Okay. Good afternoon everyone. Call the 11th meeting of the infrastructure and corporate services committee to order. Please check the city website for additional meeting detail information. City of London is situated on the traditional lands of the Anesabek, the Hodnoson, Lenowanak, and 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 of the people of the city of London. We are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. Uh we have all members of committee either present or online and councelor Purple is also joining us. The city of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings on request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact iclondon.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425. I will look for disclosures of peculiar interests. [clears throat] Uh not seeing any. Uh on consent, we have had requests for items 2.3, 2.4, 2.7, and 2.10 to be pulled. So I would look for a motion for the other items. Okay. Uh, Councelor Frank and Councelor Van Mirburgen. Thank you. Okay. So, 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 2.6, 2.8, and 2.9 are on the floor and looking for speakers. Okay. Uh, looking for any committee members first. Okay. Not seeing any. Go ahead, Councelor Purple. >> All right, Mr. Chair. I'm online. I do have my hand up. >> Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Councelor PLA. >> Thank you. >> That's okay. Um, and Jerry and I, uh, Councelor Pip and I might be speaking to a few of the same items, um, as we were both copied on in an email, uh, that I know addressed. In regards to item 2.2 on page 15, um, for the provincial government, uh, looking up for the new uh, landfill operating committee, looking to see what the timelines would be on this from staff. >> Okay. Um looking to staff, Miss Chambers, go ahead. >> Uh thank you and through the chair. The new landfill operating committee is currently uh under review with the Ministry of Environment as it involves and it's part of our larger indigenous communities communication plan. Um so we're waiting to hear back for approval from that and once that approval is received then we would go forth and canvas the uh related indigenous communities if they'd like to form and join our committee. a follow-up council. >> Okay. So, it just uh I take that as a fluid timeline. Then it could be a few months, could be whenever the province uh does that approval is my understanding from those comments made by Miss Chambers. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you to the chair. And yes, that is uh we are waiting on them at this point. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Followup counselor. >> No. uh on that one. I appreciate that of um just waiting on the province before we go and do the engagement uh to see who may be interested in uh that capacity. In regards to item 2.5 being the equipment rental and operators uh for W12A looking at the tenders uh just looking to staff, I realize that we're the recommendation is the one that we currently use. Uh just any comments on the one being essentially half the cost of the other tenders that we're looking at going with? >> Go ahead, staff. >> Uh thank you through the chair. Um for sure we've uh been in touch with JBL Construction who is doing the current operations and they are confident that they can deliver the same service for that price. um being the incumbent, they do have uh already a lot of uh investment in the equipment and kind of having that advantage of being already set up shop. So um we're comfortable and confident that they'll still be delivering for that excellent price. >> Okay, go ahead councelor. >> Uh thank you. And just one further overview realizing councelor P might touch on some things as well. had heard from the chair of the PLC at the landfill as a few of these reports do relate to landfill things but were not a public notice distribution. Uh if staff could just comment um [clears throat] that they will forward those reports just to the chair for their concern. Um I know council motion won't be required but just uh if they're watching that they'll know that uh they can get a copy of these reports coming through them and they can distribute them as they see fit. >> Go ahead Sam. >> Thank you to the chair. Uh yes, we can uh in addition to sending the links to these specific reports, we can also in future uh make sure that the chair is apprised of reports coming forward to committee if they relate to W12A and uh we'll add that to our procedures. >> Any other comments, councelor? >> No, I appreciate that. Uh realizing our current chair of the PLC is more techsavvy than some we've had in the past and it just helps with the flow of information. So I greatly appreciate that and that concludes my questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. Go ahead, councelor Pribble. >> Thank you s chair to the staff. Uh I do have a couple of follow-up questions on the uh 2.1 regarding the review of the vehicle speeds and uh the question is uh do we consider when we do these study uh studies intensifying this these issues for such that the roads are narrow, there are no sidewalks, there is no there are no barriers between the street and also the pedestrians, the citizens. Uh Mr. McCra, do you get that one? Go ahead. >> Yeah, certainly. The uh through the chair, the the studies were uh done in response to the concerns uh identified by the uh property owner. So, it was focused on measuring speeds and comparing to speed limits. >> Followup counselor. >> Okay. So, thank you very much. measuring this piece. But the question is in this study does it include or in any of the studies do we include such things as the narrowness of the road, no sidewalks, no uh nothing between the street and pedestrian. So it's kind of more dangerous and what the residents are trying to say it intensifies the uh issues with the speed limit. Uh so is this being considered or in some cases or in this case? >> Go ahead Mr. McCrae through the chair. Yes certainly when we study streets traffic operations all road users and uh adjacent land uses are taken into consideration when when the results are processed and considered. >> Followup counselor. >> Okay, thank you for that answer. In terms of the Dingman drive, no trucks should be allowed on the street. No entrances and no exit exits. This road was not designed for such traffic. It was not properly paved to take on all this traffic. The truck should be taking Wellington and not cutting through the subdivisions. Can I please receive a feedback on this statement from the residents? >> Go ahead. U Mr. McCrae or Mr. Chambers >> through the chair. the uh identified operating routes to the landfill. Identify the uh uh Wonderland Road and Wellington Road and Manning Drive. So not directing uh trucks onto Dingman Drive. So that is certainly accounted for. And then um you know with respect to the overall nature of the the road network, it Dingman Drive is classified as a rural thoroughfare. So it's a higher classification than uh the other rural roads and uh in general for all railroads according to the official plan the priority is on through movement of vehicles, farm equipment, freight and goods. So the um some although we try to limit uh truck traffic uh along Dingman um some is to be expected just given the nature of uh the function of the road within the network. followup councelor. >> Thank you. So just last followup. So the big heavy trucks that are that are driving through, are they legally allowed to drive along Dingman? The trucks, I'm not talking about the farm equipment, etc. The specific trucks, are they allowed to drive on Dingman? >> Go ahead. To the chair. Uh yes, there there is I mean aside from uh highway traffic act rules uh they are uh permitted to use the road. >> Followup councelor. >> Thank you. No more questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I did have a question uh in terms of 2.6. Um just for awareness cuz uh you know I had a few people look at this and say oh these are the only new traffic signals or pedestrian signals. um in terms of how we prioritize, but then also um if there are other opportunities in terms of these happening outside of um this list. I'll look to staff for that one through the chair. This report uh is sort of the final step in the process of the city evaluating requests and our regular monitoring of the traffic uh signal network uh for new additions new additions of signals, pedestrian signals and pedestrian crossovers. So we uh are certainly happy to take requests through the service London portal and uh those those are uh processed by staff and uh if deemed warranted they would end up in a future report. This is an annual process uh for implementation. >> Okay. Thank you. And then just to confirm this is just for new for ones that are approved but still in the works they would not show up on this list. Correct. >> Through the Mr. Chair. Yes. Uh that is correct. uh locations that were approved in previous year's reports that are you know still in the design process or just starting construction uh yes those are still in progress and and don't need to be uh you know their approval is intact >> okay thank you and looking for other questions go ahead council >> thank you I forgot once the chair to the staff 2.9 the expropation of the lands I have a question under 3.0 no financial implications. It states there is a budget available for Western Road and Sarna Road, Philip Aaziz Avenue. Uh unless I missed it in the report, I don't see there. Uh the question is where is it available this budget? >> Uh Mr. McCrae, go ahead. >> Yeah. Through through the chair, the purpose of this report is uh for the purposes of the property acquisition and expropriation process. So it there's no financial commitment being requested here. It you know the the comment is in relation to the project being a funded one and uh the project financials are shown in the overall uh budget wrap-up documents. >> Followup cancer. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Looking for any other comments or questions any items before us? Okay. Not seeing any. And just for a reminder this is for 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.6. 6, 2.8, and 2.9. So, we'll open the vote on those. Councelor Ploza votes yes. My escribe is malfunctioning. >> I'm having trouble with mine, too. I vote yes. >> Yeah, it's just a bit slow right now. Just give him a sec. Councelor Frank votes yes as well. >> Councelor Virgan. Okay. I It just came up. Yeah. Closing vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. Okay, we have no scheduled items items for direction. So on to deferred matters which are the ones that we moved from consent. Uh we will go in order on those. So um 2.3. Can I look for a mover and a seconder for that? Councelor Frank. Okay, I'll second that. So 2 looking for questions or comments. Okay, I'm not seeing any. We'll open the vote on 2.3. Okay. So, councelor Stevenson, you're able to vote correctly. It's now. >> Okay. All right. We'll close vote on that. >> Closing the vote. Motion carries. Four to one. >> Okay. Thank you. We are on to 2.4. Looking for a mover and a seconder on that. Okay. Councelor Frank, I'll second that. 2.4 is on the floor. Looking for questions or comments. Okay. Not seeing any, uh, we'll open the vote on 2.4. Closing the vote. Motion carries. Three to two. >> Okay, we're on 2.7. Looking for our seconder on this one. Councelor Frank, I will second that. 2.7's on the comments. Uh, go ahead, Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. I asked a similar question last time. I'm just looking to understand given the value of these contracts when we uh continue to use the same um consultant and just ask for them to to uh send in a submission. Is there a change in procurement policy that's allowed this or has this been an ongoing practice? >> Uh Miss Ramloop, go ahead. >> Thank you. through the chair. So this has been an ongoing practice. So that this was allowed under the previous policy and under this policy. So it is a limited tender because it is an ex basically an extension of the services. So when we have an engineer perform the on-site inspection, um it's best um under engineering practice to have the the firm that did the design work also ensure that it's built to match the design. um if we were to have a separate consultant come in, they would then have to perform um basically a peer review on the design in order to then take responsibility for it um to perform the inspection work. So that's why it's to the city's financial advantage um and to rateayers advantage as well to have the same consultant to do the contract administration and site inspection as did the design. >> Followup counselor. >> Thanks. I appreciate that. So is it safe to say that it it never goes out to tender these then it's always just offered to the um the existing consultants? >> Go ahead Miss Marilyn. >> Thank you through the chair. They are subject to a competitive um process at the outset. So when the design work is sent out for proposal that is a competitive process. So these were originally awarded that way and then it at some point um for some projects we actually award the construction administration uh work with the original uh project or with the original design work. Other projects we don't because there may be some uh question about the scope, the timelines etc. And so it makes sense to get the additional price later on, but because of the total dollar value, that does mean that it comes before committee and council for transparency. >> Followup, counselor. >> Uh, no, I think that's good. It is just the amount. It's close to half a million dollars. So, just double checking. Thanks. >> Okay. Looking for any other questions, comments. Okay. Not seeing any. We'll open 2.7 for vote. Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. >> Okay. Uh we are on uh 2.10. Looking for a mover seconder for this. Councelor Frank. I will second that. Oh, councelor Poza. I saw your hand. Okay. Your second on that one. Okay. And looking for questions or comments. Okay, go ahead, Councelor Stevenson. >> Thanks. Yes, I did send in some questions and thanks to staff for getting back to me on these. Um, I'm just wondering a whole bunch of questions around uh this report. We have 1 7 1.8 8 billion uh here in the investment portfolio. And I noticed if I go back to 2022, there was a Canada CPI graph. Um just wondering why that's not included this time. >> Okay. Um Mr. Murray or Mr. Collins, what do you go ahead? >> Uh thank you and thank you, Mr. Chair. So we are uh constantly assessing what we think is the uh right information uh in telling and and kind of giving a a picture of what is uh driving the financial markets and what is driving our uh investment portfolio returns. So from year to year we may uh adjust or or present uh something slightly differently that kind of helps to uh indicate kind of what the drivers of our uh investment portfolio performance uh was. um you know for example we've uh provided information uh as it relates to for example uh bond yields and yield curves that uh kind of help to illustrate um kind of some of the the relevant uh information that effectively tells the story for uh for this year. So the information or the graphs that we uh include in kind of the narrative of the report may may shift slightly from year to year. Uh but generally it's about trying to uh explain kind of what uh drives our performance each year. followup counselor. >> Yeah, thanks. I noticed the other graphs are all the same. It's just that one is missing. Same as the appendix last or in 2022 at least the cash and cash equivalents were included and this time they're not in appendix A. So just wondering why the change in presentation. >> Go ahead Mr. Murray. >> Uh thank you three Mr. Chair. So this uh report has uh evolved to be uh specific to our investment uh portfolio uh specifically our investments and not our cash. And uh really kind of the genesis of that was the uh implementation of new uh financial instruments uh reporting and accounting standards uh that came into effect a couple years ago. uh that really drew that distinction between cash and cash equivalents and investments, portfolio investments. So, this report uh is focused on portfolio investments. >> Followup, counselor. >> Yeah, thanks. That actually makes sense to me given the way it's presented on here. So, that thank you for that. The other question I have is I was looking up um what other cities do and there was uh an interesting report that talked about whether a city did standardized reporting, enhanced reporting. Uh has the city looked at possibly doing more enhanced reporting for the portfolios? I noticed that other cities provide the details of all the investments that are, you know, and given the amount of it, the 1.8 billion. >> Go ahead, Mr. Murray. Uh thank you and through you Mr. Chair. So uh of course we're we're uh very much interested in continuous improvement and if there's opportunities to enhance uh the information that uh we're reporting on we're we're certainly open to considering that. Um I think we provide a pretty good snapshot of our investment portfolio uh and performance through this annual report. Uh it aligns with our legislative requirements. It aligns with our investment policy. Uh you know I think um the important thing to note as well is that uh you know our investment portfolio is not small uh in terms of number of investment securities. Uh as noted in the report we have north of 180 different uh investment uh securities in our portfolio. So it is a fairly uh sizable portfolio in terms of uh number of securities. So, uh, you know, a pretty a pretty good number, uh, to to, uh, report on should, uh, we include that level of detail. So, you know, having said that, we're we're always open to opportunities for improvement and if there is, uh, specific things that council wants to direct us to include in the future, we're happy to uh, receive that direction. uh but otherwise uh happy to uh continue uh reviewing what others are doing as well and and considering whether we can incorporate uh additional relevant information as well into our report. >> Okay, a follow-up councelor. >> Yes, thank you. And through the chair. Um yeah, I think I'm going to work on this. I I'll reach out to staff and some of my colleagues between now and council because it's the same thing as the multi-year budget. If we have 180 different investment securities and we're managing 1.8 8 billion of taxpayer money to have one line or two lines. It would be nice if there was just something in between those two. Um I also in uh best practices there was reference to some cities choosing the prudent investor program. Is that something that staff have looked into? >> Go ahead Mr. Murray. Uh thank you through you. So yes we have reviewed the prudent investor program. Uh we continue to uh monitor developments in that area. It is a relatively new option that has been introduced in the last few years to Ontario municipalities. Uh I think there's a couple important things to note though that that go along with the prudent investment regime. Uh one of them being that council would give up some measure of control over the investment function to uh an external investment board. So that's uh you know I think one big consideration that uh if we were to ever move in that direction would need to be considered carefully. Uh the other I think important thing to note as well uh is that the uh designation to opt into that prudent investment regime is irrevocable. So once you're in, you can't opt back out. So uh we haven't uh we haven't gone in that direction to date. Um our new kind of insourced investment management function is only a couple years old uh at this point. Uh but if we down the road assess that we're not able to kind of adequately meet our broad investment objectives through uh our current model and our uh legal list framework that we currently utilize, then it's possible that we may bring a recommendation in the future to council to uh consider the the prudent investment regime. But uh again, it's uh it's something that is not without implications and uh you know, we'll keep looking at uh the uh the developments in that space uh in the years ahead. Followup councelor. >> Thanks. Yeah, just a couple more questions. Uh when I go back to 2022 again, it talks about percentage of the portfolio externally versus internally managed. I don't see that here. Is it all internally managed now? >> Go ahead, Mr. Murray. >> Uh through you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have uh we have insourced the investment management uh function at this point. So uh the the only uh component that is externally managed if you will uh is the uh e equity component of our uh portfolio that is through the uh one fund uh program that is uh offered uh uh through a subsidiary of uh AMO and uh it is the only means of uh us being able to get exposure to equities in our portfolio. So uh that is uh something that we cannot implement internally ourselves uh if we are not in the prudent investor program and therefore uh that is the one remaining kind of externally managed component. >> Followup coun. >> Yeah just a couple more. So when I look to since uh 2022 to now the investment portfolio looks like it's up about $300 million. Is that budgeted? Do we know where we were expecting to be uh at this point? Go ahead, Mr. Ray. >> Uh, so I think we need to uh kind of differentiate here between uh the component of our investment portfolio that is operating related versus uh those that uh relate to uh reserves and reserve funds. So, uh operating uh investments or investments of operating funds. Uh that investment income forms part of the property tax budget. Uh and that that money offsets funds that would otherwise need to be collected through property taxes or through some other uh source of of funding. Um so that that's the one component. The other component and certainly the majority the uh component the majority component is uh investments on reserve funds that is not budgeted but is included in the forecast and the projections uh in our reserve fund schedules uh in our in our reserve fund uh forecasts in the budget document. Um so that that is uh kind of the the two components of it. Um ultimately uh on the on the reserve fund piece, you know, if we if we exceed our targets for investment income on reserve funds, uh that brings us closer to achieving the target balances on those reserve funds that we articulated uh back last month in fact in our uh reserve fund monitoring report. And it also helps fulfill our capital plan requirements. So um if we if we exceed our projections for investment income on reserve funds that allows us to then uh look at the contributions that may be going into the reserve funds uh and adjust them accordingly as part of the next uh budget development cycle. >> Followup councelor. >> Thank you. That's what I was hoping was that uh there might be some cost savings for the taxpayer. So is did I miss a report that showed whether we were exceeding in terms of our investment income on reserve funds or not? >> Go ahead, Mr. Mar. >> Uh thank you chair. So we don't report out specifically on the investment income component but more broadly on how the balances of our reserve funds are progressing towards their target balances. So it's part of the uh reserve fund monitoring and housekeeping report that we bring forward annually. >> Followup councelor Yeah, thanks. Uh, I'll follow up on that one a little bit more offline. So, when I look at 2025, the investment income was approximately $112 million. In 2022, it the report showed it was 36 million. Um, and then the operating fund investments, it's.5 million this year, but it was 11 million back then. So, I I know things change, but if if we're looking at it, that's a huge swing in both ways. Anything that staff can share about that? Go ahead Mr. Ray. >> Uh thank you and through you. So the one thing I will uh point to that comes to mind uh you know very specifically is uh going back to the uh previous question around uh the change in the focus of this report. So what you would have been seeing in 2022 would have been inclusive of not only investment income but also earnings on cash in our bank. this uh and I believe the chart that you're referring to is specifically related to investment earnings uh uh in in uh this uh portfolio investment uh report. So that is the one uh big component that I can uh that I can refer you to. I mean, of course, our our investments are all subject to uh market returns and uh market conditions and um certainly interest rate environments now are very different uh and have been very different uh in the last couple years than they were say back in 2020, 2021 and 2022 where interest rates were much much lower. So, we would naturally expect higher investment earnings just because of the very different interest rate environment we're now in. >> Followup, counselor. Okay, thanks. Um, the other thing I looked at was, you know, given the amount of the reserve uh or the investment portfolio, when I look at other cities as a comparison of the amount that's in their investment portfolio versus their annual budget, ours seems to be significantly higher. Like a couple of the cities are 50% or one is 85%, one's 30%, we're 125%. Is that something that staff look at? Do we do we know sort of are we in line with um where we should be or or is that even a a relative statistic? >> Go ahead, Mr. Ry. >> Uh thank you through you. So uh going back to my previous response um I think it's important to note that uh the majority of our investment portfolio relates to reserve funds. Uh so I'll refer to uh appendix A in the report. I think about about 95% of our uh investments are are related to reserve funds rather than operating funds. Uh I think what I what I would say in relation to other municipalities is uh I suspect they have very different reserve funds uh for very different purposes. Uh they no doubt have very different reserve fund levels that they're comfortable with and targeting uh to have. Um you know so I I think that is likely to be a contributing factor as well. Um I suspect other municipalities uh you know I don't know what they are including or excluding uh as well uh in their uh investment income reporting. Others may have you know different approaches uh to investing or not. For example, some some municipalities may choose to uh simply leave a greater portion of their financial resources in the bank and not invest it in the same way uh that we do. though you know that may lead to differences in terms of uh our our investment portfolio relative uh to others. So um it's a really difficult I think comparison to do on the basis of of operating budgets because there are a lot of different factors that could play into why those differences might exist. >> Followup counselor. >> No, fair enough. I'll just make a comment that um I appreciate that this is the what is required um and that there's nothing wrong with the report that's been given to us, but I'm going to vote no to receiving it for the same reason I did with the multi-year budget and the strategic plan and that kind of thing is I just don't feel that it's adequate reporting to the public to have two lines for 1.8 billion. So, um, I'm going to be voting no and then I'll look to see if there's a motion or support on council to do a more enhanced reporting as some other municipalities are doing, especially when there's a lot of talk about that right now and a lot of desire from the public. >> Okay. Thank for any other questions, comments. Okay, not seeing any. We will open the vote on 2.10. Closing the vote. Motion carries four to one. >> Okay. Thank you. We are on to confidential matters. I'll look for a motion to go into close session. Okay. Councelor Frank, councelor Van Mirburgen. Thank you. And we'll open the vote on that. Closing the vote. Motion carries 5 to zero. Okay, we're back into public session. I'll look to councelor Frank report out from close session. >> Thank you. I'm pleased to announce that progress is made for the items for which we went in camera for. >> Thank you. And I will look for a motion to adjurnn. Okay. Uh, councelor Van Mirburgen, councelor Frank. Okay. All those in favor? Any opposed? >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Thank you everyone. Have a good day.