May 21, 2024, at 1:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That Items 2.1 and 2.3 to 2.7 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   5th Report of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee

2024-05-02 AWCAC Report

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 5th Report of the Animal Welfare Community Advisory Committee (AWCAC), from the meeting held on May 2, 2024:

a)    the resignation of J. Higgins BE RECEIVED;

b)    the following actions be taken with respect to private zoos and mobile animal display shows:

i)    W. Brown, Chair, AWCAC, BE REQUESTED to have delegation status at the appropriate Standing Committee when the decision has been rendered relating to the private zoos and mobile animal display shows; and,

ii)    the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to keep the AWCAC included in the discussion on the private zoos and mobile animal display shows and offer advice and recommendations;

c)    H. Duhamel and S. Ryall BE REMOVED from the AWCAC due to lack of attendance; and,

d)    clauses 1.1, 3.1 to 3.4, 5.1 to 5.3 and 5.6 BE RECEIVED. (2024-D19)

Motion Passed

2.3   London Fire Department Single Source Request for Fire Apparatus (SS-2023-172)

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.3) - London Fire Department Single Source Request for Fire Apparatus (SS-2023-172)

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 21, 2024, related to the London Fire Department Single Source Request for Fire Apparatus (SS-2023-172):

a)    in accordance with Section 14.4(g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, Fire Administration BE AUTHORIZED to negotiate a single source purchasing agreement with City View Specialty Vehicles for delivery of eleven (11) Rosenbauer Fire Apparatus including; two (2) Pumper Rescues, two (2) Tanker Pumpers, three (3) Engines, one (1) Hazardous Materials Response Vehicle, and three (3) Aerial Ladders;

b)    Fire Administration BE AUTHORIZED to proceed with the replacement of eleven (11) Fire Apparatus, and associated equipment, during the 2024 - 2027 Multi-Year Budget period as per the approved Fire capital budget, noting that these replacements have an estimated cost of $24,407,900 CAD (excluding HST), plus an additional $2,226,600 CAD (excluding HST) for equipment that will be acquired through regular suppliers and added to the replacement apparatus;

c)    approval hereby given BE CONDITIONAL upon The Corporation of the City of London negotiating satisfactory prices, terms, conditions, and entering into a purchasing agreement with City View Specialty Vehicles, Inc., and subject to future budget approval;

d)    that the funding for this procurement BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report; it being noted that the Source of Financing Report only addresses the current year capital funding that is required and that the remaining cost of these replacements will be reflected as a commitment against the 2025, 2026 and 2027 budgets included in the approved 2024 - 2027 Multi-Year Budget;

e)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract or other documents, as required, to give effect to these recommendations; and,

f)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with the authorization set out in parts a) through d) above. (2024-V04)

Motion Passed

2.4   London Fire Department Single Source Request for a Hazardous Materials Pod

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.4) - London Fire Department Single Source Request for a Hazardous Materials Pod

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 21, 2024, related to the London Fire Department Single Source Request for a Hazardous Materials Pod:

a)    in accordance with Section 14.4(e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, Fire Administration BE AUTHORIZED to enter into negotiations with Advanced Containment Systems Inc. (ACSI), for the purchase of one (1) Hazardous Materials Pod;

b)    Fire Administration BE AUTHORIZED to enter into a contract agreement with Advanced Containment Systems Inc. (ACSI) for the purchases of additional PODs for a one (1) year contract term with optional three (3), one (1) year contract renewals;

c)    the London Fire Department BE AUTHORIZED to procure one (1) Hazardous Materials Pod, in combination with the Hazardous Materials Response Vehicle from Advanced Containment Systems Inc. (ACSI), for an amount not exceeding $500,000 CAD ($368,053 USD at current exchange rate) (excluding HST), and with a minimum 50% downpayment at time of order; and,

d)    the funding for this procurement BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report. (2024-P04)

Motion Passed

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.5) - Property Standards Related Demolitions

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 21, 2024, BE INTRODUCED at the Council meeting on June 4, 2024 to approve the potential demolition of vacant buildings located at 219 Adelaide Street North, 695 Victoria Street and 1317 Hastings Drive under the Property Standards provisions of the Building Code Act. (2024-P10D)

Motion Passed

2.6   SS-2024-143 Single Source: Prime Consultant to Design an Affordable Housing Project at 1958 Duluth Crescent, Block 5

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.6) - 1958 Duluth SS-2024-143 SS Procurement - Full

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report dated May 21, 2024, related to SS-2024-143 Single Source Prime Consultant to Design an Affordable Housing Project at 1958 Duluth Crecent, Block 5:

a)    architects Tillmann Ruth Robinson Inc. BE APPOINTED as the Prime Consultant service provider to complete the design and future contract administration for an Affordable Housing development at 1958 Duluth Crescent, Block 5 (Building A) at the total estimated amount of $651,572.00 (excluding HST) in accordance with s. 14.4(e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the financing for this assignment BE APPROVED, as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the above-noted staff report;

c)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts necessary in connection with this assignment;

d)    the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the prime consultant for the work;

e)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute any contract, or other documents including agreements, if required, to give effect to these recommendations; and,

f)    the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development BE DELEGATED authority to approve amendments or amending agreements associated with the formal contract with the prime consultant architect. (2024-S11)

Motion Passed

2.7   London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan 2024-2028

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.7) - 2024-2028 London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by H. McAlister

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 May 21, 2024, related to the London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan 2024-2028:

a)    the proposed London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan, 2024-2028, as appended to the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED and BE ENDORSED;

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to implement the proposed London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan; and,

c)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to this plan. (2024-S01)

Motion Passed

2.2   Neighbourhood Decision Making: 2024 Update

2024-05-21 - Staff Report (2.2) - Neighbourhood Decision Making 2024

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by J. Pribil

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the staff report dated May 21, 2024, with respect to the Neighbourhood Decision Making 2024 Update, BE RECEIVED; it being noted that a verbal delegation from B. Samuel, with respect to this matter, was received. (2024-D19)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by J. Pribil

Motion to approve the request for delegation from B. Samuels, to be heard at this meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at 1:53 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, 8 minutes)

Hello, Sarah, can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Okay, great, all good. Hello, everybody.

Welcome to the seventh meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee. Please, for council chambers, please check the city website for any 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 Anishnabic, Houdnashoni, Linna Peiwach, and Adawandran.

We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, 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. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternative formats and communications, supports for meetings upon request.

To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact cpsc@london.ca, or call 519-661-2489 extension 2425. I’ll now look to committee for any disclosures of interest. I see none. Okay, moving on to consents.

I have not been informed of anybody who wants to make any polls of any of the consent items, so I will look to committee to put the consents on the floor or speak to any of the consents. Councillor Colosa. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Do we need to pull item 2.2 in order to receive the delegation status that was requested? Yes, you do, and if you would like to pull it, I can pull that and put it under— I will pull 2.2 and then happy to put the rest on the floor. Thank you. Okay, so I’ve pulled 2.2 and I’m looking for a seconder to move the rest of the items, seconded by Councillor McAllister.

Okay, looking for any speakers for the items, 2.1 to 2.7 with the exclusion of 2.2. So, approval. Thank you, Mr. Chair to the staff, I’ll start with 2.3, please.

And I just had questions in regard compared to the budget because there are certain items that are currently listed for purchasing, and when I look at page 15, excuse me, and compared to the budget, there are certain things that are not included, just like Pumper Rescue, for example, we had three and 25 and 26, too. So, my question is this, was this reprioritized based on the needs of fire department, and if you reprioritize it based on urgency, are the other items that were listed under the large vehicles, are they gonna come back? Thank you. Thank you, Councillor, Ms.

Smith. Thank you, and through the chair, I’ll start, and then I’ll turn it over to Deputy Chief Hays, or Chief Hamer. That’s a really good question. When we prepared those documents, it was back in July or August of last year.

So, at that time, we assessed and we waited until we found out what was the total amount we would get through the next multi-year budget, 2024 to 2027. And so, through that, we looked at the budget amount, 226,637,000, and so, our request before you today is for 26,634,500. So, for all of our large vehicles, this is it. We have to order now, it’s about a 24-month timeline between ordering and procuring vehicles.

And also, if we order now through our group buying, we know that we can get a discounted price. And so, I will turn it over maybe to Deputy Chief Hays to talk about the priority of the vehicles in the report before you today, versus the total number of vehicles in the multi-year budget business case. Through you, Mr. Chair, thank you for your question.

In looking at what we had proposed to order, compared to what we are putting forward to, in this report to order, we have a resource and deployment committee that was looking at what vehicles we should have. And so, the bumper rescues are more expensive, and so, one of them you’ll see has been moved to an engine. So, it actually saves us some money. In the budgetary figures, we had established a 3.5% increase, and they were coming in at closer to 6% increase year on year.

So, it did make it a bit tight for us, and there are other vehicles that are not on this purchase list yet that we’re still looking to see if we can fund. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you for those answers. I do have a follow-up.

So, based on some of the things when you mentioned the Chief at a pump rescue, we were replaced by the engine, but when you look at four years, of course, we can identify certain things can happen, but based on this proposal, as of this moment, you don’t see that you would need to go beyond the capital unless something unpredictable happens, correct? Thank you. That is correct for you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, and the last question, when are we gonna get the proposal for the smaller vehicles? When is that coming forward, staff? We’re currently working on that right now, and so, I would say within the next couple of months, as information comes in, then we’ll be able to table that report, if a report is needed at that point. And based on current delivery times, et cetera, because everything seems to be more and more delayed, we don’t anticipate any difficulties with ordering within the two, three months.

For the smaller vehicles, a lot of them are already in stock on property, so we may be out to just purchase directly. Those that have to be special ordered would, of course, take longer. Perfect, thank you for the answers. No more questions?

Thank you, Councillor. Looking to the rest of the committee for any other comments or questions, Councillor McAllister. Thank you, and through the Chair. And congratulations, first meeting as Chair.

I have just a few comments, starting off with 2.5. I just want to take the opportunity to thank by-law staff in terms of the demolitions that are brought forward. I know there’s a lot of work that goes into this, and I’m just happy in terms of the pacing of these that are brought forward. Just appreciate the hard work that goes into this, ‘cause I get a lot of requests in my area.

It’s not just Board One, I see these all over the city, so I’m happy that these come before us, and we’re able to do something. Ideally, I’d like people to use the properties, but I think we do have to send the message that if you leave your properties derelict, that we will have to act on behalf of the community. In terms of 2.6, I also just wanted to say, I look forward to seeing this project. The one at Duluth Crescent.

I think these are the kind of projects that we absolutely should be doing. It’s great to see us increasing our affordable housing stock, and so I just want to say best of luck with staff moving forward with this project, so thank you. Thank you, Councillor. I have Councillor Palosa next.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And in regards to a question on the fire department single source requests, realizing some of the vehicles are coming for 2027, and the report on page 12 states that Cummins Inc. has advised that they’re just continuing the model of engine used by many fire apparatus, and then new models coming in 2025 at an increased cost.

Wondering through you to our guests who are on hand today, if we foresee any issues with getting parts for models that we already have that we have not discontinued, that we still have in use. And the second part is, could this be comparable to vehicles when a new model comes out, that we can anticipate extra problems with it, or is it normally a smooth transition? Thank you. Thank you, Councillor, to staff.

Thank you for your question through the chair. I would say that the new models of engines that are coming, there’s two that are affected, and that fund has been included into the ask today. I don’t foresee there have been any problems with our current fleet. They are expected to maintain a service stock of parts for 10 years at least, and being such a common engine, it’s likely we’d go well beyond that.

Thank you, Councillor. Thank you for that. I do not have a follow-up. Thank you, Councillor.

Looking, Councillor Pribble. Thank you, sir, the chair to the staff. Just 2.5, very happy to see Hastings drive on the list, and thank you as well. I do think that to be honestly exhausted, there’s even going before my term for years, and we exhausted all the options with the current, with this property, with the owners.

So thank you for all that work, and when I heard a couple of months ago that we are gonna look into fixing the roof and sending the contract to there, I’m glad that the result was demolishing, because I didn’t believe that it was safe. That building is to be safe. So thank you for all that work, and tremendously happy, and the entire neighbourhood around is also happy, because it’s not just the way it looks, but also safety and security of this property. So very happy about that.

Thank you for all the work. 2.6, regarding the Duluth and through the chair, I do have a question to the staff, and the block five, I know it stays here that it’s gonna be replicated, the forestry Thompson Road. So when it’s as replicated, it’s gonna be really, truly identical to each other. Thank you, Councillor, Mr.

Dickens. Oh, sorry, Mr. Pelbert. Through you, Mr.

Chair. So what’s wonderful about this is that we have, we have the model of that property, that building available to us, so that architect is able to take that design that they’ve created on the Thompson Road, they’re able to replicate that on that particular site. It’ll be as close as possible as we can get it to, recognizing that there might be some different site constraints that we have to account for. We’ll still go through site plan and all those other things.

Once the servicing, once the development has moved through to the stage where we can actually start the development of it. So this is really just the pre-design design work so that we can be ready when various programs are announced by different governments so that we can move more affordable housing forward. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you and follow up.

Based on this kind of the pre-design work, but I have two more questions. The first one is, are there any cost savings then in terms of this being a project, same organization, doing it, if there are any cost savings, that’s one question. And the second one, building the 56 units. What is the plan for that part?

Thank you. Through you, Mr. Chair. So yes, there is cost savings.

So we’re anticipating about a 20% cost savings from the, if we were to go out to market and go through a full RFP process. For the second stage, we haven’t created any plans for that one at this point. That’ll be coming forward in future. Ideally, we’d identify a partner and have them look towards creating a design and then building that, building that building in the future.

Okay, thank you. No more questions? Thank you, Councillor. Looking to committee, Councillor McAllister.

Thank you and through the chair. I guess I would be remiss without mentioning 2.7. Also want to acknowledge the hard work I’m sure staff put into development of this plan. And just a question to staff in terms of the rollout.

I mean, do we anticipate any issues in terms of increasing accessibility or capacity for providing these programs? Thank you, Councillor, Mr. Dickinson. Thank you, Chair and through you.

I’ll start this answer and then I’ll pass it off to Mr. Blaine, who’s our manager of community strategies and childcare and early years team. There’s always going to be some unknown challenges or constraints when you look at system expansion. Expanding services relies heavily on a full complement of early childhood educators in the system that continues to be a challenge province wide.

We do have a number of local strategies around workforce development. The Mr. Blaine and his team have been focused on as we look at training and its incentives for recruitment and retention of ECEs. There are childcare providers now that are looking to expand, but they do run into some of those roadblocks as well.

We’ve taken a number of very strategic steps to address the accessibility and targeting access and inclusion under the new Canada wide early learning and childcare program, but also locally how we can ensure the new childcare spaces match our local demographics and our priority needs as well. So if I haven’t taken all the air to that answer, I will pass it to Mr. Blaine. Thank you for your question through you, Mr.

Chair. Kevin gave a great answer there. The only thing I wanted to expand on is under the directed growth strategy at the Ministry of Education. Currently we’re on track to expand close to 2,900 spaces by the end of 2026, but that is highly dependent on what Mr.

Dickens mentioned there in terms of the registered ECE sector and having available staff to fill those locations. So we have a number of strategies and initiatives in this plan through our workforce strategy to hopefully recruit and retain staff in this sector as well as looking at a number of strategies to onboard operators through that directed growth plan. But as of right now in 2024, we are on track with that directed growth plan. And we look forward to hopefully increasing accessibility for those families that need care in our community.

Thank you for that, Councillor. Thank you for that answer, I appreciate it. Just as a follow up in terms, I’m sure you factor this into your calculations, but in terms of just the growth we’ve seen with our population, I would imagine that was taken into account, but I’m just curious, you want to comment in terms of just the growth that we’ve seen in factoring that into these programs. Thank you for your question through you, Mr.

Chair. So what you see in front of you, one of the biggest parts of this renewed plan was to update the data that we had access to. Our previous service system plan was working with 2016 census data. And as we know, as a community here in London, as well as Middlesex County, we have not only seen a drastic increase in families moving to our community, but also diversity in terms of the families that are coming here.

So this plan that you see in front of us is reflective of the data from the 2021 census, as well as the Ministry of Education through their directed growth strategy, those 2,900 spaces that we were allocated to make childcare more accessible in our community was also using that 2021 census data. Thank you, Councillor. I just want to say thank you for all the answers and best of luck in rolling out those programs. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor. Just looking for other committee members that haven’t spoke yet before I go to Councillor Pribble. I have none, Councillor Pribble. Thank you, sir, to chair to the staff regarding the 2.7 as well.

There was a staff mentioned that there were certain strategies that were implemented with focus also on the local needs. What is our plan now, let’s say we implement these strategies and as the time goes, how are we going to review these strategies or are the strategies are the best fitting in our community? And what is the process going to be? And if we find out, let’s say some of them are not the best for our community or are not working, how are we going to address it during these times?

I had to thank you, thank you. Thank you for your question through you, Mr. Chair. That’s a great question.

Something that we really are proud of in this plan is the flexibility that our strategic priorities allows for the next five years. You can imagine putting a five-year plan in place. One thing we noticed with our last plan is we had a worldwide pandemic show up within one year of implementing that plan. So lessons learned from that made us reconsider how we prioritized our local needs and made sure that we really focused on the provincial priorities, which is really around inclusivity, quality, accessibility and affordability.

And you will see those hopefully mirrored in the five strategic areas of focus in the plan in front of you there. And our goal with measuring our progress, there is a commitment in there annually to review the action steps that were in the implementation plan to make sure that they’re still relevant for our community. And there will be an annual report to the community and to council to outline the progress of this plan. And something else that we are very much committed to through this plan is ongoing engagement.

So there is a very extensive engagement plan put in place to develop the plan in front of you, but to make sure that we’re still reflective of the needs of our families, caregivers and children, we will have an ongoing engagement process that will involve talking to families, children, community partners through already established means so that we continue to hear what their needs are if we’re affecting any of the outcomes that we were looking to achieve through this plan and then to course correct if needed. Thank you very much for the answer. And I was glad to hear that we are gonna have a lot of engagement and we’ll be able to adjust as needed. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor. Looking to committee for any other comments or questions for the items, 2.1 to 2.7 excluding 2.2. Okay, I see none. Let’s call that question.

Councillor Trosto. Councillor votes, yes. Closing the vote, the motion carries, five to zero. Okay, that it’s not over actually.

We still have more scheduled items to go. Thank you, Lawrence. We are on scheduled items. I have no scheduled items and items for direction.

We have the pulled item 2.2, neighborhood decision-making. So I will look to committee to put that on the floor. I’m actually looking for a motion to approve the delegation. Okay, moved by Councillor McAllister, seconded by Councillor Pribble.

So I’m looking for the delegate. Okay, we need to vote on this first. So just prepare yourself. So votes, yes.

Closing the vote, the motion carries, five to zero. Okay, Mr. Samuels, thank you for submitting your delegation prior to the meeting. You have five minutes.

Good afternoon, members of the Community and Protective Services Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today about the neighborhood decision-making program. I’m personally a big supporter of this program and I’m really glad to see your committee taking a closer look at it. Over the past two months, the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee has requested an opportunity to discuss this program with staff.

We were advised by staff to wait until after this report was received by your committee. And we are still looking forward to meeting with staff. Should our committee have feedback to share at that point, it will be reported to counsel through the Civic Works Committee. Because we’ve not yet passed a resolution as a committee, I’m not here to speak on any recommendations on the committee’s behalf.

However, I wanted to let you know about the substance of our discussions about the neighborhood decision-making program to date. Several of our committee members, including myself, have interacted personally with this program in the past, and we have a few questions for your consideration. In general, I support the changes that staff discuss in this report. In particular, I support the changes to the process to allow for residents to vote for one larger idea that can be implemented for a larger pool of money, and then vote for up to three smaller ideas that can be implemented for less money.

I think this will offer a much higher yield and return on investment for the city. However, I am left wondering about a couple of things that I wanted to raise in the context of this meeting and this report for your consideration. Number one is that given that the MDM program doesn’t have the ability to fund every single idea that’s submitted, I’m wondering what happens to the ideas that are proposed by residents through the program are ultimately not supported, maybe because they don’t receive enough votes, but that reflect gaps in existing service or infrastructure that could be filled by the city otherwise. For example, sometimes applications will ask for benches to be installed in parks where there are none, or for trees to be planted in a barren area.

These requests from residents align with other ongoing programs supported by the city and could perhaps be materialized otherwise. So my question is, is there a process for those ideas to be received by relevant divisions of the city enacted on outside of neighborhood decision making? For instance, do other divisions of the city have access to review all of the submissions to the program? I’m also wondering if and how applicants to the program who are not successful at securing funding are informed about other opportunities to pursue funding for their idea, such as through community grants offered by the city.

In terms of our advisory committee’s focus, this report does not include any mention of climate change, and we’ve been wondering about how the city’s climate emergency action plan is considered as part of the application and review process for neighborhood decision making. Does the city have, for instance, a minimum number of climate-focused projects that they aim to support each cycle? If they’re not successful at securing funding through neighborhood decision making, will applications that are relevant to climate emergency action plan implementation ever be redirected by staff to other funding streams for implementation? Finally, I’m wondering about what staff resources are available to applicants to support successful implementation of their project.

For instance, recently, a project was awarded funding by the 2023 cycle of neighborhood decision making that aimed to distribute fruit trees in the community. Sadly, that project was compromised when organizers left the plants outdoors at a venue. They were stolen before the giveaway event began. And I’m wondering, like, how can that kind of outcome be avoided?

Were staff aware of the applicant’s plans? Is there hands-on sort of facilitation? Staff working with the applicant to make sure that their plans go ahead with success? Some of the projects that are received by neighborhood decision making do require specific technical guidance.

For example, I applied in the past for funding to support creation of species at risk habitat. At the time, staff deemed that that project was a bit beyond scope and too complicated. But it made me wonder if there were a need to consult with ecologists, for instance, or staff who work in stormwater about technical details of projects, if those staff resources can be lined up to help with implementation. So those are my questions.

I don’t know if there’s anyone here from staff today who can speak to those. I’m just sharing them for your information to complement the report that you received. Thanks for your time. Thank you, Mr.

Samuels. That was four minutes and eight seconds. So you do have some extra time. But I did jot down some of your questions.

I didn’t get them all, but I will go to staff to see if we can get some answers for that. So Ms. Smith. Thank you.

And through the chair, thank you very much for attending. And I’m sure my team looks forward to attending your future committee meeting. So hopefully I got them all to. I will start.

And then I have two experts behind me, Ms. Pollock and Ms. Martino. So ideas proposed but not supported.

How do you fill the gaps, like benches and trees? This is a really good question. We have a feasibility committee. And it’s represented from city staff from all service areas.

So we are not the experts, either in, for example, stormwater trees, ecology, parks. So those staff all sit on a feasibility. They review the project. They provide their expert guidance.

And they at— and often work with my team to help craft the idea so that it meets the guidelines. And hopefully it has the best success for achievement. So a really good question for example, benches, trees, traffic calming. Because we have a feasibility committee, those staff often say, well, we already have a process.

So why would we duplicate it through neighborhood decision making? They often say we have funds or resources to do this. So they inform the resident. And it goes out of neighborhood decision making and into that other city process.

Definitely we refer to our community grants program. And actually this year, I think it closes very soon. We have our very first council approved a new stream called Grass Roots funding, where we have $100,000. And this is for very small startups.

It doesn’t— you don’t even have to be incorporated. You can be two to three people with a really good idea. Just needs to align with council’s strategic plan. So we’ve been working with staff in Mr.

Stanford’s area to really get the word out to those small informal groups and individuals across London who are interested in— in the Climate Emergency Action Plan implementation. So yes, we do refer to community grants, other processes, et cetera. Neighborhood decision making is aligned with council’s strategic plans and all the strategic areas of focus. I had my team do a quick deep dive into the successful projects over the past number of years.

And if you looked at last year, for example, there were 15 successful projects. And seven of those would have been tied to the community— the Climate Emergency Action Plan. And that’s about— so it’s between 40% to 50% of year if projects are actually tied very closely to the Climate Emergency Action Plan. Staff resources to support implementation, that’s a very good question.

We do our best to support. If a project is in a public space like a park, we take the leadership on that with the resident. We’re very careful to talk to residents right from the very beginning to make sure that they or their neighborhood has the capacity to implement. We know people move.

Things change. People’s priorities sometimes change. So sometimes projects that we’re winning idea don’t come fully to fruition. I’m sorry to hear about the project that Mr.

Samuels referred to. But we offer our support. Ms. Martino has a team four who works very closely to help support the implementation of the neighbor decision-making projects.

As they are resident ideas and resident led, we come by invitation and we provide our support. And we also look for any technical guidance that we would need across all of our service areas. I’m not sure if I missed anything. Thank you, Ms.

Smith. I’m getting a thumbs up from the delegate. Nice. It looks like you did answer all the questions I had here.

But I will look back to you guys to see if you had anything else to add. Yes, thank you and through the chair. I’ll just add there are quite a few intentional ways that we align to the strategic plan. So included in the submission form, there’s a question that asks, how does this align to the strategic plan?

So idea submitters would actually describe the alignment. We also have a new outcome that was added last year related to how to protect your neighborhood and community from climate change. So that’s another piece that Council approved as part of an update to the guidelines. We also have an idea booklet that is almost like a menu of ideas that folks can look at that have been successful in the past.

And it includes considerations that are really important to consider, because these are resident-led ideas. And one of the new considerations we’re going to be adding this year is related to considerations of the environmental impact of your idea. And we have lots of tools and resources available to us. And we work closely with environmental programs to implement those tools and resources, like checklists, climate emergency action plan lens.

So there are lots of ways that we as staff are looking and helping to make sure that ideas are supporting climate action. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Palak.

And the delegate has nodding. Yep, okay, good. Looking at the committee for any questions or comments. Councilor Pervell.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This staff, first few comments. Glad to see the deep participation 22 to 23 was increased.

I think that’s great. And also they’re remapping and to be more fair, I really think that’s positive as well. I have a couple of questions too. Is this kind of a one year this year where we make the decision, the implementation is within the following year?

Is that kind of how it works or that’s our game plan? Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, thank you for the question.

We will be rolling out early this year as mentioned in the report, the 2020-24 neighborhood decision making in June of this year. So everything in this report will be implemented for this year. At the end of every year, we evaluate, we send out a survey to all those who participated, who voted, who submitted ideas, who won ideas. We do a follow up with all of our internal, internal colleagues across service areas.

So we continue to improve and enhance the program every year by implementing stronger engagement strategies, looking for more partners, where extended last year was very successful by extending voting week to a full week. So we continue to look for improvements and suggestions every year. So everything in this report will be implemented for June 2024, NDM. Thank you, Ms.

Smith, Councillor. Okay. And one more question in the report, it stated that if we were, if we, the implementation that we are planning to do this year, last year, we would have had 29 projects. And when I know 29 times, if I go even the lowest amount, which is 15,000, I come up with a $435,000 and this year we have 250.

What was our budget last year and previous years? Thank you. And through the chair, since it’s inception, the budget has been 250,000. So why we’re changing this is because last year, for 250,000, you got 15 projects through five geographic areas.

And so if we change the voting process, so last year or currently, people could vote for their top three. And so the top winning idea, if it was 30,000, would get 30,000, which means the next project had 20,000. If the next project was 15 or 20,000, your money, your 50,000 is used up in that area for two projects. So now what we’re doing to help improve fairness and equity is we’re saying you can vote for one big idea between 15 and 30,000.

So that’s one idea. And then everything below 15,000, you can vote for three ideas. So there are a lot of really innovative, resonant led activities that are $1,000, $2,000, but sometimes it’s the big parks that get the most votes. So this way, if we had used this process last year, we would have gotten a total of 29 projects for $250,000 because it would only allow one large project in between 50 and 30,000 in each of the five areas.

So now you can have one at 15,000 potentially, if that was number one, and then that leaves you already 5,000 for a host of small projects that could range anywhere from $1,000 to 15,000. So you would have seen 29 projects instead of 15, you would have seen the number, I think, about 11 more neighborhoods would have been successful in projects with this new process than they were last year. And I think we would have had an additional two to three more awards that would have had projects if we use this approach. So we’re really hoping with fairness and equity, it will allow more people to be, their ideas to be winners, which makes everybody happy and it’ll allow us for more neighborhood decision-making projects across the city and in neighborhoods.

Thank you for that answer, and I can understand it, but the only thing is then when it stated, we could add 29 projects, and when it stated 15 to 30,000, then even when it was the lowest, 29 times 15,000, I came up with 435,000, and the budget says 250. So actually in the 29, that would mean that some of those projects were actually under 15,000, correct? Sorry, thank you, you’re correct. The majority would have been under 15,000.

Thank you very much, no more questions. Thank you, Councilor McAllister, next. Yes, and thank you through the chair. Appreciate the opportunity to talk on the neighborhood decision-making, I always find it interesting in terms of the ideas that are brought forward, and I really do appreciate the fact that you’ve really called out the fairness and equity in terms of, we have five districts, which are roughly about 100,000 people, some lower, obviously, but huge areas, obviously, of the city, right?

So geographically, and so I’m just wondering if staff could speak to in terms of the ideas that come through and trying, with that fairness and equity in mind, to not have a cluster of ideas, ‘cause these are like large geographic areas, spread across many awards in each section, ‘cause we have just the five districts. So I’m just wondering in terms of the consideration that goes into trying to spread them out across the city. Thank you, Councilor Ms. Smith, and I have Councilor Palosa, next on the speakers list.

Thank you, and through the chair, I’m gonna turn it over to my team, because a lot of that has to do with the enhanced engagement strategies and our community connectors, and the really great job they do to engage all communities across London and the supports they supply. So I’m gonna turn it over to my team. Thank you for the question. So we are looking to expand the engagement strategies, and that expansion last year did have a significant impact on the number of individuals who voted and submitted ideas in different areas across the city, particularly in areas of high social risk.

So we’re gonna continue to expand on that this year, and what that’s gonna look like is more engagements at events, so neighborhood events, special events, community-led events. In areas of high social risk, we’ll continue to do that. There are pockets of high social risk in every planning district, and so we really do target at the neighborhood level. We’ll be going to more events with our community connectors, who speak a variety of languages.

We’re going to be going to more events that have a cultural focus, like the multicultural festivals. So we’re looking to really reach different groups that we haven’t reached before, whether or not that’s a community or a neighborhood that is in an area of high social risk. We’re also going to be really focusing on that idea submission phase. We already have a lot of information about what ideas are feasible, and so we can pass that on to residents before they try to go through all the process of actually developing the idea.

So we’re gonna have our community connectors and staff available to idea submitters out in the community, looking at workshops, and how to really hone in on an idea in order for it to be more successful. So that’s some of the work that we’re doing to expand engagement strategies. What we also want to do is continue to look at new partnerships. So one of the pieces we think was quite successful last year was partnering with our neighborhood resource centers because they know the communities that they are in, and we saw many of those members that participate at the neighborhood resource centers come out, submit ideas, and then vote.

So we will continue to look for partnerships with youth focus organizations, indigenous led organizations. We have an accessibility focus we want to be considering this year as well. So that is some of the work that we’re gonna be doing to continue to expand that engagement, and I really do think that supports city wide implementation and spreading out those ideas within those large five geographic areas. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor. Thank you for that, and I really do appreciate that the expansion of in terms of the engagement. And further to that, I just was curious, ‘cause I think it would be nice, obviously, to have some of these across the demographic spectrum. I don’t know in terms of conversations we’ve had with, say, like our senior centers or schools, but kids have a lot of ideas as well.

Very different in terms of maybe a senior citizen, right? So I’m just wondering if staff could speak in terms of just that diversity of ideas in terms of the demographic. Like I hear in terms of obviously catering to the different cultural side of things, but also just so we have a good spread in terms of catering to certain ages. Thank you, Councilor, back to staff.

Thank you, and through the chair, I can start. We often go to school classrooms. Young people are very passionate. It’s my favorite part of NDM when I volunteer to do a voting is that young people come in and they are great at going out and getting their neighbors to vote for projects.

So we often, and we work very closely with the school boards to support that and as school associations to support projects. And senior centers, 100%, we’ve had some great projects from senior center and from retirement home and from long-term care homes, actually. So because of our connections with the age-friendly London network and some of our community plans around children and youth and age-friendly, we make sure that we get the message out far and wide. And we also go to our very own senior centers that the city supports in London and our senior satellites.

Thank you, Councilor. Thank you. I really do appreciate all the answers. I’m also just wondering in terms of like voter engagement in terms of trying to get as many people involved as possible.

I know you’ve spoken obviously with engagement side, but I’m just wondering, do we have any other opportunities in terms of that face-to-face interaction? I do try to direct people to the website as much as possible if we’re getting involved, but I’m just wondering in terms of trying to get our voting numbers up to ensure that the projects that are funded have the widest possible approval. Thanks. Thank you, Councilor.

Back to staff. Thank you and through the chair. We saw actually that our expanded in-person voting had a significant impact on the number of people that came out. So last year, what we did was introduce five days of in-person voting.

So typically, it’s just one day. You can vote online for a week, but you weren’t actually able to come in and do and vote in person. So we had in-person voting available across the city in our 10 community centers, as well as innovation works, looking for a central location for folks to come out. And then we had in-person voting as we always do on the Saturday at the end of the voting week in every library across the city.

And that is where we see a lot of engagement and opportunity to hear from residents. They talk about the ideas. We have people of all ages, you really see that interaction, particularly with youth and children when they come out. And it’s their first time sort of putting a ballot in a vote box or learning about the democratic process.

So we continue to expand that in-person component. I think that’s a really insightful comment and important. And we’re going to be doing that as part of our engagement leading up to the vote as well. So again, we’re gonna be supporting idea, submission processes through workshops and having in-person opportunities in places where people are.

So that’s something that we’re looking at as well. Does that answer your question? Okay, thank you so much. Thank you, Councillor.

Yes, and thank you for all the answers. I really do appreciate it. And I agree with you. I just think this is a great opportunity in terms of especially giving youth and children the opportunity to directly pitch ideas, vote on them, and actually see them come to fruition.

I think it’s very powerful. And I hope that as they vote for that, they can, as they, you know, get to 18 that they decide, you know, I saw direct action, so I’m gonna keep voting. So I appreciate all the hard work that’s gone into this. I like the updates you’ve made.

I think they’ll be very impactful and just thanks again. Thank you, Councillor. I have Councillor Ploza next on the speakers list with no other speakers. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. As this one has been ongoing, it’s, I still have questions on this program. And the program and the engagement has expanded throughout the years in the terms of council. It originally was kind of more off the side of someone’s desk.

So my question through you to Ms. Smith is, now that you’re speaking of a team of four print material, digital material, in 10 days of voting, what does that estimate cost to run neighborhood decision making? Thank you, Councillor, Ms. Smith.

Thank you. And through the chair, and that’s a good question. So even though we answer strategies, we do it with the same resources. We have a team of summer casual staff called our community connectors, who support us not just in neighborhood decision making, but in outdoor movie nights and other activities we do.

We’ve had them over a number of years to support summer programs in the neighborhood supports area. And Jen and her team of four in total have been with us since 2017. So we do a lot and they work almost full time between this and other programs in the summer. This is a very concentrated effort for the team from about June to, I want to say September.

Thank you, Ms. Smith, Councillor. Thank you. I appreciate it being done in the same staff compliment.

And I certainly don’t question Ms. Martino and her team. I know she’s very engaged in the community and passionate about her work. I appreciate the staff report.

I know we’ve been trying to final ways throughout the years in the terms of council to identify some issues of getting greater engagement, different sectors of the community becoming engaged and trying to spread the money around that people still feel empowered. I know I appreciated the idea of generation and I know that staff use that as ideas of what communities are asking for. Even if it’s just a park bench and a park that sometimes we find other ways to get that done outside of neighborhood decision making when staff becomes aware of the need. So I appreciate it there.

I still have concerns about school board and barriers. I recognize that in some areas, the only green space available is a school. Just I know I have a school trying to be involved with neighborhood decision making. They’ll be back this year and they’ll be into your inbox soon, just trying to get over those school board barriers to get some work done in the community.

I still see issues even with the realignment, especially for the Southwest of certain neighborhoods competing that are more affluent versus those that are underserved. So looking forward to measures to help equalize that. And as we’ve gone through the conversations of adopting great engagement work with different cultural sectors in our community, looking at different ages and seniors that always a little bit worried that I hear from some community members now that they’ve been trying for years and haven’t gotten anything that they’re becoming disparaged with false hope and looking to no longer be engaged in the process. So as someone who became engaged in this process before being elected to council, I hear those communities’ concerns and just passing them along that as we’re working to find ways to do smaller pots of money, I think that could really help to address amazing from issues with residents becoming disparaged with false hope of funding.

So those just comments, I don’t even reply from staff as they’ve heard a lot from me behind the scenes, but grateful for this report and the work that staff continues to do in the community. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Looking to the committee for any further comments or questions, you see none.

Okay, I need a mover and a seconder for this item. Moved by Councillor McAllister, seconded by Councillor Pribble, and I’ll put the question to the vote. Councillor votes, yes. Sorry, e-scribes having some digital issues.

Councillor Palose votes, yes. Just a second. The clerk’s just going through e-scribe to resolve the issue. The committee, if everyone hits F5, I vote yes.

I apologize through the chair to confirm Councillor Trozzo and Councillor Palose that you had both indicated a yes vote. Yes. Councillor Trozzo. Yes.

I apologize for the technical difficulties. Motion carries five to zero. Thank you for that. That leads us to the next deferred matters, additional business, we have none.

And excuse me, Mr. Lawrence, I would have to, I know, I need to quorum, I need to quorum up there, please. Mr. Lawrence, I have to give you this last warning.

I need you to just not speak at the moment because we, Mr. Lawrence, I told you. Mr. Chair, would you like a motion to adjourn?

A motion to adjourn, please, yes. Moved by Councillor Palose. Seconded. Seconded.

Seconded. I said that you could speak at the next meeting if you submitted your delegation request. Let’s call the vote, and vote’s fine. All those in favor of adjournment?

Motion is carried for adjournment. We’re adjourned.