April 29, 2024, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting was called to order at 1:00 PM.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That Items 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.6 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   4th Report of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee

2024-04-04 - AWCAC Report

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the 4th Report of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee, from the meeting held on April 4, 2024, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.2   Data Regarding Impacts of Asylum Claimants on London’s Emergency Shelter System

2024-04-29 - Staff Report (2.2) - Asylum Claimants Resolet Request for Data-Final

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report, dated April 29, 2024, with respect to Data Regarding the Impacts of Asylum Claimants on London’s Emergency Shelter System, BE RECEIVED. (2024-S12)

Motion Passed

2.3   RBB Innovations Ltd. (o/a One Human Service Network “OneHSN”) Agreement

2024-04-29 - Staff Report (2.3) - RBB Innovations LTd. OneHSN Contract final - Full

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated April 29, 2024, related to RBB Innovations Ltd. (o/a One Human Service Network “OneHSN”) 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 May 14, 2024, to:

i)    APPROVE the Agreement, as appended to the above-noted by-law, between RBB Innovations Ltd. (o/a One Human Services Network) and The Corporation of the City of London for a web-based solution to support a centralized child care information and waitlist system (“Childcare Connect”);

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

iii)    DELEGATE authority to the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, or their written designate, to approve renewals and amendments to this Agreement on that condition that same:

A)    are consistent with the requirements contained in the Agreement approved under section 1 of the above-noted by-law;

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

C)     do not increase the indebtedness or liabilities of The Corporation of the City of London;

iv)    AUTHORIZE the Civic Administration to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to this project, and,

b)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into or amending a Purchase of Service Agreement with the program. (2024-L04A)

Motion Passed

2.4   London Fire Department Fire Master Plan Action Plan - Annual Update

2024-04-29 - Staff Report (2.4) - 2024 Fire Master Plan Action Plan Annual Update

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the staff report dated April 29, 2024, with respect to the London Fire Department Fire Master Plan Action Plan Annual Update, BE RECEIVED. (2024- P16)

Motion Passed

2.6   (ADDED) 2023-2024 Multi-Sector Service Accountability Agreement between The Corporation of the City of London (Dearness Home) and Ontario Health

2024-04-29 - (ADDED) Staff Report (2.6) - 2023-24 M-SAA Report incl. Appendix A, Schedule 1- Full

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 29, 2024, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on May 14, 2024, to:

a)    APPROVE the Multi-Sector Service Accountability Agreement (“M-SAA”) for the period April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, to be entered into with Ontario Health with respect to the Adult Day Program at the Dearness Home, as appended to the above-noted by-law, and AUTHORIZE the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Agreement; and,

b)    DELEGATE to the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development and the City Manager, the power to approve execute such further and other documents, including agreements, that may be required in furtherance of the above-noted M-SAA Agreement, or any future Multi-Sector Service Accountability Agreement that are consistent with the requirements contained in the above-noted M-SAA; it being noted that the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, or the City Manager, as the case may be, shall provide a copy of fully executed documents to the City Clerk.

Motion Passed

2.5   Core Area Parking Incentives Extension

2024-04-29 - Staff Report (2.5) - Core Area Parking Incentive Extention

That the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated April 29, 2024, related to the Core Area Parking Incentives Extension:

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

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to look further into the issues contained within the attached submission from Ark Aid London that was distributed to members of council;

it being noted that the communications, as appended to the Added Agenda, from B. Maly and S.A. Collyer, R. Bernardi and G. Gastaldi, with respect to this matter, were received. (2024- T02)

Motion Passed

Additional Votes:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve the staff recommendation with the addition of a new part f):

That the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated April 29, 2024, related to the Core Area Parking Incentives Extension:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a free 1-hour on-street parking program for the Core Area until the end of 2024;

b)    the financing for a free 1-hour on-street parking program for the Core Area, in the estimated amount of $300,000, BE APPROVED from the Economic Development Reserve Fund;

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a free 1-hour parking pilot program for Municipal Lot #1 and #2 in Old East Village until the end of 2024;

d)    the financing for a free 1-hour parking pilot program for Municipal Lot #1 and #2 in Old East Village, in the estimated amount of $30,000, BE APPROVED from the Economic Development Reserve Fund;

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

f)     the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to look further into the issues contained within the attached submission from Ark Aid London that was distributed to members of council.

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by E. Peloza

Motion to further amend by including a new part a) to read as follows:

a)       the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement a free weekday 1-hour on-street parking program for the Core Area until the end of 2024;

Motion Failed (2 to 2)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve parts a) and b) of the clause.

Motion Failed (2 to 2)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve parts c) and d) of the clause.

Motion Failed (1 to 3)

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve parts e) and f) of the clause.

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 2:40 PM.

Full Transcript

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

View full transcript (1 hour, 58 minutes)

If everyone can just settle in if we can get started. Good afternoon. This is the sixth meeting in the Community and Strategic Services Committee. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Nachenabak, Padashone, Linampohok, and Adewandran.

One honor and respect the history and language and the culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nation, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. For everyone’s information, I’m joined in chambers by committee members, Pribble, Troso, and Ferreira.

Councillor McAllister has sent his regrets. Also joining us in chambers is Councillor Frank. And virtually with us today is Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor Hillier, and Raman. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports from meetings upon request.

To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact CPSC at London.ca for 519-661-2489, extension 2425. Turning my attention to committee members, looking for disclosures of pecuniary interest. Seeing none, I’ll note that we are going off of the added agenda today as some things and communications were added on consent. We now have six items looking to committee members to see what would you like to have pulled separate.

Councillor Ferreira. I thank you, Chair, through you. I’d like to pull 2.5, please, for the consent. Okay, so 2.5 being the core area, parking and incentive extension has been pulled.

Looking to other members of committee, seeing none. I will look for a mover and a seconder to put all other items being 2.1 through to put everything on the floor except 2.5. Moved by Councillor Ferreira, seconded by Councillor Pribble. So all items I’ve except for 2.5 are on the floor, looking to committee members first for questions and then happy to go to visiting Councillors.

So Raman, I know that you’re on a time, had a quick timeline today as you have other appointments to get to you. Would you like to pose your questions? Okay, I’ll recognize Councillor Raman and welcome to committee. Thank you so much.

Can you hear me okay? Perfectly. Wonderful, thank you. So thank you for allowing me to attend your committee today and to ask some questions specific to the asylum claimant, a report that’s in front of us, which has been garnering quite a bit of attention around a few things.

So I wanted to help to clarify some information that’s within the report via some questions. So first, I just wanted to thank staff for the time they’ve taken to prepare the report that’s in front of us. I think it’s quite eye-opening to see the information outlined here in the report around emergency shelter usage. So what we’re seeing from this report is about 123 unique individuals accessing emergency shelters of the 306 emergency shelter spaces that we have.

What we’re also seeing, and one thing that agencies help me to better understand as well, spoke to John Deactis this morning, is we’re also seeing that same increase in the number of people accessing services on a monthly basis, unique individuals, accessing services on a monthly basis that perhaps are not able to get shelter. And so anecdotally, if they go to a shelter and there isn’t a bed for them, they may be sent to London Cares to explore if there’s other services available. So I’m wondering if our staff can help us to understand a bit of that relationship between that coordinated response of if there isn’t a bed, how they may end up accessing services through London Cares. Thank you, Mr.

Cooper. It’s with us today to answer questions on this item. So I will go to him. Thank you, through the chair.

I’m also joined today by my team member, Julia Renek, who can assist with answering any questions. So the pathway for individuals who are new to our emergency shelter system and really new to experiencing homelessness in our community is to connecting with our coordinated access system. So currently the city of London operates as the main contact point for individuals who are new or at risk of homelessness. From there, we determine whether or not they are actually experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness.

We would create a high-fist profile for that individual, which is our homeless individual and family information systems database. From there, we would look to see what the individual’s current acute immediate needs are, whether it is sheltering, whether it is food, shower, rest. Should a shelter be full, as Council Roman had mentioned, there is a referral to our London Cares outreach team who could assist in the moment with any access to acute needs, whether it’s food, as I mentioned, or access to resting space. During office hours, the individuals do present to our coordinated access team, at which point our team provides a very similar service to London Cares during those business hours.

We have seen an increase in individuals and families accessing our family shelter. So we have, in those instances, with families, bridged access to our raw foam shelter through the number of motel stays. Council Roman. Thank you.

So clearly, the report gives us a good picture of what those supports may look like. But for instance, if somebody were to access a bed through our winter response program, for instance, or cold weather response, sorry, that information wouldn’t be captured in hyphus, as that’s my understanding, as well as this is all self-disclosed information. So this is something where an individual would have to be willing to give that information so that it could be properly documented within our system. And what we’re seeing, what we’re hearing anecdotally, is that this welcome center, for instance, was set up a Pearson for those that are claiming asylum.

And those services are not being accessed as readily. And a lot of that has to do with whether or not you want to be recorded by the government and documented. So I’m wondering how we feel and how confident we feel about this data based on some of those conditions also associated with getting this information. Okay, I’ll ask staff, realizing, could be a difficult question to answer.

Thank you, and through the chair, I’ll take my first best approach on this. To answer the first question, that is correct. None of the cold weather response services this year were added into our hyphus database. It was a staffing capacity challenge with the city at that time.

And so we are obviously looking at expanding usage of hyphus in our community. We do have an onboarding process that we have encouraged all of those organizations who received temporary cold weather response funding to apply to that process to ensure that they can access and be part of the hyphus network. The second piece is that is a challenge across the board with individuals who may or may not provide consent, who do self-report and self-disclose information. The challenge we see with individuals in general is a bit of a lack of trust.

And I think, Councillor ramen, you did identify that with the Pearson airport situation. We have seen a number of folks come into our community that bypass that situation or bypass that access and our teams broadly across the city and the service agencies do support individuals to apply to IRCC to start that asylum seeker application process, so that’s about what I got. Thank you, I appreciate that. What I see, and again, I appreciate all the information that’s been shared anecdotally with me as well from other agencies, from individuals themselves that have been claiming asylum as well as from our staff.

I think what we’ve gotten in front of us is a snapshot in time, which is great. And it gives us some early indicators and some numbers. But what it maybe doesn’t address enough that I think we need to get perhaps if possible before the council meeting is what I think we need to understand is on top of those that are accessing emergency shelter, what are the other potential needs of those that may be living unhoused in our community that are also utilizing services. And I know that’s very difficult to quantify, but I do think that we need to give the federal government, especially if we’re going to be applying for this IHAP funding and I’ll get back to that.

I think we need to provide the fullest picture possible of what it is that we are experiencing here in London, Ontario. Councillor, was that more of a comment or were you looking for a reply from staff? I was looking actually to see if that’s possible at all for some additional quantification of the London cares, perhaps some of the additional services, even some preliminary numbers. Because when we give the federal government a picture of what’s going on, I think we need to give them that fulsome and broader picture.

Because again, these are needs. And right now, we’re seeing people turned away. I heard from John, for instance, that they’re turning away about 300 people a year. So I do want to see us get the right ask in front of the federal government.

Thank you, I’ll go to staff, but I will also add on that I did have a conversation with the mayor regarding this item before coming in and discussed as well that these were shelter system numbers and how could one even, to what extent, capture the numbers of other people accessing the sister system through the cold weather response, other supports, including London cares, where they might be accessing service, making sure that if we do go, as Councillor Roman said, to the federal government that we’re not under asking and how much can we actually encapsulate all those requests? Mr. Cooper, not sure if you would need a cycle to come back or if you would be able to have additional information for council. Thank you and through the chair, I can provide a little bit of context right now and know that we can obviously come back should Committee wished with an additional report on the asylum seekers.

But I just wanted to take us back to May 2023 when our teams in our community started seeing asylum seekers and asylum claimants. We generally see a number of individuals who are moving through the refugee process. They are refugee claimants. So our system has seen a number of individuals through the past.

But with the asylum claimant challenges, we have seen that increase. And it really necessitated that time for our teams to improve the data collection process, right? As we work collaboratively with our community on ways to better collect the data for asylum claimants and asylum seekers. So they are able to more comfortably self report.

We work on a continual improvement model on that regard. So we are always looking for and working with our community on additional feedback to better reflect and capture that data. I know there’s a number of access points right now. And as you mentioned, our shelter system is generally obviously always operating at capacity.

And the asylum seeker claimants challenges, face similar challenges with at capacity. And those turn away numbers aren’t surprising to me, given some of the challenges I know where our community agencies are facing. But we will take back the comment, and we will have a conversation with our homeless prevention network to see if there are opportunities for us to improve that data collection so that we can make sure that any comments or communications we have with the federal government are clear and do accurately reflect what we are seeing in community. Thank you, Councillor Roman.

Thank you, I very much appreciate all the answers and the opportunity to dialogue on this and hope to have further conversations before our council meeting. I do think it’s also imperative that as we’re having these conversations that we’re paralleling the discussions that are happening within the community. And I know there’s a table that’s working on this issue of assisting asylum claimants. So thank you again for that work.

Thank you. And I’ll just note that Mayor Morgan has joined this meeting in person and all the concerns on the floor, including this item with the exception of 2.5 being parking. And Councillor Roman was our first speaker so far and for 2.2. I’ll also note, should there be questions regards to the fire department master accommodation plan that we do have the fire chief with us in person today?

Should there be any questions? Looking for any further speakers. Okay, so I have no committee members at this time. So happy to recognize Deputy Mayor Lewis.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And just to follow up on Councillor Roman’s line of questioning, just sharing a comment or that anything else, I do appreciate for staff that the data collection can be difficult. I do find it, frankly, a bit troublesome that the federal government has chosen to put a deadline on these applications as we know asylum seekers are continuing to enter the country every day and we continue to be in a housing crisis. So I think that while obviously we should help those seeking asylum, that’s the federal government’s role.

And so sharing that comment, not sure if colleagues feel when this gets to council, whether or not perhaps we want to ask the mayor to communicate to the federal government that the need is ongoing or not, just some food for thought. But it’s disappointing to hear that an ongoing program and an ongoing need is being backfilled by a temporary program and that deadlines have closed and that that’s the end of the resources available to municipalities for now. Through you, I do wonder if any of our staff could comment on whether they’ve heard whether or not there will be a second round of IHAP to assist or whether right now it is so far as they’re aware done. Mr.

Cooper. Thank you and through the chair. Our team did some research on the IHAP program. What we could find online, it has been a program that has been around for a number of years with obviously the yearly funding piece.

Our teams are committed to reaching out to the Ministry of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to understand any opportunities for 23/24 funding, even if should the actual application process be closed. But more importantly, we’re really focused as well on understanding the application process or the connection process and any opportunities for 24/25. So I can assure committee and council when we get there that our teams will be reaching out to the Ministry to open and continue lines of communication so that we are well advanced to be able to apply for any available funding. Thank you.

I’ll go to Mayor Morgan and she’s indicated here. I would like to add something to this question from Debbie Marlous. Yes, just to add to the context, you know, I know we provided direction to our staff to gather the data and make an application of the program. I’m also aware of some of the comments that members of the government have made in the media.

And given that, I also recognize their willingness to work with us to help us secure the funding. As we know, they also have topped up the amount in this funding because they recognize the ongoing challenges that municipalities face with providing services to asylum seekers. And so, you know, certainly I think this is, you know, got to the point where I would particularly be engaged and assisting with the dialogue with both not just at the Ministry level but with the elected officials at that level and certainly will reach out to our local government MPs to talk about the evolution of the new announcement of additional funding and top up to this, the ongoing challenges the city has and the ability to us to access. I know in these situations where they get very tense, it’s pretty easy to start to want to point fingers at everybody.

You know, that does not actually solve the challenge that we have in our city. You know, we know asylum seekers are here. We know they need to be provided with services. We know the federal government has the capacity to do that.

And it would be my intention to work in partnership with them to ensure that, you know, the full scope of the challenges that we’re facing here, we work in partnership with them to get supports to help us provide the services that we need to provide. So to the Deputy Mayor, I don’t think I need any sort of direction for that. I mean, we’ve provided the direction as a council very clearly to our staff about the direction we want to go. At this point, I think it’s incumbent for myself to be involved with the other elected officials to ensure that we shepherd this through the process as it evolves in a way that is constructive and collaborative.

Deputy Mayor Lewis, any follow-up? No, that’s it for me on this item, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you, recognizing Councilor Perbal.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, a question to the staff. Speaking of this funding, the federal funding, the municipalities, we are kind of all in the same boat. And the other municipalities, or certainly some of them, they have the same challenges to collecting the data, but somehow they did, and they did apply within the deadline, and they did, were awarded federal money.

Couple of questions, did we look, first one, did we look into the other municipalities, how they collect the data? Because again, I would imagine challenging for them, just like for us, 0.1, 0.2. How, what was the kind of the broken system or missed opportunity that some municipalities, they did know about the deadline, and they did apply before the deadline, and we did not. Thank you.

Mr. Cooper? Thank you, and through the chair, my team did reach out after the direction in November to a number of municipalities. We were only able to connect with a couple.

Most municipalities identified, they collect data through their HIFIS system, or equivalent homeless management information system. I know Toronto uses a different system than HIFIS, so other municipalities that we did connect with, were identifying HIFIS as their main data collection tool. On the second point, I would suggest that our data, and what we’ve seen, is the challenges we really started seeing with the sound seekers kind of happened later in early into 2024. As my team and I were looking at the data to report back to committee, we did include from January to March, versus just the 2023 year, as we were seeing a trend of that increasing.

And so, we wanted to bring that data back to council and committee first, before finalizing any reach out to the federal government, and we, as I mentioned previously, we are committed to looking at and reaching out to understand any opportunities for the 2324, but also to ensure that we’re clear on the application process, clear on the connection and communication processes with the federal government, and then take advantage of any opportunities for 24 and 25. How’s the approval? Thank you, so thank you for our first answer, the second one, to be clear. But again, there could be applications in the future, again, that are not clear, but what do we need to do kind of in our system, because when certain things happen, which have a negative impact, we should, as any corporation, we look at it, and we look where things didn’t fall into places as they should have, and what can we do to do it better?

So, is it something that we need to be proactive with other local MPs, or what do we need to do so it doesn’t occur again? That’s kind of my bottom line. Mr. Cooper?

Thank you, and through the chair, I think we always do a lessons learned on any program or any activity our teams take. I think part of understanding as well is when you don’t know about an application deadline or the actual process, our teams will look to balance other priorities to ensure that we can have as much information at hand when we come to council. As I mentioned previously, we did receive council direction to report back, and that was the main thrust as we wanted to understand the data before making that connection with the federal government, at which time in November we weren’t aware of any deadlines or any application processes. So, it’s a lesson learned, and something that our team will endeavor to ensure we have proper practices in place for 24/25.

Councillor? Thank you for that, and no more questions, but a follow-up comment. If you can please look and see which municipality was successful in terms of filing the best possible report application, and as well receive the funding, and just to compare and to say relate to see how they’ve done it, how they approached it, and how they work within. So again, we can compare us to other municipalities, and maybe potentially that will help us as well.

Thank you. Thank you, looking for further speakers in chambers or online. Seeing none, calling the question on items, all items except 2.5. Oh, sorry, Councillor Pribble, another item?

Yes, I do, 2.6, please, and sort of chair to the staff. I have a question, I know this is an agreement from April 1st to March 31st, and we are already a couple of weeks into it, and it’s gonna go to the May. Is there a reason for, let’s say, this one particularly, and I know this is not the first one, that we couldn’t complete it kind of before, so we actually are approving agreement that starting April 1st, before April 1st starts. Thank you.

Mr. Cooper, process timeline questions? Yes, thank you, and through the chair, in this specific instance, we are at the whim of the Ministry. The Ministry did provide this agreement middle of March, which did not align with our typical council and committee approval cycle.

So we do provide that feedback to the Ministry, I know a number of programs we run into that situation across our social and health development team, but it is heard, and it’s something we can share back with the Ministry as well on the tight timelines. Council approval? Thank you for that, and I’m sorry, 2.4. Is it being pulled out, or is it part of it, sorry?

It’s part of this, so if you have questions, happy to take them now. Thank you for 2.4, and thank you for that report, and thank you for all the KPIs and matrix, but I wanted to ask, do we also include, kind of, on our annual plans and implementation plan, actually, our targets? So let’s say, if we know that there were, let’s say, when it visits done, that our target was 15 or 25 degrees, so my bottom line is, do we provide, or within our organization, do we set the targets as well? Thank you.

I’ll recognize Ms. Smith, who can hand it over to whatever staff they would like. Thank you, and through the chair, some of our metrics have targets, and you will see those when we come forward with the strategic plan implementation, because we align a number of our KPIs and metrics with Council’s strategic plan. Some don’t, because our hope is in some, for example, number of residential fires, we hope the metrics zero, but we don’t really set targets.

So there are certain metrics that we don’t set targets for, but I’ll let the Chief Haim respond if there’s targets set, for example, fire prevention and investigation. Thank you. And through the chair, we do have metrics in the background that we’re monitoring at all times, that we do have targets for, so we’ve looked at 2023 actuals, we’ve set targets for 2024, and we use those as planning tools, basically, for us to know where we’re hitting the mark, where we’re not, what we need to look at, what we need to dive deeper into, but the appendix at the back is more of a progress report, and those metrics are all built into that. And thank you for being here with us today, Chief Haim.

Councillor Pribble will follow-up. And thank you for that answer, and the targets that are important for us as well, and I’m glad that Ms. Messman, she mentioned that in the next implementation plan, it will be included and will be able to see more clearly the targets and how we come close or over-achieve the targets, but thank you no more questions. Thank you.

Looking to committee members or any visiting member of council in regards to any items excluding 2.5, as all of their consent items are on the floor. Seeing none in chambers, seeing none online, calling the question. Opposing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Thank you.

That moves us on to consent item 2.5, being the core area parking incentive extension. I’ll note that there is a revised page two of the staff report. There’s three correspondence as well on the public agenda, and the recommendation is broken down into part A through E, and this was a direction from committee and council back to staff, so it’s not an annual report they bring back. This was a report that re-requested that’s here before us.

So looking to committee for your preferences of someone putting all items on the floor, or just some items, Councilor Troso. Thank you very much, and while it’s not in our added agenda, it didn’t get in there in time. We did receive an additional communication from our— Sorry, Councilor, I would need something on the floor in order for you to raise your next concern. Well, in order to put something on the floor, I really need to understand what the situation is, and I would have some questions.

So you want me to make up a motion to put it on the floor that I could amend later, I’ll do that. So I’ll make a motion that in addition to A through E, we include an item F, which will direct civic administration to look further into the issues that were raised in the arcade letter and report back to us as soon as possible. And I’m not asking for any legislative action today, but I do wanna get more information about this, because I think it’s very important that we be mindful of how our policies affect volunteers. Okay.

So I’ll make that motion. Okay, also, do I second? Yeah, I need a seconder, yeah. I need to write it up, it’ll be great.

Okay, so Councilor Troso’s putting— I’ll repeat that, I’m gonna say the same thing, ‘cause I didn’t have it written down. Prestigely, we’re just checking on one question of how to add an F on if it’s in order. I will note that not all staff have seen the correspondence, the correspondence did not meet the original deadline. I will note that Ms.

Campbell is with us in the gallery today, but does not have delegation status, nor can we grant it. So that’s not an option as someone had asked beforehand. The other way forward would have been allowing Ms. Campbell on behalf of arcade to come to a future CAHPS meeting with their correspondence and a motion for delegation status there if you wanted to have a full conversation.

So I’m just waiting back for the clerk’s answer, as I do have a motion for a mover from A through E with an F, just making sure that F can come on now versus having to do A through E procedurally and then amend it to add an F. So just checking on that. Mayor Morgan, procedural question? Yep, just procedural, I’m just informing you that I have to leave, I left an enable meeting to come here to speak on that last item, but I’m gonna— Perfect, thank you.

I’ll be just in your capable— Good luck with your next meeting. Okay, so procedurally, I’m going to ask that we have Councilor Trousa moving A through E as it was already circulated. With a part F, I’m going to ask the clerk to read what they’ve noted for part F back to Councilor Trousa to see if it encapsulates what he’s thinking and then I will look for a seconder. Councilor Trousa, the clerk will read out part F in a moment and as always, as we vote on these in the end, we can separate what we want in E-Scribe but just to get on the floor.

The part F that I have noted down is that civic administration be directed to look further into the issues contained within the submission from Arc Aid London that was distributed to members of Council. Councilor Trousa, does that encapsulate what you’re looking for? It does, I’m just wondering whether I could have been more specific in terms of saying what that was or does the letter speak for itself in terms of what the letter said. And I would just need a nod from Arc Aid that the letter that you submitted to committee members behind the scenes you’re finding publicly available.

I see a nod. Okay, so we’re just noting that it was the information that was sent to us for gonna attach it publicly from when this goes to Council. Through the chair, if it’s okay with the Councillor, the mover, I could indicate that civic administration be directed to look further into the issues contained within the attached submission from the Arc Aid London that was distributed to members of Council and once I receive that communication, I could attach it to the report. Okay, so I have a thumbs up from Councilor Trousa on that.

I have a seconder in Councilor Pribble. Okay, so staff reports on the floor containing now A through F. So if you update E-Scribe, it should be in there and it is now on the screen in chambers as well. And part F has already been read out.

So I’m ready to start my speaker’s list. Everything on the floor in that item is up 2.5, A through F is on the floor, starting a speaker’s list. I will commence with Councilor Perra. Thank you and through you.

I guess before commenting on that last piece, I did wanna bring an amendment to the motion as well. And I was just kind of looking into an amendment just to kind of plan for the future so we don’t get into this parking cycle again. And I was originally asking staff about looking into a report or a study, but I understand we don’t necessarily have the resources for that. And I don’t wanna be encroaching into the parking strategy that we didn’t fund for the multi-year budget work that we did.

So I was thinking along the lines of just to be kind of consistent with our mochair targets and our seat targets and also looking at ways to preserve and kind of even enhance the accessibility of local merchants. I was hoping that maybe we could look into kind of a parking re-incentive program or a token program that we could potentially look into to give either BIA’s or somehow to get parking tokens directly to merchants so they could give those tokens to their patrons that come and shop or use services or whatever it is that they have to offer just so we can get away potentially from the one hour free parking, but also ensure that we increase the or enhance or at least preserve the accessibility to those merchants. Okay, Councilor, you seem to be speaking to the motion. I need to know what the motion is and- I did send it to the clerk a couple minutes ago.

Yeah, so the clerk has it. I would need you to read it out and then do you have a seconder for said motion? Sure, a seconder or you’re gonna read it out? I was gonna read it out.

Okay, so you don’t have a seconder at the moment? Not at the moment. Okay, so the council is reading an emotion. He does not have a seconder, so just listen and then if you would like to second, I’ll look to see if there’s a seconder.

So go ahead. So for part A, it would be that civic administration be directed to implement a free weekday, a one hour on-street parking program for the core area until the end of 2024. And I say weekday, I do understand that the sun days are free already, but because I understand that Saturdays could be a potential for some good revenue to offset some of the revenues that we’re losing, maybe focusing on the weekday would be appropriate. For part B, the financing for a one hour on-street parking program for the core area in the estimated amount of 300,000 be approved from the active reserve fund, that’s no change there.

And then part C is where the substantial change comes from. And that civic administration report back to the CAHPS committee in Q4 2024. And I’m flexible with the date. I just wanted to hear what staff would have for working on the date.

But at this point, the motion reads to report back in Q4 2024 with an alternative program to one hour free parking for rebate or credit programs to be utilized by the downtown BIA, OEV BIA, and Hamilton Road BIA to provide parking incentives or rewards to patrons for one hour free parking. It being noted that the name BIA’s experience issues with parking arrangements for merchant establishments and that the city of London’s goals to preserve or enhance accessibility to local merchants also aligns with our SEAP targets and the implementation of the mobility master plan. I’m not sure if there’s a seconder for it or if you’d like to see it in writing before you decide. Okay, so the clerk’s gonna put it into the system just for you.

It was a lot that Councillor Ferra read out for us. For you have a chance to see it before you make a decision. If you would like to second this amendment to Councillor Troso stuff, those are on the floor. So just a minute while it’s being loaded.

Okay, if you refresh, you can read it. It’s an eScribe. It’s also on the big screen. This is what it would look like with the amendment.

So have a read over and then I would look to see it for this a seconder and if not, we’ll go back to the original items that were on the floor. Councillor Ferra, you’ll need to wait just the need a chance to read as you don’t have a seconder. Unless there’s an issue with the, okay, words are fine, just a game moment to review it. What’s your problem?

Thank you, Chair, through you. My problem is- So what’s our opportunity for improvement? I’ll rephrase. Part D was not in the motion.

I would not be supporting municipal law to one and two being funded and- Okay, we’re revising this, realizing that if there is a seconder and if Councillor Ferra’s items pass, it still becomes, like we still need to dispose with C and D ‘cause it’s already on the floor. Councillor Ferra. Thank you, thanks for recognizing me. And for part F, I do want to hear some more conversation on this one right off the bat.

I- Okay, you just need to stop ‘cause I have your motion on the floor. I have no seconder and we’re talking about part F. So everything else is being removed with the exception of part A, where you added in weekday and your part B things. We’re just clerking.

It’s just part D is what I would remove initially. I do want to keep part F, but I do want to hear a discussion on that. Ms. Korman, are you looking to make comment?

Yes, please proceed. Yes, looking for clarification. So it was to add a new part to add free weekday, one hour street parking in part A. Is that part of the amendment?

Yes, it is. As before it just had free one hour on street parking, it was a revision to put in the word weekday. That’s part A. Okay, so from what I’ve seen from the counselor, the part C that was circulated, that would become a new part to the motion.

So motion to amend by adding a new part C or a new part G, and perhaps you vote on each part separately and defeat the current motion on the floor. Current motion C, that’s the counselor’s not supportive of. Councilor Ferra, please read the screen. Everyone else can refresh and then we’ll pause for a moment to make sure the wording’s correct.

What we’ve done is part A would have been an amendment to add in the word weekday from one hour parking, and then the counselor’s BIA type thoughts are encapsulated in what would be a new part G. Thank you, Chair. That looks good for the funding portion, actually part A for the funding portion for the $300,000 be approved part. Should that be part of this?

It’s already on the floor. You’re just doing an amendment, so, no. And then if you don’t like the part C, D, and whatever’s, we just pulled them separate when we do the normal vote. Okay, that looks good to me.

Okay, so the mover is fine with the wording. It’s articulated correctly in the system in E-Scribe, giving one else a chance to refresh their screens. I would need a seconder for one or both. We’re not.

Deputy Mayor Lewis, not on committee, so you can’t move a second, but is this a procedural question? Procedural questions. I’ve actually been answered by the clerk. I wanted to confirm if I, in fact, heard what I thought I heard, which was the change in part A to week day, rather than just plain one hour, and clerk confirmed that that was there.

So I appreciate that, and I’m supportive of that. I have some comments. I’m not looking for speakers or comments. It was procedural only as I don’t even have a seconder at the moment, so.

Yeah, we’re still waiting for that, so, oh wait. I’m willing to second part A, that’s it for me. Not sure if there’s a seconder for part G. Don’t see one.

So part A, if you refresh part A, revised amended part A, is that for discussion, the change was one hour parking to one hour week day parking. It is moved and seconded. That is on the floor as an amendment. We will deal with this piece, and then either amended or not, once it’s dealt with.

We’ll go back into the main motion, which contained the other parts. So if you’re not sure if you want to speak to this, or Deputy Mayor Lewis, you want it in first? Just part A for the week day parking. Yes, I’ll take an opportunity to speak really briefly to this Madam Chair.

I have some thoughts about the overall motion as well, but I think for the on-street parking, focusing on the week day promotion for our businesses does make some sense. Now that said, I also think that supporting the parking lots in OIV makes sense too. But when I look through the staff report for me, when we started looking at the special events sort of things, I realized we’d get into a real challenge of what we’re deeming as special events and how any sort of consideration for exemptions might move forward. I recognize it would be very, very complicated.

And I think that for the most part, folks who are coming on the weekend are likely staying for more than one hour parking lot anyway. So I’m supportive of heading in this direction on A. I will say, I hope colleagues will support the parking lots in OIV as well, but we’ll save that for the debate on the main motion. Yes, please see those comments.

I saw Councillor Troz-Hans first, and then Councillor Pribbles, hello, Sam, are you? Yeah, just to aid the one that’s on the floor of the revised. Yeah, I thank you through the chair. I just want to say that I may have this backwards.

I think I do, but I’m thinking that it might make more sense to extend the free parking to Saturday and not during the week, because we do have a lot of activities going on downtown over the summer, and it is more likely that people are going to want to stay for more than an hour, rather than feeding a meter for a little while or running in and getting something very quickly. So I’m not supporting A as it’s written. I would support A if it were flipped, because I really would like to see more effort to bring people downtown, especially for the many free events that we have during the summer. Having said that, I’m generally not, I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it on the relevant items here.

I’m generally not in favor of more parking subsidies, but I would like to see it extended to other modes of transportation. And rather than say, we’ll look at this as part of the mobility master plan, in terms of how long that’s going to take, I’d rather see some immediate efforts to encourage bicycle valet parking, perhaps spend some of the money on reduced transit fares for Saturday, especially around targeted events. So I think that there’s more work that can be done on this, but I can’t support A as it’s currently written. Thank you, Councillor Privel.

Thank you, I will be supporting AE there for two reasons. The first one is, do we, they are important for businesses and merchants, because people do come and they just pick up certain things, and doesn’t matter if it just doesn’t have to be just restaurants, retails, law firms, et cetera. So I think that it’s important. We can’t, honestly, Sunday is free already, as was already stated.

So for Saturday, I don’t believe that’s in our benefit to start sending this marketing message come these days, but guess what, out of the seven days, one days is not. So I will not support it, and I will just support the original one, the first one, but I will not support this one, thank you. Thank you, if you’d allow me from chair, I’m a no one, although free parking, except perhaps some things that might need to be done with service partners that we’ve entered in contract agreements with, such as Arcade. Looking for further speakers on just the revised part A, Councillor Ferri.

Thank you, thank you. So just for part A. So Sundays are free, right off the bat, and the reason we were looking for, I was looking for Saturdays to be free as well is because of, with the cost recuperation and what the deputy mayor alluded to with the event parking situation, we didn’t want to have special events kind of pop up and then give free parking for one special event and then not give free parking to another special event. We didn’t want to find ourselves in that.

So we thought it would be wise to just cover the whole weekend. I just wanted to go to staff, maybe if you could answer a quick question, what would be the busiest days with respect to the weekdays and the weekends? From what I remember, weekdays have the most use and weekends drop off, but I just wanted to kind of get that confirmation. I believe that was contained within the report, Mr.

Mathers. Through the chair. So just to give you a flavor of the difference between a Saturday and a weekday, just we don’t have this for, from a statistical perspective of every week of the summer, but I’ve done a very high level review of the weeks that are the busier ones. And it’s approximately 25% of the use of the promo code on a Saturday versus like the Friday before.

So it’s much, it’s a significant drop in the use of the code now on a Saturday. Councilor Ferra. Thank you. You know, I was taking in, you know, the impact of that, the data that we have for that.

And then with what we said with the event special parking, going to the bike parking, I did have a very brief conversation with staff on this one. And I thought. Could you just keep your comments to the A that’s on the floor? Oh, right.

I was responding to the bike parking, but yeah, I can go back to that one later. You still have time if you want to just finish on to A, just don’t bring up the bikes yet. Well, I guess for free parking, for bike, the potential for free parking for bikes. Just asking to staff, I’m assuming works.

I thought we were expecting a report on that. I would suggest saving that question until you’re off the amendment. That’s on the floor. Is it strictly only this one at this moment?

A valid question, yes, just not yet. Okay, I’ll pull that question back for now. Further questions on just the amendment that’s on the floor? Seeing none, calling the question.

Councilor Stevenson, are you with us? And is that a question on strictly the amendment? Thank you, yes, it is. I’m having trouble seeing the amendment, but this is about reducing it to just weekdays.

It’s just part A on the floor that civic administration be directed to implement a free one hour weekday on street parking program for the core area until the end of 2024. Right, but currently it doesn’t specify weekday, is that correct? There’s an amendment on the floor that would specify just weekday. That’s what we’re discussing at this moment before we go back to the main motion.

Yeah, so my concern with this is that it’s for the whole core area, and some of this discussion pertains just to the downtown. So as far as I was concerned, my understanding was city staff had spoken with the BIA managers and what had come to committee was the recommendation. So I’m uncomfortable with any kind of change that’s reducing the amount of free parking and centives available in Old East Village. We have the same issues on Saturday as we have every other— Sorry, Councilor, we’re not spoken about anything on Old East Village.

The comment is just strictly part A, core area. The core area includes Old East Village. That’s contained within part C and D of the motion in regards to those municipal parking lots. I’m not talking about the municipal parking lots.

I’m talking about the on-street parking. Okay, proceed. The core area goes from downtown all the way to Old East Village. Proceed?

Yeah, so just respectfully to my colleague that I would have appreciated some conversation prior to changes being made at committee here, even though I’m not on committee. My understanding was what was coming to committee. Councilor, we’re doing committee work at committee. City Councilor.

Yeah, no. I’m gonna have to ask you to pause those comments. We’re doing committee work at committee and this was this proper space. We don’t always have ample time.

So just comments on not supporting the part A, please. Yes, so my comment is I will not be supporting this change to A. As I said, the core area is not just downtown. Let’s not forget that includes midtown and Old East Village.

And those areas are struggling even more than the downtown. And so the request for support for parking is for all days of the week. I don’t wanna see any reductions. The changes that and the reasons for this change that are being spoken at committee pertain to downtown.

They do not pertain to the rest of the area. So I would please ask committee to leave it as is and not do any reductions. If there is, I’ll be looking to bring it back when we’re at council. Thank you for those comments.

As always at council, we can defeat things and reintroduce things, which would be completely in order. I have no further speakers in chambers. The clerk has confirmed there’s none online at this time. Call on the question for the amendment, which is just part A.

Closing the vote, the motion fails two to two. That brings us back to the original motion that councilor trouser put on the floor, which included the part F. So my speakers list for there will continue now with councilor trouser and then councilor Pribble. May I ask that part F be severed and debated and voted on separately?

I would say we could debate them all at the same time, but different votes can be called separate. As I will note it, we would also need to receive the staff report. That was part E. So we can call E and F separate from the others, if you want, or if in our councilor, we can just call A, B, C, D, E, F.

When we get there, if we want to chunk it up that way, but yes, we can call them separate. Councilor Pribble. Councilor trouser, were you saving some comments or before I go to Councilor trouser? I may as well make my comments on part F right now.

I’m very torn on this because while I want to really induce and encourage other forms of transit other than parking, I also recognize the imperative that not just arcade and I know that we’re probably going to get other requests, which is why I’m not trying to enact this today and I want to staff report back. But I’m very concerned about the effect of this on volunteers, the volunteer base. The volunteer base begins in the morning. It’s light in the morning and it goes all the way when there’s overnight stays.

It goes all the way ‘til 11 o’clock. Is Ms. Campbell still in the room? She might have stepped out for a phone call.

Okay, I’ll continue. Although it’s the heaviest around dinner time and that would be at all times. They have a much higher demand for volunteers during the dinner hour. So I think one thing that I’m, and I’m not gonna put this in the motion, but I think the staff will look at this in terms of trying to quest this out.

They’re not necessarily asking for a full day’s pass. They’re asking for a very, very particular time segment pass. And what complicates this is that time segment goes before six o’clock and also after six o’clock. So it doesn’t fit neatly into the current fee structure.

I think that there is a legitimate concern here that we’re granting special privileges to one entity and not all. But I think we could also look at this, maybe we could just alter the fee structure for bulk permits to have a special non-profit volunteer category where it could be lowered for those who need the criteria even further. And I’m going to leave that to staff. I think staff understands what it is I’m looking for here.

So with that, without getting into the other parts of the motion, I do wanna put F forward and ask that this be approved by this committee so this further study can go forward. Thank you very much. Thank you, F has already moved and seconded, so it is good. Councillor Pribble, you’re next.

Thank you and so to chair to the staff. In point B, we do have the estimated amount of $300,000 and this amount was it based on the current pilot or sorry, current gram that we had up to two hours? And if it was, my question is this because there are quite a few people that are actually doing the two hours. They honestly just use that for 15, 20 minutes, pick up and go, pick up and go.

So therefore in the two hours, they were potentially but could have been three, four, five different cars. Do we kind of differentiate it? Do we look at it or do we actually take three, four, five cars times two hours? Did we assume that they stayed there for two hours?

Thank you. Mr. Mathers. Through the chair, so the analysis was completed based on the number of uses of the code in 2023 and then applying a one hour value to that code.

So that’s how it was determined. It doesn’t, the value doesn’t, it would be double that amount if you were looking at what it would be from the cost of last year. So what we’ve done is we’ve taken a number of instances the code was used. So the number of times someone’s gone in park there and then multiplied that by the fees this year and then it provided this number.

That’s approval. So thank you. So that would mean that we are using the past information, which is great. But again, it doesn’t reflect the potential that there could be car within five hours, sorry, within two hours.

Now if we divide it by two, it would be one hour. Oh my point is it would not reflect five cars within one hour changing there. If there would be five cars within one hour, we would estimate the value of five times one hour. Is that correct?

I think for clarification that the councilor is getting to the point that sometimes you use the grade app but you pull out of your spot and leave before it’s duration and someone else very well might take your spot and reuse the code. So we’re potentially paying for different time. Yeah, through the chair. So there’s still, absolutely.

So that’s freeing up the capacity and the lot for others to use. So, or that location for others to use. So yeah, you’re correct that we don’t take into account that. We just take into account what is being provided in the app and for the use of that code.

So. Councilor. Thank you. And last question.

So therefore, if we did reflect this potentially, this $300,000 could be potentially lower if there will be the scenario, correct? Mr. Mathers. Through the chair.

Yes, this is an upper estimate, absolutely. Thank you. Any more questions? Okay.

Councilor Ferra, I’m also looking to make comments but happy to take your comments and then you can recognize me. Okay. Councilor Ferra, please proceed. Thank you, Chair.

So this is for the full motion. I’m, we’re speaking to? Yes, okay. So let me start with part F.

Like I like the idea, but the language itself kind of makes me feel like we’re gonna get locked in with providing parking for volunteers for one agency. I would like that to be a little more broad. I feel like that would bring this conversation back definitely again when the next agency comes forward. I do understand that from the Councilor who brought the motion that his scope is looking at other agencies, but I would think that maybe if we were to make some changes to that language somewhere along the lines of civic administration directed to look further into the bulk parking passes for agencies working in our health and homelessness field, that might be some better language looking for some, just with the intent of the motion from what I’ve heard.

So that would be something that I’d be, I’d like to see for I guess going back to the bike parking, I guess I’ll ask this question now. What are we going to be expecting for bike parking downtown? Bike parking downtown and the core area and I guess London in general, but focus on, I guess, where we’re kind of focusing here. I’ll note that committee comments and at council also were raised that we’d also made the secure bike storage parking free for the same duration we were doing for cars and that’s not contained within the report and we were expecting to see it as part of this report.

So is there conversations behind the scenes of giving the same code extension to this? So Madam Chair, bike lock up parking right now for our bike lockers is currently two hours free within every 24 hour period. We have not reduced that to one hour. We had proposed that as part of last year’s fees and charges and received direction from council to leave it as it currently is.

So we were going to leave the status quo of two hours free per 24 hour period for our bike lockers. You will see a report later this year in Q3 this fall that we’ll be talking about city-wide strategies for public and community-based bike parking. It is an input into the mobility master plan. That would be the appropriate time to make any changes, including new investments or any rate setting that would be of interest to committee.

Okay, thank you, Councilor Ferra. Thank you for that and which is why you see the motion crafted the way it is right now. So going to the token piece and what I really would have loved to see is the reason that you saw this, it’s not just something that we have come up with. This is from research that I have done, looking at other municipalities utilizing this type of structure.

This, you know, whatever the program looks like if it’s a token or if it’s a reinvestment program, however it looks, the token portion itself gives agency back to our merchants. It gives the agency directly to the individuals who are looking for that accessibility piece. I have also brought this because again, we have this conversation and it keeps on coming back in this cyclic way and I would like to have this conversation be put to bed to rest for good with something that works so we can focus on more important issues as far as I’m concerned. I would also say that this program, this token program wouldn’t just be locked in for on-street parking from how I see it.

The tokens could be used at the lots or they could be used on the on-street parking wherever the patron finds that spot. So again, it gives that agency back to the businesses and the biggest piece for the token program would be, this actually will get people in the door in into merchants and actually, you know, buying their goods or their services. It’s something that I would see that you go into a merchant’s place, you receive whatever it is that they have to offer and then they give you that token. So that ensures that there’s a transaction done at the merchant.

So this is why I feel like this token program would be a good idea to move forward to. I’m a little disappointed that I’m not getting the support from the committee on that because this, this is something that I feel would work. So with that, I would love to hear to see some, at least reconsider or think about it from now until council, but I just wanted to make those comments. Okay, Councillor, if you’d take the chair as vice chair and then would you recognize me?

Thank you, Councillor, I have the chair and I’m recognizing you. Okay, I’ll ask that you tie me as well. I’m gonna make comments through all sections in this report at this time, for I can only relinquish the chair once. Having received communications from businesses, some residents, imbalancing those, I will not be voting in favor of A through D.

As we call it free parking, we’re still paying for it as taxpayers. The source of revenue still comes from somewhere. If we decide to waive those fees, I don’t think we’re ever gonna get the rate right. Some people wanted two hours.

They’re settling for one hour. They’ve already started writing that it should not be a pilot program to the end of the year. It should really just be a continuation of one hour, which isn’t enough that they want two hours and really they don’t want the two hours. They want it just all the time free parking.

So I will caution that we make the decision now as we have throughout the pandemic and recovery. And now that it’s still the request of just parking should be free all the time. And unless you give me that, you haven’t actually got it right yet. So end of the year, I see us still coming back at the end of the year with the exact same, cyclical comments of we should be extending it, expanding it and finding more forces of funding.

So I’m not in favor of that. I would say I’ve had a conversation with the BIA about if they would like to sponsor a municipal lot in conjunction with local merchants, or area businesses of they can run a pilot program, but please come and park here. This lot is now complimentary if they’ve covered a certain amount of fees or reduced fee, like a bulk rate to cover that lot. I did not have take up with that conversation, which was a little bit disappointing.

But if local BIA’s aren’t willing to see the value in putting something out to help fund some of these programs for their customers, I question why taxpayers across the city should be if local advocates aren’t willing to do it, why other people should be. In regards to parts F, happy to have that conversation. I will share with committee that I did speak with Ms. Campbell this morning about ARK aid.

Realizing that the report goes back, it’s not just solely about ARK aid in that space. There are other service providers like Inhale, Palace theaters down there. They also might be interested in some sort of ball of freight for volunteers, if there could be a lot in a space, if that’s a cost-inhibitive portion for volunteers to come out. I will note that Councillor Trousa has raised the points that our daytime rates end at 6 p.m.

that our nighttime rate starts. Ms. Campbell has shared that their dinner service volunteers go from four to seven, which is part of the issue of their paying twice the rates to volunteer for a couple hours in addition to being volunteers. And happy to have that conversation earlier with Ms.

Campbell, though she cannot be a delegate today due to our processes that they are willing to financially put in something. They’re not just looking for it to be completely waived. Completely waived is great, but they are willing to financially contribute to making this happen for the volunteers, recognizing summer elderly. And if we do a tag system, that for some of those volunteers, going in and getting the tag, going to their card, getting the tag, bringing the tag back in, in which case you probably forget, ‘cause you’re tired and you’re going home and then they lose the tag and then can’t use that tag for other volunteers that it’s a little bit cumbersome.

So I’m sure staff, if this passes, we’ll be happy to reach out realizing there’s perhaps other needs in financial partners who are still willing to come to the table. In regards to free parking in the core area, realizing as we defined special events, staff’s broad overview as council wasn’t descriptive in it, didn’t encapsulate things that might be going out the bug gardens, concerts, night games, bringing 9,000 people downtown. And in my opinion, if you’ve already paid for dinner out in concert tickets and have come for this great attraction that a little bit more in parking probably isn’t gonna be the deciding factor of you not going to the night’s game, especially with them being the playoffs and always a phenomenal team to go and watch. So those are my broad questions and comments.

Also with Arc Aid, I’ll single them out as they were also a service provider that city’s entered into contract with. And we’ve, in part of our contracts, are using part of their outdoor space. So their outdoor space is where they would normally have parked their volunteers, but we’re now using it to deliver service to unhoused residents. So we’ve kind of pushed them out of their space and into different issues.

So those are my general comments. Thank you to Ms. Campbell for being here today and listening to us as well as staff as we move forward in this. So those are my comments.

I will return the chair in hopes of it back ‘cause I do have a speaker’s list that’s running. Thank you, Councillor. That was a pretty good time. And I have one speaker on the speaker’s list from your discussion and that’s Councillor.

I saw Councillor Frank, but before Councillor Frank, we also had Councillors online, Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor Stevenson, Councillor Frank, and I’ll keep timing. Thank you for having taken care of that component. Deputy Mayor Lewis, if you can come on screen, perfect. Sorry, double clicked.

Thank you for recognizing the Madam Chair. So the more I listen, the more I’m struggling to be supportive of anything because what I see is more and more complications to this initiative. I was very supportive of doing some on-street, promotional parking for the downtown and certainly supporting the old East Village parking lot requests as well, which to some extent would address part of the arcade volunteers cost because they’d be able to access those free lots as well. But what we’ve already started down the road to is turning what is projected at a $330,000 project for both areas, for both initiatives into something that’s going to expand and expand and expand to further costs.

I guarantee you, if we start looking into the arcade ask, we absolutely will, as you yourself alluded to, Madam Chair, have other people asking. That was exactly the reason why I wanted to get away from the special event weekend exemptions. I noted one of the ones that was absent from the staff report was Pride and yet we actually closed down the streets for part of the Pride Festival weekend. So not wanting to give one group preference over another.

I was much more comfortable, not including the weekends, especially seeing the data that we have in terms of the general usage that it decreases. The court told decreased use on the weekends as opposed to during the week, which is reflective, I think, of a lot of people who are doing pop-in visits, picking up something out of store or grabbing lunch and then being on their way versus coming down for the afternoon and spending of a length of your time. I do appreciate Ms. Share reminding us all that the bicycle parking for two hours was extended by a council direction.

And I think we’ve done the right thing there. But the more things we add into this, the more complicated it’s going to be, I think, for all members of council to consider whether or not they’ve put support it. I recognize that everybody wants the most convenient parking spot they can find, but there are a number of parking spots on street parking spots that are not, in fact, metered on some of our side streets. When I think about Old East Village, there are some and not all, and I’m not going to say that, you know, by any stretch of the imagination, this is a solution for everybody, but Western Fair has considerable parking for their farmer’s market on the weekends.

So those customers are largely parking there. I would imagine, anyway. But I did want to provide some belief in the OAV and support that lot, or those two lots. I did want to supply some ongoing incentives, but to your point, and honestly, I will say I’m a bit disappointed that councilor Ferreira’s amendment didn’t get seconded as well with regard to the investigating the token program because I too have talked to a couple of the BIA’s.

I recognize there was some hesitancy in investing in that this year, but it was also going to be a snap of the fingers sort of, we’ve got to turn something around tomorrow because the core code is ending. I think there is an opportunity for further discussion with them, and I agree very much with what councilor Ferreira said. For me, in terms of business recovery, the more we can give businesses themselves agency, and I even like the idea of a parking ticket or token or whatever that you can put in on your next visit to incentivize people to keep coming back downtown. I think that there’s some merit to our businesses taking on some of this cost if they really see value in it, which is something I said when this was before us last time.

So I think those discussions do need to continue. Perhaps that may be discussions with the councilors who are members of the BIA’s take to their BIA’s individually then, if that motion’s not supported. I know it’s not there today. I suspect from the conversation so far that it may come back to council, but this is the— - 30 seconds.

For down face is a program that was supposed to be to support businesses is now turning into something much different than that. And so I won’t be supportive necessarily of the new part F or G only because I think that this was a COVID recovery initiative. And I think that we need to start moving away from incentivizing free parking in the long run. I see this as a step towards that.

Thank you. And then absolutely part G that did not pass today is part of the record of this committee and has a way forward at council. Should there be a mover and a seconder. Next on my speakers list, I have councilor Stevenson virtually.

Thank you, I appreciate the committee for recognizing me. I also wanted to say thank you to the committee for not supporting the amendment to A. It is important for me that that be as it was originally laid out. As far as F is concerned, I just wanted to remind committee that it was part of my letter that I brought forward in March was the issue of the volunteers for our aid who’s doing amazing work for our cold weather beds and the many, many volunteers that use those lots.

And so one of the reasons that I had brought it forward as an emergent motion was to help support those volunteers in the cost of parking. So I’m not gonna be supportive of a specific, something specifically for them, but I do support this free parking incentive and have it help everybody equally there. The other thing, I heard the comment about not supporting parking for downtown and I think what we maybe fail to remember is these are not normal days. This is not a normal situation.

This isn’t just about economic. I mean, we have a social disorder. We have a complete crisis in oldie village. The over saturation of the social services has not been addressed.

Even though it was part of number 69 of our previous core area action plan, this city council has continued to fund social services in that immediate business district on the main street of that business improvement association district. And so to talk about it as though it’s just normal days and it’s a normal economic circumstance and that people should pay for parking or that the BIAs should supplement parking, I would be in complete agreement there if there wasn’t the current situation that we’re dealing with there. And I think, I just don’t think we can pretend that that’s not happening there. The BIAs currently using their funding to replace windows and graffiti and clean up feces and clean up clothing.

And we are not keeping up. The sidewalks are full of encampments and people using open drugs and all the enclaves. And to ask people to pay for parking is just, you know, simply not gonna happen. And we’ve got taxpayers, property owners who are paying their taxes.

And for that, we are funding agencies beside them that are causing real societal issues. So aside from that, I just really, truly wanted to say sincere thank you to the city staff for the fast turnaround for this parking incentive. It’s greatly appreciated. There’s a lot of support in all these village and in that community, a lot of gratitude.

I recognize it’s a fast turnaround. It wasn’t as fast as I wanted in that I brought it last time, but I understand this is, you know, a bit of a Herculean effort. And I just want you to know how appreciated it is. So sincere thanks to city staff and to committee for supporting this.

Thank you. Next time I speakers list, I have Councillor Frank. Please proceed. Thank you.

And thank you for recognizing me at this committee. I just wanted to share a couple comments as I’m not a voting member. I’m generally not supportive of either of these motions or any of these items. Because I think we already have quite a lot of free parking.

And I use the term free because that’s what we’re using, but we all know that it costs money and it costs taxpayer money. Right now, for example, downtown, you can go park for free at Covent Garden Market for one hour during the weekday for two hours on weekends. You can park for two hours at city plaza if you go and get your parking pass validated at the library. There’s free parking after 6 p.m.

on city streets. There’s free to our parking on city streets adjacent to the main streets. For example, I go and do yoga at Moda Yoga, yoga. And on St.

George, there’s two hour parking. And it’s like a two minute walk versus if I was to try and find parking on Richmond, it’s the same amount of time to walk, but I’m trying to find a Richmond. There’s also free two hours on most of downtown on Saturdays. There’s also free all day parking downtown on Sunday.

My understanding is there’s also free parking for one hour on Dundas Place. There’s free parking almost everywhere downtown already. And just because there’s not free one or two hour parking in front of the exact restaurant, hair salon, store that you want to go into does not mean that there’s not free parking downtown. There is quite a lot.

So I’m not interested in allocating 300 or $330,000 for additional free parking. I think it’s really important right now. We’ve raised the budget significantly. We need to really be prioritizing where we’re spending taxpayer money.

And on top of that, we’ve also committed to trying to meet our 2030 climate targets. This does not help that. If I can’t find parking downtown, I decide to use other options. I take the bus, I walk, I bike, and I do this because I want to save money.

But when I do this, I still go downtown. I still go to all these village, but actually I take more time and I spend more money because I’m walking. I go in, I get a donut and a coffee at DOE V. I walk down, I go and look at a little art store.

I might go in and buy some groceries. So this concept that if people don’t drive, they’re not going to shop is not true either. I do it quite a lot and I know a lot of people do too. I’m also not keen on using parked cars and parking lots to solve social issues.

I think that if we’re trying to do that, we could be spending money on more direct ways to assist people. So overall, I won’t be supporting this at council and comes to council. I appreciate the work that staff have done to try and get this moving along. I know it was a quick turnaround, but as per most research, subsidized parking encourages car dependency.

And it really does not actually improve or strengthen small businesses or help us meet our 2030 climate targets. So just wanted to share that, thank you. Thank you. I do have and will recognize councilor Pribble in a moment.

Sorry, it was just making sure that councilor Stevenson has taken her hand down. So she’s taken care of. Councilor Pribble, you’ve used a minute and 20, please proceed. Thank you and I will support it and I do believe that we are on the right track in terms of what we offered to ours and it was parking lots streets.

Now we are cutting it down. So I believe you are on the right track, but we are not there yet. But one thing is that I want to mention and there was things like tokens and when I read the downtown BIA letter, one thing is that I would like to see BIA stating that we are lacking behind progressive cities, innovative municipal parking models and policies. Downtown BIA is supported by downtown merchants.

And if this is the case, then I would like to ask the BIA to give us a proposal and to see what they are doing because right now it’s kind of up to us, but on the other hand, BIA is living of the merchants and I would like them to work for the merchants and to come with the proposals. And you know, when I heard here that the merchant should be subsidizing potential corporations, businesses, additional funds for subsidized parking, businesses downtown are already playing and paying quite a bit in the levy. And as it stated in the letter, $2 million each year. So I would like, if there are some great, excellent, I’m challenging the BIA’s come up with proposals, work on behalf of your merchants do the comparative analysis, do the benchmarking with other cities and do give us that proposal.

But I will support it the one hour because as I said, we are on the right track. The F, which is, I don’t take it by the way that this would be just for arcade. It was based on the letter from arcade, but my thing is, again, we are not making a decision, but I would like to see this come back, our administration to talk to these agencies and to come back. I’m not saying at the end, potentially if I would support it, yes or no, but I certainly would like to see this work done because again, we know the social issues we do have and we do know that how much it costs us, the plans, the investments that we are making and we are asking these people from all over the London to come and to help us out at no cost because they are volunteering.

So bottom line is for the F, I would like our administration to go back and I will support that one as well, thank you. Thank you. And just as I’ve heard a couple of different comments, part F, as Councilor Pribble said, is correct that it’s a letter from arcade but doesn’t only speak to arc aid. So just for clarification.

Do I have further speakers online? Okay, I see, I’m just, I have no more speakers in chambers so just clearing the speakers thing. Madam Chair, I just want to do advice you that I’m going to have to leave the meeting now for another commitment. Enjoy your next meeting and the rest of your day, Deputy Mayor Lewis.

And thank you for notifying me. Okay, Deputy Mayor Lewis is leaving the meeting. Further speakers on this item before we call the question and we will split it into different parts as already requested. Okay, so we’re going to lump together A and B as that’s the core area.

C and D as that’s oldies village and E and F as that’s receiving the staff report and then the letter from arc aid. Okay, and ideally I’m not going to stop between these and do questions because it can confuse where we’re at. So last call for questions or comments on A through F. Okay, so no one online has their hands up.

No one in chambers has their hands up. So we’re just calling the question on A and B together which contains the core area in the identified funding source. Closing the vote, the motion fails two to two. Okay, this is part C and D which is the oldies village, one hour parking and identified source of funding.

Calling the question, C and D. Closing the vote, the motion fails one to three. Last is E and F which is receiving the staff report and then sending the letter from arc aid which will then be made available publicly to staff. Calling the question.

Councillor Ferrera, closing the vote. The motion carries four to zero. Okay, thank you. This will go to the next round of council.

So that concludes the consent items and thank you to Ms. Campbell for being with us and listening in today in their advocacy and wish you a wonderful day as well. I have no scheduled items. I have no items for direction.

Deferred matters in additional business. I am not aware of any but looking to see if there is any from committee members. Seeing none from committee members, that would bring us to adjournment. I would need a motion and a mover and a seconder to adjourn.

Moved by Councillor Travsau, seconded by Councillor Ferrera and a hand vote is in favor of all in favor of adjournment today. The clerk has deemed that carried. Thank you everyone and have a wonderful day.