April 9, 2025, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:00 PM; it being noted that Councillor P. Van Meerbergen was in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That Consent Items 2.2 to 2.8 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.2   Emergency Repair of Line Painting Truck

2025-04-09 Staff Report - Emergency Repair of Line Painting Truck

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to the emergency repair of the City’s Line Painting Truck:

a)    the purchase order issued for the emergency repairs on the Line Painting Truck by Core Equipment Inc. under Section 14.2 of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy at a total cost of $69,583.14 (HST excluded), BE CONFIRMED; and

b)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project.

Motion Passed

2.3   2025 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2024 Review

2025-04-09 Staff Report - 2025 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2024 Review

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment & Infrastructure, the following actions be taken:

a)   the staff report dated April 9, 2025 entitled “2025 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program and 2024 Review” BE RECEIVED for information; and

b)    the 2025 Local Road Reconstruction Project, Nashua Avenue, BE EXEMPTED from the Active Mobility Policy 349 and constructed without a new sidewalk.

Motion Passed

2.4   Appointment of Consulting Engineer: RFP 2024-379 Grenfell Drive Bridge Rehabilitation Design

2025-04-09 Staff Report - Appointment of Consulting-379 Grenfell

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment & Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of a consulting engineer for the detailed design and tendering of the Grenfell Drive Bridge rehabilitation:

a)    the proposal submitted by Dillon Consulting Limited BE ACCEPTED to provide consulting engineering services to undertake the detailed design and tendering for the rehabilitation of the Grenfell Drive Bridge at an upset amount of $275,957.37, excluding HST, as per Section 15.2 (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 staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix “A”;

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

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

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.

Motion Passed

2.5   Purchase of Replacement Ozone Based Odour Control Unit(s) - Irregular Result

2025-04-09 Staff Report - Ozone Odour Control -Irregular Result

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment & Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the Supply of Odour Control Units for various sites within the wastewater treatment systems:

a)    the purchase of Replacement Ozone Based Odour Control Units BE AWARDED to Sublime Environmental for the total price of $163,476 excluding HST, in accordance with Section 19.4 of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix “A”;

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

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with this project.

Motion Passed

2.6   Year 2025 Tax Policy

2025-04-09 Staff Report - Year 2025 Tax PolicY

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to property taxation for 2025:

a)         the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix ‘A’, being a by-law setting tax ratios for property classes in 2025, in accordance with Sub-sections 308(4) and 308.1(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 22, 2025, it being noted that the 2025 Municipal Tax Ratio By-Law has been prepared reflecting the equalization of the average property tax increase in residential and multi-residential classes with no change to other tax ratios; and

b)         the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix ‘B’, being a by-law levying tax rates for property classes in 2025, in accordance with Sections 307 and 312 of the Municipal Act, 2001 BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 22, 2025.

Motion Passed

2.7   Year 2025 Education Tax Rates

2025-04-09 Staff Report - Year 2025 Education Tax Rates

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix “A”, being a by-law levying rates for 2025 for school purposes in the City of London BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 22, 2025.

Motion Passed

2.8   2024 Compliance Report in Accordance with the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy

2025-04-09 Staff Report - 2024 Procurement of Goods and Services Annual Compliance

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by S. Franke

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

a)    the administrative contract awards for Professional Consulting Services with an aggregate total greater than $100,000, as per Section 15.1 (g) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, decentralized from Purchasing and Supply that have been reported to the Senior Manager, Procurement and Supply and have been reviewed for compliance to the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, BE RECEIVED for information, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix “A”;

b)    the list of administrative contract awards for Tenders with a value up to $6,000,000 that do not have an irregular result, as per Section 13.2 (c) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy, BE RECEIVED for information, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix “B”; and

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

Motion Passed

2.1   2026 Municipal and School Board Elections Update

2025-04-09 Staff Report - 2026 Municipal Election Update

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2026 Municipal Election:

a)    the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to request local school boards to consider scheduling a Professional Activity Day (PA Day) on Voting Day, October 26, 2026, as elementary and secondary schools serve as voting locations for Municipal and School Board Elections;

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix ‘A’ BE INTRODUCED at the Council meeting to be held on April 22, 2025 to authorize the use of vote tabulators, voting by mail, and proxy voting for Municipal and School Board Elections;

c)    no further action BE TAKEN with respect to adopting a candidate contribution rebate by-law; and

d)    the staff report dated April 9, 2025 entitled “2026 Municipal Election Update” BE RECEIVED for information.

Additional Votes:

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2026 Municipal Election:

a)    the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to request local school boards to consider scheduling a Professional Activity Day (PA Day) on Voting Day, October 26, 2026, as elementary and secondary schools serve as voting locations for Municipal and School Board Elections;

Motion Passed (3 to 2)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2026 Municipal Election:

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 9, 2025 as Appendix ‘A’ BE INTRODUCED at the Council meeting to be held on April 22, 2025 to authorize the use of vote tabulators, voting by mail, and proxy voting for Municipal and School Board Elections;

c)    no further action BE TAKEN with respect to adopting a candidate contribution rebate by-law; and

d)    the staff report dated April 9, 2025 entitled “2026 Municipal Election Update” BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Review of Winter Maintenance Performance Regarding Snow and Ice Removal - Councillors S. Franke and C. Rahman

2025-04-09 Submission - S. Franke and C. Rahman

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Review of Winter Maintenance Performance regarding Snow and Ice Removal :

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to report back to a future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee regarding amendments to the Minimum Maintenance Standards for Municipal Highways (O.Reg. 239/02) and the impact of the amendments on City operations, along with any budget considerations; and

b)   the City’s 2024/2025 winter maintenance performance, challenges and opportunities for potential service improvements BE REVIEWED, including but not limited to:

i)    a performance assessment of contracted services providers;

ii)    an analysis by staff on possible costs associated to use machines that could clean windrows or ways to clear snow that would minimize the amount of snow at the edge of residents driveways;

iii)    investigating alternative options for snow and ice removals on roads and sidewalks; and

iv)   staff engage in discussion with school boards on walking path clearance concerns on City property;

it being noted that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee received a communication dated March 18, 2025 from Councillors S. Franke and C. Rahman with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential (Provided to Members only.)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee convenes In Closed session to consider the following:

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

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

6.2    Labour Relations/Employee Negotiations / Solicitor-Client Privileged Advice

A matter pertaining to reports, advice and recommendations of officers and employees of the Corporation concerning labour relations and employee negotiations in regard to one of the Corporation’s unions and advice which is subject to solicitor client privilege and communications necessary for that purpose and for the purpose of providing directions to officers and employees of the Corporation.

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

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

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

The Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee convenes In Closed Session from 1:57 PM to 2:25 PM.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 2:27 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, 14 minutes)

Good afternoon, everyone. So I will start our meeting off. It’s the seventh meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee. We’ll start with the land acknowledgement.

The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the National Bank, Haudenosaunee, Lenapawik and Adawandran. We honor and respect the history, languages and cultures of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nation, Métis and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory.

As always, the city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats of communication support for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact icsc@london.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. We’ll move to item one. Any disclosures of pecuniary interest?

Okay, seeing none. We’ll move to consent. I will be pulling 2.1, just looking to the rescue committee if there’s anything else that they’d like pulled from consent. Okay, seeing no others.

I’ll look for someone to craft a motion, excluding 2.1. I’ll look for a mover and a seconder. Moved by Councillor Pribbles, seconded by Councillor Frank and discussion. I have Councillor Stevenson before I go to her, anyone on committee on any of the items before from 2.2 to 2.8.

Okay, I’ll go to Councillor Hopkins and then Councillor Pribbles and then Councillor Stevenson. Councillor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple of comments on a number of the consent items.

The first one, the 2.3, which is the 2025 Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program. I really, really pleased to see this report and all the work that’s going on in our city. I know there’s going to be a lot of frustration to as we move around. I do like the logo London Kindness as a reminder on how we move around and giving ourselves a little bit more time and patience.

I do think it’s important as we develop a city with housing that we create opportunities for moving around as well. So really pleased to see these infrastructure projects come forward. I do want to just share through you, Madam Chair, two staff, thank you so much for the work that you do. I know it can be challenging sometimes, but I just want to also just share representing Ward 9.

We have very few opportunities to move around and sometimes when we have these construction projects, it creates bottlenecks and I know staff do a really good job trying to coordinate leftover projects from the previous year and implementing the new projects but how we manage and balance that and then the challenges with the climate. I just want to just share the concerns that I hear in the community and just leave it with staff. So that is on 2.3 and on 2.8, which is the compliance report in accordance with the procurement of goods and service policy. Really appreciate this report.

A lot of good information and want to thank staff for it. Thank you. Thank you. And I’ll just look to Ms.

Stan and Ms. Share and see if there’s anything you wanted to add in on 2.3. I know that usually you give a little bit of commentary on our big construction. I call this the kickoff report, but I’m sure it’s really not.

But I know you’ve been doing some media and some coverage as well, anything you wanted to add in at this time? Yes, I’m through the chair. I do like to take the opportunity to provide just some key takeaways from the renew report. The renew infrastructure program coordinates and manages the construction of important infrastructure projects that are essential to support our growing city underground.

We upgrade or replace aging infrastructure to expand sewer capacity, manage risk flood risk and support urban intensification while above ground improvements enhance road safety, traffic flow and encourage more emissions free travel. Each year, we officially kick off the new construction season with the release of our annual renew London report. This report is our opportunity to highlight successes and lessons learned from the previous construction season and outlines the important work that’s planned for 2025. We accomplished a lot in 2024.

The 2024 construction season featured key transportation improvement projects, projects to upgrade underground infrastructure, lots of progress on the rapid transit corridors plus rebuilding dozens of neighborhood streets, intersection upgrades and expanding the cycling network. We also celebrated the completion of the new Victoria Bridge on Rideout Street and welcome traffic under the new Adelaide Street North Underpass. We’re excited to start the new construction season and like in previous years, it will be busy. This year’s construction value is expected to cross 170 million in new tenders plus there’s approximately 125 million in planned carryover work from several multi-year projects that were tendered in 2024.

London is quickly growing and it’s essential that our infrastructure keeps pace. We need to upgrade our underground infrastructure to support new homes and provide more transportation options to help alleviate traffic pressures on our roads. All of this increased building and road work may be inconvenient in the short term, but it will bring long-term benefits for our community. We recognize that after a consecutive years of record-breaking construction, Londoners are feeling the impacts.

We always look for ways to coordinate projects better, to minimize disruptions and to improve how we communicate. So like in previous years, we’ve selected a list of top 10 projects to provide an overview of the 2025 works that have the largest benefits, impacts and scope of work. We’ve packaged those 10 projects together in a handy story map tool that shows where the projects are happening, has visuals to illustrate the improvements and describes some of the benefits. The story map is available at london.ca/top10.

You can also visit london.ca/construction for a full list and map of all 2025 construction projects. So with that, I’ll pass it back to the chair and if there are any more questions. Thank you. And I’ll just go to Councillor Huchensey if you had anything else.

No. Thank you. I’ll look to Council Propos. Next, thank you.

And I just want to mention Councilor Van Mirberg and has joined us online. Go ahead. Thank you. So the chair to the staff.

I’ll start with 2.3, the infrastructure. I just want to verify, if you look at 24, there is a project which is deferred to 25, which is the stunning deal of Richmond. And for 24, I think it was the tender contract was seven and a half million for this year. It’s eight million.

So I just want to verify that it’s not seven and a half plus eight, that it’s just a half and 500,000 additional amount for 25, for whatever reason, for inflation. But my boy and bigger concern is it’s not together. It’s just a one. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Stan. Yes, through the chair, the stunning deal of Richmond intersection was deferred. It was meant to be a late 2024 tender.

It’s now been tendered for 2025 works and is proceeding. So at this point, I don’t know the exact value that that came out through tender, but it has come in at a good price and under the engineer’s estimate going pretender. Back. Go ahead, Councillor Pergault.

Okay, but my question was 24. It’s a seven and a half million, 25, eight million. So I just want to make sure it’s one. It’s not both together.

Ms. Stan? Yes, through the chair. The project is just the value that it was shifted to the year.

It’s not seven plus eight. Thank you for that. Just a comment on the grandfold drive bridge. Thank you very much for that project because both myself and the residents are very happy about it.

So thank you for that. And 2.6 tax policy. I just have a couple of questions. So when I look at the summary and the numbers, so all percentages, the only difference is that we made equal to multi-residential or more appropriate, multi-residential to the residential.

And we did it by increasing it, sorry, decreasing it from 1709 to 1703. But we never touched the residential because it was not needed. I just want to make sure that this is the only change that we have made in the table, in the schedule, see in all the categories. Thank you.

Thank you. I’ll go to staff for a response. Thank you. Through the chair.

Yes, that’s the only change that we made for the 2025 policy for rates and ratios. Thank you for that. And due to province, we added the aggregate extraction and these 21 properties they were backed out from, is it from industrial to the aggregate extraction? McMillan.

In the chair, yes. That’s the previous classification was industrial. They’ve introduced the aggregate class, starting in 2025 with then assigned ratio. And it is only the 21 properties, correct?

Through the chair, yes. Those are the ones that are identified as aggregate. Now those could, they could always appeal to say that it’s the wrong classification, but we haven’t received any, but there are no additional ones that have been identified. Okay.

Thank you very much. No more questions? Thank you. I’ll go to Councillor Stevenson next.

Go ahead. Councillor, can I get your mic? Thank you. Councillor Stevenson.

Thank you. I had a couple of questions on 2.6, the 2025 tax policy. In the meeting through it, I can see that there’s a move to reduce the multi-residential tax ratio closer to parity with the residential, and that on page 47, it says we’ve moved from 2.385 to down to 1.7, since 2000. So, and I believe that the entire shift gets passed to the residential.

I just wanna confirm. Mr. McMillan? Through the chair, the largest property class is residential, so they do bear a larger proportion of the shift.

What happens when we shift the property taxes, it’ll be distributed based on the sizes of the classes. So, other classes are also affected, but the majority would go to residential. Councillor? Okay, thank you.

So, I noticed that we’ve decreased the ratio by 0.004 this year. We did it by 0.008 last year. And that on page, there’s a page here where it says that the increase to residential property taxes this year from making this ratio change is 0.02%. So, I just wondered, as we’re looking so closely at the rate this year, and wanting to keep it down, is there the option, like I just wondered, do we have a schedule that we’re looking to follow?

How can you let us know behind the scenes? How do we come up with 0.004 this year that would have a 0.02% increase on residential? Could we do less? That’s what I’m looking for, is it could we do less and reduce 5.02 to staff?

We do have schedule B attached to the policy, which kind of identifies first the recommendation, which is equalizing residential and multi-residential, and not changing the other ratios. And the alternative A is what would happen if we made no changes in 2024. So, you see the difference there, and there are other scenarios that we can look at. So, I’m not really following exactly what the question is out of these alternatives, these are ones that have been presented to do further calculations.

We could possibly revisit it, but that’s going to definitely impact the scheduling of the final tax bills. Thanks, I’ll go back to Councilor Stevenson, just to clarify, and then I’ll come back to staff. Thank you, yes, I really enjoyed schedule B, and with all the scenarios that laid it out, and the impact on the residential tax rates, which was great, obviously the ones with the large residential tax rate increases not appealing. So, I stuck with the recommendation and alternative A.

So, I noticed that if we go with the recommendation, it’s going to have an estimated at least 0.02% increase on the tax rate, and so I would be interested in not doing that to save that for this year, and I just wondered if there was any staff comments on that. Through the Chair, we could pull up alternative A, which would be to make no changes to ratios, and that would be the baseline where the same ratios are used from 2024. So, the distribution of the tax levy would be as shown on alternative A, and the impact to the, or the impact increases to each class is what would be the result. Councillor.

Okay, thank you. So, I’ll just put it to committee. I like the idea of finding every little bit we can right now, and maybe there’s no answer, but I just wondered, as I said, sort of half the ratio change this year versus last year. I was just looking to understand it at a deeper level, but I can follow up offline.

The other thing as I’m looking for ways to improve our, or decrease the burden on the tax increase next year is the new class of multi-residential is at 1.0, but we had the option to do 1.0, anywhere between 1.0 and 1.1. And I wondered if that, I went back and looked, it was quite a few years ago, we made that decision, but knowing that we have a lot of new multi-residential coming on, and knowing that the difference between 1.0 and 1.7 for that tax ratio, there’s an opportunity potentially, do we have the option to raise that to 1.1, the maximum to help ease the burden on the residential rate pair? Through the chair, that is the allowable range as provided by the province, so that is an option to consider. Thank you, is it reasonable to see if we could get what impact that would make on the property tax rate in the schedule like this prior to council meeting?

Yes, that could be accomplished. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Yeah, that’d be really helpful.

It seems as though we have a lower rate than most of the other municipalities, and that slowing down that decrease on the ratio, and potentially increasing the new category might save us some money without making us non-competitive. Thank you, and so staff are prepared to provide that to members of council before this goes to council. Thank you, anything further? Thank you, I did actually have something else on 2.8 as well.

I just wondered on the list, were only provided project names and not the name of the company that got the tender, just wondered if there was a reason for that, and it talks about professional consulting, and I wondered if that’s all consulting, and we just call it professional consulting, or whether there would be some consulting companies that would not be captured in this over 100,000 list. Thank you, I’ll go to Mr. Collins. Through the chair to Councillor, with respect to Appendix A, where it’s professional consulting aggregate, that would be the area that was awarded administratively, so that we could see how much was going to each discrete consulting firm.

That way that council is aware of how much we are spending with consultants, so it would not include some of the consultant awards that are awarded through council that come forward at that time. With respect to Appendix B, traditionally we have not included on that schedule the names of the successful proponents, however all those names are available publicly on the city’s bidding site, and it is disclosed who was awarded, as well as who may have been some of the other bidders, and the plan takers, but this is just identifying what projects were awarded that were delegated to administration through the thresholds for the policy. Councillor? Super, thanks.

One last question, and that is it was mentioned that there were a few minor issues found with the compliance concerns regarding minor items, and I just wondered, is it reasonable to ask for council to be able to see that confidentially, just so that we’re aware of what was happening, or is there some reason why it’s better that we don’t see that? Thank you to Mr. Holland, is that something that could be provided? Through the chair, a lot of the non-compliance are really minimal items.

For example, we have a threshold of $15,000 as low dollar procurement, and often a couple of our areas will go over that, just when the final invoice income’s out. Best intention, when they made that procurement, that would be under $15K, but things happen, and then it goes over, so sometimes that amount is 18,000, so we report it and re-identify that and say, hey, be a little bit more mindful of your project management, as well as when you’re scoping your project. The other items may be just with the amount of contracts that the city has, there may be some instances where there could be an expired contract, and someone has accidentally engaged, and we haven’t had the opportunity to update that contract. Once again, we consider that as non-compliance, so we reach out to our colleagues and say, how can we better assist, and how can we better support you going forward, so that we’re back into compliance?

Those are the typical issues that we encounter, and we identify it, the talent of the year. Thank you. Councilor? Thank you, so I guess my last one follow-up to that is, is there, at what point would Council be made aware of any issues that were happening, even like I said, just confidentially?

I’m used to on some boards and commissions where we just get to, we’re just informed of some of these smaller details, so just wondered what the threshold might be to bring it to Council’s awareness? I’ll look to Ms. Barbelle. Thank you through the chair.

Normally through this, so to date, we’ve only had some very minor things, that typically that’s where senior leadership team would have ensure training, proper protocols, put contracts in place, if we’re starting to see trends where some of these informal procurements are starting to get larger, where we would then have to initiate. Where there would be something more significant, if there was a breach in the policy or something, those would be brought forward, typically through the audit committee, where under my delegated authority with the policy, would need to bring that to the attention of Council, and we would do that as soon as, would be absolutely possible to do that. So to date, we’ve not had an instance, certainly there are things that have occurred that I know in the past were brought automatically forward to Council, that would be my obligation in overseeing the procurement policy and obviously, treasury with respect to the city of London. So certainly, if there was anything in terms of a breach or something like that, we would be bringing that forward, confidentially, likely through the audit committee in those cases.

Okay, perfect, good to know, thank you. Thank you, I’m going to Councilor Purple again for a second, and then Councilor Hopkins. Thank you, and I did have one more question regarding the new multi-residential, and I understand it was done by the province to encourage the development, but if a property is currently under the new multi-residential, and maybe I missed it in the report, but is it classified from now on, or is there a limited time, and then it becomes regular multi-residential? Through the chair, at the outset, they set the timeline as new multi-residential for 35 years, so whether there’s going to be more changes to the property tax system after the review done by the province remains to be seen, but that is, from construction, they’re in that.

They’re classified as new multi-residential for 35 years. Thank you, so a quick follow-up. So if a current property is in the new residential, they are locked in, in the rate, which we do on an annual basis for 35 years, correct? Through the chair, that’s for new builds.

Any multi-residential that were existing before 2017 are still in the multi-residential class, but any new builds will be in new multi-res. Okay, thank you. Thank you, I’ll go to Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, thank you, and I’d like to just go back to 2.6, which is the 2025 tax policy.

I don’t wanna thank the Councillor Stevenson for her questions as well around the tax policy, and I do have a follow-up to those comments, and wanting to go through you, Madam Chair, to staff with just a follow-up question, as we support the recommendation that’s in front of us, I wanted to have a better understanding about the delayed reassessments as well that are going on in the province and still waiting to have a better understanding on what that looks like. Is that more or less why this recommendation is coming to us that we’re, sort of that unknown is still out there, and I wonder if you could speak a little bit more to why we’re going with this recommendation, why we’re being a little bit careful here. Mr. McConaughey.

Through you, Chair, the room question is, yes, I agree, what will reassessment look like, and we don’t really have any clear indication as to what that will be. What we have consistently heard from the province is that they’re concerned with the multi-residential gap between where they’re at and trying to encourage municipalities to lower that gap between residential and multi-residential. So doing it on a gradual basis seems to be the most appropriate method so that it doesn’t inflict a large shift to residential and other classes. And that way, if there is reaction from the province in the future to drastically cut it to a certain level, such as 1.5, we’re already closer and it’ll be less disruptive at that time.

Councillor? Yeah, thank you for that, that’s very helpful. Okay, so Councillor Stevenson, I see your hand up on items between 2.2 and 2.8. Thank you, it just raised another question.

There is that concern about the difference in property valuations by class and how that’s gonna affect rates in the future. And knowing that we have flexibility to change the ratios to help mitigate that. I guess I just wanted, is there, do you see that that is a tool that we have available to us if there was a big swinging classes between residential and commercial, for example, that we would be able to use the ratios to help minimize the impact on taxpayers? Through the chair, yes, last year the province announced that revenue neutral ratio and the ability to use them would become permanent, so we’re no longer waiting for an annual confirmation that we can do that.

Which means that as long as we’re below the threshold, which we have consistently been for industrial and commercial classes, we can use those ratios to help mitigate the impact to which we largely be in residential potentially. So the concern with the long gap between reassessments is how much is that shift going to be that needs to be mitigated. So in consultation we’ve mentioned in the province that maybe we need a tool to go beyond that threshold if necessary, but we haven’t really received any clarification on that as of yet, but we do have room based on past movements on the commercial and industrial ratios. Thank you, it was nice to see a little comfort in the uncertainty in this report, so thanks.

Okay, thank you. Looking for any final speakers on items 2.2 through 2.8. Count Slervan, we’re gonna go ahead. Thank you chair.

My questions regarding 2.3, the Renew London Infrastructure Construction Program. So of the 170 million for 2025, is it possible for staff to confirm how much is for BRT related costs, as well as how much is recycling related costs? I’ll go to Ms. Stan, do you have a breakdown of that?

Through the chair, I don’t have the cycling number off the top of my hand, but within this year’s program, there’s one new RT tender, and that’s the East London link. It’s been tender, it was approximately 26 million for that contract, which is Oxford Street from Highbury to Fanshawe campus, where the terminus is gonna be constructed, Councillor. Okay, thank you for that. So with as far as the cycling goes, is it possible to perhaps receive that by email later?

Ms. Stan, through the chair, I can certainly pull out the cycling value from that number in time for council. Okay, thanks very much. Okay, seeing no further speakers on 2.2 through 2.8, we’ll look to open the vote.

Councillor van Mayeburgen, sorry, Pribble. Hello to you. Closing the vote, motion carries, fact to zero. Okay, so we’ve no scheduled items under part four, we’ve got items for direction, and then we’ll deal with 2.1 after.

So for 4.1, that’s review of winter maintenance performance regarding snow and ice removal. This was submission from Councillor Frank and myself. We’ll look to Councillor Frank to move it, and then there’s another seconder. Okay, Councillor Pribble seconded it.

Any discussion? Councillor Frank, go ahead. Thank you, and I appreciate the assistance in drafting this letter. I’m sure perhaps had their email inboxes and then dated over the winter as we did, as well as phone calls from residents.

And I just want to start by thanking staff. I know they did an incredible job during an incredibly hard winter, and I appreciate all of the responsive ability they had to address unplugged roads and sidewalks who really appreciate it. That being said, given how much snow there was and the frequent freeze thaws, we did still receive emails from residents who are hoping for improvements, and these are outlined here. So some of the main issues I heard about from residents were super icy sidewalks that remained icy for weeks at the end.

I think some people have some understanding that it takes a little while to clear these, but with a strong desire to resolve those faster, as well as some discussions with home and school associations regarding pathway clearances to schools. It’s my understanding when we make sure that one area is cleared, one entrance, but that being said, there’s some schools that might have two or three, and the pedestrians might only predominantly come from a different entrance. So being able to have some discussions regarding walking path clearances to school, as well as additional other items outlined. And I’m not sure if perhaps staff could maybe speak to the standards shifting this year, but that might also help provide some clarity to counselors about other legislative things that might change some of our standards.

So perhaps over to staff of ABLE. Thank you, I’ll go to Ms. Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair.

And I can certainly start. I’m Mr. McCray, I’m Mr. Gilliter here as well.

The minimum maintenance standards work with the province is moving along, but moving along quite slowly. We’d hope to at OGR our department good roads now last week to have an update in terms of timing. We do not have that. However, staff have no concern with the motion.

If we can bring both of those back as a report late summer, fantastic, if not, we’ll bring back the non-MMS aspects of this motion separate from those related to the program review. We certainly want to respond to this motion in advance of next winter season, and as well in time for any budget discussions. Councilor? Thank you very much.

That sounds wonderful to me. And I think again, even if there are some areas that perhaps we can’t improve on or to costly to, I think again, it’d be really great if we could just be able to explain that to residents ‘cause they’re, I think just as long as they have clarity of what is possible and what standards we’re meeting would really help meet their expectations. So I really appreciate staff’s willingness to work on this. Thank you, other speakers.

I’ll go to Councilor Pribble next. Thank you. Now I will be supporting this motion, but I do have one, and I don’t want to do an amendment to this motion, but I already mentioned it over a year ago when I went during the evening, when we were clearing the sidewalks, the blade is virtually almost identical to the width of the sidewalk. And it’s very difficult for the individuals clearing the sidewalks during the night to really be perfect and do it without damaging the grass on the right left and making additional damage.

This damage was last year quite a bit. There’s, I would say, at least in my word five, even more so this year. If there’s an opportunity to look at different sides of the blade, blade wide enough for a wheelchair, but it doesn’t have to be as wide as the sidewalk. So I really would like us to look at this opportunity if it does make sense.

And certainly I believe that we would have less damage of the grass to the left and to the right of the sidewalk. I don’t know if there’s anyone from the staff who would like to comment on the blade. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.

McCrae. Thank you through the chair. Yeah, certainly recall our discussions on this issue in the past and a review of blade widths at that time. And we’re happy to incorporate that consideration into this motion and include any recommendations in the report back.

Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so I’m gonna go to Councillor Hopkins next and then I’ll recognize I’ve got Councillor Stevenson and Councillor Palose next.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And my thanks to you and Councillor Frank for bringing this motion forward. Happy to support it. I think we all do have a lot of emails from residents, especially the Swinter.

And I wanna go and thank staff as well for the work that you do out there. There’s a lot going on. I appreciate the fact that we’re going to be looking at amendments and it makes sense that that will be reported back to us. But I wanna speak to two A, which is a performance assessment of contracted service providers and maybe through you, Madam Chair to staff, just wanting to have a better understanding as we do subcontracting with these providers and I know we have contracts with them, but I would like to have a better understanding what we as a city do under our safety and health and safety responsibilities in supporting these contractors.

Thank you, Ms. Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. So the staff of the city of London have been looking into a variety of ways to improve and enhance our contractor safety expectations across the board for all vendors, not just those involved in winter road maintenance.

I’m actually the sponsor of a project that is reporting to SLT directly on this and working in great detail with our colleagues and purchasing as well as our colleagues and human resources, which is our sort of home of health and safety corporately. We have a number of programs in place related to ensuring appropriate safety qualifications and training are available to contractors and subs and then following up to make sure that those are required. The programs would vary depending on the nature of the work, the level of risk, the level of turnover, but this is an ongoing issue that has the attention of the senior leadership team and certainly has the attention of my team as somebody who puts out a fair number of contracts out into the community as well. Thank you, Councillor.

Yeah, through you. My thanks to having these programs, they are important. So thank you. Thank you.

I’ll go to Councillor Stevenson next. Thank you and thank you to my colleagues for bringing this motion forward. I was very happy when I saw this because it was, I think everybody understands it was a crazy winter, and expectations weren’t met. And so it’s just trying to figure out where the issue is and how we can do better going forward.

And like I said, in huge thanks to the staff for what must have been a crazy, a crazy year, but I did hear that there were streets that most people did not reach out to me for three days after these big storms. But then when roads still aren’t done or sidewalks near schools or on Oxford Street where a lot of people don’t have a vehicle and are using that sidewalk. So this would be really great to see what’s working, what’s not and how we can help as a council make things even better for future years. Thank you.

I’ll go to Councillor Palosa. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to yourself and Councillor Frank ‘cause I was also having behind the scenes discussions with staff, just you beat me to this one. A few questions through you to staff.

Looking at see of investigating alternative options for ice removal on roads and sidewalks. Looking through you to staff to see in their mind if this would also include residents clearing their own sidewalks. Ms. Chair.

Madam Chair, as part of the, as the strategic opportunities review working group, I’m probably getting that wrong now, there was actually a motion to consider a potentials cost savings related to transitioning to resident cleared sidewalks. It was not approved by council at that time. So I think this would still fall under the matter of reconsideration. So I’m not, perhaps clerks could provide us a bit of assistance as to if there’s a desire for staff to undertake that work.

What would happen to have to happen procedurally in order for it to proceed? Councillor, if it’s possible, the clerk’s just saying that it would be something they need to review to see what timeline was from SWORG. I don’t remember the acronym either. And it’s gone now, it’s just disappeared from a memory.

But just in report back, so if that’s okay, they can get in touch with you with that answer. Yeah, I would even like that answer available for all of us at council, realizing SWORG has now roughed into budget and not sure of other councilor’s intention as we have this discussion. Another question is to a performance assessment of contracted services providers. Just looking through your staff to see how they would envision this, ‘cause I know that there are multiple service providers in some or small contracts and some are big.

Mr. McCray. Yeah, with all of our services, we’re always looking for opportunities for continuous improvement. And this service is certainly no different.

We would start by just assessing the components of the service that are outsourced. That’s a useful approach that really helps us to absorb the pressures at peak times. And then both review in the contractual aspects that were already identified, but then also their performance, retaining performance of the contractors through the winter season. Thank you, Councillor.

Thank you, just, I’m not sure if staff have an access and as Councillor Stevenson pointed out, sometimes we know days after a snow event that they had issues would part of this assessment, come back if there was complaints lodged in the system that we can trace back to one provider over others. Mr. McCray. Certainly the service London CRM module software that we use corporately is a useful tool and we certainly anticipate using the statistics we get from customer service requests through that system to inform this analysis.

Yes, thanks. Councillor. Thank you, Madam Chair and I do have a couple more. Part D to engage with the school boards, looking to see if I realize that you yourself within a school board trustee, if it’s more efficient to go to the school boards or the individual schools to whoever.

Madam Chair, I believe we would have to manage this through the school boards. The number of individual schools is significant. We could not turn that around this year. Okay, thank you.

My last one, realizing the intro states provide improved services wherever possible and financially feasible. I’m already aware that some of the conversations I’ve had with staff, especially regarding the walking past through city property, realizing White Oak Park in my work next to several schools and it would need a large increase to parks budget as part of the consideration that we could expect back some financial things that may or may not be considered through the budget process. Madam Chair, that is the exact intent in returning everything covered in number two of the motion in probably about August in order to align with the budget process so that council is aware of any cost implications of changes to level of service. Thank you, just for clarification through you, Madam Chair.

So procedurally, would the report come back through this committee and then committee and council will make a decision to forward that business case to the budget process for consideration in the fall? Madam Chair, Stafford, I are unlikely to recommend any changes that would require an increase to budget given the direction that we are to be finding savings within our own budgets. But we can provide changes to level of service and what we believe the associated budget would be should any councilor wish to advance that as a motion through the budget committee process. Councilor?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’m just recognizing the work that in the report that this committee seems willing to get back that may, if there’s a financial cost, be actually contrary to the mayor’s direction and staff. So just so everyone’s aware that it would need to be council directive that we still want to have that conversation through budget. Thank you, that’s all my questions.

And thank you again for the letter and the work. Thank you. Other councillors on this item? Councilor Van Mirbergen.

Thank you, Chair. I will be supporting this motion. I mean, I think we’re all aware. This is one of the fundamental reasons we pay property tax is to have our streets and sidewalks taken care of in a Canadian winter.

I know in my own situation, in terms of the compliance I receive in Ward 10, they seem to fall into two groups, primarily. One was entire presence or courts being missed, sometimes on multiple occasions. And the other is the slippery, some would describe dangerous nature of the ice build up on sidewalks. Clearly, there has to be a way to better manage that situation.

So I look forward to what’s coming back, but I thought I would take this opportunity to share certainly the experience in the Ward 10 area. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, much appreciated. Any other members or visiting?

Okay, seeing none, I’ll just make a final comment if everyone’s okay for that from the chair. I just wanna, again, thank staff for their work, their tireless work this past winter. And I can’t believe I was talking about snow removal on a day we had snow yesterday in April. But I will say my ward was quite concerned with removal this year.

And I heard it from all parts of the ward, but also very different experiences for newer residential streets that were assumed versus unassumed. And so I really do appreciate staff’s involvement in those conversations with me throughout this season and with residents. And I agree with my other council colleagues who are sharing some of the concerns around crescents and courts and some of those dynamics that we also have when dealing with that and especially around the sidewalks and the schools. So thanks again.

And with that, we’ll look to open the vote. Closing the vote, motion carries five to zero. Thank you. And we’ll look to go back to item 2.1, which is the 2026 Municipal and School Board Elections update item for, it was under our four direction that was pulled.

And so I will look for a mover and a seconder on this item. Councillor Hopkins and Councillor Frank. And I will look for any discussion on this. Councillor Stevenson.

Thank you, yeah, I was just wondering through you to staff if, and I may be premature on this, but I just know in that 22 election there was, I heard some concerns about it being hard to find the voting locations and the signs being really small and it certainly was a long night waiting for the results. So I just wondered if there was anything that we could hear about how things will be improved for 2026? Thank you, I’ll go to Ms. Korman.

Oh, sorry, I’ll go to Mr. Schultz, go ahead. Thank you through the chair. We are aware of any issues from electors about finding locations.

The sign is certainly that’s something that we can review. We do have enough runway to look at increasing the signs, increasing the number of signs that are placed to direct individuals to voting centers. And as part of this report, it is the primary recommendation that we’re asking is for direction to go to the school boards to consider that TA day. So if we have school locations, those are typically large, well-known in the community.

So that will assist with individuals seeking to get to locations. I don’t know if that will answer the question. Councillor? Yeah, it’s very helpful, thanks.

And then in terms of the use of vote tabulators, is that expected to have a quicker result this year? I know last, or this next election, I know the last time, you know, we had results very quick around the city, but inside we were waiting with anticipation to staff. Thank you, through the chair. In 2018, as you called, there was a significant shift to having the right voting process in 2022.

We used the same vote tabulating equipment input. In discussion with staff, there are some efficiencies that we identified as part of the post-election debrief that I think that we can look at for the next election that should improve the turnaround. We are very familiar with the devices, our procedures, our sound, but I think that we can look at compressing the timeline so that those results get out quicker to both media and the public. Councillor?

Okay, thank you, that’s great to hear. Thank you, I’ll go to Councillor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair, and just maybe a follow-up question through you, to staff, just looking at the recommendation, and in particular, A, that we are requesting local school boards to consider scheduling a PA day on our voting day, which is October the 26th, that we’re not adding any PA days to the board’s calendar. We’re just using one of them, just one clarification on that.

Thank you, I’ll go to staff on this one. Thank you, through the chat, I can start with this one. No, the intention would not be to add additional PA days. It would simply be a request to the school boards as they’re constructing their 2026 calendar to consider moving one of the PA days to that October 26th date.

Councillor Hopkins? Good to know, thank you for that. Thank you, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you, just one last question, ‘cause I know people are gonna ask me and it may have been discussed previous years.

Is there any consideration to being able to do the remote voting, the electronic voting, and if not, just what is the explanation so I can share with residents? Thank you, Mr. Shelton. Thank you, through the chair.

There are a number of complications, particularly when you’re looking at a large city like the city of London, and when you’re looking at online voting, we’re very confident with the security in place for our current setup, which is an optical scan technology that is removed from the internet. If we were to go forward with online voting, there are a lot of complications we would need to engage with our cybersecurity experts in our IT department, as well as review some of the options that are available. I would note that our current vendor does not have that option of an online voting. They’ve moved away from that sphere, so we would need to both source a solution and ensure that it does adhere to our security requirements to ensure the integrity of the voting.

Councilor? Okay, thank you, obviously not for 2026. Just wondered, is it on our radar to eventually move that way? Are we saying as a big city that we’re more likely to keep like this for the foreseeable future staff?

Thank you through the chair. That is something that is top of mind for most clerks throughout the province. We do keep on top of the ever-changing landscape to review options as they become available. I will say that generally the threat landscape is non-approving, so I’ll just offer that as something to consider as we move into 2026 and beyond.

But clerks throughout the province, particularly big city clerks, are very aware of what the options may be out there, and we are continually reviewing that, particularly considering if there’s any cost savings, is there introducing new risks to an election process? And as I’m sure that council can appreciate that as a primary concern for all city clerks is ensuring the integrity of the vote and ensuring that those results are accurate and defensible. Thank you. Councilee, thank you for allowing me the questions and the answers, that was really interesting, thanks.

Thank you. Looking to see if there’s other members of council, I will hand the chair over to Councillor Frank. Thank you, I have the chair and I’ll recognize Councillor Robin. Thank you.

I just want to speak to this item very quickly on part A. I won’t be supporting part A, which is asking the requesting local school boards to consider a professional activity day on the voting day. And my reason for doing so is twofold one. We just had a provincial election took place on February 27th, which is a Thursday, and schools were open.

It was winter and there was no issue with using schools. I know we use more schools than the province did for that Board of Elections Ontario, sorry for that vote. But for that reason, I personally think it’s an opportunity for young people to see their community take part in their civic duty. And so I think it’s actually really important to keep schools open during election day.

We want to encourage voter participation. I also am not certain that having a PA day on that day for people with children actually doesn’t impact their ability to vote in a way. I know they have advanced voting options, but being a parent, I know when I have the ability for a long weekend, sometimes I will take it and that might impact my ability to vote on election day as well. So for that reason, I won’t be supporting it.

I personally believe that the school board should have the ability to decide when they use their professional development days. And in this request, I worry that we’re also impacting them. And this isn’t just our elections, also school boards as well. So I just wanted to say that and also if we could separate part A.

Thank you. Any other comments? No, then I can return the chair to the chair. Thanks and we’ll look to open the vote.

We’ll vote on part A first. Closing the vote, motion carries three to two. We’ll look to open the rest together. Closing the vote, motion carries five to zero.

Thank you, that concludes our items for direction. For item five, deferred matters in additional business. I haven’t been made aware of any additional business, but not seeing any hands up. So we’ll look to item six, which is our confidential matters to be considered.

We have three of them, land acquisition, business positions, lists or client privilege advice, position planning, et cetera. For item one, they’re all listed in our agenda. 6.2 is labor relations and 6.3 is the land acquisition as well. I’ll look for a mover and a seconder for Councillor Frank and then Councillor Hopkins.

And we’ll look to open the vote to move in camera. Closing the vote, motion carries five to zero. Recording in progress. Okay, thank you.

I’ll turn to Councillor Frank to report. Thank you and I’m pleased to share that progress has been made for all the items for which we went in camera for. Thank you, with that, I’ll look for a motion to adjourn. Councillor Van Meerberg and Councillor Pribble, all in favor, motion carries.

Thanks everyone.