Regional water management requires balancing supply capacity with demand through appropriate reserve capacity calculations, and addressing well interference concerns through transparent, independent review processes that protect both urban water infrastructure and rural private well systems.
安装我们的扩展，即时搜索任意视频内容
Regional Council - May 20, 2026本站添加:
Good evening and welcome to our council meeting on May the 20th, 2026.
I will now call on Tim Brewaker, regional clerk, to conduct the roll call.
>> Thank you. Regional Chair Redmond, >> present.
>> Councelor Craig, >> present.
>> Councelor Herb, >> present.
>> Councelor Foxton, >> present. Councelor Gowing >> present.
>> Councelor Harris.
>> Councelor Hunick >> is present. Councelor James >> present.
>> Councelor Liot >> present.
>> Councelor McCabe.
>> Councelor Noak.
>> Councelor Rodriguez >> present.
>> Councelor Salinan >> present.
>> Uh we have regrets from councelor Shaun and councelor Roanovich is running late.
Councelor Wolf >> present.
>> Thank you chair.
I'd like to start this meeting by acknowledging that the land on which we gather today is a traditional territory of the Hodnachoni, the Anesnabek and the neutral peoples. In doing so, I want to reflect on what it means to be doing important community work that we are engaging in collectively today and also in my own relationship to the land. As a settler, one of the most important aspects of my individual journey towards truth and reconciliation has been to listen.
I am continually grateful to the community that who shares their stories and concerns with me. As well as the chair of the region, I know I carry a large responsibility to ensure that it is not just myself as an individual listening and acting, but that as a government we are listening and creating action in the community with the community. I'm offering this acknowledgement as one of the many actions I personally in the region largely is taking towards reconciliation.
We acknowledge the enduring presence of the indigenous people with whom we share this land today, their achievements and their contributions to our community.
Colleagues, there are a few days of significance that I would like to recognize. May 18th to 24th is National Public Works Week. This year's theme is rooted in service powered by the community and celebrates how public works professionals and build and maintain the foundational infrastructure that keeps communities safe, sustainable, and running smoothly.
May 20th is UN World B Day. Did you know that Waterl region was the first bee region in Canada? Today on World Bday Day, we're shining a spotlight on the tiny pollinators that play a vital role in supporting biodiversity, local food systems, and healthy ecosystems in our community.
May 24th to 30th is National Accessibility Week. This week we take a moment to recognize National Accil Accessibility Week and celebrate the valuable contributions and leadership of people with disabilities while also highlighting the work being done to remove barriers and build a more inclusive community. We're proud to support and be a vendor at the Independent Living Waterl Region's National Accessibility Week trade show and conference which is occurring on June 1st at the Ken Caling Museum.
May 27th is the start of Eida Hadadu. Uh it's a special occasion that brings loved ones together to engage in the acts of kindness and charity towards those who require care. It's a time to celebrate the values of friendship, peace, and compassion. That sounds like something we should observe every day.
And finally, May 30th, Croatian Heritage Day. We take a moment to honor and celebrate the vibrant culture, rich history, and community spirit, and the meaningful contributions of Croatian communities to Waterlue region.
Colleagues, um are there any declarations of uh puniary interest to declare?
Seeing none, we now need a motion to go into close. Councelor Salin, did you want to put forward a motion to amend this?
>> Yes, please, Chair. Um, I'd like to put forward a motion to amend that we also consider um under section 2392 of the Municipal Act section A, which I believe you and clerks might have the exact wording as I can't remember off the top of my head, but the motion itself was circulated to council.
>> Okay. Thank you. So I'm looking for unanimous consent and it the item that would be added to the first reason we're going into close is discussion related to identifiable individuals for the process of appointing members to the Sunnyside Foundation Board. Councelor Salinin is asking um for unanimous consent to add discussion related to the security of a property in the township of Wilmont. Do we have unanimous consent to add that second?
Okay. So, we that we have unanimous consent. So, I now um the amended motion with both of those parts for reasons to going to close. I need a mover and a secondary. Councelor Herb, Counselor Noak, please use your escribe to vote.
Councelor James, have you voted?
Colleagues, that is carried. We will meet in the Waterl County room.
So colleagues, I'm going to call this meeting to order and thank the um people in in the gallery and people online for um indulging us. Our meeting went a little bit over and closed. Um I will now um entertain a motion to reconvene and open. Do I have a mover moved by councelor Fox and seconded by councelor Gowing? Please use your ecribe to vote.
Do we have unanimous consent and then we can dispense with voting?
>> Okay, I see no objections and people are voting as well. also belt and suspenders carried and we are now in open session and our first presenter is Chris Garrett's Mannheim water capacity. So Chris, welcome to the podium. Uh you have 20 minutes and uh we're um pleased that you could join us today.
Okay.
Thank you, Chair Redmond, members, council, and staff. I'm here today representing the Waterlue Region Home Builders Association, and a coalition of industry partners, including the WRBA, Grand Valley Construction Association, Konosoga Heavy Construction Association, Build Urban, and Cornerstone Association of Realtors. Collectively, this group represents development covering new residential, institutional, commercial, and industrial in Waterl region.
Today I'm here to discuss the ongoing Waterlue water crisis. Hopefully provide some additional context and background.
>> Pardon me. I'm just Could you Yeah, we can't hear you very well.
>> Yes. Is that better >> there? That's better >> here.
Is that good?
>> Okay.
>> Do you like our new podium? You can now elevate it.
>> It's very fancy.
>> I'll try to remember to speak in here.
If anyone has problems, just just let me know. So, let me see here.
Okay. So, first of all, just to to give you some background to who I am, I think at some previous meetings, there was some questions as to who this guy was that was going to come and talk to you and, you know, does he know what he's talking about. So, uh, I'm Chris. I have over 20 years experience as a professional engineer and 30 years experience as a Ministry of the Environment Well contractor. I've spent my entire life in well construction testing. Um it's been the family business since 1951.
Uh my grandfather immigrated from the Netherlands and started a well construction business. My father continued in the 70s and I continued in the industry in the uh in the '9s. Uh so I've been a licensed well technician uh and contractor since the age of of 16.
Um and I began working with the uh homebuilders association on this issue in January along with Steve Burns from BM Ross. We've participated in seven development industry stakeholder group meetings with region and local staff as well as other stakeholders.
So in terms of uh uh my knowledge of the the Waterlue area um over the course of my career I've worked on uh many projects in Waterlue including production well construction and testing for new water supplies test drilling to identify locations and well rehabilitation projects. Uh this figure shows the region of Waterlue with the number of the well a number of the well fields located in green. Uh some of the well fields that I've worked on in the past uh include Elmyra.
Um new con a new well production well in Shingletown. Uh test well production well in St. Agatha production well in Waterl North. Uh some work in William Street Wellfield. Test well in Strain Street. Uh two production wells in Foxboro.
Another test well in Strange Street. an additional uh program in Strain Street, two new production wells in Greenbrook, two production wells in Mannheim, um new production well and some additional test wells in Mannheim, new production well in Mannheim Village, test well in Mannheim Village, production well in Fountain Street, additional uh I'm getting ahead of myself. Uh, two production wells in Hesper, one, two, three in Pine Bush, work in Clemens Mills, production well in Townline Road, uh, test well that was actually in Puss Township, but it was for the region Waterlue, uh, new production well in Shane Shades Mills, new production well at Branchton Meadows, some work in Middleton, three test wells in Brelaw, and a lot of work in the Elmyra area.
So first up I just wanted to to cover a bit of background and and um give context on the the waterlue system and how it compares to other systems.
There's been a lot of talk about waterl being the most complex uh systems in the province. It may be true but it is complex by design. Um the system has been designed so there's a mix of groundwater and surface water. So the region has flexibility on how and where water is taken. Designed with aquifer storage and recovery wells to take water from the Grand River, treat it, inject it back into the aquifer as a means to recharge groundwater was also done by design. System has large scale interconnection until recent discovery water transfer issues from Middleton to Mannheim service areas that also adds complexity but it is benefit uh to the system. It was done so to ensure there's redundancy and and optionality in the operation of the system. So just to compare to some others, um York Region has multiple uh surface and groundwater sources. They've got uh the York water system that takes surface water from Lake Ontario, treats and distributes to many municipalities, some of which are blended with groundwater such as as New Market. Um they've got a Georgina water system takes water from Lake Simco and they have five standalone well-based municipal systems in the outlining areas. So combined they supply 336 million lers uh per day without the flexibility of having the interconnection that the waterlue system has. So a lot of them are standalone.
They they don't have the benefit of being able to take water from other areas.
Similarly, Peele region operates two surface water treatment plants to service the city of Missaga and city of Bmpton. And then they have four groundwater systems serving 10 municipalities in uh town of Kaledan, Englewood, Kaledan village um and uh Alton and Monomills. So in total they provide 599 million liters per day. So in summary, the waterlue system is very complex and quite possibly the most complex, but there are other systems that are just as complex and they don't have some of the benefits that the waterlue system has.
So now moving on to the current water supply issues. Uh in previous presentations, I've covered three so that I can fit it into 20 minutes. Uh for this one, I thought I'd focus on the uh the first two. So, in my opinion, you can divide the crisis into three different issues. Um, this evening, I'm going to focus on the water management philosophy and infrastructure and operational changes. In the slide deck that I believe was provided in your agenda, there's additional information on the third issue, which is low groundwater level concern. But for the sake of time, I'm going to focus on these two issues because I feel they are easier to address in the short term.
So the first is the proposed change in water management philosophy. So why am I using proposed? Because the region waterlue adopted the 2015 water supply master plan with a water management philosophy whereby they add 20% safety factor called required surplus capacity onto the average day demand as a buffer when determining if they had surplus supply.
Recent work on the water supply master plan update is ongoing and there is a proposal for council to consider a new water management philosophy called resiliency factor. As the water supply master plan has not been completed and received or approved by council, the 2015 water supply master plan water manage philosophy is in my opinion what should be used in 2026.
So the 2015 water supply master plan identified a potential supply demand gap with a deficit by 201 if they maintain the sustainable uh rate of existing sources of 193 million liters per day that was available in 2015 with the 20% required surplus capacity amount.
A number of projects were identified to be implemented through from 2015 to 2011 to address the issue including 20 million liters per day in capacity restorations. Uh Waterl North treatment plant and wells that would add 6 million L per day of new capacity. Two phases of additional work that would add 24 million L per day for a total of 50 million L per day added by 203940.
This would result in a system capacity of 243 million liters per day by 201 and an average day demand of 236 million liters per day with the 20% required surplus capacity included. So in the uh the figure in 2526 according to the the 2015 water supply master plan the total system capacity right now should be about 213 milliliters per day with an average day demand of 192 million liters including the 20% uh required surplus capacity.
So this uh chart is from the agile report from December I believe that included a review of the SEMA technical memo as part of the yetto be completed water supply strategy.
This shows the measured daily demand which is the gray bars and gray line.
The sustainable supply capacity which is the solid blue line and the sustainable capacity after 20% resiliency factor has been applied which is the dash blue line. First of all, just to define what sustainable supply capacity is, agile states the sustainable supply capacity represents long-term capacity that can be provided on a long-term ongoing basis. So, it isn't to be confused with total system capacity. It's a lesser value that agile or SEMA has has uh uh estimated in their opinion is this the sustainable yield of the the system. So that is 21% below the total system capacity. So 21% has already been removed from the total system capacity.
And then the the blue dash line represents a further 20% reduction on top of the 21% resulting in an operational resiliency of 37% lower than total system capacity.
So to summarize and compare the 2015 and 2025 forecast, the 2015 water supply master plan laid out a plan so there was no supply deficit until sometime after 201.
And as of 2024, there should have been a 13 million liter per day surplus based on the projections.
The new proposed resiliency factor approach results in a deficit of 6.1 million liters per day in 2024, 33.2 2 million liters per day with applications and growth factored in which is a difference of 46.2 million liters per day.
Uh between 2015 and current the system capacity is down uh 5.1 uh% which is 10 million liters per day and when the proposed 20% resiliency factor is applied system capacity is 18.2% less than where it should have been based on 2015 pro projections. Oh sorry I forgot to advance the slides.
So how can this be?
So to answer that we need to look at the proposed change in water management philosophy. So the 2015 philosophy which is the required surplus capacity uh was where you would add 20% buffer on top of the average day demand. the proposed resiliency factor um you would take 20% off of the total system capacity and as I'll show in the the next slide this represents a a massive shift in water management philosophy utilized by the region of water if it were to be adopted by council.
So this is the example using the numbers from the agile report for the total integrated urban system. I realize that uh now you're looking at the different service areas, but just for the sake of comparison of the effect of the two different calculation methods, I've I've used those numbers.
So the 2024 demand was 153 million L per day. The 2024 total system capacity is 183.7 million L per day. So with the new proposed resiliency factor, you take 20% off of the system capacity, which means your total system capacity is 146.9.
Your demand is 153. So you end up with a 6.1 million liter per day deficit and that's what has triggered the effective uh freeze on development.
And looking at it with the uh current approved and adopted 20% required surplus capacity, you take the total demand and you add 20%. So your system capacity is still 183.7 million L per day. Your demand with the 20% is 183.6 million L per day. So you're at a effectively uh uh no surplus or no deficit. Um and under the uh current philosophy this would trigger planning for uh system capacity increases.
So I've added uh well what is the correct approach? We'll get to that. I added a slide here which is an example of the uh uh sort of the the factors for the two separate uh systems. So the Mannheim service area. So this is breaking it down because uh from the IUS into the two different service areas. So the Mannheim service area has a system capacity of 1275.7 million liters per day, a demand of 113.
So you're using 90.1% of the system capacity, and you've got a surplus of 12.4 million LERs per day.
The Middleton service area has a system capacity of 58 million liters per day, a demand of 39.3.
So you're only using 67.8 of a percent of system capacity and you have a surplus there of 18.7 million liters per day. This is going through the calculation using your adopted required surplus capacity uh methodology that was outlined in the 2015 water supply master plan.
So overall the the the Mannheim system capacity used at 90% is not is not a a great situation in many municipalities as you'll see in a moment. This is what would trigger the additional work to add system capacity.
Um and then when you compare it sorry to overall IUS I US's demand is uh 83.3% of capacity.
So this table uh to compare different targets was in the agile report. Um it's nice to see there are some there that in my opinion aren't aren't uh uh really reasonable to use as comparators because they're 100% lakebased systems. So if we we take uh Niagara, London, Ottawa, and Toronto out of there, we're left with the city of G which utili utilizes a similar approach uh with the res to the resiliency factor. So they used 15% uh and that's 15% taken off total system capacity similar to what's proposed here. Um Peele and Brford use an approach that is very similar to the required surplus capacity which is your 2015 adopted philosophy where the planning process is triggered when use rises to 80% of total system capacity and when it gets to 90% construction uh proceeds.
So based on the 20 to 24 numbers as I showed in the previous slide the actual demand in the integrated urban system is 83.3% of the total system capacity which would suggest that the approach should be to start planning process for additional capacity.
If we look at the Mannheim system and the Middleton system which were 90.1 and 67.8 eight. Those numbers would indicate that uh construction should be commencing at the Manheim system similar to what is being done with sidestream treatment uh the Mannheim water treatment plant.
So what's what's right and who's right?
There's really no right way uh to determine resiliency, redundancy or reserve capacity. Ministry of the Environment has a very low bar for what is required. It's basically you don't allocate more water than you can supply and that is similar for sewage. So that's uh policy D51.
Um and if the region of of Waterlue wants to strive for a 20% resiliency factor as is proposed then that's that's great. It's a great aspirational goal but it needs to be implemented uh responsibly and likely phased phased in over time.
So the second issue I'm speeding a bit because I'm running out of time is uh infrastructure and operational challenges and and uh the main factor here or the main item here is uh um there's a proposal to look at the two Manheim and Middleton service areas separate whereas previously they've been considered as one system of the integrated urban system. Uh it's it's been highlighted uh in the reports that the Middleton service area um cannot provide water to the Manheim service area because of a pressure differential and different secondary disinfection residuals between the two service areas.
So we the uh we remain uncertain if two mixing of sources is prohibited or if it should be avoided as a best management practice. Um also unsure as to to why uh connecting the two systems uh finding an engineering solution for the pressure differential and the secondary disinfection method isn't higher on the list of of projects. So I think we would like to see this option explored and advanced on an expedited schedule. It's one of the items that if it if a solution could be found and you can look at the entire integrated urban system as you always have would go a long way in allowing uh development to proceed.
So some of the the solutions very quickly. Um so the request really is that council continue using the reserve uh supply capacity calculation from the 2015 water supply master plan as their water management philosophy allow development to proceed in 2025 that should be 26. Um and if there is a desire to change water management philosophy change should be phased in over time uh and over a reasonable amount of time. Um reestablishing the integrated urban system as soon as possible by by uh solving the engineering problem uh so that you can interconnect the the Manheim and Middleton service areas um and sort of longer range goals look at innovative and outside the box solutions to achieve near-term gains and address long-term viability of the the system. So I've discussed with at the staff level some of the these uh solutions which would be uh additional recharge wells uh looking at previously on tested wells exploring utilizing the Elmmy aer system and then finally continue drilling programs and exploration for long-term sources.
>> Chris, you got a couple minutes slow start so don't rush. Finish your uh presentation. Okay.
>> Oh, I'm done. We've got more time more time for questions. So, I appreciate it though.
>> That's great. Well, thank you. You came uh in under time. And for people watching online and people in the chamber, um there was a motion inviting uh Chris to come and present, which is why uh it says 20 minutes on the clock and it's not the normal five or three.
So, thank you very much and I hope you didn't feel too rushed.
>> No, no. And I really appreciate the time. I should add that uh I don't know if he's here, but I I I think on behalf of everybody, I need to to give a bit of shout out to Jeff Marose, who is the one uh staff person who's been uh uh well, maybe because we speak the same language, he's been uh uh been very helpful outside of the the normal meetings in in responding to to questions and answers. So, I just wanted to point that out. Thank you.
>> Thank you. We're we're very proud of all of our staff, but Jeff's a star for sure. Um, councelor McCabe.
>> Thank you and through your chair, thanks for um for making time to present this information uh to council today. Um, could you just put up clerks? I think it was the second last slide where it had like some of the points of like next steps. I think it was >> Oh, I'm not uh >> I think cler or sorry, does clerks have a copy of it?
>> Okay.
The suspense build as we wait.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
>> I think it was the second. Yeah, if you pull it up, I can It was the one about like things that have been done and the next steps like the Almyra well and the >> Yeah.
>> Yep. Is that it?
>> Um I think it must be go one more further.
No, I think that was the last one. So, I mentioned the Ammyra. Well, there at the the the bottom third of the page.
>> Okay, then go back.
Okay.
>> Okay. Yeah, that's sorry, that's the slide. Yeah. So I was just so we are going to um we are going to discuss uh the resiliency in I think it's June 3rd correct chair. Yeah that that's on the agenda to discuss. Um so this is helpful information in advance of that. Um, I guess my question is, um, because when I was listening to you, like are there is there anything on this list that we're not doing or already? And I guess I I don't I guess that's more of a question to staff than to Chris, but um, but I'm just because my understanding, you know, we've been we've had numerous presentations from Jeff Marose and Amy and Ken Brothers, etc. So, I'm just wondering, my understanding was that, you know, we are doing the the um the artificial recharge. We're we're looking at the the wells that are in production.
We're looking for other wells, etc. So, I'm just curious if there's anything on this list that that's new information for staff and for council.
This is a somewhat unusual um setup. So, I'm going to let Chris speak and then um Ken and Amy and Pam can decide who wants to answer. Chris.
>> So, uh through you chaired it. Um I think the the short answer would be uh that staff is at least aware of everything that I've suggested. We had a meeting with Pam Law and Jeff recently and went over the presentation. Uh, so I I think the answer is yes, they're aware and I I got the sense Pam can clarify that they're at varying stages of what staff would would consider feasible. Is that that that accurate? So I think they're they're all on the radar. I don't think I've proposed anything that is that is uh uh uh too out there. I think that I've suggested things that maybe um with the benefit of additional information they're not considering as high priority as I am. And uh but I think that that's where the main difference of opinion is is what I think is feasible in a near-term solution.
Staff uh may not share the same opinion.
Not that they're they're right and I'm wrong or vice versa, but the interconnection thing is is is a good example. like I I feel like and you know the Steve Burns and our team feels like that is something that should be looked at um in the near term and I think the proposed work plan has it um a bit further down on the list of prior >> when you say interconnection are you talking about the integration of the um the Manheim and Milton wells because I know I see in your it says reestablish the IUS as soon as possible but my understanding was that that actually there I mean that's part of the challenge right there actually never has been a connection we've called it an integrated urban system but it actually so it's not reestablished it's established isn't that the case >> I guess that would be true yeah uh maybe maybe sort of 50/50 because there is the ability to service in one direction from Mannheim to middle uh Middleton and not the other way so I I use the term reestablish it could be establish or or just get back to the uh to looking at it as a integrated urban system instead of the two separate services >> because I mean certainly and I'll let staff respond but certainly my understanding and and what I've heard in the fiveish six months that we've been discussing this in great depth but you know in the three years I've been around here we do consider we have we do consider it an integrated urban system we don't think of it as you know separate systems but that we've learned through this process that you can't you can't exchange between Mannheim and Middleton, you you can't exchange from Middleton to Mannheim. Um, and that's something that we're looking into to try and figure out a way to to fix that.
Like that's part of the engineering challenge of that. That's my understanding. And so, um, >> yeah, I I take a bit of issue with it saying reestablished because we are trying to figure that out.
>> Okay. So, I think the point's been made and Chris, you gave a good answer. Does staff want to comment on this?
>> Madam Chair, there's a point of order. I don't think it's appropriate for staff to get into a debate, a political debate with a delegation.
>> Political debate.
>> It is.
>> No, it's not.
>> This is a presentation. It um by an external person. So, if you want, we can hold all the staff questions till the end. Is that what you prefer, C?
>> I don't think it's appropriate to get staff involved. I I see it as a political debate back and forth.
>> Well, it's not a political debate. These are these are debating. So, I'm in the hands of council.
>> I'm not debating the I'm not debating the delegate council.
>> Okay. So, I'm going to say I'm in the hands of council. I'm going to say that we will save all of our questions for staff until we have all the questions of the delegation. So, councelor McCabe, do you want to go back in the line and >> Sure. I mean, I'm just asking questions to clarify the information you're presenting here because it wasn't clear to me what's different from what staff have actually provided us. That's what I'm trying to understand what's different there.
>> Okay. If you get back in the queue, then we I'll go to the next uh person, which is councelor Salin.
>> Thank you, chair. Uh, thank you very much for coming today, Chris. I really appreciated your presentation. Um, I'm curious and I know that you were speaking specifically about the integrated system and the particular capacity constraint. Um, but obviously three of our municipalities don't use any of the water in the um urban system, but of course we rely on the same aquafer. I guess I can throw the caveat Wilmont has about a hundred homes that use it. Um, but with that, I guess I'm just wondering in your understanding and knowledge, is there concern of the aquafer being overused for the ISU that there wouldn't be capacity for the three townships? Um, it's a concern that's been raised and I haven't it's kind of about as clear as mud um as to what that looks like. So, just wondering if you have anything to comment on that.
>> Um, I'll be very careful here. your your staff are are much more aware of the local water level concern around the the Mannheim wells. My understanding is simply my understanding is that it is very localized to that you know Mannheim uh treatment plant Mannheim village area and at the current moment um I don't believe they've identified a threat beyond that in terms of low water level.
>> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Banovich.
>> Thank you very much, Chair Redmond, and thanks uh Chris for uh for coming in this evening. I I think uh some of us uh both uh from council and uh um members of the homebuilders and and the media heard your presentation uh previously, the longer version at at at the homebuilders and thought it was uh good to have you come this evening. And part of it from my perspective is not only are you a a professional in this field, but uh your other job is as an elected official. So you understand I think um in in a unique way the the the challenges that we're all trying to balance uh in dealing with this issue. I guess um my my question to you well two questions. The the first one would be in terms of um the part that you omitted from the presentation today. Um which was getting into the issue of the the aquifers and and so on. Um, is there some additional information that that you think would be helpful for us to consider um in the context of this this broader issue and um sort of the the mid to longer term um around next steps that we should be considering.
>> Uh thanks you chair and it yes just so every everybody is aware I I am the mayor of the 239th largest municipality in Ontario Township of Amaran in Duffren County. Um uh but uh with respect to the question um in having subsequent conversations at the staff level with with Jeff Rose, I I feel like Jeff has a good handle on uh on what needs to be done uh in terms of exploration and further advancement of the the water system sort of on the the longer term.
My understanding and when staff gets their chance they can correct me is that they're they are undertaking sort of a an optimization program to see how they can can alter water takings to sort of try and improve the the low water taking.
um you know everything that I've highlighted in terms of where to explore uh down the road like longerterm solutions uh staff is aware and it and they're considering it. Um so I don't know that there's anything additional that that I can add at this time.
>> Okay. Thank you for that. Um the the other question then um is you've no doubt seen the the list of of capital projects and so on that um that we we're embarking on um and that uh you know some of which uh are under construction as we speak um in terms of uh the the the storage tanks and and so on which are are being constructed in Cambridge.
Um, but when you look at that when you look at that list and look at your sort of analysis of of some of the things that you spoke of, including um, you know, other test wells and so on that you've been involved with over the years. Are there any other specific things that you think um that you h that you haven't spoke of yet that we should be looking at um as a as a council and as a as uh as a service provider? I think that uh you know an in-depth review of of the past work that's been done would be helpful because you know 20 years ago when we were doing test uh exploration programs um test wells that what produced what we would have considered then on the lower side of you know 10 L per second um might be viable solutions now. So, I don't want to say that staff hasn't done that, but I think it it warrants a a very detailed uh review. Um, there are some wells that haven't been used, one in particular that hasn't been used for many years that there's the potential that it it uh it could be used. There's risks associated with it, but it is uh currently included in the source protection plan. It's it's simply just offline. Uh, so stuff like that. And then I think uh one item that I believe has already been looked at is is twinning of the wells where you add a second well at the same location simply for for redundancy. So if the prime well goes fails for whatever reason, you have a standby ready to go. And that helps increase some of the redundancy and the the resiliency and is one item that uh can potentially happen a lot quicker than a new production well at a completely new site which has to go through the EA process and and all the source water protection stuff. So those are what I would suggest.
>> Okay. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, Council James.
>> Thank you, Chair and Chris. Thank you for coming in and and speaking with us and and sharing your presentation again.
I had the opportunity to be at the homebuilders lunchon a few weeks ago now and and hear the presentation. One of the things that has come come up here and I believe you mentioned this at the homebuilders was around the data and I'm just wondering um you know is there specific data that you know you feel should you know could help in and be kind of um um relayed to you or I just I just recall that you you'd mentioned the data and releasing some data. So I just want you to speak to that if you can. I think that staff has has followed up and provided uh pretty much everything that we've requested since. Uh so that's that's been very appreciated. I think um you know one thing that that I don't have a clear understanding of which goes back to councelor Salonin's uh question about the the extent of the low the low water um uh concern and that's not um I think that that is a uh that is is a sort of a heavier lift for me to ask staff to to provide that and that to factor into to why it hasn't been provided. They have given sort of the same explanation that I gave the counselor as to the the general area. Um but everything else has been um has since been provided fairly recently.
>> Excellent. Good. And just one followup and just I guess it's more of a subject subjective question for you. How complex is our water system? Especially knowing your expertise, how would you describe our complexities of the system? As I said, it's it's very complex, but but it's complex by design. There are a lot of benefits to the complexity.
So, I see that more as a benefit than as as a a drawback. Um, it was designed to have all of these different features with the recharge wells and the the surface water taking, the groundwater taking. So, you had different methods that you could rely on rather than than just having one system that doesn't have any interconnection. So I I think that it is very complex, probably one of the most complex in the province, but again I see that as a as a positive.
>> Councelor Wolf, >> uh through you, Madam Chair. Uh I too was at the presentation and thank you very much for it. Um uh I represent Cambridge, so I'm interested in your view about Middleton.
uh when you present it, you present it as if it would be sort of a simple solution, but how feasible is it to actually draw water from Middleton, which I understand is downhill from Mannheim. So, and with various wells and things, would that be very many pumps or >> this is where uh >> one?
>> So, so uh Steve Burns and I have been working on this together and the simple explanation is I work vertically and bring water to the surface and then Steve figures out how to to pump it to other locations. So, I would uh Steve's not here. It would be a question for him, but I would probably defer to staff. There are challenges whenever you need to pump uphill obviously but uh but that's that's the reason that that you have pumps and and pump stations. Well, you know, there's a cost benefit that needs that needs to be done to figure out if if that is insurmountable. And then there's also the the secondary disinfection uh thing that goes goes along with. So there's there's two factors and I I'm sure staff has looked at it, but um I wouldn't know how difficult and what the cost associated with that would be.
>> Okay. So that why that might be why it's not feasible because of the cost.
>> It could be. Y yeah. Okay. And I think that uh that it is on the work plan.
>> I um and I think we were s just just suggesting that it be advanced quicker, I believe. And when staff answers, they'll get it uh get it correctly, but I believe it is currently on the work plan.
>> Um just not uh this year. And from do in terms of the aquifers in in Cambridge, do you think we have that much extra water?
>> Uh well the the short answer is yes because you you have the both your permitted rates uh which are much higher than what you're actually using plus the you know I referenced the what staff has indicated as a sustainable rate. So that your actual demand in the Middleton system is far less than than both those.
So the short answer would be yes. But again, it's uh staff would probably answer that. I wouldn't be surprised if if uh if they're going to indicate that, you know, water levels have been dropping, but that is consistent everywhere. But they would they would have uh more info on that.
>> Yeah. And we're growing, too. So >> yes. Yes.
>> Chris, thank you very much. Thank you for bringing your informative presentation to us. Uh I don't think you were spared any of the hard questions and you were both informative and diplomatic. So thank you m very much.
This must feel like a bit of a busman's holiday because you're a politician and you're a hydro geologist to come and talk about it to us. So thank you. Well, it's h it's nice to have a captive audience to listen to me talk about water because uh it's not every day that uh like I don't get invited to a lot of dinner parties to talk about wells and water. So, this has been very nice.
Thank you for having me.
>> We'll put you on the list and we won't make you talk about water if we invite you to dinner. Um councelor McCabe, you had a question that was posed to staff.
Is there staff that would like to respond to uh the question?
So Pam Law is our director of water capacity issues. Pam, welcome aboard.
Great to see you again. And over to you.
>> Thank you. And through you, the chair. I believe uh councelor McCabe, your question was whether or not staff were looking into all of the recommendations and the options that uh Chris Garretts brought forward. And so we had the opportunity to meet with him last week to go through um uh that list of additional solutions which weren't presented today and we can assure you that those are all being considered uh as part of our water supply strategy update. I will also want to clarify that um the project to transfer water from the Middleton service area into the Mannheim service area is being considered uh considered on the expedited list. It's listed as the Brier Dean pump station. So you will have seen that list presented to council earlier and you'll also see it um presented again in the context of the inter interim risk management framework which will be coming uh to you guys on June 3rd.
>> Uh thank you. Thank you for that. Sorry, could you just clarify um when so the the timeline for the the potential for expediting the work from Middleton to Mannheim? I didn't catch what you called it there, but what is is that is the potential timeline coming forward on June 3rd with the report around resiliency. Is that what you meant?
>> Yes. So, you will have been communicated previously that short list of prioritized projects for expedited um capital investments. Um and you'll have the final uh estimated dates for when those will be commissioned and integrated into the the water supply system um coming as part of the the report on June 3rd.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you very much for that information.
>> Uh Councelor Wolf, you want to ask a question of staff?
>> Uh through you, Madam Chair. Uh on one of the slides, they talked about um the the total required surplus capacity and that we were doing 20% over the total.
Are we doing 20% over the total or 20% over the daily average capacity?
>> Yeah, through you the chair. Um I think Chris was presenting that our previous methodology was 20% of the average day demand. The proposed methodology is that it is 20% of the total system capacity and this will allow for those planned and unplanned shutdowns of our facilities to allow them to be offline while still being able to uh operate and provide reliable drinking water.
>> Thank you, Councelor Salin. And >> thank you, Chair, but I believe councelor Fox was before me in the queue.
>> Thank you. Um, so, uh, while I was at the builder's thing and Chris's presentation, thank you again, Chris.
Um, I was told that there were eight capped wells because the water was not required by the region at that time, but the water was still good. Can somebody clarify that for me, please?
>> Excuse me. When are the questions going to end?
We we are going to deal with this presentation and um council has questions of staff and then we will get to the delegations. So we appreciate your continued patience. Uh so councelor >> well >> the name should have been asked later on at the end. So, >> so I'm gonna councelor Foxton, you were asking there are capped wells. Uh, that's your information that we didn't need. I don't >> and this media truth started exact staffed is that something we maybe have to come back to because I don't know that um I don't see recognition on water staff's face about what cap wells are.
So perhaps that's something we can take offline. this question uh through emails and Darby, you knew that and uh you also sent it to Ken Brothers and I've been waiting for a response for about a month >> and I haven't gotten it so that's why I brought it up here. Thank you.
>> Now we'll go to councelor Saladin.
>> Thank you through you chair. Um I just wanted clarification.
Um Mrs. law as you just said in your answer, the proposed um and I'm losing my words. I'm still gobsmacked by what just happened. Um so the proposed essentially equation that we're using um I was just a bit confused. I thought we had switched methodologies um slash I never thought it was proposed to council. I just thought that was the change. I'm not trying to catch you out.
I just want clarity for myself to understand what it was that you were actually referencing.
So through the chair um what Pam was saying is I think the presentation was referencing the 25 the 2015 uh numbers whereas we did make that change on the methodology back in December as an operational decision um after we um had those discussions with the ministry of the environment and that was to split uh the IUS into the two service areas to go with the average day demand and to have build in that 20% operational resiliency. I do want to say though um that I think we've mentioned it a few times that the interim risk management framework study that is going to be coming June 3rd is specifically looking at that 20% and and that will be part of what we have been working on for the last 3 months is to determine what level of risk and what operational thresholds we're willing to uh be able to operate under to allow development to continue.
So that 20% is actively and was actively being looked at and is factored into all of the data that went into that risk framework.
>> Great. Thank you for that clarity.
>> Councelor Going.
>> Uh thanks to you, chair. Uh question. We went on a tour of Laminar in Cambridge and one of the questions that I brought up was what can it uh disinfect and what can it clean? And the response that I got from the CEO was that there's not money there's not many chemicals or things that they cannot clean the water for. So my question to staff is are we looking at the Elmyra aquifer to see if that's a solution and putting a treatment there to to be able to add capacity because right now we are as as the commissioner said we have our eggs in one basket and I'm going to put that over to where Wilmont is carrying us at this point. I think we need to diversify and make sure that we're getting it from all across the region. Is this something that we're looking at doing?
So through the chair um we do have E10 on our list um our our list that we are considering and it's part of the water supply strategy update. Um and so um I was also at that presentation with you and I do know that those discussions happened around the the use of of the containers. Um that is a unique system.
Um it is a high level of flow. Uh we would have to look at the operational parameters. We would have to look at the legislative parameters, the environmental parameters, but I can assure you we are evaluating all options on the table including that one.
>> Okay. And then follow up to that, are we also looking at because I know there is some uh wastewater that potentially that system could use. Is that something that we're looking at to uh treat our wastewater to to be able to incorporate that as well? So I know what does happen and I'm not saying that's the best solution but is that are we looking if we're looking at all options is that another option that we're looking at.
>> So through the chair uh just if I could ask for clarification do you mean from our wastewater treatment plants or the waste byproducts of treatment of a water supply?
>> The wastewater treatment. Yes.
>> Uh not at this time. We have not evaluated that. We do have our wastewater um strategy underway as well.
Our long-term strategy. So, uh, all of those types of, um, ideas will be will be fleshed out through that pro that project as well.
>> Pun intended.
>> Thank you, >> Councelor Vermanovich.
>> Thanks. Uh, thanks very much. Um, and and so I just wanted to follow up on the question in regards to the um the old methodology versus the new one. And Michelle, you you indicated that's something that's going to come back on June the 3rd. I guess what's important for council to understand um it was stated that it was an operational decision at some point. Does council need to make a decision um to either adopt one or the other uh you know based on the the advice that um that we get from staff and and the inputs that we we get from the the community. Um because you know obviously if if it's a decision that council needs to make they need to balance as has been indicated the various um all of the various factors including risk factors um impact on impact on community impact on on jobs uh in the in the community and and livelihoods of of people not just in the construction sector but those whose earnings then end up you know uh supporting people in the grocery stores and in in you know all the other things that that people um you know spend their earnings on in terms of living in the community. So I'm just wondering ultimately is this a decision that council is going to need to make um or one that council should be making if we haven't thus far?
>> I'm going to look to Ken. Do you want to answer this?
uh to the chair. Uh riskbased assessment is going to consider all of those particular factors that will be coming back here on June 3rd for a discussion.
I think previously this was um uh a uh inter interpretation of the ability of staff to work within the MECP guidelines in terms of managing our system here, understanding um the different approach in terms of the separation of systems. Uh but certainly what you have before you now and coming forward will be a a full riskbased assessment that considers the economic uh impacts, the staff impacts, the um uh riskbased assessment looking at the resiliency factors uh across the full spectrum. So you have to stay tuned for the June 3rd and and you'll be looking at making a decision at that time.
>> Okay. And I'm just wondering that report when will it be available um publicly because we need to make sure that there's adequate time for people to read it, understand it and and if they choose delegate uh appropriately for it.
So when when is it intended that that one will be released?
>> So through the chair um I think we've mentioned we are working as fast as we possibly can. the consultant um sent out a draft and was waiting really quick turnaround time on the comments from municipal staff and and those on on the team. Uh it is being finalized right now. We are anticipating it'll be down to the wire for preparation right before um the agenda goes live. We're trying to get it done as quickly as possible, but we also have to do it do it right. So um it will be probably the last week of of May before we we see it. So, so like it'll be available a week ahead like normal or like I guess I'm just trying to make sure it's not something that gets dropped 48 hours before because I don't think that that's fair to the community.
>> So, it will it will um there it will you will receive it ahead of time. I don't know they can uh say right now, but we'll certainly let council know and it'll be on the website.
>> Okay. I I guess an update.
>> Okay. I I just I just want to reiterate what I what I just said and I would uh ask Mr. Batty and and and and and team to to take that under advisement. I think on something this major this significant the community is owed the ability to um to to read it to understand it and and because otherwise it'll be called into question and I think we as a region need to do better in that regard. So, Mr. Baddy, can you give us that assurance that we're going to work to to, you know, not only make it available 48 hours ahead of time?
>> Uh, yes. I I think 48 hours is not what we're aiming for. Uh, typically the reports are published about a week prior to, as Amy said, uh, we're we're doing our best to make sure that we can meet that timeline, but it will not be 48 hours before.
>> Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that.
>> Thank you, colleagues. I see no further questions and uh, thank you for weighing in. Um we're going to we have no petitions. So we're going to move on to delegations.
So uh there I will proceed as they're listed on the agenda and I would like to remind all delegations of some guidelines for participation. If you're attending in person, please proceed to the podium where you are called upon to speak. I'll note that you will now have a new accessible podium with the ability to be lowered and raised using the buttons on the right. And uh there is a button to turn the mic on. Um, if you're attending virtually, please turn your mic and camera on only when called upon.
Uh, you will have five minutes to speak.
If you registered before the deadline and three minutes if you registered after. When the light on the podium turns yellow, that means you have one minute remaining. And when the light turns red, that's means your time is up and we would ask you to sum up.
Additionally, some reminders. Um, if you conduct yourself in the following manners, it will result in immediate removal from the meeting. interrupting council staff or other delegations, derogatory statements about council staff or others, turning your camera on at an appropriate time, hate speech or defamatory comments. And one last reminder for delegations, please do not take offense if following your presentation, there are no questions from council. This is council's time to really listen and reflect upon the opinions and ideas shared with us from our community members. And a quick reminder to members in the audience, you're asked to maintain order. And this means do not address council without the permission of the chair. Do not interrupt anyone or disrupt the meeting with unreasonable noise or vocal expressions such as applause, booing, or cheering or displaying signs or posters.
So the first delegation is Team Hamindi uh employment next powered by Ciro.
Welcome to the podium. You have the floor and you have five minutes.
Good evening, Chair Redmond, members of council and staff. Thank you for the opportunity to speak about employment services in Wateroo region. Our region is growing rapidly with projections approaching 1 million residents within the next decade. This growth brings opportunity but also responsibility to ensure our workforce keeps pace. To succeed, we need a workforce that is skilled, inclusive, and adaptable.
Employment service providers play a key role in making this happen. They support job seekers and newcomers in in overcoming barriers, help people build the skills they need and assist employers in finding and retaining talent. Their impact is clear, connecting residents to meaningful employment, supporting businesses, and strengthening our economy. As water region grows, these services help ensure our workforce grows with it. Before highlighting the broader impact employment service providers are having across water region, I'd like to begin with a brief overview of who we are, the services we provide, and the role we play in supporting workforce development within our community. Next slide, please.
Employ next powered by Circle Canada delivers locally responsive outcomebased employment services for job seekers and employers across the region of Waterlue and Berry area. We're part of Ontario's integrated employment services uh delivery model and manage a portfolio of employment service providers within Ontario delivered locally through community-based employment service providers grounded in strong community involvement and partnership. And how we support our community is by providing access to personalized employment services, prepare and connect job seekers to meaningful employment and support employers and recruit and recruitment and support employers with recruitment and hiring needs. Next slide, please.
This is a map of the this is a map of all of our employment service providers within Kitchener, Waterlue, and Berry area. If you can proceed to the next slide, please.
This slide highlights all the employment service providers currently serving the region of Waterlue. Together, these organizations create a strong and connected service delivery network that ensures that ensures residents across our community can access the support they need to successfully enter and navigate the labor market. I am also pleased to share that we recently welcomed Reception House as a new employee next service provider. Their addition strengthens our regional network and expands our collective ability to support newcomers and other job seekers as they build meaningful pathways to employment here in Wateroo region. Next slide, please.
Now, I'm going to touch on some of the uh core services that our service providers offer. As you can see, there are job development and employer connections, uh career coaching and counseling, employment preparation, job placements and retention support. All services are free for job seekers as well as employers as it's funded by the uh province. Uh service highlights include um job fairs, hiring events, uh training certifications and financial incentives uh for job seekers and for employers, community initiatives, employer recognition events and specialized employment programs and workshops. Next slide, please.
some of the community events that we've done. Um we did a job fair in Cambridge which attracted over 400 job seekers from the region and over 45 employers and community partners. Um we also did one in the region um in Waterlue in which we brought in over 700 job seekers and over 30 employers and community members. So overall over 1100 people and well over 75 employers and community partners to support uh our community.
Next slide please.
Uh some of the partnerships that we have are with LANA local 183 get set which was formerly known as uh literacy and basic skills. Uh we are at the Cambridge public library uh twice a month and we're looking to expand this to Kitchener and as well as Waterlue. Uh we have a youth table to support uh organizations who are uh supporting youth. Uh we are partnering with employers to support their hiring needs.
were a member of the chamber and uh really uh endorsing the vision 1 million and also local and uh civic collaboration which I am part of a lot of community organizations. Uh next slide please.
Uh briefly just want to touch on the power centers from the ministry which supports local uh workers that have been laid off. So that's always available to support uh people who have been laid off. Next slide please.
So as I conclude uh I want to reinforce a key message. Uh employment services are essential to water region's economic and community success. They connect job seekers to meaningful work, help employers find talent and support inclusive, sustainable growth. With our region projected to approach 1 million residents in the next decade, the need for a coordinated and accessible employment system will only grow. Our success will depend on just not on just on economic growth, but on how effectively we connect people to uh opportunities. Employment service provider across the region are already doing this work every day, helping individuals overcome barriers, support newcomers and meet employer needs. As a final acts, I encourage continued collaboration with council and regional partners to ensure job seekers and employers are connected to these services early. Strengthening awareness and referrals will help more residents access the supports available. Once again, thank you for your time and your commitment to a strong inclusive workforce in Wateroo region.
Thank you so much for your presentation.
Uh we have a question. Councelor James.
>> Thank you through you, Chair. Thank you for coming in this evening. I just I have a couple questions. One is just to confirm you are a job agency.
>> No, we are the service system manager appointed by the ministry to manage all the employment service.
>> Oh, is your mic on? Can you just repeat?
Yeah.
>> Oh, sorry.
uh we are the service system manager appointed by the ministry uh to manage the employment services uh within region of water. So the map that I put up within um all the service providers that you saw YMCA so we are now managing um we are their SSM and managing their services.
>> Okay. So you had the region of waterlue on there. So >> um you're managing our service employment services.
>> Just employment services. Yes.
>> Okay. Okay. And how long have you been um operating?
>> Yeah, we've been uh doing this since 2019. However, within the region, we came here in 2024.
>> Okay. So, and you said you you manage the region's employment.
>> Employment services. Yes. We're also on the region's website. If you go there, you will see employ next powered by circle. Um we're also there as well.
>> Okay. I'd just be curious to know if that was a decision that came through council or if that was made via staff decision. And that's not for you to answer. That's that's for staff. Thank you.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Uh I think Commissioner Sweeney, you're online.
>> I am. Hi. Thank you. Um Councelor James.
Yes. So this is part of the um the employment services transformation that the min or the the ministry and the province launched um before the pandemic and the service system model um system has been put in place and so CIR was awarded uh the contract to be the service system manager much like the region holds that role for um housing and child care. uh Ciro holds it for employment Ontario services and the region of Waterlue remains an employment Ontario and EO uh provider and we work uh closely with CIRCO and uh have a really good working relationship uh in that in that work.
>> Okay, thank you for clarifying clarifying.
>> Okay, >> Tim, thank you. I see no other questions. Thank you for coming in and presenting.
>> Thank you very much.
So our next delegation is Grant Viggers from Kitchener. And Grant um you have five minutes to speak and you're joining joining us virtually.
So Grant Vickers, you're our next delegation. You have five minutes.
Yeah, it's in regards to the 89 pay hike increase. Is that being uh voted on tonight or No, I was led to believe that this was the meeting that that would be discussed in >> there. Um >> there is a notice of motion. If you want to speak to uh that issue, feel free.
>> Yeah. Okay. I'm going to um the I the 89% pay hike for the chairman or chair person uh is quite excessive.
Um and I'm pretty sure you've listened to Mike Farwell. you had one of the uh council people on uh speaking and her uh answer was it's only $5500.
And what I also gather because I've been in contact with that council person that this person has not gone a pay hike in 10 years. And if that's the case, why wait?
So, okay, I think my voice is a little loud and you probably can hear me. Um, why wait so long to ask for a pay hike?
Uh, I know when I worked at the hospital, when we were in bargaining, we would ask for 5% for over 3 years.
And like I said, my question is why do you wait so long for that pay hike? And that affects me, the pay hike. Um I pay we pay rent here. So that means the taxes of that goes up and it's not I'm on a fixed income income. I get a monthly income every month. I only get 2,600. And they don't say, "Mr. Vickers, what? We're going to give you a 89 pay height." No. And again, I I don't see the logic behind that. Now if you would have asked at a smaller increment all right but 89 I I don't think it should have been that should uh be even discussed. Um, you drive down Victoria Street and Weber Street, Kent City, people that don't have a job.
And yeah, I don't I just I totally disagree. I don't know if the five minutes is up. I can't see.
I don't know. Oh, a minute and 50 seconds left. Yeah, I just disagree.
And right now it sounds like I'm just going around in circles. So I don't want to go around in circles and repeat myself over and over. All right, then that's my time. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. Vickers. I have no questions. Uh the next delegation is Tom Woodcock, Rare Charitable Reserves, Research Reserves. And Tom, you're in person, so welcome to the podium. Feel free to move it up if you need to. And uh the floor is yours. And you have five minutes.
It is pretty cool.
That's as high as it goes. I'll I'll slow. Hi. Thank you everybody for uh allowing me to come and delegate here.
Um my name is Tom Woodcock. I'm the planning ecologist at the rare charitable research reserve uh which is a community uh nonprofit land trust uh which operates in the region of Waterl and Wellington County. I'd like to speak to um uh uh councelor Craig's motion regarding uh traffic speeding and safety in the the Shance Hill region which includes Fountain Street and the village of Blair which is where our administrative headquarters are located.
Um and our our land occupies a significant portion of uh of the space between West G and the village of Blair.
So it has a several kilometers about two and a half kilometers of Blair Road running through it.
So we uh we steward 11 properties in the region of water and Wellington County bringing our message uh our mission of conservation, research and education uh for the benefit of the environment and the community uh to the public. Our organization takes the responsibilities quite clearly. Um you see from from the map there um the Blair property is the first and flagship property of our organization. It serves the community uh several thousand members a year at least with free access to public trails, education programs for children, university research, community and food bank gardens, uh diverse volunteer opportunities, and a wide variety of events. Over the past 25 years, the community, donors, volunteers, researchers, and numerous other partners have collectively invested enormous effort and resources into ensuring these lands uh one of the largest green spaces in the region um remain in ecologically intact and protected in perpetuity.
Over this over this period, the regional government has become a strong conservation partner working with us uh providing and seeking support and information and also uh having a staff member uh seated on our actually two staff members, one retired one, one current uh sitting on our land securement advisory committee, the countryside line and the Greenland system. uh both laudable efforts which includes the environmentally sensitive landscape designation uh for the Blair Becktel Kricxton area which which covers uh a part of of of the area in the motion represents important leadership by the region.
Most of more than 80% of the region's land area currently devoted to human use. um protected lands which which underpin our efforts of course uh provide space for nature and biodiversity but also serve the public benefit and provide ecological services such as support of the water system which we've heard considerable uh amount tonight. The food system, nutrient and carbon management, flood water management uh and others.
traffic congestion and safety concerns um cannot be solved by creating additional road corridors or additional uh transportation development through protected habitat. Wild mortality on the stretch of Blair Road um that passes through our reserve already numbers in the hundreds if not thousands of individuals annually including snakes, turtles, amphibians, birds, and mammals large and small up to and including deer. Uh we'd be very willing to share data that we've collected over the years related to road mortality which may help inform and support traffic calming measures and mitigation strategies going forward. And we have um worked with both the region and the pro provincial regional staff and provincial staff in looking at road mortality issues um and wildlife mitigation measures um on our road systems.
As a donor supported conservation land trust, our lands are stewarded and protected protected on behalf of the public. Um we remain open to constructive conversations around measures that improve safety and reduce impacts associated with Blair Road itself, including through the village of Blair um where you may know is uh the roadway is very constricted.
There's meaningful opportunities to pursue traffic calming and mobility improvements that better address ecological protection, public safety, and community access. These could include measures uh such as lower and more appropriate speed limits, roundabouts designed to improve both pedestrian and wildlife crossings, improved uh pedestrian infrastructure, and enhanced public transit access, including the possibility of additional bus stops serving the area. for example, a roundabout uh located our our slit barn, our major educational center and events facility uh could be considered in addition to one near the Blair Village. And we believe that a broader trafficcoming strategy, including these measures, uh could make a big difference in putting the issues um brought forward in this motion to rest. Thank you very much, >> Tom. Thank you very much for coming in.
Uh you do have some questions. Councelor Foxton, >> thank you. and through your chair. Most of rare is in North Dumpries, but you're absolutely correct. Um, you can't get across the road most of the time. And uh, rare is on both sides of the road.
It's it's a mixed problem that through councelor Craig's motion, I think we will see or have to open our minds because the road is very narrow and if we took more land, we would be taking more of rare land to widen it and and there's a whole bunch of things we have to look at. Thank you for everything you do. I recognize the need. I go down that road and it's not a nice thing to go down, but we have a problem. And there's going to be housing units, big big development there as well on the Whistle Bay Road, which is which cooks up to you guys. So, yes, thank you for coming and thank you for what you do and hopefully we can come up with a solution.
>> Councelor Leot, >> thank you, Madam Chair. Good to see you again, Tom. Long, long time since I've seen you. I've been at this for 30 years on this on the rare. Um, do you see any of the wording you would like change? What What's your concern about the motion? Do you have concerns about it? Would there be some additional stuff or changes to the motion?
Um it's more of a more of a general um sort of offering ourselves to to work with with uh with council and with the the local municipalities on how these concerns which I mean I've only worked at I've worked at Rare for for coming up on 13 years now coming up on 12 years now and um you know leaving the wildlife mortality aside and the the noise and the dust and so forth um speed pedestri rian safety um the v the you know village of Blair I mean even if Blair Road were widened you can't widen it in the village so it would still be a bottleneck there um I mean there used there used to be an old lady that lived across the street um from our office and I used to watch in terror as she would try to cross the road to get her mail um with her walker uh if you tried to go out and ask you know tried to help her cross the road she'd yell at Um but um we did try to help her. Um but yeah, I mean e even in the village and never mind, you know, the the accidents and and the problems um on the larger road and Fountain Street as well. Um Fountain Street's a little less um difficult, but you know, we do have significant frontage um on Fountain Street and and wildlife crossing is a problem there, too. So, we're just looking to sort of um you know, o open ourselves for for discussions of solutions um as a as a owner of large property in the area.
>> So, it sounds to me like you don't want to happen like what happened to do with the pedestrian bridge across the river and the trail potential there when it had to be removed from the system. Okay.
Um a long time ago there was of course the issues with with additional bridges and roads you know through our property which is not public property and um bridges across the grand and then more recently um with West G wanting to build road you know the West G development and people discussing the building of roads um through our property to connect to Whistle Bear Road for example to make another route to the 401. Um, so we're we're hoping to head off the possibility of, you know, any sorts of additional transportation infrastructure being being targeted at, you know, the big empty space on the map that uh people see and say, why isn't there a road there?
>> I think it's good that you're being proactive. Thanks.
>> Thank you, >> Councelor Craig.
>> Well, thank you very much for coming in and I appreciate the offer in terms of cooperation and supporting, you know, what may possibly happen. Uh, I just want to reassure you. I did talk to Stephanie, the executive director, at length, assuring her that this is not a motion to compromise Rare or the river, okay, in any terms, but to look at concerns that the public is having, okay, with regards to traffic in the area. And I think you coming in tonight and in a supportive way of being proactive is appreciated. Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah. So Tom, before I let you sit down, I just have to comment that um this morning in Welssley, uh councelor Noak, councelor Verbanovich, councelor Gowing and I were at a reap uh tree planting launch and a big part of that were the seeds that were grown at rare. So it was a wonderful sort of circular um system and we were able to plant some trees in Welssley. I believe 9,000 is what they are going to do.
>> Wonderful. Councelor Noak offered to plant them all, but he was a little busy. But thank you very much for what you do for the broader community as well. And Madam Chair, if I may, just on a historical note with regards to Blair Road, if you travel down it and uh councelor Foxton will remember the the mayor at the time, I used to claim as uh the the the mayor of Cambridge that uh Rare was the crown jewel of Cambridge.
And the former mayor of North Dumpries had signs put up saying, "Welcome to North Dumpries." to prove the point that 90% was in North Dumprey. So just a historical note >> and that is the mere beauty of being a regional counselor serving on the regional council. We love every inch of the region. So thank you very much Tom.
>> Thank you.
>> Uh the next delegation is Samantha Lernout. Uh Samantha is from Citizens for Safe Groundwater Inc. Samantha's here in person.
Welcome.
You may have to lower the podium.
>> Uh, you have five minutes and the floor is yours.
There we go. Okay. Good evening, chair and counselors. I'm here tonight representing Citizens for Safe Groundwater and the 31 Wilmont families who have reported water issues in Wilmont and those who no longer have reliable access to water.
So the map I don't think you have to those are those are Dr. Hugh Simpson's slides. There was a map that I shared uh that shows you'll see some yellow dots and purple squares.
I'll just describe while she's getting it up. The yellow dots represent the families that have reported well interference or water issues.
Um the red pin in the middle is the Wilmont Center wellfield.
It's hard to see. Um and the purple squares are the are the moni is the monitoring program that the region has.
So the monitoring wells. Um so I want to start with a simple question.
Does a rural resident in Wilmont have the same right to clean secure drinking water as someone in an urban center? This is water that came out of my water heater after a slug of orange and black coffee filters came through after a 15-minute total loss of water. Um, right now the honest answer is no. Rural Wilmont should have the same level of water security as the cities this region continues to grow.
That growth cannot come at the expense of your rural neighbors.
This is also, sorry, um, rural Wilmont should have the same level. Sorry I said that. This is also about trust and accountability. For over 50 years, Wilmont has been a good neighbor, supplying the groundwater that enables the region's growth. That relationship was built upon a promise that municip that municipal pumping would not come at the expense of private wells. Last month, by removing the 1980 Wilmont water policy, that promise and the safety net was taken away. Today, we are facing a real and escalating crisis.
Residents are reporting wells going dry for days or weeks, pressure drops and sediment filled water, seniors hauling water into their homes, family gatherings canled or planned at motel due to lack of water, geothermal heating failing in the de in the debt of winter.
residents limited to water for dishes and flushing toilets. This is not theoretical. It is happening now. This is not about inconvenience. This is about dignity, health, and the basic ability to live in your own home. And the current process is failing those residents. Instead of transparent investigation, families are facing a system that disallows claims unless they first replace equipment at their own cost. withholds municipal pumping data at the time and the the interference occurs. Delayed AC delays access to well inspection findings until after the appeal begins. Issues denial letters without even collecting baseline data like static water levels. At the same time, the region is the operator, the investigator and the decision maker.
That is not an impartial process. It is a structural conflict of interest.
We have also seen this before in Wilmont. In the 1970s, municipal pumping at wells K50 to K52, the Wilmont Center Wellfield, widespread interference. That is exactly why the 1980 policy was created to prevent this from happening again. Yet in 2019, pumping near the Wilmont Center wellfield was increased without proactive collecting of baseline data from nearby private wells. Today we are approaching 30 actually sorry we're over inter 30 interference reports in this same area. 30 one failing well one failing well might be mechanical 30 wells failing in the same zone is not a coincidence. It is a consi it is consistent with aquafer drawd down and despite this increased pumping is still being pursued while these cases remain unresolved.
This is not precautionary.
This is risk being pushed onto residents.
We are not asking for special treatment.
We are asking for equal water security and fair transparent process. Mayor Salin will be bringing forward a motion to restore an independent well interference appeal committee. Council must support this and it must include the following. I I provided um our our asks in a one-page document. Hopefully council received that. Um number one, restore an independent committee with external experts external experts to remove conflict of interest. The rural will the rural counselor should be a part of that committee.
Two, shift the burden of proof. The region must demonstrate its pumping is not the cause before denying claims.
Three, implement a dynamic compensation area.
Right now, it's considered a historic compensation area, but protection boundaries must expand based on actual draw down, not outdated maps. Four, immediate data freeze and independent audit, halt the denial letters, and conduct a third-party review of the wellfield.
Five, full transparency and real-time monitoring. Make all pumping data, well data, and monitoring fully public. and most importantly halt any further increases in pumping at the Wilmont Center wellfield until all existing interference cases are resolved and stable water conditions are restored. Counselors groundwater is shared is a shared finite resource. You cannot sustainably grow cities by drying out the rural communities that sustain them. Tonight you may have an opportunity to Tonight you do have an opportunity to restore fairness, rebuild trust, and ensure that rural residents are not left behind. Please support the reinstatement of an independent resident centered well-inference committee. And please follow our our five serious asks.
Thank you.
>> Thanks, Samantha. Um, you had a little trouble with the slides, so I let you go over just a little bit. Um, Councelor Salin, >> thank you through you, Chair. Um, I will pose it as a question, I suppose.
Um, may I thank you, Samantha, for coming tonight as well as um for all of the work that you're doing in our community. I know it's a lot of um digging and information finding and it certainly helped uh make both um my recommendation tonight to council um more informed and absolutely your advocacy for our community is certainly helping to try and get um secure water supply. So I appreciate the work that you're doing.
>> Thank you Council Ging.
>> Uh thanks to you chair, thanks Sam for coming in. Um I do have a question. Um you mentioned what you are experiencing but can and I know that you are here on behalf of the others in Wilmont itself.
Can you tell me what the community is experiencing? I know you mentioned like I said your your own issues but what other things are is the community experiencing right now?
>> Yes. Um well Martha Bricker is here. Um would it through the chair would she she's the she's the f she was the first resident to report to the region. So she is the furthest through the 2015 policy procedures through the chair. Could she share briefly what her experience has been? So it's directly from her, not hearsay.
>> Well, you you registered as a single delegation. Maybe councelor Gowing can talk to her offline.
>> Sure.
>> I can I can summarize. I've got a ride with Martha today, so I can tell. But through through Martha um and Dave Bricker, they have um they they reported their incident two months ago, >> March. They had their appeal. So they they got a decision um for an offer of $4,000 to sign a waiver and not bring forward any further issues essentially in a nutshell. And then she had her appeal meeting with uh Commissioner Brothers about five weeks ago and was told she would have a response in a week, two weeks. Um she followed up, but he was on holidays and said he would get back to her, but she hasn't received anything.
No emergency water. Um she's had company come from New Finland that they've stayed in hotels because she will run out of water.
>> Council Ging.
>> Okay. Yeah, I just more if if you can go I know those are two specifics, but is there a broader experience that that the community itself is experiencing?
>> Uh well, generally so that so that's one instance. Another instant um the report when the welltech came out um attribute it to well you'll hear more I won't go get into that one but a generally we're feeling like we're a nuisance and we're neglected and our and our we're not and it's a real slap in the face when we hear that the region is looking for more water from Wilmont Center well fields while there are what I'm aware of is 30 active interference reports. Okay. That's that's what I was looking for. Yeah. Is how the feeling is.
>> It's quite a terrible feeling when we hear something like that.
>> Councelor McCabe, >> thanks uh uh through chair. Thanks for um thanks for coming in tonight and I know you you've sent us information in the past and I appreciate uh appreciate anybody who gets involved with uh following issues at at local government.
So, thanks very much for that. I'm just curious if you could um provide some explanation or rationale and help me with this because I I certainly don't have a problem with the well interference committee and I agree with you when you said it should be independent and expert members on there.
Um, but then I'm curious about where um having elected officials on there where that would fit in because that's the part that I'm really struggling with like if it really is to be independent and and have expert advice to provide recommendations around what's happening because you know you were you I'm sure you've realized like how complex and certainly there's lots of stuff we've been learning. I kind of joke that I'm taking an engineering degree in water over the past six months, but there's a lot that we're learning as lay people, right? So, I I do worry what adding um elected officials into a mix like that and and what that would do. So, can you just provide your your ex your rationale for that?
>> So, it's not my rationale, it's Dr. Hugh Simpson's rationale. So, Dr. Hugh Simpson was an employee of the region.
He he was he's a he was a hydro geologist for the region and he was um he worked for the region at the time that the well interference committee was in place and I have sent so he had rep he um supplied comments for the motion and his number one comment I'll just read it the composition of the reinstatement well interference committee should focus on township representation example the four mayor the four township mayors to ensure that the committee foc focus is on mitigating impacts of region water taking on private water supplies The urban counselors do not appear to have knowledge or understanding of how critical a private water supply is for a real rural farm, home or business.
You might take that as I'm sorry, but um external members such as academics and other technical experts should have an advisory role and not have voting rights.
>> Yeah, >> that's that's the right I'm I'm going by expert. But I'm just what would I guess you I assume from what you're I assume that you agree with that.
>> I agree with that based on his experience with the well interference committee. I wouldn't say I have knowledge to to say that based on the council chambers I'm looking at right now, but I would say that based on his experience, >> okay, >> with the with the well interference committee.
>> I mean, I can tell you um I do get a little bit of umbrage with that. I'm I'm live in the rural area now, but or sorry, in an urban area, but I I I >> grew up formative years, we're in we're in a rural area and we're not we're not debating the delegation.
>> I'm not debating her. I'm just >> No, I totally respect I respect that.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. Um and thank you Samantha for their questions. Thank you for coming in.
>> Thank you.
>> Uh the next delegation is Michael Friend from Ottawa. Um, Michael, you're joining us virtually and you have five minutes.
>> Okay. Uh, can you hear me? I'm on a internet connection. That's not not the highest bandwidth. So, can you hear me?
And and I'll keep my video off. You quality will be better.
>> Michael, we can hear you.
>> Okay, good. Thanks. Um I just wanted to put some comments uh out looking at looking at the reports uh produced and looking at the history of it. I've also been involved in uh past speaking. I spoke on April 8th. Uh you might have also seen that I was uh my name appeared in a couple uh articles in the Wley region record as well. Um I've been involved to helping out the citizens for safe groundwater for a while now. Um I've also been involved in other water issues. I'm a hydro geologist myself as well as civil engineer. Um the comment I think it's a great idea to put the um the uh the reinstate the well interference committee and I I agree fully with the comments that uh um that have been made earlier on that uh the well interference committee I'm I was surprised it was disbanded uh back I think in 2015 or something. It it really it does need it should never have been disbanded. Um but unfortunately you know we can't turn back the clock. So next best thing is to you know to reinstate it. Um and as I mentioned before the the region should have reinstated that well interference committee before cancing the 1980 policy on April 8th. Um and you know it would also have been a really good idea if the region would have solved all the well problems before discussing abandoning the 1980 Wilmont policy and and this is a point that I made uh actually a comment even appeared in an article in the record that I had made there as well. It was also I made it earlier too. Um but anyway, this just looking back so you know tonight is an opportunity to reinstate that well interference committee and you know to fix the past mistakes that were made and you know we all make mistakes uh but you know we can also fix them too. Um the other comment I think that needs to be brought in brought up is the you know the there needs to be a holistic third party review done of all the the well interference complaints together um instead of just merely peace meal um you know investigating wells individually um you know I mean there is a time and a place for that but you need to look at everything in the in the whole picture and this comments ties back to the earlier comments that multiple people have made um that you know it's not a coincidence idence that all the wells are having issues together. Um, you know, some of them are deeper wells and they're having issues and, you know, we know that it's it's known from first year hydro geology, you know, when you have a well that's being drawn down a lot, you know, and it's getting really close to being, you know, to where the pump is, you tend to get issues of, you know, mobilization of sediment. And that that's a red flag uh for a number of reasons. And you don't have to be a well technician to be familiar with that. And uh another thing also I think the the third party review should entail having monitoring of the regional of the indiv the residential wells and they should really be equipped with the same caliber instrumentation and monitoring that the regional wells have and uh you know that really should be done something to show quantitatively what the regional well the private wells are and that can you can put a monitor in the private well directly. Um, obviously you're going to get artifacting from when the pump starts up, but you'll be able to see what it stabilizes at you overnight when there's no water being drawn. And you can even put a a water meter on the actual line to the house to actually show this is how much water the house uses, you know, if you want to see that.
Um, and the well interference committee really and and this comment has also been made earlier. Um, you know, the wild interference committee really should be for all the not just the Wilmont Center, not just K50, K51, K52.
It really should be for the whole region. Um you know the the rural areas um because you know we need to be sure we prevent another shingletown type disaster from recurring. Shingletown being same as Wilmont Center. Um you know and history otherwise will repeat itself. So you know I I understand the reach needs more water you know so those are valid. I mean the region's growing.
I understand all that. Um and of course you know that's also why repairing the Manheim water treatment plant makes sense. you know the discussion earlier about you know bringing in water from from um you know the Cambridge Middleton wellfield and you know harmonizing the coronation system >> okay I'm almost done um and then you know so those are good things but you know the really the monitoring wells should be done you know proactively you know with the same diligence of municipal wells and then you know looking at the long-term time frame um you know this this dynamic compensation needs to match, you know, a change in shape. New walls are going to be drilled by the region in the future at some point. There's going to be pumping rates might increase. You know, maybe new gravel pits, new agricultural irrigation wells, precipitation changes, more urban growth, you know, that and the urban growth is expanding over the rural areas and the recharge areas. All these things are tying together. So, the dynamic compensation areas need to be able to reflect that. Um, so yeah, I'd be happy to answer any any uh any questions.
Michael, thank you very much for delegating. I see no questions, so uh thank you for joining us and uh providing us with your uh comments and thoughts. The next delegation is Mo Elash from Petersburg and I believe Mo is here in person.
Welcome to the podium and you have three minutes.
Good evening, um, Chair Redmond and members of the council. I'm in favor of reinstating the independent council appointed well interference committee. I do not support the current process of addressing well interference claims and appeals. The region's current investigation is no more than a spare, sorry, I'm a little nervous, more than a um superficial status check, ignores fundamental hydro um geo the data dep um despite the verified 67.2 2 ft drop in my well um of static water levels since 1970. The region um attributed it our losses of um water pressure, air bubbles, and cloudy water documented in our first well interference complaint to a mechanical failure of a pressure tank and um and a dated um iron filter.
This conclusion was directly counter um contradicted as you say by the independent well technician that we assigned to come and look at our um tank.
He said that it is once he drained it and recharged it that it worked properly.
As such, our well is fully functional and has no impactable mechanical issues.
The reason refused is to accept further um in interferences. Reports two and three um were dismissed until we replace our pressure tank. Once again, I quote, "Even though it works properly, um, we have recently submitted three additional well interference complaints about an um about an unexplained sputter watering coming from faucets inside our home dated over the pressure tank um and drained and recharged. It continues to hold pressure and function properly. the email that we received from um the region without an investigation and I quote without an investigation the well interference complaints four and five will um were documented and will stay in our file. If you experience a total loss of water, please contact our service well center.
As I explained, it's only when we lose full water. And I will quote that again.
It seems that the region does not feel it necessary to investigate the water issues since our well equipment is non is is to blame.
They have not accepted any responsibility nor proved it um from their excessive pumping. They are ignoring water um warning signals and will consider act um acting only at a loss.
>> Um I'll stop there. Sorry.
>> Thank you very much for coming in and councelor Salin has a question.
>> Sure.
>> Thank you very much Mo for coming in and for sharing your experience. I'm sorry to hear that that's what you've been going through. Um, I am curious over what time span have has your well been experienc that you noted already from 1970 of about 66 ft. Um, but the general sputtering issues and experiences that you guys have been going.
>> How long?
>> Yeah.
>> Oh, it's been 3 months.
>> Okay.
>> All right. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you very much, Mo. I see no further questions.
>> All right. Thank you.
Next delegation is Zachary Fowler from Waterlue. Zachary, you're here in person. You have three minutes and the podium is yours.
Can you hear me? I can empathize with the last delegates anxiety about public speaking. Um, okay. How do I start? Uh, government housing definitely like the unspoken solution to the affordability crisis. Um unfortunately uh the region's housing at 60 Paulander has not been like a shining example of housing management in in this instance I will say. Um were y'all able to access any of the pictures that I had uh sent?
If not it's fair is very last minute.
Um, so I I've been I've been working with residents um at that location uh and basically they have been they they all have uh pretty substantial gardens in their in their yards. Um unfortunately all of those gardens are being removed from uh from their property by the region. Uh the removal has started today. Um the so the the staff that I've been speaking to have uh made points that they have um they had given lots of notice. This is actually been a two-year process. Um essentially two years ago they said that the garden the garden beds were posing an imminent threat to the structure of the parking garage. So much much of the uh development is the housing is above the parking garage and so they're on uh brick. Um but so the the garden beds are there and so their their claim is that water is seeping in and uh causing structural issues to the parking garage. I'm not an engineer. I'm not going to necessarily dispute that. Um residents did tell me that there were uh those issues existing prior to the gardens um and that the region had installed uh drainage um on the ceiling of the parking garage which we we did go look at. Um you can see water damage. The water damage is not near where the gardens are but you know water moves. Um but so uh speaking with the residents, they um largely what the sentiment is is like I want to keep my garden. I can't do anything about it. Um there was a a meeting with the residents yesterday and nobody showed up. And so the staff's claim was like nobody cares. Nobody showed up. Uh most of those people that live there are non-English-speaking refugees and immigrants. Um, and so they don't they don't know what the letters are about. Um, and I mean even looking at the demographic here, like the people that feel comfortable participating in government and the people that can actually be appointed to be in the government is a very specific kind of person and not usually uh people in those housing complex. Basically, um there there are a bunch of gardens that are not above the parking garage that are also slated for removal. Um despite the fact that they can cause no water damage to the parking garage way over here. Um I talked to uh Mina Gomez, the manager of the housing. Um she said it was cumbersome for the landscapers to uh mow around. If uh if you look at the um garden beds, they are flat and smooth and against the people's fences. It it makes it easier to mow. It's a smaller section to mow. So that seems if not untrue, it seems like an issue maybe we can work on like resolving or thinking is valuable enough to protect this like very valuable resource to these people because it is one a a garden of subsistence for a lot of people. It's also like very culturally significant.
um like they're very growing very specific things. Um and in in the pictures that I sent, one of them was uh there are there are a lot of railings at that housing that have fully just um rusted off of where they're bolted into the concrete, making it incredibly dangerous to use the stairs. And I would hope that that is maybe more of an imminent threat than gardens. But sorry, sorry. So Zachary, yeah, you infused such energy and passion in this at a point in the um evening in a meeting where people can feel lagging. So thank you very much for your energy, for your interest, and it's engendered a whole bunch of questions. So I'll go to councelor Rodriguez.
>> Thanks, Zach, for coming in um and on short notice. Thanks for being here um and also for reaching out o over the last couple weeks about this. And I I know um we've had a chance to connect on this and engage with staff on this and I hope this conversation can continue. I know uh um Commissioner Sweeny's uh squares on now um and uh his team's aware of this and I think happy to continue this conversation, meet on site um and see what um and and see what we can do to um both protect and address some of those safety uh concerns that have been identified, the the engineering ones um and and see what path forward we can find for some of the ones that uh maybe less. And I I just want to note and say thanks to staff that they did hold off on removing some of the non-structural ones I think um or are holding off on that work um so that we can continue those types of conversations um from here. So I appreciate being here because I think this is such a important thing for us to get get right.
>> Um I will say just the the them not removing the ones that are not structural issues. Um, Mina Gomez uh explicitly said, "No, we are removing the ones uh that are not um on the parking garage again because the landscape issues." Um >> I think the we'll continue the conversation from here and and and see what's uh see what's possible. So, >> I'm going to save Commissioner Sweeney till the end and um so Peter, I'll come back to you. Um Council Rodriguez, that's it. Councelor Hunick.
>> Uh hi Zach. Thank you, chair. Hi, Zachary. Thank you for coming today.
Thank you for advocating for gardens and communities. I was under the impression that staff were following up with you and the rest of the members of the community. So, I'm glad that Commissioner Sweeney is here with us now. Um, so the the issues that you were provided, so the one is the parking garage, two is the the lawnmowing um concern, and were there were there other issues with the gardens that you're aware of? Um so I I basically I I have a lot of fragmented information. Again this this has been uh kind of multiple years. Um but I guess what what the tenants and neighbors have felt is that uh the the reason for removal of the gardens uh kind of changes. Um they yeah they it's it's been hard for them to trust what the region regional staff is saying because it seems inconsistent. Um but yeah no basically what it is now the justifications are the uh that the planters are creating water damage and that um they are bothersome for the landscaping.
>> I'm sorry that you feel that the information that you've received is pregnant then we can definitely work to clarify that with you. Um certainly CC regional counselors if you would like to as as you communicate with staff on this. Thanks >> councelor McCain.
>> Thank you um and through you chair.
Thanks for coming in tonight, Zachary. I just wanted to double check. Are you talking about Paul just Paulander driver? Are you also concern because concerned about um some housing or gardens at um in Waterlue?
>> Uh just just Paul and Dave.
>> Okay. Okay. because I'd also I had heard through the local counselor about some concerns around that and I guess I'll look to com commissioner Sweeney because we had also heard of something similar happening at some regional housing in Waterlue but like there hadn't been any orders issued by the city. They had indicated that there was orders from the city but okay I just wanted to clarify if you were just talking about about Kitchener and maybe Commissioner Sweeney you can just clarify that there's nothing like this happening in Waterlue because the message that I got back through our counselor was that there had initially been some kind of an order like this that went out and then it got retracted. So thanks for clarifying what's going on.
>> Councelor Foxton.
>> Uh thank you and through you chair. Um Zachary what a great advocate you are.
Uh I think I'm not sure but this has happened a few years back where they had water in their garage as well and they did the um the fix but >> in today's society we h we um are encouraging people to grow their food and things because things are just too costly. So I think if you could work with staff and find a way that it would work for everybody would be really really great. And thank you for coming.
You made my night.
Councelor Evanovich.
>> Well, thank you very much u Madame Chair and thank you Zachary for uh for for coming in. Um Madame Chair, I guess my question will would be more for for staff than than Zachary.
>> We'll come back to you then.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Councor James.
>> Thank you. Uh Zachary, thanks for coming in. Um how long have you been in in in working within the the area of Paulander?
Um it's a broad question like when I was when I was a kid I spent a lot of time there um through the non my nonprofit uh we have lots of those neighbors coming with us actually the person that has kind of uh helped like kind of um was the contact point for me was somebody that used our services and volunteered with us um and they they initially pioneered the the garden program at there and then got the region involved in uh supporting those extra um planters as Okay. So, I I I want to thank you for the work that you're doing and for coming in here and also let you know that um you know that's that's an area I grew up in. So, anything is possible especially for those new immigrants and newcomers. Okay. So, just remember that uh we we have a story and and you know there there's endless possibilities especially um in within the neighborhood that you you work in and and care about.
So, I'm going to go back to Council Veranovich before we go to Commissioner Sweeney. Did you have a specific question you want to ask Mr. Sweeney?
>> Thank you. Um, so Mr. Mr. Sweeney, I'm wondering if you can um I guess just reflect on on um what Mr. Fowler has come forward um with today. I know that uh in all of our communities um both the the area municipalities have been very encouraging of community garden programs. Um we know community gardens I mean community gardens are are important ways of neighborhoods coming together.
Uh the same would be true in in our in our housing. Um, you know, these are homes of of people who who live there and they want to beautify their neighborhoods. Um, how did we get here and and how do we find a solution that uh works for uh for Mr. Fowler and and the residents of of Paulander Drive?
>> Um, thank you. Thank you, counselor, and thank you to the to the delegate. I I'm not sure if the delegate is a is a resident um of the um location on Polander or not. Uh but that notwithstanding, so this came to my attention just last week uh through councelor Rodriguez. Um, I can assure you that in some communication today, Ryan has Ryan Pediper, our director of housing, has committed that um any um uh actions around uh gardens that are not structural in nature um are not uh are not being considered at this time. And I guess I also want to say community gardens are a big part of our um portfolio. uh we know how important they are and we are very supportive of community gardens and continuing uh to support and to have community gardens where we can. Um my understanding is that there were some structural uh issues with uh some of these particular gardens uh relative to the parking garage. Um I I think what I would say um uh I'm in council's hands, but I' I'd like the opportunity to uh to connect with the the delegate directly uh with uh with uh our staff. um feels like we've got some communication uh breakdown along the way and um and again happy to uh to take this take this away and uh and ensure that we're doing everything we can to continue to support community gardens and also making sure that we're taking care of our our physical assets as well and um so if if council's uh okay with that approach um happy to uh to connect with the delegate uh in the coming days.
>> Yeah. No, well certainly I' I'd be okay with that. I can't speak for our other colleagues. um you know when I when I look at the pictures I would just say that you know recognizing yes there is in some spaces um parking that's you know nearby but all of these pictures at least that are here seem pretty reasonable in terms of you know what's what's being proposed or what's what's there and and I would hope that we can um either allow this to stay the way it is or or directify it in a that um you know I I can't imagine that that the uh the two structures can't coexist.
>> So Mr. Fowler, I'm assuming that clerks would have your contact numbers and and um you could connect with uh Commissioner Sweeney.
>> Did you want to intervene?
>> Oh, I I guess just a couple things. Um, the pictures I took were only of the gardens that weren't on the parking structure, just as a caveat there. Um, and yeah, I just want I do want to with with the the pictures, I do want to reiterate the fact that the the it's a bit of a separate issue, but the the railings that are there that have rotted off of their um stays. It's incredibly dangerous. I almost took a 10-ft fall onto concrete because the railing just when you put any weight on it, you drop.
And I think that's an im like much more immediate than removing gardens.
>> Not to put my opinion, but >> so thank you very much for coming in. I see no further questions and staff will connect with you and follow up.
>> Thank you.
>> That is the end of our delegations.
Colleagues, uh I now would entertain a motion to approve the minutes of previous meetings and they're listed 9.1 through 9.11. Moved by councelor Saladin, seconded by councelor Foxton.
Please use your escribe to vote.
colleagues that is carried. Uh we received a information package electronically uh with correspondence through the week.
Uh the next reports are finance reports.
I would ask uh for a mover and a seconder to move uh the finance reports which are being received for information and approved. Moved by councelor Harris, seconded by councelor McCabe. Please use your escribe to vote.
Colleagues, that is carried. Uh, the next group of committee reports is community health and services summary. I need a mover and a seconder. And councelor James, you're asking for 11.2.4 to be >> uh Yeah, through you, Chair. Uh, 11.2.4.
It's the item regarding the CCTV cameras. just to I want to speak to that if I can and and to vote on it separately.
It's in the SID committee.
So, we're not there yet.
So, committee reports 11.2.1, a mover and a seconder. This is for uh the summary of community and health services from May 5th. Moved by councelor Hunic, seconded by councelor Wolf. Please use your escribe to vote.
And this is funding for the operating budget for children's services.
Colleagues, that is carried. The next vote is 11.2.2 administration and finance committee summary May 5th.
There are two recommendations with sub clauses. Moved by councelor James, seconded by councelor Rodriguez. Please use your escribe to vote.
And now u a vote to approve the summary um on the agenda from closed meeting of May 5th. Moved by councelor Foxton, seconded by councelor Rodriguez. Please use your escribe to vote.
So colleagues that is carried the next group of votes I'm going to ask for a mover and seconder but we will take 11.2.4 separately to vote on. So, a mover and a seconder. Moved by councelor Salin, seconded by councelor Herb.
So, we're voting on everything except 11.2.4.
Please use your escribe to vote.
So colleagues that is carried. Um councelor James do you want to speak to 11.2.4?
>> Yeah thank you through you uh chair. I I wanted to take a minute to speak to this as I wasn't uh there for the discussion at the last committee meeting uh just around the CCTV cameras and um their installation. I do want to thank uh Deputy uh Jen Davis for having a conversation with me about this. I know you're here tonight. Uh, one of my concerns around this, so there are multiple concerns when I think about the cameras that that will be installed is just around the accountability piece.
So, how we're making sure that um what is being, you know, what evidence is coming from from whatever is used for for these these cameras. uh there's an accountability um to be it uh the residents the police services board uh I did speak with uh deputy Davis about this and uh I don't know is it possible for for uh deputy Davis to just answer that question? I think it's a valuable one since he's in the audience.
>> Deputy Davis, would you like to approach the podium? This is somewhat unusual, but I do know that councelor James was not here for the discussion in the debate.
>> Thank you, Chair Redmond, and thank you for the question, Councelor James. I appreciate it. Um, we have a number of accountab account accountability measures that have put in been put in place for for this um project. First and foremost, uh we consulted with the information and privacy commissioner right from the beginning in drafting our uh privacy impact assessment for this.
Um we've also developed a uh board policy um that the police services board has. Um we have a procedure that is in line with board policy which um basically outlines how the camera locations are selected. uh that it's grounded in evidence um that it is based on three years of prior data to help us make those selections. Um we have a procedure that also outlines the training that a uh select group of individuals working for the police agency um must undergo before they can actually uh utilize the system and access video and upload video to our digital evidence management system for investigations.
Um we have uh auditing capabilities uh within the program as well. Um we have um there's also uh safeguards that are part of the actual technology itself uh including um privacy breaks uh so that we can black out um certain things so that we're not recording um public or private spaces for instance. Uh so those are a number of them. We also plan to take the same approach that we do with um our uh current racebased data strategy. Um so what we're doing on how we record um our search procedures, how we record uh information on our intelligence notes when we're engaging and interacting with the public, we we intend to use that same framework in evaluating um the data that we use for this purpose as well. Uh and then we will report uh quarterly to the police services board on usage of the cameras.
Um we want to do our um utmost to share uh the stories the successes that we have with this with the public. Um the camera locations will all be made uh uh public as well and be posted on our website. Uh so we have we have taken every measure possible to ensure that uh there is accountability that there is transparency that it's grounded in data um and that we are um um managing that that balance of providing public safety and also respecting privacy rights of of our community. Okay, thank you. Um, thank you, uh, Deputy Davis. So, um, just in terms of this, I know there's discussion about kind of the slippery slope with information and all of that, and I just I want this on record to flag because with CCTV cameras, there has been evidence of bias and in terms of um, you know, misidentifying individuals, especially when we look at racialized individuals as well. It is something that is is consistent.
um when I looked up kind of, you know, trends with CTV cameras and and bias there. So, I just I want that really fra um flagged because there are communities that are worried about that and and how it turns into kind of over surveilling.
And I know you'll post where the locations are. That being said, um I know there is also the the notion of our information and people having access to information. And so one of the things I'm very conscious of is we are now I mean Google has access to all of our information and we're not questioning things like that. There are Facebook groups where people are taking pictures of people's faces. There are license plates. Um what I can support is around the accountability that you have implemented and that human uh um rights approach and that databased approach. I would like to see um when it comes back to reporting and I know um um uh the government relations uh David Mullik provides us with uh council communications I would love to see that incorporated as well um if it's quarterly or what have you so that we are aware and I know the police services board reps will will be mo well you'll get they'll get the updates but I think this is critical and I know there are communities that are are worried about this but I also know there are cameras that exist now So, um, I just wanted to say that I will support this, but I do want that on record that, you know, there is things to be mindful of and and communities are are watching when it comes comes to this. Okay.
>> Councelor Salin, >> thank you through your chair. Um, I was just wondering if we could um I guess I would like to bring forward an amendment um just in wording on this particular um section. I'm supportive of votes there.
I just wanted to add in to reflect what we had discussed in um committee that no installation will occur on regional infrastructure without the appropriate area municipality having an agreement existing with WRPS. Um that was something I know both for myself and others um was important and I know WRPS already said that was their intent. I really just want it explicitly reflected. Um so I would move for that amendment.
>> Is there a second?
Yes, >> Councelor Hunick. Uh, Deputy Davis, do you want to comment? That is the understanding and that was the statement at the time.
>> Thank you, Chair Redmond. Uh, yes. Uh, that is explicitly laid out uh in the memorandum of understanding that we would sign with the region of Waterlue.
So, it's been moved and seconded and uh clerks are going to do their magic and they're going to add it to um or put the amendment up and then I'm going to seek unanimous consent to um amend this motion and then we'll vote on it.
So colleagues, we do not have unanimous consent. So the amendment has been moved and seconded and um clerks will put it up.
Deputy Davis, it's up to you if you want to stay there. You can sit down. Thank you.
So, the amendment to um the motion that we were going to vote on, but we're now going to vote on the amendment is in the form and contact satis. No, hang on.
and no CCTV cameras will be added on regional infrastructure without an agreement with the appropriate area municipality. So that is what we're voting on. It has been moved and seconded. We do not have unanimous consent. So please use your escribe to vote.
Colleagues, that is carried. We will now be uh voting on the amended motion which has been moved and seconded. The amendment passed. So, please use Eastcribe to vote.
Colleagues, that is carried. The next motion I am seeking is to approve the audit committee summary of May the 12th, 2026. And this has to do with our syncing fund financial statements and trust fund financial statements.
Moved by councelor Harris, seconded by councelor McCabe.
Do I have unanimous consent?
All right, that is carried.
Colleagues, the next agenda item is um from today's closed council summary, and it is that the regional municipality of Waterlue ratify the appointment of Linda Lucus and Dr. Sarah Maine to the Sunnyside Foundation Board for a term to expire June 2029 as outlined in a report dated May 20th, 2026.
Like I have a move by councelor um Wolf, seconded by councelor Herb. Please use your ecribe to vote.
So colleagues, escribe is getting tired at this time of night. It has been moved and seconded. Do I have unanimous consent? This is for the the closed item that we dealt with today, the two new uh Sunnyside Foundation board members. Do I have unanimous consent?
>> Yes. Thank you. Okay, that is carried.
Next agenda item is board of health update and I'll now call on Dr. Shulie Wong, medical officer of health to provide board of health update. Welcome.
>> Thank you, Chair Redmond, and good evening um members of council. Um tonight, I'd like to focus on vectorbor and animal born diseases. So as we move into the warmer months, Region of Waterlue Public Health is preparing for the seasonal recurrence of illnesses associated with mosquitoes and ticks as well as rabies exposures.
So Westnile virus uh spreads when a mosquito feeds on an infected bird and then bites a person. Region of Waterlue Public Health identifies mosquito breeding grounds, tests mosquitoes, and applies larvicide where mosquito larae are found in accordance with provincial requirements.
If spending time outdoors, residents can protect themselves from mosquito bites by wearing light color light colored clothing, long sleeves, pants, socks, and closed toe shoes. They can also use an insect repellent with DE or Iodin.
Public health is also preparing for tickborne disease activity including Lyme disease. Waterl region has been designated similar to much of southern Ontario as an established area uh under public health Ontario's surveillance uh map. So that just means that there are ticks that are here.
Lyme disease is an infect is an infection caused by bacteria carried by blacklegged ticks. The disease spreads when an infected tick bites a person.
Residents are reminded to check for ticks on your clothing after spending time outdoors and they can also visit the website eick.ca.
That's eick.ca CA for information about how to recognize a tick and to submit tick photos for identification.
Moving from insects to animals, I'd like to take a moment to talk about rabies.
So, rabies is a potentially fatal viral disease spread most commonly through the bite of an infected animal. When an infected animal's saliva comes into contact with a scratch, open wound, or the eyes, nose, or mouth. So to protect yourself, avoid contact with wild, stray, unfamiliar, sick, or injured animals, even if they appear friendly.
Assume that any bat you see has rabies, and ensure your dog or cat is vaccinated.
Residents should report animal bites, scratches, and bat exposures by either calling public health or reporting it online on our website through our animal bite reporting form. More information about Westnile virus, Lyme disease, and rabies can be found on our website at regionofwaterlue.ca, our new website, by the way. Uh, finally, I'd like to turn briefly to Havirus. So, as you may have heard recently in the news, a South American strain of ha virus, also known as the uh Andes virus was recently confirmed on the MV Hondius cruise ship.
There are no known contacts residing in Waterlue region.
Andy's virus is a henta virus but has many differences to the hent virus that we can see in Canada from time to time.
In Canada, cases of hentus are linked to deer mice and cause illness after people breathe in virus particles from rodent droppings, urine or nesting materials.
The Andes virus is carried by a different rodent species found in parts of Chile and Argentina.
Unlike most hentto viruses, the anti virus has been associated in rare cases with personto person persontoperson transmission.
When transmission has occurred, it has been associated with close and prolonged contact. So particularly among household members or intimate partners.
And that's it for today's update. I'd be happy to take any questions. Thank you.
So, Dr. Wong, I see no questions, but I do want to comment on the 25th anniversary of paramedics um being operated by the region under um your great leadership and that of Chief John Riches and uh several colleagues and I were able to join you to celebrate and I know there's some people still working who were working I think 25 years ago.
It was a wonderful celebration and truly um a testament to um the cooperation. Um I know the chief of police was there.
There were several um members from different fire uh departments there and it was just great to be with all the uh responders, first responders and to see um the cohesion. I don't know if you want to comment on that, but it was a great event.
>> Thank you so much for mentioning that, Chair Benman. And I'd like to say a very special thanks to this council who have been um very supportive of of the service um and uh have allowed really um have allowed its metrics to um um be the best that they've ever been in our in our history. So thanks uh thanks again to uh to yourself, Chair Venman, all the members of of council for their support.
>> And now we have a question. Councelor Going, >> that's more of a question. I know Chief Riches today at the ceremony mentioned that there's an open house this weekend.
I don't know if you can share the details on that for the public.
>> Uh, >> if you have it.
>> Yeah, I'm going to get it. Uh, >> sorry.
>> 10 to 2.
>> 10 to 2.
>> Yes, 10 to 2. Thank you. At the uh >> headquarters in 1001A Herbs Road. Herbs Road. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
Thank you. You never can pass up a good chance for a PSA. Councelor Gowing. That was great. Um, other matters. Um, 12.1 is Ira Needles Boulevard resurfering resurfacing and I will now call on Metugy, Commissioner of Transport Transportation Services to introduce this report which was deferred from May 5th.
Thank >> Thank you, chair. Um so following council's direction we provided two new appendices to the report. The first one is uh the the proposed business case that compares uh two options. So the the the current um uh option that's recommended by staff which is about doing a a fullsome resurfacing now for 4.5 million or a continued uh patching over the next nine years which uh which would uh uh arrive at an estimated 6.88 eight $88 million of of patching. Uh the second appendix that was added was also an excerpt of the transportation capital program. So you can see what's uh what's in stock in the future. Uh so just as a quick summary for of of the business case that is um the recommendation really aligns with a an investment that helps to bridge the corridor to its planned full rehabilitation in 2035. I think at the at committee we had underlined some of the reasons behind the you know the the rapid aging at the seams between the initial boulevard and the and and the widened uh portions that have aged u uh more quickly than uh than expected. Uh so um in terms of of of funding so the uh the proposal is to fund this through the transportation capital reserve. Just a reminder that this is not this is not a reserve like the uh the tax stabilization reserve.
This is not a rainy day fund. This is the reserve that we constitute and replenish every year to be able to fund renewal projects without incurring debt debts on existing uh pieces of infrastructure. So it's funded annually.
So this year for example in 26 um about about 40% of the transportation uh budget is an allocation of a transfer from operating budget to capital which replenishes that reserve uh of slightly more than 30 more $30 million this year.
It is also supported by annual funding from the build Canada strong fund uh formerly known as the Canada community building fund. Um, and these funding sources help support the 10-year transportation capital program and align with the asset management plan and the objective of not incurring debt on on infrastructure renewal. Uh, current projections show that after this project is paid for and even if we spent the entire budget to the penny to the to the to the penny this year, uh, the reserve balance at the end of the year would be about 8.6 6 million and then would be replenished next year again to the level of 30 to $31 million to be able to continue the to fund these infrastructure renewal projects. Thank you.
>> Do I have a mover and a seconder to get it on the floor? Moved by councelor Rodriguez, seconded by councelor herb.
Uh discussion. Councelor Salinin.
>> Thank you through you, Chair. Uh thank you very much commissioner Gatsky to you and your staff for bringing back the additional information. Um, I guess I I understand what you're saying about the reserve replenishing, um, and it having a positive balance at the end of this year of roughly $8 million as anticipated. Where I'm still struggling is the leapfrogging over then the list of other items that you had. what is the risk of this being considered in part of the 2027 budget ask um and just doing repair work this year cuz your um business case was very much a either we repair it now in full or we wait and keep doing patchwork until the 2030s when it was originally on um the schedule. So I'm just wondering I really think this should be treated as part of the larger budget process and that money would still be there um come next year.
>> So through you chair my understanding would be that we would have to do uh localized repairs this year to the you know to for about $700,000 and we would still have the 4.5 million next year. So we would the total cost would be 5.2 2 million to be able to uh um to just hold this uh boulevard together this year for uh for a more full summer repair next year.
>> Okay. So, it would be 700,000 this year if it were just repair work.
>> Yeah. There I'm just prrating uh I mean there we I'm prorating based on the because we did that that patching estimate of uh nearly 7 million over uh nine years. So, if we prorrate and if we do the worst spots today, it's about Yeah. In any case, the the the patching would be done in in stages. So that would be the additional cost. Yeah.
>> Okay. Thank you, >> Councelor Foxton.
>> Thank you. And just for clarification through your chair, um so did you say that so the money is going to come out this year from the funds? Did you say 31 million is going to go in next year >> through the through the chair? So in the in the budget in the in the transportation operating budget, the biggest line item is actually a transfer from the operating budget to reserve. So every year we transfer uh $30 million or or more from the operating budget to that capital reserve.
>> Okay. Um and did you say that you're fixing boulevard? I I have to tell you I I drove down I needles all the way back and forth and it's probably one of the best roads I drove on today. So I mean um you said something about boulevards.
So you fixing boulevards or is it the road?
>> No, that was probably a galacism. It's uh me using the French word for buda which is but it's the road. Yes, >> the road. Okay. Yeah. And um yeah, I I just didn't see it. Thank you, councelor Harris.
>> Thank you. I do recall us having a discussion at committee about uh you know I guess pending the outcome of the tender was it or council or um Mr. Guess I don't know if you want to speak to that. I know we're the motion is what it is tonight, but was there not any other added, you know, that pending the tender it would come back for approval?
>> Yep. Through chair in the we I mean since we did not change the report, uh we added this to the end of the appendix of the business case. So to confirm that staff will come back to council with a tender award report.
So even though normally it's under the $10 million uh threshold. So it would it would go through a CEO report but for this one given the interest we will bring it back to council.
>> So ultimately there would be technically a backs stop you know should council not wish to proceed at that time they could choose to do so then uh just wanted to make everyone aware that that's what we did decided to do. So >> okay I'm going to call a question that's been moved and seconded. Please use your escribe to vote.
Colleagues, that is carried. The next agenda item is Dune Heritage Village reopening admission fee. I now call on Rod Regar, Commissioner, Planning, Development, Legislative Services to introduce this report.
>> Thank you, Chair Redmond. Um uh at the uh committee meetings earlier this month, uh uh committee asked us to consider uh waving the fee for um uh access to Dune Heritage Village during the grand opening this uh reopening this uh July 1st. Uh this report uh presents uh some of the uh the relevant information including what the costs would be to uh the budget for the museum. and uh we've uh brought it here for your uh your consideration.
>> So I have a motion on the floor. Um do I have a move?
>> We need a mover and a second. Moved by councelor Vanovich, seconded by councelor Harris. Councelor Vanovich, >> just very briefly, I want to thank staff for uh for bringing this uh uh report back. I know um myself and others uh were hoping we could take this approach with it particularly with it being Canada Day and um I think uh the approach that staff are suggesting um makes a makes a whole lot of sense. So thank you for that and uh happy Canada Day everyone.
>> Councelor Hunick.
>> Um thank you chair. I look forward to supporting this because it is inclusive and it it could theoretically um generate more revenue from those who are able to make larger larger donations.
However, I would like to note that I I I feel as though if staff had come out with this proposal initially um us as a council that's really concerned about the staff the the tax rate and the revenues etc might have said why don't we charge a small fee. So, I just I just want to note that it's really important as we make decisions that we make sure they're not make work projects for staff. Thanks.
>> So, that was more a comment than a question. Correct.
>> Did you know, >> councelor Salin?
>> Thank you, chair. Um, also happy to support I guess I'd just be looking if there's interest even just to strike out having a recommended donation amount. Um really that's based off of a lot of different sources of research that usually if you put a target dollar amount sometimes people are more inclined just to stick to that amount whereas you can actually end up getting more money donated um when you don't have a limited amount and at the end of the day the expected loss in revenues is $2,000. Not to say that's something to snuff at, but in a billion dollar budget um that's not even a rounding error. So, I guess I'd just be asking to strike out having a recommended donation amount and just having donations um available and hopefully people are feeling extra generous on Canada Day.
>> So, I guess I would just ask staff before we entertain that as a um amendment because it hasn't been moved and seconded. How did we arrive at the $2 amount? Julian, over to you.
>> Uh thank you through the chair. So, um, this notion of having a $2 recommended, u donation actually predated the $2 historic fee notion. So, these are all thing all different models that were looked at by staff. Um there and uh councelor Salon makes a good point is there are lots there there's lots of different um approaches around admission by donation or pay what you can and quite right in that we could get we could have it free and then get actually more than $2,000 in donations.
That's possible. Um, at at this point, the $2 came from the historic amount for the admission for for Dune.
>> Thank you very much. So, Councelor Salin, are you making that amendment?
You're making an amendment that we strike out of $2 per person.
>> Correct. And just leave it. That's >> Is there a second?
>> Okay. Uh, seconded by Councelor Wolf.
Uh, any further discussion?
Do we have unanimous consent to strike that out?
We do.
So, it's been moved and seconded. We have unanimous consent. We will now strike out, I guess, recommended donation of $2 per person.
So I clerks magically change the motion.
Councelor James, I just had a through you chair. I just had a question for Julian and that was around reporting back. Could you provide us with some numbers and data for those for how many people come through um just to kind of see and have some kind of quantify uh and see the success of July 1st if if that's possible at all?
>> Certainly.
>> So we should not be voting yet, right?
We just have unanimous consent for a motion that's on the floor and I still have speakers. So, Council Vanovich.
>> Yeah. Just very very quickly, and staff may have their own ways of doing it, but maybe um we've all seen those those tap things, you know, with your credit card that like Salvation Army and so on and and others use. We might have we might want to have like a two, five, 10, and $20 option. And people can tap whichever one they want if they're so included inclined. And uh we'll see what the donations look like at the end of that.
So, we're all in violent agreement that we are not going to charge and we're not going to tell people what they want to donate. This will be give as you choose.
Correct? So, we're all on the same page.
Now, we can use escribe to vote.
>> We'll make this might be one of those vote early, vote often. Counc.
>> Julian, we were afraid that life was too simple for you, so we wanted to complicate it.
>> I'm sure the public will be happy that it's a free event.
>> Colleagues, that is carried.
We are now going to proceed to motions where notice was provided. The first one is councelor Craig. Um, do you have a motion? Do you have a seconder?
>> Uh, it's councelor Wolf. Thank you.
>> Councelor Craig, would you like to speak to this?
>> I'm getting a bit concerned here with people. Anyways, uh, the motion >> concerned.
>> Well, I am. The motion is really um coming out of a number of meetings uh that we held in Cambridge with councelor Helen Sheir uh and her constituency.
Uh we had a mo we had a meeting at city hall. Uh we have two meetings there and we had a a further town hall meeting with about 150 to 170 people came all to talk about regional roads and concerns they had. And basically uh people are concerned about what they're seeing in terms of traffic issues, traffic congestion, turning movements, all of that. And so what they really would like is a starting point and an examination of where we can go to make things better. This is especially true, I think, in the Blair area. And again, I come back to the delegation tonight, there's no attempt in any way to suggest through this motion of compromising the environmental aspects of the Blair area. It's really about what has happened, what can be done, and what possibilities for the future. I ran it by Commissioner Gutsky and asked him for his input in terms of how to direct this motion and he suggested that uh it would go to the integrated mobility plan which I agree with is and it would come back in the new term.
So that's so so we all understand that.
So, it's out there in the new term if it gets approved tonight and it really then will become a starting point for further discussions of what improvements can be made in specific areas. Fountain Street, King Street, Sea Hill Road, Blair. So, that's what the motion encompasses.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
>> Councelor Wolf.
>> Uh through you, Madam Chair. Um, I definitely support the spirit of this motion. Uh, we all know, uh, traffic and congestion is a serious problem, uh, throughout that whole area. Um if we could find a a bypass for Blair, um we would have the potential to um divert through traffic away from the village core, helping to reduce noise, improve air quality, and create a safer uh pedestrian environment. Um I think staff will have a challenge as Blair Village um sits between the 401 and the river and is surrounded by the uh protected lands of Rare. Um but hopefully by exploring all possibilities and all opportunities including traffic calming uh staff will be able to um find a solution and I know they'll consult uh the community and uh our uh rare staff as well and uh hopefully we'll find this balance between mobility and livability uh for the long term.
Councelor James.
>> Thank you, Chair. I uh as well will support this motion. I had the opportunity to go to one or two of those meetings uh that were out in Cambridge and uh saw how concerned and heard how concerned the residents were and are around the pedestrian safety within that area. So, um, you know, I'm glad to hear that Commissioner Getsky, um, worked with Councelor Craig on this to see what is is feasible going forward and, um, happy to support this. And I know that that area around Bolair has changed significantly um, in terms of traffic congestion and uh, um, thanks to uh, councelor Craig for bringing this forward.
>> Council Liot.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair.
Um the bypass that was originally on the maps was taken off because it was going to go through sensitive areas. So you'd have to go much further west than the village of Blair to do the bypass. Um I remember when that all happened and um it was quite an uproar when that bypass was on the map. It had been on the maps for like 30 years or something prior to that happening in 2000 I think when it was removed. But I just want to say that on my way here, I'm glad to see King Street's on here because on my way here, I was stuck for 20 minutes in one block moving an inch at a time coming up King Street and it's only going to get worse.
So, there has to be something done. The gridlock in Blair, sorry, in Cambridge going north south and you've said before, Madam Chair, it's the worst area of the region is getting in and out of Cambridge and I agree with you on that.
It takes me an hour to get here. If I don't set an hour aside, I'm not going to make it.
>> Councelor Foxton.
>> Um, thank you and through you, Chair.
It's an interesting road to travel. Um, the remember a couple years ago, uh, C, uh, demoting you to a counselor, Mr. Gretzky, um, that I talked to you about the roundouts roundabouts are there at and they were backed up. They're still really backed up. When we went to Langden Hall the other day, they were backed up for kilometers. I don't know if the road can take the main art artery road can take the congestion that's happening there. And Dune is just a dyed product. When you look at the westside lands that are going to be developed and the homes there, we're heading for a real disaster and clogged. So I you're going to think outside the box and but you know what the development that it's not happening now because nothing's happening now and that's a good thing.
It gives us time to proactive but you really go there anytime between 7 and 9 or 3:30 to to 5:30 and it will take you hours to get through.
And the other thing about that though is rare has people and young groups trying to walk across that road to get back and forth to their different parts too.
>> So colleagues, I'm going to call the question and I'm going to caution all of us that it is already past 10:00. We have two more notices of motion. We have a couple other issues and we have bylaws to dispatch with. So um I just point that out to all of us because um I love the enthusiasm. I love the comments. I think all of this is very important, but I know that colleagues uh want to get through this agenda. So, um it has been moved and seconded. Uh we will now vote on Councelor Craig's motion.
Colleagues, that is carried. The next notice of motion is that from uh councelor Saladin. Uh you'd like to present the motion um for us to consider tonight. So we need to ask you need to uh require waving of a notice of motion.
Um that needs to be moved and seconded and supported by 2/3.
So moved by councelor Vanovic, seconded by councelor Hunic.
So the request is for waving notice of motion because we did not see this receive this in the required amount of time. So I would ask you to vote and you're voting on whether or not to wave the notice of motion.
So, colleague, that is carried. So, councelor Salinin, I would now um you're ready to move your motion. Do you have a seconder?
>> Yes, councelor James.
>> So, moved by councelor Salinin, seconded by councelor James. Would you like to speak to the motion?
>> Yes. And to your point earlier, I appreciate it's uh getting late, so I'll try and be brief. Um I know that I circulated this uh or it has been circulated to council and it's rather lengthy, so I'm not going to read through it. Essentially though, um what I'm asking for is for a report to be brought back for council's consideration um to reassess how we're currently doing our appeal process for well interference. Um and requesting that we look at best practices including City of G's model. Um the recommendations in here um for staff to consider also are coming from um people who were around during the time of uh when we had this well interference committee which was disbanded in 2015. This is an ask from um the Wilmont residents in the region and it's not to predetermine that um well interferences are caused by the region. It's not to predetermine any of those outcomes, but this is to set up a structure that is equitable for those seeking an appeal and wanting to get um their voice heard and get a third party review and setting up essentially a proper structure format that people feel that their voices are heard and represented uh when they have appeals in this process.
>> So, councelor James, you were the seconder. Do you want to speak to it?
>> Um, no. I I support it and I I think that um there's there's value in at least re-evaluating bringing this back.
So, I'll just leave it there, but I support the motion.
>> Council Ging.
>> Uh thanks, Chair. I sent um staff a couple amendments to uh to the motion. I don't know if they can put them up. Our screens over here aren't working, but so I have uh four um four amendments that that I would like to add. Did you want me to read through them?
>> Okay.
>> So, we'll put them up and you can read through them and we will take them individually.
So I want the the first one is to remove uh replace the uh whereas that's in red there and the new says and whereas residents in multiple areas of the region have raised concern regarding groundwater interference associated with municipal pumping activities and whereas public confidence in groundwater management is strengthened through transparent evidence-based and arms length review process.
The third is replace uh J which is enhanced public transparency uh respecting groundwater monitoring data complaint tracking investigation reporting and committee recommendations to council while protecting the personal information and privacy of affected residents. And then addition is K options for annual reporting to council respecting the number status and resolution of groundwater interference complaints trends and uh and mitigation measures undertaken by the region. If I can speak to the amendment unless Oh, I guess I need a seconder.
>> We need a seconder. Seconded by councelor Rodriguez. Go ahead.
>> Thank you. So these amendments are intended to strengthen the motion, not fundamentally change it. The first amendment broadens the wording uh from referencing a specific well area to recognizing that groundwater interference concerns have been raised in multiple areas across the region. Um it should be a regional approach. Having it specific to one area is not this broadens that. I believe that this motion uh is more balanced. Excuse me.
this uh is more balanced, more regionwide in scope and focused on uh broader governance issues rather than a single location. The second amendment adds wording uh around public confidence. At the end of the day, this is really about transparency and trust.
Residents need confidence that groundwater concerns are being reviewed uh through a process that is evidence-based, transparent, and arms length. I think adding the language better captures the purpose behind this motion. The third amendment uh expands the transparency section rather than only reporting complaints and appeals.
This amendment would uh also include monitoring data, complaint tracking, investigating investigation reporting and committee recommendations to council while still protecting residents personal information and privacy. If we are going to establish a review process, I think transparency and accountability need to be built into the into it from the beginning. Finally, the fourth amendment would add annual reporting to council on a number stat a number status and resolution of groundwater interference complaints, trends, and mitigation measures undertaken by the region that gives council and the public a clearer long-term out understanding of what the issues are occurring, whether trends are developing and h whether trends are developing and how they are addressed over time. Overall, these amendments are intended to strengthen transparency, broaden the scope appropriately, and improve uh public confidence in the process while maintaining and the intent of the original motion.
>> Councelor Rodriguez.
>> Yeah, thank you, Chair. Um I have a question of staff just with respect to the main motion.
>> Go right ahead.
>> Um so, thanks to councelor Salin for moving this forward, very supportive of it. I guess I I have a question and this just comes following all of the delegations that we've had today. Um I'd be really interested to learn through a future report back on some of the trends say since 2015 on well interference complaints and um when they've come in um you know we're we're drinking no I drinking uh we have a lot of information uh coming at us right now with respect to to water and wells and um I'd like to just understand you know how these trends evolved over the years were there certain years where there were a lot of um interference complaints before this water issue even came up. And so I think I'd just like to understand those trends a little bit more through the report. I don't think it needs to be an amendment, but if if staff were staff are open to that level of information, I'd be interested to to understand it a little bit a little bit better.
>> So through the chair, um happy to bring those trends back uh to council um as even if it's as part of this uh motion.
Um I can tell you that the majority of the complaints did start in January of this year. Uh historically we had not seen interference complaints in in some time. So uh but happy to bring those those back to to council for your review.
>> Thanks Dr. Sha. Thanks chair.
>> Um I have a couple questions. Um, I guess I'm wondering at surface water because I didn't think that that was our jurisdiction and I also worry that we're setting ourselves up for failure given the timeline. So, I don't know if staff want to comment on those two aspects.
>> Yes, thank you through the chair. I also that jumped out at me as well because this is a well interference complaint uh process, not a surface water process.
So, uh we had flagged that to ask to have the surface water piece removed. I do know that Jeff has done several presentations here before council uh noting that uh surface water impacts are often related to to to climate change or to precipitation. So it would be very difficult for staff to be able to um address those concerns through this this typical process. So uh the original intent of this was to uh deal with drinking water groundwater wells.
>> Can you speak to the timelines too? Yes.
Uh through the chair. Yes. I believe uh Commissioner Brothers was going to speak to I think some some options. He has been dealing with the the ongoing complaints. Uh we are aware that the the policy is outdated and I do know that there are some steps that would have to be done uh to do this thoroughly uh including um having interactions with the area municipalities. We typically do two of those sessions. We also um do a full public consultation, usually two of those as well. So, what we'd like to do is hire a consultant, like we said, to have an independent third party uh to do a scan of other groundwater-based systems to see uh what types of of programs they have and to then make recommendations and then to do those consultation pieces. We'd really like to do this properly and I just stole all your thunder, so I apologize. Um, but I we more realistically would would be looking we we tried to time it out uh working with Jeff Marose and we were thinking the fall is a more reasonable uh to be able to get all of those steps done versus June which really only gives us four weeks to do all of those steps.
>> Commissioner Brothers.
>> Yeah. Uh thank you, Chair Redmond. Um Amy's quite right. Um what we need to do is a full uh scan of available policies.
Uh we need to meet with area municipalities uh the local communities.
We need to develop a revised policy because quite frankly the one that we have doesn't work. I find it extremely difficult um trying to apply a policy that's outdated with a base compensation that's uh from 2001.
It's not reflective of the cost of base cost of considering any of the well complaints that we have. And frankly, I I I I find myself in a in a very difficult position trying to implement this policy with people that come in and advocate on uh about their concerns and experiences with lack of water. I'm extremely frustrated dealing with a with a policy that doesn't allow me to do the right thing, frankly. And uh so uh this is a timely uh request to move forward with a revised policy. I think we need to do a comprehensive review to come back with a wholesome report. We can't do it within the time frame that's been tabled. I concur with Amy and our staff that we need adequate time to prepare a proper document to bring back to you options uh in terms of establishing a stakeholder committee or interference committee. How it would work, how the assessments would be done, what criteria we would use uh in developing an assessment for well complaints.
uh our policy is simply inadequate on every level. So with that um we want to do a proper job here and we'll need the time to do it. Engage a consultant um and I'm fully supportive of bring it back in uh the October time frame that will allow us to do this work on your behalf.
>> So I guess this is just taking chair's prerogative. I I would just observe I think we're all in unison saying we want the policy updated and we want um to have better uh consultation with the community. However, we do want to get this right. We waved notice of motion.
So, this isn't something that we've been contemplating. This is um come to us sort of at the 11th hour. So, I'm I'm wondering how we can uh achieve a shared end goal in a time frame that's going to have an outcome that we can all defend.
Um, so I'll go to councelor Foxton.
You're next.
>> Hit your mic.
My apologies. Thank you. Through you, chair.
This is a good thing to happen especially for the townships.
uh it is not to attack the region or anything else. It's to re we rely on the waters in the townships. If there's something going on there, we as a region need to know because we we need that water as well. So to to monitor this stuff and make sure that it's just a well issue or something else rather than actually an aquifer issue, it's really important and I think we should jump at doing something like this. Now all they're asking for is the committee to be set up first and then they will do the process with our input with our guidance and that I think it's a really good thing. It's not an attack on anyone. Getting back to um councelor um Rodriguez's comment about uh wanting to find out the numbers. We found out in the last year that people don't come forward because they can't sell their houses if there's a well problem. So the numbers aren't real until people are comfortable with it and going to if they think it's going to be dealt with or clarified that it is their issue, then things will be done right. But right now when things are hidden, when we don't do our due diligence, then we set ourselves up for failure.
Thank you, >> Councelor Salin.
>> Thank you through chair. Um I it certainly would appreciate your comment about everyone wanting to get this right. I really struggle with the timelines. There's a few issues there.
One, we're continuing to pump more water from Wilmont. Um as well as it has been made very clear that in addition to the 30 L a second, even more water is going to be pumped from Wilmont. Um, we have residents in our region who are experiencing very real issues that do not feel that they're being heard. And in my opinion, as we're fixing this water problem, we need to in lock step also be supporting our residents who are experiencing issues that are potentially correlated um to the pumping that we're doing. Um, so to me, frankly, October is not an acceptable timeline. There's also the whole issue of we don't even have a meeting scheduled as that's election season. I don't want this to become an election issue. This is about good governance and about having a proper structure in place. Um I would also argue that a lot of supports have been provided to the team and I don't see why you couldn't use one of the current existing consultants that we have or any of the backfilling or additional new hires to work on getting this policy work executed. Um, I could live with August, but uh really October is a pretty long timeline um for work that's pretty critical and impacting people directly every day. Um, and for a policy that we all acknowledge is quite outdated, but work wasn't being um done at least to council's knowledge to directly implement this. And I'm not saying that's wrong. I understand you guys are dealing with a huge amount of things in your department right now. um and that there are probably so many things to focus on. Even keeping track of everything is probably quite difficult. Um I'm just really speaking from the perspective and experience of my residents who are really asking and begging for this opportunity to feel at least heard through the process um in an effective means. So um I would just push back on the October date. Like I said, I could compromise with August, but um it needs to be done sooner. And again to my point, it can't be an election issue.
>> Council Vanovich.
Well, >> thank you very much um Madame Chair and uh want to thank councelor Salinon for uh for bringing this forward and my understanding is the amendments are supported or or friendly. Um I guess depending on how the chair rules them in the uh in in the end. Um, I I do think that, you know, we've been dealing with a a complex issue for a number of months now, and there's no doubt in in my mind that um staff have been working diligently to um try to advance uh addressing the issues that have been identified both from a a capital perspective um as well as looking at it from a a policy and operating perspect. perspective as uh as appropriate. I think this issue has been identified as a as a source of concern in our in our township areas and and as such I I think it's incumbent on us to to recognize that um our urban areas and those in the in the rural areas that are on um on water systems um you know are living and experiencing this issue in a way than those who are on on personal well systems. And as we look to both short, medium, and long-term solutions, we need to make sure we uh have a system in place that restores the the trust of uh our our resident base um in in dealing with these issues. And and that trust doesn't mean just urban, doesn't mean just rural, it means trust by everyone.
And uh this seems like a a fairly uh simple solution to uh put a process in place that will address uh areas that are identified and try to bring a a resolution to those. I I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel here. Um, I think, you know, as as councelor Salin pointed out, it's it's possible um from a policy development point of view to not take staff away from capital projects to, you know, get some external help on that and and we're not going to lose any expertise. Um, technical expertise by by doing that. Um, and so, you know, seeing that come back sooner rather than later, I think is is really something that we should strive for, especially if um, you know, there there may be other recommendations uh that come forward that could that could impact uh, folks that are on uh, on wellwater going forward. So, I would hope that we can all see our way to to supporting this um, and uh, and staff could find a path. um you know you know June may not be feasible but I think certainly before uh before the fall uh is uh is important >> Amy go ahead >> so through the chair um yes thank you for for both of those comments I can uh assure you that we could move up the timelines if uh council is amendable to us reducing from one public consultation or sorry from two public consultations which is typical down to one as well as only doing one consultation with the area municipalities that would speed uh up the timelines and I think August would be would be doable if you're amendable to that.
>> So we already have amendments on the table that have been moved and seconded.
Do I have unanimous consent to move I guess.
Okay.
Okay. So, the amendments have been moved and seconded. I had said we take them separately. I think they're fairly cohesive. If everybody understands, um, I'm going to ask if we have unanimous consent to adopt the amendments moved by councelor Gowing and Rodriguez. Do I have unanimous consent?
Okay. So, we have unanimous consent.
Now, on to the date.
Do we have a mover and a seconder or um would the mover and seconder of the original emotion be willing to uh insert August rather than July the 8th?
>> I'm willing to make it August.
>> Okay. So we we will amend it to >> and I suppose >> but August what?
August 12th is the special council water meeting.
>> August 12th >> and I suppose that would >> assume staff's assumptions about their request of going down to the one consultation round.
>> So um the mover and seconder have agreed to that change. Staff say that is more realistic. Um do I have unanimous consent?
Cool. Okay.
Now we're going to vote >> Amy >> through the chair. I was just hoping we could have that on the floor about the surface water piece being removed from a groundwater well interference complaint process.
>> Surface water is is not our jurisdiction. Again, the mover and secondary we have unanimous move. Okay.
Unanimous consent to take out surface water.
Oh, yay. Councelor Wolf is just on it.
Okay. So, now we've had two revisions with unanimous consent. We have passed the amendment. So, now we are going to vote on the main motion as amended.
Please use your escribe.
So I think this just goes to show that real life humans have much more stamina than electronics cuz escribe is still very tired.
>> No, this is us.
>> It's clerks who are overworked. Stand stand by.
Colleagues, do we have unanimous consent?
>> So, this is on uh the revi the true two true two revisions within the main motion and then the amendments which have been passed. So, it's the amended main motion.
>> Oh, we're good to go. Okay. Use your escribe to vote.
Yes, >> colleagues, that is carried and it is a mere 10:30 as we go on to the next notice of motion.
Councelor Hunick, you have brought forward a motion that you want to present, but um in order to consider it tonight, we have to wave notice of motion.
>> Yeah, I'm not sure we have that.
>> Okay. So, you're going to move waving notice of motion. Do we have a seconder?
>> Seconded by councelor Foxton. So, again, we need 2/3.
This is voting on waving notice of motion in order to consider councelor Hunick's motion.
>> Councelor Vanovich.
>> Well, I'm just confused. So, is the intent essentially to um A notice of reconsideration.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
Councelor Fox voting on the uh waving notice of motion.
It needed twothirds and it is defeated.
So, we will not be uh dealing with that notice of motion.
Not tonight, but you could reintroduce it at a future um meeting when it has enough notice that you wouldn't have to wave notice of motion.
We are on to unfinish.
We're on to unfinished business.
Other business. Chair, I have an item for other business.
Councelor Hunick.
>> Thank you. Um colleagues and for the benefit of the community, I want to share with you all that sometimes the work of um accessibility and renovation across our cities and our region can be very lonely, particularly when you are in an individual with unique challenges sharing unique experiences as members of the Grant River Advisory Accessibility Advisory Committee have done for 20 years. Um the advantage of having a regionwide committee other than Cambridge which started their own many years ago to my understanding was the collegiality, camaraderie and solidarity that came from that. Um what Kiter has done by deciding to start their own committee as well as the townships who have decided to follow them is really undermined that collegiality that allyship and the ability to work together in common cause. And what it also shows the disability community which tends to be quite marginalized is that a government body can undermine their work without consultation. And so I would urge my mayoral colleagues to do the right thing and make the committee whole again.
Thanks very much >> council McCabe.
Uh thank thanks very much through you chair. Um and thanks councelor Hunick for um for for your words there. I guess part of what I'm um I mean I I share your concerns I share your concerns around around this issue be but I also I'm really concerned that there's changes that are happening to uh GRA the Grand River Grand River accessibility advisory committee um and it's not being done in a public way. And so that really really concerns me because we know like at our local municipalities and of course at the region um we have a ve we have a very public process for committee recruitment, committee reporting. We have you know we know the process here, right? And and and that is pretty similar at all municipalities at the local levels and at the regional level.
So, I'm really concerned that there's there's work being done and actions being taken and decisions being made uh by some of our colleagues that are undermining the the effectiveness of GRA. The it's from the conversations I've had with with uh um members of GRA and we've had correspondence from people residents uh residents across our municipalities that has have gone unanswered and they're looking for information. I've been asking for information and my requests for explanations and the rationale have gone unanswered. Um that really troubles me. Um but I think you know we need to if if there's changes happening to this committee um or any other committees we need to be public about it. So I guess to to ask a qu So I'll make that those comments but to ask a question um I guess it'll um be of either you chair Redmond or our CEO um you know what is what is being proposed for gr and do we have a rationale and an rationale or explanation that anyone around this horse you would like to provide would be really enlightening and helpful.
Would you like to respond?
>> Oh, >> thanks, Haley.
>> Yeah, there we go.
>> Hello again. Uh, yeah, through you, chair. Um, typically these conversations go to a leadership level. So, I've been in front of this council before on March 10th in my role as accessibility lead um for the region. Um, I wasn't I didn't prepare any remarks to speak tonight. Um and so I want to ensure that uh the CEO is comfortable with me speaking or supporting this conversation. So in my capacity as accessibility lead, one of my responsibilities is to ensure that the region is compliant with all aspects of the AODA. One of those requirements for the region and indeed all municipalities that have more than 10,000 residents is to convene an accessibility advisory committee made up of members with disabilities from the community. Currently that committee as councilors have spoken about tonight is a joint committee among area municipalities excluding the city of Cambridge although conversations around including the city of Cambridge um are ongoing um that in uh sorry I should also clarify that um in my role as accessibility lead I also serve as the region's staff rep on the committee. So the committee currently has staff reps from each of the represented area municipalities. It has citizen members who are people with disabilities and it has um council representatives as well.
So that is my relationship to the committee. Um I guess I'm speaking from the perspective of somebody who is um invested in maintaining a productive committee that can allow us as a region to do our work effectively when it comes to accessibility. So there's kind of two points of um interest from my perspective. One is just to meet the legislative requirement which is kind of the bare minimum um and to ensure continuity of an accessibility advisory committee and the other is of course to do positive and productive accessibility work in the region. I do share some concerns about the process that has um led to changes um or proposed changes to the Grand River accessibility advisory committee. It's not incumbent upon me to speak to other municipalities and their decisions. But what I can say is as the region since we are lacking some amount of information about what area municipalities are proposing with respect to their own journey with um the future of the accessibility advisory committee. It is creating some roadblocks for the region to be able to ensure a process that means we can maintain our legislative obligations. We can maintain a functioning committee um and that we are able to do so in consultation with uh community as well.
If there are changes to the committee as it currently exists, there may be changes to membership and so there would be a recruitment process to recruit members to the committee um which we have not been able to do the leg work to engage in. So there's some things on the table uh under consideration perhaps drafting new terms of reference perhaps a recruitment angle. So just in the interest of making sure and and I I am speaking on behalf of the committee that I work with on a monthly basis. I'm in communication with them regularly. The committee members have stated that their preference is for a unified and joint committee. Um, if council would like to hear more about that, I invite you to ask questions on that. I'm happy to elaborate. Um, but uh but so that is that is the position of of committee members. However, I do respect that area municipalities may have different interests, different processes, and different rationale for why they might want to p pursue a different structure.
And so I'm not here to critique any area municipality's chosen approach. I'm just here to say that currently I feel the region doesn't have quite enough transparency information to make informed decisions about how we can ensure the continuity of an accessibility advisory committee that meets our legislative obligations. So I will I will leave it at that and thank you so much um councelor McCabe I' I've got um councelor James and councelor Hunick and it's almost quarter two and we have other pieces of the um agenda to get through. So, I'm going to take three speakers if it's still on this issue and then I'm going to move to other things and we will come back if there's time left over. So, councelor McCabe, >> thank you. I guess I would just um ask Haley if you said you could elaborate on what some of the uh the representatives, the volunteers from the disability community and from across our community who are who have who you've been talking to and who've expressed um concerns about this. if you could share some of what they're sharing that would be really helpful and I think for all of us to hear. Thank you.
>> Yes. So through your chair um I think there are three main reasons that the committee prefers a joint and unified format. One it's been in operation for 20 years and so it's a refined honed process that the community has come to be invested in and trust and know and understand. Two is that for members of the community who have disabilities and indeed many marginalized persons there's what's known as consultation fatigue. So being asked the same thing about your needs again and again and and having those needs either ignored, not met, pushed to the side. What's been really effective about a unified committee with GRA is that um if the region for example is working on a project um then our area municipal partners can hear the feedback that we receive about that project. They can apply that feedback to future works.
And so instead of having a duplication of effort of having to consult people on the same issues again and again and again, we all kind of get to listen and learn from one another. Now that's not to say that we don't have our own you know approaches and perspectives of how we do things but the committee really appreciates the fact that they have seen their feedback say from one gritting where they've advised on one issue for one municipality incorporated into the next project of another municipality. So that's a a second um important consideration. And I think the other thing that I can speak from the perspective of a staff person um and the committee has commented favorably since I began this role in August um is that we as staff reps are able to listen and learn from what area municipalities are doing. I've been inspired by some of my colleagues in the work that they're doing. The city of Waterlue has recently implemented the hidden disability sunflower program. The region, as you know, the report came u before council to the administration finance committee.
um earlier this month. We are moving forward with that program as well and I've been able to learn kind of implementation steps from my city colleagues through that consultation process that happens in front of GRA. So those are the three um strengths of a unified committee as I've witnessed and as have been identified to me by members of the community with disabilities.
>> Thank you so much, Councelor James.
>> Thank you through you, Chair. Um, and uh, I I just have a question for staff and I'm hoping something can come back.
I think this is a lot more messier than it needs to be, but I'm just wondering the historical context. Um, if we can be provided with information, when did GRA initially start the terms of reference at the time of establishment? Was it an optin for area municipalities? What were the admin? How was it administered? I I want to see some of the historical context of this just to have kind of a a wholesome um perspective and if that has changed over the years when that has happened. So my ask is to come back to us with that historical context kind of when where why terms of reference opt in opt out and who's the administration around all of this what are the costs associated that was identified early on if that could come back to us at a later date >> through your chair. Um so I just joined the region in August. Um, I do know some of the history and legacy, but I will also say that currently the administrative responsibilities for the Grand River accessibility advisory committee lay with the city of C or lay with the city of Kitchener. So, it may be more appropriate to direct that request or work in collaboration with the city of Kitchener to um gather that information. There's also some timelines I think that we need to be aware of. Um the committee currently is convening next week for um its March meeting and then for June it will recess in July and August as it does um every year in the summer and then the proposed final meeting of GRA in its current form will take place in September. So again, I think that's why this issue is maybe garnering attention is because there is some time sensitivity and some um pressures around >> how we ensure smooth transition and and some kind of continuity of ensuring each of the area municipalities are maintaining their legislative obligations. So happy to entertain that request. I'm just mindful of the timelines and and when and how useful that information would be >> given the timelines. And I'll look to the clerk a little bit too in terms of I mean I'm sure there are minutes and and things that are are established. So um just putting that out there to come back to us.
>> Okay.
>> So maybe we can get that even via an email.
>> Thank you. So councelor Henick I have you down again but are you going to be brief?
>> Yes I will be brief. I will note that Kitchener choosing to start its own committee and then inviting the townships so that only the region of Waterlue and the city of Waterlue are um excluded is contradictory to the accessibility and inclusive mandate and reeks of discrimination which has very negative connotations in the disability community and other marginalized communities as well. So, I'm going to stop it there and Haley, thank you very much.
>> My pleasure. Thank you.
>> And um I'm going to move on to a motion.
Um this is for all council meeting on June the 12th, 2026. I need >> Sorry, Madam Chair. I was under other business. My hand did go up.
>> I will come back to other business. I need to get this done. Councelor Craig, >> I appreciate that.
So, we are now going to consider uh a recommendation for a motion to authorize participation at all council's meeting on June the 12th being held in the city of Cambridge at its city hall. If I could have a mover moved by councelor James, seconded by councelor Noalk. Um, do I have unanimous consent?
Is everybody paying attention? Yes.
Okay. So, we have unanimous consent of an all council's meeting on June the 12th at 2:00 p.m. at the historic city hall, 46 Dixon Street in Cambridge.
I now need a motion to enact bylaw's first, second, and third reading um for tonight's agenda. Moved by Councelor McCabe, seconded by Councelor Craig.
Do I have unanimous consent?
>> What is the vote?
>> What? We've got you. They're just reflecting that it's unanimous consent that >> you don't need to do anything.
And now we will go back to councelor Craig under other business.
I'll make this very quick and it's a commentary mainly if I may to council but uh to the clerk yourself and and our CEO with regards to our meetings and I think they're not scheduled properly in terms of uh we're always at times going too late or feeling rushed. Uh and what I don't like is delegations that come here at a specific time uh having to wait for us to come up from a meeting because we're late. And I wonder we if we could look at our meetings starting them earlier because I think you have to be fair to staff too that have been here all day long and uh schedule our meetings a bit earlier so we build more time in and uh I think we should make it a principle that delegations that arrive at 7:00 should be heard at 7:00. I don't like the fact that I think it's discourteous to some extent uh when we make people wait like that. just a comment and it's meant to be in a positive way for reflection on possibilities of how we do our meetings.
Thank you.
>> I've got councelor Lea and then I'll go to councelor Harris.
Um, we have also from 10 to 2 on Saturday our our Bishop Street Operation Center is having their annual open house where all the kids and the adults, the boys who like to operate big toys show up with their little kids pretending that they're dads when they're really little kids themselves who get to touch and climb all over the equipment. It's it's uh people come from all over outside of the region to attend that. So that's 10 to two. But I do also want to mention that we also Dorothy, you're hosting the big city mayors in Waterlue on the 12th, right?
>> Yes.
>> So that's the same as the old council meeting in those times.
>> It'll be done by It'll be done by then.
>> OBCM is done by like 1ish.
>> Okay. It's in my calendar till 1:30. So >> Well, all council doesn't start till >> Okay. I'm just I'm just saying three of us are going to be at that. So, we have to get >> And you're hosting it?
>> Yeah.
>> No, >> yes, Council Harris.
>> Just Just letting you know that.
>> Yeah. I'm looking at my phone and my alarm is showing at 5:15 tomorrow morning, so it comes early when we're here till 11:00. I just wanted to respond to councelor Craig's comment. Um because I I felt it was somewhat directed to the clerk staff, which is probably a bit unfair because, you know, I look at our agenda tonight. We had a closed session with one very brief item.
Uh there was obviously other things that may or may not have been added. There were uh notices of motion that were being requested to be waved tonight that were coming to the agenda somewhat last minute. And so I think if we're going to put that out there, we have to also take some responsibility in um you know how we bring things and when we bring things forward. But I will say that you know democracy cannot always be as planned as some would like. I know I spent years at Queens Park and it was very regimental.
Uh but that's not what it is here. It's very free as you go. Talk as much as you want. Don't ask questions, make comments. So, you know, as a chair, I mean, I know we all try to give people their airtime and have their say because it's really just once a month we get that opportunity to do so. And we don't meet every day of the week uh on a three-week calendar like they do at Queens Park or in Ottawa. So, I understand, you know, delegations wanting to be on time. I think we heard uh one of them tonight um tell us quite candidly what she thought of that.
However, um you know, there are others that uh were here up until just recently spectating and uh we thank them for that. But, um yeah, it's it's one of those things and I think we just have to accept it. So, there you go.
>> I agree completely. Thank you very much for those comments. Um I do think that seeking uh unanimous consent has helped move things along, but I think we all have to be conscious. We've been pretty good as chairs. I think um all of us of one question, one followup and and we've got a little bit more self-discipline, but to to your point, councelor Harris, um self-discipline, we're the ones that that uh keep each other in check. Having said that, could I have a mover and a seconder for adjourning? Councelor Lea, councelor Gowing. Um, do we have unanimous consent?
相关推荐
Truckers Finally Seeing Higher Rates… But Carriers Are STILL Going Bankrupt
LetsTruckTribe
480 views•2026-05-28
IS THIS THE REAL REASON FOR DATA CENTERS?
PrepperDawg
7K views•2026-05-31
JPMorgan CEO JUST NUKED Mamdani... as NYC's Middle Class COLLAPSES
Englishman-In-NewYork
7K views•2026-05-30
The Dark Age Of Blue Collar Has Begun
derekpolasekofficial
4K views•2026-05-28
Why People Pay More For Someone They Trust
financian_
66K views•2026-05-28
What has a broader economic impact, corporate downsizing or ecological collapse?
theratracejournal
1K views•2026-05-29
China Is Quietly Buying Gold, the Iran Deal Is Frozen, and Silver Is Heating Up
RichardHolloway0
694 views•2026-05-31
Why Canadians can no longer afford to survive #canada #inflation #shorts
TrueNorthInvestor-v4j
131 views•2026-06-01
