Open Council

7th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

Open Council

7th Meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee

May 27, 2025, at 1:00 PM

Original link

The meeting is called to order at 1:00 PM; it being noted that Deputy Mayor S. Lewis and Councillors E. Peloza and S. Hillier were in remote attendance.

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That Consent Items 2.1 to 2.3 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

2.1   2025 Corporate Asset Management Plan Progress Review

2025-05-27 Staff Report - 2025 Corporate Asset Management Plan

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the report regarding 2025 Corporate Asset Management Plan Progress Review BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.2   Strategic Plan Implementation Update: Mid-Year 2025

2025-05-27 Staff Report - Strategic Plan Implementation Update

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That, on the recommendation of the City Manager, the report regarding 2025 Mid-Year Strategic Plan Implementation Update BE RECEIVED for information.

Motion Passed

2.3   Request for a Shareholder’s Meeting - Housing Development Corporation, London

2025-05-27 Submission - Request for Shareholders Meeting-HDC

Moved by P. Van Meerbergen

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 2024 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder for the Housing Development Corporation, London (HDC):

a)      the 2024 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder for the Housing Development Corporation, London (HDC) BE HELD at a meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee on June 17, 2025, for the purpose of receiving the report from the Board of Directors of the Housing Development Corporation, London (HDC) in accordance with the Shareholder Declaration and the Business Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. B.16; and,

b)      the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to provide notice of the 2024 Annual Meeting to the Board of Directors for the Housing Development Corporation, London (HDC) and to invite the President and CEO and the Board/Chair to attend at the Annual Meeting and present the report of the Board in accordance with the Shareholder Declaration;

it being noted that the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee received a communication dated May 12, 2025, from M. Feldberg, President and CEO, Housing Development Corporation, London, with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed

3.   Scheduled Items

3.1   Not to be heard before 1:05 PM - London Hydro Inc. - 2024 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder Annual Resolutions

2025-05-27 Staff Report - AGM - London Hydro

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, the following actions be taken with respect to London Hydro Inc.:

a)   the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 27, 2025 as Appendix “A”, entitled “A by-law to ratify and confirm the Annual Resolutions of the Shareholder of London Hydro Inc.”  BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025;

b)   the presentation by Y. Semsedini, CEO and C. Graham, Board Chair, London Hydro Inc., BE RECEIVED;

c)    the Vision 2030 - Five-Year Strategic Plan BE RECEIVED;

d)    the Summary of the 2024 Financial Results BE RECEIVED;

e)    the 2024 Annual Report on Finance BE RECEIVED;

f)     the communication regarding the Draft Shareholder Resolution BE RECEIVED;

g)    the communication dated May 12, 2025 from C. Graham, Chair, Board of Directors, London Hydro Inc. regarding the recommendation of appointment BE RECEIVED; and

h)    that Paul M. Madden BE APPOINTED to the London Hydro Board of Directors, Second Class, for the term ending December 31, 2025.

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That pursuant to section 36.6 of the Council Procedure By-law, London Hydro Inc. BE PERMITTED to speak an additional five (5) minutes with respect to the London Hydro Inc. presentation and 2024 Annual Report.

Motion Passed (12 to 0)

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the preamble and parts a) through g) of the motion be approved and reads as follows:

That, the following actions be taken with respect to London Hydro Inc.:

a)   the proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated May 27, 2025 as Appendix “A”, entitled “A by-law to ratify and confirm the Annual Resolutions of the Shareholder of London Hydro Inc.”  BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 3, 2025;

b)   the presentation by Y. Semsedini, CEO and C. Graham, Board Chair, London Hydro Inc., BE RECEIVED;

c)    the Vision 2030 - Five-Year Strategic Plan BE RECEIVED;

d)    the Summary of the 2024 Financial Results BE RECEIVED;

e)    the 2024 Annual Report on Finance BE RECEIVED;

f)     the communication regarding the Draft Shareholder Resolution BE RECEIVED;

g)    the communication dated May 12, 2025 from C. Graham, Chair, Board of Directors, London Hydro Inc. regarding the recommendation of appointment BE RECEIVED; and

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

Moved by S. Lehman

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That part h) of the motion be approved and read as follows:

h)    that Paul M. Madden BE APPOINTED to the London Hydro Board of Directors, Second Class, for the term ending December 31, 2025.

Motion Passed (12 to 1)

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   London Hydro Proposed Amendments to the Shareholder Declaration

2025-05-27 Submission - Proposed Amendements to Declaration-London Hydro

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by S. Trosow

That the communication dated May 15, 2025 from C. Graham, Chair, Board of Directors, London Hydro Inc. regarding the Proposed Amendments to the Shareholders Declaration BE REFERRED to Civic Administration and to report back at a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee.

Motion Passed (12 to 1)

4.2   2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan

2025-05-27 Staff Report - (4.2) 2025 LMCH Asset Management Plan

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Finance Supports, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan:

a)    the report BE RECEIVED for information purposes; and

b)    the “2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan”, as appended to the staff report dated May 27, 2025 as Appendix “A”, BE APPROVED in accordance with Ontario Regulation 588/17.

Motion Passed (12 to 1)

ADDITIONAL VOTES:

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan:

a) the report dated May 27, 2025 BE RECEIVED for information purposes;

b) the “2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan”, appended to the staff report as Appendix “A”, BE REFERRED to the meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee to be held on June 17, 2025 with a request to London and Middlesex Housing Community Housing to include in a revised Asset Management Plan to include the following:

i) a breakdown of the facilities conditions as noted in Figure 3.4 “Overall Condition” on a property-by-property basis; and

ii) additional information addressing the infrastructure gap, as listed in section 4.2.2, including exploring the opportunity to obtain a loan (including a mortgage) on London and Middlesex Community Housing properties to secure additional funds;

Motion Failed (2 to 11)

4.3   Notification of Removal of a Board of Director from Eldon House

2025-05-27 Submission - Notification of Removal of Board Director

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by A. Hopkins

That the following actions be taken with respect to Eldon House Board of Directors:

a)  the communication dated May 8, 2025 from J. O’Neil, Chair, Eldon House Board of Directors BE RECEIVED;

b)  the appointment to the Eldon House Board of Directors of Devinder Luthra BE RESCINDED;

c)  a vacancy on the Eldon House Board of Directors BE DECLARED;

d)  the City Clerk BE DIRECTED to advertise in the usual manner to solicit applications for appointment to Eldon House with applications to be brought forward to a future meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee for consideration.

Motion Passed (13 to 0)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Confidential

None.

7.   Adjournment

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by P. Van Meerbergen

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 3:27 PM.

Full Transcript

Transcript provided by Lillian Skinner’s London Council Archive. Note: This is an automated speech-to-text transcript and may contain errors. Speaker names are not identified.

View full transcript (2 hours, 41 minutes)

[2:28] Good afternoon, everyone. I’d like to call the seventh meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee to order. I’ll start with the land acknowledgement. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishinaabek, the Haudenosaunee, Lenapawik, and Adewandran. 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 Nation, Métis, and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory.

[18:28] Before we get started, I just want to remind folks online, as we are also on YouTube and anyone that’s paying attention to the meeting in the gallery as well, the city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats of communication support for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact SPPC at London.ca or 519-661-2489, extension 2425. For today, I just want to let you know who’s here with us in Chambers and who’s online. In Chambers, we’ve got Mayor Morgan, we’ve got Councillor McAllister, Councillor Cuddy, Councillor Privel, Councillor Troceau, we’ve got Councillor Layman, Councillor Hopkins, Councillor Van Mirbergen, and Councillor Ferrera.

[19:17] And joining us online today, we’ve got Deputy Mayor Lewis, Councillor Palosa, and we’ve got Councillor Hillier as well. Thank you to everyone that’s joining us. We have quite a full gallery today as we’re being joined by Young London, welcome everyone, as well as members of London Hot Drow. We’ll start with one, disclosures of pecuniary interest. Seeing none, we’ll move to item two, which is our consent agenda. I have not received any requests to pull any items, just looking around the room and online to see if there’s any requests. Okay, seeing none, I’ll look for a mover and a seconder on the consent, Councillor Van Mirbergen, Councillor Ferrera, and looking for any discussion on these items.

[20:08] I’ll go to Councillor Troceau. Go ahead. Thank you. I did not want to pull this, but I did want to ask a question about the first item. And the reason I want to ask this question is I found going through the report, there’s an asset management plan, there’s an asset management program, there’s an asset management policy, there’s an infrastructure gap, and there’s a levels of service. I was just hoping, since it’s on this first item, I was hoping before we get into the later item, if you could just very briefly just tell us the difference between the plan, the program, and the policy. And also, there seems to be a misconception that the infrastructure gap is what it would cost to bring things up to the desired level of service. And my understanding is that the gap is the difference between what’s been budgeted and what it would take to bring things up to the level of services. So, could you clarify that, please?

[21:17] Thank you. Ms. Barbone, I’ll go to you. And if you want to pass it to staff, thank you. Thank you for the chair. I can start, and then I can turn it over to Mr. Sunnis to add a little bit more. So, in terms of the policy, so maybe just to back up further, the regulation that has been set is one of the guidance and the requirements for municipalities to follow. So, as part of the regulations, first and foremost, the city of London needs to have a policy. So, that was the very first start of setting the policy that lays out how we go about that work to provide the guidance in terms of looking how we overall manage our capital assets. So, that was put in place, and as the regulations have changed and introduced timelines, we have further then developed what that program is on how we go about our work to be able to look at the state of our infrastructure, identify what the shortfalls in the funding are to support the levels of service, and where that the policy lays out the difference between the expected levels of service and maintaining the levels of service, so that councils can understand, based on the assets that they have, how they’re meeting the desired levels of service versus maintaining what they currently have, from a asset management perspective to look at what the state of that infrastructure is. So, as we move forward, the regulation basically outlines certain dates that we have had to achieve, and we’ve been very successful at the City of London, that we have met everything from a date perspective in the regulation. Now, it is the continuation of that work on how we look at the state of our infrastructure, look at the strategies to address that infrastructure, and then bring forward what needs of that infrastructure might be through multi-year budget processes.

[23:26] So, one of the key things through the regulation that got recently added was the addition of assets on our financial statements that would be managed through boards and commissions, so that was one of the most recent work that you saw take place last year. So, that the CAM team provides a great deal of assistance, not only to the corporation, but to the ABCs as well, in terms of supporting them in their capital asset management plans. So, I’m going to turn it over to Jason and see if I missed anything, and he can fill in the gaps. Thank you, Mr. Sneices.

[23:58] Through the chair, that was a good overview by Ms. Barbone. The only thing to add to there would be the difference between the asset management plans and the asset management program. And the asset management program is the stuff that’s happening day to day in between the development of the asset management plan. So, these are going to be things and strategies that the service areas are putting in place to help mitigate the infrastructure gap. Our team in corporate asset management does work very closely with our service areas to help provide the necessary support to help them use the asset management plan, which is the overarching strategy to help them operationalize their business plans to help again try to manage those assets as best as possible. Thank you.

[24:36] Thank you, Councillor Troso. Yes, and I don’t want to get too technical, and this is not about any particular agency, but could you explain the notion of the infrastructure gap and exactly what it is and how you get to it? Thank you, Mr. Sneices. Thank you for the chair. So, what we do is, when we’re building an asset management plan, the first step is to build your asset registry, which is looking at all the assets out within the scope within the service area. We’re then looking at the overall condition profile, we’re looking at the replacement values, and then what we do is we use predictive modeling, which says here’s our deterioration curves, and it models out our need for a 10-year period.

[25:19] We then look at our existing funding sources to identify the gap that would be then used to maintain existing service levels and then our aspirational goals, which are going to be things that would be achieving additional higher levels of service, which would then result in a higher level of gap. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Trossa. Thank you. I’ve got Mayor Morgan next on Speaker’s List, followed by Councillor Perbal. Yes, I’ll make a few comments on this. I appreciate the comments and questions that Councillor Trossa will ask to clarify. Obviously, these for the average citizen or not terms they come across often, and so understanding the work that the corporation is doing and different pieces is important. So, let me articulate the work in a slightly different way that hopefully makes it very understandable. Budgets are investments, like full stop. We can talk about tax rates, we can talk about support from other levels of government, we can talk about capital plans. At the end of the day, we invest money on behalf of Londoners, and there’s a really good section of this report that outlines the impacts of our multi-year budget on the infrastructure gap. In section 2.5, table 1 summarizes the impacts of the multi-year budget on the city’s 10-year infrastructure gap required to maintain current levels of service, initially estimated at 946 million, the CAM plan reporting period of 2022 to 2031.

[26:43] So, over that period, this figure has now been reduced to just under 700 million because of the investments that we’ve made in the multi-year budget. So, what have those costs? And this is not including the boards and commissions, this is just the city. Decreasing the infrastructure gap in the following areas, wastewater, sanitary, wastewater, stormwater, transportation, mobility, corporate facilities, cultural services, recreation and sports, parks, London Fire Department, long-term care. All of those areas saw a decrease in their projected infrastructure gap because of investments we’ve made. If you look at the boards and commissions side of things, through that same time period, these are organizations that manage a collective $1 billion in assets.

[27:22] The plan, I didn’t initially identified about 221 million on the boards and commissions side, which has now been reduced to 36.7 million. Now, there are a couple of boards and commissions still working on their plans, so we’ll get more information. But just that reduction itself is one of the most significant reductions that I’ve seen in my time on council in the infrastructure gap. So, what organizations have benefited from this and seen a decrease? Covent Garden Market, London Police Service, London Public Library, London Transit Commission, Museum London, RBC Place, as examples. If we are going to continue to meet the infrastructure gap and try to not continue to put enormous pressure on property taxpayers, this is what Londoners need to understand because support from other levels of government for basic infrastructure for municipalities is critical to us continuing to make these investments.

[28:12] It’s why when I go later this week, to Ottawa, for the big city mayor’s meetings and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, infrastructure and supporting municipal infrastructure is incredibly important because this is what investments can do. We can have better capital in our city, we can meet the needs of the deteriorating capital, we can close infrastructure gaps. The city of London has done a significant investment on this. We’ve done our fair share of investments, but only collecting nine cents of every tax dollar, being responsible for 60% of the assets in infrastructure in this country. We do absolutely need help from other levels of government to continue to bring this gap down. And so, I just wanted to provide that context. I think this outlines real progress, but it does not mean that we don’t have significant and serious conversations to have about municipal infrastructure in this country with our other levels of government partners, of which I will say they are willing participants and have been, but we need to look at a holistic picture and we need to make sure that we’re replacing these important infrastructure assets that people in our community and people cross Canada depend on. Thank you, other Councillor Perbault. Thank you, excuse me, I would like to make a comment in terms of the agenda 2.2, which is our implementation plan. And I would like to state that almost 97% of the actions being on track or completed is a really very successful accomplishment to get to this point. So, thank you for that, to the entire staff and all your teams. I do have a question, though, regarding the 194 matrix. We are completion 119, which is about 80% exceeded their targets in 2024. My question is the 20%. Are these targets that they finished in 2024 and therefore 20 have not been completed 20%? Or is this ongoing that this percentile could be actually increased and we still have a chance to accomplish those ones at 100%? Thank you. Thank you. And I was also supposed to give Ms. Stader’s Barra a chance to also say a little remarket. So, if you want to do that at the end or feel free, and I know Mr. Fowler is here to answer your questions on this report as well.

[30:32] Thank you, Chair, and through you. So, the implementation plan sets targets for each of the four years of Council’s strategic plan. And so, that 80% performance rate for 2024 measures staff’s performance in the implementation plan against the 2024 targets. 2025 will have its own target set out in the implementation plan. And so, those, the evaluation of that is ongoing. And so, we can anticipate that that number could fluctuate up or down in terms of the overall success for 2025 and hopefully up.

[31:10] Thank you. No more questions? Thank you. Next, I have Councillor Layman, followed by Councillor Hopkins. Thank you, Chair. I remember when the regulations came through, and the regulations came through, and I believe a very necessary thing to do. But it was handled easier with our larger ABCs and was a bit onerous on our smaller ones. I remember I was on the board for the Covent Garden Market, and we didn’t have that talent in-house to put the registry together, or be look at asset management. So, I think that added a cost burden to the market’s functions. And so, I remember at that time discussions were held to share maybe that resource, for example, with the convention center, RBC place. So, I just, now that was a few years ago, and years have gone by. So, I just want to get a bit of an update through you, Chair. How are we assisting our smaller boards and commissions? Are we leaving it up to them? And are they able to share resources? Now, the kind of registry I would assume is complete, and now we’ve moved into just kind of the asset management pace.

[32:32] Ms. Barbara. Thank you, Chair. So, I’m trying to recall exactly how long ago we did this, but my team has been assisting the various boards and commissions. So, later on the agenda, you have the London Middlesex Housing Corporation’s Asset Management Plan that was updated. Our team has been assisting those organizations. They assisted, there was a number of the plans that came forward last year, that the team assisted those organizations. We developed an agreement for cost sharing across those smaller organizations to be able to provide that expertise to assist them in developing those plans so that they have the resources available and are able to meet the intent of the regulation to meet that. It’s been working, I would say, fairly successfully to date, we were able to get the first number of asset management plans updated well in advance of meeting that regulation. So, I certainly, from what I understand, the boards and commissions have found that very, very useful to assist in developing that because certainly, they don’t have the ability to have that expertise to the extent that is needed within their staffing.

[33:43] Councillor Layman. Thank you, Chair. So, just for confirmation, you’re satisfied that these smaller boards and commissions are meeting their regulatory requirements. Councillor Pervaun? Thank you, Chair. Yes, we’ve assisted all of them. I’m not… Covergarden Market doesn’t fall under that category because it is listed specifically within our assets. The way the structure was set up, but all of the boards and commissions that we had to do plans for have been assisted that did not have the expertise to meet that on their own. And those were brought forward last year for Council approval.

[34:22] Councillor Pervaun? Thank you, Chair. Thank you. I’ll go to Councillor Hopkins next. Thank you, Madam Chair. And my thanks to the comments around addressing the infrastructure gap. I think that is something that we… I know as a council have invested in trying to reduce it, it’s good to see that we have come down from 946 million to just under 700 million. And I appreciate the work that Mayor is doing and his advocacy federally, as well as I know at AMO, provincially trying to get municipalities… to assist municipalities as well. So, you know, we’ve also put money into decreasing it, but maybe a quick question through you, Madam Chair, to staff. Wanting to have a better understanding about the program strategy, it was suggested that we do have a strategy. And I know I’ve been on Council a number of years, see it go up and up and up. It’s great to see it now coming down. But if I could have a better understanding, what do we need to do here within our own capabilities in our strategy to reduce the infrastructure gap? Thank you very much, the Chair. So, there’s a couple of different things at play here. The first is going to be financial, and that’s going to be addressed through the multi-year budgeting process, which I think has been just acknowledged through the comments made by various Council members in the Mayor today.

[36:05] In addition to that, we’re also working again with the various services to identify different lifecycle management strategies, which could include improving data for improved decision making, improving risk-based modeling, so they can help prioritize the level of investment that would make the most sense in terms of the optimal use of limited funds. And then, again, we’re trying to build additional modeling tools for them, again, primarily around that prioritization. So, that’s really the big thing, embedding that risk-based thinking into the decision-making to, again, maximize the value for the investment. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any further speakers on the consent items? Okay, seeing none online or in chambers, we will love to open the vote on items 2.1, 2.2. So, votes, yes. Opposing the vote motion carries 13 to 0.

[37:20] Thank you. That takes us to our scheduled items, and our first item is 3.1, which is the London Hydro 2024 Annual General Meeting of the Shareholder Annual Resolutions. I’m pleased to welcome the board chair, Connie Graham, to join us, and our CEO of London Hydro. There is behind the podium. I want to make sure you’re there quite. That’s Uzi, Simpsonini. Thank you so much for being here today. You have five minutes for your presentation on all the items before us. So, it’s quite a bit of information that you’ve provided. So, thank you for that. I’ll let you know when you have about 30 seconds remaining to give you the wrap-up signal, and thank you again for being here and go ahead. Thank you. Your Worship, Madam Chair. One moment. Thank you. Go ahead.

[38:21] Does the clock start now? Your Worship, Madam Chair, and City Councilors. Thank you so much for giving us time this afternoon. We’ll be sharing our 2024 results, present an executive brief of the Refest to Teach it Plan, and request approval of various shareholder resolutions. And I will skip the land acknowledgement, seeing that Madam Chair has covered that already. First of all, I wanted to say what a successful year we’ve had once again is London Hydro, but the success is always the result of the work of a talented team of professionals that have truly, every day, acted in the best interest of the corporation and our fellow Londoners. So, it’s an honor to have worked with these people. One, I’ve never forget, and I’d like my colleagues at London Hydro to please stand. Please stand. This is where you stand. Thank you. I appreciate all your work. Thank you. Tammy, would you please stay standing? I would like to introduce to you our board’s incoming chair, Tanya Goodine. Her three-year term begins at the conclusion of today’s meeting.

[39:35] Tammy is an accomplished executive. She retired a couple of years ago from a three-decade-long career with Libro. She was the executive vice president of Engagement Strategy and Innovation, and she has been with our board for about four years now. She has been invaluable as chair of our Human Resources and Compensation Committee. Last year, I asked Tammy to lead the board six-month CEO recruitment special committee during which she demonstrated her considerable leadership ability in easygoing style. And Tanya, please accept our congratulations and best wishes. As you would imagine, the recruitment and selection of a new CEO is any board’s most critical responsibility.

[40:21] Applications were received from across North America, and a gentleman who began his electrical engineering career right here at London Hydro in 2006 was selected. And Uzni Sensidini comes to London Hydro, having served successfully as CEO at Festival Hydro, rhizome networks, and NT Power in Newmarket. And most of you have had the opportunity to meet him. I’m sure you’ve had a very interesting conversation. He’s definitely a people person. He’s driven to engage, partner, and serve London in very, very new ways, refreshing ways. I would like to introduce Uzni now to continue on and give you the information on our 2025 results. Thank you. Thanks, Goni.

[41:10] Before I get into the 2024 results, it’s okay. Results for the AGM. I just want to thank Connie Graham. So Connie has been our chair at London Hydro for the last three years. It’s been a board member for 14, served as vice chair for an additional three, and has also been the corporate governance and HR chair in her tenure at London Hydro. As you might imagine, Connie has been a voice of good. Within the boardroom, she has moved things forward in this organization. I will personally miss her and wish her all the best in her future endeavors on new boards that I know we will see you on. Being aware of the timing here, I think where I will focus my discussion is really the business of the AGM. So the reason that London Hydro comes before you today is because of the Ontario Business Corporations Act, we are required to get three motions passed in front of our shareholder each year. London Hydro is the sole shareholder of London Hydro Inc and therefore needs to approve three items and there’s a fourth on the agenda for today. So the first is the approval of financial statements. This year we did something a little bit different. We actually engaged with city staff after the audited statements were approved by our board of directors and went through the financial statements with city staff and answered any questions that they may have of the financial statements. Those statements were approved and reviewed by our auditors KPMG, which is the same audit firm as the City of London. We also come here to get our election and affirmation of our board of directors. So the board slate will look very much similar to what you saw last year. The only change being of course that Connie is stepping down and there was a recruitment process that was undertook this year to find a new director. The London Hydro Board of Directors posted on the city site also posted on the ICD International. Sorry, okay, you’ve got 30 seconds remaining. Sure. What I’m going to do is I’m going to ask my colleagues if you would move a motion for a five minute extension. I Councillor Ferreira and Councillor Van Mirbergen that will open in the system for you. Thank you. I didn’t mean to make you talk fast. Sorry. The Mayor Lewis, Deputy Mayor Lewis, marking you absent, closing the vote, motion carries 12 to 0. Thank you, please continue. I hope I did that properly. So as I mentioned, the board did an extensive search where they posted application on the city’s website, also the ICD, the corporate director’s website, and a website, Miri website, which is used extensively by utilities in the province. They had applications from across the country. They shortlisted candidates based on skills, matrix, and requirements of the board. They conducted interviews and they bring a recommendation forward to Council today to elect Paul Madden to the board of directors, and that’s included in the full slate that has been provided.

[44:48] The third item that Council is required to approve for us is the appointment of auditors. As I had mentioned, our current auditors are at KPMG, which is in line with the city’s auditors. I believe the city is going out for audit service in 2027. That will be the next time that they go out for audit service. KPMG is probably the largest audit firm that audits LDCs in the province. They probably have somewhere north of 80% of all utilities in the province that they do audit service for, so they are the experts in the field. And there’s a recommendation from the board for the appointment of KPMG as the auditors for the 2025 year. The final approval that we will be looking for today is the approval of changes to the shareholder declaration. There was four elements of the shareholder declaration that were put forward that had to do with board compensation in the process associated with that. The ability to invite the mayor to strategic meetings of the board when required. The ability to remove directors from the board through application to the city.

[45:52] And I will tell you that there is nothing festering there. It is just good governance, so that has been put on there as well. Besides the business of the AGM and just being mindful of time, the other thing that I will maybe read to you is the headlines of London Hydro through the 2024 year. It was a good year at London Hydro. Financial results, we achieved targets and exceeded our budget for that year. We had stable year-over-year returns, so net income was a bit better than the previous year. We also remain stable at our A rating with the S&P rating as well. Dividends exceeded targets, so we continued a $5.5 million dividend to the city of London. We have just broached $100 million in total dividends paid since London Hydro began paying dividends in the early 2000s.

[46:39] That target is 40%. We are paying out right now about 46.9, so almost 47% of net income to dividends to the city. We have also seen decreased outages over the last year where the average Londoner is seeing about 47 minutes of outage time a year with 0.88 instances. That means the average Londoner saw less than one outage take place per year. I know for some in the north that might seem like a ridiculous number. We are doing things to try to improve our reliability in the north of the city, but the average Londoner has some of the best quartile ratings of reliability in the sector in Ontario. We are continuing to see increased electrification, 50% increase in EVs that were connected to our system from 3,000 to 4,500 in the last year. We also connected an additional 2 megawatts of solar generation in 2024, which is the equivalent of about 285 houses on peak loading. We also still boast some of the lowest distribution rates in the province, lowest quartile distribution rates as a utility, and we invested $56.2 million in capital investment.

[47:46] The last thing that I’ll just point to before turning it back over is we also released our new strategic plan, Vision 2030, that’s included in your package. That plan is an opportunity for London Hydro to work collaboratively within our community and earn every customer, which is our vision. I know it’s easy for a regulated business to sometimes forget that we have customers and that we need to set a higher bar and do what’s right by our customers because we are a monopoly and we actually have a higher bar to make our customers happy and really be a utility that people can be proud of both within London and outside of its walls. So I encourage you to please, if you haven’t had the chance to read this strategic plan, it’s a pretty easy read from that perspective.

[48:31] We will be launching more on our own social media channels of the strategic plans so our customers can see it as well. Being mindful of time, Madam Chair, I will turn it back over to you. Thank you very much appreciated and you still have 30 seconds to spare, so well done. I just, before we move on and I’ll look for a motion to receive the delegation and also the communication that’s in front of us as well as the mover for the recommended member as well. Before I do that, I just wanted to say, you know, today I’m filling in for Deputy Mayor Lewis and of course big shoes to fill and so I’m not great at sports references but I will say I’ve had the great pleasure of working with Ms. Graham as the board chair at London Hydro and Connie is a person that skates to where the puck is going. I know Sean will be very proud of me for using a sports reference. And your vision, your leadership, your good governance, all of those things will be missed and especially the mentorship. So thank you Connie. I will look to members for a motion. Councillor Layman, would you like to put a motion on the floor to receive and a recommendation as well? Yes, Chair. So what I’d like to do is I like to, I think it’s a two-parter and check with a clerk. So part A would be to receive A through D presentation, the five-year strap plan, financial results, and the annual report on finance. And then part B would be to move the draft shareholder resolution included in that are two parts. One is confirmation of the board appointment of Paul Madden, which is the board’s recommendation. And the second part would be confirming the auditor of KPMG, which is also the board recommendation. That would leave G, I’m not too sure if I need to receive G, which would be the consideration request. I would require some advice from the clerk. Thank you. And we’ll go to the clerk just to confirm how we’ll craft the motion and then I’ll be looking for a seconder. The motion is now shared on the screen. It is parts A through H, the first proposed by-law, to congratulate and confirm the annual resolutions of the shareholders of London Inc. be introduced at the next municipal council meeting and then to receive the presentation as well as the items on the agenda with H concluding that Paul and Madden be appointed to the London hydro board of directors second class for the term ending December 31st, 2025.

[51:27] Thank you. Does that confirm your motion? Okay. Thank you. Councilor Lamanai is seconder and Councillor Cuddy. I’ll look for discussion on this item. Councillor Laman, go ahead. Thank you, Chair. So I’ll please give me a signal if I get to my end of my time here because I want to address a few things here. First of all, to the board, we’re the single shareholder of London Hydro. And as a shareholder, I look for two things. It’s a public utility. So I look at the delivery of service to our residents, but also to our commercial users and our industry because those provide the jobs for our residents. And once again, my time at council, London Hydro has delivered on all accounts. As you mentioned, using the the upgrade is good at London North every sort of thing, but you’re addressing that. And that’s important for, you know, work at home enjoyment of our city.

[52:31] But just as critical is the availability of reliable power for industrial customers and for our commercial customers as they drive the economics of this city. So we’re all done. The second thing I look for is a shareholders return on our investment. A while back, a few number of years ago, I pushed to see an increase in dividends. Hydro debated that, which I think was a false and debate and bumped it up half a million. And I was pleased to see it continuing on at 5.5 million with that percentage of 46%. So thank you for delivering consistent returns on our investment. Ms. Graham, I want to echo the chair. You know, you’ve been at the helm as well as the CEO, past CEO and the current CEO with your board, delivering on behalf of London in this very, very important utility to our city. We’ll miss you and welcome the new new chair. I look forward to working with you, but I just wanted to say thank you.

[53:39] And finally to the reason for moving the board recommendation of a new board member. I look through Mr. Madden’s resume. Fairly substantial president of 3M Canada. I think he’ll make a terrific addition to your board. But also look at the process that the board went through, very wholesome process of vetting the candidates and interviewing the candidates. And this is a skill-based board to see which is the candidate level fit the skill that’s needed with this present board makeup. So my wholeheartedly supported the board’s recommendation. And once again, thank you for your service. I will see how the discussion goes. I might come back first with some further questions, but just wanted to get that out. Thank you. I have Councillor Chassa next and the Mayor Martin. Thank you. I’d like to call part H separately. And with respect to part H, I do have some questions and I’m wondering if this is the right time to ask them or whether we should just dispose of everything else and come back to this. Yep. Here’s thank you. You can go ahead. Can I perhaps through the chair, I can just incorporate all of the comments that I made last time this issue was before us. But since we don’t have that transcript here, I want to make a few points. We have 202 pages of people’s resumes and applications in our agenda. And I don’t know how many copies of this agenda are printed. And I don’t know how long it takes to read through all these. I try. My math isn’t that good, but I count 50 some applications here. How many, if I may ask you the chair, how many people did you interview? Thank you. I’ll go to Ms. Graham.

[55:47] Just one moment, Councillor. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you for the question. The process is, Councillor Chassa, that the selection committee, which is the full board, it’s a committee of the whole reviews, the CVs versus our skills matrix. We isolated five to be personally interviewed. So that was five got the full interview, which is 45 minute interview, and then question and answer by the candidate. Councillor Chassa. May I ask you the five words?

[56:27] Ms. Graham. That is confidential to the board. But I can assure you, when we took a look at our skills matrix, we isolated candidates that had in-depth knowledge of our industry that were IT specialists that were corporate CEO, higher level executive experience. And those were the people that ultimately, by CV, made the final interview. The decision process, however, is made on the interview. As we all know, CVs can say a lot of things, but it’s the detail that’s elicited in the interview that ultimately makes the board’s decision. Councillor Chassa.

[57:17] Okay. So I won’t extend this for a full five minutes. I’ll just tell you what my conclusions are here. Once again, I object to this, because I think that if we’re going to go through this process of inviting the public to file applications, to be told that you have one preferred candidate, and that we don’t even get to know who the finalists are, and the other ones weren’t even interviewed, I have a serious problem with that, because there might be other skills and attributes that a member of your board might want to have. And I’m just going to repeat what I said last time this came up, and I’m going to repeat it again when it comes up next time. It might not be a bad idea to have somebody, and at least Council should get to consider this. Somebody with a consumer rights background on the board. I know that this is a generally very well-run organization, and we don’t have a lot of issues. I know in many other cities that I’m aware of, this is a very important question. So I really question, I really question why once again, we are being told, who to a point without any further consideration by Council, and I just cannot go along with this, and I say that with all due respect to your process, but I just, if we’re going to do that, if we’re going to allow your agency to basically tell this Council who to a point, let’s just change the bylaws and say you don’t even have to come to Council, because that’s in that’s tantamount to what we do, and I object to it. So there I am.

[58:59] Thank you, Councillor. I have Mayor Morgan, and then Councillor Cutty. Well, I’ll start off, and then I’ll respond to some comments my colleagues made, but I’ll start off saying the same thing that has been said before. I want to thank Connie Graham for her service to the board. I know the chair tried to make a sports analogy, and said that you’d be skating to where the puck is, so you’ll be spending a lot of time tonight in Medicine Hat’s net, because the night’s going to crush them. But your work on the board has been transformative in guiding the organization through some challenging times. You’ve been a member of that board through the pandemic, and challenges within and changes within the utilities, basically the hydro system changing across the province, and at a time of rapid movement. So the leadership you’ve provided and guidance on the board, I think has been very helpful to the other board members, particularly at times when new board members were coming on and needed mentorship, and I know you’ve taken the time to be a good mentor on the board. I’ll say in response to some of the concerns about the appointment process, that through the chair, the hydro association is following what council has asked them to do in their shareholder directions. They’re following a process, and when you look at the letter that they are giving to us, the word is recommend. They’re providing a recommendation based on the work that they’ve done. The reason why all the applications are before us is because we have the full right to say no thank you, we’re picking someone else. So I’ll be clear, council is not being told what to do here, but the board is doing exactly what we’ve asked them to, and that’s take a look at your needs, go through a process, report back on that process, and make a recommendation.

[1:00:53] And I know the board respects and would respect if we chose someone different for whatever reasons that we would, but it’s a recommendation that’s before us, and that’s how the process works. I’m comfortable with the recommendation, and I’ll be supporting it as I am the other recommendations, and I want to thank the board for their thoughtfulness and the recommendation to invite the mayor to come from time to time to board meetings when it’s strategic to do so. I think that it is appropriate for the mayor not to have to be at every board meeting because it’s probably not necessary, but there are times when there are critical decisions being made with the utility that the perspective and guidance that I can give, as well as the perspective that I get from across the province and country through the work that I do might be of value to the board, and I’m happy to see that recommendation, and I think it’s a good one, and I’m fully willing to participate at the board’s invitation when they feel it’s necessary. So again, thanks to you and the new CEO, as well as the previous members who’ve served on the board over the past couple of terms for the leadership you provided, obviously thank you for the continued return of dividends to the city, which we have put to good use. I know that that’s always a topic of discussion, and I think the board has done a good job of balancing the city’s desire to have robust dividends while not risking the organization’s ability to capitalize itself and make the investments that it needs to make over the period of time that we expect, given we just had a discussion about infrastructure gap and the importance of investing in infrastructure. I think we all recognize around this table that we could always ask for more dividends all the time, because that makes our life easier, but we have to recognize that significant investments seem to be made in this utilities infrastructure to continue to provide great service to the people of London and region. So thanks so much for the work you do, and I’m supportive of the recommendation for us. Thank you. I’ll go to Councillor CUTTY.

[1:02:48] Thank you, Madam Chair and through you. When this board seat became available, one of the first calls I made was to Connie Graham, and like Connie always does, she called me right back, and we had a wholesome conversation. Thank you. And I asked Connie what she was looking for in a board member, and she told me. And as a stakeholder, I don’t know what the board of directors needs. It’s up to them to tell us as stakeholders what they need, and as the mayor alluded, we’re not being told what to do. It’s a suggestion. It’s a recommendation, and that’s what’s been put forward.

[1:03:30] You know, I’ve served, Madam Chair, I’ve served on a number of corporate boards and made recommendations because I knew what we needed, what was missing in terms of skill sets on the board. And we made those recommendations, and our stakeholders accepted them, possibly with some objections, but for the most part, they accepted them. And I think as stakeholders, major stakeholders, in London Hydro, we depend on, and I mean, we do depend on our board to tell us what they need. And, you know, Ms. Graham, I won’t go on like everyone else has, but I want to thank you for the work you’ve done. You’ve been a tremendous communicator, and I’m grateful. I know we’re all grateful for the work you’ve done. And, Jasney, we look forward to many, many years of service with you. Again, you have some incredible skills. We’ve had a chance to spend time together.

[1:04:32] I look forward to more time together, and I’ll wholesomely recommend that we take the recommendation from the board and for the candidate. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Hopkins. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. And just wanted to make a couple comments, and maybe just as a follow-up to Councillor Trissell’s concerns. I heard the concerns last year. I hear your concerns this year. I too am not sure what our role is, but I do appreciate the work and effort that London Hydro is forwarding on to us here. So thank you for that. Mr. Sam Sadini, I think this is your first time here, and Council Chamber is so welcome. And thank you for the money. Five million is very much appreciated. I also want to thank London Hydro as well. I represent Ward 9, the Byron area, I had a number of outages a number of weeks ago with the storm. And one thing, I found residents really did appreciate was the app following when the outages, where the outages were, when they were expected to come in. That was a wonderful piece of technology that I know residents appreciated. So thank you for that. And to Ms. Graham, as a woman, thank you for your mentorship as well. Thank you. Thank you. I don’t know if you wanted to comment on the outages, Mr. Sam Sadini, if you wanted to speak at all about the technology? Yes, so resiliency in our system is a big part of what you would see as a portion of our strategic plan. We know that storms are getting worse. They’re getting more frequent. The damage is becoming more widespread. And as a utility, we need to make those investments in our system to ensure that the system is hardened, that we have automated switches. If I go back to an outage that happened a few months ago now, but the whole north west of the city was out of power. We had lost 33,000 customers. We were able to switch those customers back in with under an hour without one truck roll. We were able to do it from our service center or operation center. And we were able to bring up that power with a loss from Hydro One supply.

[1:06:54] The same outage sort of happened about two weeks later. Again, that was a Hydro One outage, 60,000 customers out. And we were able to pick up customers through our system automation and our ability to pick up those customers. In the case of the storm that we had through Byron, that outage was a little bit longer. Some outage was out for 24 to 48 hours, which is uncommon for utility like ours to see outages in that time frame. I do thank staff. They gave up their nights. They worked around the clock. They worked as long as they could. We called in contractors. We did everything that we could do to restore power as quickly and as safely as possible.

[1:07:30] And we appreciated the support we got from residents during that storm. It’s easy to yell at the people who were out there trying to bring your power back on because you’re trying to watch the Leafs game or whatever else is going on in your life. But they’re giving up time from their families, putting themselves, you know, those are dangerous situations. When trees are down, pole lines are down, wires are on the ground, that is a dangerous situation. And we thank our teams for being there, answering the call and restoring power. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I have Councillor Palosa next followed by Councillor Ferrera and Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will have a series of comments and questions. And thank you to Ms. Graham again. I loved your chairing. Being a straight shooter, when a person asks questions, it’s a rarity and a gem when you find it. I’ll also let colleagues know that if you are really excited about this board and what they’re doing in their meetings, they’re quite welcoming me of me when I want to learn a little bit more on site as an observer.

[1:08:36] So it’s not just the merits, any of us. I’m sure that we welcome at any time. As I said, I do have a series of questions. The appointments recommendation came through the corporate governance and risk management committee of the board of London Hydro. Was it a unanimous recommendation? Thank you, Councillor Palosa, for the question. It was a, as the committee of the whole that was the selection committee, it was not a unanimous decision. We came down to two excellent candidates. And it was a split decision. But this was a, let’s say, a significant majority decision for Mr. Madden.

[1:09:21] Councillor. Thank you. I appreciate knowing that is there was many wonderful applications that were quite impressive in our package today. Looking for a little bit of information, even just an overview, I know that as we deal with our residents, as part of your report, alludes to vulnerable users of Hydro in the city. And on page 232, it outlines 12,000 customers assessing the Ontario electricity support program and some low-income energy assistance program. Just a really high level of how would we connect residents into that? And is there adequate funding made available to those who need it? Like, is it oversubscribed? And are some people turned away?

[1:10:11] Mr. Simpson. Thank you for that question. So the way the program works is there was changes in the rules a couple of years back that allowed, there were maximums before that if you exhausted the spending on the OESP programs that you couldn’t get anymore. The OESP has made changes in those programs now. So customers can access the maximum funding, which I believe is somewhere between $700 and $800 to pay their Hydro bill. But there is no limit in terms of the number of customers. So if we’ve had 10,000 or 20,000 or 30,000 customers come forward, they will all be assessed based on the amount that they can draw themselves. The way for customers to access any funding or any conversations that they would like to have about challenges in paying their bills is contact us.

[1:10:59] Contact the London Hydro customer service team. They have all the information at their fingertips about the programs available, how customers may save money and help on the affordability issue. This is something that we’re all aware of as a challenge. It has been an increased challenge since COVID. We are seeing it. Tariffs of course, those discussions don’t help. So we are here to help and we are looking to help as much as we can for our most vulnerable within the city. Councillor Pilsa. Thank you for that. Another question on an unrelated topic. The OESP has granted special visions to the company until May 2025 regarding your green button standards and technologies. As it was an exciting program, just looking to see where this sits at now, as I know it was industry-wide take-up both in Ontario and abroad for the great work that you were doing. So just looking to see how that development is still occurring today.

[1:11:56] Thank you. Mr. Sam Smith. Great. Yeah, so we are still in that program. The OED has approved an extension to the May 2025 date to align with our cost-of-service application that will be going in front of the Ontario Energy Board in early 2027. So we did get the approval to continue on with the programs that are outside of Ontario. Essentially within the LDC, we’re able to provide shared services to other utilities within Ontario. The exemption was really around three companies that are outside, either outside of Ontario or not electric distribution companies. So that extension was given and we continue to provide those services going forward. Councillor Palazzo.

[1:12:41] Perfect. Thank you, as it was a very impressive program and obviously no one throughout the country. A question which I’ll leave it to you for Lee Way of how you would like to answer it. As you may be aware, Mayor Morgan and myself is doing some engagement across different agency boards and commissions that have tax-supported budgets regarding municipal taxes. As London Hydro is a wholly owned subsidiary of the corporation, we did not present to you, but just looking overall for your finances, what do you do to help keep operations as lean as possible, realizing that it might not be tax-based supported, but definitely the dividends coming back into the city is very helpful for Londoners and how we use it on our budgets with the city. Thank you, Mr. Santzini.

[1:13:38] Sure. So, London Hydro, of course, is I’ll say a heavily regulated organization regulated by the Ontario Energy Board. So, the way we’ve chosen to do it is every five years we go in front of the OEB and essentially present our cost structure to the Ontario Energy Board. As part of that process, we review things like spending increases to ensure that our customers are getting fair and just hydro rates. As I had mentioned before, London Hydro is one of the lowest quartile costs, utilities in the province, so I think we’ve done historically a very good job of doing that. The challenge sometimes becomes in when we think about earning additional revenues.

[1:14:18] So, when a utility cuts their operating costs, that money does not sit there as additional revenue and funds over the long term. What happens is the Ontario Energy Board reduces the amount of distribution revenue that you get as an organization, keeping the bottom line consistent. So, for us, it really is a measure of the work that we have to do as a utility, and of course, balancing the affordability needs of our customers. But we don’t create, I guess, excess revenues in the organization through cuts of our operating expenses. Councillor Plaza. Thank you, my own chair. I’ll just, my closing statement would just be thank you and welcome to Chambers as your first time here. And thank you for reaching out one-on-one with us beforehand, and I really appreciate your view coming into this, that if customers had a choice, would London Hydro still be the preferred operator and up choice? So, I really appreciate that, and you being here and answering my questions. I look forward to engagements going forward.

[1:15:23] Thank you. I have Councillor Ferreira next, followed by Deputy Mayor Lewis and Councillor Ferreira. Thank you, Chair, and thanks to London Hydro for being here and presenting to us today. And I guess I’m an echo, Councillor Palosa, and reaching out to us beforehand, too, and engaging with us as well. I have some comments that I’m an echo, and then I guess I’ll get into some other comments, too. But I will echo, thank you, Miss Graham, for the work that you do, and I hope that all the best in your future. I know you were saying that we will see you again. You’re not going anywhere. So, I’m sure this work that you’re doing for us will, or for the city anyways, will continue on. And I would say congrats to Tanya up there. I’m sorry I didn’t catch your last name, but I know that you’re going to do good work as well, if the sport has selected you. So, congrats on the new role, and we will look forward to seeing you. And Mr. Sanzadini, obviously.

[1:16:15] Thank you as well to you. I’ll do the political thing and just put my thanks out. But I appreciated our chat that we had a few months back. I will be coming again, and I do feel very good knowing that this is in your hand. So, I do see that you have a very good wealth of knowledge. Really appreciate the mechanical engineering aspect that you bring to it. And I know I want to have some more chats with you on that in the future. I heard some comments. I think it was from Council Layman about the stable service and the consumer and the customer aspect. And I would truly believe that anybody who doesn’t read this report would know just from the services that they see, just living in the city and, you know, using, I guess, plugging in and using parenting, that stability and services. They would see just the reality and the experience that they have matches what we see in this report, too. So, I would kind of point that out, too. And I do see that myself. I would point out, too, I know we were talking about outages in the west and the north, but some in the central west area, too, that did have some outages. And I know that’s due to trees coming down with significant weather events and possibly some collisions as well.

[1:17:21] But because I live there and I’ve experienced a couple of outages, I just point that out for my colleagues that we get it to sometimes, but I know it’s not on London hydrants. It’s just, you know, the infrastructure getting, I guess, having collisions or, like I said, a tree coming down. I wanted to just kind of go on to the EV comments that we were hearing. So, I know we spoke about this on the last meeting, but I just wanted to maybe get some more comments or maybe even a status update on our capacity for, as the city, as residents buy more EVs, the capacity that we have, how that’s going to sustain us into the future. What are the projections like on how many, I guess, vehicles or whatever numbers that you may have that we can plug in and how long with our current system and how many EVs are we able to use as the city does electrify? So, I just wanted to kind of put that ask you that question. Thank you. So, you’re looking for more information about as we grow as a city, as well as our capacity, just to clarify, just because you were asking EV specific, but well, it is focused on EVs, but I do know that we have, I guess, a surplus of capacity at the moment, but I just wanted to know how long will that hold us into the future and then projecting of how we electrify, how long will that sustain us for? So, that’s kind of the question I’m asking.

[1:18:40] Thank you, Mr. Samstein. Great. So, currently, we’ve got about 850 megawatts of capacity within the city of London. Our peak usage last year was up around 700 megawatts. We have about 150 megawatts of available capacity through the stations that we are. As you can imagine, in the time of electrification, data centers, other areas, that capacity can be used up fairly quickly. We are in the process right now of dealing on a regional study that happens with IESO, Hydro One, ourselves, about the needs of London and into the future, and our team is working through that today.

[1:19:14] We are putting together, as part of our cost-to-service application, a distribution system plan, that will talk about capacity needs and the builds that we need to do over the coming 5, 10, 15 years to be able to ensure we can meet capacity needs as we go forward. So, I’m happy to say that I will be back to council at some point either late this year or early next year to talk about that distribution system report. Let you know what it means from a capacity perspective as we move forward. EVs, you know, to date, it’s still been a fairly low pickup. Yes, we’re increased from 3,000 or 4,500. The impacts that we’re going to see from EVs aren’t usually around our station capacity alone. It’s probably more the very local capacity that we have near the home. So, that might require, you know, digging up the line from the transformer into the home. So, there’s ways that we have to adjust to be able to ensure that people can connect, and we have an engineering team that’s ready to respond to those issues as they come up.

[1:20:09] But today, we haven’t had any issues connecting those customers. We still have lots of capacity on our system. We’ve got a way forward to ensure we can continue to connect people in the city of London. Councilor Perrera. Thank you for that. Just a quick follow-up. So, when you say, like, local infrastructure works, that’s like a 100 amp line to a house upgrading to a 200 or 400 amp line. Things like that is what you’re saying. Okay. I guess I will move on. I will also echo. Thank you for the dividends. We do appreciate that and good work on that. And I guess the last thing that I want to comment on would be, because this is part of the motion, the recommendation for Paul and Matt. And so, I went through all of the applications as well. And first thing I’m going to say is, like, wow, the type and the level of candidates that you get for the board is very impressive. So, I know that these decisions are hard to make. And I know that they’re, you know, I was speaking with Ms. Graham. There are some candidates that I’m sure was a tough decision.

[1:21:10] And for me, I had Paul Madden definitely at the top of my list as well. And I also had another candidate that I did mention to Ms. Graham. But I understand, you know, these decisions are made. And I’m sure they’re like a tight race when you get to that. So, I would be supportive of the candidate as is appointed. I do hear Councilor Trusso’s comments of what he was saying. But I am in agreement with, I guess, the selection of the board as well. So, I will be supporting this candidate as well. And just to wrap up my comments, I appreciate the work that you do. I appreciate the outreach that you’re doing with Council. And I look forward to seeing you again, Ms. Graham, and the new chair. I look forward to speaking with you again. And thank you very much.

[1:21:55] Thank you. I have Deputy Mayor Lewis next. Thank you, Madam Chair. And let me first say you nailed the hockey analogy perfectly at the start. Well done. I knew I was leaving Committee in good hands with my vice chair to fill in for me today as I recover a little bit of mobility at home. But I’m just going to continue that. I’m going to be really brief. I don’t need to reiterate what everyone else has said. You know, it’s hard to replace the first line center. And our board did that when they found Loosney and brought him on board as our new CEO. It’s just as hard to replace a, you know, championship quality level coach. And that’s what we had in Scram as our board chair. So I just want to wish Ms. Goodnight all the best moving forward into that role. She’s got some big shoes to fill, but I know she’s up to the challenge there. I just want to say with respect to the appointment, I am very much supportive of the board’s direction here, their recommendation forward.

[1:23:05] And I do not share the same concerns that have been raised by a couple of other counselors. In fact, I think that we need to do more of boards reviewing resumes and bringing forward recommendations based on the skill sets that they need to better inform council moving forward. I don’t think it’s actually realistic with all of the council duties that we have that we would be reviewing, reading every single resume, participating in interviews with candidates. I think that that is best left to boards and their governance committees and their evaluation matrices. Obviously, the final decision does rest with us, but I’m very comfortable with the caliber of candidate that’s being recommended. I know that the board has done its homework because I too have the opportunity to chat with Ms. Graham any time I have questions. So I know that that has been done. And it’s in fact a matter of discussion that we have been having at governance working group as well about developing evaluation matrices for the filling of board positions. So I think London Hydro along with LMCH is actually leading the way in having some templates that they already implement in reviewing and interviewing their candidates for board replacements. So very happy to support this recommendation. Thank you. With that, I will go to councilor Pribble. Go ahead.

[1:24:28] Thank you, sir. I do have a few questions to ask. The first one, I just want to ask you if you had year on year quite a bit of a increase in regulatory adjustments, can you please explain that if it has to do with province, what’s our expectation? Mr. Simpson. Yeah, sure. Thank you for the question. You know, utilities are an interesting thing in terms of what we build. So as a local distribution company, our revenues are around 85 million per year, but we bill out closer to half a billion dollars per year in total billing. Now, what regulatory balances usually are is a timing issue, where the OEB has set rates for us to be able to charge out. Those, the cost of power is always changing on the market. And there’s there’s a delta that that forms that delta becomes the regulatory balances that you see there. Now, as an LDC, though, we are kept whole from those balances.

[1:25:24] So if London Hydro is overpaid by $5 million from what we’ve recovered in our electricity charges, the OEB allows us to put that essentially into an account. We’re able to charge interest on that account. And over the next couple of years, we will recoup those dollars. So every year, there’s pluses and minuses and over time, those things balance out. But as an LDC, we are kept whole on those regulatory balances. And that’s why we sort of take that out of the financial statements to show what the actual net income impacts are for the organization. Councillor Pribble.

[1:25:57] Thank you for the answer. And through the chair, last year, there was a statement made. And I just want to know if it’s still valid and if it’s accurate during your presentation a year ago. The annual capital investment in infrastructure and technology is expected to increase by 130 percent from the current levels to achieve net zero by 2050. Mr. Simsonini. So we will be reviewing this as part of our distribution system plan that we will be bringing forward. We will also bring it through to our board for approval. But that will really establish our next five years in terms of capital spending and dollars that will be needed over the long term. So I can’t say today if that number is accurate or not accurate in terms of a new plan, we’ll be going forward and one that will need to be approved by the Ontario Energy Board as well.

[1:26:44] Councillor Pribble. Thank you for that answer. You’re presenting Vision 2030, your five-year strategic plan. And currently it’s at you have the specific strategies. And currently it is presented as a five-year plan. How do you plan to report to us to the council progress? Are you planning to do it on a semi-annual basis? But your targets, actions being divided into the annual or semi-annual so we see the progress that the corporation is online reaching their goals instead of just like a five-year plan. Mr. Simsonini.

[1:27:28] Thank you. So a couple of the items that we’ll be doing as part of our strategic plan, we’re in the process right now and we’ve worked with the board on identifying key performance indicators over that five-year time frame. You know, a big change as we look at the type of organization we want to be is one that is accountable and one that is outcomes-based. So instead of, you know, just building widgets, you know, what is it that is the outcome that you’re really looking for as an organization. So we are starting to set those up through the organization. So we’ll have reporting in terms of what our goals are in any given year in our key performance indicators. Might be, you know, how quickly we answer phones, how long our customers are out, how we respond to large events, storms. Are we seeing more outages during storms or less?

[1:28:11] So we’ll actually have a work plan that we establish as part of our strategic plan as well that will have sort of key milestones that we identify over that time frame. As it relates to coming to Council, as I mentioned, you know, my goal is more communication. I think stepping in front of Council once a year is probably not the right amount of time for us to be here. I think coming, you know, a little bit more quarterly talking about very key strategic issues that could be distribution system plans, that could be, you know, the filings that we’re making for the Ontario Energy Board that will impact costs over the next five years are things that we would like to bring to Council and have more strategic discussions here and information provided so that the AGM becomes really a matter of the business at hand, as opposed to the year that was in the year that’s coming. Councilor Pribble? Sorry, Ms. Graham, go ahead.

[1:29:01] Not to say, Councillor Pribble, that the performance plans for the CEO from the board and then drifting down into the organization via the vice president’s performance plans haven’t existed before they have. But if you would like reports of those kinds of progresses at the end of every year, we’re more than happy to give them. We review them through our HR and compensation committee and then all of those performance plans and achievements or not are evaluated by the board and the compensation, both base and leveraged is paid out as a decision of the board at the end of the year. So it certainly has existed. The reporting as you and Usni might agree going forward could be what you want it to be. Councillor Pribble? Thank you to both of you for those answers.

[1:29:57] Future, are we looking at potentially or are we looking in terms of the overhead and underground power lines, in terms of the existing ones and in terms of the future developments? So currently we have about 50 percent of our infrastructure is overhead, 50 percent underground. New subdivisions usually build underground. I think as we look at our long-term vision as well, one of the things that the team is looking for is location of our transformer stations around the city as well. I’m a firm believer that economic development is one of the key drivers that utilities can help with.

[1:30:35] I think the more stations we can build closer to the loads of those types of businesses will give us an advantage across the province. So it’s something that we will definitely be looking at, trying to make sure our large loads are serviced with transformer stations that are close by, looking at expansion of our stations to the north of the city as well. So this is all part of our distribution system planning work, the work with ISO around the long-term regional plan. But just know that London Hydro’s vision is one where we are aiding in the development of the city of London, both from a residential perspective, but also from a business perspective as well.

[1:31:12] Councillor Per bevel. Thank you. I would like to thank the entire team of London Hydro for all the work you do on every day basis for half a million of Londoners and I will be supporting everything that’s in front of us. Thank you. Thank you. Just looking for any final speakers, Councillor Ben Newberg. Thank you, Chair. I remember just like it was literally yesterday when we had the council meeting 14 years ago to nominate Connie Graham and I believe, I believe I’m the only one around this horseshoe. In fact, I know I am. That actually voted for you and I’m so glad.

[1:31:57] I’m so, so glad that you won that vote because what’s happened in the interim during those 14 years is tremendous. Tremendous, not only just for London Hydro, but for the city as a whole. And I’ve got to point out that I’m very thankful for the fact that when the power goes out in our street, my house stays lit. So I really appreciate that. But anyway, thank you. On a serious note, thank you so much. You did a great job. Thank you. Ms. Graham. Yes, and Paul, we don’t look any older, do we? Listen, thank you, all of you for the kind wishes. It’s just been an honor to serve all of you as representatives of our shareholder. And if I can speak for our whole organization, it’s an honor that the city of London relies on us. And we take that responsibility very, very seriously. So thanks to you all and particularly his deputy honor, who’s recovering at home. I really appreciate Sean, you attending as well. Thank you. Okay, seeing no further speakers, I will look to open the vote for a through G. And then we’ll call H separately as Councillor Jocelyn requested. Closing the vote, motion carries 13 to 0. Thank you. We’ll open part H. Closing the vote, motion carries 12 to 1. Thank you. That moves us to items for direction, of which we have item 4.1, which is London Hydro’s proposed amendments to the shareholder’s declaration, of which was discussed as well, those potential changes. I’m just looking for a mover and a seconder and any questions or comments on this item.

[1:34:28] Councillor Cuddy to move it. Councillor Chauceau, seconder. Okay, with that, I’ll look for questions. Councillor Pelosa, go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a question, I think it would kind of answer itself. But just on regards to page 533, its proposed changes should council not accept their recommended candidate for a board position. It just states if council does not initially approve the recommendation provided by the board, a board representative will discuss the recommendation and camera with council. And if we still don’t support it, they’ll bring forward another recommendation.

[1:35:11] Just realizing that at council, our procedures will trump that we have to get this direction, that’s what we want. So just making sure that as we go through this process that we don’t inherently cause problems, that if we say we don’t want them to do it, but their policies say you will do it, just making sure we don’t have those issues. So just a comment from London Hydro or this. Thank you. I will go to Mr. Sampsonini. I don’t know if you want to comment on that, but I know that this is too direct to go back to staff or to work on the shareholder declaration as well. So I’m not sure if you want to provide comment now. Yeah, correct. And we would use, you know, good governance practice and also the direction of the clerk’s office in terms of the rules as it relates to council to ensure that we don’t have, I guess, a misalignment of the direction, both from the shareholder declaration and the rules of council.

[1:36:05] Councillor Palosa. Thank you. I think even just adding the words in when it does come back of that upon request, a board representative will discuss recommendations and camera would fix any potential concerns. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions or comments regarding this item? Okay. Seeing none, we’ll open the vote. Closing the vote. Motion carries 12 to 1. Thank you. That takes care of all the items that we had with London Hydro today.

[1:36:50] We’ll move on to item 4.2, which is the 2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan. And I will first look to Ms. Barbone to see if you have any comments before we begin this discussion. Thank you through the chair. I’ll have Mr. Sunnis provided an overview of the report for the committee. Wonderful. Mr. Sunnis, go ahead. Thank you through the chair. I’m pleased to present the highlights for the 2025 London and Middlesex Community Housing Asset Management Plan developed in compliance with Ontario regulation 58817. The sample lines with the standardized approach used to develop the 2023 corporate asset management plan and the 2024 asset management plans for the agency’s boards and commissions. LNCH manages an extensive and vital asset portfolio evaluated over $1 billion, primarily consisting of housing facilities, which represents approximately 95% of the asset base.

[1:37:52] However, due to aging infrastructure, the overall asset condition of these assets is currently in poor condition. This rating indicates that most building systems are functional, but approaching the end of their service life. Our analysis highlights several level of service scenarios, along with the associated funding gaps. To maintain the current level of service, an investment of $6.4 million over a 10-year period would be required. This investment would maintain the asset base in a poor condition. Achieving an overall condition of fare, so improving the condition of fare, would require an additional investment of approximately $34.6 million. And then achieving the LNCH board-approved recommended condition of good would require an approximate investment of about $110 million over 10 years. While an investment would be required to improve the average overall asset condition, LNCH does use a risk-based approach for the prioritization investments to ensure that funds are spent fiscally responsible in a fiscally responsible manner, maximizes maintenance and the improvement of assets. In addition, LNCH is undertaking the Regeneration Master Plan that will provide a clear path to guide decision-making to ensure the long-term sustainability of LNCH. It’s important to note that this AMP addresses the state of the LNCH infrastructure along with investments to achieve various levels of service, but the ultimate funding decisions should be directed through to the multi-year budget process or the budget process. In conclusion, LMCH’s AMP provides a roadmap to address infrastructure gaps, improve housing conditions, and ensure sustainable service delivery. In attendance today, Repal Chisholm, CEO of LNCH, and John Crill, Director of Asset Renewal, to assist with any questions. Thank you. Thank you. And I will invite Mr. Chisholm, Mr. Crill, if they’d like to come up to the podium, and just in case there are any questions, welcome, and thanks for being here today. I will look for a mover and a seconder for this item, or okay, I’ve got Councillor McAllister, Councillor Cudi, and I’ll look for speakers on this item. Councillor Trossa, go ahead.

[1:40:13] Procedural question, I have filed a motion for a referral. Would I raise that at this point, or would this be defeated before I could raise that? Since it’s a referral, it takes precedence, so you may go ahead. Yes, so I’ll be looking for a seconder for the motion that was just circulated, that I don’t know if you can put it up on the screen, but basically what it says is… Just a moment, Councillor, and we’ll get that up. Or we’ll take a look so we can read it out. Okay, thank you. That is on the screen. And so, Councillor, you’re moving the motion in front of us. Would you like to read it out? Yes, the following actions be taken with respect to the 2025 LMCH Housing Management Plan A is the same as B received for information purposes. B, I’ve London and Middlesex Community Housing Access Asset Management Plan, pended to the staff report as Appendix A, B referred to the meeting of the Strategic Priorities and Policy Committee to be held, June 17, 2025, with a request to LMCH to include in a revised asset management plan the following, to include the following. One, a breakdown of the facility’s conditions as noted in Figure 3.4 overall condition on a property-by-property basis. And number two, additional information addressing the infrastructure gap as listed in Section 4.2.2, including exploring the opportunity to obtain a loan, including a mortgage, on LMCH housing properties to secure additional funds. And I’d be looking for a seconder on that.

[1:42:24] Thank you, Councillor. So, I’m looking for a seconder for that motion. This is a motion to refer, and it has specific items to it, but looking for a seconder for motion to refer. Councillor Hopkins? Yeah, I’ll seconder for the conversation. Okay. So, I have a seconder. Okay, I’m looking for speakers on this item. Councillor McAllister. Thank you. Through the chair, I’m speaking against this. What we have before us today is the asset management plan. I think what you have before you speaks for itself. Understanding that the Councillor wants more of a breakdown building by building. You’re more than welcome to speak with LMCH staff. I’m sure if you want to have a discussion on a building-by-building basis, they’d be happy to accommodate. I think the report is very clear in terms of the state of condition, what’s required to bring it up to higher conditions.

[1:43:23] I think we need to deal with these two things separately, and I think we need to deal with this today, and that’s why I will not be supporting this. What you have before you is clear, and I think we need to delineate between these two things and not lump them together. Thank you. Councillor Ferrera. Thanks, Chair. I appreciate having the conversation. I guess before I kind of ask this question, I just wanted to know, is there any issues that we might foresee of receiving a property-by-property overall condition assessment, just to break it down?

[1:43:59] And the reason I ask is because I look, and I’ll make some more comments, I guess, as we get to the main motion. This referral is not the main motion to correct, just correct. We’re going to be on that. Okay. So I’m just looking at the scenarios here, and I see, you know, some of these scenarios with the current plan budgeting of what the condition assessments are looking like going into 2043, and then I see the assessment scenario B or scenario two to maintain current level of service, and just going through the list, and I do see that as we increase in the years, even if we are advancing more funds to maintain a good state of condition of the buildings, I do see we slip into this extreme, I guess, disparity between very poor and good as we go into the years, and that’s, I’m referring to, as you see, more red on the top of these charts and more green on the bottom, so I’m worried with that respect. So maybe this is why I kind of like this motion, we could see a little bit more detail on the actual buildings themselves, just to see a breakdown of, you know, what is really constituting the red as we move into the years and what is in the green.

[1:45:09] So I guess just to refine my question, are there any issues of getting the building-by-building breakdown and condition assessment? Thank you, Ms. Barbelle. Thank you, through the chair. That information is available. We’ve just not included it as part of our plan to keep some consistency amongst all of our capital asset management plans, but certainly that information is available. I believe Mr. Sinise can speak further to that. Thank you, Mr. Sinise. Through the chair. So this information can be fine on a property-by-property basis on LMSH’s website under the March 20, 2025 board meeting, where it does provide the actual property along with the facility condition assessment. As Mrs. Barbelle has suggested, we have excluded it for consistency purposes. We were trying our best to ensure that the framework of all of our asset management plans, whether or not it’s going to be agency boards or commissions or direct city on asset management plans, are structured in a similar way. At this point in time, there is no other asset management plan that we currently have that provides that level of detail, although we do have it available upon request. But again, the goal here is to provide a consistent format and approach, noting that the reason why LMSH’s board has it is because they traditionally are getting a bit more into the operational decision-making versus the role of this committee, which would be a bit more strategic and nature relative to the actual asset management plan.

[1:46:31] Thank you. Councillor Ferrer. Thank you for that. So it is available on the LMSH website. Do we need a motion for that, or can you submit that to Council? Thank you. Are you looking for help getting that off of the website? No, I’m just for consistency of, I guess, procedure, but I guess you can correct me. Is it required that we have this motion to get that information? Because it is on the website, and I guess I would ask for it to be submitted to Council.

[1:47:07] Mrs. Barbelle, through the chair, we could certainly have that circulated with the Council agenda and provided to Council. We’ll work with LMSH to provide that. Councillor? At the will of the Council, I would request that. But that’s my comments for now, I guess, with the answer that I got. Thank you. I have Councillor Hopkins next, followed by Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you. I second this, and just to have the conversation, I do want to receive the delegation, though. I have concerns. They are here. I would like to hear what they’ve got to say with their annual update. But following up on the previous delegation, I really appreciated the desire to come to us, not on an annual basis, but throughout the year with information that I think we’re seeking, that can support the Councillor for this motion. So my concern is I don’t want to, by defeating this, maybe it’s a procedural question that I have then, that still will allow LMSH to attend throughout the year with requests that we may have to provide information. There’s nothing stopping us from doing that by not supporting this referral. Thank you. So a couple things. So what’s in front of us today is the Asset Management Plan and Mr. Chisholm, Mr. Kruehler here to help answer any questions, as is Mr. Denise and Ms.

[1:49:02] Ravon from our staff. On top of that, we don’t have a delegation, but at the next meeting of the shareholder, there will be an opportunity on that shareholder meeting to have a further conversation. I think that’s what you’re getting at for the next SPPC meeting. The motion in front of us is to refer what’s here, but that doesn’t stop us from having other conversations. As mentioned as well, Ms. Ravon said the information can be sent to us in between now and council. I’m satisfied with that. I just want to take this opportunity to encourage LMSH to attend our SPPC meetings more on a regular basis, as opposed to an annual basis, to address the concerns that some councillors have. I think it also helps with our working relationship as well, as opposed to just doing it on an annual basis. I know we’ve done it in the past, and I really would like to take advantage of that opportunity. I’m glad that we’ll be able to receive further information before council as well, so appreciate the conversation.

[1:50:18] Thank you, Councillor. I have Deputy Mayor Lewis next. Thank you, Madam Chair. Through you, I’m actually going to first direct a question to our guests from LMSH, either Mr. Chisholm or Mr. Krill, with respect to some of the language in this referral. The Board of Directors and the Finance Committee already has the ability to direct LMSH staff to utilize, for example, a remarkaging of an existing asset for renewal purposes. Is that not correct? Thank you. I’ll direct that question to Mr. Chisholm.

[1:51:11] Mr. Chisholm, thank you for being here. Go ahead. Thank you, and through the chair. LMSH is permitted to take debt, but it requires the permission of the shareholder. So we would have to do that in conjunction with city staff to do that. Mr. Burbone. Thank you. Through the chair. So certainly this, whatever debt is held by LMSH is City of London debt. So as you may already be aware that we’ve already strategically accessed debt and relation to LMSH over the last three years, a number of years for the co-investment. So that pertains to some of the lifecycle, but it was also an ability to access some forgivable loans that wouldn’t have otherwise been available. So in terms of the ability to fund LMSH through debt, that broader impact is a city of London impact and would in fact actually be something that we would want to do through the budget process because that impacts the city’s broader debt strategy and certainly has an impact on debt levels, which also impacts the debt servicing requirements, which are key contributors to Moody’s AAA credit rating in terms of the broader debt that the city of London holds.

[1:52:31] So in terms of looking all of that, any debt and if you’ll recall through the most recent capital budget monitoring, we had a significant portion that we brought forward with respect to the debt and the levels that are there in the future. So certainly from a debt perspective, the city has no issues with accessing debt through the capital market. So whether it’s done as a mortgage on LMSH properties or through our broader strategy, the end result is ultimately exactly the same. So we’re very fortunate given our self-imposed debt caps that we’ve been able to access debt and certainly we’re on the upper levels. So it’s something that we would ask council to pay attention with in terms of what the broader strategies are as part of capital financing in the future as well, but certainly something that we know that through the regeneration plans that they are looking at, they are continuing to work with us and look at what those needs are and what the ability is to access additional debt to support some of the future endeavors that would come forward through future budget processes. Thank you, Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you and thank you, Mr. Chisholm and Ms. Verbon for that answer. It does certainly underscore the importance of the allocation of surplus to debt reduction as a policy so that we can properly utilize those things. I would just wonder through you, Madam Chair, if Ms. Verbon can also speak briefly to the relationship with the county because it’s LMCH, not just LCH and what that sort of debt financing implications have on the county as well, because we do have a partner in this agency.

[1:54:16] Thank you, Ms. Verbon. Thank you through the chair. So certainly through some of the conversations we’ve been having with LMCH, as they look at regeneration of their assets, that was one of the items that we did have up for discussion, is that because LMCH falls under the previous social housing legislation, there is a cost sharing and a feature to those assets that were devolved from the province. And as we look to regenerate that, whether it be through lifecycle renewal or other mechanisms, there is a cost sharing component with the county. And we have a specific consolidated service management agreement that outlines what that cost sharing is. It’s roughly 85-15 with a little bit of nuance to that calculation that goes forward. So certainly whatever lifecycle renewal and investment is put into those assets in the future also has an ancillary impact to the county as they need to pay for their share of that through the cost sharing agreements. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Lewis on the referral.

[1:55:21] Yep. Thank you, Madam Chair, and appreciate that. So I’m speaking very strongly against this referral. I’m asking colleagues to defeat it. Let’s get this capital asset management plan approved today. First of all, we’ve heard from our staff the information is already available on the LMCH website in the Board of Directors reports. All accounts are has to do if they’re truly interested is go back and look at it. I can tell you with my board hat on, but also having looked through those reports, it’s not a surprise and should be to no one. Our adult buildings are generally those that are in the most difficult states. Our family units are in generally better states of repair and our seniors units will sometimes fall in between. There’s a lot of work that’s happening around regeneration and repair. I’ll speak to that in the main motion. The point is we do not need a referral for more information. The information is there if any counselor wants to take the time to go find it. The question around taking out mortgages to pay for renewal I think has been addressed very clearly. There is already a process by which LMCH works with the city to do that and it is through a budget process, not through a capital asset management plan, referral for building information on a building by building basis. This is a motion that’s not required and I’m asking committee to defeat it. Let’s get this plan approved and let’s get on with the work of the regeneration of our housing. Thank you. I’m looking for other speakers before I go to speakers a second time around. Okay, seeing no more, I’ll go to Councillor Ferrera. Go ahead.

[1:57:09] Thank you, Chair. Sorry, I didn’t mention this before but just hearing the discussion. I was originally looking for the referral for more information but I’m now kind of thinking I don’t want to tie our hands and I’m really worried about that. Now I’m going to say this is none of our faults of the condition of the building. Nobody in this building, nobody in this council chambers. This is something that is very complex and it’s been going on for the last few decades and I know that this is a tough conversation but looking at the report, I’m wondering at what point do we say things are quite critical? It’s all hands on deck and what do we do and how do we move forward?

[1:57:47] I hear the utilization of potential dipping into bringing out debt to help us with this and I hear that that is an option but I’m still, I’m also on the side of how do we ensure our property tax rate increase does not reflect next term what it did this term. So I have those concerns and just to make sure that we don’t potentially, again, tie our hands for any unforeseen things, maybe it would be wise for a referral to tie it into the next meeting and that’s just kind of me just approaching things with caution because you do see these substantial amounts here that are pointed out, you know, the 100 million or so for the one level of condition that we’re trying to bring it to and then I think it was like 300 and something million for a level of good condition. So we’re talking about very significant numbers here and I hear what the deputy merit is saying but at the same time, I’m kind of in this position where I would like to kind of have no points in the future where we realize that we potentially may have kind of held ourselves up and put a barrier in front of us by voting on things now. Like we need to bring the conditions of the buildings up to par as quick as possible but I don’t foresee this referral impacting that because it’s going to come to the next meeting at June 17th.

[1:59:16] So I would, I’m going to be actually voting for the referral now. I do know that we’re getting that extra information but it’s just I’m just approaching things with extreme caution from the report that I see here. Thank you, Councillor. Looking for any further speakers on the referral. Councillor Trossam. Yes, I’ll sum up and thank you very much and through the chair. I still feel very strongly that it would make more sense to have this matter decided at the same meeting when we’re doing the shareholders meeting because if we if we send this to council and council approves it before the shareholders meeting it is a decided matter of council and I do not want to be in a position where matters pertaining to the conditions of premises is rolled out of water because there are some very serious concerns about the conditions of the premises that I haven’t even started talking about yet and I wasn’t going to do it during the referral but I’ll come back to it during the main motion but I do want to say that one of the requirements of the plan is is that it lay out scenarios for closing the infrastructure gap and what I’m hearing is a confirmation of my of my theory that that financing using the property the billion dollars and or so of assets would be a viable solution yet it’s not mentioned in the asset plan as a possible idea and there is a list of possible ideas at the very least I would I would like to have that amended to include consider the possibilities as I say here in the motion now that can be done here on the spot or at council that’s fine maybe we don’t need the referral but I do not understand why we are approaching this plan approval and then the shareholders meeting in steps these should be done at the same meeting now of course if there was a deadline coming up that would be different there is a July 1st deadline for the asset management plan it’s not June 1st it’s July 1st right yes so I don’t see the problem in doing that the other point I want to make is yes it may be true that this information is contained in the minutes but by adopting an asset management plan we are creating a council approved record and there is no reason why this information especially since it’s already available and there aren’t any you know security or legal reasons why it couldn’t be disclosed it should be included even as a simple appendix to the asset management plan because if you look at the asset management plan sections dealing with conditions you’ll see that when you’re dealing with the high rises it’s much worse than the 68 percent and it gets a little better when you’re dealing with townhouses so I think the issue of property by property in a clear way on this on this motion today is is a good idea and in terms of the mortgage we should definitely be looking at this and it could be included in the asset plan is one of the things to explore so I will continue to ask people to support this referral and I will continue my comments should this deferral be defeated which I suspect it will be I will continue these comments during the main motion thank you looking council got Mayor Morgan next speakers let’s go ahead yeah else I’m going to speak against the referral for two reasons one I think staff have already answered the question that the the report can be appended by the council meeting so if we defeat the referral we approve the asset management plan they can bring forward an additional piece of information that can be added to the council agenda and appended not necessarily to the capital asset management plan but the report approving this as many communications are on the possibility of mortgages I think we heard I have at least I heard from our staff that that’s a possibility it would be most appropriate to be done through the business case although it’s not explicitly listed in section 4.22 4.22 VI does say that LMCH could submit additional investment business cases through the multi-year budget process in such cases could mitigate the growth of the achieve proposed LOS cumulative tenure infrastructure gap so it’s it’s a it’s already an option there it would involve discussing with our staff about the city’s debt load bring it forward in multi-year budget business case and then we would have the consideration about how we balance actually that that debt load over time versus all of the other debt we’re issuing because this debt is not debt the separate organization or corporation it’s debt that we basically take full account for on our books when we’re assessed on our entire and overall debt load of which this has been a discussion we’ve had a number of committees the paying down of debt the issuing of debt what that says about principal interest payments and the ability for us to borrow debt in the future at at competitive rates on behalf of learners so I don’t disagree with that the counselor has some legitimate concerns about the conditions of the assets I also don’t disagree that the counselor would like to see this information on the council record I just think all of that can be done without the need for a referral and I don’t have a concern doing the capital asset management plan now and the shareholder meeting later capital asset management plans were reviewed on a regular basis and updated regularly so there’s lots of opportunity to do so and I don’t think it precludes our ability to receive multi-year budget business cases related to addressing the infrastructure gap in various ways what I will say though is there is a large infrastructure gap here it’s a big organization right 3200 plus units 32 properties 5,000 tenants think about one multi-residential high-rise build you’re talking about 100 million dollars for one of those right so 100 million dollars of investment necessary in the infrastructure gap is very large there are pieces of this asset that are in conditions that I think we would all like to see improved I think some of the work being done to rebuild Southdale as well as the work that was done a few years back to partner with CMHC to get both alone as well as a forgivable piece of that loan and start to make improvements to the current assets I think we’d all like to see that go faster and have more money available to us but the organizations and the boards of the past have been trying to address this challenge and I think it’s fair for us to can you ask questions of them but I think we have to recognize that there is change happening that has never happened before we can certainly discuss the pace but I think there’s good work being done I’m comfortable with defeating the referral and proceeding with the main motion and the future discussions will have thank you anyone else on the referral okay see go ahead yeah just as a follow-up questions for you madam chair maybe um when will the next update on the asset management plan come forward is it brought to us on an annual basis I’m just trying to understand the sequencing here mr bone I thank you for the chair so as per the regulations and as approved in the policies every five years we have a complete refresh to bring them forward because lmch had a bit of a different schedule with respect to timing and it was actually completed initially in 2020 prior to all of the other boards and commissions we’re a little bit out of sync with bringing them all together so what we’re anticipating is that due to the timing of when we need to bring forward the next multi-year budget as well as the five-year update of all the asset management plan for the other boards and commissions we’re looking at trying to align that so that it might be here a little sooner than the the four-year or the five-year timeframe and may actually come in four years so we’re just trying to work that out to see what is the doable to try to bring them all forward at the same time again to make it a little easier to be in line with the regulations every five years.

[2:07:37] Councillor Hopkins I appreciate that information I think it is important that we try to align the the asset management plan with all the the budget and the other plans as well I’m surprised it’s five years I’d like to see it a little bit sooner than that given the challenges that are out there I’m pleased that we’re going to receive further information on property by property before a council as well you know I do appreciate the conversation I think I won’t be supporting the referral back but I I do encourage the this conversation to to be more frequent than than it is it’s something I think we all need to understand and undertake as a committee of the whole to understand the LMCH properties a little bit more so thank you. Thank you Councillor Troce you’ve used your five minutes okay thank you so I’m looking for any final speakers on the referral before I call the question seeing no further speakers that will be open for you just reminding people this is on the referral posing the vote motion fails to to allow thank you so we’ve dealt with the referral we’re now back to the main motion which was moved by Councillor McAllister and seconded by Councillor Cuddy that reads that the report be received and be that the 2025 London Middlesex community housing asset management plan as appended to the staff report day of May 27th as Appendix A be approved in accordance with the Ontario regulation 58817 so on that item I’m looking for speakers. Councillor McAllister. Well I thank you through the chair as a the board member I’ll guess I’ll get this conversation rolling I’ll be very blunt with my comments I don’t think the the results are a surprise to anyone I think what you see is a reflection of you know past decisions in terms of the investments I’m proud to say this council has invested in housing but you are trying to course correct on decades of degradation what you would see maybe with other property portfolios is a staggered plan you wouldn’t necessarily see all buildings in the same sort of condition but this is a reflection of as I said past decisions much of community housing was built around the same time many of these properties built in the 1960s 1970s and so all these properties are falling into the same trap which is aging infrastructure. What I’ve seen is a concerted effort at the board level to address these but you are in a tree other situation multiple holes in a ship that you’re trying to plug. I think we’ve done the best with the limited resources we have we have seen improvements lately you are seeing a lot of efforts being put into regeneration what you’ve seen at Southdale is an acknowledgement those buildings have reached end of life we can use our land more wisely build up and create more units which ultimately I think is the goal of this council to try to get more affordable housing options online. I know a number of my colleagues will have questions happy that LMCH staff are here if you do have them and we’re also available obviously if you do have questions in the future if you want to speak with us myself Deputy Mayor Lewis sit on this board more than welcome to talk with Councillors but I do think we have done the best with the resources we have. Obviously this report shows a number of these properties are in poor condition but what you have before you is the numbers that we would take to elevate these properties to higher levels so I respectfully ask that my colleagues in their comments if those are the directions you want to go it requires the money to do so and as has been indicated in the previous conversation these are discussions that have to happen through the multi-year budget because they have ramifications in terms of the financial impacts leave my comments there but I’m happy to have the discussion today thank you. Thank you I have Councillor Ferreira next go ahead. Thank you Chair.

[2:12:59] To Councillor McAllister’s comments like he is exactly right this has been something that’s been decades in the making and you know we had our suspicions but reading this report it’s very clear that the board and staff from LMCH are driving a ship in some I guess significant times and you know I do I do recognize the work that you’ve done I do see this report has highlighted some areas where you know just an inability to really be proactive and be more reactive just because of the resources at your disposal and I understand that that makes things very challenging and I understand that at the board level that would make things as challenging as well so I do recognize that and I do think that there is a good job being done with the resources at your disposal so I am saying that at the same time looking at the different options and I did kind of allude to this in the referral motion I am concerned with the different scenarios because I see that both scenario B and scenario C and those are the ones to maintain a fair condition and the ones to maintain a current level of service leads us to in the end by 2043 a big disparity between what is good and what is very poor and even with these scenarios if we were to decide I would say I wouldn’t be happy with scenario two and scenario three because it does leave us with that big disparity and we’re then we’re going to find ourselves in a situation where we have around half of the units that are housing that we have in a good condition and then around half in a very poor condition and I’m just worried about the the situation that leaves us in and it’s just to compare it that with today if we were to look at today you know we have obviously over two-thirds considered in poor condition but that’s in poor condition and I know just from my communication with residents and constituents that there are concerns but if we were to see these two scenarios and this is shy of the good condition assessment that would have us in yes less for example scenario three less than two-thirds in a poor condition but you have over 25% in very poor condition so that makes that’s very concerning to me and the only scenario that I see here that would be sufficient would be scenario D or scenario four to have most of the properties within good condition so before moving to that the amount for scenario four is that’s the hundred million or is that the 300 million I remember it says it’s somewhere on the end of the report but just to confirm how much would be total the amount that we would have to invest here for scenario four. Sorry Mr. Sneed. Through the chair so scenario four that would be your level of service condition of good which is again the recommended scenario recommended by the board that would require an additional investment of a hundred and ten million dollars over a 10-year period. Thank you. Thank you for confirming that and I appreciate that that is the recommendation by the board and I feel like this is the only recommendation we should be considering because the other recommendations would have us put in significant amounts of money and we would still be in a situation where we have a very significant portion at the end of this graph that or this chart that we see here in very poor condition so I guess I’ll leave my comments there for now but these these are the things that I think we should be considering and I don’t see you know any other consideration other than scenario four that we should be really looking into because in the end you know people are living here and a few of us do have constituents who live in one of Middlesex community housing and I know that we get these inquiries all the time and I really think that the discussion I guess at the next budget update or if we’re talking about debt debt is going to be around how do we pay for that and like I said in the referral I really don’t want to see a property tax rate increase so we had to catch up with a lot of past decisions with this term and I understand that and I think we did a good job on that but we can’t continue that in the future and this is something this is kind of the big elephant in the room it seems at this point and maybe and I would just kind of throw this comment out there it’s kind of 30 seconds just throw this comment out there it’s not a question but a comment at what point do we engage other levels of government for funding assistance thank you you’re asking those questions sure I’ll put that as a question actually no that’s a comment for now we can talk about that later thank you looking for other speakers on this item Councillor Chaucer to the chair and with all due respect to the staff who compiled this report and you know reading through other asset management plans this is a pretty standard report and this is this is this is how they’re done there’s something very different about the assets of London Middlesex community housing then the other asset plans we’re looking at if you’re going to go to the library maybe you’ll be there a few hours a week you’re going to get on a bus maybe you’ll be on maybe you’ll be on the bus maybe a few hours a day the way the way I hear it if you’re going to go to the police station well hopefully you won’t be there very long and if you’re going to deal with the fire department hopefully it won’t be dealing with them very much if you want to go to the museum etc etc however these assets are different types of assets because there’s a human factor here people live in these units and I want to remind people that as a matter of provincial law the we don’t have we don’t have an option between fair poor or good the provincial law provincial statute which is a higher level of law than Oregs says the RTA section 20 a landlord is responsible for providing and maintaining a residential complex including the rental units in it in a good state of repair and fit for habitation and for complying with health safety and maintenance standards good it’s for law it has to be good if it’s not good it’s substandard and if it’s substandard there are a whole there are a whole variety of remedies under this act that tenants could avail themselves of some already have that could end up costing the agency money I guess my one question I have for legal staff is if the agency becomes liable to tenants for rent related claims where they have to pay money is the city also liable for that and that’s a direct question I will go to miss hovias if you don’t mind providing any information that you can provide in public session thank you and through you chair any advice with respect to liability would be inserted in camera or the subject of a confidential report thank you councillor generally speaking if you if you if you have a shareholder and a sole share if you have a sole shareholder relationship with an agency and the agency has obligations without getting into the details of of a particular case would the sole shareholder have any liability with respect to satisfying judgments without without without talking about any particular case can you answer that in open session hovias thank you through you chair i’m not prepared to provide any opinion on liability in public councillor would you be able to do that if we wanted to close session or would you want to look at that more thank you councillor so i’m understanding your question to be are we prepared to go in camera for this item and is is legal ready to provide any advice at this time or are you looking for a report back you’re asking i’m asking legal if she’s prepared to answer the question but would prefer to do it in closed session or whether she would like to look at it more before she answers the question because if it’s the latter i will i will ask for further information to come forward at council perhaps we should go into closed session at council but i think it’s an important question because when you look at section 20 okay thank you councillor do you want me to ask that question yes please thank you miss hovias thank you and through you if the councillor’s requesting specific information i would request the ability to report back at council confidentially and that’s fine thank you councillor so the answer has been provided to you and i’ll look for what you’d like to do next yes i’ll move on and it’s never my intention to put council on the spot and i will look forward to a report back at at council and i suspect we’ll go into closed session on that now the next thing i want to talk about is the fact that madam chair point of order i’m speaking to the motion thank you councillor i’ll hear your point of order uh just hearing councillor truss’s questions and comments about going into closed session at uh council procedurally believe a motion would still be required a council to want that information at council just procedurally yes that’s correct at council thank you okay councillor truss’s in which case i’ll move and this doesn’t count towards my five minutes because it’s a separate motion i’ll move that we request legal staff to provide us a report it can be oral it can be in writing uh for the council meeting to answer the question regarding the um the liability of uh the sole shareholder in these cases and i’d look for a second for that okay councillor uh you won’t look for a second i’ll look for a seconder if there’s a motion being moved um at this time my understanding is you’re asking for a report at a future meeting so that would be at the future meeting that you’re you’re asking for that information to come back we’ve heard that that’s possible that information could come forward at a future meeting that would be uh council deciding to to receive that information or you’re looking to move right now to receive that information at a further date yes the reason why i’m looking to do it now is mostly as a courtesy to legal staff so they know we’ll be looking at that for the council meeting and it won’t be coming up as a motion for the first time in a council meeting and we’ll be right back where we are now okay councillor so here’s what i’m hearing i’m hearing uh miss hovious is told this is she’ll be prepared to uh address that in closed session at uh council so that’s already known um so i don’t foresee a recommendation needed at this time to move in that direction as you can give that direction at council thank you very much and i will i will do that and i’ll i’ll i’ll move on my next concern with this asset management plan is that and i don’t know if this is something that could be put into asset management plans or whether it’s superfluous i would really appreciate seeing a comparative analysis between where where London Middlesex community housings infrastructure gap is and where other comparable jurisdictions sit with this and maybe this is a separate report the caps maybe this is a separate report someplace else 30 seconds but i i would like to see this information at the at some point and finally the last point i want to make is we’re not gonna we’re not going to revisit this asset management plan for five years so not only is that the end of this council but it’s pretty much the end of the next council too so uh this this is why i want to take a slower more deliberate approach with this asset management plan it’s why i’ll be voting against it here it’s why i’ll be voting against it at council and i really do appreciate the additional work that legal staff will do and i appreciate the additional work that allows your time to do to get us that property by property thank you looking for other speakers on this item may or more goodness next go ahead yes i want to make just a couple of comments on this um first i want to recognize that um when we talked about the infrastructure gap generally we talked about some decisions in the multi-year budget taking what was upwards of almost a billion dollars of infrastructure gap over 10 years down to about 700 million um so when you look at the LMCH’s infrastructure gap there’s lots of conclusions that you can jump to and i’ve heard through the chair respectfully to my colleagues a number of people saying there hasn’t been investments in the past or alluding to that um certainly if you’re going back decades yes there hasn’t been investments in new um stock of social housing um community-based housing in um a generation but i i would ask colleagues and and counselor hopkins although this because she served on the last uh council as did a number of others but i know counselor hopkins has been with me on a couple of councils we have started to make investments in this space over uh successive multi-year budgets including considering business cases in the 2020-2023 multi-year budget on LMCH infrastructure gap and co-investment with CMHC and support money for staffing and security and a regeneration of public housing investments of which a number of those uh decisions in the previous multi-year budget led to a partnership with CMHC a significant uh capital investment and loan as well as a significant forgivable portion of that loan to start some of the work on regenerating some of these spaces as well as the regeneration of the Southdale assets um so sometimes these things can take time when you’re talking about such a significant asset and i think all of us would like it to be fixed and up to perfect condition today but that is not the way that municipal assets work that is why we and every municipality has a infrastructure gap in almost every line of its operating business in our capital assets in some way is because it is there are not enough resources at the municipal level to solve all of these problems all at once so what i want to recognize is two things one for those who live in these assets i think all of council recognizes that it absolutely could be better i think we’ve talked about that around these horseshoes and i think we’re committed to doing that but i also want to recognize that we have made as a municipality significant investments in the previous multi-year budgets as well as the most the current one that we’re working through in attempting to address this and a hundred million dollars over 10 years is something that we can absolutely make progress towards 110 sorry mr. scents uh we can absolutely make progress towards but we have to consider those items so although the infrastructure gap uh are the capital asset management plan sorry um gets fully updated and and built from the ground up every five years that doesn’t mean you don’t make significant investments and consider sitting of an investments between those periods of time that will chip away at that total but there is not going to be a plan that is going to be bring that gap to zero in a short period of time it would require significant investment from other levels of government and those other levels of governments know that this is uh this is a challenge that many municipalities have and and just on the comparison towards other municipalities we also have to recognize that there are a number of funding envelopes both federal and provincially that can be used in a multitude of different ways and the city of London has decided to direct some of those provincial and federal programs in uh in in affordable housing spaces that are not necessarily directly aimed towards lemma mil six community housing other communities may have done that towards their housing corporation so the comparability of these across municipalities i would be cautious about because different municipalities are making different overall social and affordable housing decisions with assets in different ways and they’re choosing to allocate those and we’ll get very complex to try to compare those on a on an apples-to-apples comparison what i think we can focus on is that we have a general commitment to making this asset better i think we have two council representatives on this organization who are committed to uh echoing that voice and bringing ideas back to this council and i appreciate the work they’re doing and i appreciate that everybody would like it to go faster but i think that proving this plan today is a step towards recognizing the condition of the asset and opening up the door for us to consider the investments that we need to make to bring down the infrastructure gap at a reasonable pace given the other challenges that we have as a municipality and that there’s only so many dollars to go around um unless there’s going to be a significant um opening up of provincial and federal contributions of this space thank you i have deputy mayor lewis next thank you madam chair so through you if you’ll come in i’d like to ask a question of mr chisholm very quickly um can he indicate to us what the average uh rent income lmch receives from an odsp or ow recipient via the provincial um subsidy that they’re provided for shelter allowance thank you mr chisholm thank you and through the chair i can report that 53 percent of our tenants pay less than 250 dollars a month in rent um for a single member household on nteria works where we include the hydro they pay 115 dollars a month for a single member household on odsp where we pay the hydro they pay 139 a month around 40 percent of our households um are running can support programs with those limited uh rental rental coming in and that’s set through the housing services act so it’s not something if we raise the rent we don’t raise our revenue we just sort of create a false accounting uh so for us that’s one of our challenges is rental revenue for some of the households is very low thank you deputy mayor lewis and three madam chair just a brief follow-up to that uh how many years has that rate been sort of locked in uh by the province at this point in time mr chisholm thank you and through the chair um for the most part the makeup support uh rental rates have been locked in place since the devolution of housing in around 2002 so 23 years thank you councilor deputy mayor lewis thank you madam chair so that’s very important information for council to have i think nowhere in the private sector uh what a building be maintained in good uh or even fair condition uh where the rental income is is less than 250 dollars a month for roughly half the tenants a little bit less than that but the point stands um and has been frozen at that rate um for over two decades um so to go to councilor ferres question the the advocacy with the other levels of government needed to start 20 years ago um but it needs to continue today uh and i i know that i’ve had those conversations with mp fragile scattos i’m looking forward to having those with mr municipal affairs and housing uh mpp flack in the coming days as well um when you look at odsp and ow uh tenants in the private sector their shelter allowances uh come in uh around the 500 dollar mark um whereas at lmch uh they’re coming in uh in the hundred and some dollar mark uh depending on the the income subsidy that is not sustainable and and councilor mccallister’s point um was excellent um this is a ship with many holes but it’s a ship we inherited via provincial downloading with many holes already in it and without any funding from the province to maintain it so this is not a direct consequence of uh the city in in some ways although i would certainly agree with the comments about for a generation the city really failed to and not just London many municipalities failed to invest in the public housing that was downloaded to us by the province that said um property taxes didn’t build these buildings and property taxes alone are not going to fix these buildings uh so the advocacy piece uh with the other levels of government is really really going to be critical um i think it’s important and and i’m not saying this to put words in this mouth but i read the cbc article yesterday and mr chism referenced the fact that since 2020 uh lmch has actually been able to start to catch up on the backlog they’ve maintained the critical infrastructure and they’ve been able to start catching up because in that 2020 to 2023 municipal budget under mayor holder significant capital investments were made for lmch to start and that investment has continued uh under the current multi-year budget uh as steered by mayor lorian and and and stick handled by councilor plosas our budget chair so there is more funding going into lmch in terms of capital repairs and and upkeep of our our properties than there has been in frankly generations i would say um given that it’s been 2003 since the the rates have been frozen by the province so i think that’s very important for colleagues to keep in mind and and i also in that same cbc article uh you know recognize uh and i know we’ve had a communication from a tenant as well uh but i recognized a tenant who was saying you know in one example she said the outdoor water tap isn’t working and that’s been three years but said it’s not an emergency issue so i guess it’s kind of put on the back burner um and that’s true and it’s unfortunate that those outdoor taps aren’t always working but when it comes to prioritization between something like that or an elevator replacements um or an hvac system in a an eye residential identity residential building i think you can see that the triaging here is absolutely necessary and at the end of the day um i would really encourage colleagues to adopt this plan uh and move it forward i do want to take an opportunity as well uh through you madam chair if if mr chism hasn’t sat down yet or if he’s willing to stand back up to direct a couple of other questions to him uh and particularly in terms of critical infrastructure because our adult high-rise buildings are obviously in some of the poorest condition um how are we trending towards getting uh what is a piece of critical infrastructure the elevator cabs and the elevator shafts uh brought up to current um needs okay i’ll go to mr chism then you have 30 seconds and thank you and through the chair so we do have an investment in elevators at this time um for around six point four million dollars starting in uh 2023 by the end of 2026 and early in early 2027 we’ll replace 100 over elevator cabs and infrastructure that includes all the gear the interiors of the cabs and it updates the codes for these uh for accessibility and fire life safety that have changed over time so 100 of those cabs will be refurbished within the next two years deputy mary those thank you and madam chair if i can just direct one other quick one to mr chism in terms of our family units and i’m thinking this is particularly our townhouse units uh how are we doing in terms of replacing our aging furnaces and the door and window repairs in units with energy leaks and cold issues and temperature control tenant comfort there mr chism thank you and through the chair um over the last five years or less we have replaced 100 percent of the furnaces in our family townhouse sites uh within the next two years we’ll replace 100 percent of the hot water tanks and um the windows have been replaced um on a side-by-side basis in the last um 10 years including our pond mills and alan rush sites that were replaced last year thank you nine second step you mary thank you madam chair so really quickly we’re building the first new housing in lmch’s portfolio in 50 years we’ve taken on a couple of buildings that the city has asked us to in lady brook and baseline and sylvan street on top of maintaining our existing buildings and we’re making progress let’s stick with the plan let’s get these to good condition thank you thank you uh any additional speakers on this item looking around the horseshoe and online okay um seeing none i will look to open the vote on this item closing the vote motion carries 12 to 1 thank you that takes us to item 4.3 which is the notification of removal of a board of director from aldenhouse i’m looking for a mover and a seconder on this item counselor for reira counselor hopkins and any discussion okay seeing none i will open this item to vote pass the votes yes closing the vote motion carries 13 to 0 thank you i’ve not been made of wear of any additional business uh just looking in jimerson uh a couple people jumping the gun to adjournment i have two for motion to adjourn i have a counselor for reira and counselor van mier-bergen and with show of hands all in favor of a joining. Thank you, everyone. Have a great rest of your day.