[00:00:01] >> GOOD EVENING. I'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THIS IS THE REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING OF COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE MONDAY, [1. CALL TO ORDER] FEBRUARY 22ND, 2021, AND THE TIME IS 7 PM. AS FAR AS ROLL-CALL, MEMBERS ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING. I'D ASK IF THERE'S ANY DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST THIS EVENING. [3. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST] ONCE, TWICE, THREE TIMES, SEEING NONE. ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES, [4. ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES] 4.1, FEBRUARY 8TH, 2021. REGULAR CAN I HAVE THE MOVE TO ADOPT THE MINUTES PLEASE. MOVE BY COUNCILLOR FENIMORE, SECOND BY COUNCILLOR CYR. ANY QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES? NO'S? NO. I'LL CALL FOR ROLL CALL VOTE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. COUNCILLOR MANN? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR FENIMORE? >>IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR PEARCE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR PATRIE? >> IN FAVOR. >>COUNCILLOR TURNER. >> FAVOR. >> I'M IN FAVOR. THOSE ARE CARRIED, THANK YOU. NO PUBLIC PRESENTATION THIS EVENING. INTRODUCTION, CONSIDERATION, CORPORATE REPORTS. [6. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF CORPORATE REPORTS] I HAVE A MEMO FROM THE CITY CLERK. OFFER TO PURCHASE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ON MCLAREN AND AS THIS MATTER DEALS WITH POTENTIAL DISPOSITION OF LAND BY THE MUNICIPALITY, IT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS PER SECTION 239(2)(C) OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT. ONCE AGAIN THIS IS, IF EVERYONE'S TAKING A LOOK AT THEIR CLOSED SESSION, THIS MIGHT BE A FAIRLY SIMPLE ONE TO KEEP OUT OF CLOSED SESSION AND APPROVE IF YOU'RE WILLING. WOULD SOMEBODY BE WILLING TO MOVE TO ACCEPT THE OFFER? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE, SECOND BY COUNSELOR MANN. ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE. ANOTHER PERSON WELCOME TO THE COMMUNITY AND I'M GLAD TO SEE ANOTHER HOME BEING BUILT. I'LL CALL FOR ANOTHER ROLL CALL VOTE, STARTING WITH COUNCILLOR TURNER. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR PATRIE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR PEARCE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR FENIMORE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR MANN? >>IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILLOR CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> I'M IN FAVOR. THAT'S CARRIED THANK YOU. PRESENTATION AT COMMITTEE REPORT 7.1, [7. PRESENTATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS] REFERRAL FROM THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RE MULTI-USE, ACCESSIBLE AND INCLUSIVE PARK PLAN, I BELIEVE, COUNCILLOR TURNER, YOU'RE THE CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND READING THEIR RESOLUTION AND MOVING IT. >> SORRY YOUR WORSHIP, I CAN'T GET THE RESOLUTION AND THE SCREEN AT THE SAME TIME HERE. >> MULTI-USE, ACCESSIBLE, AND INCLUSIVE PARK PLAN PREPARED BY LEONA MATISSE AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE HELD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9TH, 2021, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED; RESOLUTION O221 MOVED BY DEMAR. SECONDED BY J. MAYOR, THAT THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE APPROVE IN CONCEPT THE MULTI-USE ACCESSIBILITY AND INCLUSIVE PARK PLAN PREPARED BY LEONA MATISSE AND THAT THE PLAN BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. >> THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON IT. >> I NEED A MOVER AND A SECONDER FIRST, COUNCILLOR TURNER. MOVE BY COUNCILLOR CYR. SECOND BY YOU COUNCILLOR TURNER. >> I THINK COUNCILLOR PEARCE JUST BEAT ME. >> SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE. FIRE AWAY COUNCILLOR TURNER. >> A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THIS. MISS MATISSE CAME TO THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH THE CONCEPT FOR A PLAN TO CREATE AN OUTDOOR SPACE FULLY ACCESSIBLE, TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO ACCESS NATURE AND TO HAVE A DECENT SIZE PIECE OF PROPERTY TO DO IT IN. THIS GOES ALONG WITH SOMETHING THAT THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE HAD ALREADY PUT BEFORE COUNCIL WHERE WE WERE LOOKING AT THE CONCEPT OF IMPROVING A TRAIL BETWEEN THE BOAT LAUNCH AND SPRUCE BEACH. MISS MATISSE'S ADDED TO THAT AND GOING FROM THE OTHER DIRECTION FROM [00:05:08] SPINE BEACH THROUGH TO SPRUCE BEACH CREATING AN ACCESSIBLE ENVIRONMENT ALONG THAT AREA. WE'RE DEALING WITH ROUGHLY 1.9 KILOMETERS TRAIL FROM SPINE BEACH TO SPRUCE BEACH AND ABOUT 0.8 OF A KILOMETER FROM SPRUCE BEACH TO THE BOAT LAUNCH. MISS MATISSE HAS A GROUP OF ASSOCIATES WILLING TO WORK WITH HER REPORTING TO THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THAT GROUP IS LOOKING FOR THE NOD FROM THIS CITY TO SAY THAT IT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT THE COMMITTEE DEVELOPS IN THE WAVE OF PLAN, A BUDGET AND AN OVERALL LOOK TO THE END PRODUCT. IT REALLY IS IN THE INFANCY STAGE AND AT THIS POINT, ALL I REALLY WANTED FROM THE ACCESSIBILITY WAS A) ARE YOU INTERESTED, AND IS IT WORTH US PURSUING THIS? THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS GIVEN A NOD TO IT. THEY WERE INTERESTED AND IS NOW CENTERED ON THE COUNCIL THOUGH AS COUNCIL, YOU APPROVE OF THE CONCEPT AND SHOULD THEY CONTINUE WITH TRYING TO DEVELOP A PLAN AND NOT NECESSARILY DOES COUNCIL APPROVE THE EXPENSE AND ALL THE REST OF IT, BUT DOES COUNCIL APPROVE THEM PROCEEDING WITH THE INVESTIGATION. THAT'S IT, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR TURNER, I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS HERE FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL. I'M GOING TO START THOUGH WITH THE QUESTION. AS THIS GROUP MOVES FORWARD WOULD THIS BE POTENTIALLY BECAUSE THERE'S MULTIPLE PIECES TO THIS, WOULD THIS BE A STAGED IN PROJECT AND ARE THEY GOING TO BE LOOKING AT POTENTIAL FUNDING PARTNERS OUTSIDE SOURCES OF FUNDING ALSO TO BRING TO THE TABLE? >> THIS CLEARLY WOULD BE A STAGE PROJECT. IT'S A FAIRLY LARGE AND WOULD BE FAIRLY EXPENSIVE BY THE TIME IT'S OVER. THE FUNDING WAS PROPOSED BY [INAUDIBLE] WOULD BE A COMBINATION OF GRANTS FROM DIFFERENT LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT AND FUNDRAISING THAT THEY WOULD DO, SEARCHING OUT FOUNDATIONS OR LOCAL FUNDRAISING TO CONTRIBUTE TO IT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNSELOR TURNER. SOUNDS INTRIGUING ALL THE WAY AROUND. I'LL START QUESTIONS WITH COUNSELOR PATRI. >> THANK YOU. THE COMMENT MR. COUNSELOR TURNER MADE IT THAT THIS IS IN ITS INFANCY, I WOULD AGREE WITH. I'M NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSAL AS WRITTEN. IT'S ACTUALLY NOT A PROPOSAL. BECAUSE THERE'S NO FINANCIAL BUDGETS, THERE'S UNIT PRICING. I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THE RESOLUTION THE WAY THAT IT IS WRITTEN. IF IT WAS THE SAME RESOLUTION THAT WENT TO THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THAT COUNCIL APPROVE IT IN PRINCIPLE FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT AND POTENTIALLY BRING MORE INFORMATION BACK TO COUNCIL THAT I WOULDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH. BUT WHEN YOU READ THE PACKAGE THAT IS ATTACHED. THE FIRST THING THEY WANT TO DO IS THEY WANT THE MUNICIPALITY TO MOVE THE DOG PARK BECAUSE WE'RE NOT MAINTAINING THE DOG PARK WELL ENOUGH WHILE MOVING THE DOG PARK DOESN'T MAKE US MAINTAIN IT ANY BETTER. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF DOING THAT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO BRING SOMETHING FORWARD THAT WE [00:10:04] CHANGE THE SERVICE LEVEL AT THE DOG PARK AND CHANGE WHAT WE'RE DOING THERE. THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT KETTLE OF FISH AND THAT I'D BE WILLING TO LISTEN TO. BUT IF WE'RE TALKING TO MOVING FORWARD WITH A PLAN THAT'S INCOMPLETE. AGAIN, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO THE WALKING TRAILS THAT HAD BEEN THERE FOR DECADES. I PLAYED ON THOSE TRAILS SINCE I WAS AN INFANT. I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THOSE TRAILS BEING UPGRADED. I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THEM BECOMING ACCESSIBLE. IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR OUR COMMUNITY, ESPECIALLY WITH THE AGE OF THE MAJORITY OF OUR CONSTITUENTS, BUT I WOULD ONLY BE IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THIS IN PRINCIPLE, IT'S A LONG WAY FROM BEING READY FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE THIS. THERE'S NO BUDGET, THERE'S NO MONEY, THERE'S NO PLAN. IT'S STRICTLY AN IDEA AND THE IDEA I'M IN FAVOR OF, BUT THE REST OF THE REPORT, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH THERE FOR ME TO BE APPROVING ANYTHING TO TRACK STAFFER OR PUT STUFF TYPE INTO THIS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. >> WELL, I THINK WOULD AGREE WITH 90 PERCENT OF THAT. THERE IS NO PLAN, THERE IS NO BUDGET. THAT'S WHERE THEY WANT TO GET TO, THEY WANT TO MOVE ON TO GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF CREATING A PLAN WHICH WOULD BE INCLUSIVE OF A BUDGET AND >> [OVERLAPPING] POINT OF ORDER I DIDN'T [INAUDIBLE] [OVERLAPPING] THE COUNSELOR SELF-COMMAND FUNDAMENTAL TO THE WAY THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BUT. >> I'M SORRY. >> I FIGURED THE QUESTION WOULD BE FOR COUNSELOR TURNER AS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE. SO YEAH, COUNSELOR TURNER, CONTINUE ON THE EXPLANATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS IN ITS INFANCY AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR APPROVAL IN CONCEPT IN ORDER TO PUT SOME TIME AND MORE MEAT ON THE BONES FOR THE COMMITTEE ON COUNCIL TO LOOK AT. BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO BE SPINNING THEIR WHEELS AS A GROUP OF COUNCIL'S NOT INTERESTED IN MY CORRECT ANSWER, TURNER. >> THAT'S IT, YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. ANY PLAN FOR THIS SIZE OF THE PROJECT IS VERY TIME-CONSUMING AND IT INVOLVES A LOT OF HOURS. SO WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IS IN PRINCIPLE, AND I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT IN PRINCIPLE, IS COUNCIL INTERESTED IN THIS? LET US KNOW NOW BEFORE IT RESPECT. THANKS. >> MIGHT I SUGGEST A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IF THE MOVER AND SECONDER WOULD BE HAPPY WITH THAT, THAT IT STATES AND THAT THE PLAN BEFORE THE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW AND APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE. IT WOULD THAT BE ALL RIGHT WITH THE MOVER AND SECONDER OR THAT WE ADD THE WORD IN PRINCIPLE IN THERE? I SEE COUNSELOR CYR NODDING HIS HEAD, COUNSELOR PEARCE, ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? OKAY. PERFECT. >> COUNSELOR CYR, YOU HAD THAT QUESTION UP NEXT. >> IT'S MORE A COMMENT THAN A QUESTION, THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING CONCEPT. THAT'S THE CITY SHOULD BE LOOKING AT. I THINK THERE'S BENEFITS TO THE CITY BY EVENTUALLY CHOOSING TO MOVE THE DOG PARK THERE JUST BY HAVING ONE LESS LOCATION TO LOOK AFTER. SO YOU'RE MERGING THE LOCATION THAT IT BECOMES ONE SINGLE AREA TO MAINTAIN INSTEAD OF THE TWO. SECOND, THE CENTRAL DOG PARK NEVER REALLY APPEARED TO ME AS A LOCATION AND AS ANYTHING WE COULD PROMOTE THAT WE COULD BE PROUD AND PROMOTING FOR DOG OWNERS AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, BUT I'M NOT A PETAL NURSE EITHER I DON'T HAVE THE FINAL SAY IN THAT. I JUST DON'T FEEL IT'S ANYTHING I COULD BE PROUD CHEERING ON FOR. THE OTHER THING IS AS A LOCATION FOR PROMOTING ACCESSIBILITY, THE SPRUCE BEACH HAS MUCH MORE POTENTIAL AT BEING ACCESSIBLE TO OUR CITIZENS. FIRST OF ALL, NOT ONLY AS A PHYSICAL LOCATION BECAUSE OF THE LOW GRADE [00:15:02] TRAINED FOR PEOPLE WITH PHYSICAL DISABILITIES FOR WALKING DOWN TO THE WATER. IT'S A MUCH LOWER GRADE. IT'S MUCH EASIER FOR THEM TO TURN IT OVER INTO ACCESS. SECOND, EVEN PEOPLE WITH COGNITIVE DISABILITIES LIKE AUTISM, WHEN THEY'RE IN AN AREA WHERE IT'S VERY CROWDED WITH THEIR SENSORY SENSITIVITIES LARGE CROWDS CAN BECOME AN IMPEDIMENT TO THEIR ENJOYING AND EVERYBODY ELSE'S ENJOYMENT. BY HAVING A LITTLE MORE QUIET AREA TO PLAY WITH AND ENJOY, THEY CAN ACTUALLY ENJOY THEIR LEISURE TIME MUCH BETTER. AS FAR AS JUST AN AUTISTICAL PATIENT, THAT'S A MUCH BETTER SITE, JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE A MUCH-REDUCED AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ENJOYING THAT SITE. IT'S NOT AS LOUD, THERE'S LESS DISTRACTION' SO I THINK OVERALL AT THAT SITE IS A MUCH MORE ACCESSIBLE AREA FOR US TO BUILD ON FOR THE FUTURE OF THE CITY. I THINK ELIOT LAKE JUST WITH OUR SENIOR CITIZENS IN THE CITY, WE HAVE EVERY ADVANTAGE TO PROMOTE A BETTER ACCESSIBLE SITE IN THE FIRST PLACE, EVEN TO POTENTIAL RESIDENTS MOVING INTO TOWN, THE MORE WE BUILD ON THAT CONCEPT, THE MORE WE CAN ATTRACT PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES HAS BECOME A PREMIER SITE TO MOVE [INAUDIBLE] LIKE JUST BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH ATTENTION WE'RE GIVING ACCESSIBILITY. IT BECOMES A POWERFUL ATTRACTANT TO NEW RESIDENCE. I'M FULLY IN FAVOR OF BEGINNING EXPLORING THIS CONCEPT. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILOR FENIMORE. >> THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK MISS MATISSE FOR THIS WORK THAT SHE'S DONE, THIS WAS AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF RESEARCH THAT SHE'S DONE AND I WANT TO THANK HER FOR THAT. AND I JUST HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AROUND PROCESSES. I'M NOT SURE HOW WE HAVE A COMMITTEE OUTSIDE OF COUNCIL INVESTIGATE HOW TO BUILD THIS. I THINK THIS WOULD BE MAGNIFICENT. I THINK IT IS THE PERFECT LOCATION, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE DEVELOPMENT OF SENIORS COMPLEX ADJACENT TO THIS. I THINK THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL IDEA AND I COULD SEE IT WORKING REALLY WELL. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE DOG PARK, BUT AS A TOTALLY ACCESSIBLE AREA, I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL PLACE. BUT I'M JUST NOT SURE IF AFTER EVERYONE'S TALKED, I THINK I'M GOING TO REFER THIS AND I'M NOT SURE TO REFER IT TO SHARED-USE TRAILS OR TO MR. HOLLOW AND PUBLIC, SIR. I'M JUST NOT SURE WHERE IT GOES BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW A COMMITTEE OF A GROUP OF CITIZENS WORK ON A PROJECT ON FOR PROPERTY THAT IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF ELLIOTT LAKE WITHOUT A STAFF PERSON HELPING THEM AND GUIDING THEM BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT RULES AND REGULATIONS AND MINISTRY THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED ALONG THE BEACH FRONTS AND ALONG THE WATERWAYS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE NEXT STEP IS OTHER THAN THEY WANTED TO DEVELOP A PLAN. THIS LOOKS LIKE A LOT OF MONEY. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE OF $1,000 HERE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT OF MONEY. IF WE'RE IN, I WANT US TO BE ALL IN AND I WANT TO GIVE THEM AS MUCH HELP AS WE CAN GET. OBVIOUSLY, BUDGET TIME IS OVER FOR THIS YEAR. BUT TO SEE HOW FAR THEY GET AND HOW WE CAN HELP TO GET MONEY TO BUILD ALL THIS, I AM GOING TO DO REFERRAL, I'M JUST NOT SURE IF MR. GONE, COULD HELP ME WITH WHERE THIS COULD BE REFERRED TO, OR SHOULD IT BE REFERRED AT THIS POINT? I DON'T WANT TO GIVE A GROUP OF PEOPLE THE GO-AHEAD AND THEN FOR THEM TO DO ALL THIS WORK, COME BACK AND WE SAY, WELL, NO, THAT'S NOT REALLY WITHIN OUR PARAMETERS TO BE DOING THAT WITHIN THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DO THE RIGHT THING BY THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO SEEM TO BE MOTIVATED TO DO SOMETHING WONDERFUL. >> MR. DANIEL, DID YOU WANT TO CHIME IN? >> JUST IN THE SENSE THAT I CONCUR, IN A SENSE THAT WE'RE NOT SURE WHICH COMMITTEE THIS SHOULD GO TO. THIS PROPOSAL LANDED ON MY DESK FOR A WHILE AND I WAS DEBATING WHETHER IT SHOULD GO TO THE SHARED USE TRAILS COMMITTEE OR THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE OR PARKS AND THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT ANGLES, BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS WE'RE HERE NOW IF COUNCIL APPROVES IT IN CONCEPT AND IN PRINCIPLE, THEN WE CAN DEDICATE SOME STAFF TIME TO WORK WITH THE VOLUNTEERS AND WE WANT TO RESPECT THEIR TIME SO THAT THEY'RE NOT WASTING THEIR TIME. SO HENCE IF COUNCIL SAYS, YEAH, THIS IS WORTH PURSUING, THEN GOOD. THEN STAFF AND THE VOLUNTEERS CAN WORK TOGETHER SYMBIOTICALLY AND THEN BRING THAT BACK TO WHATEVER COMMITTEE MAKES SENSE. [00:20:04] NOW, A DESIGN OF A NEW SPACE HAS TO BE 100 PERCENT ACCESSIBLE. SO IT MAKES SENSE TO THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER SERVICING AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO IT'S A WIDE-RANGING PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO TOUCH ON A LOT OF COMMITTEES. BUT ONCE WE GET THE GENERAL NOD THAT IS WORTH PURSUING, THEN WE CAN FIND SOME STAFF TIME TO WORK WITH THE VOLUNTEERS AND GUIDE THEM INTO THE PROCESSES THAT WE'RE USED TO AND THE FORMAT THAT WE'RE USED TO SO THAT IT STARTS TO BE MORE LIKE SOMEBODY SAID, PUTTING THEM MORE MEAT ON THE BONES AND GETTING IT READY FOR AN EVENTUAL BUDGET COMMITTEE OR A STRATEGIC PLAN OR WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT HELPS AT ALL. >> SO YOU WOULDN'T NEED A REFERRAL, IT WILL BE JUST DIRECTION THEN? >> I THINK SO. I MEAN, WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST WE PASS THE MOTION THAT'S HERE IN PRINCIPLE OR HOWEVER IT WANTS TO BE WORDED. BUT THEN ONCE WE KNOW THAT A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL OR ON-BOARD CONCEPTUAL IT AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME STAFF TIME TO WORK WITH THESE VOLUNTEERS SO THAT WE CAN BE RESPECTFUL OF THEIR TIME AND OURS, THEN AT LEAST WE CAN GET TO WORK, AND THEN IF IT TURNS OUT THAT WHEN THE TIME COMES THAT WE NEED TO BRING IT BACK, WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO ONE OR MORE COMMITTEES. >> THANK YOU, MR. DANIEL. COUNCILOR MANN, YOU ARE UP NEXT. >> THANK YOU, WORSHIP. I THINK MY COMMENT WAS TO ONE OF THE OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL HAD MADE THE COMMENT. SO I DON'T NEED TO GO INTO THAT PIECE ANY FURTHER. OTHER THAN I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THIS. I THINK THERE IS STILL A LOT OF WORK TO BE DONE. HOWEVER, I THINK THE CONCEPT IS ABSOLUTELY WORTH PURSUING AND DEFINITELY, I GUESS MAYBE THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I WOULD HAVE TO COUNCILOR TURNER. DID HE SAY THAT THE NATURE TRAIL FROM SPRUCE TO SPINE WAS 1.9 KILOMETERS? I BELIEVE IT'S A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN THAT. I JUST NEEDED CLARIFICATION ON THAT DISTANCE. LAST TIME I WALKED IT WAS MUCH LONGER THAN THAT. >> COUNCILOR, TURNER. >> REPLY TO COUNCILOR MANN, YOUR WORSHIP. THE BEST I CAN DO IS USE THE MEASURING LINES ON GOOGLE EARTH. THAT'S WHAT I CAME UP WITH, SO I WOULD EASILY STAND TO BE CORRECTED. I'M NOT A MASTER ON THAT PARTICULAR MAPPING SYSTEM. IT IS QUITE A DISTANCE, AND THAT SECTION ON ITS OWN, I SEE AS THE SERIES EXPENSE ALONG WITH THE SECOND SECTION. IT IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL HAS TO GIVE SERIOUS THOUGHT TO BEFORE EVERYBODY LAUNCHES ON A VERY EXTENSIVE BIT OF WORK TO DO ALL THIS PLANNING. >> COUNCILOR TURNER YOU WERE ACTUALLY UP NEXT, I BELIEVE ON MY LIST. >> YOUR WORSHIP. JUST ON THE IDEA OF WHAT COMMITTEE THIS GROUP WORK. FIRST OF ALL, JUST A GROUP OF CITIZENS WILLING TO WORK TOGETHER TO AN END. THEY ARE HAPPY TO WORK THROUGH CITY COMMITTEES AND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION. SO I'M LEANING TOWARDS PARKS AS BEING THE ROUTE TO GO. BECAUSE IN ESSENCE, IT IS A PARK, IT'S NOT JUST AN ACCESSIBILITY THING. ACCESSIBILITY, OF COURSE, COULD KICK IN, AS FOR SHARED-USE TRAILS. I MEAN, IT'S HARD TO INVOLVE THE SNOWMOBILES CLUB AND THE CROSS-COUNTRY SOCIAL GROUPS ON THIS PARTICULAR TRAIL. I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE CAO TO HELP DIRECT. IT'S JUST MY TWO CENTS ON IT. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR PATRICK. >> THANK YOU. BUT THE AMENDMENT TO CHANGING IT TO IN PRINCIPLE, I'M 100 PERCENT IN FAVOR OF THIS GOING BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE CHANGING THE COMMITTEE. I TOTALLY RESPECT WHAT COUNCILOR FENIMORE IS SAYING THAT MAYBE IT'S GOING TO GO TO SOMEBODY ELSE BUT I THINK THAT'S EVENTUAL. [00:25:02] I THINK THE PEOPLE THAT ARE BRINGING THIS FORWARD ARE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT FOR THE NEXT STAGE TO BRING US THE PLAN. THEY WANT TO MAKE IT AN ACCESSIBLE PARK. SO IT'S GOING TO GO TO THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE. I WOULD WANT IT TO GO BACK TO THEM AND THEN COME BACK TO US WITH A MORE ROBUST PLAN AS TO WHAT THEY ACTUALLY WANT TO DO. AS WHAT COUNCILOR MANN STATED THAT'S A LITTLE LONGER THAN 1.9 KILOMETERS OF TRAIL, BUT I CAN MARK THAT TRAIL THE WAY THAT IT IS AND WELL, WE SHOULD UPGRADE IT A LITTLE BIT. BUT WHEN YOU GET INTO ACCESSIBILITY, I HAVEN'T GOT A CLUE AND WE NEED THE EXPERTISE OF THE PEOPLE IN THAT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE. IF WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT AN ACCESSIBLE PARK, I THINK THEY'RE THE PEOPLE TO DRIVE THIS IN THE BEGINNING, AT LEAST TO GET THE PARAMETERS SET OF WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY ASKING US TO DO. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE COME TO US AND WANT US TO DO THIS IN PRINCIPLE, APPROVE IT IN PRINCIPLE. SO I WOULD SAY YES, APPROVE IT IN PRINCIPLE, AND THEN BRING IT BACK TO US WITH A MORE ROBUST PLAN OF WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO DO. THEY DO HAVE AVENUES OF WHAT THEY'RE ALREADY DISCUSSING ABOUT WHERE TO GET SOME FUNDING AND WHAT THEY REQUIRE. BUT SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IT STAY RIGHT WHERE IT IS FOR NOW, AND WHO KNOWS, THEY MAY COME BACK US IN A MONTH, A WEEK, THREE MONTHS AND SAY, ''OKAY, WE'VE GOT THIS PLAN.'' THEY MAY BE FURTHER AHEAD, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THEY'RE AT. THEY COULD COME FORWARD WITH SOMETHING AND SAY, OKAY, WE NEED PUBLIC WORKS TO HELP US WITH THIS. WE NEED STAFF TO HELP US WITH THAT. SO I THINK THAT ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE SHOULD CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS. IF WE GET THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL TO SAY YES TO THIS, WHICH LOOKS LIKE OBVIOUSLY, WE SHOULD BUT SEND IT BACK TO THEM AND THEN LET THEM COME BACK US WHEN THEY'RE READY WITH A NEW PLAN OR WITH A PLAN. >> MR. DANIEL. >> JUST A REMINDER. I WAS REMINDED THAT THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE ACTUALLY REPORTS THROUGH THE PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE. IT WAS JUST THAT LAST MONDAY WE DIDN'T HAVE IT PUBLIC SERVICES COMMITTEE AND THAT'S WHY IT CAME STRAIGHT TO COUNCIL. BUT SO GENERALLY, ONCE THIS COMMITTEE DOES SOME WORK AND WE DO THE RESEARCH AND WE HELP PUT SOME STAFF TIME IT'LL COME BACK THROUGH THE PUBLIC SERVICES, WHICH MAKES SOME SENSE CONSIDERING MR. ALEC IN THAT DEPARTMENT IS MANAGING PARKS. SO WE CHECK ALL THE BOXES, WE JUST NEED TO GET BACK TO IT AND WORK WITH THE VOLUNTEERS TO KEEP WORKING ON THIS CONCEPT. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR FENIMORE, YOU HAD ANOTHER COMMENT? >> NO. >> THANK YOU. SORRY. I COULDN'T GET UNMUTED. I JUST REMEMBERED THAT ACCESSIBILITY GOES THROUGH PUBLIC SERVICE. I WASN'T TRYING TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM ACCESSIBILITY, I WAS JUST IMAGINING THAT THE PEOPLE ON THE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE MIGHT HAVE SOME ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES WITHOUT ACTUALLY WALKING THAT TRAIL TO TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT IT, THAT THEY MIGHT NEED PUBLIC WORK STAFF TO DO THAT KIND OF THING FOR THEM. THAT WAS MY CONCERN. ABSOLUTELY, IT'S AN ACCESSIBILITY PARK BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO BARRIERS TO THEM DOING WHAT THEY NEED TO DO. >> THANK YOU. COUNSEL PEARCE, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT? >> NO, I'M INTRIGUED BY THE DEBATE. I THINK EVERYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID HAS BEEN SAID. I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THIS AND [LAUGHTER] WE USED TO WALK THAT TRAIL FAIRLY FREQUENTLY. I'M NOT ABLE TO DO THAT RIGHT AT THE MOMENT, BUT THAT'S ONE OF MY FAVORITE TRAILS FRANKLY TO WALK ALONG THE SHORES OF ELLIOT LAKE FROM SPRUCE TO SPINE BEACH, IT REALLY IS BEAUTIFUL. IT WILL TAKE AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK TO MAKE THAT ACCESSIBLE, IT REALLY WILL. BUT, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST MOVE ON AND I REALLY COMMEND THE PEOPLE THAT DID THE WORK ON IT. >> THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, APPROVAL IN PRINCIPLE FOR THIS ONE, SO THEY CAN CONTINUE WORKING. I'LL CALL FOR A ROLL-CALL VOTE, STARTING WITH COUNSEL FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL PATRY? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL TURNER? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL MANN? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL PEARCE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> "I'M IN FAVOR." THAT'S KERRY. THANK YOU. 7.2 REFERRAL FROM THE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE, REALLY LIKE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE. I'M NOT SURE WHO THE CHAIR WAS THERE BUT IT READS, [00:30:06] PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE AND THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE HELD FRIDAY, FEBRUARY FIFTH, 2021, THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED; A RESOLUTION O221 MOVED BY T. TURNER, SECONDED BY E TENBROEKE, THAT THE ELLIOT LAKE ARTS AND CULTURE STEERING COMMITTEE, EXCEPT THE TERMS OF REFERENCE WITH THE FOLLOWING REVISIONS; THAT THE ELLIOT LAKE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE REPORTS DIRECTLY TO ELLIOT LAKE CITY COUNCIL; THAT A MINIMUM OF TWO OUT OF THE THREE MEMBERS OF ELLIOT LAKE CITY COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEANING; AND THAT A QUORUM OF THE COMMITTEE WOULD CONSIST OF A MAJORITY OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS PLUS [INAUDIBLE] REPRESENTATIVES FROM ELLIOT LAKE CITY COUNCIL; AND THAT THE SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER WILL ACT AS THE SECRETARY TO THE COMMITTEE; THAT MEETINGS WILL BE HELD MONTHLY ON THE FOURTH FRIDAY OF EACH MONTH AT 10:00 AM; AND THAT THE REVISED TERMS OF REFERENCE BEFORE [INAUDIBLE] GO TO THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING FOR APPROVAL. CAN I HAVE A MOVER, PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNSELOR FENIMORE SECOND BY COUNSEL CYR. WHO SHOULD I BE HANDING THE SOFT TO, MR. GAGNON? >> WELL, PROBABLY BECAUSE I WAS RELUCTANTLY CHAIR FOR THAT MEETING. NOT A ROLE ON THIS TOO, BUT MANAGED TO MUDDLE THROUGH IT. THIS IS A BRAND NEW COMMITTEE, IT'S THE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE, SOMEWHAT UNIQUE. WE DID THE BEST WE COULD RESEARCHING THE ATTACHED TERMS OF REFERENCE TO FLASH A LITTLE BIT HOW THE COMMITTEE WILL FUNCTION, WHO ARE THE VOTING MEMBERS? WHO ARE THE STAFF RESOURCES? WHO ARE MEMBERS OF NON-VOTING RESOURCES SUCH AS MYSELF, THE PROJECT MANAGER, AND THE MANAGER OF RECREATION AND CULTURE. THE COMMITTEE, AT THEIR FIRST MEETING OF THE NEW COMMITTEE WITH A FULL QUORUM, MET ON FEBRUARY FIFTH, MADE A FEW SUBTLE CHANGES TO THE DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE REGARDING THE TIME AND DATE THAT THEY'LL BE MEETING. WE DEBATED AND WE DISCUSSED HOW IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS COMMITTEE TO MEET WITHOUT ANY MEMBERS OF MUNICIPAL COUNCILOR, CONSIDERING THE PROJECT IS GOING TO BE FUNDED BY THE CITY AND WITHIN OUR ENTIRE BOUNDARY. WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE EACH AND EVERY OF THE THREE MEMBERS TO BE HERE, SO THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THAT TWO OF THE THREE MUNICIPAL VOTING REPS WOULD BE ENOUGH TO CONSTITUTE THE QUORUM. IT DOESN'T SPEAK MUCH TO THAT CHAIR. THE CHAIR, IF NO CHANGES ARE MADE TO THE TERMS OF REFERENCE WOULD BE ELECTED AMONG THE MEMBERS, THE VOTING MEMBERS THERE, THAT'S FOR COUNCIL AND REVIEW IF YOU WANT. BIO-INFORMATICS, FAIRLY BENIGN. IT'S A STEERING COMMITTEE FOR A RATHER LARGE MUNICIPAL PROJECT, BUT IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE FORMAL REPRESENTATION FROM CERTAIN RIVER FIRST NATION AND SOCIETY FIRST NATION. IF WE PLAN TO WORK WITH THE CONSULTANT AND STAFF AS THIS PROJECT GOES THROUGH THE VARIOUS STAGES, EVENTUALLY TO CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLETION. SUBJECT ANY QUESTIONS. THAT'S GENERALLY THE REPORT. >> THANK YOU, MR. GAGNON. I'M TRYING TO FIND HERE HOW A CHAIR WOULD BE SELECTED FROM THE REPRESENTATION. >> I BELIEVE THAT PROBLEM, IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE, ARE FAIRLY QUIET ON THE CHAIR, SO IT WOULD LIKELY REVERT TO OUR GENERAL PROCEDURAL BY-LAW WHERE THE CHAIR IS ELECTED FROM THEIR MEMBERS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT HAS ANY INPUT ON THAT, OR IF WE WANT TO ADD AN ITEM REGARDING THE CHAIR ROLE TO THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AND THEN ADOPT IT FROM THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO [OVERLAPPING] AS MR. [INAUDIBLE] CAN PULL THAT UP QUICKLY, MORE QUICKLY THAN I CAN. >> GOT SOME HANDS UP HERE ALL OVER THE PLACE. ASK MS. BRAY SHE CAN CLARIFY IF NOT THEN PERHAPS COUNSEL WILL CHIME IN ON THAT. MS. BRAY? >> I'M JUST CHECKING THE PROCEDURAL BY-LAW, BUT I DO KNOW THERE ARE SOME COMMITTEES WHERE THE CHAIR IS ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL FOR THE COMMITTEE, SO IT WILL BE UP TO COUNCIL HOW THEY WANT TO WORK THAT IN TERMS OF REFERENCE. >> WANT TO PUT A MOTION [NOISE] ON THE FLOOR? >> OKAY. COUNSEL PATRY? >> THANK YOU. I WANT TO ADD TO THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IS ATTACHED THAT THE CHAIR BE A MEMBER OF COUNSEL. WITH RESPECT TO THE PREVIOUS MEETING, IT WASN'T EVEN A MEMBER OF COMMITTEE, IT WAS A RESOURCE WHICH IS OUR CAO, PRETTY HIGH RESOURCE, BUT STILL HOW AN OFFICIAL MEMBER BASED ON OUR STRUCTURE. [00:35:04] I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IT BE A MEMBER OF COUNCIL, BUT THEN I ALSO HAVE AN ISSUE. WE CAN DISCUSS THAT NOW, THEN I WANT TO GO BACK TO THE REFERENCE ABOUT THE TWO MEMBERS HAVING TO BE THERE TO HAVE QUORUM. BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, I'LL JUST PUT IT ON THERE A MOTION TO ADD THAT THE CHAIR BE A MEMBER OF COUNCIL. [OVERLAPPING] ABSOLUTE VALIANTLY. >> IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THE AMENDMENT? SECOND BY COUNSEL FENIMORE. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDMENT? COUNSEL PATRY? >> RATIONALE ON THAT AMENDMENT IS, THIS IS A MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO BE SPENDING VALIANTLY TAXPAYERS MONEY, AND I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL OF ELLIOT LAKE SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBLE PEOPLE IN STEERING THIS COMMITTEE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE GOING DOWN THE RIGHT ROAD, TO MAKE SURE HOW WE ARE AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE GETTING THIS NEW ARTS AND CULTURE HUB REBUILT. I THINK THE DIRECTION NEEDS TO BE GIVEN THROUGH OUR COUNCIL AND THEN OUR RESOURCES, WORKING WITH COUNCIL, AND THE CHAIR BEING ABLE TO EXPEDITE THIS PROJECT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ABOUT THE AMENDMENT, COUNSEL FENIMORE? >> THANK YOU. I JUST BELIEVE THAT FOR PROCESS SAKE, THAT IT'S JUST SIMPLER TO HAVE A COUNSELOR AS THE CHAIR, TO BE ABLE TO SET THE AGENDAS, AND TO BE ABLE TO GUIDE THE MEETING ALONG WITH OUR PROCEDURAL BYLAW. I DON'T THINK IT HAS TO BE THE PERSON IN THE ROOM WHO KNOWS THE MOST ABOUT ARTS AND CULTURE, I THINK IT HAS TO BE SOMEONE WHO UNDERSTANDS THE CITY PROCESS. I THINK THAT A COUNSELOR IS BETTER SUITED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE [INAUDIBLE] CLERK WILL REQUIRE FOR US TO HAVE THESE MEETINGS MEETING DEADLINES FOR NOTICES AND SUCH. >> OKAY. THANK THANK YOU, COUNSEL CYR. >> THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR, YOUR WORSHIP. I DO AGREE WITH THIS MOTION SINCE THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT BUILD PARTIALLY INSURANCE, BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY FROM TAXPAYER FUNDS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS A STRONG VOICE IN A REASONABLE INPUT AND THE STEERING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE. I THINK IT'LL LESSEN THE CHANCE OF THE COMMITTEE AND COUNSEL BUTTING HEADS DOWN THE ROAD. CONSIDERING THE AMOUNT OF DOLLARS THAT'S GOING TO BE INVESTED INTO IT, I THINK THAT'S A WISE MOVE. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT? I'LL PUT IT TO A ROLL CALL VOTE. THE AMENDMENT IS THAT THE CHAIR WILL BE A SEATED MEMBER OF COUNSEL FROM THE CITY OF ELLIOTT LAKE. COUNSEL FENIMORE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL PEARCE? >> FAVOR. >> COUNSEL PATRY? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSEL TURNER? >> AGAINST. >> COUNSEL MANN? >> IN FAVOR. >> "I'M IN FAVOR." THAT'S KERRY. BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION. I BELIEVE COUNSEL PEARCE HAD A QUESTION UP NEXT OR COMMENT. >> ACTUALLY, NO, I DIDN'T [LAUGHTER]. >> ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE I HAVE THE NEXT QUESTION FROM A NANCY AND I'M PRETTY SURE THERE'S NO NANCY'S AROUND THE TABLE AT THE MOMENT. [LAUGHTER] NOT SURE WHERE THAT CAME FROM. BACK TO YOU, COUNSEL PATRY. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I JUST PUT MY HAND UP. IF THERE WAS SOMEBODY ELSE THAT HAD ACTUALLY HAD THEIR HAND UP, I'LL LET THEM GO FIRST. BUT IF NOT, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. >> DID ANYONE ELSE HAVE THEIR HAND UP THAT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE NANCY'S PLACE HERE? [LAUGHTER] SORRY ABOUT THAT. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES. ONE BEING THAT THE MINIMUM OF TWO OUT OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE ONION LAKE CITY COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT AT A MEETING TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEETING. BUT YET FURTHER DOWN, IT IS STANDARD, SIMILAR TO OUR OTHER MEETINGS, THAT THE MAYOR IS EX-OFFICIO AND DOESN'T COUNT FOR QUORUM. [00:40:01] WE HAVE CONTRADICTING ITEMS IN HERE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EITHER CHANGE THE OTHER PARAGRAPH THAT MAKES THE MAYOR NO LONGER EX-OFFICIAL BY MAKING HIM AN OFFICIAL MEMBER. MR. DANIEL HAD SAID THAT EVERYBODY WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING, THAT ALL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT, WHICH THE MAYOR IS A MEMBER. BUT THERE WAS A ROLL CALL VOTE AND THE MAYOR ISN'T MENTIONED. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE PRESENT AT THE MEETING OR NOT. DOESN'T REALLY MEAN MUCH EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT IF YOU WERE THERE OR YOU WEREN'T, THEN THE STATEMENT IS JUST SLIGHTLY INCORRECT. BUT THEN I HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH ADMINISTRATION. I HAVE THE ONE ISSUE WITH, WHETHER THE MARRIAGE SHOULD BE EX- OFFICIAL OR NOT, AND THEN WHEN YOU GET TO ADMINISTRATION. I HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS LIKE ITEM TWO UNDER ADMINISTRATION THAT THE COMMITTEE SHALL HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS AND SPECIAL MEETINGS FROM TIME TO TIME AS DEEM NECESSARY. I WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE IN THERE OR WORDING IN THEIR STATES THAT IT'S FOLLOWING COUNCIL'S PROCEDURAL BY-LAW. THEN IN ITEM ONE, THAT NOTHING IN PARAGRAPH CONTAINS SHALL AUTHORIZE OR EMPOWER THE ARTS HUB COMMITTEE TO INCUR ANY DEBT. I'D LIKE TO ADD IN THERE OR ANY NUMBER. I JUST DON'T WANT ANYBODY GOING OUT AND ACTING ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT FULL COUNCIL AUTHORITY. IT IS AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR A STEERING COMMITTEE AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO MAKE RULES OR EXPENDITURES ON ITS OWN. I'M JUST TRYING TO STAY IN TUNE WITH WHAT WE WERE RECEIVED IN OUR TRAINING THURSDAY ON HOW WE WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE. >> IF I MAY, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I WANT TO AGREE WITH COUNSELOR PATRICK. I THINK WE SHOULD ACTUALLY HAVE THE MAYOR AS EX-OFFICIO, AND THEN JUST CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO SAY ONE OF THE TWO VOTING MEMBERS IS QUORUM. IF THE MAYOR SHOWS UP, IT DOESN'T COUNT FOR QUORUM, BUT HE GETS A VOTE. THAT'S ALL WELL AND GOOD, BUT THAT'S GRAVY. WHAT WE NEED IS A MINIMUM OF ONE OF THE TWO COUNCIL APPOINTEES TO CONSTITUTE QUORUM. WE CAN'T HAVE AS JUST THE MAYOR SHOW UP AND THE OTHER TOO HARDLY THERE THEN THAT DOESN'T COUNT. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. MAYOR, THAT WORDING DOESN'T WORK. I'M HAVING THE SAME OPINION AS OUR CAO. BUT YOU CAN'T SAY THAT THE MAYOR COUNTS FOR QUORUM EITHER. THE MAYOR ISN'T EX-OFFICIO AND IS AN ACTUAL MEMBER. THEN YOU'VE STILL GOT TWO PEOPLE TO CHANGE THE WORDING TO SAY THAT THE MAYOR AND ONE MEMBER, CONVOLUTED THINGS. I'D RATHER KEEP IT NICE AND NEAT AND CLEAN. THE MAYOR CAN BE AN ACTUAL MEMBER, DOESN'T NEED TO BE EX-OFFICIO, WE CAN CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP. >> MIGHT SIMPLY JUST BE ABLE TO REMOVE THE LINE COMPLETELY THAT STATES A MINIMUM OF TWO OF THE THREE MEMBERS OF ELLIOTT LAKE COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEETING. IF THE CHAIR IS TO BE A MEMBER OF COUNSEL RESPECTIVELY, YOU'D HOPE THAT THE CHAIR IS MAKING IT TO EVERY MEETING AND ALSO LOOKING OVER THE AGENDA PRIOR TO SO THAT THEY KNOW THAT WHAT'S GOING ON FOR THAT MEETING, THAT WOULD ENSURE THAT THERE'S ALWAYS A MEMBER OF COUNCIL PRESENT. MIGHT BE THE EASIEST SOLUTION, JUST REMOVING THAT LINE COMPLETELY. WE'LL CONTINUE AROUND WHAT EVERYONE THINKS AND I'VE COUNSEL CYR AND COUNSEL FENIMORE WAITING TO SPEAK. COUNSELORS CYR. >> THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT I WANTED TO BRING. I THINK WE SHOULD JUST REMOVE THAT LINE WITH THE CHAIRMANSHIP, A MEMBER OF COUNCIL. I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH BECOMES A REDUNDANT LINE THAT CAN ACTUALLY CONSTRICT THE COMMITTEE. I THINK THAT TO ME, IT'S A REDUNDANT LINE. >> COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING ABOUT YOUR PRESENCE AT THE MEETINGS. WE NEED YOUR VOTE BECAUSE YOU'RE NUMBER SEVEN. OTHERWISE, WE ONLY HAVE SIX, WHICH COULD OFTEN LEAD TO A TIE, CORRECT? ARE YOU A VOTING MEMBER AS EX-OFFICIO AND NOT COUNT FOR QUORUM? I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. NATALIE'S GOT A FINGER UP. MAYBE SHE'S ANSWERING THAT. >> NATALIE. SORRY, MS. BRAY. >> THANK YOU. JUST IN THE PROCEDURAL BY-LAW, IT SAYS THE MAYOR SHALL BE AN EX-OFFICIO VOTING MEMBER OF ANY ADVISORY, AD HOC, OR OTHER COMMITTEE STRUCK BY COUNCIL. HOWEVER, THE MAYOR'S PRESENCE SHALL NOT BE USED IN DETERMINING QUORUM. >> ANSWERS THAT QUESTION PRETTY SIMPLY. OTHER THAN THE ACCESSIBILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND I'M [00:45:02] AN ACTUAL MEMBER AND NOT JUST EX-OFFICIO. ACCORDING TO OUR COMMITTEE LISTS, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY. I HAVE COUNSEL PEARSON THEN BACK TO COUNSEL PETRI. >> THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. I THINK YOU PROBABLY SOLVED THE PROBLEM. I KNOW THAT THIS HAS COME UP IN THE PAST WITH OTHER ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND BASICALLY THE RULE OF TWO OUT OF THREE COUNSELORS HAVING TO BE THERE ALWAYS CREATED A PROBLEM. REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY, IT WAS A ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEN WE WERE A LOT MORE ACTIVE. IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT SOMETIMES BECAUSE COUNSELORS DUTIES JUST DIDN'T ALLOW THEM TO BE THERE THAT OFTEN. WE USUALLY HAD ONE, MAYBE TWO, BUT THAT WAS ABOUT IT. I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO WORRY ABOUT DEBT BEING INCURRED BY THE COMMITTEE, AND I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO WORRY ABOUT DEBT BEING INCURRED BY ANY INDIVIDUAL. IF YOU WANT TO PUT IN THAT THE COMMITTEE CANNOT INCUR ANY DEBT. I MEAN, NONE OF OUR ADVISORY COMMITTEES ARE ALLOWED TO DO THAT OR THE STEERING COMMITTEES. IT'S JUST NOT. YOU CAN SAY, WELL, WE WANT TO SPEND ALL THIS KIND OF MONEY, BUT THAT'S NOT THEIR DECISION TO MAKE. THAT COMES TO COUNCIL. I THINK THAT IS REDUNDANT, BUT DEFINITELY THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT AN INDIVIDUAL COULD DO THAT IS ABSOLUTELY REDUNDANT. IT NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN. BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. >> COUNSEL PATRICK. >> THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE, SO THAT'S WHY I WANT SPENDING BE PUT IN THERE. THERE ARE MEMBERS THAT HAVE SPENT MONEY. BUT I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE ASPECT OF REMOVING THAT LINE COMPLETELY. IF YOUR EX-OFFICIO AND YOUR TWO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AREN'T THERE, THEY CAN APPOINT A CHAIR AT THE MEETING BECAUSE THE CHAIR ISN'T PRESENT AND YOU CAN HAVE QUORUM. BECAUSE YOU HAVE FOUR MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT ON THIS COUNCIL AND THAT'S MY ISSUE. I DON'T WANT TO REMOVE THAT LINE. I WANT THE WORDING TO CHANGE TO MAKE SURE. I'M NOT THE EXPERT IN IT. OUR CLERK IS MUCH MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN I AM WHEN IT COMES TO THESE ITEMS. I WOULD AT LEAST HAVE STAFF COME BACK WITH SOMETHING THAT PROTECTS US SO THAT WE DO HAVE COUNSEL PRESENT AT THAT MEETING AND THE COUNSELORS THERE TO AT LEAST TRY AND POPULATE THAT QUORUM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. BUT THE MAYOR LIVING UP IN NORTH OF TOWN AND IF WE DON'T HAVE THE TWO MEMBERS AVAILABLE FOR THE MEETING, THE FOUR OTHER PEOPLE COULD ACTUALLY HOLD A STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING CONSTANTLY. I WOULD WANT SOME VERBIAGE IN THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT STAYS THERE. I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORDING SHOULD BE. >> MR. DANIEL. >> MAYBE I'M MISSING SOMETHING. I KNOW WE'RE DOING THIS ON THE FLY, BUT IF THE CLERK CAN, AND I THOUGHT MY POINT EARLIER. IF THE MAYOR DOESN'T COUNT FOR QUORUM, THEN ALL WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT IS THAT ONE OF THE TWO VOTING MUNICIPAL COUNCIL MEMBERS BE PRESENT TO CONSTITUTE QUORUM. THAT WAY, WHETHER IT'S THE CHAIR OR NOT, THE CHAIR CAN BE ACTING ANYONE, IT'S FINE. IT'S JUST THAT AS LONG AS YOU GOT ONE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL THERE, THEN YOU'D HAVE A QUORUM. THE MAYOR'S THERE. I BELIEVE THAT ANSWERS THAT UNLESS I'M MISSING SOMETHING. >> GO OVER FOR COUNSEL FENIMORE FOR A MOMENT. >> I HAVE A THEORY YOU I THINK TO MS. BRAY. PLAYING THIS BASEBALL GAME HERE. IF THE CHAIR IS A MEMBER OF COUNSEL AND CAN'T BE AT THE MEETING, WOULD THERE BE A MEETING, EVEN CALLED BY THE CHAIR? I KNOW THAT THERE'S A SET MEETING OF EVERY FOURTH WEEK, BUT THERE ALSO HAS TO BE AN AGENDA AND EVERYTHING FORWARDED TO THE CLERK, THE WEEK BEFORE IN ORDER TO CALL THE MEETING AND HAVE THE RIGHT NOTICES AND STUFF. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IN MY HEAD IF IT MATTERS. BECAUSE IF THE CHAIR COULDN'T BE THERE, I WOULD HOPE THEY WOULD ASK THE OTHER COUNSELOR TO CHAIR OF THE MEETING AND IF THEY BOTH WEREN'T AVAILABLE, THERE WOULDN'T HAVE A MEETING. I CAN'T SEE AN INSTANCE WHERE FOUR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WOULD BE THERE WITHOUT TWO COUNSELORS. >> MS. BRAY. [00:50:01] >> IN THE PAST WHEN WE'VE HAD COMMITTEES THAT COUNSELORS HAD TO BE PRESENT FOR THE MEETING TO OCCUR. IF THE CHAIR WHO WAS A COUNSELOR COULD NOT MAKE IT, THEY CAN ASK THE OTHER COUNSEL CHAIR ON THEIR BEHALF. IF THAT COUNSEL IS NOT AVAILABLE EITHER, THEN NORMALLY THAT MEETING WOULD BE POSTPONED AND HELD THE NEXT MONTH. THIS IS A STEERING COMMITTEE. IT'S NOT A STANDING COMMITTEE OR ADVISORY COMMITTEE, BUT DOESN'T COME TO THE CLINIC WOULD GO TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY. BUT YEAH, IT'S ALL THE SAME NOTICES THERE ARE STILL APPLICABLE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR YOUR AGENDA OUT THE THURSDAY BEFORE THE MONDAY OR HOWEVER THE DAYS OF THE WEEK. >> COUNCILOR SIYA. >> THANK YOU WORSHIP. ALSO BEING THAT IT'S ON A FIXED DATE, I THINK THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY FOR THE MEMBERS TO JUST ORGANIZE A QUICK SNAP MEETING AND TRY TO HIJACK THE FUTURE AGENDAS TO THEIR REDOING IT. I THINK WE'RE SAFE FROM ANYTHING LIKE THAT HAPPENING. AS THE CLERKS EXPLAINED, SHE JUST DOESN'T HAVE TO POST THE AGENDA IF THE TWO MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AREN'T AVAILABLE. IT SOLVES ITSELF AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. >> OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THAT LINE, WHETHER SOMEBODY LIKE TO PUT FORWARD AN AMENDMENT THAT STATE'S A MINIMUM OF ONE OUT OF ONE MEMBER OF THE LEAGUE COUNCIL OR JUST TO REMOVE THE LINE COMPLETELY KNOWING THAT THE CHAIR IS A MEMBER OF COUNSEL AND IF THE CHAIR IS NOT AVAILABLE ANOTHER WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THEM. COUNSELOR PATRI. >> IN THE PARKS [INAUDIBLE] , SHE SAID THAT YOU CAN HAVE AN ACTING CHAIR SO ANYBODY COULD BECOME THE ACTING CHAIR DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A COUNSELOR. I WOULD PUT THE AMENDMENT IN THAT, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M A 100 PERCENT ON THIS WORDING. BUT I WOULD WANT THAT A MINIMUM OF ONE OF THE THREE MEMBERS OF THE ALIA LEAGUE CITY COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEETING. I'LL PUT THAT AMENDMENT FORWARD. >> IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT AMENDMENT? SECONDED BY COUNSELOR SIYA MAY FIX OUR ISSUE ALTOGETHER. COUNSELOR TURNER, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> I JUST THOUGHT THAT JUST BECAUSE ONE MEMBER OF COUNCIL CAN'T MAKE THE MEETING. WE DON'T WANT THE MEETING CANCELED, BECAUSE THEN WE JUST END UP IN CONTRADICTION WITH THE IDEA OF MOVING THIS THING FORWARD. THESE ADVISORY COMMITTEES MEETING ONCE A MONTH IS NOT WORKING AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT BY ANY MEANS. CANCELING A MEETING IS QUITE A HINDRANCE. I LIKE THE IDEA OF ONE COUNCIL MEMBER IS ENOUGH TO KEEP IT GOING. >> OKAY, COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> I'M IN AGREEMENT. I THINK THAT IT SHOULD STAY IN THERE JUST SO THE OTHER MEMBERS UNDERSTAND, IF SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THAT THE THREE OF US MEMBERS COULD NOT BE THERE, THAT THEY COULD NOT HAVE A MEETING. JUST SO THAT IT'S IN BLACK AND WHITE AND THERE'S NO MISUNDERSTANDING OR ANYTHING. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED? COUNSELOR PEARCE. >> THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP, COULD THE CLERK PLEASE READ BACK WHAT THE AMENDMENT NOW IS CAUSE WE'VE GONE THROUGH A WHOLE RANGE OF THINGS HERE. >> MISS BRAY. >> THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED IS THAT COUNCIL APPROVE PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE ARTS AND CULTURE HUB STEERING COMMITTEE AS PRESENTED BY THE COMMITTEE, AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE BE A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALIA LAKE. AN AMENDMENT HAS SINCE BEEN INTRODUCED THE FURTHER AMEND THAT A MINIMUM OF ONE OUT OF THREE MEMBERS OF ALIA LEAGUE COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT AT A MEETING TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEETING. >> THOSE ARE THE CHANGES. >> ROLL CALL VOTE [NOISE] FOR THE LATEST AMENDMENT. >> COUNSEL PEARCE. >>IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR SIYA. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PATRI. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR MANN. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR TURNER. >> FAVOR. >> I'M IN FAVOR. THAT AMENDMENT'S CARRIED. [00:55:01] HAVE ALL ISSUE'S BEEN CLARIFIED FOR THE TERMS OF REFERENCE NOW? COUNSELOR PATRI. >> JUST THE TWO OTHER ITEMS THAT I HAD MENTIONED THAT I WOULD LIKE CHANGED IN THERE AS WELL. >> OKAY, WE ARE STILL LOOKING AT AN AMENDMENT THAT STATES THAT NO EXPENSES WOULD BE INCURRED BY THE STEERING COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE OR ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER. >> CORRECT. THAT AND THAT FOLLOWING COUNSELORS PROCEDURAL BYLAW IN THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH AS WELL. >> OKAY, IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT MOTION? OR THAT AMENDMENT? SECONDED BY COUNCILOR MANN. ANY DEBATE OR QUESTIONS ON THIS? OKAY. ROLL CALL VOTE. I'LL START WITH COUNSELOR MANN THIS TIME. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PATRI. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR TURNER. >> FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR SIYA. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PEARCE. >> FAVOR. >> OKAY, SO ALL AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED. BACK TO THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED AND AMENDED AND AMENDED. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SEEING NONE. ALL RIGHT, LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING THIS MOVE FORWARD. I'LL CALL FOR A ROLL CALL, VOTE TO APPROVE AS AMENDED, THEN WE WANT POSSIBLY MISS BRAY, COULD YOU READ OUT THE [LAUGHTER] RESOLUTION WITH AMENDMENTS PLEASE? >> I DIDN'T GET THE LAST ONE THAT COUNSELOR PATRI WAS REFERRING TO. >> THAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE OR INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS COULD NOT INCUR ANY EXPENSES. I BELIEVE THE LAST PART WAS THAT THE COMMITTEE FOLLOW THE PROCEDURAL BYLAW. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MISS BRAY, IT'S UNDER SECTION D ADMINISTRATION AND ITS PARAGRAPH ONE AND PARAGRAPH TWO. >> PARAGRAPH ONE, IT WOULD BE SEVEN THE LINE DOWN, ADD AFTER HUB COMMITTEE THEN PRIOR TO INCUR ANY DEBT, THE MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION AND THEN ON PARAGRAPH TWO, THE SECOND LINE, REGULAR MEETINGS AND SPECIAL MEETINGS AND AFTER MEETINGS PUT IN FOLLOWING COUNCIL PROCEDURAL BYLAW. >> THANK YOU. SHALL NOT INCUR ANY DEBT IN ONE? >> ANY EXPENSES. >> ANY EXPENSES. >> CORRECT. >> OKAY. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT JUST ADD ANY MEMBER, DON'T CHANGE DEBT, IT'S DEBT LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION. THAT'S ALL WORDED IN THEIR PRIOR, SO I'M NOT EVEN ADDING EXPENSE. JUST LEAVE THE WORDING IN THERE. JUST ADD THAT NO MEMBER SHALL. [BACKGROUND] >> I'M SORRY. >> SORRY. SO PARAGRAPH 1,2,3,4,6,7 LINES DOWN IT GOES, SHALL AUTHORIZE OR EMPOWER THE ARTS HUB COMMITTEE OR ANY MEMBER. OR ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TO INCUR. >> THE COUNCIL APPROVES THE PROPOSED TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE ARTS AND CULTURAL HUB STEERING COMMITTEE AS PRESENTED BY THE COMMITTEE, AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE SHALL BE A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY [MUMMERS] LAKE. TO FURTHER AMEND THAT, A MINIMUM OF ONE OF THE THREE MEMBERS OF THE ELITE LAKE COUNCIL MUST BE PRESENT IN ORDER TO CONSTITUTE A LEGAL MEETING. THAT AS PART OF THIS TERMS OF REFERENCE THEORISTS, HUB COMMITTEE SHALL AT ALL TIMES BE THE AGENT [MUMMERS] [01:00:02] PARTY AND WILL ACT BONAFIDE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE AUTHORITY OF THIS BYLAW. NEITHER THE ARTS HUB COMMITTEE, NOR ANY MEMBER THEREOF SHALL INCUR ANY LIABILITY BY REASON OF ANYTHING DONE OR LEFT UNDONE BY THE COMMITTEE PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT NOTHING IN THE PARAGRAPH CONTAINS SHOWN POWER OR AUTHORIZE THE ARTS HUB COMMITTEE OR ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBER TO INCUR ANY DEBT LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION FOR HAVING [MUMMERS] SHALL BECOME LIABLE WITHOUT HAVING PREVIOUSLY OBTAINED THE CONSENTS OF COUNCIL, AND THE ARTS AND HUB COMMITTEE SHALL HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS AND SPECIAL MEETINGS FROM TIME TO TIME AS DEEMED NECESSARY, FOLLOWING COUNCIL'S PROCEDURAL BYLAW. >> WOULD WE CONTINUE ON WITH THE REST OF THE PROPOSED PIECES AND THAT SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER WILL ACT AS SECRETARY TO THE COMMITTEE, MEETINGS TO BE HELD MONTHLY ON THE FOURTH, FRIDAY OF EACH MONTH AT 10:00 AM. WE'VE REVISED THE TERMS OF REFERENCE. ROLL-CALL VOTE WE'LL START WITH COUNCIL FINAMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCIL TURNER. >> IN FAVOR. >> ELSAMANN. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCIL PATRICK. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCIL [MUMMERS]. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCIL PEARCE. >> IN FAVOR. >> AND I'M IN FAVOR, THAT'S CARRIED. SO THERE'S NO OUTSIDE BOARD OR COMMITTEE REPORTING UNFINISHED BUSINESS, [9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS] 9.1 RECREATION HUB UPDATE, MR. GAGNON? >> YES. THANK YOU, [MUMMERS]. THE REVIEW OF A LOT OF THE REPORTS THAT WE'VE HAD SO FAR IS STILL A LITTLE BIT RELIEVED. STAFF IS REALLY WITH OTHER PRESSURES RIGHT NOW. WE DO HOPE TO GET THE VIDEO REPORTS, AND THE [MUMMERS] REPORTS IN FRONT OF EITHER SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OR HUB COMMITTEE MEETING IN THE NEXT LITTLE WHILE PROBABLY WILL TAKE ANOTHER TWO WEEKS AT LEAST BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THE [MUMMERS] HAS RETOOLED THEIR FUNDING PROGRAMS AND IT'S LOOKING INTRIGUING THAT PERHAPS THE ENGINEERING DESIGN EASE THAT MOVES TO THE NEXT STEP COULD BE FUNDED TO THE 50 PERCENT FUNDING FROM THE PROVINCE, BUT THAT'S INTRIGUING. THEY'VE JUST ANNOUNCED THE HSC, SO WE'RE DOING SOME RESEARCH INTO THAT AND ONCE WE HAVE THAT HUB REVIEW MEETING, WE'LL BE ABLE TO FLOW RIGHT INTO FUNDING APPLICATIONS PERHAPS FOR THIS PROGRAM, AND THE SAME FUNDING COULD ALSO BE INTRIGUING FOR THE ARTS OF DETAILED DESIGN, WHICH IS MOST LIKELY OUR NEXT STEP THERE AS WELL. SO THAT'S BOTH ENCOURAGING ON THE FUNDING SIDE. FOR THE SMALLER SOFT COST, I SHOULD SAY THAT IT IS KEPT AT TWO MILLION DOLLARS OR 50 PERCENT FUNDINGS. IT'S NOT GOING TO DO A LOT TO THE 30 OR 40 MILLION DOLLAR FUNDING PROJECT, BUT IT WILL CERTAINLY BE HELPFUL IN THE IMMEDIATE PHASE AS WE'RE MOVING FURTHER ALONG WITH DESIGN. I HAD A WHOLE LOT ELSE TO REPORT ON OTHER, THEN WE WILL START TO PREPARE A BINDER FOR YOU WITH VARIOUS REPORTS AND, I TRIED TO GET THE MANAGERS. IT'S THE MANAGEMENT'S THING TO REVIEW THAT AND GIVE YOU SOME SALIENT POINTS AND BRIEFING NOTES AND GET THAT, PROBABLY MID MARCH AT THIS RATE. >> THANK YOU. ARTS AND CULTURE HUB UPDATE. >> WE HAVE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR OUR COMMITTEE NOW SO THAT'S HANDY, JUST IN TIME FOR OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THIS FRIDAY. WE WILL CONTINUE AND WE'LL BE HEARING FROM OUR CONSULTANTS ON THE NEXT STEP ON WHERE THEY ARE ON THEIR PROCESSES SO FAR AND HAD THE SAME IDEA WITH THE [MUMMERS] HSC, SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WE STILL HAVE A FUNDING APPLICATION IN WITH [MUMMERS] HSC FOR THE PRELIMINARY FEASIBILITY STUDY. SO WE'LL SEE HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET AN ANSWER ON THAT BEFORE WE'RE APPLYING FOR THE NEXT STAGE, WHICH WOULD BE $1.2 MILLION APPROXIMATELY FOR THE DETAILED DESIGN OF THE ARTS BUILDING. WE'RE STILL WINDING THAT UP IN THE YEAR AND WITHIN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A FUNDING APPLICATION THERE AND THEN ALSO HEAR FROM OUR FUNDERS AS TO KNOW HOW OFTEN WE CAN REAPPLY FOR TWO PROJECTS IN THE SAME, SIMILAR SCOPE. BUT THAT ONE'S SLIGHTLY MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD IN THE SENSE THAT WE HAVE THE STAKEHOLDERS TABLE AND THE CONSULTANTS ARE WORKING ON THE NEEDS ANALYSIS AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL NOW AT 20 THOUSAND SQUARE FEET AND APPROXIMATELY $12 MILLION THAT IS WHAT IS NEEDED TO REPLACE SIMILAR, [01:05:04] SMALLER FOOTPRINT, BUT SIMILAR SCOPE OF SERVICES THAT WE LOST IN THE CIVIC CENTER COLLAPSE. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. 9.3 RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS STANDING ITEM. REPORT FROM CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, [MUMMERS] WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, AS THIS MATTER DEALS WITH POTENTIAL ACQUISITION OR DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY OWNED BY [MUMMERS] MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION UNDER SECTION 239, 2C OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT. MOVER TO PUT THAT IN CLOSED SESSION. MOVE BY COUNSEL PEARCE SECONDER, TAKEN IN BY COUNSEL TURNER. MR. GAGNON, JUST TO ENSURE YOU DO HAVE A BIT OF AN UPDATE FOR US HERE THAT NEEDS COUNCIL'S ATTENTION. >> YEAH, I LOVE THE OPINION THAT WE SHOULD BE REVIEWING SOME WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND GET A REFINED SORT OF MANDATE FROM COUNCIL AS TO WHAT THE NEXT STEPS WOULD BE ON THAT. I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO DETAILED IN AN OPEN SESSION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING T BE TALKING ABOUT IN A CLOSED SESSION. BUT I'M HAPPY TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL HAS. >> COUNCIL PATRICK. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT BASED ON OUR COUNCIL TRAINING THAT WE RECEIVED LAST WEEK, WE STILL HAVE A RESOLUTION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL THAT STATES THAT WE SHALL ONLY BE DOING CLOSED SESSION MATTERS IN PERSON AND WE HAVE NOT BROUGHT THAT BACK TO THE COUNCIL TO RESCIND THAT. SO IF WE WANT TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION, I ALSO HAVE OTHER ISSUES ABOUT THIS GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION, BUT PROCEDURALLY, WE CANNOT GO INTO CLOSED SESSION VIA ZOOM. WE WERE TOLD THAT AT OUR TRAINING SESSION THAT RESOLUTION HAS TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO A REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AND DEALT WITH TO CHANGE IT, WHICH HAS NOT HAPPENED. SO IF THIS MATTER IS GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO CLOSED SESSION, WE CAN'T DISCUSS IT TONIGHT VIA ZOOM. >> SO COUNCIL PATRICK , I BELIEVE YOU DIDN'T LISTEN TO THE WHOLE CONVERSATION AS PERTAINED TO OUR TRAINING. JUST WITH THE TIDBITS OF INFORMATION, YOU ASKED WHEN THE WHOLE THING WAS MADE CLEAR, THE LEGAL OPINION SHOULD BE OBTAINED, WHICH WE DO HAVE ONE. YOUR DEFERRAL HAD TWO ISSUES PROCEDURALLY ONCE AGAIN. THE FIRST ONE IS SHALL GIVE A REASON ANYTIME CERTAIN, MEANING A DATE FOR THE ENDING OF THIS AND ON TOP OF THAT, THE WORDING STATED UNTIL COUNCIL CAN MEET IN PERSON AND COUNCIL CAN MEET IN PERSON AT ANY TIME. THERE YOU HAVE IT. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT. THE TRAINING AND COUNSELOR FENIMORE EVEN ASKED THE QUESTION. IN ORDER FOR US TO MEET IN PERSON, WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESCIND THAT BY LAW. WE WERE TOLD THAT. SO YOU CAN'T JUST KEEP DOING IT WRONG BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE LEGAL OPINION AND THEY SAID YES YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT LEGAL OPINION. BUT YOU HAVE TO BRING THIS FORWARD AT A PROPER PROCEDURALLY YOU GOT TO BRING IT FORWARD AT A PROPER COUNCIL MEETING ON AN AGENDA, MAKE SURE THAT THE LEGAL OPINION IS PRESENTED TO COUNCIL AND COUNCIL RE-VOTES TO RESCIND THAT RESOLUTION. I NEVER SAID THAT WE COULDN'T MEET IN-PERSON. I'D NEVER SAID THAT WE CAN'T MEET VIA ZOOM. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT THEY SAY. THAT LEGALLY, WE CAN MEET VIA ZOOM, BUT THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL, PUT A RESOLUTION FORWARD AND IN ORDER FOR YOU TO PROCEDURALLY STOP IT, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD TO DO IT THEN. IT'S TOO LATE THE RESOLUTION HAS ALREADY BEEN PASSED, AND SO WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND PROCEDURALLY DO THIS PROPERLY. I'M NOT WILLING TO GO INTO CLOSE SESSION UNTIL THAT RESOLUTION IS CORRECTED. THE RESOLUTION AS IT STANDS, IS THAT WE WILL ONLY MEET IN-PERSON AND I'M GOING TO STICK TO THAT. I'M NOT GOING AGAINST WHAT THE RESOLUTION OF THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL SAID. YOU CAN GO DO WHATEVER YOU LIKE BUT PROCEDURALLY, WE HAVE RULES AND I'M NOT BREAKING THOSE RULES. >> OKAY. YOUR OUT-OF-ORDER COUNSELOR PAD 2 BECAUSE YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT. YOUR WORDING WAS UNTIL COUNCIL CAN MEET IN-PERSON, COUNCIL CAN MEET IN-PERSON AND WE HAVE MET IN-PERSON. IF YOU'D LIKE TO TRY AND DEFER AGAIN THIS EVENING, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND TRY AND DEFER AGAIN THIS EVENING. BUT AT THE MOMENT YOU'RE INCORRECT. IF YOU'D LIKE, MAYBE THE NEXT STEP IS THAT WE RELEASE ILLUSTRATIVE CLIENT PRIVILEGES ON THE LEGAL OPINION SO THAT WE'RE ALL AWARE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO INTO CLOSE SESSION. YOUR WORDING WAS AND I DON'T CARE WHAT THE INTENT WAS, YOUR WORDING WAS UNTIL WE CAN MEET IN-PERSON, WE CAN MEET IN-PERSON LEGALLY. THE DIFFERENCE IS, THE WAY YOU ASK A QUESTION, TO SLIDE YOUR WAY TO GET THE ANSWER YOU WANT. [01:10:02] INSTEAD OF ACTUALLY GIVING THE WHOLE DESCRIPTION OF A SCENARIO TO GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION. SO PROCEDURALLY THAT DEFERRAL SHOULDN'T EVER HAPPENED. SO TOTAL ERROR ON MY PART FOR SURE. BUT YOUR WORDING, YOUR TIME IS UP. YOUR WORDING WAS UNTIL COUNCIL CAN MEET IN-PERSON. WE CAN MEET. SO AGAIN, UNLESS YOU'RE WILLING TO PUT ANOTHER DEFERRAL ON THE FLOOR, THEN THE QUESTION IS, ARE WE PUTTING THIS IN CLOSE SESSION AND GETTING AN UPDATE? COUNSELOR CYR. >> THANK YOU. WE ARE [INAUDIBLE] THROUGH YOU. I DID READ THE LEGAL OPINION AND I STILL DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE HAVING CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS ON ZOOM. I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH IT. IT'S PRIVATE, CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND OTHER MEMBERS HAVE NO WAY OF ENSURING THAT EVERYTHING REMAINS CONFIDENTIAL WHEN WE'RE ALL IN THE SAME ROOM, WE WERE ASSURED OF CONFIDENTIALITY. WHEN WE'RE NOT THERE IN CONTROL, SOME MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ARE PARTICIPATING IN THIS MEETING WITHOUT HEADSETS. YOU HAVE LOUDSPEAKERS ON. WE DON'T KNOW IF OTHER PEOPLE ARE LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATIONS JUST OUTSIDE THE DOOR. WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT. SO WITH CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BEING SHARED, THERE'S STILL POTENTIAL BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY. SO ZOOM IT'S NOT CUTTING IT FOR ME. I DON'T FEEL CONFIDENT AND COMFORTABLE WHEN THERE'S POTENTIAL RISK. >> OKAY. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, COUNSELOR CYR. SO TO ME, WHAT I'M HEARING IS IT'S MORE, UNFORTUNATELY A MATTER OF TRUST AND TRUSTING THAT EVERY MEMBER OF COUNSEL IS IN A SECURE LOCATION WHERE NO ONE ELSE IS GOING TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION. WE'D HOPE THAT EVERYBODY IS ADHERING TO THAT IN RECEIVING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. MY VIEW, WE KNOW IF WE READ IT ON FACEBOOK TOMORROW THAT NOT EVERYONE WHO'S IN A SECURE LOCATION. NOW THAT BEING SAID THAT THIS IS ALL PERSONAL PREFERENCE BY LAW, WE CAN HAVE CLOSED SESSION AND ZOOM. WE DO IT FOR OTHER COMMITTEES, OTHER BOARDS. WE HAD A HYBRID LAST WEEK WHICH WENT QUITE WELL. WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE BUSINESS FORWARD AND WE'RE FACING ANOTHER ISSUE THAT QUESTIONS COUNCIL AS TO HOW COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED IN MOVING FORWARD. UNFORTUNATELY, IF WE DON'T FIND A WAY TO DO THIS AS A GROUP AND AS A TEAM, CITY BUSINESS WILL NOT CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD. AGAIN, WE HAVE A MOTION THAT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO GO INTO CLOSE SESSION, I'M GOING TO CALL FOR THE VOTE RIGHT NOW. ROLL-CALL VOTE. I'M GOING TO START WITH COUNSELOR FENIMORE. COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I STILL HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT THE ACTUAL MOTION GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION. >> THE QUESTION HAS BEEN FINALLY PUT. I'M CALLING FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE. COUNSELOR TURNER, [LAUGHTER]. >> IN FAVOR. >> OKAY. COUNSELOR MANN. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PEARCE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PATRICK. >> OPPOSED. IT'S NOT DISPOSITION. >> COUNSELORS CYR. >> OPPOSED. >> OKAY. I'M IN FAVOR THAT'S CARRIED TO GO INTO CLOSE SESSION. 9.4, COVID-19 UPDATES STANDING ITEM [NOISE] 9.4.1 REPORT FROM THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, GREEN MUNICIPAL SERVICE LEVELS DURING THE SPIKE AND REPORTED CASES OF COVID-19 LOCALLY AND REGIONALLY MATTER DIFFERED AT FEBRUARY 8, 2021 AT MEETING. SO MR. DANIEL JUST A QUESTION AS TO HOW YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THIS BECAUSE THIS IS THE SAME REPORT THAT WAS APPROVED IN ORDER TO CLOSE DOWN SOME OF THE MUNICIPAL OUTDOOR FACILITIES THAT ARE STATED AND THAT IT'S REVISITED AT FEBRUARY 22ND, REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. WOULD YOU LIKE US TO PUT ANOTHER DATE ON IT OR JUST OPEN IT UP IN A DIFFERENT MANNER SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION. >> YEAH I GUESS [INAUDIBLE] 2020 SHOULD HAVE PRESENTED A PROPOSED MOTION AND THEN YOU COULD AT LEAST HAVE SOMETHING TO DEBATE. BASICALLY, IF YOU RECALL, FEBRUARY 8TH, PREMIER 4 WAS GETTING READY TO LIFT THE STAY-AT-HOME BAN AND LOOSEN UP RESTRICTIONS. AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAD A CLUSTER IN REPORTED CASES AND COUNCIL WAS DOING THE OPPOSITE. SO THE DIRECTION ON 8TH WAS TO CLOSE ESSENTIALLY EVERYTHING THAT'S MUNICIPALLY CONTROLLED, [01:15:02] WE FORGOT TO EXPRESSLY TALK ABOUT THE SKI HILL AND THEY CAN TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE. BUT NOW WE'RE SEEKING COUNCIL DIRECTION TO PRESUMABLY RELEASE OR RELAX SOME RESTRICTIONS. HOW FAR WE GO IS UP TO COUNCIL. THE STAY-AT-HOME ORDER HAS BEEN LIFTED. WE'RE IN A YELLOW ZONE, WE COULD BE RETURNING TO SOME PROGRAMMING, BUT WE STILL HAVE SORT OF A CLUSTER THAT APPEARS TO BE UNDER CONTROL IS UP FOR DEBATE. MORE TESTS ARE BEING DONE AT OTHER URBAN AREAS. IT COMES DOWN TO COUNCIL GUT FEEL AS TO WHETHER WE SHOULD BE LOOSENING UP THOSE RESTRICTIONS. WE MAY WANT TO SIMPLY GET A QUICK MOTION FROM SOMEBODY JUST TO GET THE BALL ROLLING AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS THE LEVELS OF SERVICE. STAFF IS PREPARED TO RESUME SERVICES BASED ON WHAT COUNCILS DIRECTION AS THIS EVENING. WE ALSO DISCUSSED GENERALLY HOW WE WOULD PROBABLY DO THIS EVERY TWO WEEKS AT COUNCIL TO DETERMINE WHAT LEVELS OF SERVICE ARE APPROPRIATE, CONSIDERING WHAT'S HAPPENING REGIONALLY, PROVINCIALLY, AND ALIKE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. SO COUNSELOR MANN HAD HIS HAND UP FIRST AND I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE PROPOSING A QUESTION COUNCILMAN? >> YES, THANK YOU WORSHIP. I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF MATTERS THAT NEED TO BE DEALT WITH. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT SOME OF THESE MATTERS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT. SO AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO MOVE THAT EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 23RD. BUT TO SHARE OF CRAIG MINERS MEMORIAL PARKING LOTS, AND THE SPINE AND SPRUCE BEACH PARKING LOTS BE REOPENED, AND I SO MOVE. >> OKAY. SECONDED BY COUNCILOR TURNER. YOU WANT DISCUSSION ON THIS COUNCILOR MANN? >>YEAH. THANK YOU WORSHIP. I THINK OBVIOUSLY, THERE'S OTHER MATTERS. I THINK WE STILL NEED TO DEAL WITH INDOOR AND AGAIN, THE SKI HILL, BUT FOR THE PARKING LOTS SPECIFICALLY, IN TALKING TO A COUPLE OF RESIDENTS AS WELL AS AN OPP OFFICER LAST WEEK. I THINK WHAT THIS HAS DONE IS ACTUALLY CREATED OTHER BOTTLENECKS, PEOPLE ARE PARKING ON THE SIDES OF ROADS AND UNFORTUNATELY SOMEONE'S GOING TO GET HURT. I ACTUALLY WITNESSED AND INDIVIDUAL OVER THE WEEKEND ATTEMPTING TO USE THE SCU DOO TRAIL IN ORDER TO ACCESS THE SPINE BEACH PARKING LOT, WHICH DIDN'T GO TOO WELL FOR THE VEHICLE AND HAD TO BE PULLED OFF THE SCU DOO TRAIL. I THINK OBVIOUSLY WITH THE NICER WHETHER, PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GO OUT. UNFORTUNATELY, IF PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE SOME THREATS IN THE AREA AND THAT MASKING IS STILL IMPORTANT, THEY'RE JUST GOING FURTHER AWAY AND NOT ABIDING BY THE RULES. AGAIN, IN SPEAKING TO ONE INDIVIDUAL TODAY WHO USES THE PARKING LOT TO GET ON [INAUDIBLE] AND THEN GO FISHING. THERE'S CREATING PROBLEMS WITH THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. I THINK THE RATIONALE FOR THE PARKING LOTS IS A REASONABLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I THINK AS WE CONTINUE, I THINK IT GOES PHASE. SO THAT'S WHY I JUST WANTED TO START WITH THAT SPECIFIC ITEM. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A SPEAKER'S LIST. I HAVE COUNSELOR PEARCE IS UP HERE NEXT. >> THANK YOU. WORSHIP THROUGH YOU, I WOULD VERY MUCH ENDORSED THIS. I WAS NOT PLEASED THAT WE WOULD OPEN THE SKI HILL AND NOT OPEN THE OTHER LOCATIONS. CERTAINLY A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE CONTACTED ME ABOUT THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO GO WALKING. IT'S PRETTY IMPORTANT TO KNOW LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY. I'M VERY, VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THAT. I DON'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH EMOTION THAT'S PRESENTED BY COUNCILOR MANE BUT I'M WONDERING WHEN WE'RE GOING TO BE HAVING A DISCUSSION ON THE POOL, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN IS THAT GOING TO BE OPENED? I THINK WE DO NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AS WELL. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE ON THAT, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. AS FOR THE SITUATION ON ELLIOT LAKE, I THINK IF YOU NOTICE THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE CONFIRMED AND STILL ACTIVE IN ELLIOT HAVE GONE DOWN. THE NUMBER OF CONFIRMED CASES THAT ARE STILL ACTIVE WITHIN ALGOMA RIGHT NOW DOWN CONSIDERABLY AS WELL WENT DOWN TO FOUR AS OF TODAY. I THINK WE'RE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I WILL AGREE A 100 PERCENT THAT WE STILL HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT OBEYING THE RULES OR NOT WEARING THEIR MASKS, THEY'RE NOT SOCIALLY DISTANCING, THEY'RE NOT DOING THE THINGS THAT WE REQUIRE THEM TO DO BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START UNDERSTANDING THAT PEOPLE REQUIRE SOME SOCIALIZATION AND THEY DO REQUIRE SOME EXERCISE, [01:20:04] AND SOME ACTIVITIES OUTDOORS AND THEY CAN'T DO THAT IF WE CLOSE EVERYTHING DOWN. AGAIN I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO, AT SOME POINT OF THE DISCUSSION ON THE POOL AS IT RELATES TO PARTICULARLY TO THE SENIORS BEING ABLE TO USE THE POOL. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR PATRIE. >> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR PEARCE. I THINK WE NEED TO GO FURTHER. I APPRECIATE COUNCILOR MANN PUTTING FORWARD THAT WE'VE GOT OPEN PARKING LOTS BACKUP, BUT WE ARE DOWN TO FOUR CASES IN ALGOMA, NOT JUST ON ELLIOT LAKE BUT IN ALGOMA AND WE DID HAVE A CLUSTER AND WE DID HAVE A BIG SCARE THERE AND I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE STAY VIGILANT. I THINK THAT WE NEED OUR BY LAW OUT THERE MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE SOCIAL DISTANCING AND WEARING MASKS WHEN THEY NEED TO. I THINK ENFORCEMENT IS THE KEY, NOT RESTRICTION. I WANT TO GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER THAN WHAT COUNCILOR PEARCE SAYS, OPEN THE POOL ALSO CITY HOUSE BAND CLOSED FOR A YEAR THE PUBLIC HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED IN, WE'LL STILL PAY STAFF TO MONITOR THE FRONT DESK. I WOULD LIKE CITY HALL TO BE OPENED BACK UP TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE GOING BACK INTO COUNCIL CHAMBERS TO HOLD OUR MEETINGS. I DO RESPECT COUNCILOR FINAMORE HAS SOME ISSUES THAT CURRENTLY SHE'S UNAVAILABLE BUT LEGALLY SHE CAN ATTEND OUR OPEN SESSIONS VIA TELEPHONE OR ZOOM ACCORDING TO THE PROVINCES MANDATE. I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THAT BUT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE FOLLOWING THE PROVINCIAL MANDATE AND GETTING DOWN TO BUSINESS AND MAKING SURE THAT WE CAN GET MOVING FORWARD WITH EVERYTHING. WE'RE FALLING TOO FAR BEHIND ON TOO MANY ITEMS, AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO START TO BE ABLE TO. I'VE HAD MANY PEOPLE APPROACH ME AND SAY, "I DON'T WORK ON COMPUTERS, I DON'T WORK WITH CREDIT CARDS, I'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO GET IT INTO CITY HALL TO PAY MY BILLS CASH", I'M GETTING COMPLAINTS. I'VE HAD SEVERAL PEOPLE SAY THAT TO ME AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER THAN WHAT THIS MOTION READS. I'LL LET EVERYBODY ELSE SPEAK AND THEN I MAY PUT AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION AFTER EVERYBODY ELSE IS DONE. PRIOR TO THE CALLING OF THE VOTE, I DO WANT TO PUT AN AMENDMENT ON THE FLOOR. >> THANK YOU COUNCILOR PATRIOT. I THINK I STILL HAVE SPEAKERS LIST GOING HERE, BUT I THINK MAYBE WE'RE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS MAY BE EVEN THREE BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE A MOTION THAT'S LOOKING AT THE PARKING LOTS. WE STILL HAVE OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL AREAS THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE DOG PARK, THE SKATING AREAS, THE SKI HILL, BUT THEN WE ALSO HAVE INDOOR RECREATION AND CITY-OWNED FACILITY SO, POTENTIALLY WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT A FEW SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS HERE. MOVING FORWARD I HAVE COUNCILOR FINAMORE ON THE SPEAKER'S LIST NEXT FOLLOWED BY A COUNCILOR TURNER AND BACK TO COUNCILOR MANSON, COUNCILOR FINAMORE. >> AM IN AGREEMENT THAT WE SHOULD OPEN THE PARKING LOTS AND THE OUTSIDES RIGS I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE GOING TO INCLUDE THAT. IF THAT COULD BE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THIS AND THEN WE COULD DO THE INSIDE SERVICES AND THEN THE SCHEME HELP. I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE DOING THREE SEPARATE OR IF WE WANTED TO INCLUDE THE OUTDOOR RIGS AT THIS POINT OF THIS MOTION. COUNCILOR MANN. >> COUNCILOR MANN ARE YOU OKAY WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENT OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO KEEP THE DISCUSSION SEPARATE? >> THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER SPEAKERS AND I DO HAVE A COMMENT BEFORE WE GET TO ANY AMENDMENTS, IF I COULD ASK THE INDULGENCE OF COUNSEL FOR THAT. >> OKAY, COUNCILOR TURNER. >> THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE] FAVOR OF OPENING NEEDED PARKING LOTS AND THE RIGS. ALL OUR STORES ARE OPEN, PEOPLE ARE STARTING TO MOVE AROUND. THEY DON'T SEE THE SENSE OF DANGERS IN THOSE PARKING LOTS TO THE SKATING RINKS BEING OPENED AND WITH LUCK, ONE DAY WE ALL NEED AN [INAUDIBLE] THIS DISCUSSION, PEOPLE ARE DOING REALLY WELL SO FAR AND I'M SO GLAD FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. DEFINITELY IN FAVOR OF THIS. >> COUNCILOR CYR. >> THANK YOUR WORSHIP DAN. I'M DEFINITELY IN FAVOR OF IT. I ALSO AGREE WITH COUNCILOR TURNER AND PATRIE THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT EXTENDING IT. [01:25:02] CITY HALL HAS BEEN CLOSED AS COUNCILOR PATRIE STATED FOR ALMOST A YEAR. OUR CITIZENS ARE PAYING FOR THEIR HALL TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO THEM. EVERY ONE OF THESE MEETINGS IS STILL AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED AGAINST THE MUNICIPAL LAW BECAUSE NOT EVERYBODY HAS CABLE, NOT EVERYBODY HAS INTERNET. OUR MEETINGS AREN'T OPEN AND ACCESSIBLE TO THOSE PERSONS, SO WE'RE TECHNICALLY HARD. I FEEL VIOLATION OF ACCESSIBILITY AND THE WINDOW BLOCK AS FAR AS ACCESSIBILITY FOR THEM. I THINK IT'S TIME TO GO BEYOND, WE STILL HAVE TO USE PRECAUTIONS BUT RIGHT ACROSS NORTH AMERICA, CASES ARE GOING DOWN DRAMATICALLY, SO I THINK IT'S TIME FOR US TO USE COMMON SENSE BUT WE HAVE TO GIVE THE WHOLE FACT TO THE PEOPLE AS WELL AS ALL THESE PARKING LOTS, IT'S TIME TO OPEN THINGS UP A LITTLE. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. BEFORE I GET BACK TO YOU COUNSELOR MANN, ONE OF MY BIGGEST CONCERNS AND OUT OF DISCUSSION THIS MORNING LOOKING AT OUR COMMUNITY WELL-BEING, PLAN FOR THE FUTURE WOULD BE MENTAL HEALTH. THE MENTAL HEALTH OF OUR RESIDENTS THROUGH THIS TIME AND I UNDERSTAND, THERE'S PHYSICAL HEALTH ALSO WITH THE SCARE OF COVID, BUT THE MENTAL HEALTH AND NOT BEING ABLE TO GO AND WALK ON A TRAIL OR TAKE YOUR DOGS SOMEWHERE, THIS IS WHAT'S STARTING TO CONCERN ME MORE AND MORE AND MORE, IS HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE FEELING THE DOUBLE WHAMMY. YOU GOT THE HARSHNESS OF WINTER AND ALREADY GETTING CABIN FEVER. BUT ON TOP OF IT, YOU CAN'T GO ANYWHERE REGARDLESS BECAUSE WE HAVE EVERYTHING CLOSED AND I APPRECIATE THE 99 PERCENT OF OUR COMMUNITY HAS BEEN DILIGENT IN FOLLOWING THE RULES. IT'S UNFORTUNATELY BEEN THE ONE PERCENT THAT HAD BEEN GETTING TOGETHER IN THE GROUPS AND GIVING BYLAWS A HARD TIME AND NOT DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO THAT LEAD TOWARDS THIS. BUT I'M FULLY IN SUPPORT OF SEEING US STARTING TO REOPEN AND I'LL GIVE IT BACK TO YOU COUNSELOR MANN. >> THANK YOU WORSHIP. I DO WANT TO THANK THOSE MEMBERS FOR HOLDING OFF ON PUTTING IN THE AMENDMENTS. I FULLY ANTICIPATED HAVING A COUPLE OF MOTIONS COME FORWARD THIS EVENING AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED THIS IN A STAGED END APPROACH. CLEARLY, I THINK THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH THE PARKING LOTS. IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S CONSENSUS. I WANT TO THANK THE MEMBERS FOR THAT. I DO DEFINITELY WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OUTDOOR RINKS. WE CAN TALK ABOUT CITY HALL BUT AGAIN, OUTDOOR RINKS IN THE MUNICIPAL FACILITIES ARE DIFFERENT TO ME, WE'VE GOT EMPLOYEES THAT WE HAVE TO CONCERN OURSELVES WITH. WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THE CLEANING PROTOCOLS IN THE BUILDINGS, WHEN WE START ALLOWING THE PUBLIC BACK IN ARE ENHANCED. I THINK THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, I'M GOING REFER TO STAFF FOR DIRECTION ON THAT OPENING. BUT OUTSIDE RINKS THAT ESSENTIALLY COME IN USE, SURE NO PROBLEM. I THINK THE SKI HILL IS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS TONIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY I WAS HOPING TO HAVE A COUPLE OF MOTIONS. I WANT TO KEEP THEM VERY CLEAR. COUNCIL WILL KNOW THAT I HAVE CONCERNS WHEN WE START GETTING INTO THE WEEDS WITH AMENDMENTS OR PART AMENDMENTS. I'D LIKE TO KEEP THESE VERY CLEAR FOR THE COMMUNITY SO THAT IN ANOTHER HOPEFULLY 10 MINUTES, THE MUNICIPALITY KNOWS THAT TOMORROW MORNING THE PARKING LOTS ARE OPENED. THERE'S NO OTHER PIECES IN THERE FOR PEOPLE TO GET CONCERNED OR MISQUOTED. THANK YOU. >> [NOISE] WE'RE KEEPING THEM SEPARATE AND THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON ALL THE PARKING AREAS. CALL FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE PARKING AREAS, STARTING WITH COUNSELOR MANN. >> IN FAVOR. >> JUST POINT OF ORDER. I'D LIKE A RELIEF FOR THE CLERK JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THIS, DOES THAT TAKE US OFF? WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CLERK CAN CLARIFY THAT WE CAN CONTINUE ON THE EXACT SAME ITEM ON THE AGENDA WITH SEPARATE RESOLUTIONS. >> DRINKS ARE ON THE AGENDA. >> MISS BRAD BELIEVE YOU CAN EITHER CONSOLIDATE OR SEPARATE ITEMS FROM, >> YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE'RE DISCUSSING ALL INDOOR AND OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND THEN YOU CAN BREAK THAT DOWN TO AS MANY RESOLUTIONS AS YOU WISH. >> BACK TO THE ROLL CALL VOTE. I STARTED WITH COUNSELOR MANN WHO'S IN FAVOR. COUNSELOR PEARCE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PATRICK. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR TURNER. >> FAVOR. >> AND I'M IN FAVOR SO, THAT PORTION IS CARRIED. DID WE WANT TO PUT FORWARD A MOTION NOW TO DISCUSS OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS TO INCLUDE THE DOG PARK, THE SKIING AREAS, AND THE SKI HILL. COUNSELOR PATRICK. [01:30:08] >> I'M GOING TO PUT A RESOLUTION ON THE FLOOR THAT ALL MUNICIPAL FACILITIES OPEN FOLLOWING ALL LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL SAFETY GUIDELINES WHICH DOES INCLUDE: ENHANCED CLEANING PROTOCOLS AND SO FORTH. BUT SO THE RESOLUTION WOULD READ THAT ALL MUNICIPAL FACILITIES OPEN FOLLOWING PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL HEALTH REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES. >> OKAY. IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT MOTION? COUNSELOR PEARCE, ARE YOU SECONDING THE MOTION? >> YES, FOR DISCUSSION. >> OKAY. COUNSELOR FENIMORE? >> I'M IN AGREEMENT THAT THE OUTDOOR RINKS IN THE DOG PARKS SHOULD BE OPENED. I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF HAVING OUR MUNICIPAL FACILITIES OPEN YET. I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE WAIT TILL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WHICH IS IN TWO WEEKS. WE STILL ARE IN THE YELLOW ZONE. WE JUST DIDN'T HAVE A SCARED INCIDENT. WE ACTUALLY HAD, A POOR FAMILY LOST A LOVED ONE TO COVID IN THIS COMMUNITY. WE STILL DO HAVE ACTIVE CASES. WE ARE STILL IN THE YELLOW ZONE AND I JUST THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE STAFF LOOK AT THE IMPLICATIONS OF OPENING IN TWO WEEKS. I'M NOT SURE ALL STAFF ARE EVEN BACK AT CITY HALL WORKING YET, AND I THINK WE SHOULD GIVE MR. GANIEL THAT PERIOD OF TIME TO GET HIS HOSTS IN ORDER TO PREPARE. I THINK THAT THE VARIANT TESTING THAT'S BEING DONE TAKES LONGER THAN COVID TESTING. SO I THINK WE SHOULD WAIT THIS OUT FOR TWO MORE WEEKS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SAFE. WE STILL HAVE THE SAME RESOURCES THAT WE HAD TWO WEEKS AGO. WE STILL HAVE THE SAME RESOURCES THAT WE HAD A YEAR AGO. I JUST THINK THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO BE SAFE JUST FOR TWO WEEKS LONGER TILL WE GET ALL THIS LATEST ROUND OF TESTING BACK. I THINK THAT AS FAR AS THE SKI HILL, I'M FINE WITH THE NORTH SHORE COMING TO THE SKI HILL. BUT OUR PUBLIC HEALTH DOES NOT RECOMMEND TRAVEL UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL AND I'M SORRY. I DON'T THINK SKIING IS ESSENTIAL. I THINK THAT THE PEOPLE FROM SUDBURY, THE SKI HILL COULD GIVE THEM THEIR PASSES FOR NEXT YEAR SEASON IN LIEU OF THIS YEAR'S SEASON I THINK THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL. BUT I DON'T THINK THAT AT THIS POINT WE SHOULD BE WELCOMING AND INVITING PEOPLE TO THE COMMUNITY WHEN WE'RE STILL IN THE YELLOW ZONE AND THE ELGAMAL PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ONTARIO. THE PROVINCE IS ASKING PEOPLE NOT TO TRAVEL UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL. AND I'M SORRY, BUT SKIING ISN'T ESSENTIAL. >> OKAY. COUNSELOR TURNER. >> CAN I MAKE AN AMENDMENT, FINAL AMENDMENT, BASED ON COUNSELOR FENIMORE'S COMMENTS? >> SURE. >> I'M GOING TO AMEND IT THAT EVERYTHING THAT I HAD SAID BEFORE THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE AFTER THE MARCHING COUNCIL MEETING PROVIDING THERE'S NO INFLUX IN CASES SO THAT STAFF CAN BRING THIS BACK FIRST IF NEED BE ON MARCHING. >> THE WHOLE THING, THE RINKS TOO? >> I SEE WHERE THAT COMES INTO THE WEEDS A LITTLE BIT. >> YEAH [NOISE]. >> I'LL JUST DRAW IT UP >> I WON'T AGREE TO THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. >> I THINK [OVERLAPPING]. >> YEAH. >> EVERYTHING OUTDOORS SHOULD BE OPENED NOW. I GET THAT. >> YEAH. >> THIS IS WHY I WAS TRYING TO KEEP THEM IN SEPARATE PORTIONS. EXACTLY. >> PERHAPS IF COUNSELOR PATRICK YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION AND COUNSELOR PEARCE WITHDRAWS HIS SECOND AND YOU CAN PUT FORWARD A MOTION TO KEEP THE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR SEPARATE. >> SURE, I'LL PUT IT NEW AND FORWARD. SURE. I'LL RESCIND MY ORIGINAL ONE AND I'LL CHANGE IT SO THAT WE CAN DO A SECOND AND THIRD. >> AGREED. >> OKAY. WOULD YOUR NEW MOTION BE FOR ALL OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL AREAS? >> I RECOMMEND ALL OUTDOOR IN THE CIVIL FACILITIES BE IMMEDIATELY OPENED. THEY ALL BECOME OPEN STARTING TOMORROW AND THAT BYLINE FOR SOCIAL DISTANCING AND MASKING WHERE REQUIRED. >> COUNSELOR PEARCE, YOU'RE STILL GOOD WITH SECONDING THAT? >> I AM. >> OKAY. COUNSELOR TURNER, YOU HAD COMMENTS UP NEXT FOLLOWED BY COUNSELOR MANN. [01:35:02] >> [NOISE] THANK YOU WORSHIP. I WANTED TO GO ALONG WITH THE BATTING ORDER THAT THE COUNCILOR MANN HAD SUGGESTED LET'S JUST KEEP THIS SIMPLE AND CLEAR. THIS LAST MOTION, WOULD YOU INCORPORATE THE SKI HILL AS ONE OF OUR OUTDOOR FACILITIES AND THERE'S SOME ISSUES THERE THAT I THINK MEMBERS OF COUNCIL WANT TO SPEAK TO. SO NOTHING FAVORS SUCH A BROAD MOTION. IF IT'S GOING TO CAPTURE EVERYTHING. I'D PREFER THAT WE JUST BROKE IT DOWN A LITTLE PIECES AND MULTIPLE MOTIONS. THAT WAY EVERYBODY HAS CLARITY. EVERYBODY CAN GO ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS TOMORROW SAYING I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR MANN. >> THANK YOU WORSHIP. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, BESIDES THE SKI HILL, HOW MANY OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES DO WE HAVE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? BECAUSE IF IT IS ONLY THE TWO RINKS, THEN WE SHOULD ONLY BE VOTING ON THE TWO RINKS. I THINK[OVERLAPPING]. >> AND THE DOG'S PARK. >> AND THE DOG PARK. OKAY. THEN I THINK THE MOTION SHOULD BE THAT. THAT WE REOPEN THE DOG PARK AND THE OUTDOOR RINKS EFFECTIVE A DATE AND THEN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PIECE. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR PATRIE MOTION WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO IT? >> YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO RESTRICT THIS. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. THE PREVIOUS MOTION DOESN'T INCLUDE THE MINERS MEMORIAL PARKING LOT WHERE PEOPLE PARK TO GO FISHING. I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE GATHERING AND THAT SHOULDN'T BE AND THE BY LAW NEEDS TO, THAT'S WHY I PUT THAT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT PORTION INTO MY RESOLUTION. I WANT ALL OF OUR OUTDOOR FACILITIES TO BE ACCESSIBLE AND THAT ALL RULES GET FOLLOWED. YOU CAN'T REALLY BREAK THAT ALL UP. >> OKAY. COUNCILOR PEARCE AND THEN BACK TO COUNCILOR MANN. >> YEAH. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THOUGHT THAT COUNCIL PASSED A RESOLUTION AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING OPENING THE SKI HILL. SO THE SKI HILL IS ALREADY OPENED, RIGHT? >> IT'S OPENED BUT WITH SOME RESTRICTIONS THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DISCUSS THIS EVENING. [OVERLAPPING]. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT AND WE CAN GET INTO THAT BUT THE SKI HILL IS OPEN. SO THE IDEA IS THAT WE WANT TO OPEN THE OUTDOOR FACILITIES OF THE COMMUNITY FOR EVERYBODY AND AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THAT'S THE WAY WE SHOULD BE GOING. I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS, I'M IN DAILY CONTACT WITH PUBLIC HEALTH. I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND WHAT THE PROBLEMS ARE. I THINK THE SITUATION HERE IS WELL IN HAND AND I THINK I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR PATRIE. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT IS OUT THERE DOING THEIR JOB. BUT WE'VE GOT TO LET PEOPLE GET OUTSIDE AND DO THE THINGS THEY NEED TO DO AND IF THAT INCLUDES THE SKI HILL. YOU ALREADY GOT THE SKI HILL IS OPENING, IT'S ALREADY OPENED. IT'S ALREADY HAD A SUCCESSFUL WEEKEND. SO I DON'T SEE ANY POINT IN BELABORING THE ISSUE WITH THE SKI HILL. IT'S DONE. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. DANIEL, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? >> NO, I'M FINE I'LL WAIT. >> COUNCILOR MANN. >> THANK YOU, WORSHIP. I APOLOGIZE. THE PREVIOUS MOTION SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED ALL PARKING LOTS AND IF I MISSED THE MINERS MONUMENT, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED. ALL PARKING LOTS NEED TO BE REOPENED TOMORROW MORNING. SO THAT'S WHY IF WE'RE ONLY TALKING NOW ABOUT THREE, TWO ICE RINKS AND THE DOG PARK, AGAIN, THEY SHOULD BE OPENED AT A TIME SPECIFIC WAY. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL CONCERNS WITH THE SKI HILL. IT IS STILL OPEN, SO IT'S NOT ABOUT RE-OPENING IT, IT'S OPEN. LAST WEEK WE KEPT THINGS CLOSED AND PROBABLY FRUSTRATED A BUNCH OF PEOPLE, WHICH WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK BECAUSE WE KEPT PARKING LOTS CLOSED ON A BEAUTIFUL WEEKEND IN ELLIOT LAKE, WHICH IS A BIT OF A PROBLEM AND CREATED ALL KINDS OF OTHER PROBLEMS. DON'T NEED TO GO BACK TO THE FIRST ONE. SO I GUESS MAYBE I JUST ASK WE'RE ON A DIFFERENT RESOLUTION. THAT WAS MY INTENT TO THE FIRST ONE. THE SECOND ONE, I THINK WE'RE DEALING WITH THE THREE OUTSIDE ONES, TWO RINKS AND A DOG PARK AND I THINK THAT'S AS SIMPLE AS IT NEEDS TO BE. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT? I'LL CALL AGAIN FOR ROLL CALL VOTE, STARTING WITH COUNCIL MANN. >> CAN YOU GIVE US THE MOTION YOUR WORSHIP? >> IT'S THAT ALL OUTDOOR WELL, MS. BRAY CAN READ IT BACK. >> [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. [01:40:01] EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 23RD, 2021, ALL OUTDOOR MUSICAL FACILITIES OPEN. FOLLOWING ALL LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES AND THAT BYLAW OFFICERS ENFORCE MASKING AND SOCIAL DISTANCING WHEREVER REQUIRED. >> OKAY, GOOD. >> IN FAVOR. [OVERLAPPING] >> COUNCILOR MANN? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR MARCHISELLA. >> COUNCILOR PATRIE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR PEARCE? >> FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR TURNER. >> FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR FINAMORE? >> IN FAVOR. >> IN FAVOR THAT'S CARRIED. WE HAVE TWO PIECES LEFT, ONE WOULD BE THE RESTRICTIONS ON THE SKI HILL AND THE NEXT WOULD BE INDOOR FACILITIES TO INCLUDE THE SWIMMING POOL, THE COLONS HALL, ARENA, AND CITY HALL. COUNCILOR MANN, DID YOU WANT TO START US ON ONE? >> I WOULD JUST GOING TO RECOMMEND YOUR WORSHIP MAYBE DIRECTION TO STOP TO COME BACK AT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING WITH INDOOR FACILITIES RE-OPENING PLAN. ALLOWS MR. DANIEL AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO HIS STAFF, SEE IF IT'S REASONABLE TO START OPENING THINGS UP. MAYBE THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN FACE THAT INSTEAD OF GETTING INTO THAT. OBVIOUSLY, HE KNOWS THE FACILITIES BETTER THAN WE DO EXAMPLE CITY HALL AND AT LEAST THAT WAY, IT'S SHOWING THAT WE DO HAVE AN INTENTION OF RE-OPENING BUT WE NEED TO DO IT SAFELY. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MY COMMENT ON THAT PARTICULAR ITEM. >> LOOKING FOR DIRECTION OF STAFF TO COME BACK AT OUR NEXT MEETING WITH REPORT ON SAFE OPENING OF INDOOR FACILITIES. EVERYONE'S GOOD WITH THAT AND I SEE EVERYONE NODDING THEIR HEADS. SORRY, COUNCILOR MANN, YEAH. >> I JUST WANTED MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE ASKED MR. DANIEL IF THAT SEEMS REASONABLE [LAUGHTER] BEFORE I PROVIDED THAT DIRECTION. >> THAT IS REASONABLE. WE CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE NEEDED ONE OF THE TWO WEEKS REGARDLESS TO WRAP UP, SO WE CAN DO THAT AT THE MARCH 8TH COUNCIL MEETING. I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT DATE AND IF ANYBODY ASKED WILL SAY THERE'S HOPE TO RE-OPEN ON THE 8TH. WE'RE JUST CHECKING OUR T'S AND DOTTING THEIR I'S AND WE'LL GET THERE. YEAH, I'M FINE WITH THAT. WE CAN PROBABLY ACCELERATE THAT BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE ABLE TO THIS EVENING ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILOR PATRIE. >> JUST WITH THAT DIRECTION PRIOR TO ME APPROVING THAT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I WOULD LIKE OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING TO BE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE EXPENSE WITH THE TAXPAYERS DOLLARS AND WE HAVE TAKEN ALL THE PRECAUTIONS. WE HELD A MEETING THERE LAST WEEK. SO I WOULD WANT OUR NEXT MEETING TO BE AT COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS WELL ON MARCH 8TH, WHICH IS STILL TWO WEEKS AWAY, PROVIDING WE DON'T HAVE A MAJOR INFLUX OF CASES. HOPEFULLY THINGS CONTINUE THE WAY THAT THEY ARE DOWN TO FOUR. THE HEALTH REGION MEANS THAT THERE'S LESS THAN FOUR OF THEM WITHIN OUR MUNICIPALITIES. WE ARE GETTING A VERY GOOD HANDLE ON IT. AGAIN AND I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCILOR FINAMORE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO ATTEND VIA TELEPHONE OR ZOOM BECAUSE OF THE RESTRICTIONS THAT SHE HAS ON HERSELF WITH HER HUSBAND'S HEALTH AND IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBERS I DON'T KNOW. BUT ANY LIVE PORTION, I BELIEVE SHOULD BE DONE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. >> OKAY. ALRIGHT. I PERSONALLY HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT COUNCILOR PATRIE MEETING IN PERSON. I WOULDN'T WANT TO RESTRICT OTHERS IF THEY CAN'T. INCLUDING COUNCILOR FINAMORE. COUNCILOR PEARCE. >> YEAH. I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO ATTEND IN PERSON. >> OKAY. I HAVE NO ISSUES MYSELF. COUNCILOR PATRIE. >> AND AS YOU STATED, MR. MAYOR THE PROVINCE SAYS THAT MEMBERS CAN ATTEND VIA ZOOM. I'M NOT ASKING FOR A MOTION THAT THEY CANNOT ATTEND ELECTRONICALLY DURING THE PANDEMIC. WE HAVE RULES BY THE PROVINCE THAT HAVE ALLOWED US TO BE ABLE TO MEET REMOTELY OR CERTAIN MEMBERS TO MEET REMOTELY. I JUST WANT US TO BE ABLE TO START GOING BACK TO MEETING IN PERSON. WE'VE SPENT ALL THIS MONEY, WE'RE GETTING A GOOD HANDLE ON THINGS. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS COMES LIVE AT COUNCIL NOT VIA ZOOM. >> THIS STARTED OUT AS JUST A SIMPLE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO COME BACK MARCH 8TH WITH A REPORT ON OPENING INDOOR FACILITIES. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED AN ACTUAL MOTION WITH WHAT COUNSELOR [INAUDIBLE] BROUGHT FORWARD, [01:45:05] I CAN'T TELL YOU COUNCILOR PATRIE. I HAVE NO ISSUE PERSONALLY ATTENDING IN PERSON AT OUR NEXT MEETING BUT I CAN'T SPEAK FOR OTHER MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND I PERSONALLY DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN FORCE ANYBODY TO DO SO, UNFORTUNATELY. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU CALLED THE MEETING AND DECIDED WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HOLD IT. IF YOU CALL IT TO BE AT CITY HALL THEN IT'S SCHEDULED TO BE THERE. >> MR. DANIEL. >> JUST I'M NOT SURE THAT COUNSEL, IT COMES DOWN TO EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNSELOR, HOW THEY WISH TO ATTEND THE MEETING, EVEN IF A MAJORITY, IF FOUR OUT OF SEVEN COUNSELORS DICTATE THAT WE SHALL HAVE THE MEETING IN PERSON, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE OTHER THREE ARE OBLIGED TO ATTEND. THEY CAN VOTE ANY WAY THEY WANT, EITHER WITH THEIR FEET, BY NOT PARTICIPATING, OR REQUIRE AN ELECTRONIC PARTICIPATION. THERE'S VERY LITTLE WE CAN DO TO CHANGE THAT. WELL, I WILL SAY IS IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BROADCAST MORE THAN ONE, MAYBE TWO PEOPLE VIA ZOOM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS. ZOOM IS IDEAL FOR CLOSER OPEN AND NO NEED TO GET INTO THAT, BUT OUR ZOOM IS IDEAL FOR BROADCASTING BECAUSE IT'S ONE SOURCE WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO COORDINATE THE BROADCAST, THE EASTLINK CABLE TV AND THE LIVE STREAM, AND A PORTION OF WARM BODIES IN THE BUILDING AND ANOTHER PORTION VIA ZOOM, IT GETS JUST UNWIELDY TO TRY AND MANAGE ALL THAT TECH. YOU CAN'T PUSH YOUR OWN MICROPHONE IF YOU HAVE A LAPTOP AS A TALKING HEAD, IT JUST BECOMES UNWIELDY, WE'VE SEEN THAT. WE JUST NEED TO KNOW THAT IF WE HAVE TWO OR MORE MEMBERS VIA ZOOM AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE REST OF THE MEMBERS IN PERSON AND A COUNCIL CHAMBERS, IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO PAY ATTENTION AND TRACK WHAT'S HAPPENING AND ONLY YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE STAFF TIME TRYING AND GET PEOPLE'S ATTENTION AND FIT IN, THIS CONGRESS. WE DON'T SEE ANY WAY WE CAN CHANGE THAT, THE CLEANEST IS 100 PERCENT ZOOM OR 100 PERCENT IN PERSON. BUT ALL THOSE HAVE THEIR OWN INHERENT CHALLENGES IN THERE AND A LOT OF IT RELATED TO THE FACT THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BROADCAST SIMULTANEOUSLY TO CABLE TV AND WE'RE STREAMING, WHICH IS FAR MORE THAN MOST MUNICIPALITIES DO. I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE DON'T, I'M JUST SUGGESTING IT'S A LOT OF SERVICE TO TRY TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENTLY AND WE'VE SEEN THAT TIME AND AGAIN. >> THANK YOU, MR. DANIEL. AGAIN, I HAVE NO ISSUE IN CALLING OUR NEXT MEETING FROM THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, BUT WE CAN'T RESTRICT ANYBODY FROM ATTENDANCE IF THEY CAN'T ATTEND IN PERSON. COUNCILLOR MUNS. >> THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE] I WOULD SAY THAT, I THINK THE HYBRID THAT WE ATTEMPTED LAST WEEK WAS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST FOR ALL MEMBERS PARTICIPATING. IT DEFINITELY GOT A LITTLE BIT CHALLENGING AND PROBLEMATIC AND AGAIN, I THINK THE OTHER PIECE THAT WE NEED TO REMEMBER ABOUT FACILITIES AS WELL IS SO WE'RE NOT JUST NECESSARILY TALKING ABOUT OURSELVES, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT OUR STAFF. CLEARLY THIS PANDEMIC, FOR THOSE THAT HAVE BEEN FRONT LINE OF IT, IT'S A LOT TO DEAL WITH. I THINK I JUST WANT TO CONCERN MYSELF WITH THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ALL THE EMPLOYEES OF THE MUNICIPALITY AND CITY HALL AS WELL. WE HAVE TO GIVE THAT SOME CONSIDERATION, BUT I'D BE HAPPY WITH DIRECTION AGAIN FROM THE MAYOR AND MR. DANIEL TO SPEAK ABOUT CALLING THE NEXT MEETING AGAIN, IT'S TWO WEEKS OUT. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DECIDE TONIGHT. I THINK IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO CLEARLY, IT WOULD BE NICE TO GET BACK TO MEETINGS IN PERSON AT SOME POINT. BUT AGAIN IF CASES ESCALATE IN THE COMMUNITY, I CAN ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE I WILL NOT BE IN PERSON AND THAT'S NOT MY PERSONAL HONEST STATEMENT, THAT'S MY DAYTIME JOB, SO WILL NOT DO. >> I WOULD SAY THAT WE COULD DECIDE BUT WILL DICTATE THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND HOW THIS ONE WILL GO AND I IMAGINE THE STAFF REPORT ON FACILITIES WILL BE THE SAME. THAT BEING SAID, DO WE NEED TO LOOK AT A RESOLUTION FOR THE SKI HILL TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION? POTENTIALLY THAT HAS BEEN PLACED AS FAR AS ATTENDANCE FROM NON-COMMUNITY MEMBERS. I BELIEVE THAT'S THE ONLY RESTRICTION THAT'S NOT KIND OF AN APHP, COUNSELOR MUN. >> WELL, I GUESS IT'S REALLY CHALLENGING AND UNFORTUNATE, [INAUDIBLE] , THAT THE MUNICIPALITY IS HAVING TO MAKE THESE DECISIONS. TO BE QUITE HONEST. THIS IS A PROVINCIAL ISSUE. WE GET DIRECTION THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE TRAVELING. WE SHOULDN'T BE TRAVELING INTO DIFFERENT GEOGRAPHIC AREAS. THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR. THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE REGULARLY RECEIVE UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL, AND COUNSELOR FENIMORE OBVIOUSLY MADE IT QUITE CLEAR EARLIER. [01:50:04] I'M SURE THAT GEARS, BUT OBVIOUSLY DISAGREE WITH THAT FEELING ABOUT THE ESSENTIAL MESS OF A WINTER SPORT THAT JUST STARTED PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR WEEKS BEFORE POTENTIALLY THE END OF WINTER. HOWEVER, AGAIN, ALLOWING TRAVEL, I THINK WE NEED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHATEVER WE DECIDE. IF IT'S TRAVEL, THEN IT'S ALL TRAVEL OR IT'S NO TRAVEL. OR, IS IT DISTRICT TRAVEL? WELL, AGAIN, WE HAVE OTHER CASES INVARIANT THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT THAT I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO WELCOME WITH OPEN ARMS TO THE COMMUNITY. THAT IS A PROBLEM. CLEARLY, FOR THOSE THAT AREN'T AWARE, THE MUNICIPALITY OR THAT WE WERE ASKED BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES WITH OUT-OF-TOWN MEMBERS AND THE RESOLUTION THAT WE MADE LAST WEEK HAS DEFINITELY CREATED SOME PROBLEMS FOR, NOT TOO FOR SKI HILL. I HONESTLY I'M CONCERNED WHEN I HEAR MEDICAL OFFICERS OF HEALTH SAYING ESSENTIAL TRAVEL ONLY, THAT'S WHAT I HEAR AND I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME. THAT'S, I GUESS, MY INITIAL OPENING COMMENT, BUT I'LL DEFER TO THE REST OF COUNCIL TO HEAR EVERYONE ELSE'S COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU, COUNSELOR MUN. I CONCUR WITH THE STATEMENT THAT THERE'S BEEN MULTIPLE STATEMENTS ABOUT FUNCTIONAL TRAVEL ONLY WE HAVE SIGNS ON OUR HIGHWAY COMING IN AND OUT STATING EXACTLY THAT AND IF IT WAS UP TO ME, TELL YOU THE TRUTH, I WOULD HAVE HAD BARRICADED BOTH ENDS OF HIGHWAY 108 AND HAVE THE MEN AND HAVE TRAFFIC CHECKPOINTS WHERE IF YOU'RE NOT DELIVERING GOODS TO THE COMMUNITY OR TRAVELING FOR HEALTH, YOU'RE NOT COMING IN OR OUT. I WOULD HAVE DONE THAT AGES AND AGES AGO, THAT'S MY PERSONAL PREFERENCE. UNFORTUNATELY, LEGALLY WE CANNOT RESTRICT TRAVEL IN OUR PROVINCE OR IN OUR COUNTRY. SO, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PROVINCE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ALL THE HEALTH INDIVIDUALS ARE VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATIONS BUT THEY'RE NOT ENFORCEABLE ,WHICH PUTS US IN A PREDICAMENT AS FAR AS HAVING ONE AREA BEING THE SKI HILL BEING THE ONLY THING IN TOWN WHERE WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN'T COME FROM OUT OF TOWN TO SKI, BUT YOU CAN COME FROM OUT OF TOWN TO ICE FISH OR [INAUDIBLE] OR A MULTITUDE OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON IN OUR COMMUNITY. THAT'S WHERE I SEE THE MAJOR ISSUE WHERE RESTRICTING ONLY THE SKI HILL AND AGAIN, PERSONALLY AND I DON'T CARE WHO LIKES IT OR NOT. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE RESTRICTED A LOT MORE LONG TIME AGO BECAUSE MAYBE IF WE HAD, WE WOULDN'T HAVE SEEN ANY CASES AT ALL IN OUR COMMUNITY. BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS. COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED TO ADD I DON'T WANT THE SNOWBALL DEALERS AND ICE FISHING PEOPLE HERE EITHER. I'M SORRY. I KNOW THAT THE TRAILS ARE OPEN, BUT THAT STILL IS NOT ESSENTIAL TO ME. I'M SORRY IF YOU DON'T LIVE HERE, YOU SHOULD NOT BE HERE. IF THAT WAS THE CASE, I WOULDN'T HAVE MY CHILDREN HERE. I WOULD BE ABLE TO TAKE MY HUSBAND ELSEWHERE TO VISIT PEOPLE THAT HAVEN'T SEEN HIM AND WE CAN'T DO THAT EITHER. I DID POST THE QUESTION WITH APH LAST WEEK, SAYING IF I HAD A CHILD LIVED IN AN ORANGE OR GREEN AND RED ZONE, WHICH CHILDREN SHOULD VISIT IN WHICH CHILDREN CANNOT VISIT? THE ANSWER WAS NOBODY, NOBODY SHOULD BE TRAVELING. IF IT'S NOT ESSENTIAL, WE SHOULD NOT BE GOING. WHEN WE HAVE LESS PEOPLE LEAVING TOWN NOW THAT WE HAVE THE CT SCANNER, WHICH IS EVEN BETTER, BECAUSE WE ARE BUILDING OUR OWN RESOURCES, BUT I STILL THINK THAT UNTIL THEY SAY IT HAS SAVED THE EXPERTS, WE'RE NOT THE EXPERTS. IT'S NOT EASY TO SAY NO. WE ALL WANT TO SAY YES, WE ALL WANT TO SEE EVERYONE PROSPER. WE WANT TO SEE EVERYONE HAPPY BUT THE SITUATION IS THAT IF WE CAN'T DO THAT, WE CAN'T BE RESPONSIBLE AND SAY, TO MAKE SOMEONE FEEL BETTER OR BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE MAD AT US, WE HAVE TO SAY YES. IT'S HARD TO MAKE THE BIG DECISIONS AND I'M SORRY, BUT IF IT'S NOT ESSENTIAL, WE SHOULD NOT BE TRAVELING. PERIOD. >> COUNCILOR TURNER. >> THANKS YOUR WORSHIP. I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT JUST THE CITY BOUNDARIES ARE A VERY CONVENIENT ZONE FOR US TO DRAW A LINE ON. BUT WE HAD A VERY ECONOMIC ZONE THAT STRETCHES ALONG 108. PEOPLE COME HERE TO SHOP, TO GET GROCERIES, GET GAS. THEY ALSO COME HERE FOR THE CT SCAN. [01:55:02] WE HAVE TRAFFIC MOVING IN AND OUT OF OUR AREA WITH NO REAL REASON FOR US TO CONSIDER STOPPING THEM. THEY ARE IN LEGITIMATE BUSINESSES HERE. AS YOU POINTED OUT YOURSELF MR. MAYOR, PART OF OUR HEALTH AND WELFARE INCLUDES OUR ABILITY TO OBTAIN RECREATION AND EASE A LITTLE OF THE MENTAL HEALTH BURDEN THAT GOES WITH THIS YEAR-LONG PANDEMIC. SO I WOULD THINK THAT PEOPLE WITHIN THAT ECONOMIC ZONE, WHICH IS DOWN THE 108, EACH SIDE OF [INAUDIBLE]. THEY ARE PART OF OUR COMMUNITY ANYWAY. WHETHER THEY COME HERE TO SKI HILL OR THEY COME HERE TO GROCERY SHOP, THEY'RE STILL COME HERE. I DON'T THINK THAT THEY INCREASE OUR DANGER TO A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO TAKE STEPS TO BLOCK THEM FROM BEING IN OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. >> SIR [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU. THE MESSAGE FROM THE HEALTH UNITS IS, DON'T TRAVEL UNLESS IT'S ESSENTIAL, BUT THE LOCK-DOWN HAS BEEN LIFTED. THE MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH HAS MADE COMMENTS STATING, DON'T TRAVEL BETWEEN ZONES. IF SOMEBODY WERE TO PUT A RESOLUTION FORWARD EITHER THAT YOU CANNOT COME FROM A WORSE ZONE THAN WHAT WE CURRENTLY ARE. WE'RE YELLOW, SO NOBODY FROM ORANGE OR RED CAN COME TO ATTEND THE SKI HILL, I'D HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT. OTHER THAN THAT, THERE ARE TOO MANY MEMBERS, IN MY OPINION, OF THIS MUNICIPALITY THAT AREN'T ACTUAL TAXPAYERS THAT BENEFIT THE TAX-BASED WITHIN THIS MUNICIPALITY. THERE'S MORE POPULATION OUTSIDE THE CITY PROPER COMING IN TO USE THE FACILITIES WITHIN OUR MUNICIPALITY THAN WE CURRENTLY HOLD. THE RESTRICTION OF THE NINE TOWNSHIPS I DISAGREE WITH AT THIS POINT. WE ARE GETTING BETTER. THE WAY THAT IT STANDS NOW, I BELIEVE SKI HILL SHOULD BE ABLE TO OPEN, FALL ON AND NOT HAVE TO RESTRICT STRICTLY TO MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF THE NINE TOWNSHIPS. FOR FIVE YEARS OF MY LIFE, MY FATHER MOVED US DOWN TO THE NORTH SHORE. I LIVED DOWN THERE FOR FIVE YEARS BUT STILL DID EVERYTHING HERE IN TOWN. SO MY OPINION, THOSE PEOPLE THAT LIVE DOWN THERE ARE PART OF THIS MUNICIPALITY. PEOPLE LIVED IN BLIND RIVER AND WORKED IN THE MINES HERE. PEOPLE LIVE IN BLIND RIVER AND WORK IN THE BUSINESSES HERE AS IT IS NOW. SO I THINK RESTRICTING IT TO HAVING AN ADDRESS IN ELLIOT LAKE SHOULD BE LIFTED AT THIS TIME. THE RESTRICTION BY THE PROVINCE HAS BEEN LIFTED, THE LOCK-DOWN IS OVER. SO I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO. >> THANK YOU, SO GOOD POINT BEING MADE COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE]. ELLIOT LAKE IS A HUB AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN A HUB IN THE NORTH SHORE FOR SHOPPING, HEALTH CARE, RECREATION, AND EVEN WORK. WE CAN CONTINUE TO BE THAT. COUNCILOR ED [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. THROUGH YOU, I WOULD AGREE WITH COUNCILOR TURNER. ELLIOT LAKE IS PART OF A MUCH LARGER ECONOMIC ZONE. WE ALL HAVE FRIENDS AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATES WHO LIVE OUTSIDE OF ELLIOT LAKE AND COME INTO THIS COMMUNITY ON A REGULAR BASIS. FOR THE RECORD, I OPPOSED OPENING THE SKI HILL, NOT BECAUSE I WAS OPPOSING OPENING THE SKI HILL, BUT I OPPOSED OPENING THE SKI HILL WITHOUT OPENING OTHER FACILITIES FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T ABLE TO SKI. COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE] SAID THAT HE WOULD BE WILLING TO HAVE A MOTION WHERE YOU COULDN'T COME FROM A DISTRICT THAT IS HIGHER THAN OURS, I.E, AN ORANGE ZONE AS OPPOSED TO YELLOW, WHICH IS WHAT WE ARE. [INAUDIBLE] IS ORANGE. I GO INTO [INAUDIBLE] ON A FAIRLY REGULAR BASIS LATELY I HAVE NO CHOICE. [02:00:03] OTHER PEOPLE I KNOW HAVE TO GO TO [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE SAME REASONS AND YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT I CAN'T GO THERE? THE OFFICIAL POSITION OF [INAUDIBLE] PUBLIC HEALTH AND EVERY PUBLIC HEALTH UNIT IN ONTARIO IS THAT NONESSENTIAL TRAVEL IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERTAKE NONESSENTIAL TRAVEL, BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO RESTRICT YOU FROM TRAVELING BETWEEN ZONES. NOTHING OTHER THAN YOUR OWN PERSONAL SAFETY. SO IF YOU WANT TO GO TO TORONTO, YOU CAN. PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE DUMBEST THING YOU'D EVER WANT TO DO, BUT YOU CAN GO THERE, AND IF YOU WANT TO, THEN TURN AROUND AND DRIVE BACK TO ELLIOT LAKE, YOU CAN DO THE SAME THING. THERE'S NOBODY THAT CAN STOP YOU FROM DOING THAT. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO INTERFERE WITH AN AWFUL LOT OF THINGS IF YOU DON'T ALLOW THE SKI HILL TO YOU HAVE AN OPEN. THEY WENT AHEAD. I DISAGREE ENTIRELY WITH THE WAY THEY WENT ABOUT IT, BUT IT'S DONE. THIS COUNCIL ALLOWED THEM TO OPEN. AND I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO OPEN THEN ALLOW THEM TO OPEN PROPERLY. THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO DO. THANK YOU. >> COUNCILOR C YR. >> THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. THROUGH YOU, WE HAVE SOCIAL DISTANCING, IN EFFECT AND BEING ENFORCED, WE HAVE MASKING, THAT'S IN EFFECT AND BEING ENFORCED, WE HAVE VACCINATIONS THAT ARE BEING ROLLED OUT, AND WE HAVE BASICALLY A WORLDWIDE ROLLBACK OF ACTIVE CASES. I THINK AS LONG AS ALL PRECAUTIONS ARE BEING MET, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH OPENING IT. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF ENFORCEMENT AND JUST ENSURING PEOPLE RESPECT EACH OTHER'S SPACES AND EACH OTHER'S SPHERES AS WELL. BUT I MEAN, LET'S ACT SAFE AND I THINK IT'S TIME TO OPEN THINGS UP SAFELY. >> SO MY QUESTION IS, ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL PROPOSING A MOTION TO REMOVE THE RESTRICTION, COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE]? >> I MOVE THAT THE SKI HILL WOULD BE ALLOWED TO OPEN AND ENSURE THAT THEY FOLLOW ALL SAFETY PROTOCOLS. >> SECONDER, SECONDED BY COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE]. YOU'LL WANT TO HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATION. OKAY. I'LL CALL FOR A ROLL-CALL VOTE, STARTING A COUNCILOR [INAUDIBLE] ,. >> OPPOSED. >> COUNCILOR MANN. >> OPPOSED. >> COUNCILOR PEARCE? >> FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR CYR? [NOISE]. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR TURNER? >> FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR PATRIE? [NOISE]. >> IN FAVOR. >> I'M IN FAVOR, THAT'S CARRIED. [NOISE] I THINK THAT COVERS ALL INDOOR, OUTDOOR, AND PARKING LOTS, EVERYTHING WE NEEDED TO COVER ON THAT ONE. [NOISE] MR. GAGNON? >> YES, OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION, I JUST WANT FOR CLARITY. SO BASICALLY, THAT MEANS THAT MOUNT DUFOUR CAN OPEN THIS COMING WEEKEND WITH ESSENTIALLY ZERO RESTRICTIONS OTHER THAN THE SAFETY PROTOCOLS I GET THAT, BUT WHETHER A MEMBER, OR THEY OPEN THE DAY LIFT TICKETS TO NON-RESIDENT DRAWN ALL SUDBURY, IT MATTERS NOT. AS LONG AS THE PROVINCE SAYS IT'S OKAY. SORRY, BUT I KNOW THE CIRCUS BRIAN >>MISS BRAY? >>ALL RIGHT, JUST TO CLARIFY. THE REQUEST FROM THE SKI HILL WAS JUST TO OPEN TO THEIR ADDITIONAL MEMBERSHIPS, WHICH RIGHT NOW WHEN WE PUT THE RESOLUTION THAT IT WAS RESTRICTED TO PERMANENT RESIDENTS EARLIER LIKE ONLY. THAT WAS RESTRICTING A FURTHER 24 MEMBERS, AND THOSE MEMBERS ARE MADE UP OF THE NORTH SHORE, TWO FROM SUDBURY AND FOUR FROM SAULT STE MARIE. RIGHT NOW THEY ARE ONLY ASKING FOR THEIR ADDITIONAL MEMBERSHIPS. THEY WERE NOT GOING TO SELL PASSES TO SOME OUT OF TOWN THAT JUST CAME [NOISE] FOR A DAY PASS. >>WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THEY GOT A LOT MORE THAN WHAT THEY ASKED FOR. RESOLUTION PUT FORWARD IS THAT THEY CAN OPEN. THEY CAN OPEN, WE HAVE VOTED IT'S DONE. VOTES OVER, I CAN'T COMMENT FURTHER. MR. GAGNON, YES, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. I TRIED TO PUT IT IN THERE THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT ZONES. DIDN'T SEE ANY TAKERS SO I JUST PUT THE MOTION THAT THEY CAN OPEN. THEY HAVE NO RESTRICTIONS OTHER THAN SAFETY PROTOCOLS PUT FORWARD BY APH IN THE PROVINCE. [NOISE] >>OKAY. THE NEXT PIECE WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH HERE. [02:05:04] COVID UPDATE STANDING ITEM 9.4.2, "REPORT OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER STATUS OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING LEAD PROVINCIAL STAY-AT-HOME ORDER, MATTER DEFERRED AT THE JANUARY 25TH, 2021 MEETING." [NOISE] "THE RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE SALES REPORT, MUNICIPAL COMMITTEES DONE. PROVINCIAL STAY-AT-HOME ORDERS BE RECEIVED AND THAT ALL COUNSEL AND STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING BE HELD VIA ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCING UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE PROVINCIAL STAY-AT-HOME ORDERS HAD BEEN LIFTED. MY COUNSEL CANCEL ALL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING THE PROVINCIAL ORDERS TO STAY-AT-HOME." THAT WAS THE INITIAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MR. GAGNON? >> IT WAS AT THE TIME. I'M NOT MARRIED TO ANY OF IT AT THE CURRENT TIME. WE HAVE ZOOM. I'M NOT RECOMMENDING THAT YOU BASICALLY CANCEL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS JUST TO CLEAR IT UP, THAT WAS JUST THE MOTION AT TIME. THE BIGGER QUESTION MAYBE FOR COUNSEL IS, DOES THE CURRENT SITUATION MEAN WE SHOULD BE DOING ANY KIND OF ADJUSTMENTS FOR OUR COMMITTEES? I THINK GENERALLY ENCOURAGING ZOOM IS IDEAL, SOME FORM OF LIMITED HYBRID ONCE WE RESUME THE IN, SO ACTUALLY, SORRY, I'M ALL OVER WITH THAT. THE IN-PERSON MEETINGS WOULD LIKELY BE PART OF THE MARCH 8TH REVIEW OF WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE OUR MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS THAT REVOLVE LAY PEOPLE THAT AREN'T COUNCILORS. >> JUST A POINT OF ORDER. CAN WE GET A MOVER AND SECONDER? >> BUT THE THE ISSUE, COUNCILOR PATRIE IS THE SAME ISSUE WHERE YOU HAD WITH THE LAST BEFORE. [NOISE] IT'S A STANDING ITEM THAT WE'RE REVIEWING. EVEN THIS REPORT. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT'S NOT A STANDING ITEM. IT'S DEFERRED FROM THE JANUARY 25TH MEETING, IT'S A DEFERRAL. [NOISE] >> ALL RIGHT, YOUR WORSHIP, I PLACE THAT UNDER THE STANDING COVID UPDATE ITEM. >> OKAY. >> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE WE HAD APPROVED AT THE TIME THAT WE HAD CANCELED ALL COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING THE PROVINCIAL STAY-AT-HOME ORDER. >> WAS THAT THE CASE? I THOUGHT IT WAS DEFERRED UNTIL THIS EVENING. >> YES, THERE WAS A DEFERRAL TO RE-DISCUSS THIS AT THIS EVENING'S MEETING, FEBRUARY 22ND AFTER THE PREMIER MAYORS ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT THE STAY-AT-HOME ORDER BEING LIFTED OR NOT, IT WAS DEFERRED TO THIS EVENING. [NOISE]>> OKAY, DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO PUT A MOTION ON THIS FLOOR THEN? >> MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO RECEIVE. >> OKAY. IS THERE A SECONDER TO RECEIVE THE REPORT? MOVE SECONDED BY COUNCILOR CYR, AND ACTUALLY IT DOES KIND OF MAKE SENSE TO RECEIVE AS WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN DIRECTION AND MR. GAGNON TO BRING US A REPORT MARCH 8TH AS FAR AS HOW WE'RE RE-OPENING, SO MAKES FULL SENSE. ANY ISSUES, QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES, COUNCILOR FINAMORE? >> WE WERE CONFUSED AFTER THE LAST TIME BECAUSE WE THOUGHT WE CANCELED THE ALL THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS, ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS. WE CANCELED THEM BUT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE NOW WE COULD HAVE HAD THEM SO WE'RE HAVING THEM IF WE CAN HAVE THEM VIA ZOOM FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH. BECAUSE SOME OF OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS WOULD BE HAPPENING THE FIRST WEEK OF MARCH BEFORE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR EVERYBODY. >> THE MOTION IS THAT THIS REPORT BE RECEIVED. THERE'S NOTHING PROHIBITING MEETINGS VIA ZOOM AT THE MOMENT, AM I CORRECT MISS BRAY? [NOISE] >> YES. THANK YOU IT WAS ABSORBED, AND AT THAT MEETING, THERE WAS A REPORT FROM THE CEO PUT FORWARD TO CANCEL ALL ADVISORY COMMITTEES DURING THE STAY-AT-HOME ORDER. THE WHOLE MATTER WAS DEFERRED BY A MOTION INTRODUCED BY COUNCILOR PATRIE TO DEFER THE ENTIRE ISSUE TO FEBRUARY 22ND. NOTHING WAS CANCELED, EVERYTHING WAS GOING ON STATUS QUO TO BE RE-DISCUSSED THIS EVENING. >> MR. GAGNON? >> YES THE FOOTNOTE TO SAY THAT, THAT SAID BECAUSE OF THE STAY-AT-HOME ORDER, WE HAVE CLOSED ESSENTIALLY VARIOUS SPORT FACILITIES LIKE THE COLLEGE HALL WHICH WAS A VENUE FOR SOME SOCIALLY DISTANT IN-PERSON MEETINGS. MOTION TO RECEIVE IS FINE, WE'LL TALK ON MARCH 8TH AS TO HOW WE RE-OPEN THE INDOOR FACILITIES. ANY COMMITTEES, AND WE HAVE HAD, WE HAVE ACCESSIBILITY COMMITTEE VIA ZOOM. ANY COMMITTEE THAT CAN MEET VIA ZOOM IS FINE. [02:10:01] WE JUST CAN'T ALLOW LAY PEOPLE INTO OUR MUNICIPAL FACILITIES THAT ARE STILL CLOSED AT LEAST UNTIL MARCH 8TH OR SO. >> OKAY. COUNCILOR PATRIE. [NOISE] >> I AGREE WITH THE COMMENT OF THE SALE, BUT IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE ANY STANDING COMMITTEE MEETINGS, FROM MEETING IN PERSON SHOULD THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE OUTSIDE OF OUR CLOSED FACILITIES AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW. ODDS ARE IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT LEGALLY ANY OF OUR COMMITTEES CAN MEET EITHER IN PERSON OR VIA ZOOM. THERE'S BEEN NO RESOLUTIONS STOPPING ANY MEETINGS AT THIS POINT, YEAR TO DATE. [NOISE] JUST FOR COUNCILOR FINAMORE'S CLARIFICATION AND THE MEMBERS CLARIFICATIONS. >> OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY. MOTION RECEIVES ON THE FLOOR, I'LL START TO ROLL CALL VOTE, COUNCILOR PATRIE? [NOISE] >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR CYR? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR PEARCE? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR TURNER? >> FAVOR. [NOISE]>> COUNCILOR MANN? >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNCILOR FINAMORE? >> IN FAVOR. >> I'M IN FAVOR, THAT'S CARRIED. THERE'S NO PETITIONS, NO CORRESPONDENCE, NO NOTICE OF MOTION, COUNCIL'S REPORTS [NOISE] AND ANNOUNCEMENTS? [13. COUNCIL REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS] NOT A WHOLE LOT OF ANNOUNCEMENTS THIS EVENING. I WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND CONDOLENCES ON BEHALF OF MUNICIPALITY TO FAMILY MEMBERS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT WE'VE LOST TO COVID. WE DEFINITELY HOPE THAT WE WOULD NOT SEE THAT HERE AND OUR HEART GOES OUT TO YOU FOR SURE. I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO HAS ANYTHING TO ADD TO THE ANNOUNCEMENTS BEFORE I DO THE BIG-TICKET PAYMENTS? HOUSE OR FENIMORE? >> THANK YOU. YOU'RE WORSHIP. I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT ON FEBRUARY 24TH, IT'S PINK SHIRT DAY. PINK SHIRT DAY IS BEING RECOGNIZED THIS YEAR, JOIN US IN WEARING PINK AND STANDING TOGETHER AGAINST BULLYING IN SCHOOLS, IN THE WORKPLACE, AND ONLINE. THIS PINK SHIRT DAY, THE FOCUS IS WORKING TOGETHER AND TREATING EACH OTHER WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT. >> THANK YOU. COUNSELLOR TURNER. >> THANK WORSHIP. I MENTIONED THIS AT A COUPLE OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL MEETINGS TRYING TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GO TO THE PHARMACIES AND PICK UP [INAUDIBLE]. THIS LITTLE ITEM HERE IS A NASAL SPRAY INJECTOR THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO SAVE A LIFE. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SQUEEZE. PLEASE GO AHEAD AND GET ONE, PUT IT IN YOUR CAR, SAVE A LIFE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNSEL TURNER, ANY ADDITIONAL ANNOUNCEMENTS? OKAY. I'M SEEING NONE. I WAS GOING TO ASK, COUNSELOR, HOW THE SNOW AT THIS SCALE IS, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY APPROPRIATE THIS EVENING IS QUITE A BIT OF SNOW THERE. OUR BIG-TICKET ITEMS, FEBRUARY HYDRO BILLS, 66,300, MUNICIPAL PLEASING 244,000 RECEIVER-GENERAL, 88,000 AJ BUS LINES 47,900. I'LL GO TO DISTRICT SERVICES MUNICIPAL LEVY, 182,300 BEAMISH CONSTRUCTION JANUARY 2021, CONTRACT FOR LANDFILL 21,900 AND PURGE GAS FOR JANUARY WAS 20,600. GFS ENVIRONMENTAL THAT'S CURBSIDE GARBAGE AND RECYCLING, 33,600, OMAR'S 49,300, WENDELL FOUR-PART TRUCKING DEMONSTRATION REMOVAL OF A BUILDING AND DUNLOP SHORES PLOWING 66,000, [INAUDIBLE] INDUSTRIES, CATERPILLAR GREATER 351,500. THOSE ARE THE BIG-TICKET ITEMS. UH, CAME FROM. [02:15:08] THERE'S NO ADDENDUM THIS EVENING. I KNOW BY LAWS QUESTION PERIOD. THERE WAS A SINGLE QUESTION THAT CAME UH IT WAS ANSWERED THE EVENING HAD TO DO WITH THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE ARTS HUB STEERING COMMITTEE, SO WE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION IN OUR DELIBERATION. CLOSED SESSION. LOOK FOR A MOVER TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION. [17. CLOSED SESSION (if applicable)] MOVED BY COUNCILOR PEERS. SECOND, MY COUNSELOR TURNER, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, COUNSELOR [INAUDIBLE] >> I'M GOING TO REITERATE BASED ON OUR COUNSEL TRAINING, WE HAVE A RESOLUTION OF COUNSEL THAT WE DO NOT DO CLOSED SESSION UNLESS WE'RE IN PERSON. AND I WILL NOT BE GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION TO BREACH WHAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL DID BECAUSE WE HAVE YET TO RESCIND THAT RESOLUTION. I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE ITEM IS A CLOSED SESSION ITEM BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS TO DEAL WITH DISPOSITION OF PROPERTIES. >> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY. COUNSELOR [INAUDIBLE] >> THANK YOUR WORSHIP, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I DON'T FEEL IT'S RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CLOSED SESSION CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON ZOOM. I DON'T FEEL CONFIDENT, THAT IT IS AS SECURE AS PEOPLE THINK. SO I WON'T BE PARTICIPATING. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. >> THANK YOU, COUNSELORS [INAUDIBLE]. I CALL FOR A VOTE TO GO INTO CLOSE SESSION. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THE WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, UPDATE MYSELF ROLL-CALL MR. DANIEL. >> JUST FOR THOSE WHO ARE PARTICIPATING. I'LL BE SENDING A FRESH ZOOM LINK MOMENTARILY FOR THE CLOSED SESSION. THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND WILL REMAIN THE ZOOM FEED FOR THOSE WATCHING AT HOME. AND THEN JUST LIKE WHEN WE WERE IN PERSON AND WHY WE RESERVE RETURNED OPEN SESSION TO PASS ANY OPEN MOTIONS OR ADJOURN THE FEED ON THE ZOOM FROM HOME WE'LL BE BACK ON. THAT WAY WE HAVE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE AND DISTINCT ZOOM. THERE'S NO CROSS-POLLINATION POSSIBLE. > [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S A BEST PRACTICE IT'S PART OF OUR POLICIES YET. >> OKAY, THANK YOU MR. GOVERNOR [OVERLAPPING] >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PEERS. >> IN FAVOR. >. COUNSELOR MAN. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELORS SIER. >> OPPOSED. >> COUNSELOR FENIMORE. >> IN FAVOR. >> COUNSELOR PETRI? >> OPPOSED. >> I'M IN FAVOR. WE'RE MOVING TO A CLOSE SESSION AND ASKED THAT WE HAVE A MAYBE A FIVE-MINUTE BEFORE WE RESUME WITH THE NEW LINK, MR. DANIEL. >> THAT'S FINE, I'LL SEND THE LINK AS SOON AS WE HAVE QUORUM IN CLOSED, WE CAN RESUME AND THEN RETURNED TO THE OPEN WHEN WE'RE READY. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. PERFECT THERE WE GO. CAN I HAVE A MOVER TO COME OUT OF CLOSED SESSION? WILL BUY COUNSELOR MAN SECOND, MY COUNSELOR PEERS ALL IN FAVOR. JUST WAVE AT ME. THAT'S COOL. GOOD STUFF. WE ARE NOW AT A CLOSE SESSION. CLOSE SESSION DIRECTION WAS GIVEN TO STAFF. LOOK FORWARD TO MORE INFORMATION IN THE FUTURE. [18. CONFIRMATORY BY-LAW] CONFIRMATORY BY LAW 18.1 BY LAW 21 DASH ONE TWO BEING A BYLAW TO CONFIRM THE PROCEEDINGS OF COUNSEL AT ITS MEETING HELD IN FEBRUARY 22ND, 2021. CAN I HAVE A MOVER, PLEASE? MOVE BY COUNCIL APPEARS SECOND, MY COUNSELOR FENIMORE, ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, PERFECT. THAT'S CARRIED. [INAUDIBLE] ADJOURNED. [OVERLAPPING] MAN, SECOND MY COUNSELOR TURNER, AGAIN, ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU ALL FOR A GOOD EVENING. >> GOOD NIGHT. >> FOR NOW ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.