Open Council

10th Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

Open Council

10th Meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee

June 9, 2025, at 1:00 PM

Original link

1.   Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest

That it BE NOTED that no pecuniary interests were disclosed.

2.   Consent

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That Items 2.1 to 2.8 BE APPROVED.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

2.1   2nd Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee

2025-05-22 ESACAC Report

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That the following actions be taken with respect to the 2nd Report of the Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee, from the meeting held on May 22, 2025:

a)    the following actions be taken with respect to The Corporation of the City of London review of the Urban Growth Boundary:

i)    an Urban Growth Boundary Working Group BE ESTABLISHED consisting of N. Karsch, J. Cordes, M.A. Hodge, A. Menon, B. Samuels and L. Skinner; and,

ii)    the Civic Administration BE REQUESTED to attend the June 26, 2025 Environmental Stewardship and Action Community Advisory Committee (ESACAC) meeting to provide an update to the ESACAC; and,

b)    clauses 1.1, 3.1, 5.1 and 5.2 BE RECEIVED.

Motion Passed

2.2   City of London Community Grants Program Grassroots, Innovation, and Capital Funding Allocations (2025)

2025-06-09 SR Community Grants Program Grassroots Innovation and Capital Funding Allocations 2025

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Neighbourhood and Community-Wide Services, the staff report dated June 9, 2025, with respect to the City of London Community Grants Program Grassroots, Innovation and Capital Funding Allocations (2025) BE RECEIVED. (2025-F11A)

Motion Passed

2.3   New Traffic Signals, Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers

2025-06-09 SR New Traffic Signals Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated June 9, 2025, related to New Traffic Signals, Pedestrian Signals and Pedestrian Crossovers:

a)    the installation of the following traffic signals BE APPROVED:

i)    Wharncliffe Road South at Morgan Avenue/Middleton Avenue

b)    the installation of the following pedestrian signals BE APPROVED:

i)    Fanshawe Park Road W at Foxwood Avenue;

ii)    Oxford Street E at Jim Aston Street;

iii)    Quebec Street at Queens Avenue;

iv)    Wellington Road at Tourist Information Centre;

v)    Highbury Avenue N at Townsend Drive;

c)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 24, 2025, for the purpose of amending the Traffic and Parking By-law (PS-114) related to the new pedestrian crossovers planned to be installed in 2025; and,

d)    the 2023 Pedestrian Crossover contract value with Maple City Electric BE INCREASED by $76,723.60 to $315,723.60 (excluding HST) in accordance with Section 20.3 (e) of the Procurement of Goods and Services Policy. (2025-T07)

Motion Passed

2.4   Contract Extension - Installation of Park Infrastructure (C21-054)

2025-06-09 SR Contract Extension - Installation of Park Infrastructure C21-054

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure and the Senior Manager, Purchasing and Supply, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated June 9, 2025, related to an eight-month contract extension for C21-054, Supply and Installation of Playgrounds, Pathways, Parking Lots and Site Amenities in City Parks:

a)    the request to extend existing City Contract C21-054 with Piccoli Construction Limited for an additional eight-months BE APPROVED, consistent with City of London Procurement Policy;

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

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

it being noted that the contract extension does not obligate the Corporation to purchase equipment and services from this contractor and a Source of Financing is not required in addition to previous approvals. (2025-R04)

Motion Passed

2.5   Blue Box Transition Final Year - Part A Update

2025-06-09 SR Blue Box Transition Final Year

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Environment and Infrastructure, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated June 9, 2025, related to the Blue Box Transition Final Year Part A Update:

a)    the Part A Update (Blue Box Transition Final Year), as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE RECEIVED; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to provide a Part B Update as soon as answers to the majority of remaining Blue Box transition items are available from Circular Materials, a Producer Responsibility Organization and/or separate reports if individual items require a Council decision. (2025-E07)

Motion Passed

2.6   London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan Update - 2024 Progress Report

2025-06-09 SR London Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service 2024 Progress Report - Part 1

2025-06-09 SR London Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service 2024 Progress Report - Part 2

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report dated June 9, 2025, with respect to the London-Middlesex Child Care and Early Years Service System Plan Update 2024 Progress Report, BE RECEIVED. (2025-S01)

Motion Passed

2.7   Housing Stability for All Plan - 2024 Update

2025-06-09 SR Housing Stability Plan for All Plan 2024 Update - Part 1

2025-06-09 SR Housing Stability Plan for All Plan 2024 Update - Part 2

2025-06-09 SR Housing Stability Plan for All Plan 2024 Update - Part 3

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, and with the concurrence of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Economic Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated June 9, 2025, related to the Housing Stability for All Plan 2024 Update:

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to submit the Housing Stability for All Plan (HSAP) 2024 Update to the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing as the annual update to the local homeless prevention and housing plan, in accordance with the Housing Services Act, 2011 (HSA);

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to circulate this report to community partners and interest holders, agencies, and community groups including, but not limited to, Middlesex County, the London Homeless Coalition and on the City of London website; and,

c)    the above-noted staff report BE RECEIVED. (2025-S11)

Motion Passed

2.7.a   (ADDED) Revised Appendix B

2025-06-09 SR Housing Stability for All Plan 2024 Update - Revised Appendix B

2.8   Life Stabilization Purchase of Service Agreements - Single Source Procurement - SS-2025-112

2025-06-09 SR Life Stabilization Purchase of Service Agreements SS-2025-112 - Part 1

2025-06-09 SR Life Stabilization Purchase of Service Agreements SS-2025-112 - Part 2

Moved by P. Cuddy

Seconded by H. McAlister

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the following actions be taken with respect to the staff report, dated June 9, 2025, related to Life Stabilization Purchase of Service Agreements Single Source Procurement – SS-2025-112:

a)    a Single Source Procurement (SS-2025-112) BE APPROVED at a total estimated cost of up to $185,478 (excluding HST) for the period of June 1, 2025, to June 30, 2027, with the opportunity to extend for additional four one (1) year terms, to support Goodwill Industries with the implementation and administration of the Lived Experience Community Table (LECT) initiative, as per the Corporation of the City of London Procurement Policy Section 14.4 d) and e);

b)    the proposed by-law, as appended to the above-noted staff report, BE INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on June 24, 2025, to:

i)    approve the Agreement with Goodwill Industries, Ontario Great Lakes, for the implementation and administration of a Lived Experience Community Table initiative, substantially in the form appended to the above-noted by-law; and,

ii)    authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute the above-noted Agreement;

c)    the Civic Administration BE AUTHORIZED to undertake all administrative acts which are necessary in relation to this project; and,

d)    the approval given, herein, BE CONDITIONAL upon the Corporation entering into a Purchase of Service Agreement with the selected provider. (2025-S04)

Motion Passed

2.9   Updated Highly Supportive Housing Plan Cost Breakdown Schedule

2025-06-09 SR Updated Highly Supportive Housing Estimated Cost Breakdown

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That, on the recommendation of the Deputy City Manager, Social and Health Development, the staff report dated June 9, 2025 with respect to the Updated Highly Supportive Housing Plan Cost Breakdown Schedule, BE RECEIVED; it being noted that a communication from Councillor S. Stevenson, dated June 5, 2025, with respect to this matter, was received. (2025-S11)

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the staff report dated June 9, 2025 with respect to the Updated Highly Supportive Housing Plan Cost Breakdown Schedule BE REFERRRED to the July 14, 2025 meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee in order to provide cost breakdowns or draft operational budgets for the approved Highly Supportive Housing funding amounts of $1,335,331 for 2024 and 2025 and $1,372,449 for 2025 and 2026.

Motion Failed (2 to 3)

3.   Scheduled Items

None.

4.   Items for Direction

4.1   Communication - City of London’s Municipal Rent Assistance Program (MRAP) - Councillor D. Ferreira

2025-06-09 Sub. Portable Housing Benefits - Atlohsa - D. Ferreira

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That the following actions be taken with respect to the communication, dated June 2, 2025, from Councillor D. Ferreira, related to the City of London’s Municipal Rent Assistance Program (MRAP):

a)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to allocate up to 30% of the 2025 municipal rent supplement increase (approved at $1 million annually) to Atlohsa Family Healing Services for the administration of portable housing benefits supporting Indigenous individuals experiencing homelessness, to be delivered through Atlohsa’s existing Housing First and Rapid Rehousing programs; and,

b)    the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to engage with Indigenous-led housing providers, including but not limited to, Ontario Aboriginal Housing Services (OAHS) and the Native Inter-Tribal Housing Co-op, and Atlohsa Family Healing Services with the intent to support expanded partner-led delivery of MRAP portable housing benefits beginning in 2026, and to develop appropriate administrative pathways for such partnerships;

it being noted that a communication from Councillor D. Ferreira, dated June 1, 2025, and a communication from A. Jibb, R. Joseph, J. Manidokaa Bradley and E. Gafney-Ladd, Atlohsa, related to this matter, were received. (2025-S11/C09/S14)

Motion Passed (4 to 1)

Additional Votes:

Moved by D. Ferreira

Seconded by S. Trosow

That pursuant to section 31.6 of the Council Procedure By-law, Councillor D. Ferreira BE PERMITTED to speak an additional 1 minute with respect to this matter.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by H. McAlister

Seconded by D. Ferreira

That the Committee recess at this time, for 5 minutes.

Motion Passed

The Committee recesses at 2:47 PM and reconvenes at 2:52 PM.

4.2   Communication - Request for Update on 2021 Reaching Home - Councillor S. Stevenson

2025-06-09 Sub. Request for Update on 2021 Reaching Home - S. Stevenson

That it BE NOTED that the Community and Protective Services Committee received communications from Councillor S. Stevenson, dated June 1, 2025 and June 5, 2025, with respect to a Request for an Update on 2021 Reaching Home.

Additional Votes:

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the delegation request from C. Lazenby, Unity Project, as appended to the Added Agenda, BE APPROVED to be heard at this meeting.

Motion Passed (5 to 0)

Moved by J. Pribil

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the Civic Administration BE DIRECTED to prepare an update for the August 11, 2025 meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee regarding the status of the three 2021 Reaching Home capital projects, including the status of associated operational commitments and funding.

Motion Failed (0 to 5)

5.   Deferred Matters/Additional Business

None.

6.   Adjournment

Moved by S. Trosow

Seconded by P. Cuddy

That the meeting BE ADJOURNED.

Motion Passed

The meeting adjourned at 3:44 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, 59 minutes)

[5:18] All right, everybody. I will be calling the 10th meeting of the community and protective services committee to order. I’d like to welcome everybody in council chambers and online and in the gallery, members of committee and visiting members. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anishnabek, Woodnashoni, Lina Peiwok, and Anawandred. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations, Métis and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact cpsc@london.ca or dial 519-661-2489 extension 2-4-2-5. Just to recognize the members of committee, I have counselor, Heavenly McAllister, ward 1 to my right, counselor Peter Cuddy, ward 3 to my right, counselor Jerry Pribble, ward 5 to my right, and counselor Sam Trussell, ward 6 to my right, and visiting members, I have counselor Susan Stevenson, ward 4 also to my right, and counselor Corinne Ramen, ward 7 to my right, and I believe that is it, nobody online. I will first begin with any disclosures of interest, so looking to committee for any. Okay, I have consent items 2.1 through 2.9, I have a pull request for 2.9, so I’m just going to look at members of committee for any other items to be pulled. Okay, looking for a motion to move 2.1 through to 2.8, so we did 2.9, moved by counselor Cuddy, seconded by counselor McAllister. All right, I will begin a speakers list. Sorry counselor, I see that you’re ready before I am. All right, counselor McAllister, go ahead. Thank you through the chair. My question is with 2.3. Appreciate all the additions for the traffic signals, pedestrian signals, pedestrian crossovers.

[18:03] My question is obviously specific from my ward. It’s good to see a bunch off of Hamilton Road. Appreciate that with East Street, Glenwood. My question, though, is with Manitoulin and Montebello. Also appreciate that it was called the report, the issues we’ve had with it, but I know it’s part of the 2025 construction schedule, but I’m hoping that this can be done before the start of school because that’s usually when I get all my calls in terms of the crossovers not being operational, so I’m just hoping maybe staff can confirm the construction schedule for Manitoulin and Montebello. Thank you counselor before I go to staff. I’m just going to recognize counselor Plaza who is online and now I’ll go to staff for that question. Through the chair, thank you for the question. We’re getting an early start on many of these work is underway. We’re planned to implement as many as possible in the summer before school. With the comments you’ve made, counselor will do our best. It’s a lot of work. There’s a lot of locations and the program does require the fall to finish them all, but we’ll see what we can do about completing that one Montebello before Labor Day. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. McCrae, counselor. Thank you and through you. Appreciate the answer. Yeah, I don’t know if we can do any prioritization, but this one is directly across from a school. So I hope that those ones we can try to get to first if possible. I know obviously my priority for all crosswalks, but that one in particular I know is well used and parents are very concerned about it. So I just wanted to call that one out and I’ll leave it there. Thank you for the answers. Thank you, counselor.

[19:45] Other members? Counselor, purple, go ahead. Thank you, student chair to the staff and my question. They have to do this 2.7. And first of all, I do want to say when I went through the housing stability for all plan, I think there are some really very positive numbers figures. And I just want to highlight some and also get your feedback. As we know, prevention divergence for individuals is very crucial and we have some really positive numbers. And I was wondering, in for example, 1.38 number of support workers in the housing stability system, we are surprised the 50s last year 61, sorry, 3 years ago 61 last year 79.

[20:31] If you can please comment this and kind of the success rate that we are kind of improving on this number and kind of what’s the secret of the success. Thank you, counselor. I will go to Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The increases is predominantly due to an additional investment council made into our indigenous led organizations, the Gewitash Cod plan, as well as some of the onboarding of the hubs programs with the housing stability workers that are working at those locations, as well as our housing identification program. As part of the work that our teams have been doing to consolidate payments for the housing allowances, that program has been able to expand their provision of housing support workers. So that really makes up the difference from last year.

[21:23] Thank you, Mr. Cooper, counselor. Thank you for that. Excuse me. And 1.48 number of individuals and families diverted from homelessness. Again, if you look at this, the year 5 year average is 45.49 percent. And again, last two years, 23, 24, great numbers over 50 percent. Again, if I can have the same feedback as previous question, please. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, I think the diversion piece is our team’s in the increase of relationships we’re building in community, as well as the expansion of our coordinated access system. So there’s been a quite a number of new agencies onboarded into that system, which has allowed for a better collaboration and therefore better outcomes for individuals who are at risk of experiencing homelessness.

[22:15] Thank you, counselor. Thank you for that. I’m just finishing. Sorry. 1.4 B and that’s implemented eviction and prevention programs. And again, we are very successful. And again, last three years ago, 1500 last year, 1661. If I can please have a feedback for that one. Thank you. Thank you, counselor. I’ll go back to you, staff. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, I think this one with our housing stability table, you know, the work to ensure folks are not evicted has been something our teams working with municipal housing and development teams have really prioritized.

[23:09] And so I think the solutions that we’re able to implement to support people to not be evicted, get into those situations and engage with individuals earlier on in their in this in the situation has helped prevent a number of those evictions. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for that. No question, but I’m just going to comment on 2.2 leveraging funding available from all levels of government. Thank you for this one. And thank you for the previous three as well, because I think those figures are very positive and certainly great for our community.

[23:45] So thank you and to your teams. And I have three more specific questions. And on page 75, 2.1, a number of affordable housing and modest market units, 716, which is again a very positive number. Is that list available or would it be able or available to us to see? Thank you. Thank you, Council. Go to Mr. Pelberg. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, absolutely, don’t have it with me today, but we can certainly circulate prior to Council. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you for that. And again, thank you for number 716.

[24:20] Page 76, 2.1, see number of affordable secondary units created 0 in 2024. Redesigned program has opened in 2022. Still no positive effect. Are we playing to redesign this program to maximize our opportunities? Thank you, Mr. Pelberg. Through you, Mr. Chair, absolutely. In January, February 20, 2025, we brought forward the ARU, the additional residential unit CIP program. In that program, we redesigned four different incentives, brought four different incentives and loan forward to be able to leverage and bring new secondary units into the city.

[25:01] We’re also working on programs where we purpose-built secondary units as part of new developments as well. And we’ve seen some of our major developers in town doing that as well. We’re starting also work on developing a marketing campaign to get some things out in the social media, into our community center, so that the work gets out on these programs. The goal is to spend the money that we’ve been given through the housing accelerator fund on these types of programs to create that gentle density and build more units in residential neighborhoods. Thank you, Councillor.

[25:36] Thank you for that. And last question on page 92, 4.3, the number of individuals with lift experience engaged was 501, which is, again, very great positive number. Can you describe to me kind of the type of engagement or how these individuals were used in the organizations and listed in the right column? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair, the work that we’re doing to continuously engage individuals with experience, you’ll see as well on item 2.8, the work that Life Stabilization Team is doing as well to support feedback from individuals who use our services is a continual process.

[26:20] We really rely on our relationships with our London Homeless Coalition and folks with lived and living experience and access and attend and engage in that group. We also worked through our other programs. So the Women’s Advisory Group through the street level women at risk program, as well as we did a point in time count back in October of 2024, which was also engagement with individuals with lived experience. So our Community Advisory Board through our London Homeless Coalition at this point also has lived and lived experience representatives on that table.

[26:56] So that’s sort of a breakdown of the areas that we see lived and lived and experience engagement with our teams. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. I’m very happy to hear that. And as I said, that’s a great number, but I just hope that these individuals, because I’m not attending these meetings, that these individuals truly have a 100% opportunity to make their input to the initiatives and their voices are heard. But thank you very much for all the answers. I really think besides the affordable secondary units, all those numbers or I questioned, they are actually a very positive news and thank you for that and to your teams.

[27:33] Thank you, Councillor. I got Councillor Troso next. Thank you. One question through the chair. On page 65, 2.3 create more housing stock, municipal housing and industrial development team continuing to work to increase affordable housing stock while also protecting and addressing capital repair needs of existing units. And I want to focus on that and the specific question I want to ask is, does that include units that are in need of repairs that are under the jurisdiction of LMCH?

[28:13] Thank you, Councillor. I will go to Mr. Kalber. Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair. So the way that we address the capital repairs is through a program called the Canadian Ontario Housing Initiative, which is Kochi. And the province, through the feds, they provide us last year, just about $5 million for us to work with and be able to support our nonprofits within the entire service manager area. Last year we provided funding out into the nonprofits in the county as well as in London, but we also provided about a million dollars to LMCH for them to prioritize some of the properties in their portfolio as well.

[28:56] So yes, we are supporting both LMCH and the rest of our 63 nonprofits. Thank you, Councillor. Would it be possible to get a further breakdown in terms of that money that was spent in LMCH in terms of what they did with it and what the results were? Thank you, Mr. Kalber. Through you, Mr. Chair, yeah, we can take a look to see where the agreements are at and what the status of the work is, and we can provide them back to committee. Thank you, Councillor. Go comment. While I’m grateful that this money is being spread around, including LMCH, when we look at the magnitude of the problem under the asset management plan, much, much more is going to have to be done.

[29:39] And I know today it’s not on the agenda, but it’s just something I just want to red flag is something that I think I’m going to be talking about more. And I’ll be asking you more questions when I meet with you. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Other members, visiting members? Councillor Stevenson. Thank you. I just have a question on 2.7. So on page 66, 2.4, it talks about the housing identification program and its expansion into serving households with high support needs.

[30:14] I just wondered through you to staff if we could get some information on that program. And, you know, are these the same kind of high acuity needs that are also being met through the highly supportive housing or is this something different? Go to staff without them. Sorry, through you, Mr. Chair, can you just clarify again the action metrics? I thought I heard 2.7, but I’m not seeing that on here. Councillor? 2.7 is the housing stability for all plan. And on page 66 under 2.4, there’s provide housing supports.

[30:51] And it says continued expansion of the housing identification plan. Thank you. Go ahead. In 3, Mr. Chair, similar to my answer to Councillor Pribble was as part of the work from Council approval in 2022 to align our housing allowance programs. That’s the continued expansion we speak about is supporting individuals through the collaboration and reduced administration burden, to be honest, for the organizations to administer housing allowances, but also then to implement the additional portable benefits that Council approved is through the most as part of the most recent multi-year budget.

[31:41] It’s a there’s a mix of that work being done internally by our staff, but also externally through contract with the housing identification program. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. And so that housing identification program and its expansion into serving households with high support needs. I could just have a bit more information on that. Yes, thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, it speaks specifically to the collaboration and the sort of the onboarding of our board is not right there word, but the work to get to bring those programs together and our housing first program.

[32:18] So the hit program is working closely with our housing first programs who historically would have had supplements or benefits to administer. And so bringing them into the fold of the housing identification program helps reduce that administrative burden and allows for that expansion of the hit program to support higher needs individuals. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. So just to follow up, what organizations would be those service providers and what kind of supports are being provided there? Thank you.

[32:50] Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don’t have the names of all those organizations off the top of my head. We can provide something before Council. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Is that the same with the supports offered? Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair, yes, we can get the name of the organizations and the specific supports each housing first agency offers as per their contract. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me. Any other members, visiting members? Councillor, ramen, go ahead.

[33:27] Thank you, and through you, I just had some questions for the new traffic signal, pedestrian signal system and crossovers. Thank you again, and similar to Councillor McAllister, these are really important additions in our neighborhoods and on our streets. In my ward, in particular, there’s some new areas where we will be seeing some identified pedestrian crossovers and then the IPSs as well. So with respect to the crossovers and where they’re located, they are also within school zones, of which, you know, in that area around 1,200 kids roughly are walking or could be walking in some cases to school. So definitely, if it’s possible to prioritize before the school year, I know that would be very much appreciated. I’m just wondering a little bit about the IPS at Fanshawe Park Road, the one that’s going to connect into Snake Creek, if staff can comment on that, I feel like that is going to be a very big change in behavior for drivers on Fanshawe Park Road. How will we mitigate that?

[34:40] Thank you, Councillor. I will go to Mr. McCrae, Mr. McCrae. I’ll go ahead. Through the chair, whenever a new set of signals is implemented, there are measures taken to warn drivers, you know, the most prominent of which is the the news that’s sort of starburst sign, but the installation takes a while. Drivers will, you know, be quite apparent and, you know, a pedestrian signal to a driver on the London Major Road is fully visible and, you know, we haven’t experienced too many concerns with respect to drivers being unaware of the new devices in the past. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. And for a new signal like that when it’s going in, how or who would be notified of that change, again, because it is such a large intersection and the way that that intersections configured, people already have a lot of difficulty maneuvering in the area. I’m just wondering how, would it just be the residence of Foxwood that would be notified or how that larger notification would go? Thank you, Councillor. Before I go to Mr.

[35:59] McRae, I just want to recognize Deputy Mayor Lewis’s online, so I’ll go to Mr. McRae for the answer. For new installations such as traffic signals, there’s a variety of methods that are undertaken. There are letters that go out locally, but there’s also, you know, inclusion in our annual reporting of our capital programs. There’s often PSAs and website postings, so depending on the nature of the project, this can be tailored to raise awareness. Thank you, Councillor.

[36:43] Thank you for that. I just wanted to make note of one in my ward that has been a particular interest in this is Sunningdale Road West at Metallands as well as Sunningdale Road West at Village Walk Boulevard. So with the current redesign that’s going on in the area, I want to thank staff for addressing some of the concerns at Sunningdale and Metallands by doing this temporary signal IPS at the location while we wait for their expansion of that area in the intersection. However, in this case, one of the things that I was concerned about is we, under the notes, says B, warrant should be met for justification infrastructure consistency by either A or B, and B is both the volume and the delay warrants measures at least 80%. I appreciate the flexibility with staff on this part of the warrant. I do know that that area is slated for more development, so having this in place now would allow people to cross the street safely. I hear almost at least a couple of times a week from residents in the area that really want to see some sort of signal up here. So appreciate that work that’s being done. I just had one last question and that is related to bicycle signals. I’m just wondering if any of these same intersections will be getting bicycle signals at the same time that they’re getting pedestrian signals. Thank you, Councillor.

[38:14] I will go to Mr McRae. I have to confirm all the specific designs. I am aware of one that has cycling features to it, and that is Quebec and Queen’s Avenue, and that it is an encouraged cycling route as an alternative to Dundas Street, and so it will have cycling features. The others may or may not depend on what cycling facilities connect to them. Councillor. Thank you. I did note that in the report, it said somewhere that sometimes we do the bicycle signals at the same time as the other signals. The costs that are included in the operating cost, they state the recommended or the cost for traffic and pedestrian signal, that the pedestrian and the traffic signal together is $67,200. The annual cost to maintain the recommended new PXOs is 35.3. I’m just wondering if a cycling signal is included, if there’s an additional cost.

[39:23] Thank you. I will go to Mr McRae. Through the chair, the increased cost with respect to a cycling signal for most of these locations, there would be an incremental cost, but it would be very minor, and it would just be one small additional component to the overall electrical and hardware installation at the location. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. If between now and council, if we can hear back, if there are going to be any of these same intersections that are receiving any bicycle upgrades as well, specifically, I’m wondering around the Foxwood Fanshawe.

[40:12] I’m just wondering what the intersection, what that area will look like. Will it have the green paint across, or will it have some very clear marking that will show what this crossing will look like, and whether or not we’ll end up with signalization there, just so that, again, I can make sure I message it out correctly to residents. Thank you. Okay. We’ll confirm that prior to council. Thank you. Council, Pribble, you have one minute 48. Please go ahead.

[40:49] Thank you, Mr. Chair, to the staff question, because I just thought of one idea, or one thing that would cross my mind when it says new traffic signals. Currently, when we have for our BRT or RT, we do have the lanes, and we added the turning lights for these buses. And currently, there is, again, when they have the green light, all four sides, southeast northwest, they have a red light. But we do have a green light, even though the bus is not there. And I just wanted to ask you if this potentially we are going to look into some cameras, if there is a bus that will have registered, if it’s not, that the green light will not be turned on. If there is any plan for this, thank you.

[41:32] Thank you, Councillor. Mr. McRae. Yes, certainly. We design our traffic signals to operate as intelligently as possible, and that relies on detection. And detection for the transit lanes is certainly part of that. There has been a staged rollout on the downtown loop, for example, as the detection has been as come online. And so that is a feature, yes. And it will be implemented, if not immediately, in a phase matter, at particular locations, given the constraints of the infrastructure rollout.

[42:12] Thank you, Councillor. Thank you very much. No more questions? Thank you. Okay, visiting members, or sorry, members, first, visiting members. Okay, I’m going to make some comments, conciliatory ones. First, I’d like to recognize the community review panel and the volunteers from staff that staff that it’s a good item in report 2.2, and I’m just going to name off every single person in that report really quick. Just thanks to Jane Baradini, Violeta Havenan, Terry Sue King, Clara, Madrinas, Sarah Middleton, Mandy OBM, Bunmo, Victor, who — oh, I’m going to watch that one. Victor, who are Google — sorry, and Kristin Powell. I just want to recognize the staff members who put in the extra time for that extra work. I see one is in here today. I just want to recognize for that work. And before I move on to end the consent items, I do want to go to Mr. Mathers for another announcement. So, please go ahead. Through the chair, I’d just like to highlight that today is our Director of Municipal Compliance and Orest Catollux last committee meeting. So, I’d like to take a moment to recognize and celebrate Orest’s remarkable career as your prayers retire this week with an incredible 38 years of dedicated service to the city of London. Throughout his career, Orest has been more than just a leader. He’s been a pillar of integrity, professionalism, and compassion. His knowledge, work ethic, have shaped our organization in countless ways, from planning and compliance to crisis response, including his leadership during COVID-19, our recent renovation — renovation by-law changes, and many homecoming events. But beyond his impressive accomplishments, Orest has been most — known most for his empathy, for always seeing the human side of municipal work, and for his mentorship, which has inspired and guided so many of us throughout our careers.

[44:08] He is — he has a way of building trust, offering support, and quietly leading with strength and kindness. Orest, thank you for everything that you’ve given our community to our corporation and to each of us. On behalf of the housing and community growth area, and all your colleagues across the city, we wish you a retirement filled with joy, new adventures, and all the things that bring you happiness. Congratulations, and all the best, Orest. In the Senate committee, we can clap for this one. Thank you very much. Oh, sorry. Let’s go to Mr. Catollux first, and then I see Councillor Cudi’s got his hand up. So I just want to go to Mr. Catollux really quick. Go ahead.

[44:56] Thank you very much, and I’ll say this one more time through the chair. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank all of SLT current and past for all the support over the years. Thanks to all the internal partners, all the external partners, fire, police, public health, our contractors that work on property maintenance, work on animal control. Many of the elected officials that I’ve worked very closely with over the last almost 40 years on getting things done. Almost all, I’d like to thank our staff. Our staff work, some work business hours, some work a six day shift, some work 24/7 shifts. And every day, every hour of every day, they take actions to make London a better place, to live, to work, to play. And in the words of Gourd Downey, an inch an hour, two feet a day. That’s music reference, because we are our music city. So this is the last day that I’ll be sitting on this side of the table, but I won’t be leaving this room because I’ll be sitting up there because I’ve accepted a position with a non-profit housing group. So my background is in planning, and as I say, once a planner, always a planner.

[46:27] One thing I will be giving up, though, is my cell number this Friday. So if the music’s too loud, you’ll have to call someone else. Thank you again. Bottom of my heart, it’s been a great career in the City of London. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gertola. I do have Councilor Cady. He wanted to say something. So go ahead. Thank you, Chair, and through you. And I don’t mean for this to go on, but I don’t want to just dovetail off what Mr. Mather said. And I don’t think there’s anybody in this room around this table who’s hasn’t been affected impacted by the work you’ve done, or we all have. And I remember, and I’ll be brief, but I remember coming to you with the idea of the renovation, by-law, motion, and having no idea how to move it forward. And you said, Councilor, leave with me. And within a day, you were back to me, and we had something together, and we worked through other mayors and through other municipalities, and we put together what I think is one of the best in the country. And for me, personally, I just thank you for the work you’ve done. Thank you for the work you’ve done for 38 years for all of us. And thank you for the for the work you’ve done for this Council in the past three years. And I’m very, very grateful to to know you and I’m grateful to have you as a friend. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Okay, that’s it for a consensus. Oh, I have some more hands. Councillor Perbault, go ahead.

[48:09] I take 15 seconds. Thank you for our dedication and those years. It’s virtually all the years you have given to our city is greatly appreciated. And especially in these times, these years, it’s almost unheard of for anyone to give so much to a corporation. Thank you very much. Okay. Briefly, Councillor Stevenson. Briefly, well, if we’re going to do this since here, thanks. 38 years to our city, and we look forward to seeing you in the gallery. Thanks for making a difference. Thank you, Councillor. Anybody else? Councillor, my daughter’s birthday is today, so please. I know. And I won’t take up for your daughter’s birthday, I promise. Just because I feel like everyone on committee has said something at some point, just briefly, or thank you for all your work. I have the reputation, fortunately, I’ve been referred to as the demo guy, and I know, or you’ve helped me get that reputation, but sometimes you’ve got to tear down some of these buildings to build new things. So I appreciate all the work and guidance you’ve given me in this term. I know you’ve probably helped a lot of Councillors over the years, but I appreciate your efforts, and like all my colleagues have all said, I think the city is better for the 38 years, so thank you.

[49:22] Thank you, Councillor. Let’s call the question. More here. Deputy Mayor, okay. Briefly, please. Yep. I won’t repeat what everyone else has said, but I do want to say, you know, someone who’s had the privilege of working alongside Mr. Patola for two terms now. I thank you is not adequate from your guidance in helping Councillors steer away from crossing the line on those provincial MOUs where enforcement matters are happening to making sure that the concerns of our constituents are getting addressed, and of course, leading the great team that you have in municipal compliance. You are going to be a difficult leader to replace, but I want to wish you all the best in your retirement, Mr. Patola, and please do stay in touch in your new role with the nonprofit housing work. We will welcome hearing from you on that side of things that I know you’ll contribute just as much to London that way. But again, thanks or not enough, but it’s what I can offer today and wishing you all the best in the next chapter.

[50:32] Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Thank you to everyone and see you on the bike paths. Thank you, Mr. Patola. Okay. I’m going to say that’s it for comments or questions, so I’m going to call the question. Supposing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, that moves us on to schedule items. I have none, and then we will move on to items for direction. I have two on the agenda, and then one pulled from 2.9, so I am going to begin with my motion, as a matter of fact. So I’m going to have to hand the chair over to the Vice Chair, Councillor McAllister. Okay, I have the chair. That’s okay. I won’t give any time we’re going, and then you can start your remarks. Just one more. Thank you, Councillor. So I’ve moved this motion because it operationalizes the commitments the city has already made through several initiatives, and that’s for funding rent supplements targeted to indigenous residents.

[51:37] It is a motion that fits within the city’s strategic plan. That’s the reconciliation. Sorry, Councillor, before you go too far. Do you want to move your motion and have a second? That’s correct. So I will move that. Actually, let me read that motion, and I will move right now. I’m looking for a seconder. Do you want to read your motion? I can read it, but I do believe I have a seconder and Councillor Trussell, but I will read the motion out. So it’s that the following actions be taken with respect to the communication dated June 2nd from myself related to the city of London’s municipal rent assistance program, and that’s A, that civic administration be directed to allocate up to 30% of the 2025 municipal rent supplement increase, which is an approved, which was approved at $1 million annually to at Loser family healing services for the administration of portable housing benefits, supporting indigenous individuals experiencing homelessness to be delivered through at Loser’s existing housing first and rapid rehousing programs. And B, that civic administration be directed to engage with indigenous led housing providers, including but not limited to Ontario Aboriginal housing services and the native intertribal housing co-op and at Loser family healing services with the intent to support expanded partner led delivery of the municipal rent assistance program portable housing benefits beginning in 2026 and to develop appropriate administrative pathways for such partnerships. And it being noted, communication came for myself and from at Loser. So I’ll put that on the floor. Okay, thank you. And Councillor Trussell indicated that he will second. So if you want to explain rationale, go ahead and I won’t hold that time against you. So thank you. Thank you, Councillor. I appreciate that. I won’t repeat that part, but I was just making the point that this is a motion that ties in with several initiatives and objectives that the City of London is already signed up for. Specifically, it is fits within our strategic plan under the reconciliation equity accessibility and inclusion. And that is under outcome 1.1 established and strengthened relationships with local First Nations, urban indigenous communities and indigenous serving organizations and to support indigenous led initiatives.

[53:59] It also fits under the housing and homelessness strategic area of focus in our strat plan, specifically under that outcome of 1.1 to address the specific needs of equity denied groups and prioritize housing initiatives that are affordable. And it also fits within our municipal rent assistance program framework as well to increase the use of portable benefits and utilize partner led delivery. And I also wanted to point out that it fits within our reconciliation plan, specifically strategy 4.6, creating new housing partnerships and ensuring indigenous needs are reflected in all city housing programs. So the reason that you see the motion the way it is today is because that LOSA is already ready to deliver these benefits. As you saw in the motion, they have expertise in the housing first and rapid rehousing programs and the administration of portable benefits through that. And their best position to build trust and provide culturally safe housing supports. So that’s the reason I’m bringing this motion through because LOSA is basically ready to administer these portable benefits now. It fits within our municipal rent assistance program. It fits within our strategic plan. I know Council also submitted some information via email to point out that it fits in other initiatives as well. I couldn’t capture them all, but I’m looking for your support for this motion and I will end my comments there.

[55:28] Okay. Thank you, Councilor. You’re just two minutes. I’m looking for others who want to speak. Okay. Go ahead, Councilor Trozano. Thank you very much through presiding officer or the chair, whoever. I just want to say I’m very pleased to second this and I’m grateful to Council for I were for bringing this forward so quickly. I think right after we passed our Reconciliation plan, I think it’s very appropriate that we begin right now to put some of those pledges, some of those ideas that we have in that plan to work. I did want to call everybody’s attention to a document entitled Indigenous led approaches to coordinated access in London. Final report.

[56:15] This was referred to in the letter we received and it’s also something that has been, many of us have read it in different levels of detail. I just want to say that this is a very important report, so I did want to make sure it was circulated to this table and in advance of Council. There’s a lot of very useful research in this report and it’s nothing new. This has been a situation for many, many years and the sad situation is that throughout Canada and particularly in London, Indigenous people are dramatically overrepresented among adults, youths and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Despite only making up 5% of Canada’s total population, Indigenous people make up more than 30% of those experienced homelessness.

[57:14] Now, this report uses a variety of different metrics and measures to show that this is indeed the case in London. In fact, if you go back and read many of the documents that have been tabled with us over the years, this is nothing new. This is not a surprise. I think it’s very appropriate to be doing this 30%. Personally, I’m skeptical that that might be an under-reporting, but I’m happy with that for now. It says up to. There’s a lot of discretion here. Now, the other element of this that I think is very important, which is reflected in our documentation and in this report, is that it’s imperative that these efforts be Indigenous-led, just imperative.

[58:02] There are a number of reasons for that given in the report dealing with historical conditions. I certainly don’t have the time to go through all of those, but I do recommend this report. Also, the more I go through this report, the more I find that there are some very, very good citations in here of associated literature that really helps us a lot understanding this problem. So, I think this motion is appropriate. I think it’s necessary. And if I haven’t used all my time, I’ll reserve a moment or two after I hear what my colleagues are saying. But I’m urging you to vote for this vote for this today. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councillor. You’ve used three minutes. Deputy Mayor Lewis, you have your hand up. Go ahead. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, or Mr. Presiding Officer, through you, while I appreciate the intent of this, I have some questions and concerns. And so, through you, I guess my first question to staff is when we’re talking about allocating 30% of a 2025 budget, we’re already in June of 2025.

[59:13] I’d like staff to comment on this portable benefit. What is already allocated and committed. And if we’re talking about a direction of 30% now, what is the impact on other organizations or other service providers who may need to access this portable benefit to assist other demographics? Okay. Go ahead, staff. No, any? Thank you. And through you, Mr. Presiding Officer, I appreciate the question from the Deputy Mayor. And it was part of the consideration when we were having some of these, these dialogues, both with the Councillor and with with Elosa.

[59:53] Our work, and as we’ve seen over the last number of years, a number of the portable housing developments that we’ve got under construction, obviously, have been subject to a number of delays. And so, there is some opportunity to utilize this funding in 2025, while those delays and those other developments come forward in 2026 with the additional funding that will come forward in 2026 from the Council and YB. So, staff did review our existing commitments, and we are comfortable with being able to allocate up to the $300,000 this year for Elosa and then look at other opportunities next year with the other providers.

[1:00:34] Follow-up, Deputy Mayor? Yes. So, well, that is helpful to know. And I recognize that there are some Indigenous partnerships happening. I believe Elm Street is one of them, and that’s coming along well now, although it may have been a little slow to start. But the other concern that I have here, I appreciate what Mr. Cooper is saying that it can fit, but I also wonder how this fits with our RFP policy. And this is directing specifically to at Elosa, which may be the best organization, but without having gone out to the best of my knowledge, the city having gone out to seek somebody to do this work, it seems to me like we’re directing a sole source procurement without following our procurement policies. And I’m wondering if staff can provide some context or comment on how this fits with our procurement policies.

[1:01:37] Mr. Cooper, do you get that one again? Or who does that go to? Go ahead. Thank you. And for you, Mr. Chair, or Mr. presiding officer, so this would be considered a single source. It is supporting a program that we already fund with some additional resources to help with the rent stability piece. At Elosa is funded to operate a rent stability program, rapid rehousing, as well as a housing first program. And they’ve expressed challenges with accessing units in our market without a portable benefit. And so to enhance that existing contract and existing work, this was brought forward as a single source to continue that project that was approved previously through the Give A Tosh Cut implementation plan.

[1:02:33] In addition for the 2026 piece, we would look to work with our purchasing partners to see if there is any provisions in our procurement policy, whether it’s sole source or single source or how we can support a number of the reconciliation policies that focus on procuring and working with Indigenous led agencies. Hello, Dr. Mayor. Thank you for that. So I will also reference, and I’m going to reference the report here that Councillor Truss out had circulated. And I will say that I’ve only had a chance to look at it briefly. I do appreciate him circulating that around, and I will take a look at it in more detail before Council. But I am concerned a little bit with some of the presentation of certain numbers and and how comparables are not being used in a like to like manner. And so for example, on page seven of the report that was circulated, there’s the 2024 high fist binding list, identifying 17.5% of Indigenous people on the by name list. There was a reference to the point in time count showing 30%. But the point in time count is a 2021 point in time count that’s being referenced. So there’s three years difference, notably COVID years in 2022 in between there, where I think we had a lot of moving parts and changing numbers. And so I’m concerned that the report that’s being cited as the justification for moving forward on this is is comparing some apples to oranges, rather than apples to apples.

[1:04:23] And the other piece that I’m concerned about on page 13 of that report, it speaks to having 735 Indigenous participants on the by name list, half of them spent more than 679 days on the by name list, while half of non Indigenous participants spent fewer than 512 days, but it doesn’t speak to the half that spent longer than 512 days. So you’re comparing two different metrics here, actually, and they make the same statement about 2023 and 2024. We’re comparing a number who are on longer than a certain number of period of time, versus a number who are on less than a certain period of time, rather than how many people are over a certain number of days in both categories.

[1:05:09] So to me, there’s a bit of a problem in the data here, not to say that it may not actually pan out. The comparators are not the same, and so I’m having a hard time matching that up. And I’m wondering, again, if our staff can speak to any data that they can share around comparators that are a little bit more like to like with regard to by name list versus point time count percentages, and versus the overall amount of time that that anyone in any demographic is spending on the by name list. Okay, I’ll call the staff just letting you know, Deputy Mary, you’ve got 30 seconds left. Go ahead, Mr. Cooper.

[1:05:52] Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. I appreciate the comments. I’m not going to speak too much to the the utmost report, but just to say that, foundationally, those the number of folks that identify as indigenous that actually report into our system has been a work in progress. A lot of folks do not feel safe, they’re not feel comfortable identifying as indigenous coming into our system for a variety of reasons. So we work with our indigenous led partners a few years ago to try and help improve our collection accuracy through our intake process on our by name list. We work quite closely with that LOSA on how to frame and ask the question for an individual to be able to self-identify as indigenous. We have through a number of point in time counts, recognize that which are supported by that LOSA in many cases that the population is around 30 percent of folks that are identifies indigenous that are experiencing homelessness. The real variance is because of people’s unwillingness or inability to self-identify through our HIFAS collection system. So we know that is a work in progress. We appreciate the numbers are a bit different than what we see in our consultations with our indigenous led partners in community and something we strive to work for towards. But we do feel that it that number in the HIFAS database is definitely underrepresented of the actual numbers in our community.

[1:07:26] Okay, Debbie, Mary, 30 seconds, go ahead. I’m going to be really quick and try to fit in as much as I can in my 30 seconds here. Very quick question to Mr. Cooper. Do we have a more recent point in time count with an indigenous percentage after 2021? I’ll go ahead, Mr. Cooper, when you’re ready. Thank you, Mr. President. Obviously, yes, we have our point in time count from 2024. I don’t have the exact numbers off the top of my head, but it is something we could look to have brought back for council. Okay, go ahead, Deputy Mayor. Great. So thank you really quickly. I will say, as I said, I appreciate the intent. I feel like we might be a little bit of the car to head of the force here. Even when we extended and looked at arcade moving to a year round model, we asked them to come back with a business case. We don’t have that here for at Losa.

[1:08:19] So I have some concerns about this. I’m going to take the opportunity prior to council to ask a few more questions. Okay, you’re good. I appreciate. I appreciate the event. You’re done. Sorry, I can’t cut you off, but thank you. Okay, so I did have Council approval legs. I’m sorry. I didn’t know if you put your hand up prior. I’m sorry. I’m trying to do committee members first, but Council approval and then Council for area. You also had your hand up. Go ahead. Thank you. So what’s in front of us? There’s no doubt that it’s in accordance and aligned with our strategic plan and even with the final report that was distributed by Council Trousal in terms of the what they call the arch. But I do have a question and it was partially already answered through the question for the period. Mayor Lewis, but I want to ask you in terms of the we would treat it as a single source. But are there other organizations in London that already you have an experience and potentially would like to do this and potentially also for indigenous that if we were to go ahead with this and approve this, that they would come back and say you as a city, you never gave us this opportunity and you made a decision to go with 300,000 with one organization. So if I can get a feedback or some level of comfort for that, please.

[1:09:41] Whenever you’re ready, go ahead, Mr. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. President and officer and through you. So the key point here is that LOSA is already under contract with our organization to deliver a number of housing programs. And so this is a single source under our procurement provision and it is a contract amendment to provide that additional funding for at LOSA. It is consistent with programs that they’re already delivering. They do, like I mentioned before, deliver housing support programs and this will help ensure the affordability piece that people run into in our community will be met. We have had conversations through Mr. Felberg’s area with Ontario Aboriginal Housing Services for future potential opportunities for contracts for delivering portable benefits and we continue to work with the Ontario Aboriginal Housing nonprofit, a federal non-profit group around opportunities for our Canada Ontario Housing Benefit. We don’t have contracts with either of those organizations, but as part of council direction, we do work with our Canada Ontario Housing Benefit allocation that comes in from the province each year.

[1:10:50] And so those organizations do have an opportunity to access those benefits when they’re available. Okay, follow up, Councillor. Thank you and for this one, for this motion, I certainly would prefer to have a staff report attached to it. You know, the one that would, for example, state or if there was a way $300,000, how many individuals are we or how many individuals in plants are to be helped? What are the average amounts and things like that? I don’t know if it’s something because I remember when we did it with Salvation Army with Housing Stability Bank, if I remember correctly, and they, for example, came back and they asked us through the budget plan to increase this amount, which we have not approved. Is there any way for us to do certain kind of matrix and find out, again, 300,000, how far it’s going to take us, how many individuals will be helped? And I do realize that they did do state on the second page. We have managed the Ontario Aboriginal Housing Services, Ontario Priorities Housing Initiative Operating Funding Program, but kind of the levels of success, how many individuals had helped? Is there anything that, again, can increase the level of comfort for me to make such decision? Okay, go ahead, Mr.

[1:12:09] Cooper. Thank you, and to you, Mr. Presiding, officers, as part of the work in the conversations we did have with that, Lois, so we do look at a potential benefit in accordance with our current MRAP or municipal rental assistance program. We probably can support around 33 individuals through this program. We look at individuals who may have an opportunity for shelter allowance, of Ontario, Ontario Works Shelter allowance, which is just over $390 per month, and then add in potential tenant insurance and utility support. You work into about a $750 per month benefit. This all still needs to be clarified and confirmed with the organization. This was just forecasting that I had done as part of our work with at LOSA in the accordance and consistent with some of the other work we do with other providers who are providing portable benefits.

[1:13:01] Okay, thank you, follow-up, Councillor. Very quick last question. If this was supported by staff report, would it be the recommendation to go ahead with this initiative? Mr. Dickens, go ahead. Through you, Mr. Presiding, officer, it’s a difficult question to ask because we didn’t have a staff report. This is a motion being brought forward by a member of the committee. That being said, as has been highlighted, this aligns with a lot of council priorities, the Reconciliac Action Plan, the Gewitosh Code Plan, both things that are endorsed by Council.

[1:13:42] It also aligns with our efforts at the civic administration side of trying to support Indigenous-led initiatives and Indigenous-led housing opportunities. As the Indigenous service provider network is able to grow capacity, it provides for more opportunity to connect with those that are more hesitant, as Mr. Cooper said, to connect with workers or agencies that look like me, for example. And so this is good news that we have a Council-approved MYP budget increase for the portable benefits. And it’s essentially just directing that already budgeted approved amount to be allocated in one way to this group, noting that we should continue to look beyond both in 2025 and 2026 with other Indigenous housing providers. So, in short, this aligns with a lot of your priorities, and we take the direction of council. Okay, and has your questions, Councillor?

[1:14:49] Thank you. No more questions for now, but I’ll leave some time for the end. Thank you. Okay, and you have three minutes left. Councillor Ferrell, I know you had your hand up, but Councillor Cady, also committee member, hasn’t spoken yet, so I’ll go to him. Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer. A question through to staff, you know, and with all due respect to the to the mover of the motion, there is no staff recommendation, as you just said, Mr. Dickens. There is no business case, yet here we are asked today in committee to make a decision on this. And I don’t find that we have enough information to do that, despite the fact that what Councillor Trossa was saying is, what I received, I guess, an hour before committee started.

[1:15:31] You know, this is something that I might support at council, but today I won’t. And again, respectfully to the mover of the motion, I appreciate what you’ve done. I just don’t think we have enough information. I don’t think any councilor here has enough information to work on today. I think it’s very limited. Excuse me, I’m done. Okay, sorry, there was a point of order raised, so Councillor Trossa? No? Okay. Councillor Cudi, did you want to finish your comments? Okay. So, Councillor Ferri, you would be next on the list.

[1:16:10] Thank you, Presiding Officer. Well, I do hope that we can get some support for this one, because it has to make it to committee. You know, some of the questions that were raised, I guess the first one with the procurement policy. I reached out to the City Treasurer’s Office, and I asked, are there any issues here when it comes to our procurement of goods and services perspective? And I have been told, no, there is no issues with that. We have done motions like this before in the past, which could turn out to be a single source procurement, and we’re okay to do that. I would ask you to reach out to the City Treasurer as well. Sorry, they weren’t able to be here to discuss that. I would also point out, with the trust component, that is the main thing with this motion. How do we administer benefits to specific communities?

[1:16:54] We also leverage community organizations that are tied in deeply than we are, just like, as Mr. Dickens pointed out, the trust factor could be a barrier when it comes to providing portable benefits. So, this is why you see that. On the flip side, that reduces resources on our staff side to administer those portable benefits, and it does provide, at LOSA, to administer those benefits, and it’s also something along the lines of, at LOSA has the experience to do that. I would point out, also, the question was asked, are there other partner-led organizations that provide these benefits? Yes, there are. Street-level women at risk provides portable benefits, youth opportunities unlimited, or administers portable benefits from us, and St. Leonard’s community service also does the same thing. So, this would be balancing just kind of the way we distribute these type of benefits as well. There was another point. Those would be, I guess, most of the questions that I wanted to answer actually, but I would say this is something that is targeted for individuals who are overrepresented when it comes to our data. I understand there’s some questions in the data, but at LOSA has informed me that they do have a list of individuals that are waiting and depending on these benefits. So, I would ask you, we need to have this motion be approved at this committee, because if it doesn’t make it at this committee, then we are going to have a bunch of people who are going to be unable to get supports when it comes to their housing. So, I’m trying to answer all the questions that were raised on that, and if there’s any more, if I have any extra time, I’ll try to answer those as well. Okay, thank you, Councillor. You have about 30 seconds left. So, just to let you know, Councillor ramen, you haven’t spoken yet. Councillor Stevenson, Councillor Trozzo, did you want to speak? Do you remember a committee? Go there first. Okay, right, Councillor ramen. Go ahead. Thank you and through you. Thanks for letting me speak at committee today. Thanks for bringing this forward. I appreciate the opportunity to have the discussion and to learn more about what’s in front of us in this letter. I appreciate that the letter was a starting point, and alongside that the letter from Emlosa was a starting point for this discussion. As we’ve heard already, more information is coming forward in terms of what that breakdown is in terms of the numbers. So, I just want to be clear that I have the information correct. So, if you could help me through you, I’m sorry, to staff just to clarify that I have my information correct. So, in the letter, it states that there are about 105 folks that are already on the participant list at Emlosa. And in the letter, it states that it would be the existing participants that would benefit from the program, not new participants. Just want to clarify.

[1:19:44] Mr. Cooper, go ahead. Thank you. And through the chair, I’m not going to dispute what LOSA has submitted in their letter. Obviously, as we operationalize any amendment, should council look to approve it, we would land those specific details and understand how LOSA would be looking to administer those benefits, how the existing supports are funded, and sort of land into how these benefits can help them achieve the goals of their givotosh con plan. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. So, if it was of those 105, 33 would be provided with the portable benefit of that portable benefit. Typically, it’s around $390 plus the cost of tenant insurance on a monthly basis, plus electricity support. Could I just ask why electricity support doesn’t come through the low-income energy assistance program or other programs? Why it comes through this funding mechanism?

[1:20:51] Mr. Cooper. Thank you. And through you, Mr. Presiding Officer, a couple points of clarification, the 33 was based on my calculation on averages of some of the existing supplements. So, I can’t say for certain it would be 133 of the 107. That is something we will need to work out with that LOSA to understand what the current benefit is, what they’re currently supporting individuals with and what that cost is. So, if you are dealing with existing supplement or an existing program, there could be a reduced amount because that person has some tenure in their residential situation and the benefit could be less. So, the second point of clarification was the benefit tops up and we make an assumption on the benefit topping up on individual shelter allowance on interior works. That’s the lowest shelter allowance opportunity for an individual for income of $390. So, our benefit in a private market or a nonprofit market unit helps bridge the difference.

[1:21:49] Tenant insurance, we’ve added and utilities we’ve added because that’s what we heard through our consultation with community when we brought the report forward to align all of our programs into the MRAP back in, I want to say, fall of 2022 or 2023. We were hearing quite loud and clear from folks that utilities have been a challenge, utilities, choice of food, affordability in general were a challenge for folks and so, for the ability for the program to help support individuals with insurance to ensure tenant insurance as well as utilities that was what we were hearing most from our community. Okay, follow up, Councillor?

[1:22:34] Thank you. Yeah, I can see that if we’re looking at from 2022 to 2022 to 2023, there were some changes within the expectation of OEB and how tenants should be, low-income tenants should be supported when it comes to their energy provision and I know that London Hydro mentioned that their annual report as well. Just with respect to the allocation, so just rough figures, you were looking at 33 individuals, the 750 for a total of 297,000, which is of the 300,000, so there are no administrative costs on that? Go ahead, Ms. Cooper.

[1:23:17] Thank you, Mr. Rosati and Officer. As noted, the agencies do operate existing housing programs, so administration is expected to be accommodated in those programs. At low, so also received an additional top up of our municipal funding through multi-year budget, so those details would be confirmed with the organization on contract amendment execution, but we would expect it would look to administer within their existing housing support programs. Follow up, Councillor? Thank you. And then for reporting back, what do we envision to be the mechanism to report back on the use of the 300,000 and is it for a 12-month cycle? Looks like it, but I just want to confirm.

[1:24:08] Go ahead, Ms. Cooper. Thank you, Mr. Rosati and Officer. The reporting back is likely good. Again, we have to determine we have two options. We can do a quarterly report back or we could do a monthly report back, and so we’ve been finding that should organizations provide their monthly will register of individuals that they’re supporting in each unit that helps us keep track of more real-time people entering and people exiting the program for a better understanding of how impactful our current program is in community. That would be staff’s choice, but again, we’ll work with the provider to understand the administrative burden that reporting can bring on some of these types of programs, and so whether it moves from a quarterly to a monthly, we’ll be working with the organization, but at a minimum, it’ll be quarterly reporting back to city staff. Can’t remember the second half of your question, my apologies. Annualized.

[1:25:04] Mr. Rosati and Officer, the multi-year budget commitment is annualized, so this money should when at Loser, if at Loser operationalizes it, it’ll be carried over into the following year as well, so that $300,000 will be ongoing, and then 2026, we add that extra million dollars to the program, which would then be ongoing from 2026 and beyond, and same for 2027. Follow up, Councillor. Thank you, so just to clarify, so if we commit to the $300,000 now, we’re committing to it as ongoing $300,000. Go ahead, Mr. Rosati. Thank you, Mr. President. Officer, yes, that is the intent of the portable benefit. Folks do need that benefit in likely perpetuity or in until their housing affordability situation changes, so it isn’t just a one-time, one-and-done type program. It is an ongoing commitment that helps support individuals with that housing affordability for the longer term. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. I really appreciate the opportunity to have a chance to ask my questions here at your committee. It’s very helpful to get that information in that perspective. Overall, I think that this has a lot of value. The challenge for me is I want to see a little bit more in terms of the reporting structure and how we would measure this against other systems, have a little bit more questions related to low-income energy supplement and how that feeds into the 390 to 750 range of that dollar figure so that we can maximize the support that we can get to people. I would love to see more than 33 people supported.

[1:26:47] I would love to see new people added onto the list, not just from the 105 already participating. That was kind of my understanding of how we were going to be using this extra money, so still some more questions in between, but I will be happy to do those offline. Thank you, Councillor. You’ve used 330 of your time. Councillor Stevenson, you wanted to go? Thank you. I appreciate the question so far. I have a couple of follow-ups given what’s been asked. It was mentioned that why are you and so Warren St. Leonard’s already do something like this through you. To staff, do we, have we given them allocated amounts as well similar to what we’re discussing here?

[1:27:34] Go ahead, Mr. Cooper. Thank you. Through you, Mr. Presided Officer, those organizations have existing contracts with the City of London that do provide for an allocation of portable benefits for each program. I don’t have the exact numbers of each benefit or what the allocation is or the average benefit paid by each program off the top of my head, but we can look to endeavor to get that information. Should it be beneficial before Council? Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. That would be great. There was also a mention of some urgency that people were waiting and if this didn’t go forward, that people wouldn’t have access to benefits. Is that true or would they not still be able to access them through the regular channel?

[1:28:21] Hi, Mr. Cooper. We came through you, Mr. Presiding Officer. We do align our pandemic housing benefit as well with with a number of vulnerable populations and needing populations, which includes indigenous. So we have not received our 2025-2026 allocation yet from the provincial government for the Canada and Ontario housing benefits. So things are on a pause there, which could be created in a bit of a backlog. We also are hit program or housing identification program also does support matching of individuals who are coordinate access systems. So should an individual be identifying as indigenous and be matched to support program through our housing identification program, they could receive benefit. This program, this work would be specific to an indigenous led type model, which is a decisions lined with the organization versus with administration of the city of London. Go ahead, Councillor.

[1:29:23] Thank you. Just another follow-up then so that I can understand this a bit better. But these people who are in need of the benefits, do they not have access through the current channels as well? Like, I just found it surprised that there would be people waiting that if we didn’t make this decision that people wouldn’t have access to that. So I just wanted clarity, like, is it not where the money is right now? If we were not to do this, is it not accessible to all? Thank you. Through you, Mr. Presenting Officer, I don’t know the situation of all 107 individuals on the list. That is something that we have to work through with the program. We know they had identified a need. They had identified an ability to administer and support indigenous individuals to an indigenous led model. I don’t know the situation. We do have some unallocated dollars for this year due to construction delays for a number of other developments that are coming on board. So that’s how this was able to be accommodated into our existing portable benefit budget. So we’re working with our providers at MHID to onboard those existing units as quickly as possible. And an example of some units for this year that we’ve onboarded would have been the work at Zaren. Yeah, that Zaren’s coming on. Sorry. I was going to say the YOU and Jones Place was also another option. It’s some YOU benefits, but also some of our portable housing benefits through the city run programs.

[1:31:08] I think what the question is, is the financial file exists and without this motion could those that are being supported by LOSA, not just access to the way it is. And hypothetically, that could be true. Absolutely. I think those portable benefits are overprescribed as high demand. What this motion would do is it would formalize the allocation. It would basically formalize direct that a portion of that allocation be earmarked for and be set aside for or directed to the services that LOSA provides for Indigenous homelessness. What has always been the case is that you have stated some degree of over representation and yet the services or benefits are sort of on par and they don’t necessarily reflect that over representation. So while staff could receive requests from all organizations and those benefits would be assigned and plan for and allocated as they come in, this essentially would take a step and say, “We’re going to earmark, allocate, direct a certain portion of this to align with other initiatives,” and then staff are still administering the remaining amount based on whatever other contract agreement we have with other organizations for youth and so on. So this really is a, without it, absolutely people could probably try to access it. That’s going to be a large pool of people perhaps looking to access it.

[1:32:48] This would just formalize that allocation. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. I appreciate the clarity there. I think this has been an interesting discussion. I agree with some of my colleagues that I think I would like to see a staff report or a business case and hear more about this before making a big decision like this. So the same as my colleagues, I’ll be doing a bit more, but I don’t see myself supporting it at this point. It’d be nice to send it back and get that report with the details. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Councillor. You’ve used 136. Looking forward. Councillor Trussell, you had your hand up before. Did you want to go?

[1:33:27] I see a certain sense of urgency here through the chair that I don’t think is coming through. And while it’s quite right that access to these funds, to these services could be had, could be had through our current institutional framework. What’s being missed here, and I think I want to try to emphasize this, is there is a cultural and sociological disconnect between the operational frameworks that we put into place and the world view, the other ways of thinking that have come down through this community. And there is a gap here. There’s a gap here. And the letter that we actually received from at Lauscha really gets to that without even reading the details in the report about the disconnection that people feel towards dealing with the system that has not treated them well historically. And we can’t fix that right now. But what we can fix is at least with respect to this level of benefit funding, we can be more culturally sensitive, and we can engage in an indigenous led, indigenous led, which is a very significant part of what we’re doing here, operation. And I understand a lot of the concerns and questions that my colleagues are raising, but we have to use a different lens. We can’t use the same lens that we’re used to using that we routinely use. You talk about business cases, staff reports. Counselor Ferreira, I’ve been very satisfied that he didn’t just put this forward on a whim. And he was very careful to discuss this with staff and to consult the research and to consult the reports. So I think we would be making a huge mistake if we did not grab this opportunity on the heels of a reconciliation statement and do this now. We’re talking about $300,000. There can be course correction later on. And I believe that there is a lot of opportunity for some of our other non-profit partners to be brought in to the framework of how London goes about providing RGI in affordable housing. And this is just one little piece of it. But I think in order to establish this is about establishing trust, and we have to do this. Thank you.

[1:36:25] Okay. Thank you. So, Counselor Ferreira, you only have 30 seconds left. Do you want to go last with your closing comments? Counselor Stevens and I had her hand up again. So, okay. You got 30 seconds. All right. I have 30 seconds. Hopefully that runs slow. So, Counselor Trussel’s comments were kind of exactly where I was. This is, you know, we talk about how many people we can house obviously wanted more and how do we administer that and what that means for us. But we have areas that we’ve all agreed to at this council where we’re going to take real meaningful concrete actions when it comes to this type of work. We’ve all agreed on it. This is exactly that. This is what I brought to the table. I have done a lot of diligence in this work. We’ve been working on this for two months. And I will also say, you know, I guess simply put from what Counselor Trussel just articulated, this is about- You’re at time. Okay. Well, this is just about trust. Like, honestly- No, I got to be fair. Let’s add to your time. Can I get, can I get one more minute? Okay. So, additional minute. Okay. Count seconded by Counselor Trussel. So, additional one minute if the clerks can bring that up. Thanks. Closing the vote. The motion carries five to zero. Okay, Counselor, you’ve got additional minute. Remember, it’s your daughter’s birthday. So, I understand that. But this is what I’m doing right now. Thank you, colleagues, for giving me that minute. So, what I’m trying to say is this is about, like, the gap that we’re talking about is a gap of trust, a gap of trust in the institutional framework that we’re operating in. And we are obviously trying to correct that as we go forward. But in the meantime, there is a need out there for people who need this housing. So, this is a way to not only give us a little bit of runway to build that trust, but to also provide these funds to at LOSA who is able to administer these who do not have the issues with trust. So, if we want to be assisting people on the streets and putting people into homes and helping people, especially with the initiatives that we’d agree to, the strategic objectives that we agreed to, this is the way to go forward with it. I feel like all the questions were great questions here. They’ve all been answered very well. If there’s more information that needs to be brought back, I would ask you to reach out to staff or reach out to me. I did ask all of these questions already that have been raised. I wasn’t able to put them into my preamble just for the length of it. But I do ask for your support because this is a big action.

[1:39:19] This is something that people actually need. And it’s something that they’re a huge list of. That’s a minute for people out there. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Stevenson, you still have about 330 left. Go ahead. Thanks. Just a few follow up questions. You know, I hear my colleagues addressing a need. But the thing is we, and there’s mentioned that this is an alignment with a strategic plan, a reconciliation, we’ve got a whole of community system response. I’m just not understanding why something like this would be coming from a counselor as a motion and not have a staff report or have a recommendation from the bodies. Like it’s just not, if you spent two months working on it, it feels like one more month to have that staff report to do it through that methodology rather than it be something that we’re just bringing forward without a staff report. I don’t know if staff have any comments on that.

[1:40:27] It’s like, was this something that was being discussed already? Has there been any discussion of this that was coming forward? And we’re just getting ahead of it here. Go ahead, Mr. Dickinson. Three years from presiding officer. I’ll tread lately on opinions on council motions that come forward without staff reports. That does happen quite frequently. Sorry to expand. We had not proposed a staff report. It was not part of our reporting cycle that we have planned out for the next several months. Go ahead, Councilor. Thank you. So, like I said, I, we have a lot of organizations and bodies looking after this. We have several organizations that were told or already have this. I’m assuming there was a reason why it wasn’t done then. And if it needed to be corrected, staff would bring a report forward. So, I’m still in that place of, you know, there’s a way to do this where we can have the business case and the staff report and do our due diligence here. So, okay. Thank you. You used another minute 30s. Uh, and Kate, Councilor, go ahead. You still have about a minute left. Ideally, we would go through a certain reporting cycle with a staff report. We are the elected council of this city. And it is our ability.

[1:41:58] It’s our obligation to look after these policy matters. And I’m, I’m feeling a little bit defensive here that you got these counselors who are putting things on the table without going through staff first. Well, I don’t think that’s what happened here. And I, and I think, uh, counselors come forward with the wrong prerogatives all the time. And I think it’s okay. That’s why we were elected. And that’s why we have, uh, if a counselor puts something forward, there are 14 other people on this body to say, you know, that’s a bad idea. Um, plus, uh, staff would probably pipe in and say it’s a bad idea. I don’t hear staff saying this is a bad idea. As a matter of fact, I hear staff saying this is an alignment with where we’re going. Um, anyway, I’m done. Thank you.

[1:42:49] It’s hard to cut people off when, uh, start the mic. Okay. So everyone has spoken. Okay. Thank you. Um, just one final question. Uh, just as it relates to the report that we’ve been referencing, um, and I’m just wondering, um, when staff or if staff are planning to come back to us, sorry, um, should be more specific. The indigenous led approaches to coordinated access in London, uh, Ontario final report and the policy document that’s also provided, um, in this conversation, I’m just wondering if staff are coming back to us based on the municipal recommendations with a plan for those recommendations, because it feels as though we’re accepting recommendation one, but I want to know whether or not there is a plan to enact the rest of the recommendations, because a lot of them also have some costs in them. And I’m just wondering, is this the highest priority seeing that was policy recommendation one? I’m assuming so, but I just want to make sure from a prioritization perspective that, uh, at Losa also sees this from a prioritization perspective as being the number one, uh, thing for us to consider based on the fact that the others have costs as well. Go ahead, Steph. Um, thank you. And through you, Mr. Presiding Officer, um, staff, uh, don’t have a timeframe on bringing your report back. There are always studies that are happening, and this is a study by one of our close community partners. Um, but staff are taking a look at the breadth and depth of it to understand what those impacts are, which ones possibly could be adopt and, uh, do so through our ability, uh, delegate authority. Uh, if it’s a, uh, procedural change, or if it’s a, uh, an intake matter, um, we’re going through to see which ones have, um, upfront one time, uh, cost impacts, low dollar, high dollar, uh, and which ones would potentially have ongoing, uh, costs that, uh, we may not be in a position of support unless we wanted to bring it forward to counsel. So we didn’t envision bringing it forward to counsel to say, here it is, you debate which ones you like and don’t like. Um, the community has received this. There, there are many things in this report that go beyond the scope of the municipality.

[1:45:17] Um, so our teams who work closely with that, those are continuing to go through this report to identify, you know, there’s some things we can do already that are, uh, pretty simple, and there are things that we are committing to under, uh, different city strategies, uh, like the reconciliation plan as well. So I don’t have a timeline for you on bringing a report back if counsel would like a report back on, on this study, then, uh, we’ll follow your direction. Councilor, you have about 30 seconds as well. Awesome to wrap up. I’d say this. Um, I’m not on the committee, so I can’t vote. Um, I would really appreciate an amendment to the, uh, the motion today asking for a report back on the final report, uh, including prioritization of the recommendations and those, uh, that are costed out. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Councilor cutting. Thank you. And, uh, I’ll move, uh, the motion that counselor, uh, Robin suggested and I’m looking for a sec. Sorry, I won’t be looking for a second or you will be.

[1:46:20] Thank you. Thank you. I think Councilor Brville has seconded. Okay. So this is an amendment to the motion. So if the clerks, uh, I don’t know if you caught that, or if Councilor Roman can, uh, give you the language there, uh, through you. So I just said that, um, I’d be looking for a report back from staff, uh, on the final report, and I’m not going to put a timeline on it because I do know that they need some time to go through it. And there was there a lot of recommendations that are, um, not just, uh, within one priority area, but many and in different, captured in different reports. Um, so with that outline of prioritization of the recommendations, um, and any costs associated.

[1:47:00] Uh, point of order. Go ahead, Councillor. Point of order. Um, if, if the intention of the amendment is to substitute that instead of what’s on the floor, I would think it’s contrary and we would have to vote what’s on the floor down first. If it’s to, we can pass this today, but let’s also get a staff report on the rest of it. I think that’s consistent. So could I get a, um, clarification on that with the clerk see that as contrary or complimentary? Well, it depends what the mover means as a fair, you know, beside the clerk. So you want to comment, but I do believe Councillor trust as a point of order. So have you ruled on that yet? I was looking for clarification from the clerks on the language. Thank you through the chair of the intent isn’t to affect the current recommendation and for it to be a direction to civic administration to bring back a report with respect to the prioritizations of the other recommendations. It’s not contrary in my opinion.

[1:48:48] Okay. So with that in mind, I’m going to rule that it’s not contrary looking for further information. So I’ve dispensed with that. So we are back on the amended motion. So we can start discussion on that noting that everyone except myself has spoken on this. So, you know, you can start your five minutes again, but this is just on the amendment now just waiting for the amendment there through the presiding officer. The motion that I have drafted is that the motion be amended to add a new part to read as follows. The civic administration be directed to bring a report to a future meeting of the caps with respect to prioritization of the recommendations in the atlosa report. And Councillor Truso. Yes, could it say be further directed because we have a part A, we have a part B. If part C is intended to be consistent with part A, I really hate to be doing this. But if part C is intended to be consistent with part A and part B, it would be better if it said and further. We would be passing part A and part B with part C. Is it okay? No, thank you. I like the way it reads. So I do also run around Councillor Truso. You can amend an amendment if you do want to have it amended again. I only go down two levels though. I think I’m just going to vote against the amendment because I think with what I just heard, which I think would have clarified it in a way that is consistent with the intention of what’s been put forward and what we’ve been discussing for the last what is it our now? I think I’m just going to vote no on the amendment. Certainly we’ve got a ruling and it’s not contrary. So A would still be enacted. But I just don’t understand why we just can’t try to be more cooperative here. And it really speaks to why we have such a problem of trust. Okay, Mr. Dickens, do you want to say something?

[1:52:34] Okay, go ahead. My apologies, Mr. Presiding Officer. Just to provide a little bit of clarity, going through the arch report from Atlosa, it may be helpful that on page 19 of the report, and that there are a number of policy recommendations, but the reason I searched was that I was nervous that civic administration would be prioritizing the work of Atlosa and their recommendations, and that feels a little too colonial for me to do. But in page 19 of their report, the number one action step under the financial resources piece is for Atlosa to prepare a business case to support the implementation of all the policy recommendations outlined in this report, and to work with the City of London’s Housing Stability Services team to bring this report and business plan to London City Council for approval and endorsement. And we are following the lead of Atlosa on the timing of that. I don’t have a just checking now. We don’t have a timeline on when they will be in a spot to do that, or do that engagement. But that is already in there, arch study, and perhaps we just, and instead of directing staff to bring back a report, it’s maybe just, there’s wording here, where if we follow what’s in that plan, we would work with Atlosa to have them produce a business case, and we can present that back on their behalf. Okay, thank you for that clarity, Mr. Dickens.

[1:54:01] I was viewing that as part of, as a question from Councillor Trossa. So, we are on the speakers now for the amendment. Councillor Ferri, you have your hand up. Go ahead. Thank you. Okay, further the amendment. Would this amendment, and I know I kind of chatted with the clerks a little bit on the side, but just to say it on the record, would this preclude any funding towards Atlosa for the Part A of the motion? Would it, sorry, would it not allow that? Would we be waiting for this report to come back? In which case, I would see it as contrary. So, I just wanted to go to the clerks with that, if you can. Through the chair, if the intent of the motion is to not affect the approval of Part A and B, then it’s not contrary. If the intent is to affect that, then it is contrary.

[1:54:47] Okay, thank you. And then with the reading of the motion, the intent, where it would, I guess, stop the funding towards Atlosa, I don’t see that here. So, I just wanted to confirm that with the clerk, because I know we talk about intent, but in the end, it is what is written as the motion. Like, this is the binding language right here. Okay, so maybe I’ll go to the mover. Sorry. Your question, Councillor, is… My question is, is the intent of the motion something that would hold off funding towards Atlosa for these portable benefits until we get this report back to CPSC? Or is the intent not to do that and bring back this report at a future meeting of CPSC while also administering these funds to Atlosa? Thank you, so I thought. So, the intent, through you, presiding officer, the intent is for everything to be in hold until the report comes back. Okay, so that is contrary. So, what do I do on that? So, Chair… It’s hard to do things from the distance here. Okay, so my understanding from what the clerks had told me that it wasn’t contrary, but with that point of clarification from the mover that is to hold everything up, I don’t… I’ve already ruled on that because I got different information, but I would rule that as contrary based on that new information. I don’t know if I can go back on that, but… Okay, so the clerks have advised me, based on that information though, that I, on my previous ruling on the point of order, that I can return to that decision, and I would rule that out of order based on the fact that it is contrary to the rest of the motion. So, that amendment gets withdrawn because it is contrary. So, yeah, that’s where we’re at. Councillors are free to put forward another amendment if they wish, but that is where we’re at in the process. So, I will go back to Councillor Cudi if you’d like to put forward a motion. Thank you for setting up. So, this is really confusing now, at least it is for me. So, that amendment’s off the table because it was ruled contrary to the original motion. Sorry, I just want to clarify what the clerk said. So, the reason why it’s ruled contrary is because the answer you provided essentially holds up the rest of the motion because you’re putting forward something that prevents the earlier part of the motion from being executed on. Councillor Ronda, do you want to words with or provide advice? So, we are currently on the main motion because the amendment is gone, but I’m giving the Councillors, Councillor Cudi has the most time left if you would like to put forward a motion. So, Councillor Pribble, do you want to go? I’ll check back and what was actually COVID were informed by our staff. If you look at the arch document funding, it does say clearly that I’d also have to prepare a business case in the corporation with City of London, et cetera, et cetera. So, based on this and staying in accordance, then whatever is in front of us, we should vote this down. We should vote what’s originally for us and we should go back to the, and we should go back to the business case. Thank you. That’s my recommendation. So, we’re on the main, right to the main motion. Okay, so, that’s fine. You’ve wrapped up your comments. Okay, so the clerks have advised the Councillor if you’d like to do something. So, I’ll give Councillor Cudi the opportunity to speak. Thank you. What are we, can we make a referral on this motion? So, I comment? Yes, let’s keep the side comments to a minimum here. So, okay, I can’t do anything about the mics right now, but I’m going to look to the clerks to see whether a referral is allowable at this point. Okay, difficult doing it this way.

[2:01:08] As the clerk has advised me, so referral would have had to be done at the beginning. So, yes, we’ve dealt with that point of order. We will not, we will not be entertaining a referral. We will vote on the main motion unless anyone has any amendments. Most people have exhausted their time. So, I’m not going to entertain that right now. We are going to go to the vote on this motion. Sorry, who had their hand up? I didn’t, I just saw a hand voting now, yes. We’ll cancel the vote. Go ahead, Councillor. Thank you. So, I did have a chance just to read page 19 of that report. And again, my apologies for not reading it beforehand. It didn’t have time. I will say that that page is actually quite long and extensive in terms of what they’re asking for to be funded. It’s, and, and it’s not just $300,000, 30 percent proportional on this amount. I actually think we need more information to make this decision, although I too want to move fast. I do think it’s important to move correctly in, in step with that LOSA and what they’re asking this report as well as the letter.

[2:02:28] So, if one has spoken, we’re going to open the vote on the main motion. Posing the vote the motion carries four to one. I know that you’re back to Councillor Ferrer. Thank you, presiding officer. I’m going to first move for a five-minute biobrake. If someone can move that, sorry, move by Councillor McCallister. I’ll second that. Let’s call the question. All those in favor? All those opposed? Who’s a biobrake? Just for five minutes? All those in favor? Okay, all those opposed? Okay, that motion carries. Okay, that’s almost five minutes.

[2:08:17] Just making sure everyone on the staff side is here. I will call this meeting back to order. So, next item is item 4.2, communication request for update on 2021, reaching home from Councillor S. Stevenson. And we also have a delegation request. So, I will look to committee for a motion for the delegation. We’ll go by Councillor Pribble, seconded by Councillor Cutty. And we’ll take a vote on that. It’ll be a funny script. What’s our trust? Also votes yes. The motion carries five to zero.

[2:09:18] Famous last meeting. Just state your name where you’re from. And then I’ll tell you when you got five minutes. I’ll tell you when to start. You have to do a thing. Oh, no, you hear me. Okay, I can hear myself now. Chuck Lee’s me, executive director of Unity Project. Okay, thank you. You got five minutes starting now. Thank you so much for this opportunity to address this committee today. Just to be clear, Unity Project takes no issue with the purposes of the motion that are brought forward to you by Councillor Stevenson. If this committee seeks further information or update regarding our property development at 790 Dundas Street, we’re willing to provide it. So long as the terms of those requests are fair, reasonable, and do not compromise the privacy standards we are required to uphold. What we do take issue with is the manner in which this motion comes to the floor and through Councillor Stevenson’s social media. And in a way that misrepresents both our actions and our intentions. This approach is disingenuous and it threatens to damage our character. And unfortunately, it is not the first instance that Unity Project or other homeless serving agencies have had to contend with that. As referenced in my communication to each of you last May, this pattern of behavior from Councillor Stevenson using the public sphere to circulate misleading narratives has the effect of undermining the community credibility and trust that Unity Project, I have a point of order here from a visiting member.

[2:10:54] Thank you. My point of order is this is not on the agenda. This is all of a sudden becoming about me and personal attacks about me that this isn’t the place for that. This is about the motion that was indicated there was no issue with the motion. Thank you, Councillor. I believe the representative from Unity is speaking in regards to the motion and to the communication. And I believe that they were speaking about points of contact and past conversation. So I do see that as relevant. So apologies. It’s relevant to the motion at hand that she started out saying that there’s no issue with the motion at hand. So how is that relevant? Pardon me if I could just clarify.

[2:11:41] I don’t know if I’m allowed to do that. So I don’t need to overstep. That I said I take no issue with the purposes of the motion but have some issues with the context of the motion. Thank you. So my ruling is I do see what Unity is speaking to as relevant to both your communication and the motion. I’ll continue. This has the effect of undermining the community credibility and trust that Unity project has earned over more than two decades of doing very challenging and vital work in our city. Our reputation is not a luxury. It is essential to the services we provide. We receive 65% of our operational funding through provincial dollars administered through the city of London. The remaining 35% we raise through the trust and generosity of our supporters.

[2:12:38] That trust is built in large part on our commitment to integrity, accountability, and transparency. So when a city councillor demands transparency and accountability through a motion, when it has never been withheld in the first instance, the insinuation is that we lack that integrity, accountability, and transparency. And we are an organisation that consistently goes above and beyond our contractual obligations. We’ve never shut our doors, not during staff shortages, not during citywide blackouts or during renovations, not during a global pandemic that saw us double our occupancy while relocating our operations during a time in which the fear of disease and death kept everyone else home. We not only seek to uphold best practices in our work but perpetually evaluate our approach to shift our program and services as we learn and grow and as the needs of the people we support change. And importantly, for 24 years, we have met every obligation to this city. And we have always responded to requests of information by members of this council. Upon returning from maternity leave last November, one of my first calls was to the general manager of the city’s or of the OEVBIA to discuss our property plans and ensure communication lines were opened.

[2:14:01] In February, I attended a BIA board meeting of which councillor Stevenson is a member where I shared draft designs, outlined our service model, and described our community engagement strategy. I made myself available for follow-up questions and offered direct access as needed. I’ve since participated in over a dozen follow-up conversations with member of the public to respond to their questions and concern. And though councillor Stevenson did not attend that meeting, I have no doubt she had access to the minutes and to her colleagues present. And I don’t leave it as unreasonable to expect that a city councillor seeking further clarity or accountability from our organization would simply just reach out to city staff to ask first rather than stir controversy or compromise or reputation through a public forum. This crisis will not be solved through public posturing or reputational attacks. We are very excited about the direction and planning for our new facility. And we look forward to sharing those details as we solidify our program model, facility designs, and engagement strategies. We do not wish for this on the spot manner of addressing your concerns or questions to be considered a fair and reasonable process for which organizations are expected to participate in. We are contending with very challenging circumstances as a sector. And being called to task in this manner, compromise their capacity to do the work, you contract us to do. But given the context of my presence here today, I am available to make time to answer any questions about Unity Project or our future plans. Thank you.

[2:15:35] Thank you. Okay. I’ll go to committee, members of committee first. We need a motion. Councillor Peril. Yes, I would like to make the motion and I have a question for staff. Please read the motion. The district administration be directed to prepare an update for August 11, 2025 meeting of the community and protective services committee regarding the status of the three 2021 reaching home capital projects, including the status of associated operational commitments and funding. Looking for a seconder. Seconded by Councillor Cuddy.

[2:16:30] And for our speakers list. Councillor Cuddy. Thank you, Chair. Is it appropriate if I address the presenter for a moment? If the presenter is okay. And are you asking? Sorry, Councillor. Actually, I’m going to make a comment. Ms. Lazarby, through the chair.

[2:17:07] Are you have any questions or just comments? Just a comment. Is that appropriate? As long as I’ll be very brief. I went to crucial bakery many years ago. My children were very young. And at the end of the week, I used to bring bread to Unity Project. And I want to tell you was the most gratifying thing I’ve ever done for myself and my children. They remembered to this day in their in their thirties and your staff highly, highly respectable. And I appreciate everything you do. And I think, I appreciate everything your staff do.

[2:17:44] I want to thank you for coming today. And I want to thank you for speaking to us. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Preble. Thank you. And thank you as well for a Unity Project for everything you do for our community. I do have two questions for our staff. And the first one is, there’s an agreement currently in place of a C Unity Project. I know there are two other ones, but certainly right now, we have delegation from Unity Project. Is there an agreement in place? Sorry, I know there’s agreement in place. Any indication that this organization or any other one would not be acting according to the agreement signed in place? Thank you, Councillor. Mr. Dickens.

[2:18:33] Through you, Chair. Not at all. No concerns. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you for the quick straight answer. And if you were to go in again, I do think that we have these organizations who already we have signed an agreement. And both sides, they have to act accordingly. My question is, if we have such agreements in future, and if they are kind of a long term, the five, 10 years, et cetera, do we have something in place that Council would get updated on these projects? I’m going to say it because it’s a 10 year. I don’t know, honestly, my expectation is not a 2030 page document. But is there something in place that we will be getting an update on these projects? Thank you, Mr. Dickens. Thank you, and through you, Chair. In future contracts, we could be possibly reporting back, absolutely. This one time funding from 2021 was COVID relief dollars that were made available by the federal government and approved by the previous Council. There was no expectation or referral for staff to report back when the previous Council approved this one time funding. We do are reporting annually to the federal government just through their requirement. But there was, at that time, there was no requirement to bring forward an annual update to Council or anything like that. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you very much. So, as Ms. Lezenberg mentioned that, actually, she has updated and through their BIA. So, there’s accessible documents to have the actual update. So, we can, if we are curious or interested, we can certainly research that. As in this motion, there are other organizations mentioned there. Do you know, are you aware of such that if we wanted to find out any updates that there will be sources like the end of the project BIA to find out these updates? Thank you, Mr. Dickens. Through you, Chair, it’s not a problem getting the updates. The Unity project funding was solely for land acquisition, and that’s been completed by the agency. So, the update will be that they’ve fulfilled the requirements of the funding and contributed towards the purchase of land, which was the sole purpose of that funding. So, I can give you the update today. The other piece on running CARES, as is referenced here, 602 Queen’s Ave, was the support of a number of renovations at the 602 location using one-time capital funding that had been essentially to support the administrative team to stay at that office or at that location.

[2:21:19] Again, that work has been completed, and we are compliant with the federal government. There’s not a whole lot more I’m going to be able to put into a staff report, but certainly we’ll work with our community partners to make sure we have the update information. Thank you. Thank you very much. No more questions? Thank you, Councillor. Members, Councillor McAllister. Thank you, and through the chair, I mean, as was referenced kind of in the comments, what I find troubling with requests such as this, and I think the speaker highlighted it is, the public perception does matter in cases such as this. I personally never had a problem in terms of the agencies operating my area, having conversations with them. I found city staff very accommodating in terms of meeting with them. If we want to discuss contracts where we’re at, I can understand some of my colleagues might disagree that they want to have these things out in more of a public fashion, but I don’t personally think that there’s anything untoward, but I do think, as was said, that the perception matters, and what I find troubling is it damages public trust when you essentially come forward and say I think there’s something fishy going on with this agency. Maybe not in those exact words, but I do think we have to be mindful as elected officials that our position has power associated with it in terms of those words and what’s said.

[2:22:50] So I think some of these, I have personally taken upon myself to relationship build, to speak with agencies, to try to have these conversations amongst the community with members impacted, but I can understand where agencies are coming from when these sort of things come forward. There’s not necessarily something wrong with an update, but the way in which we approach that is very important and can be damaging to a reputation, which to any organization that does fundraising can be extremely detrimental. So I’d just like to remind colleagues that at the end of the day, I mean, we all want to address homelessness, but if we go after the agencies that are doing this work and, you know, raise suspicions without any sort of evidence, it can be very damaging.

[2:23:41] And so I think that that’s a caution that we should all take to heart. And when we’re putting forward motions, we should keep that in mind. So I just wanted to put that out there. I personally don’t need this update. I’m satisfied in terms of what I’ve already had presented to me, and in my conversations, I’m satisfied with the information provided. So I won’t be supporting this. Thank you, Councillor. I have myself next on the list, Councillor Trussell. So I’ll just, I guess I’ll just do it from the chair spot. I got to completely agree with Councillor McAllister. It’s all about the way we engage organizations that help us in this work and the trust that we build and how we foster that. And I have concerns from the past, from how we have been handling our relationship with organizations, and I have a lot of concern with if we continue down this path, we’re not going to have any organizations left that are going to want to help us.

[2:24:39] And if we lose that ability to respond to homelessness, if we lose that ability to have outreach, then we’re going to have residents knocking at our door, we’re going to have people outside, and we’re going to have, we’re going to have no tools and nothing at our disposal to be able to do that. So as public elected officials, we need to ensure that that type of relationship, that type of trust is a positive one and one that is a working one as well. This meeting seems to be discussing trust again and again and again. And I’ve seen this item come through and this be discussed, but when it comes to how we build that trust, there’s many levels on how we do that.

[2:25:19] And it’s the way we engage, again, going to Councillor McAllister’s very well put point there. For me, I am big on building relationships. I am big on making sure that I can foster that trust with agencies and that allows me to be able to say and speak to agencies of my disagreements with those agencies. That opens up the conversation with that and that allows us to move forward. And I called Unity and Unity was able to give me a full update just from a phone call. I called London Cares as well. They were able to give me a full update, call it low so they’re able to give me a full update. And that’s just because of the relationship that I am trying to build because in the end, we need to make sure that we have this runway available so we can take these paths that are open. It’s about opening up options and being able to identify the right ones and pursuing those options. So I really appreciate the comments that Councillor McAllister has made.

[2:26:14] I’m not going to be supporting this motion either. Unity has agreed that they can provide that and I would believe that they probably would do it without a motion. So rather than having staff and tying up resources and sending out these requests, I think that the message is clear. But I would say this would be something that would be better left done over an email or a phone call rather than at a meeting. So those are my comments. Thank you for indulging me speaking from the chair. I will go to the next speaker, which was Councillor Trussle. Well, through the chair, I fully agree with what Councillor McAllister has said supplemented by what Councillor Ferrara has said. One of the capital projects included in the 2021 reaching home funding was for Unity Project. I’m reading from Councillor Stevenson’s submission. Please recognize this is potentially a decade. And we get this motion like 15 minutes before meeting. This has been a problem festering for a decade. I would think that we would have looked at this before. So I’m not going to get involved in trying to sort out what people’s motives are or where this is going. But I’m absolutely not going to support this. And I just really wish we would show more empathy for our frontline workers who are putting themselves out every day often at great peril to themselves. And I just think we need to be treating our partners with more trust and respect otherwise. And I think it was Councillor McAllister that said it.

[2:28:13] We’re going to find ourselves in a situation where people don’t want to work with us. Why should we? It’s just going to get attacked. We can’t operate like this, folks. And yeah, once again, this is an example of if you have a question for staff or an agency, call them up and ask them. That’s it. I’ll be voting no on this. Thank you, Councillor. Members. Visiting members. Visiting members. Go ahead, Councillor. Are City Council in charge of oversight and governance of the contracts that we do, of the homeless services that are addressing the crisis that we see on our streets. I have not suggested anything untoward. I have not made any allegations about any agency or anything negative. So it’s interesting to hear the response to the request for an update.

[2:29:26] It’s one of the things that I’m seeing, and not just in this area, but in others, we approve projects. And there’s no request for updates. We had it with the housing collaborative initiative. That started. And then 10 years later, we look into it from a CBC inquiry. So it’s raising this level of when we say yes to large projects worth millions of dollars. I think it’d be a good idea going forward to ask for updates on them. I mean, what the 2021 Council approved was two million dollars to three agencies. And we’re in a crisis where residents are saying, you know, what’s happening, what’s being done? And it would be nice to have the updates. And I think from an oversight governance perspective, there isn’t anything, you know, I don’t know why accountability is seen as suggesting that something is wrong. I really don’t understand that. And continually, not just with this, but with many things, I’m being told, you just need to go and ask.

[2:30:37] Yes, and I do go and I ask a lot of questions of a lot of things, but there’s other things that should just come through Committee and Council. I believe, anyway, that we should get regular reports that beyond the public record, not just for us, but for future councils. If I go back through, I use all of these reports to determine what’s been happening. And if there are large gaps, it would be great to leave that information so that we’re doing what we need to do. My request had nothing to do with Unity Project. It was a request to staff for an update on what we as a city have communicated and what our obligations are in terms of these capital projects. I think it’s quite reasonable to do so. So I believe through inquiry and asking, I’ve determined that the at low, so $1 million actually was put through the $5 million 2022-2023 winter response. So it went to the part of that two-year shelter contract.

[2:31:46] May I confirm that through the chair to staff? Sorry, Councilor, can you say that last question again? The at low, so $1 million. I believe through inquiry, I’ve confirmed that that money went through delegated status and into the $5 million 2022-2023 winter response contract. So that actually isn’t going to be a capital project anymore. Is that correct? Before I ask that, is that within scope of the motion? Believe it is not. Okay, so we’re, as I said, I had to hear that people are experiencing what they’re experiencing from my request for an update, and I do believe that accountability is a good thing. It’s a healthy thing. Teachers don’t just ask, “Did you do the homework?” They say, “Can I see the homework?” We put it through. It’s just part of governance as far as I’m concerned. It’s not suggesting that anything’s untoward when I ask questions. But there is $2 million that we had a previous council approved for capital projects that, and we’re in a crisis. So knowing what the options are, knowing what’s happening, knowing if we have commitments for operational funding for any of these projects is something that I was interested in, knowing what the plans are with some of the ones that I haven’t been able to determine through inquiry, and putting it on the public records so that the Londoners know that we are doing our due diligence in terms of ensuring that all of the funds that are available for this crisis, that we are paying attention and we’re checking in and asking for updates. Again, I don’t understand why that’s such an issue.

[2:33:40] Thank you, Councillor. I have Councillor Pribble next. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair, to the staff, and there was a couple of times already mentioned $2 million capital projects. Can you please clarify? And it’s not just as much for us, but also for the public in terms of the funding, higher levels of government funding, and the approval process that was done a couple of years ago. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Mr. Dickens. Thank you, and through you, Mr. Chair. It’s a little more than a couple of years ago, so I’ll do my best to answer that. So there was $2 million. This was basically top-up funding, and it was COVID dollars reallocated. There was a million dollars identified for a LOSA that did not proceed.

[2:34:27] There was $500,000 for Unity Project and $500,000 for London Cares. Those were brought forward to Council. Council approved those funding requests. We then administered those federal funds on a one-time basis for the purpose of which they were intended with the federal government’s approval and sign off. And then we report that back into the federal government. So I don’t know what more I can offer you other than these are the projects that came forward back in 2021. With the funding that was available in 2021, it’s hard to conflate 2021 with the crisis we’re having today and that somehow those funds one time that we’re going to expire would be suitable now for a different initiative. We’re talking four years ago. This was the projects that were available that came forward that meant the criteria that were submitted. And ultimately, the ones that Council approved.

[2:35:28] And again, because we haven’t brought forward a report, we weren’t required to. And I just wanted so my team hears me that does not mean we’ve tried to skirt any accountability or any transparency and any insinuation of the such would be false. Thank you, Mr. Director Council. Thank you for those answers. Based on my this question, I actually previous two, three questions that I asked before. I will not be supporting this motion. And having said that, I will reach out back to the staff if I needed some information from this organization. And they will be not willing to share it with me.

[2:36:10] In terms of the future outlook, my recommendation would be when there is this long term contract and again, agreements, which actually the staff already mentioned, I’m not saying anything new to have something like this in incorporated in the legal agreements that there would be regular updates from these organizations to city staff and city staff to the Council. But thank you very much for answering my questions. No more. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Okay. So I’ve heard four members of this committee say they’re not supporting the motion. However, I do know that there might be some more individuals who want to speak. So I am going to give you some time, but please keep the time limited because we know how this votes going to go. But before I go to you, Councillor, I do want to go to, I guess, indulge me again at the chair. I got two minutes and 30 seconds left. So I do hear the words about transparency, accountability and homework and being in charge of oversight as a elected representative and just being prepared. So I just wanted to go to the delegate. If the committee will indulge me and just let me ask this question to the delegate. As the author of the motion reached out to you and requested this information.

[2:37:23] Okay. Well, I guess I should hand this over to Councillor McAllister then for that point of order. Councillor, I have a point of order and I’m chairing. So just to be free from that decision, can I just hand it over to you? Sorry, I need the mic. Okay, I can take the chair. And so with the point of order, please go ahead. Well, my point of order is to be asking this question now. I’m not sure how it’s relevant to this. The question was not to unity project. It was to staff for an update on the capital projects. So I’m not sure how this is relevant. So I’m going to roll. We pretty much dispense with asking questions. I think we should stick to the matter at hand. So if you have comments on the motion before us, go ahead. But yeah, I don’t believe we’re going to entertain those questions with delegates at this time. Okay, that’s okay. So it’s just a matter of being prepared and doing the work before you come to the committee is really what I’m asking about.

[2:38:30] And I also know that from what the delegate has said and from what the Councillor has said as well, well, the council didn’t say this, but the delegate did say that the BIA was presented this information as an update. So that information is on the public record on the BIA minutes for that meeting. And I believe it was December 2024, February 2021. No, Councillor, I said we’re not doing questions. So okay, I’ll leave my comments there. But thank you for presiding officer for taking that. Okay, I didn’t have the time for Councillor Stevenson. She’s requesting a time update. So I’ll hand the chair back to you. Thank you presiding officer. I have the times Councillor Stevenson has nine seconds left. I can go to Councillor Stevenson. Go ahead. It’s interesting how everyone’s making this about me. Thank you. I do have quick update on that, LOSA. Okay, that Councillor has asked for an update on it, LOSA, for the agreement for the 2021 report that you submitted, I believe. So it would be the five year agreement for a million dollars with that LOSA.

[2:39:55] I’ll go to Craig or Mr Cooper. Yeah, thank you. And through you, Mr. Chair, as part of the original approval, there was a clause for civic administration to be able to sign and administer all aspects. Administrative aspects of that agreement. LOSA was unable to secure land during that agreement, and as such, the agreement did not move forward. And that money was reallocated within year as noted previously. I don’t have all the details of the reallocation, but that money was reallocated and approved by our federal counterparts. Thank you. Okay, members who might have some speaking time or visiting members, Councillor Cudi, you have four minutes and 18 seconds.

[2:40:40] Thank you, Chair, and through you, I also won’t be supporting this motion. And I do want to go back just very briefly to what Councillor McAllister had said earlier. You know, we have to be very, very careful with how we treat and how we speak about members who give to the community and these community associations, because at the end of the day, they may not be there to work for us and do the work for others. And again, I’ll hark it back to what I said before Unity Project is a great organization. Appreciate the work that they do. And that’s all. Thank you.

[2:41:26] Thank you, Councillor. Okay, let’s call the question. Go to the clerk to read out the vote. I’ll read it. That the civic administration be directed to prepare an update for the August 11, 2025 meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee regarding the status of the three 20-21 reaching home capital projects, including the status of associated operational commitments and funding. It being noted that communications from Councillor S. Stevenson dated June 1, 2025 and June 5, 2025, with respect to this matter, were received.

[2:42:15] Councillor Trozzo, closing the vote. The motion fails 0-5. Thank you. So next item. That was an item that we pulled from consent, I believe. Item 2.9. Okay, update updated, highly supportive housing plan, cost breakdown schedule. And I will look to the member who pulled that motion. Councillor Per bevel. And I would like to make a motion if I can read it now. It was circulated before. But if I can read it now, that the staff reported a June 9, 2025, with respect to the updated, highly supportive housing plan, cost breakdown, schedule be referred to the July 14, 2025 meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee in order to provide cost breakdowns or draft operational budgets for the approved, highly supportive housing funding amounts, $1,335,131 for 24 and 25, 1,372,449 for 2025 and 2026.

[2:43:44] I’m looking for a seconder for this motion. Seconded by Councillor CUNNING. Let’s just get that up and e-scribe. There it is. All right, first speaker’s list. Members first. Councillor Per bevel, please go ahead. Thank you, chair to the staff. I do have one question. And when we, when we did the, during the reports scheduled to, it was in February 6, 2024, there was the list of the agencies and we allocated the funds. And one of them was London cares, homeless response services, resting spaces, 15 beds, or housing supports. And beside, there wasn’t just the one organizations. We have many other ones and there were four areas in terms of the budgeting staff and benefits, participant expenses, operating expenses, and other costs. First, the comment. I was really happy to see that actually the initiative that London cares introduced for the resting spaces actually, I believe that we are as a community better off. I believe that what’s currently in place is better. My question now for this, what I consider better, these four lines, would it be able to, so we have everything in accordance with the way we did it in February, these four lines, would we be able to receive an update as this project was replaced? It’s the same organization, but it’s a different project.

[2:45:25] Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Mr Dickens. Thank you, Chair, and through you, yes, we will report back on the funding that the municipality has contributed to that project. It might take us a little bit of work with the operator as they have multiple sources of funding that go into their operating budget to make sure that we can pull out of our municipal funding, how much municipal funding goes in the staff, how much goes in the participant, how much goes in the operating versus their global operating budget, because they have multiple sources of funding available to them.

[2:46:00] So we’ll work with them if committees owe desires and bring back a report that shows the breakdown as it relates to our contribution. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you for that. I do appreciate it. Now, as I said, and I did hear that it will take some time, but as I said, I’m looking only for these four figures. Is the July 14th reasonable time? Because again, it’s an ongoing thing, so it’s not like someone is waiting for these funds to flow through. So is the July 14th reasonable or would it be the following month easier, better? Because again, I don’t think that one month will make any difference in terms of the influencing people’s lives. Thank you, Mr. Dickens.

[2:46:45] Through you, Chair. Okay, so having just received this motion, it’s not about the four lines. The four lines, absolutely. We can report back on those four lines. It’s not a problem. It’s that we are one of the funders for the House of Hope, and they do not structure their budget just solely on. They don’t have four separate operating budgets for four separate funding sources. So what we will do is instead of bringing back their operating budget that has shows sources of funding from everybody else, we will work with them to say, we need to tease out the exact amount or allocation of where our funds are going related to those four lines. Because when you look at staff and benefits, we will show you what portion hours is compared to their overall staff and benefits, as would another funding source. So to have it back July 14th is a report to you by the end of the month. I have not conferred with my team to see, but we will get it back to you as soon as we can. I’m not sure if it’ll be the next cycle. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. I’ll pass to my colleagues for now.

[2:47:58] Councillor McAllister. Thank you. Through the chair, I appreciate the answer Mr. Dickens just gave. It has also been my experience when I’ve talked to the agencies and budgets. We have to remember, these are mixed models in terms of funding. So again, it’s a snapshot of what we’re providing. I mean, if you just want to see the figures, that’s fine. But to me, what I find difficult about this is, to me, there’s this perception of micromanagement, to be honest, where we’re going to try to direct the operational budget based on what we’re providing. And to be honest, a lot of these organizations do not solely operate on our money. Some of them do receive a large portion. But at the end of the day, we only have a certain percentage put into these budgets.

[2:48:50] And I don’t personally see a lot of value again in doing that. I understand the calls for accountability and transparency, but finding these things is not the problem. I feel like there’s more of an issue in terms of how you want the money directed. And that’s the job of council. And if that’s what wants to be done, then that’s fine. But unless I’m seeing things coming forward saying that we want to use the money differently, I don’t see a lot of value in just nitpicking at a municipal contribution to a budget when it is purely just a snapshot of one part of a budget and doesn’t reflect the overall budget of an organization. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you very much through the chair to follow that up. I felt that the staff report gave me the information that I needed. And I think the recommendation here, which was that report dated be received, was sufficient. And we put a lot of demands on the staff. And you haven’t seen a lot of it that’s going to be coming soon, too. But I just want to say, I just don’t see the point of this. I just think that the staff report was adequate. And I’m not going to be supporting this amendment.

[2:50:13] And I like to get as much information from staff as I can. But once again, I find that it is often useful to, I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but just ask. So I’m going to be, I’m not going to support this amendment. I don’t want to be micromanaging staff. I know that there’s a balance between the amount of information that we get. And then when we come back and ask for again, but I felt that this particular staff report was adequate at this time, based on what the situation is. So I’ll be voting no on this amendment. Thank you, Councillor. So I have my next on, myself next on the speakers list. So I’m going to have to pass this over to the vice chair one more time just to be procedurally correct. You really make it be worked for this today. Okay, I apologize. And I will say this is an amendment. So oh, it’s not okay. I’ll get there in a second.

[2:51:09] Just if you can just recognize me. Okay, I have the chair and go ahead. Thank you. Presiding officer. So I got some questions on this one. Originally, like this report came from a motion from this committee or this council from, I believe it was in the author’s letter for March 26, 2024. Is that correct to staff? Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, that’s correct. Okay. And that motion, I’m looking at it and it’s looking to bring back to one of the committee’s cost breakdowns of this new highly supportive housing program and or draft operating budget. So that’s that’s the motion that has brought this one back. So like looking at that motion, that motion did not specifically point to any municipal expenditures going towards the House of Hope or or anything specific like that. It was a little general in vague and I do see that the report come that has come back even though it has given us the House of Hope and or I guess an average of the stats of the data. It does fit. It does fit this this motion. This motion is satisfied with the report that we got back. So I’m a little and when I say a little, I mean a lot hesitant to duplicate the work yet again and have another report come back to another committee and have us hear this again because we’re discussing it here. If we were to prove this motion, we would discuss it here. After discussing it at that last committee, it would go to council, we would discuss it again. Then it would come back to this committee to discuss again, then back to council. So I feel like that’s a huge redundancy in our work and like we’ve already heard from the member from I think Councilor Tresso, we’re just doing the same work again and again and again. I don’t think that’s a very efficient use of our resources. I also see, I guess my big question would be like what’s the purpose of this motion? I understand what the motion says whereas we want to look at cost, breakdowns or draft operational budgets which seems a little close, quite close to the motion that we had originally, but just that further motion, I need to know, like I still don’t understand what is the real purpose of this. So with that and just kind of with what other members of committee has said, I’m not going to support this motion either. So I guess I’ll keep my comments there just to be concise on time because I want to get out of here. So I’ll go back to the presiding officer.

[2:53:50] Okay. Yeah. Thank you, councilor. You’ve used 230 of your time and I’ll hand the chair back to you. Right. Thank you. All right. Members of committee? Visiting members. We are, but we have to give the visiting member time to speak. She’s got five minutes I believe she does. Okay. Go ahead, councilor. Thank you. I’m listening to my colleagues make up reasons as to why I’m asking for this and asking why I’m asking this. You know, I’m reachable by phone as well just to let you know that I could answer questions. But this was just what was passed by council last year that there was a schedule where we had the four breakdown between wages, participant expenses, operating expenses and admin for all of the services and all of the service providers that we funded for two years and council supported a motion that just said, yes, we switched from the 15 resting spaces on Horton to 24 spaces at the House of Hope and council supported getting an updated schedule of those four lines for the $2.7 million that we allocated. And so, look, I leave this in the hands of committee and council.

[2:55:08] If we’re going to tell the public that we don’t need any details on 2.7 million, then that’s fine. I was just following up on a council approved motion. Thank you, councilor. Members of committee? Last call, committee members? Oh, right, sorry, councilor Pribble, you have you have three minutes in nine seconds. Thank you. During port, we received February 6, 24. I thought it was a fantastic report to schedule to it showed us where the money goes, what initiatives there are. And yes, absolutely that there are organizations that receive different levels of government funding.

[2:55:53] For me, when I divided kind of when I divided number of bets, number of services, I could do a comparison. And if there was something that was way off, then I followed up and I was trying to find out, okay, how come it’s way off? Is it provincial, is it federal funding? So, I think that if the council wants to do this kind of a comparison, comparative analysis, return on investment kind of if we can consider it that way in the business world, we use this, then the council can. And this was really truly very helpful. And I really, the schedule too, which we received in 24, it was absolutely fantastic. There was one, and now I’m looking for future, future councilors, that right now, if they go back to it, because if someone was to ask me who is going to be a future councilor, how did this come about? There’s this one page that staff did, great job on, but then there’s this one, London cares that actually this project did not even happen, it was something else. And actually, I truly, as I said a few minutes ago, some minutes ago, I actually am happy that it was replaced by this, because I really think our community, we are getting much more than what was originally stated. So, the purpose of this, that the schedule too is not accurate, and I think for future, it should be updated. And point two, as I said again a few minutes ago, for me, it’s we are not influencing, it’s not a burning issue in terms of people are not waiting for funding, it’s already in place. So, for me, if it’s honestly, if it’s July, August, September, that doesn’t make a difference for me, but would I like this updated to have accurate information? Absolutely. So, those are, that’s the purpose to have this updated.

[2:57:37] So, Chair, if you want to change the deadline, if you want to leave it open, I will leave it up to you, but I do want, I truly believe that there are two purposes why this should be updated. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody? Let’s call the question. Fosing the vote, the motion fails two to three. We still have a staff recommendation to this report. Moved by Councillor Trussell, seconder, I’ll second that. Okay, looking for speakers, let’s choose any members. Last call, let’s call the question.

[2:58:55] Is there a purple and Trussell? Fosing the vote, the motion carries five to zero. Okay, that’s it for direction. That leads us to deferred matters, additional business, none, conferring with committee, nothing. Okay, that leads us to adjournment, looking for a motion to adjourn. Moved by Councillor Trussell, seconded by Councillor Cudi, and McAllister in Pribble.

[2:59:29] All those in favor? All those opposed? That motion carries.