed to report back to a future meeting of the SPPC committee with a prioritized grouping of the next steps, including short term actions, a longer term plan of actions, draft targets, metrics and fulfillment requirements to a future meeting of SPPC. That sounds a little bit repetitive, but it being noted that the recent funding approvals by municipal council for the downtown and all these village improvement areas provide some bridge funding to assist with short term challenges and needs while this work is undertaken.

[5:38:25] Is that sound like what you submitted? It sounds a little close. I would like to read it ‘cause I do see that there was some extra stuff in there, but if the clerks are making it so it fits well. I don’t, they try not to add stuff in there, they try to try to like take your words and make it into the alignment with our plan. So why don’t I put it up on the screen even though there’s not a seconder? I want you to make sure you’re good with it. Then I will ask for a seconder and if there’s a seconder, then we’ll proceed. So we’ll put this in these scribes so you can actually see it. You can take a look now with the refreshed few and other colleagues you can just take a look now to see if you’re willing to second this to be able to see it if you click current item.

[5:39:50] That reads well to me. Is there a seconder for this? A few of them, Council probably your first. Okay, now, so this is refer back with these actions. So now this is the only thing on the floor ‘cause referral takes precedent. So now we will have a debate on what Councilor Ferreira has put forward with respect to this item. Councilor Stevenson, go ahead. I’d like to propose one small change if the Councilor’s open to it or the mover and the seconder that it instead of saying a new downtown master plan it say a new core area master plan.

[5:40:30] So the Councilor can comment on it, but it’s been moved and seconded now so it might have to be an amendment. So go ahead Councilor. The language for the downtown, the potential new downtown master plan was specifically put in there. So I wouldn’t want to move remove that one. Yeah, so if you wanted to do that, it would need to be an amendment to the language. Go ahead. Thank you.

[5:41:01] I’m gonna leave it in consult prior to making any changes there. But I would like to say in terms of this core area strategy that I will support the referral. There was the issue of the oversaturation of the social services in the core area, particularly on the main street of all these village, despite the PACT report and the core area action plan has been avoided. And I understand that it’s complex and it’s an issue, but we have the whole of community and we have a new core area strategy and that issue has to be addressed.

[5:41:44] We have continued to fund again two more agencies on the main street in the heart of all these village across the street from each other. So the counselor, I hear counselors tonight saying, “Oh, we can’t have things too close to each other.” Well, they voted for those two. It seems to be okay in all these village, but not okay in other areas. So I will support the referral back. This has to be addressed. There’s no point continuing to give band-aid money to a district if this city is not committed to our core area.

[5:42:19] Those businesses are hanging on by a thread. They deserve the commitment of this city and we need to look after both of our unhoused and our housed people to have a core area that they can come down to with businesses that can survive in a city that is growing and wonderful and amazing and we get to have a heart of the city that is healthy and we get to take care of our vulnerable and there’s a way to do it. And I want that to be part of this. I may come back with an amendment at council to address that specifically. This cannot continue.

[5:42:52] I have supported a shelter spaces on the heart of Dundas Street because we already approved the daytime because people are dying because it’s winter because it matters and I will support that and we need a long-term vision. I agree. Other speakers, Councillor Lehman, go ahead. Sure, I’m going to recuse myself as I’m a member of the downtown BIA and there’s reference to bridge financing included in the amendment. Councillor Lehman is making that recusal.

[5:43:30] Other speakers, Councillor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, I want to thank the board councilor for bringing this forward. I will be supporting this. I know we’ve had numerous conversations about our downtown and how it’s going to look like and how we move forward. And I think it is an important conversation for this council or an important opportunity to discuss how downtown will look like in the future and to have these conversations is going to be important and looking forward to having more of a comprehensive idea of what all our plans are and do we need reviews or how do we move forward looking at our downtown in particular because I do support some sort of a strategic plan.

[5:44:28] But I think for now, getting the information coming back is where I think we’ve got to start and we’ll be supporting the direction, thank you. Okay, Councillor McAllister, go ahead. Thank you, through the chair. I want to thank the councilor for bringing this forward. I know the new strategic plan from the core is very important and I understand those challenges as a community that feeds into the core, really do understand it. And I just want to say, I would say in the next iteration of this plan, please take that into account.

[5:45:07] I hear it all the time from my residents that we do feed into the core, Hamilton to Horton. So these are emerging communities, these are some established communities that have been there for a very long time that feed the core. And so we want to be there, we want to collaborate with you. So please don’t forget about us and we’re happy to support you where we can, thank you. Okay, that’s all the speakers I have. It’s the referral, it’s moved and seconded. I don’t see any other, so I’m going to open it for voting. Closing the vote, the motion carries.

[5:46:13] 11 to 11 with one recused. 11 to one, 11 to zero with one recused. We’re just going to reread that vote total. I don’t know what happened there, but. Yeah.

[5:47:01] He’s coming back. - Colleagues, it was red recused, but since Councilor Lehman left the meeting, he didn’t actually vote to recuse. So we’re just fixing that total. 11 to one with an overused. Just 11 to one. Okay, given Councilor Lehman and Councilor Lehman is on his way to his, I think his office.

[5:47:56] And Councilor Deputy Mayor Lewis is not here. I’m going to deal with second one first, which is the diversity inclusion anti-oppression committee advisory committee report, sorry. We dealt with all items on that report. Yeah, when it’s referred, everything goes back. Even with the communication, doesn’t have to be received, okay, it’s on nature. Yes, we could have received the communication, so you’re going to move receipt of the communication related to that last item.

[5:48:32] Seconded by Councilor Pribble. As soon as that’s ready, we’re going to open it for voting. Just receiving the communication that was associated with that last vote. Councilor close the votes, yes. Closing the vote, the motion passes.

[5:49:25] 12 to zero with one recused. Okay, Councilor Lehman, I believe you’re online now, ‘cause you just voted, so I’m going to go to item 5.1, which is the piece of correspondence that you and Deputy Mayor Lewis wrote. I will look to you to make comments on your correspondence and bring forward any motion that you’d like to bring forward related to it as you’ve outlined in your communication. Okay, thank you, Mayor. Basically, I’ll be quick, folks.

[5:50:00] It came to my attention that the term of our advisory committees were expiring in February in further consultation with the clerk’s office, learned that they would have to be putting out advertisements to populate our advisory committees in December, which is the holiday period, given the extensive budget debates and community engagements, et cetera, that we’re facing in January or February.

[5:50:36] And I thought it would be prudent to extend the term of the committees for one year to allow us proper time to consider populating those committees at that time. The clerk asks that we change the timing of that by into April, and the reason for that is to allow advertisements for those committees to commence in January February, as opposed to the holiday season, which they felt would bring forth a better response to those advertisements.

[5:51:14] So I hope you’ll support this motion so that we can do a good job populating those advisory committees, thank you. So you want to move? The motion is detailed in the course one. Yes, please. Okay, I’ll look for a seconder for that motion. Seconded, Councillor Hopkins, seconds. Now we’ll have discussion, Councillor Troz. I’ll go ahead. Through the chair, we need to do this. And I’m supportive of it, but I just do not understand why E is in there.

[5:51:50] I think E is just a poison pill for the advisory committees, and I will not support this. I want E called separately, and I would like someone to explain what the redundancies are. Doesn’t say to determine if there are redundancies. It says to review redundancies, and it doesn’t say to review opportunities to improve the workings of the committee. It says to replace them. So there’s an agenda here to eliminate or cut back advisory committees, and I’m not going to support that. And I just do, I would like somebody who drafted this to explain where subdivision E came from.

[5:52:25] What is that about? So you can through the chair ask— Through the chair. Councillor Lehman, about the rationale behind E, which I’m happy to do. So go ahead, Councillor Lehman, and of course I can call a component separate. That’s no problem. Go ahead. Yeah, sure. There’s no agenda here. This is, I think, something that should be done on a regular basis to always look, just as we do with the working governance group, to look at how we ourselves function as a body. I think this is a prudent exercise that we should take on from time to time.

[5:52:59] So I’ll push back a bit on the agenda comment. This is, I think, just proper governance. Councillor Trost, how you still are there? Go ahead. Yes, I’m sorry, through the chair. I don’t have a problem with E if it says to review the operation, to review the operation of the advisory committees. And I would like to ask the maker of the motion, what are the redundancies you’re referring to? Because you say to review redundancies, what are the redundancies through the chair?

[5:53:33] I’d like to know. Councillor Lehman, I’ll go to you again. I also say to Councillor Trost, if you don’t like the language, and you want to adjust it, to review the operations, you can make that amendment. I don’t think I’d see that as fundamentally different myself here. There’s still a review of the operations of the committees, whether you say there’s or believe there’s redundancies or not, their review could be relatively open-ended. So I’ll have Councillor Lehman answer your question, but just your option is to also amend, if you’d like.

[5:54:10] I think the request doesn’t frequency that there are redundancies. I think that we are looking to make any operation efficient. You always look at potential. So I’m not saying that there are redundancies, but I think that’s just the nature of a review of any organizational structure. Do you want to add potential redundancies and just amend it?

[5:54:44] Yeah, I’ll move to say review potential redundancies, and also strike the rest of the idea that this is leading to a replacement. This is out of nowhere. Okay, wait, wait, wait, let me just, so you want to do that. You want to say review potential redundancies. And review, and to review opportunities to improve the operation of committees. Okay, so that’s, I’m going to take that as an amendment. I’m going to see if there’s a seconder.

[5:55:18] Councillor Ramen’s willing to second. So we’re just amending the language and E to be reviewed for possible redundancies and essentially review the operations, whatever the language is, it’s just getting up here. I’m just going to read it specifically. I just want to make sure the mover and seconder are good with this because it’s now going to read community advisory committee structures referred to the government’s working group to review potential redundancies and review opportunities to improve operations of advisory committees.

[5:56:01] See nods, so we’ll put that up. That’s the amendment. I haven’t put it up yet, Councillor. I was just reading it for you before I put it up. Now I’ll put it up, moved and seconded. Any debate on just the amendment? Just the amendment, okay. Seeing none, we’re going to open the amendment for voting. Councillor Palose votes, yes.

[5:56:43] Closing the vote, motion carries, 12 to 1. Okay, I need a mover for the as amended motion now. Councillor Hopkins as amended, you’re willing to move. Yeah, you’re on the speaker’s list but I need someone to move the as amended motion. So you’re moving, seconded by Councillor Stevenson. Okay, Councillor Hopkins, you’re next on the list. This is now the motion as amended. The motion as amended, Mr. Chair. So I would like to just remind us all that the review was going to be taking place at the beginning of next year.

[5:57:16] So I am very supportive of extending a given that we are going to be having an extensive budget review and I think the timing is appropriate. I would like to make a friendly amendment though to the extension and I have passed on some information to the clerk and I’m hoping that the mover is agreeable with the, it may be another clause but we do have a number of vacancies already existing.

[5:57:53] On our advisory groups, we will be extending this, these groups for another year. I think it is going to be important. We may even have further vacancies that we be able to advertise to fill these vacancies through the extension. That is my amendment to undertake to advertise during the end of say January, February of next year to deal with the vacancies that are already existing and I’m hoping I can get mover to support that. So the clerk says this is essentially covered by C and yes, they can advertise in January.

[5:58:40] So I don’t think you need to make any changes if it’s covered in C and they’re already, the clerk doesn’t say that on the record. Like happy to do that in January given the extended timeframe for any vacancies. I just wanted to make sure that we do advertise. I think that’s the key since we do have some vacancies. So whatever the clerk would like to see happen, I just want to make sure. I’m going to have the clerk comment on the record so that you can hear it. Thank you through the chair.

[5:59:12] Certainly we’re certainly able to advertise in January throughout February and into March if needed. Okay, good, any other speakers on the as amended motion? Okay, seeing none, we’re going to open the as amended motion for voting. Councillor Plough, the votes yes. Seeing the vote, motion carries 13 to zero.

[5:59:52] Okay, next, the diversity inclusion anti-oppression community advisory committee has their report. There’s essentially two components to this. One is a small budget allocation of $2,500 for the 2023 diversity race relations and inclusivity awards and just received the other clauses. Moved by Councillor Raman, seconded by Councillor Hopkins. Any discussion? Get, seeing none, we’ll open that for voting. Yes, Councillor Trussa, voting the vote, the motion carries 13 to zero.

[6:00:55] Okay, we’ve referred the rest of the items. I did say I wanted to say one thing before adjournment and I remembered, actually someone texted me and reminded me, although I spoke to this when we rescinded his by-law. Today is Mr. Card’s last committee meeting that he’ll be joining us for before his retirement from the Corporation of the City of London. I know he’s tuned in digitally. I know he heard the nice things that were said about him at that committee, but given this is your last time that you’ll be with us, I’m glad we gave you an extended experience tonight so that you can remember us forever fondly, but I do want to say we appreciate your service over all of the years that you have served the Corporation of the City of London and the residents of London in your various roles here at the city and most recently, obviously, as the deputy city manager and solicitor.

[6:01:56] We appreciate everything you’ve done, Barry, and you’ll be greatly missed by all of us. I have appreciated not only your expert advice as a solicitor, but also the many conversations we’ve had just to get to know each other over the years and I know many others feel the same and I would just ask that you, of course, keep in touch as I would love to know what you’re up to next and we wish you all the best in whatever that is for you. So, join me in maybe just congratulating Mr. Card now, finally, that he’s leaving us on his retirement, so. Mr. Card, do you want to say anything before you go?

[6:02:37] Of course, it would be still subject to solicitor client privilege, so you can, but go ahead if you’d like to say something. At this hour at your worship, I’m very grateful for those comments. It’s been a privilege to serve and I’m grateful for that opportunity. So, thank you all, thank you to Council for your confidence and for giving me the chance to provide you with advice over the last almost seven years. Thank you so much. All right, thank you, Mr. Card. I’d like you to move a motion to adjourn, but you’re not allowed to under the procedure by-law.

[6:03:09] So, I look for someone else to move a motion to adjourn. That’s Councilor Stevenson, seconded by Councilor McAllister. We’ll do this by hand, all those in favor. Any opposed? Motion carries. We are adjourned, thank you.