Transcript: Audit Costs, Oversight Reforms Debated - Audit Committee - February 25, 2026 | Summary 751

Good afternoon everyone. This is the first meeting of the audit committee. The city of London is situated in the traditional lands of the Nshbach, Hoson, Lapawak, and Adawandrin. We honor and respect the history, language, and culture of the diverse indigenous people who call this territory home. The city of London is currently home to many first nation matey and Inuit. Today as representatives of the people of the city of London, we are grateful to have the opportunity to work and live in this territory. For everyone's information, uh councelor Cuddi is uh ill and will be absent today. Councelor members Stevenson and Pribble are in ch in chambers and Chima is with us online. So we do have quorum and we'll proceed. The City of London is committed to making every effort to provide alternate formats and communication supports for meetings upon request. To make a request specific to this meeting, please contact accessibility atlondon.ca or 519-661-2489 extension 2425. I'm calling the meeting to order and looking to members of committee for disclosures of pecunary interest. I see none in chambers and none online. The next item we have is the election of the vice chair for the term ending November 15, 2026. Opening the floor to nominations or selfnominations. Councelor Privile. I would like to nominate Council Stevenson. Thank you. Um Councelor Stevenson, would you accept? I would accept. Thanks. Um looking to see if there's anyone further looking to serve as vice chair. See no hands in chambers or no hands online. And it's been moved by councelor member Pribble and seconded by member Stevenson. All in favor of count Stevenson for the vice chair term ending November 15, 2026 which is this end of this term of council by a show of hands. Motion carries. Thank you and congratulations and thank you for being willing to continue serving as vice chair. Uh consent, there are no consent items today. No scheduled items. items for direction. There is seven. We're going to go through them numerically as they laid are laid out. Um I'll note that if there are presenters online from any of our groups and if you have connectivity issues, uh feel free to turn off your cameras if that works easier for you based on where you might be located. Um 4.1, we will start with requests for proposals for internal audit services. We'll look to see um there is A through E. Looking to see if anyone would move that to get it on the floor and then we can start with questions. It is moved by councelor Prible, seconded by Stevenson. Opening the floor to questions and if anyone would like any part of it uh called separate, just let me know. Yeah, just 4.1. I'm just going to go by them individually. I'll note that some of our presentations today have some of the reports today have presentations that go with them. So just and they're all items for direction. So just one at a time. So 4.1 only is on the floor. That starts on page two. Looking to see if there any questions or comments. I see none online. Looking in chambers. Okay, I'm ready to call the question then. All in favor of the recommendation of 4.1 A through E by a show of hands. Motion carries. Thank you. That takes us on to 4.2. This is the audit planning report for the year ending December 31st, 2025. It's a KPMG report. Um they are with us in chambers. Traditionally, they have five minutes for presentation. They've requested 10. As you remember in the past, I've made them accidentally speedread through it. So looking to see if we're any objections to the 10 minutes. Nope. Okay. So putting that on the floor. I have a mover in C in priable seconder in Stevenson. Miss Denbach. Thank you for joining us. Uh the floor is yours to you and your team. Thank you very much Madam Chair and thank you for having us here this afternoon. Uh we would like to walk you through the highlights of our audit planning report for the year ended December 31st, 2025 as it relates to the external financial statement audit. Uh we will be referring to the page numbers in our report. And I just want to say uh up front we'll the numbers we'll use are the ones at the bottom corner of our uh our audit planning report. Um just so that everyone can follow along as as needed. Um starting on page four of our report um the audit highlights. So, just a reminder, this report contains the items we're required to communicate with you under Canadian auditing standards, as well as a general approach to our external audit plan and some additional information that we thought you might find useful in your governance role over the external audit process. Uh, so that's sort of all contained within this report. Um it's meant to outline how we plan to conduct our audit for the upcoming year and then we'll report back to the committee in June with our audit findings at the completion of the audit. Um Melissa is going to go over the details uh of the items on this page in a little bit more detail. So I won't touch on on too many more from that. There are no no real significant changes in the way that we conduct plan to conduct our audit from the previous year. Um on page five you will see a couple of things that have changed from the previous year. Um there are no new significant risks uh identified as it relates to financial reporting. Uh however there were a couple of new auditing standard changes that come into effect for the city's audit this year. They're really communication requirements. So not really a change in the independence requirements themselves or the scope of the audit. um more just a requirement to explicitly communicate which independence um standards we are following and that's being done through an engagement letter amendment as well as uh in the audit report itself if needed. Uh but I'm not expecting you'll see any major changes as a result of that. Moving on, I'm going to move straight to slide seven which is our materiality. uh as you'll recall that is the highest level threshold we use to scope where there might be material uh misstatements within the financial statements or a risk of material misstatements. This is done on a preliminary basis based on a benchmark that is consistent with the previous year. We've calculated our preliminary materiality for the consolidated financial statements at $30 million which represents 2% of previous year uh total expenditures. Um, one thing I'd like to flag for you as well is our audit misstatement posting threshold. So that's the level at which we would come back to you with any corrected or uncorrected audit differences that we've identified during the course of our audit. And the number uh the preliminary number of that for this year is 1.5 million compared to 1.25 million which was used in the previous year. Uh on page eight, we're communicating with you as required the component materialities for the significant um components where further audit procedures are being relied upon for the purposes of the consolidated audit. Um this is really just for your information. We do perform standalone audits on for all of the boards and commissions to a standalone level of materiality as well which tends to be quite a lot less than the materiality levels we use for the purposes of the group audit. On slide 9 and 10 we go over uh the involvement of others. So management does involve some some specialists in the audit. There's no changes from the previous years but we are making you aware where there has been reliance placed on others. Uh and on page 10, uh KPMG does also involve some specialists, uh particularly our actuarial specialists and valuations as it as it relates to the fair market value of investments. And um I'll hand it to Melissa to go through some further details. So starting on page 11, this page provides a summary of balances where further audit procedures are performed for purposes of the group audit. And just noting that this um does not reflect all entities where statutory audits are performed, only those relied upon for the group audit opinion. On page 12, this provides a breakdown of components where further audit procedures are performed by the group audit team and the coverage of total assets and total revenues provided by these procedures. The next page provides the same information but for components audited by our other teams in our KPMG London office. Page 14 provides information on the nature of our planned involvement in the work of the component auditors. Page 15 and the next uh page 16 as well is a summary of our risk assessment and just to note that that it is consistent with prior year. On page 17, uh this is one a significant risk in the audit which is the presumption of the risk of fraud resulting from management override of controls and just noting that this risk is present in all entities. As this presumed risk is not rebutable, our audit methodology incorporates the required procedures and professional standards to address this risk um which are noted on this slide and incorporated into our planned audit approach. Pages 18 to 25 include the main areas of focus for the audit and our planned response. Um these are noted in detail in this report and consistent with prior year. So I'm not going to go into any further detail on these pages. So skipping to page 26. Um there are certain inquiries we are required to make of the audit committee that are noted on this page. So please um read through them and if there is anything that we should be made aware of, please contact Katie or myself using the contact details at the beginning of the report. Page 27 provides the timing of certain activities over the course of the audit. And then the next page provides target due dates to assist in accelerating our audit work. Pages 29 to 30 provide information on audit quality, including indicators we will report back on during our final reporting. On page 33, this is information regarding independence, um, which KD did touch on briefly, so I'm going to move on to page 34. Um, this shows the fees as agreed to in the proposal as well as fees for additional work required due to new standards that were subsequently issued. The appendices include regulatory communications, upcoming accounting standards, of which there are no new effective ones for the current year, new auditing standards, insights, which are some additional information that the committee may find of interest. Um there's also a page on the use of technology as well as a report on indicators of financial performance. In terms of the report on the indicators of financial performance, there is nothing of real significance to note in this report. It is meant to be a value ad and for really just for your information. Um so we're not going to go into that in further detail unless there are any specific questions on any of the pages. So that concludes the presentation of our report. Thank you. Um it has been moved and seconded and on the floor uh that we approve the report before us. So starting our speakers list if anyone has any questions or comments. I will start with member appl. Go ahead. Thank you sir chair to the staff to actually to sorry to the auditor. I do have four questions. The first three have to do with comparing the previous year and this year. And I have some certain questions and I didn't find certain actions that were taken last year compared to this year. I just want to make sure that it's just kind of in the description and potentially if they were covered or if they were not covered if they were not covered the reasoning why they were not covered. So on the page 22 for the deferred revenue uh there is uh identifying the perform calculation of interest allocation to assess reasonleness of management's calculation. Thank you to staff. Um you madam chair um that that procedure is still being performed. It is just being included within a separate uh section of the report. Um so it's included as part of the um of the uh vouching revenue within the obligatory funds. We just haven't called it out separately this year as we did in the previous year but we have not changed our approach in this area member. Okay. Thank you. So that means that it's covered. Uh employee benefits uh there's the it starts with assumptions made and historical accuracy of the estimates. I didn't find that one there either. Mr. Dumbbach, thank you through you, Madam Chair. Um, that one is also included uh within the both the use of um of of experts in the area of the actuaries as well as the uh management override of controls procedures where we review um historical significant estimates. So again, no changes to our procedure, just a change in the way we've shown it in this report. Member approval. Thank you. follow up through the chair page 2425 when it talks about risk assessment summary. We used to have two columns and it was current year and also uh we had two current and previous year and this year the current one it's missing if you can please comment on that why that one is not included this year. Mr. Danbach three you madam chair we we simply removed the column we felt that was redundant because there were no changes from the previous year to the last year. No sir. Okay, thank you for that. And the last question has uh it has to do with the financial indicators and uh I do greatly appreciate kind of the comparison with the other municipalities which which is very valuable for us. Is there anything else? I know it says potential limitations. Is there anything else that you would like to add to it? because besides the uh besides the graphs and limitations there's no kind of any other suggestions recommendations or overview any anything else anything else that you would like to add to it Mr. Denbach through you madam chair uh nothing further from our end um the report as you can see from the numbers uh there weren't any real uh trends or uh results that jumped out at us that from our view would require further investigation. So really it's just there for your information. Councelor Pville. Thank you very much. No more questions. Next on the speaker's list was councelor Stevenson. Thank you. Um I had some questions regarding the billing um for the last couple of years. So um the overcharges so our our fees range between say 109 and 120 120,000 a year. Um, additional work in 2022 was $154. In 2023 it was $44,000 and in 2024 it was 65,000. So we're at, you know, 55% of the uh of the original planned charge. So I have a couple of questions through the chair to staff. Do we know what the overcharges were or the additional work I should call it? Not overcharges. That sounds better. additional work um for 2025. Okay. I can start with our staff and then um our partners if they would like also I'll start with Miss Barbone and she can hand it off as she sees f. Thank you through the chair. So we provided a summary of the fees. 2025 is the year that KPMG just presented and is about to do the work. So it has not been completed yet. So, um the fees and the information that they've provided in terms of the billings are in the report that um KPMG just went through. Council Miss Danbach, would you like to comment as well or you're always welcome to decline? Okay, nothing to add. Uh councelor Stevenson. Thank you. Silly me. 2026 has felt like a long year already. Um so I guess I have a few uh questions and likely an amendment as well. is that um maybe uh through you to uh KPMG they can just highlight why uh there's such substantial ones in the last couple years. Miss Dembbach and if there's a page number feel free to reference and we'll flip with you. Yeah, thank you through you, Madam Chair. Um no page number really for for this question. Uh however I will say in the last couple of years there has been um I would a heavier amount than normal of new accounting and auditing standards. So you may recall in the last two years there's been asset retirement obligation which was a a massive new standard resulting in a new material financial statement caption. There was the financial instrument standard which impacted the financial statements. There was the new revenue standard. There was the standard relating to purchased intangibles, public private partnerships as well as group audits. So those all came into play within the last couple of years. And I would say that in the year of initial implementation of a new standard, there is quite a heavy lift both on the part of management and on the part of us as auditors um when it comes to uh understanding management's implementation of the new standard and then developing uh auditing that implementation and then ongoing auditing of that new uh financial statement caption. So, um I would say that the additional charges which were not contemplated in our negotiated fees cuz those were negotiated in 2022 have been heavier than normal in the last couple of years. Um almost entirely related to the adoption of these new standards. Councelor Stevenson. Okay. Thank you. That's good to hear. Um and then uh through you chair to staff, I had a couple of questions. one is how are we um managing that within our budget because it's a 55% increase in fees. Uh and I and then the other is is there any issue with us uh the audit committee receiving that final uh amount each year um maybe at the time we get the financial statements so that we can see uh clearly for transparency to the public as to uh what the fees are that are being paid and the work is that's being done because potentially there could be an internal issue that we might want to be made aware of as well. Miss Barbone. Uh thank you through the chair. So at the time the audit is actually presented in June. We don't have the fees because KPMG has not finished the work. Um after the committee approves it, there is a process that still takes us through sometimes until August depending on the legal letters and formalizing. So there are many cases and there are numerous other components to the audit in addition to the financial statements um that have to be rolled up and presented and paid. So some of that may not even come through until closer to the end of the year related on what audits specifically related to the year-end audit. Um that's one component of several other audits that we do that are due to regulatory bodies that we have to provide um very specific uh statements in accordance with the funding agreements. So certainly that's something we could provide. I just don't know what time would be we would be able to say that's all wrapped up. It is definitely part of our annual monitoring process to answer your first question. So where there are overages, we may have underages in other lines where we're looking to balance. So that's part of our year-end projections in terms of our discussions where we may anticipate some things are higher in some years and some things might be lower in other lines. So when we do our budget monitoring and our projections, we're providing those estimates to try to see where we're going to be at the end of the year. So all of that would be taken into account based on what we expect the fees to be, but again there are estimates until we are finally dealt. Okay. Thanks. So what I'd like is support with the wording for an amendment that has those final amounts come forward to audit committee uh for to receive for information purposes. Okay. So one minute. So, just like a little briefing note at the end as it wraps up of what was anticipated versus actuals at the end. Yep. I think and with the details of of what the charges were. Okay. Uh, Miss Barbone, hearing the intent, is that something that's already within process that you can pull that out and highlight it or would you need andor prefer that it's clear direction recognizing? I guess this year's also an election year depending when it comes back, people here might not. I I'd prefer it to be an amendment if that's okay. Just so that it's really clear. Um, so we're scribing. Mr. Schultz would read it out. We'll see if it captures the intent and then I will look for a seconder if it is accurate. Thank you through the chair. Uh that the motion be amended to include an additional part indicating that civic administration prepare a briefing note outlining projected and actual fees and provide such information to a future meeting of the audit committee. And that would be on an annual basis. Sure. Yeah. I'm looking to make it a best practice. Okay. The clerk's noted it. Miss Barbone, any feedback on that uh annual and just projected in actuals as the clerk read out. Uh thank you through the chair. So I I think the the question might be perhaps when that might be anticipated. So obviously an a simple way to do it might be currently in the audit planning memo it shows the fees for this year that are projected. We could at that time report out the previous year's fees because we would know what they are and our year end would be close to complete. That might be one suggestion. I'm not sure if that would satisfy uh what the counselor is looking for, but that might be a simple way to bring that forward so that it's all um tied together and has a point where you see the future for the current year and the past at the same time perhaps. Okay. Currently, it just reads a future meeting. Simple is good. So, if we want to put it in with the at this time, that sounds great. So that will be part of the future the audit planning report for your end. Okay. Would I have a seconder? Second would be in councelor pribble. We're good. We're on the same page. It is on the floor. Would you like to speak? Yeah. I'm looking for support. Uh I think it's needed for accountability and transparency. It also lets the public understand all the work that goes in behind this and uh how the audit work does extend throughout the year and all the other things that are done. So, thanks everybody for their hard work. Okay. So, this is strictly just on the amendment of that piece of information coming back as part of this annual update. Looking for further comments on it before I call the question on just the amendment of adding back in that piece of what was projected versus actuals. Calling the question by a show of hands just on the amendment that we just discussed. Motion carries. Okay. So, main motion as amended which is the complete report plus that addition of getting that piece of information. Continue with my speakers list. Uh, councelor Stevenson, the floor was still yours if you wish to continue. No, I think I'm good. Thanks. Although there is the issue of the uh final amounts for the boards and commissions to that get rolled up into the final. So maybe without changing that amendment. Is it possible to have a full reporting? Uh, I guess it it it mixes them up, doesn't it? Okay. No, I I don't have anything else. Thanks. looking online to member Chim if you have a question as I have no hands in chambers. Okay, I don't see anything online. So this is just 4.2 and it's that it's approved uh for the report we just got and then noting that going forward we're going to get the projected and actuals as part of the report calling the question of all in favor by a show of hands. Motion carries. Thank you. That concludes item 4.2. 4.3 is the London downtown closed circuit television program for the year ending December 31st, 2025. This is also a KPMG one. Um I will let them decide if they would like a brief presentation going into it and I'll also note that from our corporate side we have Mr. Loki in chambers with us to answer questions or Miss Dembbach anything that you want to start with? Um thank you Madam Chair. I would just say uh not really a presentation associated with this one. The nature of the engagement is uh what we called uh what we call agreed upon procedures or procedures and findings. So really uh you should hopefully see very clearly what we did and what we found uh and the report can speak for itself although happy to answer questions. Okay. So the proposed motion is that the KPMG report just on specified auditing and procedures for the London downtown closed circuit television program for the year ending December 31st, 2025 be received. I would need a mover and a seconder to get on the floor and then we can start with our questions. Okay, I have a mover in councelor Stevenson, seconder in councelor Pribble. The item is on the floor. I can start a speaker list from there and that starts on page 72 of your package. Councelor Prible, you can start us off. Thank you, sir. Chair, and I think this will be probably more to the staff than the auditor. In regards to those uh December 10th, the two cameras, if you can please tell me, let me know how long they were down and uh uh what was the reasoning behind it and also KPMG they provide just kind of the procedures and findings, but not recommendations or suggestions. So, if you could if you could uh staff please comment on these three questions. Thank you. Okay. To Mr. Looker, thank you and through you, Madam Chair. So those uh those cameras were actually disconnected as a result of construction in that particular area was which was Clarence and York Streets. Uh so they were taken down for approximately a week. Uh so that and that was at the request of the the construction company that was doing work in the area. Um they were put back up. uh moving forward uh to rectify that is there needs to be communication directly with KPMG when they request um a sample uh that those uh those aren't available and allow them to pick their other sample uh so that it's not uh us choosing what sample but rather KPMG uh and also notifying KPMG when there's an extended uh period of time that a camera will be down so that they're well aware council. So thank you for that and uh that's in the suggestions or kind of a plan forward in terms of the KPMG but for us everyday life is there an opportunity that certainly certain cameras overlap and we could cover different angles and maybe cover even the areas that are under construction if we remove them staff through the through the chair. Uh absolutely we do try and uh bring about other cameras if we can cover an area off. Sometimes the construction area is too too large that we don't get complete coverage of that area, but we do take that into consideration. Um, we do do we we do uh period periodic checks of the system. Uh we do daily checks of the downtown camera system to make sure they're functioning properly, that their date time stamps are correct and so forth. So um but we uh we do uh as best as we can um keeping in mind that some areas don't have uh fiber connections. Some of them are are requiring a modem or radio transmission and that causes some downtime as well depending on weather and other events. Counselor, thank you very much. No more questions. Thank you. Further speakers to this item, looking online, looking on chambers, seeing none. Yeah. And it's that we receive this report. All in favor by a show of hands. Motion carries. Thank you. Um and that concludes our time with uh KPMG today. Uh so thank you again. You're free to stay. You're free to go. You you pick your adventure. Um for the MNP presentations that are the next ones, we have four coming up. I'll note that they have some staff in line, some some online, some in chambers. Um and they will turn it over to the appropriate staff as they deem needed. Uh so 4.4 4 is the summary update for the internal audit MNP. Okay. Uh so it would originally be that the communication from MMP with respect to the summary update for the internal audit be received. Um we can certainly get this on the floor and then amend it as we uh if needed. I have a mover in councelor Stevenson, a seconder in councelor Pribble is on the floor. Um just for committee I'd asked MNP if they want to do a brief a really brief like two-minute intro to each one to highlight it as there is four um coming up and then once that is concluded I will turn it to members of committee for questions. Okay seeing no objection we will start with that. So 4.4 only at this time Mr. Roco and once again you can turn it to whatever staff uh you might need. Thank you through you madam chair. I'll keep this one very brief. Uh so in front of you is the uh in front of committee is the summary update from from internal audit. There are two things that I would just like to point out for uh the committee's uh consideration. Um the first being that as has become customary and was a uh a request from the committee um we include uh as part of the memo the u forecasted audits or the plan. Um one thing of note and just as a reminder um what is included is only 2026 as planning for 2027 will take place after the process of um of the request for proposal that uh that London will go through. So there is what we're planning for the uh for the year. The other thing I would just like to bring to committee's um attention and then open for uh any feedback regarding it is we have completed um our audits to date. Um but for the next cycle there are two audits taking place. one focusing on the climate emergency action plan and the other on the subdivision review process um and um putting it forward to the committee if there are any uh commentary or suggestions with regards we are in the process of scoping so if there is any commentary or requirements or thoughts um from uh from members would be open to that thank you thank you uh we'll turn to the committee for questions comments um I will Start with councelor Pribble. I'll acknowledge councelor Stevenson after that. Actually, thank you chair. Uh Mr. Aco, you actually answer one of my questions because that was my question is if you want uh certain details or the report doesn't come back to us and then we say we were expecting this and that. Uh so if we do if we do have it today, great. If we don't, can it still be submitted to you later or does it have to go through this committee? I don't know if it's to you or if it's actually a question to our staff. Thank you. Thank you to I can start with MNP u through madam chair and thank you for the question. Um so I would uh answer that. So timing is obviously everything with regards to these. We do have a window that we want to complete them. However, if there is any feedback from members of the committee um please reach out um via email or a phone call. We are available to you. Um so if there is any things that pop into uh that pop up that you would like to consider and make sure that is on our radar um over the next few weeks absolutely open to it. It does not necessarily have to come through this piece as it is a consideration for us as we are going through our scoping process. Counselor. Thank you. No more questions. Okay. Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. Um, so I I'm going to raise the same concerns I've raised before in terms of uh my concerns around the scope being set with management rather than with council. And so to me the the intent here is the oversight, the independent oversight. And when when the scoping is done with management, it just concerns me. Um, and I didn't talk about it in terms of the RFP process, but I have spoken with staff about it, and I will be coming forward um with an um a motion later to to reook again at having a general uh an auditor general for the city of London. Um, I think it's a worthy discussion to at least look at that option because I I feel as though um there's a big a big gap here. The other thing is um the the audit plan where it's got privacy coming in December 9th instead of October 7th. Um it seems as though that a discussion happened in September and and I don't recall that. I'm going to go back and look at the video. Um and then in November it was it was in this summary update that per the September discussions those two audits continuous improvement and privacy had been flipped to accommodate the election and uh so remiss on my part that I wasn't more thorough in doing my reading and when we set the audit plan for the year there was a lot of discussion and deliberation around that we said it I'm really not expecting like I said I've got to back and see what happened in September. But I believe that if the action plan, if there's a request by staff for council to change their audit plan for the year, there should be a staff report making that ask of audit committee and council because I would not have knowingly pushed the privacy audit past the election date. We could have switched climate emergency. We could have done other things if it had been more uh a direct ask of this committee to make a change to a plan that was agreed upon uh in February of last year. So, I'm going to go back and look at it. Um I understand that the privacy is an issue in terms of the timing of the election and that was fully known last February when we set the the audit plan. So, I'm not sure if something changed or if there was just an awareness, but I'm I'm going to ask now through you to staff, is there any way um for you to be able to accommodate the audit as was originally planned last year uh for the October 7th date because the MIPA issues are significant and I think it's something that can't wait if there's any way at all that we can do it per the original timing. Okay, I'll start that question with MNP uh and then if our internal staff would like to comment as well uh through you madam chair and thank you for the uh for the question um with regards to the timing of it um from our side uh in order to work through um we can accommodate uh a switch with regards to our workflow. Um so I would um I would pass it back to you madam chair with regards to um quering uh staff Thank you. I'll start with Miss Barbell. Uh thank you to the chair. I'm just trying to pull it up really quickly, but that did go through the last and it was specifically communicated at the last internal audit committee that that was going to go occur and that was approved through the discussion. So um the discussion did occur at the committee. It wasn't done without the committee's knowledge and it was endorsed and that was revised through the audit committee. So, if the audit committee doesn't support that, I'm not sure why it went through the last one. So, um certainly that is uh problematic for staff, but um I'm I think the perhaps the clerk may want to comment on the timing because it would be their area that's impacted. Okay. Um, councelor Stevenson, I just asked the clerk what would the date of that been and he doesn't have it from so burbone just did you say those dates were approved by the last time this audit committee sat or the February when we sat just if we would like to go back and so I I did look I did go back and look and uh the November report says in the paragraph that we talked about it in September and the dates had been changed. So, I I get and I I own that it's on me and I'm saying I would like to switch it back and I'm asking if there's any way that staff can accommodate if I were to move and have that amendment pass. Okay. So, I think we heard from MNP that they can just verifying that before we get through you madam chair. Yes. Okay. Um Mr. Schultz thank you uh through the chair. Uh unfortunately these same staff involved in FOI procedures are also involved heavily in the election. Uh as uh members would be aware uh municipal election is one of the heaviest periods of workload for a clerk's office. So we simply would not have capacity to meet that October change. Councelor Stevenson, I'll let you think on that for a moment. I can see if there's other speakers um or questions. Um, we certainly recognize that our clerk's office does run the elections office and that's quickly approaching. Um, member team does not have their camera on so I don't believe they have a question at the time. No, he says no, he's okay. Um, councelor Privile, I don't know if you anything else. If not, I will return to councelor Stevenson. Okay, councelor Stevenson. I'm going to have to leave it there for now. Thanks. Okay. Uh so again, this is just that the report before us be received. Um I'll note as always that this still goes to council for a final vote. Just at that point, uh member Chima wouldn't have the opportunity to vote on it, but we would certainly circulate uh any changes to him as a member of this committee to make sure he's informed. Okay, seeing no further questions at this. Yep. Sorry, I do I do have one. So, is it appropriate for uh staff to give a staff report if they were going to I'm just looking how to do this so that it's very clear in the future. Um but maybe it's not because the audit committee is between MNP and us that there wouldn't be a staff report asking for that change. So, um I'm wondering how in future if the audit plan is to be changed that it's actually a motion to change it that we approve uh in committee so it it's not just part of the report is do I need to move an amendment to make that ask about the current process realizing audit only sits once quarterly um those changes are concerned is it something that is Especially if council has approved it and it's a decided matter of council if a change needs to be made. Is audit committee a made of it or is it a civic administration one that they change the workload and update and let us know? Just looking for process and then I can certainly go back to the council for a follow-up. Sorry Miss Barbone nodding at you doesn't help. Sorry. Thank you through the chair. So M the audit committee directs the work that M&P does. That is why the M&P provides the memo to C to the audit committee to provide the updates. Um they've amended their updates as the audit committee has asked for additional information and to make it very clear what is upcoming. So those changes were actually made last year as directed by the audit committee. So the the final approval goes from audit committee and then ultimately through council. Um, with respect to what motions come out of the audit committee, I would defer to the clerk um, as to if there's a a change or something from that perspective that might make it more obvious perhaps, but but that's the role of audit committee is to direct the work of MMP. Staff are not um, directly responsible for that. That's why there's no report brought forward from civic administration because ultimately that is rolled up and presented from MNP so that the audit committee can provide directions. So hopefully that helps in terms of process. Um staff certainly leers with the audit or with the audit committee as well as M&P to provide what the constraints are from the civic administration's end. But that would be the information that they take to influence what they ultimately bring forward to the audit committee for approval and then ultimately through council. Okay. Uh the clerk said he will concur with that. Uh so I will return to councelor Stevenson. Yeah. So what I'm looking for is when we each each the September minutes say we we received and approved the plan. We received and approved the plan. There's no there's nothing saying we made a change to the plan. And I think that if we're going to make a change to the plan, that should be the motion that this audit committee approves and then is approved by council. Okay. Because last March, we approved the 2526 plan. So, time out, counselor. Um, and I've also been forgetting to time you since this last round. Um, but you're at 3 minutes for sure. Um, are you trying to highlight that the plan changed and we did approve it, but it wasn't highlighted that the dates flipped? Sorry, just looking for clarification before I go for comment. Yes, because we needed to approve. I think the motion should have said that we changed the plan. Just one second. Okay. So, we'll go to uh Mr. Rakco. Uh the clerk is just highlighting that depending on the amount of changes or whatnot that they might not know if it's not already pulled out to be able to capture that in our motions. Um Mr. Racko, my apologies. Um the what is the question? when things get changed in the report. I I think it's I think it's it's me asking should I make an amendment now specifying that in future when a when an audit plan is approved for 2 years that any changes to it are documented in the motions uh at committee or is that something we can just agree upon? Mr. through you madam chair um and to the question um so from from my perspective uh that would be a matter of procedure at the end of the day with my recollection of how the meeting uh last September went there was um discussion uh and then we received direction I think the formality of that direction is the question at hand um from my perspective and the way that we would end up working with the committee and with civic administration um the formality of that um and the procedural aspect of that um doesn't really change the way that we would interact with yourselves or with civic administration. Um if there is a want to put formality around it, we can um adjust as needed. I'll work on it between now and June. Okay. Uh the clerk noted that uh he will reflect as well and I'll leave it to you to connect uh offline to see how it could be accommodated or highlighted. Um, looking for further comments or questions on this one. This was 4 point four. Yep. And it say it's received by a show of hands in favor of receipt. And then sorry, I'm going to do against as well for it's noted. Motion carried. So that carried with one against just since member Chima can't see. Um that would put us on to 4.5. This is the internal audit follow-up activities dashboard by report from MNP. Once again, they have a two-minute presentation and the motion is going to be that the communication from MNP with respect to the internal audit follow-up activities dashboard be received. If I can have a motion to get it on the floor, I will go to them for their two-minute presentation. Moved by councelor Pribble, seconded by councelor Stevenson. Thank you. The floor is yours. Thank you, madam chair, and thank you again. Um so the uh report that is before the committee is with regards to the follow-up activities um following the similar the process that we we do on the cycle. Um the only thing of note was is with regards to um the items that were in scope. So there were items um that we were following up with regards to the uh London housing development projects, the community grants um project, the homelessness uh audit, and the anti-racism anti-opression. Um there has been uh there was a total of 10 recommendations within uh culminating in those four reports. Uh three management action items were closed and seven are on track for completion by their current due dates. Thank you. Thank you. Uh just one second. Okay, thank you. This item is moved and seconded on the floor. You've had your brief update from MP starting my speakers list if there's any questions, comments to be raised. Okay. Uh thank you through you. Um the tenant profile considerations is the status is marked as closed. based on a report to the community and protective services committee on December 1st documenting how the city is addressing the audit findings. Yet that report says that the transition plan will be communicated to council in December of 2026. So I would prefer to not have that closed until we actually get to see uh the tenant transition plan. So through you to MNP I'm wondering if there's uh any opposition to us changing that to on track Mr. through you madam chair um understanding that uh that cycle that's being set up from that one um I will provide I would like to hear from staff as well uh from civic administration as well um I do not particularly see any issue with that um from the process perspective the only thing that I would note is that as this process went through um civic administration put a target for the Q4 2025 um so if we do look to do that I would just uh afford them the opportunity to address that and then obviously put the Q4 2026 as the target if that is the goal um to uh incorporate that feedback or sorry that uh that update cycle to uh to council. Would city staff like to comment? They're conversing. Um councelor Stevenson, would you like to ask another question or just wait for the conversion to stop? Um well I can just say that this this this was an an audit of 122 baseline. It's a very significant concern to the public and the tenency profile issue expands beyond that into our housing stability programs. So this also crosses into a a new council. And so if this comes off the management action plan, the new council will not have any uh awareness of the the high rating of risk that this played in the audit committee. So, I understand that it'll go to Community and Protective Services in December of 2026, but I think it's really important that the November audit committee also knows that this came from a high-risisk audit report. Okay. Thank you. Uh to staff, if you have any comments to add is I know you're checking dates and and things. our staff still calculating an answer. Okay, there's still Okay, I can I also have the same uh request regarding the homelessness value for money audit um where it says due date Q4 2026 right on it but and Q2 2026 and yet the status is closed. Mr. to reco. I don't know if you want to comment on that one or we could just wait for city staff to both are procedurally fine. Uh through you madam chair I can address that one. Um so with regards to the uh the question on so stepping back uh due dates are placed um as we go through and receive management action in working with management and understanding what their response is to the issue and the risk that we are raising. um we work with them to set a due date. Um appreciating the due dates are there and they were achieved before the set due date. Um that is from my perspective procedurally in line with things if there was the action was completed beforehand. Um that that does not necessarily mean they have to wait to that point. Um what we would want to just make sure and this is through the validation process that we go through is that we um have an update from civic administration and management as to them executing on the action item uh and then they provide evidence to us that they have executed on that. Um so if the I I look at it as two separate things. If the update has not satisfied that the item is closed that is distinct than the timeline not necessarily being so um from our perspective when we went through and validated the actions um they uh based upon the evidence that we received were satisfied um and the timing is more of just setting a stake in the sand um when we're initially creating the report. Okay. looking to see if our staff is ready with the preferred apply yet. Okay, I'll start with Mr. Mathers uh through the chair. So, just a reminder for folks and it was has been mentioned there was a report in December 1st, 2025 related to the 122 baseline was the focus. Um the recommendation also spoke specifically to this uh this item in the audit so that we were very clear that this is what was being addressed with the report. um working with uh what we provided as direction through the audit process. Um we feel that we've we've addressed everything that's was required as part of the audit. We have recommended some future actions here because we think it's very very relevant and there's there's a more work to do on an ongoing basis. If there is a a request for something over and above that what was provided for in the audit that we'd be uh coming through a council process that would be something that we could do more work on as well. Okay, counselor followup. Well, I guess I'm just not I I'm requesting that this just stay is on track until the report comes uh to community and protective services rather than close it saying it's going to come. Let's just wait until it does come and then we know that it's complete and be closed. So, I'm just unless there's opposition to that, that's going to be my request is that it stay on here. Okay, counselor. So just specifically what page? Oh, it's page 80 and it's the uh London Housing Development Projects number one. The rating was high and the update is that we got a report December 1st, 2025, but that report says that the transition plan is coming December 2026. And that's what the whole thing was about. Counselor, could you approach me? I just I'm having problems scanning. Okay. um looking to staff as the clerk wouldn't uh has confirmed he doesn't have information on hand of um if it's been revised that the report is coming to CAPS in December 2026 versus as the audit statement says it came 2025. So looking to see if there's class clarification for that um before I can rule if anything's in order. I'll start with anybody Mr. I'm happy with MNP and then I can go to civic amend if needed. Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. Uh through you. Um so I think we just I think there's a um just a clarification piece stepping back here. So if from our perspective the recommendations that were provided uh or the recommendations that were provided and the management and the response that management provided in relation to those recommendations is the main column there under tenant profile considerations, the bold and underline in on page 80. Um what what the process ends up going is that what management has to take action upon those to and then satisfy us that they have addressed the items under there. What I believe is in question is in part of addressing though in in part of addressing that management action there is follow-on items that are taking place where the target date is the Q4 2026 for a subsequent report to go through to the uh committee and protective services commitive services committee. Um so that is what I believe is is the piece there. The only thing that we run into just as as feedback for the committee is that um if we uh there will from my perspective generally always be follow-on activities that management is working at when they're addressing reports that we uh or actions that we do. Um, and we just have to there will be a situation if that we may never actually close off a management action if they continue to become rolling items because if we maybe get to the 20 the Q4 2026 report at this point theoretically there can be follow-on actions from that and then follow on actions from that. So um procedurally we just have to be clear with regards to what we're trying to achieve there and based upon the recommendations and the management action that was taking place. We feel satisfied that that initial report suggests those ones. However, it is upon the committee to provide direction to us as to what they want to do. Okay. Uh, so the clerk has confirmed we made it as far that that report, the December 1st, 2025 report did to go to CAPS, was approved to go to council. We'd have to trace back and are currently trying to trace back what council then did with said report. Um, as the chair of Capsaw, I know that some chunks of some things were sent back to deal with a part of a report, not the entirety of it, and I do appreciate that it's the the cyclical environment that we're in. Um, but it is confirmed that report was provided to CAPS on the date as indicated in the note before us, councelor Steve. Yep. And I wasn't disputing that. It's that the content of the report says that the key piece that is critical to the public and to me is the tenency profile piece. So, and I and I'm not um criticizing the work that was done by M&P and I totally understand why they're marking it as closed. And I have an amendment prepared um that I'd like to move that directs MNP to just keep that on until that tenency piece comes forward in December 2026. I'd like to move the amendment that was prepared uh only A. So, I can read it out. I'm not going to move B. Okay. Uh the clerk has confirmed uh that he does have the wording. I do not. Uh if you would like to read it out realizing member Chima uh cannot I don't know. The clerk would need a few minutes to put it up on the screen in which case Chima might be able to read it. I'm not sure uh of his preferred method of seeing the information, but councelor I will ask that you read it out very slowly uh and then we'll proceed from there. Okay. That MNP be directed to maintain the status of the London Housing Development Projects. Tenant profile considerations and the homelessness value for money audit phases one and two as on track to completion until the tenant transition plan is communicated to council currently anticipated by December 2026. Okay. Um just for those following along that that's page 80. Essentially, it is just changing as you would see on it that it says and currently in the report before you it says status closed that this would change it from status on track to completion um with the date of that report. It is it's up and on the screen just remember Chima that uh you should be able to see it if Um could it instead of not that uh he's not lovely Mr. Rako, instead of putting the camera on him, can you put on the screen for a minute just to give our member online who cannot access escribe because we don't use escribe that that would be the visual. Okay, so we have a nod. Um, the councelor Stevenson's looking at moving this. Um, I'll look to see if there's any quandries with staff and timing. Um, I can start with Mr. Dickens andor Mr. Rako. So, Mr. Dickens, do you want to be first or second? or Lisa. Thank you. And through you, Madam Chair. The language in the uh motion here links two different audits together. Uh the homelessness value for money audit. And it links it to um a municipal housing development audit and a municipal housing development report back. I'm just need some clarity on why we would leave uh the other one or change the status uh when they're not really linked. Councelor Stevenson, I'm happy to answer that. So on page 83 in uh homelessness value for money audit phase one number two it says that civic administration um it's a long paragraph there but it says and align with future report back requirements to council related to tenants selection and so there's in both of these I would to me it's a simple request just keep it on here as on track uh to complete completion until we get that tenant transition future report back to council. It's it's really having a very big impact and it's of uh public importance and it's it's simply asking to keep it on the report for potentially a couple of more reports so that we can be sure that the risks are addressed. councelor would be an issue realizing it's not seconded yet just trying to get have procedural issues if it was called the London housing development projects lessons learned review is as that was the original page 80 that it was under yep that's great okay Hey. Okay, maybe I'll start with seeing if there would be even a seconder for this before we go too much further. I have a question for first. Okay. Uh so counselor first. Okay. So I will circle back to Mr. Dickens first. Hearing the counselor's thing that page 83 has something else and both are moving it to on track versus closed. Um I also have the city manager with their hand up. Um Miss Ders Bear. Thank you through you, chair. Um would it be as simple as to suggest and I asked the clerk for his advice in this that there be two statements that MMP directed to maintain the status of one and the other in two separate statements. A does not A is not specific to the second value for money audit. I believe that's correct. Correct. So would these reports from staff have different due dates coming back just for we can put like with like? Sorry I I don't like word smithing but I hate even more getting things wrong. Yeah. No, understood. Okay. So, we're splitting those two things realizing they might have different dates coming back. Okay. So, there'll be one line for the London Housing Development Projects and then one for the homeless value for money audit. Okay. So, basically just duplicated and everything related to this transition plan piece. Yeah. So, just a hand. Is that it? I believe so. If we put it back up maybe. Good stuff. have a look at that. I don't know if the dates are right cuz I don't know when they're coming back, but they're separate now. and councelor, I'm not sure if the currently anticipated date is relevant in it per se. I'm I'm not fussy on that. Like this is just simply it's not any extra work. It's just saying let's just please keep it on the open management action plan for a little bit longer. So it can be whatever date staff want if staff would look again. and the counselor to see if this if I need to refresh. Yep. Sounds good to me. Okay. Before we go any further, MNP and then I will look to Mr. Mr. Dickens or Miss Derspair or Mr. Mathers or maybe all the above. Mr. Madam Chair. So just for clarity on my part because I do have to operationalize this piece then. So with what will end up happening is that the items in question will remain will be switched for on track to completion. We will end up changing the due date of those to um I'm was assuming it was going to be Q4 2026. I believe that was the number that was put up there. Um and then what will end up happening practically is that for each quarter we will follow up with civic administration. They will provide us the same update being that there is a report. It is coming for Q6 2020 Q4 2026. It is uh on track to completion. Once that is completed cuz there's a there is a little bit of a timing piece here. Um this will actually fall into the February update that you will get. there will be a transition a potentially a transition as there will be a potentially a switch over in service provider right so we have to think that's a consideration because this will not come until the February 2027 so just I'm just walking through it practically the steps there um for committee to consider so procedurally I think we have it there it's a little bit of extra work on our part a little bit of extra work on civic administration's part but that is effectively what the process will be there will be that will be stagnant there effectively until Q1 2027 Seven. Is there an extra cost associated with this extra tracking? We go through you, Madam Chair. We we go through the process of updating and reviewing um management action items on a quarterly basis. Anyway, it's part of what we do. Um it is just again more the the the time and the bits and bites flying back forward during email. Okay. Thank you. And then just to staff on another piece highlighted must be might be a missarbone question that if it's coming back in Q1 2027 if they are not the provider at that point is it still just checking it off because staff did something on their end or is it going to be having to implement it into the next contract with a different provider just realizing that's going to be true of anything that happens though in the next audits. Miss Burbone thank you through the chair. So as part of the RFP document, one of the things that M and M M&P is currently doing now and that any future provider will do is as part of the RFP, the internal auditors are to follow up on any outstanding recommendations. Um, with a change, there obviously has to be a transition and they need to understand um what is happening. This one's a little bit more complex because we're linking two things that don't necessarily um tie to the recommendations. So, um that might take a little extra work for the transition just because they'll be looking at what's written here and what has actually taken place. So, um we'll need to think about that in the transition plan, but certainly any new provider will have to uh identify anything that is outstanding and then perform a follow-up process and that will be part of uh the work that um will continue seamlessly with um the internal audit RFP. Okay. Thank you. Councelor Steven, you were fine with the wording that's currently up? Yes. Okay. I would need a seconder for it. Councelor Privile, are you seconding? Okay. Uh, so we have a mover and councelor Stevenson, a second or councelor Privile, but I believe councelor Privile has questions. Um, yeah, I can start a formal speaker list. Um, I'll note that we also already had some information shared by staff, so just uh concise. Councelor Pribble, do you want Are you okay with the mover going first or I know you had questions, journal. He had questions, journ. Thank you, sir. Chair to the staff. I do understand a potential transition and it's going to come in February 2027. Uh but I don't mind that. But what I want a clear understanding is if I look at the first column now there are four recommendations and uh if the if those four recommendations have been already fulfilled and they will not be covered in the transition tenant uh report that's coming end of this year then that's going to be kind of challenging for potentially new auditor to match it up and to make any evaluation. So I would say this if it if it's if these four points have not been covered and they'll be covered then it's fine but if they have been covered then I believe that u uh MMP needs to add something to the first column potentially additional recommendations so potentially the new audit company they know what they're actually tracking or evaluating if I can get a feedback from the staff and the MNP as well. Okay. To staff or MNP uh through you madam chair um to to uh to um committee member um we can make an amendment to the wording in here to recognize uh the work piece as well as um essentially what's off the screen there um with regards to the transition plan that we will check back to ensure that the transition plan has been completed and reported to the appropriate committee um for that target of of Q4 um 2026. Um and that might uh with that suggestion that was made that might I think be the cleanest and most satisfying piece is that we can um uh highlight these pieces as being covered off given the first item. However, there will be a follow-up completed um to ensure that that report is is is um is actually presented uh and covers off the appropriate items in Q4 2026. So, we can amend the language in order to make sure that it is clear. Um and then it's it's it's a slight deviation from what we usually do, but um I don't think it is uh overly difficult. Mr. Mathers uh through through the chair just to add some this might take some of the issues away as well. The the council resolution that we have on this is actually to provide it back by Q2 of 2026. So we should have that within the next several months. So um this may uh reduce some of the limitations or the concerns about uh the change of the uh auditor possibly. Okay. Thank you councelor Prible. Okay. Councelor Stevenson. Okay. Yeah. I I feel like this is being over complicated. Um because the the motion is simply to change the status to on track, just leave it on the report until that tenency transposition plan is brought to council. So not asking for a lot of work, not linking things together, just simply the only link is that I'm asking each one of them to be changed from closed to on track. That's it. and they both relate to the transition uh plan, but the both of them say that. So, as I said, I don't see it being any extra work. It's simply acknowledging the importance of this to the public and um and keeping it top of mind until that thing is completed. Okay. Thank you. Um the votes for and against are going to be called on this one just so you know what I'm going to call it. Um looking online to see if there's any hands up. There are not. Member Chim, do you need us to read this out again? No. Okay. Uh so all those in favor by a show of hands and against motion carries. Okay. Okay, so that was the amendment to it and then we need to do the main motion as amended and it was to receive the report and then with the change that we just discussed which hopefully we're not going to discuss again uh for those two tracking things to be changed from closed to on track. Further comments or questions on that before calling the question? I see no hands online. I see no chamber no hands in chambers. Show a hands. All in favor? Motion carries. Okay, that disposes a 4.5. 4.6 is uh the city of London internal audit community improvement plans audit. Um this commencements on page 87 and the motion is that um that we receive it. Uh so looking for a mover and seconder for that. Mover and councelor Stevenson, seconder and councelor Prible. uh a brief two-minute overview from MNP realizing anyone online who might want to join us, it's up to them if they want the screens on or off. Uh thank you through you, madam chair. Uh so the item is the uh report for the community improvement plans audit. Um in very brief summary, the the scope was looking at the program and then um two specific CIPs were uh selected to uh to review and run through the process to understand how um things are operating. Uh so it was specifically the downtown CIP and the industrial land CIP. Uh in in total uh there were five um items of note uh with the summary of those items being on page 92 of your package. Um four of them were deemed to be uh of medium risk with one being low. And just for a clarity, linking back to our previous uh to the previous item. Um so the four medium items are ones that we uh work with management to understand their action plan and then follow up on. Uh and then the low will be something that management takes. It's more of a business improvement um opportunity. So it's deemed low risk and it's not followed up on. Thank you. Okay. Starting a speakers list on this item. Okay. Dr. Stevenson, I'll start with you. Okay. Thank you. Um and thank you for this. It it does concern me how often I see things like um there remains no systematic process to monitor project level outcomes after incentives are issued. Without postfunding monitoring, there is no assurance that projects deliver intended economic or community benefits, increasing the risk of wasted resources and reputational damage. And this is something that I feel like get I don't know how to incorporate it systemwide where we're outcome focused that we're linking the money that we're spending with outcomes for the taxpayers. So to just say that we did a bunch of stuff without tracking whether it's actually making a meaningful impact in our city is it's frustrating. So I guess um like it's good to have it highlighted and identified here but um you know and then and then a lot of these management responses are uh Q2 2027. So again, a lot of this is going to go over into the next uh auditor. And I guess when when we have something that says that, you know, there's no assurance that we're going to get intended economic or community benefits. Is there any way to get the changes done faster that we're not waiting for an entire year to to make those improvements? So I guess through you to staff if there's any comments around that. Thank you, Mr. Mathers. Is this what uh through the through the chair? So, it really is just the the amount of detail and the time frames around the outcome information. So, say for example, the industrial uh or industrial development charges uh program that provides funding back to um cover those costs related to industrial development. So what going into that process um we uh have information and when we sell the land to the industrial developer we have that we have the information in the number of jobs that they're going to be provided in that facility and um and that those developments move forward they won't get the funding unless that actual development does occur. Um my interpretation of what's being suggested is with this program would be looking at that maybe at 2 5 10 years later to see whether u more jobs have have come forward or whether there's been um any other changes on the site. So um there is information on the number of jobs that's being provided. That's al something that's being provided as part of the land sale as well to council. Um so there is that information available at the time. This is just the amount of detail and and uh uh of us going back and looking at that um for for the downtown uh plan uh that's specifically related to um a tax based incentive uh for refunding um uh the development charges amounts for uh buildings within the downtown. So the outcome that we're trying to achieve is housing units in the downtown. So we could we uh monitor the construction the building ensure that the that those units have been constructed. Um we could go back 5 10 years later to see whether those units are still um full of uh of residents. They're very likely are because that's why people bring forward these types of developments. If it was something like commercial property or something like that, then maybe that would be a little bit more relevant to to that program. Um but uh uh for the most part if that building is still exists which um if it's a brand new apartment building uh there's very few of those that are uh not filled with people right now. So um it's just really the the the level of additional information that you'd like to see or the the time frames about trying to like go back and see how that program was successful and also just whether you want to apply this to our other programs as well. So we have uh over 30 different financial incentive programs. So you could apply that same logic to those programs. And um it's we have a very small team that supports our CIPs uh just three and a half uh um full-time equivalents of staff that support it. And they're mostly focused on actually uh going through the programs, going through the application programs and also creating new CIP. So very much our focus in the last several years have been on creating new programs to be able to support housing for example or for affordable housing. So that is a huge amount of the effort that they're working through right now. We ensure that we have targets to be able to be uh so that someone is uh when we uh have that application process that's really where we focus on ensuring that they meet those needs and then that they're providing what we need at the time. we haven't uh spent a lot of time or effort at this point looking at in five ten years like how was that how beneficial was that at the time. So um that we can do that it's just that would take a lot of additional staff time that we don't have at this point. So um if that's something council would like to do in the future we would suggest that be a a multi-year budget discussion. Thank you councelor Stevenson. Thank you for that. I'm also interested on any initial thoughts on the recommendation number two for phase one that suggests uh possibly incentives to milestones or phase dispersement rather than full upfront allocation. I'm intrigued by that one and wondering what staff's initial thoughts are. Okay, Mr. Mathers. Yeah, through the through the chair. So um in some ways we we have some of those programs like our tax um related programs where the funding isn't provided back for for several years. Um that is a kind of a form of what's being suggested here. Um I'd really want to know um from LEDC specifically about the industrial component. Um they this is their main um uh tool to be able to get new development industrial developers to come to development to come to the city of London. So, um I'm guessing that any kind of further restrictions is probably going to make it more difficult rather than easier for them to bring forward uh new uh indust industries into the city or targeted industries. So, um I rely on on them for that type of advice, but my thought is any more kind of restrictions or changes would likely make it more difficult. Councelor Stevenson, thank you very much. and through you to MNP. I I'm interested in knowing more about on page 96 phase 2, it mentions that there's no documented framework ensuring direct linkage between each CIP goal and a corresponding financial incentive program. I'd just be interested in hearing more about that. Mr. Rako or team through you, Madam Chair. Um what at at at the end of the day um when we step back and we took a look at it um as the statement goes there we did not see necessarily a documented framework that has that from cradle to grave. Um it is something that when you go through and you would want to see in programs such as this um that would just something that we saw as an absence. So my apologies. Can I um is there a specific item that you were thinking about with regards to that? Can you let me know specifically what you're thinking and maybe I can shed some light on? No, I guess when it says no documented framework, so there's no documentation or is it just needing clarity? Thank you. Yeah, thank you for the clarity uh through you madam chair. So when we step back and we take a look at it and this might just also be a use of language. Um when we step back and we think about programs um we use the term framework as to be something that houses and essentially lays out and frames the entire thing. um soup to nuts if you think about it like that way. So um this is not so and again please take it this way this is not to highlight that there was not not documentation in place and that type of thing but when we think about coming in a holistic like integrated item that covers the entirety um is the absence. So, um, if that offers you any clarity, that's where we were coming at. Counselor, it does. And I think that sometimes what's missing is we're very like task oriented. We did this, we issued that, we offered this, but sometimes that bigger picture is missed, you know, and it happened with the core area action plan. It was a lot of money invested into the downtown with really no uh tangible results. And so we want to make investments into our city and we want to try new things and see whether they work or not. But I really need us to be focused and I know it's hard and maybe it takes more staff and maybe we need to invest in that. But if we don't know if what we're doing is working or not or we can't show taxpayers the great things that we did and what came of it or why we thought it was such a great idea in the first place, I think we're really missing an opportunity. Um there's one other part here too where in number four on page 98 it says there was no funding cap and a lack of financial forecasting process under the industrial land CIP and I don't know if that's because it happened so quickly but I'd be interested in uh whatever anyone can share on that. Okay staff uh through the chair it's absolutely accurate that there isn't a cap on on those amounts. So um we rely on um there's a a robust uh monitor and monitoring that takes place of that reserve fund. It's and uh that's part of our reporting annually as part of the let uh the city treasur speak to this too as well that uh there's an annual reporting on the monitoring of our reserve funds. So, um, the good thing about industrial specifically, even though that doesn't have the the cap, is that we usually know several years in advance, we start working with, uh, um, companies that are looking to come to London. So, we have advanced notice of, uh, the size and the dimensions of what they're looking at bringing forward, which is what the DC is based on. So, we can start plugging those things into our model so that we know that there's appropriate amount of funding. Um the one consideration that um and I have spoke with LAC about a number of of these pieces is that the concern about having a cap is just uh it may cause some concerns for people who are coming to London as far as the number if they're will there be cap available when they actually want to come and purchase land in the city. So that was the one comment that I did receive from them. But um otherwise we we uh very much rely on our robust modeling practices councor. Okay. Thanks. I do appreciate the report and all of the information in here you know understanding too that it's about how we can get better and uh I appreciate that. Thank you. Is there further speakers? I see none online. Councelor Ple. Thank you. No questions but I would like to make a comment. I don't know if Mr. Morocco if you saw or if you went through our implementation plan which we get the up uh updates on regular basis council just like any board of directors of any corporation and I think that uh that's a great document uh and all these things should be reflected there it's we do have some ABCs and departments within the within the city city hall that do a great job and it's really for me in my position it's great I see where we started where we are prog progressing or what we have achieved. The only thing is that yes we have certain departments or ABCs that you can see that some of them spend more time on it and they really take it close to their heart and some of them don't. But I think that if this uh implementation plan if we get it to the level that we would like it to be all across the board that this is exactly what's going to address a lot of questions for you and for us as the council as the board of directors. So I just want to mention that and if you haven't seen it, you should you certainly should see it and take a look at it. Thank you. Thank you. Looking for further comments or questions. Okay. This is a motion to receive the report of 4.6 the internal London internal audit CIP audit from MNP. All in favor by a show of hands. Motion carries. Thank you. 4.7 is the housing and homelessness value for money audit supplemental report from MNP. It will commence with a brief presentation. The motion is going to be to receive it uh to get on the floor. I'm looking for a mover and councelor Pribble seconder and councelor Stevenson is on the floor. I will turn to MNP for a overview of it and then I will start a speaker list. Uh thank you through you madam chair. Um so before you in the item 4.7 is the u a supplemental memo or supplemental report that we prepared um at the request of uh of the of the committee um to provide additional information based upon the working papers that we had completed for the um for the housing uh sorry housing and home homelessness pardon me the housing and homelessness audit um that was completed uh in uh in the fall of uh of 2025. Um the big takeaway from this one is what we tried to highlight was provide a little bit of a background with regards to reframing or at least reframing our our views with regards to the hubs themselves. um provided a little bit of information um from the financial perspective of what we saw with regards to um with regards to you uh youth opportunities unlimited and at LOSA uh family and healing services uh and that and as well to try to provide a little bit of a cost comparison when we're thinking about uh short-term emergency shelters and the how the hubs model based upon the information that's currently available. Um with on within the last page, our goal was to in being as objective as humanly possible uh to provide um our perspective with regards to and remembering that the um the time frame in which we are looking at is effectively from December 2023 to July of 2023 um given when the audit took place. um with regards to the outcomes that how that hubs appear to be making. Uh and that is what we are looking at there as well as providing a little bit of a cost comparison across different types of housing intervention um that is available uh within London. Thank you. Looking for questions or comments to start my speakers list off with. Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. I asked for this and I appreciated uh the support of committee and council on getting it back. Um and I and I always appreciate getting data that whatever is available. I did mention that this is just simply uh details coming from the budget from the two hubs which is great to have for public accounting and transparency but it's not the evidence of the value created in the hubs that I was hoping to see. Right. and and I've had a conversation with MNP about this in that how do we know the real question for me as a counselor is we made the this choice to spend a lot more money on hubs than on shelter beds. So, and I did forward to MNP the ATLSA contract for the winter response where we had this 18 beds, 10 rest bits spaces in the same location for a cost of $6 to $700,000 a year. We canled that contract. We issued a hub contract at $2 something million a year. What I wanted to know was what was the value created with that extra funding. It was three to four times the amount of funding to the same location for the same number of beds. Was there psychiatric care? Was there more medical care? Did we put more people through? Were they better off? I don't know. Same same with YOU. We fund shelter beds for them at far less than $11,000 per month hub beds. $11,000 a month per bed where six of the 15 are three bunk beds in a common room. And I'm not putting that down uh because I'm sure there's great reasons for that. I don't even mind spending $11,000 a month per bed on youth for prevention, but just tell me why it's so great. Did we compare it to the cost of other cities? Did we compare the hub beds to the shelter beds? I want to be able to tell taxpayers that it's good to keep to continue doing this to renew contracts at $11,000 a month per bed instead of $2 to $4,000 a month for shelter bed. And this is why. And I still didn't get that out of this. I'm still not sure why the cost went to $362 a night per bed. And like I said, six of the beds are three bunk beds in a room with the kitchen and the living area, as far as I saw on social media at least. So, I'd love I wanted to know more. I want to be able to tell taxpayers why our hubs are so much better than the shelter beds at a time when there's limited funding, limited funding forecasts, increased need. Would we be better? Hey, we tried this and that was great, but at $11,000 a bed, we'd be better to have three times the beds at $4,000 a month and bring people indoors. I just want to be able to have data to support better decision making when the decisions come before committee and council. So hopefully there's another opportunity to get that. um we didn't get it out of the evaluation of the whole community either unfortunately even though some great metrics were brought to us and the plan for that was I thought really great and I supported it sadly the metrics didn't come so I don't know why we're not getting comparatives how do you know you got value for your money unless you compare it to something and to me we do have we had existing beds before we had existing services at YOU and Um, I appreciate the work and I appreciate getting the data, but like I said, to me that could have come just simply from uh looking at the budget, which we of course can't see, but now at least we've got some data. Um, but I I was looking for working type figures to actually show how we how it was a good decision to pay. Again, I'm going to say again, $11,000 a month per bed. Further comments or speakers? I have no one online. Um there was no no question asked directly to you. Um I took it more as a Can I ask one quick question? I forgot. Thank you for reminding. Sorry. Just cuz then you start and then it kicks back up again. But your hands up. The counselor's hands back up now. Councelor Stevenson. Thank you. I didn't get a chance to see if there was anything that came from the contract that I sent. Um um I don't think the contracts before us and committee wouldn't have it. Council, could you It was related to this and I'm happy to share it with council on the added agenda, but it was a a here's what we were paying before at the same location for the same number of beds. Does this help give us the any feedback in terms of value for money? I really want to be able to sell it to the taxpayers that this was a good move. Um, us trying to sell something to taxpayers is our problem, not staff's problem. Um, I'll also state just I paused the time. Uh, you have 20-ish seconds left. Um, if it's on the agenda, Mr. Chima still wouldn't have it. We'd have to ask specifically or if you think about signing something to him if you want. Um, Mr. Rako because now uh the questions have started again. I will go to you. I'll also note uh if you reach out to YOU directly, I did do a tour there and they did say whe the bunk beds are there operationally to help the youth. Um but Mr. Rako, the floor is yours. The council had asked a question. If you could frame it realizing that Mr. Chima would not have had information uh as well as part of your response. Uh thank you madam chair and through you uh to address this specific question with regards to the uh through the additional contract um to be very transparent with the with the committee. Uh I have not looked into that. It does fall outside of the timing of the scope that we have. I do appreciate um through you madam chair um the councelor's uh question with regards to that and I do think it is an interesting um an interesting thing for um the city to consider um particularly when if we're objectively trying to understand and appreciate the value of the uh of the hubs model. Councelor uh just starting your timer again. Do you have a follow-up? Okay, councelor Pribble is okay for questions. I see nobody online. This was a motion to receive the um supplemental report uh that we requested. Thank you for getting it back so uh expeditiously. All in favor by a show of hands. Motion carries. Okay. Deferred matters and additional business. Uh we have none. I'll note June 17th is our next scheduled meeting that everyone has on their calendars for Mr. Chima online. The clerk will be reaching out um once this passes at council as in the um item 4.1. It was the request for proposals for internal audit services. Part of that motion was that we're going to be calling an additional meeting of audit committee in May. So, the clerk will be reaching out for scheduling uh to work with you for some dates. Just wanted to give you a heads up on that as they don't have access to your calendar like they do ours. Um we have no confidential items for today. Um that would move us on to adjournment. I would need a motion to adjurnn. Moved by councelor Stevenson, seconded by councelor Pribble. A show of hands for adjournment. Motion carries. Thank you everyone. We are for that date that will be set up.

Full Transcript