Thank you everybody. Um, this meeting of Ajax Council is being held virtually. This meeting is also being livereamed and may be viewed online at ajax.ca/live. A friendly reminder to all participants to please activate your microphone only when recognized by the chair. To those making submissions as part of a public meeting or during question period, please ensure you clearly state your name. If you decide you no longer wish to speak on to an item on the agenda, please leave the virtual meeting and continue watching the live stream on YouTube should you wish to do so. I'll now call this meeting to order. We would like to begin this meeting by acknowledging the land on which we gather is situated within the traditional and treaty territory of the Missagas. More specifically, the Missagas of Skugog Island First Nation, signatories of the Gunshot Treaty of 1788 and the Williams Treaties of 1923. This land is and will continue to be home to the indigenous peoples. Let us acknowledge the mistakes and traumas of the past through authenticity and support truth and reconciliation. Let us engage and celebrate indigenous communities by being leaders of action in acknowledging the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations towards truth and reconciliation. Let us keep these principles close as we continue towards truth and reconciliation and as we move forward with kindness and respect as a community. Um so for those you notice I am not Mayor Collier. Mayor Collier is currently still on the police board. So we'll switch over once he returns. Can I get a mover for the adoption of minutes through show of hands please? I see councelor Bowerer and councelor Tyler Moore and a seconder. Uh we're going to do both minutes. the regular meeting of April 20th, 2026 and the closed meeting of April 20th, 2026. Seeing nods there. Any questions, comments, concerns? Seeing none, we'll start the vote. And that passes. Thank you everyone. Next runs a question period. Looking at the clerk, is there anyone from the public who wishes to ask a question? Seeing a shake of head, that is now we move on to number five, delegations, presentations, and public meetings. Um, our first delegation is Cynthia Davis, president and CEO of Lacage Health. Are you ready to present and clicking that and go ahead? >> Good afternoon. Thank you. I am ready to present and if somebody could pull up my slide deck please as I'm waiting for the slide deck to uh be shown. I don't know if I'm supposed to be able to see this. Counselor Lee >> uh we're still waiting to get it hooked up. Give us a very quick second please. >> Okay. So while we're waiting with your permission I can get started. So, uh, thank you so much, >> um, for allowing us to present this afternoon. As mentioned, I'm Cindy Davis, president and CEO of Lacage Health. I'm also joined by Nancy Shaw, senior director of public affairs and strategic partnerships, as well as uh, Chris Squire, our CFO and capital redevelopment uh, for Lacage. So, as we're waiting for the slides, um I also want to take the opportunity to extend my thanks uh to Mayor Collier as well as the counselors from uh Ajax for all of your support for the Ajax Pickering Hospital. Uh particularly associated with the Ajax Mayor's Gala. This year, we're uh purchasing automatic drug dispensing units uh which is vital pieces of equipment to improve our safety around medication administration. I also want to do one more shout out for Ride for the Ridge, which is our biking event that all the foundations that support Lacage Health will be participating in on May the 24th. Uh we're starting at Ajax Downs. Uh and I'm happy to have anybody join my team in this event. Next slide, please. Um the next slide really talks about uh Lidge Health and the launch of our campaign uh more than a hospital. This is Lidge Health. We talk about the system of care that we're developing throughout the entire Durham region. One that uniquely positions us within Durham, but also within the context of healthc care delivery in Ontario. And you can see on the map we highlight where we actually have uh hospital facilities as well as uh other locations uh throughout the Durham region where we provide services. And of particular I want to highlight the one uh Jerry Cogland Health and Wellness Center which opened our doors uh two years ago. And this is a center that provides surgical care as well as diagnostics and and primary care for Durham region. Since we've opened, we've actually expanded our patient volume by 38% in just two years. So, this is really helping reduce weight times across the region and helping us leverage um more acute and impatient surgeries at our Ajax Pickering Hospital. It means that uh we can do more activity and leverage all of the facilities that we have. Next slide, please. Um, we also want to talk about the continued investment at our Ajax Pickering Hospital. In particular, the most recent piece of equipment is a new fllororoscopic machine, which is a type of an advanced X-ray machine that can provide more crisp, clearer images that allow physicians to more fastly and accurately diagnose um the images from uh that have been achieved and also reducing access and wait time for treatments if they're required. So, we continue to build on advancing technology throughout all of Lake Reach Health. And this is another piece of vital equipment uh in our family of uh suites that's available at the Ajax Pickering Hospital. Next slide, please. I did want to talk about across Ontario and really across Canada and uh throughout the world, we hear about the continued financial pressures on organizations and health care in particular as we think about our future and how we need to also think about new and innovative ways to sustain health care and the work that we need to do to support growing communities. I wanted to share with you that we have achieved over the past two years $20 million in savings with no impacts on service. And some of that has been a direct result of our stabilization of workforce, particularly the elimination of agency uh nurses. uh through the funding that we received from the provincial government and the um training programs for health care professionals in particular nurses uh not only have we eliminated agencies, we've also um increased um uh sorry decreased our vacancy rate and we've reduced our overtime at the same time. So many things that I'm very proud of. Uh moving forward, we really need to think about how we're going to leverage everything that we can to continue to gain more efficiencies at the same time protecting the quality of work that we're delivering. So we are working with our government partners. There's been a number of uh funding announcements and even today we've had u Minister McCarthy and MPPP Co at our Ashawa location in terms of an increase that we received to our base funding associated with overperformance and physician assistance. And I I just want to again say that the overperformance in particular related to um surgery is definitely associated with our Jerry Coglin Center as part of the Pickering location. Next slide. Um, also wanted to talk about the emergency department and the work that we've been doing over a number of years, but in particular what's happened over the past two years. As we think about the challenges that you hear and continue to hear in terms of overcrowding and high volumes of activity within the emergency department, I'm very proud of the work our team in terms of how they have not only started to address the capacity issues within the emergency department, but at the same time have been able to reduce the alternate level of care patients that are in hospital and that create bottlenecks in our system. So over the past two years, we've h had dedicated actions not only on our emergency departments but also on our flow and access and in one year we've actually reduced our alternate level of care patients from 30% down to 10. And that's been through a coordinated systemwide efforts. And so I have shared before that the emergency department is really a symptom of things that are happening uh in our organization. And so the improvements we see in the emergency department which you can go to the next slide please is really um efforts that have focused on the emergency department as well as on our uh flow generally throughout our entire facilities. So we continue to focus on patient experience and making sure that the flow in and out of our system both in the emergency department and in our general buildings is well coordinated. We're using data to plan uh our staffing to meet the capacity demands and we're focused on the retention and hiring of high quality professionals in our organizations. As I've said in terms of physicians, uh nursing and allied health and support staff within our emergency departments. Next slide, please. And so this is some of our data that we're sharing with you again. Um, and this data is available through public reporting both on our website as well as through the provincial reporting. So, we've been able to reduce the length of time within our emergency department by 36%. We've been able to reduce the time that it takes from when you register to get in front of a provider. Um, and just really proud of what we've done for ambulance offload. The provincial target is 30 minutes. We're actually down below the provincial benchmark now at 21 minutes and that's a 50% improvement for us as well as the number of people that are waiting in our emergency departments at 8:00 in the morning. So, not only have we uh improved the access within our emergency departments, you can also see that we're serving about 270 more impatients per month within the beds that we have throughout Lakeidge Health because of the improvements in flow. Um, so I would be remiss if I didn't do a tremendous thank you to the provincial government in terms of the support that they've given us and to the care teams at Lakeidge Health who really have been focused on this as areas of improvement and one that we should be really proud of. As you hear about the continued struggles within emergency departments uh throughout the province, we have actually made some uh inroads in this and we've gone from our performance uh towards the bottom of the cortile to the top quartile and our team and I talk about becoming number one. Next slide please. So bringing surgery services closer to home and I talked about Jerry Coglin just in terms of the volume but we've actually done 10,000 more procedures because that center is opened and you can see the other statistics that we have in terms of our overall activity uh how we're meeting the provincial benchmark in terms of joint replacements and the number of people that are having these as day procedures as well as our targets for cancer um and uh our newly acquire ired robotic surgery uh program that is also planning to expand in the near future. Next slide. Um to give you an update on our um partnership with Queens University, we're now in year three of our family medicine program. Um in a short period of time, September, we'll be taking our fourth cohort, which will bring us another 20 students. So 80 students when we're at full capacity, we'll have 120 students uh training to become family doctors all scattered throughout Durham region. And we know that um when people are embedded in the community and we get them there quickly within a month of starting in this program, we uh will see better results in terms of retention of these students and start to tackle some of the issues around primary care access. Next slide, please. also wanted to provide an update in terms of where we are with our capital redevelopment. So, we're in uh phase three of the Bowmanville Hospital redevelopment. And on this slide, you'll see a rendition of uh potentially what that building is going to look like. We anticipate that we will be awarding the RFP to the vendor in early fall and start construction thereafter. you'll start to see some activity on that site associated with some uh relocations that we're doing to support u the development of this project but also parking um within our master plan and before government in our pre-cap submission is the uh complex continuing care that would be part of our Pickering location new hospital in Whitby as well as we're engaged in work with uh our clinical teams now to look at clinical programming and servicing that we can bring more quickly on board uh for Ashawa and Ajax Pickering locations. Our intention and overall goal is to continue to build that one system of integrated care to provide as much care as possible within the Durham region so that people do not have to leave Durham region uh for care and services. Next slide, please. One of the other proposals that's before government that we've talked about many times is um mental health and addictions. You can see here the volume of activity that we do throughout Lidge Health. I'm really happy to share that we did a opening of our bridging clinic on April the 1st and that really was built on partnership with the center for addictions and mental health in Toronto. This clinic actually provides a bridge for people that are are admitted to hospital or come through any of our emergency departments. They can come through the bridging clinic and they can stay within that clinic and service line for up to three months while we connect them with the other services that are available either within Lacage Health or other service providers. So just really excited by that launch. Um, we continue to uh advocate for a dedicated space for mental health and addictions emergency and urgent services. And I've shared before that that would be a hub and spoke model that would be available uh to provide coverage throughout the entire Durham region. Next slide, please. I wanted to share with you an exciting opportunity that happened in a partnership with Gran View Kids. Um we actually partnered with Grand View. They moved into their new building in Ajax and within that space was um dedicated locations for a procedure room and recovery room and through our partnership we've actually been able to equip that room and we launched uh our GAP clinic on May the 6th. So the GAP clinic is a general anesthetic procedure uh clinic. it done in partnership with the anesthesia team and O team at Lakeidge Health as well as the physicians and other service providers at Grand View Kids where we will provide sedation uh for kids with special needs to undergo procedures. Um we've outfitted it consistent with what we would do at our Jerry Coglin or O Suites. We also have a fully equipped recovery space that would be consistent with all of the technology we have in within our any of our critical care spaces so that we can uh manage the care in the most safest way possible for children. Um but really excited this has started and we can uh we see this as an opportunity for continued growth and expansion to bring care into the community in a space where uh kids and their families feel very comfortable. Next slide please. We're getting ready to launch our new strategic plan at our annual general meeting which is on June the 11th. Uh we rotate every year through a different location throughout Durham region. This year we'll be in Ashawa. I would encourage uh any of our um counselors, mayors, and community to attend. It's a great evening in terms of celebrating and also sharing highlights of the past year. Next slide, please. We have been involved. I think there might be one more slide. Maybe not. Okay. I had one more slide I thought. Um, oh, here we go. So, I in addition to the work that we've been doing on direct clinical programming and services, we've also done for the second year the women's and health symposium and I know there's many members of council that have attended this session. Um we've now had education um with in partnership with the health care professionals in our organization and people who've participated to over a thousand people. What we recognize is that there's a continued need to talk about women's health and women's education. And so we're getting ready to launch on May the 24th a yearround engagement session where there will be an opportunity for women uh to connect with health care providers and to learn more about women's health prevention, screening and treatment as well as have any women's health related questions answered. So I'm really excited by this. If you scan the QR code, you can join and I would encourage uh councils to support uh dissemination of this information to your residents. So that's it for me. Thank you so much. >> Thank you so much for that presentation. Do any members of council have any questions, comments, concerns? Um council Morn, is your hand up because you wish to speak? If so, do me a favor. Hit the request to speak button, not the end button. Thank you, Council San. >> Thank you, Miss Davis, for your presentation. Um, do you know, because if you don't, it's okay, when peak times are at the Grand View site here in Ajax, when programming is at its highest, when most people are visiting the the building in very general terms, like obviously Monday morning, is that when most staff is there? Is there an answer there? Thank you. That's my question. >> Their activity um I wouldn't have a line of sight in terms of their peak volumes and activity. The project that I talked about is bringing um conscious sedation and sedation to Graan View kids for kids to undergo special procedures and that's really been our involvement with Graan View up to date. >> Okay. No, that that's fine. I I just thought you might might know. Thank you, Chair. I I will take this offline. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Bower. >> Thank you, Chair Lee. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you, Miss Davis, for this excellent presentation. Very interesting, and I'm glad to see the numbers are are improving. So, I just wanted to ask a question. Um it's near the beginning uh one two three fourth slide where you talk about significant actions already taken and one of them is says eliminated agency nurses. So I just wanted to ask what how many does that mean staffing decreased or what does h how was that able to be accomplished with no impact on service? story for us at Lakeidge Health. Um, so you may have heard particularly during the pandemic that there was lots of discussion around agency staff and so that was because we had vacancies within our own organization and in order for us to staff those uh delivery areas, we actually needed to go to an outside company. So an agency where we brought in additional nursing staff in particular in order to manage this through the a number of initiatives and what I would say is both provincial funding additional education the extern program uh with colleges and universities we've actually been able to hire permanent staff to lacage health organization which has been very positive for us and I'll just share with you the extern program which has nursing students come in and work in different capacities uh throughout their training. We have almost a 90% higher rate with the nursing externs. And so we've actually gone from um vacancy rates that have been in excess of the provincial benchmark of 8% to well below that. Um, and I'll share with you, I have, and I apologize if you've heard this at some of my other presentations. When I started at Lidge Health, about 70% of the staff working in our emergency department were agency. We actually have no vacancies within our emergency department right now because we've been able to hire our own staff. So in addition to bringing stability in terms of staffing, there's been no reductions and in actual fact we've been able to save uh money on the other side of it because the agency nurses are such more of a cost to our organization compared to our own staff. So just a really great story and I would say to you there are still organizations in Ontario through no fault of their own that would continue to have agency staff within their organization. But I'm really proud of the fact that for more than two years we've not been able we've not needed to do that. >> That's wonderful. Thank you for that answer. Um really good to hear. Thank you, Chair Lee. That was my question. >> Thank you, Miss Davis. Do you want to just kind of stay on and then uh we don't have to kind of keep letting uh hit the request to speak, please? >> Thank you. And just don't touch. We'll keep you there. And now we have Regent H Crawford. >> Thank you for your report again. You know what I'm going to ask you to do? You want I need you to brag about your ratings. >> Yes. So, um, when I talk about our emergency department and really the work that's happened, it's all emergency averages across the board. So, the four emergency departments that we have at Lakeidge Health, we went from the bottom quartile to today, I actually heard we're in the fifth ranking in the province in terms of the metrics that we have to track. So, the volume of activity, how fast we get people in front of a doctor or nurse practitioner, how fast we get diagnosis, get people admitted into a bed, discharged home, and there's a number of other things like ambulance offload. Um, we're now sitting in the top quartortile and as I said earlier, our team is so proud of the work that they've done and we've set ambitious plans for ourselves to be number one in the province and I know we're going to get there. >> Well done. I just wanted you to brag a little. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other members of council wish to speak? I see councelor Henry. >> Hi there. Thank you so much for your presentation. You always do such a great job. We appreciate that. >> To all our friends watching at home, I just want to um just go over this quickly. Uh we as council um we have no say in the hospital. Correct. That's right. >> All right. So, um, and and the reason I say that, it's not to diminish any of your work or your presentation, but sometimes we get, uh, members of the public calling and and, you know, asking why we can't change this, why we can't change that. I always point out that we don't sit on the board uh, as a municipal council. We do not regulate or govern you. um we have no say in these things and you folks are your your uh person would be your MPP that would be the governance the province correct >> yes correct and I mean you don't sit on our board um and you're not directly involved in operations but we certainly work in partnership with our municipalities because at the end of the day we want to provide the best care and service to the residents of Durham region 100%. 100%. It's always the goal. I have I have uh nurses in my family. Always the goal. So, thank you for coming today. I just I wanted to give that little bit of information to our residents just so they're understanding when we redirect them back to the province at times. So, councelor Henry, if I could add one other piece before uh residents get directed back to the province. I mean if it's big issues around overall health care but um what I would say is our organization is committed to providing the highest quality of care to residents of Durham region and we have um you know departments within our organization that would be happy to link with anybody throughout Durham region uh around better understanding their care experiences or any suggestions for improvement for us and that information is available on our website uh through our patient experience team. Um and I would encourage people to reach out to us. The only way that we can continue to make improvements is through obtaining feedback from people that have availed of services throughout Lakeidge Health. >> Understood. Thank you. Thank you very much. I don't get a lot of calls, but I I just want to have that little piece of clarification so folks understand, right? And it's I I have to say that my personal experience um as of late has been very good. So, thank you for everything. >> You're very welcome. And if I could just share that um we're absolutely committed to being a learning organization. I know we have dedicated health care professionals in our teams. Uh sometimes through no fault of their own, we can't deliver what's expected in that day. Uh, but we really do want to hear from people so that we can continue to improve and I would encourage people to reach out to us. >> That's good input. Thank you so much. Have a good afternoon. >> Thank you, Councelor Henry. Any other further members of council? Seeing none, um, thank you very much for your delegation again and we will, I'm sure we'll see you again. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Um, to council, our apologies. Um the moving and the uh of the adoption of minutes didn't go through on the on our side. Just a bit of technical difficulties. So um just once again um moved by councelor Bower, seconded by councelor Tyler Morren uh items 3.1 3.2 uh to be moved. No questions comes concern. We're going to start the vote again one more time. Okay. And that worked. Seeing the clerk. Yes. Thank you. Okay. We're on to item 5.2 delegation proclamation for aging well month. We have Moninder Nahar, community relations coordinator. Um and Ala live community engagement associate. So you just want library. Go ahead. >> Thank you. We'll just wait for our PDF to show up on the screen. Okay. Good afternoon, Mayor Collier, members of council, town staff, and Ajax residents. Thank you for welcoming us here today. My name is Minder Nahar, and I'm one of the community recreation coordinators with the recreation culture department, and I oversee our older adults and seniors portfolio. June 2026 marks the 42nd anniversary of seniors month in Ontario, which we here in Ajax have coined as aging well month. During the month of June, we recognize the role that older adults and seniors play in our community and the contributions of their life of their time and talents that add to the vibrancy of our community and the importance of being leaders and mentors to younger generations. To celebrate Aging Well Month, we have put together a number of free activities for those ages 55 and up taking place throughout the month of June, including the popular seniors barbecue, which will be held on Tuesday, June 2nd at the Aussie Recreation Center in the community hall and the fairground space. We'd like to mention our appreciation to the Ministry of Seniors and Accessibility for their ongoing support through the Seniors Active Living Center funding. Their support has allowed us to offer many free programs, events, and services, including those during aging well month. >> Hello, I'm Elaine Lever, a community engagement associate with the Ajax Public Library, and I'm also happy to be here today to proclaim June as aging well month in Ajax. So, we have a full month of activities planned, and we're excited to bring back some popular events such as armchair travel, cultural cinema, and the cooking demo, workshops such as line dancing, art, needle felting, our trivia night, plus many more. Just to end off, please note that registration for some of these activities is required. Registration opens tomorrow, Wednesday, May the 20th at 9:00 a.m. Full details about the information shared today can be found on ajax.ca aging wellmonth 2026 or at ajax library.ca. A physical copy is also available at the information desks at any of our community centers or library branches. Staff at these locations will be available to assist you with registering for these programs. Thank you, Elaine. Thank you everyone again for your time today. We respectfully request that June 2026 be proclaimed as aging well month. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns from council um regarding aging well month? Seeing none, then allow me to um do the proclamation. Sure. >> And then I'll hand over to Mayor Collier. >> The virtual proclamation at least. Thank you very much. Uh this just says that the corporation of the town of Ajax hereby proclaims June 2026 as agent well month present on behalf of Mayor Collier and Ajax Council. Congratulations. Um one more thing before Mayor Collier joins in. Um, councelor Bower has politely let me know that I forgot to ask for any disclosures of pecunary interest. Thankfully, no decisions were made. So, does do any members of council have any disclosures of puny interest? Seeing none, you've been a great audience. Don't forget to tip your waitress. I'll now hand it over to Mayor Collier. >> Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you, uh, Deputy Mayor Lee. My apologies. My, uh, Durham Regional Police Service Board meeting ran a little late. So, thank you for, uh, covering. Moving on to the next item on the agenda which is aging well month. We have the delegation for temporary use of 10 2030 Lowers Crescent Robert McKillan senior planner the big area group. >> Uh can you hear me? Okay, >> we can hear you. >> Excellent. I'm just going to share my screen. There we go. Okay. Uh, good afternoon again. Uh, thank you very much for the opportunity to join you today. Uh, my name is Robert McQuillin. I'm a registered professional planner with the Bigly Area Group. Um, and we represent the owner of 10, 20, and 30 Blowers Crescent, uh, located just to the north of the intersection of Salem Road and Carrison Drive. Um so as council knows uh in February of this year official plan and zoning bylaw amendments were passed to permit the development of three residential towers positioned on top of a podium of commercial spaces, pedestrian prominads and gathering spaces and parking. Um and these uh this development would cover uh all properties. We're currently in the process of pursuing an application for site plan approval in order to eventually advance to the building permit stage. Um so the site plan approval uh process requires us to undertake a number of detailed studies to demonstrate that the ultimate uh proposed development can be adequately accommodated on the properties. Um which given the scale of this development will take some time to prepare. Um so as a result we're proposing uh an interim land use to activate the subject site while we under uh take the necessary work to achieve site plan approval. So the proposed interim land use is an open air vendors market. The idea is that rather than just having vacant land here for the period that we work on site plan approval, a market be established to make use of the land uh for the Ajax Ajax community. The market would operate uh beginning in the spring and ending in the fall um and would take place on Saturdays and Sundays and would otherwise be vacant uh during the week um in in the offseason. uh tents would be put up and taken down each day uh of the market uh by the vendors themselves um and would be managed by the the site's owner. The vendors are still to be determined at this stage, but anticipated to sell a variety of wares uh with the possibility that some food vendors may be considered as well. Um the owner has really stressed that he is committed to work with the town in the vendor selection process to make sure uh that the right vendors are um using the market uh on the site. The other thing is the owner is committed uh that 5 to 10% of all sales generated at the market will be donated to local charitable organizations um of Mayor Cullier and council's selection. Um, I also just want to note that this is specifically a proposal for an intram market use for uh the period that we're working on the site plan approval. Um, no events or live performances or stages would be permitted here and they're not proposed. So, this is the site plan that we've been working on and we've been collaborating with staff on its preparation. Um, and I'll just walk you through some of the key elements. Um so starting on uh the side of the site that fronts onto Salem Road which is highlighted in green here. Uh this is gathering spaces. So picture uh picnic tables and places to spend time to activate uh the property's frontage along Salem Road leading into the market stall areas in the red. Uh we're showing about 160 stalls in this uh iteration uh which will be subject to demand ultimately uh once the market takes place itself. Um, we've added in some uh mobile restrooms at the north end of the site and then we've tucked the parking in the rear uh from Blower's Crescent so that it doesn't take up a lot of visual space when when you arrive at the site. Um, and the parking rate is proposed at a rate of 19 square meters um or sorry 19 spaces per square meters of vendor space uh which was established in collaboration with planning staff. Um, so the next steps on this proposal is that we'll be working through a site plan approval process specifically for the market. Uh, just to make sure that the nuts and bolts of the the site proposal work correctly. Uh, making sure that the site uh layout uh flows well, making sure that we have uh an appropriate parking design, things of that nature. Um, ultimately our goal is to advance the the fullsome development plan of the mixeduse uh development on the site. Um but understanding that that's going to take some time to get those shovels in the ground due to the scale of the work that's required uh in the interim uh we feel that this is really an appropriate activation of the land to benefit the Ajax community in the meantime. Um and in advance we'd just like to say that we really appreciate council's uh vision for this innovative interim land use and uh we appreciate your support uh today. That uh concludes my remarks. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> Thank you. First counselor I see in the speaking list is councelor Crawford. Councelor Crawford, please go ahead. >> Thank you very much for your report. Your your report actually answers a lot of questions that I had had uh hadn't seen it before. So that that's great. Um I guess my my biggest concern would have been parking because uh it's not a walkable like I couldn't walk there. Uh based on where they are situated, none of the community could walk to it. So, it will be basically you have to drive and so um you're suggesting 183 parking spots. Is that is that what I'm hearing? >> That's correct. Yeah, that's what uh we're showing on the site plan right now. Um that parking rate is consistent with the retail parking rate in the zoning bylaw which was um advised by planning staff. So through the site plan approval process, that's those are the kind of details that we'll be working through really specifically to make sure that the number of parking spaces versus the number of stalls are appropriate given that this is kind of bit of an island. It's not particularly walkable. Um and there is a possibility uh given that the the owner owns other properties on Blower's Crescent that if we needed to expand additional parking to another site, we could do that. from a planning approvals process, it's simpler and more straightforward to accommodate it on the site that we have here. So, that's what we're intending to do ultimately. >> Perfect. So, um I'm assuming then that you're speaking with the medical office beside you. Uh like literally on like right beside you. I know that because it's my doctor's office. So, >> yes. Yeah. So, uh I did hear that Dr. Sharief is uh many counselors doctor. So, um, we haven't spoke to him specifically about the market yet, but I did speak to the owner about that, um, just recently, and he said that we're definitely committed to collaborating with the neighbors. In this case, it's Dr. Sharief to make sure that the proposal is sensitive to the doctor's office next door. >> Because if you don't, he will be speaking to me. So, I guarantee you. >> Okay. We'll get to him first. >> Okay. All right. Thanks very much. Appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Not seeing anybody else in the speakers box right now. Um, parking was not my my major um concern. My major concern is time. I want to make sure and there's a motion coming later on in this, but the developer and who I spoke with when he first came to me with this proposal knows absolutely that this is for a 2-year period. No longer. We are not um looking to extend the development process at all. Just I recognize that site plan and those approvals do take time. So you want to have a per a temporary use for the land, but I have your assurance. This is for a two-year period, two-year only. Your client will not appear before us asking for an extension. And this is in no way going to slow down the development from moving ahead. >> Yes, exactly. And this has been specifically the spirit of our conversations offline. The ultimate plan is to advance the mixeduse development uh in the time that we've been allotted because we are on a tight timeline to do that as well. Understanding that it's a bit of a process to get site plan approval. This is an interim land use permitted for a fixed period of time and after that fixed period of time uh the intention is that the full development buildout will take place. >> Two years is the fixed term of time. Correct. >> Yes. I actually understood uh that the the motion would be um 18 months with a possibility for an 18-month extension and at that point it would be cut off. Um but that was in my conversations with planning staff separately. So it's up to council's discretion in terms of what that motion specifically permits. >> Okay. I'll have to go back and read the motion, but um my understanding in speaking with the developer and now having you online seeing it publicly was that this is for a fixed period. and I just didn't want there to be any misunderstanding. >> Mhm. >> I see council Henry in the speakers list. Maybe she's going to correct me on what's in the motion. >> Councelor Henry, >> I am not going to correct you, Mr. Mayor. I am not even looking at that pony of the motion right now. I'll I'll I'll let that be figured out later in whatever you think is best, we'll go with that. Um, I just wanted to talk about um, uh, a conversation with regards to um, you've stated before to me at least that this would not be an a place for a concert stage on site like there's not going to be concerts, things like that. I just wanted to make sure that was very clear with what we're talking about today >> because this is not competition for our fairgrounds. >> No, exactly. There's no appetite for uh events here or for a stage on the owner's part and the temporary use bylaw um wouldn't permit uh event space or you know events taking place the erection of a stage. Um so that's not proposed and it's not um included in the proposal at all. >> That's all I need to hear. Thank you so much. I'll let Mayor call your work on the rest of how long we're allowing this for. All right. I I'm good with um what whatever his recommendations are on that one. Thank you. >> No, I confirmed it's two years in the motion, so we're good. Uh thank you, Robert, for appearing before us today. There's nobody else in the speakers list. >> Thank you very much for your time today. >> Thank you. Get back on the schedule here. There we go. Next delegation we have community affairs and planning committee report item 5.2 Doug Glass Ajax resident. Mr. Glass, please go ahead. You have five minutes. >> Hi, can you hear me? >> We can hear you. We can't see you. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. Uh good afternoon, Mayor, members of council. I want to speak today about the future in focus report from the May cap meeting. Uh council reports like these are not simple planning discussions uh for information only. They really do shape the town's long-term assumptions on infrastructure, capital spending, debt, property taxes, and ultimately taxpayer risk. During that meeting, the consultant uh stated that the town assumptions are built off a 2015 envision Durham population forecast of 1.3 million people. But he also said very clearly that the government of Ontario has a much lower forecast for Durham of 1.06 million residents, which is roughly 20% lower. For years, I've heard this council state that Ajax is expected to align with the provincial planning frameworks and growth policies. And at the March 2nd special council meeting, uh the mayor said the following. We follow guidelines that are set out by the province. So, I ask why are we not using the province's lower stress tested model and has uh this uh town staff prepared a model using the province's 1.06 million forecast? I would encourage council to ask for that analysis to be done and made public given the significant impact to the town and taxpayers. I do not oppose growth. I seek to understand the pace, scale, and financial assumptions behind what you are proposing. Which leads me to the employment growth and taxation because this was also discussed at the CAP meeting. For years, residents were told that economic growth and employment expansion in Ajax would shift more of the tax burden away from homeowners. There was even a goal to reduce the residential share to below 80%. So, how have we done so far since that plan forecast? In 2019, the residential share was 85.4%. Now, in 2026, with last week's uh uh 2026 rate report released, the residential share is roughly 84%. So, in spite of significant warehouse growth with additions like Amazon, Ajax residents are nowhere near the promised 80% or less goal. Why does that matter? At the CAP meeting, the consultant spoke clearly about the importance of protecting Ajax's remaining employment lands. In March, at a special council meeting, I asked council why you were supporting a development that would convert employment lands to residential. And I was told with increased density, we will be adding more residents and this will split up the pie on taxes and should take some of the pressure off. Increasingly, the spending to accommodate much more residential density is not the same as employment growth and jobs. In 2023, Ajax 10-year capital projection forecasted 520 million in spending over 10 years. This past December, the 2026 budget 10-year forecast was 602 million. So in four years between 2023 and 2026 there was an increase in about 16%. But last week with the release of the financial sustainability plan on page two the 10year spending grow to grew to a whopping 740 million. That is 138 million increase in spending in just 5 months. I want to repeat that. 602 million in December, 740 million only 5 months later. How does a 10-year capital plan grow by 138 million in just 5 months? And at what point does this council stop and ask, are we realistically asking taxpayers to sustain more than they can handle? And now there is even discussion about deferring development charges for some tax classes for up to 15 years. I think Ajax is biting off more than residents can chew. Aggressive spend growth is not a substitute for protecting taxpayers. In closing, I'd like to ask all members of council the following three questions. One, why is Ajax using a population forecast that is 20% higher than the province? Two, what percentage of the town's overall property tax burden will resident taxpayers carry in 10 years? and three, how does a 10-year capital plan grow by 138 million in only 5 months? I look forward to your reply to my three questions. Thank you. Thank you. Not seeing any uh questions in the speakers box from any members of council. I believe the next delegation is yours as well. delegation general government committee report items 4.4 and 6.2. Please go ahead. You have another five minutes. >> Uh thank you mayor and councel. I want to speak to the financial sustainability plan and the uh annual investment report from last week's general government meeting. I'll start with investments. Ajax manages a quarter billion dollar investment portfolio that is increasingly playing an important role in supporting the town's financial position with much of the leadership being done by the mayor. Last year I asked this question and unfortunately I didn't get an answer so I'm going to ask it again. What succession and knowledge transfer has taken place to move leadership of our investment strategy from the mayor and towards council? This is critical because the mayor is leaving office in 5 months. Ajax residents I think deserve a full explanation because the 2025 investment report doesn't provide any details on this. The larger issue I want to uh discuss is the infrastructure levy and the town's financial sustainability plan. Residents need to understand what is being proposed and how dramatically this discussion has changed in only four years. Most residents do not know this, but over the past four years, in addition to the regular property taxes residents pay to operate the town, council embedded an additional infrastructure levy of up to 2% within our tax bill each year. This 2% levy was approved by council in January 2023 as part of the 2023 budget. On slide 24 of that presentation, the town showed a chart titled closing of the funding gap with new infrastructure levy. That slide stated the following. Implement a 2% infrastructure levy from 2023 to 2026 and then a 1% levy from 2027 onward. The line graph on the chart clearly shows with these measure the funding gap would narrow over time. Then in 2025, 2 years after it was approved, at an asset management presentation, staff again stated the following. 2% until 2026 and 1% thereafter. So this was not just an old assumption from 2023. It was policy as recent as 1 year ago. Now four years later, with the release of the 2026 financial sustainability plan, page three states the following. The 2% infrastructure levy will continue to fund asset management needs. I ask what happened to the promised 1% levy for 2027 from 2023 and 2025. Unlike both that time, residents are no longer clearly being told how long this 2% levy is expected to continue. It's not mentioned in the financial sustainability report. Given that this is now embedded within a 10-year financial plan, it is reasonable for residents to conclude that Ajax may now be facing another decade of 2% infrastructure levies built into future property taxes. What was positioned as a temporary corrective funding tool is now looking like a permanent tax layer. What has changed is simple. Like my previous delegation showed, the town was very has very aggressive development plans and we are being asked to pay for it upfront. How do I know this? Why else would the town be considering deferring development charges for some tax classes for up to 15 years? We are not the guarantors of all of this development growth and financial risk. Managing 740 million of expansion all on the backs of taxpayers is wrong and these plans need to be scaled back significantly. Stagger major growth over 20 years instead of 10. Use the province's population forecast, but do whatever you can to find more reasonable and responsible ways to protect residents and the town. Last week, all seven of you approved receiving this report. Uh do not endorse it today. residents cannot keep being the financial backs stop every time uh assumptions become more aggressive. And I want to uh ask council one direct question. In 2023, residents were told this levy would help close the funding gap and drop to 1% after 26. So why are residents now being shown another 2% with no clear timeline for how long it will remain in place? Lastly, I want to speak to current debt. We have 27 million in between taxup supported and DC debt. But the proposal on page 26 of the financial sustainability plan shows 67 million in new taxup supported debt and 285 million in new DC debt. Growthfunded debt works best in strong economic times. This isn't the case right now. What happens if the town takes on this debt, even DC debt, and a project or a developer fails? Isn't this debt still the responsibility of residents? So, let's be sure to make it clear that there are taxpayer risks by adding this much significant debt and continued high levies. I look forward to hearing from council, particularly those who are planning to return to tackle this issue over the next four years. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Glass. Her Lee, I see your name in the speaker's list. Please go ahead. >> Sorry, they still have me as the um chair mode. Thank you, chair. Um I think um again, I I'm sure our director of finance will correct anything I'm saying incorrectly, but I think I would hazard to guess that the difference between 2023 and the present in terms of any sort of um um levy is probably due to um our dwindling casino revenues as well as our uh which are dwindling at a faster rate than we probably anticipated back in 2023. as well as um I'm sure um the Ellexon dividends that we've now kind of um you know changed the structure of um due to you know helping e our utility kind of function. So, I mean that's off the top of my head and those are pretty concrete examples of you know that probably make up that 1% but um >> no can I >> sorry go ahead >> that still is only you know even in the best of times casino revenues and alexon were never ever that high to justify 670 uh million in new taxup supported debt and 285 million in new DC debt. I think you're asking specifically just why the >> folks this is not a debate Lee question for the delegation please. >> Sorry I you know what I was you know giving an answer as to the best my ability. So um yeah I will leave it at that. Thank you chair. >> Welcome councelor Tyler Mo. You're next. >> Uh thank you worship. My question is uh through you to the chair of finance and the our treasurer uh as per Mr. Mr. Glass, another more and this is questions to the delegate, please. >> Got it. Thank you. I'll ask later uh if I have an opportunity. >> Well, both of these items are coming up in the agenda, so that would be the appropriate time. Not seeing anybody else in the speakers list. Uh thank you, Mr. Glass, for your delegation. >> Thank you. >> Moving on to the next item 5.6, 6 public meeting regional official plan amendment application ROA 26 A2 official plan application 2685 and zoning bylaw amendment Z 726 60 blowers crescent and we have I'm sorry I don't have the name of who is here representing um this developer I will just open since This is a directive that this was a group that approached me after we did 10, 20, and 30 Blowers Crescent looking to do a similar type development on their property. That development is here before you today. Um, hold on. Let me open the floor here. David Cherenko, are you here representing the developer? >> I am. You're >> okay. Please go ahead. Uh, I have a presentation that should be available to be on your screen. I can upload it if not. >> Hi, David. We did not receive a presentation for today. Um, are you able to share it yourself or would you like to send it to us via email? >> I'm happy to share my screen. Thank you. >> No problem. Sorry, David. So, you should see an option there to choose which screen you'd like to share. Uh, do you see an option within the meeting platform? No. Okay, give us one moment. Sorry, I'm just looking. I wondered if anybody had an electronic copy. I have a hard copy here. >> We're just getting access to one, Mr. Chair. Sorry. Electronic copy that can be shared with council. >> Okay, perfect. We're ready to share now. One moment. Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much. Uh good afternoon, uh your worship, members of council. My name is Dave Cherzenko. I am a principal at Bowfields. Um we're located at 3 Church Street, uh sweet 200 in Toronto. uh we are the uh planners for the applicants uh with respect to the lands municipally known as 60 blowers crescent uh in the town of Ajax. Um before you today is um applications for a regional official plan amendment to redesate the subject site from employment areas to community areas. uh as well as an official plan amendment to redesate the lands from prestige employment to mixed commercial corridor in the Ajax official plan. Uh which is also accompanied by a zoning bylaw amendment application um to reszone the subject site uh from prestige employment uh to local commercial with sight specific exceptions. Um the next slide please. I think we've changed documents. Sorry. Great. Thank you. Um so the proposal includes uh two mixeduse uh towers with heights of 30 stories um which will sit at top uh sixstory podiums. Um each of these towers uh will face Salem uh and uh occupy the uh north and southern portions of the subject site at the northwest corner um of the subject site um and uh which is also uh prominently located at the corner of Blower's Crescent and Salem Road is a proposed 400 square meter urban park uh or urban square. Um and uh in the middle of the subject site uh would be a new midblock um pedestrian connection which will serve uh area residents and uh employment um with outdoor amenities. Uh in total, the proposed development would include uh just over 58 uh,000 square meters of gross floor area. And that will include uh over 2,500 square m of non-residential space. And this is an important number because uh the subject site was approved in 2014 for the same amount uh 2500 m of uh commercial space uh which will be entirely replaced in the proposal. Um and in addition to uh that uh replacement of uh 2,500 m of non-residential space um approximately 622 new dwelling units will be um offered as part of the mixeduse development uh which will include uh just over 62 of those units as affordable housing units. Uh next slide please. Uh here you can see the proposal um looking southwest across the subject site. Um the two 30story uh buildings in the forefront are the proposal as well as the uh three buildings you can see in behind in white is the approval at 10 to 30 blowers crescent. Um, as you can see, uh, at the, um, uh, lower bot right corner is where, uh, the location of the urban square would be, uh, as well as, um, the, uh, arrangement of the two towers fronting on Salem, uh, together with, uh, increased setbacks along Salem Road for landscaping and pedestrian circulation. Uh, next slide, please. Uh here's a bird's eyee view looking west. Uh so you can see um just to the west the uh 40 blowers crescent medical office building. Um but through the proposal uh you can see that midblock connection for pedestrians um and uh the outdoor amenity spaces on the roof of the six-story podium. um all occupying the space between the two towers uh which will provide for uh a great deal of uh individual amenities uh for area residents uh as well as activate the atgrade retail um which will accommodate that uh 2500 square meters of non-residential space. Next slide please. So, as part of these applications, um the provincial planning statement provides for um uh removal of employment lands to qualify um to meet uh certain provincial um uh criteria under policy 2.8.2.5. Um and as part of this uh applications uh we have prepared the necessary supporting studies to satisfy those criteria. Uh first an employment land uh conversion study was prepared by uh parcel economics. uh and in accordance with uh the provincial policy that's applicable um it recognized that the removal of this particular site represents less than 1% of the town's vacant uh employment areas uh and would not be required over the long term for the town's um employment requirements. uh a land use compatibility study was uh completed by SS Wilson Associates and it also uh concluded that um the surrounding employment uses would not be not negatively impacted uh or their long-term functionality or viability be impacted. Uh third uh a functional servicing report was prepared by Croer and Associates uh and that that uh report concluded that there was sufficient uh municipal servicing. So that's water, wastewater and storm water uh to support the development. And then finally, my office prepared a land use planning justification report uh which included a comprehensive review of that policy context and supported the mixeduse development by um providing for that 2,500 m of non-residential space replacement as was previously approved. in addition to providing 622 uh dwelling units and about 62 of those being affordable housing units. Uh and in conclusion, uh I just wanted to thank uh the mayor and staff um and council uh for considering the applications and moving this project forward in the short term. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you for your presentation. I do have a few council the questions. Council Crawford, you're first. >> Thank you, your worship. Um, so it's are we no longer going to be attracting employment? Like you seem to believe that we don't need employment anymore that uh all we all we're going to do is build buildings for people to live in. It sounds noble like don't get me wrong but uh your assumption is that we don't need to um leave room for employment to come to Ajax >> uh through your your worship. Uh that's that's not actually um my conclusion on supporting this application. So, the subject site was approved in 2014 for a commercial plaza with uh 2,500 square meters of uh retail space. Um it's just under one hector in size, which is not an appropriate uh lot size for the type of employment that you would see, for example, on the um east side of Salem Road. um it's not of sufficient scale to accommodate those type of manufacturing uh facilities. Uh and therefore the previous use as a retail plaza is what was going to be um the employment nature of this site. And what we're doing is replacing all of that retail function in the proposal, but adding the residential uses on top to support the housing targets for the city. >> Okay, I understand. >> I understand. >> Let me jump in here for a sec. I just reached around and pulled pulled this out with the stats. One thing I've been very careful of in all of the directors we brought forward is to make sure we're maintaining that 50 jobs per net hectare minimum requirement for for the because I absolutely recognize that we do not have enough employment lands to meet our targets. But at the same time, air has value and we also have a housing crisis. So in in these that we've approved, we put wording in the bylaws and the zoning to make sure that that threshold of 50 jaws per net hectare is still maintained in most cases like the one we approved two over from this. Well, even the one next to this is about I think eight or 10 times more than if we just allowed a singlestory commercial plaza. So this is this is still maintaining that commercial use and retail use in this case but also adding you know the 2530 floors or the 622 units of uh a residential as well. So multi-use um but maintaining employment. Just thought I'd mention that. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. I understand that. Um, so the property literally beside you is saying that they don't have uh demand or or waiting through the site plan application. So, they're going to be moving that property into uh a temporary uh I don't I can't remember exactly what the wording was. So, uh do you see the demand as more or are you just ready to go through this because the zoning needs to be changed? the the purpose of this is just to change the zoning and you're not going to come back to us and say we want to have an entertainment center too >> through you Mr. uh worship. Uh no, we're we're actively pursuing a site plan application. We have an entire development team that's already uh ready to go, including ourselves. Herreri Ponini architects um and the other consultants that you had seen on the screen. Uh all of them are just waiting for uh this council decision to get going on the site plan application. So I >> we're ready to go. >> I like that. I like ready to go. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor Collier. >> You're welcome. Um just just to add the other one 10 2030 isn't because they're delaying. It's just a filler. Um while they're going through the site plan process, it's not delaying in any in any way. Um I don't expect to see something out of this group. I think you guys are are maybe a little closer. This might not be quite as complex. Uh Councelor Lee, there you go. you are next. >> Uh mayor, why don't you stay on because uh my question is regarding employment. So generally our goal is 50 jobs per net hector. Um how many jobs are we providing here then? Was it a 100? Did I see that somewhere? Or what is our final number >> through you Mr. Mayor? Uh just over a hundred. So it would be 100 uh jobs per hectare here. So double the the 50 jobs per hector target. And really the type of jobs it's um just based on what you were saying we were expecting kind of a plaza before a retail plaza. So really the type of jobs wouldn't be sacrificed. We're not losing office jobs in replace for like a fast food. Correct. Like it the type of jobs could generally remain the same. >> Generally they would be the same. Yes. >> Okay. Now um it says 10% um affordable housing and that's great. I'm just wondering why we only are um why are we only doing 10%. Like realistically from 2014 to now, so 12 years later, we've this is a fundamental change of the zoning of the, you know, the scale of the project. And so it's like um you know, like I you'll ultimately benefit quite substantially from, you know, this reszoning. And I'm more than happy to support that. But also, you know, as the mayor mentioned previously, there is a housing crunch right now that um why aren't we able to secure more um affordable housing? >> Uh through you, Mr. Mayor. Um the 10% uh affordable housing is a minimum. Um as the process unfolds and as the market demand um is better known, that number could increase. But what we're securing today is uh a minimum requirement for 10%. Um and of course that minimum could always be exceeded. >> Okay, that's fair. Uh sorry, go ahead, Mayor. >> I'll just I'll just add CHC has really tightened up their lending and and I assume this will be a rental building, but I don't think we asked that question. But CHC has actually been been quite tough on developers that have tried to go higher because what happens when you go higher um I'll use 101 Pat Bailey Square the matrix building as an example because I just have those numbers on top of my head. It was 112 units of which I think 5% was affordable that represented $1.4 million over 10 years is a significant amount of rent reduction over time. And when the finance companies look at this, it affects the business model because rents have decreased. Um, there's more inventory. And by having that higher number than 10% of affordable, it it kind of is almost the tipping point for even getting funding on a proposal. So, that's kind of why we've been we've been looking at that number. >> Okay. Well, I mean, I appreciate Mr. Chair Zenko's response of this is a minimum because ultimately you know we we do need to factor affordability in a lot of these decisions. Um and then um do we have the mix again I'm sure it's in front of me somewhere but the amount of uh one two threebedroom units available will there be more than two-bedroom units to accommodate larger families? >> Yes through you Mr. Mayor. Um a minimum of 10% of the uh 622 units will be three-bedroom units. Um and there will be um a a mix of ones, twos, and threes. Those numbers will get more specific as we get to the site plan stage, but we are committing to 10% of the units being three-bedroom or familysiz units. >> Great. I appreciate all the responses. Thank you very much. Looking forward to support. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Henry. You are next. Please go ahead. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so if this does get approved, we've received some feedback, I believe, from the um doctor's office adjacent uh to the property and you'll be looking into that, correct? You'll be making sure that that that you're you're meeting their criteria, their needs not to encroach upon their property in any way >> through you, Mr. Mayor. AB: Absolutely, Councelor Henry. Um there will be a construction management plan that will be provided at the site plan stage uh which will show fencing um uh traffic controls, uh construction management of vehicles entering and exiting the site. Uh all to protect uh surrounding developments including 40 Blowers Crescent. And when when this development is completed, will you have doctor's offices on site in in competition with the existing doctor's office? Is that one of the proposed uses? >> Um through you, Mr. Mayor. It it would be a permitted use just like it is at uh 40 blowers Crescent. Um it I can't tell you one way or another what those uses will be. um it will be subject to market sounding. Um what I can say is uh I don't necessarily agree that more medical space would be at all in competition with the medical office building at 40 blowers Crescent. I think the more uh medical office space the community has the better. >> I tend to agree with that. But I'm just um choosing my words very carefully here because I know that uh Dr. Sharief might not feel the same way. Um, I want to ask one last question. Um, more I think of the mayor andor our staff is that now that we're changing uh the use in this area so much and we know that to the west we have UPS and some other um industrial development and to the east uh more uh commercial style development. I want to make sure as I ask this with all the new developments, zoning we're changing that this will not encroach on the operation time of the existing commercial businesses to have apartments in this area. So therefore, if complaints come in about the operation time, we're not as a town going to go back to the existing operators of the commercial use properties and say you have to adjust because you are interfering or bothering the residents across the street. because this is made to be commercial area and we're changing this. So, I'm just asking for those asurances. >> Don't look at me. I think that question is to you, David. >> Who do I look at? >> I through you, Mr. Mayor. Um, could I ask Sorry, Councelor Henry, could you reframe the question? I I'm having a hard time. I think just to give >> so currently this property >> I was just going to say Nancy I believe that if a new residential comes in and there's an existing heavy commercial the new residential could could affect the operation of the heavy commercial with regards to sound emissions those types of things I believe that is is the way it works in this case um and again I've been careful with these are smaller parcels. These aren't, you know, great big properties like the Amazon property or the one just on the east side of Salem Road across the road. These which is which is warehouse space by the way. So it it's is indoors. We've been careful in bringing these forward to make sure these are in areas where we're not right next to any type of noxious type um existing commercial, heavy commercial, big emitters, smell, waste facilities, those types of things to avoid those types of conflicts. Council, >> I I'm not worried about that, Mr. Mayor, that part of it. What I am worried about, I'll give you an example of my own husband who will complain about, you know, uh, backing up of trucks and I can hear it when I'm sleeping and I'm like, and you know, um, they have a right to operate in this time period, right? So, this is what I'm saying is I don't want to see and I remember Mr. Romanowski about a year or so ago made this very specific point when we spoke about Carrison and Salem and putting something right next to um what's the development on the corner there >> southeast corner the Ishmail family on the southeast corner it was one of our to the municipal comprehensive review >> applic um a development that has housing next to a commercial style area like that that it could affect the operation of the commercial style area if there's complaints that come in. And that's my concern with this entire area because we're getting very heavy into the housing in this area. And I agree with you, Mr. Mayor, like it's small parcels and I'm not really opposed to having the housing there on top of it. It's open air. It it's it's dead zone. Do something with it. Great. Not opposed to that. I am protecting my existing businesses. That's my job. I'm supposed to do that. So, what's going to protect that? >> Through you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so, as I mentioned, there was a land use compatibility study that was done in support of the application that's actually required under the provincial policy that applies to removing employment lands. And through that land use compatibility study, they explore air and noise um impacts from surrounding developments on residential development and vice versa. So they make recommendations on the residential proposal for um screening for noise um you know window placements all sorts of um mitigation measures that might be required. In this case, um there was no concern for compatibility. Uh as the mayor had mentioned, majority of the employment uses in the surrounding area are warehouses. Um and they don't have um the air and noise um uh emittance uh that you would typically see in other employment areas. Uh and as a result um the mitigation measures as part of the proposed development to introduce residential development are rather minor and rather typical frankly of um tall buildings uh like location or or um uh height of uh um screening areas um window openings um rate uh window ratings for uh closed windows. those sorts of mitigation measures will all be incorporated into the residential development. >> Thank you. That's exactly what I needed to hear because I don't want to hear after the fact that we're getting complaints from the building that you're building from the tenants and now my existing businesses have to shut down operations at certain hours because of it. So that's what I needed to hear from you. That's exactly Sorry to interrupt, Mr. Mayor, but that's what I needed to hear. >> No, no problem. I was just going to add that that the residential is is on top of the podium which is six floors. So it's not on the same plane. It's you know so uh that limits the sound as well. it will. But to the west, we have operations of UPS that that have trucks that back up at all hours, day and night, and there's loud sounds from the backing up motions. And you know, sometimes there's complaints coming from residents of board one because of it, and it's just across the street. And when I just want to make sure that that's, you know, not going to be an issue and preclude or change the operation hours of my existing war 2 businesses. So, I'm good. Thank you. >> Thank you. And not seeing anybody else in the speaking speaker box, Mr. Chair Zenko, thank you for your presentation today. The um bylaws are at the end of the agenda for the OPA ZBA. >> Okay, >> let me just get back to my agenda. That concludes our delegations presentations and um that section. Nothing. Correspondence. Standing committee reports. So, we have the community affairs planning committee report. Let me just get to my resolutions here. There it is. So, um, what I've done in the past is just kind of Oh, councelor Lee and councelor Henry, did you want to speak again? >> Um, no. I just want to pull um Cap to um ask a question to the director. That was my next question. So, which item would you like to pull? >> Uh, community affairs and planning, please. >> Oh, cap. Okay, we're not on that yet. >> Oh, hold on. >> Oh, sorry, sorry, sorry. Yes. Which items in the cap report did you want to pull? >> Um, the um Sorry. The uh what the um deleg delegate was pulling the um >> Okay, hold on. >> Was that the growth management study? Was that that one? >> The 5.2. >> That was 5.2. You want to pull 5.2, >> please. And thank you. >> Okay. Councelor Henry, same. >> I want to pull um 7.2. Um GGC. I want to pull item I believe it's 4.7. It's regarding St. Francis rebranding. >> Do you have a motion to that effect on the agenda? >> I do. I have a motion that I sent this morning. An amendment. Sorry, an amendment. Not a motion. An amendment. >> Okay. >> And a seconder is councelor Tyler Mark. >> Okay. So, let's let's deal with these then on item 4.7. Please go ahead and assume the clerk has your motion. >> Uh they should. Yes. >> Okay. >> I saw the I saw the email. >> Oh, good. Excellent. Okay. So that it it says that if any at any point the cross is to be removed from the steeple and it that it be donated to St. Francis's Catholic Church or the Catholic Church or if no interested party from the Catholic Church is identified that the cross may be preserved in the Ajax archives. So basically what we're saying is we'd like the opportunity for it to be given back to the church first. If that should happen then it then it be removed. And I think that's a long way off but I want to put that precautionary um amendment in place. And that's it. if if um councelor Tyler Mour wants to speak to it. >> Oops. Sorry. Got to press the button. I'm Yeah. Are are you finished, Councelor Henry? >> I am. Thank you. >> Okay. Log off, please. I'll go to Councilor Tyler Morn as the second then Councelor Lee. >> Thank you, Worship. And uh thank you for uh letting me in. Yes, as the secondary I echo the first's comments and if something was to happen, yes, it would be nice to have the conversation with the Catholic Church to see if they want the cross. So, just reitimating and uh thank you for living in it. >> Okay, Council Lee. >> Um thank you, Chair, and I think we have to move this first before we can amend it. So, I'll happily move the uh motion. Um I guess my question is and unfortunately we couldn't reach the director at the time. So I'm wondering um is there a plan to remove the cross and then is there a significant cost to removing the cross? >> Director Vita >> through the chair to regional counselor Lee. Uh no specific plan at this point to remove the cross. We included the we included references to the cross in the report similar to the references of the St. Francis name um just as commentary that it denotes um a certain affiliation with the church which is something that we are wanting to create some separation moving forward. Um but absolutely if there uh should be any removal moving forward we would bring uh that proposal to council um before advancing. >> Um thank you. And then just a question to the mover or seconder. Um, when it says the Catholic Church, uh, does that mean like the the Vatican? Is that who we're sending this cross to >> sales church up the road? But let's bring the mover back in uh, to answer that question. There we go. We'll have a party. We got everybody here. >> Thank you. So staff put that as vague terminology so that they have the ability to work with who they need to within the Catholic um side and the intention is to go back to St. Francis itself but as we know there's an arch dascese of Toronto we have to go back through the proper Catholic channel and we've left that language a little vague so that staff have the ability to move within the Catholic system and go to who they need to. >> Got it. Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you chair. And if I'm uh live here, I I would ask uh Mr. Vita, Director Vita, if uh you could include the um Heritage Advisory Committee if there is any changes to the physical building, please. And thank you. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. CC. Thank you. >> Okay. Not seeing anyone else in the speakers box. Councelor Henry, you can log off. Um, council Lee was correct. So, I'll have them Let me bring up the resolution here. Moved by Councelor Lee, seconded by Councelor Henry that the recommendations of the Community Affairs and Planning Committee meeting of May 4th, 2026 be adopted. It's on the floor. Item 4.7 has been fold has been pulled. We have a motion moved and seconded. >> Does that satisfy? >> Sorry, Mr. Chair. Just just to clarify, we're on um the GGC report, correct? >> We're on the CAP report. Did I mess up report? >> Yes. So, we're going to do GGC first, I believe, and then we'll go back to CAP. >> All right. Let me Hold on. Let me go down to the next one. >> I said CAP, but they snuck in the GC on me. Okay. Uh standing committee reports. General Government Committee May 11, 2026. Moved by councelor Lee, second by councelor Henry, that the recommendations from the GDC meeting of May 11th be adopted. Item 4.7 has been pulled. The amendment is on the floor. Any further discussion? >> Councelor Henry, did you have any >> Sorry, Mr. Mayor. I think there's there's been an error. So, I was moving it and councelor Tyler Mour was seconding it. >> That's been worked out with the >> I'm talking about the report as a whole. You're moving the amendment and councelor Tyler Morren is seconding the amendment. You and Councelor Lee are moving the GDC report as a whole. >> Got it. Thank you. >> I'm going by word. It's what I do. Okay. Anything further on this? Okay. Please open the vote on the amendment. Okay. And that carries. Moving on to the next item. Item 7. Sorry. Item 7.2. Is that also GGC? >> Yes. So now we just need a vote on the main motion as amended for 7.2. >> Right. But we haven't what is 7.2 is pulled for discussion. I believe that's what the discussion just was. Uh councelor Sterlingley has also pulled 7.1 community affairs and planning but that's for a separate item. >> Okay, very good. So that's the only amendment that's the only pull on item 7.2 on GGC. >> Correct. >> Okay. On the main motion as amended, please Okay. And that carries. Now, let's just go back to item 7.1, standing committee reports, community affairs and planning committee, May 4, 2026. I'm going to go by ward again. Moved by councelor Crawford, second by councelor Tyler Morren, that the recommendations of the community affairs and planning committee meeting May 4th be adopted. Any polls? Councelor Lee, item 5.2. Please go ahead. >> Uh thank you, chair. And um this is just to the director of finance. Um so I mean the question was brought up that uh in 2023 we had a projected um levy of 1%. It's now being suggested at 2%. you know, I think there's a combination of we have now engaged in consultant and you know, casino revenues as well as uh electron revenues, but I was wondering if you can give a more definitive answer than uh what I was able to provide >> through the chair to councelor regional counselor Lee. Um yes, you were correct in uh the the reduction in casino Ajax and alexicon is part of that. The additional impact is also due to having a better understanding of our asset management needs going forward. We have since that time we had also completed the asset management plan and identified our uh the full gamut of the assets and the needs over time which uh resulted in better costing and understanding of what are those needs not only in the short term and but also the long term. So that that is probably the bigger piece um of why we need the infrastructure lending. >> So if I were to just accurately just rephrase uh based on the report in front of us right now, this is the most accurate estimation that we have based on all the information provided. Correct. >> That is correct. It's based on the most recent um knowledge and information we have. Yes. >> Okay. Appreciate that answer. Thank you, chair. Thank you. >> You're welcome. I would just add and Miss Matam please correct me if I'm wrong also provincial legislation which has changed quite a bit in the way we receive certain funding like DC's um and and make us need to re-evaluate based on these new changing facts. Is that accurate? >> Uh through the mayor that the changes in legislation does impact our debt levels uh definitely. Um the uh infrastructure levy is primarily geared to our existing asset management base. Um but it does have an impact over time when we're uh renewing uh new assets that we do bring on board. But that will be beyond that 10 year. >> That was one of the questions that was asked also was to the the debt levels that we are accumulating. >> Um you also asked about the suggestion on investment policy succession. I would suggest that there isn't one. This is a policy that we have adopted as a council and the policy will just continue. >> That is correct, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Um, councelor Lee, was there anything further on this? You didn't have a motion. You just wanted to ask a question before I move on to the other speakers. Okay. I'll assume you took yourself off the list. That's a yes. Council Tyler Morren, you had a question when the delegation was here. Now is the appropriate time to ask it. >> Correct. You've just answered my first question. My question is to the director of finance. Can you confirm that you will be continuing we will be continuing the strategy the investment strategies that we've been doing for the last three or four years moving forward? Can you just speak to that a little bit and what that might look like? Thank you. >> Through the chair to councelor Tyler Marin. Uh yes, the the we operate under the council approved policy. Therefore, we will continue uh utilizing the direction that council approved um going forward unless council wishes to make changes to our policy. We are um going to continue as uh we have been doing. Yes. >> Okay. And that information uh that you receive for strategic information regarding what to invest in the most for our money etc. that comes from in-house or is there always an option if we needed to to bring in more experts? Is that an option if that is something we'd want to look at >> through the chair to councelor uh Tyler Moren? So we do work with uh one investment to provide some of that guidance. Um you know they are professionals in in investment. So um uh we are bound by the municipal act as well as our policy. Um there is always an option to bring in additional guidance on an as needed basis. Um but at this time we are um operating as lean as possible and you know trying to get the best return for the town as well. >> Thank you very much for those answers. Thank you chair or Mr. Mayor. >> You're welcome. Councelor Crawford here next. >> Thank you. Um my question is about um if we had not reduced uh the infrastructure levy from 2% to 1% in this past budget. The idea was that that was supposed to be coming down on a on a annual basis. Correct. It was it was front-ended loaded at 2% for the two years and then gradually coming down. Is that not is that correct? That was the intent. So through the chair based on the information that we had at the time um and the analysis we had done back in 2023 when we brought forward that recommendation we didn't have that full information of what that asset management plan looked like. We made some assumptions at that time. Um we we had not experienced the reductions in revenue. So at that time yes the intent was to build up the infrastructure levy by 2% for a number of years and then uh see where we are at to start uh reducing it. Unfortunately, economic conditions and a number of other revenue reductions impacted uh some of those um projections. Um and that's why we do update our financial sustainability plan on a periodic basis just to determine where we're at from a a reporting perspective. And we will come back to council um likely in another five years um you know with potential revisions based on what's what we've experienced over time. So until so yeah and so until the new council is established in 2027 everything stays as put. I think that's what I heard you say to councelor uh Tyler Warren correct >> through the chair to regional councelor Crawford. I'm not sure exactly if you're referring to anything in in particular. Um, >> oh, I just mean the 1%. >> Yeah, >> at this point I I did explain uh in our last um in the last meeting that we will be recommending a 2% infrastructure levy in line with the updated information. Um, it that is what is needed. Um, but it will be up to council and and the new mayor to um uh move forward with those amendments at that time. Um, so can you explain to me, so it's been suggested that not everybody knew we had a 2% uh, infrastructure levy. I remember quite specifically us talking about this. How is it broken out on the tax bill? Is it is it is it broken out into a 2% or is it just a 1%. How is it explained >> through the chair? Through the chair, it is not broken out as a separate levy on the tax bill. is part of the total tax increase um that is communicated um to residents and businesses >> because I believe we do that social media wise. Correct. I know I've seen it split out a bit. It's it's this social media, right? >> So, is there a way of doing that on the on the tax bill or is the tax bill the tax bill and you can't change it >> for better transparency? I'm we're not trying to hide anything. It's just when you don't see it, right? through the chair. We do have limited uh a limited number of items that we can separately identify on the tax bill. I don't think that this would be a good use of of that additional line because it could it could be used for other purposes down the road. Um we could definitely take that back and take a look at it, but I I I we do try to do a very good job at communicating the impacts of that out through our budget documents, through our presentations uh on our website as well. Um if there is additional communication or reporting through social media that we can do, we can definitely um engage our communication staff as well. Um I would rather take those options first um and then explore an alternate if need be. >> Yeah, the issue is is that not everybody's on social media, right? And I know that that's what we're left with right now because we don't have a a local newspaper, but I think we miss a a large number of people when we don't um you know because not everybody likes social media. But anyway, I understand our limitations. Appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Just councelor Crawford, as a followup, I think we do a good job during the budget process for those that that watch it. Um, when we say, you know, our our base budget pressures are say 2 and a half% and then we're adding the 2% for infrastructure. So, it's 4 and a half% and then, you know, we don't come out and say 2 and a half. Here, I'll let you back in because I see you're back in the speakers box. But, I think we do a good job with that. and then putting out what the actual impact and then a blended rate are. You're correct. We don't have a newspaper. I don't know if we could do something like an insert in the tax bill, maybe a little better um >> way of messaging that out to residents, but but I think during the meetings we do and especially when the amendment came to reduce it, we had a pretty thorough discussion and debate and I know that was reported on social media by by uh someone that was here today. I uh I know I'm not saying we don't do a good job. I I'm always shocked at it feels like we're we're we're talking from the rooftop and I'm always surprised when people don't don't know. I know people are busy. So I just think it if if we can be like you said maybe it is a separate insert in the tax bill where it is actually broken out and explained. So um I'm not suggesting we didn't do a good job because I know I heard it over and over again. >> No, I'm just saying we could do better. >> Yeah, I'm incredibly engaged in it. So, you know that that my engagement is certainly not everybody's engagement. So, thank you. I appreciate that. >> Miss Metham, any suggestions on how we could improve the process. >> Well, we'll we'll definitely take that back. I think maybe communicating uh it clearer in the tax insert as you've suggested. Uh it's definitely something we can take back. Um I believe it is already in there, but we can take a look and just make sure that it is a bit more prominent perhaps. Um and and uh we'll implement uh we'll work with our communications team as well um for the next budget cycle to see what we could do. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh not seeing anybody else in the speakers box. We didn't have any amendments. So I'll just go back to the resolution. This was moved by councelor Crawford, second by councelor Tyler Moore that the recommendations of the community affairs and planning committee meeting of May 4th be adopted. Those in favor and that carries. Next item on the agenda, we've done standing committee reports, departmental reports, council chambers retrofit. Deputy CEO Cooper, you have the floor. Hi, thank you. Uh, so our reports in the agenda, it was authored by Miss Gracie, so we're happy to answer any questions uh that you have for us today. Um, I guess what it boils down to, I think, is we're prepared to move forward at this point uh with repairing the council chambers. We just need to understand from council their desires in terms of whether um the preference is for sort of a like forlike replacement versus a retrofit which is proposed in the report. So, uh, we're happy to take any questions that you have. Thank you. Sorry, I got to press my button first. First person in the speakers list, Council Tyler Morton. >> Thank you, worship. My question is this. Can we make sure when this is all done that the clerk's desk will be beside the chair's desk so that the regular conversations and what we see in most council chambers uh will be done. That's my first question. Well, that's >> so through you, Mr. Chair. Uh, yes, if we advance with the recommendation that staff has put forward today, the rendering that's included in this report would include the clerk's chair beside the chair. >> Okay, that's number one. Number two, as per the report, can you just speak about when it'll all be done and shiny and clean? >> Yes. So, through you, Mr. Chair, uh, our goal is to have it done closer uh, to the end of the year, beginning of the next term of council. Uh, at this point, we are waiting for council direction on the next step. So, after today's meeting, we'll be able to have those conversations around design and the insurance uh and some of the construction uh timelines as well, and then we'll have a better idea of what that timeline looks like. >> Yeah, I'm personally very sensitive to the fact that it's going to be tight. It's going to be very tight to get it ready for next term. Council, thank you so much. Those are my questions at this time. >> Thank you. >> Okay, councelor Crawford. Yeah, I I'm I'm sorry. I'm good with Oh, sorry. I'm good with the whole uh with the whole plan as long as we are not paying more out of our own budget. As long as it's all covered under insurance, then I have no issue with uh with the recommendations. And that's what we're that's what we're thinking, right? >> Uh no. So, through you, Mr. Chair. Uh recommendation number two asks that council council authorizes the allocation of necessary funds up to 175,000 beyond the value of insurance claim. Uh the conversations that we've had with the insurance uh pool preliminarily uh have let us know that the they would only cover full cost if we went like for like replacement. So if we went back to exactly the way the chambers was uh prior to the incident. If we want to move forward with this new layout and a retrofit of council chambers, then we are asking council for the uh approval of the additional funds which would come from our building maintenance reserve. >> And are we confident that that is all that will be asked? >> Uh yes, through our preliminary conversations, we do feel confident that that will cover um the uh design and the work that we're looking at. We will still be using as much uh insurance uh of the as much of the insurance claim as we can for anything that is like for like or anything uh any services and things like that that have been covered uh through the insurance claim so far. These are preliminary numbers uh through some estimating and things like that. But we do feel uh fairly confident with the number that we're putting forward to council today. >> Thank you. your next. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, so to the clerk, um, let's talk for a minute about what we looked at last year, where we are now. So, originally when we looked at a retrofit for council chambers, what was the cost of that? >> Uh, in September of 2025, we were looking at about 265, I believe. >> 265. Okay. Okay. And now you're telling us with a retrofit we're looking at how much? >> So the report uh outlines that we are looking closer to 300,000. Uh and that would be including the design work along with uh some of the materials and some of the technology that was damaged. Um the retrofit that we're putting forward to council today includes what you're referencing from the September 2025 report along with some technology upgrades as we did not plan on upgrading some of the technology in the previous report. Um but now with the damage that we've had to the technology there is some that needs to be upgraded or replaced. So in 2025 you were asking us for 265,000ish and now you're asking us for an additional how much? 100 aside from the insurance money. What's the additional amount? 175. >> Correct. Yes. >> Councelor Henry, I believe I took the other amount out of the budget as one of the amendments in that budget year. >> So that that never existed. I don't even think that got to council. >> No, it did not. >> I thought it was part of the report. I remember seeing it. >> If I could jump in, Mr. Chair, to maybe clarify. Um, it was a council strate in within council strategic plan. There was an item that asked staff to examine a possible retrofit of the council chambers. And in response to that strategic plan item, we we brought forward a report which detailed the potential for a retrofit which was costed at approximately $265,000. Staff did not proceed or recommend proceeding with that. Uh we didn't feel at the time that it was a priority uh given all the other budget pressures and so it was never included in the budget and it was never recommended to council that we proceed with that. Um, however, with the the flood and the damage that's occurred, we now feel that it makes sense to use this opportunity to uh to reorient the seating in a way that would make more sense for council. Thank you. So, numbers, going back to numbers, we were at 265ish recommended, didn't happen, nobody voted in favor of it, moved on with our lives, flood occurred. Now you're saying leg for leg we get back exactly what we had. No upgrades, nothing. Or we go into the new plan and we put out 175,000ish extra on top of what we're going to get back and we get brand new shiny clerk where they should be. >> So through you, Mr. Chair, just to reiterate what uh Deputy CEO Cooper said in September 2025, we did not ask for any funding. That was just a a report for information at that time. So at that time we had estimated that a retrofit of the council chambers would be 265 which we did not request. So it did not go through the budget. And today we are requesting council to authorize 175,000 for this retrofit. >> What's this look like on the tax bill? Uh, I'll ask the director of finance if he wants to comment on that, but it is from our building maintenance reserve. >> Yeah, it'll be zero, councelor Henry. It's from the reserve >> through the chair. Yes, it it is it is coming through the reserve. It's funding that has been set aside uh for eventual uh building maintenance which would have included you know an eventual um replacement of council chambers probably many you know a number of years in the future. Um but the the funds would be used for this um at this time from the building maintenance reserve. >> Thanks. Thanks. I thought that's what it meant but we got to say it. We're public. We got to say it. People have to hear it, right? So it's a zero. So we needed to have that said. Okay. And with the actual design itself and the upgrades, from what I can see on page 39, everything looks similar to what uh you folks mentioned to us in 2025. Um I see the ramp going up on both sides. Very accessibility uh friendly there. What I'm wondering, and I think I asked this question when the report came to council way back when, was about um safety for counselors because right now, uh there's one way that you can go up onto the council floor. There's steps. There's a little rope kind of I know it's a little rope, but it's kind of, you know, given us that little bit of distance and protection. Um is there anything put in place in case something was to go ary in the council chambers? Yeah. So through you, Mr. Chair, I'll draw your attention to the rendering that you're referencing. So council, the CAO, and the clerk, you'll see are on a shaded platform. That platform is a raised floor as opposed to the rest of staff and members of the public. So by having the ramp uh accessible only to council, the CEO uh and the clerk and having the exit as you're used to at the back of the dis uh along with um the back hallway and the back entrance that allows for a safe entry or exit if needed for members of council. Um and you are in a raised platform uh so there is quite a bit of distance between where council would be seated and where a member of the public would be able to access. >> Excellent. And um as far as the seating goes, this is just a design question, but I noticed like because we're kind of closer together and more in a you know the top end of a horseshoe shape, does that affect how we are seeing um folks in the chambers from a sighteline perspective? >> Uh through you, Mr. Chair, could you clarify the way that you see members of the public or the way members of public can see you? that I see members of the public >> uh three Mr. Mr. Chair, >> right now I have very clear sight lines. >> It would still provide you a clear sight line because you are on that raised floor. So you would be above all of the staff that are sitting on the main level, I'll call it, uh directly below council. So you would have a straight sight line to staff which are in front of you and then just past them to members of the public who are in the gallery. >> Okay. Thank you. I think that, you know, um, at the time it wasn't the time to, uh, make the changes, but since this has occurred and, uh, we have this opportunity, um, why would we put it back together broken if we could put it back together fixed? That doesn't really make sense. It's just more work down the road. So, the clerk needs to be closer to the chair. That's that's just a given. So, thank you. >> Okay. Uh, Council Lee, you are next. >> Thank you, Chair. Um I I'm less concerned about the aesthetic changes as I am the practical ones. Uh will the flood if if another flooding situation happens, are we prepared for this both on our level and the archive level? >> So through you, Mr. Chair, yes, we are uh working with building maintenance staff to ensure that the way that this new room is constructed that we uh have a better handle on some of the uh fire suppression system. And we are also looking at our record storage underneath council chambers to ensure um that all of that has the appropriate uh storage and safekeepings that we can. Uh I would also like to highlight that the town is uh very aggressively working on a digitization strategy and does digitize a large amount of records annually and we continue to go on that path to ensure that we have uh copies and appropriate record keeping for all of the town's official records >> and based on our I guess like our breakdown and you know site plan for lack of a better phrase there's like um there's no pipe issues like in terms of moving pipes or electricity or anything like that like there's no fictitious thing we didn't see before all these years and it's there now. >> Uh three, Mr. Chair, not that I am aware of. Um Director Meredith, I believe, is online if he wants to provide anything else from a facility maintenance perspective, but nothing that I'm aware of. >> Um I'll just conclude with this. I'm ultimately glad we didn't do the um renovations when was presented to us previously because then we might be encountering this on a higher scale then. So I guess timing is everything and I think right now is the perfect time to you know invest in um in a sense what is the um the uh leadership of the town. So I appreciate that. Thank you chair. >> Okay councelor Bower you are next. >> Thank you Mayor Collier. Good afternoon Graci. Uh thank you for the report. So does this claim uh how will it impact or do we know yet how it will impact our renewal rate? >> So through you Mr. Chair, we don't have uh details on that yet as we haven't gone through the full insurance claim. Uh we're currently waiting for this direction from council to understand how what the insurance claim will look like, what the amounts will look like, what we're replacing, and what we are taking a payout um on to be able to do some of this retrofit uh activity. um between myself and the director of finance, we can definitely provide um a little bit of an update and some more insurance information once the claim has uh been completed in the future. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much. And if council decided on a like forlike replacement, um where would you expect the um retrofit feasibility or where would you expect that to be pushed? Would you know would that be years down the line then like if we're replacing it or what do you see? >> Yeah. So through you Mr. Chair at this point council or council has not provided staff with any additional direction to look at a future retrofit. Uh as deputy CEO Cooper uh noted we fulfilled the strategic uh priority uh late last year by providing a report to council on this option. So, at this point, if council was to move forward with a like forl like, uh, staff would not bring forward any type of retrofit or renovation unless council asked us to do so. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Those were my questions. Mayor Carter, >> okay, Councelor Henry, you've already spoke and I was quite lenient. You went to about eight minutes on your first one, so please be brief. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, quick question with regards to insurance. I did forget to ask. Um, were we penalized because we didn't discover the flood till hours after it happened. I'm assuming we weren't alerted by a system. Was there a penalization with our insurance for that or would you know >> through you Mr. Chair? We currently do not have much information on the claim as it's still an ongoing claim, but once the claim has uh has been concluded, we can look at providing additional information. Um, right now it's an open insurance claim and we're currently going through what our options are and what the payout would look like. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, that concludes the speakers list. Um, we have the resolutions. Based on my rotation, I'm at ward three. So speak up if you don't want to move or second this. CSD 202614 council chambers retrofit moved by council d second by councelor Bower that stop bey chambers as illustrated in attachment one and two that council authorize the allocation of the necessary funds to implement the retrofit to an upset limit of 175,000 above and beyond the value of the insurance claim to be funded from the building maintenance reserve. Please open the vote. All right, that carries unanimously. Back to our agenda. Are there any regional? Let me make sure we're in the right spot. Is there any regional council reports? Councelor Crawford. >> Thank you, Miss uh your worship. Um this is just a quick update from transit um around uh there's there's a seems to be getting more legs on unified fairs across the GTA and Hamilton. Um the province is looking at adopting a single unified fair structure. Um, so you know, in in and of itself, it sounds like uh like a good thing for residents and it it probably would be except for that many of our individual transit systems have a budget that's based on the fair structure permanently. So depending on where that goes, if it goes down, then there's obviously a gap. So we are uh working with all the different agencies to ensure that um if a gap should happen uh in in this one fairer idea that that uh will be made whole. So we'll see about that. I don't think we've actually seen being made whole yet. Um the other I I'm assuming uh Mayor Collier you'll be talking about the special um committee of the whole meeting. Are you still there? Do you want to talk about the the the special committee of a whole meeting that we had? >> I was going to and I subsequent finance meeting decision about the 10-year police capital budget only, but you're on finance, so feel free to speak about >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So we had um we had the special committee of the whole meeting on Friday last week where we were presented the uh presentation of the the police DRPS uh tenure capital uh uh plan basically. Um and so from that decision, from that meeting, it was then moved to finance, which was Tuesday of last week. And uh Chair Henry uh moved a motion to have the entire uh the entire uh project or or capital plan moved to the 2027 budget. So that's where we are today. Um next week is always a different another animal, so we'll have to see where it goes from there. But those are the the two items that uh that that I I would be responsible for. >> Okay. Not seeing anybody else. I will speak a little bit more about the police uh side of things. So yeah, the first of all, Durham Regional Police was was directed by regional council in April of 2025. I believe it was about a year ago. Don't hold me to the date. It could be a little bit different, but it was about a year ago to develop our 10-year capital forecast just like transit has, which is approved by regional council, just like EMS has, just like Health and Social Services have. So, this is a 10-year lookout of capital projects, and none of the capital projects in ours are new. They've been on the books for many years, but this was just direction from council to put it all in one comprehensive package and present it so they could approve it. So, we didn't have to keep coming back to finance for a one-off every single time like we did for the land at 1401 Harwood that I can talk about now for a new police station in Ajax. Every time police wanted to do something, we have to come to regional council hat in hand and beg at a finance meeting for one-off approvals rather than have an approved 10-year capital plan so we can budget accordingly so the region can budget accordingly so there's some predictability and some continuity instead of some stability. So, we brought this back and this was supposed to come to regional council in September. Um, because of one thing or another, the treasurer resigning, then budget, then this and that. It kept getting kicked down the road again and again, and it finally came to regional council, not this past Friday, the Friday before. Um, we got the agenda less than maybe 12 hours before the meeting. Uh, so not a lot of time to review a pretty thick agenda and it was a lengthy meeting where we went through all this. Um that was an education session. Then on the Tuesday, as you mentioned, it came to finance. Um, I was absolutely blindsided when the regional chair walked on a motion to defer a $ 1.1 billion 10-year capital forecast that regional council had asked for and just punted it down the road to the 2027 budget, completely bypassing the May 27th council meeting where every member of council would have had an opportunity to review and have their say completely and undemocratically. bypass them on a vote of four members of the finance committee including the regional chair with one absent and you and Mayor Ash from Pickering voting no against the deferral motion um as well as several visitors including myself speaking to how undemocratic it was. So this is going to come back to regional council on May 27th. Um, I am going to be there is a provision in the procedural bylaw for the region where a decision of finance can basically be removed from finance. I don't think it's ever been used before, but it's there and we found it and can be brought directly to regional council and it only requires a simple majority, not a twothirds vote for reconsideration. So, I'm going to be bringing that and hopefully we can write this wrong and finally address this and not keep putting things off. The reason why the budget is so high is because these things have been putting been put off since 2007. That's the earliest we could find. The talk of uh or sorry, even before that, the talk of regional headquarters even before that. But the simple fact that the region has chosen to keep kicking these significant infrastructure projects down the road year after year, decade after decade, is a reason why our 10-year capital budget is so high. And I'll point out again, lower than some of the other departments, but still still significant. But delaying doesn't make things any cheaper as we all know. It just keeps getting worse and worse. I will also point out that I'm going to be sharing with regional council on the 27th or before the charter that was signed between the region of Durham CEO and chair. I don't know if the chair signed it, the CEO signed it and our our chief signed it which basically said we were going into this jointly collaboratively and we would agree on the recommendations coming forward to council. That did not happen. We did not agree to the recommendation that came to council of received for information or to take sections four or five of our capital budget and hide them in the back in the appendix because what you saw at finance on the Tuesday was not the report that was in front of the entire council on the Friday before. So there's a number of things going on here. I expect the meeting on the 27th to be probably quite long and I'm not going to probably make a lot of friends at that meeting, but we need to get this done and I'm happy to answer any questions. Councelor Henry, I see you in the speaker's box. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for that updated information for those of us who do not sit on regional council. Much appreciated. Um, I wanted to ask you, since you brought up um police, capital budget, infrastructure being kicked down the road, what does that look like for the Curtis site that was burnt to the ground? Has that been placed in this budget or was it replaced through insurance? >> That that's not being replaced. There was a new station already being built and the center for forensic excellence being built in Clarington. Those are already ongoing. Those are already uh approved capital projects with the region of Durham. >> So there was no replacement of the facility in Curtis? >> No. No. They were already being replaced. It's mostly a storage facility for court records. >> Yes, it Yes. And the Hummer and other equipment that they had. >> I used to deliver there, so I know >> some equipment. Yes. >> Yes. There was a lot of equipment there. Um, so what happens to that property? What happens to the money from the insurance for that property and went back into capital projects? >> Um, we don't we don't get that. So the way properties work and this is the municipal act. The way properties work for police departments across Ontario is we don't own any of our buildings or our facilities. The region owns them all. The region owns our helicopter. The region owns all of those capital assets. So, and I'll use the collision reporting center across the road from 605 Rosland Road regional headquarters as the example. That's the Durham Regional Police Collision Reporting Center. You get in an accident, you go there to report it. That building we've owned and operated. Well, we don't own it. The region owns it, but we've operated it. All of the costing for the caring charges, interest, payments, overhead, maintenance, repair, everything comes in our budget. However, we don't own it. So, any equity built up in that building, let's say that building is a is a a $15 million building, okay? And we paid for it over 15 or 20 years, that's not an asset for DRPS. What happens is when the region comes along and takes that building away, which they did, um because they wanted to use it for social services, we don't get a $15 million credit that we can now use to apply to another building even though we paid the money. The region takes that money and we start at zero and 100% of the operating like the the mortgage and interest and everything goes back onto our budget. It's a bit of an unfair system. I've been lobbying the regional chair and the CEO to give us some sort of accounting mechanism, some sort of credit so we don't look like the bad guy every time we we miss one building like like the the station in downtown Ashawa. It was built in 1972. It it has been outgrown long long long time ago. It's got mold issues. It's got all kinds of issues. We've received a letter from the police association basically se saying it's not safe to work in in some areas. That building requires about a $45 million retrofit, but it's not in the right place. Even if we retrofit it, it's still still too small and doesn't meet our needs. >> So when that building is sold, >> so hold on a minute. Hold on a minute. Something you're saying here is not making sense. >> Zero for that. Are you saying that over time you have basically paid for this building plus the building was taken away from you and you get no credit for it? >> Yes. >> And now it's given to another fraction within the same government umbrella. >> Exactly. >> Are they being charged rent for that? >> No. No. That's exactly how it works. Which is why I've been trying to have it changed in some way unsuccessfully. >> That makes no sense whatsoever. >> That is so unfair that we work in. Think about this. So pre205 there was talk of a regional headquarters for policing. Um the the council of the day made the decision that the police would occupy the third floor of regional headquarters. We have spent since 2005 approximately $30 million in rent. Our rent in that space has doubled, but our footprint, the 30,000 square feet that we had has been reduced over time for other regional uses. So we've slowly been pushed out of certain certain spaces. Um, that's $30 million that would have paid for for a new a new building, but we've paid it in rent. >> 30 million over what period of time? >> Since 2005. 21 years. >> Since 2005. And >> it's gone from 1.2 million a year to about 2.4 million a year. And how many other um um umbrellas pieces departments under this umbrella have to pay rent like you do? >> Everybody. So if you look through the regional budget, every department whether it's whether it's finance on whatever floor they're on or whether it's whoever, they have a portion of the expenses for the region of Durham building allocated to their budgets. But had you bought a building back in 2005, you would have saved millions of dollars over time. >> Yes. >> I'm not going to disagree with you on this subject. >> Okay. >> Well, I'm glad I asked this question because that's the craziest thing I ever heard. All right. Thank you. >> Welcome to the reason, Council Tyler Moore. Thank you, worship. Uh, for those listening, the money we are speaking of is for capital cost, correct? The the >> Yeah. And thank you. I I think I know where you're going with this. Correct me if I'm wrong. That that misleading article that was put out about a week and a half ago saying that if our capital budget was approved, it was going to incur a 10% increase to regional taxes. Is that where you're going? >> I am. I have a subsequent question. Maybe I can ask it now and tie it all in. The operating cost of of policing is directly tied to the community safety and policing act as as per the province. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. Those are my two questions. >> Um adequate and effective policing, >> right? Sorry, my wording is a bit off, but there's a there's a threshold that has to be met uh which costs a lot of money within itself on the operating side before we get to the to the Yeah. So the 10% was where I was going if you want to comment. >> Well, let let me close the loop on that counselor because that that was very misleading. I did some comments online. Some people listen, some people just choose not to. But um I disagreed with that that they're talking about the region as a whole, not just Durham Regional Police. So, if the regional operating if the Durham Regional Police 10-year capital budget was approved and fully implemented over the next 10 years, including our operating and capital, the police budget as a whole would account for a 4.62% tax increase for Durham residents. Now, remember the Durham region in Ajax, about 35% of your taxes stays here. That's what we control. 15% or whatever it is, and Miss Matam can probably correct me if I'm wrong. I might be off a percentage or two, goes to the province for schooling, for education. And the other 55% u sorry 10%. The other 55% goes to the region of Durham. So it's 4.62% of 55% which is about 2.5%. So the actual impact of our budget entirely operating and capital if approved and fully implemented would be 2.5ish 2.51 or 2%. That's the real story. Not that we're going to cause a 10% increase to Durham taxpayers. >> I appreciate the clarity. Thank you. >> Not seeing any other questions in the chat box. We have um let me go back to the agenda. So where were we? We're war two. Uh moved by councelor Henry, second by councelor Lee that the regional council's reports of May 19th, 2026 be received for information. Please open the vote. That carries Next business arising from notice of motion. Um item 10.1 reviewing the Ajax municipal flag raising policy. Moved by myself, seconded by councelor Lee. Um before I start to the clerk there, I provided you with an amendment. It was pointed out to me that that um what we had in the actual motion was left a little bit of um an area for interpretation. So I sent you the wording. Council Lee is a secondary is reviewed and I'll just read the therefors. Therefore, the council directs equity, diversity, and inclusion staff to amend the flag raising request policy to exclude the flying of flags representing foreign nationals. proceed for nationals and coalitions of foreign nations effective September 1st, 2026. Um that's that's the main one. The others are updating community consultation in collaboration with relevant departments to determine the continuation and curation of the town hosted flag raising ceremonies to reflect the shared values of Ajax communities and conduct a comprehensive policy review and report back to council no later than the first quarter 2027 with the community recognition program proposed to address the flag raising policy and Ajax sign commemorating lighting policy proclam proclamations requests and community notification Sorry, it's really small. It's hard for me to read on the screen. I'll just speak to it really quickly. And this this comes out of and several other I'll use two larger ones. Missaga and Toronto have approved a similar policy. We and I I got to be really careful not to misspeak here. We live in a in a a world where we've got a lot of conflicts outside of Canada that we have no control over and we have a very diverse community here in Ajax about 65% and this applies to many areas in the province and we don't want conflicts in other areas to affect how we treat each other here. And occasionally by raising flags of some of these areas, it causes hurt to some of our residents here. It causes uh a lot of feelings and it also can be perceived that we are supporting certain groups over another in these world conflicts. Um, and very honestly, I don't want any part of that. We've raised a number of flags just in the last year, and I have significant feedback from residents on both sides about about how this is affecting them, how it potentially is moving us back as far as relations and some of the good work we've done to diversity, equity, inclusion. And I really don't see the benefit to this. And that's why I brought this motion for consideration today. Uh thank you councelor Lee for seconding this and I would like to ask for council support and a recorded vote please. Councelor Lee as a seconder. >> Thank you chair. Um so when this was first proposed uh from the Ajax point of view I think my instinct was to oppose it you know using such phrases like you know our diversity is our strength and Ajax is racialized. We should be embracing that. um our differences because that's what kind of bridges the gap. Uh unfortunately, you know, as the mayor's kind of alluded to, um there are certain uh people groups who are now using these flag raisings, something that meant to kind of bring um light to the contributions and uh peoples of various nations and now um extremely politicizing it um to the point where social media posts have to be taken down and like it's um it's politicizing it to a point where um quite frankly I'm uncomfortable not just for um council and those who go to certain flag raisins and don't but also our own internal staff who are this this wasn't what the gig was right like and by no means are we saying um uh community groups cannot celebrate their nationality um you know just there won't be a flag raising for it and um as a council member who's very proud of the um de DEI work I've done over the past seven years uh through this role um yeah I understand like maybe now is the time to put a hold on this and to um to reexamine it, to reach out to the community and find those consultations. Um I was very surprised, if I'm being very honest, of the amount of people who um agreed uh with the idea of just removing them because with the idea that the Canadian, Ontario, and Ajax flags are the only flags we should be flying. So again, we will still go to community events, the ones that we support. Um, and that will not change. But in terms of flying a flag on town property, um, I I absolutely agree. It's become way too politicized, way too um, burdensome on staff and quite honestly on council at times that um, it's taken the the joy and the the uh, the ideal the initial idea of the flag raising and kind of twisted it to to an area that I'm very uncomfortable with. So, thank you for the mayor for bringing this forward. Um, you know, point number two is very important. We are going to undertake community consultation. We are going to figure out um what the path is going forward. But for now, as it's September 1st, let's stop them for now. We take a breath and we kind of reassess and go from there. So um I also would appreciate council support on this motion. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. Thank you, Council Lee. I would just point out some might ask why September 1st. Um there was already been some commitments made to certain groups over the summer. We're not going to go back on those. Those were properly submitted based on the sign or sorry the flag raising policy of the day um and fit in that but this will be going forward as of September 1st. Councelor Crawford you are next. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. I I guess my only s my only question would be why can we not extend it to the end of the year and then start fresh January. >> Is that to me? Yeah, you're the mover, right? >> I I would have had it effective today and that's what I wanted. Um but staff pointed out to me exactly what I just said that we've already made some commitments and we don't want to be going back because because the policy of today did allow some of the requests we've had and the those requests that we already have are over by September 1st, which is why we chose this date. I wouldn't be willing to keep it till the end of the year. >> So, we have no more requests past September 1st. >> There are still other flag raisings. I'm not saying this to stop. >> No, no, no, no. I just mean for for this specific group. That's all. >> Uh, this is several groups, but yeah, this is this is for foreign national flags. Um, >> no. I think my question is >> any of the other groups or I'm misunderstanding. I see Yasmin has popped in. >> Let's see what the professionals have to say. >> Yasmin. >> Oh, she disappeared. Yasmin, please press your uh >> There she is. I think she's there now. >> There you go. Yasmin, you have the floor. All right, we'll try this again. There you go. We can hear some background music. I know you're there. And you're on a minute. It's a fun system, isn't it? >> Takes a little bit of getting used to. >> Yeah. So, yeah, my only >> through the chair. Uh, can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Perfect. Um, yes. So, right now our our policy is that uh requests cannot be made more than three months out, 90 days. Uh and so the recommendation is approximately 90 days from today with a start time of September 1st. So we're just looking to align uh those practices together. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, >> Councelor Henry. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um yeah, I I'm good with the September and I I thank you for honoring the commitments of those that are scheduled for the summer. I think it's the right way to go about doing this. Um, I was not in favor of this at the beginning. I will admit that. Um, but, uh, there's been a lot of, uh, I'm trying to find the right wording. There there there's been a lot of, uh, negativity towards our staff and perhaps in some aspects some abuse. And, uh, we got to look at everything. Um I know there's been some consultation with um folks in the community and hopefully more coming forward and looking at how we can uh do this in a different way uh with different types of celebration that won't result in the abuse of comments online and the abuse of comments to our staff. So hopefully everyone's understanding the the reason why we're doing this and knowing that we are still still supporting a full and inclusive Ajax for all. Ajax for everyone. Thank you. >> Thank you. And councelor Bower. Uh oh, there we go. >> Thank you, Mayor Collier. Yes, I I uh I will admit I was not uh in support of this originally the the first time it came around or was discussed. I do appreciate the amendment that was made to 1A which um um I can understand that. Uh but I did have a question. Does this impact any of the postings that the town makes for foreign nations and celebrations on our social media channels? So, Filipino Heritage Month, Greek Independence Day, anything celebrating because I do want to stress that we do brag. I've heard every one of us talk about Ajax being the most racially diverse, culturally, culturally diverse municipality. And um I don't want to take that pride of uh someone uh celebrating their their culture or country of heritage. I don't want to take that away. um through the chair to councelor Bower um if you can hear me. So that is uh certainly the intent is to continue any of the social media postings or recognitions uh that the town does on a monthly weekly basis. Um that list that we have is maintained uh largely informed by the Canadian Center for Diversity Institute um which provides us with a listing of significant dates that are recognized um generally globally um and also by the uh by the federal government and then that list is updated on a regular basis um as uh as things are brought to the town's attention. Uh so that that will all continue all social media posts will continue um where uh where appropriate. Okay. And those social media posts will be um it's often the flag of the country. Those will continue that way. >> So through the chair, yes. where there are um designated dates that recognize Greek Independence Day or as an example or something like that that is um continued to be recognized and acknowledged by the federal government that will continue on our social media but will be a part of whatever comprehensive policy review that staff will be completing. Um the entirety of the the protocols around how the town recognizes significant dates will be reviewed. But this motion today is specifically about flag. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you very much. I'm satisfied with that answer. Thank you, Mayor Collider. >> You're welcome. Councelor Dice, you are the last speaker. >> Thank you. Um I just have a comment if I may. And uh quite recently I was at a flag raising raising ceremony and I did get a very very angry telephone call from a resident. And I have to say nobody should be at the end of that type of language that was used or the kind of hatred that I had in that phone call and the assumption that I should know what's going on in different countries around the world when they have lived there and I have not. So, you know, I don't, you know, I would never want to take anything away from the different cultures in our community, but the hatred is there because there's conflict around the world and it's getting very difficult and very stressful for many people. And I think the time has come where we do have to take that away from what's going on. We have to remove those flags and we have to, you know, focus on what goes on in our community. So, for that reason, I I do really support what we're what we're suggesting here in this um motion. So, thank you. >> Okay, Council Tyler Moore. >> Uh very quickly, I just want to thank staff for dealing with this. Um I know there's been a lot of abuse that they've had to endure and uh we do appreciate it. Um that's all I'm going to say. Thank you very much for that. >> Okay. Um, seeing nobody else in the speakers list to the clerk, please open the vote. And I did ask for a vote. Thank you. That carries unanimously. Thank you everyone. Moving on to our next item. nonresidential recreational membership fees. Moved by councelor Lee, second by councelor Crawford. Councelor Lee, you have the floor. >> Um, thank you, Chair. Uh, this should come to no surprise um to many people um on this council, but those people watching that um yeah, I I I you know, two years ago, we raised the price on a lot of our non-resident fees. Um, and then it kind of came to my attention very recently from an a resident that that doesn't actually apply to um a lot of our recreation programming costs. So, I'm just going to read the resolution. Uh, therefore, be resolved that the town of Ajax implement an additional fee of 15% on all recreation memberships, ARC performance passes, PGO, PGO 10 passes purchased by non-residents effective September 1st, 2026. uh appreciate uh director Vita and his team for accommodating so quickly but um a lot of people don't realize that um our recreation uh costs it's not full cost recovery in a sense these are subsidized costs and so what we have happening right now is um raise residents of Ajax uh through their taxes are now subsidizing um non-residents to use our facilities and sure if the program was in full that's great but we have programming such like such as our aquafit which is always full, our pickable and arc which is always full and um it's just it is this is just a matter of fairness and um try to get that cost recovery. Don't get me wrong, Whitby has a new recreation facility being built as we speak. I'm sure we'll have other ones, but right now I firmly believe that between ACC, its renovations coming up, MCC and Ark, we have some of the best community centers um and recreation centers in all of Durham. And so uh they should be provided to Ajax residents first at a discounted rate or at the uh subsidized rate and then all everyone else if you want to use facilities you are welcome to but you're going to pay um kind of the cost recovery price for that. So that's where we stand and looking forward for council support. Thank you Jarrett. >> You're welcome. Um councelor Crawford I saw you in the speakers list as a secondary. Did you want to speak? Oh there you are. Good. >> Yeah. Sorry I keep cutting in and out of this meeting. Um yeah, no, I really don't have anything more to add than I support this motion completely. Um we want to be able to service our own residents and um you know, as much as I think probably our attraction to having non-residents uh coming in is the price of it. So I support this 100%. >> Okay, seeing no one else in the speakers list, please open the vote. and that carries. The next item supporting Ajax Pickering Roadwatch community safety initiatives moved by councelor Henry, second by councelor Kyler Moore and councelor Henry, please go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, this is just um um upkeeping um policy uh if you will. Um as it stands right now, um road watch signs are always put on the curb area because that's where they need to be seen. So, folks will slow down. They're no good if they're in somebody's garden and they can't be seen. And as the bylaw states currently right now, um they would have to be removed. So, we went back had a discussion with Um to the clerk, did you need to do another roll call? >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, no roll call needed, but I would like for the record to show that item 10.3 supporting Ajax Pickering Road Watch Community Safety Initiatives motion today did pass with uh a vote of 4 to three and the three members of council opposer, Mayor Collier, Regional Counselor Lee, and Regional Counselor Dyes. Thank you. >> Did you need us to do that vote again since it didn't register? >> Uh, no, through you, Mr. Mayor. did register on our system, but for the public record, we wanted to ensure that it was shown as a recorded vote through YouTube. >> Okay. I was just going to correct one item through that debate anyway, and that is the the partnership grant. I did confirm on the break that the $5,000 is a legacy um commitment from the partnership and it's for the ongoing operation of the Ajax Pickering Roadwatch. It's not for purchase of the signs. Just to make that clarification. Moving on to the next item, we have we were just about to vote on, let me pull it up, on the 10 2030 blowers temporary use bylaw. Was there anything further on that, Councelor Lee? Cue your mic if there is. >> Um, sorry, I'm just here to say no. Um, there's no point repeating myself, but just um I just think it's a great opportunity for the community uh to use land that is currently not being actively used. And so um and more importantly to uh for the town to try something it uh has not previously tried. Thank you. Chair, >> I wasn't actually asking you to repeat. I was just asking if I missed anything, but thank you for the clarification. I have two others in the speakers list now. Councelor Henry, you've spoken as I think, but go ahead. >> No, I haven't. Sorry, everybody missed me and just continued on. So, as a seconder, >> I wanted to give you I wanted to give you the opportunity to say that I supported the amendment, but nobody asked me. So, you know, there you go. All right. >> Councelor Bower, >> thank you, Mayor Collier. I did have a question. First of all, I love this idea and I congratulate the forward thinking of the property owners and the town uh for for being amendable to try this out. I think it's great especially for the residents who live nearby in W 2. So I just have a question about 1A to the mover and where it says a period of 24 months with the ability for further extensions subject to council approval. And you know we talked about um we want development to happen and and not take so long. We want approvals. We want permits. We want shovels in the ground. So I just want to understand is there a thought process of um could this be used for um delays in the process and how could we ensure that it's not? And also what if the extension you know for acceptable extension requests would something like uh you know the cost of materials is just too high or the cost of labor is just too high for us to proceed at this time would that be considered an acceptable reason for extension? Um, I'm not sure and neither you or I will be here to make that decision, but I'm not aware of anything in that would stop the council of the day from considering an extension if this language was not in the motion, but I'll ask the mover to answer your question. >> Thank you. >> Uh, thank you, chair, and thank you, Council Bar, for the question. I think there's a thousand reasons as we've learned over the past seven years of why developers don't necessarily build right away. I think through these merit directives which I believe um covers this property. You know, we've we've made it as enticing as as possible. But again, I'm using specifically 190 Westne because I remember um after they presented this was through one of our first um MOS's, you know, I asked when shovels going around. They said, "Oh, yeah, within a year." And now it's been three years. We're no further closer. I I I'm only envisioning a scenario where we don't we don't extend and then the v the land's just vacant and then you know nobody wins in that case. This language provides the council the time flexibility now to um provide maybe an exam. Maybe maybe there's a reason I have not thought of or maybe there is a perfectly rational reason like you said price of materials or anything like that and it just gives the future council that flexibility to say hey it sounds like a reasonable ask and great we still want you to build but maybe we'll extend you six months maybe we'll send you one year but by removing that it just means that after two years like this project is done part pending another full kind of like uh procedure by or the bylaw change so I just think it's just cleaner to provide an out to the future council to just have that flexib ility in case something happens, which again in every developer we've had, every full stop eel. So, let's give ourselves that flexibility to continue doing something unique and fun and benefit to the residents. >> Okay. No, I appreciate that answer. Thank you very much. And you don't think that a developer could use this to slow the process down? >> I think it's up to I'm going to support this first of all, but I I'm asking that question. I think it's up to the council at the time to decide whether they feel any um reasoning for delaying is valid or not. But >> got it. >> If there is valid reason, then let's continue uh utilizing this land while we still can. >> Thank you very much. Okay, >> thank you. >> That's my question. Mayor Ker. >> Okay, seeing nobody else in the speakers list, let's open the vote. That carries unanimously. I believe that concludes all of the motions. There we go. Yes, it does. Moving on to bylaws. Oh, sorry. Hold on one sec. Let me just go back to my agenda. Okay. Yeah. Moving on to bylaws. We just did W two. I think we're going to W one is next. Move by C. Shoot. Hold on a second. Sorry, it's hard to juggle all these things. I need a minute just to find my place here on this other screen. There we go. Uh moved by councelor Tyler Moore and second by councelor Crawford that bylaws 45 to-2026 to 47-2026 and 51 to 2026 be approved. Um if either of the mover the seconder has an issue, let me know. I'll put somebody else on. And this does not include the mayor's directive one for 60 blowers. These are just the other bylaws. Questions or comments? Hearing seeing none, please open the vote. Okay, that carries. Uh for the next one, which is the directive for 60 blowers, I'll put move by myself, seconded by councelor Lee that bylaws 48-2026 and 50-2026 be approved. Questions or comments on the OPA and zoning bylaw amendment directives? Hearing seeing none, please open the vote. And that carries unanimously. Thank you everyone. Miss here. Is there any notice of motion by members of council? Okay. Not seeing anyone. Any new business or announcements. Still not seeing anyone. Oh, there we go. That would shock me. Councelor Lee. >> Thank you. I was giving everyone else a chance first. Um, tomorrow is Asian Golden Ribbon Day. So, this was uh something that originated in Canada. It's a grass grassroots campaign. founders to stand in solidarity against the dramatic rise in anti-Asian racism, violence, and discrimination. We had uh passed a motion in support of this I think about four years ago to the day. So, I just wanted to reinforce that. Um coming up on Saturday is the first ever Mediva Awards. Um this hold hosted by Cultural Expressions and um uh just a really cool way to support black excellence uh within Durham region. So hopefully people we uh people will support that. Uh, those are the two. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. And still not seeing any other announcements. I feel like I'm missing something. Okay, here we go. Um, close session. There is no closed session. Confirming bylaw. We're under ward three. Moved by councelor Bower, second by councelor dies. that bylaw 52-2026 being a bylaw to confirm the proceedings of the council of the corporation of the town of Ajax at its regular meeting held on May 19th, 2026 be approved. Those in favor that carries. And our final order of business for today moved by councelor Lee second by councelor Henry that bylaw 52-2026 being a bylaw to confirm the proceedings of the count nope sorry moved by council le second by councelor Henry that the May 19th 2026 meeting of the council of town of Ajax be adjourned. Please open the vote. And that carries. Thank you everyone. Um, enjoy the rest of your day.