Open Council

19th Special Meeting of City Council - BUDGET

Open Council

19th Special Meeting of City Council - BUDGET

November 27, 2024, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:03 PM; it being noted that Councillors S. Trosow, P. Van Meerbergen, D. Ferreira and S. Hillier were in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED Councillor S. Lehman discloses a pecuniary interest in item 18, clause 3.12 of the 6th Report of the Budget Committee having to do with the Amendment  “Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Improving Safety/Security, Property Damage Grants”, by indicating that it relates to grants for Downtown London Business Association and the Councillor indicates they are member of the association.

2.   Recognitions

None.

3.   Review of Confidential Matters to be Considered in Public

None.

4.   Council, In Closed Session

None.

5.   Confirmation and Signing of the Minutes of the Previous Meeting(s)

None.

6.   Communications and Petitions

None.

7.   Motions of Which Notice is Given

None.

8.   Reports

8.1   4th Report of the Budget Committee

2024-10-29 Budget Report 4

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 4th Report of the Budget Committee BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.1.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.1.2   (3.1) 2025 2025 Annual Budget Update

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Mayor’s Proposed Budget was provided to each member of Council, the City Clerk, and the public on October 28, 2024.

Motion Passed

8.1.3   (3.2) 2025 Annual Budget Update Administrative Matters

Motion made by E. Peloza

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

a)    the Reconciliation of the Property Tax, Water and the Wastewater and Treatment Budgets to the Public Sector Accounting Board Financial Statement Budget (“Reconciliation”) as presented in the Mayor’s Tabled Budget for Council’s Consideration – 2025 Annual Budget Update (appended to the staff report dated October 29, 2024 as Appendix “A”) BE RECEIVED for information; 

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to update the Reconciliation based on final budget decisions and to publish it within the adopted 2025 Annual Budget Update document;

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to bring forward any necessary by-laws regarding the tax levy for introduction at Municipal Council; and

d)    the 2025 Annual Budget Update Presentation (as appended to the staff report as Appendix “B”) BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

8.2   5th Report of the Budget Committee

2024-11-19 Budget Report-PPM 5

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the 5th Report of the Budget Committee BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.2.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

Motion Passed

8.2.2   (3.1) Public Participation Meeting - Not to be heard before 4:00 PM - Budget

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the following written submissions for the 2025 Annual Budget Public Participation Meeting BE RECEIVED for consideration by the Municipal Council as part of the Multi-Year approval process:

  •    a communication from K. M. Pagniello, Executive Director and Lawyer and M. Laliberte, Staff Lawyer, Neighbourhood Legal Services;

  •    a communication from M. Davis, Supervisor, Responsive Community Care;

  •    a communication from A. Selk, Occupational Therapy Clinical Leader, VHA Rehab Solutions;

  •    a communication from C. Saika, Manager, Talisman Woods Housing Co-op, Executive Co-Ordinators Association of Southwestern Ontario (CASO);

  •    a communication from C. Tremeer, CEO/Executive Director and B. Verberne, Union President, OPSEU Local 116, Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex;

  •    a communication from M. Rioux, Chair, Board of Directors and M. Ciufo, Program Coordinator, Life*Spin;

  •    a communication from K. Tremblay, Virtual Professional Organizer;

  •    a communication from A. Summers, Medical Officer of Health, Middlesex-London Health Unit;

  •    a communication from C. Parra, Integrated Health Manager, London InterCommunity Health Centre;

  •    a communication from R. A. Patrick;

  •    a communication from P. Moore;

  •    a communication from C. Moss, Executive Director, London Cares; 

  •    a communication from P. Seale, Manager of Public Policy and Advocacy, Pillar Nonprofit Network; and 

  •    a communication from AM Valastro;

it being noted that at the public participation meeting associated with this matter, the following individuals made oral submissions regarding this matter:

  •    K. M. Pagniello; 

  •    P. Moore;

  •    AM. Valastro;

  •    Unknown; 

  •    M. Cassidy; 

  •    I. Brammall;

  •    M. Ciufo;

  •    B. Samuels; 

  •    T. Mackenzie-Picot;

  •    R. Gabel;

  •    G. MacDonald;

  •    D. Pasquino;

  •    C. Butler;

  •    F.  Panaitescu;

  •    V. Kniivila;

  •    Erica;

  •    M. Richardson;

  •    S. Campbell;

  •    S. Villeneuve;

  •    I. Leishman;

  •    J. Macpherson;

  •    S. Clark;

  •    D. Wrather;

  •    C. MacDonald;

  •    J. Lean;

  •    D. Peck;

  •    L. Mauffette-Leenders;

  •    Ashley;

  •    A. Keet;

  •    D. Boyce;

  •    R. Clem;

  •    Unknown;

  •    M. Sheehan;

  •    W. Bhagwandeen;

  •    Rudy;

  •    R. McGrath;

  •    C. Robinson;

  •    R. de Freitas;

  •    B. Muller;

  •    S. Forbes;

  •    V. da Silva;

  •    A. Schwanz;

  •    J. Wernham;

  •    R. Van Gelderen; 

  •    E. Akanbi; and

  •    Harris.

Motion Passed

8.3   6th Report of the Budget Committee

2024-11-21 Budget Report 5-Complete

Motion made by E. Peloza

That items 1 to 12 (5.2) of the 6th Report of the Budget Committee BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

8.3.1   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED Councillor S. Lehman discloses a pecuniary interest in item 3.2 having to do with the Amendment - Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Improving Safety/Security, Property Damage Grants, by indicating that it relates to grants for Downtown London Business Association and the Councillor indicates they are member of the association.

Motion Passed

8.3.2   (2.1) 2025 Annual Budget Update Civic Administration Presentation

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the budget presentation from the Deputy City Manager, Finance and Supports BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.3.3   (3.1) Mayor’s Budget

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Mayor’s Proposed Budget was provided to each member of Council, the City Clerk, and the public on October 28, 2024.

Motion Passed

8.3.4   (3.2) Amendment - Budget Case P-31 - Councillor and Budget Chair E. Peloza and Councillor S. Franke

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Parks Maintenance Service Enhancements and Supports based on Action 1 in Business Case P-31 – Parks Operations Service Delivery Enhancements is considered on November 22, 2024 as item 3.11 in this report.

Motion Passed

8.3.5   (3.3) Amendment - Budget Case P-13 - Councillor C. Rahman

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED to include one-time funding of up to $947,000 to support Ark Aid’s Cronyn-Warner location from one-time 2024 surplus in the Housing Stability Services operating budget and that Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to contribute $947,000 from the Housing Stability Services 2024 operating budget surplus to the Operating Budget Contingency Reserve to facilitate this funding (it being noted that staff have indicated a report will come to Council with information on support for Ark Aid through the Federal encampment funding and/or Q3 and Q4 2024 IHAP funding):

2025 Operating Expenditures:  $947,000           2025 Tax Levy:  $0              2025 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2026 Operating Expenditures:  $0                      2026 Tax Levy:  $0              2026 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2027 Operating Expenditures:  $0                      2027 Tax Levy:  $0              2027 Capital Expenditures:  $0

Motion Passed

8.3.6   (3.6) Amendment - Budget Case P-15 - Councillor S. Trosow and Councillor D. Ferreira

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED to include funding for the London Extreme Clean and Hoarding program based on 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget Business Case P-15 – “Hoarding/Extreme Clean Program” to be funded from the Life Stabilization Operating Budget:

2025 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2025 Tax Levy:  $0            

2025 Capital Expenditures:  $0

Motion Passed

8.3.7   (3.9) Amendment - Budget Case WWT-1 - Mayor J. Morgan and Budget Chair E. Peloza

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED to remove Budget Amendment WWT-1 (Budget Increase for Stormwater Management Facility (SWM) Land Acquisition):

2025 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2025 Rate Impact:  $0          

2025 Capital Expenditures: -$1,964,000

2026 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2026 Rate Impact:  $0          

2026 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2027 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2027 Rate Impact:  $0          

2027 Capital Expenditures:  $0

Motion Passed

8.3.8   (3.11) Amendment - Budget Case P-31 - Councillor and Budget Chair E. Peloza and Councillor S. Franke

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED to adjust Parks Maintenance Service Enhancements and Supports based on Action 1 in 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget Business Case P-31 – Parks Operations Service Delivery Enhancements from $827,000 of Parks Operating Expenditures to $808,000, with an equal adjustment to the contribution to the Climate Change Reserve Fund, and to adjust Parks Capital Expenditures from $560,000 to $221,000:

 

2025 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2025 Tax Levy:  $0          

2025 Capital Expenditures:  -$339,000

2026 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2026 Tax Levy:  $0           

2026 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2027 Operating Expenditures:  $0          2027 Tax Levy:  $0           

2027 Capital Expenditures:  $0

Motion Passed

8.3.9   (3.13) Amendment - Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Graffiti Removal, Power Washing, Expanded Street Cleaning and Beautification and Maintenance

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED by increasing the budget to provide a grant, funded from the Economic Development Reserve Fund, to the London Downtown Business Association for the purpose of additional cleaning and maintenance, such as graffiti removal, power washing, expanded street cleaning (garbage and sharps removal), and beautification and maintenance:

2025 Operating Expenditures: $300,000     2025 Tax Levy: $0    

2025 Capital Expenditures: $0

2026 Operating Expenditures: $300,000     2026 Tax Levy: $0    

2026 Capital Expenditures: $0

Motion Passed

8.3.10   (4.1) Middlesex-London Health Unit 2025 Funding Request

Motion made by E. Peloza

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

a)    the report regarding the Middlesex-London Health Unit’s (MLHU) 2025 additional one-time funding request BE RECEIVED for information; and

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to fund the City of London’s increased share of $226,954 for 2025 from the Operating Budget Contingency Reserve.

Motion Passed

8.3.11   (5.1) VHA Home HealthCare and Extreme Clean Program

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the request for funding the VHA Home HealthCare and its Extreme Clean Program, as referred to the Budget Committee on November 5, 2024, BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

8.3.12   (5.2) Amendment – Budget Case P-46 - Councillor S. Stevenson

Motion made by E. Peloza

That the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update BE AMENDED by reducing by $500,000 the additional annual contribution to the Economic Development Reserve Fund included in 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget Business Case P-46 – Economic and Partnerships Initiatives in the adopted 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget and that the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to transfer one million dollars from the Community Investment Reserve Fund to the Economic Development Reserve Fund in 2025 only;

2025 Operating Expenditures:  -$500,000         2025 Tax Levy:  -$500,000             2025 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2026 Operating Expenditures:  -$500,000          2026 Tax Levy:  -$500,000             2026 Capital Expenditures:  $0

2027 Operating Expenditures:  -$500,000          2027 Tax Levy:  -$500,000             2027 Capital Expenditures:  $0

Motion Passed

8.3.13   (3.4) Budget Case P-2 - Councillor S. Franke

Motion made by E. Peloza

That items 13 (3.4) to 21 (5.4), BE RECEIVED, with the exception of item 18 (3.12).

Motion Passed (15 to 0)

At 1:27 PM, His Worship Mayor J. Morgan, places Deputy Mayor S. Lewis in the Chair.

At 1:31 PM, His Worship Mayor J. Morgan resumes the Chair.

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update to remove Budget Amendment P-2 - “Pause Current City of London Annual Community Grants Program and Implement Reduce Program based on Availability of Funding”.

Motion Passed

8.3.14   (3.5) Budget Case P-3 - Councillor A. Hopkins

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update to remove Budget Amendment P-3 - “Pause Neighbourhood Decision Making Program”.

Motion Passed

8.3.15   (3.7) Budget Case P-16 - Councillor S. Trosow

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update to include funding for the Housing Stability Bank Expansion based on 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget Business Case P-16 - “Housing Stability Bank Expansion”.

Motion Passed

8.3.16   (3.8) Budget Case P-51 - Councillor C. Rahman

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update by reducing the London Transit Commission budget for the 2026 Budget Update. To reinstate this funding, LTC must submit an amendment for the 2026 Budget Update, the online booking system be operational and that a plan for implementing the 10,000 additional service hours for 2025 must be provided to Council no later than Q1 2025. The financials are outlined in the 2024-2027 Multi-Year Budget Business Case P-51 – “Transit Service Hours Growth”

Motion Passed

8.3.17   (3.10) London Police Services Operating Budget - Councillor S. Franke

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update by reducing the London Police Services operating budget.

Motion Passed

8.3.19   (3.14) Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Marketing and Promotion Initiatives

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee did not consider an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update related to an Amendment - Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Marketing and Promotion Initiatives.

Motion Passed

8.3.20   (5.3) Rapid Transit - East London Link - Councillor S. Stevenson

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update related to Rapid Transit - East London Link.

Motion Passed

8.3.21   (5.4) Unfunded Liability Reserve Fund - Councillor S. Stevenson

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update related to a drawdown from the Unfunded Liability Reserve Fund.

Motion Passed

8.3.18   (3.12) Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Improving Safety/Security, Property Damage Grants and Crime Prevention

Motion made by E. Peloza

That it BE NOTED that the Budget Committee considered an amendment to the Mayor’s 2025 Annual Budget Update related to a Grant - Economic Development Reserve Fund - Councillor D. Ferreira - LDBA for Improving Safety/Security, Property Damage Grants and Crime Prevention.

Motion Passed (12 to 2)

9.   Added Reports

None.

10.   Deferred Matters

None.

11.   Enquiries

None.

12.   Emergent Motions

None.

13.   By-laws

Motion made by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Introduction and First Reading of Bill No. 398, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

Motion made by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Second Reading of Bill No. 398, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

Motion made by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

That Third Reading of Bill No. 398, BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (14 to 1)

14.   Adjournment

Motion made by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Lewis

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 1:52 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, 3 minutes)

[14:32] Okay, thank you, please be seated. This is the 19th meeting of City Council. This is a special meeting devoted solely to the approval of the budget and taking the recommendations from the Budget Committee. The City of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabak, Haudenosaunee, Leni Peiwak, and Adawandran. We honor respect the history, languages, cultures, and diverse indigenous people who call this territory home.

[15:06] 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 live and work in this territory. As well, the City of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact council agenda at london.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. Now, we do not have a national anthem singer today, but what we have queued up, given it’s a special meeting, is the choir who sang at our original inauguration.

[15:43] So, if everybody would like to rise, you can feel free to join in, or you can listen to their beautiful voices. Please be seated.

[17:18] We get started with disclosures of pecuniary interest. Councillor Layman. I’ll declare conflict on number 18, 3.2, as I’m a member of the LDBA, and potentially apply for a grant that’s mentioned in that motion. Any other closures? Seeing none, we have no recognitions today. Nothing to review in confidential, to be considered in public, no closed session.

[17:52] We have no minutes to sign, no communications or petitions for this particular meeting. No motions to which notice was given, which means we can proceed into the budget related reports, of which you will see a number of them there today, both the items that were approved by the budget committee, as well as much like we did at the multi-year budget. The items that may have been considered, but were not approved, which can be packaged in either an IT being noted clause, or if colleagues at that point would like to reconsider one of those that they could do that at that time.

[18:29] Otherwise, they’ll be taken care of in an IT being noted that these were amendments considered in the budget process. And then at the end, we’ll have one by-law to pass, and that’ll bring it, bring us through. So I’m gonna have Budget Chair Palosa present the multiple budget committee related reports, and she’ll provide some more guidance on how she’s gonna walk us through this. So thank you. Thank you, Your Worship. I’m gonna put each report on the floor separate, just to keep things for the ease of expediency and clarity as we go forward. So I’m gonna put the entire, if there’s no one looking to pull anything, just the fourth report, the budget committee.

[19:06] This was our October 29th meeting in which staff, just in the mayor presented the budget to us. So if no one wants one, two, or three pulled from that, I will put the rest on the floor. Okay, so we’ll put all of 8.1 on the floor. And again, this is just something that we have to receive as part of the process. So go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. The only request I’ve had from behind the scenes is just looking to finance to remind us, as we start today’s discussions, on page 24 of your budget package was next steps, realizing once we pass it today, there’s veto powers and different day timelines of just going to Mr. Murray and his team, just to remind us of those process and timelines before we get into deliberations today.

[19:55] Thank you, through your worship. Yes, I will refer Council to page 24 of your budget document. The next step in the process, after approval of Council amendments to the mayor’s proposed budget, is then a 10-day period, period of up to 10 days for the mayor to provide written veto of Council’s amendments. I will note that the mayor has the ability to shorten that timeline. And in developing the schedule for this year, I believe the mayor had committed to providing a decision on vetoing by December the second latest, so that will then allow us to feed into the next steps in the process and align with existing Council meetings.

[20:38] So once we get through the mayor’s veto period, that would then open up a 15-day period for Council to potentially override the mayor’s veto with a two-thirds majority in the event that Council wishes to do so. Thank you. Okay, so what we got on the floor is all of 8.1. I don’t know if there’s any discussion on any of that. Okay, we’ll open that for voting. Council votes yes.

[21:19] Those in the vote motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, go ahead, budget Chair Palosa. Thank you, what next one is 8.2, the fifth report of the budget committee. This was our public participation meeting on November 19th. I will put the entire report on the floor. Okay, this is just the public participation meeting on the fifth report. That’s moved, any discussion? All right, seeing them, we’ll open that for voting. Council votes yes.

[22:03] Those in the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Go ahead. Thank you. This moves us along to the sixth report of the budget committee. As noted earlier, items one to 12. I can handle those separate. Happy to put those on the floor, realizing as we get into other items that I know a couple need to be pulled. Or do you want me to pull them now, your disposal? I think we can do one to 12 first.

[22:35] Those are the things that we ended up approving. If anybody would like any of those one to 12, dealt with separately, we could, or we could proceed with voting on those. Are there anybody like anything from one to 12 separate? Okay, looks like that’s okay. So any discussion then on that? Okay, seeing none, we’ll open items one to 12 for voting. Senator and Councilor Trosto indicated verbally yes, closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero.

[23:44] Okay, go ahead. Thank you. Under the other items, as the mayor said, this was the it being noted section that these were discussed during our budget deliberations, but they did not make it into the budget as for amendments. Number 18 will need to be dealt with separate, as Councilor Lehman has declared a public conflict. I wasn’t personally made aware of any others, but I know the mayor might have been. So I was just talking to the clerk procedurally, given this as part of it, and it being noted these were discussed clause, it would be, so we’ll have a separate it being noted for the 18, number 18.

[24:24] We’ll have it being noted for the others. If someone would like to revisit any of these, the easiest thing is to indicate now that you would like to potentially pull it out. And that would require a mover and a seconder to take an action on it. If there was no seconder, let’s say for example, but it would just go back and we would consider the it being noted a vote on whatever items they were. So just because it’s pulled doesn’t mean we’re going to put it on the floor again, and just have the opportunity to put it on the floor, but it would require a mover and a seconder for any one of these items, because they are not being presented by the budget chair, they would be being moved as new items since they did not make it through the committee.

[25:05] So, but we’ll deal with all those first that we can package all the it being noted back together. So is there anything other than 18 that colleagues would like us to consider separately? Yes, go ahead, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, I did send a message saying I’d like 21 pulled. So 18 and 21, any other ones? Okay, so I think the best way to proceed chair just based on the advice of the clerks is we could deal with the 21 first, because we’ll see if the councilor wants to move a motion and have a seconder on that.

[25:56] If that does not have a seconder or is not successful, we can package everything back up into the it being noted because it would have been noted that it was a discussion. So we’ll deal with that item first, that way we can get that out of the way, we can kind of clean everything up all at once at the end. So we’ll move to item 21, and I’ll go to Councillor Stevenson to potentially move either putting it back on the floor or making the same motion or whatever it is that you’re intending to do with it. Thank you, yeah, I would like to put it back on the floor if there’s a seconder to discuss a potential two percent reduction of the 2025 tax levy increase for next year.

[26:36] Okay, I’ll look to see if there’s a seconder for that. I don’t see a seconder, so. I don’t see one either, so I’ll stand alone, thank you. Okay, so now we’ll go back to the, considering the it being noted. So we’re gonna do all of the it being noted with the exception of 18. Okay, let’s do 18 first, the Councillor Lamas. So we’ll put, budget chair will put the it being noted that 18 was discussed as a possible amendment on the floor by the chair, any discussion on that?

[27:17] Okay, we’ll open that for voting then. That’s a vote, yes. Opposed in the vote, motion carries 12 to two with one recuse.

[27:54] Okay, now there’ll be an it being noted with all of the other items together for the same reason with no conflict. So that’s put on the floor by the budget chair, any discussion on this being noted? Go ahead Councillor Stevenson. I will speak to 21, and although there wasn’t a seconder and no willingness by council to discuss this further, I listened intensely last Friday to my colleagues. And as you know, I was a professional accountant for 25 years.

[28:37] And the thought that taking $16 million temporarily from a discretionary reserve fund of which we have over 1.2 billion, the thought that the sky will fall and our credit rating will collapse by this temporary motion to give back to taxpayers their tax savings at the time when they are really hurting. Reserve funds are and may be used to maintain control property tax rates.

[29:15] They can be used and converted to other uses with council’s approval. It’s right in our financial statements. So I guess my question is if I have a question to staff, if reserve funds are available to maintain control property tax rates, does the city of London have sex to reserve? And if so, how much is in it? That’s gonna be Mr. Murray, Ms. Barbara. Through you your worship.

[29:51] So in general terms, reserve funds do have specific purposes that govern them. They are laid out in the reserve fund bylaws for those specific reserve funds. Council can choose to use those for different purposes on council’s resolution to do so. However, they are intended for specific purposes as laid out in those specific reserve funds. With respect to the question of, is there a reserve fund specifically for tax levy mitigation?

[30:23] There is not a reserve fund specifically for that reason. However, we do have our operating budget contingency reserve. Now that is intended for multiple purposes. That provides working capital for the corporation to allow us to pay the bills. That provides liquidity to manage the ups and downs of our cash flows throughout the year. So it is not intended as a tax levy mitigation tool in general terms. Currently the operating budget contingency reserve has a balance of approximately an uncommitted balance for approximately $37 million give or take.

[31:04] Go ahead, Councilor. Okay, thank you very much. Taxpayers are concerned. They are very concerned about the increasing property tax rates that’s, we’re into our second year of over 7%. Our discretionary reserves are currently, or at the end of 2023, totaled $1.2 billion. In 2014, they were 400 million. In 2018, they were 663 million. In 2022, they were 1.1 billion.

[31:39] They went up by over $100 million in 2023. The reserve funds are generated investment income of 27 million in 2023 and 17 million in 2022. 16 million is half of last year’s surplus. Reducing the reserve fund for an unfunded liability of $313 million, we’re way, way short of meeting that liability. So when we say we can’t take money from there, because we owe that money, we don’t even have said aside even half, or approximately half of what we actually owe.

[32:19] I appreciate people’s comments and the apprehension to deplete savings. But these are the tax dollars of residents that we put away with their willingness into our reserves. We have escalating debt servicing costs and escalating debt that when we looked at the budget in 2023, in December of 2023, and then we passed our multi-year budget, our debt servicing went from $27 million a year to $90 million a year, that’s what we first saw, to $27 million to $144 million a year.

[32:58] Our debt doubled in the projections from $397 million to $801 million, and we have not discussed it. So I will ask to staff, do we know at all what the debt servicing pressure is going to do to subsequent years? Is it reasonable to say that we’re looking at 2% a year for the next few years just in debt servicing increases? I’ll go to Mr. Murray, Councilor Trossawa here.

[33:34] I see your hand up and I’ll get to you on the speaker’s list. It’s a point of order. Okay, if it’s a point of order, we’ll deal with that now. Go ahead, Councilor. I just recall that we just brought this to discussion and it was not a second. Are we not now debating an item for which there was not a second? Yes, Councilor, so I’m trying to provide a leeway here that we discussed in the previous multi-year budget and that is there is no motion on the floor, but there is a recognition that we discussed these amendments on the floor.

[34:23] The Councilor has chosen to provide some commentary on that particular amendment in asking some questions of staff. You’re right, we will not be making an alternate decision, but it is something that process that we tried to set up to allow for as much discussion as possible last year that is why we are where we are. So the Councilor’s got under two minutes left. I’m gonna let her proceed with her comments and then anybody else who needs to make any comments on these other items can, but we’re considering just the it being noted piece, but it is actually a motion on the floor, so I’m gonna allow the Councilor to speak to it and I’ll go to Mr. Murray to answer the question.

[35:11] Thank you and through your worship. So I believe the Councilor’s referring to page 86 of the budget document for 2025. So the figures that the Councilor has quoted, that represents total tax-supported debt service and costs, so included in that, however, is debt servicing costs that are not tax-funded. So for example, the city services reserve funds are DC debt. That is included in those figures. Other debt, specifically debt that’s funded through other sources of revenue, for example, the municipal accommodation tax, that is included in those figures as well.

[35:52] So the figures that the Councilor’s referring to does include other things that will not impact the property tax levy into the future. Having said that, the future debt servicing costs are projected to go up and this is based on our current forecast, we will be recasting this forecast again, as part of the 2026 annual update and as part of the 2027 annual update as well. So there may be adjustments into the future. So but having said that, the projections are that debt will and debt servicing will increase over the coming years.

[36:27] However, we are fortunate to have a number of good policy tools at our disposal to chip away and work away at that debt so that we don’t have to issue that debt and those servicing costs don’t come to fruition. So specifically, I’ll refer to the surplus deficit policy, which allocates 50% of any year-end surplus to reduce authorized but unissued debt. Similarly, the assessment growth policy, any unallocated assessment growth in any particular year, 50% of that goes to reduce authorized but unissued debt as well.

[36:59] So we do have tools in our toolbox, if you will, to chip away at this and to prevent the issuance of that debt and the subsequent servicing costs. Councilor, you got about 145 left. Okay, thank you very much. And I do appreciate, I’ve had a lot of questions and I’ve been getting a lot of answers from the finance group over the last week or so and I really appreciate it. Londoners have been pleading to me. I don’t know about the other Councillors but the residents in my ward have been pleading to say we cannot afford these high property tax rate increases year after year and that is what is projected if we do not change.

[37:45] Things are not going to get less expensive unless we decide to take a really hard, serious look at the programs and services that have been compounding over the last decade through the decisions of previous councils that may have made sense, I’m sure they did make sense at the time but upon reflection now with the fiscal pressures that we are under, that we have chosen into through taking on the debt that we have approved through this multi-year budget for what we are handing to the next term of council, I feel very much that it is our responsibility to take a much deeper dive than what was done in the SWORD committee.

[38:29] Although that too had good intentions, it did not realize the results that the Londoners that I speak are expecting. So how will these large and escalating debt servicing costs be absorbed in future budgets? How will they? If we are going to need to take a deep dive into programs, services and overhead costs eventually, why not do it in 2025? 2026 will be an election year and 2027 will be the start of another multi-year budget process for 20 to 2031. If not us, then who, if not now, then when?

[39:09] Okay, I put myself on the list next, so I’ll turn it over to Deputy Mary Lewis. Thank you, Your Worship. I will take the chair and recognize Mayor Morgan. So thank you colleagues. It’s not my intent to get into a significant debate about the other items here, but I will take the opportunity to provide some commentary on the comments that were just made by the council, of course, through the presiding officer. I don’t disagree that we need to take a hard look at the budget.

[39:40] I think this award committee has an opportunity and mandate to continue to do that. I think that this council has the ability to continue to do that. And I do not think that those comments have anything to do with the motion that was proposed. There’s a reason that there wasn’t a seconder for this. It’s not because members of this council don’t want to find savings for taxpayers. I think absolutely every single member of this council would like to do that. But the motion on the floor was a very specific way to do that. And so I just want to clearly articulate what I heard because I know the councilor put out some information in social media.

[40:16] I certainly received the emails and I can tell you what my response was. I was very transparent about what the motion would do. Yes, it would reduce the 2025 tax burden by 2%. But it was not a sustainable cut. It would go back up by an additional 2% in 2026. And when people were told that, they said, well, that’s going the wrong direction because going from 6.4 to 8.4 in 2026 is absolutely the wrong direction. We had 8.7 last year through tax policy and education tax that came down to 7.7.

[40:50] We had 8.7 this year through the budget I tabled and the work of this council, which I commend you for, down to 7.3. And when we do tax policy and education taxes in the spring, hopefully that’ll come down more. Going the other direction in 2026 is not anything any of us want to do. So yes, I think we all want to find tax savings. But it is the way that was described looking seriously into programs, finding sustainable cuts that transcend the years, not an artificial one year down the next year back up. That simply kicks the can down the road that year and that is not something that lenders want us to do.

[41:26] They want us to find long-term sustainable tax savings to the budget so that they get the savings each and every year, like the work in service review that our staff does, who again found another $6 million through that process. And through the course, and that’s on top of the course of what they found at the tabling of the multi-year budget, which was I believe 10 million and 3 million one time. Through the course of that service review process over the last decade, they’ve carved over $50 million out of the base budget of the municipal council, equaling savings of well over $200 million over that time period.

[42:01] You know, that’s the kind of sustainable savings that lenders expect us to dive into. And it is not the easiest thing to find. You’ve got to make tough decisions. You’ve got to dig deep. You’ve got to take the time to go through those departments. It’s exactly why this council supported boards and commissions, who remember, when we tabled the multi-year budget, civic administration’s budgets was at 2.2%, plus the capital financing portion. But if we provide training to boards and commissions, we can help them try to find savings in their budgets and continue along the lines of the good work that our staff have done as well.

[42:33] So make no mistake, this council, and I think every single member is committed to trying to bring the budget down, find savings, be as efficient as possible with the resources that we have, while achieving the goals in our strategic plan. But we’re not going to do that in a way that is artificial and not sustained and only kicks the problem down the road one year and pushes us in the wrong direction in 2026 up to 8.4. That’s like going back to where we started in the multi-year budget process. And I think we need to continue on the trend line that we’re on, not return to the start of the race.

[43:10] Thank you, Your Worship. I will return the chair to you and I have no other speakers on the list. Councillor Layman and then Councillor Frank. Thank you, Mayor. Let me start off by saying that of all the emotions in front of us, this one was one that I was sorely tempted to support. As the Mayor said, who amongst us don’t want to see attacks cut people, we realize people are really being challenged right now with cost of living.

[43:43] Of course, we believe that. I could have, knowing, I knew this motion would probably fail given the results of the last vote in our working group or committee. But with that, then the right thing to do, to say, well, you know, and I could say, well, I voted to cut your taxes by 2%, knowing full well that this would have lost, but I couldn’t do it. You know, I gotta be true to what I believe. And I agree with the Mayor in that this is the wrong way to go about finding savings for London taxpayers.

[44:23] Using an unfunded liability account, that’s easy. We can just, why not make it 3%, 4%. The idea I imagine was that if we took $16 million, why our feet would have been to the fire to find $16 million next year to find it? If the Councillor had come to us and said, listen, here’s $16 million in savings through this action, this action, this action, this action, I would have been pleased to consider that, strongly, to see what we can do. But I can’t just go the easy route and saying let’s just take it from this unfunded liability ‘cause that’s a name it implies.

[44:59] It’s a liability that we owe at some point. We’ve always been a good fiscally managed institution. I think our AAA credit rating, regardless of what term of council has been, has been to protect that and to lean on our extremely talented financial team to make sure we do not stray from that discipline. Now, that doesn’t absolve us from still getting there. Let’s work next term starting tomorrow on making the head roads and fighting that $16 million for the property taxpayers.

[45:40] In true ways, in true savings, as opposed to just taking it from a certain unfunded liability account. ‘Cause what we’re doing, as a mayor said, is sure, it would be a temporary feel good 2% down, but man, we get hit next year when that 2%‘s at it back in. So let’s keep the direction we’re going, but let’s work hard to find savings for our taxpayers’ alignment and get that tax rate down further. Thank you. Councillor Frank to the end, Councillor Cutty. Thank you, and I’ll be quick ‘cause I didn’t plan on speaking either, but I thought I had to add my two cents regarding this.

[46:19] And I just wanted to remind folks, but I’m sure no one actually needs any reminders. But when we’re complaining about tax pressures, the police budget was just under half of the entire increase for the last two years, 5% of 8.7% last year, 2% of the 7.4% this year. And so if we want to find savings, we could have supported a reduction in our biggest cost driver, but we didn’t. And regardless, I also agree with the mayor and Councillor Layman that if we want to find reductions, we need to be looking for real places to make real reductions and not artificial ones. So thanks. Councillor Cutty and then Councillor Hopkins. Thank you, worship and through you.

[46:52] I want to take a moment to thank my colleague for bringing this forward and for finding an opportunity to try to save taxpayers money. We all want to do that, as you mentioned, your worship. And as Councillor Layman said, while there are ways to do it, this is not the way to do it. Playing jeopardy with our credit rating is not the way to do it. I’ve had numerous conversations with Mr. Murray. Our credit rating is critical to us, critical to the city, critical to us saving money for the future.

[47:28] I serve on SWORG, which your ship you’ve put together and you asked our budget chief to chair. That’s an opportunity for us to continue forward and to find savings. It’s my plan to keep on working in that effort. Your worship, my constituents are hardworking. Many are hourly laborers. Many are retirees on pension. This is hard on them. But I will dedicate the next year to working for my constituents to work for the constituents of the city to find tax savings. Thank you. Hopkins, go ahead.

[48:03] Yeah, thank you, your worship. And I too was not gonna speak to this, but I will. And I appreciate the conversation here wanting to reduce the tax levy ‘cause it is quite high. I do hear from residents that we need to reduce that. What I hear is that we need to reduce it through the police budget. That was the highest cost driver in our tax levy. And I want to reiterate what I’m hearing from residents is the police budget being high.

[48:40] Go ahead, Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you, Your Worship. I’m gonna try not to repeat too much of what I’ve heard ‘cause I agree with much of what was said. Although respectfully, I’m not hearing from my constituents reduce the police budget. I’m hearing from my constituents that they appreciate seeing more officers on the street doing traffic stops, that they appreciate the fact that the 911 response times are coming down. So while that may not be what other counselors are hearing, and I will say, I don’t take 45 speakers in the gallery at a PPM as being representative of half a million people anymore than I take 43 responses on the Get Involved survey as being representative of that many people.

[49:18] Yes, those people came and shared their thoughts with us, but we had people share their thoughts with us in many other ways as well. What I will say though, is that I agree with the fact that we need to find permanent opportunities for savings and efficiencies. But I will tell you, trying to find 16 million in one year for next year would have one result, drastic service cuts in some area in one way, shape, or form. And I don’t wanna be in a position of telling residents in July, sorry, we’re not gonna have swimming lessons at our community pools this summer because we reduced the budget and we can’t find the savings.

[49:56] Or that come the end of October, sorry, your next garbage collection is gonna be January because we just didn’t budget properly, we can’t find the savings and now our choices send you a second bill or eliminate a service. I recall very clearly how long it took the city to recover from an artificial zero percent tax increase under a former council who were playing to the, we have to keep taxes down. While I’m having an honest conversation with my residents, cities are not immune to inflationary pressures and we are not allowed to run deficits.

[50:32] We must run balanced operating budgets annually. Property taxes are never going to go down if we want to continue to provide services because fuel in our vehicles, paying our employees, keeping the lights on in our facilities, the cost of doing all of those things continues to rise. And I agree that the last two years of budget hikes have been steep for homeowners. I’m a homeowner myself. I see it on my own property taxes. But I will tell you this, just one quarter percent interest rate cut by the Bank of Canada this year did more for savings on a household mortgage renewal than what is going to be impacted by these property taxes.

[51:17] And really, if we want to see property taxes come down, I would encourage residents to write their MPPs and to write the Premier and say instead of sending us a $200 check to cover our property taxes for one year, transfer that three billion to municipalities year over year so that they can provide the services that we ask them to provide because that is the real issue here. Well, we have other levels of government offering to send people checks that would cover your property taxes for this year. They’re not transferring the funding to municipalities to pay for the services and programs that you expect us to deliver.

[51:50] So if you really want your property taxes to come down, write your MPPs and MPPs and tell them it’s time for municipalities to get a new fiscal deal because we cannot continue to do everything on property taxes while they try to buy your votes by handing out rebate checks on the verge of an election year. Councilor Pribble and then McAllister. Thank you and I just, I’m gonna look into the future more and I really hope that I know someone said tomorrow, I don’t think it’s gonna be tomorrow, but honestly, January 2nd that our leadership team and hopefully with us as well, but certainly leadership team is gonna revisit really deeply all the programs that we offer because again, if I look at $2 million, we are looking at kind of $60 million, it’s like 1.2% of our annual budget and I really hope that we are gonna as a team look into it and really deliver the results starting next year to decrease the taxes even lower than they are.

[52:52] And the other part is economic growth and I really think that that’s an area that we need to improve on. So we really diversify our industry, our businesses, our commerce because we really need to be with all the pressures that are ahead of us. We need to be ready and we need to be ready for these challenges. So let’s look into the future and I’m really looking forward to our senior staff to attack this and give us some proposals starting January, how we are gonna revisit it, how we are gonna look into it and how we are gonna deliver the results that often land of Londoners want us to deliver.

[53:27] Thank you. Councilor McAllister and then Council Raman. Thank you through the chair. Along the same lines as the Deputy Mayor said, I think one of the things throughout the budget process that always strikes me is yes, municipal services have grown over time, but I really view that as a byproduct of the downloading that’s happened, especially the province. I’ve also heard the comments made in terms of prioritization. And I would say the two things that I often hear, especially when a bunch of discussions come up, housing and homelessness are still top of mind.

[54:05] And those are responsibilities that I think that the province still needs to come to the table with some real dollars. I do think the federal government for the money that was provided in terms of the money for homelessness, I know they were waiting in terms of the province to come to the table, we’re still waiting for that. I want us to be whole. I know it’s something AMO stresses a lot. We wanna see that money flow from the province. I don’t fully expect everything to be re-uploaded, but if things are gonna be downloaded, I would like the money to come with it because as a municipality and as was being said by a number of my colleagues, I do not think the property tax is the appropriate place to be funding a lot of housing and healthcare dollars, to be honest with you.

[54:45] So for me, I wanna say thank you to all my colleagues through this budget discussions. I know it’s been a while, and we keep having these tough discussions, but I also want there to be accountability with other levels of government. We are one player, but we need everyone to come to the table with money to show results for the city. Thank you. Councillor ramen. Thank you and through you. So first, I wanna take a moment to say thank you to the budget chair, the mayor and staff for what’s in front of us today. But I hear from Londoners as well, that they’d like us to do better.

[55:20] So I wanna comment first on the unfunded liabilities component of this discussion. First, I wanna thank my council colleague for striking a conversation. And it’s definitely a conversation we need to continue to keep having. However, I don’t think that the savings that are available through the unfunded liabilities are the way to go. When I proposed moving money from reserves to savings at a smaller amount for savings, my colleagues called it a budget bomb. Surprised that the same language isn’t being used now. Through SWORG, I worked to bring forward a $3 million from reserve into multi-year savings that we did see through the mayor’s budget.

[55:59] I wanna speak globally about some of the amendments that I didn’t support that are still here. Some including bathroom cleaning in our parks, MLHU increases, downtown London’s additional increases that I’m not in full support of. But I supported today in this budget because I do think that although we are, you know, in these budget committee meetings to have good discussion and debate about the things we do and don’t support in the city, when the budget comes forward, we need to do our best to coalesce around the direction that we’re heading in and where funding is going.

[56:38] And the reason for that is because the community needs to hear that we’re all doing what we can to find savings and efficiencies, but we’re also supportive of the programs that we also have and the opportunities that we have in the city currently. But what I’m seeing is not that. What I’m seeing is that we’re championing motions in an all or nothing standpoint at times and that is leading to distrust in the public as well. So what I heard today, repeated by many of my colleagues, was that they’d like to see a direction that staff be given a direction to find further savings.

[57:21] Staff do that annually through the service review and those savings have been, as the mayor highlighted, quite considerable. But what I’m hearing is that we want to take additional direction. So I just wanted to ask through the chair whether or not that additional direction would be something that is needed at SWIRG at an upcoming meeting, or would the mayor entertain that in his budget going forward? So I’m happy to address that.

[57:57] So I do think SWIRG is a place for these ideas to come to. It’s got the full mandate. It’s populated with council committee members. It has a process to bring those savings forward. And I absolutely, as you’ve seen me do in this table budget, respect the discussions and the motions that council has brought forward for consideration in the budget process. And so I think that the direction is there. The structure is there. And I agree with what has been said about the work that our staff is doing, but if councilors want to have a serious discussion about a program of this municipality, it can start at that committee, receive the support of the wider council, and then the information can come forward on whether or not we want to make that decision together and through the budget process.

[58:47] But there is an opportunity for those tough discussions to happen and the structure is there. So I would encourage colleagues to use that. Thank you. And I appreciate that response and we’ll look to do that. So we know the mechanism and we’re hearing from councilors today that there’s that desire. And I’ll look to further that work as we move forward on a line-by-line basis, as I see and hear that we’re looking to do at this time. For now, what’s in front of us today, I will support, and I want to thank again my colleagues and staff for their work.

[59:24] Thank you. Okay, that’s all the speakers I have on the it being noted piece. So we’re going to open that it being noted clause for approval. That’s no vote, yes. Closing the vote, motion carries 15 to zero. Okay, we got no added reports, no deferred matters. I don’t think there’s any inquiries related to this special meeting.

[59:58] So it’s got to be on topic related to this. Okay, none, no emergency motions. We have one by-law to pass, which is the confirming by-law for this special meeting, which is the standard by-law we pass every meeting. I’ll look for a mover and a seconder for bill 398. Councillor Cutty and Deputy Mayor Lewis will open first reading as soon as it’s ready. Councillor Truswell.

[1:00:32] I vote no. Closing the vote, motion carries 14 to one. Okay, second reading of the confirming by-law. Same mover and seconder or nodding, yep. So we’ll open that. Oh, any discussion on the confirming by-law? Yes, Councillor Truswell. Yes, I just wanted to indicate that I, well, I didn’t speak on the last matter. I just wanna make it clear that people can look at our votes from the budget committee to get a sense of where we stand on a lot of things. I’m speaking now, I’m going to vote no on the overall budget, because while there are a lot of things that are in the budget that I support, there are, is this out of order?

[1:01:15] Yeah, well, you’re not voting on the overall budget. The confirming by-law is a by-law that we pass at the end of each meeting to just confirm that we had a meeting and clean up all the resolutions. It’s more of a procedural thing than anything. There is no final vote on the budget because what we passed today was a series of amendments which changes the budget from the one that I tabled to a budget that now has all of Council’s amendments attached to it. So that process is over. Yeah, thank you. Thank you for that. That’s exactly the same point I tried to raise during the multi-year budget.

[1:01:48] So I just wanted to understood that people, when they wanna understand where we stand on these different issues, they really need to look at the budget committee. And with that, I’ll withdraw my objection based on what you just said. Okay, thanks, appreciate that. With that, we’ll open second reading for voting. Yes on this, also. Closing the vote, motion carries 14 to one.

[1:02:25] Okay. And that moves us to adjourn. Before we adjourn, I’m just gonna make one comment from the chair. I was indicated by Mr. Murray at the start that I express my indication to declare my intent on whether or not DeVito, any of Council’s amendments by December 2nd, I can indicate to you today that I have no intention of vetoing any of these and I will probably proceed with providing that.

[1:03:00] Okay, so I’m gonna make one comment from the chair. I was indicated by Mr. Murray at the start that I express my due to any of these and I will probably proceed with providing that formally in writing with the clerk sooner rather than later to bring the budget into effect. So I might do that later today. I’ll just make sure I know exactly what words to put in writing and just so colleagues know you don’t have to wait until the second to just make it clear that I have no intention of vetoing any of the good amendments and the good work that Council did through the budget process this year.

[1:03:33] So with that, I’ll look for a motion to adjourn. Moved by Councillor Cudi, seconded by Deputy Mayor Lewis. By hand, all those in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.