Transcript - Housing Approvals Amid Rat Crisis - Community and Protective Services Committee

Housing Approvals Amid Rat Crisis - Community and Protective Services Committee - March 9, 2026

Okay. So, we're only Okay, good afternoon everyone. This is the fourth meeting of community and pro protective services. Uh we will begin with a land acknowledgement. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Inishabek, Hodnosoni, Lenapoek, and Adawand. We honor and respect the history, languages, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many First Nations Matei and Inuit today. As representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. Uh just some other housekeeping. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this comm meeting, please contact CPSClondon.ca CA or 519-661-2489 extension2425. With that, we will look for any disclosures of pecuniary interest. Okay, seeing none, um I should mention that uh we are here at the community protective services committee with members of the committee all present. That's myself as chair, councelor Prible who's the vice chair, councelor Troso, councelor Hopkins, and councelor Ferrer. We're joined by visiting counselors, Councelor Frank, Counselor Stevenson, Counselor Mallister, and online we have councelor Cuddy, and councelor Pelosa. Oh, and councelor and Deputy Mayor Lewis. Thank you all for joining us. And with that, we'll move on to our consent items. At this time, I've had no request to pull any of these items, but I will look to committee to see if there are any requests. Okay, we'll deal with all items and consent all at once. I'm looking for a mover and a seconder for the consent items to put them on the floor. Councelor Hopkins, Councelor Purle, thank you. We will begin discussion looking for any discussion on these items. Councelor Ferrer, go ahead. Thank you, chair, and welcome. Um, so I'm going to I guess I got some questions about 2.5, the negotiated request for proposal. uh for uh 1364 1408 Hide Park Road. I have been speaking with staff on this um and I understand uh there are some uh I guess nuances here, but my um question and my concerns would be regarding block A. And first I would say good job, good work on this. Um but I just wanted to know um I do see that as originally proposed uh specifically for block A uh the permitted height is six stories. Um, and I know you speak to it in meters, but six stories is kind of how I read it. And then with the conceptual design that's coming back here, we're looking for uh a building that is three stories high. Um, and I do see that um we are kind of hitting the density for uh for that site. But I just wanted to ask what is the permitted density for the block A site and then what is the density that is being um proposed here in this report? Thank you. Thank you. I'll go to Mr. Felber and team. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. So, I'd like to introduce uh Miss Espinosa and Miss Sundercock who can answer some of those very detailed questions. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you to the chair. Uh, the density permitted on this site is 150 units per hectare. The proposed is currently 156. The R9 zone specifically has a density bonus provision, not to be confused with the former section 37 uh bonusing provisions that allows for additional density uh in exchange for additional landscape open space. In this case, this uh property would need to take advantage of that density bonus provision uh in order to uh kind of meet that 156 units per hectare as proposed. So, it is technically over what it is permitted in the zone. Councelor Ferrer, thank you for that. And I do see that with that density, we're below the maximum height permitted on on the block itself. And the reason I asked the question is um I do see that we're above what the density requires. And I have specific interest on the affordable units in that block because that is our land that we are looking to transfer over ownership uh to the proponent. Um, but my issue with when it comes with respect to affordable units is I see a lot of uh single and studios, but I do not see very many familysized affordable units. That's the two and threebedrooms. And I do feel that because we do own the land and we can, you know, negotiate in the negotiated request for proposal, we do have a little bit of leverage to maybe push for more familysiz units. And I understand we're using that census data. Um I I know that is what we're required to do, but most of the calls that I get when it comes to uh people seeking affordable units are families of low income who need to support and house their families. So that's the reason I'm asking the question. So I wanted to know um I guess for the total amount of affordable units on block A, can you break down the studio onebedroom 2 and three that is proposed for block A? Thank you. I'll go to staff. through you, Madam Chair. For the studio apartments on block A, we have two low rent, six affordable rent, and 18 market. And for onebedrooms, we have one low rent, 10 affordable, and 20 market units on that site. Councelor Ferrer, uh, I'm sorry. And the for the twos and threes, oh, for the twobedroom, we have one low rent, five affordable, and 13 market. and 12 threebedrooms which are one low rent, four affordable and seven market. Counselor, thank you for that. So that's uh that's where my concern is because I do feel that because we're not bringing up the building to the maximum permitted height, we can still have the density and I see the density is like I said is is higher than what is permitted, but we do have the ability here to, you know, request more familysized affordable units. And that's um kind of where my concerns are uh with this. Um, and I just wanted to know like at what point could we be maybe request that ability? Thank you. I'll go to staff. Uh, thank you. And through you, Madam Chair. So, we based a lot of the decision-m and the type of units on the housing needs assessment that we undertook for the housing accelerator fund. In that uh assessment, they identified a a significant shortage of bachelor and one-bedroom units, which this project is uh going to be able to help us fill some of that gap. But as you'll note, there's also some two bedrooms and three bedrooms as well, which is some of those larger size units that we're looking to bring on. Uh the housing needs assessment also identified it that there were a series of extra-l large unit. There was a shortage of those extra-large units as well. Um for the location given that it's close proximity to the um uh a higher density node like a civic boulevard or a main street, not a main street, but a civic boulevard like Harry Park is. This is the type of development that you'd expect to see along that uh along that type of road. Uh for the other projects that we have like Duth or Fairmont, those would be opportunities for us to go and create some of those single family h homes like town homes and things like that or some of the that lower density form with the larger units. So that's where we're focusing and if you uh if you go back to some of the concepts that we brought forward uh for the Fairmont resoning and the duth resoning, you'll see that type of uh development coming forward in the future. councelor, thank you for that. Um, I appreciate the answer. Um, I still do want to see those larger size affordable family units and because we we own that land and we are transferring the ownership. We do have that leverage. This is not like another um proposal that comes forward where we don't own the land and we're looking to reszone or something like that. And I just think that because we do have that height that we can still reach three stories, um there is that room there to do that. It's permitted to do that. And like I said with the own land, we have that leverage as well. Um so with when it comes to I guess like seeing if this is an option, this is a site plan I guess discussion really from what I understand. Um, is it possible that you can go back and just kind of pitch that to the proponent and see at this stage if I were to approve this conceptual site plan, which I'm not I don't really want to approve. Um, and then maybe we could reconvene at council and I don't want to do committee work at council, but I I really want to see if this is a possibility. I really think we should be pushing for more affordablesized uh family units is really what I'm saying. And I feel like we do have an opportunity here because we own the land and we can leverage that um we can we have way more leverage here uh than on any other proposal. So is that a possibility? Thank you. I'll go to staff. Uh thank you through you madam chair. Uh so what we're recommending today is the uh award of the project to the two proponents. So we've gone through the procurement process and uh we've identified that these are the best two proposals that were submitted at the time. um as to um how we might move forward uh in the future. What we can do is uh as the development performers uh are developed over the next period of time, depending on what the construction value comes back as and what they're able to get from a financing perspective, what the rates they're able to achieve through CHC or other private lenders, there may be opportunities to uh add units to the property, but that's not something we can do until we move through the development approvals process, really understand where they are and get ready to actually start construction. So, it's something we can approach in the future, but for today, what we need to do is award the uh the contract so that we can start and get into that process and solidify uh the development at this location, counselor. Okay, thank you for that. Then, um I'll tenatively approve a committee here, but uh I guess we'll have a conversation uh offline and see what we can do. I'm I'm obviously like I understand 30 seconds you're speaking about uh some future developments but I'm I I do want to speak about those but I want to speak about this one too. So um I guess I'll yield and thank you. Thank you. I have councelor Hopkins next. Thank you Madame Chair and welcome to community and protective services. I do have a comment on 2.4 and 2.5. 2.4 the community uh safety and well-being plan update. I um I read the comment about it's it is a plan of plans and I truly believe in that and want to thank staff for their engagement um going forward and and the best practices. I definitely support the five proposed priority risks that are mentioned in the recommendation mental health, housing, substance abuse, crime and gender-based violence. that that was the priorities that we heard as we engaged and and um sent out surveys. Many thanks to the federal government for giving us 2.78 million to municipalities and indigenous communities as we deal with uh safety in our communities and and protecting children and young adults. I uh do want to just bring uh getting back to the plan of plans. One of the plans I want to bring attention to is the uh reconciliation plan and uh to me that is really important uh when we deal with the the the challenges um and how it aligns with uh this plan. It's really is helpful um that uh we are able as a city uh to take upon the actions 155 in the next 10 years to um work within the reconciliation plan. And for me, one of the big big importance is the housing and homelessness part of of that plan. So looking forward to the next steps. I know there's five uh and definitely supportive of that engagement. uh with communities on 2 H so that would be 2 uh five the uh municipal land for affordable housing on High Park. I think this is a good news story. I uh regardless of how many units, the more the better, but the affordable housing units, the more we can uh put into uh our city stock, the better we will be as a city. I do have a quick question for you, Madam Chair, to uh staff about the learnings that we've learned from the RFP process. I wonder if staff can sort of maybe make a comment just uh bit of an update. Thank you. I'll go to Mr. Felberg through you, Madam Chair. Some of the learnings through the negotiated process is that actually having those conversations with the proponents to really get their vision and then be able to negotiate from there. So, it's really understanding instead of picking a proposal that you've just read, you're able to get a lot deeper into the negotiation and really see what they envision for the sites um and what their true interests are. um that part of that negotiation process just like getting an extra 32 units but understanding why because at first we didn't want to change the built form but instead after learning of why they wanted to look at apartments rather than just town homes it changed the way that we were able to look at the RFP. So I would say that negotiated process was key to ensuring a successful build. Council Hopkins. Yeah, thank you for that. And I know as we undertake other applications, uh those learnings I think are going to be very very valuable. Many thanks to the uh two applicants that put their names forward. I know uh we had a lot a number of applicants, but not everyone is uh able to uh do this kind of housing. So um yeah, good work. Thank you. Thank you. I have councelor Pribble next. Thank you. 2.5 very happy to see this in initiative in front of us. So thank you for that. 2.2 the committee is asking requesting our uh civic administration to respond to some of the questions concerns they had and my question is if it has been done or what will be the process of getting this point completed. Thank you. Uh thank you. I will go to staff on that question. Um but I believe that's uh Miss Feffer. It's just regarding ESCAC the committee and just the next steps on the questions that they had proposed um in the report. Thank you and through you madam chair. I'm sorry I was focused on another matter. Could you have the counselor repeat his question for me? Absolutely. Uh, council approval. Thank you. And the chair to the staff. Uh, it was under 2.2 the the environmental committee. They did have uh they requested uh answers to some of their questions concerns. I was just wondering if it was completed or what will be the process to complete it. Thank you. Thank you and through you chair. Yes. So, we attended the most recent meeting of the committee to discuss their questions and we will be providing written answers to all of the questions that were included there. Thank you, councelor. Go ahead. Thank you very much. No more questions. Thank you. Uh, councelor Ple, will you take the chair? I have the chair and I recognize councelor Ramen. Uh, thank you and through you on the consent items. Um, I wanted to start with 2.4 for which is the community safety and well-being plan update. Um so I wanted to start by first thanking staff for the update. Um I found it very helpful to be able to go through this information get a sense of what the priorities uh that we've been working on. One first how things have went kind of engagement has happened but secondly um with respect to uh the plans that align with all the plans the plan of all plans. I like that expression as well. um but also uh where we're heading. And so I wanted to talk a little bit about um the substance use portion of that conversation. Sorry, I'm just looking for my notes. Um so I was really interested in some of the language that was used in this section and was hoping that maybe it could be broadened. And um just looking at some of the recent work by CAMH um I'm wondering if there's a way to introduce some additional measurable outcomes and overarching strategies and those particularly would be around expanding uh access to evidence-based treatment services through straightforward pathways to voluntary substance treatment. Um this is again part of the the language that we see coming from CAMH um specifically around how to uh better uh create opportunities for people to find those pathways. And second to that is um looking at uh an overarching strategy to reduce the wait times for publicly funded drug treatment services. Right now in Ontario, we're seeing about a 16-day uh lead time for assessments and then for admissions, we're looking at a 72day wait time uh as reported by the province of Ontario. So, we've got work to do and uh I think it's uh it would show good alignment for us to include those in that section on substance use, but I'll go to staff for comment. Thank you. And going to the staff. Thank you. you know, and through the chair. Thank you for those suggestions. So, at a high level conversation with my uh evaluation team at the city because they're experts on evaluation. They have suggested that we look at uh the um addition you have expand access to evidence-based treatment services through straightforward pathways to voluntary substance use treatment and supportive housing would uh probably fit best under an overarching strategy because then the strategies go to the action tables and the action tables uh create actions to implement the strategies and then um decrease the wait time for publicly funded drug treatment services below the 16 days for assessment and 72 2 days for admission average in Ontario is uh is an outcome and I would want to go back to the team and make sure that it's data that we can collect and it's an outcome that we can measure because the um outcomes that we have the measurable outcomes that we have currently right now are those that we have data for and that we also share on our dashboard. So, I'd be more than happy to take these back, just confirm them with the uh tables and the community partners, and then we can make these additions to the plan and bring it to the council meeting on March 31st. Councelor, thank you. Um, thanks for that feedback. Uh, I just wanted to move on to with my limited time, I want to move on to item 2.5, which is the award of the, uh, lands municipal lands for affordable housing in Hyde Park. So, I wanted to thank staff for their continued engagement on this. Um, it's helpful to uh have what's in front of us here for discussion. It's been a good starting point for conversations, continued conversations with the community. Um, can you just maybe just provide a little bit more about next steps to the staff? Uh, thank you and through you m um Mr. Presiding officer. Um so after uh after committee it'll go to council assuming council endorses the the agreement the report uh we'll then work with the proponents to sign that. After that we'll get into the development approvals process. Um and once the once we've actually received a formal site plan application we'll be able to provide that to counselors yourself and others if they're interested in seeing what the concepts the final concepts look like. Uh and then through that development process once I get to the building those will all be things that we'll be able to share uh on potentially on a u some page or through uh through working with counselors as well and then hopefully probably about 18 months for construction uh for each of the two blocks and we'll have some coordination around that before we actually occupy. Councelor, thank you. That's very helpful. Well, much appreciated uh for the work that's done and uh continued conversation and I know my word's very interested. So, thank you. That's all my comments. Thank you. And I'm returning the chair to you. Thank you, Councelor Stevenson. Go ahead. Thank you very much. I've got a couple of questions on 2.3 and 2.4. 2.3 is about um as I read it anyway is about limiting the choice of parents with kids between the ages of eight and 10 in terms of keeping them with them in gender specific change rooms in our outdoor pools. And so it says at the top that uh there's regular feedback and this change was requested and I'd just like to hear more about that, what the feedback was and how this change was requested. Thank you. And Miss Smith. Oh, sorry. Sorry. Thank you. And through the chair, we regularly get feedback um either directly from residents through our email web page, through counselors on um on our service at our uh recreation and sport facilities. And this was one of them that uh we got some feedback from. Uh and as usual that when we did our uh research on this, we saw that uh the majority of municipalities now have an age uh 0 to 7. Uh and this goes beyond pools but in all of our our change rooms and our washroom facilities. And as we looked at that the with the um building for example at East Lines Community Center and the building we do we have a number of universal washrooms and change rooms and facilities so that there's options for people uh to use. So that also took us into account when we looked at this. But basically it was wasn't when we did our scan of what other cities are doing all across Ontario and facilities in our own uh municipality. this uh we realized that uh they've all changed to the age of seven. So we came forward with an update to our our current bylaw. Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. Just to follow up, I'm wondering what the concerns were. What was the feedback that you heard that prompted this? Thank you. And and through the chair, the concern was specifically in our aquatic facilities um with uh in our gender specific change rooms. And in aquatic facilities, people tend to change uh down to nothing as they change out of their uh swim facilities. And it was just being uncomfortable with children at the age of 10 in uh a in a segregated or women only or men only change rooms. Counselor, thank you. And was there any reach out for general public com uh feedback around that to know that this is a direction that parents are looking for? Miss Smith, thank you. No, we didn't do a public participation meeting or go out in general. No, we didn't. Councelor Stevenson, and can I just ask how long has the bylaw been at the age of 10? I I didn't see how long this existing bylaw had been in place, Miss Smith. Thank you. And through the chair, it's been in existence for 10 years. Counselor. Okay. Thank you. I might do some of my own public engagement just to see what the thoughts are on that. The other thing is uh around the community safety and well-being plan and mine is around the substance use as well. I noticed that the goal states individuals and families are supported to reduce the impacts of substance use and achieve greater stability, health and well-being. And I just wondered um there's nothing here about reducing substance use, reducing addiction, the level of addiction, nor the community impacts of uh substance use in neighborhood parks and business districts and that kind of thing. So I'm just looking through you to staff around how we narrow down to what seems to be more of a medical office of health type thing um versus maybe the larger community uh concerns. Miss Smith. Thank you. And through the chair. So the community safety and well-being plan or framework is a high level plan as we heard in our report and with the other counselors. It's a plan of plans. So when we get into the specifics, we would assume that they would be in the plans and the implementation plans of the critical network or tables. Um if there are specific plans or strategies that are not in any of the plans that are identified as part of the community safety and well-being plan, um our our staff and partners would look to see if there's plans that cover this already in the community. And if not, we have an emerging emerging priority strategy where if this is a uh a big issue with the si with uh the community and and with Londoners and there's no plans that cover this, then it would go through our emerging emerging priorities um process which is part of the community safety and well-being framework. Councelor Stevenson, thank you. I guess my concern too is we use the word community a lot and I never know whether it means community like our residents or community of agencies and and there's sometimes a bit of a difference here cuz the measurable outcomes uh all three of them relate to poisonings and toxicity and not around the level of addiction. Um, and I do think there's a disconnect between what some of our agencies are focused on and what uh the average Londoner is concerned about. And so I really see that here in the community. I'm going to do some looking into it because the community safety and well-being plan um like this is a big issue. It's a big issue and I feel like what's here is more of a Middle Sex London health unit type thing. Decreasing emergency departments, hospitalizations and deaths rather than improved safety of neighborhoods, public housing, um business districts, workplaces even like this extends so far and that this is such a narrow um a narrow bit. So maybe just one last question through you to staff around can you just explain for the public as to how we come up with this overall goal and these outcomes. Who is it that's making uh these decisions and how does it come to council like this? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Smith. Thank you and through the chair. So the community safety and well-being plan uh comes to us through through the province. It's a required plan of all municipalities that they have one of these plans and it outlines the the provincial requirements. So when we first developed our first plan, the broad community engagement on what those priorities are, the province outlines those key priorities as you saw in the report and then looks to municipalities for uh prioritizing those priorities. So when we were asked to update as per the uh as per the province our plan we looked at those and you're right community means all of community everybody living it it's a plan for London. So, as part of this, we looked at all of what are our current plans that are already in it, what are they addressing, and then we went out to ask our community partners and interested uh um community partners on what are the priorities they have and what priorities they are addressing. So, the priorities we're looking at and addressing in the community safety and well-being plan are ones that we have plans that we are able to support and implement. If there are priorities that don't currently have a plan in London, a community plan that addresses them, that's where we would look at prioritizing it through an emerging emerging priority. Counselor. Okay. Thank you. So, I'll just, you know, we're going to be talking about this later as well, but I I do really I'm seeing more and more a disconnect, a disconnect between a focus on uh helping people use uh drugs safer um and not dying of that drug use, which, you know, there's general support for that goal. But that seems to be all we're focused on. And we're we're not talking about uh where that can happen in such a way that it doesn't uh impact communities and how we can keep communities safe. Uh support prevention in terms of uh our children not not seeing this, not uh normalizing it in that way. Um and so I'm I'm seeing a missed opportunity here or maybe an opportunity for discussion later, but I I appreciate the report. Thank you. Looking for any other speakers on the items for consent. Okay, seeing none in chambers, checking online. Seeing none online, we will open the vote. Trust votes yes. Closing the vote. The motion carries five to zero. Okay. Thank you. Uh we'll move on to our scheduled items. That's item 3.1 uh which includes a public participation meeting. This is related to our short-term accommodation licensing and penalties. Uh I'm looking for a mover and a seconder uh for this item. Councelor Ferrer, councelor Privile, thank you. Um with that, I will look to uh start the public participation meeting first and then we'll take uh any any further conversation on this item. Um so I will look for a motion to open the public participation meeting of councelor Ferrer and councelor Hopkins. Thank you. Um, so with that, anyone that's looking to speak on this item, um, you may make your way to the microphone. Oh, sorry. First, we'll vote and then we'll do that. Hold on. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Okay. Thank you. Now, anyone that wants to speak on this item, we will now hear from members of the public who wish to speak on this matter. Okay, thank you. So, anyone in attendance who would like to speak will have five minutes to do so. Please ensure your comments remain respectful and directly related to the item on the agenda to help maintain decorum and ensure that everyone feels safe today. Uh, I'd like to remind everyone that there is no clapping, cheering, or booing in the gallery when someone is presenting or following. If you need more information about the rules of decorum, there are placards on the wall as well. Um, and if you wish to speak, like I said, move make your way to the microphones to do so. Uh, for the speakers, I will let you know when there's you have about 30 seconds left just to help you wrap up your comments. Uh, and when you begin, please start by stating your name. Thank you. Hi there. I'm uh Jordan Clawson. I also submitted a letter, so I won't belabor the point, but I live in Old South. I'm on Baseline Road uh with my wife and two kids and uh we have a property with an Airbnb in the back and uh during the pandemic towards the end of that we wanted a place with a bigger yard and so this place was available. It was still in the neighborhood but the way that we could afford it was uh and make the numbers work was by uh using the addition that was on the building uh as an Airbnb. And so uh we've been doing that for four years. um since before this was licensed and uh um and have participated in the licensing program uh since the beginning. So uh we do I do appreciate that the city uh is allowing Airbnbs and licensing them and uh I understand that with um the regulations need to change uh and be tweaked over time uh to make sure that it works um for the neighborhood. Um that said, I had a couple of concerns um which I've outlined uh in my letter, but I wanted to just quickly um summarize. And um they come down to the idea that you're that it seems to be treating whole home large group uh Airbnbs the same way as they're treating uh add-ons, uh small units that might have uh uh one bedroom and be part of an existing house and support like two to four people. And so one of the rules uh that was proposed was limiting the number of guests uh to two people per bedroom. Now if you have a hotel style uh unit with say two queen beds in the same room uh my understanding of the proposed changes is that would still be limited to two people instead of four which would seem reasonable for that size space. So, uh, what I would suggest, uh, is that possibly the twobedroom or two people per bedroom limit, uh, only apply for, uh, units that were attempting to rent out to more than say four or some number of guests. Uh I'm not sure what the solution is, but um we have a unit like this and uh it would really uh we rent to a lot of young families and uh they're usually visiting other people in the neighborhood and these families that come back to us every year would not be able to rent it if the parents and their two kids can't rent the unit anymore because it's it's uh barred because of the floor plan. Uh so that's my first concern. Uh and then the second concern is the uh increase proposed in the rate. Um it's more than doubling. Uh it's already gone up every year. Uh the current rate um is reasonable, we think. Uh but the proposed increase uh seems again to be treating whole home rentals um that take in a lot more revenue with people who are just renting out an additional room uh on their property or a small space. And for those smaller uh renters that have not nearly the revenue, uh raising raising the price to like over $500 a year is like extremely ownorous for them. And so I would prefer if the rate uh stayed the same or uh only increased with the rate of inflation. Um but if it has to go up, uh perhaps differentiate between the type of uh unit. So, separating whole home rentals from uh add-on units as some other municipalities do. Uh so, uh if those things could be done, I think with some small tweaks, um I have no other issues with it and I continue to support this program and really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Looking for any other speakers from the gallery. Just checking with the clerk to see if there's any speakers online. Okay, seeing none online and none in the gallery, we will look to close the public participation meeting. Looking for a motion, Councelor Ferrer, Councelor Hopkins. Thank you. We will open the vote. closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Okay, I will look for speakers on this item and I know that there is also um an amendment that's been prepared, but I'll await speakers, but just a reminder to everybody to move your amendments on your first time speaking. Councelor Hopkins, you had your hand up first, followed by Councelor Traso. Yeah, thank you. I just have a a qu question uh through you to staff. Maybe it's a technical question, but wondering if notices were sent out to the public on this public meeting. I just want to have a better understanding if that was done. Uh thank you. I will go to Miss Fever. Thank you. and through you. Yes, we did send out emails notifying all current license holders of the uh public participation meeting and when they could expect to review the proposed changes. We did also um post the notice on the city's website indicating that there would be a public particip participation meeting in relation to this. Councelor Hopkins, thank you for that. I'll um wait for the amendment to come forward. Thank you. I will go to councelor Traso next. Oh, thank you. Thank you very much. Um and I'll save my um main comments for the discussion on the motion and the amendment. One question. Um I would have liked to have seen more uh information on not doing the um density uh part part of this. Um, I know we do that for some some massage parlors. Um, given given the demonstrated negative effects that many of these um units um have on the surrounding neighborhood, and I'm I'm sure I'm not talking about anybody in the audience, but there there have been owners who have uh abused this. Um I I would like to probe this further because I think under your um under your licensing authorities you can discriminate between different types of uh you units and I think particularly in the near campus neighborhood um there are density there are density problems and I would like to spread these out. So, uh, are you open to discussing this more or are you really solid on, uh, eliminating that as an additional requirement? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Beefer. Thank you. And through you, Madam Chair. We did contemplate the issue of density controls in relation to the um improvements or recommended improvements to this bylaw. We believe that in the principal residence clause that really does speak to density controls because as um the primary resident requirement lists you cannot own more than one uh short-term accommodation and so this was looked at as a form of density control but certainly if uh we were to receive direction to review this again we would do so. Would trust would we be able to um approve uh in my mind the very sensible uh measures that you put forward but re reserving reserving that other issue for a not immediate but uh f future report miss pepper thank you and through you chair I think that's possible yes yes so I'll bring that up when we get to further um amendments I I was under the impression that there already is a principal residency requirement. Now, the problem with principal residency requirements is there are all sorts of ways of um of getting around that. And and and I think that people who are operating these legitimately have to understand that to the extent some of us may seem judgmental about this industry, there are some very bad players out there. And I I think there is a uh industry there's a there's there's a website. Um it's been called to my attention that there are players in London who are doing this many many many um times. And my my problem isn't so much the bylaw that we have right now. It's it's the it's the um it's it's the enforcement. So I I really appreciate the attempt that you've made to um to do this. I'll save that for the for the motion. But my other question is how like if people don't register, how do we know they didn't register other than incidental complaints from neighbors? And we're we're relying on the on the occupancy tax from this program to fund a lot of things. And I I think it really sets the city back when we don't get that re revenue. So I think when we also think of this as sort of a tax evasion uh uh sort of device that a lot of a lot of owners are doing uh that might give rise to justification for for broader measures and and again I'm not addressing this to uh the the those who are trying to lawfully comply with this um bylaw but I think that there's a lot of problem out there. Do we have any sense of what the magnitude of that problem is based on uh complaints that we've gotten about not non-registered units? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Bever. Thank you. And through you, chair. So, we do have enforcement tools um that I I can't be more specific about in this venue, but we have enforcement tools that assist us in determining where the unlicensed uh venues are. Certainly, we receive reports from concerned uh residents in relation to unlicensed um properties. And we also have a requirement written in this proposal that dictates that if a broker wants to list um a short-term accommodation, it must have an associated license number. So, those brokers will no longer be able to list those short-term accommodations for short-term rental. if it doesn't accompany isn't accompanied by a license number. Thank you very much. I think you've done some really good work on this and I'll get back to this when we talk talk about the motion and the amendments. So there'll be two amendments. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um, so my understanding, counselor, just because I don't want you to give up your time on your first time speaking if you want to move an amendment is you're planning on the amendment to add an amendment. Just to be clear, I would like to amend the motion to add a clause at the end that says, notwithstanding the adoption of this motion, this committee may at a future time request the staff report on the additional matter is density the right word or is of uh imposing a density requirement and I'm I'm I'm not I'm not putting a um time I leave that to staff yeah I I think it's just whether or not Just a moment. We're just discussing discussing the language. Just a moment. Okay. Pardon me. Did I discuss? We're just discussing the language. Just a moment. councelor. Uh just to match the language of the report, did you want density controls or do you want minimum distancing? Both. Thank you. Okay, councelor, just to confirm the wording for you, um, it would read that the motion be amended to add a new part that reads as follows. Notwithstanding the adoption of this motion, this committee may at a future time request a staff report on the additional matter of imposing minimum distancing requirements and density controls. Does that read correctly? Okay, thank you. Looking for a seconder for that amendment. Councelor Ferrer, thank you. We'll begin discussion on the amendment. Councelor, would you like to speak to it? o only only to say um based on what I read in the report and the communication that I received um and what the staff said today I I don't want to preclude this as a decided matter of council yet I don't want to delay the impleation uh implementation of these needed um changes which are badly needed and um I also do not want to place any sort of burden especially in the short run on the staff for this But I maybe we'd want to revisit this within a year. So I just think that that protects us to be able to do that. Thank you, Council Ferrer, on the amendment. Thanks, Chair. And just before I ask, is this the amendment that we were expecting? No. Okay. No, this is the other amendment because I didn't see that other amendment. Uh, all right. Well, I guess you have me on the speaker's list after this amendment. Okay. So I do see that this was a direction that we did provide uh in the last direction from the July 25 um direction when we discussed this and I do see the report comes back and I guess the real concern would be that a density control uh would be hard to establish because of existing STRs in the area and if we find that some existing ones are already clustered um that could be an issue because then we would be in a position to revoke a license. Is that I just wanted to clarify that. Is that correct? I'll go to Miss Pepper through you chair. Uh that is certainly a concern that we would have to address if we had imposed uh density controls. Um again as I said it wasn't determined to be a significant um problem at this time within the city of London. It's um something that is seen uh in some heavily uh tourist laden municipalities, much smaller municipalities in London, but we didn't determine it to be a significant concern at this point in time as far as enforcement is concerned. Councelor Ferrer, thank you. And would that be the only restricting factor I guess when it comes to a potential density control measure? Or are there anything is there anything else that we should be aware of if we were to um I guess pursue um any type of density control measures? Miss, that would certainly be one restricting um matter. Yeah, sure. Thank you. Go ahead. Please go ahead. Thank you. Through the chair. Um section 153 of the municipal act is a restriction with respect to business licensing. Um it states clearly that a municipality shall not expect except as otherwise provided refuse to grant a license for a business under this act by reason only of the location of the business. There are other exemptions um to this rule. For instance, it's specifically stated in the municipal act that um the location can be determined with respect to adult entertainment uh establishments for instance um payday loan establishments uh as well, but there is no provision that allows for um restricting the location of the business with respect to uh these short-term rentals. Thank you, Miss Marshall. Council Pereira, go ahead. Thank you. So, a measure that restricts the density and using location specifically because it is considered a business license is not something that the municipality could legally do. Miss Marshall uh through the chair. Um the as I said the the act is clear that you cannot um restrict or refuse to grant the license by reason only of the location of the business unless there's a specific exception in the act and and there isn't one. Um this in terms of land use control bylaws um that is certainly a a means of determining um you know the location of businesses but um there's that doesn't apply here. Council Pereira, thank you for that. So, I do see the issues with clustering and I do want to avoid that. But I also see that there's some legal um roadblocks that would I guess uh push us back from potentially doing something like that. I do say that this motion is asking for a future report back um on the additional matter of imposing minimal distance required for any density controls. So I would wonder uh with this language um if that is even something if we would just get the same answer back than uh what we just got here. So I'm just trying to find like a pathway because I do have concerns with the clustering and I do want to see if there's any measures that we can take that would avoid that but I know that we don't want to actually focus it specifically on the locations because we can't do that. So, I'm just looking for a little guidance on how we could maybe proceed with that or if it's just something that we just can't actually do. Uh, just some clarification. Thank you. I'll go to Miss Marshall. We'd be happy to provide a uh further report. Councelor Ferrer. Okay, that's it. Thank you. Councelor Trusso, you wanted back on the speakers list on this item. Very briefly, the inclusion of the word only, keeping in mind the role of statutory construction that says every every word has to be given a meaning otherwise it's surpluses, which is a construction we should avoid. If the word only wasn't there, then I think it would be more absolute. But the fact that the word only is there, I think it creates a a roadblock but not an insurmountable one if there are other conditions present. And I think that that can be uh addressed in the staff report. So while I agree with you that that language is there, the use of the word only does limit it a bit and give us a little bit more discretion in my view. Thank you. I'll take that as comment. Uh I'll go to councelor Hopkins. Yeah, just a a quick question through you to staff. I'm trying to I guess understand uh the amendment in front of us and I hear the counselor's concern when it comes to having some kind of control around density and reviewing that. But my first question is will we not be getting a report back when it comes to the minimal distance requirements? It's my first question and my second question is within this recommendation we are dealing to some extent with the density as well. So have I got that right? I'll go to Miss Feffer. Thank you. and through you. I do believe you have it right and certainly uh if directed we would take this away and monitor how um this iteration of the bylaw works and determine whether we need to look at those um clustering or density uh considerations and whether they would be applicable or not. Councelor Hopkins and this report back would it come back to this council or and is this council or will the next council be obligated to follow with the decision that we are making or that we are trying to make here. Miss Feffer, thank you. And through you I suppose that would be determined based on the direction we received today. Thank you. Yes. So what we have in front of us right now, it says may at a further time request a staff report, but it isn't actually requesting the staff report at this time. So I I think that's the clarification on that item. Perfect. Um, okay. I had councelor privile next. Thank you chair. Actually, that was my question through you to the staff and the comment was made pro uh we can provide further report. What will be the time frame for this report? Miss Pepper. Thank you. And through you. Realistically, it would make the most sense to give this iteration of the bylaw some time for us to determine whether or not um those considerations are required. But certainly, if we were directed to do so, we could bring something back uh sooner than later. um being mindful of our our current uh work schedule and um having several reports coming to this committee over the coming months. I don't know that we would be able to do it in the coming months. Councelor Purple. Okay. Thank you for that response. Uh based on everything I heard, I will not be supporting what's in front of us now, but I will have further discussions actually with the staff before the council. But I will certainly not I will not be supporting what's in front of us right now. Thank you. Thank you. Looking for other speakers on the amendment. Okay, seeing none here or online, I will look to open the vote on the amendment. Closing the vote. The motion carries 3 to two. Okay. Thank you. I will look for uh a mover and seconder as amended. Councelor Ferrer, councelor Traso. And so on the as amended, I have councelor Purple. Next on the as amended. Thank you. And uh thank you staff. as uh as was stated actually by my fellow council at Truss. So uh we did have uh various issues with quite a few short-term accommodations. Again, I don't want to see I don't want to sound negative. There are many more applications or licenses that are out there than we received. But it certainly was on the rise. So I'm very glad that uh the stab came back with because there are some things that I believe they are going to give us more tools to address these issues. I also had conversations with tourism London and Ontario restaurant hotel association and uh in addressing some of the concerns what we heard including the three letters. I would look I would like to put following amendment forward and that part B be amended to read as follows. The proposed bylaw as appended to the above noted staff report to be introduced at the municipal council meeting on March 31st 26 to amend bylaw number L13116 be amended in section 8.12 to offer or provide short-term accommodation at a dwell dwelling unit for more than two individuals per bedroom not including children under two years. Single room short-term accommodations occupant limits will be determined upon inspection but are excluded from this clause and I think this is the reason why I'm introducing this. It addresses the issues of the two individuals maximum. Thank you counselor. I'll look for a seconder for this item. Sorry councelor I can't hear you. Can you put it up on the scribe please? It should be up now right now. Okay. So, uh looking for a seconder on this item. Councelor Hopkins. Thank you. Yeah, sorry about that. Uh, I just want clarification. I heard the counselors um state the age not including children under the age of three. This is two. I just want clarification that I heard it right or I've got it right. Thank you. I believe I said two, but either way it's two. It should be two. Okay. Thank you. Um I will uh I'm still looking for a seconder but not seeing one. I will second this to get this on the floor for discussion. Um I looking for uh committee members first for any discussion on this item and then looking to other members council over I'll go to councelor pull. Thank you chair. So I already briefly mentioned the reason why I introduced it but again I take it accommodation sector hotels motel uh uh Airbnbs try to uh the rules the rules to be obeyed and same as much as possible for everyone. And when we look at the hotel rooms and when we look at some of the rooms that was stated the large rooms to maximize it to two individuals uh I I believe this is more fair towards STAs. Uh I did discuss this with our staff as well who uh this was discussed with our staff. I'll leave it at that. But bottom line is you know some of the letters by the way which I was kind of some of them I was disappointed some of them mentioning in terms of uh uh MAT municipal accommodation tax everyone has to pay it and again uh some of the comments that were made in terms of the Orma so or terrorist around hotel mot association they are only involved in the operational stuff the regulatory the enforcement the taxation it's all by the municipality orma does this by the way throughout the entire province so Just going back to it tied to this motion. I really feel this would be more of a level playing field to the STAs compared to the other sectors of the accommodation industry. Thank you. Thank you. Have councelor Trasa next. Thank you very much. Uh I'm speaking against this um amendment. There's a good reason why it's not a level playing field and is these are residential neighborhoods. hotels generally are in commercial areas. Um, this is one of the reasons why we need to institute this change in the first place because there's been overcrowding. Um, I noticed that the um motion does not define bedrooms. Uh, this is being brought forward because somebody said they have a very very large bedroom yet. This is being the way the motion is drafted. It's applying to all bedrooms. uh this would be a little easier to understand if it said large bedrooms meaning but basically this is just an invitation to engage in the same type of overcrowding that got us into this problem in the first place. So I really want to with without further clarification of what you mean by bedroom and without clarification without further clarification as to maybe where what zones this can be in which we've already been told would be a problem. Um, I just have to oppose this uh this amendment and I would urge my colleagues here to vote no on this amendment. Thank you. Thank you. I councelor Ferrer next. Uh, thank you. Um, I was just looking at the motion. I didn't see it beforehand. I know it wasn't circulated. Uh, so I just to get some understanding here, like as I read the motion, it does say to provide short-term accommodation at a dwelling unit for more than two individuals per bedroom. So I guess more than is um inter can be interpreted. So I would just go to staff and say how would how many more than two is the question. I'll rephrase. I can see staff is wondering what what am I saying here? I'm sorry. Um right now we're looking to restrict to two individuals per bedroom with these changes that we have before us. This motion has to provide short-term accommodation for more than two individuals, but it doesn't say how many more. So, how would you interpret that number? How many more is the question that I would have? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Bever. Thank you. And through you, chair. The intent with this specific clause is to enable an inspector to determine the appropriate number of individuals allowed in a single room. It's not a single bedroom. It's a single room short-term accommodation. So, that could be quite large. It could be small, but it's impossible to um establish a limit on a single room accommodation without having seen that single room accommodation during the licensing and inspection process. Council Ferrer. Thank you. And with respect to the fees being raised because we're trying to have a cost recovery model, a motion like this would require the inspector to go in and actually make a determination which would I would assume would take a little bit of more time and more resources. So would that push up the fee potentially? I'll go to Miss Bever. Thank you. And through you, chair. So the license fee is not being increased, but we have established an inspection fee for both fire and property standards inspections which will come with an associated fee. This is the intent behind this is to align it a little closer to the residential rental unit licensing bylaw. Uh but it is something that we have the resources for currently and we intend to begin inspecting all short-term accommodations if this is successful. Councelor, thank you. Did uh did staff um look into this scenario or this potent this possibility with the original report? And if they did, um why uh did we not include this? Miss Pepper. Thank you. And through you, chair. The issue that was um brought to our attention in relation to single room short-term accommodations was not initially contemplated during the review of this bylaw, which was uh which is why you're seeing this now. Counselor, thank you. Is this only specific to single room STAs or single room? Is this only specific to single room STAs or it says single room STAs actually would be excluded from this clause. So this is everything with the exception of single room STAs. Miss Buffer. Thank you and through you chair. So the proposal recommends no more than two adults per bedroom in any short-term accommodation between one bedroom and five bedrooms. Councelor Ferrer. Thank you. Um, okay. I guess with that, uh, it's hard for me to make a determination whether I would support this or not. I didn't have I don't have enough time to really kind of, I guess, digest and go back and forth with staff. Um I would request uh some motions um come before us before so we can actually have some I guess discussion that I I may be able to support it but I I don't know all the details so I wouldn't be supportive of it now. Okay. Thank you. Looking for other speakers. I have uh councelor Hopkins and then I'll go to visiting members councelor Frank next. Uh thank you. Um, I appreciate the conversation here, but I really do not understand this amendment and trying to understand as as it goes through. Uh, the recommendation to me, I was satisfied uh that uh we could control some density with allowing it up to two people. It's why I wasn't that supportive of of the previous amendment. Uh, thinking that we're already doing what we need to do uh to deal with the density. And I I I feel like I'm being flip-flopping back and forth, always open to being convinced I've got it wrong, but presently I I won't be supporting the amendment. Thank you. I'll go to Councelor Frank next. Thank you. Yes. And I appreciate councelor Pribble for bringing this forward. Uh I upon reading some of the communication was contemplating something similar at council. So appreciate the discussion and thank you to Mr. Class. And I've never had a complaint about that location in my ward. So, I just want to say that um I was wondering through the chair of staff if um the single room exclusion makes as much or more sense than doing uh on Airbnb it differentiates between whole home rental and like a room within a within a building or as was referenced like an addition onto a building that the primary residence is staying in. I'm just wondering I understand the desire to have the single room potentially have a couple more people. the situation that we've given the example is this king bedroom plus a queen which I can say as someone who has a a three-year-old um I wouldn't be able to stay in this situation if the current prevailing uh legislation was passed um and I have stayed in Airbnbs where I'm in the same room as my child. So, I again appreciate the flexibility that council pribles bring, but I guess my question is um are there other situations where potentially there's um a one-bedroom Airbnb that has a king and a queen in the onebedroom and then let's say a king in the the living space. Um that then again would fall into the existing proposed recommendation from staff and this wouldn't qualify for it. So, I guess what I'm wondering is um it feels like sometimes we are potentially um disadvantaging people who are compliant in the STAs and and trying to keep it in a good spot versus like party houses. And I'm just wondering if there's a way for staff to um include people um like requesting an an assessment and exemption if their house is um not a party house through ST through the chair. Thank you. And through you uh or sorry, thank you and to staff. Sorry to Miss Beer. Go ahead. Three you chairs. So that's not contemplated in this uh proposed amendment. Councelor Frank. Yes, I understand that. I appreciate perhaps. Okay. Between now and council, perhaps I'll have more discussion with staff because I feel like I'm trying to land on something that I don't truly have the words for. That being said, um at this point I will be supportive of this amendment from councelor Pribble uh at council because I do think again um myself going to other cities, I use Airbnbs and I have a toddler and I think it uh would be good for us to continue to allow um people who are using these services to be able to use them for the purposes that they intend to use them for. And um this will provide the clause that would allow people who are operating their STA properly and have single rooms to be able to continue to do that. So, I have a couple questions on the main, but I'll I'll leave it there. Thank you. Uh, I had councelor Purple back on the speakers list. Go ahead. Uh, excuse me. Thank you. And actually, um, councelor Frank mentioned one thing and she said we are in terms of disadvantaging the ones that that they obey by and play by the rules. I want to state that I do have quite a few issues with Airbnb last couple of years and one I would say two really extreme ones. So in terms of this I really feel what we brought and again when we did the comparable analysis with other municipalities is very much in line and I believe we took the stricter parts from each. So we are really trying to protect the half a million of Londoners what I always say but one thing is that the biggest issues that I actually had that the owners they were not present at those premises at that uh uh at the at the building at the house and that was the number one reason. So it wasn't kind of in terms of the having three or four people per bedroom and uh as we there are quite a few SDAs that we have that the owners they live at the promises and they do have one large one two large rooms that they are trying to rent and trying to make the extra income and they are playing by the rules and they are living at the property and those are the ones I really didn't want to disadvantage and I feel this is this is fair going forward and And as I said, I'm the guy who had probably around the horseshoe quite a few issues with Airbnbs. But again, so that's that's my main reason. And uh with the clause which was already reiterated by our staff that it would be determined during the application process uh based on the inspection. So I hope it's going to be supported here. If it's not going to be supported here, I certainly hope it's going to be supported at the council. Thank you. Thank you. Looking for other speakers on the amendment. Okay, seeing none in chambers and none online, we will look to open the amendment. Closing the vote, the motion fails two to three. Okay, thank you. That takes us back to the main motion. I will look for any further speakers on the main motion. I'm councelor Ferrer. Thank you, chair. So, uh, I appreciate the report. Um, I appreciate how we're trying to clean things up. I also have, uh, party, uh, short-term accommodation issues in my ward. Um, and I do feel like we are getting closer to cleaning things up as much as we potentially can. I guess my first question would be and and with respect to the fees, um we I think originally I think the fee was like $196 or somewhere around there and we're substantially increasing that fee. And I know that um we're really trying to focus on the commercialization of short-term rental accommodations, but at the same time, I I don't want to be uh also kind of using a broad brush and also impacting the smaller level short-term accommodation. So, I guess I just want to get some clarification from staff on the licensing and if that applies to I guess an address specifically or if that applies to um you know how many bedrooms are being listed as the short-term accommodation. So, if we have like an additional dwelling unit that's being used as an STR and that's a one-bedroom, let's say, is that a $547 fee compared to um a a house that has maybe four bedrooms or let's say three bedrooms in it? Um is that the same fee both on both for both of those those parties? Is it is an is it an address specific fee? I'll go to Miss Bever. Thank you and through your chair. It is address specific and it includes the fees for fire inspection and property uh standards inspection. So that those fees would be a onetime fee. The annual renewal fee would remain or as it is now 196. Council Ferrer. So it's the fire inspection and property inspection part that's really kind of bumping it up. So regardless of how many bedrooms it is, every single unit or every single address needs to be inspected with respect to fire or property standards or anything like that to make sure we're in compliance. So that is really the reason. So that's why we see that big jump. Um the bedrooms are not really what's um you know inflating the fee. Okay, I'll go to Miss Beuffer through your chair. Yes, that's correct. councelor. Okay, thanks for that clarification. Um, for my next question, um, going through the report and I guess specifically, uh, I guess, you know, the report is pretty clear. We're looking for a one provider, one property, kind of one license model. Um, and that's kind of what I see of of an overarching uh, theme throughout the report. And I do see there's references uh for a single party to um operate the STR or have consent from any stakeholders whether it's an owning party or um any other stakeholders on the property. And I do see that that was something that was brought up. But I also know that I think that was something that we already did. Uh from what I understand, if there is an owner on title and there's a renter of the property, that owner did have to provide consent previously. So there's no change in that regard. Uh I just wanted to ask that. Thank you. I've got M through you chair. Yes, that's correct counselor. Okay. Thank you for that. And then I guess my last question would be um as I was looking at the report and I guess specifically with appendix A on page 231 um the report does make mention um that there could be more than two short-term accommodations at the same time. And I just wanted to confirm because we are looking for a single party that owns or has one license for one accommodation. We're trying to clean it up on that and we're trying to make sure that we don't have that commercialization of things. So I'm finding this on page 231. Um and let me just go to the report of 231. I just wanted to confirm that language specifically on that. And that was in I can't find the clause, but it's there. Um, let me just Sorry. Sorry, committee. Just give me a second. Okay. Yeah. So, it's clause 8.4, and it says, "No person licensed um as a short-term accommodation provider shall operate, advertise, broker, carry on the business of, or permit the operation, advertising, brokering, licensing, or carrying on the business of more than two short-term accommodations at the same time." So I just wanted to get clarification on staff with that. Thank you. I'll go to MT. Thank you. And through you, chair. So that section is being deleted. Just if you refer just above that to uh number nine and the instructions there. We'll be deleting that counselor. Okay, that's good. Then with that, I wouldn't have uh any more questions further. Uh I do appreciate the work that staff has done. I do really want to move away from the commercialization of short-term rental accommodations. Um I do have problematic areas in my my ward uh specifically in some neighborhoods. I do have concerns with the density. Um I know that we legally may be very restricted on being able to you know either permit some this type of business license or not when it comes to the address itself. But I am interested to see um what other tools can be had or what other 30 seconds uh so we don't have those clustering issues. So with that um I will support the motion as it is and uh I guess I only have a couple seconds left so I'm done. Thank you. Thank you. I'll go to Councelor Hopkins next. Yeah, thank you. And on the main motion, uh maybe a quick question uh for you to staff before I make my comments. I did hear from the public the challenges of the increased fees and I'd like to especially as it relates to um um um sort of um smaller um rentals compared to the the larger ones. Uh, did you look at the the differences of the rentals to come up with the the increase fee? Sort of looking at a just a a one-time shortterm renter part of the house compared to a house itself that's always on the market or um or did we not discriminate when it came when it comes to the increase in the fee? Miss Pepper. Thank you. And through you. So the current license fee is 196 and and the proposed fee is not the fee is not proposed to increase. It's the inspection fees that we're proposing to uh add because we intend to inspect all short-term accommodations. Thank you for that clarification. And on the main motion, I am very supportive. um um of of the uh intent here in the recommendation. I think it does deal with the density. I have a a number of um uh rentals homes in particular in in the ward that I represent. Uh the the other proposals that are being made when it comes to uh the mandatory uh emergency control obviously the consent and uh limiting it to providers to one property and one lines license and to enhance property information to support inspections. I think all those things are really really important in our neighborhoods. That's something that I can go to and explain to residents when I hear their concerns. So I think better regulation is uh needed and we'll be supporting the recommendation. Thank you. Uh I'll ask councelor Purple to take the chair. I have the chair and and I recognize councelor Ramen. Uh thank you and through you. Um I just wanted to say first uh thank you to staff for this report and uh the information that you've provided and the thoughtfulness that you put into it. I also want to take a moment to thank councelor Purbal for his work on the original uh motion that led to this report. Um I know that you have uh faced some challenges in your ward uh with respect to short-term rentals and I appreciate the thoughtfulness that you put into bringing something forward that we could uh action and and give uh some clearer direction on. So thank you for that as well. Um looking forward to further discussion at council. I think this will be something that we'll we'll need some input further on. Um, but I do think this is a really good starting point for where we go to next with this and as this continues to evolve uh in our community. Thank you for your comments and returning the chair to you. Thank you. I will go to councelor Frank. Thank you. Yes. And I just have a few more questions on the the entire report uh through the chair to staff. I'm wondering, I looked at the comparable fees uh across other municipalities and there are some that had an initial upfront higher cost and then the subsequent re renewal years were decreased. I'm just wondering if staff contemplated that um option for London and why we didn't go in that direction. I'll go to Miss Pepper. Thank you. and through your chair with the uh implementation of inspections that is um a new expense for short-term accommodation holders and we recognize this. So, we didn't contemplate increasing the licensing fee uh because of that reason and certainly going forward for renewals the licensing fee uh will remain um as it is. Councilor Frank, thank you. And perhaps you've already explained this and I'm just confused. But so um the additional $547 that's not the licensing fee, that's a different fee. Thank you. And through you. So that is a fee that includes a licensing fee, a fire inspection fee, and a property standards inspection fee. Councelor Frank. Thank you. So then every year they'll get a fire inspection and a um a inspection by our city staff on their location which is part of the 547. Thank you. And through you no it's not intended that they'll be inspected every year. It's intended that they'll be inspected upon initial application of for the license or for those existing um and following uh every renewal wouldn't require an additional inspection. Council Frank, thank you. Yes. Um, see that that does have me a little bit confused because it sounds like the first year that they pay the 547, that's their licensing fee, their fire inspection fee, and then an inspection fee, which is three different fees in one, which makes sense to put them all together, but then the following year they're not going to get a fire inspection and an inspection. But then the price is still 547 each year. I guess that's a question. Miss Feffer, thank you. through you, their renewal licensing fee would be $196, councilor Frank. Okay, I think I'm almost there. So then they're only paying the 547 the first year and then they go back to the 196 subsequently, Miss Pepper. Yes, that's correct. Councilor Frank, thank you. Sorry to make you go through that. You probably already have again, but I understand now. I appreciate it. Um the only other question I had was is it possible to send an email to all the STA folks about the outcome of today's meeting including a link to the report and a link to the amendments we've made um ideally in the next day or two so that if there are any additional comments that can be submitted to council by the the um STA folks. Uh, just one moment, Miss Feffer, before you answer that question. Uh just procedurally um just in conferring with the clerks, they wouldn't normally have the report ready for it to go out from a standing committee that quickly. So to anticipate the turnaround then for staff to send it out. So, it might be better for us to do our own engagement as counselors. Um, and let I mean, they've done the the outreach to let people know that this was coming to the standing committee, but I'm I'm not sure if in between now and council that's procedurally possible for us to get that and get that feedback in time. Councelor Frank. Sure. Yes. I think the only unfortunate part is we don't all have an email list of all the SDA folks. So, we'd just be putting on our socials and that would go out to, you know, the 2,000 people that follow me. Um, but I would love if I can't direct staff at committee and it'd have to go through council. I understand that. But it would be really great if staff were able just to send a blast out to the list that they already sent the first blast out to and just say we had the meeting. Here's a link to the the website. I understand they won't have a report done because the report won't be done till council. But I will just say um I would like that as a communication tool because I I did hear from a couple of STA owners in my ward that they uh it went into their spam or that the title of the email was confusing so they didn't click it. I know that we sent out an email and I do appreciate that but I think again for folks who um who are following this it might be nice to give them that additional information. At this time, I don't have anything else, but uh I do want to reiterate I will be supporting council pribble's uh amendment that did not pass at this committee at council. Thank you. And I just wanted to check with Miss Feffer if uh the link was provided. Is that something that could be shared out to that list? Just the link, not a report to the video. Thank you, Chair. And yes, we would be able to do that. Thank you, Councelor Hopkins. and just trying to read your mind there. Council Hog. Okay. Thank you. I have councelor Pelos next. Go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh one, thank you for chairing. Um and two, uh just following along with the conversation. Um I appreciate the the counselor's uh Frank's desire to get more information out fast. Um I would say everything's available on the website. Just looking if we start doing this for individual topics um of council business becoming committee business when not all members are present and if committee has a different viewpoint than what has changed at council it really muddles the conversation. Um, if individual counselors want to share out the link or whatnot, absolutely. But I would have mass concerns with uh committee directing staff directly without counsel uh to start pushing a certain conversation that happened at committee that may or may not be the will of council. Uh so just flagging that procedurally. I don't believe it's an order. Um maybe that's just how we change our get involved in our communications and making sure everyone knows what council or committee meeting it's going to at what time and where the screening links are to go out and view the minutes and the meetings. Um but not not okay with uh addressing staff oneoffs to start going and doing different things without council approval. Thank you. Thank you. And I appreciate that feedback. Um so this would not be a clerk's direction to do that. It would be up to uh staff if they wanted to to put that engagement out as part of their engagement uh on this report, but that's I I guess up to staff, but not directed by the committee nor directed by the clerks. Okay. Looking for any other speakers. Seeing none in chambers and none online, we'll look to open the vote. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Thank you. That takes us to items for direction. Our first item for direction is item 4.1 which is a communication from councelor Mallister and it's the request to expedite the review of the property standards bylaw CP24 as it pertains to property conditions that enable rat infestations. Um we have two requests for delegation uh related to this item. I will look for uh a mover and a seconder to allow those requests for delegations. Um the motion would read that the request for delegations from R. Shields and am Velastro as appended to the added agenda be approved. Looking for a mover in secondary is councelor Hopkins and councelor Ferrer. We'll open the Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Thank you. And uh I we'll start with Mr. Shields. Good afternoon. And I'm Robert Shields. Hi, Mr. Shields. Thank you for joining us today. You have 5 minutes, and I'll give you a 30 second warning when we're we're close. Well, 5 minutes ain't going to really touch this too far, but I live east of Adelaide. And we have a rat infestation. The rats are about the size of squirrels. They're eating everything we own. They're eating through concrete. Nobody's doing nothing about it. Um, we can give people stuff to do drugs, but we can't do anything for us. We, the taxpayer, maybe should be looked after just a little bit. It's getting to the point where it's crazy. I kicked a hornets's nest when I talked about this. I was on TV last week and people are constantly coming to my door now, emailing me, texting, calling. I wasn't going to come here today, but so many people have come to my door. Now it's time to do something. We want to be like Toronto. Toronto has a task force for a rat problem. Why don't we call them and see what they do so we can do the same thing. It's not just a couple houses. It's a big area. And it seems to be the east west area of London that uh the problem's been in. This problem was brought up in October. I don't know if it was in Ness or council, but nothing's been done. So that's been 5 months. Just think of how many rats have babies every day. And this is how we got to live. We're not talking little problem. We're talking holes through our walls. Run. They're not scared. They're they're going in their houses. They'll look right at you and then turn around and walk away. They don't even run. I thought I had a mice problem. My dog brought me a rat in his mouth from my basement. It's beyond embarrassing. I was embarrassed at first, but realized it's just not my problem. It's everybody's problem. It's not just a garbage problem. Rats will eat anything. They'll eat each other. But if we don't do nothing about it, it's not going to get any better. What is can city do to help us so we don't have to live like that? I don't want to move. I'm old. I too lazy. I just want somebody to actually look after the problem. That's all. Thank you. Thank you for sharing your feedback. Uh I'm Miss Faststro next. Thank you. You have five minutes. Um I actually don't think there's anything wrong with a property standards bylaw. Um the problem is that residents and property owners are not familiar with it. For example, garbage needs to be stored in secure bins and bimonthly garbage must be dry garbage. It means no food can be in that garbage. I really think the problem lies with the lack of enforcement on private and commercial properties. I live in a neighborhood with a lot of absentee landlords that do not maintain their property. they they um get the tenants to put out their own garbage, but those tenants really are not informed on how to put out their own garbage or they collect the garbage and dump it all in open bins at the back of their property. Um I constantly call enforcement on my neighbors. It's a really bad uh chronic issue in my neighborhood and I have to say that there is a real lack of enforcement. It's okay if the garbage is on the street or on the curb. The city will come right away. But it's when the complaint is actually on a private property or it's part of the uh on a part of a commercial establishment on Richmond Road. Um so we we'll file the complaint. Um and once it's filed, we know that people get warnings and are are issued at times fines. Uh but fines are paid and and they're not a deterrent. on private property, uh residential private property, uh my understanding is they give the land owner, um 2 weeks, uh to comply. Um and on commercial property such as the barking frog, um dirty garbage, um it's just a constant problem. Um the open bins are overflowing. It uh we complain about it over and over again and nothing happens. And I would like to see um those establishments establishments shut down. No different uh um when they are um given a citation for infestation. But that doesn't happen. There seems to be a different approach to the commercial properties and private um owners and garbage on the street. So the commercial properties are probably the real source of uh rat populations and yet it doesn't they don't look at it that way and I think fine should be a deterrent um for repeat offenders. I also want to say that poisoning rats is not the way to address the problem. Not only is it cruel, but a poison kills other wildlife such as squirrels and pets. Uh we have neighboring we have properties in my neighborhood that find a concentration of dead squirrels from adjacent properties that use poison while their garbage overflows. People should also be aware that local wildlife such as skunks and raccoons, they eat uh rats. Raptors as well, they will come down and they will eat rats and they are an effective population control. So, when you see a skunk or a raccoon on your property, don't call wildlife businesses to come take them away. They they do you a favor if you have a rat infestation. Uh I think really to resolve this issue, the focus should be on enforcement, including neighborhood blitzes, which we have tried to get in our neighborhood over and over again. Uh there was a time when they were doing them and now they they just don't. And I really think there needs to be strong um fines for repeat offenders. And I really think enforcement really has to focus on the commercial um the commercial businesses because they put out an extraordinary amount of food garbage far more than any household would do and yet nothing nothing really uh tackles that problem. Thank you. Thank you for your feedback. Okay, those were two speakers on this item. Um, I will look for a mover in seconder for the uh motion that was in uh provided in the letter um so that we can begin discussion on this item if there's a mover and seconder. I have councelor Purple as the mover looking for a seconder on this item. I'm happy to second this to get this on the floor as well. Um, Council Mallister, since this is your letter, I'm wondering if I can go to you first for your comments. Uh, thank you and I appreciate as a visiting counselor to be able to speak to this item first. Um, as you've heard, I think pretty much every major news outlet has done a story on this. U, I don't think it's necessarily just restricted to my award. I'm hearing now more and more from other parts of the city. Um, everyone seems to have had some sort of a rat issue. So, I think that it's important that uh committee and even council weigh in on this this issue. I did raise it uh in October, November, we did u pass a motion in terms of looking at the residential dumpsters. Um as you've heard um you know since this has kind of come out uh it's not restricted just to that. Um I did get a lot of complaints last summer regarding uh the the dumpsters. Um but I do think this this has expanded to not just residential uh as we've heard commercial perhaps even industrial. I've heard some of those areas experiencing as well. Um so really I wanted to put this on the floor to have that discussion. Um I'm hoping my colleagues will be able to weigh in in terms of whether they want to see this expanded if you want to not just have residential commercial properties as we've heard uh can also be a source of this. Um but really this is a conversation starter to see some concrete action come out of this. Um as I've heard from a number of my residents um they're all dealing with the rats. This is impacting their lives. It's a public health issue and we really do need to see some action on this. Uh, I know I'm sure bylaw has uh some comments they'd like to share on this, but this is an issue that impacts all of us and rats breed very quickly and if we don't get a handle on this right now, it's going to get worse and it's going to impact the whole city. So, I really hope we can make some uh progress on this item. Uh, I'm happy for um people to put forward some amendments if they have them, but we absolutely need to see some traction on this. Thank you. Thank you, councelor. I had uh councelor Ferrera next then Hopkins and Traso councelor Ferrer. Thank you chair. Um so I've been trying to um look into this myself and I do hear there are some um different ideas of where I guess the issue would go to and I really think maybe we should be focusing on what is the reason. What are the reasons why we're seeing these infestations? Why are we seeing them localized in certain areas of the city with respect to other areas of the city? I hear that there could be a lack of enforcement and proper containment with some commercial areas. Um there are some uh issues with garbage containment uh for residential areas. Uh I do know from last uh from past discussions um here at council before this term that I think the compliance message was always that um the message is um that like a yard and lot maintenance bylaw is a containment issue or could also include or could promote something like this. When it comes to garbage or rubbish um or especially food scraps that could also promote something like this. I was doing some thinking myself like I do understand that um you know with respect to our green bin program and the uptake of that with the city I would really want to know if with those who are not using their green bins and they're putting their food scraps into their garbage and now there's a twoe cycle where those food scraps are in those garbage cans would that maybe be an issue with that as well just because uh with the uptake and I know and I know I don't see anybody from waste management here. Um, but these are some of the Do we have someone from waste management here? Uh, yes we do. Miss Chambers is online. Yeah. Okay. I'd like to go to Miss Chambers and ask if um if you can just remind us what the uptake is for the green bin program and if you have any data on potential areas where uptake is a little bit less than the rest of the city. If you have any information on that. Thank you. I'll go to Miss Chambers. Uh, thank you. And through the chair. Um, I know generally our uptake is approximately 60% citywide. Um, we'd have to report back on particular areas that are low spots and if there's a correlation between rats and green bin usage, there'd be a report back. Councelor Ferrer. So, I'm just kind of spitballing ideas of what could be it, but I think that there's a lot of different ideas of what could be causing this. And I really think an approach we should take is to really get a comprehensive report back of what staff can find of what may be um promoting the issue that we're seeing. U especially because I do see that there's some areas in the city that locally have this issue being reported a little bit more than other areas of the city. So that kind of tells me something and I would really like to know what tools we would have at our disposal, you know, to be able to mitigate that. So, I I like what councelor Mallister is doing, but I would want to add um a report back from staff to just really hone in on what the issue is and really go from there. Um just to understand uh what's happening because there's a lot of ideas um that I see um coming my way of why the reason would be, but I think that we should really kind of write try to refine that and reduce that down to what's the real issues are. And I think, you know, a deeper look, more comprehensive look might help us on that. So, I would put an amendment um on the floor. And the amendment would be um to have a comprehensive report back um on what the sources are for certain rat infestations and um and to look into and I know this lang if the clerk can just help me out here. Sorry to throw this last minute to you on the floor, but if we can just find um any type of trends, localizations within the city and any type of correlations between any other uh programs that we may have or correlations with maybe enforcement issues or um or anything like that. Um, and I I know this is terrible language, but but I think that we should have a report back that basically looks on a comprehensive report that identifies the localizations of where rat infestations are and any type of um correlations between uh with containment with commercial businesses, restaurants, potentially with uh green bin uptake. Okay. Thank you, counselor. Just before I go to your amendment and the language contained, I just want to go to staff for a moment because the direction is a report back, but it's a little bit more specific to the bylaw piece. I'm just wondering if you might be able to specify if the report back would contain any of that information that the counselor is asking for in this amendment. I'll go to Mr. Mayers um through the chair. uh just uh the time frame around this report is is extremely short like uh we're it's Q1 is this is the last month of Q1 so Q2 is by June if you want any kind of a detailed analysis that's going to take more time than this also remind you that the the same team that's working on this has uh I believe it's four other requests related to bylaw major bylaw changes that are being um proposed that have come out of other council resolutions. So, um, just want to highlight that if you're looking for any kind of detail that, uh, it really will require a longer period of time before bringing forward the report. Council Ferrer. Um, so we've got language ready for your amendment. The issue will be the date. So it almost puts the motion as the report back as contrary unless we separate your portion of the report back from the portion contained in the bylaw. Councelor appreciate that. I just want to follow up um before I do officially move an amendment and I do want to hear the language and I appreciate you working on that for me. Will does this motion as it is have that um comprehensive report? I did see that you said that the timing would be an issue and that kind of tells me that if I were to add that then the timing won't work but that also is telling me that that is not included in this motion as it is. So I just wanted to confirm what I'm looking for is that included in the motion as it is. Mr. Mayor uh through your uh through the chair. So uh staff didn't have any contribution into this motion. So, um I'm not aware of what the intent was to be included in the motion. So, any kind of clarification on that from the um the writer of the letter of course would be very helpful, but um from our just just wanted to report back and be very open with you that if this is a comprehensive report, you're not going to get it by that time frame. It's too too difficult to be able to meet that expectation. Thank you. I'll go to councelor Mallister if that's okay just to clarify the intent of the wording of his motion that's on the floor. Uh thank you through the chair. So, um, two things here. Um, the first is what I would say is, um, a request essentially to expedite the review that was already initiated in the fall. Um, I have included all residential property types because when I looking at my complaints, a lot of them were residential based. Um, recognizing there's a desire for commercial. So perhaps if the counselor is looking for something in terms of a larger report back, um, that could be an examination of the commercial side of things because mine is right now just focused on the residential. Um, with respect to part B, the reason why I'm requesting an option in terms of reporting is outside of the collection that I do through my calls and emails, I'm not sure in terms of what bylaw can point to, but I do think there needs to be a better reporting mechanism in place. Um, other municipalities have that in terms of rodent control. Um, because right now I don't think we have a good handle in terms of where the hot spots are. And so to your point about a larger report, I think we need a reporting mechanism to be able to then have that larger report to show those areas uh to understand in terms of zoning, is it residential, is it commercial, is it industrial. Um so that was kind of my intention with these two uh recognizing that there would probably be discussions in terms of where else people would like to go with this. But um I was trying recognizing as Mr. Mather said the tight timeline. Um, but the reason why I put Q2 is this process was in place and I was just trying to capture as much residential before that report for this came back. Thank you. Okay, Councelor Ferrer, back to your the language on your amendment. Go ahead. Thank you. Before I get to the language, I think we need to be coordinated because this is an issue that's been going on since I I hear it really kind of enhanced after CO and this is and there was an issue. Chancellor, sorry. I just want you to be aware you have about a minute left and you have you want to introduce an amendment. So, I just want to keep you in time to be able to do that. Go ahead. All right. I think we should be coordinated. If we focus on the residential, we may start pushing issues towards commercial. I think the time frame, especially considering that this is a we don't even know what the issues really are, we should maybe push the time frame out if the staff needs that uh for that comprehensive report back. Can the clerk read me back the motion? Okay. Um, so counselor, the amendment as you're proposing it because we've been told by staff and we've been told by the the writer of the letter that the intention is to bring back the bylaw change in quarter 2, 2026. your amendment would be additional but contrary. So just based on the time. So I'm just wondering can we do it as a report back that's a separate reporting time versus what's in front of us which is tied to this motion. If if that's what we need, I would recommend we change the time frame coming back to a later date to have everything together as one coordinated effort. We don't know what the issue is. We don't know what the source of the issue is. Um but if one moment okay thank you. So then on this amendment, this amendment is related to report. So, you're actually looking for another amendment to first amend the timeline in order to then bring in your report. I guess I would. Okay. So, you're looking to move an amendment to move the timeline to when it um I guess I would go to staff and you probably wouldn't be able to answer this. How how much time would be a reasonable amount to make this comprehensive report? Would you need six months? Would you need 10? I'll go to Miss Beefer. Thank you. And through you, chair. I estimate that we would need until at least Q3. Okay, councelor. So, you're looking to move an amendment. You have 20 seconds. So, I'm trying to help you to get Q3 2026. Okay. I'll amend to Q3 2026 if that works. and then I would add uh the motion the the um addition. Thank you. Just a moment. We're just clerking it. Just noting that the mayor has joined us. So, councelor, I'm just going to read it back to you. Just make sure the language correct again being noting that you're short on time. that part A of the motion be amended to change the reporting back to Q3 2026 to allow staff to provide a comprehensive report back related to sources of rat infestation trends localization correlations with programs and enforcement issues. Does that language suffice? That's perfect. When I say programs, I mean city programs, but if staff interpret that with city programs or any other I guess I maybe it's good to stay broad. Thank you. We're adding city programs. Okay. Okay. So, I'm looking for a seconder for the amendment. Okay. I do not see a seconder for your amendment at this time. And you're out of time. Okay. And that and that's your time on uh this round of discussion. So, I will go to councelor Troso next. I'm going to start by just reading my amendment and I can give a reason why I'm doing this. Um, my amendment reads simply that civic administration be directed to consult with the environmental stewardship and action community advisory committee about the city's response to rodent infestation and opportunities for improving public information. Should I wait to see if there's a second or should I explain my rationale? Thank you. So I will look for a seconder on this amendment. Councelor Ferrer has seconded. Go ahead. You may speak to your item. This is one of those situations through the chair. Um it cuts across different divisions and different departments. So when we say send something back to staff, I already have a problem with that because it doesn't say to who. Um, you can't put chicken bones in the green bin that are wet and not do anything else and be surprised when you get rats. And I I guess the question that I have for code enforcement is don't we already have a number of bylaws on the books that deal with rat infestation and the and the obligation of a property owner to uh keep keep their keep their uh property free of uh rodent infestation and the types of debris that will cause it. So could you state what they are? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Pepper. Thank you chair and through you. I'd like to introduce you to the manager of community community compliance, WDE Jeffrey, who will answer that question. Thank you, Mr. Jeffrey, for joining us. Please go ahead. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um through you, uh we do have a couple different bylaws that do address uh debris as well as pest infestation uh pest inf excuse me, pest infestation is handled through our property standards bylaw, CP24. Excuse me. there's a a specific regulation in that bylaw that speaks to pest infestation. Uh with respect to the debris, we can handle that through both bylaws. Um for containment, um there are specific regulations that that speak to containment and ensuring that it's compliant. Um we find that through our inspections, a lot of it is improper storage. So there is um you know that that we we deal with um on a daily basis through our inspections. Um and again this is something that is uh it's a high volume um complaint year after year uh due to that counselor. Thank you. That's very helpful. And the reason I'd uh like this to go to the advisory committee is because they do have expertise in dealing with animal issues. They do have expertise in terms of dealing with green bin problem issues, yard yard debris. They've worked on the yard and lot bylaw and they understand the interreationship between different bylaws that cut across uh different parts of uh civic administration. We're asking our staff to do a lot. And what's holding us up here is not the will to deal with the rat infestation problem. It's that we just keep asking for more staff reports. I mean, part A asks for a staff report on strengthening the bylaw. And I can't support that because I think that the bylaws already state that there's an obligation not to have rat infestation. The problem is coordination between code enforcement and uh garbage pickup. And I think that that's something that uh we we we do poorly when we have to go across different uh agencies. I also disagree with the contention that nothing's been done because I know I've called in a number of uh complaints about uh about dumpsters and they've they've been dealt and they they've been dealt with. Um not as quickly as I'd like, but you know they they've they've been dealt with. So, what I'd like to do first is I want to bring in the expertise and and advice uh from the advisory committee. I'd like staff to um cooperate with them. And I see this not as a way to devest staff from their authority, but a way to assist them at a time when they're being asked to do a lot at the end of our term. So, that that's what I have to say about this particular amendment. I'll say more about why I can't support part A of the main motion when we get to that. Okay. Thank you. We are on the amendment which is part D. If uh you refresh your screen in escribe, you'll be able to see it. But for anyone that's following along, I'm just going to read it again. That the motion be amended to add a new part D to read as follows that civic administr with the environment stewardship and action community advisory committee about the city's response to rodent infestation and opportunities for improving public information. Now, this is uh an amendment to the main motion. So it will come after ABC. It will follow as D. Councelor Ferrer, you had your hand up. Thanks, chair. So this, I guess, is close to what I was saying. Um, I think we need more information and if the environmental stewardship and action committee does have expertise here and they can make a scan on different city programs and really see maybe type of any type of correlating trends or localizations and issues like that, I will support it. Um, I agree with council trusso. need to potentially have coordination between our enforcement and garbage pickup. I do see that um there could be different areas with some of our programs that may be contributing to this, but I don't know for sure. And I I worry that if we don't really understand the full, I guess scope and breadth of the issue, we're just going to be putting in resources and taking shots and just gambling to see if it works or if it doesn't. And I really think we need to coordinate our effort and really understand the issue before we do anything because if we have a motion uh as it's proposed above, I worry that we're going to do that work and we're not going to see any difference. Um so just that understanding of really what the issue is, where it lies, and what are the contributing sources for the issue, I think is the first step that we should really take. Um so I'm going to support the motion as it is. I hope that we get that scan of where the issues lie, what type of city programs or not programs may be involved and how we can identify to I guess mitigate really what the issue is. But because I'm hearing a lot of ideas of why uh we may have infestations in this area or infestations in that area and I and I see that, you know, they're kind of all over the map, I really want to understand really what the contributing factor is. Now, we may have issues that are aligning with one area that are different from the other and maybe we can have a better coordinated approach with that, but again, it's really about understanding cuz I don't want to be telling the public that this is going to solve your issue and then it doesn't. I worry about that and I don't want to be wasting city resources on trying to put these resources in to solve the issue and then nothing comes out of it. I don't think that's a good u a good spending of of taxpayer funds. So, um I I understand the issue. I and I and I want to have a real understanding of why that issue is occurring. I really want to see where these infestations why they're happening. Uh so I'm going to support this as it is. I'm hoping that we get um you know a a a good amount of information of what is contributing to the rodent infestations and hopefully we can get some good ideas of what opportunities there might be uh to mitigate those and maybe we can coordinate that with with our efforts in the future. But because this is something that has been going on for years, um we need to really have a good understanding if we want to make an effective uh action and approach. So, I'm going to support the amendment. Uh I think it is going to take what my last amendment was bringing about. I understand it's maybe even better because it's not going to waste or really tie up city resources as it is. Um but I'm going to support it as it is. So, I appreciate it. Thank you. So um I just wanted to seek clarification from staff on the order by which this is um being discussed. So I just want to clarify that the report in part A would be the expedited piece that would come forward in Q2 2026 and that there is time to go to the um ESCAC committee in that cycle before it comes back to committee. Mr. Mathers uh through the chair. So I I can confirm that that wouldn't be possible without well giving some like we don't want to go disingenuously to this group and say that hey we're going to reflect your comments but then not have our information available until after or right before their meeting and then not be able to that turnaround to bring it back to committee. So it is be very difficult within this time frame. We can absolutely do that still within that Q3 time frame, but any of those uh more significant uh issues or items that were brought up by uh councelor Ferrer as far as that additional information just by adding this isn't going to necessarily get that into this report. So um yeah, it would be very uh very actually not possible to be able to do that in that time frame. Okay. Thank you. So Mr. made this just to clarify. So we would be able though to before it comes back to report to the committee bring it to ESCAC. They can provide in the minutes of their meeting any suggested changes any advice that they have to committee to consider while this bylaw is brought forward. So that could still meet the timeline uh through the chair. Yes, there could be a parallel process, but if you're looking for the content of what comes out of that committee to go back into the report and the findings before it comes to you, then that would be very that wouldn't be possible. But if you want to go in parallel and provide them at the same time, we can absolutely do that. Thank you. Okay, I'll go back to councelor Ferrer. Thank you, chair, for asking that question. I have concern with a parallel process because as we make an implementation here with this direction that could uh I guess skew some of the um information that the environmental stewardship and action committee gets. I honestly ultimately just want a real solution that will actually work that's informed. Um, if this committee needs to rush this motion forward, I have concerns on what it its effectiveness is actually going to be, and we'll find out very soon u, especially as the summer comes up. But if that's the intent of the committee, then that's fine. If I wouldn't want to speed uh this review coming back from the environmental stewardship and action committee. So whether it's parallel or not, it depends on um the work that they do and how long it takes them to do it. But I think the report needs to be quite deep uh and comprehensive in really kind of analyzing the issues. Um because I think if even if this motion does work um and the actions from the motion work, I I really want to understand um what's really what's going on. And if that work takes a little bit longer for the environmental stewardship and action committee and they have to be separate in that regard, I guess that's fine. Um, but ultimately I just want to see a real solution and I think we need to understand the issue and we don't understand really what the issue is. So I guess I'll leave it there. But um, I wouldn't push for this to be parallel with that other report. I think that it's okay if it takes a little bit longer. It's okay if it comes to the next council because ultimately we're trying to really solve an issue that's going to last for years if we don't actually take a real approach to it. So 30 seconds. So I'll leave it there. Thank you. So just to clarify, if we're not amending Q2, then it is a parallel process in order for this amendment to not be contrary. So the amendment as it sits right now is not a parallel process or is a parallel process as it reads. Okay. So on the amendment, any other speakers? Okay. Looking for speakers online. Seeing none. Looking for those in chambers. Seeing none, we'll open the vote on the amendment. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to one. Thank you. I'm looking for a mover and a speaker on the as amended motion. I have councelor Traso. Councelor Hopkins. Thank you. And I will look for speakers on the as amended. I'm going to go to committee first. I'll go to councelor Traso, then councelor Hopkins, and I have councelor Stevenson after that. Councelor Traso. Um thank you. you and I and I don't want the counselor who brought this forward or members of the public to think that I'm minimizing your concerns which are very which are very well taken. Um my my problem with the way A is written however is as I understand this the state of our bylaws which I've studied and this has been confirmed by staff we don't need to change the substance of the bylaw to say well you you you can't you you can't just like ignite rats and vermin and you can't leave things around. We've got we've got a number of bylaws that do that. If a said to to take further enforcement, enhanced enforcement measures, I'd be good with that. But but I don't want to send staff back to to try to reddraft um the the bylaw. I don't think that's necessary. I think if there's a flaw in our bylaw, it's the protocols for enforcement. And I want to remind everybody, we have a we have a report coming back from uh code enforcement staff um soon on on the protocols for dealing with uh with with with resident complaints. I also understand that uh over in the other garbage uh division, there is also a a staff report that's going to be coming back. I'm I'm not sure exactly what the time is on that, but we've already asked for a number of reports that bear on this. Finally, um I'd like to say that we don't always have to reinvent the wheel. If I understand rats, the rats in Toronto behave much like the rats in London. And uh the the fact that the city of of uh Toronto has already done a very comprehensive staff report on this that goes into all sorts of detail. Really, we should we we should just be reading that. Not just, but we should start by reading that report before we send staff off to recreate that report because sometimes I think this staff work has been done very effectively um by another jurisdiction. So, um and I'm and I'm sure the advisory committee will look at the Toronto report uh the and uh I've spoken I should I should say uh informally I've spoken to a member of that committee. uh they're very anxious to get started and they understand the Toronto report and they understand the inter relationship between what we do in our garbage division. I'm calling it the garbage division uh and uh and the code enforcement division. Maybe we need a rat division that just brings them all together. But I I think the intention here is to uh is and I think it's really in keeping with with what the counselor is trying to do. Um, I I think what we need is an all-encomp all-encompensing situation uh report where we we're in a position to to to to pinpoint what changes we need to make in our practice. Not necessarily a bylaw amendment maybe, but we'll find out. So, that's that's my position. And I don't know, are we speaking on the main motion right now? This is the main motion as amend. Yeah. Um, so I'm not going to put another amendment on on the table to um make make part a more to my liking, but if I was, it would be along the lines of uh not asking for a full bylaw review, but a particular enforcement review. But I think I'm just going to vote against part A and leave it there because I think what I want to do here is going to happen with or without part A. Thank you. Thank you. will prepare that for separation. Um I will I will go to councelor Hopkins next councelor Stevenson and councelor Pelosa and this is on the amendment and the motion the motion as amended. Yes. Thank you and I want to uh thank councelor McCallister for bringing this forward and and for having this conversation here at um committee. I know there's a lot of rats in my community. Not those rats. These rats. Sorry. Um um sorry. Um I'm getting sidetracked here, but um and and you did um counselor acknowledge that it's not just an east end problem. It is uh throughout the city. And I I do appreciate that. I do have a couple questions through the chair. maybe to staff trying to better understand what we're doing with this motion when it comes to a expediting uh the review of the property standards bylaw. Expediting um gives me a bit of a a pause. I would like to know when we are expecting the um property standards bylaw update coming to committee is my first question. I'll go to Miss Feffer. Thank you and through you chair. So, we're expecting the uh review of CP24 as it relates to residential um garbage control in Q2 of 2026, but that doesn't speak to much of what's included in a as you've referenced. Councelor Hopkins, thank you for that. And uh my second question again is uh as it relates to B. I just want to um I'm not sure what uh including uh or directing to include the option to report rat infestation conditions through service London. What what exactly would that entail? Thank you. I will go to Mr. Parody. Uh thank you through the chair. Uh we currently have uh the ability to report uh pest inf infestation especially under a rental unit or buildings. There's no drop- down boxes out of the 15 icons. You pick that one specific icon and go right into a description box. Uh there's no drop-own boxes and you can report your pest infestation. If you're talking yard and lot lot maintenance bylaw, uh you can go in there and this is where you're looking at uh different lots around the city or or property next door or even in the backyard property of uh the unit you're renting in. And there's two drop- down uh fields in that box. And one is uh it's the tall grass and weeds doesn't really apply. And then there's one that says debris. Now, that one there we can build out as part of the direction. uh uh coming out of this uh report. And maybe we put in some examples and some brackets there to make it a little bit clearer of what you can report under that. And we can put garbage or junk and pest infestation as some examples in there to help out. But we currently have with those two uh icons the ability to report. Hopkins, thank you for that information. And with that, I will not be supporting A, but supporting B, C, and D. Thank you. Thank you. Um I had on my speakers next uh councelor Stevenson then councelor Pelosa. Thank you. I just wanted to thank councelor Mallister for bringing this forward. It is an issue that I hear about in my ward uh too often. Um specifically recently around the McMahon area in Carling and the Oakland A, which is pretty much the entire ward. It's a really traumatic experience for people. Um, I've got people saying they woke up with a rat running across their face, uh, nibbling the bananas on their dining room table, having to keep their fruit in bathtubs. They're chewing through water lines and wiring and literally chewing through almost anything to get into the home. Some of the homes have dirt basement. Some of them have foundations that uh, you know, don't have a cement floor. They're finding it almost impossible to keep the rats out. I did a quick Google and I don't know how accurate uh Google is here, but they're saying that rats are uh able to reproduce at 5 or 6 weeks old, that gestation is only about 3 weeks. Um that they can get pregnant again in 2 days, and that a pair of rats can explode into a rat infestation of about 88,000 within a year. So, I guess I I'm I support all that's being talked about here today, but I'm just wondering the things that I'm hearing is uh the residents believe it's happening. They're being stirred up with the construction, some of the deep uh construction that's happening. Uh coming from vacant buildings that have been left vacant for a while, there is concern that it's about the bi-weekly garbage pickup. property standards which we're talking about here where garbage is not being uh dealt with appropriately also the demolition of restaurants and other buildings again as we do our construction. So my question through you to staff is is there uh any comments on sort of the sources of what's stirring up these uh uh infestations and affecting homeowners and is there a way that we can be proactive? I mean, if we're if we're putting traps out that will kill them, that's not poisoning, that's not going to affect other um animal life, could we be putting them out when we do construction and when we do demolitions uh to to help address the issue as quickly as we possibly can? I'll go to Mr. Mayers uh through through the chair. Absolutely. I think we could probably start and this was highlighted by um one of the other counselors as well about like just trying to take some of those learnings from other municipalities. Right. So I've just in this time been able to pull up the the uh a rat plan by the city of Toronto and it highlights some of those very issues construction possibly being linked to it. So I think we very much have to build on what some of the pieces that we can learn from other municipalities but then also um make sure that we contact all those other parts of the corporation that might um touch this uh this issue in any way. Councelor, thanks. Yeah, I'm going to look at this between now and council to see if we can maybe proactively put traps out as we, you know, we have a lot of infrastructure projects, hopefully a lot more that we could do it proactively around uh maybe require it on vacant buildings and when we look at demolitions, look at dealing with it right away. The facts, if they are accurate, are very scary in terms of how quickly they can reproduce. there's a lot of health uh associated with that and um it can be costly for people and so if we could even loan out rent rat traps or I don't know I I would I appreciate all the other work but I really want to address this as quickly as we possibly can to uh eradicate some of these and reduce the populations before we really do have something that's a lot more serious than it already is. Thank you. Okay, I have councelor Pelosin next followed by councelor Mallister and then councelor Frank. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh through you to staff as city staff and partners go out and do the vacant building inspections as required by fire. Um is there any notes made in there potentially regarding rats as they go through or is that something that could be added if we're already on site? Mr. Jeffrey. Thank you, Madam Chair. When we are out doing inspections for vacant buildings, we take into account all of the uh yard late lawn maintenance, excuse me, and the property standards bylaw regulations that come into play uh during those inspections. So, we are addressing debris, pest infestation when it is in fact valid and uh able to be addressed. Councelor Pelosa, thank you. So, I'm understanding that if there was a rat colony discovered, we would take action on it. Just looking for clarification, Mr. Jeffrey through the chair. Yes, we would we would uh address that. Counselor. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, having been a second term counselor and having rats in the south end as well. Um, when staff have been involved in the past, it came back to property standards, hoarding at homes, hoarding in the yards, hoarding of yard waste and sod piles. um residents who lovingly feed wildlife, usually the flying happy bird kind, the feathered kind, and overfeeding, which falls to the ground and creates rats in the neighborhood uh and under neighbors sheds to which colonies have formed in the past in the south end. Um or commercial waste within the dumpsters. Um, for the most part, it hasn't been associated to the waste collection that we'd see at the curb on a weekly basis. Uh, certainly that's in some neighborhoods. Green bins are, I would say, more of a proactive tool allowing that organic waste to be removed as a food source on a weekly basis. Um, so as we move through these conversations, just really mindful of where we're going to put resources and the tools that we already have that staff have been well utilizing and experiences in the ward of it tends to be feeding. I've have a neighbor who feeds rats running through my backyard as well. Um, so just really cognizant of when we're asking for staff stuff to be done of just looking if is it just and maybe through you to Miss Feffer and her team. If someone does lodge an untidy property complaint, how quickly is there a staff compliment who could usually get to address that concern for the resident? Thank you. I'll go to Mr. Jeffrey. Through you, Madam Chair. Typical response for a concern or complaint that's registered like that would be two to three day turnaround for our staff to address it. Councelor Pelosa. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um just really looking then I know sometimes in the past it ended up being residents who didn't want to clean up their property or didn't want to pay the fee of actually removing that rat infestation that they were harboring on their own property. Uh so that's where more of my interests come in with staff of our bylaws are already there being well enacted on staff in a very timely manner. Um having multiple bylaws of just how to how to enforce the standards um realizing that one person doesn't keep those cleans and absolutely can traumatize an entire neighborhood. That's where my my interest is focused. Thank you. Thank you. Um I have councelor McAllister followed by councelor Frank. Uh thank you through the chair and I really do appreciate the conversation today. Uh it sounds like we've all encountered this at some point or another and we all have um differing opinions and suggestions. So I really do appreciate that. Um but for me really this was I was trying to come up with something in an expeditious manner. Um my residents are living with this as councelor Stevenson has said as well. I've had some horrific stories uh and some of the problem properties which is why I think those reviews are very important um have existed for a very long time and I just have not seen resolutions. Um the reason why I originally brought up the residential dumpsters for instance uh there's properties on Shelurn there's properties on King Edward which have been problematic for years and I just not have seen any sort of resolution understanding by I'll have to follow a process but my intention in terms of strengthening the bylaw if staff come back and say we think we've got what we need on the books I'm fine with that in the report they don't need to be exhaustive about that but if the enforcement mechanism and the measures they have at their disposal are not necessary to address these long-standing problems That's the issue I'm having because there are the same things coming up time and time again. And if we keep doing the same thing and the result is the same, I just don't think we're making progress. Right? So that's where a lot of my frustration and the frustration of my residents comes from is they're reporting things and they're not really seeing um any sort of resolution to it. Um in terms of um the reporting aspect, appreciate Mr. parity what he said, but really for me it's having um a dedicated spot where rodent infestations can be reported because when it's pest control, I want to be able to look at CRM and say, "Okay, these are my hotspot areas." The issue I'm having when it just says pest is if I if there's a roach problem, I don't necessarily need everything conglomerated into one box saying pest control issues are a problem here because I really want to get us more granular in terms of okay, is it roaches? Is it mice? Is it rats? That's where my intention with that was coming from is that I do want us to look more specifically what the problems are because our response is going to change depending on the problem especially when it comes to pest control. Um just to give some rationale there. I understand in terms of the language people might have wanted something different with a I was still very willing in terms of an amendment. Um but I was looking more for the enforcement as has already been said. Um the Q2 is a recognition that in the summer this is the height of when my residents are dealing with this. this is when they're live like they're living with it now particularly when it's the colder months the rats are coming inside um but it's rampant in the summer and it it's really bad so I was trying to offer some relief to my residents um as we go into the summer months cuz that's where they're really seeing the problems so again appreciate the discussion today I hope we can find something and move this forward thanks thank you I have councelor Frank next followed by councelor Stevenson thank you and um I thought I heard clearly but that councelor Stevenson said eradicate and I really liked it. So I hope that somehow makes its way into a clip somewhere. Um but I did have one quick question. Um I just want to confirm uh in my ward we've had some issues with rats near commercial dumpsters. Will that be looked at in this report back from staff? Thank you. I'll go to Miss Beer. Thank you through you, Chair. Yes, that's the intent. Councelor Frank. Great. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. I'll go to councelor Stevenson. Thank you. I just wanted to follow up on a few of my colleagues regarding the enforcement because when we hear two to three days uh for a response, I too hear from residents that have properties that have been ongoing concerns for years and they put the complaints in, they file the complaints, things happen but nothing changes and they are left uh very very frustrated. I had another call on Friday. So, I just wondered through you to staff, are there things that council could do in terms of policies or is this something that's going to be coming back to us in Q2 about how we can have greater enforcement so that uh residents can get the outcome that they're looking for? Right? If this isn't allowed, we run into this with the homelessness situations, right? Zero into zero tolerance for encampments. What does that look like? And why do zero and uh tolerance areas are they covered with tents every day all day all the time and so residents get frustrated if it's not allowed why does it continue so anything that you can provide would be appreciated miss beer through you chair we certainly uh do get chronic uh residential complaints in relation to this issue and Part of it is in relation to the compliance first mindset. We really want to give residents the opportunity to comply with our bylaws. And so we do that. That gives them a period of time in which they have to potentially clean up their property. Uh when that cleanup is done or if it isn't done, the city will undertake those cleanup um endeavors. But we sometimes see that this is uh sort of a rinse and repeat cycle where the problem resolves itself temporarily and then renews again. And so we really do understand and and understand the frustration. Uh but we need those continuous complaints to come through to us so that we can resolve it. Uh in terms of what council can do, we'll uh look at that in this report coming back and if there is anything that we identify, we will certainly put that in the report. Councelor Stevenson. Thanks. I really appreciate that. It's it's about um managing expectations as well, right? like you want to tell the public this is this is the way it is and then you this is what you can expect and and a lot of that uh is important here. Thank you. Uh looking for other speakers I have councelor Trasa. I thank you uh through the chair. I I think this is a very productive discussion and I sense that we're getting very close to having unity on this. So I I I'm going to take back something I said and I am going to offer an amendment to A because I don't want to vote against A. I'd rather just fix it. And if we substitute the word bylaw where it says recommendations to strengthen the bylaw, take out the word bylaw and put in the words enforcement of the bylaws, then that would that would uh that would take care of my objection to the fact that there's more than one bylaw and that really the problem is enforcement and the bylaws are already there. So if if if we could make that small amendment, I don't think it's contrary, counselor. So the only issue is that you already on your first round speaking, you moved an amendment. So that's the only issue. Um but I just want to clarify just a moment. Okay? Because we just get I want this to be anonymous if possible. Okay. So, councelor, um because you already spoke on this item um on the as amended, that was your time to move an amendment. So, I'm just trying to keep us procedurally in order, but if anybody else who hasn't spoken perhaps maybe uh would like to from the committee, they could. Thank you. I'll go to Thank you. I'll go to Mayor Morgan. Yes. No, I see councelor McAllister brought this saying nodding that he's comfortable with that language. I I I'm happy to move the amendment. I hope not everybody needs to speak to it again and we can move along and get language that can allow us to proceed. So, I'll put it on the floor. just a moment and I will be going back to staff to ask if this affects the timeline at all uh through the chair. So uh this actually probably makes things a little more simpler even so it doesn't impact the timeline. It doesn't Thank you. And I have councelor Trusso as a seconder. We're just preparing the language. Just a moment, please. Okay, Mayor Morgan and Councelor Trasa, just going to you on the wording that the change to part A is to read the enforcement of the bylaws. Thank you. I'll go to the mayor in case she wanted to speak to this item. No, I don't need to speak to it. Thank you. Looking for any speakers on the as uh on the amendment. Sorry. Councelor Ferrer, this is what I needed to carry me over to support it. So, you'll have my support for a Thank you. Looking for any further speakers on this. Looking online. Okay, looking in chamber, seeing none on the amendment, we will open the vote. Councelor Trusso closing the vote. The motion carries 6 to zero. Thank you. I'll look for seconder on the as amended. Councelor Ferrer, councelor Hopkins. Thank you. Look for any final speakers on this item. Okay. Looking just for clarification from anyone on committee if this still needs to be separated out. Thank you. And last call for any speakers. Seeing none, we will open the vote. Closing the vote. The motion carries six to zero. Okay. Thank you everyone. Committee, I'm in your hands if you'd like to take a break now or if you'd like to wait until after the next item to take a break. So, I'm in your hands looking for anything. Seeing no one moving towards the mic for councelor Ferrer, go ahead. I need a bio break. Can I get five minutes? Do I have a seconder for five minutes? Councelor Hopkins seconding a five minute break. I will take a vote by hand. All in favor? So we have councelor uh Ferrer. Just keep your hands up folks. Ferrer Hopkins and Pribble. So opposed. That fails on a tie. I'm sorry. Okay, so that looks like we're proceeding with our next item. Uh we are on item 4.2 which is councelor Stevenson's uh letter uh stating restricting city funding organizations from distributing safe use drug smoking supplies. I have a delegation request uh for this item. What I'd like to do is I'd like to hear the delegation request first and then I'd look for a motion or an alternate motion to be put on the floor for discussion. Uh, I will look for a mover and a seconder on this item. Okay. Councelor Hopkins for the delegation. Sorry, Councelor Hopkins. Councelor Ferrer. Thank you. We'll just prepare that. Okay. We'll open the vote. Closing the vote. The motion carries 6 to zero. Thank you. This was a delegation request from Miss Blastro. You may come to the microphone, please. Thank you. And you have 5 minutes. Okay. Um, harm reduction policies were adopted decades ago after people were dying from drugrelated diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C. Hepatitis C is in particular shows no symptoms for 30 years or more at which point people were in late stages of liver disease. Harm deduct harm reduction policies were pushed by health care workers because it was is cheaper on the health care system to prevent disease rather than try to treat it in its late stages. Premier Kathleen Wyn just before leaving office made hepatitis C drugs available for free under the Ontario Trillium Benefit program at a cost of approximately $50,000 per treatment. it was still cheaper than letting pe patients either die as hepatitis C is a death sentence uh without access to the drugs that purge the virus from the body. That's why safe use drug supplies are important. They alleviate pressure from the health care system and why the program is under provincial jurisdiction. So, I I really don't understand what's motivating the counselor to bring this forward. I can't help think that it's um it's a form of showmanship because I don't understand why the counselor doesn't understand that it's a provincial program um that the cities are obligated to to administer because it's pragmatic. It's a pragmatic program because of the burden it places on the health care system. Um, it's important to bring these supplies to the people that are that need that are the users because they're it's it's more it's a sure thing and it's important for people like myself who pick up um drug paraphilania from my own property and from other properties. It's much safer for me um if um a supply like needles and what have you are used once rather than being very dirty because they've been used over and over again. I just um I just find it tiresome over time to have to always address these issues when to me they're just very straightforward. The province wants the burden off the health care system. These supplying safe um paraphilania for drug use alleviates a lot of that. It's it's a preventative measure to keep people uh one for for for causing an epidemic that the health care system then has to deal with. And so I I hope this is a short conversation um because the city seems to have no jurisdiction and the council should know that and and I'm hoping that this conversation isn't belabored. Um people should know that it's a provincial program that the city must um um um bring forward. Thank you. Thank you for your feedback. Um I have uh a communication from two members of the committee. I have a communication from a visiting member of committee. Uh I'm in the the committee's hands as to just a moment. Okay. Sorry about that. Uh I'm in committee's hands for uh next steps so that we can continue the conversation. Councelor Ferrer. Thank you, Chair. Uh councelor Trusso and and myself, we did uh add a communication because we do feel like uh when it comes to uh this topic, we would like to get as much information especially from the professionals um in the field um as possible. So we did reach out to the chief medical officer of health at the Middle Sex London Health Unit. I just texted him. From what I understand, he's ready and online. So, if the committee would permit me, I'd like to uh request that you would allow me to move a de a motion for delegation uh for Dr. Summers. He didn't submit a delegation before. So, I guess before I would move that motion, I would just want to know if if this is in order and how to how to go about that. Okay. Thank you. So, counselor, I don't need a motion to delegate for Dr. Summers, but I would like something on the floor before we ask people to speak to some to an item. I don't have a motion. Um, go away. Uh, I do have a motion ready for items to be received. If that's a motion that committee would like to entertain. Um, and then we can ask for for anybody else any questions of anyone else that has questions. And the items to be received would be the letter from councelor Stevenson and the letter from councelor Trusso myself. Okay. As well as the delegation. I would I would move that. And I have a seconder and councelor Hopkins. Okay. So now that that item's on the floor, you may begin your questioning. Dr. Summers, I understand you are online. Thank you so much for being here and for your patience because I know you've been online since about 1:00. Um, and uh, I will um, direct any questions that come your direction uh, to you should members of committee or visiting council have any questions. And councelor Fer, go ahead. Do I have to ask first? Oh, I wasn't I wasn't ready to ask the questions first. I'll yield to committee and I'll I'll put my hand up after. counselor. The motion is to receive the communication. If you have questions for Dr. Summers, those would be where this would be the time where you'd ask questions. Am I the only one who's going to ask questions to Dr. Summers? No, it's just that you're you're the speaking right now because you were the last one on the motion to move the motion to receive. If you don't have questions, I can go to other members of committee. Well, I do have questions. I just don't want to ask them yet. Can I can I ask them after? Okay. Thank you. I will go to other members of committee on this item. Councelor Traso. Yes. I'm going to ask um first of all, thank you for thank you for joining us and thank you for staying with us through uh other parts of the meeting. um you've had the opportunity to um re review Councelor Stevenson's um request. You're familiar with the program and what I'd like to what I'd like to ask you for and this is a general question and if it's too general I'll make it more specific, but do you and your office have an opinion on the matters under discussion? I I hope that's not too general. Thank you. I will go to M to Dr. Summers. Sorry, Dr. Summers. go ahead through you madame chair. Good afternoon everyone. Uh what I can speak to and and thank you to councelor Trosau and Ferrer for the invitation to delegate today. Uh what I can comment on is certainly that uh there are potential health implications from limiting access to uh safe uh consumption supplies including inhalation supplies. Um these are critical tools in minimizing the risks of uh infection transmission particularly bloodborne infections like hepatitis C and HIV as well as uh respiratory viruses and bacterial infections as well. Um it is essential um with these programs for them to be successful that um they are the materials are available and we recognize that people who are um consuming drugs and have problematic substance use um are often uh somewhat limited in where they're able to access these materials. So um it it is certainly um from a health perspective advantageous ensuring that these materials are broadly available. Uh thank thank you. My next question is um g given the fact that um your your office and your your board is is an independent board pursuant to provincial law. Um could you just briefly tell us what the involvement in your off of your office has been in this program? Um I'm not sure council can direct you to stop doing this although that's not the motion but it would have that side effect. So could you please speak to um the the the the origin of this program where the funding comes from and uh under whose authority it's carried out? Thank you. I'll go to Dr. Summers through you, Chair Ramen. As a local public health agency, uh we receive our direction on the minimum programs we have to deliver in our region through what are called the Ontario public health standards. uh within those standards there are a number of guidelines including some that refer to this program directly and we are expected to ensure the availability in the region of safer drug use supplies. Um we as a board um and as an agency uh ensure that that's the case through uh directing funding uh to a partner the regional HIV AIDS connection to operationalize um this program which includes the distribution of the materials uh which are often received through other programs from the province um through things like our careoint site um the health units offices at city plaza as well is through a number of satellite locations um including outreach programs. Um it is uh uh through those variety of mechanisms that the that the materials are distributed. Um so yes uh as a public health agency we're required to ensure the availability of these types of supplies. Um we then uh fund our hack to operationalize it through a number of different satellite sites. um as I've mentioned, councelor Chara and my ne my next question is um given given that it seems that you are under an obligation to delve into this area and maybe this is better for the um city solicitor I don't I don't know um does this council have the authority to to pass just from a jurisdictional point of view does this council have the authority to pass the uh measure that's uh the the the motion that's that that's on the table without causing a conflict and that could go to the solicitor. It could go to uh to your office. That's up to staff. I'll go to Mr. Shand. Uh thank you to the chair. Um the way I've read the direction is that it relates to uh city funds and city programs. So uh I think the jurisdiction is sort of limited to what the city would already have control over. Um, and that probably would not include the uh Middle Sex London Health Unit. Um, but if you wanted further uh uh exploration of the legal authorities, uh we'd have to uh provide a report for council. Councelor Trussa, I don't want to create another motion, certainly not in close session if it's not necessary. So, without knowing how councelor Stevenson's motion turns out today, it's it's hard for me to ask the next Sorry, the motion's not on the floor. The motion not on the floor. Okay. Would I be able to come back and reass this if it gets on the floor or am I done? The mo the motion right now is to receive. So, if a motion failed, then that would be your opportunity to do so. Uh the motion on the floor is to receive councelor Ferrer's and my letter. Is it on? It's to receive all communication as well. Okay. Um I I have a side question that's related to my jurisdictional question which I'm hesitant to get into but given given the risk of not being able to come back to this. If this council passed a measure, this is for the solicitor. If this council passed a measure restricting the distribution of of of the um I'll call it safe supply gear that that is that that's been described. Would that create would that have potential charter implications under section 7 with respect to claimants rights to life and security of the person? Uh so in order to answer that properly, we'd have to go into close session and um uh likely uh we'd need more time to prepare a fullsome report for council. Uh thank you counselor. Thank you. I think that's it for me and I hope that other members of this body have questions because this has been very illuminating. Thank you. Okay, so I have Mayor Morgan next followed by Councelor Ferrer. Um thank you. So, I I have a couple questions for uh for Dr. Summers. Um first though, I I just want to be clear that I um I support the the notion behind uh Councelor Stevenson's submission um uh of the desire to reduce uh and decrease drug use in our community uh and and investigating avenues to try to determine um how to best do that. And so, uh I I just wanted to put that out on on on the floor first. But with respect to uh Dr. Summers and and I appreciate you being available today to to answer a couple questions. Um, I want to ask a couple of questions about uh the history of the programs and then uh some questions about what we might be able to do to to achieve that goal that that may or may not be along the lines of what uh the council proposed in the letter. So, first I recall in my my first term of council near the end there was this uh at the end near the end of the term there was a significant um there was a significant outbreak of of HIV in the community and the the health unit through a a number of these programs uh decided to take action. I believe this was mainly on um the injection drug side of things, not the inhalation, but could you comment on that and what the effects of uh of that health intervention were on um the rates of HIV and I believe hepatitis C in the community. Thank you. I'll go to Dr. Summers through your chair. Uh yes. Uh from 2016 through 2018 um the Middle Sex London region concentrated within the city of London uh experienced a significant spike in HIV cases uh well outpacing the rest of the province and that spike was driven uh within the population of people who used injection drugs. uh so 2015 2016 2017 we would see about 40 to 60 cases of HIV new HIV diagnoses in those years again about 75% of them uh identifying a risk factor of people of of using injection drugs uh in response to that uh a multi-pronged approach was taken increased outreach from the health unit to support uh people getting HIV treatment an expansion of uh safe drug consumption supplies the opening of the Care Point site, which is the consumption and treatment facility. Um, a number of different modalities. As a result, last year, um, we saw seven new HIV cases in the Middle Sex London region with none of them reporting a risk factor of using injection drugs. Um, there are very few success stories that I'm able to share that are that positive. Um so it uh this part is one part of that response but um the distribution of safer supplies has been a critical component in addressing that HIV outbreak. Um hepatitis C rates um also continue to be things we're monitoring. We saw a high water mark um in and around the same period. it continues to decrease um although it has not had the the the as significant a decline um largely because hepatitis C is is more prevalent associated with newcomers to Canada as well because of potential medical procedures overseas um but all in all certainly we've seen significant progress Mayor Morgan yes and I appreciate that but I also recognize that that the counselor's focus has been on um uh uh inhalation um materials And so I I guess my question to you and I'm I'm unsure if you can answer this. Um and and if the chair will just allow me just a little bit of information I can share to help preface my question. Um one of the challenges with um the land please services open air drug strategy is if they come across an individual and they're trying to make a referral uh if they're uh an introvenous user they can take them to Care Point and and provide a connection point. uh Care Point doesn't currently uh provide any sort of inhalation oversight services from my understanding. Um and and that feels to me like a bit of a gap in the system because you know there can be an intervention but if there's nowhere to uh safely take someone there's a challenge with that. So that could be you know the lack of you know treatment and recovery beds in the community, the lack of uh the ability of the facility we have to actually deal with some of the problems and challenges that people might be facing. Um can you articulate um I know the council has provided a suggestion on a path we could take to reduce this um but do you perceive other paths that may be effective that we could pursue either ourselves or through provincial advocacy related to the area specifically around um uh inhalation uh drugs and and and reducing um reducing that challenge that we see on the streets of our community. Dr. Summers through through you, Madam Chair. I thank you for that question. Morgan, want to preface this by echoing your comments previously about the uh critical issue that has been highlighted through this letter of ongoing open drug use and the impacts that has, the negative impacts that has on community. Um certainly the health unit and myself uh are fully aligned with the uh London Police Services open drug strategy. That's been work that has been co-developed through our community drug and alcohol committee which um I chair. Um so uh fully supportive of of the work that needs to happen there. Um when we look towards what those solutions might be uh we can consider the prevention activities that need to happen which includes things like addressing poverty and trauma. um continues to be things like early childhood supports uh but also increased access to treatment uh for those that are uh suffering from severe addiction and that includes inpatient beds, outpatient services that include wraparound supports with primary care. Um, and we also need to explore additional services that give people safer spaces to use the drugs they would be using anyways so that we can reduce it on our streets. Um, there are other jurisdictions in Canada that have implemented safe inhalation facilities. um that is not currently uh a funded resource here in the province of Ontario, but over the last number of years given the increase in inhalation drug use, it is a service that I would be uh highly supportive of exploring for the city of London. Um the Care Point safe injection site has been a critical part of our response. Uh but as you mentioned, it is not for inhalation and it is a notable gap in our region. Um unfortunately when individuals who are uh stricken with addiction such are as the folks that we see on the streets um they are folks that are going to be using these drugs in their current context regardless of the types of materials we provide them. The effort to provide them with safer equipment is to minimize the risk. And I think it is very fair to to state as you have that we need alternative places for them to use since we know they'll be using regardless. Mayor Morgan. Yeah. My other questions are for our staff. I don't know if you want me to do that at this time or or let focus on Dr. Summers. Um I'm in your hands if you'd like to continue with your part of the discussion. Sure. Then just a couple more and to our staff. Um I I just want to so I understand the emergency treatment uh I think it's the emergency treatment fund that the federal government gave us that provided a variety of services had a component within it that required us to fund in some uh way um uh harm reduction materials being distributed uh and and my understanding is that that funding expires at the end of March and there's no uh continuation of it and so that that funding of that program would end. So recognize that the city does have at least one program that the feds have required us to fund uh the distribution of materials. Beyond that, are there any contracts or dollars specifically allocated by the municipality to distribute um inhalation kits or or kits in the community? Is that something that we've specifically put in a contract uh beyond the the federal one or or something specifically that we've allocated dollars towards? Thank you. I'll go to Mr. Dickens. Uh, thank you. And through you, Madam Chair, that is correct. The only reference to harm reduction kits or safe use gear uh was through a Health Canada funding agreement from the federal government. Uh, that funding expires on March 31st as council is well aware as we brought that forward. our other contracts. Um we we uh fund um uh sorry just uh we fund three organizations for outreach. Uh 509 Pursuit being the one that's receiving the emergency treatment funding from the federal government. The other two that we fund through city contracts uh for outreach are at LOSA and London Cares. Uh and neither one of those contracts have any dollars attached to the uh procurement or uh obtaining of any harm reduction kits or any requirement that they even distribute harm reduction kits. It's not part of the contract. Uh it's not part of u an expectation that they do it. Mayor Morgan and through the course of this discussion um and even the engagement through the open uh air drug strategy that London Police Services has had, I know there's been engagement with our staff about how to try to tackle some of the challenges that we may have gaps in the system um for from a healthcare perspective. Has there been any uh engagement with our staff, with the agencies who may of their own accord be handing out kits about them potentially modifying the areas that they hand them out in or being sensitive to some concentrations uh within say the downtown core or on or on Dundes Place or or places like that? Has there been any engagement on that side of things to see if if we're not funding it but others are doing it? Have they has there been any engagement to say can you modify what you're doing without without the need for for a motion? I'll go to Mr. Lettisaur. Yeah, through you madam chair. So there has been engagement with uh with the outreach teams uh since uh this uh this concern was was raised. Uh through that discussion the outreach teams at this point uh have decided that they would uh would uh not be distributing on specifically Dundash Street. um uh for 24/7 uh wouldn't uh wouldn't uh continue distribution distribution at that area realizing that their distribution in other areas would continue uh as normal. Mayor Morgan, you have about 30 seconds left. Okay. So, do you want me to I'm going to use the last 30 seconds for debate. Do you want me just to squeeze that in because I do actually have to leave at 4:30 as well. So, or do you want me to hold so others can ask questions? You go ahead. Okay. start my 30 second clock now. Okay. So, um in debate and and very tight. I appreciate the answers to the questions. I appreciate the council's goal and I appreciate the attempt uh and desire to align with some of the other things we're putting with open uh air drug strategy. To me, it seems like we're not necessarily funding this directly through some modification that agencies are willing to do. And I would support at some point a renewed advocacy position with the province on increasing the number of treatment and recovery beds or even the investigation about whether uh inhalation services at Care Point is something that we want to pursue to provide an alternate drop off for London police services. So I think there's alternatives to the motion. I respect where the council wants to go. I support decreased drug use. Thank you. Okay. I have councelor Ferrer next and then looking for other speakers to add on to the list. Thank you chair. Thanks for the questions. Mayor, Councelor Trusso, uh I'm going to start with this. Councelor Stevenson's motion does point to a very real issue. Um open drug use on Dundas is a real thing. It is a real thing citywide. Um I see I've seen it in bus shelters. I've seen it on the bus and I know um that there's a lot of uh impacts downstream for uh the greater London when it comes to this. At the same time, the direction that's being taken is kind of where I depart from that because I do understand as as far as I see it is, you know, we are lacking that full comprehensive health care system which is not there and that's really the issue that has ar has arisen here. um the questions that the mayor and council trusso has asked to our chief medical officer. I guess I would ask one more question and I do see that the counselor has referenced uh for a provincial declaration in 2024 to move away from harm redu from the harm reduction model. But I also understand that the Middle Sex London Health Unit uses the provincial uh health standards and I just wanted to know have you seen any uh legislation change uh with that declaration from the province or are you still operating under how the provincial health standards uh mandates your work to operate when it comes to safer supply materials? Thank you. I'll go to Dr. Summers. Uh through you, Madam Chair. Uh we continue to operate under the Ontario public health standards. Um and just to expand ever so briefly um you know harm reduction um as an approach and treatment and recovery as an approach are not mutually exclusive. Uh they are uh work in tandem and in partnership as part of that comprehensive uh way to respond to uh problematic substance use in any community. Councelor Ferrer. Thank you. And I feel uh some of the big issues that I see when it comes to this is obviously the lack of provincial support when it comes to this. They are little pieces here and there uh but they don't have the full system and there's a big un misunderstanding of how things are actually going to be translated into a pathway or stabilization for treatment and recovery and the fact that that system is not there and that's really on the pro the province's hands. Um, I usually say this, but I I don't appreciate um how the debate is is usually crafted where you have the province kind of behind us. The people are in front of us and the people are looking at us saying, "What's going on? We need answers. Give us solutions." When in reality, we have no real tangible ability or direct control when it comes to um actually doing something. And I really would like us to have that uh aware when we bring um items like this to the public debate because we have the province pushing us in the middle and with a motion like this, we're wedging ourselves in the middle and we should really be careful when we do that because we need people to understand that coming to us for the issues when it comes to substance use disorder and the system that's barely there is not really something that we can control. Um, and we really need to start focusing the conversation and really uh have like an educational component on it on where people should go when they're trying to advocate uh for an actual change cuz I think we need some serious changes. um we need a real uh you know comprehensive model as I'm saying but we have to be really um careful when we position ourselves this way because if we do then we are making some promises that we can't achieve and promises that we have no direct control over um I want to go back to the health uh the medical health officer now I understand that we in our contracts we have a harm reduction approach but we don't directly fund any of the distribution of these services and the metal Middle Sex London Health Unit is using the Ontario provincial's uh health standards uh on how you go about things. We can't control that. That's correct. I just if you can just answer that we have no ability to actually give you a direction to say to you you cannot hand out safer supply materials. That comes from the province. And if we did somehow um even though I know we can't stop the distribution of these materials on Dundas, you would still be able to uh I guess um hand out supplies from your satellite locations and your location um at your main office. Is that correct, Dr. Summers? Through you, Madam Chair. Um, our our uh board operates under the requirements of the Ontario Public Health Standards and that would remain in place um regardless in this situation. Um, and we would still be required as a local public health agency to ensure the availability of these types of materials given the drug use patterns that we see in this region. Uh, moving ahead. Councelor Ferrer, thank you. So um we really need to be speaking to the province for more supports and taking away safer supply materials as was said can you know promote communicable diseases and it can reduce uh the full spectrum of public health in the area like I would say you know there's an analogy here when it comes to um substance use disorder there are there can be genetic predispositions there can be um p and there's obviously predisposition dispositions to um when it comes to someone's upbringing, when it comes to any type of trauma that someone goes through, but there is a choice element there as well. But when it comes to let's say cancer, there are genetic predispositions as well. And uh let's say if we're talking about drinking or or smoking, you can have liver cancer or lung cancer. There's a choice element there as well. But the difference between the two is 20 seconds. How many seconds? 20. Oh, the difference between the two is that we have an oncology unit at the at the hospital. We have a full spectrum of care. We have safe supplies if it comes to needle injections for individuals who are going through cancer treatment. We don't have that when it comes to addictions or substance use disorder. Thank you. Can I can you give me a little bit of leeway? I just I did, but if you want to just final three words. I can't do it with three words. Okay. Uh councelor, you know, you're always able to ask for more time from committee if you need it, but there are waiting for speak. So, at the end of your time, you've moved a motion for two minutes. I have a seconder in councelor Traso. Uh I will one moment while we prepare. We're opening the boat. closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to one. Go ahead, council. You have two minutes. Thank you, colleagues. I won't take the full two minutes. Um, the point I'm trying to make is this. We have systems in place for other types of substance use. The difference is is when it comes to smoking or drinking which can cause cancer which does require um extra supports and help. If we didn't have those supports, an individual who wouldn't be able to work if they had extreme malignant cancer in their body that's metastasized from their lungs wouldn't be able to work and they could be out on the street as well. But we don't look at it that way. we see that we have this health care support. We have a whole unit in the hospital that's able to help somebody with that with the both the precare, the surgery, and the afterare. Um, and we don't think anything about that. But if you look at the two, there is an applesto apples comparison here. The difference is when it comes to substance use disorder and addiction, we don't have that. We just don't have that. We have little bits here and there. We have what I've spoken about before when it comes to um the priv private equity model for distribution of of opioid agonist treatment which is an issue but I'm not going to go there right now and we also have the distribution of safe supplies and we have a little bit of downstream assistance but nowhere near enough and that is the main issue that we have here when it comes to advocacy to the province. You know, I know we've been advocating to the province very well for a long time trying to say, "Hey, we need a little extra help, but we haven't really seen too much of that. I would like to see more inhalation um supports like we see at Care Point, but I would say if it's only Care Point, that's that's not good. We need more I agree with the mayor. We do need more areas uh in the city to have safer consumption sites and we need more downstream uh supports. We need a better comprehensive care system is really what I'm saying. So, thank you for giving me the extra time and and I I'm done. Thank you. Okay, I had councelor Hopkins and councelor Stevenson. I'm going to go to councelor Hopkins and to councelor Stevenson just to follow our practice of going with committee members first. Go ahead. Uh yes, thank you. And um I I I first of all would like to say I am looking forward to the counselor's comments um as well, but um I want to thank Dr. Summers for being here and sharing your expertise. I think it does matter and thank you for that. I uh also appreciate what the mayor had to say too. You know, we can maybe find out other opportunities, areas to improve um areas for inhalation sites. I think, you know, there are missing gaps along the way, but um it it reminded me of how we must and can do a better job working together. I really do think that's very very important. I appreciate councelor Stevenson's perspective. Um, it may not be my perspective, but I do uh I and would like to encourage you to work with city staff, work with agencies, and and come up with opportunities where we're all in it in this together, working together to solve, I think, the same um um goals that we all have, trying to protect our vulnerable um community. I find myself uh saying more and more when I'm at this committee um the importance of um um of how we do ourselves a disservice when we look at good policy. I think we fail to commu u protect the community when we ignore, try to change, um try to divide uh I think we can all do a better job uh looking at our policies and and working together. So, thank you for that. Thank you. I had councelor Stevenson and then councelor Purple said he will follow you. So, I will go to councelor Stevenson next. Okay. Thanks colleagues. this has uh been good. I did have a couple of qu I just want to reiterate that this is not about should we have these harm reduction supplies or not. It was simply the limitation of a very small area of our city probably two blocks wide along Dundas Street and up along Richmond. That's it. That's the only change. We've already since uh putting this forward it sounds like the agencies have voluntarily said not Dundas Street. So this is not the divisive issue that some are making it out to be. It's about we have a common goal to have an economically viable downtown and a safe neighborhood for people to live. And we spending a lot of money on that on consultation strategies and on our London Police Service. It's about alignment. It's about better outcomes. And is there something we can do? Can we fix the entire problem? No, we cannot. But I don't I think we underestimate what we can do as a municipality and I think we're it's incumbent upon us to find out how we can do better than what we're already doing just making things better. Um so for those who are concerned I just wanted to confirm through Dr. Summers I believe uh regional HIV AIDS has harm reduction there is a team of harm reduction outreach workers uh for whom this would not uh impact. Uh I'll go to Dr. Summers. Do you need that question repeated? Nope. Uh through you, Madam Chair. I that is my understanding as well, although I uh can't comment in massive depth on the outreach operations of Rhack, but it it is my understanding. Yes, Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. Uh, and I appreciate that answer and and I can get clarity between now and council, but my my intention was not to impede in any way the provincial obligation to provide this equipment to Londoners. Uh, and that is absolutely available and I'm confident in the Middle Sex London Health Unit's ability to do that. We also get provincial funding and federal funding to achieve our objectives around housing, around homelessness, and around safety in our neighborhoods. That is this council's obligation, and I am looking to make that better. We have an issue. it's been raised and I I believe there's a way and and have hearing that the agencies are already voluntarily uh agreeing to this makes it all the more reason why I believe this is a motion that should be put forward that it should be put in the contract that there is an area that we're committed to where we're willing to align our taxpayer funded services because we right now we are funding uh policies that collide and that's just not helping anybody. So if there's an area that we can agree on then I believe that's where the motion should be and we should be really uh clear about that with our contracted agencies. But in the meantime through you to staff I'd like to know where along Dundas Street from end to end that that agreement has been taken place and for what time period we're talking about at the moment. Thank you. I'll go to Minister Leisur. Thank you. And through you, Madam Chair. So, right now, it's uh it's ongoing. Uh there's been no deadline uh communicated uh as far as Dunda Street. My current understanding is the extent of Dunda Street uh through Old East Village and right out to the river. Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. And in the discussions, was there a reason why just Dundastra and not the twob block width of the uh Midtown Oldies village downtown? Thank you. I will go to staff through you madam chair. Uh at this time there was no communication in other areas. It was specific to Dundas Street, but we are early in those communications. So, this was just over the last day or two that those communications have taken place. Thank you. And through you, um just curious why Dundas, you know, not Richmond, not like was there a reason like how did how did it come out that now it's Dundas Street? Mr. Latasaur. Thank you, Madam Chair. I wasn't directly involved in those communications. So I think uh it was uh and I don't want to speak on behalf of London police but where the majority of their work is occurring in the open air project as well uh and looking at how that collides with uh with the work uh being done on Dust Street. So I think that was the uh the nexus of that conversation. Um but again uh I wasn't directly involved in that uh that conversation that was with the manager of uh CIR. Thank you uh councelor Stevenson. Yeah thank you. So, I just want it to be clear to see how easy this can be, right? That we can come together and agree upon an area. It's not going to put lives at risk where the agencies wouldn't have agreed to that. It's not getting in the way of provincial health matters. It's simply us taking control over what we can control and giving Londoners what they need and deserve and what supports all of our objectives. We want the downtown to be viable. We want businesses and uh residents to flock downtown and the uh abuse of substance abuse and the open public drug use is a number one concern. Number one and London Police Service has done their bit and this is about how we can do our part to come alongside that and say not here just in this one small little area not here. That's what the motion is about. I'm I'm hoping that we'll have support if not here at council in making our policies and systems better. Just a small tweak. Thank you. Okay. Uh I had councelor Purl next. Thank you sir. No doubt and we all know that I'm not saying anything new. We do have these issues uh and uh we do need to address them. uh you know in terms of the harm reduction and such initiatives there are cities in the world that it works for them and they support it and they go further and there are some that that it doesn't and they go the o they go the opposite way it's really interesting worldwide where it goes one way and the other way well some where it goes the other way the issue I have is this we do have uh London police and London Cares which London Cares is the primary outreach organization that does this initiative 519% they don't do 519 pursuit all they have is Nalakan and they don't distribute it and I I don't see a reason I think that uh and I said it a few times during the three and a half years I don't think that we have to do everything through motions we just need to work together and if we have London police and London cares already working on this and they uh by the way just so you know the Dandas is first they're talking about the other two areas as well that are being discussed and kind of everything around it. I just don't see I I prefer to work with the teams with the organizations. Let's work faster. Let's get it done. Let's address it. But that's my issue. So I uh if it does come to the council, I will not be supporting it because I want this to be driven by police and the organizations and I believe it's going to be more successful and more more faster uh addressing these addressing these issues. And and the other thing is also involved in the enforcement. I really think that if we look at this and if we are going to go through the if we are going to go through the city first, if we are going to pass uh if we if we are going to pass this then the next step is going to be enforcement. How are we going to enforce it etc etc. I really think that police and London cares let's leave it what they come up with. Let's see what they come back with and uh I believe it's going to be more efficient, more effective and faster. Thank you. Thank you councelor P. we take the chair. I have the chair and I recognize councelor Ramen. Thank you and through the presiding officer. I wanted to say first thank you to Dr. Summers for being here today. We really appreciate having you you on the line and the uh care that which you've uh provided answers to us today. Um I also want to thank uh there's been a number of engagements I've had. I had some engagements with the London police as well as London cares um just on this matter as well. Um what I find very helpful NC staff, sorry I should say. Um thank you for all the information. It's good uh from the perspective of getting more information and just having more background. Um what I did appreciate was how quickly London police have been able to with in partnership with London Cares been operationalizing other changes as needed uh throughout. And to me, this is very similar to um some of the initiatives that London police are taking on uh around even things like uh officers on buses. Um these are things that they're able to move and operationalize before even we can bring a motion and and address it. So this is to me is very similar. So I thank the counselor for uh for providing all counselors that provided communication on this matter and the delegation. I think uh it's important that we are having these conversations at committee. Um, you know, it may not be that every motion is moved forward, but the actions and the conversations are just as important. And I'm glad to hear that this is already um starting to see some some changes and impacts uh in the areas that were uh outlined in the letter as well. With that, I will uh my remarks. Thank you for your comments and returning to chairs to you. Thank you. And I will look for any final speakers on this item. Seeing none online, seeing none in chambers, we'll open the vote. The vote is yes to receive. Closing the vote. The motion carries six to zero. Okay. Thank you, committee. I'm in your hands for a break at this time. Uh I'm looking for someone to move motion on a time for a break as many are in need of one. Councelor Traso, I'll move 10 minutes. Councelor Truss has moved 10 minutes. Councelor Hopkins has seconded. All in favor by hand. Any opposed? Motion carries. For those in the gallery, we are our committee to consider a change of order for the items that are under deferred matters and additional business so that we can deal with 5.2 first as we have a delegation for that item and then we can deal with 5.1. So I'm looking for a mover and seconder to uh move that uh item those items. Councelor Prible. Uh, Chair, I'd have to call a point of order for this one, actually. Um, and it's just procedurally going through the procedure bylaw. Um, and I'm looking at, uh, part four of committee section 391 of the deferred matters additional business um, item. And it says it includes matters, uh, or of deferred matters list or other business of an emergent nature that must be dealt with before the next regular meeting of a standing committee. So I just wanted to know uh if this is on if both of the items actually are on the deferred matters list or what would be the reasoning of the emerent nature to hear them today. Uh thank you. So you're asking me as the writer of the motion. Okay you I will turn the chair over to councelor Pribble so that I may answer those questions. I have the chair and I recognize councelor Ramen. Uh thank you and through you. So, uh, item 5.1, the reason that I brought this item forward was as, uh, we were dealing with an item at council. Uh, and this item was directly connected to the item that we dealt with at council. So, I was trying to move it forward, uh, as a remedy to follow up on that discussion. 5.2 again was an item that came through committee and council. So, uh, after those discussions happened, uh, I was looking to sequentially move those, uh, items forward following those matters. And as you'll see, there was also additional communication submitted from councelor Stevenson on a matter that, uh, I would say residents in that building are also uh, raising for consideration, which is why the delegation's in front of us as well. Councelor Priv, thank you for your comments and I'm returning to chair to you. Sorry. I think uh because the council is calling a point of order on motions of which I've submitted. Um I'm going to ask that you deal with the the item. I'm dealing with the item. Can I challenge the chair on that? Sorry. I have not made a decision yet. Based on the comments I heard from councelor Ramen, my decision is that uh the items on the deferred matter stays as they are and her explanation in terms of the last meeting uh followup from the last meeting agenda. Thank you. So can I challenge her now? So I would challenge because section 39 for an emerent motion speaks to we need to hear this before the next council because it will cause irreparable harm or loss to the corporation. Um so I need to know just to be procedurally in order because I do want to keep things as procedurally in order as possible and we did speak to that earlier today in this count in this committee meeting. Um, I I haven't heard how hearing these motions today would be um they need to be heard or discussed because there is an a potential irreparable harm or loss to the corporation. Okay, counselor. Uh if I can ask you to make the motion and based on the motion I will decide if I stand and the the committee will decide by the vote. If you can please put forward a motion. Thank you. Uh just to clarify a motion to challenge the the chair. It is to appeal the ruling of the chair. And just for your information, counselor, if you are appealing, you will need a seconder. I would like to ask the members of the committee if there is a seconder. I don't see a seconder. So there my decision stands. Okay, thank you. Uh, we're back to the change of order at this time. Sorry, council approval. Thank you. And I'm returning the chair to councelor Ramen. Thank you. I have the chair and sorry. Okay. So, we are entertaining the possibility of a uh change of order and it was again to hear a delegation request. So, if anyone would like to move that change of order, I have councelor Perble and councelor Traso. Thank you. And we will prepare that for vote. It is open. closing the vote. The motion carries four to zero with one abstain. Okay. Thank you. Um I am looking to committee for a motion to hear the delegation request from Miss Phoenix. Councelor Traso, Council, Councelor Perbble. This is on item 5.2, the community housing financial challenges. Thank you. That is open to vote. counselors Ferrer and Trusso. Oh, yes. Trust. Yes. Councilor Ferrer. Chair, with all due respect, I don't want to vote because this is Council Ferrer. This is a vote right now. It's not a debate. One more call for councelor Ferrer. Councelor Ferrer. Um, the system won't allow me to close the vote without a counselor voting, so I'll have to mark you absent. Is this absent from the subsequent vote on it? Closing the vote. The motion carries four to zero. Thank you, Miss Phoenix. Thank you for joining us. You've been very patient. Please go ahead. You have five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Jody Phoenix, and I'm currently the president of the board of directors at Toe Puddle Housing Cooperative. Many of you in the room know me and have worked with me in the past. I've been a long-term resident of of Toe Puddle for approximately 11 years. Most recently, I'm sure we've all seen the news story of last Friday, Thursday or Friday. I had a whole five minutes worth of something I prepared to say, but recent actions or again inactions of council has diverted my attention. If anybody in this room does not feel the urgency of this issue, I don't know what it is we can do to help you. We house 134 units of highly vulnerable lowincome people and we've been given no assistance from the city of London via their staff. Nobody at council stood up and asked questions. Nobody did the footwork to find out what I was going to talk about today. We have tried as a board of directors to work in partnership with the city of London through your staff on many occasions for funding, for solutions, for help, for resources, and we have received nothing but crickets. There was a change in housing division staff that we weren't even made aware of. As a matter of fact, the last meeting that we had was with somebody who's not even with the department anymore. We were told that there was going to be a security audit. That was 16 months ago. The city staff hasn't followed up. Our most recent meeting with three city staffs, it took me six weeks to coordinate because they were unwilling to meet on site with us. They were unwilling to meet on site. And when they did meet on site, we were told they had a limited 30 minutes. They were going to talk and we were going to listen. That is not a partnership. That is not what the city manager stood up and told council about last week. that we work closely to form partnerships to see what resources we can extend. That's not happened. And it hasn't happened at all for 10 years. Topal has been the victim of many decisions by council the victim. Most recently, we've been the victim of the housing list because those people aren't vetted and council for some reason wants to pat themselves on the their back when they house somebody who's homeless. You're not doing them or the community any services or any favors. Somebody who is suffering deeply from mental health and addiction issues, they need help. They need to be made well. I just heard the counselor speak to the Dr. Summers saying that exact same thing. But we want to take somebody off the street in the active throws of addiction, in the active throws of a mental health crisis, put them behind a closed door at toe puddle and say, "We've done our job." Tooka doesn't have the resources to help that person. As I said last week, we are a piece of the puzzle. We're not the first step. Council has done nothing to help those people but to try to house them. What resources do they have at toe puddle? They have zero. So what happens is they rely on the support systems they have from the street because government at all levels, it's not just you guys, it's all levels, the resources they have on the street, the support they have on the street, they invite them into their homes and then we have to deal with it because council through staff isn't giving us any resources. We now have 247 security. 247 security. I was told by a pre previous housing division manager that the city was doing a security audit and that there would be money attached to that. As I said that was about 16 to 18 years or months ago. We are in an operational deficit. If we don't get help now, it is going to be an urgent matter that the city has to deal with. Time is Phoenix. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. Thank you uh for your feedback and um I will hand the chair to council approval. Thank you. And I have the chair and I recognize councelor Ramen. Thank you uh councelor. Um I sorry I failed to mention to you that staff did have uh an an update for us before we go to my communication. Okay. So before I go to the council ramen I'm going to the staff for the update please uh through the presiding officer. So, um, I did, uh, prepare a memo with Matt Felberg, our director, on the just providing a little bit of information on the our role as a service manager versus the housing provider and operating agreements. Um, this is just because we're used to dealing with a lot of uh um different matters with LMCH or some of the other city buildings like Silvin, Thompson or Baseline. This these providers are inherently different. So, the city doesn't have an ownership stake. We have a a role through the housing services act and those tools that we have are mostly financial related. So um we very much are are there to be able to support the uh the various housing providers and that requires uh financial controls as well to ensure that we're uh uh spending the money appropriately. So um so say for example like in the last uh since 2022 we've we've provided about $1.2 2 million in capital and additional funding over and above our operational funding to topple this uh um since that time. And uh all of these things they require us to have documentation, make sure we have quotes, receipts, uh signed funding agreements, all those types of things. So um we very much uh that's our role is just being able to provide this financial piece and of course uh anything else that's listed under the act. So um uh also noted in my memo is we are bringing forward a report in April that's going to provide a more detail and background on the tobal housing uh co-op and uh we very much do we will be continuing to work with all of our housing providers uh make sure that we both uh provide them the financial amounts that they're that they uh that they deserve and also ensure that they're meeting those provincial operating agreements as well. So thank you very much. Thank you Scott. Uh thank you Mr. Mayers for your update and I'm going to go back to councelor Ramen. Uh thank you and through you. So, um I did uh prepare a letter and my letter was related to uh the um previous report that we had, but also just in consideration to some of the additional concerns that we're hearing um on community housing financial challenges, noting that we did receive a memo saying that a report would be coming forward on TE for with toll puddle uh toll puddle sorry um specifically in April. Um so this report was more of a general uh look at appendix B of the previous report that we had received noting that approximately 75% of housing providers are are able to fill their vacancies but we had this 25% where there was this gap. So, the motion reads that the civic administration be directed to report back to a future meeting of the community protective services committee with a summary of the number of units currently vacant within the community housing system in the service manager area and collect additional data from community housing providers and provide an analysis of the key factors contributing to the vacancies. Uh, that's my motion. Thank you, Councelor Ramen. And I'm looking if there is a seconder for this motion. I will second council if you would like to start speaking about your motion. Thank you. I will look to speak to it. So um again looking noting in the report that uh we are experiencing higher vacancies losses and that these losses mean that individuals uh like families uh and individuals in the community are not able to then occupy these units and therefore they sit vacant. Uh and you know that downstream effect has impacts on um our on housing in general but also looking at the fact that there are needs for repairs uh capital improvements and wanting to understand better that turnaround and turnover timeline as well as any administrative processes that are involved. Um so this report is to give us more in-depth answers on those matters. Um, also again noting that on the other issue, we are receiving communication in April with a follow-up report. Thank you, Councelor Ramen. I don't have currently anyone on it. Councelor Hopkins, please go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Uh, Mr. Presiding Officer, so I I I really do think some clarification is needed. I I was getting very confused at the beginning because we did receive a memo uh regarding toll puddle. That recommendation will be coming to CAPS April 13th and I wanted to try to understand how this motion works and I appreciate uh the counselor coming forward uh and explaining um the concerns around the higher vacancies. So, uh, so we're going to be here asking for another report back and maybe through you just to staff and we do not have a timeline, but I'm trying to um understand what this report back will look like. Is it is it a a a huge undertaking? I think is what I need to know first of all. Thank you, councelor. I'm going to the staff in terms of the report and timeline. uh through the presiding officer. It is a substantial amount of work. It's information that we haven't collected in the past, but I think it would be very valuable to collect to be able to have that understanding as far as why these vacancies occurring and some of the roadblocks to be able to uh address those vacancies. So, uh it's likely going to be at least probably Q3 of this year because it'll take a lot of work. We've got our our 65 providers and we'll have to be um collecting a lot of information from them to just have that understanding and we want to give them a little bit of time to collect it to be able to provide it to us as well. So Q3 is what we're projecting. Thank you counselor. Sounds good to me. Thank you. Council Trusso. Go ahead. Um, I'd like to make a motion and um I would like to move I would like to move the um text of the motion that councelor Stevenson circulated to us earlier. Are you amending it under and uh make I'm amending the motion on on on the floor to to to to add that to it. I don't think it's well, I shouldn't argue, but I should just say I'd like to get that. And if there's a reason why we need to break this up and maybe have part of it come later to give staff more time, that's okay. But the top piece I really need to have dealt with right away. Jerry Jerry gave it to me and she circulated. I don't know why they don't. I need a mic. I need a mic. Thank you, Counselor. Right now, it's with the clerk. They are looking at the mo. They're searching right now for that motion. and presiding officer, I'll second that. Sorry, councelor. Can you repeat it? I will second the motion that councelor Trusso has moved for councelor Stevenson. Okay. Uh I was advised by the clerk that uh I want to see it first uh because the two motions they are they are different. They are different. So I'm going to read both of them now and I will make the uh the decision if I believe that it would be an amendment to it or not. Just as Thank you all for your patience. I was comparing right now with the clerk the both motions and I made a decisions that they are not the same. The one that's in front of us it's uh addressing the number of units and the data analysis comp contributing to these units and the one council trusso is it is different. So my decision is that it's not the same and my decision is to deal with the motion that's in front of us first. Excuse me. any other speakers to council Ferrera. So I saw this motion out of order because it is and there's no urgency to the nature. Now I understand what the delegates are saying but this motion this the motion that's on the floor is for a report back. The motion that councelor Trussell and I just seconded is specifically for you and the chair the presiding officer just turn deemed that out of order. You are looking for support. I will give as much support as I can. I have not had any reach out from this housing cooperative, but every time I do, I help as much as I can. I would like to see staff and I would like to see council do everything we can to support housing providers as much as possible. That's what I do all the time. The reason I deemed a report back out of order is because it's going to take months for it to come back. We are on the same page here. Point of order. What is a point of order? Thank you. The counselor is referring to the motion being deemed out of order, but you're as you as a chair have not deemed it out of order. Thank you, councelor. And I stand behind it as it is as it is to what to what is in front of us. The motion that was proposed by council truss is not in order. Thank you. Can I continue? Thank you for your comments, Council Ferrer. You can continue but to the motion that's in front of us currently. Thank you. The motion in front of us that's before us is for a report back to be procedurally in order for it to be heard on an added item. It has to have or show irreparable harm to the corporation specifically. We deviate from our rules and our procedures a lot and because of that we run into issues and this is why I think we need to get what's on the floor in front of us right now. Please talk to that. Where's the point of order? I I am speaking to what's on the floor, but if I don't want to be heard by the committee, then that's fine. Councelor, we dealt with the point of order. You can continue with your comments towards the motion that's in front of us. Presiding officer, with all due respect, I was continuing with my comments. Please go ahead. You didn't lose any time. The motion is out of order, but if I sit here, I am not able to abstain. I can only vote negative because I will be deemed as absent. I will support the motion. It is not urgent, but I will support it if we need to get this on the floor. But I have trouble deviating from our policies and our procedure again and again and again. It gets us into trouble. Council Trussa, go ahead. H how would uh this is a procedural question through the chair to the chair or the clerk or solicitor or housing staff? If I feel that the situation at toll puddle is currently an emergency, how would I make that finding at this meeting so we could proceed with at least the toll puddle part of it? because based on what I understand and my knowledge of that building, I believe that there is a substantial um emergency in terms of the condition of the building um particularly at at at puddle and I I'd like some guidance in terms of how I could move that urgency forward and today I'm just talking about toll puddle. I'm not even talking about on the floor. But right now, we can only speak to motion. Councelor, if currently we are speaking only to the motion that's on the floor. Any additional comments you can certainly bring back. to the council on March 31st. In that case, I'll move a I'll move an amendment to the motion on the floor to include language that says the committee is concerned that the current conditions as we understand them constitute a threat. threat to the health and safety of toe puddle and surrounding residents. And we request that this matter with respect to toll puddle proceed as an emergency matter at this time. Is that right? So, council trust out the comments and you're a madman. It it has to do with the motion that is not in front of us and that's the one that you are speaking with that was potentially another motion but the other motion is not currently in front of us. So I will ask you if you look at the current motion that's in front of us if you have any comments or amendments but those amendments would have to be again to the points that are there in terms of the units number of units in terms of the data analysis. So, if you can think about if there's anything you want to change, amend to the one that's currently in front of us. Yes, but I feel I stated that in the motion that I just put forward with the parent, which apparently is out of order. Um, did did you just roll my motion my amendment out of order? In which case, I'd like to make a motion to overrule the chair. Yes, there's a seconder. Council Ferrera Okay, the clerk is ready. So, if you vote yes, you are agreeing with my decision. If you do not agree with my decision, you vote no. Councelor Ferrer, are you calling the vote? I didn't hear everyone for or against, so I vote nay. Closing the vote. The motion fails two to three. Okay. Based on this vote, Council Trussa, please go ahead with yours. I put the motion on the floor. My concern and the reason why Oh. Okay. Thank you councelor. So currently the clerk has the committee is concerned that the current conditions constitute a threat to the health and safety to the residents and to puddle and and that we request and that's all we so far. So if you can think about the rest what you would like to move. Would you like me to read it again or no? And we request that the matter of treating I need the deficiencies at toll puddle to be an emergency which would warrant immediate action and further bey. what is what has already been provided in parts B and C of the motion that councelor Stevenson circulated previously which I could read but I think we already have that right I do this and I'll second that we need a minute thank you boo clerk is working with it right Okay, thank you all for your patience. So based on the proposed motion from council trussau, this is an amendment to the originally proposed motion by councelor Ramen and stated by council trasa that the motion be amended to add a new part that reads as follows. The committee is concerned that the current conditions constitute a threat to the health and safety to the residents at at Tall Puddle and request that the matter of treating the deficiencies to be an emergency which would warrant immediate action and that the following actions be taken. I the civic administration be directed to immediately advance the funds and approvals necessary for 2526 Kochi project security system fire monitoring system for toll puddle housing cooperative as outlined in appendix G of the Feb 1726 CPS-C 2.5 affordable and community housing update as approved projects and without any conditions regarding a lean payment. I I the civic administration be directed to report back on the lean situation regarding the tall puddle housing co-op including the amount any concerns regarding the amount supports to be offered and timeline to April 13th 26 CPSC that's correct is that accurate council yes it is a Okay. Can I have a seconder for this motion? Council Ferrera. Okay. Council Trust. How would you like to speak to it first? um only to reiterate what I said before about the emergency um conditions. And I I should express another concern too and that is um now that this is known to members of the public, I I fear that the bad condition there right now without these security improvements could lead to more um criminal activity on the premises. uh either through people breaking into the property or being in invited in in an unauthorized way. And I guess I would I would raise a question to risk management or the solicitor's office in terms of what type of legal liability we're we're we're looking at. Is is is there something dire or unusual about this? Thank you, counselor. and I'm going to staff through the chair. I just wanted to make sure that we're all on the on the same page with this because there seems to be a bit of confusion. So, the the $91,000 that's already approved, there's there's no limitations on us providing that that funding. There there needs to be a request for the funding. We haven't we've been told that that they do not at this point require the funding from the lean. That was the last meeting that was held. So, we we need a request and then there's there's uh through the the uh funding that we get from the the from the province, there's requirements for an agreement to be signed, those types of pieces. But uh um um we're a little bit unclear what the challenge is as far as actually being able to do that. But the money is available. It's already been committed. So, we're ready to proceed with providing that funding as soon as all of those steps take place. Thank you, councelor. Thank you. That's helpful. in which case I'll withdraw my request to the um solicitor and risk management because it doesn't seem as if that's necessary. Now um would it be would it be possible to try to wrap this up before the council meeting stuff through the chair? I don't see that there's any barriers to doing that. So, uh, I'll task my team with just ensuring that if there needs to be like a there's something happening with the telephone game here between all the different pieces, but all the information that I have says that we're prepared to be able to provide the funding as soon as possible. And based on that representation through the chair, excuse me, counselor, sorry, counselor, please go ahead. Sorry, through the through through the chair. And I'll I'll slow down. Um, in that case, based on that representation, I don't believe I need to prepare any further amendments. And I think we've uh reached some type of resolution to this, at least for now. And I want to hear from the other counselors because I'm talking too much. Thank you. I have first councelor Ferra and then councelor Hopkins. Thank you. And this is an this is a motion that is urgent and this is a motion that is specific to what's being asked for by the delegates. A report back wouldn't do that. And this is and it's it is procedurally still out of order. But for me to tip and break procedure, I need something that actually will bring resolve to people. Point of order. Council, go ahead. I don't think it's procedurally out of order because we overruled the ruling of the chair and this is on the floor now. I agree with council trusso. Council Farah, please go ahead. He's correct. I forgot about the ruling of the chair. So, but this is something that would carry me over. This is something that is urgent. This is something that will bring direct benefit despite the heat that I was getting. I want to see actual movement that helps actual people in real ways and this that was my main concern. This does that. So, this is why I'll support that staff have gotten the direction that they need and I'm hoping that we can have as quick as quick of a resolve as possible with the motion. Thank you, Councelor Hopkins. Thank you. My first question is, has this amendment been removed? I heard from the mover that he was going to withdraw the amendment. The Oh, sorry. The amendment currently is still on the floor. So, it was on it was not pulled out. Council Trusso didn't ask to pull it out. He just he was just making a common statement after the 91,000 that no no other necessary additional amendments need to be done. But I will go back to council truss. So if you can confirm what I said or if there's anything else you would like to add. Yes, that's correct. And what what I what I withdrew was what I said about wanting to ask some questions to risk management and the legal staff. And I said that's not necessary in light of what's been said by staff. Thank you for that clarification very much. I will not be supporting this amendment for a number of reasons. We heard there is funding available right away. All you need is a request from toll puddle to get that funding. The next caps meeting is April the 13th. So any report back will happen along with the report and recommendation coming from staff. I am satisfied with that and will not support the amendment. Excuse me. Looking for other speakers. Council Stevenson. Thank you. And thank you to my colleagues for moving and seconding this amendment. I just want to give you a little bit of history here in that Toll Puddle reached out to me in December, invited me to come and hear the concerns that they had in their building, get a tour and see how terrible it was. They told me at the time that they were likely 6 months away from bankruptcy. Okay. I didn't do anything about it, right? Because civic administration are on it and I was listen to them. I did what I could. I didn't put it on social media. I didn't go to the news. I didn't make a big deal out of it. I wait. But February 17th comes a community and housing update that does not address the concerns that I heard specifically. Right. We're now 3 months now. They're saying they don't have enough money to last the end of the month. On top of that, that report was dated February 17th. There was an appendix in there that listed the projects that were approved. But two days later, there's a meeting at toll pedal with civic administration. And there's an email that I get that says that it's those two, the fire and the security, which they desperately need, along with the payment of a construction lean that they are fighting, that they don't want paid. And what I was told was that it was a take it or leave it. It's all three or nothing. And the email that I got is civic administration saying, "Sorry to hear that you've said no to the assistance that we were looking to provide you." That is what I've been trying to get clarity on. I received an appendix that I said, "Okay, great. They're getting the funding for their fire and their security." But then I find out from them, no, they were told that they felt that they were being held hostage around the payment on the lean. So, I want to separate that and I want to ensure that they get their security and their fire and the lean gets to be a separate issue that I'm trying not to get into and asking for a report at a later date. But since raising these concerns, there's been a bylaw uh review of the building, which I'm very grateful for. Okay? And I'm grateful for the staff memo with all of the information. This is important. It was a fast turnaround. I really appreciate it. But that bylaw review lists all kinds of deficiencies that need to be dealt with and that is a whole another conversation in itself around what we're doing in terms of who we place in that building and then the expectations we place on the building which are just totally mismatched in my opinion. Today, what I would like to do is just simply ask for this committee's support to support the amendment that was moved and seconded. That reiterates what staff has already agreed they're going to do to just reassure this board who is very stressed out and running out of money as we speak to just reassure them that they will get the security and the fire that the lean will be left for another day. I don't I'm asking the committee to support it. Staff have said they don't have an issue with it. It provides clarity to some really vulnerable people who need clarity right now. I don't need to get into the details of what's happened. Just provide the clarity today that this will they will get what they absolutely need and we will get a report back in April which again is a super fast turnaround time and I really appreciate it. Thank you, councelor. Councelor Ramen, please go ahead. Uh, thank you and through you. So, um, I just want to go back to the language that's in the as amended section. Um, so part I, um, just for clarification because I'm hearing some conflicting information. Um, I just want to be clear that we think that we can reach an agreement with the board using the language that's here and because this doesn't go to council until the end of the month that we aren't actually creating a limitation as to your ability to negotiate in the meantime on something that seems very close already. That's my concern with supporting this right now. So, I'm asking you through through you to staff to for that clarification. Thank you, councelor. Going through the staff uh through the chair. So, I I think I put all the pieces together now because I even for myself, it wasn't clear cuz uh um if the comment was related to being able to break it up. I've just conferred with my team, then we can do that. Um this doesn't nec this doesn't cause any kind of challenges with us trying to do that in the short term. And I kind of I think I understand what the challenge was now. I didn't I wasn't aware that we were we were saying it was an all or nothing. So, I think this is very um a prudent approach and I've talked to my team to be able to like move it forward in the short term, but uh this does not conflict or cause any challenges with us proceeding now and uh just reinforces what we're going to what we're going to be doing. Thank you, councelor. Thank you. And through you. So, I'm happy to support it um as an amendment to the original motion. Any other speakers? So if if you allow me from the chair, I will Oh, sorry. I'm going back to the staff stuff. Please go ahead. Sorry. The um so the last sentence there uh indicates that uh the funds be provided without any conditions regarding a lean payment. That's a requirement of the construction act. It's also a requirement of the tenant uh the transfer payment agreement with the province for coochie funding. So we can't comply with that direction. So, is this the payment for the money for their lean or Okay, thank you staff. Uh, I will go back. Sorry, my apologies. Is this in relation to the construction lean or is this in relation to the 10% hold back that's required under the construction act? A go back to council. Construction. It's construction lean. I'm hearing construction lean. So does it change your reply or does your reply stand? No, I I think that's fine. Thank you. So thank you sir. Just comments from the chair. Uh I will be supporting what's in front of us as well. I really thought actually that we had after the first motion we had the opportunity to address the second motion. So thank you for bringing this forward and I will be supporting it. speakers. Yes, this is the amendment that's in front of us and I'm looking if there are any more speakers and if there aren't, we are going to go to the vote. Okay, let's go to the vote, please. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Okay, I'm looking for a mover and seconder for the motion as amended. Councelor Ferrer moving it and seconder. Councelor Trasa. Anyone to speak to it? Councelor Stevenson, go ahead. Yes. Uh so thank you for the support of the amendment but I also had another piece that I thought was very similar to councelor Ramen's in terms of vacancies. Mine was around details on the financial insolveny risk of 43% of the housing providers and 25% of those whose future survival is at significant risk. And I just didn't know if committee had missed that part or if there's an unwillingness to add that to the motion, but it would be my request. I will be doing it at council and I heard quite clearly people don't like to do committee work at council. So I would appreciate somebody adding that amendment to this so that in addition to the vacancy we also get the other information that I was looking for. Okay. Thank you. Actually before I go to the members of the committee if they would like to move it forward can I have a feedback from the staff regarding this uh proposal from councelor Stevenson. Can I get your feedback? Uh point of order. Can we do that? The point of order is there is an addition to the motion that's not within the scope of the discussion and the motion on the floor. Can we go beyond the scope and ask these questions to the clerk or anybody? staff, I still would like to go to you if you have any comments. If you don't, we'll proceed and then I'll I'll come back to you based on the result of the vote. I call the point of order, presiding officer. You have to hear the point of order when I call it before any further discussion is made with respect Council, I heard your point of order. I'm just trying to go to the staff to get clarification. That's all as 45 seconds ago. I'm going back to the staff if you have any comments at this time. Thank you. uh through the chair. Yeah, there there's no challenge at all being able to provide that information. It would be this along the same time frame frame. Um uh we had brought forward our annual report and happy to provide any further details that might be helpful for council's consideration. So I'm ruling on the point of order based on what I heard from the staff. I believe or my decision is that councelor Stevenson's uh comments motion are in are in order. She does not have a motion. So, so now it is after we heard the comments I would like to go to the members of the committee if anyone would like to move the motion as per request of coun from councelor Stevenson based on what staff just said I would move that So we have a mover and we have a seconder. Councelor Hopkins. Okay, clerk is advising me that is it has been updated in the scribe. So council trussa if you can read through it and if it's actually both council trussa as a mover and secondary councelor hopkins if it's accurate as per your comments number life. Is that okay? The IV can come. just ask to refresh it in a moment. So, council, if you can wait a couple of minutes. Cler is right now removing the IV. If you can refresh now. Removing the IV can hurt. So, it has been updated by the clerk. Motion five and currently X and there is only three. One, two, three. I I I and I I I and Ivy has been removed. So, if you can please confirm, councelor Trusso and councelor Hopkins. Yes, I'm confirming this based on what staff said a few minutes ago and I don't think there's anything in here that's a problem with that. And I'm hearing Yes, I I confirm that. Thank you. And council Hopkins. Thank you. I see I see a nod and I would like to anyone would like to speak to it. Speakers list. I don't see any. So we go to the vote. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. I'm retaining the chair to council ramen. Okay. I'm looking for a new mover and second for the motion as amended. Councelor Hopkins and me. Okay. So, we have the motion moved and seconded. Looking for any final speakers on this item. Seeing none, we will open the vote. Closing the vote. The motion carries 5 to zero. Thank you. We're on to item 5.1. I'm returning the chair to councelor Pribble so that I may move a motion. I have the chair and I'm recognizing council Ramen. Uh thank you and through you. So, um, I'd like to move the motion, uh, that's in contained in the letter I've submitted. Uh, the motion reads as follows. That with respect to municipal compliance service council policy and the creation of a public rental license lookup tool, the following actions be taken. A, the civic administration be directed to report back with proposed amendments to section 4.7 of the municipal compliance service policy, including options that would permit the city of London to provide complaint status information where appropriate. B, the civic administration be directed to report back with options for implementing a public rental license lookup tool using a similar a model similar to that of City of Bmpton. and see the civic administration be directed to investigate placing compliance status updates in the property licensing listing available online. Thank you, councelor. I'm looking for a seconder. Council Hopkins and going back to council ramen. Go ahead. Uh thank you and through you. So, um, what's in front of us today, uh, came out of the discussion from our, uh, last, uh, conversation at CAPS, uh, and that took place at council around the desire for improved transparency for residents. Um, something I hear from residents in my area is that they are looking for more information at their fingertips. They're looking for a way to understand when a request has been made uh in their neighborhood for a specific compliance uh issue um what has happened with that in terms of what those next steps are um and what we can share. And one of the things I found challenging as a member of council is the limitations of the information that can be public made publicly available. I do believe that we have an opportunity today uh to strengthen trust in the city's enforcement processes to reduce the volume of service requests seeking verification which I get a lot myself even uh as it relates to complaints and secondly I think that we have a way to make our system more efficient uh in providing information to residents. So, just to give you an example, um you know, I've had residents call and they say, you know, is this place uh a rental and when we've in the past provided them the property lookup tool that is forward- facing on our website, it's quite a cumbersome tool to be able to look up whether or not there is a a license. the zoning map tends to be the where the information is actually uh found easily and then you have to know what are the different colors of the dots uh that are on the map related to that address. Um so for me that's quite a challenging process to explain to a resident as to how to find this information readily available for them to then inform uh their their actions. But it's also really important when you're looking for a rental um you know when you're looking for a rental property to understand and want to be compliant to want to rent from somebody that has uh has a rental license I think is really important and I think that just to just to clarify within this motion um this applies to units of smaller size. So this is units with one to four um units in them uh versus a a larger building. And again, this is what I'm hearing from residents in a lot of my neighborhoods where we have um rentals that are advertised, you know, on Facebook or elsewhere, and they're looking to find out whether or not these rentals are legal. And secondly, they're looking to find out, has there been uh complaints about the rentals and so this is an opportunity for us to move this item forward and have staff report back. Thank you. Thank you, councel. Councelor Hopkins, go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Um, the reason I second this uh I know we're directing um back it back to get a report back, but I do think we can do a better job when it comes to streamlining. I don't think we have to get into the weeds. I I have concerns there when we um try to uh um create create more problems um than than are necessary. But how can we do a better job streamlining our system and maybe uh communicating to residents uh tenants, landlords uh on on opportunities for them, not for me as the counselor, but for them to uh look into things with having regard to this sensitivity uh of by law enforcement and uh putting out too much information. So, I think we have an opportunity to um again maybe streamline it a little bit. So, I I'll second this. Thank you, Council Hopkins. Council Fera, go ahead. Thank you, presiding officer. I don't want to sound annoying, but this motion I find out of order as well. I would like to see if we can get um a take on if this is item is within within the under the additional business and deferred matters if it's on the deferred matters list and if not if I can hear how without hearing this before the next council meeting it will cause irreparable harm to the corporation. Okay. Thank you council. I'm going to consult with the clerk. Okay, I will go to councelor Ramen if she can state her reasoning. Thank you and through you. So I did uh when this item was brought up just beforehand uh on all of section 5, but I will state it again um that this item was tied to the previous agenda and um I have the procedure bylaw in front of me. 339.1 does not pertain to anything that causes irreparable harm to the corporation. Um, I'm not sure where that language uh came from. It might be from from not the standing committee portion of the bylaw. I'm just uh seeking further actually I'm not seeking clarification, but that's just what I read. Um, that's why this is in front of us today. Thank you, councelor, for the explanation of your reasoning. I'm going to go back to council Ferrera. I'll go to the clerk on this one then because I do believe that it has to have an emergent nature within the language there of section 391 and I wanted to know how that emergent nature ties with the next council direction on an emergent matter. Thank you councelor. I will go to the clerk. Thank you through the presiding officer. Section 31 39.1 of the council procedure bylaw states that items to be dealt with under this section um shall include matters contained in the deferred matters list or any other business of an emergent nature. Emergent nature is defined in our council procedure bylaw in the definition sections but it's not defined in this specific section itself of the council procedure bylaw. councelor and under the council section of an emergency nature what cons what is be what is considered as an emergent nature on the council section if this part of the bylaw points to the council section point of order go ahead council ramen thank you and through you presiding officer I do believe that you ruled on the entire section of of part five uh when it was originally dealt with on whether or not these items were deferred matters or additional business thank you counselor for a reminder and I do agree and uh uh that I have already ruled on this as both point 5.1 and 5.2 stand under the deferred matter and we'll be dealing with them today. Point of order on that is that correct? If there is a ruling it's on the entire section regardless of what item it is. Thank you. I will go to the clerk. Thank you. through the presiding officer. The point of order was made at stage five for the two items councelor. Okay. Okay. Fellow fellow colle. It's 7 to 6. So I need a motion to extend past 6 o'clock. Councelor Ramen, second to councelor Hopkins. Can we vote by hand or are we going to wait for the system? Okay. Councelor Ferrer, I vote nay. Thank you. Closing the vote. The motion fails 3 to two. So we have seven minutes and we have council ramen. She talked we have in front of us her motion. Any others? Any speakers towards what's what's in front of us? Any speakers currently? Council Trussa go ahead. Sorry, there was a east crab error and there's going to be a revote on the past 6:00. So, if you can please refresh and cler and Okay, the vote is open. Please vote. And this is for past 6:00. Councelor Ferrer. Second call for councelor Ferrer. marking him absent. Motion carries 3 to one. Okay, council. Thank you. So, we are it's approved to go beyond 6:00 and uh we have in front of us the motion brought up by councelor Ramen and I'm looking for speakers list. Council Trussa, go ahead. Thank you. And I want to start by asking staff um a question. Um Miss Feffer um didn't we already didn't council already send something that's similar if not identical to a to you for your report back and aren't you currently working on such a report? Thank you. And going to the staff. Thank you and through you presiding officer. We are currently working on a report back in relation to exploring uh potential amendments to that CPOL410168. There are some distinct differences in relation to that motion and the work we're currently doing and what's before us here. Uh what I can say is that the initial motion uh or direction to report back in Q2 of 2026 would not be impacted by this additional uh work if uh count committee were to um direct us. So thank you councel. Well, through the chair, I must say I I find it very confusing because I I worked on that motion that went to you and as some of the staff members here know, um this question of coming up with changing our protocols for um how the city of London provides complaint status information where appropriate is something we've been talking about for quite a while and council's already taken action on this and I just think I at this point in the council term, especially given some of the other demands that we're placing on staff. I want to avoid duplicative requests. And from my point of view, I don't see anything that's being added in A that you're not already doing. So, I'm going to ask that A be called separately, and I'm going to vote no on A. Not because I don't believe that we should do this, but I believe we're already doing this. Now, um having having said that, we really need to do this, which sort of um but I have confidence that staff is working on it and is going to give us a report back. And I would like to better under I'll change my position on this if I could better understand what the uh section A that's in front of us adds to what you're already working on because I don't understand it and I don't see it. Thank you council. I'm going to go back to the staff as council trusso ended with a question. If you can please explain why the would be different or in addition to what was submitted last year the request. Thank you and through you presiding officer. So, we'll be looking at some um IT improvements potentially, which will require collaboration with IT to determine an exact uh scope and timeline with that in addition to potential costs. And the specific language in relation to the residential rental unit licensing was not a uh part of the previous motion. in addition to the specific direction to review the city of Bmpton um public licensing system. Thank you, councelor. But the direction that you have through the chair, as I understand it, is that you are also looking at the protocols that we use to amend and potentially replace the the the notice that that complainants receive after they file something on Service London or with enforcement, which has caused a lot of consternation and upset on on the part of residents, which is to the which is to the extent of uh thank you for your complaint. we may not get back to you for purposes of privacy and the independence of the uh investigation and that that's what we asked you to um look at which is I I think pretty broad and it doesn't matter with I don't do we need was that just to property standards so if we also want it to be as to licensing problems we could just say with respect to licensing only I mean I I really want to avoid duplic duplicate requests to you because it's sort of like we never did that. And I have a I I I I have a real problem with that cuz some of us really worked hard on that and it's sort of like it just isn't there and I just feel bad about this motion. So I will go to the staff but I do just from the chair I do want to make a comment because we did work on it together with council trust. So I don't uh I don't see from the A. I see very much similarity as well. But if you could please clarify that if A stays, if it brings additional value to the ones that we have passed already last year. Thank you. Thank you. And through you presiding officer, I do believe it brings additional value. uh that will be documented or outlined in the report that's to come. But again, as I reiterated earlier, it won't impact the timeline for return in relation to reporting. Thank you very much. And my next question was timeline and you already answered it. Thank you. Council Truss, do you have any additional comments, questions? Uh no, no, I don't. And based on what was just represented by staff, I will support this cuz I believe in the concept, but I just I don't know. I'll just leave it at that. Thank you, Council Trusso. Any other comments? No. Thank you. I will support it as well based on the answers. Thank you very much. Let's go to the vote all together. Councelor Trusso closing the vote. The motion carries four to zero. Thank you. I'm returning chair to council ramen. Thank you. The last item on the agenda agenda is adjournment. I will look for a motion to adjurnn. Councelor Hopkins and Councelor Purple. Thank you. By hand, all in favor? Motion carries. Thanks everyone.

Full Transcript