January 29, 2024, at 1:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by E. Peloza

That Items 2.1 to 2.4 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   Grand Theatre 2024-2027 Multi-Year Grant Agreement

2024-01-29 SR Grand Theatre 2024-2027 Multi Year Agmt

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to the Grand Theatre 2024-2027 Multi-Year Grant Agreement;

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February 13, 2024, to:

i)    approve the Grant Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between The Corporation of the City of London and Grand Theatre, setting out the terms and conditions of the City’s grant of funds to Grand Theatre;

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

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, to act as the city representative for the purposes of the above-noted Grant Agreement; and,

iv)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, the authority to amend the above-noted Grant Agreement with respect to the total maximum amount of the City’s contribution towards the funded activity under the Grant Agreement; and,

b)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED. (2024-F05A)

Motion Passed

2.2   The London Arts Council 2024-2027 Multi-Year Agreement

2024-01-29 SR London Arts Council 2024-2027 Multi Year Agmt

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to the London Arts Council 2024-2027 Multi-Year Agreement:

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February 13, 2024, to:

i)    approve the Purchase of Service Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between The Corporation of the City of London and the London Arts Council, setting out the terms and conditions of the City’s grant of funds to the London Arts Council;

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

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, to act as the city representative for the purposes of the above-noted Purchase of Service Agreement; and,

iv)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, the authority to amend the above-noted Purchase of Service Agreement with respect to the total maximum amount of the City’s contribution towards the funded activity under the Purchase of Service Agreement; and,

b)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED. (2024-F05A)

Motion Passed

2.3   London Heritage Council 2024-2027 Multi-Year Agreement

2024-01-29 SR London Heritage Council 2024-2027 Multi Year Agmt

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to the London Heritage Council 2024-2027 Multi-Year Agreement:

a)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February 13, 2024, to:

i)    approve the Purchase of Service Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between The Corporation of the City of London and the London Heritage Council, setting out the terms and conditions of the City’s grant of funds to the London Heritage Council;

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

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, to act as the city representative for the purposes of the above-noted Purchase of Service Agreement; and,

iv)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or their written designate, the authority to amend the above-noted Purchase of Service Agreement with respect to the total maximum amount of the City’s contribution towards the funded activity under the Purchase of Service Agreement; and,

b)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED. (2024-F05A)

Motion Passed

2.4   2023-2024 Next Generation 9-1-1 Transition Funding Support – Transfer Payment Agreements

2024-01-29 SR 2023-2024 Next Generation 911 Transition Funding Support - Full

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by E. Peloza

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to the 2023-2024 Next Generation 9-1-1 Transition Funding Support Transfer Payment Agreements:

a)     the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February 13, 2024, to:

i)    approve the Year Two (2023-2024) Next Generation 9-1-1 Transition Funding Support Transfer Payment Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Solicitor General and The Corporation of the City of London and London Police Service Communications Section; it being noted that this is the second round of three years of funding;

ii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services to execute the above-noted Agreement; 

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services to undertake all the administrative, financial and reporting acts that are necessary in connection with the above-noted Agreement;

iv)    authorize the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or written delegate, to execute any financial reports required under the above-noted Agreement; and,

v)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services to approve and execute a future agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and the London Police Services Board assigning the terms of Schedule ‘A’ of Appendix ‘A’ to the London Police Services Board; and,

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on February 13, 2024 to:

i)    approve the Year Two (2023-2024) Next Generation 9-1-1 Transition Funding Support Transfer Payment Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Solicitor General and The Corporation of the City of London (London Fire Department-Communications Division); it being noted that this is the second round of three years of funding;

ii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services to execute the above-noted Agreement;  

iii)    delegate authority to the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services to undertake all the administrative, financial and reporting acts that are necessary in connection with the above-noted Agreement; and,

iv)    authorize the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, or written delegate, to execute any financial reports required under the above-noted Agreement. (2024-P16/F05A)

Motion Passed

2.5   Municipal Compliance Annual Report

2024-01-29 SR Municipal Compliance Annual Report

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, with respect to the Municipal Compliance Annual Report, BE RECEIVED; it being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into 2023 data and future reporting will provide additional information and fulsome aggregate tables on Short Term Accommodations and Property Compliance. (2024-C01)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by D. Ferreira

Motion to amend the main motion by adding the following wording:

“it being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into 2023 data and future reporting will provide additional information and fulsome aggregate tables on Short Term Accommodations and Property Compliance.”

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve that the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, with respect to the Municipal Compliance Annual Report, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the motion, as amended, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

2.6   Operational Transition Plan for 446 King Street Housing Project

2024-01-29 SR Operational Transition Plan for 446 King Street Housing Project

That the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to Operational Transition Plan for the 446 King Street Housing Project:

a)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED;

b)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to disburse up to an additional $300,000 as municipal contribution to this housing project from the Service Manager Administrative Funding account, conditional on the Canadian Mental Health Association (“CMHA”) taking ownership of this property and entering into an agreement of assignment and assumption with The Corporation of the City of London and Council of LIFT Non-Profit Housing Corporation;

c)    the Deputy City Manager BE AUTHORIZED to approve and execute an amendment to the Municipal Contribution Agreement for CMHA to support the business transition plan;

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to allocate rent subsidies to this project; and,

e)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide an update to Council after the transition plan has been successfully implemented. (2024-S11)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Trosow

Motion to amend the main motion to add a new part e):

“the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide an update to Council after the transition plan has been successfully implemented.”

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by D. Ferreira

Motion to approve the motion, as amended.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.7   Data Regarding the Relocation of Homeless Individuals

2024-01-29 SR Data Regarding the Relocation of Homeless Individuals - Full

That the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, related to Data Regarding the Relocation of Homeless Individuals:

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

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to update the snapshot of London Homelessness on the City of London website on a quarterly basis. (2024-S14)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to approve that, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report, dated January 29, 2024, with respect to Data Regarding the Relocation of Homeless Individuals, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve that the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to update the snapshot of London Homelessness on the City of London website on a quarterly basis.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Possible Amendments to the Vehicle for Hire By-law

2024-01-29 Sub. Possible Amendments to the Vehicle for Hire By-law

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

The Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back at a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee with recommendations on possible amendments to the Vehicle for Hire By-law to address cab owner regulations on minimum vehicle operation periods and licence renewal timeframes; it being noted that the Civic Administration will be reporting back on vehicle age limits in 2024; it being further noted that a verbal delegation from H. Savehilaghi, Yellow London Taxi Inc., with respect to this matter, was received. (2024-T03)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

Motion to approve the delegation request from H. Savehilaghi, Yellow London Taxi Inc. to be heard at this meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   (ADDED) Remembrance Gardens at 2315 River Road

2024-01-29 Sub. Remembrance Gardens - McAlister and Ferreira

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Remembrance Gardens Located at 2315 River Road:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to a future meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee with a memorandum of understanding laying out the roles and responsibilities of the City of London and the Remember the November 11th Association, for the shared operations of the Remembrance Gardens, located at 2315 River Road, by the end of Q2 of 2024; it being noted that this report would include any costs that may be incurred on the part of the city for regular maintenance, electrical, or infrastructure upgrades which may be required on the property;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to recognize and promote Remembrance Gardens as an attraction for both residents and visitors and to include park signage; and,

c)    the communication from Councillor H. McAlister and Councillor D. Ferreira, as appended to the Added Agenda, BE RECEIVED. (2024-M02)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 3:01 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 (2 hours, 23 minutes)

Great everybody, welcome to the third meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee. I’m gonna strike this meeting now. So the City of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabic, Paudenosaunee, Linna Peiwok, 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 Nations, Métis, Inuit, today. As representatives of the people of the City of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. I will ask members to disclose any pecuniary interests, looking to committee. I see none.

Okay, we’re gonna move on to consent. I’ve had communication from Councilor Perbal to pull 2.6 and 2.7 on the consent items. Oh, and I will just add one thing. Considering we do have a budget public participation meeting today, which may be lengthy, I would like to keep this meeting as concise as possible.

So if we can keep our comments, our questions, and our answers concise into the point, that would be appreciated. Councilor Trusson. I’ll pull 2.5 as well. Okay, 2.5, Councilor Trusson.

All right, any other items to be pulled? Okay, can I look for a mover for items 2.1 to 2.4. Councilor McAllister moved and seconded. I think we’re seconded, Councilor Palosa.

So looking for comments from the committee. Councilor Perbal. Thank you, I sort of chair to the staff and actually to my fellow councilor, I decided to have a meeting today with Ms. Ms.

and Armistat regarding 2.2 and 2.3. And it was a really good proactive meeting. Thank you very much for your time to both of you. And I do know the reason why this came delayed due to our audit report that we received late last year.

And going forward, I feel very confident in it and also in terms of us approving certain initiatives. And the implementation plan will be directly implemented to each individual initiative. So thank you very much for that. And I feel very confident about it and very much looking forward to approving it.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Anybody else? I’ll make some comments.

I’ll speak to the multi-year agreements that we see here. And I do want to speak to the grand theater. I do want to just show my appreciation for the people of the grand. I did like to see that the report did indicate that the grand brings about 100,000 visitors to the downtown core.

So that’s always appreciated and I will be supporting that. So thank you. We’re going to call the vote. So votes yes.

And I vote yes as well. Voting vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, next item on the consent list, 2.5 municipal compliance and annual report. I would just like to ask one question from the chair if I can.

I just wanted to ask. So I will be, I was working on some things. Councilor Troso and I were working on some items for the short-term accommodation items. And I just wanted to clarify that this report from 2023 would not preclude us from being able to bring that report to the committee.

Yes, through the chair, that’s absolutely correct. We are always open to continuous improvement and having offline discussions and having discussions at committee as well. Okay, thank you very much. You’re looking to committee for questions or comments.

Sorry, procedure wise, it’s not on the floor yet. I’m happy to move it. Okay, sorry. Thank you, Councilor Palosa.

I have a move by looking for a second or a seconder by Councilor McAllister. Now I’m looking for questions for the item. And Councilor Troso, I’ve already recognized it. I’ll ask my questions before I make a motion to amend this if necessary.

So this is the report that we get once a year. It says annual report. Yes, through the chair. This is the first time that we reported in a number of years on an annual basis for the reason that previously we reported our statistics through the Interial Benchmarking Initiative, where another number of departments were reporting out.

That later changed to the Municipal Benchmarking Initiative. And there was a corporate decision to not be part of that group anymore. And that’s the reason for this annual report. And we will follow up annually moving forward.

Mr. Clerk, Councilor? So I just wanna say with all due respect and Mr. Mathers knows where I’m gonna be going with this ‘cause we’ve had a number of discussions about the need for more fulsome reporting.

I don’t find this report at all adequate to serve as an annual report. I notice by way of comparison, the report that the planning that the PEC committee gets regularly from the building department, I think is an example of a very helpful informative fulsome report. And I would like to start seeing that low. And I know it’s a burden on staff, but I think it’s important that we get that level of specificity around some of the things in code compliance.

In particular, I find the report here on the short-term accommodations and on property standards, wholly inadequate. And I’m not inclined to want to accept this report. I really would like to see more detail. Now, I know going forward, we’re gonna be discussing how we can improve this reporting, but I’m just not willing to accept this as last year’s report without more information in it.

And I’m wondering, would it be possible without too much disruption? And I know that we’re in budget, so I’m not gonna ask for something to come back at the next meeting, but would it be possible to have you fill in a little bit more information maybe in two meeting cycles? Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Catolic.

Through the chair, we’re always open on reporting back, but if I could get some clarity on what is inadequate about the parts on the short-term accommodations and property standards, are respecting that there is a city council policy that we don’t report back on the status of complaints. Thank you, Mr. Catolic, Councillor. I’m not asking for individual information about individual open complaints any more than the building department gives us addresses for where activity has happened.

I’m asking for a more fulsome aggregate table. And again, I would direct you to the building department’s report for the type of format that I think could be used without violating any information about particular cases. But I just think for an annual report, this is just very summary. As Mr.

Mathers knows, I’ve made a number of inquiries, inquiries, complaints, questions about what’s going on in these two areas. And I think that we’ve had a couple of discussions here at Council about the need for more information to come out and I think we’re making progress on that. But I just can’t let this go by without saying that I don’t think that this is adequate in terms of an annual report. And I’m just wondering if other people on the committee would be willing to have another look at this with maybe some tables that goes into a little bit more detail.

Thank you, Councillor. I believe that might be a question that you’re asking to the committee. I just want to state a couple of things in regards. I certainly agree with Councillor Trosto that this reporting, this report can be improved and give us more additional information.

Having said that my focus, or I really want us to focus on the future and in terms of the future, I know we already are looking at the legal department in terms of getting more information on the active enforcement’s files. And I do realize that this committee is the one that would propose the changes and I do believe we will propose them, but I do think that we need another meeting with our staff to prepare this. But do I believe we need additional information, more information? And yes, absolutely.

I do believe that we needed to make better decisions. I also do believe that some of the enforcement’s files, we have currently in place. I don’t know if the right word is more stricter, but give us more, I guess more power to take actions and for these actions not to take so long. So in this perspective, I do agree with my fellow Councillor Trosto.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. It’s looking like there might be something coming from the two Councillors on the side. I believe that the other members had their hands up, so I would defer to them before.

I intend to make a motion to ask that this be, and I wanna use the right word, deferred, referred. I would just like to see this report with a little bit more information with respect to those two items. And I’m not gonna ask for it at the next council meeting ‘cause I understand we’re in budget, but two cycles. And maybe if the clerk could capture that, but I do wanna hear from other Councillors, and I’d ask for a second on that.

Thank you, Councillor. You have 30 seconds left on your speaking. I see that Deputy Mayor’s next on the list, and then I have Councillor McAllister, the Deputy Mayor. Just to stay procedurally consistent, as a member of the committee, I’m gonna allow Councillor McAllister.

I’m gonna yield ‘cause I’m not a voting member of the committee, so I should be after the voting members. Thank you, Deputy Mayor, Councillor McAllister. Thank you, and through the chair. I do have a few questions in terms of the report itself.

One of the things I do actually appreciate in terms of one of the things in the report in Q4 of 2023, the reorganization that went on with planning and economic development and realigning the licensing administration with compliance services. I’ve seen some benefits in terms of that database, in terms of derelict buildings, in terms of the demo reports, and I do actually appreciate in terms of the communication that’s gone along with that. I would say I would like to see more information as some of the other Councillors have indicated in terms of where we’re at, in terms of some of the property standards. I know that list is probably quite large for the city.

I have numbered my ward, and I think it would just be beneficial to kind of have more regular touch points with that instead of Councillors having to be more proactive in terms of reaching out on those files. I’d also like to ask in terms of the short-term rentals, because they are called out in terms of the licensing. I see there was about 317 if memory serves me. I’m just curious in terms of what we think that number is at, and if that number is still accurate, going into 2024.

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Kacolo. Yes, through the chair, the amendment to recognize as a business category, the short-term rentals was actually an amendment to the business licensing by-law, and that a standalone by-law. So the 317 was for the 2023 calendar year.

So all of those, if they want to continue, will have to be renewed. So the renewals are happening right now. The calendar year is the end of January annually. So we’re gonna be starting to see 2024 STAs.

We’re looking at mapping those on the city map, updating that, and we’ll be seeing new ones come on stream all the time. We are very fortunate that we’re working with the innovative software company to identify short-term rentals, because they are quite difficult to identify without actually booking a short-term rental to identify the address. Thank you, Mr. Kacolo, Councillor McAllister.

Thank you, and just as a follow-up to that question, I have just noticed in terms of the scan that your team’s doing, I think that’s mostly from what was called out in terms of like Airbnb, or both like things like that. But I’d just like to also call attention to some of the ones that have been brought to my attention in terms of rentals to students which wouldn’t fit the parameters. And I’m just curious to know if that’s on the radar in terms of illegal rentals that have showed up in this report. Thank you, Councillor, Mr.

Kacolo. Yes, if I understand the question, our software company that we’re working with, they scan a number of different platforms. New platforms are coming on stream all the time. It’s from what I’m told, it’s quite easy to set up a quick platform to do short-term rentals.

So it’s not just the big Airbnb, VRBO, booking.com. It’s many, many others as well. Thank you, Mr. Kacolo, Councillor McAllister.

Okay, next on the list, I have the deputy mayor. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. And through you, I just want to share for committee members consideration before any sorts of amendments are proposed.

I would not be supportive of asking staff to go back and reproduce this report. I am absolutely supportive of some process improvements and some other ways of reporting out in future reports. But I want to move forward. I don’t want to ask staff to be retasked with the report that’s before us.

I think if there are specific questions about the information in the report, those can be brought forward. I think that suggestions on improving the reporting process are great. I will say on the report that we receive from the building division at PEC, while I like the format, I will also share that PEC has actually indicated to staff that we are prepared to receive that less frequently because of the amount of work that goes into producing those on a regular basis. So we’ve actually asked staff to reduce their reporting frequency, still include all the data, but send it to us on a less frequent basis.

I do agree with Councilor Trossal that I think that that report provides a nice template for how to break some data out further. I do. I just won’t be supportive of asking to have this report redone. I think it’s feedback for future reports incorporating data in a different way that I can be supportive of.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I have Councillor Ramen next on the list. Thank you and through you and thank you for recognizing me at your committee. I want to say thank you for the report.

One of the things I appreciated was how it gave me more information on what’s to come, as well as highlighted different areas. So I wanted to talk a little bit about some of the things that I noted that were highlighted. And I wanted to share, I think this is really exciting that in 2024, we’re already seeing the most animal licenses that we’ve seen in 40 years. I think that’s really exciting news because one talks about our growth, but also it says a lot about the good work that the folks on that team are doing as well.

And the proactive approach they’re taking to pet licensing, so thank you for that. I wanted to ask a question about the ALPR vehicles in the GPS. Some concerns that I have around the proactive, first I think it’s great that we’re trying to take a proactive approach to it and that we’re using technology. One of the challenges though, that I wanted to raise was just, if we have any concerns with the issue around not having good data any longer about people’s license plates based on our changes, provincially to our licensing vehicles and how that might pose a little bit of a challenge on that front.

So I wanted to ask about that and have some other questions about the report. Thank you, Councillor to staff. Yes, through the chair. Thank you for that question, it’s a very timely question because we’re having discussions with LPS exactly on that topic when the provincial government made a change a few years ago about your MTO plate renewal.

There is still a requirement to renew your plate. Although it’s at no cost, you still have to go online once a year on your birthday period and renew your plate at no cost. So we are having those discussions. There’s a number of municipalities that have ALPR in place right now.

And prior to introducing that, we have to do a privacy report to ensure that privacy requirements of the province are in place. Thank you, Mr. Kedolek, back to Councillor Ramen. Thank you, I think it’s great that we’re looking at some changes around property standards and looking at a fee of $75 to be charged for each of those property standards orders that are issued.

It’s also good to see that we have an idea of what that might mean in terms of anticipated collection as well. Can you just share a little bit about why we’re looking at going this road and what we see as some of the benefits associated with this? I think it’s timely and I think it may help to address the volume that we’re seeing but also create more reliability on people taking care of their own properties. So.

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Kedolek. Yes, through the chair, based on our experience, when we issue orders, lots of times the orders are not adhered to. So there are basically some put them in a blue box, some ignore them, some actually respond back and take actions.

And what we find is that when there’s no consequences, behaviors don’t change. And usually a consequence in the form of a fee or a penalty will move property owners to comply with bylaws. There’s only a few cities in Ontario that actually charge for the initial notice. And when this came up about five years ago, we were a bit surprised that some cities were doing this quite aggressively at the outset, charging a minimal fee for a notice.

And then speaking with those municipalities, that resulted in changes and higher compliance. And that is the reason that we presented it to council, last quarter in 2023 and it’s been approved in the fees and charges bylaw. We’ve already begun in January of this year for all yard and lot maintenance bylaws and property standards bylaws to charge a minimal fee. Thank you, Mr.

Catolic, Councillor. Thank you, much appreciated. And just to go back to the conversation about the short-term accommodations and with some of our new approaches around the Airbnbs, I see that we had about 115 or so amps associated. Do we see that we’ve seen success since we’ve went to this model?

I know a lot of cities are looking for some benchmarking against this as well, just wondering what we’re seeing in terms of the short-term rental market based on what we have in the report, but also what you’re seeing on the ground. Thank you, Councillor, back to Mr. Catolic. Yes, through the chair, we are seeing success.

We are seeing that our initial notice that goes out is not just a standard notice. We’re actually specializing that notice with photos of their booking, the software scans, dozens of different platforms in identifying the short-term rentals because, as I mentioned to a previous question, without booking an address, you don’t exactly know where the address is. So we are seeing success. We’ve sent out around 700 letters already.

So a lot of them, once they get the letter, they immediately pull it off the platform. We have also double-amped certain properties that have not complied with the initial amp. So we have that possibility of double-amping where we get continuous non-compliance. Thank you, Mr.

Catolic, Councillor. Thank you, I just want to say thank you again for the report. Thank you, Councillor. I believe the clerk has drafted up some wording for a potential motion.

So I thought I would just read it out if the Councillors are still willing to be putting that on the floor. So the staff report dated January 29th, 2024, with respect to the municipal compliance annual report be referred back to the civic administration for report back at a future meeting of the community and protective services committee to provide additional information and full some aggregate tables on short-term accommodation and property compliance. And I have Councillor McAllister next on the list with you already have a minute 40, so you should be okay for time for a little bit. Thank you and through the chair.

I just had some follow-ups in terms of with the way this report ends and obviously reference to the business cases that are coming before us. One of the things that I was looking for a bit more in this report is a bit of a comparative analysis in terms of what we’ve seen in previous years. And I’m just wondering if I can take this opportunity for Mr. Catolic, if you just want to comment in terms of the areas where you’ve seen dramatic growth, ‘cause obviously that would feed into in terms of the business case that was before us in terms of staffing.

And just like a better idea in terms of allocating resources and where we’re seeing the growth and where we need more staff in terms of compliance. Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Catolic. Through the chair, we’ve seen definite growth in the complaints coming in through the yard and lot maintenance by-law.

We’ve also seen growth as mentioned in the report in property standard complaints. And the reason we’re getting more property standard complaints is a few years back when we did a housekeeping review of the property standards by-law. Council directed us to come up with a task force, a landlord tenant task force. And part of the goals of that task force, because we were hearing from the public at public meetings that the public did not know how to complain about by-law infractions.

So we’ve improved that process. And I think that’s one of the reasons that we are seeing complaints coming in under property standards. I think another reason that complaints are higher on yard and lot maintenance is because we’re always increasing through our contractors of doing improvements in cleanups on properties, rather than issuing amps under the yard and lot maintenance by-law. It’s far more effective and cost efficient through our contractor to do a property cleanup in terms of removing brush, removing debris, towing derelict vehicles, rather than going through the amps process, which could be appealable through a hearing.

Thank you, Ms. Catolek, Councillor. Thank you and through you to the motion, which has been read out. I would just like to say, echoing the deputy mayor said, I’m not adverse to having a future report.

I’m not in favor of going back and rewriting reports that’s currently in existence. I think what would be beneficial as I indicated with my questions, I would like to see those tables, but in terms of the yearly comparators in the future, that would be helpful. And so I would actually like to see for the 2024 report comparisons year over year, ‘cause I would find that helpful. I don’t think we need to necessarily rewrite this report.

I understand where the Councillors are coming from with this, but I think giving future direction is more appropriate at this time. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. I have Councillor Palosa.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just wondering, you’d read out a motion if anyone actually moved and seconded, just wondering where the conversation actually is. Out of something’s on the floor, we’re talking about other things and there’s no clear path forward.

That is correct. There’s no one has moved or seconded the motion. I have a mover for the motion, looking for a seconder. I do see where the Councillors are coming from as well, and I would like to see that in the 2024 report as well, but just considering the time constraints for staff, especially with everything else, I would not be supporting that at this time, but I would like to see it for 2024.

Councillor Pribble. Yeah, I have a sort of chair to the staff. I do agree, as I already said, that we need additional data. And now when we accept this report, I would imagine for us to receive, and right now I don’t have all the, I do know of some data that I need for us, that I believe for us to move forward.

But again, I don’t know all the data. And as I said, I think that all the data and the information will arise through our different meeting than this one. But one thing is, if we do accept this, I wanna make sure that I’m not gonna get the answer. Jerry, it was 2023, it’s over, we cannot go back, we are not gonna do that.

So I just want to make sure I’m more than willing to accept this report, but I just wanna make sure, question to the staff, that for us to move forward, we will need additional data from 2023. And when we meet, whenever it is, hopefully soon, I’m not gonna get a response that’s 2023, you already accepted the report, we are not going back. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor, back, staff.

Through the chair, I’m listening to this debate. I hear the committee, I have a number of suggestions that I’d like to discuss with our staff. This is very similar to the debate that we heard about animal services about 10 years ago, where the focus was on data and how do we produce it publicly? And the solution there was to be more transparent on the city website in terms of data on number of animals, number of animals, licensed, et cetera, et cetera.

So I have some ideas that I will be implementing, so I hear the debate. Thank you, Mr. Councillor, back to the council. Just to follow up, and maybe I didn’t hear it clearly enough, but if needed, if we agree that it would make sense, we can go back to 23 and look up the additional data.

It’s not gonna be that we accepted this report, and we can’t go back, correct? Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Councillor. Yes, through the chair, we have a lot of data within our databases.

It’s just that I’m hearing a count, the committee would like a deeper dive into the data, and I’m willing to produce that. Thank you, Mr. Councillor. Thank you very much, no more questions?

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Trussle, you have 30 seconds left. Pointed that I didn’t get a second, ‘cause I think we need to talk about this more. However, I will withdraw that and put on another motion that says it being noted that accepting this report does not preclude revisiting data from 2023, and I really hope that someone on this committee is willing to step forward and second that, because this report was not adequate.

Thank you, Councillor. Councillor, would you mind just repeating that language? Yes, it being noted that accepting this report does not preclude further inquiry into 2023 data. Thank you, Councillor, I’ll second that.

Looking for other speakers, Councillor Pribble. Me. I certainly don’t mind supporting it at all, but having said that, I think the staff actually said the same thing, so because of what’s already said, I don’t mind supporting it, thank you. Thank you, Councillor.

Looking for other speakers, Councillor and Councillor. Thank you, and I would just like to add the language that was brought up because I wasn’t necessarily against that language. I just think for future reporting purposes, that would be helpful. So in terms of what had been presented before, I do think it being noted should also include the aggregate tables on the short-term accommodation and property compliance, if we could add that in.

Thank you, Councillor, good, Councillor McAllister. We have some language that the clerk just wrote down from Councillor Trussell, and I just wanna read it back to you so you can read back what your suggested language is. So what we have is it being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into the 2023 data. And just adding in the language that was on the motion before in terms of future reporting will include aggregate tables on short-term accommodation and property compliance.

Thank you, Councillor. Looking for the mover with that language, please, Councillor. As friendly, I’ll accept that, yes. I’m just gonna read the motion one more time.

It being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into 2023 data and future reporting will provide additional information and full some aggregate tables on short-term accommodations and property compliance. Looking to the committee, I seconded that one. Okay, looks like I’ve exhausted the speakers list on this one, just looking one more time. Council, please.

Thank you, I appreciate where we’re trying to go. Just raising the concerns that moving a motion that this is not pre-clued us from going back and asking questions on past data. Like we’re always allowed to go back and ask questions on data. I see a member of committee shaking their head, but staff is always available as public data.

Sometimes we need help finding it, absolutely. But just worried about the tone of this and that it does send that perception of we need to write into, I don’t wanna see every motion coming before us that we need to start going back and putting in that we have given ourselves permission and told staff that we’re allowed to ask questions when we feel like we have a question to ask. That’s how I’m reading the tone of this. I take offense with it.

I believe our staff is available. I know some don’t. I would also say that if you have specific data you’re looking for, absolutely put in writing if we can have a wholesome conversation about what you would like to see coming forward. Let’s us all know.

And specifically when we get to council, we have many visiting counselors that if they have word work that they’ve raised a flag and if I wish I knew this, at any time you can bring that through and staff can consider into a future report. Thank you, councilor. Councilor, you have one at 45 seconds. Thank you and through the chair and recognizing to councilor Palose’s point, if this would also be considered a friendly amendment to have the language change to reflect that future reporting would include a year over year comparison ‘cause that would capture 2023.

And then it’s reducing the tone in terms of that information not being available, but I do think that a year over year comparator would satisfy that. Thank you, councilor. And councilor, is that a change to the language that you previously submitted? Yes, through you.

That would just change the initial it being noted to the precluding and just saying that future reporting would include 2023 and a year over year comparison with data. So you’ve exhausted all your time, okay, councilor? Actually, for that I don’t. And so I do think there’s an issue on the floor.

I think it being noted that this doesn’t preclude us, protects members of the committee who maybe unwarrantedly worry that we’re gonna be told that we can’t go there because it’s a decided matter of council. And I’m not willing, well, then say it in the motion. I’m sorry, looking for any other. Here’s, I’m gonna read the motion one more time.

I think that we’ve exhausted our speakers less I’d like to vote on the motion. So a motion to amend the main motion by adding the following wording. It being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into 2023 data and future reporting will provide additional information and full some aggregate tables on short-term accommodations and property compliance. Thank you for further comments, questions.

Let’s call that. Closing the vote, the motion carries four to one. I’m looking for a motion to approve the original motion as amended. So looking for a mover, councilor Mcallister looking for a seconder.

There to approve the councilor approval comments from the committee. Thank you, just requesting that you separate those out for the vote. I’ll separate that out for the vote. Thank you, councilor Trussell.

Yeah, I believe it’s already been voted on separately when the vote of the amendment, but sure, go ahead. I can support this. There’s a point of order. Please state your point.

Thank you. I know it’s been voted on amended. It’s still my right as a councilor for having to vote no on the whole thing to have it separate. Thank you, councilor.

Understood, and I will be supporting the motion with the amendment. Thank you. Any further comments or questions? Okay, I see none.

The clerk is just typing this up. It will be in your e-scribe in a second, then we’ll call the vote. Okay, to the committee, the first part of the motion is up for voting. Please state your point.

I guess my question of procedure is, if the first part fails, I’m not willing to support the motion. So I need to see the second part, which I think we already voted on before I could decide how to vote on the first part. Okay, thank you, councilor. You’re free to vote as you wish on the motion.

Just bear with me for a minute. The clerk is still just working on this motion at the moment. Okay, committee, just got word back from the clerk. Since the motion is tied together, we would have to vote on the first part first and then the second part.

So the clerk will be putting up the first part. Oh, it’s already up. The first part, you should see up in your e-scribe. If you refresh your screen on e-scribe or hit current item, you should be able to see that.

Part that’s on the screen right now is that on the recommendation of the deputy city manager planning and economic development, the staff report dated January 29th, 2024, with respect to the municipal compliance annual report be received. Councilor Perbal and Trosto, please. Trosto votes no. Councilor Perbal, closing the vote.

The motion carries four to one. Okay, thank you, committee. The clerk will be putting up the second part of that vote. Motion to approve the motion as amended.

It being noted that accepting this report does not preclude the committee from further inquiry into 2023 data and future reporting will provide additional information and fulsome aggregate tables on short-term accommodations and property compliance. And the clerk will be putting that up for a vote very shortly. Closing the vote, the motion carries four to one. Okay, thank you.

Next item, 2.5, municipal compliance annual report. That was pulled by Councillor Perbal, I believe, 0.6. Okay, oh, sorry, yes, 2.6, operational transition plan for 446 King. I’m looking for a mover and a seconder, Councillor McAllister, seconded by Councillor Peruzza, thank you, looking for a speaker’s list of the Councillors.

Thank you, and through you, I’m just looking for some additional information from staff with regards to this. I know in terms of what is being asked of us, it’s the 300,000 as our municipal contribution to the project, and I’m just wondering in terms of any other costs, is this the extent to it, or are there further costs that would be incurred from the city on this project? Okay, Councillor, Mr. Felberg.

Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair. So the project, we’re taking the funding out of our discretionary account that we received through the different provincial and federal funding programs that we have. The additional funds that we may, that we will be expending on this will be through the rent supplements in order to bridge the balance or the delta between that 50% and the 80% in order to keep the folks housed and continue to offer them the services they need.

Thank you, Mr. Felberg, Councillor. Thank you, and through you. And I’m just also curious, in terms of CMHA taking over operations, do they envision any turnover of tenants, or are they just taking over the current tendencies?

Mr. Felberg. Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair.

So currently there are four vacancies right now, so we’ll be able to transition some of those off of our list immediately, and then over time as folks move out, or move out of the building, we’ll continue to add more up to that 14 that we’ve identified in the report. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, and through you again. So any vacancies would be coming off of our wait list to fill?

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Felberg. Through you, Mr. Chair.

Yes, that’s correct. Okay, thank you, and through you again. In terms of what the CMHA envisions as this facility, have they given any indication in terms, are they just taking over operations, or are they looking to use it for a specific clientele? What does that look like for them?

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Felberg. Through you, Mr.

Chair. So they’re actually already in their operating facilities, so they’re providing mental health supports to the individuals there already. So they’ll continue that operation, continue to provide the supports for those folks, and continue to help them succeed, and help them live effectively in those buildings. Thank you, Councillor.

Thank you, and through you, just some general comments. I appreciate staff bringing this before us. I know there is a desperate need in terms of protecting the affordable stock that we have. So I do appreciate what’s come before us.

I will be supporting this because I do, as I indicated, we really do need to protect the stock we have. So thank you. Thank you, Councillor, looking to the committee, first for any other comments, and then no one from the committee. Okay, and visiting members, sorry, Councillor Pribble.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, to the staff. I have a few questions. Oh, a couple of questions on page 148, where it states CMHA to secure donor commitment up to 680.

Is this to secure or has it been already secured because I received two different informations? Thank you, Councillor, to staff. Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair.

So they are working with a private donor. My understanding is that it is secure, but we have to work through the final details, the purchase and sale agreement, finalize some of the operational, establish the mortgage converting of the mortgage. So there’s a bunch of administration that still needs to happen. So they still need to work with those folks, and then they’ll additionally be lobbying the province for additional funding in order to support the ongoing operations.

Thank you, Mr. Faber, Councillor Pribble. Thank you, I answered the chair to the staff. The other point is that on the same page, Minister of Health for any remaining units and discussion have been ongoing between CMHA and Minister of Health, I know there is nothing confirmed, but do we have any idea, kind of, if this has a chance to get a positive response and to get funding from Minister of Health?

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Felberg. Through you, Mr. Chair.

It’s my understanding that it’s positive, but I don’t have a confirmed answer to that. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, and against for the chair to staff, page 149 has the projected financial performance, which is the table two. And maybe this, and maybe I missed it, but in the first year, the government subsidy is 407 compared to kind of the 260s after.

What is the additional 140 there from, or what is the additional amount there coming from? Thank you, back to staff. Through you, Mr. Chair.

So what it is, is it’s that delta or that amount in order for us to address the previous deficits that you see on the previous table in table one. So there’s still that, there’s still an operating, there’s a difference between the operating and their actual revenues, so that we still have to address that, and that’s what you see in that first year. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, so as a source of revenue, what do we expect is 140, because it says government subsidy.

Which level of the government are we expecting this additional amount from? I think you, Councillor, back to staff. Through you, Mr. Chair.

So some of that funding is gonna come through the Ministry of Health, and then as the vacancies start to come up, we’ll start to supplement that with our supplements as we fill in the vacancies for the units in the building. And it might be helpful for us to go through, and if you’d like, I could offer an opportunity to chat with you in detail, and we can lay out all of the different budgets and operating values and whatnot. That sounds great, I will certainly accept it. Thank you very much.

And I think I had the last question, and that has to do with, we are saying that there’s an opportunity or go from, I think it was 60 to 80%, sorry, from 80% average market rate to bring it down to 60. If the people are already actually living there, what is actually, what kind of powers do we have that actually increase this, or decrease the level of subsidy, increase the amount from 80 to 60? I understand if the vacant unit is vacant, for the vacant units who is gonna move in, I don’t see any issue with that, but certainly the existing ones. Don’t we have to, can we actually do that, or do we have to wait till they would move out?

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Filbert. Through you, Mr. Chair, that really is how we’re balancing out operations and affordable housing.

Over time, as the vacancies come up, then you start to add in that different AMR. We would not be going backwards. We’d not be increasing the rent for the tenants that exist there already. They’ve got a lease, and they’d be subject to the RTA, and all the rules associated with that.

When they leave, then we’d have that opportunity to increase the rents. Thank you, back to Councillor Perbault. Thank you, and one last question, and I know under page 150, right above conclusion, it’s the Civic Administration, can commit to provide an update, et cetera? Can we build this into the motion?

Thank you, Councillor. Mr. Filbert. Through you, Mr.

Chair. Absolutely, we can commit to coming back. I don’t think you need to provide us direction to do that. We’ll come back once we’ve completed all the work that we have to do with CMHA.

I don’t think that’s any issue at all. Councillor? This point, I really would like to not, I do take this a little bit different, and we’ll just talk about the previous point, because this one does say clearly can commit. It doesn’t say will commit.

So from my end, I really would like to add this to the motion, to the city clerk that is our expectations of our committee. And I hope I get a support for that, thank you. Councillor, would you mind just repeating that language one more time for the clerk? It’s actually page 150, and it’s right, the two lines above conclusion.

Civic administration can commit to provide. So I would like it to stated that we do expect this update. As I said, if it would say will commit, or is committing, then I would leave it as is. But because it says can commit, I would like to make it clear that that is our expectations of our committee that we will get this update.

Thank you, Councillor. I believe that’s not in this staff recommendation. If you have a specific language that the clerk could jot down, that would be appreciated. For the civic administration, committing to providing an update to council after the transition plan has been successfully implemented.

Councillor, so that language is just a second. So your chair, I would love to get an advice from the city clerk. I think she knows what I’m trying to, my point to get it across and I’ll look for her advice. Thank you, Councillor.

They’re just jotting it down. I’m gonna read it back to you. What I have is a motion to amend the motion to add a new part E that the civic administration be directed to provide an update to council after the transition plan has been successfully implemented. That reflects exactly what I said.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Councillor. So you’re moving that. I am looking for a seconder, seconded by Councillor Trussell.

Looking for a speaker’s list. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair and thank you for running today’s meeting. I have to say procedurally and you asked folks to be concise at the start.

We’ve seen a couple of items now pulled for amendments with no indication to members of the committee ahead of time in writing either as added or as circulated via email so that people can come prepared to debate the merits of this, the proposed amendments. So I would respectfully ask colleagues to please keep in mind that in order for members of the committee to be properly prepared to debate an item, it is really respectful and the most efficient use of the committee’s time to circulate proposed amendments in advance whenever possible. We’ve had this report since last week. While I don’t disagree with the amendment that the Councilor is proposing, this should have been circulated in advance, not words smith on the floor.

Thank you for any other committee members. Councillor Stevens. Thank you, my questions are on the report itself rather than the amendment and I’m not voting so I don’t know if you want me to ask them now or wait. You can ask them now Councillor.

Okay, thank you. And I do appreciate Councilor Pribble putting that motion forward, it’ll be nice to see the update. I have reached out to staff and I will book an appointment or a meeting to go into the details. I have a lot of questions about this.

It’s interesting because this property, I’ve had several phone calls in the last month with some concerns about this particular property and the women and some of the things that are going on there. But I’m just wondering if staff could give us an overview of what has gone on here because I find it interesting. The report says that in 2009, 3.5 million dollars was invested into this project, 25 year commitment to the affordable housing and then 10 years in there was trouble. So that was in 2019.

And it seems to me from reading this report that in that time CMHA had, it says that CMHA expressed an interest in May of 2019 in taking it over. There was no consensus for that transition. And that since that time they have been running, operating and present in that building. And yet we have the serious state that we have.

Like here we’re talking about financial considerations, which are concerning, but I’m also concerned about the women. We’ve got very, very vulnerable women in there. It says here that it was planned to be only 10 with serious mental health issues in there. We’ve got everyone in there that’s my understanding with mental health and high acuity issues.

So I just wondering if we can have an overview because it says that the board, the same board of governors operates the two, but we only have problems with one. So can you maybe just give us an idea of what happened here, what we’ve learned from this, what we can, do we have this in other situations that are gonna come forward? I know that’s a lot of questions. Thank you Councillor to staff.

Thank you and through you Mr. Chair. Yeah, that’s a lot of questions, very broad, a lot of different angles that we have to address. So first off, I think it’s important to note that the board in this particular property, they’re independent of the other two projects.

So it’s two separate corporations. So that’s the first part. The second part being that the board that we have for this particular property, they’ve effectively stepped away. But from the folks that were on the boards or actually someone very elderly, three of them have actually passed away and or two have passed away and three are actually in long-term care homes.

So the attention on the property isn’t there from where it was at the beginning. So CMHA has been operating and working with Lyft at this particular property and supporting the women in the building. And they’ve actually been incurring costs out of their own operating budget. And they’ve reached a critical point, which is why we’re here today.

We’re trying to ensure that there are 30 individuals who do not end up homeless and are able to retain their housing, retain that dignity. So given the complexity in that space and given the complexity of the relationship with Lyft and CMHA, what we felt was important was to find a clear and very, very simple way to move the project over to CMHA so that they could take over operations and carry it on into the future. Don’t have a ton of history at this moment on the 2009 contribution, but it was for affordable housing, which is different than social housing. So this is not rent geared to income.

This is affordable housing. We have a contribution agreement with those folks and we’ll have different checkpoints over time as we’re operating an affordable housing project. And that gives us over that time, the period of that contribution agreement, we might make tweaks as we’re going depending on the market conditions of the time. So the average rent that would have been available about 20 years ago now in 2009 is gonna be very different than we are today.

And given the increased operating costs that you see across all sectors, not just housing, there are those tweaks and balances that need to be done and an active board in order to support all of those decisions as you’re moving forward. So I think that that’s a summary for now. I think that might lead to a number of other questions and maybe that might be better for a very focused conversation with you, Councillor. Thank you, Mr.

Felberg, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you and through the chair, yeah. Thank you for that and I do look forward to the meeting. I do have a lot of questions.

But from a taxpayer perspective, 3.5 million went into that property in 2009, CMHA is looking at purchasing it, we’re looking at paying out deficits and debts of 300,000 as London taxpayers specifically. Did we consider purchasing the property ourselves? Is there, like I’m just wondering why there isn’t enough value in that property that it wouldn’t cover the deficits that we would need to get involved there? I’ll slide back to staff.

Through you, Mr. Chair. So if you look in section 3.2, you’ll see three of the other options that we considered for this particular issue. One of them was bring on a replacement board members for the Council of Lyft.

Another one was city assumes ownership. So actually exactly that we would take over the ownership, but we’re not a resource to be a property manager. That’s not what we do. We build housing and we support new affordable housing in the community, but we’re not actually operating it.

And then the other option, number three, is allow the project to fail, but we didn’t feel that that was a good approach. We wanted to make sure that those folks retain their housing. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you and through the chair again.

So thank you for that. And again, the question is why do we know what the purchase and sale is gonna be? Was there not enough there to cover that off that we need to put in 300,000? I’m just looking at why we’re having to invest in a purchase and sale agreement that’s happening between two other parties.

Backstop. Through you, Mr. Chair, again, the priority here was for us to ensure that we were not sending these folks a homelessness. We have a discretionary fund through our administrative funds, which is how we’re funding the 300,000.

Doesn’t impact any other programs that we have. So we felt that this was an appropriate use of that funding. So we don’t have the details of the purchase and sale agreement at this point. We still have to work through contribution agreements and all of the legal details with CMHA.

If we’re able to share those in our update report, we’ll provide those, but that’ll be dependent on how the next few steps go in that business transition plan. Thank you, Mr. Felberg, Councillor. Thank you.

I’ll try not to go too deep and save these for our meeting, but it was supposed to be affordable housing. So how did it become the situation where we have 30 high-cuity or like that they’re all high-cuity? We’ve come into an issue. Like since 2019, who is responsible?

What role has the city played in this? What responsibility do we have in this particular kind of situation? Because it seems as though CMHA has been running it for five years and why we had the problems that we’ve had for the last five years, if now they’re gonna take it over and it’s gonna be different. It does also seem we’re shifting back to affordable housing now, which is going to change the demographics in that building.

Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Felberg. Through you, Mr. Chair.

So the building is still affordable. It’s affordable with support since CMHA is providing the supports. What I would say though is at the time in 2009, when this contribution agreement was established, we didn’t have the tenant placement agreements that we are looking to provide and add to our roadmap to 3,000 contribution agreements. So for us, from the city perspective and managing our wait lists and managing tenants that will be in there, that gives us the opportunity to have a little bit more connection to the folks that are actually going into the building.

So that’s actually a benefit to us, which is another reason why we’re bringing this forward today is because it’s connecting what we’ve been saying on the roadmap to what’s happening in the existing operations. At this point, our role as the affordable housing buildings carry forward is through the contribution agreement. And that’s where we have the connection. So when those folks come forward for different things, depending on the market conditions, the rents that they need in order to cover the operating, that’s when we have our chances to touch in with those folks.

The tenant placement agreement will give us a little bit more connection into what’s happening day to day in those buildings moving forward. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, and what role has the city played since 2019 or what is our responsibility when it comes to this? To staff.

Through you, Mr. Chair. So we’re acting as a service manager in this particular case. And so 2019 today is far too long.

That’s a five year period for us to be addressing these. And this is another one of those cases where we are looking to be more efficient, more effective in how we respond to these issues so that we don’t get to this point where we are providing a bailout as it were. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, and I appreciate that.

And I maybe didn’t hear the answer as to what responsibility we have. Like it talks about accountability and oversight. The problems came about in 2019. I’m just wondering, are we being over and above here doing this or do we have a responsibility to this?

Thank you, Councillor, back to staff. Through you, Mr. Chair. So many of the funding programs that we administer and that would have been established that contribution to have a service manager oversight role.

So we are providing that, we are meeting our service manager obligation by doing that. Are we providing over and above? I wouldn’t suggest that. We’re preventing folks from going to homelessness, which is a key element and a key part of our housing stability action plan and a service manager role.

Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. And believe me, I’m 100% with that. That I want that support.

The concern more is, as we go into budget time, that this 300,000 is just covering off deficits, right? Like, I think everybody wants their money to go— You have about 30 seconds left, Councillor. Helping the people stay homeless. Those four units have been vacant.

My understanding or what I’ve been told is for quite some time now, women, and now I’m wondering if they’ve been left vacant to now be moved into people from the wait list, which is fine, I’m just wondering, I just have a lot of questions I’m looking forward to the meeting. Thank you, Councillor. You do have two seconds left. Okay, I’d like to move an item.

Part E, an amendment to the main motion. It’s moved and seconded. I’d like to disperse of that. So I’m just looking at committee one more time for any comments to that amendment.

Okay, let’s call the question. Supposing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, we have the main motion, which has not been moved or seconded. So I’m gonna look for a mover and a seconder.

Geez, we need to move on a seconder to approve the motion as amended. So moved by Councillor McAllister and seconded by seconded. Looking at committee for speakers for Stevenson. Thank you.

I really will save most of my questions for later. Did have a question. I moved on to something else here. It talks about on page 147, the new ownership would offer renewed leadership that is invested in better outcomes for tenants.

And I just wondered if we could just get more information on that ‘cause I am very much looking forward to better outcomes for tenants. But I’m wondering about the renewed leadership if CMHA has been managing it for five years. I’m just wondering what the change will be. Thank you, Councillor, just ask.

Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair. So because the board was not active and not engaged in the project, you lose that financial decision-making and that ability to direct what’s gonna happen on the property. So by having CMHA be involved and be actively involved as the operator and working with the board directly, you’ll have more connected building and more connected operations.

Awesome. Thank you and through the chair. I don’t wanna get us in-camera, but I’m gonna ask just generally, CMHA from reading the report, my understanding is they were responsible for who gets placed there. If we know that the board is not operational and there’s problems, is there a liability risk to the, like, I’m just worried about these women who’ve been in there for the last five years with a board that wasn’t functioning and yet we were placing high-cuity women in there.

So I just, just trying to understand. Thank you, Councillor, back to staff. Through you, Mr. Chair, I think I’d have to go back to CMHA and talk to them a little bit about how they’ve actually made the tenant selection.

We do work with them on a day-to-day basis and identifying tenants and trying to identify them off our list, but as far as the specific tenants that are in there right now, I don’t have those details. And thank you, Councillor. Thank you, so just a couple of quick specific questions. On the projected 2025 on page 148, the mortgage expense is 100,000 more than the other years.

I’m just kind of curious about that. I also wanted to know if amortization is included in the expenses? Thank you, Councillor. Mr.

Felber. Through you, Mr. Chair, a big chunk of that is the penalty, actually, to pay off the existing mortgage, Councillor. Thank you, and is amortization included in these expenses?

Through you, Mr. Chair, apologies. Yes, yes, amortization is included. And final question.

I noticed that the maintenance and repairs for the projected is 100,000 a year over the actuals from 2020 to 2022. And if we are moving to less acuity, I guess, I’m just wondering why, and we’re getting more money in rent, is there any explanation to the extra amount for repairs each year? Through you, Mr. Chair.

So we’re not necessarily moving from a supportive building to a non-supportive building. It’s continuing to be a supportive building through CMHA. So the maintenance and repairs would still be retained. Often what happens when there is this sort of financial trouble in this sector, is that capital expenses are deferred in lieu of making operating budget payments.

So a large part of that is what’s going on here and balancing that over time, is what we’re trying to build into this new projected performance. Okay, thank you. I really appreciate the answers. Thank you, Councillor Palazzoneck.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Realizing we have a budget participation meeting commencing it for and expecting a larger turnout, what time is this committee slated to run to today to give us time to prepare for the next thing? Thank you, Councillor.

I’m hoping that this committee and this meeting ends sooner than later. I’m hoping to expedite the next few items, but I do want to hear the committee just for discussion. Okay, respecting that, I will state that it gets too late. Motion to adjourn will be made without the business of the committee being concluded today and putting things off for another cycle, realizing we also have a delegate who’s hoping to be heard today as well.

So just mindful as we move through this process. Thank you, Councillor. Looking to the committee for any other speakers. Okay, it’s moved and seconded, I’ll call the question.

Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, thank you. Last item on the consent that was pulled, that’s 2.7 data regarding the retention or the relocation of homeless individuals. Looking for a mover and a seconder for that item.

Moved by Councillor Pelosa. Seconded by Councillor McAllister. Looking to the committee for speakers. Thank you, I’m gonna try to be brief and kind of summarize.

I do understand that both, by the way, through the chair to the staff, CRM and high-face reliability and the information is not the best. Most accurate, I still would like us actually, but to work ahead and try to make it as accurate and as feasible as possible. I think in 2022, we did receive some reports as well, which had some additional valuable information. And the question, I have only one question to the staff.

And how can organizations have an access to high-face to improve the data? And you know, we have outreach organization that currently the data, as far as I know, is not included. So that’s the only question I have to our staff. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor, staff. Through you, Mr. Chair, could you just repeat the last part of that question? I feel like I heard that outreach data is not included.

So the second part was the outreach organizations. If the outreach organizations, is their data included? The information they collect is the data included in high-face. That was the second part of the question.

The first part of the questions, all the community organizations, social agencies, do they have an access to input the data into the high-face or is there a process that their information collected would make it at the end to high-face? Thank you. Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Dickens.

Mr. Cooper. Thank you, and through the chair, I’ll answer the second part of your question first. So the outreach organization right now that’s in high-face would be London Cares.

Recognizing there are a number of outreach agencies in the community, 519 Pursuit. Our LOSA team offers an Indigenous-specific outreach program that they’re starting up as well as, I believe, the ARC offers a bit of an outreach program. So London Cares currently is the only organization that is inputting this information in high-face. And then that leads into the first part of your question.

So in order to become and be part of the high-face group, there is a specific process, an application process, for organizations to apply to our London Homeless Prevention Network, which is the governance body for our high-face working group, to consider and then approve those organizations and they’re onboarding into high-face. Our provincial partners, who require us to have a buy name list through our Homeless Prevention program, do support and expanded use of high-face in community. But what we are always wary of is client confidentiality, consent, and some other considerations that our Homeless Prevention Network reviews when we consider each application. Thank you, Mr.

Cooper. Councillor? No, I’m sure I don’t have no more questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Looking to committee for any other questions, comments? Deputy Mayor. Again, I’m going to be very brief.

But I do want to just take a moment to say I appreciate the collection of this data is hard. It’s never going to be 100% accurate. And I want to take a moment to recognize that the member of the local media who had the buy line in our local newspaper is with us, and I’m not criticizing him because I know that the authors of articles don’t write their own headlines. But the headline that indicated there was no proof of this issue being a challenge was not accurate.

The challenge and the article did get into the details. And so I’m glad it was in— the details were in there. It’s that we don’t have the data. And we’re not actually sure how to collect it in a meaningful way.

And I absolutely understand that. And I absolutely understand that we don’t want to in trying to collect data lead to a situation where an individual feels that they won’t get service and therefore are not willing to disclose it. So I recognize that this is a difficult nut to crack. And I appreciate the work that’s been done on it.

And I know that Mr. Cooper and his team and Mr. Dickens are continuing to look at ways to better collect data, but that it is a challenge. So fully recognize that and appreciate the work that’s done into getting this information back to us.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I don’t have any other speakers. Councillor Stinson. Thank you.

I have a whole bunch of questions, but I will spare the committee and staff and do this after. I did wonder in the article on what sort of brought this about, it said that there was 319 people who were supported in being returned back to where they came from. And yet in here, it says 663 individuals contacted London about it, but we don’t know whether they actually came here or not. I just wondered if that information is available to have an update on the 319, like how many people we helped get back to where they have a natural support network, or if that might be able to be provided by Council?

Thank you, Councillor. Mr. Dickens. Thank you and through you, Chair.

I can certainly check with our team here. Well, we have them to see if we have an update on that data. There is a little bit of nuance to all of this, of course, in terms of the number of folks that we directly assist in repatriating back to their home community versus those that self-select to do that. Now, the team could do an update, but I think there’s also some context of that original number.

I think the original number was misrepresented as well in terms of the magnitude of folks that we’re supporting. And, Joseph, if I may, Chair, on a regular basis, we do support some people to make their way to other communities. Likewise, we sometimes get an Otis that someone is coming to our community. We recently received a communication from a shelter.

I won’t name the organizations or the parties, but we received notification from a shelter. An individual was being supported by an organization in Toronto in that organization would be sending that individual to London to take up a spot in the shelter, to which the shelter had notified them that the beds were full. We had no space and that they shouldn’t do that. The communication back and forth was essentially, this person used to be living in London.

We would like to send them back here. That’s our process. They would like to go back to London, so we’ll send them. We will be reliant on the fact on whether that person actually comes to London.

If they come to London, they would have to present at the shelter that was notified. They would have to corroborate the same situation, so we knew it was them. But even then, that’s a data entry or a note in the hyphes. It doesn’t generate a tick box that we can report on.

Should this person be sent here from Toronto, we still would have no way to quantify whether they were sent here against their will or under false pretenses and sold a bill of goods in Toronto that there’s a bed waiting for them. In fact, when they get here and as soon as somebody were to start asking those probing questions, it’s likely that for the sake of survival and doing whatever they feel they need to be supported, we would get a completely different answer than the reality. So to go back to the deputy mayor’s earlier comments, theoretically, the assertion that people come to London for a number of different reasons, and sometimes they’re influenced by other people to come here because they’re told it’s going to be better here, likely does happen. Theoretically, it’s true.

Scientifically, can we quantify it? Not reliably, because there’s so many different variables. Likewise, as we recently helped individuals experiencing homelessness repatriate to family up north and assisted them in that transition. I’m not sure that home community is counting it as them being sent against their will, even though the city of London helped financially assist them to do that.

So this is very interesting and delicate work and it is not a simple exes and o’s, we’re not counting widgets here, which makes it really hard and we do apologize for the complexity of trying to report something in an exes and o’s fashion to the public and to council. But I will look to my team to see if there’s anything that. Thank you, Mr. Dickens, Councillor.

Okay, thank you and through the chair, thank you for that. It does help understand what we’re dealing with here a little bit better. Two quick questions, I think they’re quick. One question is under what circumstances would we support somebody to get to another city if that’s where they were from and they want to return back there, even if they don’t have family there, would we help them if that were the case?

Thank you and through the chair, our general processes around the diversion, we call that diversion, ‘cause we’re trying to prevent somebody from accessing emergency shelter in our community. What our coordinate access team typically does is they will try to make a connection in that community. So obviously through conversations with the individual, we’ll look to see if there is friends, maybe not family, somewhere we can make a connection where that individual could stay. If there is not an availability then, we would look to connect with a shelter in that community to see if they have space.

Should they then have space, we would look to pre-book that room for that individual and make sure that’s where they want to go. And then we would warm transfer them to that community. We never, our team never sends anybody to a community without some sort of a plan in place for the individual. Thank you, Mr.

Cooper. Okay, thank you for that. The last question is I noticed that last May, we had an update, I believe it was the housing stability and it provided all kinds of information in terms of the numbers on the by name list, the number of unsheltered, the number diverted from homelessness housed from the by name list. Is that coming again in May of this year?

Like is that an annual report that we get? Councillor, Mr. Dickens. Thank you, through you, Chair.

Yes, that’s an annual update on the housing stability action plan and in fact, through 2024, the team will be undertaking a number of engagement efforts to start to update our housing stability action plan ‘cause we’ll be at the end of our cycle in 2024 and a new one will commence in 2025. We also will just take this as an opportunity to note that as we start to refine this data and find ways to present the data and thanks to our communications team here at the city who’s been able to pull together the infographic for us and having those resources now in-house is something where we could look to make this data available updated quarterly perhaps on our city’s website so that the public can see sort of this quarterly snapshot of homelessness, I would caution that we not start manufacturing new data sets every quarter that we want to meet some sort of personal objectives on but if we could stick to this method in this format, it is something that we could work with communications on and keep it available to the public on a quarterly basis. Thank you, Mr. Dickens, Councillor Stevenson.

Thank you and through the chair, that sounds great. There’s a great deal of interest in the community to see what is happening there, good or bad and that would be terrific. I did note it said here, it talks about inflows and outflows from the by name list. I don’t know if that’s part of the reporting but it would be great, it’d be interesting to see that rather than just look at the static number or the change from one year to the next.

So I look forward to that and thank staff for all that they do because the need out there is tremendous and I’ve been hearing great things about how people are supported out there so thank you. Thank you, Councillor Stevenson looking to the committee. Okay, I’m just gonna, if you just don’t mind from the chair, I did want, I don’t wanna take too much time but for the appendix say, hearing what Mr. Dickens had to say, is that data, would that data be available quarterly?

Would you be able to report that out to the committee quarterly? Is that what I heard? Through you, Chair, to non-state report to the committee quarterly, what we would do is we could create a homelessness report card or snapshot on our city’s website and we would update the content quarterly. Thank you, do you need a motion for that?

That would be helpful, sure, thank you. Looking to committee for that motion. Councillor Trussell, seconded by Councillor Pribble and the clerk is gonna be putting that language up. Mr.

Dickens, for the name, the title of that appendix A and the quarterly report, we would be reporting not back to committee, just for the clerk’s language, you mind just repeating what you said? Through you, Chair, absolutely. That civic administration would, on a quarterly basis, update the snapshot of homelessness in London on the city’s website. I apologize to the committee.

I felt like this would be an important one, so let’s just, if you just indulge me, we’ll get that language and then we can vote on, move along. Okay, I’m gonna read this motion. Civic administration be directed to update the snapshot of London homelessness on the city of London website on a quarterly basis. And the mover and the second are okay with that.

Looking to the committee for any comments, questions? Okay, let’s call the question. Posing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you, committee.

And we have the original motion has been moved and seconded. Last call for questions or comments. Let’s call that question as well. Posing the vote, the motion carries five to zero.

Thank you, committee. I have nothing for schedule, or that’s it for consent items. I got nothing for schedule items. We’re moving on to items for direction.

I would like to look to the deputy mayor for his motion that he’s brought here. So looking to the deputy mayor. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer.

Again, I’ll try and be very brief. I know that we are tight on time today. This motion that’s before you in the communication comes after a couple of months of discussions with both the industry representatives from all the different taxi providers in the city as well as with our staff and a whole bunch of different ideas that came forward. And basically this brings it down to what in consultation with staff was something that we could consider operationalizing in conjunction with the work that they are already doing in reviewing some of our bylaws around vehicle for higher regulations.

So that’s where this is emerging from. I think the motion itself is pretty self-explanatory in terms of looking at a review. And again, these are recommendations for possible amendments. This doesn’t mean that this is where it will ultimately land when Mr.

Catolic brings us back a report, but making some changes to things like, just like our own driver’s licenses allowing drivers to renew their license two years at a time, save a little bit of work for our staff, allowing that operational period where our license can be parked and a vehicle is not on the road to be extended ongoing as it was allowed to be done during COVID and leave that as the delegated authority to Mr. Catolic and his team and look at the license or the age of operational vehicles noting that we continue all of us right across society right now continue to experience some supply chain challenges. It can be difficult to get parts. It can be difficult to secure new vehicles, all of those various things.

I see Ms. Smith nodding and she knows very well how difficult it has been to secure some, or procure some things for East Lions Community Center that we need, so it’s not just this, it’s everywhere. So that’s why I’m asking for your support to let Mr. Catolic do some continued engagement with the industry on this, with his own team and come back to us later this year with some options for our consideration.

And I believe there might be a mover for that. I know our regular chair had indicated she would be willing to, and I believe Ms. Councilor McAllister might as well. So I’ll leave that in your hands, but I think there is a mover for it.

Thank you, Deputy Mayor. And that’s moved by Councillor Palosa. Happy to move it, then I like to speak to it. Just before that, looking for a seconder, Councillor McAllister, okay, Councillor Palosa.

Thank you for bringing this back. Happy that I don’t always extol everyone. That’s fully known. Thank you for circling this in your regular agenda and working with staff, that staff had an opportunity to collaborate with you on this to make sure all the timelines match.

And as an added bonus, it was a report coming back. Anyways, as this committee already directed, happy to always improve efficiencies and reduce administration, work behind the scenes, anything we could capitalize on to hurry up some staff time and help serve the industry better. Happy for that. And then once we deal with this, looking to see how you like to handle the request for delegation status as well.

Thank you, Councillor. I would look to the committee for the delegation we have, I believe we have three options. We can hear the delegate, we can deny the delegate or we can refer the delegate back to a future meeting, a future public participation meeting, Councillor Palosa. Thank you, normally I would just refer this to the future meeting when the report came back, but seeing as they’ve already sat for almost two hours with us, I would move that we hear the delegate today for up to five minutes.

Okay, moved for five minute delegation by Councillor Palosa, looking for a seconder, seconded by Councillor McAllister. I’m gonna call that vote. I’m closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, looking to the delegate up in the gallery, sir.

Each, either one of the mics you can choose. Thank you for speaking before us today. I’ll just let you have a mic check first before anything and then we’ll give you five minutes to speak. And I’ll let you know when your time begins.

Do you hear me? Do you hear me? Okay, loud and clear. Okay, your time begins now.

My name is Hassan Savaheilagi, who found their own Vice President of Yellow London Taxi. Thank you so much for giving me this precious five minutes. And at the same time, I would like sincerely thank Deputy Mayor for paying some attention to out of many issues, some of the issues he brought up and put it in a form of motion. So in previous meeting, committee meeting, I provided some recommendations for members of city council generally, and particularly this committee, understand this industry, tax industry that is absolutely in trouble at this time.

There are many issues in five minutes, there is no way I can outline them all. But I have some other issues to be considered by members of city council. One of them is, the whole city is saturated with so many vehicle for hire, that includes taxi themselves, class A and B, and repeatedly class B place released. And then on the side of that, we have so many lift and recently entered the city in Uber with absolutely no attention towards supply and demand rule.

They keep coming and they keep adding so many vehicles, majority of them are truly international students who come supposed to go to university or college, but they engage in driving with Uber or Lyft. So what we think would be appropriate to do for a city of council or this city is putting a cap, just simply based on supply and demand. The second recommendation, it would be a good idea, it’s about time, unlike any other business, we are still wondering why a license fee for one single plate is at $750. We recommend by all reasons we have that to be brought down to $250, that makes it reasonable for everyone.

We have seen violence and so many safety problems against drivers that are not reported, I think it is a good time for city council to reconsider mandatory security cameras in every single vehicle for hire in the city. In many areas, it is going to be very much helpful. The final thing I wanted to bring to attention, we have examples of that and it can be provided to you as a proof. Currently, average insurance, commercial insurance for taxis is about $15,000 one way.

This industry is, it’s not only London, it is across Ontario and particularly Ontario is being that difficult for taxi industry when it comes to commercial insurance. I am not sure how at this time I have some ideas myself personally, based on my experience. I think there is a room for city at a certain level to engage and assist taxi industry in communication with the finance ministry of Ontario that they are the ones who are regulating insurance and how we can get help. If we cannot find reasonable approach when it comes to insurance, literally taxi industry is choking from this problem.

That’s all I appreciate that I was given time in a short notice. In the past, once I recommended a tax force to be formed, put together in close communication with city staff and this committee, bring proper information to your attention. So everybody as voters on this industry at one time, I know amendment to the bylaw is not something easy. It’s time consuming and it’s costly to the city.

At least we have enough information provided to you as voters, as decision makers, then we can come to a point of amending the bylaw. That’s all, thanks again for your time. I have a copy, a written copy of my comments. If you are interested, I can provide you with copies of it.

Thank you. Thank you to the delegate for speaking to the committee. Okay, looking to the committee for any further comments or questions on the motion on the floor. I’m so trustful.

Yes, I’m in support of the motion and I thank you for bringing it, but listening to the delegate, it seems as if additional items are being raised that go beyond the face of your motion. So my question is to the deputy mayor, is it your intention to also include these other issues that the delegate raised? So thank you for the question, Councillor. I don’t want to speak to the particulars of Mr.

Catolic is reviewing. I’ll leave that to him. I will say what I brought forward were the items that I’ve heard repeatedly from various players in the industry and where there was general consensus. There were other ideas.

I did not bring forward those other ideas. I’ve heard the insurance comment before. That is jurisdiction of the provincial government, of course. So I am not supportive of dipping our toe into that water because frankly, then we have to start talking about the insurance of every vehicle on the road, private and commercial, which are all under those pressures.

So I focused on the items that I heard various companies across the industry had some general consensus on. And thank you, Councillor. And that would not preclude limiting this motion would not preclude further inquiry into those other areas at a later time. Is that correct?

Certainly, that’s not my intention to pre-clude anything else coming forward. And through the chair, I don’t know if Mr. Catolic has anything he might want to add about what they’re currently reviewing. I won’t ask him to do that ‘cause I’ll leave that with him to decide whether he needs to add any other context.

But for me, this was an incremental change that I felt we could get done now. There may be other issues that need to be addressed, but I think that they would take longer to reach some consensus on. Mr. Catolic.

Through the chair, yes, we’ll be reporting back in Q2 of this year on the issue about the years of the vehicles. The motion before you today is something that we could add to that report as well. Some of the other issues I’ve heard today would take longer to report back. We are internally discussing a task force because this industry is evolving with new players, and we could break forward future reports in that regard.

Thank you, Mr. Catolic. Councillor, you’re good? Okay, looking for any further comments.

Okay, now let’s call the question. Closing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you. This is our last item.

I don’t know if deferred matters, additional business. Like the last item, I will go to, thank you and through the chair, and I appreciate the committee hearing my motion. I know it was last minute, but it is a bit time sensitive, recognizing that staff have been working on this, but I did want to bring this to the committee’s attention. This is for the Remembrance Gardens, which is at 2315 River Road.

The organization, remember November 11th, began work in 2015. They’ve since made additions to this property in terms of maintaining a poppy garden, adding boulders. They also run a Remembrance Service and various commemorative services throughout the year. As I indicated in the preamble, they’ve done a lot of work on this property, which is owned by the city of London.

They have maintained it through a dedicated team of volunteers. This is a place solely dedicated to the Remembrance of Veterans. They have asked for really not a lot in return, other than being able to work with the city. That is why I brought this motion forward, because this is a longstanding issue in terms of the property owner and then the maintenance provider.

So what I’m looking to do with this motion is essentially set up a memorandum of understanding. So moving forward, the roles and responsibilities of both the city and this association are understood and respected. I’m looking for support from the committee to move this forward. I will move this, and I hope there’s support for it.

If you haven’t had a chance to go to these gardens, I would highly recommend it. This organization has done a lot of work. As I said, they do the Remembrance Service. They also do a meal for Veterans of Centennial Hall in Remembrance Day, and they run a number of services that are well attended by not only board one residents, but Londoners across the board and the region as well.

So thank you, and I will move this motion. Thank you, Councilor McAllister. I will second that. Looking to the committee for questions, comments.

Councilor Plaza. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have a short list of comments and questions.

Looking through you, I guess to the mover, I appreciate the work on this and the importance of this in the area, but reviewing it, it currently says that this area is maintained solely through a dedicated team of volunteers. And then in part A, you’re asking for a report back that delegates duties, but that would include any cost that may be incurred on the part of the city for regular maintenance, electrical infrastructure upgrades. So it looks like the properties currently maintained by volunteers and the report back, you have put all the maintenance and upgrades solely financially on the city. Looking for clarification.

Thank you, Councilor, looking to the mover. And then I have the deputy mayor. Thank you and through the chair. Yes, just to clarify.

So the organization is doing the maintenance on the gardens themselves in terms of how we’ve operated in the past, and Mr. Yeoman can correct me if I’m wrong here, but it has been more of an ad hoc approach in terms of some of the services they have required. There are some things that we retain ownership of as it is to our property, and they don’t have direct control in terms of that. That they don’t obviously interfere in terms of electrical sewage, and so we’re trying to kind of lay the groundwork in terms of what’s our responsibility, in terms of what we control and what they have control over.

So right now, the maintenance component is directly related to the things that have been added by the association, but the property itself in terms of any like utilities or underground infrastructure would be up to us. Thank you, Councilor, Councilor Plaza. Thank you, just wanted to ensure that the volunteers wouldn’t have the opportunity to remove from them of maintaining gardens and stuff that I’m sure they take such pride in that we didn’t accidentally word ourselves into a corner of, I’m sorry, your volunteers are legally liable and will be not allowed on. They’d be trespassers on their own gardens.

Secondly, part B, that civic administration be directed to engage tourism London to recognize and promote remembrance gardens as an attraction for both residents and visitors. As a member of the board of tourism London, we as Council can fully direct civic administration, but just highlighting that we cannot tell tourism London that they will do this work and will promote the gardens, just making them aware that this is a lovely opportunity and to fit where they can on the tourism’s website and promotions. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor, I have a deputy here next.

Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer and through you. First of all, on part A, I think it’s actually long overdue that we get an MOU in place on this property. There have been some challenges and it’s great that we are going to work out exactly who is responsible for what there.

I have attended a number of events there as well. It certainly is a nice spot for some reflection and for some beautification in what I would otherwise describe as a bit of a remnant piece of land that we’re not otherwise utilizing. So it’s great that the community has come together on that. I will say that for me, if part B is left in and this gets to Council, I will be pulling that to vote against it and I want to be really clear about the reason.

And Councilor Palosa started down that route. I’m going to continue a little bit further. Not only does civic administration not direct tourism London, but I believe this is opening a Pandora’s box. This is a very slippery slope of starting to ask civic administration to intervene and engage with tourism London anytime somebody wants their project promoted for tourism purposes.

Colleagues will know that I was very involved in the Holy Roller Restoration Project. The Holy Roller Restoration Project itself engages directly with tourism London and is in the process of doing so, along with those involved with the Battle of the Atlantic Memorial at HMCS Prevo and the RCR Museum to start to see if there’s a way to develop an experiential tourism offering around London’s history as a military city. That is quite separate from promoting a park on Veterans Memorial Parkway out of a budget which is primarily paid for by tourism members. There is the hotel tax that contributes to tourism funding as well.

Although that’s used for only new events and projects, not for existing, so it’s not for advertising per se, unless this was included somewhere in a military tourism experience package as a site people could visit. This is why I really think that part B needs to be dropped because you’re going to start getting asks from everybody for civic administration to go and talk to tourism London. Tourism London’s door is open to anybody who has an opportunity, a stop, an event, whatever that might be. The door is open for people to come and engage with tourism London directly.

I do not support asking our civic administration to be middlemen in that discussion. If the organizers of the Remembrance Garden wish to have a conversation with tourism London, they should do that themselves, not ask our staff to do that. I don’t think it’s part of Mr. Yeoman and his team’s role to engage there.

So I would really respectfully request colleagues consider either removing B or, you know, when we get to council where I do have a vote, I will be pulling it and encouraging colleagues to defeat that section. I think the rest of the motion makes a lot of sense. I do not think B is appropriate. And thank you, Deputy Mayor.

I have, or Councillor McAllister next. Thank you and through the chair. Not trying to ruffle tourism London’s feathers and hearing what my colleagues have to say. Just in discussions with staff, I know Mr.

Yeoman and myself are trying to kind of think of ways. If tourism London is not the way, you know, that’s fine. But I would like to then change the wording in terms of we can strike the tourism London, but recognizing that it is a park. I do know from our discussions that it is on the parks website.

So civic administration be directed on our part. I don’t know how you want to word that, but the civic administration be directed to recognize and promote their remembrance gardens as an attraction for residents and visitors, striking tourism London. As part of that, I would also like to request that signage be included. So just so the clerk is aware, I’m asking to strike the tourism London component, keeping the rest, and then at the end, just including that city signage for the park be included.

Okay, thank you, Councillor. So Part B, you’re looking to strike tourism, and you’re looking to include the signage piece to Part B as well. Yeah, so it’s the civic administration be directed to drop to engage tourism London, but just have it to recognize and promote remembrance gardens as an attractive destination for residents and visitors, just recognizing that it is a civic administration. So this is being recognized through parks, and then the signage, obviously, would be for the park itself.

If that’s okay with staff, just confirming. Through you, Madam, or Mr. Chair, that’s something I believe we can operationalize. Okay, thank you.

Just going back to Councillor McAllister, the clerk is looking for a little bit more clarification on the signage piece on what exactly are we asking for the signage? So at the end, to include parks signage. And that’s the idea at the end of Part B. That would be at the end of Part B, yes.

Okay. As the seconder, I’m okay with that change. I have Councillor, the Councillor, sorry. Can I just read that?

Okay, I’m just gonna read Part B. That civic administration be directed to recognize and promote remembrance gardens as an attraction for both residents and visitors to include signage and to include park signage. If you open your e-scribes now, you can look at the language. There is indicated that that is good for the language, looking to the committee for any other comments.

I see Madam, let’s call the question. Posing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, that leaves us with a German, looking for a mover for a German. Anybody want to move to a German?

Councillor McAllister, seconded by Councillor Pribble. Hand vote, we’re adjourned. Thank you.