Open Council

The 1st Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

Open Council

The 1st Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

December 5, 2023, at 4:00 PM

Original link

1.   Call to Order

1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

1.2   Election of Vice Chair for the term ending November 30, 2024

That it BE NOTED that Councillor D. Ferreira was appointed as Vice Chair to the Community and Protective Services Committee by Mayoral Decision 2023-008.

2.   Consent

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That Items 2.1 to 2.3 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   Farquharson Arena Amending Agreement

2023-12-05 - Staff Report (2.1) - Farquharson Arena Amending Agreement

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report, dated December 5, 2023, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 19, 2023, to:

a)    approve the Farquharson Arena Amending Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB) and The Corporation of the City of London;

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

c)    authorize the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or written delegate, to authorize and execute any administrative actions in connection with this matter. (2023-R05A)

Motion Passed

2.2   SS 2023-333 - Single Source Award – Life Stabilization Short-Term Counselling

2023-12-05 - Staff Report (2.2) - Daya 2024-25 Agreement - Full

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated December 5, 2023, related to a Single Source Award for Life Stabilization Short-Term Counselling (SS#2023-333):

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on December 19, 2023, to:

i)    approve the Purchase of Service Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, for the delivery of specialized individual services to Ontario Works Participants, between The Corporation of the City of London and Daya Counselling Centre;

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

iii)    delegate the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development and the City Manager the authority and power to:

A)    represent the City (City Representative) with respect to the Purchase of Service Agreement; and,

B)    approve and execute amending agreements and approve additional one-year terms to the Purchase of Service Agreement that are consistent with the requirements contained in the Purchase of Service Agreement and that do not require additional funding or are provided for in the City’s current budget and that do not increase the indebtedness or contingent liabilities of The Corporation of the City of London; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all other administrative acts necessary in connection with this agreement. (2023-S04)

Motion Passed

2.3   WITHDRAWN - Winter Response Contract Between The Corporation of the City of London and London Cares

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That it BE NOTED that item 2.3, entitled Winter Response Contract Between The Corporation of the City of London and London Cares, was withdrawn from the agenda at the direction of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development and the Deputy City Manager, Legal Services.

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   (ADDED) Councillor S. Trosow – Amendment to the Streets By-law (S-1) to Regulate the Display of Graphic Images on the Streets in the City of London

2023-12-05 - Item (5.1) - amendment to the Streets ByLaw for Display of Graphic Images

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by S. Trosow

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare a by-law amending the Streets By-law (S-1) to regulate the display of graphic images in the City of London with a report back at a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee and a public participation meeting on the proposed by-law amendment by the end of Q1 2024; it being noted that the communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, from Councillors S. Trosow and H. McAlister and K. Dean, with respect to this matter, were received. (2023-C01)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That pursuant to section 31.6 of the Council Procedure By-law, Councillor S. Trosow BE PERMITTED to speak an additional 5 minutes with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 4:37 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 (52 minutes)

[16:03] Good afternoon everyone, this is the first meeting in the community and protective services committee. Count, we’re held in council chambers. With me and chambers today are Councillor McAllister, Pribble, Troso, Ferrara, and myself, and Councillor. The city of London is situated in traditional lands of the Denishnabek, Haudenosaunee, La Walk, and Adewandran. We honor and respect the history, language, and the culture, the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many first nation, 18, and Inuit today.

[16:35] As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact CPSC at London.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. I’m calling this meeting to order and looking for disclosures of security interest from committee. Seeing none on item 1.2, this is the election of the vice chair for the term ending November 30th, 2024.

[17:12] The mayor actually selects the vice chair and Councillor Ferrer was selected to continue serving in the role as vice chair. The wording’s already in the system, but we don’t do a vote about it because it was actually an appointment from the mayor. On the consent list, items 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, looking to see if any member committee would like anything called separate. Okay, I would need a mover and a second to put those items on the floor. Councillor Ferrer moves, Councillor Trowsau seconds. So all items are on the floor.

[17:47] As this is our first meeting of this committee, I’ll note that I do time all speakers, committee members, and visiting Councillors alike to the five minute maximum. And when it comes to questions, I go to committee members first, and then to visiting Councillors. In this afternoon, we have Councillors, Stevenson and Chambers with us, and there’s no other Councillors online, just for we know who’s part of the discussion today. So, consign items 2.1 to 2.3 on the floor, looking to committee and visiting Councillor to see if there’s any questions. Okay, staying none, I will start with Councillor Stevenson.

[18:23] First, please proceed. Thank you, mine is more of a comment on 2.3, that this was me looking for the financial details beyond the lump sum of the winter response contract for London Cares. I filed an amphibo request in the spring, and I received the contract. The budget information, it said to be finalized. That budget information wasn’t picked up by my amphibo request. I met with Mr. Card at the time, and the clerk, and spoke with the city manager, and I had two options at that point to file another amphibo request to pick up that budget information, of which it would all likelihood to have some redaction to it, or the easier path I understood, was to just see it in camera.

[19:21] So per that recommendation, and per the wording of the motion by the clerk’s office, that was approved by Council. So Council approved on November 7th, the motion that said that civic administration be directed to bring forward to a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee, the full detailed financial information related to the winter response contract between the corporation of the city of London, and London Cares. It being noted that the provision of some or all of the above noted information may require to be presented to the CPSC in closed session, in accordance with section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001.

[20:00] So staff are doing their due diligence on this. That’s all good with me. I’m not in a rush. I’m looking forward to seeing this though. I’ve been told all along, Council can see these documents in closed session. And so I’m looking forward to being able to do that when the time is right. So that’s really just my comment, is that this has been an ongoing thing. I’m speaking now because I know publicly people are watching, they were expecting me to be able to see this, and I just want to sort of reassure that way, that this was a directive of Council.

[20:41] I’ve been told we’re entitled to see it, and it’s just gonna take some time for staff to do their due diligence on that. Thank you for that. Some more of a comment than a question. Not sure Mr. Dickens, if you wanted to reply, realizing it’s been withdrawn, but at some point it will obviously come back. If you have any timing or insights on that? Through you, Chair, I have no comments, and at this point it wouldn’t be my comment to make. It would, that would come from legal. They’re the ones that have been providing us direction in civic administration. Would legal like to comment at this time?

[21:18] Through the Chair. The exact timeline isn’t known. There’s external parties involved, and so we’re looking at, ideally, by the end of January, but we can’t confirm that. Perfect, we look forward to the follow-up once it is. No one comes forward. Councillor Troso, of any items from 2.1 to 2.3. Could you ask the last speaker to identify herself, please? Sorry, Ms. Special, if you could come back and just introduce yourself, realizing some of the members in committee are new as well, just I guess we’re settling back in.

[21:56] Ms. Madam Chair, Lynn Marshall, solicitor with the City of London. Thank you. Looking for further speakers on items 2.1 through to 2.3, seeing none in chambers or online, realizing they’ve been moved and seconded, calling the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries, five to zero.

[22:47] Thank you, we have no scheduled items, no items for direction. For deferred matters and additional business, we do have one item for additional business on the Addict agenda, and realizing there’s also an Addict communication. Before I commence on item 4, 5.1, please note that item 5.1 includes a content warning, as it discusses pregnancy loss. If you need support, the Employee Assistant Program is available to city employees, and for members of the public, there are community supports listed on the agenda cover page with the item safety and wellbeing or priority, so please do not hesitate to take any time you need, or to step out during the conversation.

[23:29] Item 5.1 is an Addict communication from Councillor Trousao, for the street by-law to regulate the display of graphic images on streets in the city of London. There’s wording provided in your package, it’s from Councillor McAllister and Trousao. Circulated in advance, there was also a staff report coming, so I’m gonna let the Councillors move in second their item to get on the floor, and then there’s information from Mr. Katoalik that would be pertinent to this conversation that I couldn’t discuss with you beforehand, because it would have broken quorum of committee.

[24:10] So, looking to the Councillors of who would like to move in second, Councillor McAllister? I would like to move the motion that was in the— Okay, so moved by Councillor McAllister, seconded by Councillor Trousao. Would you like to introduce your item at this point? Okay, I’ll go to, there’ll be a speaker’s list, but I’ll let Councillor McAllister introduce his item, and then we can go to staff for information. Thank you, and through the chair, this motion is a companion piece to the graphic image delivery by-law Pw14 that was passed by the previous council in May of 2022.

[24:51] I wanna start by thanking the past council for their hard work on the by-law. The motion before us utilizes the same legal rationale. In the graphic image by-law subsection 10, two of the Municipal Act, it provides that a municipality may pass by-laws respecting health, safety, and well-being of persons, as well as by-laws for the protection of persons. The past council acknowledged that the unregulated delivery of graphic images to residents caused harm. Our amendment to the streets by-law also acknowledges that the public display of graphic images can cause harm to residents of London.

[25:30] For those who have lost the child, women who have had a miscarriage, or those who have chosen to have an abortion, the display of these graphic images can retraumatize them. By disregarding consent with the display of graphic images, Londoners are being subjected to distressing, unwanted, distracting, and harmful images. We are therefore asking for this committee to support our amendment so that we can mitigate the harm being caused to our residents by including the regulation of graphic images in our existing streets by-law.

[26:02] Thank you. Thank you for those comments. For clarification, the prior council, when we did the male one graphic images contained all graphic images, so it wasn’t just, so making sure for your clarification that wasn’t just abortion ones, that it was all graphic images, Councillor. And just to clarify, we did use the definition that was laid out in the previous graphic images by-law. Thank you, that would also pertain to cruelty, to animals and other graphic images.

[26:40] And thank you for recognizing the work of the prior council, as this was one of the things that we took on. I’m gonna go to Mr. Catolic, realizing that they reference prior councils, and council did have other items, looking to you to see what work is already being done, and if this could be part of it. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. When the graphic images by-law was passed, we received direction from the previous council to look at the signed by-law, with respect to graphic images specifically, like on streets.

[27:16] So we’ve already addressed the graphic images that were being delivered to residents’ homes. So we have direction already, and it’s number one under deferred matters list. And as you can see on the deferred matters list, we have tentatively scheduled a report back in quarter one of 2024. Thank you. Knowing that, and it’s in line with your letter, and I believe your intent, looking to committee to see, we can continue with our speakers list, but if you would be fine, that committee receives this, and it’d be considered by administration to come back with that full package in Q1 of next year.

[27:59] So that’s gonna be my recommend, ‘cause it’s not gonna come back any faster if we do it separate. So I’ll continue with my speakers list, but just for you know that that report’s already coming back, and this would potentially flow into it. Next to my speakers list, Councillor Troce, did you, or Councillor Mc— sorry, David, I wasn’t looking left. Okay, so next to my speakers list is Councillor Troce. This is a companion measure to what the last council passed.

[28:38] And I think the last council broke a lot of new grounds. London became the first city in Canada to pass such a by-law. And since that time, many other jurisdictions have followed too. And I’m very proud of the work that our predecessors did. I call this a companion measure, because I think that there were certain things that were left undone, and I think that it’s time for us to address it. And that’s why we have this motion on the floor, but this is very specific.

[29:13] This is precisely specific, and what we’re asking for is what I propose here, and what Councillor McAllister proposes here, is an amendment to the existing streets by-law. We are not proposing a new amendment. And the purpose of this amendment is to regulate the display of graphic images, which is already defined. We’re using the exact same definition that the last council passed. We wanna report back to this committee, and we want to schedule a public participation meeting on the proposed by-law amendment.

[29:48] I haven’t drafted the by-law amendment. I know that staff is going to want to do that. Legal is going to want to look at it, and this requests they do that. However, I did include Councillor McAllister, and I did include two key definitions that I think are essential to what we’re talking about here. The first one is graphic images, and it means an image or photograph showing, or purporting to show a fetus, or any part of a fetus. This definition, by the way, is taken directly from the previous by-law.

[30:23] So there’s nothing new. We thought it would be confusing to actually use a different definition here, and it’s important to be consistent in legislative drafting. The other operative term that is being proposed is the term display. Display means to cause a graphic image to be publicly visible anywhere on a city street, including the sidewalks and other public property. And I think it helps explain this a little bit to talk about the fact that display does not include displays on private property.

[30:58] It is designed to deal with those that are publicly visible. So, for example, if there was a placard that had a display of a graphic image, and that was obliterated, that would not constitute public, that would not constitute publicly visible. And we chose the term publicly visible to be very, very specific, ‘cause our intent in drafting this is to be as limited as possible, to be as precise as possible, and to present what the law would call less restrictive alternatives.

[31:38] Now, I wanna talk a little bit about the main objection to this by-law, which was the main objection to the graphic image’s by-law delivered to doors. And that is, it created a burden on freedom of expression, and indeed constituted a violation of section two via the charter. And it did. There was no dispute of that. It was a content-based measure, and it limited permissible, otherwise permissible speech. It’s the same thing here. However, it’s important to recognize, as the last council did, very specifically, is section two of the charter creates a right, but section one of the charter, and I think it’s useful to just read it.

[32:23] This is not my opinion. Set the Canadian Charter of Rights, guarantees the rights and freedoms, set out in it, subject only to such reasonable limits, prescribed by law, as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. And based on section one of the charter, the last council- - You have 60 seconds remaining. I’m going to ask for an extension. You can when you get there. Okay. Basically, courts have set down a series of tests, and there are four prongs to the test. I think it’s important to recognize that the council carefully went through these four prongs and was satisfied that the graphic images, by-law delivered to doors, satisfied the Oakes test, and therefore constituted a permissible limitation under section one.

[33:09] My looking at this is, we’re doing the exact same thing here. The first prong of the Oakes test, and this is not, this is very well, very well established, the objective to be served by the measure has to be legitimate. It has to be a sufficiently important objective to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right, or freedom, and this does that. And I think Councilor McAllitt or laid that out, we held the public participation.

[33:45] Councilor, you’re at your five minutes. Are you requesting an extension? I would request another five minutes. This is going to be a very short meeting, and I want to lay this out. Okay, the councilor has moved a five minute extension for himself, seconded by Councilor Ferra. Looking to see if there’s any questions or comments on this, just from council members. I will just comment from the chair of the preference for keeping our comments to directing it back to staff in the by-law process, versus legal guidance in our interpretation of the law.

[34:32] Looking to see if there’s any other speakers. Councilor Ferra seconded. Councilor Trossa moved. Okay, that’s opening an e-scribe. So Trossa, you need to relinquish your vote. Your mic first, you can read the vote.

[35:06] Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, your five minutes is reset, please proceed. I think when I read a provision straight from the charter, I’m not giving a legal interpretation, I’m just stating a matter that this council can take notice of. So it’s clear that, and this last council recognized that, and it was quite a bit of discussion, so I’m going to proceed with this. You have to have a sufficiently important objective. This is why I’m requesting a public participation meeting. It’s at the public participation meeting that members of the public are able to weigh in on the proposed amendment, so they can demonstrate to the council.

[35:49] So the council can make an adequate finding that there is a sufficiently important objective, and that is the reduction of the type of harm that the councilor spoke to. And just to cut this short, the measure that’s being passed has to bear some reasonable relationship to the legitimate objection. And part of that is not being over-brought, not being vague, being really clear, and trying to be as restricted as possible. And that’s why I took care in my definition of not only graphic image, but also display.

[36:24] In summary, I think that this has been a very important issue for the public. I’ve heard from a number of constituents throughout the city, as have others who I am in communication with, that the display of these images on the streets causes a nuisance. It causes the inability for people to focus. It causes distress, it causes harm, and it is a measure that is not in keeping with good traffic safety. Now, I think that this will have to be demonstrated at a public participation meeting.

[37:00] What I’m doing right now is I’m asking that this legislation be further refined by the staff and brought back for a public participation meeting and specific language. I’ve tried to be helpful in terms of coming up with a useful specific language. And with that, I would just say thank you for the additional time. And I hope that the city council just passes this companion measure and continues with the good work that was done by the last council, because this is creating a lot of problems for people. Finally, I want to thank the city clerk for putting that extra language on the agenda, because yes, indeed, this triggers, this triggers very serious emotions.

[37:40] And I think it was very, very appropriate, very appropriate for that language by way of question for this to be on the agenda. And indeed, that is exactly why we are promoting this measure. Thank you very much. Thank you. Looking to maybe if there’s further speakers, but I will go to staff to Mr. Catolic, just confirming that a public participation meeting with those by-law change would have been required regardless of the wording today.

[38:21] Yes, through the chair, we were planning on having a PPM based on previous council’s direction already, so yes. Thank you, and just confirming that the wording of this motion also conforms with the prior council’s direction and could be accepted and considered still coming back in Q1 2024. Yes, that’s correct. Thank you, and Mr. Catolic, could you remind me if when the by-law comes back, if there’s fees associated with people who would violate the by-law, if that was included in the report coming back?

[39:00] Yes, when we get a request from council to amend the by-law, we always look at the penalties, and we have an administrative penalty system, so we would be recommending. So the process would be we would drop a draft by-law and have a future PPM. Thank you. Looking to committee and guest councilors to see if there’s any other questions or comments on this, I’m going to go to councilor Pribble next, and then I’ll do councilor Ferreira, and then circle back to councilor McAllister, who’s used one and a half minutes of his time.

[39:42] Councilor Pribble. Thank you, and I would like to make a comment, and certainly from our staff, if any feedback would be appreciated. Based on the information I received, and the council took on into 2022, my preference is to wait for the report from our staff. I do believe that we have even more urgent matters that we had to deal with during the last year, that we waited for the staff report, and based on the staff report, we made certain adjustments or proposals or decisions. And yes, it could be also, because I honestly, and I certainly don’t disagree with my fellow councilors, if they hear this from their constituents.

[40:26] To be honest with you, I honestly, in whatever 13, 14 month, I haven’t heard this once, that it will be a concern, but I certainly do believe my fellow councilors, saying so that I’m against it, but again, based on our past 13, 14 month, that we had many, many more urgent matters, including the homelessness, and we waited for the reports. And I will not support it at this time, and I will wait for the report from the staff first. If there’s any feedback or comment, please feel free, but I don’t have any specific questions, thank you.

[41:00] Thank you, Councilor Ferra. Thank you. I appreciate the conversation that we’re having here in the motion brought to the committee here. I will be supporting this at this time, just because a lot of the displays of such graphic images do happen on the streets of the Corps. So I have, I guess, surveyed people leaving conversations with individuals on the corners, and I usually get feedback where there’s some type of harm that was brought, some type of feedback, which brought up memories for certain individuals.

[41:35] And I do want to stress, which I like what was said already, but I do want to include that, you know, if we look at our strat plan, we’re supposed to be a safe and inclusive city. We’re supposed to be a welcoming city. And because a measure like this, I do see would be preventing harm. I do think that we should be revisiting this, and I do look forward to what staff has to come back. With respect to the public participation meeting, I know that will be an event on its own, but for something that is this large, we should definitely engage the public to get their opinion and feedback on that. But at this time, I will be supporting this, and I do appreciate bringing this to the conversation.

[42:14] Thank you, Councilor McAllister. Thank you, through the chair. Just to take on board, some of the comments that were said, and I’m looking to my seconder to see if you’d be accommodating and realizing that we’re entering the multi-year budget cycle. I still want the motion as it is, but I am willing to push it into the end of Q1 of 2024. Gives us some months in terms of priorities, as Councilor Pervall spoke to, but I do think that the motion as it stands can still be addressed even with the staff report that comes back to us, just to offer some more direction in terms of the work that’s previously been done, adding in, I don’t see this being at odds with the work that’s being done, it’s just adding to it.

[43:00] So in terms of that report coming back to us, I would still like this motion to come back with that report because we’ve identified an area that we would like to see. Thank you, I’ll note that, Councilor, okay. That finished my original speaker’s list. I have a comment to make on that, but I’m actually gonna relinquish the chair to Councilor Freire for this one, and Councilor, please time me as well.

[43:34] There’s the little stop-and-watch function on your app on your phone. Thank you, Chair. I have the chair and I recognize Councilor Palosa. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. On this one, I certainly supported it. Last term of Council, as I would say, it tends to go in cycles of what groups are active in town and who’s doing what publicly and heard from many residents with the mail that was delivered directly to homes and the impact it was having.

[44:07] Certainly the conversation also involved public streets, sidewalks and people using the streets freely, like recognizing some displays are also visually distracting for pedestrians and motorists alike and/or impeding walking spaces that were made for active transportation. I was looking forward to report back in Q1 2024. I’ll support what’s before us as it’s essentially the same.

[44:41] That was in my mind to me, that was already coming back and being done and it’s no extra work for staff ‘cause the wording’s the same. As for the time, realizing staffs already been working on staff’s original request, I don’t believe they could make it faster or slower. It was Mr. Catolek who said the report be back by end of Q1. So timelines I’m fine with. Happy that committee is supportive and continuing the work of last council, realizing things take time to do full environmental scans, check with legal and draft bylaws and administrative penalties.

[45:21] So I’ll be supporting this today. I’m fine with the wording. If not, I would have just received it, but it already is in line with the council’s previous direction. So that’s my comments and that concludes myself. So Mr. Presoning Officer. Thank you, Councillor. That was two minutes. I will yield the chair back to you. Thank you.

[45:52] Was noting my two minutes, Councillor McAllister not tripping anything to add ‘cause there was probably a question in there and I interjected, so I apologize for that. And I also do see Councillor Pribble after this. Thank you, through the chair. Just to follow up, I just wanted to change the language to include that that would be part of Q1 report that would come back end of Q1, end of Q1 of 2024 just so that language is in there. Looking to the seconder to see if you had a problem with Q, you’re okay with Q1. Okay, so we’ll put end of Q1.

[46:26] Staff was already fine with it. Clerk is clerking, Councillor Pribble. I actually do have two questions through the chair to the staff. The first one, and I’m quite sure it was already said, but I just wanna make sure that I understood correctly. Even if this motion wouldn’t be passed, I still would be, if we wait for the Q1 report from the staff, there would still be a room and opportunity for the public participation. Is that correct? Mr. Catolic?

[46:59] Yes, through the chair, that’s correct. Okay, thank you. And the follow-up questions against through the chair to the staff. Any feedback on this proposed amendment that’s proposed by my colleagues? Any comments, concerns, enforcement, whatever it is? Any feedback? Thank you. Mr. Catolic? Yes, through the chair, I have no comments at this time. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councillor Pribble. Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, I just have one comment, and that’s that I’ve received four emails, all opposing this.

[47:36] One saying that we have much bigger things that they wanna see us focused on, and the other three opposed to censorship. So I’m not voting, obviously, but that is what I’m hearing back so far. Thank you, I will note during prior conversations on council, people mobilized across locally, abroad, far, far abroad. So I’ll just, as we all start to get those, you’ll have to judge for yourselves the weight that they hold based on where they come from.

[48:10] And the public participation meeting, we welcome people virtually as well in chambers to make sure that we’re accessible and that comes for anyone in the gallery that whatever happens today, and as the Councillor said, they can’t vote on this, and that’s just because the members, the five members of committee vote on it, and then it goes to council and has a full vote there. So everyone will have a say. So that’s just how our process works in chambers, just ‘cause it can be confusing. Councillor McAllister. Thank you, and through the chair. Just to, I believe this kind of got up in just the discussion, but in terms of where I’ve received these complaints, I have Victoria Hospital within my award.

[48:49] Healthcare providers have brought this up to me, women’s groups have brought this up to me. So in terms of the feedback, I’ve been receiving a large part of this healthcare facilities. Councillor Trozzo has Western University. I know in terms of the near campus neighborhoods also have been subjected. So just because one Councillor is getting emails countering, we’ve also received calls and emails to the contrary. So different perspectives, obviously, but just to add more in terms of context on the conversation. Thank you.

[49:21] Thank you. The votes loaded in the system. I have no further speakers. So doing a final call for speakers before we call the question, Councillor Pribble. One more question, sir, the chair to the staff. Was this amendment? Would there be any potential delay in terms of delivering this by the end of quarter one, this proposal? Just checking in with Mr. Katoalik to make sure you’re good with this language in addition, what you already had and still mean the Q1 deadlines. Through the chair, passing the motion tonight will not have any impact because we’re already working on this.

[49:58] Perfect, Councillor. And one more, if this is passed with the deadline Q1, we still have an opportunity for public participation. And again, what’s gonna come back from the staff is the report with the proposed by-law. Is that correct? Mr. Katoalik, can you just outline what comes back in Q1, what your report looks like? Through the chair, based on the way the previous by-law was passed, the graphic delivery by-law, we dropped a draft by-law recommending a public participation meeting in the future.

[50:37] And based on the public interest in this issue, I expect this to be a lengthy public participation process with opinions on both sides. And then we report back after that point with a draft by-law taking into consideration all the public comments received at the PPM. So it becomes a three-step report-back process. Mr. Preble? Thank you very much. No more questions?

[51:09] Okay, still seeing no further questions or comments by members of committee or visiting Councillors calling the question. Councillor Trosto, closing the vote. The motion carries five to zero. Thank you, that concludes our deferred matter in additional business, which moves us on to adjournment, looking for a mover for adjournment, moved by Councillor Frater, seconded by Councillor McAllister, a hand vote of all in favor of adjournment.

[51:56] Councillor Perbillon, Councillor Trosto, I need your vote of adjournment. Okay, that’s carried. Thank you everyone. We are now adjourned.