Open Council

10th Meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee

Open Council

10th Meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee

May 26, 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 S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That Consent Items 2.1 to 2.11 BE APPROVED with the exception of item 2.8.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   Standing Committee Meetings and Annual Meeting Calendar

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Annual Meeting Calendar

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the annual meeting calendar for the period January 1, 2026 to December 31, 2026 (as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “A”), BE APPROVED; it being understood that adjustments to the calendar may be required from time to time in order to accommodate special/additional meetings or changes to governing legislation.

Motion Passed

2.2   Enwave Update - London District Energy

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Enwave Services

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the report dated May 26, 2025, titled “Enwave Update – London District Energy” BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.3   Junior Achievement Centre, 15 Wharncliffe Road North

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Junior Achievement Centre

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to the roof replacement of the Junior Achievement Centre, 15 Wharncliffe Road North:

a)    the report BE RECEIVED for information;

b)    the funding for this procurement BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “A”;

c)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to negotiate an updated modernized agreement between the City and the Junior Achievement of Southwestern Ontario Inc.; and

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all actions necessary to implement these recommendations.

Motion Passed

2.4   2025 Reserve and Reserve Fund Monitoring and Housekeeping Report

2025-05-26 Staff Report - 2025 Reserve and Reserve Fund Monitoring

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

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

a)    the 2025 Reserve and Reserve Fund Monitoring and Housekeeping Report BE RECEIVED for information;

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as “Appendix C”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to amend By-Law No. A.-8409-258 being “A by-law to establish the London Police Service Reserve Fund”;

c)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as “Appendix D”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to amend By-law No. A.-8413-262 being “A by-law to establish the DC Incentive Program - Property Tax Supported Reserve Fund”; and

d)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as “Appendix E”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, being “A by-law to establish the Community Efficiency Retrofit Programs Reserve Fund.”

Motion Passed

2.5   2024 Annual Report on Development Charges Reserve Funds and Development Charges Monitoring

2025-05-26 Staff Report - 2024 Annual Report on DC Reserve Funds and DC Monitoring

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

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

a)    the 2024 Annual Report on Development Charges Reserve Funds and Development Charges Monitoring BE RECEIVED for information in accordance with section 43 (1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, which requires the City Treasurer to provide a financial statement relating to Development Charges By-law and associated reserve funds; and

b)    the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports BE DIRECTED to make the 2024 Annual Report on Development Charges Reserve Funds and Development Charges Monitoring available to the public on the City of London website to fulfill Council’s obligation under section 43 (2.1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997.

Motion Passed

2.6   2024 Parkland Reserve Fund Annual Financial Statement and Reporting of Former Section 37 Planning Act (Bonusing) Funds

2025-05-26 Staff Report - 2024 Annual Report on Parkland Reserve Fund

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

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

a)    the 2024 Parkland Reserve Fund annual financial statement BE RECEIVED for information in accordance with section 42 (17) of the Planning Act, 1990;

b)    the 2024 reporting of former Section 37 bonusing funds held by the City of London BE RECEIVED for information; and

c)    the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports BE DIRECTED to make the 2024 Parkland Reserve Fund annual financial statement and reporting of former Section 37 Planning Act (Bonusing) funds still held available to the public on the City of London website.

Motion Passed

2.7   Agreement Between the City of London and Donald Jones Management Services Inc. for Management of Centennial Hall

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Agreement Between the City and Donald Jones Management

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the proposed by-law as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “A”, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025 to:

a)    amending agreement between The Corporation of the City of London and Donald Jones Management Services Inc. (the “Amending Agreement”) BE APPROVED to:

i)     extend the term of the agreement to December 31, 2030;

ii)    amend Schedule “A” Regular Personnel Costs or Contract Service of the Agreement; and,

iii)    amend Schedule “B” – Centennial Hall Rates and Requirements of the Agreement;

b)    the Mayor and the City Clerk BE AUTHORIZED to execute the agreement approved in a), above.

Motion Passed

2.9   Contract Award: Tender RFT-2025-087-Bradley Avenue Extension and White Oaks Tributary Complete Corridor from Wharncliffe Road South to Jalna Boulevard (West Leg)

2025-05-26 Staff Report - RFT-2025-087-Bradley-Ave-White-Oaks-Tributary

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the award of contract for the Bradley Avenue Extension & White Oaks Tributary Complete Corridor project, from Wharncliffe Road South to Jalna Boulevard (RFT-2025-087):

a)    the bid submitted by J-AAR Civil Infrastructures Limited, at its tendered price of $21,135,965.36, excluding HST, BE ACCEPTED; it being noted that the bid submitted by J-AAR Civil Infrastructures Limited was the lowest of four bids received and meets the City’s specifications and requirements, in accordance with Section 13.2 of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

b)    WSP Canada Inc. BE AUTHORIZED to complete the contract administration and construction inspection for this project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $1,937,031.96, excluding HST, in accordance with Section 15.2 (g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

c)    the contract with Montrose Environmental Solutions Canada Inc. BE INCREASED by $139,980.00 to a total amended value of $639,425.00, excluding HST, for additional consultant tasks including coordination for tender preparation, construction support, and post-construction flood line mapping, in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy;

d)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to approve Memorandums of Understanding between the Corporation of the City of London and private property owners, in relation to the cost-sharing of servicing and wetland compensation works contained within the Bradley Avenue Extension & White Oaks Tributary Complete Corridor project;

e)    the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “A”;

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

g)    the approvals given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract with the consultants for the work;

h)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract for the material to be supplied and the work to be done relating to this project (RFT-2025-087); and

i)    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

2.10   2024 Annual Update on Budweiser Gardens

2025-05-26 Staff Report - 2024 Annual Update on Budweiser Gardens

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the 2024 Annual Report on Budweiser Gardens, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as ‘Appendix B’, BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.11   Procurement Strategy: Prioritizing Canadian Businesses

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Procurement Strategy Prioritizing Canadian Business

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the Procurement Strategy: Prioritizing Canadian Business report BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.8   Appointment of Consulting Engineers for the Infrastructure Renewal Program: Round 5

2025-05-26 Staff Report - Appointment of Consulting Engineers for the Infrastructure Renewal

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by J. Pribil

That on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the appointment of consulting engineers for the Infrastructure Renewal Program to carry out consulting services for the identified projects, at the upset amounts identified below, in accordance with the estimate on file, and in accordance with Section 15.2(e) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy:

i)    Archibald, Gray & McKay Engineering Ltd. BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Ontario Street, from Central Avenue to Dufferin Avenue, in the total amount of $268,400.00 (including contingency), excluding HST;

ii)    Archibald, Gray & McKay Engineering Ltd. BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Southdale Road East, from Wellingsboro Road to Willow Drive, in the total amount of $266,888.00 (including contingency), excluding HST;

iii)    GEI Consultants Canada Ltd. BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Dearness Drive, from Bradley Avenue to Wellington Road, in the total amount of $176,500.50 (including contingency), excluding HST;

iv)    Development Engineering (London) Limited BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Edinburgh Street, from Foster Avenue to east limit, in the total amount of $235,284.50 (including contingency), excluding HST;

v)    Spriet Associates London Limited BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Paul Street, from Lorraine Avenue to Wharncliffe Road North, in the total amount of $240,752.60 (including contingency), excluding HST;

vi)    Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Inc. BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Oxford Street West, from Capulet Walk to 100 metres west of Wonderland Road North, in the total amount of $181,567.10 (including contingency), excluding HST;

a)     on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions taken with respect to the appointment of consulting engineers for the Infrastructure Renewal Program to carry out consulting services for the identified projects, at the upset amounts identified below, in accordance with the estimate on file, and in accordance with Section 15.2(g) of the City of London’s Procurement of Goods and Services Policy:

i)    Development Engineering (London) Limited BE APPOINTED consulting engineers to complete the resident inspection and contract administration for the 2025 Infrastructure Renewal Program Florence Street, York Street and Eleanor Street project in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $618,827.00 including 10% contingency, excluding HST;

ii)    AECOM Canada ULC BE APPOINTED consulting to complete the pre-design, and detailed design for the reconstruction of Grand Avenue, from Wellington Road to east limit, in accordance with the estimate, on file, at an upset amount of $212,242.00, including 10% contingency, excluding HST:

b)    the financing for this project BE APPROVED as set out in the Sources of Financing Report, as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix ‘A’;

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

d)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a formal contract; 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 (5 to 0)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   2025 Council Policy Review

2025-05-26 Staff Report - 2025 Council Policy Review

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Polices:

a)    the proposed by-law (as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “B”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to introduce a new Council Policy entitled Centennial Hall Policy;

b)    the proposed by-laws (as appended to the staff report as Appendices C1 to C43) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to make the specified amendments to the following Council Policies:

  1.    Access and Privacy Policy

  2.    Accessibility Policy

  3.    Annual Assessment of Underutilized Light Vehicles Policy

  4.    Anti-Racism and Anti-Oppression Policy

  5.    Appointment of Council Members to Standing Committees of Council and Various Civic Boards and Commissions Policy

  6.    Appointment of Deputy Mayor Policy

  7.    Assessment Growth Policy 

  8.    Benefits for Survivors of Employees Killed on the Job Policy

  9.    City of London Community Suite Policy

  10.    City of London Days at the Budweiser Gardens Policy

  11.    City of London Records Management Policy

  12.    Collective Bargaining Activities Policy

  13.    Community Arts Investment Program Policy

  14.    Community Engagement Policy

  15.    Corporate Identity Policy

  16.    Corporate Plaques and Recognitions Policy

  17.    Council Members’ Expense Account Policy

  18.    Employee Service Recognition and Retirement Policy

  19.    Encroachment Policy

  20.    Flags at City Hall Policy

  21.    Free of Fear Services Policy

  22.    General Policy for Advisory Committees

  23.    Illumination of City of London Buildings and Amenities Policy

  24.    Investment Policy

  25.    Issuance of Technology Equipment to Council Policy

  26.    Leasing and Licensing of City Owned Land Policy

  27.    Mayor’s Expenses Policy

  28.    Mayor’s New Year’s Honour List Policy

  29.    Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Policies

  30.    Promotion of Products or Services to City Employees Policy

  31.    Property Enquiries to Board of Education Policy

  32.    Property for Capital Works Projects Policy

  33.    Public Access During Council and Standing Committee Meetings Policy - including an amendment in section 4.2.5 to replace the word “Protest” with “Intentional Disruption”

  34.    Public Art Monument Policy

  35.    Public Notice Policy

  36.    Queen Elizabeth Scholarship Policy

  37.    Real Estate Service Policy

  38.    Request to Waive or Reduce Facility Rental Fees Policy

  39.    Rzone Policy

  40.    Sale and Other Disposition of Land Policy

  41.    Selection Process Policy for Appointing Members to Committee, Civic Boards and Commissions

  42.    Use of City of London Resources for Election Purposes Policy

  43.    Use of the City Hall Cafeteria Policy

c)    the proposed by-laws (as appended to the staff report as Appendices D1 to D3) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to repeal the following Council Policies:

  1.    Media Protocols Policy

  2.    Soliciting Funds in City Hall Policy

  3.    Use of Civic Square by Centennial Hall Events Policy.

d)    By-law No. CPOL.-54-286, being the “Appointment of Deputy Mayor Policy” BE REFERRED to the Governance Working Group for review.

e)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to amend By-law No. CPOL.-231-555, being the “Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Policies” for the next Council Policy review cycle to include a requirement to review Council Policies using a Climate Lens;

f)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult with the school boards with respect to the applicability of By-law No. CPOL.-17-213, being the “Queen Elizabeth Scholarship Policy”, extending to Conseil scolaire catholique Providence and Conseil Scolaire Viamonde and bring forward any necessary changes to the Policy to a future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee; and

g)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to:

i)       continue to work with London Transit Commission and London Public Library to determine appropriate metrics for which these agencies may apply for assessment growth funding;

ii)      review and report back to a future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee on amendments to By-law No. CPOL.-47-243, being the “Assessment Growth Policy”, if necessary, to clarify eligibility criteria pertaining to the pressures of a growing city.

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That, on the recommendation of the City Clerk, the following actions be taken with respect to the Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Polices:

a)    the proposed by-law (as appended to the staff report dated May 26, 2025 as Appendix “B”) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to introduce a new Council Policy entitled Centennial Hall Policy;

b)    the proposed by-laws (as appended to the staff report as Appendices C1 to C43) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to make the specified amendments to the following Council Policies: 

  1.    Access and Privacy Policy

  2.    Accessibility Policy

  3.    Annual Assessment of Underutilized Light Vehicles Policy

  4.    Anti-Racism and Anti-Oppression Policy

  5.    Appointment of Council Members to Standing Committees of Council and Various Civic Boards and Commissions Policy

  6.    Appointment of Deputy Mayor Policy

  7.    Assessment Growth Policy 

  8.    Benefits for Survivors of Employees Killed on the Job Policy

  9.    City of London Community Suite Policy

  10.    City of London Days at the Budweiser Gardens Policy

  11.    City of London Records Management Policy

  12.    Collective Bargaining Activities Policy

  13.    Community Arts Investment Program Policy

  14.    Community Engagement Policy

  15.    Corporate Identity Policy

  16.    Corporate Plaques and Recognitions Policy

  17.    Council Members’ Expense Account Policy

  18.    Employee Service Recognition and Retirement Policy

  19.    Encroachment Policy

  20.    Flags at City Hall Policy

  21.    Free of Fear Services Policy

  22.    General Policy for Advisory Committees

  23.    Illumination of City of London Buildings and Amenities Policy

  24.    Investment Policy

  25.    Issuance of Technology Equipment to Council Policy

  26.    Leasing and Licensing of City Owned Land Policy

  27.    Mayor’s Expenses Policy

  28.    Mayor’s New Year’s Honour List Policy

  29.    Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Policies

  30.    Promotion of Products or Services to City Employees Policy

  31.    Property Enquiries to Board of Education Policy

  32.    Property for Capital Works Projects Policy

  33.    Public Access During Council and Standing Committee Meetings Policy

  34.    Public Art Monument Policy

  35.    Public Notice Policy

  36.    Queen Elizabeth Scholarship Policy

  37.    Real Estate Service Policy

  38.    Request to Waive or Reduce Facility Rental Fees Policy

  39.    Rzone Policy

  40.    Sale and Other Disposition of Land Policy

  41.    Selection Process Policy for Appointing Members to Committee, Civic Boards and Commissions

  42.    Use of City of London Resources for Election Purposes Policy

  43.    Use of the City Hall Cafeteria Policy

c)    the proposed by-laws (as appended to the staff report as Appendices D1 to D3) BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025, to repeal the following Council Policies:

  1.    Media Protocols Policy

  2.    Soliciting Funds in City Hall Policy

  3.    Use of Civic Square by Centennial Hall Events Policy.

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by J. Pribil

That By-law No. CPOL.-273-251, being the “Public Access During Council and Standing Committee Meetings Policy” BE AMENDED in section 4.2.5 to replace the word “Protest” with “Intentional Disruption”.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by S. Franke

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the motion BE AMENDED to include a new part to read as follows:

The Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to amend By-law No. CPOL.-231-555, being the “Policy for the Establishment and Maintenance of Council Policies” for the next Council Policy review cycle to include a requirement to review Council Policies using a Climate Lens.

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by J. Pribil

That By-law No. CPOL.-54-286, being the “Appointment of Deputy Mayor Policy” BE REFERRED to the Governance Working Group for review.

Motion Passed (3 to 2)

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the motion BE AMENDED to include a new part to read as follows:

The Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to:

i)       continue to work with London Transit Commission and London Public Library to determine appropriate metrics for which these agencies may apply for assessment growth funding;

ii)      review and report back to a future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee on amendments to By-law No. CPOL.-47-243, being the “Assessment Growth Policy”, if necessary, to clarify eligibility criteria pertaining to the pressures of a growing city

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the motion BE AMENDED to include a new part to read as follows:

That Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult with the school boards with respect to the applicability of By-law No. CPOL.-17-213, being the “Queen Elizabeth Scholarship Policy”, extending to Conseil scolaire catholique Providence and Conseil Scolaire Viamonde and bring forward any necessary changes to the Policy to a future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by A. Hopkins

Seconded by S. Franke

That the motion, as amended, BE APPROVED

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

4.2   Bad Debts - Aspire Food Group - Councillor S. Stevenson

2025-05-26 Submission - Bad Debts – Aspire Food Group-S. Stevenson

That it BE NOTED that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee received a communication dated May 15, 2025 from Councillor S. Stevenson with respect to this matter.

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare an information report summarizing the amounts owed by Aspire Food Group, the process to collect, expected outcomes and a brief summary of property taxes, fines and other accounts receivable that are deemed uncollectible.

Motion Failed (1 to 4)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

5.1   (ADDED) Proposed Road Rehabilitation Project - Gainsborough and Hyde Park - Councillor C. Rahman

2025-05-26 Submission - Gainsborough and Hyde Park-C. Rahman

Moved by C. Rahman

Seconded by J. Pribil

That the following actions be taken with respect to the rehabilitation project on Gainsborough Road:

a)  the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult with the community regarding the proposed changes to the stretch of Gainsborough Road; and

b)  the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to prepare a new rendering that supports maintaining the (2) two eastbound lanes on Gainsborough Road;

it being noted that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee received a communication from Councillor C. Rahman with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

5.2   (ADDED) Concern Regarding an Infrastructure Renewal Project - Councillor S. Stevenson

2025-05-26 Submission - Infrastructure Renewal Project-S. Stevenson

That it BE NOTED that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee received a communication dated May 22, 2025 from Councillor S. Stevenson with respect to this matter.

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the following actions be taken with respect to the Eleanor Street Infrastructure Renewal Project:

a)    Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to consult with the community, including local businesses, regarding the changes to this part of Eleanor Street;

b)    Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to prepare a new rendering that addresses the parking needs, accessibility concerns and loading dock on the west side of Eleanor Street.

Motion Failed (1 to 3)

6.   Confidential

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

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

6.1 A matter pertaining to litigation or potential litigation and advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose with respect to the Eleanor Street Infrastructure Renewal Project.

Motion Passed (4 to 0)

The Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee convenes In Closed session from 2:42 PM to 2:53 PM.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by S. Franke

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 2:57 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, 59 minutes)

[13:55] Good afternoon, everyone. I’ll look to call the 10th meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee to order. First, I’ll start with the land acknowledgement. The city of London is situated on the traditional territory of the Anishinaabek, the Haudenosaunee, Dhulanapuek, and Adawandran. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory.

[14:30] The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and 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. Before we begin our meeting, I just wanted to recognize that last week was Public Works Week. And I just want to say a big thank you to our important Public Works employees, everyone that was involved with Touch-A-Truck, which I hear was quite a success.

[15:06] And just again, thanks to everyone that participated, I had a chance to do a tour of our wastewater management facility. And I have to say to Mr. Otakirk, a big thank you for sharing his passion and his knowledge with me and with a group of new interns and employees at the city. It was a fantastic opportunity to learn. It smelled pretty good. I was surprised, I was worried, but it was really well done.

[15:41] If you ever get a chance, media included to tour this facility, it’s a wonderful experience. So thank you to him and to all of our staff that were present and supporting there. Okay, we’re gonna start with item one, which is our disclosure of Pecuniary Interest, looking to the committee and seeing none. Thank you. We just wanted to let everybody know that here in Chambers, we’ve got Councillor Frank, Councillor Hopkins, we’ve got Councillor Pripple, myself, online, Councillor Van Mirbergen, joining us in Chambers, not on the committee, but always welcome Councillor Ferrera and also online Councillor Stevenson and Councillor Hillier.

[16:22] Good to see you all. We’ll start with consent. I’ve been asked to pull item 2.8. Anyone else looking to pull any other items? Okay, seeing none, I’ll look for a mover and seconder for all other items except for 2.8. I’ve got Councillor Frank and Councillor Van Mirbergen. Thank you. And I will look for speakers on these items. Councillor Frank.

[17:01] Thank you, yes. And I just wanted to make a couple of comments. I had all my questions answered by staff in advance, which I really appreciate. I do hope that for item 2.2, for N-Wave, we are able to look into opportunities where we can improve our energy sources and hopefully reduce emissions at the same time. So I look forward to the report staff. We’ll bring back for that. And additionally for item 2.11, the procurement strategy, I just want to say thank you to finance staff. I think that’s a really great direction we’re headed in. And I also really like the exception for agricultural purposes and food because I think there’s lots of opportunities to support local food producers.

[17:39] And everyone else who wrote a report, thank you. Okay, thank you. Looking to other members of committee. Okay, Councillor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. And just want to thank staff for the report too. I do have a comment regarding the 2.5, which is the annual report on development charges, reserve funds and development charges monitoring. I know just making a comment to you about the shortfalls.

[18:15] Obviously there’s going to be a need for advocating to get the DCs. And I just wanted to also acknowledge the advocacy that AMO and Ontario Home Builders Association is working together with the provincial government. Obviously we want to speed up building homes, but it’s really important to acknowledge the AMO board is generally supportive of measures that improve transparency and predictability and standardization where it makes sense as well.

[18:56] So I just wanted to bring forward those comments from the AMO board and also to make a quick comment on 2.11, which is the procurement strategy, prioritizing, Canadian businesses. I really appreciated the report and the information in that. And really anticipating and pleased to know that there will be opportunities for us as we go forward dealing with the uncertainty, especially around the tariffs that’s supporting the businesses.

[19:30] So really appreciated that report. And that is it for me, thank you. Thank you, before I go to visiting Councillors, I’ll go to Councilor Purple, go ahead. Thank you and question to the staff through the chair, 2.10, which is a Budweiser Gardens, now Canada, a life place. I wanted to ask you, when I look at the paid attendance, which is actually up compared to the budget, which is great, very positive. But then when I go look at the city proceeds from ticket sales, it’s actually down. And I just want to make sure that, is that because there is a flat fee for the tickets?

[20:05] I don’t know if you know the answer, but is it because there is a flat fee for the ticket and the average price was up? Because in that perspective, that would make sense if you can clarify this for me. Thank you, Ms. Farben. Thank you through the chair. That is a flat fee of the number of tickets that are sold. So the number of events has gone down. Therefore, we’ve seen a change also in the amount for the ticket sales in terms of proceeds for the city of London.

[20:38] Councillor. And therefore the average price of the ticket was higher. That’s why the entire amount, the gross revenue is higher. I would imagine that is correct. I see a nod. Thank you very much. No more questions? Thank you. Okay, I’m going to go to Councillor Stevenson and then I’ll look for other speakers. Councillor Stevenson, thank you. Yeah, thank you. I had a question on, I guess it’s, well, it’s on page 35. So in 2.4 on the reserve fund.

[21:12] So it’s a housekeeping and by-law update. So we had done this by-law. I was a brand new one, I believe last year. And now we’re adding in a part B that includes the financial incentives available in the residential development charges grant program. And I just wondered why we were including the city’s, the city’s incentives in with the statutory ones from the province. Mr. Murray, go ahead.

[21:49] Thank you and through you, Madam Chair. So this reserve fund deals with all DC incentives. So the addition this year is strictly an oversight. These incentives have traditionally been paid from this reserve fund. We did not, though, unfortunately, when we created the by-law in the first place, we did not include that original perimeter in the by-law itself. So it has simply been added to reflect what has been ongoing practice for that.

[22:25] That was perfect, thank you. Thank you, that answers that question. And then I had a question in the 2.4, the development charges reserve funds in the appendix A where it says it’s the activity for the year ending December 31st, 2024. I guess there’s just a lot of older projects on there. And I just wondered, like on page 80, there’s close to 25 million in cycling projects, but it goes from 2017, it looks like, to 2027.

[23:04] So I just wondered if staff could just explain a little bit about what we’re seeing on this activity report. Miss, I’ll go back to Mr. Murray, go ahead. Thank you and through you. So what you see here is a comprehensive list of all of the projects and their life-to-date budgets that have draws on those respective city services reserve funds. So what you often will see in some cases such as the projects that the counselor alluded to is that there is a separate project created for each year’s annual budget.

[23:44] So for example, 2017, 2018, 2019 and so on would have their own individual projects, own individual capital projects. And as works progress and draw on those specific capital projects, eventually over time, those projects will fall off as they are ultimately exhausted and extinguished. So that is why you see in some cases projects with similar wording or similar language, similar titles. We do actively monitor, as Council will be aware, we do actively monitor our capital budgets.

[24:23] We have the semi-annual capital budget monitoring process that comes forward to Council twice a year. And you’ll recall, as part of that report, we do pay particular attention to those projects with budgets that are greater than four years old. So those are the ones that we’re constantly assessing and looking at to see which ones are candidates for closure. So those tend to be the focus as part of that semi-annual monitoring report that comes forward. I hope that answers the question, counselor. Councilor Stevenson. Thank you, it does.

[24:56] And so the projects come off of this report once all funds are extinguished. And I guess when the project itself is just, there’s nothing else to put through potentially on that. Some of them just, I’m gonna follow up with this offline between now and Council just to understand it a little better. I think I’m good for now. Thank you, looking for other visiting or other members of the committee on the consent items other than 2.8.

[25:34] Okay, I will ask Councillor Frank to take the chair, please. Thank you, taking the chair and recognizing yourself. Thank you so much. I just wanted to comment on the consent items in front of us. Again, thank you to all staff for those reports. Just my own thoughts on 2.1, the standing committee meeting. I understand that we have asked for a week where we have no meetings that week. And so that pushes some of our meetings into Wednesdays and Thursdays in order to accommodate.

[26:09] I’m just sharing my own personal views. I would prefer to keep things on Mondays and Tuesdays and have the additional days for my reading and for my preparation on Wednesdays and Thursdays as well as my other commitments. With respect to 2.2, the N-Wave update, the London District Energy just wanted to thank staff for that report and the work that you’re doing to ensure that we are in a situation to address these concerns. And hope that continued conversation or conversation can happen with London Hydro on these matters as well.

[26:43] With respect to 2.3, the Junior Achievement Center, I’m so glad to see that this is in front of us ‘cause I know this is a necessary repair. This is a city asset and it’s important that we protect city assets and so any necessary repairs should be done. I do appreciate staff coming forward to update an agreement that’s 59 years old. Again, with respect to the DC Reserve Fund and the Housekeeping and Monitoring Report for the Reserve Funds, I just wanna thank staff again for these reports and the thoroughness.

[27:18] I had similar questions to Councillor Stevenson with respect to some of the reasons why some of those items were still showing on the report but appreciate that that has been addressed. The only other thing I will add is we have a report at SPPC tomorrow which I think also relates back to these but it’s around our planning around our assets and just looking at that asset plan and how it might interact with these in the future.

[27:51] I think will be a good conversation for us to have looking forward. And I just wanted to speak quickly to 2.7 with respect to the service agreement and I think it’s also in the policy review that’s in front of us on Centennial Hall. Actually, it is in the policy review, so I’ll save my comments until then, sorry. Last comment, 2.9, Bradley Avenue Extension. I know a lot of people, I see Councillor Palosa has come online.

[28:24] A lot of people in the community will be really pleased to see this moving forward. Thanks for your work on this. And lastly, the procurement strategy, share the same comments as other Councillors. This is of priority to the city. It’s really important for us to continue to look at how we do business with Canadian companies. So thank you. And that’s my end of my comments. Thank you guys and well with under your time limit, so we’re turning the chair to yourself. Thank you, I have the chair again and I will go to Councillor Palosa, go ahead. Thank you, ma’am chair.

[28:57] And it’s just 2.8, that’s pulled, correct? That’s correct. Perfect. A question three to staff on 2.3, being the Junior Achievement Center at Warren Cliff Road. I understand that it is a city asset. And I know there’s a lot of history to these. Can you update us that when you go back to do a review of the current agreement that’s in place, realizing they don’t seem to pay any lease amount or anything to us and we’re taking care of the building. What can we expect going forward?

[29:32] As the report also notes that in 2006, we purchased a roof then, just looking to see what you’re gonna potentially come back with us and it will committee get updated of what negotiations happened or ways forward? When would we see that and how will we see it? Ms. Barbone? Thank you through the chairs. So as you can see through an agreement that is many, many years old, there is some clarity lacking in terms of what the intent of the agreement was with respect to large significant capital costs.

[30:11] Also in saying that, however, the city of London holds the title, although we don’t really utilize the building on a day-to-day basis. So that is gonna be the intent of the clarity and the discussions we would have with Junior Achievement about trying to look at ways to plan proactively for capital infrastructure lifecycle renewal that would be required. So I think certainly the intent would be we would initiate those discussions and whatever we would bring forward to land on with respect to an agreement would come forward for council’s approval before we proceed.

[30:50] So that’s our intent is that the immediate need is to basically fix the roof. We believe given the history of the city of London fixing the roof, it’s probably prudent for us to proceed to do so given their request and their inability to fund that. But I do think there’s opportunity to look at how we plan for the next roof replacement and how that might be utilized and organized as part of the agreement going forward. So we will bring whatever that is back to council for that council improvement. Should we be able to reach something? Councillor?

[31:23] Thank you. I appreciate that. We just have concerns that as the building continues to age as many municipal assets do that when the building comes to end a lifespan that it’s going to be, they’re handing back a building that doesn’t suit our use that will need to be removed or just looking for the city to fix it in perpetuity whenever there’s issues that arise. I really do have concerns about this as I’m sure there’s other places that would prefer to build a building on city property and then let the city manage all costs associated with it. My other is, as Councillor Roman said, 2.9.

[32:01] It’s the Bradley Ab extension. Looking for you to see how the early spring tree removal went prior to migratory birds returning to make sure that was done in successfully and in time and looking to see what residents can anticipate here out for either disruptions in the area or communication plans from the city. Thank you. I’ll go to Ms. Chair. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I’m Mr. McRae and Ms. Grady are here. Thank you.

[32:35] Over to Mr. McRae. Thank you through the chair. Yes, the project has some very public facing work on the east side, but then a lot of it, the extension part where Bradley Ab doesn’t exist will be quite non-disruptive. There have been, has been consultation with the community throughout the project cycle and this will continue with another public meeting in June and that will provide information about the upcoming construction phase and what residents can expect.

[33:12] Councillor? Thank you, Madam Chair. A follow up at this time, I’m assuming the tree removal went fine. This project I know has had some delays already in the process out of our control due to approvals from a conservation authority. So just looking to see if as of right now, everything’s still moving forward as it is a project that we’re hoping alleviates and change some traffic flow patterns in the city. Thank you, Mr. McCrae, trees and project going forward. Yes, sorry, I skipped that part of your question.

[33:46] Yes, the tree removals were done as per the deadlines and compliance with the Migratory Birds Convention Act was successful. So that part of the project was completed on time and it’s, it provides the path for the construction to move forward. Councillor? Thank you to staff for the communication with the Councillor and the ward as we’ve moved through this through multiple terms of council. It is an important project in the South End and happy to see us moving forward with it and looking forward to the completion.

[34:23] Thank you. Okay, any additional questions for, oh, Councillor from me over you, go ahead. In point. Councillor, can you move closer to your mic or we’re just having a look at you, thank you so much. Yeah, this is a lot of talk. Yeah, on 2.9 with the expansion, et cetera, Bradley, this is certainly a good news story for the Southwest of London.

[35:00] This will take significant amount of pressure off Southville, which is perennially congested and this will read a great improvement. So very good on that. 2.11, 2.11, the procurement strategy. Prioritizing Canadian business, excellent report. I think it’s further evidence that we are showing our neighbors to the South and therefore the Trump government that yes, we are smaller, but we are mighty.

[35:43] We are completely in sync with our community, indeed our nation, from everything from buying groceries, the types of restaurants, who owns them. We are very, very conscious of using the economic leverage that we have on all levels and yes, including the various levels of government. So in that regard, what we’re seeing here is absolutely in sync with those around us. Thank you.

[36:15] Thank you, Councillor. Okay, seeing no other speakers on these items, we’ll look to put the consent items excluding 2.8 for, and we’ll open the vote. Closing the vote, motion carries five to zero. Okay, thank you, we’ll move to item 4.1, which is the 2025 Council Policy Review.

[36:52] With this, as you know, this was quite a large item. I know there are a number of amendments that people would like to put forward. To start, what I’d like to do is get this item on the floor and then we’ll look to those that have amendments. Councillor Pribble, thank you, and Councillor Hopkins, thank you. Okay, why don’t we start with some questions and discussions and then we’ll move through the amendments. Councillor Frank.

[37:27] Thank you. I don’t have any questions or comments because I, shadow staff before, but I do have two amendments. But in regards to comments, I just wanna say, thank you for doing this. This is so much administrative work that makes my eyes feel like they automatically pop out of my head. So whoever has to do this, I really appreciate it because it’s a lot of work and a lot of details. So appreciate that. And I’m happy to move those amendments whenever possible. Thank you. If you’d like to get us started with your amendments, go ahead. Sure, yes. Regarding the, I’m just gonna try and pull up the name of it.

[38:01] Where did it go? There’s so many. I’m just trying to find where it is. Is it in eScribe? Oh, great. That’s even better than I’m not gonna look at this long list. Just need to refresh it. Okay, Councillor, would you like to get started with the public access during council and standing committee meeting policy? Thank you. Okay, so I can read it for you if you’d like. Great, that by-law number CPOL273251 being the public access during council and standing committee meeting policy be amended in section 4.2.5 to replace the word protest with intentional disruption.

[38:46] Perfect, thank you. And just to speak to that one, unless do you want me to see if I have a seconder? Speak to that. Yeah, we’ll look for a seconder before. Councillor Pribble, go ahead. Thank you. And I just had a brief email back and forth with our head of security on this one. And my intention being that I don’t mind protests if they’re silent, if they have signs, if they are complying with not disrupting. So just replacing that word with intentional disruption because I think that’s more what the concerns are. And if there’s noise or yelling, that’s obviously where we need to intervene.

[39:21] So just wanted to replace that to make it really clear that people silently protesting are totally cool. And then additionally, I just wanted to highlight that my understanding is the fobs would be only for guests on this floor, which I am okay with. I would not want to make people who are sitting in the gallery have to get passes, but that is not what the policy says. So I’m okay with that. So that’s one of my amendments. Okay, thank you. I’ll look for speakers on the amendment, which has been moved and seconded. Councillor Pribble, go ahead.

[40:02] Thank you, and through the chair to the staff, if I just can receive as feedback on this change from the staff, thank you. Thank you. I’ll go to Mr. Parity. Thank you through the chair. No, we’ve already talked about this with the councilor put it on the floor. There’s no issue at all with changing that name to intentional disruption. Councillor? Thank you, no more questions. Thank you. Okay, so on the amendment, any other speakers? Seeing none, I will look to open the vote on the amendment.

[40:51] Opposing the vote, motion carries five to zero. Thank you, Councillor. I’ll go back to you for your second amendment. Thank you. And I don’t have it in front of me on eScribe. Would you mind reading it if it is over on your eScribe? Okay, so the amendment reads that the motion be amended to include a new part to read as follows. The civic administration be directed to amend by law number CPOL231’s 555 being the policy for the establishment and maintenance of council policies for the next council policy review cycle to include a requirement to review council policies using a climate lens.

[41:42] Thank you, and I can speak to that, but would you like me to get a seconder? Yeah, I’ll be looking for a seconder. Councillor Hopkins, go ahead, Councillor Frank. Thank you, and regarding this one, I was really happy to see that these policies were being reviews within equity lens, and I think that that adds another layer of opportunity for us to evaluate if the policies we have for the corporation are abiding by best practices in regards to equity, and in the same way, I was hopeful that we could, at the next review, opportunity, which is in two years from now, use a sustainability or climate lens, and we have within our climate emergency action plan a point where we are trying to implement the climate lens framework across all different policies, projects, programs of the city of London, and I see this as another good opportunity.

[42:29] Quite a few of these will have no climate impacts, I’m guessing, but there are some that I noticed that might have an opportunity to get a second set of eyes, there’s references to technology, to vehicles, to procurement, and I think that having a climate lens review on that can help us find opportunities to reduce emissions and cost saving, so I’m just hoping I don’t want to have to interrupt the good work that’s being done right now, because I think that would take a little bit of time for staff to rework it, but at the next policy review opportunity, I would like us to use the climate lens framework that staff have been working on, as is referenced in our climate emergency action plan and in our strat plan, thanks.

[43:09] Thank you, I’ll look for other speakers on this item, on the amendment, Councilor Pribble. Actually for Noah, we just like clarification because in the email, it stated sustainability and now it’s from us, it’s climate. Thank you, Councilor, you’re just looking to clarify with Councilor Frank on this, okay, I’ll go to Councilor Frank. Thank you, yes, I kind of had made up my own term, which is sustainability lens, which is not something that we have, climate lens is the term that staff are using the climate lens framework, and so that’s why I changed it before the meeting, just so that it aligned with the actual framework that we have at City Hall.

[43:49] Councilor? Thank you for that answer, and going to the staff through the chair, any feedback from the staff, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Certainly the staff and environment and infrastructure are able to support our colleagues in other parts of the organization where a climate lens review would be appropriate for the policies that they have custodianship, if it’s the will of Council to apply this to yours. Thank you, no more questions. Thank you, looking for other speakers on this item. Okay, if it’s okay, I’ll give the chair to Councilor Frank.

[44:32] Chair, I have the chair and recognize yourself. Thank you and through you. I just wanted to check in with staff, and I heard Ms. Sherry your answer to the question, and thank you for that as well, with respect to applying the climate lens to our policies. I’m just wondering, are we, I guess when I saw this, I was thinking about how we apply the anti-oppression lens right now and going forward on our policies. I’m just wondering if we’re in the same position to do that, and I’m not sure who might be able to help me understand.

[45:09] I know that in the report it talks about more training that’s happening for the area framework. I’m just wondering timeline wise if they’re very similar in terms of the all staffing trained and all those things. Thank you to staff. Thank you very much, Madam Acting Chair. Yes, we have a climate emergency screening tool as well as a more detailed climate change evaluation framework, and those would be an appropriate thing to apply to this sort of work.

[45:40] I believe most of the staff who would already be using that for their own projects, policies, and budget submissions would have the appropriate training, and certainly we’re in a position to support them. I believe the vast majority of these policies will not apply, many of them do not have a physical aspect to them that would be impacted by a climate tool. Some of the ones that do are already being screened, so this would just be a chance to provide some additional supports to the rest of the organization where appropriate. Councillor ramen. Thank you, that’s very helpful. I’m just wondering, we got this today, so I haven’t had a chance to discuss further with staff, just kind of any potential impacts or any concerns, so I will definitely look to do that in advance of council.

[46:27] So I have no issue with applying the lens of the framework. My challenge would be around setting future course in direction for the next term of council, because I see that as part of the role of our strategic plan for the next term of council to set those priorities and objectives. So I kind of feel like we’re preempting that process in a way, so that would be the only concern I have, but otherwise I don’t see any issue with it.

[47:05] Thank you and returning the chair. Thank you. Looking to others on the committee comments, questions? Okay, seeing none, I will open the vote on the amendment. Opposed in the vote, motion carries, four to one. Okay, thank you.

[47:39] So we’ve worked through a couple amendments. I’m just wondering if I can go to anyone else who has an amendment, I’ll go to Councillor Hopkins next. Yeah, thank you Madam Chair for recognizing me. I have been asked to see if the committee would support a referral to the governance working group, and this is the, regarding the recommendation B, number six, the appointment of the deputy mayor policy, and just a request to refer to the governance working group.

[48:15] I know we’ve spoken about the deputy mayor’s position before at the group, but for further discussion. Not sure what the procedure is, if we could just refer it here at committee to go there, and then maybe follow up to the process, would that discussion then? Councillor? Yeah. So I have clarification from the clerk that that’s in order to refer it. So I will let you speak to your referral in just a moment, but I will look for a seconder on that referral.

[48:54] Councillor Pribble. Okay, Councillor Hopkins, would you like to speak to it? Go ahead. Yes, I’d like to have a better understanding on the process. Again, we have talked about the deputy mayor’s position at the governance working group just for further discussion. So that discussion when you report then would go to SBPC and then back to council, and then would it go back into the policy? I just want to see how it loops in the end, or we did, thank you. Thank you through the chair.

[49:28] If the policy is referred to governance working group, we would proceed to consider it at that time. It would then be reported to SPPC and then council. And then we would pass a bylaw at council. Councillor? Yeah, thank you for that. I’m looking to committee to support the referral. Other speakers from committee, I’ll go to visiting Councillors, Councillor Palosa.

[50:07] Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to the item that’s on the floor, it ties into a question ahead of the overall policy for the deputy mayor. It seems to be making an amendment that if we’re under the, just for clarifications, it’s at six. Is this the, delete the assistance with the operating capital budget process to be participation of the audit committee for grammar and collection corrections throughout under 4.2, which would be the, so the appointment of the deputy mayor policy, like exactly what line is that in this multiple page report as the deputy mayor has referenced several times throughout said report.

[50:47] Sorry, and I’m cooking. Thank you, N3, so we will, or not three, but we’ll go to just to the clerk to give you the update on what page number we’re looking at just so you have the exact policy. Through the chair, it is page number 52 of the report and 244 of the agenda. And that is the appointment of the deputy mayor policy. Councillor, go ahead.

[51:20] Right, that just be repeated again, which said page 100 in. Through the chair, page 244 of the agenda and page 52 of the report. Councillor? I’ll speak later, I have to look it up. Okay, thank you. Looking for other speakers on this item. Councillor Frank. Thank you, and I think perhaps I’m seeking the same clarity that Councillor Palose is. So it would refer the whole policy, but right now the only thing that’s being changed in this policy is in regards to forcing the deputy mayor to sit on the audit committee.

[52:00] But by referring this, the whole policy would go to Governor’s Working Group and we get to look through the whole thing and tweak it if wanted. Okay, let’s click through the chair, that’s cracked. Okay, I see Councillor Palose has her hand up again. Go ahead. Sorry, Madam Chair, just, I guess, proceeds really could be a question for now. I have a question for later. You stick it where you want. Just, we’re looking at the changes of the deputy mayor and some changes have been made through this course, essentially removing the deputy mayor from audit, making it a budget chair position and making budget a budget on committee in position.

[52:42] Is part of the policy updates as well, recognizing the role of budget chair as well through bylaws or is it strictly still just officially only deputy mayor within the policies and bylaws? I’ll go to the clerk. To the chair, thank you, we did not receive any direction to introduce a new bylaw or a council policy for a budget chair. Councillor? Thank you, I’ll follow up the mayor directly. Thank you, okay, looking to other members of committee on the cement.

[53:24] Okay, seeing none, I just want it if it’s okay if I speak from the chair. So I’m okay with sending this to GWG, but I don’t foresee any other changes other than the line that or foresee supporting other changes other than the line that’s there right now for change. So I’m not sure if there are other items that people are looking to change in the policy, but maybe if they want to, if you want to provide any other feedback on why it needs to be referred, that would be really helpful as well.

[54:06] Councillor Pribble. Thank you, I seconded it. I seconded the referral because I did one more information based on the information I received. I will not be supporting the referral. I will vote no against the referral. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, just to answer your question there about the reasons, it has been a discussion at the governance working group and it has been asked that we refer back just for a further discussion. Thank you.

[54:41] Okay, Councillor Frank. Thank you. Yeah, I too am with Councillor Pribble on this unless I understand more fully what we’d be tweaking and I don’t know if we necessarily need to have a general discussion unless. Anyway, between now and council, perhaps I’ll find out more if there’s other things to tweak. I did have one question upon reading the policy through yourself to staff. In regards to the section where I said the deputy mayor will be appointed by the mayor and then approved by council. If the council members did not approve the deputy mayor, would the mayor’s pick oversee that or would the council’s, if let’s say hypothetically the future of council but a majority did not approve the deputy mayor does that negate their appointment?

[55:35] Thank you, I got the correct. Thank you through the chair. Is that, I don’t believe is a strong mayor power. The appointment of the deputy mayor policy would prevail. Councillor Frank. Thank you, sorry. And just to confirm, ‘cause it’s all one sentence and perhaps that’s why I’m struggling. It says the deputy mayor shall be picked by the mayor and then approved by council. So I’m just wondering if one of those things supersedes the other ‘cause it’s all in one sentence. So just from a comprehension perspective, I’m not sure if the council could negate the mayor’s choice. Mr. Shelters.

[56:30] Thank you through the chair. Should this be referred? We could seek some legal advice and advice at GWG. Councillor Frank, thank you. Yeah, I actually would find that interesting to discuss. So I actually will support her for all at this point. Thank you. Seeing no further speakers on this item, I will look to open the vote on the amendment. Those in the vote, motion carries, three.

[57:17] Thank you. I will hand the chair to Councillor Frank so I can move some amendments. Thank you. I have the chair and I recognize Councillor Roman. Thank you. I have two amendments. I will start with a by-law number CPOL47243 being the assessment growth policy. The amendment I’m looking to put on the floor is that the motion be amended to include a new part to read as follows. The civic administration be directed to continue to work with London Transit Commission and London Public Library to determine appropriate metrics for which these agencies may apply for assessment growth funding and two, sorry, I review and report back to the future meeting of the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee on Amendments to By-law Number CPOL47243 being the assessment growth policy if necessary to clarify eligibility criteria pertaining to the pressures of a growing city.

[58:14] Thank you and I’ll look for a seconder for that. Get on the floor for discussion. Thank you Councillor Van Meerbergen and I’ll pass back to Councillor Roman if you’d like to explain. Thank you. So I know we’ve had some back and forth and some discussion in other places around the assessment growth policy. I really appreciate the work that staff has done to work with the library and with LTC to discuss how they can fit within the context of the growing city that we talk about in part five of this policy.

[58:49] However, I would like us to continue those conversations, to continue to engage with them, to be able to find metrics that work for both LTC and the library when it comes to some of the pressures that they’re facing as well. And for that reason, I’m putting this forward. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from folks? Seeing none, then I’ll call the vote. Opposed in the vote, motion carried five to zero.

[59:38] Thank you, and do you have another amendment? So Councillor Roman. I do, thank you. My second amendment relates to bylaw number CPOL17213 being the Queen Elizabeth scholarship policy and that the motion be amended to include a new part to read as follows that civic administration be directed to consult with the school boards with respect to the applicability of the bylaw number CPOL17213 being the Queen Elizabeth scholarship policy extending to concierge, scolier, catholic, and probidance and concierge scolier viermon and bring forward any necessary changes to the policy to a future meaning of the infrastructure and corporate services committee.

[1:00:21] Thank you, and do I have a seconder? Councillor Hopkins, all right. And back to Councillor Roman if you’d like to speak further. Thank you, and through you, a presiding officer. So my reason for bringing this forward is that the policy explicitly says Thames Valley District School Board and London Catholic District School Board as there are four boards that are recognized here in the city, this would allow for all those boards to be consulted to see if they’re interested in being part of the selection process for this particular award.

[1:00:55] The two French Catholic and the French public board, both have high schools here in our community. And so they may have eligible students and so it’s just an opportunity for them to be considered as well, as well as further outreach to our Francophone community and recognition of student excellence there as well. Thank you. Any questions or comments from other members? Councillor Hopkins. Yeah, just a follow-up question.

[1:01:28] Are we excluding, I guess, private schools too? I just wanna, I’m supportive of including all schools in this, I appreciate the amendment. I wanna support it, but I’m just being a little cautious here that we’re not excluding other schools in this city. So I’ll just kind of leave it at that. Thank you, I’ll take those as comments perhaps. Okay, great.

[1:02:02] Any other questions from colleagues? No, I think this is a great idea. Those are my notes from the chair, thank you. All right, then I will call the vote. If I see no other questions, all right, calling the vote. Close in the vote, motion carries, five to zero. Thank you, and any other amendments, Councillor Roman? No, oh, comment, okay, over to Councillor Roman. Thank you and through you.

[1:02:35] And I forgot the number, so I’m sorry about that, but I know that staff have these memorized and they know the numbers, so joking, obviously. Schedule A for the Centennial Hall policy. I just wanted to comment on bullet three, which says to establish a rental fee structure for nonprofit community groups. I’m just wondering, have we ever considered having something for agency sports and commissions similar to nonprofits? I know that some may be nonprofits, but some may not. And I’m just trying to find a way forward that potentially our ABCs would utilize Centennial Hall.

[1:03:17] And think of it as said, they’re a good choice for them in terms of utilization. So I’m not sure if it needs to be changed in the policy, but I just thought I would bring that up as a comment. And maybe staff can provide any feedback. Thank you, and to staff, if there’s any comments on that? Thank you, through the chair. I don’t know the answer to that question off the top of my head, it may or it may not have, or I’m not really sure. So I can certainly follow up and take a look.

[1:03:50] The fees normally go out through our fees and charges by-law that we bring forward annually anyways. So there would be opportunity if there is something there to certainly look at that if it doesn’t already exist. Certainly from a policy perspective, that was put in place quite a number of years ago that we’re just cleaning everything up, but there may already be something in our fees and charges. I’d have to go look, but I can take that back and follow up. Thank you, Councillor Roman. Thank you, much appreciated. And again, more of a comment and potentially something that we can look at in the future.

[1:04:25] The last thing I would just say is that I do appreciate that we’re looking at our, our bylaws or sorry, our policies through the anti-oppression and anti-racism framework and that we’re looking at inclusive language as we look at these. If there is any additional language cleanup that’s needed between now and council, I think it would be really helpful to have that brought forward to us so that we can make our policies or sorry, make our policies as inclusive as possible.

[1:04:59] I know I’ve shared some feedback as well just with that respect, thank you. Thank you for those comments and I will return the chair with no one on the list. Thank you, so I will look to anyone else for any additional amendments, maybe that have come up, okay, as you’ve been talking, Councillor Pribble. Thank you and I would like to put on the floor, the motion, title of bad depth as part of food group, a bike which is included in the agenda.

[1:05:35] Sorry, Councillor Pribble, we’re not there yet. We still have to approve the whole, sorry, that was, I was, I wasn’t clear enough. So we’re still on four point one. We’re just looking to deal with now the motion as amended. So to capture all of those amendments that were put forward, if I could have a mover in a second for that, okay, Councillor Hopkins and Councillor Frank and any other comment on the motion as amended, Councillor Hopkins. Just my thanks to staff, there was a lot of work and a lot of reading, so very much appreciated.

[1:06:12] Thank you and I echo those sentiments. Thank you so much to everyone that worked on this policy review and much appreciated the amount of detail that goes into preparing these documents for us. So with that, I will look to open the vote. Closing the vote, motion carries to zero. Thank you, now we’ll move on to item 4.2, which was the Bad Debt Aspire Food Group letter from Councillor Stevenson.

[1:06:48] Councillor Pribble, you indicated that you would be looking to put this on the floor, looking for a seconder on this item, Councillor Van Mirbergen, thank you. I will look to members of committee first, see if they have comments then move to the Councillor for any comments on this letter. Okay, Councillor Stevenson, I will go to you, go ahead. Okay, thank you and I appreciate my colleagues putting forward the motion so that I can address it. So this was, it came into the news that there was over a million dollars in property taxes owing, and so I just thought it was a great opportunity to address it from a governance perspective, because it’s not something we talk about very often, to highlight the great work that we do in terms of protecting our receivables, to answer any of the public’s questions that they might have about whether this is a risk to the corporation or whether it’s well covered.

[1:07:48] I’ve talked a little bit to staff behind the scenes, but I’ll ask them to just quickly say, but I thought this motion has a asks for a report that would just outline the million dollars in property taxes, I mean, maybe it’s several years’ worth of property taxes, we could just outline that. It has aspired, ever paid any amounts towards that. A quick sharing with the public in terms of the process to collect that and the expected outcomes, which I understand are quite favorable for this particular account.

[1:08:22] It was also an opportunity to ask for a brief summary of property taxes, fines and other accounts receivables that might be deemed uncollectible. In 2014, there was a news story that there was 400,000 being written off. And I hadn’t seen anything in the news or in the report since then. And obviously, there would be amounts that would be written off for penalties, fines, taxes, other types of receivables. Most of that is delegated to staff as the amounts are quite small.

[1:08:56] But I do think that some reporting out is good and if we don’t do it on a regular basis, this is a good opportunity from a governance perspective to just check in. My understanding is that there were several properties put up for sale last year due to tax arrears and that 12 or 13 of them were failed sales in that they weren’t sold for enough to cover the taxes. So we hold on to them. What I received from staff said it was about $180,000 worth of taxes there.

[1:09:30] So the motion is to ask staff for a quick report coming back to the next committee to just outline some of this information so that it’s in the public record that when there was this million dollars outstanding that from a governance perspective, we checked in on that, asked for a quick report. And at the same time said, can you let us know what kind of amounts have been written off recently, under delegated authority and what are those amounts, the types and stuff, just to check in on that.

[1:10:04] So I don’t know if there’s anything that staff would like to add, but it really is just a governance check given what came up in the news. I think it’s prudent for us to just ask for a quick report and an update on where we stand in terms of accounts receivable and bad debts. Thank you, I’ll go to Ms. Barbone. So if she has any comments, go ahead. Thank you through the chairs. So I’m just on the vein of council policies. There are several council policies that govern both the miscellaneous accounts receivable, as well as the tax sale process is a very highly regulated and legislated process through the Municipal Act.

[1:10:44] Certainly in this particular case, the amount is a little bit larger than we have typically seen, but all amounts that fall under taxes receivable fall through the same policy and process under the Municipal Act to recover those. So certainly, anything under the taxes receivable have some security as part of that process and that the property can be sold off through tax sale to recover what is owing to the city of London. So most of that information is readily available in our public policies that are on the website.

[1:11:20] We can certainly draw attention to what that is. I will note through the audit committee next month, our financial statements will be coming forward and we do some additional analysis on accounts receivable and provide a five year review on that as well as the taxes outstanding through that process. So there’s certainly a great deal of information that is publicly available and that will also be coming forward next month through the financial statements being brought forward to council and committee. Thank you.

[1:11:52] Councilor Stevenson, any follow-up? Yes, I do, thanks and thanks for that information. So I’ll just say again that I think there’s especially given the budget talks, there is an interest in the public to just have a bit more information on this. So this motion is asking for a breakdown of the million dollars. You know, is it five years worth the taxes? Did they pay half of it? And this is the other half, is it the whole amount? Just the simplest of details there. And then a brief summary of the bad debts expenses are the arrears that were last year.

[1:12:26] So the fact that there were several tax properties put up for sale and that 13 of them did not sell for even the amount owing on the taxes and that that value is close to 180,000. I think there’s just some interesting information that doesn’t usually come to council and the public, that this is a timely time for that. And so I’m asking for support of my colleagues to just have a brief report as a governance due diligence kind of thing. Thank you, I will just read the motion out just so that everybody is aware and that it’s in the public record, that the civic administration be directed to prepare an information report, summarizing the amount owed by Aspire Food Group, the process to collect expected outcomes and a brief summary of property taxes, fines and other accounts receivable that are deemed uncollectible.

[1:13:19] It being noted that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee received a communication date of May 15, 2025 and Councillor Stevenson with respect to this matter. Any other speakers on this item? Councillor Prolo. Thank you, Mr. Chair, I do have some questions to the staff and thank you for those comments in terms of the Municipal Act and Council policy as we are protecting the corporation. Did we have for in the past, I believe it is that anything greater than 10,000 that would be brought to the council.

[1:13:55] Did we have any reports on any situations in the larger amount and what’s specified? Ms. Berbone. Thank you through the chair. We’ve been fortunate through our, so obviously through our council policy is what guides the process that we follow. So outlined as part of that council policy is that if there are any write-offs that are in excess of $10,000 for miscellaneous accounts receivable and greater than 15 for provincial offenses acts that those write-offs would be brought forward to council.

[1:14:30] So certainly from our perspective, we’re very fortunate that we utilize a collection agency to seek the collection of anything that is outstanding. And as a result, we have not had any significant write-offs that we have had to bring forward to the council. So certainly one of the things that we do is our recovery efforts continue until they are absolutely exhausted before we proceed to write something out. And we’ve been very fortunate to have some very, very good success. So that policy covers that. And then obviously from the tax sale perspective, if there’s something that does not sale at tax sale, we have another council policy that governs that, where based on the review of the properties, the council can choose to vest those properties.

[1:15:16] If there’s a decision made that makes sense for the council to vest the city of London to vest those properties, our report is brought forward. Otherwise, we have the opportunity to go forward for a tax sale yet again to try to recover those amounts. So the risk from a tax sale perspective is very limited, given that we have a special link on the properties and we are able to utilize those properties to try to recover all the amounts that are over the period of time. Councilor Perbal? Thank you for that follow up.

[1:15:47] Which reports this would be in and are the oldest reports accessible to the public? Ms. Perbal? Councilor, just to clarify, are you looking at past reports if they are accessible to the public? Councillor? Yes, that is correct, the past ones. And actually, even this one, let’s say, when the aspire, which reports the past situations, which they appeared in, and if they would be accessed to the public, and potentially the future ones as well, just in case there was a change in between.

[1:16:22] Ms. Perbal? Thank you, through the chair. All of our committee reports are accessible to the public and they would come forward to the infrastructure and corporate services committee if there are any. We haven’t had one in a number of years because we don’t have any accounts that we’re looking for council approval and authorization to write off. But certainly the recent one that has a significant balance of just over a million dollars just started to become payable within the last year. 2024 is when that amount started to become outstanding. And so it is still recent.

[1:16:56] Although there is a receivership, there has not been bankruptcy declared. So we are working through the process and when we have the opportunity and the proper timing to move forward is when we will be doing so. So any reports or anything that goes forward that is advertised for tax sale is done publicly through the public process to ensure that the public is notified that we have tax sales that are outstanding and that there is a minimum price set so that when people move forward to bid on those properties that the city is recovering the minimum amounts owing.

[1:17:33] So if something doesn’t proceed through tax sale, that means we did not recover the full amounts and then it would be up to the municipality to decide how to proceed going forward but that process is not exhausted until the property is finally complete. Council approval. Thank you much for the detailed answer. And I’m quite sure I know the answer to this question but I’m still gonna ask. And the specific case that was mentioned by my fellow councillor, there’ll be of course in this process that there will be again reported to the council and it will be totally open book for the residents for the public knowledge, correct?

[1:18:12] Mr. Provost. Thank you for the chair. I believe you’re referring to the Aspire amount owing. So currently there is, it is under receivership. So there is no actions publicly that the city is taking until that process is complete. When that process is complete, depending on what occurs, the city has jurisdiction through the special leads to ensure that it can recover its taxes. So until a bankruptcy occurs, we have to follow the process before the courts currently.

[1:18:50] Councillor? Thank you very much for answering all my questions no more. Thank you. I see Councillor Stevenson, you have your hand up. You have about 55 seconds remaining. Yeah, I just wanted to quickly say that other municipalities do, some of them do report out each year and just say these are the amounts that were written off for penalties and fines and provincial offenses. Because so few of them are over $10,000 or over $15,000 per person or per customer, that’s not gonna come to council.

[1:19:22] So I’m just looking for an information report. All of these properties went up for sale last year. 13 of them didn’t sell with about $180,000 in property taxes, not a recoup rate. And I’m not saying there’s a huge risk there. I’m just saying it’s worthy of a staff report. Thank you, you have about 17 seconds remaining. I have Councillor Hopkins next, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate the concerns the Councillor has raised about the amount being owned, roughly over a million back property taxes.

[1:19:57] I just wanna maybe get a little bit of clarity on the motion. We are only asking for the information report on Aspire Food Group is what I understand, not other debts. And the information that we’re seeking given that the process is still not complete. There’s no bankruptcy. It’s a recent amount that has been in 2024 that has been owed.

[1:20:37] I’m not exactly sure what information we’re gonna get back. And maybe I just need a little bit of clarity through you, Madam Chair, to staff, given that we’d need a quick turnaround here. I’m just trying to seek what information we are going to have in this motion that isn’t already available to us if we go through other reports. But I just wanna make sure that the information as being asked is relevant and it’s gonna help us understand the situation.

[1:21:21] I’m just not sure what we’re asking for here. Thank you, Councillor. Okay, so two questions that you asked. The first was in a relationship to the motion and how it reads. So the first line of the motion that civic administration be directed to prepare an information report summarizing the amount owed by Aspire Food Group. I read that to be solely of Aspire Food Group. And then from there on asking the questions that would be in the report.

[1:21:54] So now just with respect to what staff can prepare, as you’ve mentioned, they said that this process is still underway, but I will look to maybe miss our boned comment on what could be in a report at this time. Thank you through the chair, so a lot of the information that would be in the report is what I’ve actually conveyed today. We have policies that govern it. And certainly with respect to Aspire, they’re currently under receiverships.

[1:22:28] So we’re working alongside the process. Should they go into bankruptcy, we would be in a position to move to recover. Certainly from that perspective, we would be working with legal closely as we walk through that process to ensure that ultimately the property sale would occur to recover what the city amounts are owing. The second part of the process, the second part of the request, as I understand it, looks for a brief summary of taxes, fines, and other accounts that are deemed uncollectible. Certainly, I don’t have anything at this point in time that we would be bringing forward, but we would be able to walk you through our process and tie it back to the policies and also make a linkage to what is in our financial statements that will be presented to audit committee next month.

[1:23:16] Councillor Hopkins. Okay, any further speakers on this item? Seeing none, I’ll ask Councillor Frank to take the chair. Thank you, I have the chair and I recognize Councillor ramen. Thank you, just wanna speak to this item. So I do appreciate the council bringing this item forward and the fact that we were able to get an update today here on this item and where we are in this process. I do agree that the public are interested to know more about how we’re handling these situations.

[1:23:51] I do think, however, though, hearing the information that’s been provided that we may be a little premature to get a report from staff as things are still underway. So I will look to follow along as this continues to unfold and then look to ask staff for more information as things proceed with this. So with that in mind, those are my concluding comments. Thank you and I’ll return the chair with no one on the list.

[1:24:27] Thank you, looking for any final speakers on this item. Seeing none, I will open the vote. Closing the vote, motion fails, one to four. Thank you, we are now moving back to 2.8, which was in our consent package. That’s the appointment of consulting engineers for the Infrastructure Renewal Project Round 5.

[1:25:02] With that, I will look for a mover and a seconder on this item, Councillor Hopkins and Councillor Pribble. And I understand that there may be an amendment on this as well or I’ll just look for speakers and see where the conversation is. Seeing, oh, I have Councillor Pribble going. Thank you and there was, I would like to put on an amendment or sorry, just a second.

[1:25:45] There was just a recently circulated potential motion for 5.2 and I would like to give actually the words to the Councilor, to the word Councilor Stevenson, who would like to. Councillor, are you pulling in the information in 5.2 for 8.8, sorry, 2.8, I was looking numbers, 2.8. We’re back on the consent item under 2.8. I know, it was for 5.2 only.

[1:26:29] Thank you, okay. So with respect to these infrastructure renewal program round five, I see no speakers from committee. I see Councillor Stevenson has her hand up, go ahead. Thank you and again, I just want to thank my colleagues for putting forward, pulling these and putting forward motions for me and I’ve been well. So I wasn’t able to do the meetings ahead of time with them. So thank you everybody for supporting me with this. My question is around B and it is the design engineering, the design fee and the resident inspection and contract administration fee that’s coming forward on the Florence Eleanor York Street project.

[1:27:16] My understanding is that that project begins at the end of June. It is something that I want to talk about in 5.2. And so through you to staff, I want to know two things. One is, I potentially am asking the committee members here to not support this one at least until council to see if some of the issues that I’m going to address in 5.2 can be dealt with. I’m also wondering what is the resident inspection and contract administration fee?

[1:27:52] It seems like a really high amount and that’s coming to us just four weeks before construction is supposed to begin. So any information that you can provide would be appreciated. Thank you, Ms. Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is in fact the resident fee and not the design fee. This work has been tendered and successfully awarded and is starting imminently. As is our common practice, we are recommending the award of the onsite services. So that is the contract administration of the contractor onsite, as well as the resident, so basically the owner’s engineer onsite to the same firm who prepared the design.

[1:28:26] When we’ve satisfactory performance in the design phase, that is the process that we would recommend with the same consultant stay on for the next process for the actual construction. So this work is ready to begin. We do need to have the resident engineering contract administrator in place as the work is ready to go. And the fee is in line with what we would anticipate for a project of the size and complexity. Councillor students. Perfect, thank you for that information. And I’m wondering, it’s difficult to do this ahead of what’s coming.

[1:29:03] But if there were to be a delay in this project, would staff wish that this would be approved regardless? Or would it not, is it something that could come forward at the next committee meeting in line with any changes that might be made? Ms. Chair. Madam Chair, without straying into what may require some in-camera legal advice with respect to contracts, it’s hard to speculate on what might be appropriate for the course of action for this item without knowing what the decision of council will be on 5.2.

[1:29:52] Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, I’m just gonna leave it there. It can be addressed at council. I’m just highlighting the fact that this project is showing up in two places in this report today. And I did notice it. And I think I’ll just leave it there for now. Okay, thank you. Any further comment on this item? Seeing none, I will look to open this for a vote. Those in the vote, motion carries, five to zero.

[1:30:35] Okay, thank you. That just poses of all of our consent items and items for direction. We’re now on deferred matters and additional business. And the first item, I will look to turn the chair over to Councillor Frank. Thank you, I have the chair and recognize Councillor Rhone. Thank you. This is related to item 5.1. I’ve circulated communication regarding a proposed road rehabilitation project at Gainesboro and Hyde Park. And I have circulated a letter. And the reason for doing this is a few things.

[1:31:11] When I was made aware of this project and receiving the letter in the communication that’s come from it, you’ll note that the description of the project is the city of London is planning to improve the road condition of Gainesboro Road in 2025 by repairing and upgrading the road surface. And so for some residents, they may not have looked at the entirety of the project. And so one of the things I was asking for was whether or not it would be possible for us to have an opportunity to do some more consultation with the community regarding the proposed changes to the stretch of Gainesboro Road.

[1:31:55] Part of that has come because members of the community, especially those that live in the Prince of Wales Gate neighborhood and South carriage area, may not have seen the plan at this time as it would be circulated mostly with the folks that live on Gainesboro Road. I do know a couple homeowners I’ve spoken to that live on Prince of Wales Gate who have seen this, but we’re not fully up to speed on where things were with this project. Second, that I know that staff have been working to connect with businesses in this corridor.

[1:32:33] I did circulate a letter that was shared from a business in the area that feels as though they are impacted. And they did receive notification of this, the changes and the proposed new redesign about a week and a half ago. And they’re concerned that they are going to be impacted, their business will be impacted because they will be losing a turn lane into their business as well as I did circulate communication from the BIA that shared that they’re supportive of more continued consultation on this.

[1:33:10] And that again, was circulated to members of committee. Last point that is in the proposed motion that staff be requested to prepare a new rendering that support maintaining the eastbound lane on Gainesboro. Sorry, the two eastbound lanes on Gainesboro. I just realized that you knew a secondary before I speak. Sorry. That’s okay. I thought you’d get it all out at the beginning and then do it. So yeah, if you don’t mind reading your motion and then I’ll look for a seconder. Thank you. That the following actions be taken with respect to the rehabilitation project on Gainesboro Road.

[1:33:44] A, that civic administration be directed to consult with the community regarding the proposed changes to the stretch of Gainesboro Road. And B, civic administration be requested to prepare a new rendering that supports maintaining the two eastbound lanes on Gainesboro Road. It being noted that the infrastructure and corporate services committee received a communication from Councillor ramen with respect to this matter. Thank you. And I’ll look for a seconder, Councillor Preble. All right. Would you like to speak anymore to this Councillor ramen? Yes, okay, over to you. Thank you. So, and through you. So I did share a picture and I wanna say thank you to Councillor Preble for seconding this.

[1:34:21] I did share a picture with staff with the committee story. This is the most recent picture on Google Maps of this intersection. You’ll see what’s very evident in most of my ward, which is a lot of construction that’s happening in the area. So at this time that this picture was taken, it was with respect to the construction that is now a complete building on the corner of Gainesboro and Hyde Park. So one of the reasons that I’m asking that we take another look at this is because of the amount of development that’s happening in this part of the city.

[1:34:56] Along the stretch of Gainesboro in this portion, we have two new buildings that have been just opened in the last year or so with ground floor commercial that’s just taking shape. We’ve got brand new residential that’s taking shape in that area as well. And then we’ve got a number of development proposals coming forward. And when I say number, I did try to count all of those that were either, that I was aware of that were either in pre-planning or that are through the pipeline or further on. And there’s around six or seven within a two kilometer radius of this particular intersection.

[1:35:37] So for the community to lose a lane of traffic that has since 2018 been very difficult for them to navigate because the lane has had the arrows that were directional to show that this was actually a turn lane for most of that stretch from just past the rotary Hyde Park Trail or near the cheerleading, which most people know in the ward facility up to Hyde Park for a long time.

[1:36:14] You couldn’t read the marking on the road. So what happened was people were using this as two collector lanes basically. There were two lanes of traffic up until you get to the corner of Gainesboro and Hyde Park. And then it was a turn lane for them. So because of that, now not having this turn lane in the middle will actually feel like you’re losing a lane of traffic. And so that’s the concern for residents in the area is we’re adding density, we’re adding more units, we’re adding more commercial in this area.

[1:36:47] And here we are potentially losing a lane. And so that’s the feeling. And I think that’s why we need more consultation with the community on this change. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from members? Councillor Bribble. Thank you, I have a couple of questions sort of chair to the staff. How far is this project into so being tendered and what are our options? And if actually the option that’s actually in front of us, if it’s even feasible and any potential circumstances associated with it, thank you to staff.

[1:37:29] Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. I can provide some additional information and Mr. McCrame is great here as well. So this project has been tendered and awarded, but it is part of a package of two projects. So we do have a bit of time as we can have the contractor start on the other project while we pursue the items that are listed in the councilor’s motion with respect to new renderings and some additional consultation. Yes, we have enough space within the right of way without substantive design change to accommodate the two through lanes, the one that is legally actually a left turn lane, but has been used de facto as a through lane by the community for some time.

[1:38:05] We also can accommodate the bike lane that was approved as part of the 2016 cycling master plan and re-approved as part of mobility master plan in March. There would be an additional loss of some on street parking, but certainly we can prepare that rendering, go back out to the community and we do have a little bit of time in this case because we are able to start on the other major rehabilitation project that was considered as part of this tender. Thank you, Councillor Peruzza. Thank you once again for your detailed answer. The other ones through the chair, I have a question comparing, let’s say, I have an initiative in my ward and it’s gonna be north of Sunnydale and we are taking the bike path actually through the area between Sunnydale and Medway.

[1:38:51] While we are doing it here right on the road, we’ll be the difference or comparison which way while we’re leaning one way in one area and the other way other area. Thank you. Back to staff. Thank you, Madam Chair. The routing of active transportation infrastructure in a given community will vary incredibly depending on the availability of open space, the type of road, the type of use, the facilities that people may be attracted to cycling to and from as well. So I’m not able to specifically identify why we’ve used the Medway in that area other than we’re lucky to have that green space as a space where we can put active transportation.

[1:39:30] In this case, the areas around it are well developed and the on street route here is the most appropriate location and in fact, I believe the only location with any proximity to Gainesville. Councillor Peruzza. Thank you very much. No more questions in just a comment based on the answers I received. I will be supporting the motion that’s in front of us. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Councillor Hopkins. Thank you. Appreciate the comments from staff. I’m just curious what project will go forward.

[1:40:05] I just wanna make sure that we won’t be setting ourselves up as we go through further consultation and a new design. I just wanna make sure everything connects. Mr. Chair. Madam Acting Chair, may I seek a bit of clarification? Are you asking what project would go forward at this location or the alternate project that’s part of the same tender? I heard that through the presiding chair that we are able to accommodate the consultation and that process and go forward with another project.

[1:40:43] Wanted to know if it’s in this area or would there be conflicts or setting the project that’s gonna go forward setting ourselves up with this project. Thank you, is that clear? Okay, great, back to you. Thank you for the clarification. This project was tendered as two projects. So two individual projects. The other one is the significant rehabilitation of Dundas East, the pavement rehab job that is proceeding there. So no conflict, they both needed to be done this year. We’re able to do the additional consultation and renderings as requested in the motion and have the contractor who’s awarded both projects start there without any significant risk to overall delay or progress.

[1:41:24] Thank you. Great, thanks and Councillor ramen. Thank you, just to follow up. So I just wanna highlight two concerns and I guess this is where I think the consultation really needs to potentially gather community feedback. So the BIA and the business owners and some of the area have highlighted the need to maintain parking as well. So we’ve got a need to balance the parking needs, the need for the road to be rehabilitated and the need for it to be accessible to all users.

[1:42:00] I’m just wondering if there’s a possibility for in Boulevard bike lanes in this location. I know it’s not typically part of what we’d consider a road rehabilitation, but even if it was just done on the eastbound side and the lanes on the westbound side were continuing to just be on road, I think it would allow for the ability to meet all the needs of users and I’m just wondering if that’s something that was explored. Thank you, I’ll go back to staff and just letting you know that you’ve got about 30 seconds left in your time, sorry.

[1:42:36] Thank you, I will refer that question to Mr. McCrayer, Ms. Grady. The chair, we did look at that option of putting in Boulevard bike lanes, but due to the limited right-of-way space and existing hydro poles and just space constraints in general, it just wasn’t a feasible alternative to put in the Boulevard. Thank you, back to Council Raman. I’ll ask quickly, and is that a cost constraint? Staff, at this time it would be Madam Presiding Officer, both a cost and a schedule constraint.

[1:43:16] Council Raman. Thank you, and so that would be something I would be willing to explore in terms of from a cost perspective, and I understand that that could shift the schedule, but I do think that if there’s opportunity for us to provide safer cycling options in this area, this would be a desire as well. Thank you for those comments. Anyone else questions comments? If not, I’ll make one briefly from the Presiding Chair. I’m generally supportive of this because I understand the need for good traffic flow in the area.

[1:43:49] I do still desire a bike lane of some sort. I actually would have preference for an in Boulevard one if possible, and if there’s relocations required or something, I’d be interested in pursuing that as a potential opportunity, although I know it probably had a lot of stress to staff, but I would much prefer some sort of protected bike lane, and if not, I guess my only question to staff would be, if this redesign process comes back, is it at a later opportunity where a committee would decide what the final design looks like, or would this direction just, have you guys complete the design and then execute it?

[1:44:28] Thank you, Madam Presiding Officer. At this time, the motion does not entertain a report back to council. It does suggest that we would do additional consultation, including the renderings of the two through lanes. From that point, we would be in the hands of committee and the council if there’s to be further direction. Thanks. So that being said, I don’t necessarily need a report back as long as there’s a bike lane on Gainesboro at the end of the day. So I don’t know if there’s any comments on that too from staff. Madam Presiding Officer, the Gainesboro bike lane was approved as I mentioned in 2016 in the cycling master plan and recently re-approved as part of the mobility master plan when we went through that process with the maps.

[1:45:09] There was no deletion of this particular facility, so in order to not build a bike lane would be a matter for reconsideration. Great, thanks, great information. Okay, I have no other questions personally or comments. Any others seeing none, then I will call the vote. Opposed in the vote, motion carries five to zero. Now I’ll return the chair.

[1:45:48] Thank you, Councillor. I will look to committee, we have item 5.2, which is an added item concerning concern regarding an infrastructure renewal project. This was a letter circulated by Councillor Stevenson. I understand Councillor Pribble has agreed to move this letter. Thank you, I’m looking for a seconder, which I understand Councillor Van Mirberg and you may be. Seconding, thank you so much. With that, I will look for comments, I will read it out just so that it’s available to everyone. That the following actions be taken with respect to the Eleanor Street Infrastructure Renewal Project, a civic administration be directed to consult with the community, including local businesses, regarding the changes to this part of Eleanor Street, civic administration be requested to prepare a new rendering that addresses the parking needs, accessibility concerns, and loading and docking on the west side of Eleanor Street.

[1:46:43] So this has been moved and seconded. I will look to members of committee for comment. Seeing none, I’ll go to Councillor Stevenson, and I’ll just note that Councillor Hopkins had to step out for an appointment, so we are just a committee of four right now. Councillor Stevenson. Thank you. I’m in the hands of civic administration in terms of guiding me through this process. I think they understand what I’m trying to do. I don’t know when the appropriate time is to go into a closed session, or if I’m free to speak about this.

[1:47:24] Okay, one moment, Councillor. Councillor, can you state your reasons, please for wanting the committee to go into closed session? Well, I don’t need to. If I’m free to talk about it, I will talk. I just know sometimes there’s a flag to say we’re gonna need to go into closed session. So I’m aware of that and seeking guidance as I have since I first started bringing this issue up.

[1:48:02] Thank you, Councillor. So here’s what I’ll do. Why don’t you start your questions? And if there’s any items that are deemed closed session, then I will let you know at that point that we will need to go in closed session to address them, so that’s perfect. Thank you. So the reason I’m bringing this forward and as an emergent item is that this contract award has been tendered, the work is supposed to start the end of June. So there was a bit of an issue in that when the notices went out, it wasn’t apparent the extent of the changes that were going to be made.

[1:48:40] And I wish I would have liked to have gotten involved in this a lot earlier, have I been made aware of it? So I just wanna read that the business that is impacted is a mobility, it’s called Mobility First Limited. I think there’s other businesses impacted as well. But they’re one of the biggest ones in London. They’re the only one on the East End. They serve a community of people who are recently with mobility issues and those who have them. And this is a large change. So this is a portion of the letter that they sent to me was that their dedicated parking is to be drastically reduced from 22 spots to just nine for the three businesses in our building along L industry.

[1:49:25] More concerning is that these remaining spots would no longer be dedicated, but shared street parking. The current plan may unintentionally reduce accessibility for the very people it aims to help and force clients to park in street parking north of Florence and then cross over one of the busiest corridors in London with reduced mobility. Many whose walkers, wheelchairs, or rely on taxis and specialized transport like Voiggo to get around. Parallel street parking on a busy street filled with cement tracks and tractor trailers already strained for space.

[1:49:59] Simply does not meet their needs and poses serious safety risks. Many are without accessible placards. The proposed sidewalk placement crosses over an existing loading dock which is active several hours a day. So this is one of those things where it’s going to have a large impact. I do understand that the contract has been awarded. I do understand that work is about to begin. And then I’m just wondering given the length of time that this kind of infrastructure lasts and the importance to the community of this kind of service, what opportunities through staff, what kind of opportunities are available for council to meet the needs of the community even at this late stage.

[1:50:48] Okay, thank you, councillor. I will go to Ms. Share on this and just let you know you have about a minute and 40 seconds left after. Thank you, Madam Chair. We have been in engagement in providing information related to this project to the community starting May 25th of 2024. And while we agree there are substantive changes to this right of way there to address a current use that is informal, it is not dedicated parking and is non-compliant with AODA and other design standards. We cannot in best conscience of course recommend a design that does not comply with current design standards or the AODA legislation.

[1:51:24] And in order to change to what is requested of this particular business, it would be a substantial concern from both a technical and design perspective as well as the impact on the contract. And if we wish to explore the contractual implications in more detail, that probably would be a time for a city solicitor, the acting city solicitor to recommend we go on camera. But in the meantime, if there’s other questions that are not related in detail to those contractual implications, we’re happy to answer them. Councilor Stevenson, did you have any follow-up questions?

[1:52:00] Yes, thank you. I guess from a broader perspective, when a project like this has significant, and I understand all the complexities of this, but when we see an infrastructure project that is going to reduce parking spaces from 22 to nine, that is going to have substantial impacts on the neighboring property, I’m wondering what the policy is for notification of the business and/or the word counselor, so that there could be more proactive involvement in this.

[1:52:35] It just seems like when there’s just such a big change, the notice that went out didn’t really highlight the significance of this. Madam Chair, if I may, we certainly have provided correspondence to effective businesses and then copy to the word counselor as I noted on May 25th, 2024, August 9th, 2024, and as well on January 28th, 2025. We’ve also had a number of meetings with this business, and the door is always open to have those conversations, but from an engagement and information sharing perspective, we have been providing information regularly with respect to this particular project.

[1:53:14] Certainly we like to work with our colleagues in communications to ensure that what we’re providing is comprehensible and plain language for people to navigate as they receive it, and this has been an ongoing conversation though since this time last year. Thank you, Councillor Stevenson, you have 53 seconds. Thank you, I’d like to go into closed session to discuss the contractual options here. So I would be looking for any members of committee to make a motion to go into closed session and for what reasons?

[1:53:49] Okay, I have Councillor Pripple and Councillor van Mirberg. Through the chair, the motion reads that the Infrastructure and Corporate Services Committee convenes in closed session to consider the following added litigation, potential litigation, solicitor client privilege advice, matter pertaining to litigation or potential litigation and advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege including communications necessary for that purpose.

[1:54:33] Thank you, just a moment, we’ll load that into eScribe. Thank you, that’s open to vote. Opposing the vote, motion passes four to zero, noting Councillor Hopkins is absent.

[1:55:28] Thank you, we’ll just take a moment to prepare the room for an in-camera. Okay, I will look to Councillor Frank to report out and then we’ll go back to our item.

[1:56:54] Thank you, I’m pleased to report that progress has been made for the item we went in camera for. Councillor Frank, if you don’t mind doing that again, just for our amusement, just so that it’s in the public record ‘cause it wasn’t recorded on the stream. You bet, I am pleased to announce that progress was made for the item for which we went in camera for.

[1:57:32] Thank you very much. Okay, we’ll return to this item 5.2. I will look for any other speakers on this item. Okay, seeing none, we’ve got a motion in front of us. Again, I’ll just read it out so that everybody has it. The following acts be taken with respect to the Eleanor Street Infrastructure Renewal Project. A, civic administration be direct to consult with the community, including local businesses regarding the changes to this part of Eleanor Street. B, civic administration be requested to prepare a new rendering that addresses the parking needs, accessibility concerns, and loading dock on the west side of Eleanor Street.

[1:58:15] Okay, and this motion’s been moved and seconded. I will look to open the motion. Closing the vote, motion fails, one to three. Okay, that addresses all of our deferred matters in additional business.

[1:58:47] We are on to item seven, adjournment, looking for a mover, counselor, van Mirbergen, counselor, Frank, all in favor, by hand. Councilor Pribble, I think you did put your hand up. Okay, we did, okay, great. And thank you, everyone, and I’ll go to motion carries. Thank you, thanks everyone. Have a great day.