Open Council

5th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

Open Council

5th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

April 10, 2025, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:00 PM; it being noted that Councillors P. Van Meerbergen and S. Franke were in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

2.1   Economic Development Strategy: Appointment of Consultant for RFP 2025-004

2025-04-10 Staff Report - Economic Development Plan

Moved by S. Hillier

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of a consultant for the development of the Economic Development Strategy:

a)    Deloitte LLP BE APPOINTED as the Consultant to undertake the development of the Economic Development Strategy, for a total amount of $233,820.00 (excluding HST), in accordance with sections 15.3d and 12 of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    the funding for this assignment BE APPROVED as set out in the Source of Financing Report, as appended to the staff report dated April 10, 2025 as Appendix ‘A’;

c)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all the administrative acts that are necessary in connection with the Economic Development Strategy project;

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, if required, to give effect to these recommendations.

Motion Passed (10 to 2)

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the appointment of a consultant for the development of the Economic Development Strategy BE REFERRED to a future meeting of the Strategic Policy and Priorities Committee for Civic Administration to report back on proponents and their status as Canadian firms.

Motion Failed (4 to 8)

2.2   Communication from Councillor/Budget Chair E. Peloza and Councillor S. Lehman

Moved by E. Peloza

Seconded by C. Rahman

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Submission – Economic Development Strategy:

a) the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to review the City of London’s contracted services with London Economic Development Corporation, TechAlliance and the Small Business Center to identify if any duplication in services exist and if any cost savings can be realized and report back to a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee; and

b) Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to review and report back on potential efficiency improvements in relation to economic development opportunities for agencies, boards, and commissions, including but not limited to the relationships between the Film and Music Offices, Tourism London and RBC Place.

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated January 27, 2025 from Councillor/Budget Chair E. Peloza and Councillor S. Lehman with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

None.

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential 

None.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Hillier

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 1:57 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, 6 minutes)

[9:44] Good afternoon, everyone. It is 1 p.m. So I am going to call the fifth meeting of the strategic priorities and policy committee to order. And I want to begin by acknowledging that the city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabic, the Haudenosaunee, the Lene paywalk, and Adirwanderan peoples. And we honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, and Inuit. And as representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory.

[10:19] City of London is also committed to making every effort to improve alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. And to make a request specific to this meeting, please contact sppc@london.ca or phone 519-661-2489 extension 2425. Colleagues, I’m going to begin just before I look for any disclosures of pecuniary interest. I am just going to take a moment to ask the mayor if there’s anything in strong mayor powers that would allow him to direct staff to make sure that spring is here, because I’m hearing from lots of residents today that they’re tired of looking for snow, looking at snow.

[11:07] But I see the city manager shaking your head and saying that’s not a strong mayor direction you can issue. But we are very happy that at least the city golf courses are ready to open when there’s not snow on the ground. And the deputy city manager is saying tomorrow. So for those looking for a round of golf, you can go online and get yourself a space at a city golf course tomorrow. I will look now for any disclosures of pecuniary interest. And I see none. Colleagues, we’ll move on to the consent agenda. This has the feel of a special meeting, but it is a regularly scheduled strategic priorities and policy committee meeting. We only have one item on the consent agenda. That is the economic development strategy appointment of a consultant for an RFP. I know there’s some folks who want to ask some questions. Before we do that, I’m just going to look for a mover and a seconder to get the motion on the floor, moved by Councillor Hillier and seconded by Councillor Cuddy. And I did ask and we’re going to ask Mr. Fowler to just give us a very quick three, four minute before us how we got here today. So Mr. Fowler, if you’d like to proceed.

[12:15] Thank you, Chair. And through you, I appreciate the opportunity to introduce this report to members of committee today. So this report provides the results of the RFP process to secure a vendor for the creation of a renewed economic development strategy. And this initiative arises from Council’s strategic plan and is supported by business case P-46 in the adopted multi-year budget. Can distill the scope of this engagement into three key areas, the first being research. And so we’ll be looking to the vendor to draw on their expertise and their data sources to look at macroeconomic trends, local economic data, relevant regulations and bylaws, a review of London’s existing approach to economic development, and some analysis that is localized to London’s context. The second key area is engagement. So we’re asking the vendor to lead an engagement with key participants to augment the data and research phase and ensure that this strategy is built with local knowledge and local expertise. Members of Council will absolutely be engaged as part of this phase to provide input into the strategy’s development.

[13:30] And of course, the final strategy will come back to Council for endorsement. On that strategy piece, the vendor will be working with staff to use the results of those first two phases to develop a draft strategy. We can anticipate that that would include vision, goals, and priorities. And of course, a clear implementation plan for delivering and reporting on that strategy. So staff worked with procurement services to issue the RFP and to review and score the project proposals. Through this process, Deloitte LLP received the highest aggregate score among all submissions. And so today, we are at the approval stage. And as outlined in section 8.5A of the procurement policy, we are seeking Council’s approval to enter a contract with Deloitte for the execution of this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fowler. So we’ve got a motion moved and seconded.

[14:28] I will open the floor now to questions, comments, and I’ve got Councilor Trust out first. Yes, thank you very much. And I had a chance to talk, Mr. Fowler, about this before, so there are no surprises coming. I’d like to inquire about the status of the country of ownership of this particular vendor in light of where we want to be moving towards in terms of local procurement, Canadian procurement, and if possible, local. And I, yeah, I’d like to just put that out there because there was nothing in the report about it. Mr. Fowler. Thank you. And through you, Chair.

[15:12] So the report, the doesn’t specify any criteria around a Canadian requirement in terms of how the evaluations would be scored. That said, it does manifest in the scoring of the experience. And so we would be looking at relevant experience that each of the vendors brought. And in particular, that would come out as a review of initiatives that they have done that were perhaps local to Ontario, to southwestern Ontario, et cetera. In terms of the vendor in question, my understanding is that it is a Canadian organization that is part of a membership group of an international broader organization, but that all of the individuals in that will be involved in this are Canadian employees working for a Canadian firm. Does that answer trust out? Yes, to follow up through the chair. But the actual corporate entity itself is based in the United States. It is a United States firm that has entities throughout the globe. Is that correct? Mr. Fowler? Through the chair, that is correct. Okay. In that case, I’d like to make a motion to defer this item for a little bit of additional feedback from the staff in terms of the local. I’d like to defer this item to get additional information from the staff in terms of the local Canadian and local status of the other entities that are mentioned. I think that this would be a really good type of contract to give to a local company, to give to at least a Canadian company and a local company. And again, I’m not questioning the professional competence of this huge concern. Councillor, before you get into me, you’re moving a referral? Yes, ma’am. So we have to see if there’s a seconder for that first.

[17:37] Councillor Hopkins? I’ll second it. I do like to ask the question as a follow-up. Okay. So that’s been moved and seconded. Now, Councillor, trust out, do you want to speak to your referral or do you want me to go to Councillor Hopkins for her question? I’d love to hear her question. We’ll go to Councillor Hopkins then. So on the referral then for you, just to staff, what does the deferral mean here in terms of timelines and opportunities to move forward? Mr. Fowler, Ms. Daedra Speer. Through you, Chair, if the intention of this is to take a closer look at the proponents and their status as a Canadian organisation and the degree to which that would affect the outcome of this process, my suspicion, and I would look for my colleagues for confirmation, is that that would require us to reissue the RFP. That’s correct. Yeah, thank you. Ms.

[18:46] Parwan? Thank you. Through the Chair. So one of the specifics, so based on the RFP, that was issued and this was issued by the end of January prior to the by-local under which we have a current procurement that wasn’t processed and about to be issued. So we cannot alter the terms of the criteria at this point in time that comes forward. Yesterday, as part of the infrastructure and corporate services, we did provide an update on the work that we are doing with respect to the procurement policy, with respect to the by-local, and we’re coming towards finalizing a new updated policy. So under the terms of a current policy, there is no ability to go back without re-issueing an RFP and completely completing that process all over again to reflect additional information that we would need to ask. Certainly, in the current procurement policy, there are no exclusions with respect to origins and those pieces. We would need to have council approved definitions to be able to exclude anyone at this time. So certainly, that work is ongoing. We are working very closely with AMO. We understand Toronto has issued some definitions on their procurement policy. We are also trying to get some provincial direction because there are still current trade agreements under which we are obliged to proceed with. So there are requirements that if we change the midstream, could have other implications on procurements that are in process that need to be worked through and understand the implications. So there are a number of things that we are hoping we will get some provincial direction on to support what those definitions and potential changes we could also bring forward as part of the procurement policy. So as Mr. Fowler indicated, if there is a desire to collect more information and go down a different path, that would need to be as part of the criteria in the fair and transparent process. Certainly on the firms that were all evaluated equally on the same basis and that is which the award is being made. If the council wishes to change the criteria, that would be a brand new procurement, but still under the current policy until which sometime the council chooses to make those changes. As we noted in our report yesterday, we are looking to bring forward a new procurement policy and some of those details will be brought forward at the end of May. So we are nearing the completion of that work, but we’re not quite there yet. So before I go back to Councillor Hopkins, she did ask specifically about the timeline and what that would mean. And I don’t want to put words in your mouth, Mr. Fowler, but what it sounds like you’re saying is we would actually be cancelling the current RFP and re-issuing.

[21:30] And so can either of you respond from a timeline perspective as to how much time that adds to moving this forward? Thank you, Chair. And on the assumption that we do end up with different criteria, we’d be looking at approximately two to three months. Thank you. Councillor Hopkins, no further questions? Councillor Hillier. And then Councillor Palosa. Yes, thank you. And through the chair, could staff just let us know how many of the proposals were from Canadian companies, if possible? Mr. Fowler. And through the chair, I will say that we did wrestle with the issue of what constitutes a Canadian company. I can say that there are at least three of those nine that I can say confidently are solely and purely Canadian. The way that some of the organizational models are characterized, it’s a little more here in terms of what that means. So for for instance, the Dwight website describes their Canadian operation as 100% Canadian owned and operated as a legally separate entity. And so for someone that might mean that means Canadian and others might think otherwise because of those global connections. So we could do some work to like arrive at that, but we would want to lay out a more precise methodology to do so.

[23:02] Councillor Hillier. Thank you. You answered that. And the secondary question about Deloitte, thank you very much. Councillor Plosa. Thank you. And I too had questions following it. I heard from Ms. Verbone that it was prepared at the end of the month, but the report saying February 17th, it was one out and I know February 11th is when Council had conversations in chambers in our direction, but realizing things are already in the works and behind the scenes and things are still happening. Yeah, especially if this was Council’s direction of Canadian local focus, realizing that Deloitte, depending on how you look at what is Canadian, also if we’re looking at London operations, they do not have a London office here any longer. Should they have had one, though KPMG does down on Fullerton Street. So just interesting as we shape those conversations going forward about if it’s a scoring system for local versus regional versus Canadian versus Canadian own versus broader regional international impacts, realizing this report is hopefully potentially due back at the end of 2025, if depending on the scope in the terms of the research, just realizing that if we do postpone it for going back out to tender, we’re looking at mid-2026, potentially, in which case we’re on the Virgin election cycle for us ourselves. So just mindful about what’s coming back to us when and the work that needs to be done. I do support local offices, but personally, I don’t want to hold back a development economic plan for the entire corporation in the city, but still following it with great interest. Thank you. Mayor Morgan.

[24:47] Yeah, so I don’t support the deferral. I’ll give a couple of reasons. One is, I think moving forward with the development of the economic plan is important on the timeframe we have. We know that we’re moving forward with the development of the downtown plan. These things are going to work very closely together because the way that we approach the downtown is going to be very much a function of the way that we approach the economic development in the city as well. Having those run in parallel with each other where they can interact is, I think, an ideal situation. The other piece I’ll say is, and this is a conversation that has happened with other mayors and with other municipalities, how we define Canadian. If you want to go with purely, this is a fully Canadian-owned company, you’re going to exclude a whole bunch of London companies who employ a whole bunch of Londoners who have pretty much sole Canadian operations and from being bid on or having employment by other municipalities. So if there is a global company that has a Canadian subsidiary that is employing Canadians and has operations here in Canada, I don’t think there’s anything stopping us from supporting them. Again, it’s always nice for it to be very local like within the city where possible, but that’s not our current procurement policy. And I think we want to be very careful about setting ourselves up for a situation where we’re going to be sending a signal to others that is going to be detrimental to the types of jobs that we have here in our city, Londoners who are employed by Canadian arms of global companies, right? There are still Canadian jobs. There are still jobs here in our city. We have to make sure that we’re protecting those as well.

[26:31] So this is why the development of a procurement policy in consultation with the provincial governments and the rules and what we can do and what rules may need to change for us to do different things is the piece that needs to come first before we start trying to make these changes on the fly before we get those. So I say let’s proceed. We posted this under our current procurement policy. It’s got a Canadian arm of the organization that is employing Canadians, and we can proceed with this, get this work done, and we’ll make changes to the way that we procure once we’ve done, actually done the work in consultation with others. I commend the Councilor for wanting to do this now, but we’re just not in a position to understand exactly how we can do it yet. So let’s not hold back what we know is needed work in our community when we essentially got a firm that does operate here in Canada that has a Canadian subsidiary that is employing Canadians. I came for other speakers. Oh, I got Councillor Pribble. I did say to Councillor Truss that I’d come back to him, but Councillor Pribble. Thank you. I will certainly not support any deferral because I really think that we need to start as soon as possible on this project. And I believe that Deloitte, Canada, if they function worldwide, just like the other subsidiaries in the other countries, they are like legalists separate and independent and today Deloitte and Canada. So I won’t either way, I will not support it because I believe for our community, for our growth, we need to start as soon as possible, coordinated with the downtown master plan as well, and the other two master plans. I think it’s very crucial now, and I will leave it now, but I do have a question specific to the staff later. Any other speakers? Councillor Hopkins.

[28:37] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I just want to thank the Councillor for bringing this forward. I think it’s an important conversation that we have here at committee. I am reminded as I listen and thanks to after their comments to about the trade agreements that we already have, and the work that is going on with other municipalities, and I know it’s a big conversation at AIMO, but I think it’s also important as a municipality. Sometimes we don’t get too far ahead of the federal and provincial work that needs to be done here, that will help support municipalities in the end, but I really do appreciate this conversation. Thank you.

[29:17] Any other speakers before I go back to the mover? Dean Nunn, then I’m going to go to Councillor Trussa. Thank you. I love getting positive feedback even when I think I’m about to lose the vote, but I do think this is important, and I did raise this as a point of principle. We passed a resolution talking about the local procurement. I can’t think of any type of service that is more appropriate for local ownership and control than something like this. We’re not moving goods around. We’re not talking about international agreements. We’re talking about something very local here in London, Ontario. I’m going to stand by my request that this be deferred. We passed a resolution not too long ago saying we wanted to do this, and I really think we should be following through. This can be framed in a number of different ways. I don’t necessarily think we have to exclude this multinational entity, but I think that there would be ways of looking beyond that and seeing if there is any local expertise that’s homegrown here in London.

[30:36] We have a major research university here. It should not come as a surprise that somebody from a university background is saying, let’s try to push some of these consulting contracts to our own residents. Yes, I know that somewhere down the corporate ladder, there’s an entity that’s been created as a matter of law that multinational corporations do that routinely, and there’s nothing wrong about that. There’s nothing illegal about that, but I don’t think it’s keeping in the spirit of what we’re trying to do here in terms of our local initiative. So I’m going to keep this on the floor and urge people to support it to Councilor, and I have no one else on the speakers list. So on the referral, I’m going to ask the clerk to open the vote.

[31:29] Councilor Van Mierbergen, closing the vote. Motion fails 4 to 8. So we return to the main motion on the floor, and we’ll look for any speakers to that. Councilor Palosa.

[32:22] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m looking forward to moving my amendment to the main motion at this time, and then that way, if we just deal with it, then everyone can speak to everything as amended. I’ll ask the clerks to load it into East Grabber, put it live. Apologies to colleagues for a short notice of a Part B. I will note that the wording correction that Councilor Pribble flight for me, it’s the London Economic Development Corporation has been corrected in Part A, and Part B has been added. I’ll read it out, but I do want to just confirm that Councilor Ramen will be my seconder. Appreciate that, Councilor. Didn’t want to interrupt you midstream, but in consultation with the clerk, they actually suggested we deal with yours separate from, not as amendments to, but as a standalone motion. It’s related to you, so even though it appears on the agenda as a child item to the main motion, that we should dispense with this one, and then put yours on the floor as well, if you’re okay with that, because you’re actually providing some direction to civic administration to do some of their own review, whereas this is specifically.

[33:26] I just didn’t want to miss my opportunity. No, I’m not going to miss your opportunity. We’re just going to come back to you after we’ve dealt with the main motion, and then yours will be a secondary motion related to it on the main motion, Councilor Palosa. On the main motion, not talking to the things coming forward, just glad for this opportunity, realizing that this is a broad overarching policy for the London Economic Development Plan, realizing our region has some great opportunities, we’re well positioned both in size and geographical location, and really looking forward to this report when it comes back. So looking forward to it, and thank you for the work that’s already gone into prefacing this. Councilor McCallis, thank you and through the chair, appreciate the discussion we just had, but recognizing obviously we’ll bring forward the new policy and those guidelines, and I very much do agree with Councilor Troso sentiments that we should be looking local and Canadian as a matter of course, moving forward. I did just have some questions with regards to this in terms of have we looked at bringing anything in-house? Obviously this is for the development strategy, but with the conditions we’re dealing with that are erratic, to say the least, in terms of trying to come up with an economic strategy. I’m just wondering, moving forward, if there is any sort of discussions that are going on, especially now that economic development falls under the city manager’s office, to have more in-house expertise in terms of economic advice that would be directly from maybe the city manager’s office, Mr. Fowler.

[35:08] Thank you, Chair, and through you, there’s been no discussion of that nature. However, part of the project scope is to look at our current system, and so if that kind of conversation does happen, we would expect it to happen through the course of the development of that strategy. Councilor, thank you and through you, and that’s good to hear in terms of the scope of the project. I think that that’s wise, especially moving forward. I think having that in-house expertise would be invaluable. I know I would benefit greatly from that to have somebody that even council could maybe go to in terms of economic strategy. So I look forward to having this report back and having that pulled into a number of other reports, but I do think when I look at our tendency to go out to outside consultants, I think for some of our things, it would be valuable to try to bring some of this in-house and have staff be able to speak to that directly. Thank you. Councilor Stevenson.

[36:15] Thank you. When I talk to Londoners, they’re still talking about the property tax increase of seven and eight percent and what’s coming, and so the request has been to really look at each decision that we make and is it necessary? So my question is we have an economic and development team. Londoners are going to ask, why do we have to pay $200,000 for a consultant for this? Why, you know, what is it that they have that we don’t have the talent within the team already?

[36:53] And it’s also around small and growing businesses, entrepreneurs and nonprofits supporting them to be successful. And the question there too is, is that what people pay their municipal property tax dollars for? What makes supporting small businesses something that taxpayers want added to their property tax bill? Ms. Dator’s beer. Thank you, Chair, through you. Certainly appreciate the suggestion about how best to ensure that the services or the policies and procedures that we develop to support economic development in this community more broadly in the region are very much focused within the work of our city. And so I absolutely appreciate that. I want to be clear about the current, I guess the current reality of our economic development team. Mr Fowler heads our strategy innovation and economic development, government relations team, which includes a number of different things. So that’s a new area that’s gone into Mr Fowler’s area. We have three staff within that area, one manager and two other staff who work for it. To say, as Mr Fowler said earlier, in order for us to develop a really good economic development strategy for this community supported by stakeholders and others in this community, we’re looking for expertise to help us do that. When we get that expertise and eventually have it within our organization, we hope for that. But right now we need to, we need to, I guess, acquire some outside services to get that expertise and develop that from within. The staff complement we have does not help us do this process nor does it allow us to do the kind of engagement that will be essential for this process to be a helpful one. As it relates to the not-for-profit piece, I appreciate the comment about our role as a city in working with not-for-profits. We work with many not-for-profits in this organization across many different service areas. I certainly take your advice about whether or not that’s our role for this process. But some, actually, many organizations across this city and broadly do economic development in different ways. And so we’d be looking to them as well to give us advice about the types of things they do in employment in other activities that really support the broader economic piece. So I think that’s why we’d be helping them and supporting them as well, Mr. Stevenson. Thank you. My other question is through you to staff, you know, when I talk to small businesses, they are really, really struggling and they could really use support. But I don’t hear them wanting us to, you know, come up with a bigger strategy.

[39:35] What I hear is how can we help them with the really devastating retail theft in a lot of our small businesses, the property vandalism and the crime, helping them navigate the permits and the processes within City Hall. I hear so many concerns and delays. People have gone bankrupt after renting or leasing property and then it’s taken them a year to navigate the process. They’re asking us to maybe reduce the red tape, support them during construction. So I’m just wondering, maybe it’s not an either or, but that is what I’m hearing lenders want. Is that something that we’re looking at or it’s coming to us maybe at a later point? Mr. Dator-Spare.

[40:26] Thank you, Chair, through you. A number of items there to speak to. So you spoke about small businesses and the services that are available to them. Certainly that’s available through a number of economic development organizations in this community, including the Small Business Center. It’s available for them and we’re happy to refer any of those organizations to the small business centers, an organization that we fund here at the city. So happy to put that in place. As it relates to vandalism, property damage, obviously, as we would say to anyone in our community, where there is crime, those issues and concerns are best forwarded to the police for support and the work that we do in trying to work in partnership with the police to ensure the best possible outcome for anyone in this community is a continued piece of work that we do. So I want to be clear that in as much as we try to ensure a safe and appropriate community, we also look to our colleagues at London Police Services. You talked about, I think, also about a reduction in the red tape and I think around delays in processing. I’m pretty confident based on the work that we do within our building services area and the feedback we get from developers or builders or others in our community that we are making great strides to address those challenges and those issues and things are moving quicker. I’m not going to suggest to you that we don’t have or we can always improve. I’ll put it that way and as there are concerns or challenges, it’d be helpful to hear those directly from service providers or from others as well.

[42:02] Thank you. So I’ll just say I’m not going to be supporting this. I do support investing in our small business supports but I think they need direct supports right now. I think that there’s so many things that we could do to have client services to help guide people through the process to provide more money for safety and security and also even things like the oldies village BIA is looking to expand so that we can collect more levies and be so that they can you know create more revenue and there’s staffing delays here that are going to postpone that.

[42:45] So I’m just thinking there’s a bunch of things that I would be more than happy to invest in but consulting fees is not going to be that. Okay, for other speakers. Answer, trust out and then Councillor Pribble. Just to say that I agree with Councillor Stevenson. Councillor Pribble. Thank you. So I guess if we start on this note, so I would say I’ll get the security with my two colleagues. No, there’s a big vision and we have I totally agree in terms of the points what Councillor Stevenson said but those are kind of the quicker action points that we do need to address and they are a must but there’s a strategic vision and I did spend some time on it.

[43:31] I would say during the year year and a half talking to various local organizations, doesn’t matter if it’s LEDC, Tech Alliance, Small Business Center, Western Research Parks, Post Western Fanshawe. We really have a lot of institutions here, a lot of organizations and we are not maximizing our opportunities. We are not pulling it together and I truly believe that this is a I do like to do things inside the house. I don’t believe that we are already both with our resources currently to attack it and we need to attack it as soon as possible. So I’m very much in support of it because in the circumstances we are, we need to move forward, we need to bring all the major players together and we’re going to start maximizing our opportunities for London and our region and I truly hope that this will give us the opportunity.

[44:20] I’m very much in support of it. To be honest with you, I wish we had this in for about six months ago. I’m very much in support of it. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Preble, looking for any other speakers. I will ask Councillor Rama to take the chair then because I’d like to share a few thoughts as well. Thank you. I have the chair. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. So I’m definitely going to be supporting this and to me, this is an and both situation and I look at some of the investments we’ve made elsewhere. When I hear that we need to be providing businesses with directory supports and cutting the red tape and I look at right outside these chambers where the pathways to approval counter has opened and people can come in and get in-person face-to-face service with their permit and licensing issues. I’m not going to get the exact number off the top of my head and Madam Presiding Officer, if Mr. Mathers has the precise number, I’d be happy to hear it, but I believe in our last Planning and Environment Committee update, our building permit approvals and the associated permit applications were meeting timelines by well over 90% in terms of our statutory deadlines for the provincial guidelines.

[45:42] We’ve made tremendous investment with our police services to improve community safety and just this week we had the chief provide the first announcement around the open drug use strategy and then I see what’s happening in our, you know, we had a request for an MZO about industrial lands for new businesses to develop and what I would say to residents when they say I don’t think this is where my property taxes should be spent is twofold. First I would say you have to remember that commercial and industrial properties pay property taxes into the city’s revenues as well and they should expect to see some revenue that they’re committing to be spent on things that benefit them, but these are also the job creators. So if we’re not making these investments, if we’re not looking at developing a comprehensive strategy so that we have things that are complementary to our existing supply chains, that we’re taking advantage of our geographic and our resources, including our human resources in the area to create those jobs, my fears that the property tax burden will only grow on residents because there will be fewer people employed because we won’t be attracting kind of jobs and we’ll start to see more of the ex-urban growth not on the residential side but on the employment side. So I want to see a plan that’s bringing job creators to London that’s revitalizing our economy and I know that one of the advantages we already have is that in London we don’t have all of our eggs in one basket. We have some in the advanced manufacturing sector. We have agar food and food processing businesses going on. We have some tech companies that operate here. We’ve got a diverse manufacturing base so far and we’ve got a diverse range of small businesses. You know, on the Argyle BIA board I can say we’ve lost a couple businesses over the last couple of years. We’ve also gained a couple of businesses. We’ve attracted new businesses into the area. I’m sure that I won’t speak for but I’m sure the presiding officer probably has seen the same thing in Hyde Park with their BIA where new businesses have appeared as well and so to me it’s about developing a strategy so that we take all the pieces of the puzzle that can create a good picture and put it together and that’s going to benefit the current folks who are paying industrial and residential property tax but it’s also going to benefit us with new revenue from new growth as we attract new employers into the city, create opportunities for people to have jobs that don’t require them to move away and creates that stable base so that not everything has to be about the residential property taxpayer but is in fact spread across the different sectors because we have thriving sectors in all areas. Our institutions, our university and college and our health care facilities, our industrial base, our commercial base and our residential base and so that’s why I’m supporting this because I think it’s one of the legs of the stool that perhaps needs a little shave or a little pad underneath to level it off because we haven’t had a comprehensive strategy in a while. While we’ve been working on housing and safety we need to work on how we’re going to bring jobs to the city as well. Thank you returning the chair to you with no one on the speakers list. Oh what Councillor Stevenson on the speakers list?

[49:01] Just one moment because I locked my device so I now can’t put on a timer or see my speakers list. Sorry Councillor Stevenson go ahead. Thank you just two quick questions. What is the definition of a small business as far as this report goes and also what is the reason that this is not already dealt with with the London Economic Development Corporation contract? Mr. Fowler or Ms. Dater’s beer? Good chair and and and through you speaking first to the definition of small business we I can’t offer a precise definition but what we can commit to was working with the small business center to to find that information in terms of who who they’re the client tell is and and then to let return that that information with respect to the second question on on why this isn’t with the LEDC directly. It’s just that so first I do want want to say that the LEDC along with a few other partners form part of the governance group for for this initiative so they are engaged in it but what we’re also looking at and I think that’s been spoken to here is really setting an economic vision for the city that includes LEDC but also considers broader broader organizations and industry associations and sectors and it’s about the the opportunity is is really to set that common trajectory and so we want to be part of that because we believe that the city is uniquely positioned to see that system view and be part of that of that conversation and so the notion is that when it sits with the city we can be a bit of a convener and bring together all of those views and have that collective conversation and set that that collective direction together. Councilor. Thank you just to follow up then because I’m a little confused that sounds much bigger and broader as was the the mention of industrial lands versus this specifically says it’s small and growing businesses entrepreneurs and nonprofits so is it something much broader than that or is this targeted to to one’s particular segment? Mr. Fowler. So so our intention is that this would include all segments and I’m just trying to pinpoint these the specific reference. Councilor. It’s just on the first page in the linkage to corporate strategic plan it says expected results small and growing businesses entrepreneurs and nonprofits are supported to be successful. Thank you chair and and through you yes that that is one of the expected results the the the other two are part of that too and and when we look to the associated implementation plan through Council’s strategic plan there is the reference to the development of a comprehensive economic development strategy for this for the city so that does form one component of it but it does go broader. Okay thank you that clarity any other speakers on the main motion? Mr. Preval. Thank you just two questions and when you look at this strategy and I just want to verify this because it was in wilder notes I’m looking really at this big picture really don’t yes small businesses which I’m actually owner of a small business as well it’s all part of it but this again should be the big vision bringing all the big players in the London together and making a vision which everyone can work together and set direction for London’s economic growth including strategies, plans, KPIs for delivering on that direction can please confirm that to me or if there are any other comments towards this please. Sir. Sorry. Mr. Fowler. Thank you chair.

[53:36] That is correct that’s that’s the intention I do want to acknowledge that to follow the process faithfully we need to be open to to to what we learn and what we hear through the engagement process but going into it those are the broad moves that that we are looking at. Councillor Preval. Thank you for letting you know you got about a minute 30 left. Thank you. Thank you and I was very happy to hear sorry to read on page three the bottom programming says we’ll be working concurrently with the downtown master plan but the downtown plot master plan will be longer the deadline than for this one. How are you going to coordinate it time wise to make sure that it is aligned and both these master plans have the same vision because they the this one we are talking about downtown is going to be part of it and I think it’s very crucial for this to be aligned together. Mr. Fowler. Thank you chair and through through you. Yes, we agree 100% so in terms of how we’ve been designing these different project plans I’m in close contact with the lead Mr. McCauley on the downtown master plan. We have standing meetings to to check in on progress. We are looking at where and how we are doing engagement so we can avoid reaching out to the same people multiple times for similar conversations. We’ve talked about how our projects vary in scope and intent but also where they also where they have those like alignment areas and given that the economic development strategy is designed to come first we can see that as a bit of an overarching framework through which the downtown master plan should should fit and the two should not only complement each other they should actually reinforce each other and so what that ultimately means we won’t know until we’ve gone through the process but that that intent and that that communication infrastructure is is is there for us to estate coordinated as we go because we absolutely see a value and we absolutely want to avoid duplication. Councilor Pribble, Councilor Stevenson. Thank you just one quick point as I come to understand the broader view on this I’m even more opposed to it because until we see a budget or financial statements for the LEDC I don’t want to be spending more money on that same thing until there’s some transparency around the three million dollars a year that we’re already spending. Thank you. Any other speakers?

[56:18] I open the vote. I’m going to ask the clerk to open the vote. Closing the vote. Motion carries 10 to 2. Thank you colleagues. Now as you know on your agenda there was an added from Councilor Plowza and Councillor Layman. Councillor Layman was not able to attend to these meeting.

[57:01] Councillor Plowza started to introduce this with a seconder and Councillor ramen. So Councillor Plowza I’m going to go back to you to introduce the motion that you have with respect to the communication that was related to the economic development strategy. Thank you and you did acknowledge that Councillor ramen is still my seconder. Thank you. As you’ll see the original date in the letter was January 27th. I have been waiting for this one for a while as we talked about the economic development plan in the city and how we shape things just starting to look at annually we see the Small Business Center Tech Alliance and LEDC come before us was wondering if there’s any overlap in the services that they offer and where things are best set through my engagement through the budget process and leading some agency boards and commissions through the process and being in different spaces was contemplating the relationship of how the music office currently sits under tourism London how luck and London economic development corporation has the film office and also looking at tourism London and RBC place realizing some places actually have their convention center with tourism in the same the same parcel of what they do realizing I know that this isn’t the big economic overarching stuff that we were just previously talking about but these are all economic drivers that could do so much in our city and already doing such great work in making sure that as we review things that civic administration has the opportunity to look and report back as they consider this of what they find for relationships if there’s ways to do anything better or differently or if we’re currently being well served by the current setup especially realizing the film office was a pilot project that has gone in my opinion extremely well and just having that review come back to us so looking for your your support today just that we get a report back at a future meeting of SPPC from civic administration after they’ve had an opportunity to look at these things and others that they might come across as they look at different AVCs. Thank you Councillor Palosa so that’s moved and seconded by Councillor ramen it’s on the floor now for any discussion. Councillor Hopkins.

[59:17] Thank you and I do have a question around clause B I’m supportive of A we’d like to have a better understanding exactly what we are asking civic administration and the work that will be required to reach out I assume to all our agencies boards and commissions and have a better understanding what we are asking of them to review within their policies I’d like a better idea on how I can explain that to the boards and commissions that I belong to. I’m going to go back to Councillor Palosa I think Councillor Palosa was and I’m actually going to add on to what you said Councillor Hopkins just because I think it might help with Councillor Palosa responding because it’s her motion so I’m going to go to her for the response but I think she was specifically speaking to those boards and agencies that are in the economic development sphere not necessarily all of them but Councillor Palosa do you want to do you want to provide that clear for an answer to that?

[1:00:25] Yeah thank you that was correct it was under the economic plan realizing the water board probably has very little but they could do for us economic drivers besides we have clean water and please come to London that it was really not realm of like which ones are contributing to the economic development in the city and I saw those as the major ones there might be a couple other outliers but most of them would be would be smaller like I know people coming to enjoy the conservation authorities they might have some opportunities for economic drivers but it would be so small that it’s not what I’m going for of really the big drivers of where does the convention center sit person because they’re what we could do with Canada Life Center and just how this energy is between the two those major players play of how we market things and where they sit for economic drivers in the city. Councillor Hopkins good other speakers Councillor Stevenson.

[1:01:23] Thank you I’m happy to support any motion that’s looking at cost savings but I’m still puzzled by the the fact that we’re not looking at the financial statements for the ledc so we can look we’re looking at these small little amounts but what about the 3 million that we paid to ledc we don’t know how much of the last few years contracts have been unspent we don’t know what amount they’re sitting on and we have no idea what the salaries are being paid so I’m not saying that it is happening but we do have the LHC situation and the tvdsb issues. So Councillor I’m going to stop you there because I think you’re leaving the I think you’re moving into some territory where you might want to be cautious about speculation but also that you’re moving away from the motion that’s on the floor.

[1:02:16] Well how it relates to the motion on the floor is we’re looking at cost savings and efficiencies between film music which are very small dollar amounts in comparison to the 3 million and I’m not speculating but I’m saying there’s due diligence in terms of knowing what salaries are being paid out and what those even ballpark numbers are could be a potential place for cost savings or due diligence on behalf of the taxpayer. Thank you and and I appreciate you bringing that back to the motion that was on the floor looking for other speakers. Councillor Palosa. Thank you just going to highlight in that too like as you’ve seen some of these some of them are salaries they sit underneath the city manager’s department others are contracted services. I know we’ve had this conversation before also let you know that I did reach out to LEDC. Individually it was interesting some of their salary kind of conversations and was told that they do have a board they do to their environmental scans of what the salary ranges are within but for the city we just purchased a service arrangement it would be a question really if someone wanted to bring up for that discussion of when we do tenders and RSVPs and contracts for services if council has any stipulations in their currently or if we would look at any end that a certain amount would be spent on salaries certain amounts would be spent on administration office things. I don’t believe we get that that detailed with providers right now that is just the city would like to purchase this and people make offers and they do their budgetary allotments as they see just a comment rather than question Mr. Chair.

[1:04:10] Thank you. Councillor Stevenson. Yeah I can’t help but reply to that in that I’m pretty sure this is an untendered contract so there isn’t a competitive process and I have looked at some other cities and they do the same what what appears to be the same thing a contract with a private corporation for economic development and the financial statements are provided publicly. Thank you and I’m just I’m going to caution colleagues we’re really getting into not only cross debate but we’re discussing we’re really starting to get away from what’s on here in terms of reviewing duplication of services and cost savings and we’re getting into a realm of disclosures of employee salaries and things like that and that’s not really what’s on the floor. It’s also not really necessarily appropriate to be engaging in in public session where there’s a contract in place that may have to become an in-camera discussion as part of a review of a contract.

[1:05:23] Part of this is a review of contracted services so until we have that report back we’re really we’re straying away from whether or not we want a review of the contracted services which is there now so I’m just I’m cautioning colleagues I’m going to cut off any more sort of cross debate discussion on who earns what it’s not germane to what’s on the floor right now with a review of duplication of services in existing contracts. I’m looking for other speakers seeing none then I’m going to ask the clerk to open the vote. Opposing the vote the most closing the vote motion carries 12 to 0. Thank you colleagues and the good news is it is not 2 p.m. and we have dispensed with our agenda so I’m looking for a motion to adjourn moved by Councillor Hillyer and Councillor Hopkins seconds by hand all those in favor that motion carries thank you we are adjourned.