Okay, good afternoon everyone. Call the 10th meeting of the infrastructure and corporate services committee to order. Um, please check the city website for additional meeting detail information. The city of London is situated on the traditional lands of the anabek, the hon, the len lenol adawand. We honor and respect the history, languages and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. City of London is currently home to many First Nations, Matei and Inuit today. As representatives people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. Uh we have uh Mayor Morgan joining us today, um myself, uh councelor Stevenson, and online we have uh councelor Frank and uh councelor PL just joined us. and visiting counselors. We have councelor Purple and councelor Trusso. Uh 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 meeting, please contact ICSC atlondon.ca or 519-661-2489 extension2425. Looking for disclosures of community interest. Okay. Not seeing any. Not seeing any online. Uh, we do have a request for a change of order. Uh, Mayor Morgan, you want to move that? >> Uh, yes. I was hoping we could deal with the uh the in camera items at the top of the agenda. Um, there's a significant number of staff associated with them that are only here for that item. And um, given the nature of the items, it would uh, it might be advantageous to us to get that uh, done off the top. So, I'm happy to move a change of order to put the in camera portion at the start of the meeting. >> Okay. I will second that and uh, we'll put that to a vote in a moment. Or actually is there any discussion on that? Okay. Not seeing any. Open that for voting. >> I'm in favor. I'm not not logged in yet. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. >> Okay. Uh thank you. Just get ready for a close session. Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. Okay, we're back in public session. Uh look to councelor Frank to report out. >> Thank you. I'm pleased to report that the matters for which we went in camera for progress was made on them. >> Okay. Thank you. We are on to consent. Uh I've had a number of poll requests. uh 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.9 and 2.12. So we have uh 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, 2.10, 2.11, and 2.13. Those are left. Are there any other poll requests? Sorry. 2.1 is pulled out or no 2.1. >> Okay. So, the ones that have been pulled are 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.7, 2.9, and 2.12. Everything else is left. Anything else? Okay. I'm not seeing any other requests from >> one more time. >> Okay. The poll requests are 2.1, 2.2, 2.4, 2.7, 2.9, and 2.12. And everything else is still on the consent item agenda. And I have no other requests unless there are any. Not seeing them online. So what is left is 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, 2.10, 2.11, and 2.13. And I would look for a motion for those to be put on the floor. Okay, Councelor Stevenson, I will second that. Okay, so those items are on the floor. Looking for speakers. Okay. Um, I'll get to you in a second. Councelor Trusso, I did just want to make one quick comment on item 2.13. Very much appreciate um, terms of the Hybrid Avenue uh, non-rine maintenance. Um, heard this a lot um, from my residents. People use hybrid. Greatly appreciate the cleanup efforts. Uh, I know we had to pull a lot of staff for the the cleanup we just did, but it is very much appreciated. It makes a huge difference. Garbage really does accumulate on that stretch. uh it is a main gateway to our city and it's very much appreciated to to have those cleanups and having the additional cleanup I do think will help because we are just seeing a large volume of garbage. So really appreciate that. Again, thank you again to all staff members who participated in that. Uh and that's my comment on that item. Um councelor Stevenson, do you want to speak on the consent item? Go ahead. >> I did just on one uh 2.8. I just had some questions around um the B the administration uh contract for administration and also around the procurement process. So for the membrane replacement it says that the lowest submitted tender was 9.6 million but in the other reports that we got we saw the other bids the amounts in the bids. So, I just wondered maybe why that wasn't here and uh to better understand um how this limited tendering process was applied to this one. Um because especially with it being a half million dollars. So, if I could just hear more from staff, I'd appreciate it. >> Okay. Um go ahead, staff. >> Uh thank you through the chair. Uh so the limited tendering was applied to the consulting engineer because they were the design engineer on the project and so because of the unique uh exposure that they have to the project. They are you know familiar with all the intimate details of it. Uh it really uh makes sense that they are the ones that carry forward with that project for continuity and for uh signing off of the final product. So that's why we have uh they were uh selected through a competitive process for the design and then during that process in order to level the playing field we ask them to assume a certain amount of contract administration duties so that each firm carries the same amount and it doesn't allow them to kind of game the system that way. But then once we get through detailed design the scale of the contract administration becomes clearer. And so that's why um you know normally you could look at it and say this value would have been included in the original competitive bid but it would have been equally carried by all. So uh in this case a limited tendering process was considered appropriate. Um as far as the membranes they were uh pre- purchased and carried as part of the value of this project. And uh I believe your question related to why the other bids weren't shown. That was just a um we just didn't include it in the report. Uh those numbers could be made available to you. Uh but the uh baseline was the low bid >> followup counselor. >> Uh thank you for that. I would like to know the other two. Um and I just wondered like is there a standard practice for the reports where usually the standard is to provide them or it isn't and the exception was on the other report that we did get to see them. Go >> ahead. Go ahead staff on your >> uh thank you for the chair. Sorry we just had to consult to make sure the answer was consistent but uh essentially that information is available on bids and tenders once the award is actually made. So it is publicly available. I don't believe it's typically in all of our reports. We tend to show it for some of the larger ones typically, but it's not a consistent standard that uh every single procurement report we list all the biders given that uh it is the chosen proponent typically that uh the lowest unless there was an irregularity that something else would would prevail, we would always be going with the lowest price. So there isn't uh a standard consistent for every single contract award, but uh on the bigger ones, we tend to show it. So hopefully that answers your question. >> Followup, counselor. >> Yeah, thanks. I I would just say I think it is helpful. I know it's available on bids and tenders, but we're not going to take the time to look that up. And it is helpful to just see how close the bids are. Um so I would find it useful. Maybe a standardized uh best practice. I think it would be a good idea. The other question is regarding appendix A. I notice it said, unless I'm reading this wrong, that this submission the total expenditure is 4.7 million and I'm not sure why it isn't, you know, closer to 10 million. So, I just wonder what I'm missing in there. >> Uh, go ahead staff when you're ready. >> Uh, thank you. through you. Uh that actually so the value of the contract that was shown there uh we pre-purchase. We did a separate competitive process to buy the equipment, the membrane equipment and it actually is a bigger part of the tender value than the the construction work itself. And so that money was already allocated as part of that purchase and then we just rolling that value into the construction contract. So the construction works that they were bidding was actually that lower number. And if you add the I can't remember what the exact number was, but the five or $6 million that the membranes are worth, uh that's how you get to the total value of the construction contract. So So the the part that was being bid was that lower percentage or that lower like less than half of the total value of the contract. And the reason we do that is that we wanted to make sure we had control over the purchase of the equipment because it's so unique and so integral to the design. And then once we had that established, we want to make sure that it's included in the value of the contract. So all the insurance and bonding and all those other things cover off on that value of the equipment which that uh purchase process is novated to the general contractor. >> Okay. Followup counselor. >> Yeah, thank you. It's just that it says in here that the lowest submitted tender at the total cost of 9.599 million. Uh, and then because it's over 6 million, it's coming to us for approval. And yet it says this submission, the total expenditure is 4.7 million. So, I'm just not understanding like because you'd think if it was 4.7 in this submission, it would it wouldn't even hit the 6 million. >> Go ahead, Steph. Thank you. And through you. Uh, yes. So, it's just that we because of uh us wanting to make sure that the insurance and bonding and all those other aspects of the contract considered the value of the equipment, the pre-purchased equipment, we included that in the total value of the contract that was to be awarded. But really, the five plus million that was related to the purchase of the membrane equipment was uh not part of the works that they tendered. So uh since we already committed that funding under the existing capital budgets, we only are showing the additional $4, uh whatever million dollars related to the installation. So that I think in terms of the appendix A, the source is only looking for that additional funding that wasn't already dedicated to the membranes. So we issued a purchase order to the company to start the delivery of that equipment and so that money was already committed and so the only additional money that was required to be found as part of the source was the money to cover off the installation. So you're correct. Normally if we hadn't rolled the value of the membrane equipment into the construction contract, you wouldn't be seeing this report because the total value of it would have only been 4 uh whatever million. >> Followup councelor. >> Yeah, thank you. I guess um my comment would just be if if if it's it needs to come to council for approval, I need more information in the report to understand it. You know what I mean? Like it would be helpful to to have a calculation that shows the expenditure that misses and maybe I'm maybe I'm missing it. >> Go ahead, Miss B. >> Uh thank you through the chair. I would refer the counselor to page 161. The very last page of the source of financing in the last column where you have the total shows the the $9 million start and then the deduction of the previous award to give you that reconciliation to the 4.7 in the source of financing. So that is there to uh show the changes that have occurred and how that financing was obtained. >> Okay. Thank you for that followup. >> Yeah, thank you. I I really appreciate that it helps and like I said if it's in the body of the report it helps too but thanks >> uh looking for any other speakers on the items. Go ahead councelor Van Mir. >> Yes. Thank you chair. I wanted to um follow up uh basically on that uh uh 2.8 eight. It um in the report it talks about in 2008 uh with the membrane bioreactor technology. Uh was that the it seems to me at the time that we talked about it uh that was the first time London was connecting with this type of technology. Is that the case? >> Go ahead, Steph. Thanks. And through the chair. Yes, this was uh and it at the time it was actually unique across Canada. One of the first membrane bofiltration ultra filtration projects that for wastewater applications. So uh it very much was at the cutting edge back then and uh through the works and and working with the manufacturer we actually got quite an extended life even uh better than they had hoped. Uh so it's it's really truly a success story for us and uh going forward we're hoping to build on that with the the new version of the same technology. >> Followup counselor Yeah, for some reason uh anything to do with bioolids, it just sticks in my brain. I just uh so I so yeah, so I I remember that clearly. Um and and I also remember that it had the capacity this technology and obviously it improves over time this technology to uh forall the creation of new uh sewage treatment plants. Uh is that a fair statement? Go ahead, Steph. Uh through you. Yes, correct. It's actually uh it was very effective for Oxford because we had limited space within which to build new tanks to expand the capacity. And so this technology is one of many that are available, but a a cutting edge technology that allows us to get more capacity out of the existing tankage. So instead of building or expanding uh plants, we can just intensify the treatment within those tanks and still accommodate growth and and uh flow increases with uh climate change. >> Go ahead, Cancer. >> So the u the technology has more than proven itself and in a very real way is a a costsaver for taxpayers. Uh is that too a fair statement? >> Go ahead, Ste. Uh yes, through you. Yes, this is uh now we're at a position where by adopting that new advanced technology, we can simply do a life cycle replacement uh and using the incremental improvements in technology that happen over time. Now the next version that's going in, we can actually get even more capacity out of those existing tanks. And so that's going to be instrumental in taking some of the development pressure off of Oxford for uh growth in the Northwest. >> Followup. >> That's great. Thank you very much. Okay. Looking for any other speakers. Go ahead, Councelor Trosa. Um, thank you very much. Keeping in mind that I'm not in a position to um vote or make amendments, I would like to ask a few questions about 2.5 annual update on Canada Life Place. Um, I'm I'm recalling that these uh improvements were done in two stages. phase phase phase one which came through a committee and phase two which came through the multi-year budget. Um would it be possible to get some fuller detail about the funds that were expended to date on both uh phase one and phase two with the with with as much detail as possible because this report seems to be mostly about um all of the events that have uh taken place in the facility which is which is great. But um I'm I'm looking for more information about the expenses that have been incurred to date and those that are still to be undertaken. >> Okay. Uh who wants to take Canada live question? >> Uh thank you through the chair. I'll start and uh perhaps Mr. Murray can assist. So um the so this report is brought forward on an annual basis to provide specifically the annual report and the results of the operations. Certainly if if the committee is looking for additional information with respect to the expansion um we can certainly provide a separate report if there's details um further to that. So essentially, just to give a little bit of detail and context about that, the funding that was approved by council to support um the phases of the uh expansion project has been uh transferred and the we can clearly know that the phase one project has been fully expended and those costs are completed. They are in process of working through the funding and spending um of the second phase which is scheduled to be completed um shortly sometime this summer. So they are working through what that final date is going to be but uh certainly as you look at the building progress is uh certainly moving forward. So um the process that was put in place is that as those funds are expended we have been receiving reports. So we do know um how far they have been progressing but the um process to expend has been fully through the project that has been paid for with the culmination of both the funds put through by the partners on the project as well as the city of London. And uh I believe Mr. Murray can provide an update as to the extent of the funding that has been spent for the project as a whole. >> Uh thank you and through you Mr. Chair. Uh so uh the phase one of the project was approximately uh $17 million as Miss Barbone has noted that has been fully expended at this point in time. Uh the second phase of the project was uh about 20.5 million. Uh and at this point that is approximately 3/4 uh expended thereabouts. >> Followup counselor. >> Well, will the council be getting some type of um re report about ex exactly how the funds were expended in in total now that it's completed with phase one? Could we get that by the council meeting to append to this report? Uh >> go ahead, Steph. uh through the chair through the chair if I can perhaps get clarity on what exactly the counselor is looking for. Um is it what Mr. Murray had just said in terms of the percentage and the costs that have been paid to date? Um there are costs that are still continuing obviously so this would only be at a point in time. >> Okay. A point of clarification. Go ahead councelor. >> Yeah certainly. I'll clarify it. I I don't see anything in the report in front of us that deals with it. We just received an oral report at a very summary level and I would I would like to see um a more detailed listing of um the the the funds that have been expended on the completed phase one. And since it's already completed, presumably that would not be a burden to um to to give to us. And I'd like to see that um at the uh council meeting if possible. It may be a little bit more complex with respect to phase 2 since some of those are still being um undertaken, but I'd like to see that as well. I I believe that this council should be getting some level of reporting about the uh the funds that have been expended. While this was not money that went on the levy, it still was uh in large part taxpayer money through our through different funds. Okay, I'll give staff a moment uh before they comment. >> Uh thank you through the chair. So this the funds are not being paid. So this the funds were provided to Budweiser Gardens as a grant. There were two phases where those grants were provided that form a total budget because only 80% of the funding for the expansion came from the city of London. So if the council is looking for a detailed accounting of the full construction costs, that is not something that the city of London has. We have been apprised by Bud Gardens as the construction phases have occurred as to the level of spending and where they're at in terms of monitoring the city's investment. However, we do not have a detailed accounting of where all those funds were spent and for what purposes given that the project was not put on by the city of London. It was a contribution to a broader grant and capital project that was completed on behalf of Bud Gardens >> through the chair. If it was a grant, wouldn't we still nonetheless get a report about how the um grantee expended the funds that they received through a grant? Uh just a reminder counselor to wait for me uh before you speak again but uh I'll leave that to staff. Go ahead. >> Uh thank you through the chair. So as the project is not completed yet and it's still um that's something that would fully be done at the fund and once the com final um expenses have been brought in. So doing that now certainly as we're in the midst of the project and the project isn't completed we do not have fully. We know at what percentage completion they are at in the funds that have been paid so far, but I we do not have a full accounting of various line items. I can tell you that the fund was fully expended for the phase one, but that that is part of a broader project where phase one and phase 2 were done concurrently. So until the project is completed, we will not have more detailed information other than what has been spent at a point in time to be able to provide uh again through through the chair um if phase one is complete I'm still not clear why that information could not be given to us with respect to phase one >> I believe staff have already tried to address that but if they don't want to comment further go ahead Uh thank you three Mr. Chair. So um what I what I can say is that uh our classification of phase one and phase two um for our purposes and the grant that was provided uh by the city to to the partners for the project. That is not how the construction contract as I understand it with uh with the contractor has been structured. it has not been delineated in the same phase 1 or phase 2 uh distinction that we split the grant. So uh to Miss Barbone's earlier point, I think it would be uh it would be prudent to wait until uh all costs are in with respect to the project uh to provide that that final uh accounting or breakdown of of how those uh those funds have been expended because the the the alignment is not identical between what we would consider phase one and what uh the contractor would consider to be phase one or phase two. Okay. And councelor just being advised for the clerk that I mean at a later date you could bring a letter to committee if you want those but as staff have indicated it would probably have to be when the project's complete to get that full breakdown. >> Yes. So my next question to follow that up through the chair is when might we expect that? >> Staff would like to comment on that. Go ahead. >> Uh through the chair. So, sometime over the summer, we don't have a final date. They're certainly trying to uh wrap up as much as they can as quickly as they can. Um certainly the intent is to have it fully completed and finalized in time for um the September opening, but they're trying to get a substantial completion date um from the contractor as they're pushing to get the final elements done. So, we do not have a date, although we do know it should be sometime early summer where we would um have a final substantial completion and some of those costs would be starting to be wrapped up. So, certainly by the fall, I expect that we should be able and be in a position to have a final accounting of all of the costs as uh they have will likely have been expended or close to being expent at that time. >> Okay. Thank you. Follow-up, counselor. >> Yes, thank you uh through the chair and I'll be looking forward to that. Um, the reason I'm raising this uh now is um there's recently been a lot of uh public attention given particularly to the locker room uh uh improvements and uh I'm starting to get questions about what those expenses were and uh also particularly during periods of the year when the nights are not playing. What is happening with those facilities? Are are there other groups or uh or or uh recreational programs in London that get to use those facilities when they're not being used by the Knights? >> Um staff want to comment on that? Go ahead. >> Uh thank you to the chair. Um that's not something I I think I know the answer, but I don't want to hazard a guess um without being able to uh confirm with uh Bud Gardens management for that. So certainly London Knights are a tenant as part of that and pay lease and and there is a separate tenency agreements related to that. So um those would not be terms that we would be privy to to be able to provide that information. >> Okay. And thank you and uh yeah Canada life place I still call it JLC but uh just so get our corporate uh sponsorship correct here. >> Well thank you. I'll follow this up at council and any any additional information you could provide for me at council would be um useful at council. I will have the opportunity to pull this to ask for it to be voted on separately or perhaps to make an amendment asking for um further reports. Although it does sound like um at least the aggregate expenditure report will be coming to us in the fall. I do have concerns about um our ability to understand since it was taxpayer money um how these facilities are being used when the knights are not using them. So to be told that we have no ability to get that information. Um I'm I'm hoping we can we can clarify that. >> Okay. I'm going to take that as a comment but uh go ahead city manager if you want to >> through you Mr. Chair. That's not what we said. I want to be clear about that. We will get the information to get it back. >> Okay. Thank you for that. >> Thank you. I'll look forward to it. And that's all I have right now. >> Okay. I have councelor Ramen uh next and then councelor Prible. Go ahead council. >> Uh thank you and through you. Um so I wanted to start by thanking staff for the reports that are in front of us uh today. Um, I wanted to speak directly to 210 the uh contract award tender and appointment of consulting engineer for Sunningdale Road West, the improvements from Wonderland Road to Medway Creek Bridge. Um, I want to say first, thank you for the information that's here. I find it really helpful that as we get a contract tender, we get more of a summary of what's going on with the project, where things are, if there's any changes in that summary. I I'm reading through to find those out. Um, one thing that I'm struggling with though as we're moving through these projects is around the communication side uh with our construction right now. Um, I think there's a bit of confusion out there sometimes when something is a developer-led construction component of a project versus when it is a construction that the city's undertaking. And sometimes that confusion also lies with the fact that they're the same contractor for different sections of the same project. So I'm wondering if maybe we can uh have a bit more dialogue at this committee or elsewhere around how we can improve that communication. Um lately I will tell you um uh with one specific contractor named here um they've had private work that's been going on in the exact same stretch of area. And so I will get uh all of a sudden a surge of calls from residents because of a a road closure for instance and I'm spending half of a morning tra track tracking down information on why the road is closed to find out it's private developer work not associated with this work not associated with the contract but it's also not sometimes on Renew London which is also really challenging. So I'm wondering how we might be able to work through some of those challenges. Thank staff want to comment then go ahead. >> Uh thank you Mr. Chair. We are always looking to find ways to improve our construction communications and certainly uh emergency repairs and private development construction uh are part of that discussion. We do have a central construction coordination committee and and I can certainly take that back to them and have a discussion with those folks as well as with uh our communications colleagues about how we can share that message uh more clearly about what's private and city work. uh this the private work is approved by the city through a permit process managed through uh housing and community growth. They are members of the construction coordination committee. So it with a bit of time I'm happy to spend a little bit of time with that group and see what we can do to maybe make get those messages more clearly and ensure that we're getting timely information for Renew London for works that are not city-led as well because we do hear those same frustrations. We get quite a number of calls as I'm sure many of you do about private works and the uh closures that are impacting people's daily commute. >> Uh thank you and appreciate that. And just to follow up on councelor's point, uh yeah, anytime we can get notified as well, it's appreciated because uh I try to keep track of as many of the projects as possible, but those private ones that' be good. Even if it's just something as simple as a CC on there will be private work uh at that certain location is greatly appreciated if that can happen. I'll go back to the counselor. Go ahead. Yeah, thank you. And I I appreciate the support for that comment. And I will say in some cases, this is just a matter of uh part of it happening in new subdivisions. So, one of the things that I was not aware of that I'm learning more about is that when a subdivision is new and not under the the city yet, um when certain roads are closed for uh works, we don't know. And so again, this is where the puzzle starts to uh become much more complicated and where I'm finding myself making a lot of phone calls to a lot of construction companies trying to figure out what they are doing in the area to inform residents. Um I also don't understand why when a private contractor is doing work, whether it's in a new subdivision or not, why they don't have a notification requirement, for instance, if they're closing a road. So, I ran into the situation in one part of the ward directly related to this construction as well where they closed a a road that was connected to the Sunningale project. People assumed it was connected to the Sunningale project. The subdivision's not assumed. So, what ends up happening is that none of us know that the road has been closed uh because of that. So, um, I was able to work it out with the developer and and the contractor, but it is definitely something that I think we have to figure out a way to address. Um, one other comment, similar to councelor Mallister's, when counselors are looped in on the communication, it would be very helpful to see the communication plan for Sunningdale. I get questions daily about this project and what's what's taking place. When a uh turn signal, for instance, when when you could make a left-hand turn from Sunningale onto Richmond and all of a sudden that gets removed, it's not updated in Renew London, the only way I'm finding out this information is from residents are driving down the road. And by that time, the frustration level is already pretty high. So, if I can get out ahead of that message, if we can get out ahead of that message, I think it's helpful. Um, I'm just not sure how we're we're going to do that. And so, I want to get better at this. If you have any suggestions for how we can do that because these things don't show up in Renew London. It just kind of has a blanket statement that construction is happening for the next few months and expect delays. >> Thank you for that. And uh yes, we're definitely in the the season of construction. So feel that frustration. But if staff want to comment further on that, go ahead. >> It would thank you, Mr. Chair. It would be quite difficult to uh address in Renew London or through communications plan all of these small changes that happen a particular road restriction in real time. Sometimes they are well planned in advance. We are taking signals off overnight. We're doing night work. We're flipping one side to another. We're closing a turn lane. But there are often small changes that happen as the practical nature of working in a physical infrastructure environment move. Um we certainly can get the communications strategies that has the broadstrokes there and we can commit to providing the best information we can in real time. But uh noting that if you look at renew London, there are hundreds of construction projects and we do not have um we only have two construction communications coordinators for the entire city and uh the project managers have very high workloads to manage the projects in real time. So it is very difficult to necessarily communicate those things as they happen. We will try our best to flag the big changes. So there are likely, for example, you can no longer make this turn movement. It would be a change that I think would be well uh valuable for us to communicate out so people can plan an alternate route in advance. >> Okay. Uh any other comments, councelor? No, you're good. Okay. Uh looking for anyone else? Okay. Uh councelor Prebble, I think you had you're on the list as go ahead. >> Thank you chair to staff. Actually, I just uh when councelor Ramen mentioned this, I do want to go to 2.10. Now I'm going to ask you because when I look at the entire stretch between Richmond and Wonderland, the budget was $36.6 million. When I look at Medway to Wonderland, we are looking at over 20. So are we still looking at the same budget for the entire stretch Sunningale between Richmond and um Wonderland to be within the $36.6 million? >> Uh Mr. McCrae >> through the chair. Yes, we're on target with that budget. Uh this contract award is more than half because it includes the bridge over the Medway Creek which is a major uh cost expenditure and the subsequent phase will be uh consequently lowered a smaller half >> followup councelor. Okay, thank you for that. I do want to talk about 2.5. I'm going to take a different approach than my colleague did in in terms of the Canada life place. uh I want to uh when I look at the numbers in terms of the revenue and in terms of the number of events it's very positive and it's positive in terms of there's an increase and as we know there's economic downturn so I'm really happy to see that because of course that's more money for the for the city as well. Uh the second question I have uh we did approve the expansion and this expan the expansion was also to be seen for future events that city of London that together tourism London and Canada life place can bid on. Is there any information that you can provide and I'm not talking specific dates specific organizations that we were able to tap into and potentially have incremental revenue with different events based on the expansion. Uh go ahead staff. >> Um thank you through the chair. So, because it's not entirely known the exact date that it's going to be ready, um I believe they've built in a little bit of a buffer room in terms of starting, but certainly um in terms of how they welcome um guests for events and some of their live concerts and there's a number of things that they have plans to use that for and that are already going to provide significant relief in terms of where they would have been able to hold some of those events previously. I do understand there is some things that are scheduled later in the summer that they are anticipating to use that space for. So, um they're starting to look at that. Um certainly one of the things that they also um is looking at how that space can be used for potential bids for other um large events that might be able to come to the city in the future. And certainly they work collaboratively with Tourism London on those. So, they're certainly looking at all those opportunities. There's nothing that uh I have specific that I can share, but it certainly they're actively looking at those opportunities and looking at how that space can be used and have a number of things that are planned into the fall that they are planning to use that space for. That has brought uh significant ability to attract new artists and and support the artists that are already booked there. >> Followup counselor, >> thank you for that. Do we have any information in terms of their forecast for this year? if it's about the same, slightly better, slightly worse than last year. >> Okay. Um, somebody has a comparator. Go ahead. >> Uh, thank you through the chair. In terms of 26's budget, I believe it's relatively similar um in terms of what the the net bottom line is anticipated. Obviously, once the um expansion is completed, there are some provisions that change the limitations on the um amount that goes towards the losses that have been incurred in the previous that would allow the potential for more funding to come to the city. So certainly from a budget perspective, we believe the event in terms of total income is roughly going to be um positive and similar in in terms of what we're expecting at this point for this year. But uh certainly the expansion and when that is completed will allow a little bit more in the early phases to have additional revenue and that greater share come to the city of London as a result. >> Followup councelor, >> thank you for that. Andy even though it's not a part of this uh uh report but my colleague already asked my biggest question is this organization came to us with specifics in terms of what they are planning to do during the phase one phase two uh there it was supported by the initiatives actions and also the financials I'm quite sure I'm going to get the answer which I'm expecting but the most important at this stage for me is uh are they within the amounts that council has approved. Go ahead, staff. >> Uh, thank you through the chair. So, based on the amounts that council approved, council approved a fixed contract and that that would not allow any additional funding from council to come forward. So, certainly that's one of the reasons we've been monitoring the status of the project and where it is um as the the billings have come in, but certainly um the contract does not allow for any additional requirements for city funding even if there was anything. So those safeguards have been put in in place to ensure that no additional funding would be required. So certainly at this point in time they are well within um the budget and we do not expect any cost overruns to occur. >> Followup councelor. >> Perfect. Thank you for the confirmation. Uh I'm just going to make a comment that certainly uh uh Canada Life Place is a bright star for our downtown and for our city and it's not just the revenue it brings on the paper now but if I look at the economic spin-off and impact certainly for downtown and therefore for the entire city is very positive. Thank you for this report. >> Okay, thank you. I'm looking for other speakers. Okay. Um not seeing any. Um, so we will open the vote on these consent items. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. Defer. >> Yes. So we don't have any defer. So we could just state that and then we'll go right to 2.1. Okay. So, we don't have any scheduled items items for direction, but we have uh deferred matters for the items that were pulled. Okay. So, we have we'll just go in order of these. Um >> change of order. >> Uh thanks. There's been a request to do 2.7 first if possible. >> Okay. Um, can I You're going to move it then, Council Stevenson? >> Yeah, I'll move that change. >> Okay. Can I get a seconder for that? >> I'll second it, Chair. Um, to hear it on the floor and hear the arguments. Thank you. >> Okay. So, that is being put forward. Um, we just putting it in the system and then we'll vote on that. That's to move up 2.7. Okay, it's on the floor. Any discussion? Okay, not seeing any. We'll open the vote on that. >> Just a change of order. >> Yeah, change of order to move it up to the first item we're going to talk about. Councelor Pelosa. >> Sorry, I was get the chair asked for comment. I just didn't understand why we're doing a change order on this one, but I see the vote's open, so I'll just vote accordingly. Closing the vote. Motion carries 4 to one. >> Okay. So 2.7. We'll start with that. Look for a mover and a second. >> I'd like to move it with the amendment that uh I circulated to the clerk. So we have to um deal with the amendment separately because it would contradict the motion. So um >> pardon >> it would your amendment would contradict um the motion. So you have to do your amendment first. >> Okay. I'll I'll move it the staff recommendation then. >> I'll second it. This is the staff recommendation. Staff recommendations on the floor. If you want to put forward your amendment, go ahead. >> I will put forward the amendment then. Um, and sorry, I just got to look for a seconder for the amendment. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Van Rberen. So, that's seconded. Go ahead, Councelor Stevenson. >> Yep. So, uh, it's that civic administration be directed to bring forward a bylaw amendment to bylaw number A16 procedure bylaw to delete the following pro provisions in section 3.1. A, one week without meetings to be set aside in each of the months of April and May, and B, two successive weeks without meetings to be set aside in each of the months of July and August. It being noted that the proposed 2027 meeting calendar would require the rescheduling of two of the four standing committee meeting cycles by one week as follows. April 26th and 27th instead of May 5th and 6th. May 25th and 26th instead of May 19th and 20th, July 5th and 6th instead of July 14th and 15th, and August 3rd and 4th instead of August 11th and 12th. Okay. Do you want to speak to that? >> Yes, I will. And thanks for allowing us to move it up. Uh counselor, there was a counselor that wanted to be present for this and isn't able to, but um we'll just go ahead with it anyway. The reason that I'm bringing this forward is for this week, we've got um standing committee meetings Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, which all go to council for a final decision on Tuesday. And we had this previously, and we've got it coming up again. and it puts a lot of uh committee work into one week and really makes it difficult uh to get the public engagement and consultation or even to get the answers from staff. I've had to send a whole bunch of them uh in a in a short period of time. So, this was something that was done previously to try to provide I believe constituency weeks. Um but I think it's much better from a public perception. It it I've had some people say to me, it looks like you're trying to rush stuff through. Um, and then there's also the workload on council and staff. So, I would just like it to be consistent throughout the year where we'd have two committee meetings each week followed by a council meeting and the third week. I think uh that would be much better for all of those reasons that I stated and I'm hoping to have committee support. >> Okay. Uh, looking for other speakers. >> Okay. I'm not seeing any speakers, so we'll open the vote on the amendment. Ramen, you got into the neck of time. >> Uh, thank you. And through you. So, I'm not a voting member of this committee, so I can't uh vote on the amendment, but I would like to um just uh if possible, um I understand that staff will will do whatever the the decision that's made and the outcome uh after council on on this matter, but I just wanted to ask if it's possible um if this amendment has been reviewed, if staff feel that there were benefits or there drawbacks to the previous uh schedule that we had just agreed to about a year ago or so. Um I just want to find out if they can provide some commentary if any on on what that might look like. um because part of the reason why we also considered this change was around um uh having not just constituency weeks but also in terms of some of the timing uh for staff and and others. So I just want to see if they can provide any feedback. >> Okay. Um city manager want to take a crack at that? Go ahead. >> I'm happy I'm happy to. Thank you. Through you. Um we um I think when we for the 2026 uh calendar we provided it we did receive feedback there was a recommendation brought forward through a committee uh to change the 26 calendar to this mechanism. So with the constituency weeks uh we implemented that council's direction because it was approved by council we've brought the next calendar back with the same uh tenants the same principles. if there's a desire to go back to the way you were before, we're happy to do that. Um, but we took council's direction to do it in the first place. Uh, and so we I think what we did was we mirrored last year's into next year's, sorry, this year's into next year's I should say. Um, but happy to take any advice about how you'd like that changed. >> Followup, counselor. >> Okay. Thank you. uh and through you and um with those changes that are proposed in the amendment uh how do we map out things like uh FCM and AMO and and other things and was any consideration given to whether or not those meetings will now fall on Mondays and Tuesdays instead of Thursdays and Fridays uh in into those other weeks. >> Okay, the clerk's going to take this one. Go ahead >> through the chair. Thank you. We'll have to uh double check, but there might be conflicts with the scheduled AMO and FCM conferences for the following year. >> Uh go ahead, councelor. >> Uh thank you if I may. Um so, uh will we have that answer before council >> through the chair? Certainly. We can send an email to council indicating the dates of the scheduled AMO and FCM conferences. >> Okay. I'm not seeing any other speaker. >> Sorry, I still have questions. >> Keep going, counselor. Sorry. >> Uh, thank you. And how will we make the determination if the meetings happen on a Monday, Tuesday versus a Wednesday, Thursday of those weeks that are now being specified? >> Is it because the conflicts with the holidays that you're also concerned about or sorry, go ahead. >> Uh, thank you. It's just sometimes when we're planning for these types of meetings, we're planning council and standing committee meetings based on our schedule, but we also have agencies, boards, and commissions that are planning around us and have their calendars uh somewhat set as well. So, I'm just trying to find a way so that we don't run into, and I know some of my colleagues have had this, and I've had this problem, too, where we have um conflicting meetings at different times scheduled from agencies, boards, and commissions of which we also have uh to consider in our schedules. uh through the chair. We don't have authority to direct when agencies, boards, boards and commission scheduled their meetings. We certainly provide um the schedule for the following year so they can take that into consideration. But other than that, that's all we do. >> But I I think your question was more in terms of ensuring they don't fall on Wednesdays and Thursdays. >> Uh thank you through you. Yes. So, uh, in the revised calendar that's in front of us right now, we have meetings going for Wednesdays and Thursdays as well. Um, what I'm trying to understand is how when we're making those determinations around the schedule, um, how are we allowing for, for instance, when certain other committees, agencies, boards, and commissions have meetings set for every Thursday or at a set time every month. I'm just wanting to make sure that we're we're able to check those kinds of overlaps be as we make these decisions. I'm not sure if the clerks have had time to go through and look at that. I know we kind of set our schedule and expect everybody else to uh work with us around that, but I I just think we have to take that into consideration. Typically, and before this term of council, our meeting schedule was completely different. and now we've made our agencies, boards, and commissions kind of work around these new complexities of our schedule. So, it is something we need to consider um and and especially as we move into other term of council, what we're uh setting forward as the next um calendar. I think that having our meetings on Mondays and Tuesdays uh has been our norm and and if we can continue that, if we're looking at this amendment, I think that that would be helpful. Yeah, councelor. Um, just to your point, I think we'd have to have a further amendment in terms of ensuring that the meetings have to be scheduled on Monday and Tuesday. Uh, just cuz right now it's more in terms of a week count and just recognizing we got some holidays in there, too. So, that presents its own challenge through the summer. Um but yeah, maybe that's something to bring to council for consideration. Um unless anyone else wants to make an amendment um or any other comments, we will open the vote on this. Closing the vote. Motion fails. One to four. Okay. Uh we are now back onto the the schedule we had before in terms of going in order. Oh yes, sorry. We have to uh >> Yes, sorry. Now we're back on the staff recommendation for 2.7. So any comments on this? >> Uh sorry, we're still on 2.7. We just have to vote on the actual staff recommendation. Okay. Um yeah, this is the main motion. Any comments, questions? Okay, not seeing them. We'll open the vote on this one. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries. 4 to one. >> Okay, so now we're back on to the regular schedule. This is 2.1. This is 2026 reserve and reserve fund monitoring and housekeeping report. Uh looking for mover and seconder for motion. I need someone to to move something. Okay. Uh councelor Frank, councelor Posa. Thank you. Okay. So that's on the floor. Any discussion or questions on this? Councelor Stevenson, go ahead. >> Thank you. Yeah, I had quite a few questions around this one. Um, with this being uh the 2026 reserve and reserve fund monitoring and housekeeping report. I'm just I'm trying to understand how um a report that gives us the uncommitted lowbalance forecasted in the next 10 years compared to the target value is the only information that we're getting as we monitor reserve funds that from what I can see in the the last financial statement 2024 were $1.5 billion. Um and so it's a ton of money. it's been increasing quite a bit and in in this annual report we don't even see what the balances are the ins and outs. So through you to staff I I'd just like to understand how this is perceived as the uh the only monitoring that this council and the public gets to see. >> Uh Mr. Murray, do you want to take that one? >> Uh sure. I can start. Mr. Chair, if Miss Barb wants to add anything, she can certainly uh jump in as well. Um I I think uh I think it's important to to distinguish between uh different information for different purposes. So the counselor has referred to uh amounts that are reported in our audited financial statements. Um those uh audited financial statements of course provide a historical kind of backwards looking uh view of our of our finances in general including our reserves and reserve funds. Uh on the other hand, there is uh forward-looking uh information uh that uh would be information that we of course uh present in our uh budgets uh every year uh and uh in the uh in the monitoring report that you see uh in front of you here today as noted. Um, so I I I would say we're dealing with different different information for different purposes. And uh what we focus on in this report is as the counselor has noted uh the forward-looking uncommitted uh balances of of reserve funds. um those uh are certainly very different than what may be sitting as an actual current uh balance of a reserve fund uh by the the very uh fact that uh a current balance doesn't reflect future commitments that council has made against those reserve funds. So, uh, ultimately when we're when we're presenting, uh, the, uh, projected uncommitted balances, we're trying to give council a view of how much there, uh, really is to work with in those respective funds, uh, based on the commitments, uh, that have been already made. So, you know, we don't want to be in a situation where we're overcommitting uh, reserves or reserve funds. And uh so by presenting the the uncommitted balance that gives a a truer picture of what is available uh for council uh to utilize for future spending. >> Followup counselor. >> Yeah, thank you. And through you I'm not trying to say there's not merit in what is presented here because there is but what I'm saying is if in 2024 we had $1.5 billion in reserve funds. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see any is there is there another report or budget that shows the actual amount that we have sitting in reserves? Cuz when I look at the budgets, it's it's uncommitted amounts is the only thing I'm seeing in there. So, are we am I missing a report that shows the extent to which we have reserve funds of over a billion dollars? >> Uh, Miss Marbone, go ahead. Uh thank you through the chair that that what the council is speaking to is our city of London consolidated financial statements that go to the audit committee in June of every single year. That is the balance that is available at a point in time. The details are recorded on our balance sheet and there is a note uh that provides the details and the breakdown of what that is. So this report speaks to the amounts that are remaining that have not been committed and uh are taking into account the commitments that council has approved um through its process. So certainly there are different times um to look at what is currently at uh the money at a point in time and certainly our DC's is uh the next item which there is significant dollars in those reserve funds and we have a statutory report out on those balances at that point in time. So our financial statements are the view of the reserve funds at a point in time and that show the cash that is sitting there but does not reflect any of the future commitments. So um certainly the as Mr. Murray had identified. That is the point in time that is related to the cash that is there. But unfortunately, the financial statements do not take into account what those future commitments are. And that is where the budget process then lays out what those other amounts are and those details are provided in the the budget update that we bring forward every single year as well in terms of what those balances are and then what those commitments are spread out over the period of time for which they've been approved. >> Okay. Uh thank you. follow-up, counselor. >> Yeah, thank you. Again, I'll just say, but it in the budget update, it doesn't show the actual amount of the reserves. It only shows the uncommitted balances. Is that correct? >> Uh, Mr. Murray. >> Uh, three, Mr. Chair, that is correct. The focus of the budget is on forward-looking information, not historical information. >> Followup, counselor. >> Yeah. So, I I love forward-looking information. I love that. But I just feel as though if we have $1.5 billion of taxpayer money set aside for reserves that it would be nice to have some kind of a report that states that aside from the audited financial statements cuz nobody really looks at those. Um but that if we're going to do monitoring if c this council and this committee is going to monitor the reserves and reserve funds then somewhere in that report somewhere I would like to see the amount that we actually have the amount uh to previous years there's a lot of public discussion and from the provincial government and through other uh agencies that are saying municipalities are uh increasing reserve funds at a very high rate and at At a time when we have high property taxes and there's pressure on us to reduce uh DC charges, I think we need to be really uh transparent and just explain why do we have all this money? What are we holding it for? So that there uh so that it's clear to taxpayers. $1.5 billion is a lot of money and the reports that we see only talk about a few hundred million. Um uh so I I I'm I'm not satisfied that this is an adequate monitoring report um for this issue. The DC reserves we show the actual amount and then you see the committed amount. That would be great. Um maybe I'll ask through you to staff. Was there a time when the actual amounts were reported and the uh committed amounts or how long does this go back this this level of reporting? Uh Mr. Murray, go ahead. >> Uh thank you and thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a relatively new report. So this uh has only been uh introduced in the last, I believe, 3 years or so, I want to say approximately. So this is this is certainly not a uh a long-standing historical report where we've provided uh this uh this annual monitoring uh in this form. So uh that uh there there was no uh different version that existed previously. Uh this is the uh the version that has essentially existed since uh we introduced this report approximately 3 years ago. >> Followup councelor. >> Uh yeah, I've got a few. So So prior to 3 years ago, >> sorry, just as Ryan, you have a minute left on this. >> Okay. So there was no annual reporting of reserve funds prior. >> Go ahead, Mr. Murray. >> Uh thank you three, Mr. Chair. So the financial statements of course and the budget would provide information on uh reserve funds historically. Uh we did also bring forward an annual report uh every year approximately this time of year. Uh however, the focus of that report uh was historically on uh revisions that might have been required to uh reserve fund bylaws. So you know if we were uh repealing uh a a bylaw to terminate a reserve fund, for example, or if we were introducing a new reserve fund, uh that was historically the the focus of this report before we introduced the monitoring element a few years ago. followup. Councelor >> Yeah. If target balances were changed, would that be reported to council right away? >> Mr. Murray, go ahead. >> Uh three, Mr. Chair, that would be the intention of of this report. It would be uh highlighted in this report. >> Followup, councelor. >> Yes. Uh how many new reserve funds have been set up in this term of council? >> Mr. Murray, go ahead. Uh three, Mr. Chair, I believe there have been nine. uh reserve funds set up although uh some of them are uh similar reserve funds although uh across different uh rate bases. So you know for example uh we established DC exemptions reserve funds uh uh one for the uh property tax supported budget, one for the water budget, one for the wastewater budget. So similar purposes for all three uh but uh three nonetheless due to the different rate bases. So uh nine individual reserve funds in total. Followup counselor. >> Yeah, thank you. Is there a move to having more reserve funds? Like just trying to understand this better. >> Mr. Murray, go ahead. >> Three, Mr. Chair. Actually, the uh the intention would be to the extent that we can reduce and uh rationalize the number of reserve funds that would be preferred from our perspective uh because uh the the more reserves and reserve funds we have, the more uh administration is involved with uh the the ongoing uh monitoring and management of those. So uh over the last say 8 years or so we've been trying to actively where possible uh reduce the number of reserve funds uh and uh try and get them and and keep them uh as uh manageable a number as possible. >> Followup councelor. >> Yes. Um and I've I've lost it now. Um, I forgot my question, but I'm not going to be supporting this because, as I said, nothing wrong with what has been provided. I just think it isn't adequate for the $1.5 billion reporting and monitoring that is expected uh that I'm hearing is expected from the taxpayers. >> Looking for other speakers on this item. Okay, not seeing any. I will open this for a vote. Closing the vote. Motion carries 4 to one. >> Okay, we are on 2.2. This is the 2025 annual report on development charges reserve funds. Looking for a mover and seconder motion. Councelor Frank. and I'll second it. Okay, that is on the floor. Go ahead, Councelor Stevenson. >> Thank you. Yeah, on page 40 in under 1.5, it talks about uh previous iterations of this report included commentary of the DC revenues and expenditures for the year. This will instead be included in the growth management implementation strategy plan to be brought forward uh to committee in June. and I just wondered through you to staff if they could just explain that change. >> Uh go ahead, Mr. Murray. >> Uh sure. Through you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, absolutely. So, uh the intention is to provide that commentary uh as part of the the GMIS report. Um our our intention with this change is really to align uh that uh detailed information on uh actual uh revenue and expenditure uh developments in the DC world uh with the decision making that will then be required or associated with uh with that information in terms of implications on uh growth related projects. uh having that all in one spot as council is making those decisions uh around project timing uh for growth related projects. Uh we feel that uh that will be helpful information to have all uh in in one place uh as part of of that report. So the intention would be then that this report uh is uh effectively what it uh reverts back to effectively what it had been historically which is uh simply providing the the uh legislative uh reporting requirements that uh we need to provide annually under the DC act. >> Followup councelor. >> Yeah thank you. On that same page, it talks about discontin the decision to discontinue the interim borrowing charge uh on the DC reserve funds. And I just wondered um if through you to staff if you could explain the impact that that's going to have going forward on the tax levy. >> Go ahead, Miss Bray. >> Uh thank you through through you uh Mr. Chair. So uh we don't envision uh any significant impact on the tax levy associated with this. Um the uh the impact on an annual basis has kind of been in the in the $200 to $500,000 range uh every year. Um that's a relatively uh minor impact that we do not envision um will have a significant impact on our investment income budget. Uh there are other factors, other uh market related or economic related factors uh that have far more significant uh implications or far more significant drivers on our uh future investment uh income budgets. Whether those budgets are larger uh than they are if interest rates go up, for example, or if they are lower, if interest rates decline, those are are far more impactful than uh what we're talking about here, which is uh in the neighborhood of a few hundred,000 annually. followup, councelor. >> Uh, thank you. Yeah, I do understand that in the scheme of things, it's small and yet it is, as you said, $200 to $500,000 a year. Now, that won't be uh that'll be an increase uh to what taxpayers are paying or not have the credit for the interest. Um, and the other thing is in here it mentions about um the financial sustainability of the funds is becoming a significant concern. So through you to staff, I'd just like to hear more about that, especially in light of uh what's expected to be pressured to reduce DC charges going forward. And you know, we saw Vaughn take theirs to zero for 12 months. So I'm just wondering what this state does to those options for London. >> Um M Oh, Mr. Barbone, go ahead. >> Thank you through the chair. So certainly this has been an issue that we have been flagging for a number of years now and um it is something that is uh certainly causing a little bit of concern when we look at the longer term sustainability of development charges with the um recent changes that have been made that have created a significant number of exemptions. Um if you will recall there was um items put into the multi-year budget to support the exemptions and the backfilling of those exemptions. Um as a result and those were continuing to grow over time. The decision was made um through the council and through support um of a letter that was received from the province that municipalities although um not required to fill those back fills um could make the decisions to manage those. So the council decided to remove those exemptions. So as a result those exemptions remain unfunded and um continue to grow over time. So what I can tell you is we had more exemptions in 2025 than we had revenue of development charges that came in the door. As a result, um the continuing decline that we are continuing to see um well into this year with lower building permits coming through um we did not have a significant amount of revenue received in the first quarter. And as a result, all of those reserve funds which are required and predicated to support the projects that are within our DC background study and that support the growth of the city are um not keeping pace with the expenditures that need to be made. So one of the tools that we have as we've noted in the past is the GMIS process and that is where through that process we look at the financial sustainability of the funds and what the requirements are with respect to financing the housing enabling growth. So um that uh report will be coming in June and we look at um what deferrals can be made. Um you'll also recall that we've made a number of deferrals with respect to non um housing enabling funding to be able to manage the shortfalls that were within those funds. So um certainly as we see the shortfalls um continue and grow and the number of the expenditures um obviously that need to be made to support a very large growing city. um we are starting to get a little concerned and we're starting to look at that and that is based on the current DC revenue and rates that are in force in effect with respect to the DC background study. So um the decision to defer the interim borrowing is one of those tools that we're using to try to manage those shortfalls without having a significant impact on the property tax budget. Noting the exemption backfill was taken out of the budget. Um the only other tools we have at this dis at our disposal at this time is to continue deferring projects and currently um approved projects to try to manage what those shortfalls are going to be. Um that is something that as we continue and look at the new DC background study and all of the master plans that have been approved by this council. Um certainly as we work through that process that there there may need to be some choices in the future as to what will be able to be done within the funding that will be provided within the DC background study. So we're undertaking that work currently now. The DC background study will come forward in 2027. So, um, there's certainly some things that we're paying attention to and starting to look at much closer, but this is an interim step that we're trying to manage it until the next DC background study is completed. But the the pressure to reduce DC's further will have a significant detrimental impact on the ability to continue with the growth that we currently have given the state of the revenue and that is coming in at this time. >> Okay. Followup counselor. Yeah, thank you through you. So, a city like Vaughn that uh reduced them to zero for a year, did they just have a healthier DC reserve fund than the city of London or are they doing that a different way? Do you know? >> Uh staff know what the city of doing? Go ahead. >> Thank you for the chair. Um I I can't speak specifically to city of Vaughn but um certainly when we look at the DCs at the city of London in comparison to other cities of similar size city of London's DCs are considerably lower than especially cities anywhere near and around the GTA. >> Follow council. >> Okay that's good to know. Um and so if you know you say the only option is to defer projects, do we have the option to uh use debt financing instead? >> Uh Miss Marone, go ahead. >> Uh thank you through the chair. That is currently um something that we do uh quite regularly. Um you'll note if you look at the details, there are many projects that are primarily debt funded. Um certainly the debt still has to be repaid. So there has to be sufficient DC funding coming in to ensure that those debt repayments can be made. Obviously when there's debt financing there is a cost of capital that is also part of that. So it is a little bit more expensive as you spread it out over time. So it is something that is taken into account. Um certainly we would never want to move to a fully debt financed uh model. So that we try to use as much balance between all of those based on the funding that is available related to the timing and the scope and scale of the projects. >> Follow C. >> Yeah, thanks. Just my last question then is about the reporting because it does show the uh the actual I'm assuming these are the actual balances in the DC reserves and then the amounts that are committed. Um so I just wondered why the presentation is different than for the reserve funds. Go ahead, Miss Burma. Uh, >> thank you. This is a legislative report that is required through the development charges act. Um, these are very specific in terms of the DC background study and the development charges act has extreme number of requirements that are in need to be upheld. So this uh is posted publicly. It is communicated and provided to the ministry as well. And uh there are a number of uh constituents across including all the development community that uh actively uses this information um through the the ongoing discussions and monitoring at a communitywide level. >> Followup counselor. >> No, that's all. Thanks. >> Okay. Uh looking to other committee members for visiting counselors not seeing them. Go ahead counc. >> Thank you s chair to the staff and I had kind of a similar question in terms of this. So the report because first when I read it uh I was missing the uh DC's monitoring and then in 1.5 I heard it's going to be GMIS. I just want to verify that in the GMIS we will receive the same information, same figures, same graphs, revenue analysis, projected versus actual conso consolidated CSRF's uh depth payments to the DC ref analysis because these reports are what I saw last year were really truly beneficial and I just hope that the same information is going to be in the GMIS next month. >> I'm the chair. >> Go ahead, staff. through the chair. That's a great question there. Yeah, what we're looking at doing is we've evaluated what's historically been presented in terms of our DC monitoring. We call them the DC lever. So, you got your lever being the revenue element, the expense element, and the reserve fund side. Um, we are in the midst of again just trying to identify exactly what the reporting is going to be, but it's going to be very similar. I can't use the words identical, but it's going to going to contain a lot of the really useful relev relevant information for the public and council to be able to assess the overall health of the of the of the DCs. >> Followup council. >> Okay. So, thank you for that. So, I certainly hope it's going to be improved that it's going to be even better, but uh I just want to let you know that certainly the report from last year was really beneficial certainly to me with both understanding and visualizing the situation we are in. So I hope you keep it that uh uh uh because again those graphs and figures they truly help tremendously uh much easier than just writing and uh we can identify the issues much easier. Uh and uh so thank you for that and I hope you will consider my comments. Thank you. And then um uh based on the last comments so last fall we had $140 million. So the expectation in June that this number is going to be even larger. Is that correct? Go ahead. >> Sorry. Can I just get reference to the 114 million? >> Clarification. Council. Sorry. >> It was in last year's report. I don't have it in front of me, but it says uh uh that the uh DC shortfalls now are at $114 million. That was last year's report. >> Yeah, thank you for the chair. Thank you to the chair there. Um yeah, what's happening is that we've had now essentially four consecutive years of net loss on the revenue side. When you look at the actual budget relative to the revenue coming in, um last year in particular, 2025, you're going to be seeing in the next report, it's it's very significant. Um so we're going to be identifying that cumulative loss growing. um in terms of continuing to to present that number, we're looking at um modifying the presentation of that information uh because the numbers is becoming very very large and we are we are implementing various levers to mitigate that again through GMIS project timing uh adjustments as well as through the the annual budgeting process where we're looking at our network knee capital projects and adjusting those timings as well. But yes, the bottom line is that the gap is growing in terms of that uh cumitive loss and that would be much greater than the 114 that was presented last year. >> Followup counelor. >> Thank you for that explanation. And the last question I have uh on the other committee we get once a year and I believe it's the other committee we get a report in terms of the developers in terms of how the value of dollars we assume on the infrastructure projects through the private developers and if I remember correctly over two years we were over $200 million. How is that now let's say in terms of how do we calculate with this with the DCs because yes DCs we stop charging for certain things again not just by us it comes from the province but the on the other hand we assume certain projects as I said over $200 million how is this looked at in terms of offsetting potentially these amounts because I would imagine if the developer would not do it we would end up doing And >> go ahead Steph. >> Yeah. Uh through the chair. Thank you much for through the question there. Um what we're talking about is local service costs. When we look at specifically our development charges background study bylaw, um we have certain costs that are defined as as local service. Those are going to be costs that are that are essentially the responsibility of the developer and that that are typically going to be paid for by the developer and not on the back of the development charge. Right. But you're right. If there was if we changed our policy framework and included more costs that were not sorry reduced elements and policy elements that were taken out of the local policy they would then form part of the development charges and the rate would effectively go up. Um what we do is we do extensive consultation specifically with uh a development charges study community reference group that is composed of LDI homebuilders the construction industry and the urban league. So we have a lot of conversations on policy mechanisms and policy choices related to development charges. Uh one of which is local service policy elements. So again that has been through a comprehensive review that will be embedded and baked specifically into the upcoming uh 2027 devel 2028 development charges background study. Thank you. >> Followup counselor. >> Thank you for all all your answers. Appreciate it. No more. >> Okay. Thank you. Looking for any other questions, comments. Okay. Not seeing any. We'll open this for voting. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. >> Okay, we are on 2.4. This is the bianual procurement report and update. Looking for a mover and seconder for a motion. >> Councelor Pelosa will move. >> Okay. And I will second that as on the floor. So any questions, comments? Go ahead. Councelor Stevenson. >> Thank you. You had a couple of questions on um so on page 100 there was the discretionary benefits program 2.6 million. I just wondered for this one. Um my understanding was this was the first time it went to tender and I just wondered if that's true and then what precipitated that uh change. >> Um go ahead Miss Burp. >> Uh thank you the chair. So certainly this was uh previously it was a small dollar value to so it was not there was a contract contractual obligation in place but it was for less than uh it was at an upset value of $50,000. So with the um requirements of the program that have changed the uh value of the program went up significantly which is why it met the threshold to go forward for a tender. So um based on the council policy and the amount that went forward um for the tender process and was uh done through procurement for the first time given the value increase as a result of the program need >> followup counselor. >> Yeah just trying so so the program went from 50,000 to 2 a.5 million >> miss barbone go ahead. Uh thank you. This is through the provincial um discretionary benefits program. So that uh program is legislated and run through um Ontario works. So the program has gone through a number of changes since 2018 when this was last um gone forward initially. >> Followup council. >> Okay. Thanks. Yeah. As I I know we had a local nonprofit that uh lost that bid by just a little bit. So I just wanted to know a little bit more about it. it went to a a Toronto company, I believe. Um, and then there's a design and implementation of a new online public engagement platform for the city of London for 250,000. I just wondered if I could hear more about that. Maybe there was a staff report for that. >> Um, who who gets that one? >> Go ahead, Mr. Dar. >> Thank you. As as part of our processes uh through you, Mr. As part of our processes, we are uh moving forward to uh ensure that we increase the engagement that we do uh across all platforms. And so we have implemented a plan to put a new process in place. We've moved forward on that, but I'm happy to get more information in response to any counselor questions on this one. And I sorry I don't have it with me today. >> A followup, counselor. >> Yeah, no worries. So there was no staff report for that. Like we council was not aware of whatever that change is that's happening. Uh, go ahead through you and chair. I believe there was information. I I know I do not know if the director of communications is on currently, but we'll get the information to your counselor for sure. Okay. >> Uh, she is. She is on. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you. And through you, chair. Um, so this was um there was no uh report on a committee or council agenda on this. However, it was a um an RFP that went out for the uh a change in um in the platform that we're using for public engagement that that platform went live um at the very end of 2025. So, it's now been in place since for 5 months and we did a competitive uh procurement and um I'm sorry I didn't I didn't hear the amount that you mentioned, but uh uh the the cost came to about 40,000. >> Followup counselor. Uh, no. I'll follow up on that offline, but I've got another one. Um, and it's under the emergency procurement. So, for the trailer rentals for the microo shelter, it says that emergency procurement required to support the urgent oper operationalization of the micromodular shelter program. So when we talk about emergency procurement, are we saying that in in us approving that micro shelter, we created an emergency that allowed the procurement to be done that way? I just I was just surprised to see that something that we operationalized fell under emergency procurement rather than just go through the normal procurement channels. Okay. Um, go ahead staff. >> Uh, thank you through the chair. So, as as you know, this was certainly through a mayoral direction and the response where there was very very limited time frames in terms of procuring what was required to get a micro modular site up and running. So with the urgency to have this done and through the reporting that was provided to council this is uh the provisions under the procurement policy certainly we utilized through the cooperative purchasing we looked at all the options and were able to ascertain that there were very limited suppliers that could deliver anything within that very limited time frame. So given the time frame and the requirements to get something up and running within a um very limited time, there were no other options within the procurement policy to go out and create an RFP document and follow other provisions that would have taken us through a normal process. However, normal process still allowed us to follow the cooperative purchasing that uh was leveraged to be able to move this forward where through those co-ops there is a procurement process that is undertaken. So um certainly it was our intent and desire to follow as much public procurement pro protocols as much as possible. >> Okay. Thank you. Followup counselor. >> Uh thank you. I I'll look into that a little bit more. Just again, it's around the uh nuance of what is an emergency, I guess, in terms of, you know, if we're just behind on things and they need to be done, can we use emergency procurement? And I guess that's the benefit of having it publicly reported like this. Um so, and then just in general, like this is our first uh procurement report since uh we made the big changes. Um, and I just I'm just concerned because I'm getting a lot of uh concerns brought to me around our procurement process and then uh in terms of little things that have gone wrong or the perception that they've gone wrong. And so just from an oversight perspective, I just wonder is there any way for council to know sort of how many issues there have been? uh how many went to a committee to be resolved uh anything like that. Could that be part of the reporting? >> Go ahead, Stephanie. >> Um thank you through the chair. Um uh when we'll bring back the um annual reporting as per section 35 um we will have more wholesome data to provide which will include um your non-compliances which will also include sustainable procurement initiatives. So right now we are in the middle after stabilizing we are in the middle we are putting those controls so that we can have more wholesome uh reporting done at once we complete one year mark um uh for with the updated procurement policy. Thank you. followup councelor >> um just one other question then I guess uh any comment from staff around the issues that were raised through the audit committee there were uh I believe several uh key things that were noted as a concern around our vendor programs and I know we didn't fund them through the budget so I just any comments from the staff regarding how this um these procurement report updates will help council um adequately provide oversight over an issue where uh issues were raised. >> Uh go ahead, Mr. Collins. >> Uh through the chair uh to committee uh consistent with uh with what Miss Aurora indicated earlier about the annual review outlined in section 35.2 2 of our policy, we speak to uh uh a summary of vendor performance evaluations and resulting actions if applicable. As part of the uh procurement of goods and services policy that was approved by council uh based on uh the resources and capacity that procurement has, we have embedded uh some of the insights gleaned from the internal audit report that was provided to us to uh fold in some of those concepts to uh the degree that we can support and manage based on our existing resources. uh regrettably it's not uh to the extent that was uh uh identified uh by MNP at the time. Uh however there are a number of council priorities uh looking at uh the limited uh resource base that we have. So we're doing uh what we can and we've folded into the policy uh what we can do. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And uh just a reminder council, you just have a minute left. So go ahead. >> Okay. Um and when is that annual report come before council? Um, Mr. Collins, >> uh, through the charter committee, we just reported out on the, uh, annual report for 2025. So, uh, we would suspect that the annual report for 2026 will probably be, uh, in the spring of 2027. Uh, however, uh, within the policy, there is an expectation set out that it will be no later than such a date, and I believe that's in May. So, uh, there's a framework to govern that reporting. Thank you. follow-up counselor. >> Uh that's good to hear. And so my other question is around uh issues that may come up uh during the procurement process. My understanding is that a complaint can be filed, but there's a committee that looks at those complaints that basically um uh you know it it it's still within the administration that is responsible for the process. I don't know if when cities have um auditor generals if they're able to go there with their concerns, but it just seems to me like there isn't an avenue for issues with the procurement process that might rise above the uh administration that's responsible for the process, but I'm open to hearing from staff that there actually are avenues to address maybe some bigger issues that might arise. >> Okay. Uh that'll be the last question on that item. Go ahead. >> Thank you to the chair. Yes, the supplier dispute committee is in in place. Um, whatever process is laid out as per the procurement and goods and services policy, we uh the supply dispute committee follow that. In terms of reporting, all the disputes do not come to uh are not part of the annual report as well as bianual report. But in um in terms of how many disputes have been received uh what what were the decisions that aggregate value can be provided um to council if that uh is required. Thank you. >> Okay. Looking for other questions, comments. Not seeing any. We'll open that for voting. Councelor Vanir Bergen. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries 4 to one. Okay, we are on item 2.9, the contract award tender RFT, appointment of consulting engineer, Bowler Road Water main and cycling improvement project. Um, >> that's a closable move. >> I'll second that. That's on the floor. Any questions, comments? Councelor Stevenson, go ahead. Yeah, thank my my question is regarding the um the low bid is significantly lower than the other three. And so I just wondered uh through you to staff how uh you know, have we had experience with this company before? Do they have a good track record given that it's going to be a main road, Bowler Road, closed for 15 to 20 weeks this construction season? just makes me a little nervous when I see uh one being so much lower than all of the others. >> Okay. Um M Sheer, Mr. McCrae, who wants that? Go ahead. >> Through the chair. Uh yeah, we do have some anecdotal awareness of this contractor's work in other municipalities and that combined with the issuance of their bonding as part of their tender submission provides us the confidence to award the tender >> followup councelor. >> Yeah. Can you just explain the uh issuance of bonding in terms of how it like the concern with taxpayers is that we say 15 to 20 weeks and sometimes it's a long long time. And so if we're going with a low bid, how do we protect taxpayers from a longer construction delay? Um if there's issues with with this, does does the issuance of bonding help at all that way? uh who wants to take the bonding question? >> Uh I can start if uh any of the finance people want to chime in. But the bonds um our insurance of uh financial stability and performance on projects of similar or uh larger magnitude. uh there aren't necessarily a guarantee of performance and uh we um administer our contracts with the mechanisms the contractual mechanisms that are in them and we we hold our contractors to account and um so you know we um do our best through the administrative processes to hold the contractor to those commitments that are uh they're contractually signed up for when they accept and submit their bids. followup, counselor. >> Yeah, thanks. I'll just take the opportunity to ask, you know, are there because people ask me quite regularly, did we at least save some money when these projects go along? Like, are there financial implications to contractors not completing the work on time? >> Go ahead, Steph. Uh yeah, speaking in generalities, yes, there are there's uh there's both incentives, disincentives in various contracts and in pretty much all contracts for linear construction on the roadway. There's a concept of liquidated damages whereby if a contractor goes past uh the completion date or the allocated amount of working days, the municipality uh charges money back to account for the additional uh social and administrative costs to the public and the municipality. >> Followup council. >> Okay. Thank you. That's good to hear. Um, and just again for education purposes, I guess, is it unusual to see such a a discrepancy in the bids? Are there extra steps that are taken when you see a low bid that comes in maybe much lower than all of the others or lower than expected? >> Go ahead, Mr. >> The chair. Yes, certainly all tenders received particularly the low tender are scrutinized. Uh the line items are compared to the preconstruction estimate prepared by the consulting engineer and you know any red flags are looked for any any concerns and we satisfy ourselves that you know that submitted costs are within uh you know typical ranges to provide us the confidence um and we rely on our consulting engineer for this uh frequently um that they they make a recommendation for tender award after they've done their thorough review. >> Followup counselor. >> Yeah, just one last question on quality control. So, does the consulting engineer also responsible for making sure that we get a high quality product? >> Go ahead, Mr. McCrae. Yes, the the consultant contract administrator uh administers both the processes to uh to ensure that they meet the requirements of the contract and also the materials and uh parts supplied and that those also meet the material specifications. >> Followup council, >> one last question and that is a finance question. Um it shows that uh 1.85 85 million will be uh a debenture for the active transportation for the cycling lanes. So if people are asking again when we talk about how many much we have in reserve funds um and there seems to be money available for active transportation just remind me how this uh one part becomes a debenture. >> Go ahead Mr. Murray. >> Thank you and thank you Mr. Chair. So uh typically the uh the uh financing decisions on our capital budget are driven by our capital budget and financing policy. Uh the uh the nature of the works uh dictate typically what the most appropriate funding sources are. Uh in this case uh we are we are dealing with um growth related projects and so um you know to the extent uh that there are uh non-growth uh related shares uh of of growth projects or or non-growth portions of growth projects. Uh typically one of the uh primary funding financing sources for that non-growth share is is tax supported or rateup supported debt. uh for the uh for the growth share uh as Miss Barbone noted on a previous agenda item uh that may be a combination of direct draw downs from the city services uh reserve funds the DC reserve funds uh or uh the the use of uh debt funded by the DC reserve funds or some combination thereof. So uh again it's it's all uh predicated on the nature of the project and uh the most appropriate funding sources based on that uh project's nature. Followup counselor. >> Okay. Looking for any other questions, comments. Okay. Not seeing any. We'll open that up for voting. closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. >> Okay, we are on 2.12. This is the appointment of consulting engineer Sunningdale Road West. Improvements from Hyde Park to Jordan Boulevard. Looking for a mover and a seconder for a motion. >> Councelor Posal will move or second. >> Okay. Um, if you want to move, I'll second that. That's on the floor. Any for questions, comments? Okay, councelor Stevenson. >> Thank you. Just a quick question, I think, on this one. I'm just paying a lot of more attention to the procurement piece of this. So when we're using um it says um you know the deliverables deliverables can only be provided by a particular supplier. No alternative or substitute and that only one supplier is capable of providing the required services. the policy that's quoted is just so specific and yet this seems like it's just because the person had done it before they have the most logical one to be able to do it at the lowest price. This isn't something I understand all that well, but is it you know when it's a is it is it a subjective decision? Is there a way to make it more uh where you put it out there because maybe there is somebody who could do it um for the same price that feels that they didn't get the opportunity. So I just wondered if staff have anything to share there. >> Uh Mr. McCrae, do you get that one or this year? Go ahead. >> Yeah, thank you. Through the chair, there's a few different aspects of this. the limited tender that the work is being um assigned to the consulting firm that did the design for the work. though there's you know a few uh aspects like they're they're fully aware of uh the design work obviously the consultations the relationships you know the the work ongoing with things such as utility companies you know the work that spans both the design phase and the construction phase when utilities have to relocate. I guess the most specific uh reason why the uh design firm in this case and in many cases for uh capital construction projects why they uh should do the construction administration is because we require uh record drawings with an engineer stamp on them and that is an important foundation for our infrastructure database and our asset management systems. It requires uh an engineer to stamp the drawings as constructed so we know exactly where the sewer pipes and the water mains and all the infrastructure is built. If if we were to bring a new consulting engineer in at the construction phase, that engineer would essentially have to go through the motions like of a complete redesign to satisfy themselves that the design is appropriate before they can put their engineer stamp on the constructed drawings because they're essentially taking responsibility for uh for the quality of the design. So, so introducing a new engineer at uh at the final at the construction phase of the project really requires that engineer to you know step back many steps in the in the project phase and it really would cause delays and and great additional cost to the to the project. >> Followup counselor? No. Okay. Looking for any other questions, comments? Okay. Not seeing any. We'll open that up for voting. Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. >> Okay, that concludes our items. We just have adjournment. Looking for a motion to adjurnn. Councelor Van Morgan. Thank you. I will second that. All those in favor? >> Motion carries. >> Have a good afternoon.