Thanks, Jesus. All good evening, everyone. Sego Ani Boujou NDO Wachia Cue. As the mayor of the city of Kingston, I offer these words in the spirit of this gathering. Let us bring our good minds and hearts together as one, to celebrate these traditional lands as a gathering place of the original peoples and their ancestors who are entrusted to care from other earth since time immemorial. It is with deep humility that we acknowledge and offer our gratitude for their contributions to this community having respect for all as we share the space now and walk side by side into the future. So we were meeting in Committee of the Whole Closed meeting. We did discuss several items. The Lemoine Point Farm Update or Proposed Acquisition or Disposition of Land, the Elgonquin Lakeshore Catholic District School Board, and also a highway two property. So I will ask for a motion to rise with that reporting, please. Move by Councillor Amos, sechnet by Councillor Tozo, the Council rise from the Committee of the Whole Closed Meeting without reporting. All those in favor. Opposed, and that's carried. Okay, next we have the approval of the addendum. We just have the addition of a couple of delegations. Can I get a mover in a second here for the, at its move by Dimir Steven, seconded by cancer Tozo. All those in favor opposed, and that's carried. Are there any disclosures to potential bikini interests Councillor Amos. Thank you, Mayor Paterson, through you. Hi, Don Amos Councillor for the City Kingston declare conflict of interest with respect to report 26 - 158. A Gonquin Lakeshore Catholic school board surplus sites. I'm an employee with the seniors Association Kingston Region, which is interested in purchasing one or both of these schools to deliver community programming. Thank you, Councillor Bohm. Thank you, worship, and through you. I, Ryan Bohm, the Council of the Corporation of City Kingston, declare my cuneary interests in the matter of clause through report number 51. I declare an interest in so far as this moston may relate to utilities Kingston. That's been duly submitted to the clerk. Thank you. Okay, thank you. See no other disclosure is we will move on. We have no presentations this evening, but we do have two delegations. So first I will invite Catherine Belsud and Nicole DeScenny to appear before Council to speak to Clause 1. Report number 51 from the CAO, respect to the naming rights and scope for the swimming dock and water play area and floor McDonald Confederation Basin and inflatable water park alternate location. Just a reminder to our delegations that you have up to five minutes, and then we'll open it up to questions from Council. Well, just ask you to, if you just tap. The on button there, and there we go. Oh, as long as you don't take it out of my file. I will not. You've got five minutes. Okay, I must say to you all, it's a pleasure, Mayor Patterson and members of the Council, as well as all members of staff who are here tonight as opposed to being outside in that beautiful weather. So I'm happy to be here. I will tell you that given the short notice, we had for this meeting and for the issues you have to discuss. I'm here in spirit representing a lot of background information people. And I can cite a few of them waterkeepers, great lakes waterway, pathway, and on and on, I could go. So in spirit, I hope to make sure that you understand their sentiments. Um, I would like to, number one, thank you all for having open spirits and for having listened to us as a delegations to you to talk about our concerns. As citizens in the entire city of Kingston, because we're not one issue people. We're concerned about what happens everywhere. So I'd like to start off by saying of the three points you're going to be asked to vote on today. I'll be brief. And I say number one, we're very happy that you have the option to not proceed with the Patriot aquatic park. That was very important to us from the get - go and happy to see that there. The second point is the third point of your asks for voting tonight, which is the movement of the idea for an aquatic park to another location. And in your remarks, it's a grass creek park. I mean, there are potentially after investigation other opportunities. If it's looked at in depth. So thank you. We congratulate you on those two points. And we look forward to actually seeing your debate on those issues. I'm coming to you from the following perspective. This is the public reaction to what they found out as it was presented in the news on Thursday, I believe it was, with their first notice. So this is what they had to say. As the bedrock of all their commentary, it was the following position. There's some mention about the promenade in even this report, but it's not explicit. It's just alluding to the promenade park. What everyone in the community wants to see is that the Council, in a determined fashion, vote to say we are building the Confederation Basin Parkway, that is the promenade. Because it's been from 2016 when it was first proposed to 2022, when it was voted on there are no shovels in the ground. So people are saying, can't they get with it? Isn't it possible for them to do it? And now they're coming and they're actually saying we want add - ons. So please understand my comments with that baseline. Get to it is what they want to say. Let's get it done. Okay. With that regard, point number two, and it was saying that, that, that in the report, not one, two, three. But the second one is with regard to an original patry idea, which was we will have a swimming platform, and we'll have swimming area enhanced. And then toilets, and then change rooms added. So these are the concerns that are brought to our attention. That we have never had reports back from staff in the course of this year with regard to the questions that were asked about the purity of the actual water. It's a closed basin. There's a marina. There is the oil slick coming across that waterway. There isn't an influx of fresh water, accepting where the entry is to the marina. That is a problematic point of view. Until those reports come forward, the community isn't willing to say, well, why would we move on that? We don't know. Secondly, it's a brownfield. The water underneath, as one guy in the kingstonist pointed out, he put an anchor down because he moored his boat there. And the anchor came back with tar on it. So kids jumping into the water off of a water platform. And creating a slurry there may not be the healthiest. So we would like to see reports on the safety, environmental safety of that basin before the community would be all excited about having that done. We have also considerations for safety because the marina is there. Boats come in. Young kids now are taking electronic speed boat things going through the base in there and having a good time. But there isn't any demarcation that's clear as to where there would be safety for swimmers who would actually be in the water enjoying it. 30 seconds. In the official plan, I want to say the steps going down and they were happy to see that because we get an idea of what the buy will be for the full project. Now I have 30 seconds. I've been told. Now you have 15 seconds. I have 15 seconds. I want to thank the Council and all of the staff for taking us seriously and listening to our concerns. We can't be more gratified than that. We've gone around to meet all of the Councillor's Minus one. And I'm happy to say people listen to us. Staff as well. So thank you very much. Thank you. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Uh, are there any questions for the delegation? Okay. See none. Thank you very much, ma'am. Thank you. Is there a question? No question? No, you're free to go. Thank you very much. Okay. Next our second and final delegation this evening. We'll invite Riverstone to appear before Council to speak to new motion number one regarding dress your room, equity and allocation for ICE user groups. Uh, river. I see you. Oh, there we go. I see you and, uh, you have the floor. Okay. Great. Thank you so much. Um, so I'm here today to speak about, um, regarding motion 19, uh, the stated goal of this motion is to review and amend the ICE allocation policy and guidelines to support equitable access for female participants. And I'm here specifically to provide some insights and recommendations on some changes needed, uh, basically around the language to more effectively meet this goal. Um. For sorry, uh, would you be able to go to the next slide, please. Thank you. Um, regarding terminology, there are quite a few terms, but I'm going to be focusing specifically around three for this. The first is gender identity, which is a person's sense of their own gender. Uh, sex, which is the physical characteristics that historically have been broadly categorized as male and female and transvestigations. This is a combination of the words transgender and investigation. This is a informal discriminatory practice of investigating whether a person is secretly trans. This is done through the analysing of a person's appearance and anatomical structure. It's transphobic invasive damaging and can happen to anyone regardless if they are trans or cis, especially because all it takes for this to occur is one person questioning another one where you quote unquote belong. Transvestigations also disproportionately affect women and racialized members of our community. Um, next slide, please. So where I'm coming from with, uh, today is that, uh, the motion that I'm speaking to as well as the policy that needs revision, uh, there is a combination of both sex based and identity based language used. Uh, I'm here to advocate that the city of Kingston abandoned the sex - based language going forward. If our policies and our social norms continue to centre sex this further, this furthers these systemic erasure of intersex people justifies discrimination and exclusion of trans people as well as breeds of culture that normalizes transvestigations. Furthermore, if the policy revision uses exclusively identity - based language going forward, this will better support the city council's goal of inclusion and equitable access. By having policies that centre identity over sex, uh, you create equitable access not only for women, but also non - binary people, uh, and this is for everybody regardless of their identity expression or sex. Next slide, please. So, uh, I also wanted to speak about why this matters. On this slide here, you'll see eight different individuals who cover a diverse range of identity and expression. Each person has their own combination of experiences. But to highlight the diversity within this slide, seven of these people are athletes with specifically three of them being ice users themselves. Five of these people are trans, four of them are women, four Canadian, two are intersex. And you wouldn't be able to tell any of this by just looking at them. So, but what's most relevant about all of these individuals is that they have very publicly experienced discrimination due to the sex. They were assigned at birth. And now advocate for themselves and their community. I've shared their names because they have already done so publicly and embraced fighting the discrimination, um, but who I can't show you on my screen right now, our local Kingston athletes who have to continue this work in their day - to - day lives. Um, our community is absolutely seeking to understand. But these things take time. And until then, it's important that we minimize the labour. Who I can't show you on this screen right now, our trans individuals in Kingston who get harassed while accessing public spaces, who I also can't show you are trans youth who hesitate getting involved in sport leagues due to the hostility that is common for queer and gender nonconforming people. And additionally, I also can't show you Kingston athletes who choose to remain in the closet because they can't come out without complicating their position in a league. To summarize, this matters because people matter. Both the ones featured in my presentation who had to overcome their discrimination in a very public way as well as the people who live here locally in Kingston who are just trying to live their lives without having to add for gate for themselves at every single turn while accessing a public space. Um, next slide, please. 30 seconds. Perfect. Thank you. Um, so in conclusion, uh, to summarize, I'm looking to advocate that we specifically have the policy review occur that operate on identity - based language and to have the, have an amendment for the removal of sex - based language. So that would be specifically, um, retiring the use of male and female terminology. I also wanted to take this opportunity to communicate that the erasure of intersex and non - binary individuals is rarely intentional, uh, but it is detrimental to everyone alike. And, uh, thank you. Thank you. Just advocate that the policy changes are do not normalize transvestigations. Thank you very much. Um, I'll just, I'll just pause right there. Are there any questions from council. Okay. Uh, Councillo, go ahead. Thank you Mayor Patterson through you. Could you just elaborate on further policy recommendations you'd like council to consider. Yeah. So, uh, with the review that is currently, or sorry, for the motion, my understanding of it is that, um, this is if, if processed, uh, you guys are looking to have the ICE allocation reviewed and then revised. And I'm asking in that revision, um, that we ensure that it has identity based language, uh, so we're not speaking to sex, but rather how people identify. So would you just to clarify, you'd prefer more like neutral language that doesn't die if I mail female gender binaries or just more generic, like inclusive language for different identities. If I'm understanding. I think, yeah, it's, it's a great question. I think if you're looking to speak to specifically women's issues, uh, the use of the word woman is totally applicable. Um, but it is when you're trying to advocate for women, if you're using female, uh, that is where, um, exclusion of different types of women can occur. Thank you very much. Okay. Seeing other questions. River, thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. And with that, uh, we have no further delegations. So we will move on in our agenda. Are there any petitions to present. And we have no deferred motions. Uh, we do have a couple of special motions. So first we have a motion of recognition. I moved by Councillor Amos. Second by Councillor Shaves that Kings and City Council recognised June as seniors month in the city of Kingston in recognition and celebration of the vital role that seniors play in building vibrant inclusive and resilient communities within the city, through their experience, wisdom, volunteerism, and leadership. Council remains committed to fostering an age - friendly environment that supports active aging promotes de - respect for seniors and ensures equitable opportunities for full community participation and encourages all Kingston residents to honour the contributions of local seniors and actively participate in the community events programs and initiatives taking place for the month of June. Uh, second, we have a motion of Condolence moved by Mayor Paterson, seconded by Deputy Mayor Steven, that the Condolences of Kingston City Council will be extended to the family and friends of Walter Finland. Respected business leader, philanthropist, and dedicated community builder whose contributions to Kingston left a lasting legacy. As founder of Fenlin, financial Walter built a distinguished career in wealth management while remaining deeply committed to civic service and charitable giving. Lawnside his wife, Linda Andayle. He established the Finland family daily Foundation in support of local charities, hospitals, universities, and community initiatives. Ultra served in leadership roles with numerous organisations, including Kingston General Hospital Hotel Gew Hospital, the Community Foundation of Greater Kingston and the Grand Theatre Foundation. Was just strong supporter of many important city building projects. Known for generosity, Mentorship and Dedication to the community, Walter made a profound impact on Kingston and the many lives he touched. His passing is a great loss. He will be deeply missed. Our thoughts are with Linda Anne, his family, and loved ones during this difficult time. We will call the vote. All those in favor. Opposed. And that's Keering. Okay. With that, we will move to reports. First up, we have report number 50 from the CAO. Move by Councillor Shae, seconded by Councillor Amos that report number 50 from the Chief Administrative Officer consent be received and adopted. Okay. Uh, there is just the one clause. Which is the start of annual tax rebates for Brownfield project at 223 Princess Street. We will call the vote, please. Councillor Osterhoff, is your online voting working your remote voting. Okay. Um, as we have with other remote councillors, we will mark you in favor unless you so indicate by crossing your hands. Your arms. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. And that carries. Next, we have report number 51 from the CAO. Move by Councillor Ridge, sectioned by Councillor Toso. The report number 51 from the Chief Administrative Officer recommend be received and adopted clause by clause. Okay, clause one, naming rights and scope for the swimming dock and water play area and floor MacDonald Confederation Basin and inflatable water park alternate location. Councillor. Thank you, Mayor Patterson, through you. Um, I just have some questions related to costs and 400, 000 dollars for a washroom and change room and the swimming platform. Um, how much of that is the washroom. It's expensive. Miss El Grisma. The amount that is being requested, um, as part of this, uh, report tonight is the 400, 000 is essentially the, um, the balance that is needed to complete the enhanced swimming dock, um, without the sponsorship. So this sponsorship originally was to cover the cost of the inflatable water park as well as a portion of the, uh, this enhanced swimming dog. So it does include the cost of the washroom. Uh, this particular, uh, these funds that we're requesting tonight, um, through, through the budget process, uh, 27, do not include the washroom that was, um, previously approved in a, in a previous Council meeting. Okay. Um, sorry Commissioner Campbell, do you want to jump in. Uh, yeah, thank you. And through you. I just wanted to add, so when council approved the direction to explore the inflatables in addition to the enhanced swim platform, Council approved an additional amount of money at that time, which was then allocated towards making some of those enhancements with the removal of the inflatable sponsorship is where that 400, 000 dollars is now needed to make up essentially the difference. Okay. Um, we're still looking at their sponsorships to help lower that price. Is that my reading of the report. Ms. Huckersman. Yes, I'm through you. Uh, yes, absolutely. We are still seeking out sponsorships. Um, other funding opportunities, um, there's at least one grant application in the works right now. Um, and we are hopeful that the additional funds coming forward, um, through those means. Okay. Um, so is the washroom that's available accessible. That we're building. Cause now that the lack of them in the downtown. Yes. And through you. Uh, yes. The washroom building, um, is accessible. There is one universal change room that includes a change table and one standard, uh, washroom. They're also change stalls, um, in addition to the washroom, uh, whereas one is also accessible and want to standard. But that's allocated absent of this motion tonight, correct? Yes. And through you. Uh, yes. So this, the washerman change room, um, additions were approved in the previous, through previous motion at another meeting. Thank you. So if Council doesn't prove this, what do we have left here. Like what, what will this look like. Yes, and through you. Um, if this amount tonight is not, or this is not approved tonight, then essentially the promenade project would go back, um, to the, uh, more of the original, I guess, design. And we wouldn't be able to complete the, um, the enhanced swimming dog. So there might be a modest platform, but we would not be able to complete the, uh, the swimming dot component. See, Ortl. Thank you. And, uh, through you. So I'm not sure if you recall councillors when we brought the report in 2025, it was the, the original swimming platform was quite small. It was essentially just a location for people to be able to launch and go for a swim. This enhanced swimming, um, platform that we're talking about is really more, um, the creation of a bit of a swimming pool in the lake, if you wish. It's that concept. It'll allow actually people, and especially kids to have a more safe environment for swimming in the lake. It also provides space for parents to be around. It provides the ability for partners to deliver programs and lessons even within that space. So it's almost creating a bit of a swimming pool, but, uh, in the lake. So it's, there would be a significant program difference between the two. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Council Ramos. Thank you, Mayor Paterson, through you. Just a couple of quick questions about the inflatable, um, park. In the movement of it. My concern is removing it to Grass Creek, which is a great park. However, it's not very accessible. We don't have transit out there. Um, and it's not really supportive for tourism. It's not supportive to really a lot of our families. And I'm just wondering the thought process is Grass Creek, the only option that we are considering right now. Are we looking at Lake Ontario Park? Are we looking at any other option that at least would have some sort of transit availability for our families. Ms. Huckersman. Thank you through you. So the Grass Creek Park offers a number of advantages. Well, it's not in the downtown. People will tend to travel to bring family member, bring their families to an inflatable water park like this. There are options that, um, that we would like to, um, consider and that will be important to consider as part of this, um, projecting shuttles, um, access through the municipal fee assistance program. We, we heard from Council that it was important that the Inflateable Water Park be affordable. We would like to work with our partners to assist with buses and access for kids and families. Um, so I think the lot of options out there that could help support access for families and for those who need lower cost options as well. Grass Creek Park offers some really great amenities. Um, there's already washroom facilities there, change facilities. Um, there's parking. There's lots of room for families to come for the day and have picnics and hang out and, uh, and so on playground, lots of things to do. Um, in terms of other locations, uh, the Lake Ontario, um, options, of course, as you know, the wind and wave action, uh, at Lake Ontario Park. And this option was also looked at again when the, um, the Confed, um, I guess option, we were looking at changing the location. And there really are not a lot of other options around Kingston for the inflatable water park requires certain depths, uh, requires certain, um, wave and wind restrictions are important considerations for those things. So Lake Ontario Park actually has quite a high waves and would require an additional breakwater system to even be considered. And even then, uh, still didn't meet the criteria. Um, so Grass Creek Park is a, I think a really good option. And, uh, and I think it would be really well deceived, especially by a lot of families. People coming up from the rural areas would be able to come in that way from, then, and then to Kingston also perhaps. So I think that there probably would be some, some spin off and some tourism, uh, coming to the city with the addition of this park or the inflatable water park and grass creek park. Thank you. I'm not challenging the idea that. There won't be spinoff going to that park. And I'm not, I'm not convinced that one, the water depth at Grass Creek is deep enough to hold, uh, these inflatables. I'm not convinced that when I'll just say when or if these inflatables were kept in the downtown core, security for those inflatables would be a lot higher. And the more pedestrians. It's right on our, our backyard, if you will, city hall. And now we're potentially putting it out in a park. That who is responsible for it overnight. Who is responsible to keep as a security assessment been done on putting it out there. For the months of July and August. Do we have lifeguards that are, are we, are we looking at bringing in a third party to provide lifeguards to oversee this operation where we were looking at it as a blended or an amalgamated aspect in the downtown core and battery park with a third party operator. And those slave cards being enhanced with this. Now we're potentially asking two third party operators. To one, do the battery park operation. Potentially. And now we're asking another operator or same operator to oversee an operation out at Grass Creek Park if the city of Kingston is not overseeing us. Could staff elaborate a little bit on those aspects, please. See you, Hurdle. Thank you. And through Mr. Mayor, I'll get started and also add some information to your previous questions, uh, Councillor Amos. So the couple of things. As council's aware, we have been working on the option of rural transit and on demand in particular. So this area would be captured under the on - demand rule transit, um, that we've been working on. And we'll be bringing back to city council. Understanding, of course, that inflatables at Grass Creek Park would not be something that would be implemented in the near future. We understand the lanty process in terms of receiving approvals. So that's the first thing. The second thing is I have been working quite closely actually with tourism Kingston downtown BIA and Kingston Accommodation partner about this potential relocation. Um, you know, they recognise that. Having the inflatables would bring more people downtown, but did not raise any significant concerns with having them relocated outside of the downtown. I think from a tourism perspective, we understand people will come downtown, but it is not the only location within the city where we can attract people. So I did want to flag that. The other thing that I would add in the Director Recreation is around the operations. The intent was in terms of the inflatable. Relocating two grass park or another location would be to have a private operator, also owner of the Inflatable. The intent is not to have the city pay essentially for the inflatable. So it would have to be a private operator that do come with its own equipment. Sag is my thank you and through you. So the question around security, which I can respond to is that in the downtown core, with the inflatable, originally planned, um, Confederation Basin. Security was to be part of the operational plan for obvious reasons. Uh, and the security plan would also be part of the operational plan security measures will be part of the operational plan that an operator would be required to produce. Um, so, so that is part of what needs to be considered for the, for the project. I would also just like to note that a bathymetric survey has now been completed. And previously during the initial assessments that had not been done with this further technical study, um, we can confirm that location, the location does offer depths that are suitable for an inflatable water park. And with a change in the configuration, um, this is now confirmed and possible. And, um, and we have, uh, memo technical memo from, uh, from shoreline engineering firm, uh, that confirms those things. Did I miss anything. Thank you. Yes. You, you covered it well. So my last comment I want to make then, um, in regards to this matter. And I appreciate, um, CEO hurdles comments about the BIA and tourism Kingston offering their input that alleviates some of my concerns in regards to tourism. If we're going to have a third party operator, um, whether they purchase, um, and then set up shop at a grass creak park. I would kindly ask that, uh, city staff work with this operator to see if we can have our spark program be eligible so that any disadvantaged families or families with economic circumstances that are being challenged that they have the ability to enjoy this water park as much as anyone else does using the spark funding, uh, that we have set aside to support families. So I will leave that for consideration. And I cannot say how much I am disappointed that this water park is not moving forward, uh, at this time. This is something our families need. This is something that young children would enjoy teenagers would enjoy. It's a full aspect of, uh, something that gets a lot of people talking in a positive way about our city. And now we're probably putting an onhold a minimum of three years according to the report. Uh, the way the federal government works and the provincial government, we're probably looking at five years. So it's, it's frustrating. And at the end of the day, our families lose out on this, um, I'll leave it at that. Okay. Thank you. Next is Councillor Senek. Thank you, your worship. Um, when we vote on this, I just want to ask if we can, um, we can have those clauses separated, uh, when we vote, all three classes. All three separate votes. Yes. Of course. Yes. Great. Yeah. So I'm, you know, I support that we abandon the naming rights, but, um, I have problems with the other two. So, um, with the enhanced swimming platform and making it like a big outdoor pool and having swimming lessons, I think that this is a little bit too premature. Let's first build, you know, the, um, the, um, uh, what are we calling it right? The big breakwater, right? The new parkway system. Um, like I'm just horrified to hear about the, uh, the anchor going down in that area and pulling up coltar. Like that is terrifying. And, um, you know, and it could be made even worse once we have this, uh, promenade belt. So I think this is like 400, 000, just a little bit too soon. Let's build the promenade first. That gives us time to see, you know, the wave action, the water flow. At the same time last year at this time in 2025 when we were last talking about this, we hadn't actually proved the big condo that's going to be built right there next to the marine museum. And with that condo is going to be, um, if I believe the planning report correctly, a community benefit of a deep water dock. And so we're going to be having boats coming in ships coming in. Who knows how big they could. They could be using that dock, but also bringing diesel and other pollution with them. And again, that could affect the water quality in there too. And it might not become the big enhanced swimming area that we hope for right now. We don't know the effect of those boats coming in. So, um, I'll be voting no against the second clause and about the third clause. Yeah. Grass creek park is great in Kingston because it's sand. And whereas city of limestone rock and, you know, that's what makes grass creek so good. It's like, um, sand bars and sand. You can go way out there. And the sand is just up to your knees. But at the same time, because it is so shallow, I remember when my kids were small, the beach was closed a lot of times because of E. coli. And, you know, if we're going to be creating this into, um, an inflatable water park, it's going to take away our lifeguards, whether it be a private operator or, you know, like a city of Kingston swim facility. There's only so many lifeguards to go through. We have the enclosed Memorial Centre pool. I'm a new aquatic centre being built at the inficia centre. We need all the lifeguards. And to have, you know, um, this one out in Gross Creek Park having to be closed, you know, then those poor lifeguards on those bad weather days for bed weather or E. coli. They won't have a job. And those resources are really neat for our city owned Kingston facilities. So I can't support, um, grass creek park being one of the sites. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Next is Councillor Rich. Thank you. Your worship and through you. Um, so I just want to begin by, uh, thanking staff for the recommendations and the language and the report about, uh, reflecting on the feedback from the local neighbours. With regards to this project. I just have a couple of questions for some clarity. Um, did we recently revise our naming rights policies for the city. Hurdle. Thank you. And, uh, three Miss Mayors. So we made some revisions some time ago. I can't remember exactly when, uh, Council Ridge. Those revisions were made. Um, but we, I mean, we continuously review our, our policies. And this would be one of them that we recently looked at. Thank you. Uh, February of this year. Thank you very much. And are we in the process of, uh, creating a, you know, a standard policy or a process for unsolicited partnership proposals. See you, Hurdle. Thank you. And, uh, through you. Yes. Um, yes, we are in terms of, um, actual partnership proposal, but that may not sincerely cover naming rights, which is what, uh, this particular proposal was, uh, was about. Thank you very much. And what if, uh, let's say hypothetical three year worship, let's say hypothetically that, uh, we just move forward with the construction and the promenade. What is the expected timeline for it to be constructed and to be open to the public. Sag us. Thank you for the question. Um, the anticipated timeline is approximately two years for construction. Okay. Thank you. And. There's an understanding that this, this sign, if there are any significant modifications, uh, that there would be some sort of consultation with near neighbours. Is that correct? Yes. Thanks for the question. The prominent project now, as it stands, um, we are planning to, um, we have a get involved Kingston page, an engagement page right now, uh, and we are planning consultation with near neighbours on the prominent project and swimming components as well. Okay. Thank you. And finally just so the couple of questions about the actual design that I've received from constituents. Is there on the enhanced swimming platform, uh, through your worship. Is that ramp accessible. Yes. There is accessible, the ramp to the, to the swimming platform and to the water. And finally through you, your worship, um, is there that there was any original 2022 plan, uh, The Cement tiered stairway down to the water. Um, it's, is that still in the current design. Yes. And thank you. The enhanced public realm, I believe is what you're referring to. And that, um, that consists of, uh, concrete, uh, kind of step system to the water. That's still in the, in the design and is designed to improve access to the waterfront and access to the water cell. Thank you. And just, just as a last question, a three year worship, do we have an idea of where the washroom or change room is to be located as it wasn't, uh, in the diagram. Yes. Thank you. The washroom and change room, uh, location is near the entrance towards the entrance to the promenade itself. I believe we calling you to call it the Southwest side of the, uh, of the park and not far from the entrance. So kind of on the, on the grassy knoll, uh, with a pathway. Hard to explain right now, uh, without, without a map. Um, but that is something that we, um, we will be sharing with the near neighbours and discussing with them, uh, and there'll be some additional details on the Get Involved Kingston page as well. Some images. Mr. Campbell. Thank you. And through you, if I can try to help draw a picture in one's mind, um, if you envision the enhanced swim entry point with those stairs, the intent for the change room and the washrooms would be to be located in that corner of the park closest to that entrance point such that, you know, if you have family members or others needing to avail those facilities, they're very close to the entry and exit location. Thank you, Interview. And through your worship, I apologise. I keep saying finally as if it were the last question, but I promise you your worship. This is the last question. Um, will there be, thank you Councillo Tozo. Will there be any additional work or assessment that will be done on the safety of the water. In terms of the concerns that we've heard, uh, from other Councillors and constituents over this discussion in the previous meeting. Miss Sogrisma. Yes and through you. Just wanted to clarify that the, uh, the work to the promenade is essentially on top of the existing break wall. So there's no new work touching the bed of the lake. So we don't have those risks of the sediment on the bottom or disturbing sediment and so on. I think you should be aware of. There has been ongoing testing for several years at that site. And testing is continuing again this season. The results that we've seen at that location are very similar to the results. At the other, other beaches in Kingston. And, uh, so, so I wanted to share that. And, um, and we will continue that testing program up until, um, the promenade is complete. And then the public health KFLA takes over that testing. And those results are all shared publicly as they are with the other beaches. Okay. Thank you very much. Ju, you're your worship. So it's clear that the work and time and discussion and consultation that's gone into this by staff. And, you know, and, and I myself personally have relayed a lot of, uh, concerns from constituents to staff. And I'm very, um, pleased with this, uh, proposal as it exists. And I think the other thing too that we really need to consider is, um, as part of our strategic plan is trying to find creative ways to create new means of access for aquatics and recreation. And so, uh, I'm happy to support the recommendation in this report. Thank you. Thank you. Um, next is Councillor Osterhoff. Yes, I think Premier Passion. Can you hear me well enough. Yes, we can hear you fine. All good. Um, yeah, this is an interesting topic. Obviously we all. Have a lot to say on this. And I want to thank my colleagues for great, great questions. And, um, I, um, I, I did not vote in favor, um, way back when of the, of the, um, inflavable water park at the location downtown. And I, um, maybe I don't know how much fun they are because I'm not against fun. Um, I really did think that the water was not suitable and the location. And I have heard from considerable constituents, um, and I'm glad that that's Councillo Sanic has asked that he said, we can separate them. I'm also troubled. So I'm going to rain in the parade about it being at Grass Creek. So I'm willing to listen, of course. And I guess the question I have Mayor Paterson is, um, is it obviously if it's down the road that is open for discussion, whether it's actually a suitable location, right? Or if council approves it to be there. I appreciate the work. I, I'm concerned about. Impact of unenflatable water park almost wherever it goes. And so I thought they can take apart would be best. But I understand the staff have done their work. But I'm not convinced it would be acceptive at Brant's Creep. I am quite sure that, um, it's, it's a big change to the culture there. And I'm worried about that. So the question is, will there be a time where we get to have a say on that location or is tonight the night. Miss Sagittarius. Thank you. Uh, so tonight, you know, the report before you, um, does contemplate this location. And so we are looking at approvals to proceed with the lease for the water lot. So that's, that's what we're looking for tonight. Um, so it doesn't commit us necessarily to grass creek park. Until the, I think once those, those pieces are, are complete. If we have approval to proceed with those permitting aspects and the water lease, water lot lease, then we would be able to come back to council to discuss the location once again. Okay. Thank you for that. I told I thought and I want to support the efforts required to try to make it happen. I want to say it too in behalf of all the colleagues. I know the looks like you've done a lot of work here. And, uh, I do want to honour that and respect that. Um, I have a different attitude toward, uh, inflatable water park, but I'm happy to be wrong. And if it's, if it's really going to be supported by my community in the rural area and there, then I will listen to that too. I just, I have a concern about it. I'll private operator. Um, I probably would support that actually, but I wonder who would do that. So thank you Mayor Paterson. I'm glad that we can break up the motion and speak, uh, through the voting. And I look forward to hearing more. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Shapes. Thank you. You may have been asked already an answered, um, but just to confirm, just to tag on what the delegations were concerned about. Have there been reviews and studies done on the water quality in that area. And also in regards to the effects of, um, the boat movement in the area and the safety of any potential swimmers. Cause I think that one has not been touched on, but maybe the first one. Thank you. Ms. Sogrisma. Thanks for the question. Uh, yeah, so water quality testing has been happening at both sites for several years. Any swim, any official swim, uh, Beach has testing on a regular basis from KFLA. The city has under has been taken on the testing at the Confederation Basin because it's not an actual swimming beach at this time. So both locations have been subject to testing and both are satisfactory and actually similar in terms of water quality number of potential closure dates, um, that have been analysed over time. Um, and sorry, the other part of your question. Both traffic and the safety words, the swimmers. Thank you. Uh, so for the boat traffic, absolutely there needs to be buoys and floating floating boys in the locations protecting the swim areas. And that would need to happen wherever an inflatable water park is as well as swimm docks. Thank you. And I want to also touch on the sort of recommendation in regards to grass creep park. Um, because I think I'm not sure if I understanding it correctly or if I'm hearing incorrectly from my fellow calsters. We're not actually approving an inflatable park at recipe at this time. We're looking at reviewing or getting the approval from the governing body who owns the property to see if we can use those lands. And then the final decision will probably be a future council. Ms. Huggersman. Yes. And thank you through the for the question through you. Uh, yeah. So tonight, the motion before you is to proceed with the permitting requirements, uh, the water lot that the grass creek park that would be needed for the inflatable water park, um, is on crown lands, uh, there are some, some permitting requirements from the Ministry of Natural Resources and others. And so we're seeking to proceed with that. And then we would come back to Council At a later date, uh, both the, uh, Grass Creek Park and proceeding with that site and keep in mind another sponsor for that water park would also be required. Thank you. Commissioner Kevill. Thank you and through you. I just wanted to add to Director Elkers Move response. Um, just a flag for cancel. One of the decisions or the proposals to pursue the approvals is that it's about a three year timeline to receive those approvals. What we did entertain when we had the last offer to install this water park in the downtown, uh, was an accelerated timeline to deliver that outcome. So what staff are requesting is Direction of Council to secure those opportunities so that if an opportunity to install an inflatable water park war to come forward, we would be in a more favorable position to support that opportunity and also to have that realised within our community. So just wanted to be a little more clear there on, on what might happen, um, and that we're really just trying to get ahead of time. Thank you. And just to confirm, even if we move forward with this permit, there's no commitment that we have to go follow through with the permit. If it's approved and then responsibility. Uh, yes, that's correct. There's no obligation. If Council there's a motion tonight to pursue the permitting, uh, there's no obligation to, um, to proceed with grass creek park with the inflatable Zachary Grass Creek Park at this time. And there's no financial fee for the restoration or permit. Thank you. Uh, there, there will be some, um, there will be some fees and those will be addressed in the 2027 budget application fees and such. Do we know roughly how much that might be? Commissioner Campbell. Uh, thank you and through you. The fees are fairly minimal, you know, maybe 10, 20, 000 dollars to secure additional opportunities for use at grass creek park. So again, as Director El Grima was sharing, um, this is the kind of, uh, exploratory permitting that we would include within our normal capital envelopes to ensure that we can develop our parks appropriately and have those controls where we want them. So, uh, aligning with that opportunity, we would, we would seek this permit opportunity within that budget. Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Next is Councillor Trinity. Thank you. And through Mr. Mayor. So I guess it's kind of like piggybacking on Councillo Sandic and then something that, uh, was mentioned about after the completion of the promenade that public health would have final testing and approval. So what would it look like if say public health said, okay, this is not safe for swimming. Then what happens to this swimming platform or our plans for that. Yes. Thank you through you. I think that if public health deemed any waterfront or beach location, uh, to be unsafe for swimming, there would be a closure and then follow up testing until it was able to reopen. Okay. Um, I guess I think I was looking more for, uh, say if there was a more permanent unsafess to the water, like where like, um, like say like where it's because it was a brown field and things like that, if they deem something that's more long - term and not like a short - term thing, does that, what does that do to the project. Commissioner Campbell. Uh, thank you. And through you. Though unlikely, uh, if there were to be found to be some, um, concerning and enduring issue, um, with water quality, uh, we would obviously work with public health to understand the source and to then explore remediation opportunities if required to address them. Uh, we would return to Council, of course, with updates. That would be true of, um, swim opportunity here in Kingston. We have a very active waterfront with a historic use largely industrial. And so as council is aware that when you engage in those waterfronts, you can often turn things up in the processes of a construction and development. Um, we haven't seen that limit swim opportunities at other locations where there is similar concern about industrial infill development of the waterfront, et cetera. But, um, to be clear, you know, if public health directed that this was an enduring issue or water quality was not appropriate, we would have to take action or remediation steps. Uh, I guess Cataclysmic, but unlikely outcome would be that the beach would be permanently closed and no water access would be allowed in that location. Okay. Thank you. And then in say hypothetically in that case, then we wouldn't be spending the 400, 000 dollars extra to build a water structure, or a watered platform. Commissioner Campbell. Thank you. And through you. No, the 400, 000 dollars is for the expanded water platform if we were to arrive in a circumstance where the water was deemed unsafe and an enduring way. Um, the additional investment that Council has already approved to have water entry points, um, and a small water platform there would also be, I guess, compromise from an investment perspective. So the 400, 000 is just the enhanced aspect that Council is considering this evening prior approvals from Council have already directed water access at this location. Um, and so those commitments of Council would also be defeated if the water quality was found to be sustainingly unsuitable. Okay. Thank you. Um, so then I don't have a problem supporting this. I think that especially with enclosing the Cologan pool at the Memorial Centre, um, we've kind of lost some outdoor swimming space and having an expanded swimming dock would really add back to that, what we have lost. So, and I think that that if we can do this, then that would be a great addition for the city, for like programming, like was said before. So I would support this. Thank you Councillor Glenn. Thank you and through you. Uh, thank you to my colleagues for the, um, detailed questions. I do want to ask a few questions to provide enhanced clarity. So although we've already touched on the naming, can staff please confirm that should we engage with someone who is willing to provide funds for some naming that the name of Battery Park will remain as it is. CORD. Thank you and through Mr. Mayor. So I want to thank you for the question Councillon. I want to clarify that the intent was never to change the name of battery park. The park was always going to retain battery park as a name. It was really about the water park and the renaming for that aspect, which was the promenade. And obviously the other amenities being the enhanced women platform and the inflatable. In this case, if we had other contribution, again, it would be related to the promenade and other amenities, but Battery Park would remain and keep its current name. Okay. Thank you. I think that provides some comfort that Battery will remain named as it is. Um, with regards to the safety, we've touched on public health, but can staff please confirm that should test come back indicating it's unsafe to swim that the medical officer of health has the power to shut down swimming. And maintain that shutdown. Miss August. Uh, yes. So, um, under public health regulations, if water testing, uh, quality tests come back, um, at a level, um, that is not acceptable than those beaches must be shut down. And the same would go for the swimming dock facility. Okay. Thank you very much. Um, so a couple of other questions. So I know that there was concern expressed about when the project might start. So could staff just sort of give us a high level overview of the process that will occur should everything pass and we start moving forward with this. Thank you for the question. Um, yes, sure. So the, um, one of the first things that will happen is that they get involved kinks in page. We updated to share the information with the public. Um, we know that the neighbours are very interested in what's happening at the promenade site in Confederation Basin. So that will be one of the first things that we work on as well as scheduling a meeting with the near neighbours, uh, the other thing that will happen is, uh, the design, uh, the design is just revising some aspects of the design. We'll work towards that. And then in 2027, uh, we will start to work the procurement for the project will happen, likely in early 2027. And that will go out, uh, that will go out for public procurement. Following that, uh, construction contracts would be awarded in the project would commence likely in the, in the winter, uh, for some, um, moving us some materials and some work that can be done the winter. And, uh, with the majority of the work happening during the summertime. The other thing that would happen in parallel, um, should this be approved here tonight is that the permitting work would also happen for the grass creek park location at the same time. But essentially then we're into construction project, um, and then of course the operational elements need to be considered such as the operator operating plan, safety plans, and so on. Okay. Thank you very much. So my next question has to do with, uh, the entry to the water. So, um, in part two where we're discussing the enhanced swimming platform and washroom. Does this also include the enhanced entry to the water? So if, for example, that, uh, clause was voted down, would we lose the enhanced entry to the water as well. Thank you. Uh, no, we would not lose the enhanced centre each to the water or the, um, the public realm, uh, tonight the request is to proceed with the additional funds, um, is for the, um, which would go through the 2027 budget process, is for the enhanced swimming docs only. Okay. Uh, and with relation to the situation regarding swim, swimming in the city, um, I know that we've done a lot of work to try and improve opportunity for swimming and swim lessons. Um, and we were hopeful to move ahead with project at InVista. Um, my understanding though is where we're at that project is quite an improve years out, uh, potentially given the cost to it. So where are we in terms of accessibility to swim lessons and would the addition of this platform in lanes, uh, increase our ability to offer some swim lessons potentially. Yes. And through you, the enhanced swimming docs, um, as CAO hurdle pointed out is essentially like a swimming pool in the lake. Uh, there would be at least one lane, uh, 25 metres for swimming similar to swimming pool. And there are ample opportunities to conduct swim lessons there. Lane swim kind of like family swim, you know, lots of opportunities for play as well as learn to swim there. Of course, the Cologan Water Park is underway as well to enclose that facility, which is going to bring additional opportunities for swim lessons. Um, the InVista project is, um, is underway in terms of design work and planning for that site as well. Um, but this site will allow people to swim outdoors, uh, with the additional swim lesson opportunities, um, fitness opportunities and overall opportunities for wellbeing, really. Okay. Great. That's a positive thing to hear. Um, so my last question is with regards to the consultation. And I know that my colleagues have touched on this. But given the wording of the question, I want greater clarity on this. So are we going to consult within your neighbours given that the changes that are contemplated with this enhanced platform and the move of the washroom change room facility, uh, to the other sort of end of the, um, the battery park area are going to be contemplated so that they can have some input. Cause I think that that was the general concern that we have not seen diagram and a layout. That was what was expressed from a number of people. So I just want to confirm that because that was brought to my attention, uh, on a number of vocations. Thank you. And through you. Uh, so the, um, yes, absolutely. Um, we are planning on consulting with the near neighbours. We've heard from many of them, um, you know, when the, uh, when the, uh, from the last report to now, absolutely, um, and so we're happy to consult with them, um, and hear their thoughts on the project. So we would not be looking to, at input that would change the design. But we would like to hear from them. We would like to share the plans with them, uh, and communicate with those neighbours. Okay. So just for some clarity, what kind of input would they be, uh, giving to you? Because I know if you're not looking for any changes to this, is there opportunity to talk about aesthetics, for example, because that was one of the concerns. So if it's not about placement, is there opportunity to discuss how it looks given that they live there. Yes. There will be opportunity to weigh in on the look and feel of the structures. Um, some of the finishes. We'd like to hear from them on some of the operational concerns that they may have and discuss that with them. Um, but there are some opportunities to hear from them. Um, but the promenade itself as well as the washroom location have been designed for those specific locations. And so we are, we're not contemplating changes to those locations, but we are certainly open to hearing on the aesthetics and how to ensure that the, uh, that the buildings fit into the, uh, the neighbouring areas. Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate the answers. And, uh, I think I'm satisfied that we can move ahead with what's here, uh, and should water park be, um, a possibility at Grass Creek Park. We have opportunity to discuss it in the future. Thank you. Councillor Bo. Thank you. We're just been through you. I have a few questions to staff in this. I guess the first one is it kind of feels like we're dividing our effort now that they're not going to be co - located. Um, I know the delegation mentioned let's focus on the promenade first, increase accessibility. The water as soon as possible. So how much of a split does this kind of create trying to sort of do the one and also do the inflatable water park somewhere else in all of that? Does this like clearly staff is a limited resource. So is it, is it half? Are they coequal? Is it 70 towards the promenade? Uh, Ms. Huckersman. Yes. Thank you for the question. Uh, so the majority of the effort is definitely around the prominade project. Some effort for the swim docs, of course, the Inflatable Park. Once confirmation of the design, um, is in place. It's a relatively straightforward project that doesn't take an abundance of staff time. Of course, there's some work to do there in terms of planning and working with an operator and those types of things. Um, but the majority of the effort would be focused on the, on the promenade project. Okay. Thank you for that information. Um, I guess right away, like the first two clauses, I would support. I do have reservations about the third. So I know we're not there yet. And tonight's not a final decision, but once we start down these tracks, it really does kind of coalesce sometimes into a decision only looking at one area. So that park out there is, is not considered a destination park currently, correct? Thank you for the question. So, um. Yes and no. The currently staff are undertaking and exercise to reclassify parks within the city. And that park is actually, would be considered a city park, uh, given the amenities and the size, um, and uses and so on. So, so that park, uh, we would consider to be a destination park. Okay. So historically it wasn't, but it's, it's becoming one. Okay. Fair enough with the reclassification. So whereas Lake Ontario Park is considered a full destination park has been one for quite some time. Yeah. No, I think that Grass Creek Park was, uh, is also considered a destination park. It does contain, um, of course, the waterfront for everyone to be part of. And, you know, the playground, the amenities that are there, uh, do, you know, give it that status. And I think CORL could probably expand on that. Okay. CORD, you want to jump in? Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. And through you. Although if you look at technical classification, it may not have been traditionally classified as such Councillor Bohm. I would argue that it is a citywide destination. We have people that are coming from different parts of the city. It is by far our largest sandy beach that we have available within, uh, The City of Kingston Boundary. So I would say it has been a destination. It is very popular. And we do have other sandy beaches, but they're not, uh, quite as large as the one that we have at Grass Creek Park. It is quite a unique asset. And therefore, that's why we have people coming from all over the city. It is quite a destination. Okay. Thank you. So that does sort of hit on the point that it wasn't previously and was kind of sort of a little hidden area. And now it is basically becoming a very well used park. So much so that when you go there for a lot of the events, like for instance, the sheepdog trials, so the next phase of this is if there were to be a water inflatable there, more parking would have to be created, which would take away a lot of the active green spaces. Is that accurate. Or we'd have people parking on the roads, which they do right now. Yes, thank you. Thank you for the question. You know, you bring up a really good point about the parking. Um, so on a really busy day, it can be quite busy out there. Um, so I think that what we're challenged with is finding those parking solutions. And that can include shuttles that it can include offsite lots with shuttles to the park. Uh, that may include buses from existing partner organisations that can help bring families and kids to the site. So, um, and I know CA Hertle mentioned future expansion for some rural transit. So, um, I think we are challenged with finding some of those solutions. And we look forward to doing that. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. I guess my point there was if, if we pursue this water inflatables, it's not just the water inflatable area. That needs the upgrades. It's the entire area there. So that there's actually adequate parking. Cause if you're going to have a destination park, you have to have places for people to actually, you know, put their vehicles and get there properly. So, and there would be no risk and or threat to the world renowned sheepdog trials that currently take place there. Is that correct? Yes, thank you. Uh, so, so the, uh, we would, we would not be looking to displace them due to the, due to the Inflatable water park. Uh, we would hope to work with them and come up with solutions that both can both can happen. Excellent. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you Councillor McLaren. Thank you. I heard earlier in response to a colleague's question that, uh, the cost of pursuing the crown lease would be a minimum 20, 000 dollars. Is that lease paid once every year, every month? How often do we pay that 20, 000. Thank you for the question. So, um, there are a number of costs that would be considered, I guess, upfront costs or cost for application for the application process, as well as some additional documentation that would be required from some consultants. Uh, so we don't quite know the full extent of the lease. And what that costs would be, um, but we are hoping to be able to go through that permitting process and then come back to council with the additional information before the, uh, before the location is confirmed and the, and the water park would proceed. And sir, I just heard you say you would have to consult with consultants pleural. How many consultants and how much would they be. Thank you. Uh, so likely a shoreline engineer, um, is what would be required. Maybe one or maybe two. We don't quite know at this point. But that's what we're looking for tonight is Direction to be able to pursue those things. Okay. Um, and we don't know how much that's going to cause. Uh, do we know how much staff time this is going to cost? I understood that this was process was done in a, uh, accelerated format. For downtown. Um, how much staff personne hours did we devote to that. Mr. Campbell. Thank you. And through you. I'm sorry Councillor at this time I can't give you a finite number of staff hours. We can certainly take that away and calculate that for you. Um, the exploration of the downtown water park option is obviously very intertwined with other considerations for the downtown activation. Um, it would be very challenging to separate the greater project from the specific elements that were considered for the inflatable water park. Um, we can certainly work to quantify the number of hours. It would take to receive permitting at the Grass Creek Park location. Um, as Director Elgisma has shared the intent here is to seek direction of council. And as we mentioned earlier, the costing would be included in the development of the budget. So Council would have opportunity again to see and ask questions. Um, as we were to begin to understand the costing associated, the estimate I provided is based on, uh, those shoreline studies and the understanding that the permit application does require some technical review. Um, obviously then we would come back to council as Director Elgisma has shared and speak more about any indooring costs for that lease or permitting agreement. But those costs are usually far less than the initial permitting or at least request process. But again, Councillor, I don't have and I don't believe Directors Elgismo would have account on the number of hours at this time. We can certainly work to provide that though. Okay. And, um, did I also hear right that we will, that this is in a sense being imposed on the residents in that area. They're not going to have a choice as to whether this happens or not. We're going to consult on the form of the texture of the, uh, stuff. Um, is that, did I hear you correct, uh, this is another example of making a decision before we consult and then consulting afterwards, but not on that decision. It's only on the way it comes out. Mr. Cavill. Thank you. And through you. Thank you Councillor for the question. Um, I think this has been a point of confusion. Council has considered the proposal to develop this section of the waterfront for water access and amenity space. Um, through any number of council reports, um, and so the consultation has been extensive and has been in many years long process to get us to where we are today. Uh, the proposal tonight is to revert to an approval that was previously issued by Council in response to request for additional amenities on this property. Um, and so what council has before you tonight is consistent with an extensive consultation process, uh, what Directors El Grisma and myself have commented on earlier this evening is that given that that prior consultation has arrived at this set of amenities, uh, the opportunity to reconsult and reconsider those amenities is not where we would be at moving forward with council's direction. However, engagement on built form, the appropriateness and the and the suitability of the style and appearance, uh, to blend into the neighbourhood is really what we're indicating would be possible. Um, as opposed to moving elements that are constrained by site design or prior approvals of council. Thank you. Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to speak. I think it's just two of us. Okay. I think the set on this. So at this point we will move to the votes. We're going to do three separate votes. So first we will do the vote on clause one. Or sorry, on paragraph one of cause one. And that carries. Okay. Next we will do the vote for paragraph two. And that carries by a vote of nine to three. Councillor Tosonica McLaren opposed. And now we'll do the vote for paragraph three. And that also carries by a vote of nine to three Councillor Osanic McLaren and Glenn opposed. Okay. Uh, with that, we'll move on to clause two Lemoine Point farm update. Okay. We will call the vote, please. And that carries. Okay. Now clause three drinking water quality management program 2025 management review report and reindorsement of operational plan. Councillor Shapes. Thank you. Um, thank you for the report. As always each year. I did read, which was a little concerning to me within the report drinking water systems are being adequately managed, operated and maintained. The word adequately for me is questionable. Cause if I see that a report card, it means could use improvement. So I was wondering if you could address that, please. Miss Roberts. Sure. Through you, um. Mayor Paterson, thank you very much for the question. Um, Councillor Shaves, I, I appreciate the comment. And the concern over the use of adequate. Um, I. I want to explain that we use that because that's a term used in needing the standard. So the standard asks that the top management review confirm that the systems are being adequately managed, operated and maintained and in response to that, it's the use of the term that we want to confirm that that is being done. So we're matching the level of the wording of the standard that is being provided by the province. Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. Um, just case email is one ring. And my real question is, are we doing everything possible to ensure there is safe drinking water for Kinstonians. Ms. Roberts. Three year worship. Yes. And I say thank you. Okay. Thank you. If there was no other discussion, we will call the vote on clause three. And that carries. Okay. Uh, moving on to report number 52 from the Heritage Properties Committee. Moved by Councillor Klenn, seconded by Councillor Osterhoff that report 52 from the Heritage Properties Committee be received and adopted. Okay. Uh, we have two application supported for approval by the Heritage Properties Committee Councillor Glenn. You would like to separate them. Um, okay. So we'll just deal with one by one. Uh, so first we have the application for Ontario Heritage Act approval 226, 228 King Street East. Okay. So did you want to speak to that? Wanted to Councillo Glenn. Okay. So we'll call the vote first on that number one. And that carries. Uh, next we have the application for Ontario Heritage Act approval. Uh, 166 West Street Council Glenn. Thank you and through you. I have an amendment to put up. Okay. So we have, uh, an amendment moved by Councillor Glenn. The clause tour report 52 from the Heritage Properties Committee be amended in exhibit A by deleting condition one in its entirety and inserting thereto. One, the applicant shall consider amending their plans to reflect the use of two over two slash windows in the southern and northern elevations to the front section of the building and place the proposed casement windows. Otherwise, the applicant shows the swing encasement window is proposed in the submitted plans, which were selected for the design compatibility, security features and ease of use. Okay. So this is, um, an amendment. Is there a seconder for the amendment? Second by Councillor. So duly moved in secretary Councillor Glenn. You have the floor to speak to the amendment. Thank you very much. I'm actually going to ask staff to provide some clarity as to why the amendment has to come to Council. So just to give context for why we're giving consideration for this and why it could not be done at the committee level, please. Mr. Gibbs. Thank you for the question. And through you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, the process for Heritage Permit applications are outlined in the Ontario Heritage Act. And the city's procedural by - offer heritage. In short, this is a property that's in a heritage conservation district. Those applications always come to Council for approval. So council is where, uh, amendments can be made. Other types of applications, part four applications. So properties outside of heritage conservation districts can be approved through delegated authority. So at the committee levels where amendments can be brought forward. Okay. So thank you very much for that clarity. Um, so this particular piece of property has, um, sought and been suffering from what I would call demolition by neglect. So the applicant has brought forward a very comprehensive plan to restore this property, which would, um, really be a credit to the entire area. However, the, uh, heavy heritage requirements typically. So the amendment is simply to allow a different sort of window. And as is outlined here, it would, uh, improve the security features and the ease of use, which I hope you will see as being reasonable given that Wes Street is a very open street and it sits quite close to, uh, the roadway. So it's a small change, but I think is significant, uh, in terms of the livability of, uh, the home moving forward once it's completed. Um, and it's very much still, um, a heritage window that's in keeping with the look and feel of the building. So I think this is a reasonable thing to do. And it would be, um, excellent to, to allow the applicant to move forward and restore this building and have it be a credit to, uh, the neighbourhood in the city. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Is there any further discussion on the amendment. Councillor Bomb. Yeah, I get a fully support this. It actually reminds me of some of the issues that we've had previously, uh, with the Pine Grove Cemetery Church, um, where the preferred solution was actually composite and non - wood. And it would actually last longer. But there were some concerns like this was sometimes the actual policies don't keep pace with the building materials. And so this is a good example of where council can use its power to sort of veto some outdated policies and kind of go with common sense here. So great, great, great amendment. Thank you. Okay. We will call the vote on the amendment. And that carries. So now we're back to, um, uh, number two. Uh, as amended. There's no further discussion. Then we will call the vote. And that cures. Okay. Under port number 53 from Planning Committee. Move by Councillor Chanani Seknad by Deputy Mayor Steven. The report 53 from the Planning Committee be received and adopted. So the one Claude zoning by La Amendment 3119 and 3123 Princess Street. Councillor Sanek. Thank you your worship. The nearby neighbours still have concerns. I appreciate that staff where you're able to increase the amount of open space on the property to 19 percent of the property is going to be paved over. And why that's a problem is that the neighbour to the immediate west and the neighbour to the media itself are at a lower elevation than this property. And there is adrenage stitch to the west that goes through the backyards and then goes up to Princess Street. But that drainage ditch, um, was meant for a big grassed area when the two lots to the other side of them were homes and not, you know, 80 percent pavement. So there's concerns there for drainage as well with these two lots, right? They're housing lots residential. And we're removing them for commercial, like a commercial mall purpose. And for, um, for this application is actually asking, it's not just going to be a little neighbourhood mall is actually asking for twice the size as what's allowed in the zoning mall. So it's really going to be a big commercial mall. And to the north is Woodhaven subdivision. Back 20 years ago, it was called Cataraqui West subdivision. And they were supposed to be in the Cap West master plan 20 years ago. It was supposed to be a commercial mall area in Cat West. And as Cat West, Woodhaven has been developed section by section, the developers have always pushed that commercial area further into the future saying that there's not the need, that the need right now is hosing, housing, housing, that they wouldn't be able to find any commercial tenants. And even right now would Haven does not have a commercial mall that's been built out. So this converting a residential, two residential lots into a commercial Lake Mall. It just doesn't make a lot of sense when we're in a hosing crisis. And also that in the commercial, you know, studies that we do, it shows we do have enough commercial right now, maybe not to 2051, but for right now as well, the Southeast coroner, just down from there at Collins Bay Road and Princess Street has all been grubbed out, all cleared out, um, that's sewn commercial. So the residents have concern about what's this need for commercial, especially because 18 commercial lots are being proposed here. So that's their concerns. And that is why I'm not voting for this. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I think we will call the vote then on clause. One. Oh, I'm sorry cancerostroph. Did you want to speak. No. Your worship, I think Councillor Office is giving thumbs up that he's okay with it. Yes. Yeah. We can call the vote. That carries if I vote of 11 to one Councillor Sanek opposed. Okay. We have nothing from committee of the whole. Informational reports, uh, we have a few to move through, uh, first and foremost, we have a briefing, uh, about the special constable programs. So at this point I will turn it over to Commissioner Agnu, Commissioner of Growth Envelopment Services, uh, as well as, um, Director Kyle Campo of licensing enforcement, uh, to speak to the special constable program. Thank you, your worship. Um, so Mr. Campo and I are here tonight to talk to you about special constable program. We were last here about a year ago and we've been working on the implementation strategy ever since. Uh, we are also joined this evening by Mr. Mothersol, who many of you know he is our manager of licensing enforcement. So Mr. Campo is going to just go over the high level details again, just reminding members of the public and council in terms of what the parameters of the program are. We're very excited. We've had, um, a number of months of training and we'll have a compliment of eight special constables that will be starting work as of July 1st. So I'm going to turn over to Mr. Campo. He is also wearing this evening for your benefit. The special constable uniform. We're trying to do as much education as possible to help members of the public understand the new program, what the officers look like and primarily what the purpose of the program is, which is really about positive relationship building. So Mr. Campo. Thank you Commissioner Ayrton through you. Uh, Mr. Mayor, this evening we are pleased to present the municipal special constable report to Council. This report represents the final stages of implementing a program that has been under development for some time. It is intended to enhance community safety. Improved support to frontline enforcement operations and provide an additional level of service within municipal facilities, parks, and public spaces. It is important to note that municipal specials are not police officers, nor are they intended to the replace the role of kinks and police. Rather, they are to provide a specialized level of enforcement that bridges the gap between traditional municipal bylaw enforcement and policing. The initial implementation of the program will focus primarily on authorities under the trespass to property act supporting and supporting municipal enforcement officers in the field. This approach will allow the city to establish a program in a measured, in responsible manner while focusing on municipal properties and facilities where staff regularly respond to trespass in public safety concerns. A key objective of this program is to improve officer safety and enhance our ability to respond to situations that increasingly involve complex social issues, encampment - related concerns, unauthorized access to municipal properties, and other matters occurring in public spaces. Special constables will work hand - in - hand with municipal law enforcement officers. They have completed the required training. We're just at the final stages with the rest of our supervisors right now. Um, and we will continue to receive ongoing training in regards to de - escalation, mental health awareness, community engagement, and safe exercise of their authorities. The program is not intended to be a 24 - hour emergency response service. During operating hours, special constables will respond it to matters within their delegate authorities. Outside of those hours, the Kingston Police Service will continue to respond as they do today. Success will not be measured solely through enforcement statistics. Staff will monitor the program through a number of different performance measures, including proactive patrols, calls for service. Support provided to municipal law enforcement officers, response times, community engagement activities, and overall impacts and service delivery. This program is really establishing the focus on building positive relationships like Commissioner ANU spoke to. The goal is to provide a visible, professional, and accountable public safety presence while supporting compliance, enhancing staff, and public safety. And helping ensure municipal facilities and public spaces remain safe and accessible for everyone. We're confident that the implementation of this program will improve service delivery. Increased staff and public safety. And provide the city with an additional tool to address issues occurring on municipal property. I thank you for your time tonight, and I am open to questions from members of Council. Okay, thank you very much. Are there any questions from Council? Councillor. Thank you, Mayor Paterson, through you. Uh, thank you and great report. Uh, guest a question I have is you have a really interesting defying success criteria in year one. Is Council going to be informed periodically about the metrics that you're using to define success in some sort of parameters and how this has done year upon year. Thank you. And through you. Yes, we're going to continually update Council. Again, this is the implementation of the start of the program. So we want to do this very measured and defined. Um, but we would be providing statistics back to Council. We'd be providing updates just on the program how our success were, we're defining success. And again, around those statistics, but again, we're really looking at the relationship building with members of the community, um, and that's hopefully going to be shown back to you through council, through just, you know, discussions with residents and things like that is a goal as well. But yes, in general, we were reporting back. Thank you. And second question, um, there are going to be tabs on special constables as well and their mental health and how they're doing on the job as well, because we don't want burnout. And, um, certainly if you're going to be in much more challenging situations, which bylaw is already in, that's going to be a parameter of this. So there will be wellness checks, correct? Through yes to there will be. Councillor Senek. Thank you, your worship. Um, a member of the public, uh, asked us a lot of questions today. And so I want to ask some of the questions that were forwarded to us. So one of them was the public reporting. So thanks for asking that question. Councillor Tozo. Another question, um, that we had sent to us today was, um, how proactive is it going to be like, are you still going to be as a special constable reporting to complaints or when you're walking around, are you going to be like proactively looking for things where someone might not necessarily be causing problems. No one might not be complaining. Like what will be happening there? Thank you Councillor Stannekin through you. Um, so for the first question in terms of public reporting, um, the questions around how the public can get a hold of us for reports is that clarifying it Councillor Sanic. Um, yes, for the public reporting question that was sent to us, um, it was more like, could they see, um, could the public see the situations that, um, the special constables had to respond to. Thank you for the question again through you. Uh, so yes, we're going to be providing, um, some data in terms of again, uh, the number of calls that we're going to proactive enforcement, potentially the number of calls that are sort of going away from Kingston police that we're able to respond to on behalf of, um, our byla officers that are in these situations. Um, so there is going to be some data that we're going to be able to share publicly. Um, and again, we're going to establish and we are working through that for July 1st is that we're going to have a city website that's dedicated to the special constable program providing forward facing information on data statistics reporting and what this program's all about. So that's what we're working towards. Uh, the second question in terms of proactive enforcement, um, again, this is a very design program to support our bylaw officers in the field. Um, we would be on a, you know, hand in hand partnership with our bylaffice there. So our bypassers are still frontlined officers. We would be that supporting mechanism. So we're not necessarily going out and looking for proactive situations or trying to get involved in other situations. But we do want to be a visible presence. So you are going to see us, um, our special constables in uniform coinciding with our bylafficers. So we're looking at, you know, events that are in the downtown, maybe movies in the square or promenade or buskers, our major events, tourism sort of activities where you would see our bylafficers, um, visibly in the community with our special constables visibly in the community with our bylafficers. So there will be that aspect of visibility, but again, it would be reactive in based on, um, working with our bypassers. Thank you. And one other question is, um, okay. So a bylaw officer, can't use force. But a police officer can. And I might, maybe I need, um, I should already know this answer to the question, but I don't. Can you use more force than a bylaw officer. Or what type of force? Thank you, you. So, uh, we have delegated authority, um, through the Kingston Police Services Board. And those are for very defined provincial statutes that speak to what we can and cannot do. So one of them, it would be, for instance, the trespasser property act. And for by Laffice, right now where they're into situations, they don't have arrest authorities and they don't have advanced PPE that they could defend themselves with if they're into a scenario of high escalating situations. For us, for special constables, we now do under that provision have been arrest authority where we could, um, potentially arrest somebody in the worst case scenario. Um, if that helps. Thank you. Uh, Councillor McClen. Thank you. You're a uniform is impressively scary. It's quite intimidating. Um, may I ask, what do you have in your utility belt. Thank you for the question Council McLaren. Um, so for what we have in our tool belt is we've got handcuffs. We've got OC spray. So pepper spray. And we carry a baton. So those are what we've been granted through the police services board. Um, that's in relation to what we've seen with other municipalities as well that their special constables, um, the TTC or for Ottawa transportation. They're using the similar PPE along with Kingston Police. In terms of the uniform itself, there's been a lot of conversation around our uniforms. Uh, there are provincial requirements where we can't look identical to a police officer, but we have to stand out in terms of an enforcement service. Um, so there's sort of like that mixed began between a police officer as ECSI would be in a black uniform, our bylafficer in blue, some mental health services are in red. So, um, from right now with consultation with Kingston Police, we've decided on a grey uniform. Okay. Um, has any thought been given to the likeness of your grey colour with regards to your stated goal of de - escalation? Because I understand the dark colours from colour psychology tend to be more aggressive and tend to be more escalatory rather than de - escalatory. You thought of lightning it up, or is this like set in stone now. Thank you for the questioning again through you. Um, so we've sort of had a mix of our uniforms. We also have white uniforms officer shirts, I would say. But I would say first and foremost is our jackets in any kind of utter material are in yellow, uh, for high visibility. That's we're trying to distinguish ourselves with. But again, we're really focusing on the public engagement, getting interactions with different stakeholders to make sure they're aware of what the program is, um, we're working with our Director of IIDA. Currently to be able to get out in front of the public to, you know, grab some clarity on what this program is. But again, when a special constable goes into a situation, our role is not just directly enforcement. It's about communication, presenting ourselves in a professional way, but we're really continuing to work with our outreach partners and getting people into the proper, um, services that they need. So that's going to be part of the conversations that we're having daily, um, with individuals to help identify, again, it might look intimidating. It's also an enforcement service, but we are really focused on delivering that message that we're here to support by the officers, but get people, um, to the services that they need. Thank you. Thank you, Council. Thank you, Mayor Paterson, through you. Uh, Director Campo, thank you for this presentation. It's very helpful. Thank you. Could you talk a little bit about the amount of training, um, or the types of courses that, uh, the eight special constables have now been engaged in? Yep. Thanking through you. Um, so there are provincial examinations that, uh, special constables have to go through. So there's actually a requirement from the province for each of our special constables to go through a specific course. So it's a bit of four to five week course. Um, that some of our, our staff are on right now. Um, with the provincial examination at the end. So that focuses on, again, the, uh, using all the PPE and the defence tactics and things like that. But it also really focuses on mental health trauma informed training, you know, de - escalation tactics, um, communication. Those are part of the provincial legislations that we have to go through for our examinations further to that in the city. That's what we're really focusing on. We're really focusing on that trauma, mental health, um, training that we can provide to our officers. Um, again, in crisis situations. And that's what, again, our focus outside of the provincial mandate is those areas right now. That's perfect. That's exactly what we were hoping for. I think as a council is de - escalation and the mental health aspects and the communication aspects. It's well done. Um, I want to touch a little bit on what Councillor Tozo talked about. Obviously when a special counsel becomes engaged in an escalated situation, um, the mental health aspect is very important for that special constable in a debriefing afterwards. Do we have it set in our procedures for those special constel to have a debrief and who is the debrief with? Is it with another supervisor? Or is there a procedure in place to protect all eight of you. That way? Yeah. There are SOPs in place. So standard operating procedures that we have in place where, uh, special constable is dealing with that kind of situation that they'd be able to go through a process to get support. If that's what you're asking, um, so we are very, um, aware, for lack of a better term of the situations and the mental fatigue that our officers could go through. So that is in partnership with what we're doing with our own health and safety advisors with the city on if the burnout, what those considerations look like. And we're putting procedures in place, but we're working with our staff to develop these as well. Perfect. And the, one of my final questions, um, in reading the report, it appeared that there will always be a special constable on shift during regular operating hours. Is that correct? Or is there, will there be gaps in service in that type of form. Thank you for the question for you. So again, the idea, um, generally as we implement is that there would be a special constable on seven days a week. Um, with the realities is that we have six supervisors, myself in manager mother cell who will be the eighth. So ideally we're going to be staffing as much as possible. Um, with the goal to be seven days a week, um, but this isn't again a 24 seven operation. So we are still going to be relying on Kingston Police to help support this program. I really appreciate the update. I appreciate the seriousness of what the department is endeavoring to do in moving forward in this engagement. Obviously there was a lot of fearfulness from the public and certain aspects of this and misunderstanding and confusion. Uh, I think you've provided that guidance and judging by what you have indicated with a report today. It's, it's, I think it's heading in the right step. So well done to you and your team. Thank you. Okay. There's no other questions. Mr. Compo, thank you very much. Thank you so much. Okay. Uh, so, um, if you have any other questions with any information report, please raise your hand. I think we've covered one and two. Uh, so number three, future long - term care facilities, Councillor. Thank you, Mayor Patterson, through you. Uh, this motion came about in 2001. Did The Clerk recall who put forward this motion. Or 2021. Thank you. No, it wasn't in 26, five year old motion. Thank you. Madam Kirk. I'm sorry Councillor Tozo. I wasn't anticipating the question. Could you repeat it, please? Thank you. So this motion was before day in 2021, not 2001. Do you recall who put forward the motion originally? I'm just curious. I don't recall off the top of my head, no. I think it was former Councillor Holland, but. Okay. Very, okay. That's, that's just my memory. I'm not paying present. Interesting. Well, five years later, we have an answer. So thank you. Okay. Number four, 2026 municipal debt limits. Number five enhanced property standards. Councillocenic. Thank you, your worship. Um, I love this report. And, uh, through you, a question to staff. So with these recommendations for enhanced communications, they haven't happened yet. Is that correct? And if so, when will they start to happen. Mr. Compo. Thank you for you. I appreciate the question. Councillor Sanek. So we've already started to implement some of these processes, especially with the communication to our property standards officers on how they're communicating back to the public on certain complaints or to update feedback. We're also working on or we have implemented, I should say a callback card so that, uh, what we're going to do to door. We're really trying to focus on providing that relationship with how you contact a by the officer making that more apparent, how to specifically get a hold of that officer. So those are some of the things that we're working on as long as, um, as well as, uh, we're working on the city website to provide more clear information so that we can, um, provide some information back to the public. So the number of things working on. Some have already been done, but we're still focusing and continuing that. Great. And, uh, just so, um, I'm clear. And so some of that communication would be with the person who made the complaint. Uh, because that's where I always hear things kind of fall through. Like someone for me, it's not the tenant landlord at complaints, but it's neighbour to neighbour. So someone makes a complaint. And then they'll call me, you know, like a month later or so. And they say, is it still ongoing? Like I can still see that it's happening. I made the complaint. So is some of that enhanced communication with the person who made the complaint late to educate them. Um, about what the city can do and can't do. Thank you and through you. Uh, yes. So we hear that quite often as well that this case is still under review. We can't provide any additional feedback. Um, we understand the frustration that that causes. There is some legal components to that that we can't disclose where things are in terms of, uh, the case. Um, but we're also understanding of where the community's frustration is is for that. So we're working on providing again, more information on what we can provide, what we can't provide in trying to just pick up the phone, call somebody, uh, who's the complainant and have that personal touch as well to have those conversations opposed to more generic messaging, for lack of a better term. Perfect. And, uh, my last question is, um, it was just asked if in, um, you know, how when we send out the property taxes, we always have that little insert flyer, um, about information about the city. If maybe we could advertise the good neighbour, the good neighbour policy in there, um, in the future, uh, with as part of the communications to roll out, you know, like these enhanced property standards. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Cancer Toso. Thank you Mayor Paterson through you. I think, uh, Director Campo knows where I'm probably going to go with this. And one of the questions I've asked about is the vegetation maintenance and freedom of expression, considerations. So I guess a question I have, because I've dealt with this a lot in my district lately is when is a lawn unkept and when is it a freedom of expression and what like what objective measures does the city use when it comes to differentiating? This is really your worship. Like what's the, like what's differentiation between the two between, this is my freedom of expression and I just don't want to mow my yard. Miss Morley. Thank you. Please enlighten us. Thank you through your worship. So we do have the benefit of two Ontario Superior Court of Justice decisions on this topic now where the courts have held that naturalized lawns have been recognised in certain circumstances as a protected form of expression. So there was a decision in Mississauga this year where the court declared that Mississauga's restrictions on grass height were unconstitutional, uh, because they infringed on the property owners'freedom of expression. They view gardening to be a form of expressive conduct that is protected under the charter. Um, I can confirm that the cities enforcement practices are focused on objective, health and safety concerns, particularly around fire risk. And the city enforces its bylaw in a way that's intended to minimally impair the property owner's right to expressive conduct and focuses purely on objective health and safety issues. So I got some follow - up questions on that one. So a yard is unkept in basically what we're looking for, because this has happened in my district now is like, it could be rats and there could be like problems with that area in ticks are certainly an issue. I understand Nomo Mei, but now we're in June and July and August. And there's definitely fire hazards here. Like one such example in my district is just a vacant lot. It's being kept unkempt. Like how do we deal with that from a municipal perspective if it's a freedom of expression? Like, I mean, I'm just confounded by this. Ms. Morley. Thank you. And through your worship. As I indicated, our focus is on objective health and safety concerns. If the concerns are purely aesthetic in nature and are subjective, the city doesn't enforce its bylaws in a way that would impair someone's right to freedom of expression through gardening. So our bylaw officers will investigate and they'll assess whether there are health and safety risks associated with that property. There may be other property standards concerns that arise as a result of the unkempt yard, such as rodent infestation, for example. And there are other avenues for enforcement to address those types of issues. So with another avenue be like calling public health, would that be a more fruitful way? Or is there anything the city can do in these cases? Because I've got, I've had a few frustrated constituents. Thank you. And through your worship, our provisions in the city's property standards by a law that requires property owners to maintain their property in a way that prevents infestation of rodents. So if that was deemed to be an issue, then the property standards by luck could be invoked to take enforcement action. I feel this isn't well known. Does no, like does the public know, cause I think that we need to, sorry, this is a comment, but also a question. Could we like inform the public a bit better that this is a charter related issue? Because I've had some really interesting conversations with constituents that the property owner next door has a charter protected right to leave their lawn unmaintained. Is there, like, this is just, I'm sure I'm hoping staff can appreciate as a councillor. This is a really challenging thing to explain to constituents. Miss Marley. Thank you. And through your, it's very difficult to provide definitive information to residents on this issue, as you can imagine every circumstance is going to be entirely fact specific in terms of whether charter rights have been invoked and or infringed upon. We could certainly provide information to council on the 2026 decision, but we would not want to definitively state that we no longer have an ability to enforce our bylaws. I'm going to have, I'm going to, I'm going to have to think on that one. Thank you. Christian asked and question answered. Can I Councillor Joso? Okay. Okay. That seems to have sparked a few other questions around the table. Uh, next is, um, Councillor Shapes, you had your hand up first. Yes. And first I'm going to say, I don't believe I'm going to be saying this, but it's confused as Councillor Tozo. In regards to this. I know when we first started changed this bylaw, it was to help allow individuals to have naturalized front yards. Either vegetable gardens or flower beds to have polymer - friendly gardens. However, I also believe that a number of people don't know we've changed this bylaw to allow this. So either they're just not maintaining it unintentionally. That was not using their charter rights. Or they're using this as a loophole. My concern is not to receive the C number of concerns because I've. Been in the. I give you preamble, but I just need you to get to. Well, I understand. Maybe how we can sort of close this down. And define this and allow people to naturalize and use their charger rights is maybe doing something similar to what the fire department does with their fire permits. And we're going to have a fire pit. The apply online, do all the check boxes to make sure it's in the red location. It's free and it's registered. Because in quite certain, and I'm also thinking of the bylaw officers, the amount of time that they take to get to investigate all these complaints. If someone wanted user charter rights, have a naturality's front yard. That they could register somehow through the licensing or bylaw. So then they could have a permit. And if the by - wide received a complaint, they could just look it up and going, no, it's already been approved. It's fine. And if anyone doesn't have their permit, then they'd be asked to cut the cross or get a permit. I'm just wondering if staff would have any thoughts in regards to that. Mr. Coppel. Thank you and through you. Uh, so there's a lot to unpack with that one. Um, in terms of, again, we came to administrative policies a year or two ago when we did, I believe it was last year when we amended the yards by law. That was consultation with the naturalized lawn associations. Um, we did lots of public engagement for that. And we did outreach along with after the fact we did public engagement to really try to educate the public on, um, what the new regulations have been. In terms of the registry, I do think that it's something that we can look at. I would be, um, just conscious of the fact that, you know, the way the bylaw is written right now is, um, to Miss Moiley's point around health and safety, um, and we have the prohibited plants list. So we put the onus back on the complainant that they have to identify what type of plant is in violation compared to that list. And they provide that information to bylaw. In terms of the registry itself, I think it would be, um, somewhat difficult because, um, again, when I think of a registry, a registry comes back to, uh, the staff have done review that they've, um, had an intake. They're reviewing the types of plants that are involved in our officers on trains in terms of that. But it is something that we can explore. I'm not saying it can't be. Um, but I would just like to point that out. So as a follow - up question, unless the hand behind me. Could we modify the Baylar to see if you want to naturalize your front yard. You need to have the permit. And if not, you do need to maintain your grass to a certain level. Commissioner active. Thank you. And through you. Um, so just in terms of what's before you tonight and what we can commit to, I think, um, to Mr. Campo's point, we haven't been able to assess this from a staff resourcing or like a feasibility perspective. So I'd be hesitant to suggest that we go with a program like that at this point. I think it's something we can explore at Council's direction, but we do need time to properly assess whether we could do it effectively with the resource implications would be given all of the other, uh, priorities we have right now for the enforcement team. But happy to do so if Council wants us to direct us to have a look at that more formally. But we wouldn't be able to be back with, um, any information on that for some months, I would say based on the rest of the priorities. We're trying to complete right now. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions at number five. Okay. We have no information reports from members of Council. Miscellaneous business. We have one motion moved by Councillo Sanic. Second by Cancer Bohm. That is requested, sorry, two. First it is requested by Diane Fitzel, Earthfest Kingston City Council proclaimed June 1 to 6, 2026 is Canadian Environment Week in the city of Kingston. Number two, thest requested by Hal Cain, Cycle Kingston City Council proclaimed June 1 to 7, 2026 as cycling weak in the city of Kingston. All those in favor. Opposed, and that's carried. Okay, we have one new motion. Uh, it is moved by Deputy Mayor Steven and seconded by Councillor Amos. Whereas national studies have identified barriers contributed to declining participation among girls and young women in sport, including lack of belonging, inadequate access to safe and equitable facilities, negative body image and environments that do not adequately support the needs of female athletes. Whereas creating equitable access to appropriate dedicated gender specific dressing room spaces is an important component of fostering inclusive, respectful and supportive sport environments that encourage continued participation and retention of girls and women in sport. Whereas the city of Kingston's ice allocation policy and guidelines affirm equitable access to arena facilities for all users, regardless of gender orientation and require booking groups to provide ice use schedules one week in advance to support accurate communication of PAD and facility assignments. Whereas the policy does not currently include specific provisions governing the assignment of dressing rooms or defined standards for ensuring consistent application of equitable access considerations. Whereas current operational practice relies on booking groups to request required dressing rooms at the time of booking. The city staff assigning rooms based on those requests and documenting them and booking notes and facility communications, including Digital Signage Wear applicable. Whereas this client - driven process generally functions effectively for most user groups, but can result in inconsistency and circumstances where a participant composition is not fully anticipated or clearly communicated at the time of booking. Whereas private hockey schools and similar commercial skill development, ice users operate outside of formal sanctioned league structures. It may have variable participant composition creating a need for clearer and more consistent dressing room designation practices to support equitable access outcomes. Whereas a recent operational review identified issues involving dressing room allocation for a private hockey school booking, highlighting a gap in policy direction for the specific user category. Therefore be it resolved to Council Direct staff to review and amend the city of Kingston Ice Allocation Policy and guidelines to establish clear provisions for dressing room assignments specific to private hockey schools and similar commercial skill development Ice users. And to implement an operational standard whereby city, staff assigned dressing room allocations for such bookings at the time of booking, including designation of appropriate space to support equitable access for female participants. And the Council to further direct that all other ICE user groups will continue to operate under existing client request model where my addressing room requirements are identified by user groups and reflected in booking communications and facility signage where applicable. In the Council Direct staff to ensure dressing room assignments for applicable bookings are clearly communicated at the time of booking confirmation and consistently reflected in a facility operational systems, including Digital Signage. The Council Direct staff to return accounts with updated policy language and implementation recommendations by the end of summer 2026 for Fole Implementation for the 2026 to 2027 ICE season. Deputy Mayor Stephen, you have The Floor. Thank you Mayor Paterson. I'm sure everyone's still awake after that long, long motion. Um, thanks for the introduction. So, um, first off, thanks to Councillor IMS for seconding and also I want to thank River as well, uh, for coming to speak to us tonight. River and I had a really great phone conversation yesterday. And it was decided that this delegation was actually a pretty unique opportunity considering it's the start of Pride Month to help educate us and remind us of how important language can be. Um, so just to put everyone's mind at ease, I do have some amendments that will be coming. I've got them ready to go. Um, but just before we get to that, I would like to set the context of where this motion actually came from. Um, so it started off with a very specific complaint that had happened a few times. And what it had to do with was specifically with girls change rooms. So it was around Coed organisations where there was some sort of breakdown in communication where the need of the change rooms wasn't being expressed clearly. And therefore wasn't being provided properly at city facilities. So staff investigated when we brought this to them. And interestingly, they actually found, you know, yeah, the operational stuff here, but the gap in our ice allocation policy. So while the Ice Allocation policy itself talks about equity of access, there's nothing in there about change rooms. And I think given the current political climate, I think it's important that we make sure that this is a piece of our policy so that this carries forward beyond whoever's in charge and whoever staff are. And that way it gives them clear direction what to follow. So in terms of conversations with river, I think what I want to highlight is a couple of things. So what came out of this are some lessons learned. And one of the things is the really important reminder that language does matter. And so I really appreciate, um, the educational piece of sex - based language versus gender - based or cultural - based or identity - based language and how it's really important that the city move in a direction toward identity - based language. So that was a really important part of our conversation. Um, something else I just want to acknowledge too from a Council perspective is that hard things are hard. And sometimes you nail it. And sometimes you're close, but you're not quite there. And so again, I think I want to thank River because there was a lot of grace given there and a lot of understanding that this is genuinely coming from a good place. We are trying to do right by community. And so as I said, there are some amendments that are coming in order to just correct that. Um, the last thing I just want to mention too, is, and I don't know if anyone else around the horseshoe has felt this before, but, um, sometimes you get a feeling that something's not quite right. And I had that feeling as we were working on this motion. I couldn't pinpoint it. And I didn't slow down to really dig into myself and be like, what is that feeling? And I think it would have ultimately come back to language, right? So I just want to say, you know, trusting your gut sometimes is hard and it's a good reminder for me to make sure that I slow down and make sure that I'm doing things in a good way. So as for those amendments, The Clerk's probably like, are we getting to the amendments? Um, so there's two pieces to the amendment. Would you like it up first or can I speak now while it's going up. Why don't we put them up and then I'll restart your time. You can speak to the amendments. Okay. So First Amendment move backstown. Stephen, seconded by Councillor Amos. The new motion number one be amended. In the first operative clause to delete appropriate space to support equitable access for FEMO participants and insert thereto change room spaces to ensure equitable access for all participants. So the clause reads as follows. And I think you can see it there in the bold. So I think we'll, so we're presenting these individually. Or together. Oh, all is one. Okay. And then further, uh, new motion number one, be further amended by adding the following is the penultimate operative clause. The Council Director staff to review an amend the city of Kingston ice allocation policy and guidelines to his identity - based language to establish clear provisions for dressing room assignments specific to private hockey schools and similar commercial development. ICE use. So that's, that's the addition. Okay. So dually moved and seconded. So Councillor Stephen, I'll restart your time and you can speak to the amendment. Thank you, Mayor Paterson. Um, so just briefly, it's just, it's changing the word female to all participants. That's, that was the overall intention. Um, we were, I think, a little bit too focused in on the girl's experience. And so we did use the word female and just wanted to acknowledge that, you know, any harm that was done since your apologies, that was not the intention. Um, and we, we are trying to correct it. So obviously we want equitable access for all participants. Um, the second piece of the amendment is touching on what River mentioned in the delegation. And it's talking about using identity base language. So again, just giving staff that direction, um, to, to start working towards that and looking at the policy through, through that different lens. I'll leave it there. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Does anyone want to speak to the amendment Councillor Miss. Thank you, Mr. Patterson, through you. Um, I too had a conversation with River and I really appreciated the, uh, enlightenment. And, uh, I had one lens and it was obviously in a protection mode for, uh, female hockey. And she, or sorry, River brought forward some really good conversation for me. And I really appreciate that. And so this, this amendment captures that in a, in a, in a good context. So, uh, I appreciate the mover. Bringing this forward. And for rivers comments on this to help address this. So well done. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else on the amendment? Councillor Bomb. Thank you. Your worship and through you as a father of a couple girls who play hockey, um, I think this is a great amendment to this. Additionally, as a coach, there's a lot of courses that coaches take on exactly this. And it's something where just to be a coach, you now have to be quite aware of this and you have to manage these situations. So the fact that this is kind of aligning right with the coaching courses and how you, how you can have, you know, more inclusive and equity and all these things along with sports so that we don't inadvertently have people disappear from a sport because they didn't feel part of it. This is, I think the right move to have a policy to really look at that and to correct any language errors that may exist there so that everybody can feel welcome. So thank you for bringing this forward. Okay. We will call the vote unless, because Steven, it's anything else you wanted to add. Okay. Okay. So with that, we will call the vote on the amendment. And that carries. Okay. So we're back to the motion as amended. Is there a Councillor Stephen? Thank you for supporting the amendment. I'll let others speak if they'd like to. And then I have something else to add at the end. Super. Is there anybody else that wishes to speak to the motion. Council famous. Thank her, Pastor. Very quickly. I have coached for a number of years. Close to 15. And this has been a long struggle and battle. To see equity brought forward. In any sort of light in regards to hockey allocation or ice allocations. So, um, I'm super proud that this is moving forward. I know our policy has been a little bit dated and it's always good to review our policies and move them in a good direction. And, uh, for an old retired hockey coach, this is nice to see. So well done. Okay. Der Premier Steven. You have the last word. Thank you Mayor Paterson. Yeah. I just want to sort of end by acknowledging that again, any work in EDI or to SLGPTQ to IA plus space. Like all of this stuff, um, can make those of us who have grown up with privilege and not in this world feel kind of uncomfortable. And I just want to acknowledge that that's real. And it's okay. And I think that as long as we are bringing brave enough to try and we are humble enough to accept when we don't quite get it right. And we are carrying enough to actually listen and learn and try to change. Um, I would just, I would hate for us to have this conversation on this policy. And then for someone to say the word female or male and have someone jump down their throat, like if I don't think that that's the intention of the community at large, I just want to acknowledge that most people will give you grace if you try. So let's, let's, let's mess up. Let's keep trying. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. So with that, we will call the vote on new motion number one as amended. And that carries. Okay. We have no other emotions. Are there any notices of motion. Not Madam Clerk cross for minutes, please. Moved by Councillor Sanek, seconded by Councillor Osterhoff that the minutes of city council meeting 2026 13 held Tuesday, May 19th, 2026 be confirmed. All this in favor. Opposed. And that's carried. Okay. Is there any other business Councillor Tozo. Thank you, Mayor Paterson, through you. I would like to thank the vast majority of Council who all wrote War Red shirts today. Um, tomorrow is the red shirt day of action and accessibility inclusion, just reminding the community to wear red tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Ridge. Thank you. You worship in for you. Um, I just, I just wanted to bring to the attention of Council that, uh, FIFA World Cup is beginning soon. And I am unusually excited about that. Uh, I believe it begins on the 11th and goes through to July and that there will be an event in Superior Market Square on the 27th, uh, that I'm really looking forward to attending with my son. Um, so, um, and I'm sure if there are any other events, we'll hear about them in the near future, but I just wanted to highlight that. Thank you. Great Councillor Chase. Thank you. Um, just be aware. June is Portugal Heritage Month. June 10th is Portugal Day. In the Portuguese community is actually hosting a Portugal Day Festival, Friday and Saturday at Our Lady of Fatima Parish Hall. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Um, Deputy Mayor Steven. Sorry. Thank you Mayor Paterson. One thing I forgot. I'm very excited. Um, so Saturday June 6th from one to 4 p. m. The public is invited to the grand reopening of the Isabelle Turner Library branch. It is awesome. And I cannot wait for everyone to see it. Thank you. Very good. Okay. Madam Clerk asked for bylos, please. Move my Council McLaren seconded by Councillor Glenn that bylaws one through six and eight be given their first and second reading. All this in favor. Opposed. And that's carried. Move by Councillor McLaren Seknet by Councillor Glenn. That bylaws two through eight be given their third reading. All this in favor. Opposed. And that's carried. Motion to adjourn, please. Move by Deputado Mar Stevens. Second by Councillor Sanek. All those in favor opposed. And we are a germs. Thanks very much.