Transcript - Fraud Audit and Funding Debates - Audit, Finance and Administration Committee

Fraud Audit and Funding Debates - Audit, Finance and Administration Committee - March 26, 2026

Sound check 1 2 3. Sound check 1 2 3 Good morning everyone and welcome to audit finance and administration committee for March 26 2026. My name is Jeff Bey. I will be your chair today. In chambers with me, councilors Tatison, Clark, Cooper, Wilson, that is Moren Wilson, Cretch, and Spataphora. And online is councelor Esther Paul's. We have quorum. So, at this point, I'd like to remind all members and members in the gallery, please set your phones and electronic devices to a nonaudible function, which is to say, please make them silent for the duration of the meeting. Uh Elsie Bates, could I uh get confirmation on the agenda? Are there any changes to the agenda that we should be made aware of? There are no changes, Mr. Chair, since the agenda was published yesterday. Wonderful. If I could have a mover and seconder to approve the agenda, seeing councelor Spataphora, Councelor Tison, any questions from committee members on the agenda? Seeing none, we could have a show of hands vote. All in favor? And that is unanimous. Thank you. Colleagues, moving on to item four, which is declarations of interest. Are there any declarations of interest? Seeing none, moving on to item five, which is the approval of the minutes from the previous meeting. This is the minutes of the meeting from February 26, 2026. If I could have a mover and seconder to adopt the minutes of this meeting. Looking for a mover in councelor Tison. Secondary councelor Cretch. Any discussion on the minutes? Seeing none, please indicate your vote by a show of hands. All in favor? Excellent. Thank you. Colleagues, we're moving on to item six, which is delegations. Uh we have a delegation today at item 6.1. First want to remind members of committee that questions of the delegates are for clarification purposes only and not for debate. Joining us is Havis Hussein, respecting Ontario Works, eligibility and value for money audit, information on overpayments, fraud, fraud complaints, and for the city of London, a regional municipality of Peele. Um, I think Hussein, Mr. Hussein is joining us virtually. Are we doing it video or just audio? No, by phone. Uh, audio. By phone. Just audio. Okay. The feast, thank you for confirming that. And just of course a reminder, I know you've joined us before that when we do have delegations, uh, we have a procedural bylaw that would instruct that we are looking for new information. We're not coming back to the well for the same information. I'm sure that you're aware of that. So, uh, when you have uh prepared yourself, we'll begin with your fivem minute delegation. Okay. Thank you, chair, and thank you um, everyone in the audit finance and administration committee. And so through the chair, I'm just here today to present some new information um given that this is on the auditor's general scope plan for the Ontario work value for money audit. Um as well as to address some of the additional questions that came from previous AFNA meeting back in January 15th. Um during that time I was able to collect Oh, can you guys hear me? Yep, we are able to hear you. Please continue. I I apologize. I wasn't sure I heard her echo. Okay. Um, so I wanted to present today some new information that I received through Freedom of Information. Um, as staff are going to be producing a report for the emergency community meeting for Q2. Um, and some of that information came from comparisons from other municipalities acting as service delivery managers of managing the Ontario Works portfolio. And so to the comparisons, there are a few more other municipalities that I'm I would like to provide this committee um shortly as as I get them. But I did receive some new information from the city of London, which is a good comparison to the city of Hamilton as a single tier municipality. And in the agenda today in appendix 8, if you look into it, um the number of Ontario works allegations that were investigated by the city of London for the period of 2022 to 2025. Um in 2022 there were 770 cases. Um in 2025 there were 618. Um, in this comparison from the city of London, out of those cases, in 2022, 147 were founded and there was an allegation of fraud. In 2023, there was 102. In 2024, there's 85 and in 2025, there's 115. So, I just wanted to give that insight of the how this issue is really important to a scale for a municipality of a single tier municipality such as the city of Hamilton. um an appendix B um in my submission um is the city of London's over Ontario work year end overp payment balances and so if you see here from 2022 um the total of all cases um as staff um defined it in January 15 of active in act and and also inactive cases were 58.224 million and this amount has increased to $62.4 4 million. And just from a scope perspective, this is just one municipality. There's 60 or 65 service delivery managers all across the province. And this is just the Ontario work. So if one municipality smaller than the city of Hamilton has 62.40 million in overp payments, what is the municipality doing to collecting it? And so as the auditor general is investigating this and staff are going to present this report, this would be a question to ask staff as that report comes into play. Um in appendix B um in my previous submission that I did um um it was stated that the numbers that were provided to me through the clerk's office were incorrect. So I wanted to provide to you um the updated information that I received um dating in 2022. the total and this is not the total outstanding balances for the city of Hamilton. It was the total out um amounts collected um and it it ranges from 4 million in 2022 to 4,591,000 in 2023 and 2024 is 4,82,000. 2025 was not available through my updated freedom of information request. Um, I have reached out to staff several times to ask for clarifications and to meet with them. Um, however, I have not heard back from both the treasurers's office or the finance office or neither from community services or healthy and safe based communities um, willing to come to city hall to look for these numbers. Um and and I also wanted to bring to committee's attention um through a council correspondent I brought um to this council on February 27th um that's posted on Eastride um that in the region of Peele um they have indicated to me based on an updated FOI that um they've investigated three cases of Ontario Works fraud in 2020 mount uh 2021 which was totaled $3,750 and then three cases in 2023 for 70,470. Um, and that the cases that they investigated were all client cases and they were not employee theft cases. Um, I think there was in um um um information that was presented by staff in January 15th stating that they were all employee cases. Um and um in fact they were all client cases. I'm not sure why that was stated on January 15th, but I wanted to bring that to council's attention with my correspondence. Um, I did also receive an appendix E through my freedom of information request, the current policy and procedure of social assistance fraud that was provided by the clerk's office and feel free to review it um as it was in this agenda. Um, and this policy is mandated by the province in order for um staff and the eligibility review office to and um refer matters to the I just need to interject for a moment. We've reached the end of the 5m minute mark. So if you could kindly just summarize your conclusion uh for us and then we can uh see if there's any questions from members of committee for you. Okay. I'll give you a little bit of just to conclude please. Yeah. I apologize. Thank you chair. Um so just wanted to conclude in appendix F for you. There was a case of Ontario works fraud that the auditor general brought into council that I'm not sure was even reported to police because staff indicated that the only um event that was reported in 2022 was employee theft. But uh this wasn't even captured in the fraud and waste report in 2022 that I've um observed online. So at the end of the day, I just wanted to keep this committee updated through information that I'm gathering from other municipalities and how it benchmarks with the city of Hamilton. Um we do have an onus to make sure that the public um p and the public dollars are used wisely and that um as committee members and council and we need to take our role at service delivery manager seriously so that we um trust the province's funding to ensure that those that are eligible for Ontario works get it as well as those that don't we do every mechanism to collect and um all the information is available for you in the appendix in the agenda that I sent. Okay. Thank you, Mr. We. We have uh a question from one of our committee members. I'm going to turn next to Councelor Brad Clark, please. Thank you, Chair Bey. Uh I do not have a question. I want to thank Mr. Hussein for his continued um persistence in digging into the data and sharing that data with us. As chair of ECS, I am in discussions with GM Mater. um and the information that you're providing in terms of the comparators with other municipalities is very helpful. So, thank you, Mr. Hussein. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Clark. I'm just going to look around and see if there's any additional questions and I'm seeing none from the remainder of committee members, Mr. Hussein. So, with that, I thank you for your u uh delegation today and your continued efforts to bring us information as councelor Clark alluded to and uh we look forward to uh most likely seeing you again. Have a wonderful day, sir. Thank you. Okay, if I could have a mover and seconder to receive the delegation. Seeing councelor Cooper, councelor Clark, looking around for any questions. Seeing none, we'll call the question now. All in favor by a show of hands, please. And that is unanimous. Thank you. Colleagues, we're moving on to section seven, which is items for information. Starting with 7.1 FCS26020. And this is correspondence from the Hamilton Police Service Board, an agreement to share provincial offenses um revenues. And this was referred from council from January 21st, 2026. And so I'm just going to put a notation in here for committee members that we are intending to receive these all together at the end of all the information reports. Of course, if there is uh some different direction the committee members may wish to go, uh please indicate that. Otherwise, we will do a receiving of all information at the end. Uh turning now to the speakers list starting with councelor Brad Clark, please. Thank you, chair. A couple of questions for general managers Garrick. Um, I'm trying to understand the rationale um from the police. You may not be able to help me, but we fund them. The city of Hamilton funds the police completely. On occasion, they get some grants. Um, I'm trying to understand the statement that the Hamilton Police Services uh would like to see a funding agreement for the purposes of offsetting direct expenses related to providing court security at the POA courtrooms. Don't we already pay for that? So, we're going to turn to the bench and look to general manager Ziggger for response through the chair. Uh Mike Siger, general manager of finance, corporate services. Uh there is revenue sharing with the provincial government with respect to court security. That revenue sharing is uh based on um each year's municipal reporting with respect to court security costs. Um, one of the challenges is that the provincial funding only funds, I believe, 60% of Hamilton Police Services Court security related costs. Um, the the cause for that uh that shortfall is that the provincial funding for court security across the province of Ontario has not changed for a number of years. I believe it's 125 million across the province. And uh so as it relates to court security costs, those are uh funded through the provincial government. The challenge is the provincial government has not increased the funding for municipalities and police services as it relates to court security for for I believe well over a decade. Okay, counselor. So isn't there a line item in their budget to pay for that 40%. Through the through the chair, that's correct. And so the police services are requesting that the city of Hamilton offset part of uh part of that uh shortfall. Uh what city staff are identifying is if the provincial government fully funded core security costs, it wouldn't be a pressure for police services, nor would they be asking the city of Hamilton to offset that cost. I I totally agree with that last statement. I'm still a little bit concern confused. The 40% I thought I heard you say it's included in their police budget. So they are getting paid from the city of Hamilton the difference between um what the province pays, we pay the rest. So then why do they need provincial offenses revenue at 50%. through the chair. Um, and this is my understanding as it relates to Hamilton Police Services 2026 budget submission. I believe that they've assumed uh an amount of funding from the city of Hamilton as it relates to these related costs. Uh, and that may be in the ballpark of approximately a million dollars. And so that is how the police services 2026 budget has been reflected and uh for that reason the correspondence is before committee and the request is before the city to provide revenue sharing as it relates to these revenues that traditionally have been used to reduce the levy. We've applied these funds to reduce our overall levy position in past years and as well some of these funds are related to red light camera and those funds have been applied to vision zero initiatives. So we're already doing what they're asking us to do through the chair. They are asking that the city uh forego some of those investments as reduced to reducing the levy and uh funding. available for vision zero and instead transfer those funds to police services to offset some of their pressures as it relates to court security as well as it relates to uh their action supporting vision zero. So chair, I still remain confused. I don't understand. We provide a budget. They tell us what they need from the city. We pay that. Provincial offenses money comes to the city offsetting whatever we're doing over there. We decide to put it into vision zero. We're already doing all that. So I the police request to me I still don't understand the rationale. My apologies, but I don't. Okay. Fair comment. Um, and unfortunately there isn't anybody. Well, we have members of the police service board, but they're not here in that official capacity. So, uh, I don't know what the appropriate lever would be, uh, counselor to try to get some clarity for you. Um, other other than having, uh, police services board chair possibly delegate before this committee at a future meeting. That might be an option for them. I'll throw that out into the universe and see what happens. Uh, we have councelor Cameron Cretch up next. I think the police have provided a pretty clear written reason and explanation as to what they want to do and why they see the reason for us to do this. So, I mean, we can ask someone to come here and read a letter out, but I don't think it's going to change much. Really, what this is is just sort of a tomato tomato situation. As far as I can tell, the money is being paid for by the city regardless for the police budget. Exactly as what councelor Clark said. If the police need money for something, then they ask the city for the money and then the city gives them the money. So, I don't get why we would do this. Doesn't make sense to me. Also, this is all kind of fictive. Anyways, the what we end up talking about is this when we talk about budgeting is bizarre in my opinion. The police has their own budget and we talk about it like it's this special magical thing. No, the total costs of policing are what we should be talking about. That's it. poling costs $290 million in the last year, but the budget that was presented was like $ 250. So, we end up having this weird protracted conversation where it's like, well, where's the other $40 million come? From the same place the other $250 million came from. Like, it's all coming from the same taxpayer if you want to look at it that way. It's all coming from the same budget if you want to look at it that way. Uh, also what we know from all the evidence that exists is that the number one best way to help with street safety issues, issues in neighborhoods where people are concerned is by changing the road design, by having a really great system for how we do road design. And that's where we're spending this money right now is on those kinds of elements. To take that money out of it means less road design, less safety, and then more enforcement. Enforcement is again think it's always the 1585 rule. 15% of things can be solved by enforcement. 85% are solved by design. So, we're putting the money already in the place where it makes the most sense. Really, I think this is just a I'll be honest, I think it's just an optics thing, right? You know, reducing the police budget down here. Again, the cost is just going to be over here. The total cost of policing will never change. So, I don't see why we would get involved in this. Anyways, it would require a motion, I think, anyways, for someone to bring something forward. I don't see anyone doing that. So, it's for information and happy to receive it. Okay. Um, I'm just going to pass the chair. I'm going to go to councelor Tatis and then I'll pass the chair. I guess the question that I have um through the chair would be would we see a corresponding line on the police budget somewhere that would say where the money from this comes and then a subtraction line from the amount that we give. Is that is that understood? Uh GM Jim Zerick through the chair. As I understand it, the 2026 Hamilton Police Services budget has assumed a million to million and a half as it relates to this revenue sharing. So what council would expect is if the city does not share these revenues and offset city investments to that same amount is this would be reported through variance reports for Hamilton police services in 2026. I think councelor Tatison's question is if the city were to proceed with this revenue sharing effectively we are just switching revenue from one source of municipal funding levy funding the challenge for municipal operations is municipal operations would forego 1 to$1.5 million whether that is in levy reductions whether that is in red light camera reserve funds towards vision zero investments that would be the impact to municipal operations if the city agreed to share one to one.5 million with Hamilton Police Services. Councelor, thank you for that answer, GM. It was such a better answer than the question that I asked. So, I appreciate that. I was going to throw the chair o over, but I think you you've actually summarized my my question rather well. Essentially, I view this as the request for cost for the operation of security at the courthouse where the provincial offenses are remedied would be shifted to the penalties paid on those provincial offenses to then operate the remainder of the 40% funding for security. But that would leave us in a shortfall that we would then have to levy fund potentially. So, we're levy funding it either way really. Um, okay. I don't see any further questions or delegation or sorry not delegation direction on this. So we are going to move on to 7.2 which is PW2629 which is a management response to report AUD2501 contract payments to darts. Looking to committee members if there are questions for staff on this report and I'm seeing none. So we're moving on to 7.3 FCS26021 2025 renumeration and expenses as required under section 284 of the municipal act 2001 as amended. This is a revised report looking to committee members if there are any questions for staff and I see councelor Crutch please. I think last year when this report came forward and the year before when this report came forward, I made the same comment and I'm wondering if maybe a motion is necessary or maybe there was one, frankly, I can't recall about how we present this information to the public. We're still not presenting the information to the public that the public expects from this report. So I understand that we traditionally have done this report the same way for many many years. But when the public reads this report, what they expect to see are budgets for counselors. Not just our expenses, not just this time we went out to, you know, Lord Taffy's in or whatever and had a meal with someone, but also the expenses coming from our office budgets. So when I do a mailer for instance, when I'm holding a meeting and have expenses for those meetings there, we need one comprehensive report. I've been asking for this for many years. I keep hearing it's coming and then we get another report again and it's not there. Like we just need one report that shows this is what counselors are spending from their offices. These are their expenses like all together. How can we achieve this? general manager through the chair. Um, it would be absolutely it would be a different body of of information in a report what I'm hearing the counselor and I appreciate the request was made previously in the past. We've reported uh with respect to not only counselors, elected officials expenditures relative to their uh budget but as well senior leadership team. So what I'm hearing is the council asking not only with respect to uh ward office budgets or or uh elected officials office budgets but as well other expenditures that might have been funded elsewhere. So in the case of um conferences or whether a elected official is an FCM representative or AMO representative those are not funded from the word office budgets those are being funded through the legislative budget. So staff could develop a more comprehensive report identifying the various expenses and the various funding sources. Uh but again, if the intent is for to capture all expenses related to elected officials, it would be neither this report nor a report with respect to um expenses because again we would need to to broaden the report to include not only um expenses as it relates to to travel or conferences, but expenses as it relates to how W office funds are expended. Yeah, that's what I think is important. So on my website for instance, and I don't know other counselors who've done this before, but I do. I have a literal table on my website that shows as much as up to date as I can get it because sometimes I don't have the information right away. Every single dollar that's spent from the W 2 offic's budget and what it's spent on. That's the kind of transparency the entire public deserves. And there has never ever been a report here at this council in this term or any other term that has accurately shown what counselor spend in their budgets. It's nested into one line or two lines. Um I've made categories like mailing, postage, communications, website, design, because sometimes you have to get design work done. Every single one of those things is itemized in a table on my website. And it's been I'll say to you honestly excruciating to get that information. It's not been easy. Now I understand part of that's because of the cyber security incident and some of the reporting issues we have with that and I put that disclaimer on my website but there isn't a really great system that we have at the city for keeping track of this information. Uh when I've asked print and mail folks for instance hey can you provide me with a list of all the all the information you've build me for in terms of print and mail they're often having to do that process manually. So there should be just a really clear picture counselor by counselor of how we spend our office budgets so the public can see that. I don't think anyone's doing anything exciting, frankly. But the point is the public has a right to see that it's not exciting. So they're not continuing to ask questions about how that money is spent. So that's really always what I've been asking for and we are not reporting that to the public currently. GM. Yeah. Through the chair and I appreciate the counselor clarifying. I interpret it beyond office budgets. If it is with respect to office budgets, uh if there is a outstanding business item list, we're happy to identify timeline to to achieve that. If there isn't, if a motion could be put forward and staff can develop a timeline with respect to a um a framework with respect to how to report publicly with respect to the the expenses as it relates to board office budgets. I would I would offer up it may be helpful for staff first to propose a template or framework to make sure that the categories in the former reporting meets the expectation before um operationalizing the the exercise. Thank you. Yeah, I'll bring a motion to the next day if on this then. But just to clarify because I think it's important to set this straight as as we're all kind of talking about this. It's everything in one report. We tend to do this thing here where we think about things maybe philosophically differently. Oh, like these expenses that are coming from some other account. The public couldn't care less what account they're coming from. And neither do I. So, I think what I'm trying to say is if a counselor is using public money as an expense, for reimbursement, for their office budget, for a sandwich, like whatever we're spending, one report counts as spending. So my table for instance includes salaries and benefits and pension for all my staff and my employees uh and myself in one lump number mind you right for for human resources purposes in terms of you don't expose people's salaries and benefits and pensions and things like that to everyone in the public it's one aggregate number but like there should be an easy way to see what that looks like uh for for every single thing in one report every year it's called the counselor's expenses report and it just details everything that's spent and clearly says Oh, these people went to the FCM conference. These people went to AMO. These people went to Alpha. Whatever it is they went to, that can also be articulated in the same report. That way, people aren't constantly asking, "Hey, which report am I looking for? And is it this one or this one's called the the remuneration report with respect to expenses with respect to something else? I just want to have one report. So, I'll put together a motion behind the scenes and and bring it to AFA next time." Thank you. Okay. Up next, we have Councelor Brad Clark, please. Thank you, chair. So, can I ask how um indepth are the policies when it comes to meeting expenses, um meal expenses, not just for council, but also for uh the leadership team and management and how low does it go with management? So when we're dealing, can any manager meet with people and put it on a credit card that the city pays for for a meal? James Agaric through the chair. Uh there are guidelines, not necessarily a policy with respect to uh what staff or um elected officials by extension are eligible for in terms of uh applying their their budgets against. With respect to meal expenses, there is uh there may in fact be a policy. It may be more than a guideline that speaks to what staff are entitled to when they work overtime as it relates to um either a financial amount or an amount in terms of the the procuring of uh of food when staff work overtime. So, uh definitely a guideline and in some cases there may be a policy. Okay. Counselor. And what about um a meeting in in a restaurant? GM Zerk through the chair. I think it would be tied to our perdm. Uh it would uh through the chair. I think we would have to take this away. I know there is a policy with respect to um what is eligible with respect to meals and expenses uh and with some carveouts for some program areas like economic development. But uh again I would ask if we could bring that back because I don't want to misstate uh what our policy or guideline may be. Counselor, I I would appreciate that. Um, it's long bothered me that there is no line item in our budget where it totals up all of those expenses across the city. So, we don't know how much money is being spent on meals uh for meetings with staff or external stakeholders. Um, and I've always taken the position I don't buy people lunches on the taxpayers's dollar. I meet with them in my office, happy to make them a cup of coffee, but that's it. I don't go out and take lunches and I don't um um pay for lunches. It it just it doesn't make sense. If you want to meet and talk about something, come to the office and we'll talk about something. Um, so I would appreciate I'm not sure exactly how we would get all of that information um or whether a motion is required to do that. Um, let me speak with uh Mr. Ziggger offline and perhaps we can draft a motion that's suitable that I know we're both getting exactly what we want to see in the report. Okay. I do have a response from GM Ziggar I think. So through the chair, happy to have that conversation with councelor Clark. There is a uh staff have confirmed there is a meal expense lounge policy but happy to share that with councelor Clark have a a conversation and see what information we could report back to committee in the future. Okay. It it's interesting um chair because it's along some of the other things that I've tried to point out over the years. We spend an awful lot amount of money on advertising, but we don't know how much because each division, each department pays for their own advertising. And so we never really understand what's the total value that is being spent on these things if we don't have a cumulative amount reported in the budget. Thank you. Okay, we're moving on next to Councelor Rob Cooper, please. Thank you, Chair. Uh through you to General Manager Zager. Um, as as much as I I heard this morning, there's a desire to do some consolidated reporting. Uh, and just just for clarity for folks watching, some of this is driven by the municipal act. So, as much as we have a desire to put all things into one report, there'll still be a need to have separate reporting because of uh the legislative requirements under municipal act. Um, would you confirm that for everyone, please? To the chair, if that's accurate. Okay. Thank you. And so, that really gets into the report that I'm seeing as page two of seven. um on appendix A that that would be really the one element of the municipal act reporting that we have to do. Is there anything beyond that through the chair? No, this is a uh report that each municipality is required under the act to provide. uh it's there as information, not as a recommendation or approval. And as referenced in the report, staff will be reviewing across municipalities best practices for the next term of council and identify if there's opportunities to improve this report. So this level of reporting will continue and then there would be maybe a a second report if we could call it that with this more comprehensive approach that my colleagues have been talking about through the chair. That's correct. I see them serving different purposes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, general manager. Thank you, chair. Okay. And looking Oh, I'm going back to uh councelor Clark for a second time. So, the report that we received this morning, as councelor Cooper has indicated is the requirement under the municipal act, but that municipal act requirement is the minimum that is required to be reported. It doesn't prevent us from reporting more wholesome expenditures from offices. Correct. Jim Zerk through the chair. This is with respect to uh remuneration including expenses. If committee and council request additional information around ward offices beyond the contents of this report or other forms of reporting, that would be supplementary reporting. Thank you. I I I I view it as very similar to when they prescribe a a public notice 120 m around the development. That's the minimum. They could do 250. They could do 500. Same with this. This is the minimum reporting that is required and the council can most certainly pass a policy that would request all of the expenditures. Thank you. And very similarly, I think we did do that. We are now at a 240 radius I think as a request of uh council. So we have it within our authority to do these things. Going back to councelor Cretch for a second time please. I just want to respectfully disagree with this discussion a little bit. No. No. I don't think we need to have multiple reports. Again I want to say this one report. How about I structure it right now for everybody. Page one. Uh page one could be me for fun. For fun. Ward two counselor salary staff salaries and pension and benefits here. Oh, uh, this person sits on a board and gets paid more money. Put it there. Here's the different categories of all the different expenses that come from their office listed. Next, W three. Next, W four. One report. The problem with this kind of system we have currently is we are having all this information everywhere. It's reported different times at different meetings. It's not trackable. It's not easy for people. If this is public reporting, it should be designed for the public, not us. We already should know what our expenses are, right? And staff already know in finance what they are. If this is a public report, it should be designed for the public. One report. Let's make it simple, folks. That's my motion. So, we're going to bring it forward at a future meeting. Just put the information together in a simple way that everyone can understand it. Thank you. And I think that speaks to perhaps what GM Ziggger was suggesting in terms of ensuring that the template that we are looking for is what we end up with. So I'm anticipating that there'll be some conversation around this body with regards to that. Seeing uh no further questions or comments, we are moving now to 7.4 4 which is FCS210821 and that is the utility billing transition March 2026 program update. This is from the OBL. If I'm looking around I don't see any questions from committee members on this document. Oh, I see one question from councelor Moren Wilson please. Thank you chair. I know it has been a topic of uh great interest given the um implications for residents and I know there has been a lot of hard work put into this. So if I could kindly ask through you just for a summary um because I think it's a good report good news. Thank you. Okay, I'm going to be turning it over to director Pereira for that. If you could kindly introduce yourself, Clayton. To the chair. Clayton Pereira, director of revenue services. Um happy to provide a summary. Uh the March 2026 program update provides uh committee with the council directed monthly update on the new utility billing solution that will be administered by city staff to replace the billing services currently provided by Electra. staff completed a 30-day readiness assessment on March the 13th with key business and technology stakeholders including the Hamilton utility billing otherwise known as hub Hamilton water finance IT and taxation the assessment reviewed solution readiness business and operational preparedness deployment planning communications and overall project risk hub will launch April 13th and the city has formally notified elector in accordance with their 30-day notice period. As part of the final readiness activities, the project team continues to track small number of remaining system operational and transition items as part of the standard goal preparation. These items are actively managed, reviewed daily and governed through established readiness and acceptance criteria. Overall readiness is progressing as planned with remaining activities expected to be completed appropriately managed prior to launch. Additionally, staff have now received 56% of pre-authorized payment forms. The report uh as authored was at 51. So we have uh moved up on the needle and and there were a lot more applications right at the deadline which are being processed. That's all I have for an update. Okay. Councelor Marine Wilson. Thank you for the update. Really appreciate it. Okay. Moving next, we have Councelor Rob Cooper up for questioning. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Um through you to the director. Uh I'm in the habit of going to my community mailbox on a daily basis and picking up my mail. So yesterday when I picked up my mail, I got the welcome to Hamilton utilities billing with information indicating that I had to March 20th to sign up for the automated withdrawals. Of course, it was referring to 2026, so we're now late. Uh today's March, yesterday was March 25th. So I just wanted to circle back first of all probably some feedback, but when did we mail this stuff out? I mean, we're sending it to communities now and it's already past the date then they could sign up. Director Pera. Uh, the chair. Uh, so the welcome package was uh mailed out uh I believe two weeks ago. Um, I could be wrong on the timing, but uh essentially uh the the deadline was to ensure uh there was payment continuity as far as a pre-authorized. We have several residents that are continuing to um uh provide their completed forms and we're doing our utmost to try and complete them uh even before we uh go live. Uh so um we are welcoming that through the various uh avenues that uh exist at this point being city hall uh Hamilton water went location as well as being uh mailed directly to the third party processing center. councelor. Thank Thank you, chair. So, so if I was to understand it correctly, uh people can still sign up for the automated withdrawals and will that take effect in time for this program or will they miss a month or how would that all work? To the chair, uh the goal is to try and get them before uh the next bill is issued by hub. Okay. However, if that's not the case, then it would be for the next billing cycle. Okay. Could could you have some information sent around to um you know our offices just because I'm I'm sure we're going to be getting phone calls on this. I mean I uh I know Bonnington and some of the other areas would have just received this. I've um yeah I did get some calls on this uh as well last evening and so um if uh if yeah, you could provide that information just so we can kind of direct people properly as we get these calls. looking to the director or the general manager for a response on that through the chair. Um I'll start and then I'll ask director Pereira maybe to provide some additional content with respect to the PAP. And uh what I'll ask director Pereira maybe to identify is while the welcome letters were sent out two weeks ago. Uh I know as a resident that over the holiday break I received a letter and did my pre-authorized payment form back uh during I believe December. So, so again that wasn't a oneandone. There was previous correspondence sent out and uh some information has been shared with elected officials including uh FAQ, but we're always happy to supplement that information and continue to refresh that information for elected officials. Thank you. Okay, no further questions then. Oh, my apologies. Councelor Pauls, please proceed. Hi. Um, through the chair, I just wanted to uh be clear on this because I just got an email just now about this situation. So, we're saying that they could sign up for pre-authorization anytime, but they would miss the month prior. Is Is that what I heard? I just got somebody that says she was older and she didn't get in time to do it, but she really would like to. So she'll just miss a month and then she'll do it the following month to sign up. Looking to director Pereira, please. Uh to the chair. Um uh our goal is to try and uh capture everyone uh for the first billing cycle. Uh but if if if it is missed, it would be the next billing cycle. And the uh the other important piece here that council approved was the waving of penalty and interest uh till July. Uh at which point um we are hopeful to capture all those who uh were missed through the pre-authorized. Okay. All right. Uh I actually I just got it right now. We'll send it to you because she she has few other questions. So you've been always helpful. So I thank you for your direction. Thank you. Okay, I see no further questions on this. Um, one of our members did notify me that he has a question on a previous report that we've already moved past. This is what I'm going to do. Uh, we're going to go to 7.5 first. We're going to finish the order and then, uh, councelor Tatson has asked for us to return to 7.2. So, we're going to go to 7.5 first. so that we are in the correct order. You got to you got to keep with us here, Mark. You got to keep with us. All right. 7.5 HSC260002 is just a followup on the Red Hill Family Center value for money audit. This is also from the Obl. Very quickly look around and see if there are any questions from members on this report. Okay, seeing none, we will then go back to 7.2. two and that is PW2629 which is the management response to report AUD250001 contract payments to darts and I have councelor Mark Tatison up next. Thank you. I'm not sure who on the bench is going to answer this question, but when I'm looking at this contract and and there's certain things that I have concerns about. My my main concern for raising questions here is what we're doing here. Does it improve the experience for the riders that use darts? That's that's the overriding reason why I'm asking that. So when I see things like termination clause, the agreement may be terminated or revised based on audit findings or compliance with the industry best practices. Notice must be given to DART when the agreement is under review. things like this. To me, I see that inhibiting Dart's ability to provide service to their customers because if you're constantly under the gun in the sense of like your contract may be terminated, how are you going to hire people when you have to hire people when they might not have job security more than a month out? Something else is like the data security and software custody. So counselor, I'm just going to pause for a second. I want to confirm that we have people in the uh in the audience who are able to answer your question because we did move past this item already and I do see some conference. And before you uh get too far into your questioning, I want to make sure that there's people on the other end that are listening to the questions. That's appreciated. Thanks. So I'll pause for a second. I'm going to turn it to I I think it's I'm going to turn to somebody in just a moment. We'll just get a second. Are we able to answer the question on 7.2? And were we listening to the through through the chair? I apologize. I didn't hear the question. Oh my gosh. Sorry. Um I have asked is Jackie Kennedy, general manager of public works. Nancy Perer has I've just asked her to rejoin because there are questions about it. I I had thought we'd moved past it and she had okay gone on to other things but we will do if I can just uh I'll take the chair back for just a second. We can uh then make sure that director Perer who's joined us. Thank you. Nice to see you Nancy. Uh there was a question as it pertains to the management response report to contract payments to darts from councelor Tatison. Uh, and I'm wondering if you heard the question or if you'd like uh, councelor Tatison to restate the question. Good morning to the chair. Could the question be reasked? Okay, not a problem. We'll turn it back over now to councelor Satison for a reboot. Okay, so I'm going to really summarize this down to the nth degree here. Um, how do things like a termination clause which prevents Darts from possibly hiring people when that um and and then the other piece, how does the data security and software custody being taken away from Darts? How does that enable Darts to provide better experiences for their customers? And that's it. Okay. uh through through the chair uh Nancy Purser, director of transit, we um are not um taking away the functionality for them to provide um the service that they are contracted to provide. This is about who has care and control of the overall software, access to client personal information, um, and retaining that by the city as they are, uh, City of Hamilton clients. Okay. So, I appreciate that and I can understand that they're wanting to be if we're the overseers that that we're kind of big brothering it. Um my question then with the termination clause this contract is that is the goal for the contract to be um to give darts some sort of uh understanding that they will be act that they'll actually be um providing that service with the city for the long term or is it going to continue on a month-to-month kind of basis? Well, through through the chair, we are working on a new agreement um that yes, this one has been month-to-month since 2017. Um so it's long overdue. Uh so we are we have proposed a new contract. We're summarizing it. Um it will include all the recommendations from previous audits. Um and we'll be working uh negotiating with darts uh through the summary of changes to come up with a new um longer term agreement. And just for my understanding, Darts is at the table as you're drawing the contract or are you going to come up with the contract and then share it with Darts? Oh, through through the chair, we are going to present a summary of changes we would like to see and that will begin our negotiations um for a new contract. Okay, thank you very much for those answers and I apologize for not being quick on the response at in the first place. Okay, thank you very much, Councelor Tatterson. We're moving on now to Councelor Brad Clark. uh if you could just identify if we're speaking now to 7.2 or if you had a different um item that you wish to go back to. Uh same item. Okay. It's important for us to understand that while staff are now drafting a contract that is long overdue, I might add, there have been several issues that have occurred with darts over the last few years. We had vehicles that failed safeties but were left on the road because some mechanic chose to here you go, everything's fine. And so those vehicles when they're on the road and if they're unsafe, it puts DART's passengers at risk. We've had videos, recordings of customers released to the public breaching privacy rules. So, that part of the contract is being tightened up. So there are several issues um in the contract that our staff are working on to ensure privacy of the of the passengers as well as the safety of the passengers. And every contract that DART has ever had um has and and quite frankly all of our contractors is there can there's a termination clause. If things are not done, there's a process that we meet with them and we say, "Okay, you're not doing this, this, and this. You got to do this to be in compliance with the contract." Should they ignore us, then it gets ramped up to a higher point and then eventually it comes to council for a discussion as to whether or not we're going to terminate the contract. That's nothing new. It's been there forever and it needs to be there. there needs to be tension in the system to ensure that oversight is happening. So I appreciate the questions. I agree. Um he should be able to raise them here. Uh it's just important that we have the full context context as to what transpired with darts and why we are now doing this. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Clark. I see no further questions. Uh so we have and I'm going to recap gone through 7.1 which is the correspondence from Hamilton Police Service Board 7.2 which is the management response to the contract payments to darts which we just discussed 7.3 2025 renumeration and expenses reporting uh 7.4 4 which is the utility billing transition update 7.5 which is the followup on the Red Hill family center value for money audit we have thoroughly entertained questions we have gone through the process and we are now at the point where I need a mover and seconder to receive these reports seeing vice chair spatora councelor Cooper with a show of hands please indicate your vote all in favor councelor Paul's in favor thank you that is unanimous we're moving On now to items for consideration, which is beginning with 8.1, amendments to the outstanding business list. There's a number of them there listed. If I could have a mover and seconder to approve the amendments to the outstanding business list. Seeing councelor Cretch, apologies, had a small blip. Councelor Cretch and councelor Mike Spataphora. Any questions for staff on the OBL list changes amendments? Okay, this will be an electronic vote. Could be the first one of the day, which means we have to warm up the robots. Please indicate your vote in favor or opposed. and please indicate your vote now and that carries 8 Z. Thank you colleagues. We're moving on to 8.2 which is PEED26052 and that is the community liaison group immigrants and refugees. Uh this is something I require a mover and seconder to approve the recommendations in the report. Seeing councelor Cretch looking for a seconder. Councelor Spataphora. Thank you. Any questions of staff on this report? And I am seeing none. So therefore, we will require an electronic vote. Please indicate your vote now. Councelor Paul, you in favor? I see you are. Thank you. And that carries by a motion of 7 to one. We also need to receive the correspondence attached to this item and that is 8.2A which is correspondence from Grace Baldwin and Kim Martin Hamilton Immigration Partnership Council respecting Hamilton immigration partnership council assuming the role of new community liaison group for immigrants and refugees. If I could have a mover and seconder to receive the correspondence. Seeing councelor Spataphora, Councelor Crutch, thank you. Any questions for staff on the correspondence? Seeing none, I need a show of hand vote. All in favor, please indicate your vote. Oh, I see councelor Clark has a question. One moment. We'll hold that vote in just a second. Before that, we will go back to councelor Clark. An error on my vote. We are on 8.2 2. Now we are on 8.2A. We just Okay. So previous item um I'd like to have the vote changed to a yes. I thought we are on 9.1. Ah not a problem. I think the clerk has made note of that. Thank you. And we can do that administratively. I believe if we could have a separate v a revote that would be cleanest. Thank you. Give me one second. Not a problem. So folks, we're going to go back and redo the vote on 8.2. No problem at all, councelor Clark. It happens. This will be PED26052, Community Liaison Group, immigrants and refugees. And the movers and seconders will stay the same. In a moment, we'll have the electronic vote on this item. Councelor Polls, are you still in favor of 8.2? Okay, thank you very much. Which means that carries unanimously. 8 Z. Okay, we're moving back to 8.2A, which is the correspondence that I previously mentioned. We have a mover and seconder on the receipt of the correspondence. All I need now is a show of hand vote to ensure that we are all in agreement. All in favor? Show of hands, please. Councelor Pauls. Thank you. That is unanimous. We are now moving on. Okay, we are at the stage now where we are looking at motions from members. We have a motion at 9.1 and this is with regards to eco home and energy self audit kits for ward 4 residents. Councelor Cretch, if you would please introduce your motion. As excited as I am to introduce this motion. It's not actually mine. It's councelor Hang's motion. She's just not able to attend today because she has a board meeting that she's at. So I've offered to present it on her behalf. I won't read it out loud. Um, we have it on the official record with respect to making sure that there's a grant for eco home kits for W4 residents and my seconder is councelor Moren Wilson. Thank you. That has been duly moved and seconded and I now see that we have a speaker list populated. So, we're going to go to councelor Brad Clark, please. Thank you, chair. So I'm trying to understand because there are programs federally a programs proincially and now programs municipally uh in terms of make making homes more energy self-sufficient um what's different okay so I I'm going to ask the mover although this is being moved on behalf of another member so I'll turn to councelor Cretch to offer an explanation My understanding based on this motion is that these are take home self audit kits and so this isn't something that's being funded. My understanding anyways at other levels of government the kinds of energy retrofit things that are happening that we're talking about at uh that level are hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars of investments. This is about small a small amount of money being spent for people to have audit kits to take home to assess their energy needs. and this is being done as a pilot through green venture. That's the information I have about this. I was satisfied with that because it made sense to me at that level and understood that it was about a self audit of your home energy needs. It's about educating people, informing people about how they can be more energy efficient. And this is being operated through, I think, the war for capital discretionary count, which is that $100,000 that counselors have. So, it's not coming directly out of capital area rating because it's not a capital expense. It's a program expense and that's the information I've got here on based on that. I'm happy to support it. But I understand if people have more questions. If uh there's something that city staff can't answer or no one else can answer that's here today. I'm sure it's not an emergency that it couldn't be dealt with by council. So I'm going to support it here today. If there's questions maybe they can be asked of the ward counselor before council. Thanks. Okay. I'm turning it back to councelor Clark please. So, has anybody reviewed the take-home energy self audit kit itself, staff or otherwise? So, I'm looking to see if there is anyone available to answer that question. And given that this is a word specific item, I don't know that staff have the ability to answer, but I will see if there's an answer from the general manager through the chair. We would have to take that back and ask uh across the organization whether or not uh city staff have reviewed and assessed these kits. Uh so I understand very clearly that this is the ward for capital discretionary account. Um but I'm seeing potential duplication and redundancy and I don't see exactly what the self energy kit what what we're actually funding. What what is it? Um, and so I don't know. I guess at this point the only thing I can do is simply uh oppose it. Um, and then try and get more information from the ward counselor before council. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to go to councelor Tatison, please. Just a question for the mover of the motion. Um, says in war two 100 eco home kits were delivered. at was that cost $5,000 as well? Council Crutch, I don't remember the exact amount. Sorry, I didn't come prepared with that information like from memory. Um, it's all on our website. I can look it up for you if you want, but it's all it's all transparently there on the website for W 2. Um, I can look it up for you before the end of the meeting. Again, I'm doing this because councelor Hang is not here. Um, yes, we had eco home kits that were distributed in W 2 as well. Um, I don't know if they're exactly the same ones as these eco home kits because I don't have full sight to exactly what councelor Hang's plans are. Again, I'm moving this on her behalf as a collegial activity here today. Um, in the spirit of understanding what I think this is, if there are questions for councelor Hang, I'm sure she's available to answer them by email. Okay. I was just uh trying to ascertain how much how many kits are going to be distributed. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Tatison. If I could turn it over to Vice Chair Spoutor for just a second, Chair Bey, go ahead. Thank you. Um, it wouldn't be fair for me to really ask any in-depth questions because the mover isn't here. Um, what what I'm going to offer is an overarching statement over a viewpoint that I'm seeing increasingly. Um, and I absolutely respect each and every ward office, W counselor having the opportunity to fine-tune programming within their communities. But what I have seen over the course of the term is that we've ended up where I think now we're heading down towards two and four having access to an additional level through this uh type of program for eco and home energy self audits. I don't know if if other wards have access to that. We have a number of uh wards that have community grants. Um some do, some don't. We seem to be moving in a in a more fragmented fashion. And I'm just I'm raising that as a concern um in terms of having different abilities to achieve different things depending on where you live within the se within the city as a resident. Um, I'm not sure that that is best practice and I know that that's going to bring a a comment, I'm sure, from the W 2 counselor. I see him already up there. I'm going to take their the chair the chair back. You may have it back, sir. And I'm going to recognize for a second time Cameron Gretch. Just to answer councelor Tennyson's question. I looked up the motion quickly and it's part of our community grants program. We used uh $4,000 to for eco home kits, but the description here is different. These are slightly different as far as I can tell. They may be the same kits, but I don't want to speak for councelor Hoy. That's all. What I'll say to you is that the community grants program, right, that we're talking about, every counselor who has access to some funding, and it depends on where you are in the city, right? So, I know that for instance, we redrew the municipal boundaries, board 10 got some area rating funding. Uh, Ward 14 has a little bit of area rating funding, but the plan for area rating funding was to literally put it back into the communities where it was raised. So individuals, residents who are part of all residents in W 2 pay taxes through their rent or through their property taxes contribute more than other wards do. And that money is then there and the purpose is to put it back into that community for those individuals. And so in 2018, council developed a grants program. And that grants program was meant to say, okay, if you've got this discretionary money or you can use area rating money, depending if it's a capital thing for an off-profit, but you can use this money in your award to distribute it. In terms of whether that's a fair a fair thing or not. I think it's a reasonable comment. I've long thought that all area rating shouldn't exist. I've been very clear about that. I think area rating does a disservice to communities. It pits communities against one another. It sets things up in unfair ways. This is the system that was agreed to. And just for reference, because I did some historical homework on this, I'm just going to share it. What I learned, which which was really interesting to me, um, and I'll share it with the rest of you, and if it's food for thought or fodder for emotion in the future, great. Despite the fact that some of these agreements were made at at amalgamation, it wasn't until 2011 that the word area rating system actually came into place. Oddly enough, so it wasn't until 2011 2012 that area rating started actually happening. So we keep talking about it as if these are rating funds have been going on since amalgamation. They actually haven't been. It's a relatively recent development. Um, if you're if you're interested, uh, my website has a whole section on it which talks about the history of area rating and there's a whole section about forward two, how much money has been put there and it's many many many millions of dollars over those of those years. So, I think it's a worthwhile conversation to have anytime someone wants to have it. I couldn't care less if it's an election year for the record. So, if people want to have that conversation now, have it next year, have it whenever they want to have it, happy to do it. I'm not on the uh area rating committees that exist right now. Um, but happy to join in the future if if it gets exciting. Thank you. And I'm not going to dispute anything that was said other than to say I don't think I mentioned fairness in my comments. So, um, just to set the set the record straight. Uh, we are moving on now. I'm looking to any other speakers and I don't see any which means we're coming to the point where we will require an electronic vote to indicate your support or otherwise for the motion on the floor. Nope. One moment. I have uh last minute request from the second term speaker meeting. The next AFNA meeting is April 16. Then would it not be possible just to defer this until we get the information from the counselor? Looking to the mover. Yeah, I mean if people want a motion to defer, someone who hasn't spoken could certainly do that, but I'm here to represent this on behalf of councelor Hang. I think there's probably a chance to ask councelor Hang before council to be fair. If you're not satisfied with the answer, you can always defer to council. I think that's just the more reasonable thing to do in the situation. If you're not satisfied with the answer at council, just defer just defer refer that that time. Um, that's my that's my suggestion. I can't comment further. Okay. So, I'll vote against it now pending the more information. Thank you. Okay. So, we're going to go back to the electronic vote. Those in favor, those opposed, please indicate now. And that carries by a vote of 62. Thank you. Colleagues, we're moving on to notices of motion which is item 10 10.1 which is the financial accountability and the administration of grant funding notice of motion. Councelor Crutch, please indicate indic introduce your notice of motion. with the theme of the week. I think this is my sixth or seventh notice of motion for this week. I'm leaving it as a notice and the reason is because I think it's important because I haven't provided it in a timely fashion for everyone to have a chance to chirp if they want or comment or say, "Hey, could you could you correct this?" Just to be really clear what it basically is saying because I think there's been some confusion about it. The whole purpose of this motion is something councelor Huang and I have been talking about here about a year ago was and specifically back to the last thing we were just talking about. We need to have something in writing for how this works. So I developed the war 2 community grants program with finance staff. It's very very very highly controlled. Monies don't go out until receipts come in. We audit it. We have a scoring system. Like it's extremely complex and transparent and so but there's no standard for that. We're doing that because that's what we think we should do, but others aren't required to meet those standards. So counselors are often able to sort of do kind of not whatever, but you don't have to do that level of detail in terms of a policy. So this is meant to say, can we have a plan, a policy, and write and everyone falls, it's the same. See you next AFNA with the actual motion on April 16. Okay. Uh so now colleagues, we are going to be moving into private session. Uh if I could have a mover and seconder to move into the close session with respect to item 11.1 which is pursuant to section 9.3 sections B D and F of the city's procedural bylaw 21-021 as amended and section 2392 subsections BD and F of the Ontario Municipal Act of 2001 as amended as the subject matter pertains to the personal matters about an identifiable individual including municipal or board employees. labor relations or employee negotiations and advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege including communications necessary for that purpose. A mover and councelor Spataphora seconded by councelor Cretch. Thank you. Please indicate your electronic vote now. Thank you. That carries 8 Z. So members of the public, this is to notify you. The meeting will continue following the closed session portion of the meeting when you will see members of the committee rejoin. The committee will wait up to 5 minutes upon reconvening in open session before proceeding with the meeting and that will provide members of the public and the media the opportunity to return. Before we move to close session, I would ask that all members of the public please exit council chambers and the WebEx meeting now. Thank you. and any staff who are not directly related to item 111 are asked to please exit the meeting now as well. A reminder to all members of the committee to please ensure that you move to the close session portion on escribe. I also remind members of the committee that as per section 8.7 of the procedural bylaw, the use of personal electronic devices during closed meetings is strictly prohibited. the use of city electronic devices during closed meetings are limited to text communication only and not as a telephone recording device or camera. Staff from the office of the city clerk are exempted from subsection 8.7c when using electronic devices for recordkeeping purposes. When the clerk has determined that only the appropriate attendees are still in council chambers and WebEx, we will then begin in private session. Sorry you had to stick around. I didn't know for So, how are you, Laura? Hey, never do. Yeah, another serious matter. Thank you and welcome back. This is the return to open session for the audit finance and administration committee meeting March 26, 2026. If I could have a mover and seconder that the report AUD 260003 auditor general reporting of serious matter to council report 90083 be received and remain confidential. Councelor Spataphora and Councelor Crretch. Thank you. Please indicate your vote by a show of hands. All in favor? That is unanimous. Thank you folks. Being that there is no further business, this meeting is adjourned at 11:42. Thank you everyone. Have a great day.

Full Transcript