Committee of the Whole – April 13, 2026

00:27:44
Good morning everyone. My name is Rory Nissan, counselor for W 3. I would like to call to order the committee of the whole meeting for Monday, April 13, 2026. Burlington as we know it today is rich in history and modern traditions of many First Nations and the Matei. From the Anesa to the Hotni and the Matei, our land spanning from Lake Ontario to the Niagara Scarment are steeped in indigenous history.

00:28:07
The territory is mutually covered by the dish with one spoon wampam belt covenant, an agreement between the Irakqua Confederacy, the Ojiway, and other allied nations to peaceibly share and care for the resources around the Great Lakes. We acknowledge that the land on which we gather is part of the treaty lands and territory of the Missosagas of the credit.

00:28:29
In the event of an emergency, please evacuate the council chambers by the nearest exit staircase which is located through the doorway marked with the exit symbol. Once you have evacuated the building, please gather in civic square outside of city hall. All City of Burlington committee and council meetings are live webcasted and archived on the city’s website.

00:28:49
Today’s meeting is being captioned digitally through our agenda management software. Remind everyone to slow down and speak clearly so your words can be captured by the software. I would also ask everyone attending virtually to please use appropriate microphones so your words can be captured accurately by the software.

00:29:09
We do have rules of engagement in committee meetings. We ask everyone to please be respectful while others are speaking and listen as you would want to be listened to. A reminder to committee members to adhere to the procedure bylaw and limit your questions to two at a time.

00:29:22
Further, a member may ask a question only for the purpose of obtaining facts relevant to the matter under discussion and necessary for a clear understanding. All questions will be stated succinctly and will not be used as a means of making statements or assertions. We’re not making decisions today, only recommendations that will go to city council for final consideration on April 21st, 2026.

00:29:49
The public is welcome to see when the final decision-making happens by attending the meeting either in person or watching the live stream. Delegates are welcome to register to speak at the council meeting. By way of introduction of our members, our first order of business for today’s meeting is to conduct a roll call.

00:30:06
I’ll now turn it over to the clerk who will take attendance of members present and confirm a quorum. >> Thank you. Council Greg, >> present. >> Councelor Karns, >> present. >> Councelor Stool, >> present. >> Councelor Charman, >> here. >> Councelor Bentovena, >> present. >> Mayor me Ward, >> present. >> Councelor Nissan, >> here.

00:30:27

We have quorum. >> Thank you. Uh staff joining us today are many including our chief administrative officer Kurt Benson, our committee clerk Suzanne Gillies and other staff in attendance will be introduced as each agenda item is discussed. Today’s uh schedule is uh the usual with uh breaks midm morning and afternoon lunch from

00:30:48
12 to 1:00 p.m. Confidential items will be dealt with after lunch at 1:00 p.m. Uh the meeting is scheduled until 4:30 p.m. today and set to continue tomorrow if necessary. No, it will be tomorrow for the statutory public meeting at 9:30 a.m. Okay. Approval of the agenda. Are there any uh requests to change the agenda? I will ask for a member of committee to move the approval of the agenda.

00:31:18
Councelor Stolty. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Any declarations of pecuniary interest on today’s agenda? Councelor Galbreth. >> Yes. Thank you, chair. Uh, I’m going to declare an interest on item 8.2, two, the real estate matter on Waterdown Road LLS-17-26 and the corresponding item 9.

00:31:42
1 of the confidential agenda um regarding the same item. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Anyone else? Okay, seeing no others. All right. Um we’re going to start with our delegations and a reminder to delegates that uh items will be discussed in the order of the approved agenda. Uh you may remain in the uh chambers or if you choose to leave you can watch the meeting live stream online.

00:32:11
The link to the live stream is available at burlington.ca/meings. All public attendees are asked to maintain order, not engage in any uh disruptive behavior. Each delegate will have 10 minutes to provide comments. We’ll be using the time clock in council chambers to keep track of your time, which you will be able to view at the podium or on your screen if attending remotely.

00:32:35
Once you’re done, please remain to answer any questions committee members may have. I remind committee members that your questions should be for clarification only. We have six registered delegations for today’s meeting. And uh our first delegate is Reverend Canon Matthew Griffin, Rosemary Armstrong, and Wendy Murray.

00:32:56
all joining us in person to speak regarding the St. Luke’s window to the lake implementation and required agreements CSS0626. And we’ll just get your microphone on. Welcome. Thank you for being here. Your mic is on. If you need to, you can raise the podium with the little up arrow on the right there. And otherwise, you should be good to go.

00:33:18
Whenever you’re ready. >> Good morning. I’m the Reverend Canon Matthew Griffin and have been the director of St. Luke’s here in Burlington since the beginning of March this new year. I’ve been joking I still have that new car smell. I’m really glad that I have the opportunity to delegate today.

00:33:36
Um, one of the things that helped me discern the call to become the director of St. Luke’s was the Church Avenue project that was already underway. It’s on your consent agenda today and the enthusiasm in the parish for this opportunity is significant. St. Luke’s is tremendously excited to work with the city of Burlington on transforming the Church Avenue corridor into space that will benefit all who share in downtown Burlington.

00:34:07
One of the teachings of the Church of Jesus that we’ll hear on April 26th is his desire for us to have life and to have it abundantly. We’re meant to participate in life fully together and for every human being to flourish. So sharing this window to the lake with the citizens of Burlington and all who visit by creating an inviting space for reflection, contemplation, and celebration will offer deeper and more vibrant opportunities for abundant life together.

00:34:40
Standing with me this morning are Rosemary Armstrong and Wendy Murray who serve on our parish committee supporting the Church Avenue Project. We’re happy to speak to any questions you may have. >> Thank you very much. And do we have any questions for the delegates today? >> Okay, >> that was easy. >> Thank you for your time. Appreciate it.

00:35:03
Well done. Our second delegate this morning is Megan Trauno, um, Burlington Community Foundation, joining to speak to real estate matter, Waterdown Road Properties leased to Inwell LLS 1726. Perfect. >> Good morning. I will raise the table. I’ve been here before. Um, good morning counselors and mayor me Ward.

00:35:35
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak this morning about affordable and supportive housing in Burlington. Specifically, the proposed supportive housing project by Indwell on Waterdown Road. At the Burlington Community Foundation, we understand the urgent and pressing need for more affordable and supportive housing in Burlington.

00:35:53
We are the city’s giving and generosity hub, working closely with donors who want to support vital community needs such as housing in the community and with charitable partners who are working to meet those needs. We provide grants to charitable organizations in Burlington and across Canada, both through our foundation directed granting program and through the generosity of our fund holders and donors in this generous city.

00:36:19
Last year, I shared with this committee details of the foundation’s 2025 vital signs report which provided a snapshot of how Burlington residents were feeling when about firsthand research conducted by Canadian firm Leger. Surveys were conducted nearly a year ago and at that time residents felt that issues in Burlington the top issues were cost of living and afford and housing affordability.

00:36:43
Around four and 10 provided negative ratings for the availability of supportive housing in the city and just less than half were negative regarding the availability of subsidized housing and affordable renting opportunities. Nearly one year later, there remains a continued need for housing solutions and supports.

00:36:59
In response to BCF’s vital signs report, the Burlington Community Foundation took several actions. We made housing one of our key priorities for annual grants last fall, ensuring support for local housing organizations as part of our 315,000 in annual grants in one year alone. We held a vital community conversation on housing in January in partnership with the Burlington Public Library to deepen the discussion and share actions we can all take to support housing in our community.

00:37:25
and we created a housing support fund, a way for individuals, businesses, and community groups to directly support housing needs in Burlington and across Halton Region. Through community generosity, this fund has raised nearly $80,000 in a short time frame. In the immediate term, we were able to grant 25,000 each to both Wesley for its emergency shelter ser shelter here in Burlington as well as Shift for Homes, Halton’s only maternal residents to help meet urging h urgent housing needs.

00:37:56
The remaining funds are invested in perpetuity for the long term so that each year we will provide grants to specifically uh support local housing initiatives in our community. The fund continues to support and accept uh public donations as it grows and it too will be able to provide those grants annually. We are an organization built on sustainable philanthropy and we see this project um with Indwell as a vital step to creating local sustainable housing solutions that will address the current crisis and support the diverse needs of individuals who need assistance the most. Creating an impact for generations to come and is a sustainable path for Burlington. The community foundation would like to walk this path with Indwell through government, charitable partners, and private partnerships. We have an opportunity to work collaboratively. One example is our partnership with Halton Children’s Aid Society. BCF partnered with both our Hamilton and Oakville Community Foundation peers to

00:38:54
provide a mortgage for a transitional home here in Burlington to help the Children’s Aid Society, a home which has now supported more than 50 youth with stable housing as they move out of care. As an organization, we are focused on growing our social impact investments and helping to strengthen community through partnerships and generosity.

00:39:14
Recently, the BCF team met with IND with the Indwell team and learned more about the Waterdown project and how INDL approaches supportive housing needs. We knew about their impactful work that they are doing in other municipalities through our community foundation peers. Their projects have provided successful housing outcomes in other communities with a proven model that will expect we expect will have an equally impactful outcome and results here in Burlington.

00:39:39
At BCF, we’ve truly been waiting for local opportunities such as this to come forward that we can come together in partnership and collaboration. We want to be part of creating sustainable, meaningful change in the housing landscape in Burlington. But this is not an issue that philanthropy can solve in isolation.

00:39:55
Partnership in the spirit of community building is essential to creating lasting housing solutions that will benefit Burlington for generations to come. Indwell helps an individual build community, the supports that are so essential for all of us to thrive. And that is something we understand deeply at BCF. With this project on Waterdown Road and hopefully many more, the city of Burlington has an opportunity to provide leadership on the housing crisis through prevention, not reaction.

00:40:24
As a community partnering with Indwell, we can step up to meet the needs of our neighbors before the local landscape becomes more challenging as it has in other municipalities. By being proactive around housing, Burlington can build an infrastructure that will expand and strengthen the housing continuum, helping to create space where all residents can thrive.

00:40:43
Through our deep community relationships at BCF, we also know there are many other housing projects that may be in the works at any given time. There is no shortage of organizations, so we must meet the moment. We also understand that through our relationships with housing organizations that some of this work needs to be done quietly and discreetly in order to build support and these necessary pieces of community infrastructure.

00:41:07
Through our relationships, we also know that there is quiet support for projects meeting housing needs in a recognition of how critical this issue has become, such as evidenced in our um our launch of our housing support fund and the the extreme support that we received in such a short amount of time.

00:41:21
Please do not let negative voices drown at the support of voices simply because they may be louder or more visible. Indwell has a long-standing track record as a community provider of housing and is able to support residents as they transition in independence with their housing needs. We believe this project will be a significant asset to Burlington and the Alershot community.

00:41:44
It will be to our detriment as a community if we do not meet this moment and support this project. The Burlington Community Foundation fully stands behind the Indwell Waterdown Road project and we look forward to working with Indwell, the city of Burlington and other organizations to build long-term sustainable solutions for housing just as we have done with philanthropy.

00:42:00
We look forward to welcoming Indwell as our neighbors and celebrating this project as a source of pride in our community. Thank you for your time today and happy to take any questions if you have them. >> Thank you very much, Megan. I see a question from councelor Karns. >> Thank you very much for joining us here, Megan, and for your advocacy on housing for all.

00:42:23
Um, one of the things from your website and from when you when you did the launch of the housing support fund was you identified two recipients in 2025, Sherrifa Holmes, who I support deeply, as well as uh Wesley, which is located in W 2. Um, one thing I did not hear from your delegation and is a concern for me is the fundraising abilities of Indwell to wholly fund the build.

00:42:46
Am I hearing that Burlington Community Foundation will be one of the financial sponsors of this project? Uh, well, it’s not confirmed. We we do extend our full support in helping to raise awareness around the initiative and learning more about what exactly the funding needs are which we are aware of and working with donors and fund holders to make them aware of the opportunity.

00:43:08
So whether it be through our granting that INDL would be eligible just like any other organization to apply for annual granting in addition to individual generosity and philanthropy from individuals across the city. >> Okay, thank you for the insights. >> I’m not seeing any other questions, Megan. Thank you very much.

00:43:26

Thank you. >> And our third uh delegate this morning is on the same item. Uh Leah Logan and Sylvia Harris from Inwell joining us in person. You can bring it down if you need to. >> Good morning, counselors, mayor. Um it is lovely to see you all again this morning. As a quick introduction, my name is Leah Logan and I’m here on behalf of Indwell family of companies regarding the proposed lease agreement of Waterdown Road lands that we are working to develop in partnership with the city of Burlington as part of 8.2 LLS 1726. For those in the in the community that might not be aware of Indwell, Indwell is a permanent supportive housing provider that brings interdisciplinary health supports into the buildings that we operate. Operating over 1,450 units of permanent housing today across

00:44:26
southern Ontario, we are focused on seeing our tenants grow in their health, wellness, and belonging. This means that we hire staff who work in our buildings and programs focused on growing our tenants social determinance of health. Whether that be supporting their ability to stay housed by coaching them on activities of daily living, providing health supports and referrals into the community, connecting our tenants with employment and volunteer services, or helping grow in food security on a limited budget. We also help tenants with family members birthday parties in our building spaces. The individuals that we hope to house in our programs are your neighbors already. They are neighbors whose income makes it impossible for them to find and keep housing in Burlington at the moment. People on Ontario disability support program are individuals who have been told they cannot work because they have a health condition. And these

00:45:24
individuals are receiving $599 for rent on a monthly basis. It is impossible to find housing for that rate in Burlington at this time. Folks who cannot work to h because of health struggles are becoming are being put in conditions of abject poverty. What we want to do is ensure that at the very least they have a home in their community.

00:45:51
Today you will receive information on the intended land lease agreement with Indwell. We took council’s concerns and suggestions from phase one of the land lease agreement process into our conversations with city staff with the proposed lease agreement at hand. Items that we discussed included that the land lease will be contingent on Indwell’s ability to source support from both Halton region and the federal government under Build Canada homes.

00:46:16
We also discussed we that we will work with the access Halton access to community housing weight list, the Hatch weight list, which is the housing system in place to offer those in need of affordable housing options in the city of Burlington. We also discussed that we are focused on building no more no less than 70 units of housing, recognizing that there is need in this community.

00:46:43
Furthermore, having participated in a mayor and council town hall meeting last week, we heard that vacant land was posing a problem for neighbors in this community. This project is compelled to be built in a timely manner under the requirements through the housing affordable fund affordability fund timelines inwell is focused on meeting.

00:47:05
Finally, outside of the lease agreement, Indwell is comm committed to being a good neighbor, focused now on connecting with a community, our new neighbors. We are eager to do so. Last week, I spoke to a new neighbor that was interested in preserving the streetscape of Waterdown Road and Plains Road.

00:47:21
We understand that interest and are focused on designing a building that complements the aesthetics of the community around us. We are also connecting with the public at various community meetings, including our own on April 16th at 6:30 p.m. at East Plains United Church, intent on being transparent about our work, uh, educating about our model, and seeking input from the community that we are excited to be a part of.

00:47:48
We remain steadfast in not only being good partners to the city of Burlington, but good neighbors within the Eldershot community as well. We look forward to the next steps within this process and we’re happy to answer any questions you might have. >> Any questions from committee? >> Councelor Karns. >> Thank you.

00:48:12
Apologies for the the technical uh lapse there. Um my question to you is this. So, one of the pieces of information that I think hasn’t been fully um explored across the community while we respect the the livelihoods of all of our neighbors is who exactly will we be welcoming into the new um housing opportunities that are being built here? >> So, we’ll be welcoming individuals that are currently on the Hatch wait list looking for affordable housing.

00:48:42

Okay. So, as a followup, is it Burlington only, men, women, everybody? Is it high acuity, mid, low? Can you give us some more information? Because I think that’s really the source of uh some of the push back and I think this is a great forum to clear that up. >> For sure.

00:48:58
Um so for us uh anyone on the Hatch wait list has the opportunity to decide the community that they want to live in. And so we’re presuming that with a hatch list, those that want to live in Burlington will be those that are uh sent our direction in the intake process. Um, in terms of the acuity of the individuals that we serve, we are still understanding what that looks like.

00:49:21
And so the program has not been defined and yet uh we know that it’s individuals who need two things. They need deep affordability in their housing and they want supports as part of their housing. And so for us that will be housing individuals that want support from staff in our B buildings. >> Okay, I’m going to I see there’s more questions so I’m just going to pause there. Thank you.

00:49:45

And councelor Stoalty. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, so I’m curious about the response to councelor Kern’s question. So I know that one thing we talked about the last time we had this conversation in chambers was about um the focus on making sure that the housing accelerator fund that is meant to be for Burlington residents was used for Burlington residents.

00:50:02
It sounded in your response when you said that it’s going to go to the Hatch wait list for people who choose Burlington. So they very well may not be Burlington residents. And the reality is is that they may not be choosing Burlington. They’re choosing to get housing. And if the housing exists and is offered in Burlington, they will move to Burlington to get the housing, which I don’t blame them for.

00:50:23
That’s a very legitimate thing. But that’s a very different concept than what I thought we had talked about, which is ensuring that the Burlington dollars and Burlington taxpayer dollars are used for Burlington residents, existing Burlington residents. Can you clarify that? >> Yes. Um, so one thing that I I need to name is that this is a conversation I need to have with Halton Region staff as well.

00:50:44
And those are some of the preliminary conversations that we’re having about who the referrals will be from the Hatch weight list. And yet I think um we have seen in all of our programs through any coordinated weight list that the people that want to live in our communities are folks that are already in our communities.

00:51:00
And so it’s a very natural progression in the intake process that those that are considered um are those that actually are in the in the community and want to be part of the community. So it’s it’s not something um yeah that that’s what I would say to that if that makes sense. >> Just a followup when we had had this conversation before I thought there was some assurance that that conversation had already happened with the region.

00:51:28
Are you now saying that that conversation’s not clear with the region as far as how the hatched weight list will be dealt with? >> Yeah, in terms of the process for this project, we first come to the city of Burlington and with the approval, we then start conversations with Halton Region. So, we are in those stages of conversations just at the beginning of looking at a how uh we get supports from Halton Region and the regulations around that support as well, which tends to be around the hatch weight list and their expectations. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Not seeing any other questions. So, we’ll thank you very much for coming in. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> And our next delegate is Terry Kado, uh, Burlington Chamber of Commerce, joining us in person to speak regarding economic development and tourism service delivery options. TRN0426. Is Terry maybe online possibly?

00:52:35

Sorry, >> you’re not Terry. >> I’m not Terry. Um, yeah, apologies. Uh, Terry just messaged staff to say that he’s having some vehicle problems, so he would prefer a virtual option. >> Yeah, no problem. Is he here, though? We can always Okay, we we’ll try him later. We’ll try him later. No problem.

00:52:51
We’ll come back to him. So uh with that we will have Ron Lman and Leslie Cook Bithri uh Burlington Economic Development and Tourism joining us to speak to economic development and tourism service delivery options TRN0426. I believe they’re online. >> All right, we see you Ron. >> I’m here.

00:53:23
Can you guys hear me? >> We can hear you fine. Is Leslie also on the line or is it just you? >> Uh, it’s just going to be me. Okay. Today. >> All right. Sounds good, Ron. Whenever you’re ready. You got 10 minutes. >> Okay. Uh, well, hello everyone. Uh, I’ve been here a few times, so most of you know me by now.

00:53:39
Uh, thanks for the opportunity to speak today. Uh on behalf of the Burlington Economic Development and Tourism or BEDT and our uh HR and governance committee, um I want to begin by acknowledging the significant work undertaken by city staff on this file. Uh we appreciate the collaborative approach over the last few months and are are aligned in the shared objective of strengthening governance, alignment, and service delivery.

00:54:01
Our delegation today is in support of the staff recommendation to proceed with option one, an enhanced service agreement. Uh I don’t plan to take the entire 10 minutes um but instead I’m here to offer some areas of context and answer questions if any at the end. Uh I want to begin on governance and the value of the current model.

00:54:20
Uh it’s important to reinforce BDT as an independent incorporated notfor-profit organization governed by its own board and operating as a strategic delivery partner to the city not a municipal department or ABC. Uh the current model brings tangible value. Our board is made up of private sector and industry leaders who contribute market insight, sector expertise, and strong business networks.

00:54:40
The structure also allows BED to operate with agility to respond quickly to opportunities, convene partners, and deliver programs that are market informed. In practical terms, it strengthens the alignment between municipal priorities and real market conditions. Uh with that said, I want to spend a little time today on general guidance related to the service agreement framework.

00:55:00
I don’t plan to get into details, but um we see the development of a renewed service agreement as a as a central opportunity coming out of this report. Up to this point, materials circulated reflect an early stage position standard to city arrangements like these and will require further development to evolve into a fully scoped service agreement.

00:55:17
Given this, from our perspective, that agreement should be built on three key elements. Uh first, it should be principles-based and strategy-led. Uh this agreement should be anchored in existing council approved FRA frameworks like vision 2040 economic vision 2025 and related strategies and should be able to evolve alongside any updated community economic development strategy.

00:55:41
This ensures that scope measures and performance expectations are grounded in a shared modern strategic framework with a flexibility to evolve over time. Second, it should be partnership oriented. Uh we recognize that the early stage materials may reflect more typical transactional arrangements and will evolve through further discussion and development.

00:55:58
Uh it will be important that the final agreement reflects a true partnership model based on shared objectives, strategy and mutual accountability rather than a purely transactional relationship as is currently presented. Third, it should have clear governance and accountability. Uh this agreement should clearly define the relationship between BEDT city staff and council including reporting structure, scope of services and accountability mechanisms.

00:56:20
This clarity will strengthen alignment and transparency while still preserving the operational flexibility that enables BEDT to be effective in a dynamic environment. Beyond the service agreement components, there is another recommendation for council to proceed with a comm community economic development strategy, which is great.

00:56:37
Uh for clarity to council, BDT does have a strategic plan in place and our work is already grounded in multiple council approved strategies and plans. So the opportunity here is not to start over but to align and modernize these frameworks with within a horizon 2050 context. Finally on organizational considerations on the two options presented uh from an HR and governance perspective option two within the report um which is not the recommended recommended option in there but option two introduces risks related to staff retention loss of knowledge disruption to stakeholder relationships and reduced agility in service delivery as we have all discussed before. Uh these risks are particularly relevant given the recent merger and alignment work that’s already underway. Uh as we look at option one, uh it is important to keep in mind there will continue to be disruption in costs associated with executing this as well. Uh particularly around separating BEDT from from any city support activities such as IT, insurance, finance, payroll processing

00:57:37
and related administrative support currently provided by the city and as proposed in the city report. All this to say there is significant work still ahead with the recommended option to determine the best structure and option for each service. So hope uh today is that council and city staff recognize this in terms of next steps that there is quite a bit to do.

00:57:54
So to sum up um BEDT board supports proceeding with option one an enhanced service agreement. Uh we see this as a practical and structured path to clarify governance accountability maintain continuity and formalize alignment within a collaborative framework that ensures all stakeholders are considered and we remain committed to working closely with council and city staff to move this forward. Thank you.

00:58:18
Thank you, Ron. Appreciate it. Councelor Karns has a question. >> Thank you for joining us today, Ron. So, the recommendation actually is to uh execute and finalize a service agreement, but it doesn’t have the purview of council associated with it. So, it is delegated to staff. Um, is that is that the direction that that you’re supportive of or did you want this to come back to council one more time so uh we could see the balance of the responsibilities on both sides as a sort of service agreement? We haven’t, to my knowledge, effectively executed a service agreement under the uh new framework for agencies, boards, and commissions. And I’m just wondering if you’d like that involvement. Um I I might defer to Anita who’s in the room, but my um my initial inclination would be that we’ve we’ve been working with city staff on this up to this point. Um we do have various council

00:59:17
members and the mayor in our board who can review this. We have city staff who are brought into meetings. So I feel we can get to that point. Um I feel we can we’ve been working in a collaborative manner. Um but it is really early stages. So, I I think I might, you know, I feel like we can get there, but I I might defer to whatever process is typically followed in these situations as I haven’t gone through this with with the city.

00:59:39

Okay. So, just before Anita answers as a followup, have you been briefed with any draft agreements yet or are you um will you see them in due course? Uh we have been uh briefed with some initial uh guidance materials outlining some certain conditions which I think are part of a future discussion council has. Okay.

01:00:00
So that’s that’s a satisfactory response to my first question. Um then my second question is this because you would be taking on a different uh structure under you know a more prescribed framework. It is uncommon to have such a significant number of uh council and staff. I think it would be three plus uh the CAO.

01:00:18
At what point will will the board address that within the uh new framework? Um, just for clarity, are are you referring to the number of council members on on the board? >> Yes, council members and uh the CEO all serve on the BET board, and that’s very uncommon, especially if there’s going to be a uh proper service agreement in place.

01:00:46

Yeah. So, our our intent with the service agreement would be to address that as part of it. Um, a lot of those arrangements on the board right now only go to the next term of council as it is. So our intent was always to have that worked out by the next council having clarity because we did go through that merger with tourism a couple years ago or year ago whenever that was now.

01:01:04
Um so there was more council members than than originally planned on the board. So part of that is we we plan to address that through the service agreement and through uh through the next council. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And we have a question from councelor Charman. >> Thank you very much.

01:01:22
I just wanted to pick up on the question of number of members of council and the representation uh because the board has always been very significant. Um are you aware Ron that prior to your being chair that in fact we always had three representatives of council and the city manager? I I am aware um I’m I’m also I’m also aware that previous um engagements or analyses that were done through external parties indicated that that was too much at the time.

01:01:53
So we made the decision after that to to to bring that down to a a more manageable number to ensure that there was more concrete ways of getting information to council. It wasn’t going through side channels. Um it was just more of a defined relationship and and we’re hoping through the service agreement that that will be more clearly defined. we can get to that point.

01:02:10
So, um I don’t want to predetermine the outcome here, but we did go from a high number to a lower number and we came back up through the merger uh in the last couple years. So, um where it goes, we will work through that. >> Yeah, thank you for that because you make the good point that in fact it was down to two members of council and uh and the city manager and then when we merged with tourism, there was a council member on that.

01:02:34
So, now we are tourism and ECDAB. So that might suggest that we have the representation. I leave that >> question >> for the for discussion. But is that correct? >> Okay. >> Uh it it are you are you asking is that right? >> Is it correct that we brought in another we merged in tourism and therefore we got another board member that way.

01:02:56

Yes. That because there was there was a council appointed um member on the tourism board as well as the ectode board. So we came together and just kept that as it is when we combined the boards. >> Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Lots of time for statements later. Any other questions? No other questions for you, Ron.

01:03:15
Thank you very much for your delegation. >> Thank you. >> And next, we do have Terry uh available to delegate. So Terry from the Burlington, Terry Kado, Burlington Chamber of Commerce is going to join us in person to speak uh on the same matter. Uh Terry, uh whenever you’re ready, uh go ahead. Thank thank you.

01:03:37
Um my apologies to this the chamber or to the uh council for not attending in person which was my intent. My comments basically are I want to compliment uh the council and city staff for listening to the business community. It was, you know, when I spoke to most of a number of our 900 members, it was very obvious that the business community appreciated the voice that an independent economic development and tourism committee brought to different issues and created a different lens to see issues through. um council has a lens, city staff has a lens, all very positive, but having independent third-party uh leaders from the community that represent a number of different businesses adds a different perspective to the whole whole issues that economic development and tourism going through. So, I really wanted to compliment city staff and council for

01:04:36
for listening to the business community. And I also wanted to reinforce the relationship and independence between the Chamber of Commerce and economic development and tourism staff. Even though we both serve as part of the uh team Burlington, we bring independent lenses to to issues and we’re not duplicate duplicative of our efforts.

01:04:56
We spend a lot of time ensuring that we work in different areas and are collaborative and create more synergy. um independently we can get more done and that we don’t duplicate our efforts. So I just wanted to kind of sum up by uh saying that economic development is is really meeting the needs of the business community as well as on the tourism side.

01:05:20
I don’t want it to go underappreciated that the majority of the hotels and motel if not all of them in Burlington have seen a significant improvement of the professionalism that tourism is being led by comments and coming from the tourism world myself, it was uh very receptive to calls uh very reactive.

01:05:44
Now, I describe our tourism department as very proactive and seeking u new opportunities and driving more business uh because tourism should be the third or fourth largest economic driver for our community and I’m very optimistic that it’s heading that way. Uh if there any questions, thank you for your time. >> Thank you, Terry. Appreciate it.

01:06:04
I don’t see any questions on the board, so I’m going to thank you for your delegate delegation. Thank you, Terry. Okay. Uh our last uh delegate this morning is Doug Brown uh from BFAST uh joining us in person to speak to the motion memorandum regarding on demand transit pilot project COW1026. Doug, it’s not your first time.

01:06:30
Uh we’ll get that mic on for you and then you’ll have uh 10 minutes once you begin. >> Thank you, Chair Nissan. Um, members of council, uh, I’m, uh, uh, here representing Burlington for Accessible, Sustainable Transit, a long-standing organization in Burlington, founded some almost 40 years ago to uh, improve uh, uh, transit throughout Burlington.

01:07:04
and um so uh haven’t delegated many times but I think uh uh uh some things have come to a head and uh and here I am. Um you all have uh I think our our written uh submission and um we were uh not happy with uh uh councelor Charman’s uh recent uh criticism of Burlington Transit and not getting I think the term was value for money.

01:07:41
Um and so we uh we’re not going to let that that comment pass. Um I think the evidence there is uh that we do get very good value for money from our transit service and um they have a difficult assignment going back in history. You know, 51 years ago, uh we didn’t have a municipal bus service.

01:08:11
We had uh a contractor called Norton Bus Lines. And uh back in that era, council made a very good decision to finally get a municipal bus service. And the first years, the first decade of that uh service was uh pretty positive. And um the the main principle it wasn’t sophisticated but uh what really gets riders is frequency and uh during that era we had 15 minute service during the day on all the major routes and that attracted riders.

01:08:50
So this led to uh a growing system. Uh by uh 1970 no 1989 uh the u motoral share for transit in Burlington which had been almost zero uh uh was uh reached an all-time high of uh 7%. That means 7% of all trips in Burlington were made by riding transit. Uh compare that to today. We are just a little over four 4% is the last figure that that I’ve seen.

01:09:35
And uh we we had a a a really bad era, I would say, beginning in the mid ’90s uh until 8 years ago. And uh we um saw that motoral share of transit uh riders uh dropping to 2%. Can you imagine? uh because the service wasn’t there and the budget that was because the budget was cut, we made a big transfer of uh funding directly uh the the gas tax money uh was reduced and uh taken away and put into roads.

01:10:24
So uh uh one thing that has been constant is the leadership, the bus drivers, the workers, the mechanics at Burlington Transit have done a magnificent job over the years and continuing right up to today. They are dedicated to providing the best possible service uh even though their budget really uh isn’t sufficient to uh guarantee that we do get the best possible service.

01:10:59
However, that that’s where we’re at now. In terms of the term value for money, we get very good value for money. And you know th this is a uh what we really have to do is uh not me or counselor charman determining what what’s value value for money but this is a field of economics you know let let’s have uh economic experts do the evaluation uh an evaluation was uh done some seven or eight years ago as part of a bark.

01:11:40
Burlington and Hamilton are partners in cleaning up the Burlington Bay or Hamilton Harbor. and the uh Hamilton took the opportunity to do a benefit cost analysis. And that benefit cost analysis which was done by a Burlington academic uh ATF Kersi uh and it showed very very good rates of return just in economic terms uh for Hamilton HSR.

01:12:15
What we need to do is do something similar in uh Burlington and we have missed those opportunities. The last major transit study did not look at the economics at all. That was the left turn right turn uh study of just several years ago. So uh we would propose first let’s let’s look at the economics.

01:12:39
Let’s do an an economic evaluation. Um the other uh thing I wanted to highlight, we’ve got all the details in our in our handout was uh the um um there’s a now a proposal before you uh uh from transit to do a another study and um we do have some uh concerns about uh uh what would be included in the study.

01:13:16
As I said there would be for starters it would be an opportunity to uh do the a solid economic analysis. Uh this we don’t dread this we uh we we look with great anticipation because we know that there are huge b economic benefits to transit. uh all the uh people that are unable to drive which includes everybody under 16. It includes a lot of seniors uh like myself who might have a medical condition that restricts uh driving and then just economically it costs a lot of money to keep a car on the road.

01:13:56
So we have uh a lot of people struggling financially and they really rely on transit to get to work to shop for everything. So I think we have to uh consider that any any new um initiatives uh uh I think uh should should address address those uh those points. I wanted to also or we wanted to also raise the uh uh a concern uh of u the use of a private corporation recently within Burlington.

01:14:38
Uh Argo is the uh company involved. It’s a Bmptonbased uh company and um it to us and you know we we do have consultations with Burlington Transit. This seemed to come out of nowhere and uh you know suddenly Argo minibuses started to appear and uh in fact one of our members who is disabled uh she called called for uh a uh handy van and we have a very good handy van service underfunded and uh she was put on a Argo bus with a not a Burlington transit driver and you know this this raises concerns with us about process and should be looked into. Um yeah on getting also centering on

01:15:41
economics uh refer council to uh the Toronto Board of Trade recently did a study of the uh cost of congestion and I know that we’ve had uh uh some discussion around congestion in uh in recent months It is certainly an issue and a key way of uh relieving congestion is to have fewer cars and the best way of doing that is get people out of the car and using our good transit system.

01:16:15
So uh uh the Toronto board of uh trade they they determined that the cost of congestion in the GTA was $45 billion. So, it’s gigantic what we’re losing and it should be addressed and uh transit has to be a key role in that. So, I think without further ado, I I’ll take any questions. >> Thank you.

01:16:42
Thank you very much uh Doug for your delegation this morning and I do see a question from councelor Stolty. >> Thank you chair. Thanks Doug. Always great to see you over here. >> Thank you. Um so my question a couple questions of clarity. I was actually going to ask you about the privatization of the buses.

01:16:58
So, I’m glad you brought that up. In the motion that’s before us, it speaks about on demand transit being incorporated into other communities like Oakville, Hamilton, Milton, Bmpton, Niagara, and Bradford. Are you aware in those other communities whether that on demand service was that part of their public transit system or were those those privatized companies that were in those communities? Do you? >> No, the closest thing to it is has been handy van, you know, getting uh people uh who have a disability and uh you know, because uh uh the first part getting from house to uh to a transit stop uh is is sometimes very very arduous. So, we do have an excellent handy van service and uh you know the users of handy van um I I I’ve listened to a lot of them.

01:17:55
The uh the staff are great and they’re doing the best they can. The trouble is you have to book several weeks ahead and and uh you you know that that’s uh uh makes life uh a bit difficult for for a lot of people. You you can’t always plan well in advance of an appointment or or or uh you know important meeting or something.

01:18:24

Yeah, I agree. Thank you. And then my second point of clarity that you brought up just at the very end that I would love I think we would all like more clarity on is could you try to see if there’s a way to get more clarity on that information you shared about a client who called for a handy van bus and was actually put on an Argo bus.

01:18:44
I think we would all be very interested in more information about how that may have happened. >> Yeah, I I would like to know too. Uh it it it uh uh that particular trip from talking to our member who experienced it uh it was also a very long trip. It involved a very roundabout route and took almost an hour. uh so uh uh uh but I I I have no idea why why we are suddenly seeing presence of Argo a private corporation.

01:19:23
Um it it to me it doesn’t make any sense. >> No, it concerns me too. Thank you. Thank you for being here today. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh more questions of clarity to councelor Sharman. >> Thank you very much. I really appreciate your being here, Doug. Uh and of course we’ve had many conversations over the year.

01:19:41
I do want to talk to you about Handy Van. So I gather from what you’re saying that you find Handy Van a really ex extremely helpful service >> and it is available to you when you where you call for it. >> Mhm. >> So on demand. Well, it’s it’s uh with the lead time required like like uh if if I if if I needed a handy van, I would I would need a two week lead time.

01:20:07
They they aren’t take if you phone up. Uh it’ be very rare that they say, “Oh, yes sir, you’ll have a a ban there, you know, within a reasonable length of time.” No, they they uh we we really need to add to that service. We we need more we need more handy vans, more drivers and you know because that’s ju just not uh reasonable that you have to plan a couple of weeks ahead of time for for getting out.

01:20:47

Thank you for that. Um my next question with respect to handy vans is the medical certificate. Um, if there are an awful lot of seniors who would like to get around but don’t have access, don’t have a medical certificate to give to the handy van, could we, would we not be better off just removing that requirement and making handy van available? >> Well, we we we certainly need more capacity that that that’s uh uh uh something that uh we we feel should should be done right away.

01:21:17
we uh you know that that uh our most vulnerable citizens you know it shouldn’t be put through such long wait times. >> Thank you. >> Thank you councelor and councelor Bentovenia has a question. >> Thank you chair. Thanks Doug. Always a pleasure to hear your uh uh you at the podium here.

01:21:39
Um, first of all, we all are aware of what you mentioned in terms of uh your delegation, where we were with transit and where we’ve come so far and thank you very much for your advocacy over the years. Um, transit has done an excellent job and so has council in terms of the seniors, free transit and so on so forth. My my question is um when we talk about capacity in handyman versus I guess Argo scenario >> um is it important how important is it that we get facts because we’re asking staff to come back with some information. Um, wouldn’t this help in deciding the the financial issues involved doing uh going to something like Argo versus what we have existing? >> And wouldn’t that help all of us

01:22:39
understand more as to where we want to see the future in terms of public transit? >> Yeah. The uh our our goal uh I’m not sure what to make of it. I’m I’m really not familiar with the company. Uh we have looked into the background of the the the company, but uh you know it’s a it’s a Bmptonbased uh company and a lot of their business is in uh Willberry and really rural areas that are now developing under the grow growth uh pressure they’re experiencing.

01:23:22
So uh uh we we don’t envisionage something like gargo uh taking over from handy van. The handy van drivers are wonderful universally. You talk to anyone that uses handy. They talk about how great the drivers are because they’re dealing with people with various disabilities day after day and they have real empathy for them and they provide great service.

01:23:50
The only trouble is there’s not enough of it, which you know involves having u um more more money to to acquire additional drivers, mechanics, and buses. And also the the the handy van buses are quite robust. Uh they’re heavy duty and the Argo uh vehicles not not so much. So, we we had one on display at the uh congestion um uh seminar and you you know it’s it’s it’s it’s much smaller than a handy event.

01:24:29

Okay. >> Thank you for that. And I’m going to ask a followup if if I can. If not, it’ll be my second question. >> Yeah. Go. Uh just to to to clarify out not forget using the word handy van. Let’s just call it another transit vehicle. like our goal would be. That’s what I was referring to. So, >> are we not in a good place to get this kind of discussion happen openly in terms of needs, financial situations, number of vehicles, uh on demand um and again not using the word handy van, just using the transportation vehicle that this might help us make those decisions in the future. because we’ll have numbers in front of us and and costs and number of >> vehicles that Argo is going to use versus number of handy van >> just a word that we’re going to need

01:25:28
moving forward. Um do you think that this is a good idea to to have this report? Uh I think I think uh uh handy handy van is pretty descriptive. you know, if you if you have uh a disability of of any kind, I mean, it it might not even be visible. uh uh but you know if you’ve got uh respiratory condition or all sorts of invisible conditions as well that uh you know it um I think it helps direct people you know that that need this service to to uh request it.

01:26:17

Okay. Thank you. Oh, more questions on the board now. And uh Mayor me board, you’re first. >> Okay. >> Thank you, chair. Thank you, chair. Always great to see you, Doug. And uh my question is around um how uh the information might help us make decisions about that. Uh I’ll call it the first and last mile.

01:26:38
And I’ll cast uh cast my mind back to many years ago when uh it was inefficient for example to run a fixed route link in my old neighborhood Tyandega where the nearest bus stop was 2 km away. >> Uh and so we had a partnership with a local taxi company a private company to do that um pickup and it was more efficient than running buses all day every day through uh through Tyandega.

01:27:07
So if um uh if if that is a way for this program to help supplement the fixed route link, would that be more amanable given that we have had that experience of working with private operators and kind of blending and integrating that into our system? >> Yeah. Uh uh dialide. >> Yes, that was the program.

01:27:27
I thought it was a very good program. Um uh it’s getting off topic of transit a bit, but uh our feeling is that uh um the the trans transit uh situ or the taxi situation in Burlington is uh not very clear to us, you know, and uh you know, I contrast that uh if I if I’m taking a trip uh and I I take I take via uh you know to uh alers there’s usually no taxi there.

01:28:09
If I get out at uh Oakville station there’s usually three or four taxis. Uh so so I I there seems to be a Oakville has an abundance of taxi service and it seems to be lacking in uh in Burlington. Yeah, I was thinking more just for clarity, Doug, around the use of a private operator to supplement a fixed route transit system, which is how I see this motion asking us to do so.

01:28:40
Is whether it’s a taxi or an Uber, some communities now have switched to Uber for their dialer ride, but >> this is a is a potential possibility to fill that dialer ride need. So, I’m just wondering if that >> uh our experience uh is that uh you need heavy duty vehicles. Uh we put uh you know our uh our our buses uh uh stay on the road for 12 years and they’re driving all day.

01:29:12
They put on millions of miles and uh if if we don’t use heavy duty vehicles, they’re just not going to last. >> I see. Okay. Thanks, >> Councelor Karns has a question. >> Thanks so much. Uh great to see you here, Doug. Through the chair to me over here. >> Um I think that there’s a piece that I just wanted some clarity on.

01:29:38
Uh are you understanding this as an eitheror? So handy van or on demand microtransit or are you understanding that this is sort of a third plank within the transit service delivery model? >> Um we we don’t we don’t really understand uh what Argo would add to the system. you know that uh um the first mile last mile is it’s almost being treated like a a magic bullet to solve our our transit problems.

01:30:14
But there there is no magic magic bullet here. It’s uh you know keep in keep improving our both our standard transit uh great drivers and heavy duty buses and and uh we need some expansion of handy vans so people don’t have to book so far ahead. >> Right. But follow-up question, the handy vans are a specialized transit with a barrier to access, which is a medical documentation, I understand.

01:30:47
Is that correct? So, so you’re saying the issue is that there’s not enough handy vans to serve the people who are um within the requirements to access the handy vans. You’re saying that? >> Yeah. >> Okay. And then you’re saying that you think that the um uh large scale buses, the big routes, the main routes, those are sufficient as well.

01:31:12

There’s enough buses on the road for that. Okay. >> Yeah. >> And then I’m just looking at the U BAST website. Do you have a list of um advocacy measures that you want to see outside of just that handy van expanded service by number of vehicles? Do you have a list of what BFAST wants from the city to enhance transit? >> No, just a simple more uh that uh you know there uh uh we we know through the long uh advanced booking requirements that there is not enough uh handy vans and drivers uh to get uh accommodate people’s trips within a reasonable length of time. >> Okay. So, it’s a handy van conversation. >> So, we won’t do the math, but you know, we’ve got good good staff to do that. >> Okay. Thank you, Doug. >> Okay. Councelor Stalty, second time. >> Thank you, Chair. So, this is where

01:32:12
these conversations are so helpful because so my question to you is kind of a combination of conversations that have occurred during this question period and it comes back to the idea of the Argo buses and the experience that you understand the person who you know who was given an Argo bus option instead of a handy van.

01:32:27
experience they had that you said that it was a very long circuitous route that took them an hour and that’s been one of my concerns and I’m wondering when we bring up the idea of the taxi system that was in place before that would have been a more individualized and efficient model of taking one or two people to their destination >> would you have a concern with the Argo model of these buses that that’s exactly what could happen because just as from a business perspective economies of scale that Argo bus is going to have to pick up a number of people along along a route that is going to take everybody a lot longer to get where they need to go in order to make that system work. Is that something that you would be concerned about? >> Oh yes. Yes. Uh so um and and their durability is al also an issue. uh uh but but w with heavy he heavyduty handy vans and and buses

01:33:23
uh incredibly it’s a testimony to our wonderful mechanics at Burlington Transit 12 years as as a standard uh uh service length. So so we get very good value out of those vehicles. >> Okay. Awesome. Thank you. >> And councelor Charman. >> Yeah. Thank you. I’ve been thinking about your comment about Argo.

01:33:45
Um, are you aware that in fact transit does have a s a taxi company that uses minivans and cars to pick up people when the transit van handy van cannot be there to take them home? Did you know that? >> No. >> Okay. You might I ask you to check with our other transit people and back to that person, please, and get back to us.

01:34:09

Yeah. Um well in the uh proposed uh study I mean that this is something that transit should should check out you know and and evaluate and come back with a recommendation. >> I agree with you. Sorry I have a question though. Did you see the name Argo in the motion memo that’s going forward today? >> I’m sorry I missed it.

01:34:32

Did you see the name Argo >> in the report? >> You can mention that later. >> Yeah, >> it was a question. and and and the driver was not a Burlington Transit driver. >> You can clarify later, Councelor Charman, when you introduce the motion. Thank you. >> Okay. >> And and that’s it.

01:34:48
Thank you, Doug, for your delegation. Appreciate it. >> All right. Let’s uh see if we can get through our consent agenda before the break, at least um talk about it. We have eight consent items on today’s agenda. 7.1 St. Luke’s window to the lake implementation and required agreements CSS0626 7.

01:35:13
2 2026 tax levy bylaw FIN0126 7.3 Financial status report as at December 31st 2025 FIN0426 7.4 for operating budget performance report as at December 31st 2025 and summary of year and financial position FIN0926 7.5 government relations annual report and funding updates CAF0326 7.6 6 Advisory Committee 2025 annual reports and 2026 work plans and budgets LLS0926 7.

01:35:56
7 significant tree maintenance rebate program PWS 1126 7.8 8 tender award ES2605 for Spruce Avenue Area Renewal PWS 1426. Reminder, if you’re commenting on the consent item, you do not need to pull it. All members will be given the opportunity to comment prior to the vote and pulled items will be discussed at the beginning of their respective sections of the agenda.

01:36:21
Does anyone have questions and want to pull an item from the consent agenda? I see councelor Charman. >> Thank you. I’d like to pull 7.4 4 7.5 7.6. >> Thank you. Anybody else? Seeing no one else at this time, uh, Council Sherman, would you like to move the balance of the consent agenda? >> So moved. >> Thank you.

01:36:47
Before calling the vote to approve the consent agenda, would any member like to comment on any of the items left on the consent agenda? I see. Councelor Karns. >> Thank you very much. I just wanted to comment on the first item, which is St. Lukes and thank uh the congregation and individuals for being here today with us.

01:37:05
I am incredibly um excited to see how this vision will unfold and will connect uh our sort of urban area right to the steps of our uh incredible waterfront and become a place of reflection and um peace for everyone who enjoys that um uh corridor. I also think this is a really important step in the process that will give this group the ability to unlock upper level and uh community funding.

01:37:33
Uh this is what they have been waiting for and needing and moving through some complex agreements. Thank you. I see Emily back there. Thank you to your team. You did a tremendous job in being able to navigate this. Um uh there were a few tricky bits behind the scenes and they were done uh with very professional hands.

01:37:51
So, thank you for that. And now we’re on to the next really exciting stage, which is um the construction, the fundraising, and the final design piece. So, uh congratulations to everyone that’s been involved. This will be a legacy project that will uh be enjoyed by many for years to come. >> Thank you for your comments.

01:38:09
Uh Councelor Galbreth. >> Yeah, thank you, Chair. Just want to comment on the uh item 7.7, the significant tree maintenance program. um as a ward that has a lot of big large mature trees. I think this is a great program. Happy to see the funding doubled for this program. Um a lot of a lot of these trees are on private property and this will uh significantly help those that have these trees, help have them maintained, have them be safer, um have them trimmed u when needed and uh it’s great to see the funding added to this. So, thank you. Thank you, Mayor Midwart. >> Thank you, Chair. I too want to commend uh staff and the congregants at St. Luke’s for the incredible work on the uh the new window to the lake that will be be uh constructed. I think this is a one

01:39:08
of those fine examples of city community collaboration and partnership and will bring uh a a really nice respit area for people in our community. And it was really great to see some of the historic photos of what it looked like back in the day. And so now we can restore and return that wonderful space to uh to this area.

01:39:28
So I want to thank everyone for their efforts on that. Uh I too am very pleased to see the increase in the tree maintenance uh rebate program. We do ask people to preserve their trees and uh when we uh when we do that we should provide some additional assistance and funding. So uh a carrot approach I always like to see and this is our one of our many ways that we contribute to reducing the impacts of climate change in our community.

01:39:56
uh flood mitigation through the absorption of of rainwater and storm water uh with our trees. So uh these uh these are both great examples again of how we are working with and partnering with community to achieve citywide goals. >> Thank you very much. See no further comments.

01:40:17
I will now call the vote on the consent agenda. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. All right. Well, I think we’ll take our 5 minute morning break now and be back at 10:50. Thank you very much. Okay. Uh we have a few pulled items um

01:48:20
for the community and corporate services regular items uh agenda. So the first one is item 7.4 four operating budget performance report as at December 31st, 2025 and summary of year end financial position. Councelor Charman, you pulled this report. Have a question? >> Uh, actually I have a couple of questions.

01:48:39
The first one is with respect to uh the planning fee stabilization fund which uh uh declined 3.6 million and now we’re almost $3 million uh negative. then raises questions about how we recover from that and what’s the plan going forward to uh to uh get back in the uh in on the good side and then I have another question. Thank you.

01:49:03

Uh through the chair to the counselor. So staff are fully cognizant of last year was not a good year in terms of a development activity level. Um volume and revenues were down substantially both in planning and as well as in building on a revenue side. Um we have been monitoring that situation very carefully from an expenditure side in the managing the vacancies.

01:49:22
Uh what I can tell you is based on the information I’ve received that already year to date we’ve exceeded the revenues for 2026 that we did in 2025. But we will then need to replenish that reserve which is very through either managing costs and expenditures carefully as well as looking at other funding sources to pay for the day-to-day operations of community planning.

01:49:45
So, for example, the housing accelerator fund, there’s money in there for zoning reform. So, that would be a logical uh funding source as opposed to the levy or relying on other costs. But, um the what we will need to get to a position where activity levels are exceeding forecast to generate that surplus to replenish the reserve.

01:50:04
Those monies that do go into the reserve though are a pledge against future works in the sense that someone is paying for a site plan or a reszoning application or a subdivision application. It may not get processed in the calendar year or processed within that calendar year but they do become an obligation for future work.

01:50:23
So we have to make sure that we do have ultimately the funds available to pay for those works. Um, but a lot of this is going to have to be through cost containment based on our activity levels. And that’ll also help be part of the fee bylaw discussion that we are going to start re-engaging with committee and council later on this month, I believe in May, on the principles what should be in the fee bylaw to align our revenues and and our expenditures so that we are in a better fiscal position going forward.

01:50:49
Thank you. >> Thank you for that. Uh if I could do a follow-up question to our CFO uh have you got a financial forecast that talks about over the next 12 months what we see as the uh as the the how this is going to cash flow is going to be resolved or how it will occur in the next 12 months. So through the uh through the chair to the council, great question.

01:51:09
Um we’re currently working on the uh quarter 1 um report which is to March and as part of that we will take a look at projections for the remainder of the year in terms of uh how significant or insignificant those challenges will be. Um, and I think to to uh Steve’s comment too, um, as we go into the 2027 uh, budget cycle as well, we’ll be incorporating some of the, uh, findings uh, through Steve’s team’s work.

01:51:38
Uh, make sure we have some uh, stability going forward. >> Okay, thank you for that. Um, and my second question, chair, is the uh, I noticed transit equipment, parts, and supplies were under were excessive budget by $1.4 4 million for the year. Um I’m just wondering what the impact of that is for the 2026 budget. So through the uh through the chair to the council again at this point for 2026 I’m not it’s early in the year still.

01:52:13
Um so I don’t have a forecast of where we’re going to be. I from what I understand we should be close to where we are. Um, but we’ll be able to update that with the uh with the quarter one report. >> Okay. I look forward to that. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, councelor Karns. >> Thank you very much.

01:52:31
And thank you to councelor Charman for addressing the um building and the planning stabilization pieces. Um, as you know, we took out a third in the reserves as a draw last year. Uh, which was alarming because we can’t replenish it and we already did an increase to those um fees. Uh so I’m interested to understand what the difference is going to be between cost containment and fee increases.

01:52:52
Um my actual question is around the provision to the capital purposes reserve fund as well as the tax stabilization reserve fund. And I’m just wondering um how much lower can we go? So we’re at 5.38% of our target of 10 to 15 on tax stabilization and we’re technically at only 0.

01:53:13
47% 47% of our 2% target on capital reserves funds. Um how much more aggressive are we going to get so that we can hand over the next council um a bit of a better shape than what we’re in. >> Uh through the chair to the councelor. Thanks for the question. Um no doubt as as you’ve highlighted the uh our reserves under are under pressure.

01:53:37
Um, having said that though, we we we are uh confident that for this year we’ll be closer within budget as we’ve been to prior years and we will be coming forward with a long range plan uh early next year to kind of see if council wants to um rebase or change our policies uh going forward and uh again as we go through the 2027 budget cycle um we’ll be looking at uh costs as well as revenues going forward.

01:54:06

Thanks very much. And I just have a second question that’s a little bit more global in scale. So when I did my last research around uh what the general trend in reserved uh retain sorry in retained savings, it usually would pace historically between 1.1 and 1.4 to 1.6 million per year.

01:54:23
Whereas this year we seem to have uh unodudited retained savings of double that. And I just felt like I went through the whole table. Unfortunately, the column doesn’t have a percentage of favorable unfavorable to budget. And I just thought it was a little bit strange that this year we we doubled what our general uh trending is in regards to retained savings.

01:54:42
I wondered if there was any insights there >> through the chair to the council. I think as the report kind of highlights, we we did better on some of the uh revenues uh than originally forecast. Um my understanding is that those um improvements were incorporated into the 2026 budget.

01:55:00
Um similarly on the uh um um expense side as well, we had some savings. So I would anticipate that while it may seem like a larger amount overall, it’s it’s not a you know it it’s it’s not insignificant, but it’s not that far off trend. I would expect again it’s only April that um on the revenue side we most likely will be closer to uh what we actually budgeted this year.

01:55:28

So just a follow-up question then is this a sustainable number or is this a oneoff year >> uh through um the chair to the counselor. So I I again would say it’s um we do our best to try and and hit where we are where we budget. I would say it’s not uh a huge different from the past.

01:55:49
Um but I would again it’s April. I would anticipate that the number might be more in line with perhaps what you described in past years. >> Thank you councelor Bentia. >> Thank you chair and uh great questions uh by everyone. Um we talked at the outset that obviously costs are rising and so on and we’re looking for uh ways to increase revenue in that Q1 report that we will receive moving forward.

01:56:19
Um, can we see um some options as to what we can do? And I know we’re legislated to do certain things that we can’t do uh to see what kind of where we could find revenues um to help mitigate some of the uh um the budget issues. Uh is that is that something that we could receive in in Q1 >> uh through the chair? Is that specific to holistic or specific to to to planning? Just holistic overall? Yeah.

01:56:55
Again, it’s early in the year. So, um we will we will forecast as best we can. We’ll identify where we need to any changes in in uh funding for this year. Um everyone’s paying more for gas. Um the city’s paying for more gas, too. So, we’ll take a look at that. Uh and again, if there’s significant changes needed, we will, you know, deal with those through the 2027 budget.

01:57:16
Um we do have a stabilization reserve. While it’s not where we want it to be necessarily, there is it’s there for a reason to deal with these one-off year differences, but uh we’ll identify what we can in the Q1 report. >> I appreciate just like a quick followup. I mean, the situation that we’re seeing today and in the near future is throughout the whole city.

01:57:39
So, I just want to be mindful that we’re we’re looking at everything that we can to to support uh the residents out there to uh minimize any impacts. Thank you. >> Sorry, what’s your question? You have a question or that’s a comment. How about you move it and that’s your comment. How’s that sound? >> All right.

01:58:01
Moved by councelor Bentovenia. Any other comments on the item? >> Okay, we’ll call the vote. All those in favor? And any opposed? That’s carried. The next uh pulled consent item is 7.5 government relations annual report and funding updates CAFO326. Councelor Charman. >> Thank you very much. Um and I see our government relations team are already there ready to go.

01:58:28
Uh and I really appreciate the uh the report and great work all the way through. That’s a comment. Write it down. Bad. Um the um the question I have for you is with respect to the conversation we’re having about transportation and and designing a transportation system that is going to be more serviceoriented to individuals and and customers around the city.

01:58:48
Um and I see that you’ve got Canada public transit funding and we’ve got more potential for the Canada public transit fund for metro region. Is any of that is there any of that can any of that be kind of written in a way that it could yield a more flexible efficient effective system and that might help us with funding the on demand if we go that way? >> Sure.

01:59:14
Thank you for the question counselor and for the record my name is Paul Shackich one of the halves of the GR team here at the city with my colleague Jason Dah. Uh to your question you’re honestly it’s it’s it’s a great time to be asking this question. And the Canada Public Transit Fund is a 10-year program that we have secured funding for for 10 years. So 1.

01:59:33
397811 will be coming to the municipality every year for the next 10 years starting in 2026. And what the federal government has asked for uh to release those dollars is sort of uh a broader capital plan that we had already submitted last year to secure the funding. And a lot of what we talked about in that is commitments to rolling stock and improvements and expanding on that.

02:00:00
Uh the feds recognize that things are in flux, priorities change, uh costs increase on projects, that each year we have an opportunity to submit what they’re calling a capital plan. It’s pretty much a project plan that allows the municipalities to say, “Hey, this is how we plan to spend uh this dollars that have been allocated to us that are consistent with the parameters of the program.

02:00:24
” uh and my understanding is that on demand and things like that are definitely within scope for the funding. >> Thank you very much. I don’t have any further questions. Just Thank you. >> Thank you, Paul. Uh councelor Kurtz, >> thanks so much for this update. Um one thing that struck me and that I tried to uh look up was what Burlington’s comparison is in terms of funding secured for the municipality looks like compared to other municipalities particularly within Halton region.

02:00:51
I’m just wondering did you have any insight into that benchmarking to see where we are compared to our neighbors? >> Thanks for the question councelor through the chair. Uh we don’t have that comparison but we will certainly take that back and and look into that. >> Can we get something similar to that by council as a memo just uh I think that’s an important benchmark to know.

02:01:14
And then my second question is this. Could you remind me uh what we might have received in terms of government funding for the entirety of the Baitman um complex? >> Yes. Uh we’ll double check for sure, but I my understanding the intergovernmental funding that we did receive dedicated was about $1 million from the federal government.

02:01:36
Or was it more? >> Well, we might have to double check on terms of what that was. That project started before both Jason and I were here. So, we can double check that information for you, counselor. >> I appreciate that. And that would be my followup, which is uh when I looked at the forecast out for the 2026 applications.

02:01:55
Um I didn’t see too much related to phase two of Baitman. Now, I know this is a chicken and the egg. Um and that it does identify seniors acting active living grants, but Baitman is not a senior center. Uh so, I’m just wondering if you had any insight on what the efforts related to phase 2 Baitman might look like. through the chair.

02:02:16
Great question and these are active conversations that are happening right now. Now that phase one obviously is open to the public, there are a lot of questions about uh the remaining opportunities at that facility. So we are engaged with departments in terms of having conversations about what funding might be available uh that could go towards something like that.

02:02:34
Uh a big fund that has been announced from the province recently is a re-upping of their community sport and recreation infrastructure fund. Baitman would probably fit within the scope of that, but we’re still very much at the project identification uh stage, but that one is on the table. >> Okay. Thanks.

02:02:51
So, is it moved yet, chair? I don’t >> We have one more question still on the board. Okay. >> Oh, well, that’s all right. Uh would you like to move it? >> Okay. Moved by councelor Karns and uh Mayor Midwart comment then. >> Thank you. Yeah, just a comment. No, no, uh question for you. Uh I just wanted to say first of all uh thank you so much for you and your team.

02:03:14
It was really interesting to see the historical data the uh 2023 numbers uh in terms of federal money 3.8 million 2024 11.7 2025 12.9 uh actually closer to 16 uh when you add in the provincial and the same trajectory provincial 2023 2 million doubled in 2024 uh 3.4 4 million in uh 2025.

02:03:40
So um it just shows that the work that you are doing has paid off uh literally for our residents. I continue to believe that the allocation programbased funding model for municipalities is inefficient and uh not your fault. That is a provincial comment. Uh we have been engaged through Ontario big city mayors, through AMO, through FCM to say that we need a new deal for municipalities and we do.

02:04:05
There is no um equitable distribution of funds at all in the province and uh these these ultimately are a combination of political decisions as well as your funding application uh programs are always oversubscribed um and there’s not enough uh dollars to go around. So, I think the fact that you’ve been able to increase the uh amount that we’ve been able to bring back uh tax dollars of our own residents who have gone to the federal and provincial governments coming back to our community by way of these grants uh and you’ve increased those year over year. So, we will uh need to continue to have the conversations that this is not the way to fund municipalities. It is inefficient. it is uh very heavy on overhead and it is not equitable or transparent really in terms of uh who gets what and why. So uh in the midst of all of that chaos uh thank you so much

02:05:04
for all of your efforts. They’re paying off. >> Thank you, mayor. I see no other comments. I’ll I’ll just uh make a comment and thank you uh as well. Um the uh the work to bring home the funding is is really appreciated. I I completely agree with the mayor’s comments here and uh I I do want to note that um although it it sounds great and it is great for the city anytime we get funding especially for public transit um that um believe it or not there’s inside that Canada public transit fund is a $5 billion cut uh from 30 billion over 10 years to 25 billion over 10 years. So, a lot of organizations including the Federation of Canadian Municipalities have come out and asked for that $5 billion cut to be uh reversed. Essentially, the money was moved into the um I believe it’s the Building Canada is the name has changed. Building Canada strong fund um which is the old gas tax uh fund which means that transit

02:06:04
projects have to compete uh with uh a lot of other projects including schools and healthcare. now the way that fund has been uh expanded. Uh so that uh that call remains uh for FCM. All that being said though I am very grateful uh and it’s a very complicated landscape uh of the fund the new funds changing funds are coming at us really fast.

02:06:25
So I’m really glad we have you two and Leah’s leadership as well uh to get us that money. So thank you very much. Uh councelor Curtis I see a hand. >> Yes, please. Thank you. Uh just a follow-up question also. Sorry, now that it’s moved, I will comment also. Um, so I was reflecting on some of the work that’s been done to date around, you can leave it as a question um, uh, that was done at 1200 King Road.

02:06:49
We’ve seen some, uh, panel community representations to do Q&As’s, things like that. And one of the pieces given the shifting landscape within the uh post-secary education uh field industry was the relationship with Mohawk College related to 1200 King Road a lineia comprehensive redevelopment and I’m just wondering will that be on the GR work plan for this year to shift from a letter of understanding to a proper memorandum of understanding and I think that will relate to how we can capture some additional upper government dollars and or project if there’s going to be a required city to venture to bring a campus like that in the future. So, can you speak to that at all? >> Yeah. Through you, uh, chair. Um, we know that those types of partnerships are really important to the city. Um,

02:07:47
you we’ve had a good partnership with uh a few of our post-secondary institutions. We want to make sure that we’re always looking to strengthen those partnerships. There’s a tremendous opportunity for uh the 1200 King Road site. Um so, um the more uh that we go down the path in kind of solidifying the vision for those lands, the more that we’ll look to strengthen those partnerships and if it means that we’re we’re coming back through more formalized agreements and that that’s the path that we’ll take. >> So then just a followup. So, the reason I’m asking that is because we’re moving into a more formalized ask a little bit further down the agenda, which is the request for the municipal land facilitation services. And I’m just wondering if it might be helpful that we have that solidification of that post-secondary piece embedded into there. >> Yeah. Through you, um, chair. Yeah. the and and I’ll be happy to speak

02:08:45
to this item specifically when that or or that item when when it comes up further in the agenda because I I think um we’re really um the item was was really in response to a request that we had uh around two specific scoped issues. I don’t want to complicate matters when it comes to the work that that we would do with the provincial land development facilitator.

02:09:08
much rather continue to have uh a very scope conversation in terms of what they can leverage in terms of assistance. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh no more comments. So I’ll now call a vote on the item. All those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. Next item is 7.6 6 advisory committee 2025 annual reports and 2026 work plans and budget LLS926.

02:09:40
Councelor Sherman, >> thank you very much. So back to me and I apologize for all of this. Um this is a a question with respect to the Burlington inclusivity advisory committee and and in their report um they have talked about um the the the alignment between the BIAC initiatives and the city corporate policies.

02:10:04
And you will recall that when we were dealing with the zoning bylaw, um they brought forward a series of recommendations that were not were perceived not to be relevant in the context of the zoning bylaws and and what the decisions we were making, which was a deep frustration to them. Um and and there are more things coming up even today that that’s concerning them.

02:10:28
So the question I have for you uh strategically is is there a way that we can get ahead of that frustration and think about the relationship between advisory committees and this one in particular because it’s very sensitive with senior senior policy staff and very early to help people then get into a conversation about okay what actually are these things these these reports addressing uh and in what way might it address the accessibility factors? uh through the chair to the C counselor.

02:11:04
Short answer is yes. Uh we can take we do consult with all the advisory committees in preparing our major policy initiatives whether it’s a new official plan or a new zoning bylaw. But based on the conversations that we’ve had to date or the feedback we’ve heard here at committee and council, I think we can do a better job.

02:11:24
And we I can commit the depart DGM to have further conversations to engage with those groups, explain when is the best time for them to get involved at the different stages and what are the limitations under the various statutes, the planning act, what we can and cannot do, but how their feedback and also to demonstrate how their feedback is reflected in the documents that we are bringing forward so that they can see that their feedback is they’re not wasting their time essentially and that we are listening and we are trying to accommodate all of the stakeholders that we hear as it relates to the planning initiatives, you know, the province is coming out with a very new new direction. For example, the new 250 page limit on official plans that may limit on what we can and cannot put in an official plan or what we can or cannot put in a zoning bylaw. But I think it’s important that we take time to work with those advisory groups to listen to what they have to say and where we can try to ensure that their input is reflected in the documents or the policies that we develop. Thank you.

02:12:21

Thank you. Yeah, sure. Go ahead. >> Yeah. Through you, chair. Maybe just to add to Commissioner Robisho’s comments um because I think the scope of the committee goes well beyond just the the land use planning environment. It it really delves into matters of corporate policy.

02:12:38
So I think um we’ll take that comment away and see if there are any opportunities where we can um level set or um have that early information exchange with senior members of the organization just to ensure that uh we have a common understanding in terms of where those areas of focus should be and and and and help them contribute to what really has been value added expertise provided by the committee.

02:13:06

So so thank you for that. I just want to follow up on that point. Um recognizing that right now we tend to have people reacting to reports coming to us just like we do. But actually with respect to these committees um if it could start off with early in that cycle a broader set of you know what is what are the rules engaged here and what are the implications and limitations with respect to in this case accessibility if we could do that please. Thank you.

02:13:40

Thank you. Uh good. Yeah. Councelor Karns. Thank you very much and thank you to councelor Sherman for pulling this. I was going to take this offline but I’ll take this opportunity. So uh my question to clerks is what control does council have around shifting the budgets within the advisory committees? And here’s why I’m asking.

02:13:58
So um the mundilization committee has $1,200 set aside for a FIFA World Cup local activation on the Japan Netherlands game whereas we already have now learned that there’s uh something more uh broad happening across the community. And the one that struck me as significantly underfunded, which is I don’t know, it’s page 98 of my um my appendix A, uh which is under the Burlington Inclusivity Advisory Committee, there’s only $400 set aside for both Pride and Black History.

02:14:27
And I just really felt that that seemed to be um significant underfunding for two huge uh community groups across our city. And I wondered if there was a chance to make any changes or how we’re we’re determining which sort of groups get that level of funding. >> Uh thank you and through the chair uh uh as noted in the report there are opportunities throughout the year if there’s an unbudgeted or unplanned expense arises there’s uh opportunity to for more funding uh that can be addressed. So, uh I I think there’s opportunity also for um uh funding that is not funding that is not spent in certain areas that that budget still exists and so if there are other opportunities in other areas such as that you’ve noted we can uh spend more funds in those other areas.

02:15:27

So is it possible to ask uh staff to come back with any kind of recommendation related to um both pride and black history in terms of funding? because I’m wondering if it’s a chicken and the egg situation where those two particular groups are generally underserved and they’re underserved probably because they’re underfunded and would they be better served and we would see more activations if they had a funding source as well.

02:15:50
I just feel like if I was in either of those groups, I would feel like it’s hard to be seen in our city for $400 split. uh through the chair. Uh perhaps I could ask uh Lisa Polalmo uh to come up and speak to the budget allocation process uh because I think there’s some opportunity for um for increased budgets in other committees.

02:16:21

Thank you. Lisa Polarmo, um manager, committee services, deputy clerk. Um there is opportunity for the committees to request more during the year if uh something comes up that they’d like to spend the money on. There’s 45,000 that’s allocated to all committees and there can be adjustments.

02:16:35
Some are a little over spent or some underspent uh throughout the year and they don’t go over the 45,000 allocation. Um my understanding is the inclusivity advisory committee has um matched their work plan with the budget that they’ve um requested. So it matches the initiative that they’re prepared to resource and uh run throughout the year.

02:16:58

Okay. So, is there a way that we we could go back to both of those groups, um, both black community groups and pride groups and see if there is a need for more funding before we approve this before council, is there a direction through the advisory committee that can ask those individuals that are representative of those communities? >> So, the funding that is allocated, the $400, is based on the work plan that the committee members um, the initiatives of the committee members.

02:17:26
It’s not necessarily based on um money that’s going to the other communities that you mentioned. They will work in collaboration with those communities uh as part of some of their initiatives. So the money is for the work that our committee members will be doing in conjunction with the community members. >> Okay.

02:17:45
Okay. Maybe we’ll take it to Rex and community culture. Thanks. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh councelor Charman. >> Thank you very much. just like to move the report and make some comments. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> Um so moved. Um really I want to thank everybody in the advisory committees for all the work they’ve done uh throughout the last uh through 2025.

02:18:11
Um it’s it’s a lot of work uh a lot of passion goes into this uh these processes uh with deep sincerity and I really appreciate it and I appreciate the reports they brought back. um they make a significant contribution to our community and uh I’m I’m looking forward to continuing to work with them.

02:18:28
Um and I’m looking forward also to us finding a way to uh improve the system because I know that’s what we’re working on. Lisa, thank you. >> You any other comments? Councelor Bentinia. >> Thank you, Chair. I just want to make a comment as well as as councelor Shyman was alluding to. I’m uh the council representative for the Burlington inclusivity uh committee and uh um was involved in listening to to uh their budget process and uh both this year and and last year.

02:19:00
Um they do work very closely with these other organizations. Uh we actually had events at Applebee Arena this past uh uh month or so um u with the um minority groups and it was well attended. Um and they just uh set their work plan based on the committee committee subcommittees and uh and budget accordingly.

02:19:24
And if the as Lisa Puo mentioned, if we do need more funding um um we just ask for it and hopefully we get it and um if things do come up. So uh I just wanted to make comment and yes, they do work uh uh hard and they do have a lot of activities going on and there’s more to come in the near future. Thank you. >> Thank you very much.

02:19:53
I see no other comments. Uh I’ll I’ll just add also that my experience with Monday is uh they do some pretty great events for the community. The uh the FIFA event um is uh two of our our two twin cities are playing each other uh the Netherlands and Japan. And so uh I think it’s actually uh going to be pretty pretty great and very very directed towards our twin city relationships.

02:20:17
And that’s the differentiator from the uh from the larger event. Uh should be a lot of fun. Hope to see everyone uh out there. And uh my experience with other committees is that uh the budget is available and can be found if necessary um to support their activities. That being said, I’ll now call a vote. All those in favor of the motion of the item. All opposed. That carries.

02:20:46
All right. On to our regular items. 8.1 Community Engagement Charter Relaunch CF0126. I’ll uh now introduce Andrew Pian uh manager of engagement and marketing who will be providing a presentation. Uh good morning members of council, community members who may be joining us online and other staff.

02:21:19
Uh as you heard, my name is Andrew Pion and I’m the manager of engagement and marketing and I’m joined by my colleague uh Tracy Hasslefeld, the adviser of engagement and volunteers. Our team is pleased to present the refreshed Burlington community engagement charter and framework through recommendation report CAF0126.

02:21:40
The engagement charter has been a long time coming and we’re pleased to be here today to share the complete charter and recommend that council endorse and adopt it. I’ll start with a brief background and then Tracy will speak to the engagement we undertook to refresh the charter. Uh next slide please.

02:21:55
We’ll go one more as well and one more. Oh, perfect. Thank you. So, in April 2013, Burlington City Council approved the city’s first community engagement charter created by residents with support from staff. The charter serves as an agreement between council between council and the community, outlining commitments, responsibilities, and the principles that guide how the city and residents work together.

02:22:31
Engagement charters are much more common today than they were in 2013 and Burlington was an early leader in this space. Many municipalities now review and update their charters approximately every 5 to 10 years. Hence why we are here today. Work on the refresh charter uh contained in the report began in September 2023 at food for feedback marking the beginning of the first phase of engagement which Tracy is going to expand on shortly.

02:22:56
Uh next slide please. So, what is a community engagement charter? You can read what’s on the screen, you can listen to me. It’s up to you. The community engagement charter is a governance level principal-based document that sets expectations for how residents engage with city government. Council adopts it to give it legitimacy and support staff in their engagement work.

02:23:19
The charter anchors our engagement practices, helps residents understand what to expect, and creates a shared understanding across the organization of what meaningful engagement looks like. Next slide, please. So, what should you expect with the new charter? There’s three things that I want to highlight for you. First, uh, the charter identifies that good engagement happens when community members, city staff, and members of council work together to listen, share perspectives, and participate in meaningful and respectful dialogue, supporting informed and thoughtful decision-making. Secondly, uh, we heard this very clearly from our community. Transparency matters. The new charter renews and strengthens our commitments to open, collaborative, and transparent decision-making. And finally, the charter also commits us to hearing from all voices in Burlington through engagement that is inclusive,

02:24:17
accessible, and welcoming. The last item was a good setup for this. As Burlington continues to evolve, so too must our approach, ensuring our engagement practices reflect the community we serve and create a genuinely welcoming environment for everyone. Uh, next slide please. I apologize you probably can’t read this, but I do want to draw your attention to the screen.

02:24:37
It would actually take less time for me to describe what hasn’t changed about the charter. I will give you a very brief overview. Uh, in short, the refreshed community chart, community engagement charter represents an evolution of our shared commitments. Key changes include clear explanations of more detail, a stronger emphasis on accountability, including reporting back on how public input was used, a greater focus on inclusion, including efforts to reach under reppresented groups, and remove barriers such as language. Recognition of the role of technology and engagement, an increased emphasis on clear, timely, and accessible communication using a range of methods. Now that you’ve got the background, I want to turn it over to Tracy. She’s going to walk you through uh the engagement that we did on the charter. Next slide, please. >> Go. One more, please. So, with the engagement charter, we actually had a very wholesome uh engagement that happened. It happened in two phases. The first phase, as Andrew

02:25:34
mentioned, started in 2023 at Food for Feedback. From there, we actually did five sessions of community engagement, both in person and virtual. Um and that was done over the couple of months. Uh with that the one meeting we did uh partner as you’ll see on the slide with Halton Multicultural Council that was our largest attended engagement where we had 55 sorry 54 residents um come out to participate in the engagement working with Halton Multicultural Council.

02:26:01
We actually had 12 languages translated. So we had 12 lang 12 translators in the room. We worked through the process with them um and was able to gather their feedback. Also within phase one, we did uh some engagement with um the original residents who were part of the charter action team was which was was called in 2013.

02:26:23
There were still three individuals that we were our our former manager Michelle Dwire was able to reach out to and sit down and chat with them to sort of see here’s where it was, how do you think it’s doing, where it was going. So they were some key individuals who were part of it from the beginning that we wanted to make sure we engaged with as well.

02:26:40
part of phase one, we also reached out to all the members of counselors and did sort of one-on-one uh sessions, meetings with everybody to get their input, feedback, um recommendations. We also did provide staff uh staffer B are a key part of this as well. So, we actually did some engagement. We had two sessions with staff um to sort of gather their input into um the charter engagement, things like that.

02:27:04
From phase one, we went into phase two. So, let’s go next slide, please. After we took all the feedback and knowledge from phase one, we drafted a document of the engagement charter and framework. So phase two involved us coming back to the community, back to staff, back to council to say, “Here’s what we heard.

02:27:25
Did we get it right? What are we missing? How does it look?” Um, as Andrew mentioned, there was a lot uh we went from a a page and a half document to almost 20 pages. So, there was a lot of information that we put into it. So we wanted to make sure that the residents and staff had an opportunity to view it as well. So we went out to the community again.

02:27:44
We had uh this time four sessions, sorry, five sessions again with in person and virtual. And we made sure that we went back to the Holton community, sorry, Halton Multicultural Council. We had worked with them to try and get the individuals that were part of phase one to come back to part be participate in phase two.

02:28:03
But we also had individuals who didn’t participate in phase one come out and sort of look at it to so we got that view of those that did see it before and those that didn’t with Halima multicultural the second time we had 48 people but we still had those same 12 languages um translated in it as well. We also did go back to staff on this one to to get them to get their thought of here’s the draft tell us uh what you think. Next slide please.

02:28:32
In regards to the engagement, we also did uh the kickoff was in 2023 with the food for feedback and we actually went back to food for feedback in 2024 with that draft. Um and we did some engagement at that event to sort of same thing ask the question did we get it right and we with that engagement we also did some priorities.

02:28:52
We heard what residents had said that this is how engagement should be. So, we tested it out to the public to to sort of get their uh feedback as to is this correct? Do you agree with this? Um, things like that. With council, as I mentioned, phase one, we did engagement um with all the counselors.

02:29:09
One thing I forgot to mention in phase one is we did reach out and we attended all the advisory committee meetings. Uh, engagement staff went out to each meeting to make sure that we were incorporating their feedback into it. And then for phase two, we didn’t go back out to the meetings, but we made sure to send them drafts um to do it.

02:29:26
With the with the phase one, what we did as well is we had an online workbook that the residents could fill out on their own or we had it set up so that community groups could go back and do it together as a group. So, it was a document that uh a community group could go out and do. And we did have some community groups like Burlington Green for instance um sat down they put it on their agenda for one of their meeting and they went through and and and did the the workshops.

02:29:51
So we had lots of engagement from them. Um and then staff I had mentioned we had gone back to them and then the community action team. So we did lots of uh engagement. I mean it’s the engagement charter. We want to make sure we’re doing proper engagement on it. So um we did uh make sure to try and get as many voices as we can. Next slide please.

02:30:16
So, with with that said, I want to acknowledge that a lot of the work that has occurred on the charter predates my joining the city of Burlington. And so, I’d like to acknowledge uh Tracy, former manager, Michelle Dwire, the other members of my team, uh Sam and Nicole, as well as uh our head of corporate affairs, Leah, for all of their work on this.

02:30:33
Uh it’s taken a long time to get here, but I’m very pleased with what we’ve presented you today. So, thank you very much. >> All right. Thank you very much. Very effective presentation. And do we have any questions on this item or is it that good? Looks like it’s that good. Could I have someone move the item? Councelor Charman, you got your hand up. Go ahead.

02:30:57

Thank you. Again, I’m going to comment that back in 2010, I think it was, or maybe nine, um, a former mayor at the time created a community engagement mayor’s advisory committee that we promptly changed to the name shape Burlington. And that had profound implications to the way in which, you know, we engaged with the community because we had this conversation.

02:31:19
It’s very formative times and it’s great to see it evolving in the way that it has and so there was clearly a journey and you and you brought us to the ne next stop the new levels of sophistication and I I really applaud you and say thank you. >> Excellent. Thank you uh Mayor Mewart. >> Thank you very much.

02:31:40
I really uh want to highlight a couple of additions and and changes that I think are terrific and thanks for all of the consultation that you did to get here. It shows in the final draft. So some of the language uh changing citizen to resident very important so that everyone can see themselves in it.

02:31:58
The plain language uh it’s very readable and very understandable. And two things in particular that I really appreciated um in the roles and responsibilities section the uh the word respect and respectful consideration of another person’s point of view uh interacting with city staff the community and each other with mutual respect focusing uh being open-minded discussion over debate.

02:32:25
I think that’s really important and there’s some new uh meat there that um uh that that wasn’t as specific in the original draft and it really speaks to how we talk to each other as much as what we talk about. I think that’s really important. Um and I think there is also um uh it’s really important to let folks know that sometimes we’re not going to do what they want and you’ve done that.

02:32:47
Uh you know at some point the decision may align with your endpoint and other times it may not. And often we hear from folks uh who who wanted us to do a particular thing and we didn’t. We chose not to. That they they feel this sense of uh you’re not listening or I’m disengaged. And this actually says to them there actually will be times when the other input that we hear in addition to yours is more compelling.

02:33:14
And it really comes back to this isn’t about people. This is about principles. And to put that right in the document, I think it’s really important to let folks know. Uh I’ve I’ve always liked the AP2 chart of what kind of engagement we do. I used it in all my community meetings and it really does help people to understand when they’re being consulted, what are we talking about, what are we here to do? And and when we do that upfront, we get much better input and focus from communities. So I think this is a great uh refresh after 10 years of this. and I think it’ll continue to be a model for other communities. So, well done. >> Thank you for your comments, Councelor Karns. >> Yeah, thanks so much. I was holding my comments because I wrote down my like social media ones to make an awesome post about this afterwards and to put it in my newsletter. Um, but what I will say, um, I’m glad to see the way that this has been redone in a very clear and

02:34:13
concise way. And I think what people are asking for more than anything right now is just simplicity. So, I look forward to seeing how this will now come into our reports with the engagement section fuller. And I encourage you to review our our package today and see how many times the engagement portion is fully filled out.

02:34:30
Um, another piece would be to really enhance those um executive summaries or overview at the top of each report so people know what they’re looking for. Um and then again we’ve got something here uh that’s going to move out the distance between committee and council and know striking the fact that we had four business days with this agenda which is huge and had some pretty important topics in it should underpin ways in which we should be using the engagement charter to navigate how we’re making the information easy and accessible for people to use and be part of the conversation even if it’s at the beginning of the AP2 spectrum which I’m certified. in now and got a certificate. Um, so we want to be able to make sure that people know they’re coming alongside us and you know maybe in the next term or maybe uh you know as we evolve we’ll make it easier for people to attend council by putting those evening pieces back. Um because I do hear that a lot. Um the language is

02:35:30
clearer which is great. Uh the pictures are updated and I I was standing yesterday actually in Nelson Arena uh right in front of the engagement charter that is in our um recreation facilities which is a broadcast out to everyone that’s using our facilities that we are listening and I look forward to when we get an updated plaque um those those are going to be another signal that people are invited to be part of the decision-making process in a in a transparent and open way.

02:35:56
So, um, you definitely got my feedback when we had our premeating. So, thank you. A lot of that is in here, and I just look forward to us continuing to evolve the conversation alongside and with our community. Thanks. >> Thank you, counselor. Councelor Sult, >> thank you, Chair. I too want to add my thanks for this um the results that you’ve put forward to us.

02:36:20
this report is excellent and this plan going forward and it’s particularly page 15 of your report and how you’ve set up the four steps for planning for public engagement and I really appreciate the wording and it speaks a little bit to what the mayor had commented on and that is that identifying and defining the members of the community who may be directly impacted by a certain outcome or decision.

02:36:40
I think that is hugely important and then flipping all the way to step four at the other end of that which I really really appreciate being in here because we’ve heard a lot of feedback on that from in the community is city council. also staff and city council taking the accountability and the responsibility to make sure that we share back how the feedback was or was not incorporated.

02:36:58
And then even more importantly, the piece that comes next was um as well as key cons key considerations um that informed that decision because that’s what’s important. People, as the mayor said, people can get frustrated if they feel as though we’re not listening because they feel as though their input is going into a void and they never know what happens with it.

02:37:16
So that’s so important is identifying at the beginning who’s going to be impacted by this and making sure that we complete the circle and get back to them at the end to say this is why the decision was made the way it was. So I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you councelor Sult. I will now call the vote on the following motion.

02:37:37
Endorse and adopt the updated community engagement charter and framework as outlined in appendix A to corporate affairs report CAF0126. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries? Thank you. Item 8.2 is real estate matter waterown road properties leased to Inwell LLS 1726. There’s no presentation, so we’ll just look for questions.

02:38:10
Seeing none. I’m I’m kidding. Does anyone have questions about this item? No questions. Anyone? Okay. Guess my intuition was pretty good there. Uh, who would like to move the report? Yes, >> it does. Yes. All right. So before asking for a member to move the motion, there is a confidential appendix related to this item.

02:38:39
If any member would like to go into close to discuss the appendix, we’ll do so prior to voting on the item. Are there any members looking to go into closed to discuss the confidential appendix? I see councelor Sultty uh noted. Yep. Okay. So, uh, we will, uh, hold this item in obeyance for the close session at, uh, 1 p.m. And, uh, leave that for now.

02:39:02
There’s no, I don’t see any open questions, so that’s fine. Item 8.3, council remuneration for 2026 to 2030 term, HRS0126. Questions for staff on this item? Council Karns. Yeah, thank you very much. Um, I just wanted to draw your attention to the section around the interns and it’s the corporate intern uh project in corporate internship program.

02:39:33
And this is a fund that is $96,000 per year. And I really believed this to be an incubator for co-op students, interns, things like that to get into the underserved departments where we’re having challenges with recruitment where they could kind of do an inside track to that department. I hear oftentimes that we’re struggling with recruitment.

02:39:57
We want to make sure that we’re creating a pipeline to employment. And I find it really uh difficult to accept that additional corporate dollars should go into an internship program within contracted service individuals which is all of council. Um and it should be going into the departments like engineering, recreation, community culture, HR etc.

02:40:21
Now that said, the the principle and the policy related to a corporate internship program is certainly something that has a lot of value. However, the funding source is the place that I take issue from because it’s essentially overstaffing one counselor’s office or the mayor’s above and beyond everybody else’s. And I wanted to see if I could get some insight on that where the program could proceed but it would have to be funded out of the council budget not the corporate budget through you the chair to the counselor uh council kern just so I have so I can understand the question is are you looking for council to decide whether they should like that council should be allowed um to have an intern be considered for an interim position as part of the program. >> No, I think I was very clear for years

02:41:19
now actually saying that the corporate internship program funded by the corporation of the city of Burlington should only exercise uh that program for departments that are within corporate purview that is engineering, planning, building, rec community culture, legal, licensing by law.

02:41:38
It should not include mayor and counsel as a business unit. However, the policy or the program could be extended rightfully to mayor and counsel provided it is funded out of the mayor and council budget. So, having mayor and counsel take from corporate is what I disagree with. Having mayor and counsel use it funded by mayor and counsel I agree with.

02:42:02
and that is not delineated in this renumeration because essentially what it does is allows any of the offices to take a corporate resource and be out of balance with the rest and that I think is not equitable. So can you give me comments to that or a path forward? Thank you counselor. Yes. So the internship program as as you’ve seen in there with regards to the background is that we do the goal is for it the the interns to be approved for um areas that that are connected to one of the priorities whether there is the corporate um andor operational um areas. In addition to that it is also intended to support co-op students coming in and being exposed to I’ll say um the government environment. uh we do have we have had individuals that come in through um I’ll say the the elected areas and they move on throughout the city as well. So from a succession

02:42:59
perspective they’re exposed to um the government um government in as a whole right so there’s two pieces connected to it is it is attraction to um potential individuals in school or just finished as well as those who have um as well as organization making sure that we’re focusing it in the right area.

02:43:19
We also have regular intern and co-op positions identified that to help with that succession planning within those particular areas that really are looking to develop and grow in those particular areas. This is in addition to and looking at the organization as a whole. Uh we also look at um when we’re making selections with regards to that is so that we do get an opportunity to provide um this um these positions to other areas.

02:43:48
So it’s not the same area year-over-year because if it is an area that requires this year-over-year, counselor Karns, we also should be looking at it like holistically from a staffing perspective is should there be an intern uh or co-op position that we budget uh more long-term in those particular areas.

02:44:05
So bottom line is that yes in in almost all circumstances the majority of the positions are move are selected and land in a department position an operating departmental position. Um however we have definitely had uh positions um that have landed in um some of the elected well one of the elected official positions if it were to be used within the counselor’s area as well as stated in the report it would be something that would be considered by the operating area.

02:44:34
So I the example given if the uh counselors decided one or two they decided they needed additional communication support is that the the direction would be that you connect with we would we would direct you um to connect with the director of commun communications to see what support is needed in that particular area. It’s a need.

02:44:56
It’s a need. the public as well are looking for that and they can they’ll determine if they can do it within their within their current compliment and they may not necessarily need an intern and or they’ll make that decision going oh you know they’re going to apply so they’re going to apply for the intern position on behalf of council um and to see if they were able to secure that position and it’s also a good testing ground in some of these particular areas to determine if our operational areas need to increase compliment in those particular areas Okay. Well, I disagree. So, I will probably bring a motion to council because I think it takes away for such a small amount of money 93,000. >> Uh will will staff work with me on bringing a motion that exempts it’s fine to have interns, but mayor and council has to pay for that intern. It can’t be taken from corporate options. So, uh will you work with me to bring an amendment uh forward for council? I could definitely work with you,

02:45:54
counselor. Thanks. >> Okay. Any other uh questions on this item? >> Yeah, >> council Karns, go ahead. >> Thanks. Um I’m going to ask if I could uh table a staff direction to bring a report on the internship programs for the last uh since 2020 and the locations like the departments and the funds.

02:46:17
And if I could get that by council uh in a council information package, I would appreciate that. So my staff direction please is to uh bring the information related to the intern program since 2020 by department FTE or or PT and funds. >> Do you need that up on the board? >> I think we’re going to need that in writing.

02:46:43

Okay, I’ll send that along. Um All right. Uh procedurally, I’m going to suggest that we uh and looking at the items that remain that we take our lunch break at this time. I’ll give uh time for counselor to bring uh that amendment. >> So the item will the item has not yet been moved.

02:47:33
So we will still discuss the item further. Do you have any other or does anyone have any other questions on this item we could handle in the next few minutes? Uh leaving that uh that direction or or do you do you have the direction practically ready counselor? Okay, let’s let’s deal with that then and then we can call uh call the lunch break.

02:47:52
Sorry I got you excited but a long lunch there. May I speak? May I speak to it? >> Let’s just get on the board so we can see it while you speak to it. Thank you so much. >> I just need to know if they want direct HR or direct somebody else. >> Be human resources. >> Yeah, I think so. >> Chief human resources officer. Yeah, direct the human resources officer uh from 2020 to 2025 if you don’t mind.

02:48:36

That would be to report to council, I assume. >> To report to council to provide council >> with a report. uh 2020 to 2025. >> Yeah, that’s good. >> Council Kron, would you like to speak to the item? >> Yeah, that’s perfect. motion to the >> I think it’s important that um that we see this to ensure that it’s uh if it is having an actual impact on the council

02:49:34
renumeration by way of uh exceeding or under uh under under supporting the departments related to mayor and council um because really the mayor and council supports are part of the renumeration and I think that having full transparency and visibility to that is really important.

02:49:51
Um I do know that I’ve been asking for this every single year, but it would be nice to have that in one complete um piece of information. For example, in 2023, I know there was a community planning intern for 10 months. Digital services asked for some support. 2024 had building policy. Uh we also had business services intern.

02:50:10
Uh so I would think it’s really important that we see this because it will have an effect on level loading the support within the offices related to uh mayor and counsel versus the rest of the corporation. And if it’s corporate funds, it should stay in the corporation. And if it’s mayor and council funds, it should be within mayor and counsel’s renumeration package, which is what we’re considering today. So that’s the rationale. Thanks.

02:50:36
Thank >> you. Any questions or comments on them on the uh amendment? Sure. Councelor Karns, could you move the report as well? >> Sure. Moved. >> Okay. >> Uh, Mayor Meard. >> Yeah. I I certainly believe there should be a holistic look at this across the entire city. And I’m just curious as to the dates.

02:50:58
Um, they kind of bridge parts of two terms. So I’m thinking it’s either we deal with all of this term up to and including 2026 because that interimm program I believe has already been set for this year the it closes in August. So if we want to get a complete picture we should include 2026. Uh and if the intent is to overlap with last term of council that would have started in 2018.

02:51:23
So uh to get a complete picture of what is happening in the corporation, I’d um I guess suggest a change to the dates uh 2018 to 2026 or scope it to a single term. Uh I don’t understand the the rationale for those specific dates. Um but it would also be helpful to get a sense of what you know how long the intern program has been going.

02:51:49

So uh am I out of time already on my question? >> No, you’re good. You’re good. Continue. >> I don’t know. I think I think it’s a question actually. So, >> was it a question? >> Uh, I guess it’s around changing the date. So, it’s an a it’s a proposed amendment to the amendment if I can do that.

02:52:04
So, I guess >> Well, let’s let’s see if it’s a friendly amendment. Seems reasonable. Council Karns, you okay with more dates? >> Sure. I I would be preferential to 2018 to 2026. >> Okay, perfect. Any other questions or comments on the amendment? Yes. Go ahead. So, >> counselor says, >> apologies. Yes, counselor.

02:52:27
When it says number of full-time and part-time, is that within the department or are you are you talking about is this strictly about interns? Because all interns are part-time. >> All interns are part-time. >> All interns are part-time. >> Do they work 37.5 hours a week or >> they can they can work 37.

02:52:45
5, but they’re they’re not full-time um from a contract perspective. So maybe it’s just a like >> I thought I think that’s an HR word. Okay. But >> how much did how much did they work? Was it >> you’re not looking for the full-time compliment of the department strictly at the interns? Thank you. >> Do you need words that help you with that? Because I don’t know that language.

02:53:12

Number of interns. >> Okay. Number of interns. Can you take out FTP and just write number of interns? Okay. Uh, Mayor Reed Warren is new hand. >> Yeah, just a comment actually on uh on this particular thing. Certainly happy to get the information and I can share that I have uh benefited from uh interns last term and this term.

02:53:35
I think it’s an absolutely great program. Uh we’ve had people move uh from the intern program into the human resources department for a period of time. Uh so it does become a bit of a farm team like all of the rest are. Um if council wants to sequester funding for a council and mayor intern, that’s a budget question that can be uh that can be discussed for sure.

02:53:58
Uh so that there’s um a fund for city and a fund for council and mayor and council. But I think it’s a completely uh appropriate use of uh resources to provide support in our work to community. Uh and that all goes through a very transparent uh application process. It is judged against other uh priorities in the community and it’s very public.

02:54:21
Uh we introduce our interns every uh whenever they come and uh they’re they’re fully um uh accountable within the corporation and to our residents. So, I would encourage uh council actually to uh look at the interimm program and whether it could help assist your work with community when it rolls around uh in the next term should you be back. Thanks.

02:54:44

Thank you. And uh just note that we’re only talking to the amendment right now, but uh you save us time later, so that’s fine. Councelor Karns, uh on the on the amendment uh please and then we’ll do the main motion in a moment. >> Yeah, thanks. So the reason uh that my rationale is sitting within the amendment is that it’s really not about the value of the interns, what the interns do. Um I think they’re fabulous.

02:55:06
My office has also had interns which I paid for out of my office budget and honorarium. Uh it is a funding conversation that we’re having right now because we’re within the context of council renumeration and the amount of bench strength that you have in your role is a material thing that is uh discussed within this report.

02:55:25
So uh this is not a debate about the value of the interns. This is a debate here about the funding and appropriateness of those interns. >> Right. Thank you. I see uh no other comments or questions on the amendment. So I’ll call the vote on that. Uh all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. So we’re back to the main motion.

02:55:50
would like to clear this before uh lunch and item has been moved. Any comments on the main motion as amended? Okay, I see none. So, I will call the vote on the following motion. Approve the council remuneration for the 2026 to 2030 term in accordance with column 2 contained in appendix C of human resources report HRS0126.

02:56:20
All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. All right. Uh we’re going to take our lunch break. Before we go, I will just ask uh for an indication from my colleagues regarding which confidential items they would be interested in going into close session for. Uh clearly we will go into close session for 9.

02:56:40
1 regarding Water Down Road Properties lease to Inwell. There’s a there’s an appendix for economic development and tourism service delivery options. That’s item 9.2. Two appendices. Anyone want to go into close for that? Show any hands. Okay. We can choose to do that later if necessary after we uh once we’re in the item itself.

02:57:05
Uh but it’s good to know. Uh 9.3 confidential legal update on litigation matter regarding Burlington new official plan. Anyone planning to go into close for that item? I don’t see anyone. 9.4 Confidential legal update on litigation matter regarding 2076 Old Lakeshore Road. Anybody planning to go into close for that item? Take that as a likely. Okay.

02:57:33
So, we’ll make sure our our staff are available at 1 p.m. to speak to that item. Um, they will not be coming around for 9.2 2 or 9.3, but can be called upon if necessary. All right, we’re now uh what do we what do we call it? In recess. We’re in recess. See you at 1:00.

— one hour lunch break —-

04:46:03
Okay, we’re back. I will now rise and report. In close session, committee discussed and provided instructions to staff for the following uh item. 9.4 confidential legal update on litigation matter regarding 2076 Old Lakeshore Road, LLS 2126. Committee also discussed the confidential appendix to report LLS 1726.

04:46:27
No votes were taken for this item in close session as it is a public report. But we will now deal with item 9.3, confidential legal update on litigation matter regarding Burlington new official plan LLS 1826. Could I have a member to move the following motion instruct the commissioner legal and legislative services and city solicitor or his designate to proceed in accordance with the instructions sought in confidential legal report LLS1826.

04:47:01
have a mover for that please. Mayor me. Thank you. All in favor? Any opposed? That carries. And that concludes the confidential items. We will now continue with the remaining regular items. There are a few left. 8.2 real estate matter water down road properties lease to end well. Uh was uh discussed the appendix was discussed in close session. LLS 1726.

04:47:30
Any um any questions for staff on this uh public report? Okay, seeing none, we’ll get a mover for the motion. Please get a volunteer. Councelor Charman. Thank you. Any comments? Mayor Midward. Go ahead. Thank you, chair. I am very excited to see this opportunity to continue to move forward.

04:48:06
It still has some milestones to reach. Um, but it is an opportunity for us to partner with other levels of government and a nonprofit organization to bring much needed affordable housing to our community. So, uh, still some steps to go, but we’re moving forward in a good way, and I’m really happy to see this here. >> Thank you very much.

04:48:33
Anybody else? Any more comments? Council Karns? >> Yeah, I just want to say thank you to staff for continuing to walk us through this. I’m glad that I had um asked that the lease be brought forward to council so we have an opportunity to review that. Um we’ll continue to navigate this with our partners and uh this is uh really at the end of the day what’s looking to be supportive housing in our community paid through the half funding.

04:49:00
So we’ll continue to work through those milestones um and of course update the community as we go through. So uh a little tight lipped in here right now but please watch out for those community engagement opportunities as well as the open houses that are coming forward. Thank you, councelor Stoy. >> Thank you.

04:49:20
Uh the tight lipped comment is appropriate from councelor Karns as far as there’s certainly things that we um cannot speak openly about about this project. I do hope that this project ends up being something that is good for the residents of Burlington. As the mayor alluded to, there are steps that we still need to go through um particularly at a regional level to ensure that this does end up being affordable housing for residents of Burlington. Thank you.

04:49:44
Thank you. Uh I’ll just comment uh optimistically that I’m I’m happy with where things are and looking forward to um well to uh to the groundbreaking frankly uh when the time comes. Uh I want to see um people in units and uh people in need in those units and um that’s the most uh important thing that I can discuss at this time.

04:50:11
And uh with that, I will call the vote on the following motion. authorized the manager of realy services to take all steps necessary to proceed with a long-term land leash lease of 1022 to 1030 water down road comprising approximately 2,670 square kilmters of land to indwell community homes inwell at nominal value and generally in accordance with proposed terms to be negotiated as set out in confidential appendix A to legal report LLS1726.

04:50:42
six and authorize the mayor and city clerk to execute any agreements, leases, or other documents in connection with this matter in a form satisfactory to the commissioner of legal and legislative services, city solicitor, and with content satisfactory to the commissioner of development and growth management.

04:51:01
All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay. Uh item 8 four 8.4 economic development and tourism service delivery options TRN0426. I would like to uh welcome Andrew Scott, chief transformation officer who will be providing a presentation. >> Thank you to the chair and um for members of council. Uh good afternoon.

04:51:33
Um it’s a pleasure to present to you today. Um, as the chair mentioned, my name is Andy Scott and I’m here on behalf of the city staff to present two fully developed options for how Burlington delivers economic development and tourism services moving forward. Uh, my plan is to briefly walk you through how we got here, the two options that are available um to council today, our staff recommendation and then what we would propose would happen next.

04:51:53
Um, I would like to thank all of my city colleagues, the BDT staff and the board who have contributed to the various reports, analysis and the presentation that’s here before you today. And I would welcome any questions that you may have. Uh, next slide please. So, council will recall that um staff received directions through CA report um0625 to bring back two fully developed um options.

04:52:16
One for bringing economic development and tourism services in house, one for a renewed service agreement um with Burlington Economic Development and Tourism. We were able to execute a memorandum of understanding um in late 2025 that enabled the collaborative exchange of data, information and analysis between the two organizations and that was a really important foundational step because it ensured that both parties were working from the same foundational information and um you will recall as well in January which was part of the um staff direction was that council were looking for um was for a series of um factual um factual information and that was provided through the councelor information package at the end of January. Um and this document was provided in draft um to the um BDT’s board in advance um to confirm its accuracy. So what you’re seeing today um is the result of really thoughtful and a really collaborative process between the two organizations. Next slide please.

04:53:16
So before we get to the options at hand, something that’s really important is to ground us in something foundational and the work that we’ve been doing in that the city of Burlington holds the statutory authority for economic development and tourism services under the municipal act.

04:53:28
That authority, the accountability that comes with it rests with the city regardless of how that service is delivered. BDT has been the delivery organization acting on the city’s behalf for over three decades now. Um but the mandate, the oversight and ultimately the accountability belongs here with to council and to the city administration.

04:53:47
So this framing is really important as you consider the two options. Either way, the city remains accountable and responsible. What we’re deciding today is is how to best exercise that authority and that responsibility. Next slide, please. So staff have developed two fully formed options for council’s consideration and that’s part of the report and the appendices um before you.

04:54:08
Option A, which is our recommendation, is that we would proceed with a new service agreement. This would continue to see BDT um as the the the delivery organization, but under a different accountability focused service agreement, which would also address a number of the corporate risks that were create u by creating clearer separation between the two legal entities.

04:54:30
Critically, it would also set the city of Burlington on a path to develop a commu a community level economic development strategy in partnership with BDT but with the city as the lead reflecting its responsibility under the municipal act. Option B, which is that in-house transition model.

04:54:45
This would bring economic development and tourism services inside the city as a new division or department. staff have developed a complete transition plan and this path and this plan is available to you as one of the confidential appendices to this report. I do want to be clear that both options are available to council today.

04:55:02
Staff are prepared to execute on either of these two options. The question really is of in terms of which path is right for Burlington is you know what is right for this moment in time and our framing which I will come back to this later is that structure should really serve strategy not replace it. Next slide please. So why are we recommending option A? The core of our recommendation comes down to this in that Burlington doesn’t currently have a communitywide economic development strategy aligned with Horizon 2050. Until we know what the outcomes are that the city wants to achieve with respect to economic development and tourism, what kind of growth, what kind of sectors, what parts of the city it wants to grow, we can’t design the right organization to achieve this. If we bring um if we proceed to bring the um with the transition plan and start to bringing those services inhouse today, what we would be building is an internal team and an internal structure based on what exists today, not necessarily based on what the city is actually looking for in the future.

04:56:02
We’d be replicating that structure, not building a structure towards a purpose. Option A gives us a window of opportunity to develop that strategy in collaboration with BDT while we finalize the service agreement centered around accountability and while addressing the immediate risks that exist because of the current blending of the corporate services as council pre previously heard in the past.

04:56:22
At the end of that window, council will will then have everything that it needs to make a more fully formed strategy grounded decision about the long the right long-term model. So the answer isn’t whether option B is the wrong answer or not. It’s just really a question of timing and information that’s available to you to make that decision. Next slide, please.

04:56:42
In following the direction of council, staff have done the work on option B as well. We have developed a transition plan which is available to council today. We’ve engaged with um in an environmental scan of other municipalities that have made similar considerations as well as an internal organizational analysis determining how an in-house team could be best structured and function.

04:57:01
That transition plan covers proposed organizational reporting structures, a service continuity plan to transfer programs and relationships with minimal um disruption, uh consideration of BDT implications with respect to staffing, organizational culture, and the board’s obligations as well, and a phased implementation with defined milestones over a 20-month period.

04:57:21
If council does direct option B today, staff will proceed, and we’re ready to do so. Next slide, please. But if council follows through on the recommendation of staff, which is approve option A, a new service agreement will set us forth on a path from our current arrangement as exists today, which as it should be noted, um we do not currently have a formal service agreement agreement in place today.

04:57:44
The new agreement could include things like outcomebased targets which are tied to um to to Horizon 2050. um you know a regular reporting cadence to ensure that you’re seeing you know what type of performance is BDT providing to the city under that service agreement much greater role clarity than what exists today a greater understanding of the role of the city and BDT and its partners as it relates to economic development and tourism um functions and services and the and how the city plays a key role in in supporting all of those. The service agreement would also address the corporate risks as identified and then there would also be that formal evaluation clause and what that means is it would it would tie performance to future grandfunding opportunities. Those are all terms that we could that that we could look at including that might be in a service agreement but we would be entering into a period of negotiation with BDT to finalize that agreement. Um at the point when the strategy is

04:58:43
complete, this would be the opportunity for council to formally evaluate the service delivery model, but it would also give council an additional input which would be which which would be the ability to evaluate a period of time where both organizations are working together under a newly developed service agreement and the effectiveness of that agreement.

04:59:00
So option A is not status quo as it exists today. It is meaningfully different from what we experience today with a different relationship. Next slide, please. If council approves staff’s recommendation today, and I apologize, this is a little small. This is what the pathway looks like in terms of timing. Um, in the spring of 2026, as we are now, council approves option A and delegates that authority to staff to negotiate and execute a new service agreement with with BDT.

04:59:26
Over the summer, the service agreement would be finalized, incorporating the accountability provisions, the outcome targets, the reporting requirements as described. And this is the same time that BDT have indicated that they would be in a position to start working on addressing those corporate service risks as identified.

04:59:43
And then in 2027, this is the point where the city would develop a community economic development strategy in partnership with BDT but crucially with the city as the lead. The corporate risk work also continues in parallel and then post strategy um finalization

05:00:00
is the point where council would be best positioned to evaluate that service uh delivery model in full with a completed strategy, a track record under a new service agreement and a clear review of what Burlington needs into the future aligned to Horizon 2050. Next slide, please. In closing, staff’s recommendation is clear at this time.

05:00:19
Proceed with a new service agreement with BDT, which is option A. um use that agreement period to build Burlington’s economic development strategy and then revisit the service delivery model at the conclusion of that strategy development from a position of knowledge and confidence. Our recommendation is that structure should serve strategy not replace it.

05:00:38
With that, I welcome council’s questions. >> I see councelor Galbert. First of all, thank you for the presentation Andy. Thank you, chair, and thanks for the presentation, Andy, and and all the work that’s gone into this over the last couple of months. Um, most of my you did answer uh my questions mainly, but um in order to do the strategy, would would it’s going to be sort of city and BED at the same time? Would a third party be needed to uh execute and and and create that strategy essentially >> through the chair? That’s something that we would need to evaluate and work with BDT with respect to um we whether we would feel the need to um engage with a with an independent third party other strategies that we’ve developed has seen a third party engaged um to provide that degree of expertise you know supplementing the expertise of BDT staff the board and city staff as well and

05:01:37
just to follow up to that working on joint um things like that would those costs be shared between the city and BEDT or borne by one entity? through the chair. So that is an option that’s available and that can be covered under the terms of the service agreement. I do know that you know BDT have developed a number of strategies over in in the past.

05:01:57
They have developed those strategies by using you know in part or in full the funding envelope that is provided by the municipality to support that work. I do believe as well that there is currently re you know there is an intention to develop a strategy in the future as well which BDT have funding that’s available to do that. Okay, thank you very much.

05:02:22

Councelor Curren next. >> Thanks. I’m going to ask a question of clarity and then go back into line. So I just want to understand a little bit more around the scope of work that the Mix Sweeney consultancy agreement was for that to my understanding was solely to explore what inhouse structural options might look like.

05:02:38
And so the recommendations in there which would be around integrating um you know the the development of that would both of which would require a municipal tourism services corporation. That’s not something we’re exploring at all. We’re not exploring a municipal services tourism corporation because we’re not doing the option two which is the in-house which was the foundational objective of the Mixweeni consultancy.

05:03:07
Is that correct? through the chair to the counselor. Um the scope of work for Mweeni the independent consultant that we engaged with was to um you know for their focus to be um to support the development of an in-house model and what options are available in terms of an in-house model.

05:03:23
um the formation of a municipal services corporation to um to deal with um the um the municipal accommodation tax portion of the funding is yet another option that would be available but that would require further exploration in the future as well. So that is not a defined pathway in terms of how we would deal with the municipal accommodation tax. That’s correct.

05:03:45

Okay, I’ll go back into Q. >> Go to councelor Shan. >> Thank you very much. the um the issue of strategy clearly read that first. But that leads to the question then about that strategy presumably has to lead to some understanding of restructuring uh and that also has to be thoughtful um thoughtfully done and then you have to figure out all the cost elements of it whereas what we’ve seen so far is kind of you know part of the way down the path but there’s a whole lot more work to be done. Is that correct? uh through the chair um councelor your strategy you know could and should inform you know what should future service delivery look like whether that is offered by you know an in-house model or by economic development and tourism either organization now economic development and tourism if that strategy supports their you know them and an amendment to a service agreement I am certain that they would refine their services appropriately to achieve the the goals

05:04:43
and the outcomes of the strategy likewise if it If if it was the decision by council to proceed in the the direction of being in-house, we would then need to stand up a service. The ability for us to stand up that service in alignment with the strategy and ensuring that we’re delivering the the services that are necessary that would also help inform future cost allocations as well. That’s correct.

05:05:03

Thank you. And that presumably would then want us to have a budget for each I whatever piece of it is a full financial analysis for each I whatever the paths are, it all has to be properly costed up >> through your council. Yes. and we’re not there yet, right? So that’s it. Thanks. >> Back to councelor Karns.

05:05:25

Okay. Thank you for that clarity. So if we’re moving forward with the almost remain arms length type approach, uh which I believe is is what the recommendation says. Um, one of the things that I’ve continued to be unclear on and did not come out in this report is once there are those service requirements embedded in in this arms length agreement, where does this the other side of the page land internally at the city? So if there’s going to be metrics or requirements for that organization that’s arms length and independent to achieve where when we when will we see what’s required on the other end of the city because if the service requirement would I hope and assume include metrics deliverables etc uh objectives defined by council which in the Mweeni report it says council really hasn’t done a good job at identifying their objectives. when that gets done when will it be and how will we know that the city is

05:06:24
resourced to um deliver that in parallel >> through the chair. So in terms of um the you know the the service agreement and then the KPIs you absolutely the KPIs are something that can be built into the service agreement and that is what would be intended to to be done. So but likewise those KPIs can also del delineate with respect to what can what is what is required of the city to help support and supplement that the work of the independent organization.

05:06:52
So those KPIs can also be identified from the city’s perspective as well in terms of the city’s respons roles and responsibility around that because of the nature of the you know the the independence of the two organizations there you know the work of the independent organization would also be you know would would require the city to also fulfill the the obligations that it has in um you know within certain aspects of that work.

05:07:15
Um, in one thing that I would also clarify though in terms of option B, we’re not suggesting that we would entirely abandon option B. That is an option that would still remain available to council. It’s really a question of whether today council has all of the inputs in absence of the strategy to be able to make that determination.

05:07:35
Today, what we’re suggesting is option A, which is you negotiate and finalize a service agreement, develop that co that cohesive community level strategy. That is the point and the opportunity where that council could then revisit option B should it choose to and option B in the transition plan that was developed um in conjunction with Mweeni is something that will still be available at that time and all of the reg um to action that transition plan that option B transition plan would still exist.

05:08:08
Sorry, just a follow-up question then for clarity. Um, how healthy is it for the organization to have an option B bring it into the municipality option hanging over your head when I thought we were being guided to go with um option one which is the enhanced service agreement >> through the chair to the councelor.

05:08:28
So that option because of and why I prefaced with the municipal act and the role that council and the city has with respect to economic development and tourism services. That option always exists to council. Council always has that option and the ability to to determine how to how is the best way and the best role and the best organization to develop those services.

05:08:49
The difference now is we actually have a a a a guide, a plan in terms of what that actually would look like, which is another input for council to determine whether council would wish to go through that 20-month period to um to go through that process. >> Okay. My second question is related to tech place.

05:09:08
At what point does the city have the analysis to decide if it wants to uncouple itself from tech place via the arms length BEDT or take it in house and issue it as part of a local business development type function. So, one of the anomalies that we did uncover was that not every municipality holds its tech innovation house uh arms length and that this budget is generally inflated because of that tech place piece that would fall under the service agreement >> uh through the chair.

05:09:41
I’d actually looked to the commissioner of legal services and the reason being part of the discussion and some of the questions that the council had just posed may be covered within part of the confidential you know the answer would need to address some of the the um some of the response and some of the information in the confidential report.

05:10:03

I’m going to rescope it to not get in any trouble around confidential and not confidential. Um, is there more work to do on the tech place piece and does that have an impact on the options presented to us today >> in public session >> through the counselor? So, how you know the options that are available in terms of how to address um your tech place in isolation are covered within the um confidential appendees in the um in the in-house transition plan option.

05:10:36
So maybe just to add, I I I think my answer is yes. There’s more work to do, counselor. Um, and I think we’ll get there. And I I I did want to just revisit the comment about kind of this option being left out there as a kind of a a means or a lever. Um, I would like to think that along this path that we’re on with the Economic Development and Tourism Corporation, it’s about building relationships.

05:11:03
So, we’re we’re we’re we’re trying to strengthen those and strengthen the common understanding on roles role clarity. Um, so I I I don’t want to leave council with the impression that we’re we’re somehow being kind of tactical um with the way that we’re staging this. Um we are uh genuine in our um recommendation that we do need a strategy.

05:11:29
We do need that strategy co-developed. We want the city to lead it but they will be our partner in developing it. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Karns. >> Okay. I just have one question first. Thank you. Uh on that I I as I understood the report um to our CEO was that uh we are going into this in in I mean we we’re we’re negotiating a new agreement service agreement with the intention of then implementing that agreement for the for the long term.

05:12:06
Um, is that a fair assumption or I mean you’re going to give that give that a good go subject to council always has the opportunity to review uh certainly once every term to review our decision-m and so on. >> Yeah. Through your chair certainly. Uh I I I think that’s a good way to characterize it.

05:12:26
I also think um like any um um initiative that council undertakes um and any framework that’s in place, it’s important to review those things from time to time against kind of the the evolving environment that we’re in and changing players. You know, there there’s a whole series of variables that we want to make sure that the city remains responsive to.

05:12:48
So, so yeah, we will um proceed with, you know, should council uh choose to adopt the recommendations, we’ll proceed with the notion of putting that enhanced service agreement in place as as quickly as we can. and and that agreement may actually last u for quite some time up until uh you know perhaps uh uh you know the the review of the strategy may tell us you know there might be different models uh to to address uh broader economic goals or objectives.

05:13:21
So we want to we want to give council some certainty in terms of you know what we see as the important next steps what to expect as a part of the service agreement but at the same time uh we do want to come back with that strategy that will dictate do we need any change or is the status quo actually going to service us well from a strategic perspective.

05:13:44
So um if I understand correctly, correct me if I’m wrong, we’re going to do the enhanced service agreement. A strategy will be developed between the two uh organizations. A strategy will be implemented. Um and uh but the the broader framework of that strategy is that it’s going to be the service agreement that already exists.

05:14:05
Like the strategy is not going to come back and say forget that service agreement, you know, bring it in house. like that’s that’s that will be determined by this through this report, right? >> Uh yeah, through you chair. Yeah. Yes, that’s correct. Um but I’ll I’ll give you an example of of perhaps uh an aspect in which I see you know maybe there is an opportunity for change or refinement.

05:14:30
Um, you know, the BDT provides a a liaison function for uh those proponents who want to call Burlington home that are looking for land, you know, want to, you know, construct a new facility here. For example, um the city provides uh the service for development, review and approvals. we are moving, you know, the city is moving towards an environment where we’re trying to uh be much more amendable and and supportive in attracting some of those those uh investments and those proponents and the BEDT is also doing very similar work. So so trying to come up with role clarity with respect to development review and approval process is going to be important. Uh so we may find that the current state we’re locking in a particular arrangement that maybe that arrangement evolves a little bit over

05:15:29
time and and so we don’t want to we don’t want to lock ourselves into uh kind of the state of uh where we are in service delivery right now uh without actually allowing ourselves uh to go through that kind of strategy development and to test our assumptions with respect to you know is that the model and it could be you know the model doesn’t change but maybe the service offerings change you know what’s provided at the city versus what’s provided with an independent agency and I think that’s uh I think an important distinction here thank you >> Sure that’s what I would hope for so appreciate that uh first time councel mention >> thank you chair and uh I just want to emphasize here I mean a lot of our operations out there arms length oper have framework agreements We did have agreement with BED beed at the time that has lapsed and what we’re

05:16:28
doing now is we’re taking it bringing it forward because of the change of adding tourism and so on. This brings a whole new context to what service we’re looking to to uh to move forward. And to um CEO’s point, things have changed our and I’ll go back to the the tax program. we probably maybe focus more on commercial and employment people to come into town to reduce the burden on the homeowners taxes as an example.

05:17:04
So this is an ongoing as as was mentioned um conversation that we have to build on what we have and to look at what opportunities are. So, um, because we’re going to have this conversation with other other arms lock partners out there. We’re already discussing in my other boards that I’m involved with as well.

05:17:24
So, um, um, I appreciate where we’re going. I’m pleased to see the direction we’re going and I look forward to, uh, our input once we have more information. So, thank you. >> Question. No question. >> We’re comments. >> Would you agree? No, we’re not doing that. Uh, okay. Uh, Mayor Mewood, I believe it’s your first time as well. Over to you.

05:17:54

Thank you. I I think the the question of clarity in my mind that I think everyone would benefit from, including the board, is is the in-house model off the table completely now? And the way I read the report is that um everything is still possible depending on the review of the strategy. Is that fair to say >> through the chair to um to the mayor? The I think the benefit that council now has is that they actually have a plan that they can see what what steps would be necessary in order to achieve an in-house model that will continue on. You know, it it’s available today, but it will also be available in 2 3 4 years. The option for for council is always to re-evaluate who and how service is delivered. I think the difference now is actually having that, you know, a a more cohesive plan and a plan of action in terms of, okay, if if council makes that determination, what are the necessary steps that would need to be gone through in order to achieve that?

05:18:52

Okay. And the plan that you’ve outlined has those additional steps just to be clear as a follow-up. Okay. >> It does. That’s correct. >> Okay. And then with respect to the service agreement, um, that will that can evolve as well. Some services may come in house that were not in house. some may be offloaded back to the corp to the beed corp that were done by the city.

05:19:14
So there so it is it fair to say that even that will have some changes of of what comes potentially in house or vice versa? >> Yeah. Um you know through the chair absolutely. So the intention would be that we would you know initially initiate and finalize and execute a service agreement but recognizing that that will likely need to change over time and if it’s if it’s the desire of council that that BDT continue to offer service independently of the city we can then identify which of those services do continue to need to remain externally and then we can adjust the service agreement through an amending agreement or an updated agreement if you if that agreement is coming close to expiry in the future. Okay. So, can I ask a quick followup or um so would it be fair to characterize this as this is what we’re doing now until we do the rest of the work that needs to be done leading into 2027? There’s there’s more work and potentially more different decisions to

05:20:13
come. >> Subject to council’s approval today of um of the service agreement and the desire to develop a community level strategic plan. Then yes, that is absolutely true. >> Thank you. Council Sherman, >> thank you. I’m just going to comment to clarify. You have delivered what you were directed to do and that is not absolutely helpful because it appears that there’s conflict that is not needed to be seen as conflict.

05:20:39
So with respect to the strategy, I know perfectly well you have people on staff who can do work who are doing work in the city that needs to be done and that what we need to do is have a process map that shows those relationships relative to the strategy. Is that correct? in terms of the um through the chair in in terms of the work that and how BDT and city staff interact through the types of um interactions and the support that we provide either independently or jointly to um you know to other you know to you know to the business community to non-residential developers absolutely we should have process maps and there are there’s a lot of work that has happened over the years in terms of refining and developing that process but also things have changed over time as well you know we had the regions involvement uh in terms of planning and economic development which has now changed. So those those process maps that have been

05:21:38
developed con also constantly need refinement and so that’s a really important step. Absolutely. >> So so thank you and for clarification that will take care of any concerns about duplication of activities or or conflicts because you will settle that with BEDT as part of the process of implementing the strategy.

05:21:58
Am I right? That is correct councelor. Yes. >> Thank you. So my second question was what do we mean when we say arms length when we are when the city is providing millions of dollars in support and we’re going to have a a a service agreement that defines the nature of that relationship. So surely that means it isn’t we we are not arms length and furthermore that leads the question of how you going to bring that back to council from time to time to make sure we’re getting regular reports from from BDT >> through the chat. in terms of you know the use of the word arms length or partnership you know we’ve heard different terms that are being used today the business community do like to feel that degree of separation from council but at the same time in terms of the municipal act and the responsibility and the accountability of council you council under the municipal acts do hold that responsibility for economic development and tourism services I I know because of the conversations that I’ve that I’ve had in terms of economic development and

05:22:57
tourism staff and the There is a desire for you know that degree of partnership and that recognition of partnership and so far as we possibly can that’s what would should be reflected within the service agreement. >> Sorry can I just follow up on that? Go ahead. >> Because it’s got to do with the business industry say they want a different view.

05:23:17
I don’t agree. I think that is our decision. So right into the into the service agreement. Can we do that and that will agree that will figure out how council will will work with the with BED. I don’t think they have any problem with that at all. So, is that possible? >> It is absolutely council. >> Let’s do it.

05:23:37

Council Karns, >> thanks for the line of conversation and through the chair. I I want to be absolutely certain that the uh bring in house option is now off the table via the service agreement. More work is required. C I don’t believe council has its priorities straight if I have them. I didn’t see them in this document.

05:23:56
So, I don’t know what the KPIs are. I don’t know what council’s direction is. I don’t know what the reporting structure is. How often do you come back to council and tell us um the metrics that I still am aware of or from our vision to focus? And I have not received any reports that say that those have completely failed.

05:24:14
So, um I’m think I’m aligned with councelor Sherman where I’m just asking for a very clear streamlined process process map within the agreement. Uh that closes the door on the bring it inhouse option because I think that that is leading to some uncertainty that I thought we were closing up today. We’re not we’re not still.

05:24:39
We can bring pieces in house if we want. So we still don’t have a strategy. Okay. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Well, we’re we’re two consultants deep on this and we still don’t have a strategy. So, there’s a comment. Sorry. >> Staff want to respond to that or Okay. >> All right. Well, I see no more questions.

05:25:10
I believe I need a mover for this uh item. By the way, there were confidential appendices. We said we weren’t going to close on them. Can I assume that’s continues to be the case? Looking for a mover. Councelor Sherman. And would you like to comment? >> I will. This has been a tortured journey where where we had all sorts of odd input that didn’t that caused some of us, you know, to gag.

05:25:33
Um that caused an awful lot of work to be done and a lot of lot of um a lot of work at BED after we’d spent a year combining tourism into BED. So I I totally agree that you can’t do anything without informed strategy. You have to have an aligned set of processes and aligned set of activities and jobs. And we’ve been talking about you know moving the deck chairs on the Titanic to my view is completely inappropriate and having done years of reorganizing corporations what you’re proposing strikes me as being right. Uh I think that the the question that you were answering in the staff direction about what would an internal an inside corporation look like you had a consultant do but that doesn’t mean you’re going to do it. We will find out what what what is needed. So let’s get on with the strategy. Let’s figure

05:26:33
out the alignment of the processes and the jobs, get the KPIs right, and then we’ll have another conversation. But I do want to see this stuff come back to council and I want BDT to come to council as well. That’s it. I’m in support of what we’ve got though. Thank you, >> Councelor Galra comment. >> Thank you, chair.

05:26:50
Yeah, I uh I just want to compliment staff for all the work they’ve done again on this. Um looking forward to the joint strategy done with the city of Burlington and BEDT. As I’ve said many times, I am kind of the T in the BR beed coming over from tourism joining this organization. So um you know it’s been it’s been in transition for a couple of years now and I think it’s uh important that we arrive at this decision and start a new direction going forward.

05:27:17
I I think we’ve all identified gaps um in the communication between the two organizations and uh I I I think it would be beneficial for everyone to get on the right page and steering in the same direction. So I’m looking forward to the outcome. So thanks. >> Thank you very much. Not seeing anyone. Oh, Mayor Meboard, go ahead. >> Thank you, Chair.

05:27:41
Uh, yes, an incredible amount of work has been done to get us to this point and I think what we have in front of us is exactly the right step for today given that uh strategy should be informative to structure. You know, Ecdev has uh in my mind two jobs um attraction and retention and tourism has uh really the same just from a tourism perspective in terms of bringing events and uh providing the clarity after a year of well little more than a year of uncertainty through saying we absolutely have to get a service agreement in place. There are very real matters that need to be addressed today. We can’t wait any longer on those things. uh we know what they are and and so that’s exactly what we need to do and as this evolves uh this conversation evolves to strategy we have the process map um at a high level

05:28:38
in your slides uh 2027 there will be an economic development strategy and it will bring together in a more formal way the horizon 2050 and the work that ACD has done economic development and tourism has a strategy we are developing uh horizon 2050 our previous uh plans did have KPIs relative to economic development.

05:28:57
We had a whole section on it. Um, and that was something that ECDev took very seriously and incorporated, but it it’s it’s uh the two haven’t come together in the same way as one plan. We have these two sitting out there. Uh, and then you you layer in the destination marketing plan on top of that and there is a real need for us to uh to come together and and so that’s an additional step that we can do through the strategy development.

05:29:21
Once we get to that strategy development, then we determined who does what and that’s really what the conversation is. Who does what is it ECD and tourism does it? Is it city inhouse does it? I suspect it’ll continue to be a blend of the models uh as uh tourism for sure we know has to be the Matt tax has to be delivered by an independent corporation.

05:29:44
So I think this is the right step for today as we continue to do the work that needs to be done. it settles things um and and it provides some clarity on the immediate issues that we need to address. But there’s still more to come and no one should assume that this is the end of the conversation or the end of the conversation around what the right model and structure is.

05:30:00
There’s more conversation to be had. >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Uh my comments on this uh well, first of all, Andy, thank you for for coming in and uh you joined the organization a few months ago and jumped right in the deep end with this one. So, uh, kudos to you for, um, really working hard on this.

05:30:20
Uh, same to our to our CEO for that matter. You know, there’s a a ton of work that has gone into this as noted by the mayor and others. And I think this does show some lessons learned maybe for us around this table around the cost of uh, focusing inward versus focusing outward. A lot of time spent on the process and what would be best for us.

05:30:42
And arguably we spent so much time thinking about that that sort of overruns any advantages to the change because we’ve got two organizations working so hard trying to figure out what would be best versus actually going out there and getting uh jobs for the community and getting uh tourism for the community and and and achieving our economic potential as as Terry noted on the tourism side.

05:31:09
So there are operational governance costs to change and sometimes that’s necessary and sometimes it isn’t and uh in in this case uh my opinion was probably more towards the latter that I think uh we spent a lot of time uh looking at a change that uh would lead to um relatively minimal advantage. Uh that being said, I think now we’re going to get to where we the things that we should be doing, which is a service agreement that was way overdue and then um a strategic plan that will carry us forward. And I know that uh the work the operational work will continue through through that process. So it’s been a very hard process, very hard on on the on uh on board members uh on uh on this council as well. It’s been a It’s been a tough conversation, but uh at least it’s done for now. So, thank you everybody. I’ll now call the vote uh on the item

05:32:09
which is uh direct the chief transformation officer to finalize and execute a service agreement with Burlington Economic Development and Tourism to the satisfaction of the chief administrative officer and the commissioner of legal and legislative services and direct the chief transformation officer to plan for the development of a community economic development strategy including budget considerations for council deliberation during during the 2027 budget process if necessary. All those in favor and any opposed that uh carries unanimously. Check that box and I think uh we should take a 5m minute break. So I’ll see you at 12 241. 241 All right, welcome back everyone. We’re

05:40:38
on item 8.5 motion memorandum regarding eligibility criteria for membership on standing committees of council CO826. Councelor Karns, would you like to move your motion and speak to it? >> Uh, it’s explanatory, chair, so I’m happy to go to the vote. >> Well, we can’t go to the vote yet. >> Well, you can do it.

05:40:57
You asked me not to talk, so I’m happy to. >> I did not ask you not to talk. Never would never would I say such a Yeah, that was Yeah, you confused two of us, I think. >> Yeah, I’d I’d welcome uh I’d welcome whatever you you would like. >> Okay. Well, any questions for staff or the mover on this item? Councelor Galbra questions of staff or the mover or comments? >> Sorry, did you ask for me? >> Yeah, go ahead.

05:41:34

Okay, thank you, chair. Um, >> uh, maybe a quick question for staff. Um are we are we satisfied in our uh the parameters around who can sit on our standing committees as it is right now? Does it protect us against um I I’m not going to say lobbyists are a bad thing to have on standing committees, but are are we satisfied with the parameters that we have that establish who can sit on our standing committees and who cannot? uh through the chair to the counselor.

05:42:08
Uh certainly when we’ve come up with standing committee uh requirements um they include a number of uh requirements in terms of the individual’s participation. Um some of those include uh code of conduct requirements etc. With respect to the the motion, staff has uh reviewed the motion and uh feel that they can respond back with some detail with respect to what’s being asked.

05:42:34
And I think the the question if if through that review we come up with some additional requirements or some additional um uh requirements or uh restrictions then that’s something we’ll bring back and and council can discuss that uh in terms of the response for the motion. My concern is that the the motion kind of directs staff to uh almost eliminate a type of person from a standing committee.

05:43:04
it’s almost, you know, too directed. Um, what you just said, you’ll bringing back information. You can certainly do. Um, I’m just concerned about the way it’s worded and and if that’s interpreted that way >> uh through the chair, staff interpreted it as a as a review and bring back with potential amendments.

05:43:21
So, staff views it as open to uh recommending no change. Uh, but again, that’s for council to consider when we bring that back. >> Okay. Yep. Thank you. Councelor Bentovenia. >> Thank you, Chair. Just a quick question along those lines. We have we belong to boards, we belong to other committees and um where where does the line stop I guess when people come and delegate from one of the operations that or one of the boards that we represent or we working with and I I’ll use our board as well right here around this table. We have expertise many of us in certain fields. Sometimes we might get influenced by our one of my colleagues or vice versa. So I

05:44:20
just look at it and saying like where do we draw the line for this and at the end of the day who makes that decision is I understand staff make the recommendations we make the decision but from a from a from this situation does head clerk get involved in this kind of decision making as well >> uh through the chair council I missed the last part of your question there.

05:44:50
Who does who get involved or does what get involved? >> Who actually will make the decision that there’s an issue? Um I understand the legal side of it, but you know, we do have uh a city clerk who’s legislated to do what they have to do as well. Um so, and I know that we make decisions here at this table as well.

05:45:12
So, who actually makes a decision on this issue? uh through the chair to the counselor. Uh once someone is on a standing committee of council, then their obligations with respect to that uh committee are set out uh in their obligations with the um code of good governance, the various documents that would apply to that committee member.

05:45:36
Um and so that is what was would be applied. So there’s conflict of interest for example, we deal with that. Members recuse themselves. So it’s their it’s the individual’s members obligation to meet their requirements through whatever uh requiring document would set that out.

05:45:56
So it is on the individual member at that time. Certainly u from a committee of council there’s opportunities for people to raise concerns with uh an integrity commissioner. uh but up uh it’s up to the individual counselor or member of a standing committee themselves to govern themselves accordingly in in uh accordance with the documents that govern their participation on that committee.

05:46:20
I know that sounds vague but that is the the accurate answer. >> That’s great. So just for clarity I I understand what you said. So if someone has a conflict of interest, they’re the ones who are responsible to bring it forward. And if someone doesn’t agree with it, then the person who doesn’t agree with it takes them to an integrity commissioner to make not a decision necessarily, but bring it forward.

05:46:48
Is that correct? >> Uh generally speaking, yes. >> Council Sherman, >> thank you. Um well I’m assuming the members of the pipeline to permit who are lobbyists have signed the lobbyist registry and therefore it is totally in the open. Uh so on that premise my assumption is that the code of conduct the um the conflict of interest rules need to be understood by the members of that committee and that’s the critical matter for us >> uh through the chair uh with respect to pipeline uh to permit committee.

05:47:20
My recollection is that there are requirements from the formulation of the pipeline to permit committee with respect to its members and requirements with respect to uh conflict of interest that those members would have to deal with uh as part of their participation. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mayor Midward.

05:47:42

Thanks. Uh so just a question. Um if you look at our registry, our lobbyist registry, it says who should register as a lobbyist. And one of the um uh exemptions of registering says lobbyists who conduct lobbying in public meetings or processes do not have to register. and and in effect uh the the two there are two uh registered lobbyists around pipeline to permit which is the only standing committee I’m aware of that has uh people registered as lobbyists they are doing that so uh should they uh be advised since their uh voice is actually around the table in public as part of a public meeting and process that if that’s where they conduct any of their advocacy they don’t they no longer need to be registered as lobbyists uh through the chair. So, uh staff wouldn’t be making any recommendations per se to members of committees as to

05:48:41
whether or not they should register as a lobbyist or not. That would be up to them to decide whether to do that. I think the staff direction is broad enough um to uh for staff to take a look at whether or not there’s any changes that need to be made with respect to the lobbyist registry as it relates to people sitting on u standing committees of council or whether the terms of those standing committees of council are sufficient to address uh concerns that could be raised.

05:49:15

Okay. I’ll uh I’ll just ask a uh well I guess a question comment uh to the mover. So I’m okay. It’s it’s hard to say no to to a review which will bring to light further information and it doesn’t tie us to a decision. Um and that’s consistent with our procedure bylaw which I just called up which uh notes that motions requesting a policy or bylaw amendment must be directed to the CAO or appropriate department for review with a report back to committee.

05:49:43
So, um, my question for the mover would be, would you be okay if we just made a slight change here and said direct the city clerk to review eligibility restrictions, not review or establish? Cuz I would say that the established part would be theoretically out of order. Um, and staff are going to interpret this as a review.

05:50:04
So, I I get that, but I would rather be consistent. So, that’s a question to the mover if you would be okay with uh essentially striking the words or establish at this time. Presumably, this could lead to a second motion when we get the report. >> Yeah, as the mover, if I can respond, I’m fine with that. This language was also reviewed and approved by the clerk’s office before it was published in your agenda.

05:50:28
So I feel that they do have the appropriate scope that they’re comfortable with, but I’m happy if it moves it along to uh strike or establish. Um I also do want to address one additional piece. So when the lobbyist registry indicates um speaking in public forum that would be an example that we had earlier today where Indwell who is also an a lobbyist registered on the lobbyist registry spoke in public forum at the lect turn and that was quite fine.

05:50:57
The difference that is material in my mind that I’m looking for um you know some review of would be the fact that a standing committee of council is basically one notch removed from the decision-making authority of council. It’s it reports directly to council from committee. That’s very different than an individual uh or a representation of a corporation like Indwell that just spoke as we saw today by way of a delegation.

05:51:25
So I think the materiality is quite different and that’s why the scoping of the language here uh does really speak to standing committee of council. It doesn’t include advisory committee just as well and it doesn’t include delegations for that same illustrative purpose. But if it’s helpful I’m pleased to remove or establish and we’ll just allow staff to report back on their insights.

05:51:50

Thank you for that uh that change and uh I see your hands gone down now as well. So with that change having been made, I think we all have an understanding of the of the change. Uh I will uh ask for any further comments. Mayor Midwart, go ahead. >> Yeah, thanks. Uh no further questions. I do have some comments.

05:52:09
So um certainly okay to review. Um I don’t think we have a problem now but if a review establishes that we are on the right side of uh our our business process um that is going to be helpful information for the community. Currently uh we have one standing committee which is very unique in the municipal sector and has been extraordinarily helpful uh and modeled uh or asked about by other uh inquiries from other municipalities about it.

05:52:41
Uh the individuals around the pipeline department committee have been selected because they have expertise to give us. sitting around a uh committee meeting provides opportunity for greater dialogue and conversation that isn’t afforded to us currently uh by way of delegation which is a one-way uh I give you my input you can ask questions but it’s really not a conversation um and and these are folks that have um have information that have has benefited us there are two out of 13 members uh so no undue influence there democracy rules and recommendations go straight to council where there’s seven of us. Uh again, uh that is the failsafe and there is um currently legislation around conflict of interest, code of conduct that appropriately guide that behavior. And I will note I did go back and look

05:53:37
at the um the committee itself to see um how well we did in our recommendations and aside from one related to procedure of whether a matter should come back to committee or come back to P2P the decisions were unanimous of council. So this committee has proven its worth in terms of um having those folks around the table and I would simply say that having them around the table brings lobbying into the light.

05:54:04
It is not behind closed doors anymore. It is folks sitting around a table in public session with agendas published in advance. So the folks can come uh they can request to delegate. We haven’t turned down any requests to delegate to the committee. Those decisions are recorded in perpetuity and they are uh then sent to council where there’s an additional public process and that uh really um is a different model than the other one that we have had which may still exist which is the housing development liaison committee where staff would meet with developers um and and those um I I looked on the website to see if I could find the the minutes uh the terms say that we will have those. it was very difficult to find. So they may exist uh but this brings that discussion around development activity into public into the light and that’s where it should be. >> Thank you for your comments. Uh

05:55:04
councelor Galbreth. >> Uh thank you chair. Yeah I certainly agree with those comments. I I’ve always thought that having uh uh you know in this position we are lobbyed by many many people. Some are registered some are not. Um uh the most transparent place to have them I think is in a standing committee.

05:55:21
Um it’s it’s open to the public. It’s uh live webcasted. Um so I I I think it’s uh those those lobbyists that are being discussed here have certainly brought some fantastic uh information. We want the best information uh when we’re in standing committees to make decisions. So, I I I welcome the best information from the experts in the field and uh it’s the most transparent way to do it in a standing committee.

05:55:48
So, um I definitely echo the mayor’s comments. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Charvin. >> Thank you very much. The um standing committee with less than seven council members um is fairly typical or or less than all council members is typical across all municipalities. um as long as we got we have a standing committee with a with a few members on in fact it’s our second one we have audit and um we’ve done quite fine with that for for many years so I’m not stressed about the um the issue around the standing committee not having all members on it um although I don’t want to have all standing committees like that um I must say that I think that um the issue of transparency is not an issue because it’s it clearly is we have people on there in the open talking to us in public u and we all know who they

05:56:48
are. I think the more important thing is that in the past after years and years of being on council I can tell you we have a no a poorly informed understanding of the development industry. We we we live with secondhand information. um we get these applications and for years we kind of treat them as you know not our best friends um and and what we now have is an opportunity to exchange information and make informed choices that I think is a dramatic advant advance from what we’ve ever seen in the past and it has allowed this council uh and this municipality uh to gain a high degree of respect around around Ontario uh in a way that other municipalities you know are envious of. So, we need to keep doing that. Um, I do believe that, you know, that any system, any process needs to be re reviewed every now and again to make sure it’s being uh being effective and efficient and compliant. Um, so I I

05:57:48
support what is before us because it’s fine. Let’s take a look at it unless if something needs to be changed, we’ll change it because we’ve been doing this for two years and we’re good to go. So, I’m up for it. Thanks. >> Thank you, Councelor Sherman. Councelor Karns. Yeah, thanks very much for the support that I’m hearing because as you’ll know, I’m oftentimes forward- facing and future focused and this is not a defensibility exercise in terms of either audit or pipeline to permit.

05:58:12
Uh technically pipeline to permit could cease uh in a new term of council added as required. Uh a new a committee uh could be established. Perhaps it’s a budget committee. Perhaps it’s an investment committee. Uh something that responds to the challenges of the day. So uh this is really not something that is meant to be a defensive uh approach in nature.

05:58:34
It’s meant to build upon the great work that we’ve done in terms of transparency and accountability. That is in fact the lobbyist registry itself. The whistleblower policy via audit is coming into effect uh this spring in in short order. Uh we’ve done some other things that have also uh made that transparency piece around closed meetings uh continue to be out in the light.

05:58:55
So this is just one more opportunity to continue to build upon that and there’s certainly a place for people who are experts in their field. Perhaps it’s just a question of which hat ought they wear. Uh if you decide to be a lobbyist, maybe the advisory committee is maybe the advisory committee is a better place for you.

05:59:11
Uh maybe you can be more uh contributatory in a different function. So we don’t know that. Uh that’s the role of staff to do a scan for us and to come back and let us know if we’re on the right side of things. uh we haven’t had to be in this situation uh before, but I will say it it was really interesting to see how things came through the pipeline to the council table.

05:59:32
Uh that caused us quite a bit of grief. So I think it’s a great uh start for us to just take a review of our processes and if something comes out of it, we’re all the better for it. And if nothing comes out of it, we’re also all the better for it. >> Okay. Thank you. Seeing no more comments, I’m going to call the vote on the following motion.

05:59:52
Direct the city clerk to review eligibility restrictions which may result in a bylaw amendment recommendation for members.

06:00:00
ship on any standing committee of council where a member of committee is a registered lobbyist under the municipal act 2001 and the city of Burlington’s lobbyist registry bylaw 47203 and where the subject matter of that lobbying activity materially aligns with the mandate of the committee and report back with potential amendments by Q3 2026.

06:00:20
All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Item 8.6 Six motion memorandum regarding changes to 2026 calendar of meetings CO926. Uh Mayor me Ward uh or councelor Stolty uh who wants to move the motion and start us off? Go ahead, Mayor. >> Thank you. Uh the uh motion really does respond to community feedback.

06:00:48
So, this is one of those uh opportunities to do what councelor Stolty said earlier when we were talking about the charter, which is actually to tell folks when their input has made a difference. And so, we have had a uh we’ve had both systems over the years that I’ve been around here.

06:01:07
We’ve had a week between committee and council and then we’ve had uh you know the very next week. So uh we have heard from commi committee uh from c sorry community members that they would value uh a longer break between uh committee meetings and council meetings. I think it would give our staff additional time to put the materials together particularly now that we have uh the standing committee uh pipeline to permit on the Thursday which provides really little uh turnaround time.

06:01:36
We have workshops the day before um as well. So, this just gives everyone a little bit more time and helps to address the um the Tuesday after a long weekend as well. So, we’ve uh reset the calendar to avoid council meetings being on a Tuesday after a long weekend, which is kind of like a Monday.

06:01:55
Uh but also to provide that additional space in between. So, that’s the intent and I want to thank all the residents who have uh given us their their input on this. We have heard you and this is the result. Salty, go ahead. >> Thank you. Now, I kind of wish I’d taken the opportunity to speak first because I don’t have a lot to add to that.

06:02:16
I think you’re very well said and thank you for uh using the opportunity as a good example of exactly what we talked about in our engagement charter, which is uh explaining to the community how we have used the information and the suggestions and the feedback that we’ve received from them. Thanks. >> Thank you, Councelor Karns.

06:02:37

Yeah, thanks. Perhaps just a question around the the content. So I I want to recognize that this is a welcome uh breath to manage the information that’s coming before us. But I also want to say uh we’ll need some leniency then still in council because this package here that’s been received uh I had four days with it, four business working days.

06:02:57
It was received on a Thursday. We had a 4-day long weekend. We had four days of business uh functioning and then we had another three-day two-day um weekend and then we were in chambers right now. So we had four days with uh the better part of 418 pages not including our closed materials and so uh I’m glad that we have that extra breathing room.

06:03:21
As I did say I’m waiting for some additional information to come to this council in this cycle. Um, so maybe if we have a little bit more open-mindedness and leniency, uh, people might just be finding out about items when they come to committee, uh, in the public and might want to have some more dialogue with us.

06:03:38
Uh, that’s a little bit more than four business days worth of review when we get into these holiday crunches. So, uh, I look forward to a little bit of that additional breathing room. It’s these agendas can be big or small depending on the cycle. Um, and we’ll see what we can do when we get to council with it. Okay, thank you. See no other comments.

06:04:01
Uh I’ll just say and and I would welcome further maybe sharing from the from the sort of movers. Um I haven’t gotten any comments that said this uh outside of the context of um the DC issue and the uh of course the uh the that report coming out behind what our procedure bylaw said it went said it should come out uh for various reasons.

06:04:24
So uh I actually haven’t gotten any feedback that said we need another week between committee and council. the information uh for council is the is very similar to what comes out for committee. Um so if if there is that information I would be happy to receive it. We made a decision I believe a couple years ago to uh tight tighten up the schedule a bit to to leave time for our other our other work and our other duties.

06:04:52
Um, fortunately I don’t see any conflicts in my calendar for for this change in year and it can be reviewed in the next term uh when that calendar of meetings uh comes up. But I got to say I I don’t know I haven’t seen any upswell of of requests for this. Um u so it works for me for this year. I’m willing to give it a shot and uh maybe some sharing could occur from the two movers to me cuz uh I have not seen any I don’t know what problem we’re solving here.

06:05:23
But um I will just ask staff if there’s any concerns with this change uh whether this messes anything up for you on your end like wouldn’t want uh you know any vacations to be canceled or trips or anything. U but any issues at all with this or are we all good? uh to the chair. Uh from a legislative services perspective, uh the proposed amendments don’t cause any uh concerns or from from a city process perspective.

06:05:52
There’s there’s nothing there. >> Good to go. Okay, that’s good enough for me. And councelor Sharman, go ahead. >> Thank you very much. Well, we always had this sort of longer wait in the past and it was fine. Um, I don’t think that generally it makes a whole lot of difference except when it falls on a Monday, a Tuesday when there was a bank holiday and a bunch of members kind of decided that that was problematic um, for a bunch of reasons that were valid.

06:06:22
Um, but I don’t want to go through that again. So, I’m quite happy to move it five days and keep you all quiet. Thank you, >> Councelor Stoalty. >> Thanks. Just in response to your questions particularly chair um I have received quite a bit of feedback over the years so it’s not something that was a grounds well as of late to me it was something that the mayor and I had talked about that the the whole DC conversation kind of was a culmination of having heard that feedback a number of times and I think when whenever you hear once it’s a one-off and I wouldn’t have put a motion forward on a one-off but twice is a coincidence and by the time you get to thrice you have a pattern and I think I certainly saw a pattern coming Okay. So, I’m not seeing any other comments. No, I do. Council Kurts, go ahead. >> Yeah, just through the chair. It’s really interesting when we’re hearing

06:07:22
what we’re hearing from the community. And uh I do have a motion coming up after this that does talk about uh our community survey, our community response survey. Uh we didn’t get the wholesome report on how things are working for the community to engage with the city particularly around how we do our work procedurally within that calendar.

06:07:40
So this is good work for now for the balance of the term which is pretty much hardly anything. Um, and then we will have an opportunity to take the information that we have when we get our community survey responses back and see if there’s additional changes that need to be made around what the 2027 and beyond calendar of meetings looks like.

06:08:00
So, uh, this is nice to give us some breathing room during the balance of the year, but um, we have more more work to do to make sure that we’re optimizing our schedule for maximum engagement. >> Right. Thank you very much. I’ll just my final comment is again I haven’t heard anybody and and for me three three would not be enough to to change it.

06:08:22
I feel it was the the comments were really inside that DC discussion. Uh but I’m willing to try anything once so that’s fine. All right. I’m now going to call the vote on the motion which is to direct the city clerk to amend the 2026 calendar of meetings for council and standing committees to add a full week between committee and council.

06:08:42
All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. 8.7 motion memorandum regarding on demand transit pilot project. Councelor Charman, would you like to move the motion and speak to it? >> Well, thank you very much. Um, I’m going to start off by congratulating the transit department on $500,000 of additional revenue in 2025.

06:09:09
was too bad about the old buses that we had to maintain for another million and a half bucks that put us in the hole again. Um that said, the uh the delegation this morning was excellent in pointing out that we needed small more small vehicles that we don’t have and it was clearly a cry for help from the older adults.

06:09:27
And that gets me to introduce uh the purpose of the ondemand transit pilot. And I would refer on demand then to being handy van just for future reference because that’s kind of what it is. Um the purpose of this report is to summarize the potential mobility, ridership, financial, and social benefits of implementing a localized ondemand transit pilot in Burlington.

06:09:51
The pilot would test the use of flexible vehicles operating within neighborhood zones to complement the existing fixed bus route network. The intent the initiative intended to improve mobility for old rattles with limited mobility. And we know for example we have 39,000 uh old rattles over the age of 65 of whom 20 to 25% can’t get around.

06:10:16
they are living in in in kind of isolation, have trouble traveling. Um there is desperation for more handy vans. Uh but we require some sort of doctor certificate to make that happen. Um and it’s over booked and then it has to go and it leaves you at your doctor’s appointment many times and then we have to get a send a taxi to pick them up.

06:10:39
That is not effective and efficient. So that is not about last mile, first mile. that is about a whole different market segment that we can service of our members of our community members who are not getting service today. Then in addition to that um we also have young people um you know who are typically you know maybe 10 to 10 to 15 16 um who have to wait around on mom and dad or brother and sister uh and if we had this kind of transportation available that was um on demand um and efficient and effective and convenient um they could get around a whole lot easier. But what that does in both those instances is it it it gets cars off the road. And the third one is the last mile, which is people going to the GO station, which is estimated to be about 2,000 people a day. Um, so 4,000 rides uh in their cars today. And if we could get them into effective and efficient transportation system, um, then that would also increase our ridership and

06:11:39
get cars off the road. So there are three three particular causes uh sources of opportunity uh where where we can improve the transit system efficiency, we can improve social isolation or reduce it and we can improve health outcomes. I believe transit is the way forward just not what we have in quite the same way as it is today.

06:12:00
Uh it needs to be it needs to be effective, efficient, uh um convenient, and get people from where they are to where they need to be at a reasonable pace. I think that will also help us with people wanting to use scooters, get them off their scooters and get them into into some small floor kind of vehicle.

06:12:24
But I just throw that out for fun. Okay, that’s it. Um I have a lot more notes and comments, but I’ll spare you the details. Um thank you. Thank you, Councelor Bentovenia. >> Thank you, Chair. Uh, I do support this uh this pilot project um because I think it’s a smart thing to do. I mean, I it’s also a very practical um it’s only going to increase transit.

06:12:49
And again, I’m I’m going to speak from a personal standpoint. I think it hits close to home to many people. Um, I live probably three three and a half kilometers from the uh the go car poolool on Dundas Street from my home and and when I go to the airport, I call one of my children and I say, “Can you drive me to the car poolool cuz I’m taking the go bus directly to the terminal, which by the way is $12.50.

06:13:16
” Um, and I get there in 40 minutes. So by having on demand I can make arrangements, get on and I get there and there’s no problem and then the way back do the same thing and it does take the vehicle. It’s not only me getting there but then they’re going to have to come pick me up. So that’s just one example.

06:13:44
I I want to say thank you to the transit staff for bringing our numbers up to three plus million riders. And that’s a testament to if we deliver convenience, we’re going to get busier. And this is going to just I think um help us tremendously especially with the density that we’re looking at down the road and u and for those individuals that live in suburbia.

06:14:17
I guess now it’s it’s a true option to be able to say I can leave at 2 in the afternoon and I can get there at 2:05 210 somewhere around there. So very much in support of this uh pilot um and the information will be very very valuable for all of us. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Galbreth. >> Thank you chair.

06:14:45
Um yeah just maybe a question to the uh to the mover. Um, so since we already have ondemand transit in the handy van, is this are you asking staff to just expand on it or is this a brand new ondemand program? How does it differ from the handy van service that we have already? >> Thank you for the question. I think I think handy van is on demand.

06:15:11
It’s just very constrained >> and and if and there are questions about the nature of the equipment being used that could be addressed here. Maybe handy van the the mechanical vehicles versus electric vehicles are are dramatic are different. The maintenance cost is different but we need to know those things.

06:15:32
I was just talking to the director and she was saying we can get electric vehicles for $400,000 and they will last seven six or seven years. So that’s you get three of them for the cost of a major bus. So the question is could we can we get the right ridership? Can we get people service better? Um will the numbers work? Um I I I don’t have skin in this game.

06:15:56
I mean yes we’ve saw the Argo buses. They were attractive but interesting. Um but that doesn’t mean that that what that is what I I am suggesting we do. Um but I I believe that our transit department have the wherewithal to figure it out and they’ll come back with recommendations. Thank you. And then uh my second question I guess is for staff if uh are staff prepared to do this work and do they have capacity in their work plan uh to deliver it by Q4 2026.

06:16:30

Just uh introduce yourself. Go ahead. >> Uh Rayen Jackson, director of transit for Burlington Transit. Um yeah, I think Q4 2026 is a reasonable expectation to put a report together that will offer probably a couple of different solutions because this is a um part of the industry that is really growing and and there’s a lot of interest in a lot of different agencies and there’s a lot of new technology and software that we’re seeing.

06:16:54
So I think that we can come back with a few different solutions that might work for Burlington and then we just go from there. >> Great. Thank you, >> Councelor Stoalty. >> Thank you. Uh, councelor Galbre’s questions were very much in line with mine and I think I’m comfortable with that. So, this is not my my first reaction to this motion was that it was uh jumping too far too fast, but I feel comfortable that staff feels as though they can come back with some options that the pilot project is not to be implemented as a proposal 24 months plus or minus. I’m glad that plus or minus is in there. Um, I’m very curious about the financial implications saying the goal of no proposed increase to the municipal tax levy. I’m not entirely sure how councelor Charman is hoping for us to dramatically increase service without any dollars, but I’ll be curious to see how he proposes to do that. Thank you. >> Council Karns. >> Uh, thank you very much. And maybe I’ll just pose this as a question of the

06:17:51
mover um or maybe staff. Now, I have heard some disscent. Uh I am I am in agreement in in principle. Can you please tell me if this is effectively the privatization of our public transit service? >> You’re asking me >> somebody. >> It is not our intention to do that. Uh our intention is to have the most efficient and effective uh reliable and financially suitable um operation of the transit system.

06:18:20
But I strongly believe continue to believe uh that we wish to have transit our transit organization managing uh the services offered to our uh our community members. So I’m not willing to wanting to sell anything to that at all. No. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mayor Midwart. >> Thank you. I’m really interested to see what uh information staff are able to bring back.

06:18:47
I see this actually as very similar to uh what we used to do with the old dialeride we called it or the ch taxi chit service where we um enhanced and a amplified our uh public transit system by securing the services of um of private organizations where a fixed route service was not efficient and that’s really the key.

06:19:11
it is uh we we will always have a need for those um fixed routes, you know, the number one being one of the most busy. Uh but it’s when we get into the nature of our community, which was built um as a suburb around the car and people living great distances from the closest transit stop.

06:19:36
and it’s very difficult to serve people in those communities who want to take transit uh outside of a specialized enhanced service like this. So I uh I am very supportive of exploring that. I see it as a both and and I see it actually as uh something that we’ve done in the past. We we do even still today. and uh and we want to make sure the goal here is really making sure that people can get from A to B because for me transit is about participation.

06:20:07
It’s about the ability to participate in the life of our community. It’s more than just a way to get around. So we don’t want anyone to not be able to, you know, have to choose between the doctor’s appointment or visiting family because they can only get one ride in two weeks based on our handy van service as it exists.

06:20:24
So, uh, we really want to be able to, um, support people to get around and to be able to have full participation in the life of our community and this is one step in that direction. >> Thank you. Uh, just jump in with a comment. So, uh, very, uh, willing and understanding that staff were involved in the development of this motion um to, uh, to explore to see see a proposal.

06:20:53
We’re not approving a pilot today. We don’t our procedure bylaw wouldn’t allow us to do that. We’re going to see financial implications and I think they’re I can’t wait to see what that shows us. Um it’ll be really interesting. Um and we we will go from there and I think that’s really the nut of the matter is is the business case for this that we need to better understand.

06:21:15
Uh I will say that um public transit fixed transit routes are have been around a long time. They function very well. They’ve been proven through studies. We don’t need to do a study on public transit. Fixed transit it works. Uh Burlington Transit also functions very well and uh provides a very important service in our community.

06:21:40
I was just looking at the transit map and I’m pretty sure that at 95% at least of our community is within a 15minute walk of transit, you know, if not higher. Um, so the dialer ride days may not, you know, we we’ve added a lot of buses the last eight years to to Doug Brown’s comments uh to bring it up and it’s pretty pretty good now.

06:22:01
Um, you know, uh, not to pick at councelor Bentane’s example, but there’s a bus route that goes right through Head and Forest that goes directly to 407 carpool. You can get to that carpool from practically anywhere in the city without connecting. And all of our ghost stations are really well connected. People are driving, a lot of them are driving from out of town.

06:22:21
Aldershot, for example, is full with drivers from from west of us. Applebee, which is the go station that I use. You can get a parking spot there any time of day. Uh quite easily, I would say. So, let’s make sure we’re solving the right problems here. I believe there is potential. Um I uh am concerned on the per rider cost, but uh time will tell and it’s it’s a well-ritten motion, counselor Charman, and I appreciate all the detail that you’ve put into it to give us uh the answers that we need.

06:22:58
So, just checking the board, I see no other comments. I will now uh call the vote on the following motion. Direct the director of transit to explore how ondemand transit could be incorporated into Burlington Transit’s fixed route model to improve transit efficiency, increase service utilization, and expand access to residents who currently do not use fixed route transit services.

06:23:18
and direct the director of transit to develop a proposal for a 24month plus or minus pilot project that provides a phased implementation plan for ondemand transit service within Burlington and report back to council by Q4 2026 with service design options, financial implications, technology requirements, performance metrics, risk assessment, implementation timeline and direct the director of transit to include analysis of how The pilot could increase vehicle capacity utilization, improve overall community mobility access, increase satisfaction among both existing riders and non-riders, and reduced per trip subsidy over time. All those in favor and any opposed that carries. All right, let’s keep it going, folks.

06:24:14
8.8 8 motion memorandum regarding 2025 community survey. Further discussion and presentation COW 11126. Councelor Karns, would you like to move the motion and speak to it, please? >> Yes, please. Thank you very much. So, uh we had a little bit of a a transitional uh pressure when we uh took on some new new folks and overseeing the 2025 community survey results, which are presented to council every two years.

06:24:40
So the last time we saw our community survey results was in 2023. So this just a little bit of a course correction. So we did receive some information about the results in two parts. One, a preliminary update prior to the budget work. And two, a council information information package which was distributed December 19th, the Friday before the holidays.

06:25:01
uh neither of which uh presented the findings in the same way that we are accustomed to receiving in the past which is the full presentation by deote the consultancy as well as uh information that is very helpful for uh strategic direction and for decision-m processes as well as uh budget funding.

06:25:21
So because we only get this twice, well every two years we only get this every two years. It’s pretty important that we also give the community an opportunity to delegate to it to share their insights. Uh we just heard why we need the insights from the community. It could be around uh scheduling of council.

06:25:37
It could be other priorities. And so because we had not received this in the same um completeness, this is an opportunity for staff to bring this back again to council for council to accept the results of the community survey. We did not accept them. We just advanced them by way of acknowledging them in the in the CIP.

06:25:57
Uh but they were significantly paired down and I think we do definitely need that presentation and discussion. So that is what this helps to usher in by way of support and assistance from both the clerk’s office uh and corporate affairs. So that’s what it’s asking us to do. >> Thank you counselor. Any questions or comments from committee? >> Seeing none. Uh, I agree.

06:26:23
I I really like the um results that we got, you know, going back a couple cycles and uh we’d like to see that uh repeated. It was really useful information and I would like to make sure we have we have everything and we have a good discussion. All right, I’m going to call the vote. Uh and the motion is to direct the head of corporate affairs to bring forward the 2025 community survey results including a presentation of the findings from Deote to a committee of the whole meeting in Q2 2026.

06:26:58
All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay, good progress folks. We will now move to the public works regular items 11.1 vision zero road safety action plan PWS 1326. See we have staff in the room to answer any questions. Does anyone have questions for staff on this item? Councelor Bentovenia.

06:27:34
Thank you chair. Uh question with staff is the uh $300,000 that we’re we’re looking at here. Um this is part of the 2026 budget that was not approved previously. That is a walk-on to the 2026 budget. Is that correct? >> Through the chair to councelor Bentoveny. Yes, that is correct. And it is an upset limit.

06:28:00
So, it’s just asking for council’s endorsement for that upset limit. And again, it was not in the current 2026 approved budget. Second question was, and if my memory serves me right, I don’t know what the exact amount, but it was somewhere in the area of $300,000 that we’ve already spent in the past on some sort of research regarding um vision zero.

06:28:36

No, through the charity council. Not that I’m aware of in the four years the four and a half years that I’ve been here. So unless I don’t I don’t believe we have any record of doing any type of consultation process from a vision zero lens prior to this. >> Okay. I’m going to have to go back and take a look, but I guess uh I’ll come back with my uh with more questions.

06:28:59
Those are my two for now. Thanks. >> Well, uh I I’ll just ask a question. No one else on the board. uh could you just remind committee members uh why we’re doing an in-ear ask at this point and uh you know how the plans had to change? >> Sure. Thank you, councelor. So, just a reminder to council um the reason why we’re coming back to committee today is that originally the automated speed enforcement program was going to assist to um give us the revenue to help move forward with this program. So when that was cancelled at the end of last year, it put us in a position we had already gone through with the budget process. So we didn’t have this money allocated. So what we’re asking for is that funding to be provided uh in year uh so that when the election takes place, staff can continue with this work and bring it back to committee next year. Thank you. >> Thank you very much, Councelor Brentia. Second time. >> Thank you, uh, Chair. Now you’re

06:29:59
recollecting my memory here. That’s great. Um I’m in favor of making sure that we do this correctly and we eliminate obviously accidents and deaths for sure. I mean uh but I guess my my concern is twofold. One >> question we’re looking at spending money now through research. We’re going to be looking at areas that we need to focus on traffic areas and so on and so forth.

06:30:27
what we need to do to reduce um you know incidents. Much of this information we already have and I guess my question is how do we make sure that we’re using those funds in the right aspects of of what we’re looking for without duplicating what we have whether it be through H you know Alton Regional Police or transportation people uh and so on and so forth.

06:30:56
So through the chair to councelor Bentovenia. So what we haven’t done as a as a city is defined what we call emphasis areas and that’s will be part of the process through the consultation review is to go out to stakeholders go to our residents to identify what those key areas are that’s specific to Burlington.

06:31:12
And when those emphasis areas are identified we’ll look at either engineering education or other measures on how we can mitigate fatal and serious collisions. And then just to recap as well, vision zero is already embedded into our Horizon 2050 strategy. So there is identification that we want to reduce fatal and serious injuries on our roadsways.

06:31:32
So this is really just in um response to the larger strategic corporate vision. Thank you for that and I appreciate all that and believe me I’m I’m with you in terms of the safety a aspect the results of whatever we’re going to receive in terms of spending their this this money is not going to be available and again correct me if I’m wrong in uh late Q3 or four of 2027.

06:32:07
So my question is why can’t we wait till the next budget seeing that we’ve spent and people are quite angry but our last budget so why can’t we wait till 2027 which is because of the election it’s actually going to be early. Thank you >> through the chair to councelor Bentovenia.

06:32:29
So this was an asked through the cycling advisory committee to see if there was a way to accelerate the review of this of this process. So in light of the upcoming election, this is the best uh way forward that staff thought that we could at least start the work so that after the election uh knowing that the budget will be delayed because that budget will not be approved until Q1 of 2027.

06:32:50
This just gives us several months head start. If we can bring this sooner than I believe in the report we identify Q4 2027, if we can get it finished before Q4, that’s our that’s our goal. It’s just we just set that target based on the staff availability that we have working in the through the consultation process with the consultant. Thank you.

06:33:11

Thank you councelor Mavvenia. See no other questions on the board here. Could I have a mover for the uh for the motion please? Councelor Charman. Okay. And I’m going to look for any comments. Councelor Charman. Go ahead. >> Uh we’ve been talking about this for a long time.

06:33:29
We started off at the a the region a bunch of years ago. Um we had great hopes that we would have the um the speed cameras. Uh and uh somebody felt they were not the right answer. Um personally I believe that we need to take a significant amount of of of care of the people who live in our communities. Uh and that means taking steps to curb drivers who are driving dangerously uh and make the roads uh designed more effective.

06:34:07
And I can tell you as a cyclist um that you take your life in your hands every time you get on that bike. And we need to uh think differently about that because we are promoting um active transportation. So if it’s not safe, we shouldn’t be promoting it. So I’m I’m up for getting this done and doing as quickly as we can. Thank you.

06:34:35

Thank you, Councelor Benia. >> Thank you, Chair. Again, uh I just want to reiterate I fully support the goal of improving road safety. No question. And that means bike lanes, protected bike lanes. And I’ve always been in a situation where I’ve if we’re going to spend money on bike lanes, we should just do that right the first time with with protected bike lanes.

06:34:56
Having said all that, um just interesting, we talked about when we got these reports. Uh I was fortunate enough to get it well before the holidays and I just happen to have had two drop in sessions and and this came up and everyone feels the same way I feel. It’s very very important to support road safety and we’re not necessarily want to push it back or push it forward, but with results coming in 2027, we could spend the money in the budget cycle coming up in the first quarter of uh Q1 of 2027 and still get all the results when we need to get the results. And after the hike that we had in budget, um you know, I think people are going to feel that yes, we need to do this, but it’s not

06:35:55
going to really change other than getting perhaps the information now, but the report is not going to happen till it might increase it to Q3 of 2027, but we’ll still um it’s easy to throw money at budgets. what I call walking mounts and and I am going to do an exercise for 2026 to see how many times we have actually done this through our reports that get somehow it gets embedded into our and that’s what people look at when they get their tax bill in 2027 when we decide whatever we decide and it’s higher than what they expect and I think it’s important for us to realize yes we need to do this and it’s very important and I have grandchildren that are very young and I’m on the road

06:36:54
as well I don’t ride the bike but I certainly walk with them when they’re driving but timing is everything at this point and uh it really will not affect a whole lot by making the decision in January, February, and still have the results when we need to have the results in 2027. That’s my comment. Thank you.

06:37:24

Thank you, uh, Mayor Midwart. >> Thank you, Chair. I think this is another example of us listening to our community, which is great. We got to tell our cycling committee that we have heard you and uh and the uh safe streets Halton who also delegated if I recall in support of this and uh certainly have gotten feedback from others.

06:37:48
So just want to let community know here’s another example um on our agenda today where we’re listening to your priorities. Uh unfortunately it’s also an example of uh government interference and downloading of costs. We had a way to pay for this with the speed camera revenue. I remain of the view that speeders should pay for poor behavior on our streets, not taxpayers.

06:38:12
And whether this comes through the budget cycle, which has a direct impact on uh on taxes, or reserves, which has an eventual impact as we replenish those reserves. Now it’s everyone else who has to pay to provide safer streets rather than the folks who are causing the streets to be unsafe in the first place. So, uh, I’m an optimist.

06:38:35
I believe one day we will have speed cameras because science and good decision-m will prevail. Uh, it’s not going to be anytime soon. So, in the meantime, it falls to us to uh really put our money where uh our values are, which is we want safe streets, and there’s a cost to that.

06:38:54
And so, uh, we’re we’re going to, um, we’re going to put put the cost where it belongs and make those streets safer. And I’m happy to explain it to residents that may have concerns about it. Uh, the timing is it gets us started now so that some of those measures can be identified and implemented as part of the 2027 budget.

06:39:16
If we wait, uh, we just delay this by, uh, really almost a year, I would say, by the time we can get out and do some of the, uh, some of the actual work to make the street safer. So, the first round is analyze and the rest of it is to install, all of which could have been done through speed camera revenue, which we don’t have now.

06:39:38
Uh but perhaps when once we get to uh trafficcoming measures, the government program will have expanded so that those communities uh that want to put traffic calming measures that they will make good on their commitment to helping us out regardless of whether we had speed cameras turned on or not.

06:39:53
Uh right now we’re not eligible for that funding, but we’ll continue to advocate that we should be. >> Thank you very much. I’ll make my comment now. Uh well, I I agree with your comments, Mayor, and I I won’t um belabor the point of how disappointed I am uh that uh we don’t have the funding source for this and that the you know delays in terms of getting getting this off the ground and uh vision zero has been in our strategic plan for a long time.

06:40:25
But I’m I’m happy with where we are today. And and by the way, you know, as a friendly reminder, this is about more than cycling. It is cycling. Absolutely. And it’s about pedestrians as well and and safe roads for for uh I think it’s safe roads for cars, too. I can zero fatalities. That’s the goal.

06:40:41
Um and uh you know, a dollar today versus a dollar at budget time. We’re doing this transparently with the public uh able to hear us that we want to do this in year because it’s a priority that we get it done sooner than later. This council, if we agree to this, is saying that we agree that this should not wait any longer.

06:41:01
we need to get ahead of this problem and we don’t have to wait for a budget cycle in order to do a one-time expense. So, I don’t see the principle behind uh behind that. I see the principle behind us not waiting any longer to uh bring a communitywide strategy for vision zero. I don’t think it could come any sooner.

06:41:22
And and by the way, as we all know, there is an election between now and the next budget. And that doesn’t mean we should stop doing what this council thinks is right. And so if this council thinks it’s right, I don’t see why we should wait uh at all. And I I hope we have uh great results as a result of this and we can look back someday and go uh many years without a fatality in our community and it will have started with this uh with this action plan.

06:41:51
So councelor Charman second time. Go ahead. >> Thank you for that. I was just thinking about you know a car seat for a child. we spend the money on that. If we have a problem with safety in our home, we fix it. Uh whatever it is, we pay attention to safety and the quality of our lives. And this is important.

06:42:08
So I I I don’t see anybody thinking that us spending money on doing a job to help people save their lives or live uh without injury um is inappropriate. Um and then I’m going to deal with the funding issue. This isn’t a budget discussion. It’s coming out of a capital reserve and we replenish those when we do and it comes out of um you know any any um any any end of year adjustments.

06:42:39
Uh it doesn’t have an automatic effect on next year’s budget. Um so it’s it’s onetime money and we do that every year and I’m okay with that for a really good purpose. So, uh, I totally support this and I don’t want to mislead people about budgets and cost. That is not what this is about.

06:42:57
It’s about doing the right thing and the cost of it is almost negligible. It’s less is about 0.1 of 1% of our annual budget. >> Thank you, Councelor Sherman. Seeing no other comments, I will now call the vote on the following motion. Direct the director of transportation services to initiate the development of a vision zero road safety action plan and approve an upset limit of $300,000 from the capital purposes reserve fund as an in-ear budget request to retain a qualified consultant through a competitive request for proposals process to support the development of the plan as outlined in public works report PWS1326 and direct the director of transportation services to report back to committee of the whole with a completed vision zero road safety action plan and implementation recommendations by Q4 2027. All those in favor

06:43:56
and any opposed that carries. Great progress everyone. Moving to growth management regular items now. 12.1 Heritage Response to Bill 23 phase 2 short list of designation candidates DGM0726. Going straight to questions of staff. Councelor Karns, go ahead. Thank you very much. Uh my first question is related to 1419 Ontario Street. Oh, my apologies.

06:44:25
The first one, 2137 Lakeshore Road. Uh this is the junction pumping station and I’m just concerned that we would be advancing any type of heritage designation on the property when we’re also continuing to look at upgrades that might be needed uh to support all of the infrastructure in the Lakeshore area.

06:44:44
Uh we have a number of holding provisions based exactly on that uh municipal juncture for water and wastewater and we also own the property. So I don’t really see the value in this designation. I’m just wondering if you had some thoughts there. uh to the councelor through the chair. So I did have a note that um you know the notices were sent to the region for this one.

06:45:08
That’s who um I had as the owner in our property management system and we hadn’t heard anything. So no concerns have been brought forward to my attention about any potential upgrades. Um so that’s my response. >> Okay. I’m sure they probably didn’t even find it, but that’s okay. I also wanted to ask about 1454 Birch Avenue.

06:45:26
Uh that has currently been provided with a permit to do some exterior renovations and I’m just wondering how these two pieces will work together. Also noting that we’ve received a correspondence from the homeowners saying that they will take us straight to court. So I’m uh inclined to remove that one as well and just looking for your thoughts >> uh to the counselor through the chair.

06:45:50
Um I am aware that those owners have indicated they don’t um support the designation. So, just to speak to that first, there is the Ontario Land Tribunal process. Um, and they also have the opportunity to um object to what’s called the notice of intention to designate before the OOLT. So, there is a process if they don’t support uh to go through should council proceed with issuing that NOID.

06:46:11
Um, in terms of the permit, I am aware of it. I have been to the property and I spoke with one of the owners at the time. Um, I believe they’re putting an addition kind of to the side, the rear of the property, and I didn’t have any concerns from the heritage perspective. It does appear to be um, a compatible addition.

06:46:27
So, uh, this would not, you know, prevent them from completing that work. >> Okay. I wasn’t able to find the current designation related to the Harry Graham House, which is located at 530 Branch Street. It’s currently operating as a real estate office. Um, do you have any insights on where that one is? It’s not on this list.

06:46:49
It was previously designated as a class C because I think I when I’m looking at the um heritage register on our open data, it skips that. It goes from 518, 524, 574, 620 Brandt. And uh I think what I want to do is actually have some investigation done on 530 and Skip Burge because they’re back to back and the significance on Brandt Street is is quite prominent.

06:47:17

Through the chair to the counselor, I’m just trying to pull that up on the mapping on my end. Um there was uh a large dellisting of properties um >> previously. I think it was around 2012 or 2014 when anything that was not like a grade heritage property was removed. So, um, if your information indicates that it was a C, then it likely was removed from the register.

06:47:38
That being said, that was a classification system we don’t use anymore. We have our Ontario regulation 906 that we follow to evaluate, not an ABCD system as was in place at that time. So, it would be newly assessed. >> Okay. So, just as a followup because I think I’m on my two questions. >> You’re three question.

06:47:58
You’re over three questions. >> Two two properties. >> I think you’ve done three properties now. >> I do three. Okay. Sorry, I didn’t do any hands. Sorry. >> That’s okay. I just have one question. We’ll get right right back to you there if if there’s no others. Um could could you just go, could you just remind us uh what uh what we’re what we’re doing through this motion? We’re not approving anything.

06:48:18
So um what would the timelines anticipated timelines be and what’s the you know cost for us to go ahead and and any responses from from the community so far would be welcome. >> Uh sure to you councelor Nissan. I’ll just kind of take a step back here. Um so there was funding approved towards the end of 2025 in the amount of $75,000 um to look at a phase two of the short list project.

06:48:46
So, uh, last year we looked at 27 properties. Um, most of them were designated. There were a handful that didn’t meet the criteria. So, this would be the same process with, um, potentially 10 properties that are on the list. Um, we would be hiring a, uh, heritage consultant to evaluate them using uh, the Ontario regulation 906 criteria that I mentioned.

06:49:09
So, in terms of this staff report, um we’re not designating any properties today or changing any property statuses. It’s to confirm the list that would be provided to the heritage consultants. Um and again, working through the procurement process to retain them. Um in terms of hearing from the community, I have heard from probably about half of the owners.

06:49:34
There are a handful that I haven’t heard from. Um there are two that uh indicated clearly they aren’t in support. So one was 1454 as councelor Karns mentioned and uh the other property was 1419 Ontario Street. Um there were some owners that did appear to support. So I had a good conversation with uh the reverend at 2464 Dundas Street which is St. John’s Anglican Church.

06:49:58
Um, I also had a good uh conversation with the owners of 5534 GLine. Went to the property and met them there to see it in person and answer their questions. And um, yeah, a couple other by emails as well. I received some questions and, you know, provided more information on the designation process and uh, the financial incentive program.

06:50:20
But in terms of owners who aren’t supportive, it’s really those two that you know clearly wrote to myself as the staff contact and their counselor. Okay, excellent. Thank you, councelor Bentovenia, first time. >> Thank you, chair, and thanks for the presentation. Um, for council, will you be um giving us more information on these properties, whether they are supportive, not supportive, or sort of in limbo? Can we have that for council? >> So, to the counselor, through the chair, there’ll be a report on each um of the properties. So, we had that with with the last report again. and there were the 27 and for everyone there was a report saying here’s the criteria on the architecture these were met these weren’t as well as the history and the context um so that will be a later phase and I think councelor Nissan was asking about the timeline I didn’t quite answer that but um yeah it’ll be another probably month until we get through um the procurement process assuming a

06:51:20
decision is made today um and then the consultants you know would start in the spring and summer to do their research and evaluation and I would hope to try and report back um you know by the end of Q4 of this year if not going into Q1 of next year. >> Thank you councelor Stoy. >> Thanks chair.

06:51:40
So, just for clarity, Chloe, thank you. That the couple of uh properties who’ve expressed a disinterest in being designated, there is an appropriate process that they can go through if they’re not happy with the outcome of the assessment and that the cost for this was has already been dealt with in our budget deliberations last year and there is funding available already.

06:51:58

Uh to the counselor through the chair. Yes, that’s correct. So, there’s the two-step process. They can object to the notice of intention to designate. If council chooses to designate, they can appeal the bylaw to the Ontario Land Tribunal and uh yes, the funding was approved um at the end of 2025.

06:52:15

Thank you. >> All right, I’m not seeing any other questions or unless there are questions. Councelor Curtis, go ahead. >> Uh thanks. I just want to take a separate vote, please, on 1419 Ontario and 1454 Birch. >> Okay, sounds good. That being said, could I have someone move the motion? Maybe councelor Stoalty would like to do that.

06:52:38

Move a motion to take those two out. >> No, just move. >> Yeah, we’ll do a separate vote on those two. So, you’re moving the main the whole motion. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Uh so, uh any any comments uh here? >> Councelor Mento, you’re first. >> Thanks. I just not sure about the um pulling them out for a separate vote.

06:53:06
I mean, it really doesn’t matter. We’re not getting any information on the others. Um so, that’s a concern to me. Otherwise, I’m just going to vote against the whole thing. >> Me, too. >> What uh what information are you looking for? the information I asked whether all these properties I want to hear whether they were okay with it, not okay with it or are still thinking about it.

06:53:30

So, she did answer that. There’s two properties that are not and those are the two that were pulling out. The others are in favor or >> But she did answer that. I did >> she mentioned the uh the Dundash Street property. >> I’m good. >> Okay. Uh, Mayor Midwart, >> thank you.

06:53:49
I support getting uh the information on all of the properties and um, you know, I think the people that live in the homes may benefit from knowing the history as well if they don’t already. Uh, and we know ownership sometimes changes over the years, uh, as it would. Um, I live in a designated house. It was built in 1928.

06:54:07
There’s been lots of different owners over the years. So I think this at this stage we’re just getting information and as we saw the last time um there are uh there’s a we we received recommendations not to designate. So we don’t know just having them on the list and doing the study we don’t know what the um analysis is going to show.

06:54:29
Uh council does tend to support the um the advice that we receive about whether or not they are worthy of designation. And I think the only time um we we designated something recently was when there was kind of split views. We had we had different consultants telling us different things. But um I think it’s really important and incumbent upon us to meet our obligations under the uh Ontario Heritage Act to do our best to preserve built heritage to get the information at the very least and then we’ll have a second opportunity to make a decision. And I hope the folks who uh are concerned at this point realize that we are not designating their property today. we’re getting that information uh and there’s no guarantee that the the result will show that is worthy of designation. It didn’t in the past uh for every property that we had on the list and this is exactly the appropriate process to go to uh through to get the information and then we can make an informed decision. >> Thank you councelor Charman.

06:55:28

Thank you very much. It’s about this time when we’re talking about doing telling taking even the beginnings of a look at a home to see whether it could be heritage or not where I remind people that the only time I will consider designating a home heritage is when the owner says I want that to happen.

06:55:44
Um in my view um a homeowner uh has the right of ownership. They have the right to live and enjoy. uh and um that there’s a significant um impairment uh in terms of economic impact and potential sailability of a house when it is designated. Um and there may be some disagreement about that, but that’s because people are reading the wrong studies.

06:56:10
Um and then you get into it’s getting there. Um and and then and then into that um you know frankly I just will never vote for anybody’s home becoming heritage against their own choice. >> Okay. Thank you councelor Charman and councelor Stoalty. >> Thank you. I just want to reiterate that we’re not making any decisions to designate today.

06:56:36
They were merely getting information and I actually think it’d be irresponsible to not at least get the information then so that we can make an educated and informed decision as can the prop property owners at that time and that to pull any properties at this point achieves nothing more than demonstrating that threats of litigation conquers council decisions which I think is a slippery slope to go down.

06:56:58

Thank you very much. Seeing no other comments I’ll just uh I’ll ditto that councelor Stolty. He said it better than I was going to say it. Uh the heritage act exists for a reason. If if the uh if we only designated properties that people wanted to have designated, then there would be no need for designation in the first place.

06:57:16
The uh the provincial government doubled the level of heritage value required in order to meet the heritage act requirements. So it is a high threshold and uh I agree now would not be the time to pull these items uh out. In fact, uh just like the mayor said, not only the history uh of the properties, but the heritage value um of the property, which is uh a history is only one uh one important element of that.

06:57:45
So, um they may not know. They may not know. We certainly don’t know. That’s why we’re doing this evaluation and we’re paying for it. So that will be on the books and uh and uh I guess there’s apparently there’s some dueling uh evidence about whether this uh is uh a net positive or negative for the value of a person’s home, but I have not seen any uh peer-reviewed reports that state that this is going to cost the homeowner.

06:58:15
So I look forward to receiving those if someone would like to send them to me. Anyone? I look forward to it. Council Karns, >> thanks. Does council have the ability to pull an a house up uh on this or how do we go about doing that in terms of like the short list >> to get information? >> Yeah. So, uh I’m happy to be corrected, but council has the has the right to to change properties if they uh so wish.

06:58:42
As far as I know, I don’t believe the Heritage Burlington Advisory Committee has to be consulted first, but I would recommend that it was before we add other properties on and also that consultation occur with the uh with the homeowner like the the same sort of um information sharing that has occurred. So, >> okay, I’ll uh I’ll maybe bring something for council. Thanks.

06:59:05

Sure, sounds good. Thank you. Okay, I’m going to call the vote on eight of the properties and I will read them out uh now. uh direct the director of community planning to retain a consultant to assess the eligibility of the following properties for potential heritage designation under part four of the Ontario Heritage Act.

06:59:23
Consult the Heritage Burlington Advisor Committee and report back to council with statements explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of qualifying properties prior to January 1st, 2027 on the following eight properties. 2137 Lakeshore Road, 2464 Dundash Street, 1264 Lemonville Road, 5534 G Line, 1391 Ontario Street, 566 Locust Street, 2187 Lakeshore Road,

THIS MEETING CONTINUED ON APRIL 14TH, 2026