Transcript: Health Board Tackles Air, Opioid Crises - Board of Health (Hamilton) - April 27, 2026 | Summary 695

Health Board Tackles Air, Opioid Crises - Board of Health (Hamilton) - April 27, 2026

Sound check. 1 2 3. Sound check. 1 2 3. Hello and welcome to the board of health committee meeting for Monday, April 27th. I am your chair, War 2 city councelor Cameron Gretch, joined today by other members of the board of health, councelor Craig Casar, councelor Tammy Huang, councelor Alex Wilson, member Chelsea Kirkby, member Ryan Jansen, councelor Mark Tatterson, joining us online is Vice Chair Emil Joseph. Thanks for being here. I'm going to call the or the meeting to order because we have quorum for today's meeting. And the first item up for discussion today is the approval of our agenda. So we'll need someone to move that we approve our agenda and second it. Thank you. So I see councelor Casar and councelor Hang. And there's been a request from the city clerk on the item with respect to the elections to move it up in the agenda because he's not able to remain here for the rest of the day. So as soon as delegations that portion of the meeting is done, then we'll go right to the city clerk. Just one second. My computer is presenting an issue at this time. So, I'm going to go to the manual items here. Uh, it's been moved and seconded. All those in favor of the agenda, by show of hands, that carries. Thank you. Want to declarations of a conflict of interest. Anyone have a conflict of interest to declare for today's meeting? Member Kirkby, go ahead. Um yeah, I just add nondisqu nondisqualifying interest uh for item 8.3. So that's the evaluation of the Hamilton opioid action plan initiatives. Um just because I was consulted on the evaluation through my employment at YWCA Hamilton. Okay. And you can fill out the appropriate paperwork which it seems you've already done magically and file that with the city clerk. Any other conflicts of interest for today's meeting? And welcome to Member Chung. I don't see any other conflicts for today's meeting. will move on to the approval of the minutes of our previous meeting. Do I have a mover and second to approve the minutes of our previous meeting? Moved by member Jansen, seconded by Councelor Chatterson. Any questions, queries, or comments about the agenda from our previous meeting, the minutes, pardon me. No. All those in favor by show of hands. That's everyone that carries. Thank you very much. We're on to delegations today and we have one delegation item 6.1 from Evan Eubine. Is Evan here? I see Evan. Great. Evan, come on up. It's respecting item 7.1, the communication update respecting an environmental registry of Ontario posting related to Arclar Middle Defasco. And welcome Evan. You know how this works. I will say that if you'd like to adjust the height of the desk on your left hand side there's a little button you can push up and down to adjust the height of your desk. Otherwise, once your presentation's been loaded, you'll have 5 minutes. Check. One, two. Okay, we're good. Okay. Good morning, uh, board of health members, uh, counselors and citizen members of board of health. My name is Evan Eubine. Since uh September 2025, I've been working at Environment Hamilton. We've been closely monitoring our seller middle defasco and its progress on its coal phase out project which it announced publicly in uh 2021 in collaboration with the government of Canada. So on the agenda today, it was brought to the board's attention that there was a environmental compliance approval open for comment. Uh it was open January 12th until March 12th for comment. And so I was hoping to take this opportunity to explain more about what that is, why it's important. Uh just so some background to start with, in 2023, March 2023, this board of health and subsequently Hamilton city council passed a motion that opposed any extension of sight specific standards at our Seller Middle Defasco. So for those who don't know, Ontario has general air quality regulations and for heavy industrial polluters, it gives uh basically what is an exemption and they're allowed to pollute up to a higher limit. And so that's what a sight specific standard is. Some additional updates. So, like I was saying, in 2021, this project was announced to phase out coal at our seller Middle Defasco. Uh, then we get to the motion in March 2023. Um, September 2024, CBC Hamilton did an investigation, uh, confirmed that there wasn't any construction started yet. uh November 2025, a Hamilton resident filed a uh request for investigation into the pollution levels at Defasco. That request was denied, but the Ontario Ministry of Environment, Conservation, and Parks. And then early this year, CBC reported on changes to the project agreement. So, important notes, uh the amount was slightly increased to adjust for inflation. Uh the project timeline was apparently expanded, although the government officially says they still expect it to be complete by 2030. Uh and some other language in the agreement specifically around jobs was made more vague. In April, just recently, two weeks ago, Defasco announced it would be decommissioning uh one of its two remaining coke plants. So, the good news is this will improve air quality in Hamilton and we won't be wasting millions of dollars refurbishing outdated fossil fuel infrastructure. But the bad news is there's still no indication that DeFasco is interested in in committing to its its project. Uh in the interim, it's probably going to purchase coal um from elsewhere and continue on with its normal operation. So overall greenhouse gas emissions won't change. So now let's get to the environmental compliance approval. Um like I said it was posted in January. Uh the photo there is all of the details that were publicly submitted with the proposal. And actually these details were only posted after some lawyers with the Canadian Environmental Law Association requested it and that was still all they posted. Uh privately they gave us a little bit more information, but it still wasn't much. So what does the environmental compliance approval do? Um it sets operational limits for DeFasco. Um it defines the performance conditions they can operate in and importantly it allows for future construction and alterations of equipment to continue without any like rigorous approval. So that's the main thing that is being renewed here. Um if it's not renewed, Defasco will still continue to operate, but any construction it does will be under uh increased scrutiny from the public. So our concerns with this, Defasco has been operating under an abatement plan since its sight specific standards expired in 2023. Abatement plans are not supposed to be an indefinite operation uh stipulation. It's supposed to correct a violation of the air standard. It's now been three years under this abatement plan. The public hasn't been able to comment on the abatement plan. There's no proposed changes to the abatement plan or environmental compliance approval to reflect um this uncertainty. Uh my time is up. Uh would be about a minute longer if that's okay. Yeah. Go ahead. The only delegate we can we'll survive the extra minute. Go ahead. So there's no proposed changes to the abatement plan to reflect the uncertainty with its coal phase out. And actually if you look at its abatement plan, which uh we were able to get through a Freedom of Information request, um some of its equipment they justified not doing upgrades on because that equipment would be phased out. So now we're stuck with indefinite uh old equipment that's being used without upgrades because of this coal project with a deadline that we don't know when when this is going to happen. Um and there's no proposed changes to the environmental compliance approval to speed up uh the coal phase out project or increase transparency. Um, I can elaborate more on some of this stuff if anyone has questions. Um, so next steps, what we're asking, right? So, what can the board of health and Hamilton City Council do? Um it's it's been pretty demonstrated uh through many different local groups who have advocated through Ministry of Environment and Climate Change that they're far more interested in in helping industry than local residents. So, you know, anything that is done that should be kept in mind. However, when Hamilton City Council takes a stand, it's often galvanizing for the local community to push back on certain things, and that's the only uh pressure point that has been successful at at forcing uh the current provincial government to take action. Right. So, we're asking for a renewed call to oppose violations of of regular contaminant concentration standards and to oppose a renewal of the environmental compliance approval unless certain things are included that uh put it under increased public uh transparency that could hopefully speed up the project timeline. That's all I have for you. I'm happy to take any questions. Thanks very much. Just a little procedural guidance before we get to questions. So, in terms of what this body can do, we are a semi- autonomous board of health, which is a new thing for Hamilton. We can send information off. We can do things here and we can advocate as a board of health, but we can't direct council to do that. Frankly, us asking council to do something is a little bit awkward at this point. So, if you wanted to ask council to do that, you have to go through that council process directly. Also, we'll say there's been discussion here about air quality. A few of us have moved motions here at this board, myself, councelor Quang, councelor Nan, and so I encourage environment Hamilton to reach out and that's the way to do it in terms of getting a motion on the table. Right? So we're not going to be putting motions forward today as a response to a delegation. But if you want a motion to come up on the agenda for our next meeting, please reach out to those counselors individually and they can bring a motion and then we can speak to it at that time. On that point, first person with questions, councelor Wayne, go ahead. Thank you, Evan. And uh full disclosure, you and I have already been chatting about potentially putting a motion forward, so we're just working on that. Uh thank you for that. So I wonder in your last point, you talked about um essentially shoring up the ECA process. So I wonder if you could just help me understand how a motion like what are the what are the expected instructions that you're trying to give in that second point and I can't remember the actual wording. Um, so to include in the environmental compliance approval. Um, is that what you're asking? Sorry, I'm going to just check my oppose the renewal of the ECA unless enhanced air quality monitoring performance conditions and reported requirements are included. So, how do you expect that to happen? Okay, so that's a good question. There is precedent for this. Um, prochemical facilities have a technical standard. they have to adhere to. It has pretty rigorous air quality monitoring requirements. Currently, how air quality regulations work at Defasco is they have to model their air air emissions with a computer program. And using that model, they figure out, okay, this is what we predict the worst possible concentration could be. uh due to our emissions, concentration of a a harmful contaminant. And so they do that using a model. Now, what we've what we've seen in Ontario sometimes is these companies have this model and then they put real air quality monitors on the uh perimeter of their uh their uh plant and the air quality monitors give a different reading than what the model gives. Um which is to be expected. A model is only so good. So, um, yeah, when there's a increased, you know, public concern about how a company is operating, that's the most, uh, the easiest thing to do and at first is to put in actual monitors so that the public can see, uh, in real time what the emissions are like. Okay. Thank you. My last question through you chair is um how is this different from say the industry standard that DeFasco and the MECP keep saying that they are moving this is why they are not doing all this stuff is because they're working on an industry standard. So how would we differentiate between the two and that's my last question. Thank you. Right. So, uh, for those who don't know, since 2019, actually, DeFasco, Stelco, other steel manufacturers have been saying that they're working on an industry standard with the Ministry of Environment uh, conservation and parks. So, there's three ways to regulate air quality emissions at a heavy industry. One is you just go by the general Ontario air quality standard that's used across the board. Second, you can get an exemption with what's called a sight specific standard which is an upper limit you have to adhere to um which is what Defasco had up to 2023. And third is you can have an industry standard which more uh is not necessarily a limit on air pollution but it uh sets requirements for the equipment you need to use at your facility. Um and to make sure you have the newest equipment, you know, best best processes. That's there there are some technical standards in place for prochemical facilities in Ontario. there's still not a technical standard in place for steel manufacturing facilities even though they've been working on one apparently since 2019. Uh so yeah, it's it's just another area where we don't really know what's going on. Uh at worst it's being used to deflect from, you know, better regulations by saying, well, we're working on this, we're working on this. Thanks very much. And I'll just pass the chair briefly over to councelor Casar since you're in the room and vice chair Joseph is joining us remotely. It'll be easier for you to chair here. Just had a question myself about this. So you're here representing environment Hamilton and I know that this is something that's been worked on for a long time. You have stack watch other kinds of things that are going on. Do you have any anecdotal information you can share, other data you've collected to talk about sort of what you've observed, what volunteers have collected, what you've seen that may be different that's being reported? Yeah. So, anecdotally, a lot of residents, especially in the vicinity of the area, are, you know, it's a constant thing they have to deal with. Um, Environment Hamilton started a project uh before I started last year. I think it started in 2024 called What's the Grime, which is a partnership with a research group at McMaster and they're looking into the chemical content of soot residue that builds up in neighborhoods, you know, on houses, on playground equipment, and they're looking into, you know, like what the content actually is. Um, and we put out a call for people to volunteer for that project and take measurements at their household and there were too many applicants for us to to include everyone. Right. So there's a that's that's just one example of how there is a very high interest of this in the community and and people do experience it happening uh on a daily basis. Thanks very much. Those are my questions. I'll take the chair back. I don't see questions from others at this time. So, thank you very much for your delegation. At this time, we need someone to move to receive. Moved by councelor Alex Wilson, seconded by councelor Huang to receive today's delegation. That's a vote by show of hands. All those in favor of receiving the delegation. That is everyone. It's been received. And now we're on to items for consideration. Unless there's something else, sorry, I see someone indicating one moment. Thank you. Through you, chair. This wasn't a question for the delegate. It was a question for staff on the delegation if that's okay at this time. The item is 7.1 and we can do it on 7. That makes sense. Okay. Yep. Just a second here. Yep. Exactly. We can do it when we get to 7.1. We're now on to items for consideration. We've rearranged our agenda slightly. This is item eight. Now magically will become item seven later, but it's uh CC2601, the adoption of the use of city resources during an election policy. Item 8.4. Can I have a move written second on the following that the use of city resources during election policy including included as appendix A to this report be approved and adopted by the board of health as a board of health policy and that staff be directed to notify the board of health of future amendments to the policy is required. So I need a mover and second on that and then we can have discussion. Moved by councelor Alex Wilson and seconded by councelor Tatison. Is there any discussion on this item? I'm not seeing any. So, I'll pass the chair again to councelor Casar. And I'll just jump in to say that I think it's worth pointing out that this is pretty similar to the same thing that we have at council. I think it's the same actually for council and for counselors. We're adopting it here as the board of health because we need to have a policy here as well in case anybody on the board of health is running in a municipal election and knows exactly how and when they can use municipal resources up until the time they can use municipal resources and so on. This board does not have access to municipal resources in the same way counselors do. But it's still important for us to make sure no one's going around doing something they shouldn't be doing. So everyone, just as a highlight for you, if you're thinking of running in a municipal election as a member of the board of health, just make sure you read the policy. Take the chair back. We'll go on to an electronic vote for this. All those in favor are opposed and it will be coming up shortly. It's not up yet for me. I'll just double check. It's loading at this time. Those watching, this is a very exciting time for us during the pause where we wait for the vote to load in the electronic system. And the vote is up. And that vote carries 9 to zero. Thank you very much. We're now on to items for information. So we're going to deal with items 7.1 to 7.6 together. I know someone's already asked to take out 7.1 to speak to it. So we can do that when we're going through these these few sorry 7.1 and 7.6. Can I have a mover and second or put those on the floor? Councelor Hang member Jansen and there are questions on 7.1. We'll start with councelor Wilson. Go ahead. Uh thank you through you chair. Just a very very brief kind of preamble. I heard um concerns raised with respect to the content of the arrow posting. So there's less information than there typically is or it's vague. We had that experience with award 13 um ero posting recently. That's not necessarily a board of health specific concern, but the amount of information there, that's a concern I heard. I heard a concern that the technical standards that industry is held against, whether it's a steel plant or a lime facility, um there's maybe a belief or a concern that the ministry is not uh using the most up-to-date science, is not uh enforcing the strictest standards that could promote health, but the ministry is kind of falling down is maybe the concern that was raised there. And then I also heard a concern about how we're monitoring, tracking abatement, and what's actually going on in our communities. what are the actual kind of levels of toxins etc. Um, would it be possible for staff to comment on where they see uh the board of health or rather the kind of the health uh health team at the city public health the city being best able to support or where there might be gaps because I can understand some of those are more advocacy based concerns or they're technical concerns that maybe are held at the provincial level but then there's you know what's actually happening in our backyard and regardless of what the provincial legislation is I think there's some argument that we have some jurisdiction over what's in the air in our city and how we measure that And so I'm just trying to understand um based on kind of the breadth of concerns had where staff maybe see us being most effective um as a board of health or as a public health agency through the chair. Uh good morning Kev McDonald, director healthy environments with Hamilton Public Health. Thank you very much for the question, counselor. Um I'll begin by saying uh Hamilton public health uh monitor and assess and submit comments to the ERO um quite frequently in terms of where it's deemed that uh the implications concern public health and such was the case with this specific ERO around our Mattel Defasco uh which resulted in our decision to circulate a communications update to the board should members wish to uh review and potentially comment on their own as well. uh picking up on your question and in furtherance of the delegates's comments which uh much of which we would support uh in terms of the chronology uh and the overall assessment of the situation here in Hamilton. Uh I would uh once again highlight the opportunity for advocacy. Uh I certainly can't speak to the motivations of the company or the ministry. Um that I'm not in a position to do that. Uh but certainly we recognize there are some gaps uh and uh the opportunities to comment and to advocate uh continue locally uh as was referenced we're seeing uh local action in terms of some research uh not only from McMaster University. as highlighted by the delegate. Uh but also uh we have a report forthcoming next month um uh resulting from a motion uh from the earlier public health committee and this board of health uh regarding examining uh what people are commonly referring to as soot in certain areas of the city mostly in direct proximity to industry and manufacturing and the larger industrial uh emitters in the city. Um so there are opportunities. We do have a good working relationship with our counterparts at the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks. We do appreciate some of the um challenges they're facing in terms of the uh creation of a a steel specific standard uh for industry. Um we continue to talk with them about such uh and we are working closely uh with a number of different community partners through Clean Air Hamilton uh who also take a keen interest in this matter. Um, with that I'll I'll turn it over to Matt Lawson uh manager of health hazards uh and vectorbor diseases who has the air quality group within his uh program area should he have any further questions or comments. Thank you, Kevin. Matt Lawson, manager of health hazards, vectorbor diseases with Hamilton Public Health. Um through the chair to councelor Wilson's question related to um what we're seeing locally related to this file, the advocacy point that Kevin described when we support or submit comments to the ERRO. Uh in this particular case, it did echo many of the concerns that the delegate provided. Uh the letter that was submitted to the ERO on behalf of the program indicated that um the request was to allow limited operational flexibility within their um uh environmental compliance approval which the program viewed as um without it without the sight specific standards being updated since 2023 which they expired. um that the program did not agree with granting limited operational flexibility uh because we saw it as prioritizing convenience for the industry over the health concerns of the community. So that is the voice and the message that was carried forward in that letter. Um so from an advocacy standpoint, there's that. uh we continue to encourage um to try and get that steel standard uh made the that they've been promising for a while. That's something out of our control. Um that is with the provincial level ministry of the environment as I understand it that the standard is being developed in the Toronto offices. It doesn't have anything to do with our local Hamilton office. Um however the Hamilton office would be involved I would imagine uh talking to the engineers who are developing the standard and then you overlay other considerations um potentially for the government. So that's somewhere that I shouldn't comment I guess. Um but the health department's concern is related to how it does impact the community's health. And to that end as well um we have information some of the best information we have locally would be through our uh community health status report the population health status report that does uh attempt to define how many premature deaths and morbidity and mortality related to air quality. Um, councelor, if there's further if you further questions within that, I'd be happy to just I'll be brief. Um, I think that does help if there could just be a specific comment. I forget if I'm using the correct terminology, but around the ring or perimeter monitoring that was brought up with respect to the steel um AMD lands that so is that something where obviously having population level data is useful, but actually having contaminant or testing data of air being able to say on this day this was this I know there's already a report back happening with the black soot that's coming. So I don't need a commentary on that. I understand that role in this but just specific the request around perimeter monitoring. I'll bring up I think the bigger piece I'm going to is there's a couple of these around the city. There's um in Flambor we have the quarry GFL has doesn't have a sight specific but is has its own kind of challenges right now where there's requests from community to have an enhanced monitoring regime. How are we evaluating those requests? How are we understanding our jurisdiction or responsibility in those requests where people aren't feeling that the province is doing its job or isn't holding us to the high enough standard and they'd like a higher analysis regime done so they can say I know definitively what's in my water, what's in my soil, what's in my air given that gap. And so specific to the monitoring here, just wondering if you could comment where do you see our role um with respect to the perimeter monitoring that was requested as a mitigation under the ECA through the chair to the counselor. Um, with respect to the air monitoring related to industry and and regulation, the perimeter air monitoring is a good start to see whether they're complying with what they've they've been issued a permit to pollute at. But from a public health perspective, I think it's very important for us to go beyond the perimeter into the community to measure what we're observing there because that is where exposure to the individuals is going to be happening. uh the Hamilton Air Monitoring Network in Hamilton does provide some of that function in the heavily industrialized north end, but um in wards such as uh yours out by the quarry, we don't have that luxury to observe what's being monitored in that community. That said, um City of Hamilton since 2015 has had uh two mobile air monitoring units, the airpointers that can be moved around. they may not measure exactly what we want to see given any ECA, but there is a suite of chemicals that can be monitored with them. Um, and so from that perspective, we find that that's the most useful and informative information about the actual risks presented to the population. from the perimeter monitoring of air quality. It is a strict regulatory exercise to see at the fence line what's coming, what is the concentration of what's been modeled and are we seeing it at those levels or not. And if they're seeing it above that, that's where the ministry's role is to then regulate. Thank you. I think I can follow up outside. I just if that data doesn't exist, then the ministry is not regulating is I think the trap we find ourselves in right now. And I guess I'm I'm wondering how we close that gap, but I can have the rest of that conversation offline. I think it's helpful to know that both staff commented in support of the de delegating community's comments on the arrow posting with respect to the approval and that there is monitoring of results and we're trying to move this forward. But I appreciate I think uh to further the conversation, but appreciating the time here today. Thank you. Thanks very much. Is anybody else wanted to raise any of the other items 7.1 through 7.6 for comment? I'm not seeing anyone wishing to do so. So, by a show of hands, we're going to receive 7.1 to 7.6. All those in favor? Thank you. Those are received. And that is carried. We're on to 7.7, which is the board of health 26016. It's a program update series that staff are bringing to us here at the board of health. This one's on food safety. Call upon Richard McDonald, the manager for environmental health, to provide the committee with a presentation on this item. and then once the presentation is over we will take questions. Y thank you chair. I'm just going to give a brief introduction if that's all right just to speak about the um the program update series. So, um, when we've been out doing the, uh, the discussions we've had with each of you last year and again this year, as well as just during the, uh, meetings themselves, we've heard a desire to have some more information about the programs that we do, and to, uh, also have more information about performance, how well are we doing with those, and value for money. And so, we came up with the ideas, the uh, leadership team to do these program updates. They're a standardized way. We plan on doing them with um we're going to do about five programs between now and through the end of this term of the board and uh do them across a variety of programs and services. Present to you information relevant to what I was just saying and would very much like your feedback as to whether these are useful or not as we go forward or what you might like to see changed. I mean, you know, as we go through them as well, not just wait till the end of the five, but Richard has kindly um offered to be the first to come forward with a food safety program update and so we are very pleased to be starting them and kicking them off today. Thanks very much. Take it away, Richard. Good morning. Thank you. My name is Richard McDonald. I'm the food and water safety manager with Hamilton Public Health Services. It's my pleasure to be here today and present an overview of the food safety program. I'll walk through our mandate, key population health trends, how the program operates, and highlight our 2025 activities and outcomes. Next slide. To begin, I'll provide a quick overview of what we mean by a food safety program. At a center, the program ensures that food is safe to eat, properly handled, and prepared in sanitary conditions. It brings together inspections, education, enforcement to reduce the risk of food born illness. Our work is guided by a legislative and regulatory framework. The health production and promotion act provides legal authority to boards of health in Ontario and outlines our responsibilities. Under that, the food premises regulation sets out specific requirements that food operators must follow, things like sanitation, safe water supply, temperature control, and pest management. The Ontario public health standards then guide how we deliver our program, ensuring consistency and accountability across the province. Together, this framework allows us to prevent illness, reduce exposure to hazards, and support safe food handling practices. This work is carried out by our incredible team of certified public health inspectors who focus on identifying and reducing risks in food premises, protect public health, and improve public health outcomes. Next slide. Looking at public, sorry, population health trends, illnesses affecting the stomach and intestines in Hamilton remained relatively stable over the past decade, averaging of 266 reported cases per year. While Hamilton Public Health is currently investigating Salmonella outbreak that has caused serious illness and affecting many people, it's important to view this within the broader community trend. We've seen a decreased trend with Salmonella with rates declining over 37% since 2015. Our local rate is actually lower than the provincial average, which is encouraging news. However, it's important to understand that reported cases only tell part of the story. Only about 9% of individuals with GI illness or gastrointestinal illness seek medical care, meaning the vast majority of cases go under reportported. Based on national estimates, we believe that it's close to 98,000 cases in Hamilton in 2024 were not captured in official data. This gap is significant in terms of real world impact. For some individuals and families, this could mean lost income, direct financial costs for child care or overthec counter medication, absenteeism in the workplace or at school. This highlights why prevention is so critical because many cases never enter the health care system yet carry meaningful personal, economic, and community impact. Next slide. Our program uses a riskbased approach to determine how often food premises are inspected. Premises are classified as high, moderate, or low risk based on factors like the type of food handled, preparation methods, volume of food, population served, and compliance history. High-risisk premises, such as those handling complex food preparation, are inspected more frequently, while low-risisk settings are inspected less often. When a food safety issue is identified, we use a progressive enforcement approach, starting with education and moving to written orders, closures, or fines if necessary. We also investigate all reports of suspect food illnesses. In addition, we offer food handler training and certification to support practices at the operator level. And to promote transparency, inspection results are shared publicly both on-site and online, helping residents make informed choices. You may be familiar with the current three card disclosure system is green pass or yellow conditional pass or red closed sign. Next slide. This slide provides a snapshot of the scale of the food safety program. We've inspected more than 3,500 food premises across Hamilton. To support this, we've conducted 6,000 over 6,100 routine inspections and more than 800 reinspections to ensure issues were corrected. Food handler training is also a key requirement of our program. Over 250 individuals have participated and more than 200 certificates were issued. We continue to phone focus on accessibility as well, offering food handler training materials in mult multiple languages and working with community partners to support participation. For example, collaborating with the YW.CA support food handler certification for newcomers to Canada. Next slide. In addition to routine inspections, a significant portion of our work uh involves responding to complaints and service requests. We responded to over 1,800 complaints and service requests. Complaints are often related to food handling, sanitation, or pest concerns. Service requests can include pre-opening inspections, consultations, and general inquiries from the public. We also conducted 168 foodborne illness investigations. These are critical in identifying potential sources and prevent prevent further spread of illness. Another key program area is the support of special event activities in the city. We proactively risk assess over 300 attended 80 and completed more than 900 inspections and reinspections combined. We are seeing increasing complexity and special events with more mobile vendors, temporary food booths, and diverse food preparation methods. This requires more detailed planning and coordination, including reviewing vendor lists, food sources, preparation processes, etc. These proactive risk assessments and inspections are especially important for large events such as when on a peach festival or super call where thousands or tens of thousands of people may be served, helping prevent food born illness outbreaks before they occur. Next slide. A key focus of our program is protecting populations that are more vulnerable to s to severe food born illness. This includes young children and older adults who are at risk of serious complications if they become ill. We prioritize oversight in settings that serve these groups such as long-term care homes, childcare centers, hospitals, and other institutions. This would include over 400 facilities, all of which received a routine inspection from food safety as well as the infection prevention and control team. Next slide. Food safety is a shared responsibility and relies on strong partnerships. At a federal level, we work with agencies responsible for national food safety standards. At a provincial level, we collaborate with ministries in the public health Ontario for guidance and laboratory support. Locally, we work closely with public health units and our city departments, including licensing, bylaw, Hamilton water, building, and fire. We also collaborate through a centralized city of Hamilton special events advisory team to support special event planning with all these various departments. In addition, we partner with schools and community organization to support safe food practice in schools, childcare centers, settings, and community programs. Next slide. To support all of this work, a program operates with a budget of approximately $2.2 million and an incredible team of 15.5 full-time equivalent staff. These resources support inspections, the investigations, education, and enforcement activities across the city. Next slide. With this context in mind, I'll move into impact. How this work translates into measurable outcomes. We achieved 100% completion of all required routine inspection across all food premises. We also s saw improved outcomes in food handler certification with over 80% of participants successfully becoming certified. This is an important step because education one of our most effective prevention tools. In addition, all suspect food born illness cases were investigated within 24 to 48 hours. Next slide. This slide highlights inspection findings. About 23% of routine inspections identify critical infractions such as impro improper food temperatures or crosscontamination issues that could pose a potential health risk and require immediate corrective action. 40% of the time it was identified at non-critical issues such as minor cleanliness or maintenance concerns and 37% found no infractions. Next slide. When more serious or ongoing issues are identified, enforcement actions may be required. This includes this included closures, conditional passes, and tickets. Closures are used when an immediate health risk health risk is and operators must stop serving to the public until the issue is resolved. Conditional passes indicate significant non-compliance, but corrective actions are immediately implemented by public health inspectors with a follow-up inspection typically within 48 to 72 hours. While these represent a relatively small proportion of overall inspections, they aren't important tools of ensuring compliance and protecting public health. In most cases, operators come into compliance. once the issues are identified. Next slide. We also focus on continuously improving how we deliver our program. This includes improving efficiency, making better use of resources, enhancing data systems. For example, we've adjusted staff set uh staffing for special events to boost overtime costs while maintaining service levels. We've also implemented application improvements to support inspections and data collection. In addition, we are currently participating in a provincial quality improve improvement collaborative to share best practices and strengthen consistency across health units. This ensures our program continues to evolve and respond to changing needs. Next slide. I'll close with this key message that a strong food safety practice in food settings supported by routine inspections, education, enforcement all play a critical role in reducing the risk of food born illness. They also help build and maintain public confidence in the safety of the food served in our community. Next slide. And with that, I'll thank you for my time, for your time and attention today, and I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. All right, members of the board of health, this your chance to ask any questions about our safety programs, and I'll look for people with questions at this time. I'm not seeing anyone with questions at this time. Just a moment here. So, we're going to need to receive the presentation. Oh, pardon me. I didn't see you there, Vice Chair Joseph. Go ahead. Hi, good morning. Uh, I guess my question is, um, a little bit of understanding how things work and, uh, maybe a question to for staff. Um so when there is a a significant event or adverse incident uh outbreak um how does the program respond to um you know the I guess what I don't know how to how to word this but um you know a lapse or uh something that wasn't caught uh you know in an instance where something is given a pass or a conditional pass and then you have a an outbreak uh and people become ill. Where does the learning happen in the programmatic structure in terms of evaluation and feedback loop such that uh an event like that is uh looked into maybe uh in in terms of an inquiry um so that learnings can be uh ascertained and and uh maybe the plans can change or uh be amended or adapt. through the chair. Thanks for the question. Um, Elizabeth Richardson, medical officer health. the um in the case of a significant event such as what you're describing an outbreak or the like I mean the uh the outbreak itself is always managed in real time and part of that real-time process is always looking at the history of what has gone on with the uh the particular premise or particular issue that we're dealing with and trying to understand it in that context. So it's very much a part of the active investigation and further when that that outbreak is over there's a period for reflection a review if you will to to look at any other lessons learned you know once we're out of the heat of the moment in responding to the to the issue and undertaking the investigation and focus there we always do look back to see if there's any other lessons that we could we could learn as we go through. So that's the process with any significant event um or any sort of unusual event that we might have. Can I just maybe I think the other part of Dr. Joseph's question was really about what happens next though, right? So you reflecting back on what happens you're addressing the immediate issue but then based on what was presented I think we have a picture of that but then what changes in terms of the next steps because you know if a premise passed or a premise fail whatever happened in the past might give us an indication of what's happening but then what is the action that we take going forward and thanks for that clarification chair I'll turn that over to Richard to give an idea of what happens if that's uh if that's occurred if there's been something identified. Thank you to the chair. Um so to Elizabeth's Dr. Richard's point, um we do have a critical incident review after the fact in sort of I'll say a debrief where we collect all the investigation information, inspections information, do a review of the establishment. Now through the chair, is the question about what happens within an establishment or just simply within our own program area? I think both. So what h what happens? Okay. So I think we addressed the first question again. It's that collecting information, doing a critical incident review and a debrief about what was learned, what was understood, and what happened as far as an incident. Now, every incident like this is unique in its own way. Um there's no one outbreak investigation that is exactly the same. Um but we do have our internal policies and procedures that we do follow to risk assess an establishment to ensure that it can safely reopen again. Okay. So, I think if I have the answer to the question so far, Dr. Joseph, if you have follow-ups, that's good. But I think what's being said is that there's a review that's done, documentation that's made, an assessment about the further risks going forward. Does that answer your question? Yeah, mostly. Um yeah I'm just thinking about it you know well if um in the critical incident review both what's happening in the place and uh what's happening with process and procedure and program in terms of public health that there's um I guess documented accountable traceable trackable uh responsible measures to ensure that when a critical incident is looked at that uh what could be done differently also happens internally not just at the site but I guess it's both and right um so it sounds like when there's a critical incident uh there is a review that review is kind of 360 and where there's changes to be recommended um in terms of practices policies or programs that those would be implemented after the review upon recommendations of review. Am I correct? I'll turn to staff for an answer. Y through the chair. That's correct. And I would note we're always looking at things and learning and and so if there's things we don't just wait till after the incident, they will be implemented as we go. If there uh things we need to do either for the premise or in terms of our work, um they're implemented as we go and then the the larger sort of policy writing and those sorts of things happen. um after the uh after it's complete. Thanks very much. We have other speakers on the list now. I'll turn first to Councelor Tennis, then member Jansen. Hi, I'm just going to ask a question about the school boards and there and how public health interacts with them for their snack programs. Is that a requirement that they have to follow certain guidelines for that through the chair? Yes, that is correct. Yes. uh before and after care programs. Uh my understanding is that they are looked at and we do engage with our local boards of health or boards of uh education uh for food safety practices. Okay. And um generally the school boards are I guess I guess the question is are they are they generally passing inspections at first inspection or is it taking you know warnings and so forth through the chair? Well, I can't speak to specific schools or which board and uh what I can say is many of these um settings are considered a low risk. So, typically it's small things like cutting apples, uh crackers and cheese and things of that sort that do present a very very low risk of transmission of illness. So, I can't say that specifically that we're seeing a trend that there's a problem. Um but they are low risk settings. They would be considered. Okay. Thank you very much. No more questions. Thanks, Councelor Jison. On to member Jansen. Thanks so much through the chair and maybe just a comment on the exercise on the whole. I really appreciate this opportunity to hear from as I heard specific programs and this program specifically um and the hard work that's being done with this team. I did have a question on so slides 10 through 12 spoke about uh there were three slides about the impact measures. Um, and I'm just wanting to be sure. I'm I'm certainly not a quality specialist, but these they they seem more like output measures um rather than outcome or impact measures. And I'm just wondering, I guess um to help me understand how uh again this program or or um uh staff more broadly, how we think through the difference between output, outcome, and impact measures. And and I think well I'll pause that there with that question. Thanks through the chair. Uh indeed the so you know as we were putting together the outline for this slide the slide presentations that you're going to see here and over the ones going forward you know we had to sort of choose some standardized names to use. And so um you know the impact slides are meant to represent the kinds of indicators that the program may have. When we think about indicators, we do of course have, you know, process measures, we have outputs, we have impact measures, and we have outcome measures. And and, you know, those are harder and harder to collect the further down that list that you go. Um, we actually just did a a workshop um last week with all of our management team talking about, you know, how can we move further down that list uh as we go forward, but a number of our programs and services, it's quite hard to move into impact and outcome. Um, if you think about this program in particular, and I don't want to put words in Richard's mouth, um, you know, really looking to see the change in disease, uh, rates that are specific to, sorry, that should be on silent. Um, they are, um, you know, that they're the kind of trends that he outlined for you at the beginning of the of the presentation. Difficult to tie solely back to this particular program, but gives us an overall sense of how we're doing from a community perspective. So I think he preferred to give them to you as population indicators rather than give you as specific measures of the of the program's impact. And and so here we are seeing more the output uh type ones. Um and so I think when we go through the presentations with the different source you'll see a bit of a range of those types of indicators as we go through that staff do use to track. And so I'll just turn to Richard to ask if he wants to provide any further detail on that piece. I'm seeing a no. So, thank you very much for your question, Member Jansen. I'm not seeing further questions, so I'll need a mover and second to receive this report and presentation. Moved by councelor Hang, seconded by member Kirkby, and we'll do a show of hands. This is an information item. All those in favor by show of hands. That's everyone. It carries. Now, we're back to items for consideration. 8.1 Food Advisory Committee Transition BOH26011. May I please have a mover and a second to put the report on the floor? Moved by Councelor Hang, seconded by Councelor Tavison. Is there any discussion on this report? I'm not seeing any. So, we're going to go to our electronic vote and that will come up shortly and I'll let you know when it's up. It's up. Please vote. And that carries 9 to zero. We're on to 8.2 Board of Health 26012. The Hamilton Public Health Public Beach Water Quality Monitoring at the Binbrook Conservation Area. Can I please have a mover and second to put this report on the floor? Councelor Tatison was fast off the draw. Councelor Huang, is there any discussion on this? Councelor Tatterson, just want to thank Hamilton Public Health for working with the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority to come to a resolution over this and um help move things forward. So, I appreciate the efforts. Wonderful. Any further speakers? I'm not seeing any. We'll go to the electronic vote and it's up. Please indicate your vote. That carries 90. On to 8.3. Board of Health 26015, an evaluation of Hamilton opioid action plan initiatives. This is an outstanding business list item. We please have a mover and a second to put the report on the floor. Moved by councelor Hang, seconded by member Jansen. Is there any discussion on this item? I'm not seeing any. So, we'll go to the electronic vote. And that is up now and that carries eight and 10 zero with one abstension. Sorry through the chair. Just to say that the abstension is not necessary. Yeah, you have a non-disqualifying conflict of interest and so we'll mark your vote as in favor if that's okay with you. It is okay. Thank you. Only for disqualifying. Do you have to vote an abstension? It's okay. These technical things are just technical and easily easy to resolve. So that carries 90. We're now on to amendments to the outstanding business list. Can I please have a mover and second or to approve the amendments to the outstanding business list? Moved by councelor Casar, seconded by councelor Hang. Any hot discussion on the outstanding business list or cold discussion for that matter? None. Okay. Oh, pardon me. I see someone here. One moment. Go ahead. Member Jansen. Thank you so much. Um, I did want to ask uh Okay. So, on board of health uh 26015, the evaluation of the Hamilton opioid action plan initiatives. Um, I believe I'm in the right spot here. Page 11, uh, four lines from the top, it reads, um, uh, as the only consumption and treatment service site in Hamilton was required to close in April 2024. I'm just wondering if that's a typo and supposed to read April 2025. Yes. So, we're going to go back in time now, I guess, and we're going to go backwards. It's okay. It's No, again, uh, this is not a crisis. It's a technicality. So, you're asking a question about something which we can answer. So, we're going to answer it. And the question is, is that the correct information or is it should be 2025? And if you wouldn't mind just saying again where that was. Uh page 11, four lines from the top. So page 11 of BOH26015. And about four lines from the top of that page. We're just verifying whether that date is correct. Hello, Melissa Bixa, director of epidemiology and well-being. Uh through the chair to the member. Uh thank you. Yes. Uh for the table, we will um we can amend that. Thank you. Okay, that's great. Thanks. And and I it just flagged to me. I know that this is going to come up when we speak about the motion uh that will be coming. Um, but I think it's just important in so far as this is going to council to have uh the proximity of that closure April 2025. Um, down at the bottom it speaks to the opioid related paramedic calls and emergency department visits uh remaining stable from 2023 to early 2025 but then increases beginning in May 2025. Um, so again just having that clear temporal line um in so far as we can draw a causal analysis there. I think that that's useful. Thanks. Thanks. I don't think there's a response to that. You were just making a comment. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you so much. I don't see anybody else on the list for the outstanding business list. On that note, we'll require electronic vote and that electronic vote is up. So, please indicate your vote. That carries 90. We're on to motions and we have a motion 9.1 correspondence concerning provincial actions relating to the opioid crisis. If it's okay with everyone, please don't read the whole motion into the record. We all have it already. I'll just give you some time to introduce your motion and speak to it. It's moved by member Jansen and seconded by member Kirkby. And once you've introduced it, then we'll have a chance for discussion. Go ahead. I will sit on my hands here. Uh thanks. I I think the motion is fairly self-explanatory and uh I mean I introduced it in that comment uh there a little bit earlier. Um I think that where this comes from is a lot of the conversation that has been had both at the board of health. Um I know um uh our last meeting we were talking about the difference between a crisis and an emergency and that we are in both of them. Um but uh but then further that uh there are many levers of change that exist within the jurisdiction of the province and I think that uh this motion will allow us to um advocate for uh some of those um uh provincial levers that can ameliate the situation that we find uh in downtown Hamilton. So, my hope is that this is an advocacy exercise primarily. Um, but I'm open to uh further conversation and dialogue about it. Thank you. Thanks. I don't see further people with questions I want to ask Dr. Richardson, maybe if you could just This is our first time as the board of health directly advocating to the province on something like this. So, could you maybe just explain to the board of health what the process looks like in terms of if the motion is approved, what happens next? Thanks very much. Sorry. So if there's um advocacy that you wish to write this correspondence that we develop and uh that reflects the motion itself and I believe usually the motion is added to it and then the um uh the letter goes through the clerk's office through Matt and he will work with the chair and uh we'll ensure it's appropriate reflects the information that was asked for and then subsequently the chair submits it to the province. Okay. Okay. Just wanted everyone to know what's going to happen, right? So, we will try and make sure we circulate that. When it comes to me, I'll circulate it to members to make sure nothing was overlooked before we send it on. Just wanted to make sure you understood what the process was going to be. Any further discussion on this motion or questions for staff? I'm not seeing any. We'll go to the vote and it'll be electronic. Pardon me. We're going to go back in time uh remotely for further technicality. Councelor Hang. Um I'm just thinking in my brain about whether this uh copy should be sent to the AMO health task force um as a resolution as well. So it gets added on to their um advocacy work with the Ministry of Health. So perhaps I'll ask that if there's an amendment to add um that this also gets circulated to the EMO um health task force. Okay. Okay. So, if the mover and second are okay with it, we could amend the motion to say that it gets added to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario's Health Task Force, also sent over to them just they can also advocate. Is that fine? I'm seeing nodings of heads. Is that okay with you, Councelor Hang? Legislative Coordinator Goce has written that down. Everyone's good. Any further speakers on this item? I'm not seeing any. We will go to the electronic vote for real this time. And it's up. Please indicate your vote. And that carries 920. Being that there are no notices of motion, we'll move to bylaws, can I please have a mover and second to approve the bills for today's meeting or the bill itself? Yes, councelor Casar. Councelor Hang. I don't believe there'll be discussion, but I'm going to look real hard. In case anyone has a feeling about the bill, I don't see it. This will also be electronic vote and it's up. Please indicate your vote. That's carried 90. As there is no further business for the board of health, it is adjourned at 10:33 a.m. Thanks for being here today, everyone. The next meeting will be held on Monday, May 25th, 2026 at 9:30 in the morning. Have a good day.

Full Transcript