May 6, 2024, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:01 PM; it being noted that Councillor P. Van Meerbergen was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That consent items 2.1 to 2.3 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

2.1   Respectful Workplace Policy and Workplace Violence Prevention Procedure Annual Report January 1, 2022 to December 31, 2023

2024-05-06 Staff Report - Respectful Work Place

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Enterprise Supports, the report regarding the Respectful Workplace Policy (Anti-Harassment/Anti-Discrimination) and Workplace Violence Prevention Procedure BE RECEIVED for information purposes.

Motion Passed

2.2   2023 Compliance Report in Accordance with the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy

2024-05-06 Staff Report - 2023 Compliance Report

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken;

 

a)    the administrative contract awards for Professional Consulting Services with an aggregate total greater than $100,000, as per Section 15.1 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, decentralized from Purchasing and Supply that have been reported to the Senior Manager, Procurement and Supply and have been reviewed for compliance to the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, BE RECEIVED for information, as appended to the staff report dated May 6, 2024 as Appendix “A”;

b)    the list of administrative contract awards for Tenders with a value up to $6,000,000 that do not have an irregular result, as per Section 13.2 (c) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, BE RECEIVED for information, as appended to the staff report dated May 6, 2024 as Appendix “B”; and

c)    the City Treasurer, or delegate, BE DELEGATED authority to, at any time, refer questions concerning compliance with the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy to the City’s internal auditor. The City Treasurer, or delegate, is hereby further authorized to ratify and confirm completed awards or purchases between $15,000 and $50,000 where the City Treasurer or delegate is of the opinion that the awards or purchases were in the best interests of the Corporation.

Motion Passed

2.3   Association of Municipalities Ontario - Board of Directors, Large Urban Caucus - Councillor A. Hopkins

2024-05-06 Submission - AMO Nomination-A. Hopkins

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Board of Directors:

a)    Councillor A. Hopkins BE ENDORSED to stand for election to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Board of Directors, Large Urban Caucus, for the 2024/2026 term; 

b)    subject to Councillor A. Hopkins’ successful election to the AMO Board of Directors, Large Urban Caucus, all associated cost to attend the Board of Directors meetings, AMO Conferences and other related commitments (Task Forces, Executive Committee, etc.) for the 2024/2026 term BE APPROVED for reimbursement by The Corporation of the City of London outside of her annual expense allocation; and

c)    Councillor A. Hopkins BE REIMBURSED up to $500 for campaign-related expenses outside of Councillor A. Hopkins’ annual expense allocation, upon submission of eligible receipts.

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Presentation - Property Assessment and Tax System - Municipal Property Assessment Corporation

2024-05-06 Presentation - Property Assessment and Tax System - MPAC

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That it BE NOTED that the Corporate Services Committee heard an update from B. Slater and A. Haines, Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) with respect to the revised property assessment and tax system, as appended to the added agenda.

Motion Passed (6 to 0)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Consideration of Appointments to the London Community Advisory Committees

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the consideration of appointments to the following London Community Advisory Committees BE REFERRED to the May 28, 2024 meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee:

  • Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee;

  • Diversity, Inclusion and Anti-Oppression Community Advisory Committee;

  • Ecological Community Advisory Committee;

  • Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee; and

  • Integrated Transportation Community Advisory Committee.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.2   Application - Issuance of Proclamation - Day of Remembrance of Our London Family

2024-05-06 Submission - Proclamation - Day of Remembrance

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That items 4.2 to 4.6 BE APPROVED.

4.2       Application – Issuance of Proclamation – Day of Remembrance of Our London Family

That based on the application from Muslim Wellness Network, June 6, 2024 BE PROCLAIMED Day of Remembrance of Our London Family.

4.3       Application - Issuance of Proclamation – June 1984 Sikh Genocide

That based on the application dated April 14, 2024 from London Sikh Youth Alliance and United Sikhs London Chapter, June 1 - 10, 2024 BE PROCLAIMED June 1984 Sikh Genocide.

4.4       Issuance of Proclamation - November 1984 Sikh Genocide

That based on the application dated April 14, 2024 from London Sikh Youth Alliance and United Sikhs London Chapter, October 31 - November 5, 2024 BE PROCLAIMED November 1984 - Sikh Genocide.

4.5       Issuance of Proclamation - Orange Shirt Day/National Day for Truth and Reconciliation

That based on the application dated April 17, 2024 from City of London Indigenous Employee Resource Group, September 30, 2024 BE PROCLAIMED Orange Shirt Day/National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.

4.6       Issuance of Proclamation - Life as a Refugee (LAAR) 2024

That based on the application dated April 23, 2024 from the Cross-Cultural Learners Centre (CCLC) and our community partners College Boreal, London Public Library, LUSO Community Services and Pillar Nonprofit Network, June 20, 2024 BE PROCLAIMED Life As A Refugee (LAAR) 2024.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential (Enclosed for Members only.)

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Stevenson

That the Corporate Services Committee convenes In Closed Session to consider the following:

6.1 Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

 

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

6.2 Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

 

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

6.3 Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations 

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

6.4 Land Acquisition / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice / Position, Plan, Procedure, Criteria or Instruction to be Applied to Any Negotiations

 

A matter pertaining to the proposed or pending acquisition of land by the municipality, including communications necessary for that purpose; advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege; commercial and financial information, that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value or potential monetary value and a position, plan, procedure, criteria or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

The Corporate Services Committee convenes In Closed Session from 1:55 PM to 2:14 PM.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 2:17 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, 7 minutes)

Good afternoon everyone. I’d like to call the ninth meeting of the Corporate Services Committee to order. Please check the city website for additional meeting detail information. Meetings can be viewed via live streaming on YouTube and the city website.

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

And I am joined by most of the committee, including the mayor. Councilor Rynne Berbergen is having some technical difficulties, and he’ll join us shortly. And I would like to say welcome to our new city manager. This is Senator Dator’s beer, thank you.

I’m sure we’ll be seeing a lot more of you. So welcome, welcome, and hopefully you stick around. No pressure, no pressure. Sorry, it’s a Monday, okay, okay.

The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternative formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact csc@london.ca or 519-661-2489 extension-2425. I’ll look to committee for any disclosures of procuring your interest. I’m not seeing any, and just so committees aware, Councilor van Berbergen has now joined us.

So we are on to consent items. We have three items. I have not got any requests to pull those. So perhaps looking for a motion to have those all moved.

Councilor ramen, Councilor Cuddy, thank you. Okay, so 2.1 to 2.3 is on the floor. I’ll look for any questions. And just so committees aware, Councilor Hopkins is here.

If you do have any questions for 2.3. I’ll give her the opportunity if she wants to speak to that. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for recognizing me.

And I am looking to the committee to support my endorsement, to put my name forward to run for the AMO board for the upcoming year. I just want to let you know that I would like to finish off my municipal term on the AMO board. I’ve been on the AMO board for the past five and a half years. It is an honor and a privilege to represent our city at the AMO board.

I chaired the large urban caucus during the pandemic, which was really an important time for municipalities to be at the table with the provincial government. So hoping for your support. Thank you. Okay, thank you.

And thank you for the work that you do on the AMO board. Mayor Morgan, go ahead. Yes, let me just say to Councilor Hopkins, first off on behalf of Council over a couple of terms, thanks for your service up to this point on the AMO board. We appreciate it through some, both challenging and difficult times through the pandemic.

I think you provided a lot of leadership. I’ll say too, I also appreciate our ability to work together with me as Vice Chair of OBCM and you as a board member at AMO on our coordinated approach to a number of matters that has come before municipalities in the province and that coordinated approach is very effective all the way to the point where I know both organizations tomorrow will be presenting to Committee on Bill 185. And we talked about it even today about that coordinated approach that we take. So first off, I want to say thank you for your service.

Second, very supportive of the motion for you to continue on. I think having a spot on the board is really important. I know when I move from Vice Chair to Chair of OBCM, I will also be on the board. We’ll be able to serve together at that point.

But for colleagues, this is just the first step. This is just Councilor Hopkins asking to be our nominee and get the permission to. We also have to do our best to try to get her elected. So should Council support this?

Let’s all make our best efforts to support Councilor Hopkins in her election for the AMO board, whether that’s reaching out to those who can vote or participating in engagements leading up to the vote at the conference. So should you get all of Council’s endorsement which has given no one had decided to pull it and run against you? I’m assuming it’s going to go pretty smooth. Just to let colleagues know that there’s some work ahead should we support this and I’ll certainly be there to support you however I can, Councilor Hopkins.

Great, thank you, Mayor Morgan. And yes, I do believe Councilor Hopkins, you have some buttons. So come August, everyone wear your vote, Hopkins buttons when we get to Ottawa. So I appreciate you serving again.

I’m looking for any other comments on the other items. Okay, go ahead, Councilor Rhonda. Thank you and through you. I just had some comments on 2.2, the 2023 compliance report in accordance with the procurement of goods and services policy.

I was just reviewing the Appendix C and particularly you just wanted to ask about on page 51, the contract renewals previously approved by City Council at the amount of less than 6 million. I’m just wondering how that came about that and I tried to find some previous information just that direction and then I also wanted to ask about the single source contracts as well. Looking to staff. Afternoon, I’d be happy to answer through the chair.

Regarding the section C or Appendix C, the contractor renewals previously approved by Council less than 6 million. I believe that was an increase on a previous level from I think a couple of years ago, increase that threshold in an attempt to kind of reduce the volume of reports that were submitted through Council. Is there anything more specific that your planning Councilor Rhonda follow? Thank you, I appreciate that.

Yeah, I was just trying to get some rationale behind what the motivation was to change that threshold and perhaps also some more time and I’m happy to send that question offline. Something that I’ve noticed is that we seem to get a fair amount of single source contracts we have lately that have been in excess of 50,000 and I’m just wondering when, if and how, we would go about reviewing that threshold and if that’s something that perhaps we’re also looking at administratively. Who said? Through the chair and the committee, currently as outlined on page, sorry, page 43 of the committee report in terms of continuous improvement.

City’s current of goods and services policy is under a very thorough review at this time. We’ve engaged in a third party law firm to go over our thresholds as well as we’re looking to bring forward a very fulsome review of that policy which would take into consideration the various thresholds. With respect to single sources with the threshold of $50,000, we feel that given a single source is generally a non-competitive procurement and there are limited opportunities in the market, it is imperative that we bring this forward to committee so that they’re aware of those types of procurements that the city may be engaging in. Follow up, Councilor?

Thank you, I appreciate that and look forward to getting that information in the future. That was my, all my questions for 2.2 and then my only other question was with respect to 2.1 and the respectful workplace policy in workplace violence prevention procedural report. I understand that we are in different spot right now where we’re awaiting some additional information as we onboard our human rights area that will also have some reporting, et cetera, that will come about in 2025. My question is, are there things that we’re seeing already coming about that can help frame our understanding of the work that’s being done?

This report is helpful from the perspective of the employee groups that are not impacted through the human rights office. I’m just concerned that it’s quite a length of time between reporting that we’ll know if we’re on the right track with the new approach using the human rights office. So don’t know if it’s possible for an interim report or just some additional information just to help to understand where things are with the parallel process so that counselors are more informed because I think it is a really important matter. And I think that we need to be better informed as to what and why and where we’re going with this.

Okay, it’s definitely to comment, go ahead. Yeah, through the chair. Right now, as obviously we do an annual report, but if it’s the Wish of Council for us to come back more frequently than that, we’d be happy to do so to track that data and bring forward for consideration. Follow up, Councilor?

Yeah, and I’m happy to get more information offline. I just think that the report’s very helpful and that it gives us a picture of where we’re heading and the issues that we’re trying to address as well as the types of issues that are coming forward. However, I do feel like without that other piece of information, perhaps I don’t have the full picture and I wanted to get a better understanding of kind of directionally where we’re heading from what’s in there. Okay, any further, okay, all right.

Looking to any other committee members for comments, questions, oh, Councillor Frank, welcome, late, go ahead. Thank you and thank you for letting me join your committee today. I did have one question regarding 2.2 following up on Councillor, some of Councillor Robin’s questions. I did notice that there was reference to the sustainable purchasing aspects of reviewing the policy.

I’m just wondering, will we be moving towards maybe like a, how do I word it? More rigorous sustainable and environmental policies given our climate emergency screening tool that we have implemented? To staff. Through the chair to committee, correct.

Back in 2012, the city had engaged Reeves Consulting to introduce within the policy sustainable procurement. Now we’re taking the next step by engaging a collaboration led by Reeves Consulting with other public entities across the nation to look out ways to introduce sustainable procurement within our policies and within our processes. So we looked to bring those forward as part of the, not only the policy, but also an application too, which would take into consideration evaluations of procurements too. Thank you.

And a follow up, Councillor? Yes, thank you, very glad to hear that. Of course, and a follow up to that is, I’m just wondering, I know that there’s some international treaties, but how far along are we in regards to local procurement and trying to source as locally as possible, for example, like local food procurement to try and support our local food systems? To staff, through the chair.

It’s all kind of collaboratively being worked on together through our consultant right now. There’s a lot of aspects of the procurement policy that we’re looking at reviewing and changing and they’re all kind of interlinked. So they all kind of work together and the sustainability piece along with the trade treaty work that we’re reviewing. It all has to kind of work together.

So we’re hoping to have that all come together later on in a report with the revisions to the policy. A follow up, Councillor? I just want to say thank you and I really look forward to seeing more of those elements in our policy. So appreciate the work of staff.

Okay, looking for any further comments, questions? Seeing none online, okay. That has been moved and seconded. So we will open all the consent items.

Councillor Van Meerbergen? I’ll vote yes. Opposing the vote, motion carries, six to zero. Okay, moving along, we are now onto our scheduled items.

We do have a presentation by MPAC. So I will look for that to get set up. And Councillor Ploza has also joined us on Zoom. Good afternoon, everyone.

My name is Brenda Slater. I am your account manager with Municipal Stakeholder Relations. It is a pleasure to be here today. And I’m also joined by my regional manager Anne Hayne.

Our roles and responsibilities impacts role in the property assessment and tax system is to calculate, to capture and to distribute property assessments for all properties across Ontario. We do this in compliance with the assessment laws and legislation that are set by the province of Ontario. I wanted to share some highlights for you from our 2023 role return. And for the 2023 taxation year, we captured $715 million in new assessment for the city of London.

And that’s a result of building permits and new construction. During it as well, some of the additional work that we do throughout the year, certainly it’s very important that we provide support and guidance to property owners and as well as our municipalities. We post those requests for reconsiderations when property owners have questions about their property assessment. And as well, we do new assessment forecasting as well as market analysis and trends throughout the year.

Property assessments, sorry, I’m gonna back up, provincial legislation determines when the next assessment update takes place. And as well, the provincial government determines what the legislative valuation date will be. The last assessment update that took place in 2017 is based on a January 1, 2016 legislative valuation date. The provincial government did pass a regulation to amend the assessment act to postpone the assessment update, the next assessment update, which means that assessments for the 2024 taxation year are still based on a January 1, 2016 taxation date, valuation date.

For new properties and new assessments that we’re adding, MPAC determines a value as of January 1, 2016, to make it equitable with properties that are already assessed. As well, the provincial government made an announcement and has committed to a review of the assessment and tax system. And the next assessment update will be postponed until that review has been completed. Very happy that you have IT support.

Thank you for that. I’m very excited to share an update on our new insights campaign. And you might have heard about this through social media and/or some media releases. The insight campaign is based on residential properties and how the residential property landscape has changed over the past 10 years.

You can find more information on MPAC.ca. There is an interactive housing inventory map and that’s shown on the slide. And it reflects values as well as inventory for different residential properties across all areas in the province and of course for the city of London. In terms of the relationship between assessment and property taxes, it’s very important that we support property owners as they are the ones that are paying for the property taxes for various community services.

We have developed as well some information on MPAC.ca to answer some property owner questions. About my property is available for property owners to go in and review how MPAC has determined their assessment. As well as look at up to 100 comparable properties in their neighborhood. Should a property owner wish to ask for a review of their property assessment, that is also available through about my property.

And as well to explain the relationship between assessment and property taxes, we do have a educational video and it’s shown on the slide. It’s about two minutes and it shows the relationship between assessment and taxation and then when assessment shifts, how that may potentially change as well. As well, there’s a lot of social media campaigns and brand new, we have a first time homeowners hub and there’s actually great information for anyone that owns property. There’s links to additional resources and a lot of frequently asked questions.

And the idea is that we have a lot of easy to understand and accessible resources for property owners and as well for municipalities. For municipalities as well, we’ve had our social media campaign and we also have a digital toolkit. We’ve had just over 3,400 views on our digital toolkit and again, it’s meant to be easy to understand resources that you can use when answering questions from property owners. I do as well encourage you to read our new partnerships report and our annual report that have come out for 2023.

And as well, you can subscribe to our in touch newsletter. It’s an e-newsletter and it provides all of the up-to-date information in one or two pages. Please feel free to reach out any time. Our contact information is there on the slide.

And thank you very much for having me here today. Thank you for the presentation, appreciate that. I will look for a motion to receive the presentation. Okay, Councillor Cutty, Councillor Roman, thank you.

Okay, so we’ve got that motion moved and seconded. I’ll now look for any questions or comments on the presentation, really? Well, I’m very surprised, come on, this is impact. Usually there’s somebody who has a question.

Oh, okay, we have one from a visiting counselor. Go ahead, Councillor Hopkins. Thank you very much and I guess just wearing my email had just a comment there. I know it is a priority, a demo and obviously OBCM to the importance of getting the updated assessments done given that we’re at 2016 and we’re into 2024.

It’s a lot of time and I am sort of bracing myself a little bit too once the review is being completed and these new amounts are brought forward. There will, not sure how that’s gonna look like, but I am bracing myself as a counselor and how I share that information. I do have a question and congratulations on your new insights campaign. I think getting that information out to residents is really, really important and maybe through you, Mr.

Chair, to our staff, do we share this information on our website too? Just wondering how we can redirect information when it comes to assessments back to MPAC? To staff, go ahead. Through the chair of the committee, on the city’s external facing webpage, under the property tax section, there is a direct link to MPAC and all the information that they afford are property owners as well, as well as help navigate if they want to find out more about how their property is assessed.

So it’s in tandem with MPAC and I know our tax office works hand in hand with them. Yeah, thank you for that. I’m glad we’ve got that information and I guess this updated information can be shared as well. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Have Councillor Palazzo online, go ahead. Thank you for welcoming me at your committee, Mr. Chair, and thank you to MPAC for appearing before us today and the presentation.

Couple of questions. First off, I have residents that have used it. The review of their property value. Is there a fee to request a review if they think something’s not quite in alignment and what is the turnaround time on that?

Thank you for your question. There is no fee actually to file a request for reconsideration and our typical turnaround time, and I might not have the exact days. We may have up to 180 days and I’d have to double check that. But our staff would be in touch with the property owner right away to discuss their request.

Thank you for that. As I know, I have had residents use it and they appreciate that opportunity to raise their concerns through a formal process. I’ll also say that I am the city’s budget chair that sees us through our budget process, in which case we discussed our property tax levy. I know that the report is in the works and being reviewed and worked on, do you know have any timelines to share with us on when that report is expected to be finished or presented?

So like it impacts under review and I know you’re reviewing the process and won’t change the rates from 2016 until the report’s done, just do you know when the report’s gonna be done? At this point, it’s a matter of waiting when the Ministry of Finance, when the provincial government completes the review. They are undergoing consultations with municipalities and certainly MPAC is participating and providing our assessment expertise as well to the review. Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that. And I believe it was gonna be a phased-in approach once that was finished as long as that’s still the recommendation coming out of that report in Ministry of Finance. I would say this is a hot topic for anyone who owns property or rents it as the rates changed. I know there’s a lot of fear that everyone realizes that their property values are not the same as when they were in 2016.

So looking forward to that report in any way that the municipality of London can participate at the proper times, happy to do so. And thank you for being here again today. Okay, thank you, Councillor. I have a Councillor Perule next, go ahead.

And thank you, I just a comment, just to reconfirm. It is 180 days, and potentially you have additional 60 days if there are any additional issues, but it is 180 days. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councillor Perule.

Looking for a job at MPAC, I think. (laughing) Go ahead, Mayor Morgan. Go ahead, Mayor Morgan. I saw it, Councillor Stephens’s hand up first, but she said to go ahead, so I’m gonna go.

So I have a couple of questions and some comments. First off, I appreciate and understand exactly what MPAC does, but I think one of the challenges both municipalities and I would say MPAC faced is the large-scale misunderstanding of exactly what happens from home valuation all the way to how much do I pay for property tax. And so on the education side of things, I appreciate what you’re doing. I wonder, first off, my first question is how far does your educational mandate expand?

Do you support municipalities? Do you do direct education aside from the web? Is there any sort of direct education you do with taxpayers across the province to help them better understand exactly how this exceptionally complex system works? ‘Cause at the end of the day, most people just wanna know, what am I gonna pay and how’s it gonna change over time?

And we know that that is a very convoluted answer for any individual property taxpayer because of all the inputs that go in and all the shifts that happen to get to that. So just a general thought on like, where does your educational mandate extend to and what do you do to reach the taxpayers directly? Thank you for the question. Certainly we do have our online platforms as I mentioned and about my property is very informative for property owners to go in and understand how we’ve determined their assessment and answer a lot of their questions.

A number of property owners will contact us through our customer contact center as well. 1-866-296-672-2. And our customer contact center will also walk them through how to utilize about my property so they’ll take them through how to get access to their property, how we’ve done the assessments. If they’re requesting a new property assessment, notice, et cetera.

And then if the property owner has additional questions, even if they have not necessarily filed a request for reconsideration, our customer contact center will put that call down to our local field office here in London and then someone from the local field office can get in touch with the property owner as well. So we always encourage property owners to reach out with that to us. Our first point of contact would be our call center. And then like I said, those calls are forwarded down to the local field office.

I’ll follow up Mayor. Yes, my next question, I’m not sure if you’re gonna be able to answer. I will express my personal general concern about the length of time that assessments have been frozen and any sort of shifts that have happened between the various tax classes. Because one of the things, as you know, we have very little control over is how the tax burden will be shared both within the different property valuations within a tax class as well as between the tax classes.

And given the length of time, I would say we’re relatively uninformed about and it’s probably different all across the province, but relatively uninformed about how the valuations have shifted between the classes. So although we will still set a budget and that’ll be all we collection no matter how valuations change, who pays for that budget, how that shifts between say industrial, commercial, residential or even within the residential, how it shifts across the city and individual taxpayers. Like I don’t think we have a really good sense of it. And I certainly understand that the province is doing a review given the length of time that this has been left.

It would presume that not only in terms of review need to be conducted, but a plan and an understanding on how to get out of the situation we’re in is probably warranted, especially if there was large scale shifts between the tax burden, between those classes. So do you have any sense on how things have shifted over time and do you have any sense on when the province decides what they’re going to do? Is there going to be a time period at which we can understand how things have changed so that we can get ahead of communicating to say this is how things are going to shift? This is where the municipality has some control and this is where it has no control because even with the difference between ratios, we know that the province restricts some of those ratios within corridors.

So our ability to even mitigate that by shifting the ratios is relatively limited in some cases. So I guess do you have a sense on how things have changed but do you have any sense on the runway that you might be given between a decision on what we’re going to do is made and then kind of an education phase so people understand what’s coming? Thank you for your comments and your question. What I can speak to as I mentioned is we are awaiting the outcome of the review, of course, the property assessment and taxation system.

The other thing that we have introduced is the residential insights campaign and that does provide insights into how the residential property inventory has changed over the past 10 years. And as I mentioned, there is the interactive inventory map that’s available on our website so that it’ll show as a point in time 2013 and then for 2023. And at this point, the residential properties are the only ones that we have the data available to prepare those insights. Follow up here?

Yeah, maybe I’ll just finish with two things. One, first, I’d really appreciate you coming before us and answering questions that you’ve answered so far as well as the additional ones that will come from my colleagues. I think that that’s really important for us to be able to both dialogue and share information. And so my final piece is really sharing some perspectives for you to take back ‘cause I know that as we both engage with the province and you’re involved in what comes next, I just wanted to share it with you a little bit about kind of our perspective and our challenges but I don’t think are uncommon with municipalities that maybe you can take back in whatever discussions you’re having ‘cause I know that we’re having them too.

You know, there’s obviously some very high level pieces that we get over and over again that we’re required to explain to Latiners and it is very difficult to sit down and go through that. Like people get a bill that won’t understand what the bill is and how it’s gonna change. First off, the valuation that is frozen. I think there is a general lack of understanding that when a new property is built, that they’re not taxed at that level, that you go actually go back and revert that new building into what would be the equivalent in a 2016 valuation.

So although someone just built a house for $800,000 that on their tax bill, they’re gonna have an assessed value of much less than that based on reverse engineering into the 2016 timeframe. I don’t think people really know that and that’s an education piece that you need to get out there. The other piece is that we’re relying on actual data when we say this is the average assessed value. We’re not making that number up.

We’re not using an estimate. That’s actually mathematically the assessed value. Nobody believes that when we put it in our budgets to say, here’s the average assessed value across the city. It’s $255,000 and everybody says, there’s no house in the city that is 255,000, but that is what is actually the numerical assessed value on all the property tax forms that people are actually getting taxed on.

The other, I think, misconception that people have that is helpful is when this happens and these valuations are unlocked, that there’s gonna be a giant windfall for municipalities. And people don’t understand that we’re still gonna collect exactly what we budget for and that the tax rate will actually adjust to ensure that we do that. But where I think the shock is gonna come and where my biggest concern is is, although the tax rate will lower as the assessments go up to make sure we collect the amount, how that shifts across the city if we don’t have some sort of different plan could be, and I don’t know if it will, but could be fairly dramatic. So we could set a budget increase of X and there could be some people in the city who have a significant negative tax increase.

Some people who have a tax increase well beyond X. Some people who might write beyond that, but no one, everybody essentially has their own individual tax increase across the city because their valuations have all kind of shifted over this period of time in different ways. That is going to set municipalities up for a tremendously difficult conversation of explaining what the heck has happened over this previous decade with taxpayers. And we’re likely to face the brunt of the anger, even though we have very little control over any of these components, right?

We’re simply setting a budget and collecting that amount of money. And with the restrictions on the tax ratios, we can’t even really balance to a certain degree between the different tax classes. And certainly within a tax class, there’s not much we can do at all, right? It’s just gonna shift within the residential class.

So I think I have a tremendous amount of concern on behalf of Londoners in the angst that they have, in what’s coming next. And then concern as municipal leaders in that our capacity to be able to explain to them why the system works the way it is when it is very unintuitive. And frankly, a little bit, well, actually, it’s archaic, right? It was built 150 years ago when we didn’t kind of build the modern cities that we built.

So I look, I’m very interested in what the province does. And I’m very interested in the plan that they attach to it on what comes next. But if it is going to be the same old, we’ve done the valuations, we’re gonna do it how we were. Here’s the old date.

I think we’re in for a very difficult ride in explaining what has happened over the last decade, because nobody is going to understand why their tax rate is what it is. They’re gonna see a municipal council pass a budget. I’m gonna say what happened from my property value is nowhere near that. It’s either way below, way above, or maybe for some people it might be right on, but that average is gonna be skewed.

So any runway we can be given between here’s what we’re gonna do, here’s the data, let’s all understand the impacts of the data so that we can start to either provide feedback to say, whoa, there’s something different that we have to do here, or engage in an education campaign in partnership with the province and an impact to really explain what’s happening here. Because again, it’s a frustrating position for us to be in, because we have very little control over much of this. And yet we will likely face the brunt of the questions and information that taxpayers are looking for coming at the other end. So I know a lot of that is not your decision-making, and I’m trying to put you on the spot, but I know you’re engaging with our provincial partners as well as we are and through our associations, but that would be the angst and concern that I have, given the length of time that has passed in what comes next and how we are as transparent and as possible with learners so they understand what’s happening with their tax bills.

Okay, thank you, Mayor Morgan. I’m looking to Councillor Stevenson, I believe you were next on this slide. Thank you. I was looking to talk about those evaluations, and shifts, so I think it’s been fully covered, thanks.

Okay, thank you. And I’m sure we will all wait to see when the province will do the reassessment, that is the million dollar question and then a lot of folks are looking for. Oh, Councillor van Mirbergen, sorry, I just saw your hand, go ahead. Thank you, Chair.

I know the mayor touched on this in his remarks, but I think because of the confusion out there in the public, I think it bears repeating that even with evaluation increase, it does not necessarily mean the average homeowner will be paying more in taxes. Maybe I could ask our guests and or Mr. Collins to comment on that. Good.

Thank you for the comments, that’s correct. So an increase in assessment does not necessarily mean an increase in property taxes. And I think as others had made comments, it will depend on how your assessment has shifted in comparison to the other assessments within your same class. So to some of the points that were made earlier within that same residential class, so it will depend on how all of the property shift and how your property shifts in comparison to those.

And thank you for the comment. Follow up, Councillor? No, I think that basically clarifies it. Perhaps I could ask Mr.

Collins if he has anything to add on that. Go ahead, Steph. Through the chair to the committee, I defer to the very astute clarification that the representative from MPAC provided they did it in a much clearer and concise way that I could have done. Okay, thank you very much, appreciate it.

Okay, thank you. Looking for any further questions, comments? Okay, not seeing any. Thank you very much for your presentation today.

We appreciate you answering those questions. Okay, so that the presentation was moved and seconded to be received, I’ll open that for voting. Oh, yes. Opposed in the vote, motion carries, six to zero.

Okay, thank you. We are now on to items for direction and Councillor CAUTI had indicated that he would like to put forward a motion. Thank you, Chair, and through you, I’d like to make the motion that we move 4.1, consideration of appointments to the London Community Advisory Committees to our May 28th SPPC agenda. Thank you.

Okay, I believe so this is a referral to the SPP. Referral? Referral, pardon me. Yes, that’s fine, that’s okay.

I’ll second that. Okay, so it’s been moved and seconded. We’re looking for discussion on that. Go ahead, Councillor Roman.

Thank you, appreciate the motion. I’m just wondering if Councillors can share the rationale. Yeah, I’d be willing to start and then I’ll give Councillor, actually you moved it. So you— Yes, I actually made it.

Councillor Stevenson corrected me. I actually made a mistake. That was for A, Chair. We’re not gonna refer to everything, right?

My apologies? No, so I believe— And it’ll give the reason because we give a reason to Councillor Roman. We only have two candidates for seven positions. So if we refer this to May 28th, in all likelihood, we’ll have more candidates by that time.

Thank you. So Councillor, I believe you had previously indicated that you wanted all items. I did and I apologize, that was my error. We do have enough candidates for the rest of them and I think we should proceed with that.

So we get those off, is that a problem to change that? I didn’t think so. Just to change it to leave it for A and then because the rest, we do have enough members for. I apologize for the confusion.

Okay, so where I’m seeing some confusion here is, so in terms of what had been put forward, prior to the meeting, was consideration for all of them. And let me just explain the rationale ‘cause I had discussed this with the clerk. So our governance working group, we had discussed having all of these appointments go through SPPC to alleviate having to do two votes. Because essentially, we’re voting at this committee, which is a smaller pool, which is only five Councillors.

And what we had decided through governance, which is coming to us, but that will not be ready until June, was that these appointments would all come through SPPC. And then as a full council, we have the opportunity to vote on them, rather than having to do this twice, essentially, it was the logic. Okay, thank you, Chair, and I do apologize again. Well, I understand and I do remember that and we had that discussion from governance.

And I’m still prepared to move this, that we move everything. And if Council Rometer, Council Stevenson, have a comment on that, but I’m prepared to move that if you’re gonna second it. And sorry, just to clarify, you’re willing to move all of them or just one. I’ll move all of them.

And I’m willing to second that. Okay, so now we have a referral for all the appointments that are listed under item four direction. I will look to committee for comments, questions. Okay, I’m not seeing any, and yeah, really this was just trying to keep in practice with what we’re trying to do moving forward.

This was a discussion we had previously had governance. I do think it just makes sense in terms of having the opportunity for all Councillors to just vote once. And then obviously this would go to Council afterwards, but I do think SPPC is a better place for this to land. So Chair, thank you.

So moving forward, based on our discussions and governance, this is the process and procedure that we’ll follow. So not yet, that report would be coming next. So that is going to the June cycle. So we haven’t got there yet.

That’s why this one unfortunately has kind of fallen through the cracks because we don’t have a new process in place, but that was the direction that we had given a governance. Okay, I’m not seeing any Councillors raise their hands for questions or comments. Oh, Councillor Romney, go ahead. Thank you and through you.

I’m just wondering how one the committees will be notified of the change in our practice for, because of the outcome of this decision, as well as if the candidates themselves will be notified, just because I know some people are following along. Through the Chair, we will notify the applicants if committee chooses to refer this to this May 28th meeting. And if we make changes to the general policy for community advisory committees, they will be consulted as well. Okay, that’s wrong.

Thank you. And with respect to 4.1A, where we did only have two applicants is the committee appointments still open, like the application’s still open for those, leading up to our deadline for May 28th. Through the Chair, the appointment windows are closed, but our council procedure by that does permit us, to include added communications on our agendas if they come in within the deadline. So yes, if you have someone in mind, and there’s still some time, that does give us a bit of a window.

There are two weeks, that’s not the biggest delay, I think that that’s fair in terms of giving us the opportunity as a full committee on SBPC to vote, I think that makes more sense. Any other questions or comments? Okay, I’m not seeing any that has been moved and seconded, so we’ll open that referral for voting. Councillor Vane-Mierbergen?

I’ll vote yes. Closing the vote, motion carries, five to zero. Okay, thank you. We are now on to our issuance of proclamations.

We do have five listed, looking for those to be moved together or folks like them who moved individually. I’m looking at the moved as a package, that’s okay with committee, Councillor Cady. I will second. Are there any questions or comments on any of those?

And the clerk did check, they do have all local London connections. Go ahead, Councillor Vane. Thank you and through you. This is not particular to any of the organizations or the groups of people, individuals who have submitted the proclamations, it’s a process related question, concern.

Where would I find somewhat challenging with our proclamation process right now, is that we ask for organizations direct contact, connection to London, but we don’t get a lot of qualifying information about what the proclamation is actually about. So for instance, we have two proclamations that I needed to more information about personally in order to make a decision about. And it would have been helpful, and I know the information is provided of the organization, but I do think it’s important for us, and I know that I don’t know how we go about doing this, but I do think we need to have a conversation around the role that ARIO play in our proclamation process, because what my concern is, is do we have enough information to make a fulsome decision around proclamation? And some of the things that I would like to get a better understanding of is, is this provincially recognized?

Is it federally recognized? Is this something that we’ve done historically ourselves as a city already? I note that one is new, and the remainder we’ve already done previously. I think that that also is helpful from a contextual perspective.

And I also think that I would like ARIO to have a lens on this in order to better understand and give council the understanding of some of these events and proclamations that are coming forward, because I do think that we don’t potentially have the full context, and I think that that could be something that perhaps we need to look into. So I’m not sure what the best avenue is for that, but I do think we need to have a further discussion. I’m not sure if it’s an upcoming agenda item that we could do here, or if that needs to go to another committee. Perhaps the clerk’s office can provide more information.

OK, just one moment. I do agree in terms of what the council said. I find having more context in terms of what’s being requested. Some of the organizations do periodically provide attachments where they provide more context, in terms of what they’re requesting.

But I agree that that would be something that would really help in terms of providing more information with these requests. Thank you, and through the chair. We do generally reach out where we find that information is lacking on an application. But certainly, if the committee wishes to see more information on the application form itself, that’s submitted on the agenda.

A communication can be submitted to CSC to direct civic administration that way. Go ahead, Councillor on. Thank you. Just to follow up, where it says required supporting documents, I think even just if we said detailed information on the event slash the date of significance or what’s being asked for, I think that that’s where we could potentially address that right off the bat.

Because it’s great that we’re getting the organizational connection, but I do think anything else that we can fill in would be helpful. I do appreciate the community reaching out to us on proclamations. And I realize this is a newer or a return of a process for us. So we’re kind of learning our way through it right now.

So again, any updates we can consider, I think, would be helpful going forward. Yeah, and that’s great feedback. And the clerk’s been taking some notes, though, in a way. Thank you for that.

Excuse me. Any other questions or comments on the proclamations? OK, not seeing any has been moved and seconded, so we’ll open that for voting. Closing the vote, motion carries.

5 to 0. OK, that concludes our items for direction. We have no deferred matters or additional business, so we’ll look to go for motion to move into confidential session. Councillor Cuddy, Councillor Stevenson.

Thank you. Just give us a moment to shuffle folks around. Oh, yes, sorry. We got the motion to move in second, so now we’re going to vote on that.

And then we’ll shuffle staff. All four years. Closing the vote, motion carries. 5 to 0.

Recording in progress. OK, we’re back in public session. We have no more agenda items. Looking for a adjournment motion.

Councillor Robin, Councillor Cuddy, be good. I was going to report on it. Oh, yes, thank you. Committee met in confidential session from 156 to 214.

Progress was made in matters discussed. Thank you, Vice Chair. Appreciate that. OK, looking for the motion to adjourn, Councillor ramen, Councillor Manner, Regan.

OK, all those in favor of adjournment? Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, everyone.

Have a good afternoon.