Jun 27, 2022 City Council

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:11]

WE'LL CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER THIS REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING OF COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE, MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2022.

THE TIME IS 7:00 PM.

AS FAR AS ROLL CALL, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COUNCILLOR CYR, WHO WILL BE ATTENDING A LITTLE BIT LATE.

HE'S ON HIS WAY NOW.

IS THERE ANY DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST THIS EVENING?

[3. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST]

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP I'LL DECLARE ON 7.7 AND 12.1 FOR VERY OBVIOUS REASONS.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MANN.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP I'D LIKE TO DECLARE ON ITEM 16.5 BY LAW 2264, AS IT IS A CONTRACT THAT'S CURRENTLY HELD WITH MY EMPLOYER. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER DECLARATIONS THIS EVENING? SEEING NONE.

[4. ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES]

CAN I HAVE A MOVER TO ADOPT THE MINUTES PLEASE? MOVE BY COUNCILLOR TURNER. SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

ANY ADDITIONS, DELETIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE THEN.

ALL IN FAVOR. THOSE ARE CARRIED.

THANK YOU. FIVE PUBLIC INPUT SESSION.

MS. BRAY. HAS ANYONE CONTACTED YOU FOR PUBLIC INPUT? NO ONE HAS CONTACTED THE CLERK'S OFFICE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SIX PUBLIC PRESENTATION 6.1 OPP MUNICIPAL POLICING SERVICES WILL BE PRESENTED BY KELLY

[6. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS]

GOOD EVENING.

JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE MICROPHONES CLOSE ENOUGH THAT EVERYONE CAN HEAR YOU.

AND I'M NOT.

YES. THERE WE GO. PERFECT. THANK YOU.

GREAT. AND IT'S SHOWING FOR EVERYBODY.

WE'RE GOOD. ALL RIGHT.

SO GOOD EVENING AND YOUR WORSHIP, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TONIGHT.

MY NAME IS KELLY WITHROW.

I AM A SERGEANT WORKING OUT OF THE MUNICIPAL POLICING BUREAU OF THE OPP.

WITH ME HERE TONIGHT IS SERGEANT LISA ROTTAR [INAUDIBLE] OF THE MUNICIPAL POLICING BUREAU, OPP.

AND, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW YOUR LOCAL DETACHMENT COMMANDER AND INSPECTOR TYLER STURGEON.

THIS HERE IS JUST AN OUTLINE OF WHAT I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THIS EVENING.

I'M GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT YOUR OPP ANNUAL EXPENDITURES, YOUR OPP BILLING MODEL, THE OPP MUNICIPAL POLICING COST TRENDS, AND YOUR 2022 ANNUAL BILLING STATEMENT.

SO WHEN I TALK ABOUT THE OPP BILLING MODEL, I REALLY LIKE TO START RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING, WHICH IS THE WITH THE PROVINCIAL POLICING BUDGET.

SO THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT PROVIDES THE OPP WITH A PROVINCIAL POLICING BUDGET OF $1.214 BILLION DOLLARS, 64% OF THAT OR $778 MILLION DOLLARS IS A PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

AND 34% OR $402 MILLION DOLLARS IS A MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITY.

SO THE 64% OR THE $778 MILLION DOLLAR PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IS PROVIDED TO ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE OPP POLICE AT NO COST RECOVERY.

WHERE THE 34% OR THE $412 MILLION DOLLARS IS A MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THESE RESOURCES ARE PROVIDED TO ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE OPP POLICE BUT AT A COST RECOVERY.

SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? THIS MEANS THAT THE OPP NEEDS TO RECOVER $412 MILLION DOLLARS TO PROVIDE BACK TO THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT.

SO ON THE PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ASIDE, IT ACCOUNTS FOR 64% OF THE $1.2 BILLION DOLLAR BUDGET OR $778 MILLION DOLLARS. SO AS I SAID, THIS IS PROVIDED TO ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE OPP POLICE AT NO COST RECOVERY.

SO THIS INCLUDES THINGS SUCH AS YOUR TRAFFIC SAFETY, YOUR INVESTIGATIONS, YOUR INTELLIGENCE, YOUR SPECIALIZED RESPONSE TEAMS. SO THE TRUE THE ERT.

YOUR UNDERWATER SEARCH AND RESCUE, THE AUXILIARY UNIT, COMMUNITY SAFETY, INDIGENOUS POLICING IN OUR UNINCORPORATED TERRITORIES.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS A PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THESE RESOURCES ARE PROVIDED TO ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES, THAT THE OPP POLICE NO COST RECOVERY.

NOW, THE 34% OR THE $412 MILLION DOLLARS IS A MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THIS MONEY NEEDS TO BE RECOVERED BACK FROM ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE OPP POLICE AND RECOVERED BACK TO THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT.

SO THESE RESOURCES INCLUDE YOUR DETACHMENT STAFF, WHICH INCLUDES SUPERVISION, FRONTLINE CONSTABLES, YOUR CIVILIAN ADMINISTRATION AND SUPPORT.

AND SUPPORT POSITIONS AND ODOE'S.

SO OTHER DIRECT OPERATING EXPENSES SO THINGS SUCH AS YOUR COMMUNICATION OPERATOR.

SO YOUR DISPATCHERS.

PRISONER GUARDS ACADEMY REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS.

[00:05:02]

TO THE LEFT OF THE SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE EACH LINE REPRESENTS A MUNICIPALITY AND HOW MUCH THEY WERE PAYING IN 2014 PRIOR TO THE MODEL.

DOLLARS MEAN THE SCALE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM.

YOU CAN SEE THAT HOW THE GAP OR DISPARITY HAS BEEN ADDRESSED THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MODEL.

TO ADDRESS THE TRANSPARENCY NEW REPORTS HAVE BEEN CREATED TO SHARE WITH MUNICIPALITIES SPECIFIC INFORMATION RELATED TO THEIR BILLING.

ANNUALLY WE HOLD WEBINARS.

WHEN THE STATEMENTS ARE DISTRIBUTED TO EXPLAIN THE STATEMENTS, WE GO OUT, WE DO PRESENTATIONS AND EXPLANATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF THE MUNICIPALITY, JUST AS WE'RE HERE TODAY AND WE POST ALL OF OUR INFORMATION ON OPP.CA FOR PUBLIC ACCESS.

THIS SLIDE WILL SHOW YOU HOW WE COST RECOVER FOR THE MUNICIPAL PORTION.

SO THE FIRST THREE SLIDES THAT I SHOWED YOU WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE PROVINCIAL BUDGET AND THE COST RECOVERY.

SO THIS IS HOW IT'S BROKEN DOWN TO RECOVER THAT $412 MILLION DOLLARS THAT I SPOKE ABOUT.

YOU CAN SEE THAT THE NUMBERS ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT IN THE RECOVERY.

AND THIS IS ONLY BECAUSE THE $412 MILLION DOLLARS IS THE 2020 RECONCILED NUMBERS.

AND THIS 418.8 IS THE 2022 ESTIMATED NUMBERS.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE, THE COST RECOVERY IS BROKEN DOWN INTO THREE CATEGORIES.

WE HAVE BASE SERVICE CALLS FOR SERVICE AND OTHER COSTS.

BASE SERVICES ARE ALLOCATED ON A PER PROPERTY BASIS.

BEING $172.07 FOR A TOTAL COST RECOVERY OF $203.1 MILLION DOLLARS.

SO CURRENTLY THE OPP POLICE 330 MUNICIPALITIES AND OVER AND ACTUALLY IT'S EXACTLY 1 MILLION 180,469 PROPERTIES.

SO THE CALCULATION IS $172.07 MULTIPLIED BY THE 1,180,469 PROPERTIES.

GIVES YOU THE COST RECOVERY FOR BASE SERVICE OF $203.1 MILLION DOLLARS.

SO EVERY PROPERTY THAT THE OPP POLICE ARE CHARGED, $172.07.

NOW CALLS FOR SERVICE ARE BASED ON EACH MUNICIPALITY'S USAGE FOR A COST RECOVERY OF $176.9 MILLION DOLLARS.

SO IF YOU THINK OF THIS AS A BIG POT OF MONEY AND IN THIS POT OF MONEY IS $176.9 MILLION DOLLARS.

EACH OF THE 330 MUNICIPALITIES THAT THE OPP POLICE NEED TO PAY A PORTION OF THIS POT AND THE WAY IN WHICH WE CALCULATE THE PORTION IS BY THE MUNICIPALITIES USAGE. AND FINALLY, ADDITIONAL COSTS ARE BILLED TO MUNICIPALITIES ON THEIR SPECIFIC USAGE AT A COST RECOVERY OF $38.8 MILLION DOLLARS.

SO LET ME BREAK THIS DOWN EVEN FURTHER.

BASE SERVICE IS YOUR PROACTIVE POLICING.

SO AGAIN, IT'S ALLOCATED AMONGST ALL MUNICIPALITIES ON AN EQUAL PER PROPERTY BASIS.

WHEN I SAY PROPERTY, I MEAN HOUSEHOLD, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY.

THIS BASE SERVICE COST INCLUDES PROACTIVE POLICING, SO THINGS SUCH AS CRIME PREVENTION, RIDE, SPOT CHECKS, TRAFFIC SAFETY, COMMUNITY POLICING, OFFICER TRAINING, ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES, AND INCLUDES ALL INSPECTOR AND STAFF SERGEANT POSITIONS.

THE CALLS FOR SERVICE ARE ALLOCATED COST TO THE MUNICIPALITY BASED ON THEIR INDIVIDUAL USAGE.

CALLS FOR SERVICE REPRESENT THE REACTIVE POLICING SERVICES, WHICH MEANS ACTUALLY HAVING SOMEBODY IN THE COMMUNITY PICKING UP THE PHONE, HAVING THE POLICE ATTEND FOR BREAK AND ENTER, MISCHIEF, ASSAULT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.

MUNICIPALITIES ARE BILLED FOR THE ACTUAL NUMBER AND TYPES OF CALLS FOR SERVICE THAT THEY RECEIVE.

ALL CALLS FOR SERVICE ARE BASED ON NINE TIME STANDARDS APPLIED TO THE MUNICIPALITIES FOUR YEAR AVERAGE, SO THAT IF YOUR MUNICIPALITY HAS ANY MAJOR CALL OR A MAJOR SPIKE IN CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR ONE YEAR, IT ENDS UP EVENING OUT WITH THE ROLLING AVERAGE.

SO YOU DON'T SUFFER FOR THAT YEAR.

AND FINALLY, THERE'S THE ADDITIONAL COSTS.

SO THESE ADDITIONAL COSTS ACCOUNT FOR THE FINAL $38.8 MILLION DOLLARS, AND THIS INCLUDES OVERTIME, COURT SECURITY, PRISONER TRANSPORTATION, ACCOMMODATION AND CLEANING AND ENHANCEMENTS.

SO OVER TIME, IF YOUR MUNICIPALITY ACCRUES OVERTIME, YOU PAY FOR IT.

COURT SECURITY IS ONLY CHARGED TO MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE A COURTHOUSE IN THEIR MUNICIPALITY.

PRISONER TRANSPORTATION IS CHARGED ON A PER PROPERTY BASIS BEING 100 OR SORRY, $1.71 PER PROPERTY.

AND THE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT EVERY MUNICIPALITY NEEDS PRISONER TRANSPORTATION, WHETHER IT'S TO TRANSPORT TO JAIL, COURT, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE.

[00:10:01]

IF YOU DON'T REQUIRE IT, YOU DON'T PAY FOR IT.

IF YOU DO, YOU PAY ON A PER PROPERTY COST OF $4.83.

AND FINALLY, ENHANCEMENTS ARE 1 TO 1.

SO YOU PAY IT 100%.

IF YOU WANT AN ADDITIONAL OFFICER FOR WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, SOMETIMES WE HAVE IT FOR SCHOOL LIAISON.

IF YOU WANT AN OFFICER IN YOUR SCHOOL MONDAY TO FRIDAY 8 TO 4, YOU CAN HAVE IT, BUT YOU PAY FOR IT 100%.

AND IT'S CALLED AN ENHANCEMENT.

NOW THIS SLIDE SHOWS COST RECOVERY TRENDS AT THE PROVINCIAL LEVEL.

SO THE BLUE BAR BAR IS ALL ELEMENTS COMBINED BEING THE MUNICIPAL COST RECOVERY.

AND THE RED BAR SHOWS THE AVERAGE COST PER PROPERTY FROM 2014 TO 2022.

IN 2022.

IT IS $355.

THIS SHOWS THAT ALTHOUGH THE RECOVERED COSTS CONTINUE TO RISE, THE COST FOR PROPERTY FOR MUNICIPALITIES REMAINS RELATIVELY STABLE.

THIS IS YEAR 2022 CALLS FOR SERVICE BILLING SUMMARY FOR ELLIOT LAKE.

AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS SLIDE, HERE ARE THE NINE TIME STANDARDS THAT I SPOKE ABOUT.

SO THEY ARE DRUG POSSESSION, DRUGS, OPERATIONAL, OPERATIONAL TWO, OTHER CRIMINAL CODE VIOLATION, PROPERTY CRIME VIOLATION, STATUTES AND ACTS, TRAFFIC AND VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE.

AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT YOU CAN SEE THE COST RECOVERY OF $176.9 MILLION DOLLARS.

EACH YEAR IS BROKEN DOWN FOR THE FOUR YEAR AVERAGE.

SO YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY HOW MANY CALLS YOU HAD FOR EACH CATEGORY AND HOW MUCH TIME WAS SPENT IN EACH CATEGORY.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE A FOUR YEAR AVERAGE THAT YOU HAD 213 VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE OCCURRENCES.

SO WHEN MULTIPLIED BY THE 16.1 HOURS THAT AN OFFICER SPENDS ON A VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE OCCURRENCE, YOU GET 3,421 HOURS SPENT INVESTIGATING THOSE CALLS.

FOR ELLIOT LAKE YOUR PORTION OF THE $176 MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET IS 0.8187%, WHICH COMES AT A COST OF $1.4 MILLION DOLLARS.

IF I LOOK AT THE CALLS FOR SERVICE DATA FOR ELLIOT LAKE, I CAN SEE THAT YOUR HIGHEST PERCENTAGE OF THE CALLS FOR SERVICE POT IS WITH YOUR OPERATIONAL AT A PERCENTAGE OF 0.2981%, WHICH COMES AT A COST OF $527,000 DOLLARS.

VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE AT A PERCENTAGE OF 0.1966%, WHICH COMES AT A COST OF $347,000 DOLLARS.

AND PROPERTY CRIME VIOLATIONS AT .1319% AT A COST OF $233,000 DOLLARS.

THIS SLIDE HERE. I BROKE IT DOWN EVEN MORE.

AND I'VE OUTLINED YOUR TOP TEN OFFENSES FROM YOUR 2022 BILLING STATEMENT.

I CAN SEE THAT UNDER THE VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE, THE HIGHEST CALLS FOR SERVICE IN YOUR MUNICIPALITY IS ASSAULT OR OTHER THREATS TO PERSON AND CRIMINAL HARASSMENT FOR OPERATIONAL IS ASSIST PUBLIC NEIGHBOR DISPUTES, DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE, SUSPICIOUS PERSON AND FAMILY DISPUTE AND FOR PROPERTY CRIME IS THEFT UNDER 5,000 AND MISCHIEF. THIS IS THE COST OVERVIEW FOR ELLIOT LAKE.

SO THIS SLIDE HERE SHOWS YOUR AVERAGE COST PER PROPERTY FOR EACH YEAR COMPARED WITH THE PROVINCIAL AVERAGE AND SHOWS THAT IT'S GONE DOWN OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS FROM $454 PER PROPERTY TO $419 DOLLARS PER PROPERTY.

YOU ARE STILL ABOVE THE OPP AVERAGE.

HOWEVER, YOU ARE A FAIRLY LARGE HUB COMMUNITY.

AND YOU CAN SEE PRIOR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OPP BILLING MODEL IN 2015, YOU ARE PAYING $496 DOLLARS PER PROPERTY.

SO YOUR COSTS HAVE GONE DOWN OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

THIS SLIDE IF I TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR 2022 ANNUAL BILLING STATEMENT THAT YOU GET EVERY YEAR, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE BREAKDOWN OF THE BASE SERVICE CALLS FOR SERVICE AND OTHER COSTS COME IN.

SO IN THE ORANGE BOX THERE, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED YOUR BASE SERVICE COSTS.

IN THE BLUE BOX, IT'S YOUR CALLS FOR SERVICE.

AND THEN IN THE GREEN BOX, IT'S YOUR OTHER COSTS.

SO I CAN SEE JUST FROM THIS PAGE THAT YOU HAVE A TOTAL OF 6,579 PROPERTIES.

AND OF COURSE, WE GET OUR PROPERTY COUNT FROM MPAC.

WHEN MULTIPLIED BY YOUR BASE SERVICE COST PER PROPERTY OF $172.07, WHICH IS DOWN FROM THE 2021 COST.

IT COMES TO $1.1 MILLION DOLLARS.

YOUR CALLS FOR SERVICE PERCENTAGE IS 0.8187% FOR A TOTAL COST OF $1.4 MILLION DOLLARS.

I CAN SEE THAT YOUR OVERTIME IS $121,000 DOLLARS, COURT SECURITY IS $45,000 DOLLARS, PRISONER TRANSPORTATION IS $11,000 DOLLARS.

[00:15:05]

FOR 2022 ESTIMATED COST OF $2.7 MILLION DOLLARS.

IN THE 2020 YEAR END RECONCILIATION I CAN SEE THAT YOU OVERPAID BY $62,000 DOLLARS, WHICH WAS TAKEN OFF THIS YEAR'S GRAND TOTAL.

YOU HAVE A FINAL GRAND TOTAL FOR 2022 OF 2.695 MILLION DOLLARS.

AND FINALLY HERE YOU CAN SEE THE 2022 ESTIMATED BASE SERVICE AND CALLS FOR SERVICE COST SUMMARY, WHICH IS ALL THE CALCULATIONS THAT WE DO TO COME UP WITH THE BASE SERVICE AND CALLS FOR SERVICE COST RECOVERY.

AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE $172.07.

WHICH IS THE COST PER PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN DIVIDED BY THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PROPERTIES THAT THE OPP POLICE BEING THE 1,180,469 PROPERTIES. YOU CAN SEE THE $203 MILLION DOLLAR BASE SERVICE CALCULATION RIGHT ABOVE IT.

THE $176 MILLION DOLLARS CALCULATION BESIDE IT.

AND THEN WE DIVIDE IT BY THE TOTAL OPP POLICE PROPERTY COUNT OF THAT 1.1 MILLION PROPERTIES.

WITH THAT NUMBER, WE COME UP WITH A BASE SERVICE COST FOR PROPERTY OF THE $172.07.

SO ALL THESE CALCULATIONS HERE IS EVERYTHING THAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE COST SUMMARY AND FOR YOUR REVIEW.

IT'S ALL TRANSPARENT.

WE DON'T HIDE ANY NUMBERS.

IT'S RIGHT HERE FOR YOU GUYS TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHERE THE NUMBERS ARE COMING FROM.

AND OF COURSE WE HAVE HELPFUL ONLINE RESOURCES FOR EVERYONE THROUGH THE INTERNET AT OPP .CA AND I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME PRESENT, AND I'M OPEN TO QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

I'LL ASK MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRESENTATION? COUNCILLOR PEARCE. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

IT WAS VERY ENLIGHTENING IN A LOT OF WAYS AND I KNOW THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT THIS, BUT I'M JUST SORT OF INTRIGUED.

I'M WONDERING WHY, IN YOUR ADDITIONAL COSTS, THINGS SUCH AS COURT SECURITY, CLEANING AND PRISONER TRANSPORTATION ARE INCLUDED WHEN IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THOSE WOULD BE MORE LOGICALLY SHOULD REST WITH THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL, NOT WITH THE OPP, AND IT SHOULDN'T BE REALLY TRANSFERRED TO ANY MUNICIPALITY.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE SOLICITOR GENERAL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR.

YEAH. SO I CAN'T TELL YOU.

[LAUGHTER] AND I KNOW THAT I'M JUST.

YEAH, NO, ABSOLUTELY.

AND YOU KNOW, YOU ARE ALWAYS WELCOME TO.

SO ANY OF THE CONFERENCES LIKE THE ROMA, THE AMMO OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY WELCOME TO ATTEND THERE AND THAT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE ANY OF YOUR CONCERNS. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY DO ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT AND ARE WILLING TO CHANGE IT IF IT MAKES SENSE, THAT SORT OF THING.

SO THEY'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO HEAR FROM MUNICIPALITIES.

SURE. YEAH. [LAUGHTER] THANK YOU.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. THANK YOU THROUGH YOU, YOUR WORSHIP.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

THE QUESTION I HAVE IS SO IF WE DIDN'T SUPPLY THE STATION CLEANING AND ALL THAT, WE WOULD BE BUILT $4.83 PER HOUSEHOLD.

YES, THAT'S CORRECT. PER PROPERTY? YES, I THINK IT'S $4.68, BUT YES, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

WHATEVER IT IS, I CAN TELL YOU EXACTLY.

YOU DON'T KNOW. YOU'RE RIGHT, $4.83.

YEP. SO QUICK CALCULATION THAT WOULD BE 31,000 A YEAR.

WHY ARE WE SUPPLYING A BUILDING AND CLEANING AND SO FORTH THAT COSTS MORE THAN THAT, IF WE COULD GET IT FOR 31,000 DOLLARS.

QUESTION OF COUNCIL.

I WOULD MUCH PREFER NOT PROVIDE YOU WITH THE BUILDING AND THE CLEANING SERVICES AND ALL THE STUFF THAT GOES WITH IT AT THAT PRICE.

IT COSTS US WAY MORE THAN THAT TO DO IT.

AND I GET IT. IT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL DEAL AND SO FORTH AND THAT'S WHEN WE SWITCHED OVER TO THE OPP BUT THE ORIGINAL DEAL WAS A LOT MORE PRECISE.

WE GOT TO DEMAND HOW MANY OFFICERS WE HAD, HOW MANY OFFICERS ON DUTY, HOW MANY PEOPLE ON PATROL.

MY ISSUE IS I DON'T FEEL THAT HAPPENING.

AND IT'S NOT THE DETACHMENTS ISSUE.

WELL, IT'S THEIR ISSUE.

IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT.

MY BELIEF. SHORT STAFFED.

WE USED TO HAVE 17 OFFICERS ON DUTY AND WE DON'T GET THAT NOW.

AND SO MY ISSUE WITH THE BILLING MODEL IS I DON'T THINK WE'RE GETTING OUR BANG FOR THE BUCK IS THE ISSUE.

[00:20:02]

I'VE JUST HEARD SO MANY HORROR STORIES WHERE.

LET'S GO BACK. EIGHT YEARS AGO, AND WE HAD POLICE PRESENCE HERE.

THE RESPONSE YOU'D HAVE THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE OFFICERS SHOWING UP TO A CALL FOR A POTENTIAL BREAK IN AN ALARM, WHATEVER.

NOW WE'RE GETTING ALARM CALLS AND SO FORTH, AND WE'RE GETTING A HALF HOUR OR 45 MINUTE RESPONSE TIME TO GET ONE OFFICER.

SO MY ISSUE AS A COUNCILLOR IS I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE THE OFFICERS IN PLACE IN TOWN.

AND I GET IT.

I KNOW WE DID FOR A WHILE HAVE A SHORTAGE OF OFFICERS HERE, WHICH PROBABLY DROVE UP OUR OVERTIME COSTS, WHICH I FEEL IS UNFAIR TO US BECAUSE THE OVERTIME COST IS BECOMING WE DON'T GET A CREDIT IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH STAFF TO COVER YOUR SHIFTS.

BUT WE GET BILLED THE OVERTIME FOR THE OFFICERS THAT HAVE TO WORK THE OVERTIME TO COVER BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OFFICERS IN THE DETACHMENT OR IN THE AREA FOR THE SERGEANTS TO ACTUALLY PERFORM A BETTER SERVICE.

SO WITH YOUR FACILITY, THAT IS, OF COURSE, COMPLETELY UP TO YOU.

WE FIND THE LARGER COMMUNITIES, THE HUB COMMUNITIES NORMALLY DO, AND THAT'S JUST NORMALLY A PREFERENCE OF THE LARGER COMMUNITIES, BUT IT'S 100% IF YOU DON'T WANT IT IN YOUR COMMUNITY, THEN IT JUST MOVES BACK TO BLIND RIVER, WHICH IS THE HOST DETACHMENT.

IT'S COMPLETELY UP TO YOU GUYS.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE IT.

IT'S NOT A NECESSITY.

YOU COULD GO BY THE PER PROPERTY COSTS, BUT THEY WOULD BE DISPATCHED OUT OF THERE.

YEAH. CLARITY.

YOU SAID THAT THE COMMUNITY OUR SIZE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN OFFICE HERE.

NO, THEY DON'T HAVE TO. I JUST SAID A LOT OF THEM DO, LIKE A LOT OF THE LARGER COMMUNITIES, A LOT OF THE HUB COMMUNITIES LIKE TO HAVE THEIR OWN FACILITY, BUT 100% YOU PROVIDE IT.

YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH IT.

IF YOU DON'T WANT IT ANY MORE, YOU DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE IT JUST MOVES BACK TO THE HOST DETACHMENT AND BLIND RIVER AND YOU JUST PAY THE PER PROPERTY COST.

THAT'S A DECISION THAT COUNCIL CAN MAKE.

AND WE'D HAVE WORSE SERVICE THAN WE HAVE NOW IF WE DON'T HAVE OFFICERS HERE.

SO THE LEVEL OF SERVICE SHOULDN'T CHANGE.

IT WOULDN'T CHANGE BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE THE OFFICERS.

IT'S JUST WHERE THEY'RE DISPATCHED FROM.

JUST WHERE OR NOT EVEN DISPATCHES WHERE THEY REPORT TO.

COUNCILLOR TURNER.

THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION.

THE BILLING MODEL PORTION THAT I'M ASKING ABOUT, I GUESS, IS THE BASE MODEL.

AND UNLESS I MISUNDERSTOOD THE LIST HERE, IT SEEMS TO ON THE LAST PAGE OF YOUR PRESENTATION.

YEAH. I JUST PULLED IT UP THERE.

OKAY. SO THAT SEEMS TO INCLUDE EVERYBODY IN ANYBODY IN THE OPP.

YES. AND DIVIDE IT BY A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES IN ONTARIO.

YES. AND THEN WE TAKE OUR PORTION OF THAT.

YES. AND THE PROVINCE IS PAYING THE LION'S SHARE, I TAKE IT, OF THIS? WELL THE PROVINCE PAYS ALL THAT PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY.

RIGHT? YEAH.

OKAY. BACK TO OUR LOCAL.

YEP. AND YOU HAVE OPERATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL TWO.

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? YEAH. SO AND WE GET THESE QUESTIONS A LOT.

SO IN YOUR ANNUAL BILLING STATEMENT THAT YOU GET EVERY YEAR, YOU HAVE YOUR BREAKDOWN.

SO IT WILL SHOW AND I'LL PULL IT UP ON PAGE.

IT STARTS ON PAGE 7 OF 20.

AND IT GOES THROUGH EVERY SINGLE ONE.

SO FOR OPERATIONAL FOR YOU GUYS SPECIFICALLY, IT'S LIKE THE ALARM CALLS, ANIMALS, LIKE THE DOG BITES, [INAUDIBLE] ASSIST, FIRE, ALL THOSE SORT OF THINGS OPERATIONAL TWO. IT'S LITERALLY YOU CAN SEE EVERY CALL THAT'S IN BOTH AND OPERATIONAL TWO IS MAINLY THE 911S AND FALSE ALARMS. SO OPERATIONAL TWO IS JUST WHAT YOU MIGHT CONSIDER A HIGHER PRIORITY, LIKE A 911 CALL? YEAH. YEAH.

THE DIFFERENCES. WELL, YEAH, LIKE, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.

911 CALLS ARE DROPPED HANG UPS, POCKET DIALS, AND THEN THE FALSE ALARMS, THE ACCIDENTAL, THE TRIPS MALFUNCTIONS.

THERE'S ABOUT TEN OF THEM IN THE OPERATIONAL TWO.

THEN LAST.

I'LL TRY AND KEEP IT SHORT HERE.

[00:25:03]

SO THIS MUST INCLUDE THE STAFF SERGEANTS AND INSPECTORS.

TIME TO LOOK OVER THE FILE OR WHATEVER.

WELL YEAH, IT INCLUDES EVERYTHING IN RELATION TO IT.

SO COURT TIME, EVERYTHING AND THEY TAKE AN AVERAGE SO THEY LOOK ACROSS.

SO FOR EXAMPLE IF THERE WAS A VIOLENT CRIMINAL CODE SO OR LET'S JUST EVEN SAY AN ASSAULT, THEY WILL LOOK AT EVERY OFFICER THAT HAS RESPONDED TO AN ASSAULT CALL AND HOW LONG IT TOOK FROM START TO FINISH, INCLUDING COURT EVERYTHING.

AND THEN THEY TAKE THE AVERAGE.

OKAY, WHAT'S THE RATIO OF OFFICERS TO POPULATION HERE FOR ELLIOT LAKE? OFFICERS TO YOUR POPULATION? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE.

IN THE PROVINCE. I GET THAT I COULD GET THAT ANSWER.

IN THE PROVINCE, WHAT WOULD IT BE, ONE TO 1500 OR 1 TO 2000 OR? YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE.

I CAN GET THAT ANSWER FOR YOU, THOUGH.

I'M CURIOUS. DO WE HAVE ENOUGH OFFICERS FOR THIS SIZE OF OUR POPULATION? FOR ELLIOT LAKE? YEAH. VERSUS OTHER TERRITORIES AND DISTRICTS? THAT WOULD BE AN OPERATIONAL QUESTION.

SO NOW THAT CAN BE BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE POLICE SERVICES BOARD OR I CAN HAVE DETACHMENT COMMANDER SPEAK ABOUT THAT NOW, BUT THAT'S UP TO YOU.

BUT THAT WOULD BE AN OPERATIONAL QUESTION THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE POLICE SERVICES BOARD, BUT THAT I CAN BRING HIM FORWARD IF YOU GUYS WANT HIM TO ANSWER THE OPERATIONAL? SURE.

JUST IF NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, INSPECTOR, JUST CURIOUS IF YOU KNOW WHAT THAT RATIO IS.

NO WORRIES. I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT THE EXACT POPULATION OF ELLIOT LAKE IS, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S 28 OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO ELLIOT LAKE.

FOR 11,500 AND THAT'S? SO WE'RE FULLY STAFFED.

AND WE DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS WE HAVE IN A DETACHMENT HERE, THE SAME WAY IT'S DETERMINED IN ANY OTHER COMMUNITY POLICE? THAT'S BASED ON THE OPP STAFFING MODEL YEAH, WHICH IS A BALANCE OF POPULATION THAT CALLS FOR SERVICE.

AND I CAN'T TELL YOU THE EXACT RATIO OR THE FORMULA FOR THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT'S BASED ON THE OPP STAFFING MODEL.

YES. OKAY. THANKS.

THANK YOU. JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON COUNCILLOR TURNER'S QUESTION.

MUNICIPALITIES STILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY IF WE WANTED MORE BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO LOOK AT ENHANCEMENTS OR THE SPECIAL CONSTABLE POSITIONS TO INCREASE BOOTS ON THE GROUND BUT THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL COST, IS THAT CORRECT? 100%, YEP.

WHAT IS THE COST PER ENHANCEMENT? SO IT'S APPROXIMATELY IF I THINK JUST OFFHAND, APPROXIMATELY $195,000 PER YEAR.

OKAY SO PER ENHANCEMENT.

FOR AN ENHANCEMENT.

FOR ONE BODY. BUT THAT INCLUDES THE VEHICLE, THE UNIFORM, THE TRAINING, EVERYTHING.

SO FOR THAT ONE ENHANCEMENT, 195, APPROXIMATELY.

WHAT IF WE'D BE OKAY WITH HORSES? I ENCOURAGE IT. THAT CAN BE GREAT.

ALL RIGHT, SO I'VE NEVER HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE BILLING MODEL.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN EXPLAINED VERY, VERY CLEARLY.

AND OUR NUMBER IS MONTHLY FROM OUR POLICE SERVICES BOARD MEETINGS ARE VERY CLEAR.

I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH THE OPP MOREOVER, THE OVERALL JUSTICE SYSTEM WITH THE REVOLVING DOOR SYSTEM WE SEEM TO HAVE. AND I PERSONALLY, IF I WAS ONE OF OUR CONSTABLES OR SERGEANTS IN TOWN, I'D HAVE FRUSTRATION IN THE FACT THAT YOU CAN ARREST SOMEBODY AND TWO DAYS LATER YOU SEE THEM OUT DOING THE EXACT SAME CRIME AND YOU'RE ARRESTING THEM AGAIN FOR THE EXACT SAME CRIME.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT GOES BEYOND THE OPP AND OVER TO THE AUTHORITIES AND THE BAIL COURTS AND JUSTICE OF PEACE AND HOW THEY READ THE RULES.

AS FAR AS BAIL COURTS ARE CONCERNED, EVERYTHING'S SUPPOSED TO BE BASED ON THE VERACITY OF THE CRIME AND HOW MANY TIMES THE CRIME'S REPEATED.

BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE THAT WAY, BECAUSE I KNOW MANY OF OUR OFFICERS IN TOWN, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I KNOW I WOULD BE FRUSTRATED WITH IF YOU ARREST SOMEBODY FOR A VIOLENT CRIME AND THERE THEY ARE TWO DAYS LATER WALKING UP THE STREET.

SO AGAIN, THAT'S NOT WITH YOU THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

WHAT I DO HAVE A BIT OF ISSUE WITH IS AND I STILL CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE THE ISSUES WITH DRUG TRAFFICKING AND HOW WE CAN CURB THE DRUG TRAFFICKING.

BECAUSE I HAD AN UNDERSTANDING WHEN THE PROVINCE AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PUT FORWARD THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA, THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO OPEN UP ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR THE OPP TO REALLY CRACK DOWN ON THE HARDER NARCOTICS.

[00:30:04]

SO WHAT CAN BE DONE TO TO CURB THE TRAFFICKING? AGAIN, I'LL MOVE THAT TO OPERATIONAL.

ARE YOU SPEAKING FROM LIKE A LEGISLATIVE STANDPOINT, YOUR WORSHIP OR? I'M SPEAKING FROM WHAT CAN WE DO TO CURB IT? WE KNOW THERE'S TRAFFICKING GOING ON.

WE KNOW IT EXISTS.

HOW DO WE SLOW IT DOWN? YEAH, WELL, THE NUMBER ONE THING FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE AND INVESTIGATIVE PERSPECTIVE AS WE TALKED ABOUT MANY TIMES AT POLICE SERVICES BOARD MEETING, IS INFORMATION SHARING.

OFTENTIMES WE'LL HAVE PEOPLE REACH OUT AND SAY, I KNOW THAT TRAFFICKING IS TAKING PLACE AT THIS CERTAIN RESIDENCE, BUT THAT INFORMATION IS NEVER FORWARDED TO THE POLICE TO ALLOW US TO FORMULATE AN INVESTIGATIVE HISTORY ON ANYTHING WHICH WILL THEN LEAD TO A SEARCH WARRANT, WHICH WILL THEN LEAD TO CHARGES, WHICH THEN LEADS TO CONVICTIONS AND POTENTIALLY HOPEFULLY DETERRENCE AND OR INCARCERATION TO PREVENT THAT TRAFFICKING FROM REOCCURRING.

BUT FROM THE POLICE INVESTIGATIVE PERSPECTIVE, THE INFORMATION SHARING IS THE NUMBER ONE THING WE NEED, RIGHT? WE TALK ABOUT ANALYTICS.

IF WE AREN'T GETTING CALLS FOR SERVICE, WE DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM ABOUT SOMETHING OR THAT INFORMATION IS NOT BEING SHARED.

IT NEVER ALLOWS US TO DRAW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS THAT INDIVIDUAL OR THAT HOUSE OR THAT GROUP THAT IS PERHAPS PARTICIPATING IN DRUG TRAFFICKING.

SO YOU CAN BE [INAUDIBLE] MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ACTUALLY HAVE INFORMATION, CAN CONTACT THE DETACHMENT, CAN CALL OUR 1888 NUMBER, WHICH IS 1-888-310-1122. THERE'S ALSO CRIME STOPPERS, WHICH ALLOWS PEOPLE TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS AND PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE POLICE WHICH WILL BE FILTERED THROUGH US.

AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, CRIME STOPPERS, IT REALLY IS ANONYMOUS TO THE POLICE.

THE POLICE DO NOT KNOW WHO PROVIDES THAT INFORMATION, AND WE HAVE NO WAY OF OBTAINING THAT INFORMATION.

AND ALSO, YOU CAN JUST CALL THE DETACHMENT AND ASK TO SPEAK TO AN OFFICER.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO CALL NORTH BAY AND GET DISPATCHED, YOU CAN CALL THE DETACHMENT AND ASK TO HAVE AN OFFICER SPEAK WITH YOU AND YOU CAN PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT WAY.

AND THEN IT CAN BE SENT OVER TO OUR DRUG INVESTIGATORS, OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY STREET CRIME UNIT, OUR FRONTLINE OFFICERS, AND ONTO OUR ORGANIZED CRIME ENFORCEMENT BUREAU.

SO MY NUMBER ONE SUGGESTION ON HOW TO TACKLE TRAFFICKING IN THE COMMUNITY IS SHARE INFORMATION AS OPPOSED TO JUST THINKING THAT YOU BELIEVE SOMETHING AND NEVER SHARING THAT INFORMATION WITH THE AUTHORITIES BECAUSE IF YOU'RE KEEPING IT TO YOURSELF, IT'S USELESS TO EVERYBODY ELSE, REALLY.

THERE YOU GO. SO WE HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR EVERYONE WATCHING.

SHARE THE INFORMATION.

COUNCILLOR FINAMORE. THANK YOU.

I GUESS THAT'S NOT THE BUZZ, RIGHT? THAT'S [LAUGHTER] [INAUDIBLE]. SORRY, I HAVE A QUESTION.

I'M JUST TRYING TO REMEMBER, I WAS A MEMBER OF THE POLICE SERVICES BOARD FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS, BUT A FEW YEARS AGO.

SO DURING THAT TIME I THINK WE HAD SECTION TEN, SECTION FIVE BOARDS AND BILLING WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT DEPENDING UPON WHAT YOUR I GUESS, COMPILATION WHAT YOUR PAYMENT WAS.

BUT MY POINT IS, IS NOW THAT THIS BILLING MODEL HAS CHANGED AND IT'S BEEN CHANGED FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW.

WE HAD WITHIN THE SOUTH ALGOMA DISTRICT [INAUDIBLE] IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE HAD SECTION 10 WE HAD SECTION 5, AND WE ALSO HAD A COMMUNITY THAT DIDN'T PAY AT ALL, AND THEY PAID TOTAL FEE FOR SERVICE WHENEVER THERE WAS A CALL THEY WERE BILLED.

I THINK THAT WAY THROUGH, I THINK IT WAS IRONBRIDGE OR THAT AREA.

SO NOW THAT THIS BILLING MODEL IS IN AND SO EVERY HOUSEHOLD THAT IS NOT COVERED UNDER A CITY OR TOWN POLICE SERVICE OR AN ADDITIONAL POLICE SERVICE, THEY ALL PAY? EVERY ONE OF THEM. EVERY ONE OF THEM, OKAY.

I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE OTHER SYSTEM WAS VERY UNFAIR THAT.

YEAH. AND THAT WAS THE PURPOSE BECAUSE IF THEY HAD AN INCIDENT THEY HAD THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICES WE DID.

YOU JUST PULLED THEM FROM EVERYWHERE ELSE, AND THAT MEANT THAT THEY PULLED THEM AWAY FROM OUR COMMUNITY IF THEY WERE NEEDED.

SO I JUST WANTED THE OTHER THING I THINK THAT WE ALL WELL, I HAVE AN ISSUE, NOT AN ISSUE, BUT A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING AND PAYING IS THE OVERTIME BECAUSE I NEVER UNDERSTAND WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE OF SHORT STAFF.

IF THERE'S AN INVESTIGATION GOING ON TOWN AND THEY'RE CATCHING THE DRUG DEALERS AND THEY'RE CATCHING THE VIOLENT OFFENDERS, AND THAT CAUSES THE OVERTIME, I'M 100% BEHIND THAT. BUT I GUESS I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT WE'RE AT FULL STAFF BECAUSE THAT SHOULD CUT DOWN ON OVERTIME.

I'M SURE. I'M SURE DURING SUMMER HOLIDAYS, THAT MAKES IT A LITTLE EASIER TO BE ABLE TO HAVE OUR OFFICERS HAVE THEIR TIME OFF BECAUSE EVERYBODY NEEDS THEIR TIME OFF.

BUT I JUST WANTED TO I THINK THAT THAT'S WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER IT, BUT YOU CALL IT OUR OVERTIME.

AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE GET STUCK.

AND I JUST GOT TO SAY, LIKE THIS PAST WEEKEND FOR THE OPP IN THIS AREA, LIKE GOD BLESS YOU ALL BECAUSE YOU HAD DROWNINGS, YOU HAD ACCIDENTS, THERE WAS MURDER LIKE ALONG THE 17TH CORRIDOR.

[00:35:01]

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND TO OUR OPP, BECAUSE I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT A WEEKEND IT WAS.

WELL, THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF THEM.

BUT AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT POINT, ANYTHING PROVINCIAL THAT FALLS UNDER THE PROVINCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OVERTIME YOU DON'T PAY FOR.

SO FOR THOSE HOMICIDES, FOR THE UNDERWATER SEARCH AND RESCUE, ANYTHING LIKE THAT, IF THEY'RE DOING OVERTIME, YOU DON'T PAY FOR IT.

COUNCILLOR PEARCE. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

I GUESS THIS IS A ANOTHER OPERATIONAL QUESTION, BUT IT'S JUST FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT COUNCILLOR PATRIE WAS ASKING ABOUT.

CAN SOMEBODY TELL ME WHAT THE AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME IS FOR THE OPP IN ELLIOT LAKE? SO AS AN ORGANIZATION WE DON'T CAPTURE RESPONSE TIMES.

SO BECAUSE WE USE WHAT'S CALLED THE INTEGRATED SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL, WE CAN PULL FROM ANYBODY.

SO EVEN IF, SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE SAY ME, YOU KNOW, I'M A SERGEANT OUT OF THE MUNICIPAL POLICING BUREAU AND HEADQUARTERS, BUT SAY I'M COMING HERE TO DO A PRESENTATION AND I HAVE MY UNIFORM ON, I HAVE MY GUN, I'M READY TO GO.

AND THERE'S A CALL AND I'M CLOSEST TO CALL.

I GET THE CALL, I RESPOND.

SO IT'S NOT JUST TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE MEMBERS IN ELLIOT LAKE AND THEY RESPOND TO THIS.

ANYBODY IN THE ORGANIZATION, IF THEY'RE CLOSEST TO THE CALL, THEY GET IT.

WE ARE TRAINED. WE'RE READY TO GO.

WE GET THE CALL. I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'M AGAIN, I'M ECHOING A BIT OF WHAT THE COUNCILLOR PATRIE HAS BROUGHT UP.

I KNOW THAT IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BY PEOPLE AND AGAIN, I'M GETTING THIS THIRD HAND.

SO BUT THEY'RE FEELING THAT THEY'RE NOT GETTING THE RESPONSE TIMES THAT THEY USED TO GET WHEN WE HAD OUR OWN POLICE FORCE.

I DON'T KNOW OK, BUT IF THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM, THEN I THINK I'D LIKE TO FIND OUT WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.

AND I KNOW THAT THE DETACHMENT IS NOW FULLY STAFFED.

WE WEREN'T FOR A WHILE.

WE HAD SOME REAL SHORTAGES GOING ON HERE, NOT THE FAULT OF ANYBODY HERE.

IT WAS JUST THAT WAS THE WAY IT WORKED OUT.

BUT WE ARE FULLY STAFFED NOW.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THE RESPONSE TIMES ARE THEY BETTER THAN THEY WERE OR ARE THEY WORSE THAN THEY WERE? ARE THEY GOING TO BE IMPROVING NOW THAT WE'RE FULLY STAFFED? IT'S A FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD QUESTION, I THINK.

YEAH, IT'S 100% STRAIGHTFORWARD, BUT AS AN ORGANIZATION, WE DON'T CALCULATE RESPONSE TIMES.

AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THE MEMBERS AREN'T RESPONDING FROM A CERTAIN DETACHMENT.

THEY'RE NOT SITTING IN THIS DETACHMENT.

THEY'RE NOT SITTING IN THE BLIND RIVER DETACHMENT, JUST WAITING FOR A CALL TO COME IN SO THAT WE CAN SAY, OKAY, SO CALL CAME IN.

THEY'RE NOW LEAVING FROM THERE.

HOW LONG TO RESPOND? THEY'RE STATIC. THEY'RE GOING, THEY'RE COMING.

THEY'RE ALWAYS PATROLLING.

SO IF A CALL COMES IN, THEN IT'S THE CLOSEST TO CALL.

THAT'S WHY WE IMPLEMENT A CLOSEST TO CALL.

THEY GET IT CLOSEST TO CALL, THEY GO GET IT, THEY RESPOND.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT.

YOU KNOW, JUST TO BUILD, LIKE YOU SAY, WE DON'T CALCULATE THE AVERAGE RESPONSE TIMES.

BUT ON AN ANECDOTAL LEVEL, I CAN SAY THAT THE RESPONSE TIMES IN ELLIOT LAKE ARE QUITE GOOD.

AND GIVEN THAT ELLIOT LAKE IN TERMS OF HOW WE STRUCTURE OUR PATROL, ELLIOT LAKE IS ITS OWN ZONE.

SO GEOGRAPHICALLY SPEAKING, OFFICERS ASSIGNED TO ELLIOT LAKE ARE TYPICALLY WITHIN VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY.

AND THEN THE OTHER FACTOR TO BEAR IN MIND WHEN YOU HEAR IT FROM A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, FEELING THAT PERHAPS A RESPONSE TIME WAS NOT WHAT THEY EXPECTED.

THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERING PRIORITIZATION.

RIGHT. TO THEM THAT MAY BE THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED TO THEM, AND THAT'S COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDABLE FROM THEIR OWN PERSPECTIVE.

BUT THE OFFICERS ALSO HAVE TO BALANCE WHAT IS PERHAPS GOING ON ELSEWHERE WITHIN THAT ZONE AS WELL.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

AND TO CLARIFY A LITTLE FURTHER, YOUR WORSHIP.

I'M SORRY, BUT COUNCILLOR PEARCE AND I ARE NOT TAG TEAMING YOU.

BUT SO IF WE HAVE 28 OFFICERS HERE, HOW MANY ARE ON DUTY AT ALL TIMES? AND I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO WHERE I WAS SAYING IN HISTORY.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE.

I OWN A BUSINESS.

I WOULD GET AN ALARM CALL.

THE ALARM COMPANY WOULD CALL ME.

WE'RE IN ELLIOT LAKE. I LIVE LESS THAN 5 MINUTES FROM MY BUSINESS.

I WOULD GET TO MY BUSINESS AND THERE'D BE TWO OR THREE CRUISERS THERE.

I'VE HAD AN INSTANCE WHERE MY BACK DOOR WAS OPEN AND I'M DRIVING THERE AND HAVE MY CAMERAS UP AND THERE'S FLASHLIGHTS IN THE BUILDING AND I'M GOING, UH OH, IT WAS OFFICERS BECAUSE THEY SEEN IT OPEN AND THEY WENT IN TO INVESTIGATE.

SO. THAT'S WITHIN MINUTES.

SO THE ISSUE BECOMES WHEN I HAVE BUSINESS OWNERS SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT, I HAVE AN ALARM CALL AND I'M SITTING IN THE PARKING LOT AND I'M TOLD TO WAIT THAT THE OFFICER'S MINUTES AWAY BECAUSE THE PRECINCT IS JUST DOWN THE STREET AND THEY'RE SITTING THERE FOR HALF AN HOUR.

NOW, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN WHEN WE WERE SUFFERING THE STAFF SHORTAGES.

[00:40:02]

HOW MANY ARE ON DUTY DAYTIME AND HOW MANY ARE ON DUTY AT NIGHTTIME IS PROBABLY THE BEST WAY THAT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER OUR QUESTION FOR CALL RESPONSE TIME? SO THERE IS NO EXACT NUMBER THAT'S CONSISTENT AT ALL TIMES.

IT DEPENDS ON TRAINING, VACATION, ILLNESS, INJURIES, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

SO THERE IS NO ONE SPECIFIC NUMBER THAT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE'S ALWAYS X NUMBER OF OFFICERS ON DUTY IN ELLIOT LAKE THAT IT JUST DOESN'T EXIST.

WE DON'T HAVE A MINIMUM LIKE THAT.

IT'S UP TO THE SUPERVISOR OF THE DAY TO DETERMINE WHAT'S OPERATIONALLY NECESSARY AND IF THEY NEED TO MOVE BODIES AROUND HAVE INTEGRATED RESPONSE LIKE THEY CAN BRING UP AN OFFICER FROM BLIND RIVER TO ASSIST WITH COVERAGE OR MANITOULIN ESPANOLA.

WHEN I SAY MANITOULIN, I MEAN ESPANOLA AS WELL, BY THE WAY.

SO THERE IS NO SPECIFIC SAYING THIS IS THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS ON DUTY AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

AND THAT'S WHERE I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS NEW MODEL, BECAUSE UNDER THE OLD MODEL, WE KNEW THAT WE IF OFFICERS FROM THE ELLIOT LAKE DETACHMENT WERE SENT TO THE NORTH SHORE, WE WERE TO GET CREDITED FOR IT.

SO WE WEREN'T BILLED FOR THOSE OFFICERS.

SO NOW WE'RE BEING BILLED FOR X AMOUNT OF OFFICERS AND THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT WE HAVE OFFICERS HERE ON DUTY.

THAT'S WHAT MY ISSUE AS THE COUNCILLOR IS BECOMING IS I CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT FOR TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR, WE HAVE COVERAGE WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY BECAUSE IF SOMETHING HAPPENS ON THE NORTH SHORE, YOU HAVE TO PULL ALL OF THE OFFICERS FROM HERE.

YOU'RE GOING TO PULL THEM IN IF SOMETHING HAPPENS HERE.

AND I GET IT, IT'S WORST CASE SCENARIO AND WE DON'T EVER WANT THAT TO HAPPEN, BUT WE STILL GET BILLED FOR IT AND WE DON'T GET THAT SERVICE.

AND THAT'S WHERE WITH THE OLD BILLING MODEL, IF WE LOST THAT SERVICE, AT LEAST WE GOT CREDITED FOR IT.

WE WERE BILLED FOR THE SERVICE THAT WE WERE USING AND NOW WE'RE GETTING BILLED FLAT RATE ACROSS THE BOARD NO MATTER HOW MANY OFFICERS WE HAVE.

SO IF WE HAVE FOUR OFFICERS ON OR IF WE'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE FOUR OFFICERS ON TO BE THAT COMPLEMENT, TO GIVE US WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO AND WE DON'T HAVE THEM, WE STILL GET BILLED FOR IT. WELL, THE OLD MODEL YOU PAID PER FTE SO PER BODY, THIS ONE, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BODIES YOU'RE NOT PAYING PER BODY.

YEAH. SO YOU'RE PAYING IT'S THE INTEGRATED SERVICE DELIVERY.

YOU CAN HAVE ANYBODY WITHIN THE OPP COULD RESPOND.

IT'S NOT, THEY'RE NOT SPECIFIC.

YOU DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC OFFICER, A, B, C AND D ARE GOING TO BE RESPONDING.

OKAY. [LAUGHTER] IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY SEEING NONE THANK YOU ONCE AGAIN FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND TAKING THE TIME TO COME OUT HERE THIS EVENING.

ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

AND NOW WE KNOW WE HAVE TWO EXTRA OFFICERS IN TOWN FOR THE EVENING.

YEAH, FOR A COUPLE MORE HOURS.

[LAUGHTER] SEVEN INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF CORPORATE

[7. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF CORPORATE REPORTS]

POWER, TAKEOFF AND SHRINKAGE REBATE HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES RECOMMENDATION THAT THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND TREASURY RE HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES RECOVERY OF FUEL TAX REFUNDS AND POWER TAKE OFF BE RECEIVED.

AND THAT COUNCIL ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR THE PROCESSING AND RECOVERY OF FUEL TAX REFUNDS AND POWER TAKE OFF FROM THE MINISTRY OF REVENUE, PROVINCIAL FUEL TAX REFUND AGREEMENT.

AND THAT COUNCIL ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR THE PROCESSING AND RECOVERY OF FUEL TAX REBATES AND SHRINKAGE APPLICATIONS FROM THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, PROVINCIAL FUEL TAX REBATE AGREEMENT AND THAT THE APPROPRIATE BYLAW BE PASSED.

CAN I HAVE A MOVER, PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

ALL RIGHT, MS. SONNENBURG. THANK YOU THROUGH YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

PER THE REPORT AT THE GOOD ROADS CONFERENCE CITY STAFF WERE INTRODUCED TO REPRESENTATIVES FROM HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES.

I MET WITH THE PROPRIETOR OF HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND HAD AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION WITH HIMSELF AND OUR DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, MR. HALLOCH. HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WILL TAKE A LOOK AT OUR USAGE OF FUEL ON ANY VEHICLES THAT ARE NON LICENSED. SO USE OF FUEL WOULD INCLUDE ANYTHING THAT IS AN AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT EVEN ON A LICENSED VEHICLE. SO FOR EXAMPLE, CEMENT MIXERS BURN FUEL BECAUSE THE CEMENT MIXER IS SPINNING.

THIS IS GOING TO GET INTERESTING.

THIS IS GOING TO BE FUN, AERIAL BUCKETS, LIFTS AND CRANES, REFRIGERATION UNITS ON TRUCKS USE THE GASOLINE THAT IS NOT BEING USED TO POWER THE VEHICLE

[00:45:01]

HE EXPLAINED TO BOTH MR. HALLOCH AND I THAT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY SITTING IN A REBATE POT AT THE PROVINCE UP FOR GRABS.

SO TO THAT EXTENT, MR. HALLOCH AND I ARE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO PROVIDE THEM THE INFORMATION THAT THEY REQUIRE TO EXPLORE THIS REBATE.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WILL WORK ON A COMMISSION BASIS.

IF WE GET A CHECK, THEY GET A PAYMENT.

SO IF IT'S NOT MATERIAL ENOUGH FOR US TO EXPLORE, THEN WE GET NOTHING AND WE DON'T PAY ANYTHING EITHER. SO IT'S A BIT OF A WIN WIN FOR THE CITY AND IT'S A REBATE THAT WE'RE NOT CURRENTLY READY TO PURSUE ON OUR OWN DUE TO STAFF TIME AND CONSTRAINTS.

AND I ACTUALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND IT AT ALL.

I'LL BE VERY FRANK.

SO THE GREAT NEWS PART OF THIS IS THAT EXECUTING THIS AGREEMENT WITH HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WILL ALLOW US TO GO RETROACTIVE FOR FOUR YEARS.

THEY WILL DO THE ENTIRE AUDIT AND SUBMISSION, AND WE WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE REFUND FOR UP TO FOUR YEARS PRIOR AND MOVING FORWARD AS WELL.

THERE IS NO EXPENSE FOR ENGAGEMENT WITH ALL THE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES.

THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF A REFUND AND AN ADDITIONAL REVENUE STREAM FOR THE CITY.

SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I THINK BETWEEN MR. HALLOCK AND I, WE CAN PROBABLY ANSWER THEM.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MANN.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

MS. SONNENBURG. CLEARLY, WHEN THERE'S A POTENTIAL UNTAPPED RESOURCE SITTING AT THE PROVINCIAL LEVEL, IT SEEMS REASONABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. MY ONLY TWO QUESTIONS WOULD BE WHAT'S THE ESTIMATED RECOVERY? DO YOU HAVE ANY SENSE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS? OR THIS IS JUST BASICALLY, OBVIOUSLY A SMALLER MUNICIPALITY COMPARED TO SOME OF THE LARGER ONES OUT THERE.

AND THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS HOW MUCH OF OUR STAFF TIME IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THIS ORGANIZATION WITH THE INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR THEM TO WORK ON OUR BEHALF? THAT'S THE OTHER PIECE, BECAUSE THERE IS SOME STAFF TIME.

IF IT'S MINIMAL, OBVIOUSLY IT MAKES SENSE TO GO AHEAD.

I JUST THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS I HAD.

THANK YOU. BASED ON THE CONVERSATION WE HAD WITH MR. HOLLY, THE STAFF TIME WILL BE QUITE MINIMAL ON THIS.

WE WILL, THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT WILL SUBMIT ALL BILLING THAT HAS OCCURRED THROUGH OUR PROVIDER FOR FUEL THAT WILL BE CROSS-REFERENCED WITH REPORTS THAT ARE ALREADY ABLE TO BE GENERATED OUT OF OUR KEY LOCK SYSTEM, I BELIEVE IS WHAT WE CALL IT.

AND THOSE TWO PIECES OF INFORMATION WILL BE KEY FROM HOLLY TRANSPORTATION AND THEIR STAFF TO DO THE FULL ANALYSIS ON WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE OUR REBATE.

MR. HOLLY EXPLAINED TO DARYL OR SORRY, MR. HALLOCH AND I, THAT THE REBATE, FOR EXAMPLE FOR A QUOTE MA AND PA VACUUM TRUCK THAT WOULD BE USED FOR SEPTIC SERVICES WOULD OBTAIN APPROXIMATELY FOR ONE VEHICLE $600 PER YEAR IN A REBATE.

SO THIS WOULD BE FOR A SMALL ONE VAC TRUCK ORGANIZATION OBTAINS APPROXIMATELY $600 DOLLARS USING HOLLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES TO APPLY FOR SAID REBATE SO.

MAYBE WE'LL GET AT LEAST 600 BUCKS.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

I MET WITH OUR TREASURER TODAY ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I DID HAVE MAJOR CONCERNS WITH IT.

I DO UNDERSTAND THIS BECAUSE I DO IT WITH MY OTHER BUSINESS AND IT IS SUBSTANTIAL REBATES.

THE ISSUE IS WE DON'T HAVE IN PLACE ANY WAY RIGHT NOW FOR US TO MONITOR AND RECOUP THIS.

THE BENEFIT IS WE GET FOUR YEARS BACK.

THE DETRIMENT IS THAT FOR THREE YEARS THEY ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO IT, BUT THAT BUYS US TIME TO PUT INTO PLACE A PROCESS.

AND I THINK THE BIGGEST ASPECT OF THE REBATE IS GOING TO BE WHERE WE'RE DOING OUR SUMMER PUBLIC WORKS STUFF, WHERE WE HAVE GAS POWERED EQUIPMENT THAT WE'RE PUTTING GAS IN AND WE'RE PAYING STREET TAX ON THAT FUEL THAT'S GOING INTO EQUIPMENT.

IT IS VERY SIMPLE ONCE WE PUT A PLAN INTO PLACE TO MONITOR HOW MANY LITERS A YEAR WE'RE PUTTING INTO EQUIPMENT AS OPPOSED INTO VEHICLES AND APPLYING FOR THAT REBATE.

BUT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN PLACE AND WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF IN PLACE AT THE CURRENT TIME, I THINK TO LOSE THE REBATE PORTION FOR THE NEXT THREE YEARS AND FOR US TO BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT, TO DO IT IN-HOUSE, I THINK IS WORTH OUR WHILE.

[00:50:05]

I WISH WE WOULD HAVE HAD THE STAFF IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO DO IT IN THE PAST.

BUT I DO KNOW THAT IT COULD BE A VERY SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE COULD GET BACK IN TAX REBATES OF FUEL THAT WE'VE PUT PAID ROAD TAX ON.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE DIESEL, WE'RE PRETTY SAFE BECAUSE THE MAJORITY, WE BUY A CLEAR END COLORED DIESEL AND THE COLORED DIESEL ALREADY HAS THE ROAD TAX TAKEN OUT.

WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THE PTO EQUIPMENT.

WE DON'T HAVE CEMENT MIXERS, WE DON'T HAVE A VAC TRACK.

WE DO HAVE A STREET SWEEPER THAT WILL POTENTIALLY HAVE SOME COST SAVINGS THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

BUT THE MAJORITY OF OUR DIESEL EQUIPMENT IS ALREADY IT'S ALREADY THERE.

SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE A SUBSTANTIAL SAVINGS WITH THAT.

BUT I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO BE ABLE TO, ONCE THIS STARTS TO HAPPEN, TALK TO HOLLY AND BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT OUR OWN PROCESS AND DO IT IN HOUSE DOWN THE ROAD.

JUST ON THAT, IT SAYS IN THIS AERIAL BUCKETS.

SO THAT INCLUDE FIRE DEPARTMENT EQUIPMENT, ANY OF THE LARGE VEHICLES THAT SIT STATIC FOR AWHILE OR IS THIS PUBLIC WORKS AERIALS ONLY? BUT ARE THEY LICENSED EVERYTHING? ALL OUR PUMPERS AND RESCUE TRUCKS, THEY'RE ALL LICENSED.

HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE JURY CANS THERE THAT WE USE FOR PORTABLE PUMPS, WEIGHT JACKS, PUMPS AND STUFF LIKE THAT FOR FOREST FIREFIGHTING, GENERATORS AS WELL, CHAINSAWS, RECIPROCATING SAWS, PORTABLE FANS THAT ARE ALL RUN ON GASOLINE ENGINES.

SO THEY WOULD PROBABLY BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR THAT REBATE.

SO SOMETHING TO ADD TO THE BUCKET.

OKAY, COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY IT'S A NO BRAINER.

I THINK THAT TO MOVE AHEAD AND SEE IF WE CAN GET WHAT WE CAN GET, I CAN'T IMAGINE THE BRAIN HAS TO USE THE CALCULATION TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH GASOLINE A CEMENT MIXER USES, BUT MORE POWER TO THEM, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THEM THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT.

BUT I AGREE, IF DURING THIS PROCESS IF STAFF CAN LEARN, I THINK THAT'S WONDERFUL.

BUT I THINK THEY NEED TO BE LED THROUGH IT FIRST.

AS THEY'RE SAYING, THEY DON'T COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IT.

BUT IF YOU CAN GET THE DATA THROUGH THE KEYLOCK SYSTEM, I THINK THIS IS A NO BRAINER.

THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GUYS FIND THIS STUFF, BUT KEEP BRINGING IT FORWARD.

COUNCILLOR TURNER. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE AN ATTRACTIVE DEAL WE ARE UNABLE TO DO IT OURSELVES NOW.

STAFF ARE ALREADY APPEAR TO BE TAXED TO THE LIMIT AND IN THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

SO LET'S DO IT.

THE $600 DOLLARS EXAMPLE GIVEN IS THAT $600 TO US, OR IS THAT 600 MINUS THE 40% PLUS GST 45.8 OR HSD 45.2 I THINK WHICH IS WE GET THE 600 OR.

THE EXAMPLE THAT MR. HOLLY GAVE US DURING OUR MEETING WAS THAT HIS SEPTIC CUSTOMER RECEIVED THE CHECK FOR $600 AND HE WOULD HAVE RECEIVED A CHECK FOR $400.

IT'S A 60 40 SPLIT, SO WE CAN GO BACK UP TO FOUR YEARS TO THE TIME THE TAX WAS PAID. LET'S GO GET IT.

THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE THEN.

ALL IN FAVOR. THAT'S CARRIED.

THANK YOU. 7.2 REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE, TREASURY, VÉRI-AUD INC.

CONTINGENCY BASED AUDITORS RECOMMENDATION THAT THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TREASURY RE.

VÉRI-AUD INC. CONTINGENCY BASED AUDITORS BE RECEIVED THAT COUNCIL ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT VÉRI-AUD INC.

FOR THE EXAMINATION OF THE CITY'S TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES AND THE APPROPRIATE BYLAW BE PASSED.

CAN I HAVE A MOVER PLEASE? MOVE BY COUNCILLOR TURNER SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

MS. SONNENBURG. ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU THROUGH YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

SO THIS IS ANOTHER GOOD NEWS FOUND MONEY STORY.

IN THE CURRENT YEAR, WE'RE TRANSITIONING TO A CLOUD BASED TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE SYSTEM FOR THE CITY AND REMOVING OUR OLD ARCHAIC MITEL PHONES. THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE HAVE BEEN ANALYZING OUR BELL CANADA COMMUNICATIONS EXTENSIVELY.

AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS WE'VE NOTED THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME INCONSISTENCIES IN THE BILLING ACROSS DEPARTMENTS, WHETHER WE CANNOT IDENTIFY HOW THESE INCONSISTENCIES HAPPEN.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY'RE THERE, FOR EXAMPLE, OF STANDARD VOICE LINE AT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CURRENTLY RUNS $83.06 PER MONTH.

[00:55:06]

SO WE HAVE SOURCED OUT [INAUDIBLE] TOGETHER WITH THE MANAGER OF I.T.

WE HAVE LOOKED AT AT AUDITING THE TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES TO THAT EXTENT VÉRI-AUD WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION.

ESSENTIALLY THEY WILL DO THE BACKGROUND RESEARCH THAT WE CANNOT SEE ON THE FACE OF A BILL AND UNDERSTAND AND APPLY FOR ANY COMPENSATION WITH SUSPECTED DISCREPANCIES AND DETERMINE WHAT THOSE DISCREPANCIES MEAN.

THE TELECOM AUDIT WILL IDENTIFY AND CONFIRM CHARGES, HIDDEN COSTS, BILLING ERRORS AND ALSO REVIEW ACTIVE LINES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED BILLING AND POTENTIALLY RECOVER COSTS FOR OVERCHARGES THAT HAVE OCCURRED THROUGH THE LAST TWO YEARS.

SO DUE TO RESTRICTIONS WITH THE CRTC, WE ARE LIMITED TO GOING BACK TWO YEARS, WHEREAS THE LAST ONE WAS FOUR YEARS.

SO ESSENTIALLY USING THE TEAM AT VÉRI-AUD THEY WILL TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF OUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS LINES AND DETERMINE ANY DISCREPANCIES.

IN THE EXAMPLE THAT I'M SUSPECTING THAT WAS GIVEN IN THAT BACKGROUND PART, IN THE BACKGROUND PIECE OF THE REPORT THAT LOOKS LIKE APPROXIMATELY $20 A MONTH, $20 A MONTH FOR TWO YEARS DIVIDED BY TWO.

WE WILL RECEIVE THAT BACK AS A REFUND.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO EXPECT AS A REFUND.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO EXPECT AS THE EXPENSE.

IT WILL BE A 50-50 COST SHARE.

SO WHATEVER WE RECEIVE, WE WILL PAY VÉRI-AUD INC.

50% OF THAT BACK.

IF THEY FIND NOTHING, WE PAY NOTHING.

IT'S ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE GOOD NEWS STORIES.

THE STAFF TIME COMMITMENT IS EXPECTED TO BE VERY MINIMAL, VERY, VERY MINIMAL IN COMPARISON TO THE PREVIOUS REPORT.

ESSENTIALLY, ONCE WE APPROVE, VÉRI-AUD INC.

AS OUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS AUDITOR, WE WILL PROVIDE THEM A PASSWORD AND ACCESS TO ONLINE BILLING, WHICH IS ALREADY ESTABLISHED WITH BOTH BELL CANADA AND ROGERS FOR OUR CELL PHONES.

THEY WILL OBTAIN THE INFORMATION REQUIRED AND DO THEIR PROCESS ON THE BACK END AND DIG THROUGH THOSE BILLS AND SEE WHERE THERE MAY BE SAVINGS TO BE FOUND.

SO. GIVEN THAT WE ARE DELETING OR DISCONTINUING SERVICE WITH SOME OF THE LINES THROUGH THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS UPGRADE, WE WOULD OBTAIN THE FULL REBATE ON THOSE AND WOULD OWE ONLY THE 50% PORTION.

WE WOULD NOT HAVE ANY BILLING IN THE FUTURE WITH VÉRI-AUD INC.

BECAUSE WE ARE CANCELING THOSE SERVICES BUT SHOULD VÉRI-AUD IDENTIFY, FOR EXAMPLE, MY CELL PHONE BILL IS $30 A MONTH AND DAN'S IS $45 A MONTH.

THERE'S $15.00 DOLLARS 15 TIMES 12 MONTHS, TIMES 50%.

90 WOULD BE DUE TO VÉRI-AUD FOR THE FIRST 12 MONTHS OF THAT SAVINGS, BECAUSE THOSE TWO LINES WOULD CONTINUE BECAUSE NEITHER DAN OR I ARE LEAVING.

THERE'S NO FINANCIAL IMPACT TO THE CITY.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DON'T KNOW.

WE KNOW THAT ALL OF OUR BILLS ARE CURRENT WITH OUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS.

HOWEVER, WE DO SUSPECT THAT THERE ARE SOME INCONSISTENCIES IN BILLING.

COUNCILLOR MANN. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

THANK YOU, MS. SONNENBURG, FOR THIS REPORT.

CLEARLY THIS ONE'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE PREVIOUS BECAUSE THIS IS MORE OF A HISTORY LESSON THAN MOVING FORWARD.

CORRECT? OKAY.

AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS JUST REGARDING THE MOBILITY SIDE.

HOW OFTEN IS THAT TENDERED OUT? IS THAT REGULARLY GONE TO MARKET? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, PROVIDERS, NEW PROVIDERS WOULD DO THIS TYPE OF AUDIT FOR, YOU AT NO COST MOVING FORWARD.

I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE ON TENDERING OF TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE RECENT RFP FOR THE CLOUD BASED TELECOMMUNICATIONS.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. THANK YOU FOR THIS REPORT.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WAS SORT OF ALONG THE SAME LINES AS COUNCILLOR MANN ARE WE GETTING RID OF BELL CANADA AND ROGERS? LIKE IF THEY'RE BEING INCONSISTENT AND I GUESS ANOTHER WORD IN MY MIND IS CHEATING ALMOST OR OVERBILLING.

LET'S HOPE IT'S NOT A CASE OF UNDER BILLING.

AND THEN THEY TRY TO CATCH YOUR PHONE UP TO DAN'S.

BUT BECAUSE THAT'S USUALLY WHAT HAPPENS IN MY WORLD.

BUT ARE WE LOOKING TO CHANGE THROUGH THIS NEW SYSTEM? IS IT THROUGH BELL? NO. IT'S OUR SINCERE EFFORT TO ABANDON BELL ANYWHERE WE CAN.

[01:00:04]

SO THERE WILL STILL BE SOME.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE CUSTOMER SERVICE HAS BEEN SORELY LACKING, LET'S JUST SAY.

AND THE SAVINGS FROM THE NEW SYSTEM WILL BE MASSIVE.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT.

BUT THERE WILL BE SOME OLD SCHOOL COPPER LINES THAT NEED TO REMAIN.

LIKE WITHIN MY FAMILY WE'VE PLAYED THIS GAME WHERE I'VE CALLED MY DAUGHTERS, CALLED MY OTHER DAUGHTERS, CALLED TO TRY TO GET BETTER DEALS ON YOUR PHONE LINES AND DEPENDING ON WHAT TIME OF THE DAY YOU CALL, EVEN IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE SAME SERVICE, NOT THREE OF US HAVE EVER HAD THE SAME NUMBER, THE SAME AMOUNT PAID.

SO IT'S I DON'T KNOW.

MS. SONNENBURG. SO TO CONTINUE WITH COUNCILLOR FINAMORE'S POINT, THIS IS SOME OF THE INCONSISTENCIES THAT THIS AUDIT WILL DIG OUT.

THIS AUDIT WILL SHOW THAT WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT ON CERTAIN LINES AND THAT CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS FROM BELL SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXTENDED TO ALL ADDITIONAL LINES THAT ARE ALL HELD BY THE SAME ORGANIZATION.

AND WHERE THIS GETS LOST IN THE SHUFFLE IS IN AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF PHONE BILLS THAT HIT THE PAYABLES DESK ON A MONTHLY BASIS AND THINGS SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING BY PERFORMING THIS AUDIT OF CURRENT ACTIVE LINES AS WE TRANSITION TO A CLOUD BASED TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE WHERE POSSIBLE. COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

AGAIN, I SPOKE WITH THE TREASURER ABOUT THIS AS WELL TODAY.

ONE OF THE OTHER BENEFITS IN OUR CONVERSATION THAT I HAD WITH HER IS WE HAVE A LOT OF PRETTY MUCH DEADLINES THAT WE'RE STILL PAYING FOR.

AND THIS AUDIT, WILL FIND THOSE LINES AND GET RID OF THAT HARD WIRE THAT WE'RE PAYING EXPONENTIALLY TO BELL FOR.

SO WE WILL HAVE A MAJOR SAVINGS.

NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY UP THE 50% COST WHEN THEY FIND THOSE LINES FOR THE RECOVERY OF ANY OF THAT STUFF.

BUT ONCE THAT LINE IS DEAD, WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY GOING FORWARD ON THAT.

WE'LL CUT THE LINES OFF AND IT WILL BE STRICTLY WE'LL RECEIVE THE SAVINGS AND THEN WE WILL JUST SAVE THE 100% OF THAT SAVINGS IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE WE WON'T HAVE TO PAY THE SAVINGS PORTION IF WE DISCONNECT THOSE LINES, WHICH I THINK COULD BE QUITE SUBSTANTIAL WITH THE AMOUNT OF FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE.

COUNCILLOR PEARCE. THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

IS THIS A ONE TIME AUDIT OR IS THIS GOING TO BE AN ONGOING CONTRACT? THIS CONTRACT WILL CONTINUE FOR THREE YEARS WITH.

FOR THREE YEARS. WITH A REVISION ON ALL LINES AS THEY ARE ADDED AND REMOVED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL SAVINGS OR ANY OTHER DISCREPANCIES. BUT YOU'RE BASICALLY GOING TO A VOIP SYSTEM, RIGHT.

A CLOUD SYSTEM? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THERE AREN'T GOING TO BE ANY LINES PER SE ARE THERE? VERY FEW.

YEAH. OK COUNCILLOR TURNER.

THANK YOU. I'M VERY GLAD TO HEAR WE'RE STILL KEEPING SOME OF THE BASIC TELEPHONES AROUND.

THEY WORK WHEN THE POWER IS OUT.

THE ONE THING I DO HAVE SOME CONCERN WITH IS A CLOUD BASED SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK REAL WELL WHEN THE CELL TOWER IS DOWN.

WHEN WE LOSE CELLULAR SERVICE HOW DO WE COMMUNICATE? THROUGH YOU YOUR WORSHIP TO COUNCILLOR TURNER THE AVIA SYSTEM THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS ACTUALLY VOIP BASED, SO IT DOESN'T TIE INTO THE CELLULAR NETWORK IT ACTUALLY USES.

SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE SAID THE INTERNET.

OH, SORRY.

IF THE INTERNET DOES GO DOWN, WE RELY ON CELLULAR SERVICE, BUT THERE ARE REDUNDANCIES THROUGH THE SYSTEM THAT DOES ALLOW THE PHONE NUMBERS TO TRANSPORT OR TO FLIP OVER TO ALL THE MOBILES THAT ARE BEING USED.

SO WHEN SOMEONE CALLS DAN AT 848-1234, WHICH ISN'T HIS REAL NUMBER FOR THOSE AT HOME, BUT ANYONE THAT CALLS THAT NUMBER, IT WOULD RING AT A DESKTOP, IT WOULD RING AT A MOBILE. SO IT'S SEAMLESS AND WE OFFER SEAMLESS SERVICE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE MUNICIPALITY.

THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO HEAR.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SO WE GET A $600 REBATE ON FUEL AND NOW MAYBE A $500 REBATE ON PHONE.

WE'RE GETTING THERE. CALL FOR THE VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED. THANK YOU.

7.3 REPORT OF THE MANAGER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK THIS IS JUST FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES.

[01:05:03]

ABSOLUTELY, YES. JUST FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES.

COUNCIL WILL RECALL EARLIER ON IN THE YEAR WE DID HAVE THE MEMORIAL AND RENAMING PROGRAM BROUGHT FORTH COUNCIL HAD APPROVED TWO NAMES.

ONE OF THE NAMES THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL AND DID PASS THE PUBLIC VETTING PROCESS WAS MR. REJEAN CYR. AND WE WERE GOING TO NAME THE CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRAILS, THE MR. REJEAN CYR CROSS COUNTRY SKI TRAIL.

MR. CYR DID REACH OUT TO ME HE'S VERY TOUCHED AND MOVED THAT THE MUNICIPALITY WOULD CONSIDER NAMING THEM.

MR. CYR IS ALSO VERY HUMBLE AND HE FEELS THAT HAVING THOSE TRAILS NAMED AFTER HIM, IT WOULD BE MORE FITTING OF ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEMBER.

MR. CYR HAS PUT THAT NAME FORWARD.

IT HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE POTENTIAL NAMES LIST AND THERE IS AN APPLICATION THROUGH TO RENAME THOSE TRAILS UNDER ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS NAME.

SO BY FEBRUARY IS THE NEXT TIME THE NAMES COME FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

SO STAFF WILL BRING THAT FORWARD FOR COUNCIL'S APPROVAL.

BUT THIS IS, AS YOU MENTIONED, YOUR WORSHIP JUST CONTEXT.

SO IF THE SIGN DOESN'T GET CHANGED, YOU DON'T THINK STAFF DIDN'T GET AROUND TO IT, IT WAS JUST WITHDRAWN BY THE PROPONENT.

OKAY. QUESTION COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE FEBRUARY ISSUE AND I SPOKE WITH MR. ANTUNES AND THAT'S BECAUSE THAT ONLY COMES FORWARD ONCE A YEAR.

SO IT CAN'T BE DONE PRIOR TO FEBRUARY.

BUT MY QUESTION BECOMES, IS MR. CYR'S NAME STILL ON THE LIST? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WASN'T RESCINDED FROM THE LIST BECAUSE IT'S RESCINDED FROM THE SITE.

THROUGH YOUR WORSHIP. YES, SIR.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE THE NAMES THE MEMORIAL NAMING PROCESS IS A TWO STEP PROCESS, SO COUNCIL APPROVES THE NAMES FIRST IN PRINCIPLE AND THEN APPROVES WHAT THAT NAME WILL BE USED FOR.

SO YES, MR. CYR'S NAME IS STILL ON THE LIST.

COUNCILLOR MANN. THANK YOU.

YOUR WORSHIP IS THERE ANY ACTION REQUIRED OF COUNCIL? BECAUSE WE APPROVED THIS AT SOME POINT? NO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY ALL ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THANK YOU, MR. ANTUNES.

AT 7.4 A MEMO OF THE MANAGER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RE TRAILS AND LEASE, AS THIS MATTER, DEALS WITH A PROPOSED OR PENDING ACQUISITION OR DISPOSITION OF LAND BY THE MUNICIPALITY. IT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS PER SECTION 239 TWO C OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT.

CAN I HAVE A MOVER TO PUT THIS IN CLOSED SESSION? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

THANK YOU. QUESTIONS.

QUALMS, QUERIES? COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. THE WAY THAT THE REPORT IS DRAWN, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE A CLOSED SESSION ITEM.

I UNDERSTAND STAFF'S CONCERN.

RESPECTFULLY, IF STAFF IS WORRIED THAT THE PROPONENT WANTS TO WAIT TO SEE IF THE MANAGEMENT IS AGREEABLE, THEN WE DEFER THE REPORT UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING TO SEE THEIR POSITION. AND I WOULD PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DEFER THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH IT IN PUBLIC AND LET STAFF DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE WITH THE PROPONENT FIRST. OKAY IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THE DEFERRAL? NO SECONDER FOR THE DEFERRAL.

BACK TO THE QUESTION OF MOVING IT TO CLOSED.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES.

CALL FOR ROLL CALL THEN.

START WITH COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

OPPOSED. COUNCILLOR MANN.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR TURNER.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

IN FAVOR. I'M IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED TO CLOSED.

7.5 REPORT OF THE MANAGER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UNSOLICITED OFFER FOR LAND OWNED BY THE MUNICIPALITY AS THIS MATTER DEALS WITH A PROPOSED OR PENDING ACQUISITION OR DISPOSITION OF LAND BY THE MUNICIPALITY.

IT MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS PER SECTION 239 TWO C OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT.

AGAIN MOVER TO PUT THIS IN CLOSED? MOVE BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES? SEEING NONE. I'LL CALL FOR A VOTE THEN.

ALL IN FAVOR THAT'S CARRIED.

7.6 REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CLERKS IN PLANNING SERVICES, A SITE PLAN CONTROL AGREEMENT 42 OAKLAND BOULEVARD AS THIS MATTER DEALS WITH POSITION PLAN PROCEDURE CRITERIA OR INSTRUCTION TO BE APPLIED TO ANY NEGOTIATIONS CARRIED ON OR TO BE CARRIED ON BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE MUNICIPALITY MAY BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION AS PER SECTION 239 2 K OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT.

[01:10:03]

QUESTION, QUALMS, QUERIES? COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

AGAIN YOUR WORSHIP THIS IS GOING TO BECOME A PUBLIC DOCUMENT ANYWAY.

STAFF HAVE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE.

THE REPORT IS VERY THOROUGH AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS SHOULD BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED.

IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE DISCUSSED IN OPEN SESSION.

WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WILL PROBABLY BE THE LAST ONE THAT WE DEAL WITH AS A COUNCIL.

THERE'S A NEW POLICY COMING NEXT MONTH WHERE THESE WILL BE DRIVEN STRICTLY BY STAFF REGARDLESS.

AND I'VE ACTUALLY ASKED THE PROPONENT IF HE MINDED IF WE SPOKE IN PUBLIC AND NOT PUT IT INTO CLOSED.

AND HE SAID HE IS FINE WITH IT BEING DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC AND I WOULD PREFER THIS TO BE DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC.

COUNCILLOR TURNER.

THANKS YOUR WORSHIP. CONSIDERING WHAT THE CONTENT IS HERE, IT'S PRETTY BENIGN.

I DON'T SEE US CREATING A DISADVANTAGE EITHER FOR THE CITY OR FOR THE PROPONENT.

I'M WILLING TO LISTEN TO ANY REASONS WE HAVE TO GO TO CLOSE, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I DON'T SEE THE NECESSITY.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES? I'LL GO FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE THEN AND SEE IF WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE OR DEALING WITH THIS IN OPEN.

I'LL START. COUNCILLOR TURNER.

OPPOSED.

COUNCILLOR FINAMORE. IN FAVOR.

COUNCILLOR PEARCE. IN FAVOR.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

OPPOSED. COUNCILLOR MANN.

OPPOSED. WHAT THE HECK? LET'S DO THIS IN OPEN. I'M OPPOSED.

SO C.

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CLERK AND PLANNING SERVICES SITE PLAN CONTROL AGREEMENT.

42 OAKLAND BOULEVARD.

MS. BRAY. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF CLERKS AND PLANNING SERVICES DATED JUNE 22ND, 2022, CONCERNING THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AGREEMENT FOR 42 OAKLAND BOULEVARD BE RECEIVED AND THAT COUNCIL AGREES TO ENTER INTO A SITE PLAN AGREEMENT WITH BLANCHETTE ELECTRIC, INC FOR LANDS MUNICIPALLY KNOWN AS 42 OAKLAND BOULEVARD AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 7134 SECTION AES SRO LT3 PARCEL M 378 GUNTERMAN ELLIOT LAKE IN THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE, AND THAT COUNCIL DIRECTS STAFF TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY BYLAW TO ENTER INTO A SITE PLAN AGREEMENT WITH BLANCHETTE ELECTRIC, INC.

MOVER PLEASE? MOVE BY COUNCILLOR PATRIE SECOND BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. SO BLANCHETTE ELECTRIC INC ATTENDED A PRE CONSULTATION MEETING FOR A SITE PLAN APPLICATION ON MARCH 9TH, 2022.

SUBSEQUENTLY, A SITE PLAN APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY ON APRIL 11TH.

STAFF COORDINATED WITH THE APPLICANT TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS OF A COMPLETE APPLICATION AND THE FINAL REVISED APPLICATION, WAS RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON MAY 25TH, 2022.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON HIGHWAY 108 NORTH OR SORRY, 108 ON OAKLAND BOULEVARD.

IT IS A CORNER LOT WITH FRONTAGE ON OAKLAND BOULEVARD TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND MOUNTAIN ROAD TO THE EAST.

IT HAS AN APPROXIMATE AREA OF 0.23 ACRES OR HECTARE SORRY, AND A FRONTAGE OF APPROXIMATELY 61 METERS TOWARDS THE NORTH AND APPROXIMATELY 40 METERS TOWARDS THE SOUTH. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR AN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTING SHOP WHICH WILL COMPRISE OF AN OFFICE SPACE, STORAGE SPACE FOR INVENTORY, AS WELL AS RETAIL OF LIGHT FIXTURES, AND RELATED ITEMS. HE INTENDS TO SHARE THE BUILDING WITH A WOODWORK CONTRACTOR WHO WILL BE UNDERTAKING LIGHT MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF CABINETS ON PART OF THE PROPERTY.

SO AGAIN, THE PROPOSED BUILDING COMPRISES OF TWO UNITS, HAS AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 297.29 SQUARE METERS, WHICH AMOUNTS TO A LOT COVERAGE AT APPROXIMATELY 13%. THE SITE PLAN SUBMISSION PACKAGE WAS PREPARED BY TULLOCH ENGINEERING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT AND WAS CIRCULATED TO BUILDING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ENGINEERING, PUBLIC WORKS, FIRE, AND PLANNING WITH NO OBJECTIONS OR CONCERNS RECEIVED FROM ANYONE.

THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTED STAMPED ENGINEER DRAWINGS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE SIGNING OF THE SITE PLAN AGREEMENT.

SO OUR PLANNER IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY RETAIN 50% DEPOSIT FOR SITE WORKS.

WHAT TO BE A REASONABLE AMOUNT TO ENSURE THE WORK IS DONE AND TO PROVIDE AN INCENTIVE TO THE DEVELOPER TO COMPLETE THE SITE WORKS TO RECEIVE DEPOSITS BACK.

THE APPLICANT HAS AN ESTIMATED SITE WORK OF 51,400, SO ACCORDINGLY A DEPOSIT OF 25 SEVEN WOULD THEREFORE BE REQUIRED.

SO BASED ON THE ABOVE INFORMATION, IT'S RECOMMENDED THAT WE ADOPT A BY LAW TO ENTER INTO A SITE PLAN AGREEMENT WITH 1972889 ONTARIO, INC AND THE AGREEMENT WILL BE REGISTERED ON

[01:15:09]

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

AS I STATED, IT'S A VERY THOROUGH REPORT.

I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE SITE PLAN AGREEMENT.

I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE 50% DEPOSIT.

IF YOU GO TO PAGE TEN OF OUR PACKAGE, SORRY, THE PUBLIC DON'T HAVE THIS, BUT THE CLOSED SESSION PACKAGE, THE $51,000 DOLLARS IS BROKEN OUT.

WE'RE AT A DISADVANTAGE HERE.

WE'VE ALREADY PROVIDED A BUILDING PERMIT.

THE SITE HAS ALREADY STARTED.

ITEMS ONE, TWO AND THREE ARE ALREADY COMPLETE.

THEY HAD TO BE COMPLETE BEFORE THE SLAB COULD BE POURED, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS POURED TODAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS FINISHED, BUT I SEEN THEM POURING CEMENT THERE TODAY.

AND THEN THE BIG COST INVOLVED IN THIS IS GRANULAR M DRIVEWAY.

IT'S ALREADY A GRANULAR M LOT, SO THE MAJORITY OF THAT MONEY IS ALREADY IN AND SPENT.

SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT INSTEAD OF A 50% DEPOSIT, A 10% DEPOSIT.

THE PROPONENT IS TRYING TO BUILD.

HE'S OBVIOUSLY INVESTED AND HE'S SPENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN THE COMMUNITY AND GETTING A BUILDING ONTO OUR TAX ROLL AT HIS EARLIEST CONVENIENCE.

I JUST DON'T WANT TO HINDER ANYTHING.

ASKING HIM FOR $25,000 ON WORK, THAT IS PRETTY MUCH MAJORITY OF IT IS ALREADY COMPLETE.

SO THERE'S VERY LITTLE LEFT TO DO.

I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE TO CREATE AN INCENTIVE E4M TO GET HIS MONEY BACK.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE CHARGING IT TO HIM.

WE SHOULD BE OPEN ARMS TO BUSINESSES AND HE'S GONE THIS FAR AHEAD.

AND SO I WOULD THINK THAT MY PERSONAL OPINION IS IT'S NOT PART OF THE MOTION, BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE GO WITH A 10% DEPOSIT. OKAY.

COUNCILLOR MANN. THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP.

ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I AGREED TO HAVE THIS, IN OPEN IS BECAUSE THERE WAS A CLEAR RECOMMENDATION FROM CITY STAFF OF A 50% DEPOSIT IN THE REPORT.

I DO APPRECIATE AND THANK COUNCILLOR PATRIE FOR THE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT'S ACTUALLY GOING ON ON SITE TODAY.

BUT I BEYOND THE WORD OF A COUNCIL, WHICH I'M NOT GOING TO DISPUTE.

I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE PROPONENT OR FROM STAFF SAYING, YEAH, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE.

AGAIN, WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE HERE SAYING $40,000 FOR M GRAVEL.

AGAIN, WHETHER THERE'S M GRAVEL THERE OR NOT, IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN IN THIS REPORT OTHERWISE.

SO AGAIN, I'M HAVING A BIT OF A CONFLICT BETWEEN A 10% AND THE 50% THAT STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING.

SO AGAIN, AND HERE'S THE PART OF THOSE CHALLENGES ABOUT HAVING SOMETHING IN OPENED.

IT'S AN OPEN. SO NOW WE GET TO TALK ABOUT IT.

SO CLEARLY THE PROPONENT IS AGAIN ADVISED COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH IT. SO HERE WE GO.

I JUST I HAVE A CONCERN.

WE'VE GOT 40% IN THE DIFFERENCE HERE.

AND I JUST NEED A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION.

OKAY MS. BRAY. THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP.

SO I DID HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY.

THIS REPORT WAS WRITTEN PRIOR TO ME SPEAKING WITH OUR ACTING INSPECTOR THIS AFTERNOON.

SO HE HAS ADVISED THAT HE HAS CONNECTED TO WATER AND SEWER ALREADY.

THAT'S BEEN DONE. SOME GRAVEL HAS BEEN PUT DOWN, BUT THERE IS A FINAL TOPPING AND GRADING TO BE COMPLETED.

THERE ARE SOME SWALES FOR RUNOFF, IF I'M CORRECT, MR. HALLOCH, THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN CARE OF.

AND A NEW RECOMMENDATION OF 10,000 FOR CONSIDERATION WOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP FOR DISCUSSION THIS EVENING.

SO WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NOW, IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL WOULD LIKE.

OKAY.

COUNCILLOR TURNER. SORRY MS BRAY THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU'RE PUTTING FORWARD 10 THOUSAND? THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY OUR ACTING INSPECTOR TODAY.

AND YES, I WOULD SUPPORT $10,000 DOLLARS BASED ON THE WORK LEFT TO BE COMPLETED.

OKAY, THANKS.

SO IS ANYONE WILLING TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT? COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

SORRY. WE WOULDN'T NEED AN AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT'S JUST ASKING COUNCIL TO DIRECT US TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT SO I CAN PUT WHATEVER NUMBER WE DECIDE INTO THE AGREEMENT THAT WILL COME TO THE NEXT MEETING OF COUNCIL.

OKAY. EVERYONE'S GOOD WITH THAT.

ALL NODDING HEADS. YEAH.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. WHAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION? I ASKED FOR FIVE.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS.

SHE'S SAYING TEN.

HAPPY MEETING IN BETWEEN.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES? ROLL CALL VOTE THEN.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

[01:20:06]

COUNCILLOR MANN. IN FAVOR.

COUNCILLOR TURNER.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

IN FAVOR. I'M IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED 7.7.

A MEMO FROM THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER RE COUNCILLOR PEARCE LEGAL COSTS INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER VERSUS PEARCE.

MR. GAGNON, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. SO ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING IS A LETTER FROM THE CITY SOLICITOR FROM AIRD & BERLIS, MR. MASCARIN. AND I THOUGHT AFTER DISCUSSING WITH YOU AS CHAIR AND THE CLERK THAT WE WOULD JUST DO THIS ITEM IN OPEN FOR JUST ADDED TRANSPARENCY.

COUNCILLOR PEARCE COUNSEL IS AWARE THAT THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER AT THE TIME WAS E4M AND THEY CHOSE TO PURSUE CHARGES UNDER THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT AGAINST COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

HE WAS FOUND TO BE GUILTY, BUT THE REPRIMAND WAS SIMPLY THAT JUST A SIMPLE REPRIMAND BY THE JUSTICE GAREAU I BELIEVE HE WAS IN SAULT STE.

MARIE.

E4M TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO PURSUE AN APPEAL TO THAT DECISION.

COUNCIL WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE APPEAL AND NEITHER WAS ADMINISTRATION.

BUT WE ARE POWERLESS TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT AT THE TIME THAT APPEAL WENT THROUGH.

THE APPEAL WAS GRANTED IN FAVOR OF MR. PEARCE. SO AND DURING THAT PROCESS, THE COURT AWARDED $16,000 IN COSTS TO MR. PEARCE. E4M IS OF THE POSITION THAT THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT $16,000 DOLLAR COURT COSTS.

AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT E4M SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT COST.

IN THE MEANTIME, IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE COURT ORDER, MR. PEARCE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY OF THAT $16,000.

AND THAT'S WHERE MY REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT THAT'S WHOLLY UNFAIR.

I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS IS A DISINCENTIVE TO THOSE THINKING OF RUNNING FOR COUNCIL.

THIS APPEAL PORTION, NOT THE ORIGINAL CASE, WAS COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OF MR. PEARCE'S CONTROL AND LARGELY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY'S CONTROL.

UNFORTUNATELY, MR. PEARCE IS SUFFERING FROM THAT, AND I'M CONCERNED THAT COUNCIL IS SOMEWHAT COMPLICIT IN THE FACT THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, NOT ENGAGING OR NOT ACTING ON THE COURT'S COST AWARD.

SO HENCE THE LEGAL OPINION FROM MR. MASCARIN IN CLOSED, POTENTIALLY IN CLOSED UP TO COUNCIL, OF COURSE.

AND THE ITEM THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS BASICALLY JUST CASTING SOME LIGHT ONTO THIS ISSUE.

AND THERE ARE TWO ISSUES.

THE $16,000 WAS AWARDED BY A JUDGE.

AND, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF OUR STANDOFF WITH E4M, THAT PAYMENT HASN'T HAPPENED YET.

SO WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT.

AND, YOU KNOW, SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THAT AND FIGURE OUT A WAY TO SORT THAT OUT.

AND THEN MR. PEARCE'S LAWYER HAS SUGGESTED THAT THERE'S ANOTHER $12,000 IN COSTS RELATED TO THE APPEAL.

THAT IS STILL NOT PART OF THE JUDGMENT FROM THE JUDGE, BUT IS STILL OUT OF POCKET FOR MR. PEARCE ON THIS APPEAL THAT HE HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO DEFEND HIMSELF OR RESIGN.

AND WE HAD NO CHOICE IN THE MATTER EITHER, BUT TO FUND AND WATCH HAPPEN DESPITE OUR OBJECTIONS.

SO THAT'S IT IN A NUTSHELL.

IT'S UP TO COUNCIL AS HOW YOU WISH TO PROCEED.

WHETHER WE LOOK AT REIMBURSING MR. PEARCE DIRECTLY FOR THE 16 OR THE 12 AND OR THE 12, OR WHETHER WE JUST SIMPLY TELL E4M TO INVOICE US FOR THE $16,000 DOLLARS IN COURT COSTS AND PAY HIM THAT WAY.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. GAGNON. JUST TO BE CLEAR, SO E4M TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO APPEAL A COURT DECISION CHARGING THE TAXPAYERS IN THIS COMMUNITY MORE MONEY.

AND NOW THEY ALSO WANT US TO PAY THE OTHER END AFTER LOSING IN SUPREME COURT? SUPERIOR COURT OR WHATEVER COURT.

BUT YES, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY FUNDED, THE TAXPAYERS HAVE ALREADY FUNDED PURSUING MR. PEARCE THROUGH THIS APPEAL.

AND WE WERE TOLD WE HAD NO CHOICE IN THE MATTER UNDER THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER REGIME.

AND AND THEN THEY LOST.

AND NOW THE COURT HAS AWARDED COSTS.

AND E4M IS OF THE POSITION THAT THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE PAYING FOR THAT $16,000, EVEN IF THE DECISION TO PURSUE THAT APPEAL WAS 100% E4M'S DISCRETION. AND IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT, PERHAPS, IF THE JUDGMENT WAS VAGUE.

IT WAS QUITE CLEAR THE PANEL OF THREE JUDGES WERE QUITE DISMISSIVE.

AND TO E4M, THEY BASICALLY SUGGESTED THEY COMPLETELY MISINTERPRETED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT, AND THE ENTIRE APPEAL HAD

[01:25:03]

BUT IN THE MEANTIME, MR. PEARCE IS SUFFERING FROM THIS STANDOFF WE HAVE BETWEEN THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE AND ITS ONE TIME INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER.

I'M IN THE OPINION THAT WE TAKE E4M TO COURT.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. TWOFOLD.

I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS THE LEGAL OPINION.

IF WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE LEGAL OPINION, I WILL MOVE THAT WE WAIVE OUR PRIVILEGE, AS PER THE EMAIL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM MR. GAGNON STATING THAT WE CAN AND BRING THE LETTER THE LETTER FROM MR. MASCARIN INTO THE OPEN SESSION SO THAT WE CAN DO THE COMPLETE DISCUSSION.

I DON'T WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION NOW AND THEN A DISCUSSION LATER.

PUT ALL THE CARDS ON THE TABLE.

SO I WILL MOVE THAT WE BRING THE LETTER AS PART OF THE OPEN FORUM AND WAIVE OUR PRIVILEGE.

IS THERE SECONDER FOR THAT MOTION.

SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCILLOR MANN. I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY MOVING PARTS IN PRECEDENT SETTING POTENTIAL IN THIS YOUR WORSHIP.

I'M NOT PREPARED TO WAIVE PRIVILEGE YET.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

I THINK THERE'S OTHER INFORMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE SHARED ABOUT THE PRIVILEGED INFORMATION IN THAT DOCUMENT.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

THANK YOU. THERE'S MORE THAN ONE LEGAL OPINION I THINK WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IN CLOSED SESSION.

MR. GAGNON. THERE'S A LETTER FROM MR. PEARCE'S LAWYER, WHICH HAS SOME CONTENT IN IT, WHICH IS A PRIVILEGED, PRESUMABLY LETTER FROM MR. PEARCE'S ANGLE AND THE LETTER FROM MR. MASCARIN. THE ONLY THING I WILL SUGGEST IS THAT I HAVE NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER THAT E4M IS WATCHING AS WE SPEAK.

SO ANYTHING WE DISCUSS ABOUT E4M STRATEGICALLY, IF WE DO IT IN OPEN SESSION, THEN WE'RE SHOWING OUR HAND TO E4M, FOR WHATEVER THAT'S WORTH.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.

A FOLLOW UP? YES.

WHO IS THE JUDGMENT AGAINST? THE LEGAL OPINION FROM MASCARIN IS THAT IT DOES NOT NAME THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE AND IT NAMES THE ELLIOT LAKE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER, WHICH WAS AN OFFICER OF COUNCIL E4M. WE RAISED OUR OBJECTION AT THE TIME AND IT FELL ON DEAF EARS.

SO. FUNDAMENTALLY, WE THINK WE HAVE A STRONG POINT.

DO WE HAVE A LEGAL POINT? THAT'S TO BE DISCUSSED WITH MR. MASCARIN PROBABLY IN CLOSED SESSION.

BUT AGAIN, THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE. I HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT IT.

BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO CLOSED, ARE WE GOING TO DEFER THIS ITEM UNTIL AFTER WE DEAL WITH MR. MASCARIN'S REPORT AND THEN COME BACK AND HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION THEN? I'D BE FINE IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

PROBLEM IS, I JUST DON'T WANT THE PEOPLE THE PUBLIC AT HOME TO HAVE TO SIT AND WAIT THROUGH ALL OF OUR CLOSED SESSION ITEMS TO COME BACK AND DEAL WITH THIS.

THAT'S WHY I PUT THE I'M SORRY, BUT I DISAGREE WITH WHAT COUNCILLOR MANN HAS UNLESS HE'S GOT MORE INFORMATION THAT HE WANTS TO DISCUSS IN CLOSED SESSION, THAT I DON'T KNOW. BUT BASED ON WHAT I READ IN THE LETTER, THE LETTER IS PRETTY CUT AND DRIED AND TELLS US WHAT WE CAN DO AND CAN'T DO WHAT WE'RE OBLIGATED TO DO.

AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM BRINGING THAT LETTER FORWARD.

BUT AS LONG AS WE'RE GOING TO DEFER THIS MATTER, GO IN, AND HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LETTER.

AND THEN COME BACK AND DEAL WITH THIS.

I'LL STAND DOWN. I JUST HAVE A FEAR THAT IF ANY ACTION ISN'T TAKEN BY COUNCIL, THAT THIS MAY BE A RECURRING THING COMING FROM E4M WITH ANY FUTURE DEALINGS.

SO I'M OPEN TO DEFERRING IT IF THAT'S THE WILL OF COUNCIL AND COMING BACK AFTER CLOSED SESSION TO DEAL WITH THE REMAINDER IN OPEN.

IF I MAY YOUR WORSHIP MAY WE DO TWO CLOSED SESSIONS? CAN WE GO IN AND DEAL WITH THIS LETTER? DO A SHORT CLOSED SESSION, AND THEN COME BACK AND DO THE OTHER CLOSED SESSION LATER? I DON'T WANT TO KEEP STAFF HERE ALL NIGHT EITHER.

IS THAT A PROBLEM? I'VE NEVER BEEN ASKED THAT.

SORRY. I BELIEVE WE ONLY HAVE THREE ITEMS FOR CLOSED SESSION.

IT'S NOT. THERE'S NOTHING LENGTHY.

I THINK SOME ARE JUST UPDATES AND LOOKING FOR QUICK DIRECTION AND THEN THIS ITEM.

OKAY. SO IT SHOULDN'T BE VERY SORRY.

I'M SORRY WE'RE ALLOWED TO MOVE THE ORDER SO WE CAN JUST MOVE THIS DOWN TO LATER IN THE AGENDA IF THAT'S THE WILL OF COUNCIL.

[01:30:07]

OKAY. WE'LL JUST SLIDE THIS ITEM DOWN LATER IN THE AGENDA THEN.

PRESENTATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS.

NONE OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE.

PEARCE, COUNCILLOR PEARCE TO RETURN TO HIS SEAT.

I'M JUST READING OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE REPORTING.

NONE. 10 UNFINISHED BUSINESS.

[10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS]

ANYTHING MR. GAGNON? NOTHING PARTICULARLY MEATY OTHER THAN WE HAD AN ARTS AND CULTURE CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE LAST WEEK WHERE WE DISCUSSED THE UNFORTUNATE NEWS ABOUT THE FUNDING.

WE DID REACH OUT TO BROOKE MCELROY, THE FIRM WHO DID THE DESIGN TO SOME DEGREE, TO DATE FOR THE FEASIBILITY STUDY.

WE ASKED THEM JUST ROUGHLY TO IF WE WERE TO REMOVE THE GREEN COMPONENTS OF THE NET CARBON ZERO BUILDING, WHAT WOULD THAT DO TO THE CAPITAL COST? AND WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE EXERCISE BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE IT'S WORTH IT, BUT WE CAN STILL PURSUE THAT IN MORE DETAIL.

BUT BASICALLY WHAT HE SUGGESTED WAS REMOVING THE NET CARBON ZERO WILL DECREASE THE COST FROM, LET'S JUST SAY, ROUGH NUMBERS, 21 MILLION TO 14 MILLION.

BUT THE INFLATION THAT WE'RE SEEING DUE TO COVID AND UKRAINE AND EVERYTHING IS JUST GOING TO PUSH THAT BACK UP TO 21 ANOTHER, 30%, 35.

SO WE'RE BACK AT 21 MILLION.

IF WE HAD THE SAME SCOPE OF WORK, THE SAME COMPONENTS, EVEN WITHOUT THE NET CARBON ZERO BECAUSE OF INFLATION.

SO WE'RE STILL AT, IN MY OPINION, COST PROHIBITIVE NUMBERS, CERTAINLY WITHOUT SERIOUS FUNDING DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE ABANDONING HOPE, BUT THAT THE HOPE OF SIMPLY REMOVING THE GREEN ELEMENTS WAS GOING TO GET IT INTO A PALATABLE NUMBER IS NOT LOOKING LIKELY.

WE WILL HAVE TO KEEP LOOKING AT EITHER THE SCOPE OR OTHER FUNDERS AND REGROUP.

BUT CERTAINLY I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT ONE UPDATE THAT INFLATION HAS GOBBLED UP ANY OF THE SAVINGS FROM THE NET CARBON ZERO.

AWESOME. WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT POTENTIALLY PERMANENTLY HOUSING SOME OF THE SPACES AT THE FORMER THEATER? WE DISCUSSED THAT WE DIDN'T GET TOO DETAILED.

WE WERE STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE SCOPE OF THE THEATER, AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER EITHER FOR THOSE GROUPS WHO ARE SAYING IS THE MOVIE THEATER RENOVATION A PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY STRUCTURE? MY PERSONAL PROFESSIONAL OPINION IS THAT IT'S PERMANENT IN THE SENSE THAT I'M NOT SURE WE CAN AFFORD TWO BUILDINGS AND TO OPERATE TWO BUILDINGS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE CONCRETE DETAILS YET. WE'RE STILL ASSESSING THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE MOVIE THEATER.

WE KNOW THOSE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE UP, SO WE WILL BE BACK IN FRONT OF COUNCIL, JUST NOT THIS EVENING, OF COURSE, WITH FIRM NUMBERS TO TRY AND UNPACK WHAT THIS FUNDING, LOSS OF FUNDING ON THE HIGHWAY MEANS AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE MOVIE THEATER AND WHAT THOSE INFLATIONARY PRESSURES ARE.

WE'RE STILL ASSEMBLING INFORMATION AND INTEL ON THE MOVIE THEATER RENOVATION.

WE DID GET A GENERALLY POSITIVE STRUCTURAL REVIEW FROM STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS THAT GENERALLY POSITIVE STILL HAS SOME ISSUES TO ADDRESS.

AND IT'S AN OLD BUILDING AND WE'VE GOT SOME SOME ADDITIONAL INPUT THAT WE NEED TO REFINE THAT BUDGET.

SO WE WILL BE BACK IN FRONT OF COUNCIL IN WEEKS, NOT MONTHS, LIKE THIS SUMMER TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE MOVIE THEATER RENOVATION SCOPE OF WORK AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE ARTS HUB AS WELL.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU. JUST ONE QUESTION I HAD BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT POTENTIALLY HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH OUR NEIGHBORING FIRST NATIONS.

HAS THAT TAKEN PLACE? DID YOU WANT TO JUMP IN ON IT? I JUST NOTICED YOUR BODY LANGUAGE? NOBODY REPRESENTING THE FIRST NATIONS ATTENDED THE MEETING, SO THEY WERE NOT AVAILABLE.

SO AT THE MEETING LEVEL, WE DID NOT DISCUSS THAT.

NOT FORMALLY, BUT WE HAVEN'T FORGOTTEN.

IN FACT, I'LL BE IN BOTH FIRST NATIONS IN THE NEXT 48 HOURS, SO I'LL DEFINITELY TAKE IT UPON MYSELF TO DISCUSS THAT CONCEPTUALLY AND SEE WHERE THAT TAKES US AND GET BACK IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL.

I LOOK FORWARD TO THE UPDATE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING HAVING THAT DISCUSSION.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COUNCILLOR PEARCE. YES.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

WE'RE RAPIDLY RUNNING OUT OF TIME THAT WE CAN MAKE ANY KIND OF A DECISION.

DO YOU THINK IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS BEFORE THIS COUNCIL HAS TO GO LAME DUCK? THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES, ABSOLUTELY.

WE NEED A DECISION WITHIN THE NEXT WEEKS.

THREE WEEKS? FOUR WEEKS? YES.

OR WE NEED TO, YES.

WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE MOVIE THEATER.

AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT IN A VACUUM.

WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE COST IMPLICATIONS ARE.

[01:35:01]

SO WE NEED TO HAVE THESE DECISIONS WELL BEFORE COUNCIL'S POTENTIAL LAME DUCK IN LATE AUGUST.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS UPDATE? 10.2 RESIDENTIAL WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS.

ANY UPDATES ON THIS MR. GAGNON? NOT AT THIS TIME, NO.

THERE'S NO PETITIONS.

CORRESPONDENCE 12.1 LETTER FROM JOHN MASCARIN.

[12. CORRESPONDENCE]

MOVER TO PUT THIS IN CLOSED, PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

QUESTIONS, QUALMS, QUERIES.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

ROLL CALL. COUNCILLOR TURNER. FAVOR.

COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

CAN'T. SORRY.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

OPPOSED. COUNCILLOR MANN.

IN FAVOR. AND I'M IN FAVOR.

THAT'S MOVED TO CLOSED.

NOTICE OF MOTION. THERE ARE NONE.

12 COUNCIL'S REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

[14. COUNCIL REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]

SO CANADA.

JULY 1ST CANADA DAY EVENTS.

WE'RE GOING TO SEE A BEACH BASH AT SPRUCE BEACH WITH ACTIVITIES FOR ALL AGES, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

KARI, GIVE ME THE NOD, IF YOU WOULD.

YEAH. AWESOME.

AND FIREWORKS WILL BE AT DUSK, WHICH WILL BE VISIBLE FROM SPRUCE BEACH OR WEST VIEW OR ANYWHERE ON THE HIGHWAY AROUND THAT AREA.

ALL RIGHT, JULY 2ND.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE PARADE HAS BEEN CANCELED DUE TO LOW REGISTRATION, WHICH REALLY SURPRISES ME BECAUSE A FEW YEARS AGO WE HAD THE LARGEST PARADE TURNOUT SINCE THE MINE SHUT DOWN, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.

JUST FOR THE PUBLIC [INAUDIBLE], WE REACHED OUT TO ALL THE PARTICIPANTS FROM THE SANTA PARADE TO MAKE SURE WE TAPPED THEM ON THE SHOULDER TO SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD A PARADE A FEW MONTHS AGO, ARE YOU ABLE? AND THERE JUST ISN'T THE CAPACITY AMONG THE GROUPS TO MOBILIZE ENOUGH TO HAVE ENOUGH PARADE FLOATS TO JUSTIFY A PARADE? I THINK WE HAD FIVE, SO IT'D BE A PRETTY SHORT PARADE.

AND WHAT WE HAD ONE WAS THE OPP, ONE WAS THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

SO THAT'S GOING TO BE REPLACED WITH A HOME AND BUSINESS DECORATION CONTEST AND THE STREET DANCE AT CENTENNIAL ARENA GATES OPENING AT 5 P.M.

COUNCILLOR FINAMORE. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD THAT THIS AFTERNOON BLIND RIVER PUT ON THEIR COMMUNITY DAY'S FACEBOOK PAGE THAT IF THEY DON'T GET MORE FLOATS BY WEDNESDAY, THEY'RE ALSO CANCELING THEIRS.

SO IT'S NOT JUST AN ELLIOT LAKE SEEMS LIKE IT'S A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM.

I JUST FIGURED COMING OUT OF COVID, EVERYBODY WOULD BE SUPER STOKED FOR A PARADE OF SOME SORT.

MAYBE FOR CHRISTMAS.

JULY 3RD. GEOLOGY TOURS AT 10 A.M.

AND 1 P.M..

IT'S FOR ALL YOUR ROCK HOUNDS.

GET A TOUR AROUND THE COMMUNITY AND TAKE A LOOK AT OUR PREHISTORIC ROCK.

JULY 15TH, THERE WILL BE A FOOD DRIVE RADIOTHON IN SUPPORT OF THE ELLIOT LAKE AND AREA EMERGENCY FOOD BANK.

THAT'S AGAIN THE ANNUAL FOOD DRIVE RADIOTHON.

ALSO BEGINNING JULY 15TH WILL BE THE DRAG RACE WEEKEND THAT RUNS FROM JULY 15TH TO JULY 17TH.

AND I BELIEVE WE'RE REINSTATING THE DAY PASSES THIS YEAR, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.

SEE NODDING HEADS, YEP.

SO THERE'S QUITE A FEW PEOPLE THAT HAD MENTIONED THAT THEY ONLY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME IN FOR A DAY.

THEY'D REALLY LIKE TO GET JUST A DAY PASS.

WELL, IT'S AVAILABLE AGAIN THIS YEAR.

AUGUST 1ST, LUMBERJACK DAYS ARE BACK AT MISSISSAGI PARK, LOOKING FORWARD TO SOME HATCHET THROWING AND CHAINSAW SPINNING AND ALL KINDS OF GOOD SHINDIGS OUT THERE. OH, IT'LL BE YOUNG CHILDREN THROWING HATCHETS.

ALL RIGHT. WE JUST TURNED THIS INTO AN INSURANCE NIGHTMARE.

HEY [INAUDIBLE].

THAT'S BETTER. ALL RIGHT.

TICKETS FOR ALL CITY EVENTS CAN NOW BE PURCHASED ONLINE, ALONG WITH MORE DETAILS ON CITY EVENTS AND FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND HOW YOU CAN BE A VOLUNTEER OR A VENDOR AT ANY CITY EVENT.

PLEASE CALL 705-848-2287 EXT 2300.

MY NEXT PIECE, AFTER RECEIVING A CHALLENGE FROM THERESA AND STAFF AT MAPLEGATE HOUSE FOR WOMEN, TELLS FOUR WOMEN TO GO HOMELESS FOR A NIGHT.

[01:40:03]

I BELIEVE I GOT HEAT STROKE TWICE LAST WEEK.

WOULD NOT WANT TO BE ON PAVEMENT THAT THAT MUCH NONSTOP.

THE STAFF FROM BOTH MAPLE GATE AND LARRY'S PLACE ALSO TOOK PART IN THE CHALLENGE, SPENDING FREE TIME AND NIGHTS WHEN THEY COULD, ALONG WITH SOME PRETTY HARDCORE MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY AND COUNCIL.

NORTH SHORE MAYOR TONY MOOR ALSO DOVE INTO THIS CHALLENGE AND HIS COMMUNITY IN SUPPORT OF THE SHELTERS WHICH SERVICE THIS ENTIRE AREA.

WE SAW DONATIONS ROLL IN FROM LOCAL BUSINESSES, SCHOOLS, FIRE DEPARTMENT, CITY STAFF, CHILDREN, BIG HEARTED MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY, AND IMPORTANTLY WITH THE SPIRIT OF GIVING BACK, MANY THAT HAVE HAD THEIR LIVES CHANGED BY THE SUPPORT OF THESE SHELTERS AND OUR COMMUNITY ALSO CAME IN TO DONATE.

MOST TOUCHING WAS A GENTLEMAN WHO STILL STRUGGLES WITH POVERTY.

HE CAME TO GIVE WHAT HE COULD, WHICH WAS QUITE TOUCHING.

AND THIS WASN'T JUST ABOUT RAISING MONEY, BUT ALSO TO CHANGE THE STIGMA TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY.

LAST MONDAY, AS I BEGAN SETTING UP THE BOX WHICH COULD BECOME A HOME FOR THE WEEK, A YOUNG MAN WALKING ACROSS THE LOWER PARKING LOT SHOUTED UP AT ME, YOU F-ING CRACKHEAD.

SO I IMMEDIATELY FELT WHAT IT MIGHT BE LIKE TO BE LIVING IN A BOX.

HE THEN HURRIED AWAY.

THE REALITY IS THAT ANYONE CAN END UP IN THE SITUATION AT ANY TIME, AND THE STORIES THAT WERE SHARED THROUGHOUT THE WEEK WERE BOTH INSPIRING AND DISTURBING AT THE SAME TIME.

EVERYTHING FROM DOMESTIC ABUSE, SUBSTANCE ABUSE DERIVED FROM PRESCRIBED METHADONE, OXYCONTIN AND OPIOIDS, JOB LOSS, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.

AND THE NEWEST IS OUR WORKING POOR.

QUITE A FEW PEOPLE WITH JOBS THAT STILL CAN'T AFFORD THE MEANS.

MY TAKEAWAY IS THAT OUR SENIOR GOVERNMENT HAD A GOOD PLAN THAT WAS BEING FUNDED AND HELPING PEOPLE THROUGH SHELTERS AND THE PROGRAMS WHICH ARE VERY IMPORTANT.

BUT NOW, THROUGH LACK OF FUNDING, MEN'S SHELTERS ARE THE FIRST IN LINE TO DISAPPEAR.

HUMANS HELPING HUMANS CAN BE THE ANSWER.

I JUST WANT TO THANK THE WHOLE COMMUNITY FOR YOUR SUPPORT AS THIS CHALLENGE RAISED DIRECTLY TO MAPLEGATE $10,000.

GO FUND ME. IT WAS 1730.

THE CITY DONATION PAGE 1875 CASH ON SITE WAS 1125 FOR TOTAL RAISED LAST WEEK, $14,730 DOLLARS PLUS CHANGE.

AND THERE'S STILL MORE PLEDGES TO ROLL IN.

SO A BIG THANK YOU TO EVERYONE THAT MADE THIS POSSIBLE.

AND I'D ASK THAT IF YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST IN LEARNING MORE, TO CONTACT THE PEOPLE THAT WORK AT MAPLEGATE IN TOWN OR AT LARRY'S PLACE.

IS THERE ANYTHING TO ADD TO COUNCIL'S REPORT THIS EVENING BEFORE WE HIT BIG TICKETS? COUNCILLOR PEARCE. YES.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP.

THIS PROBABLY RELATES MORE TO MR. GAGNON THAN ANYBODY ELSE ON COUNCIL, BUT A PILLAR OF THIS COMMUNITY HAS DECIDED THAT SHE IS GOING TO RETIRE IN ABOUT A WEEK'S TIME AND SHE HAS BEEN CUTTING HAIR IN THIS TOWN FOR OVER 40 YEARS.

HER NAME IS DIANA MCDONALD AND A WONDERFUL LADY.

HER MAJOR POINT OF INTEREST IS THAT THE MORE SHE TALKS, THE MORE SHE CUTS.

WHICH IS WHY MR. GAGNON'S HAIR IS AS SHORT AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.

BUT SHE HAS BEEN A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT PART OF THIS COMMUNITY FOR A LONG TIME.

AND I, FOR ONE, WILL MISS HER TERRIBLY WHEN SHE DECIDES TO HANG UP HER BARBER CHAIR.

SO. ALL THE BEST OF LUCK TO DIANA MCDONALD.

AWESOME, AWESOME, AWESOME LADY.

ANY ADDITIONS FOR COUNCIL'S REPORT.

SEEING NONE I'LL READ OUR BIG TICKET ITEMS. MINISTER OF FINANCE, MUNICIPAL POLICING $224,643.

BANG ON THE NUMBER THEY GAVE US IN THE PRESENTATION.

RECEIVER GENERAL FOR CANADA $89,866.

AJ BUS LINES TRANSIT ONTARIO, NORTHLAND $36,600.

ALGOMA DISTRICT SERVICE ADMIN BOARD MUNICIPAL LEVY $186,990.

GFL ENVIRONMENTAL MAY CURBSIDE FRONT LOAD SEWAGE HALL $41,400.

HYDRO ONE NETWORKS VARIOUS LOCATIONS $20,187.

MCCOWAN & ASSOCIATES LIBRARY [INAUDIBLE] $27,400.

OMERS $49,000 RENAISSANCE SENIOR CENTER DONATION COMMUNITY GRANT $25,000.

SAULT STE.

MARIE INNOVATION CENTER GIS IMPLEMENTATION 25% COMPLETION CAPTURE $37,800.

[01:45:09]

INTRODUCTION, CONSIDERATION OF BYLAWS.

[16. INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF BY-LAWS]

MOVER PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR THAT'S CARRIED.

16.2 BYLAW.

22-60 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH HOLLY TRANSPORT SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCESSING AND RECOVERY OF FUEL TAX REFUNDS AND POWER TAKE OFF FROM THE MINISTRY OF REVENUE PROVINCIAL FUEL TAX REFUND AGREEMENT.

MOVER PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS QUALMS QUERIES? SEEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED ALSO.

16.3 BYLAW 22-62 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH NORTHSHORE TRACTOR LTD WITH RESPECT TO THE PURCHASE OF A KUBOTA.

MOVER PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE. SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

QUESTIONS QUALMS QUERIES? IF NONE ALL IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED ANY OPPOSED? NONE. THAT'S CARRIED.

16.4 BYLAW, 22-63 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH BEAMISH CONSTRUCTION INC WITH RESPECT TO THE EXTENSION OF THE AGREEMENT FOR LANDFILL SITE OPERATIONS.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED.

16.5 BYLAW 22-64 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZED AN AGREEMENT WITH HURON LODGE WITH THE RESPECT TO THE SPECIALIZED TRANSIT SYSTEM.

MOVER PLEASE? MOVE BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? ALL IN FAVOR. THAT'S CARRIED.

16.6 BYLAW 22-65 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE AND AGREEMENT WITH AJ BUS LINES LTD WITH RESPECT TO A CONVENTIONAL TRANSIT SERVICES.

MOVER PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER SECOND BY COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

AGAIN, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR THAT'S CARRIED ALSO.

16.7 BYLAW 22-66 BEING A BYLAW TO AUTHORIZE AN AGREEMENT WITH NORTHERN SEALANTS INC WITH RESPECT TO CRACK SEALING FOR 2022.

MOVE BY COUNCILLOR MANN SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

JUST QUICK QUESTION, MR. HALLOCH. I NOTICED THAT IT LOOKS LIKE CRACKS ARE BEING SEALED ALREADY.

IS THE LINES GOING TO BE COMPLETED AFTER THE SEALING OF THE CRACKS? YEAH, YOU'RE CORRECT. SO THIS WEEK, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THE LARGER PAINT TRUCKS COMING BACK TO DO OVER THE MAIN LINES THAT ANY CRACK SEALING.

SO THE REASON WHY IT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD IS WE PUSHED FORWARD TO GET HIM IN EARLIER SO THAT HE COULD CROSS SOME OF THE LINES AND STUFF.

SO THE ACTUAL TRUCKS COMING BACK SHOULD BE THIS WEEK AND HE'LL PAINT OVER THOSE SO WE GOT TRIAL AND ERROR LEARNED FROM A FEW YEARS AGO.

PERFECT. SO IF WE DON'T PASS THIS BYLAW, WILL THEY COME BACK AND REMOVE ALL THE CRACK SEALANT? YEAH, WE COULD TRY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THERE.

[LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT.

I'LL CALL FOR THE VOTE THEN.

ALL IN FAVOR. THAT'S CARRIED.

THE CRACK SEALANT STAYS.

16.8 BYLAW 22-67 BEING A BYLAW TO ADOPT AN ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE POLICY.

MOVE BY COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED. THANK YOU.

CLOSED SESSION, MOVER TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION?

[17. CLOSED SESSION]

QUESTIONS QUALMS QUERIES? ROLL CALL COUNCILLOR TURNER.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR MANN.

IN FAVOR. I'M IN FAVOR.

WE'RE NOW GOING INTO CLOSED SESSION AFTER A QUICK BREAK.

THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.

ALL RIGHT. LOOK FOR A MOTION TO COME OUT OF CLOSED SESSION.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR MANN SECOND BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

ALL IN FAVOR.

IT'S CARRIED. WE'RE NOW BACK IN OPEN SESSION.

WE GOT TO GO BACK TO 7.7.

[01:50:01]

I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR POSSIBLY A FIRST MOTION TO RELEASE LEGAL DOCUMENT WOULD BE THE WORDING FOR THAT MS. BRAY? YOU KNOW, JUST LOOKING BECAUSE SHE ALREADY HAS IT WRITTEN DOWN.

GOT TO GET THE WORD SHE HAS THERE MAKE IT EASIER.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. SO THAT THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED ON THE LEGAL OPINION OF JOHN MASCARIN OF AIRD & BERLIS LLP AND THAT IT BE DISCUSSED IN OPEN SESSION.

OKAY. MOVER PLEASE? MOVED BY COUNCILLOR PATRIE SECOND BY COUNCILLOR TURNER.

QUESTIONS CONCERNS? COUNCILLOR MANN.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. COULD I JUST HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE ACTUALLY DATE THE SPECIFIC CORRESPONDENCE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT JUNE 23RD, 2022? YES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE VERY CLEAR THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFIC PIECES OF CORRESPONDENCE.

YOU DON'T WANT TO RELEASE EVERY CORRESPONDENCE WE'VE HAD IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS? [LAUGHTER] I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR, YOUR WORSHIP.

THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM.

OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR.

OPPOSED? OKAY. SO THAT'S CARRIED.

AND THEN ON TO THE MEMO FROM MR. GAGNON. LOOKING FOR DIRECTION FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL ON THIS ONE.

LOOKING FOR DIRECTION COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

IT WAS A VERY GOOD DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WITH MR. MASCARIN. FIRST OFF, I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT THIS MATTER IS EVEN BEING BROUGHT FORWARD TO COUNCIL.

THIS REPORT RECOMMENDING SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE, IN MY OPINION, IS VERY DISHEARTENING.

PLEASE REMEMBER THAT I BROUGHT FORWARD A NOTICE OF MOTION THAT COUNCIL DENIED ASKING THE CITY TO ASK E4M NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS APPEAL.

I UNDERSTAND THAT COUNCIL IS NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE PROCEEDINGS, BUT IN THE ORIGINAL TRIAL, THE MAYOR WROTE A LETTER REQUESTING FAVOR FROM THE CITY ON CITY LETTERHEAD.

SO I WOULD BE LED TO BELIEVE THAT WE ALREADY HAVE.

REGARDLESS IF COUNCILLOR PEARCE PLED GUILTY OF THE CONTRAVENTION OF THE ACT AND COULD HAVE STEPPED DOWN AND NOT COST THE TAXPAYERS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

THE FACT THAT THE COURT AWARDED $16,000 COSTS TO BE PAID BY E4M IS NOT FOR THE CITY TO TRY AND RECOVER.

COUNCILLOR PEARCE SHOULD BE PETITIONING THE COURTS TO GET HIS MONEY, NOT THE TAXPAYERS.

IT'S MY OPINION, IF E4M SAYS THAT THE CITY OWES THAT MONEY, THAT IS A DISPUTE WE HAVE AS A MUNICIPALITY WITH E4M. BUT REGARDLESS, THEY, AS PER THE COURT, OWE THE MONEY TO COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN THE COURT ORDERED THE AMOUNT OF $16,000 TO BE PAID AS COSTS, COUNCILLOR PEARCE AND HIS COUNSEL SHOULD HAVE OR COULD HAVE ASKED THE COURTS FOR THE AMOUNT TO BE HIGHER.

THE COURT DEEMED THAT THE APPEAL COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN $16,000, AND IF MORE EXPENSIVE ROUTE WAS CHOSEN AGAIN, THAT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE TAXPAYERS BACK.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT I SYMPATHIZE WITH COUNCILLOR PEARCE AND KNOW FULL WELL THE COST OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.

BUT REMEMBER, HE PLED GUILTY AND CHOSE NOT TO STEP DOWN BUT RATHER EXPEND HIS AND THE TAXPAYERS MONEY TO FIGHT TO KEEP HIS SEAT, WHICH HE'S BEEN ABLE TO DO.

IN CLOSING, I BELIEVE THAT COUNCILLOR PEARCE SHOULD BE GOING AFTER E4M FOR HIS DUE $16,000 AND NOT THE TAXPAYERS OF THE MUNICIPALITY, WHICH HE IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT. I THEREFORE WANT TO PUT A MOTION FORWARD THAT THE REPORT OF THE CAO BE RECEIVED AND THAT COUNCIL CONTRIBUTE ZERO DOLLARS TOWARDS COUNCILLOR PEARCE'S LEGAL FEES.

I'D ASK FOR A SECONDER FOR THAT MOTION IS THERE A SECONDER FOR THAT MOTION? SHOULD A MOTION LIKE THAT, NOT SAY IT'S NOT JUST LEGAL FEES.

IT WAS THE AWARDED $16,000.

DOES THAT COUNT? QUALIFY UNDER THE WORD LEGAL FEES? IMAGINE IT WOULD JUST BE COUNCILLOR PATRIE IS LOOKING AT ZERO.

I HAD THE DISCUSSION WITH THE CLERK.

I DON'T KNOW WHICH THE CLERK WOULD PREFER HOW IT'S WORDED.

THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE THAT THE REPORT OF THE CAO REGARDING COURT COST AWARD APPEAL FOR COUNCILLOR PEARCE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE BE RECEIVED AND THAT COUNCIL CONTRIBUTE $0 DOLLARS TOWARDS COUNCILLOR PEARCE LEGAL FEES.

SO THE MOTION DETAILS APPEAL FOR COUNCILLOR PEARCE.

[01:55:10]

AND EVERYONE JUST LOOKS KIND OF LIKE YOU'VE BEEN AT A STREET BRAWL.

YOU KNOW THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A TOUGH ONE.

I DON'T THINK COUNCILLOR PEARCE HAD TO GO THROUGH.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL PROCESS AS TO WHY AN INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER REGIME OF ANY SORT WOULD BE ABLE TO MANEUVER LIKE THIS IN ORDER TO NOT ONLY GOUGE THE TAXPAYER, BUT FINANCIALLY BURDEN A MEMBER OF COUNCIL THAT MAKES NEXT TO NOTHING MONTHLY.

STILL MAKES NO SENSE TO ME, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT.

I THINK THE JUDGE'S RULING WAS CORRECT.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THE APPEAL WAS A PLOY NOT TO ONLY MAKE MORE MONEY TO MAKE A NAME FOR ONESELVES.

I JUST DON'T KNOW HOW THE MUNICIPALITY CAN HELP COUNCILLOR PEARCE IN RECOVERING THE FUNDS.

IS THERE A POSSIBILITY MR. GAGNON IF COUNCILLOR PEARCE DOES GO FURTHER THROUGH THE LEGAL SYSTEM, WHICH HE WAS AWARDED $16,000 TO BACK HIM UP IN SUPPORT AND ANY OTHER WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.

WELL, I MEAN, THERE'S IN-KIND SUPPORT, THERE'S MORAL SUPPORT, THERE'S PAPER RECORDS AND STAFF TIME.

AND IF THERE'S A SUBSEQUENT REQUEST FOR LEGAL BILLS THAT WE WOULD INCUR IN HIS EFFORT.

THAT'S A WHOLE OTHER CONVERSATION WE COULD CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN AT THAT TIME.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING WRITING A CHECK TO MR. PEARCE'S LAWYER. I'M JUST SUGGESTING INCURRING SOME OF OUR OWN COSTS WITH MR. MASCARIN AND TO TRY AND UNPACK WHAT NEXT STEPS MIGHT BE TO SUPPORT MR. PEARCE HIS EFFORTS TO SECURE THE $16,000 OR MORE OUT OF E4M.

I IMAGINE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE FRIENDLY TO HIS CASE AND TO HIS POSITION, IF NOT WILLING TO REIMBURSE DIRECTLY, WHICH IS WHAT I'M SENSING. I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT THIS WON'T BE THE LAST TIME THAT E4M DOES THIS.

WE KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER CASE GOING ON.

AND WHAT'S TO STOP THEM FROM JUST CONTINUING TO GOUGE THE MUNICIPALITY AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL? AND I IMAGINE THEY'RE DOING IT IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ALSO, A HUGE CONCERN.

COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. I'M JUST WONDERING IF MAYOR AND COUNCIL CAN AT LEAST SEND A LETTER TO THE JUDGE ASKING HIM TO ENSURE THAT E4M IS PAYING THE JUDGMENT THAT WAS AGAINST THEM AND NOT AGAINST US, I DON'T KNOW.

IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THE OPINION THAT WE'RE NOT LIABLE FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY.

I CAN'T EVEN SAY ANYTHING BECAUSE I'M TOO ANGRY TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT E4M AND THIS WHOLE DEBACLE.

BUT IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE COULD DO ANYTHING TO PUT PRESSURE ON THE COURT SYSTEM TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

THEY'RE THE ONES THAT CHOSE TO DO THIS.

THEY KNEW WE DIDN'T WANT THEM TO DO IT.

AND I THINK IT'S UP TO E4M TO DO WHAT THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO DO.

MR. GAGNON. JUST TO CLARIFY, I EXPLORED THAT WITH MR. MASCARIN WEEKS OR MONTHS AGO.

THE PROBLEM IS INHERENT THAT WE DON'T HAVE STANDING.

OUR ENTIRE POSITION IS THAT E4M CREATED THIS APPEAL.

SO THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE COURT IS E4M AND MR. PEARCE. SO WE CANNOT INTERVENE AND TRY TO PETITION THE COURT OR WE'VE BEEN RELUCTANT TO DO SO BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE STANDING.

IT'S THE INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER E4M AND MR. PEARCE. SO WE DON'T, WE CAN'T WRITE TO THE COURT BECAUSE THE COURT WON'T LISTEN TO US.

WE'RE JUST THE PEOPLE WHO PAY THE BILLS.

SO IT'S NOT THAT EASY.

OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE.

COUNCILLOR MANN.

THANK YOU YOUR WORSHIP. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE.

I THINK ULTIMATELY THIS MUNICIPALITY SHOULD CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT THIS COUNCIL HAS NOT SUPPORTED E4M SINCE WE REMOVE THEM AS OUR IC AND REPLACED THEM WITH ANOTHER IC SO THAT WAS THE END OF THE FORMAL RELATIONSHIP.

[02:00:07]

THAT'S UNFORTUNATE.

EVEN THOUGH WE'VE ASKED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, BUT NO LONGER HAVING THEM AS OUR IC, I THINK HAS CLEARLY SENT A MESSAGE.

AND I AGAIN REAFFIRM THAT DECISION TONIGHT.

IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION TO DO AT THE TIME.

THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR TURNER.

THANKS, YOUR WORSHIP. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS WHOLE THING IS JUST ABSOLUTELY IRRITATING THE CITY OF ELLIOT LAKE AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL HAVE ESSENTIALLY BEEN VICTIMIZED BY E4M, AND THEY'VE TAKEN THEIR AUTHORITY AS AN INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER, ALMOST AS A LICENSE TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.

AND DOING WHATEVER THEY WANT, HAS COSTS US A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY.

BECAUSE EVEN AFTER THE COURTS FOUND THAT COUNCILLOR PEARCE HAD TECHNICALLY VIOLATED THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT, THE COURTS ALSO SAID THAT IT WAS TO SUCH A MINIMAL DEGREE THAT A REPRIMAND WAS SATISFACTORY AS ANY KIND OF PUNISHMENT.

E4M THEN WENT ON AND LAUNCHED AN APPEAL.

THE ONLY BENEFIT TO THAT APPEAL WAS THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO PERHAPS MAKE SOME CASE LAW, GET THEIR NAME IN PRINT.

THE END RESULT IS WE GET STUCK WITH THE BILL FOR E4M'S LEGAL COUNSEL, WHICH THEY HIRED.

AND COUNCILLOR PEARCE HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO DEFEND OR HE COULD HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO DEFEND, WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED E4M TO RUN ROUGHSHOD.

I THINK ANY OF US WOULD HAVE HAD ENOUGH BRAINS TO DEFEND.

UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE AND IT COULD HAVE HAPPENED TO ANY MEMBER OF COUNCIL JUST AS EASILY.

WE GET STUCK WITH THE HORRENDOUS LEGAL BILL FOR TRYING TO DO OUR JOB AS COUNCILLORS.

MR. MASCARIN POINTS OUT IN HIS LETTER THAT COUNCILLOR PEARCE DID NOT ACT IN HIS OWN FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST. HE WAS TRYING TO SERVE TWO ORGANIZATIONS, THE CITY AND ELNOS, BOTH WHICH HAVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF ELLIOT LAKE IS THEIR MANDATE.

HE MADE AN ERROR.

WE ACTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF HIS COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST HIMSELF.

AND HE APOLOGIZED FOR HIS CONDUCT.

SO. HOW FAR DO WE LET THIS GO? DO WE HAVE NOT HAVE SOME OBLIGATION TO TAKE CARE OF PEOPLE SERVING THE COMMUNITY? I SEE NO INDEMNIFICATION AVAILABLE THROUGH OUR INSURANCE POLICIES BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, IN ORDER TO SAVE THE COURTS TIME AND EVERYBODY ELSE, TIME AND MONEY AND LEGAL EXPENSES, COUNCILLOR PEARCE DECIDED TO PLEAD GUILTY.

ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS AN OFFENSE AT THE MOST MINOR LEVEL.

AND THE END RESULT IS IT COST HIM SOME 27, $28,000 IN LEGAL FEES.

HE'S ASKING FOR US TO AT LEAST COVER WHAT THE COURTS AWARDED HIM WHEN E4M, APPARENTLY, ACCORDING TO THEM, ACTING ON OUR BEHALF LOST THE APPEAL, WHICH THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN DARN WELL WOULD FAIL.

NOW WE'VE ALSO BEEN NOTIFIED THAT IF WE GO AFTER E4M FOR THE MONEY WE COULD HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING IT OR GETTING A DECISION IN OUR FAVOR.

[02:05:05]

WE'RE IN A QUANDARY.

DO WE HELP COUNCILLOR PEARCE, WHO AS I SAID, ENDED UP IN THE POSITION THAT ANY OF US COULD HAVE ENDED UP IN, OR DO WE BLOW IT OFF? SAY NO TO AIDING.

AND SUGGEST THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE'RE SAVING THE COMMUNITY MONEY.

AND I GUARD AGAINST THAT OR ASK US ALL TO GUARD AGAINST THAT THOUGHT PROCESS BECAUSE WE HAVE AN ELECTION COMING UP IN ANOTHER THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AND WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING NOW AND THINKING, DO I WANT TO GO ON COUNCIL WHEN I AM SUBJECT TO THIS KIND OF ABUSE FROM THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND INTEGRITY COMMISSIONERS LIKE E4M? DO I WANT TO RISK MY FAMILY'S MONEY, SAVINGS, MY HOUSE, MY CAR, WHATEVER? FOR WHAT? $900 A MONTH.

IF IT'S THAT. IT'S REALLY SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY HAS TO THINK OVER TWICE.

I FORTUNATELY HAVE NOT BEEN ON THE RECEIVING END OF AN INTEGRITY COMMISSIONER INVESTIGATION.

AND I HAVEN'T ASKED FOR ANY TO BE LAUNCHED.

BUT I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO SEE MY FELLOW MEMBERS ON COUNCIL NOW OR IN THE FUTURE BE SUBJECTED TO THIS KIND OF THING. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? I THINK I'D ECHO COUNCILLOR TURNER'S COMMENTS AND READING THIS SUBSECTION 283 2 OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT PROVIDES THAT THE MUNICIPALITY MAY PAY EXPENSES OF A MEMBER OF COUNCIL IF THE EXPENSES ARE ACTUALLY INCURRED IN THEIR CAPACITY AS A MEMBER.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EXPENSES FOR AN APPEAL.

WE DIDN'T WE DON'T EVEN KNOW THE GRAND AMOUNT OF THE EXPENSE OF THE ORIGINAL TRIAL WHERE THE JUDGE CAME DOWN WITH A JUDGMENT AND SAYING, YES, COUNCILLOR PEARCE WAS GUILTY IN RESPECT TO MUNICIPAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT IN THE WAY IT WAS WORDED, BUT AGAIN, DID NOT ACT IN HIS OWN FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST, WHICH IS THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS A PECUNIARY INTEREST.

NO. NOBODY GETS ON COUNCIL SO THEY CAN BE FINANCIALLY DESTROYED WHILE TRYING TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY.

AND I THINK THERE'S A SITUATION HERE THAT NEEDS TO GO HIGHER UP IN THE LEVELS OF THE GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT RIGHT IN ANY CAPACITY FOR ANYBODY TO ENDURE TO GO THROUGH IT NOT JUST ONCE, BUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH IT A SECOND TIME.

IT'S NOT ALL RIGHT. AGAIN IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILLOR PATRIE. JUST ONE YOUR WORSHIP THROUGH YOU.

COUNCILLOR TURNER SAYS THAT THERE IS NO INDEMNIFICATION.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THERE IS.

WE ARE INSURED IF WE'RE NOT GUILTY.

AND IF WE'RE NOT GUILTY, THE INSURANCE COMPANY WILL PAY OUR FEES.

SO OKAY. A ROLL CALL VOTE.

MOTION READ OUT PLEASE, MS. BRAY? THAT THE REPORT OF THE CAO REGARDING COURT COST AWARD APPEAL FOR COUNCILLOR PEARCE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASE BE RECEIVED AND THAT COUNCIL CONTRIBUTE $0 DOLLARS TOWARDS COUNCILLOR PEARCE'S LEGAL FEES.

ROLL CALL. COUNCILLOR TURNER.

OPPOSED. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

IN FAVOR. COUNCILLOR MANN.

IN FAVOR. AND I'M OPPOSED, BUT THAT'S CARRIED.

[02:10:02]

[18. CONFIRMATORY BY-LAW]

SECOND BY COUNCILLOR PATRIE.

QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? ROLL CALL.

COUNCILLOR PATRIE ROLL CALL.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR MANN.

IN FAVOR.

COUNCILLOR TURNER.

FAVOR. COUNCILLOR FINAMORE.

IN FAVOR. I'M IN FAVOR.

THAT'S CARRIED. MOTION TO ADJOURN.

MOVED BY COUNCILLOR TURNER. SECOND BY COUNCILLOR MANN.

AGAIN THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR WATCHING AND ATTENDING THIS EVENING.

HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. WE'RE NOW ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.