[00:00:05] >> I'LL CALL OUR COUNCIL MEETING FOR TUESDAY, [1. Councillor Smith will read the Opening Statement.] MAY 25TH, 2021 TO ORDER. I WILL ASK COUNCILOR SMITH TO PLEASE READ THE OPENING STATEMENTS. >> THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE ACKNOWLEDGES THAT WE ARE LOCATED IN CHIEF DRAG EAST TERRITORY. FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL, IT HAS BEEN THE TRADITIONAL LAND OF THE YELLOWKNIFE STANDING FIRST NATION. AND MORE RECENTLY, THE HOMELAND OF THE NOR SLEEP MEI TI. WE RESPECT THE HISTORIES, LANGUAGES, AND CULTURE OF FIRST NATIONS MEI TI INTO IT, AND ALL FIRST PEOPLES OF CANADA, WHOSE PRESENCE CONTINUES TO ENRICH OUR VIBRANT COMMUNITY. >> THANK YOU. THERE WERE NO AWARD CEREMONIES OR PRESENTATIONS FOR THE AGENDA ADOPTION OF MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING. [Items 3 & 4] MINUTES A COUNCIL FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF MONDAY, MAY 10TH, 2021 ARE PRESENTED FOR ADOPTION. COUNSELOR SMITH. >> I MOVE THAT THE MINUTES COUNCIL FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF MONDAY, MAY 10TH, 2021, BE PRESENTED FOR ADOPTION. >> THANK YOU, SECONDER? COUNSELOR MORRIS, ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT WE HAVE DISCLOSURE PECUNIARY INTEREST IN THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF. THERE'S ANY MEMBER HAVE A PECUNIARY INTERESTS BEFORE COUNCIL TONIGHT? SEEING NONE. THERE WAS NO CORRESPONDENCE, NOR WERE THERE ANY PETITIONS FOR THE AGENDA. THERE WAS NO STATUTORY PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR THE AGENDA. THERE WERE NO DELEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. THERE WERE NO STATEMENTS FOR THE AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY MEMBER STATEMENTS FROM THE FLOOR? NEXT WE HAVE INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION AT COMMITTEE REPORTS. [Items 11 & 12] [NOISE] PARDON ME, COUNSELOR SMITH, IF YOU CAN INTRODUCE THE GPC REPORT FOR MAY 10TH, PLEASE. >> I MOVE THAT COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO DRAW DOWN THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER THE 45,000 IN REVENUE REQUIREMENTS THAT WILL NOT BE MET BY THE SET MILL RATE. >> THANK YOU. IF I CAN GET A SECONDER, COUNSELOR PAIN. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? COUNSELOR MORGAN IN FAVOR. THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. [NOISE] COUNSELOR SMITH PLEASE. [13. Councillor Smith moves, Councillor ____________ seconds, That Council direct Administration to enter into a five (5) year lease with HREIT Holdings 18 Corporation for Unit 7, Condominium Plan C2535 (Centre Square Mall, 5022‐49th Street).] >> I MOVE THAT COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ENTER INTO A FIVE-YEAR LEASE WITH HR EIT HOLDINGS 18 CORPORATION FOR UNIT 7, CONDOMINIUM PLAN C TWO-FIVE, THREE-FIVE CENTRE SQUARE MALL, 50, 22, 49 STREET. >> THANK YOU. IF I COULD GET A SECONDER, COUNSELOR MORRIS, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT WE HAVE GOVERNANCE AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE REPORT FOR MAY 17TH, COUNSELOR SMITH. [Items 14 & 15] >> I MOVE THAT ONE PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2 OF ZONING BY-LAW NUMBER 4404, AS AMENDED, CHARLIE WAITE BE APPOINTED AS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE, AND TWO THE TERM OF APPOINTMENT SHALL EXPIRE UPON TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT WITH THE CITY OF YELLOWKNIFE. >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECONDER? COUNSELOR SILVERIO ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THERE WAS NO NEW BUSINESS FOR THE AGENDA. IS THERE ANY NEW BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR? ENACTMENT OF BY-LAWS, BY-LAW NUMBER 5037, [Items 18 - 20] WHICH IS THE 2021 MUNICIPAL TAX LEVY BY-LAW IS PRESENTED FOR SECOND AND THIRD READING. COUNSELOR SMITH. >> I MOVE SECOND READING OF BY-LAW NUMBER 5037. >> THANK YOU. SECONDED BY COUNSELOR CONGO. COUNSELOR WILLIAMS YOU WANTED TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT? >> YEAH. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I'LL JUST SEND IT OUT RIGHT THIS SECOND TO EVERYBODY. I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT ADMINISTRATION ADJUST THE MILL RATES TO REFLECT A 0.86 PERCENT TAX INCREASE FOR 2021. [BACKGROUND] >> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECONDER? [BACKGROUND] COUNSELOR MORGAN? COUNSELOR WILLIAM. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, EXCUSE ME FOR ONE MOMENT. [NOISE] SORRY ABOUT THAT. [00:05:02] [LAUGHTER] I'D LIKE TO MAKE ONE LAST DITCH EFFORT FOR COUNCIL TO RECONSIDER THE PROPOSED 2.5 PERCENT TAX INCREASE THAT WAS A RESULT OF BUDGET DELIBERATIONS FOR 2021. FIRSTLY, AT THE TIME OF THE DECISION, WE DIDN'T HAVE CONFIRMATION ON GNWT INCREASED TO COMMUNITY FUNDING. WE NOW DO HAVE THAT CONFIRMATION AND WE WERE SUCCESSFULLY AWARDED THAT FUNDING. WE WERE ALSO UNSURE OF THE SUPPORT TO CLEAN SWEEP PROGRAM. AGAIN, THE GNWT STEPPED UP TO THE PLATE AND FULFILL THE COMMITMENTS THAT THEY HAD MADE TO THE CITY. SECONDLY, IF YOU RECALL THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OR THE AUDIT PRESENTATION THAT HAPPENED IN LATE APRIL, IT SHOWED US THAT AS A CITY WE HAVEN'T WEATHERED THE COVID STORM BETTER THAN WE HAD HOPED. IT ISN'T JUST BECAUSE OF FEDERAL CASH, BUT ALSO BECAUSE REVENUES WERE UP 1 PERCENT OVERALL AND EXPENDITURES WERE DOWN 6 PERCENT OVERALL. WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE IN THE YEAR, THE CITY POSTED AN $8 MILLION SURPLUS. I DON'T THINK THAT A 2.5 PERCENT TAX INCREASE FOR THE RESIDENTS IS A PROPER REWARD FOR THEIR RESILIENCE OR THEIR PERSEVERANCE. LASTLY, WHY SHOULD THE TAX INCREASE BE SET FOR 0.86 PERCENT, NOT 2.5 PERCENT? BECAUSE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION FROM ADMINISTRATION. WE, AS A COUNCIL, DECIDED TO PICK 2.5 PERCENT OUT OF THE AIR BASED ON ALL OF THE UNKNOWNS BECAUSE IT FELT RIGHT. WELL, FOR ME TODAY, WE KNOW A LOT MORE. WE CAN SEE THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL, AND A 2.5 PERCENT TAX INCREASE JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT ANYMORE. THEREFORE, I PRESENT THIS MOTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. >> THANK YOU. COUNSELOR MORRIS YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK NEXT? >> I GUESS SO. [NOISE] IT'S MOSTLY JUST THE PROCESS RELATED QUESTION. I JUST KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO RE-INTRODUCE OR REVOTE ON THINGS THAT HAD BEEN VOTED ON ALREADY IN THE PAST SIX MONTHS. I JUST DID LIKE SOME CLARITY FROM THE ADMINISTRATION IF THIS MOTION FALLS INTO THAT CATEGORY OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT'S FINALLY BRING UP BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE QUITE AN EXTENSIVE DEBATE ABOUT THIS SUBJECT AT BUDGET TIME. REGARDLESS OF MY POSITION ON IT, I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF WE'RE ALLOWED TO DEBATE IT AGAIN, THOUGH. >> MISS BASSI-KELLETT >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CERTAINLY, THIS IS COMING AS QUITE A SURPRISE TO ADMINISTRATION. THOUGH THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THERE WERE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE BY A COUNCIL, CERTAINLY IN DECEMBER OF 2020, AND THEN ALSO WHEN WE DISCUSSED THE AUDIT AND WHEN WE BROUGHT FORWARD THAT DISCUSSION ON THE MILL RATES OVERALL IN APRIL. IN TERMS OF THE LEGALITY OF THE PROCEDURAL SIDE, I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE HONORED WHAT COUNCIL HAS DIRECTED US TO DO IN DECEMBER, AND I WILL ASK MS. GILBERT IF SHE WOULD LIKE TO WEIGH IN AND HAVE ANY ADVICE FOR COUNSEL ON THE PROCEDURAL SIDE, AND PERHAPS [INAUDIBLE] AS WELL. >> [NOISE] I'M SORRY, THIS IS MISS GILBERT I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE HAS THERE HAD BEEN ANY IRREVOCABLE ACTION. HOW DOES THAT AFFECT CHANGING IT AT THIS POINT AND STAGE, I'M NOT SURE IF WE NEED TAXATION TO COMMENT ABOUT THIS FOR THE LEGALITIES? >> CAN YOU HEAR ME? IT'S KERRY. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE COUNCIL'S PROCEDURES BYLAWS SO IT MIGHT BE GREAT IF WE NEED TO ANSWER THIS IF WE CAN HAVE A COUPLE OF MINUTES. I KNOW SPECIFICALLY, THE ZONING BYLAW A THE REQUIREMENT IN THERE THAT IF SOMETHING'S BEEN DEBATED AND DENIED, IT CAN'T COME BACK WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT SAME CLAUSE EXISTS IN THE COUNCIL'S PROCEDURES BYLAW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, SO I'M JUST TAKING A LOOK. THAT WOULD BE MY RESPONSE FOR RIGHT NOW SHORT OF MISS WOODWARD HAVING ANYTHING TO ADD >> THANK YOU. IT'S MISS WOODWARD HERE. WHILE KERRY IS HAVING A DEEPER LOOK INTO THAT, IN TERMS OF IRREVOCABLE ACTIONS, I'M NOT SURE WE'RE AT THAT POINT. BUT BASED ON WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THE DIRECTION THAT WAS GIVEN BACK IN DECEMBER ASSUMING THAT THE FUNDING WOULD COME THROUGH WHICH THE FUNDING DID, AND THEN THE DECISIONS OR THE DISCUSSION THAT CAME OUT OF THE MILL RATE AND [00:10:06] SUBSEQUENTLY THE COVID BONUS FUNDING THAT WE RECEIVED SOMEWHAT UNEXPECTEDLY, BUT VERY APPRECIABLY IN 2021, ADMINISTRATION HAS GONE AHEAD AND MADE SCHEDULES AND SO ON TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET OUR TALKS NOTICES OUT ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION ACT. THE LONGER THIS IS DEBATED, IF WE NEED TO GO BACK TO REDO THE CALCULATIONS, WE ARE REALLY COMING UP TO A TIME CRUNCH ON THAT REQUIREMENT IN TERMS OF DELIVERING THE TAX NOTICES. A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THE COUNCIL PROCEDURES, BUT ONE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US, OF COURSE. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THANKS. I [NOISE] APPRECIATE THOSE ANSWERS. I THINK THAT REGARDLESS OF THE ANSWER AS TO WHETHER IT'S A LEGAL THING TO DO, I THINK THAT FOR ME, I REALLY DO CONSIDER IT A BEST PRACTICE TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO REVISIT DECISIONS THAT COUNCIL HAS ALREADY VOTED ON, AND THIS ONE PUTS ME IN A BIT OF A FUNNY PLACE BECAUSE AS FAR AS I RECALL, AND I'M PRETTY SURE I RECALL IT RIGHT, I ENDED UP ON THE LOSING END OF THIS DEBATE. I WAS IN FAVOR OF A LESSER TAX INCREASE, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT COUNCIL MADE A DECISION, AND I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT FOR THE STABILITY OF OUR PROCESSES TO GIVE ADMINISTRATION THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THEIR WORK WITH A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PREDICTABILITY FROM COUNCIL THAT WHEN THE BUDGET IS VOTED ON, WE LEAVE THE BUDGET AT THAT. I THINK THAT THAT'S A BEST PRACTICE FOR A VERY GOOD REASON AND SO I'M NOT COMFORTABLE REOPENING THIS REGARDLESS OF MY POSITION ON IT. I JUST THINK THAT THIS IS A DECISION THAT COUNCIL MADE AND WE NEED TO FOCUS ON DECISIONS THAT ARE BEFORE US, NOT REVISITING DECISIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DEBATED. I THINK THAT'S WHERE I LAND ON THIS. IT HAS COME A BIT UNEXPECTEDLY, AND I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING AS DRASTIC AS RE-DEBATE THE NUMBERS THAT WERE AGREED UPON AFTER BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, WE'D NEED TO HAVE A PRETTY LENGTHY GPDC DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AND GIVE ADMINISTRATION A SIGNIFICANT HEADS UP BECAUSE ALL THEIR WORK PLANNING IS BASED ON THE BUDGET THE COUNCIL SETS. I JUST THINK THAT [NOISE] TO ENSURE THAT WORK CONTINUES EFFICIENTLY IN THE ORGANIZATION, WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT ADMINISTRATION HAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PREDICTABILITY IN THE WORK THAT THEY DO. THOSE ARE MY FEELINGS ON IT. I DO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE COUNCILOR IS COMING FROM THAT'S BROUGHT THE AMENDMENT FORWARD AND I SUPPOSE I SYMPATHIZE WITH THE THOUGHTS, BUT WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NEXT BUDGET. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE AMENDMENTS? COUNCILOR CONNER? >> THANKS. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS. WE DID HAVE A LONG DEBATE AND I CAN UNDERSTAND. I'D LOVE THE TAXES TO BE AS LOW AS POSSIBLE AS WELL, BUT WE HAVE A LOT PROJECTS COMING UP AND NOT EVEN PROJECTS THAT ARE WANT TO. WHEN I SAY WANT TO, I'M TALKING THE POOL. WE COULD LIMP ALONG WITH THE POOL WE HAVE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, BUT WE STILL HAVEN'T GOT ALL OF OUR FUND FOR THE PIPELINE, THERE'S STILL OTHER STUFF THAT HAS TO HAPPEN WITH THAT TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE FRESH WATER. WE KNOW THAT WE'RE IN A POSITION WHERE WE'VE GOT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS COMING DUE FOR REPLACEMENT, SO I DON'T THINK THAT 2.25 PERCENT TAX INCREASE OR WHATEVER 2.5, WHEREVER WE ENDED UP AT, IS TOO ONEROUS FOR PEOPLE AND I'M GOING TO STAY THE COURSE ON THAT, AND I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCILORS? COUNCILOR WILLIAMS, YOU'LL CLOSE, SO COUNSELOR MORGAN? >> THANK YOU, YOUR WORSHIP. I GUESS A QUESTION FOR ADMINISTRATION FIRST. ASIDE FROM HAVING TO CHANGE THE TAX SERVICES THAT MAY ALREADY HAVE BEEN DRAWN UP, WOULD THIS DECISION CHANGE ANYTHING IN ADMINISTRATION'S WORK PLAN BESIDES SHIFTING MONEY OUT OF ONE FUND? WE PLAN TO PUT EXTRA MONEY INTO THE CAPITAL FUND. [00:15:04] IF WE DID VOTE FOR THIS, IS IT JUST A MATTER OF CHANGING WHERE THE MONEY SITS, OR WOULD THIS IMPACT, SAY, PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS OR THE WORK PLAN THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS UNDERWAY FOR 2021? >> MISS BESSI KELLERT? >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE QUESTION. IF I CAN JUST FRAME THIS BY SAYING THAT WHEN COUNCIL DISCUSSED BUDGET 2021 LAST DECEMBER, AND IT CAME DOWN TO A DISCUSSION ON THE PERCENT TAX INCREASE, COUNCIL WAS VERY DELIBERATE AND CONSIDERED, I BELIEVE THAT IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, IT WAS ABOUT THREE OPTIONS AND LANDED VERY CLEARLY ON THIS ONE. THERE IS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF PLANNING THAT'S GONE INTO THAT ASSUMPTION, THAT WE THEN BROUGHT FORWARD, OF COURSE, IN THE MEMO RELATED TO THE MILL RATE AND THEN, OF COURSE, REQUIRED TO SET THE MILL RATE BY A BYLAW WHICH IS FIRST READING WAS TODAY AT NOON AND NOW SECOND AND THIRD. THERE'S AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF WORK RELATED TO THE BYLAW, AND THE SETTING THE MILL RATES AND GETTING THE TAX NOTICES OUT ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION ACT. THERE WOULD BE AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF WORK FOR US TO DO THEN TO RE-CALIBRATE WHERE OUR BUDGET IS AT IF THERE WAS A REDUCTION THAT COUNCIL WAS OPTING TO BRING FORWARD AT THE 11TH HOUR. IT DOES SHIFT A LOT OF THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS MADE BASED ON THE DIRECTION THAT COUNCIL SET IN DECEMBER. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF MOVING PIECES TO THIS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO ADJUST AND RE-CALIBRATE. CERTAINLY, THE BIGGEST POINT OF THIS CHANGE WOULD BE RELATED TO THE TAX NOTICES THAT WE ARE SCHEDULED AND WE'RE LEGALLY REQUIRED TO GET OUT UNDER PADA, AND THEN WE WOULD BE NEEDING TO LOOK AT OUR BUDGET POLICY TO SEE WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS ARE. WE ARE ALWAYS FULLY RESPECTFUL OF COUNCIL'S DIRECTION ON THIS. THIS COMES VERY LATE IN THE GAME, AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY CHALLENGING FOR US TO THINK ABOUT IN TERMS OF HOW WE SHIFT THAT DIRECTION AT THIS TIME. THANK YOU. >> I AM SYMPATHETIC TO THAT, THAT THIS THROWS A MAJOR CURVEBALL TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT GOOD PRACTICE TO GO BACK AND REVISIT PREVIOUS DECISIONS. BUT I ALSO AM AWARE THAT WITH A NUMBER OF ANNOUNCEMENTS AND NEWS ITEMS THAT HAVE COME OUT IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS TALKING ABOUT THE CITY'S SURPLUS AND THE EXTRA COVID FUNDING THAT WE'VE RECEIVED. IT HASN'T SAT WELL WITH LOTS OF CITIZENS TO HAVE HEARD THAT ON A YEAR THAT LOTS OF PEOPLE HAVE STRUGGLED, WE DECIDED TO PUT EXTRA MONEY AWAY TO SAVE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. TO HAVE HEARD A STRING OF ANNOUNCEMENTS RECENTLY OR NEWS ITEMS THAT THE CITY APPEARS TO HAVE THESE SURPLUSES AND IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. I DO THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME REASONS TO GO BACK AND RETHINK WHETHER THAT WAS WISE. I KNOW I VOTED AGAINST THE 2.5 PERCENT INCREASE AT THE TIME, BUT I ALSO AM SYMPATHETIC THAT THAT WOULD PUT THE ADMINISTRATION IN A VERY TIGHT PLACE AT THIS POINT. AS WE DISCUSSED, AS KELLET SAYS, BEING AT THE 11TH HOUR AND BEING UNDER A TIME CRUNCH TO GET THOSE PROPERTY TAX NOTICES OUT. I'M NOT SURE IF COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS HAS ANY RESPONSE TO THAT IN TERMS OF WHETHER YOU THINK THAT IT'S A REASONABLE THING TO ASK ADMINISTRATION AT THIS POINT? >>YEAH. THANK YOU. >> HOLD UP. COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS, YOU'LL CLOSE. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILOR SMITH. >> THANK YOU. I WON'T BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS. I DO RECALL WHEN WE DID DELIBERATE ABOUT THIS BACK IN DECEMBER, WE HAD THREE OPTIONS. ONE WAS A VERY HIGH TAX RATE. THIS WAS SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE AND THEN WE HAD A LOWER ONE. WHEN WE DISCUSS THIS I KNOW THERE WERE A FEW OF US THAT WERE LET'S GO VERY HIGH, HAVE WORST-CASE SCENARIO AND THEN, [00:20:01] IF WE HAPPEN TO GET THE FUNDING, THEN IT'S YAY. THEN THERE WERE SOME OF US WHO WERE LIKE, WELL, LET'S GO IN THE MIDDLE BECAUSE EVEN IF WE DO GET THE FUNDING AT LEAST IT'S A REASONABLE AMOUNT, THAT IT'S NOT TOO HIGH FOR EVERYBODY, BUT WE DO HAVE PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD. WHAT'S THAT STORY ABOUT THE ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER, SAVING FOR THAT RAINY DAY AND THAT RAINY DAY IS GOING TO COME. THE END OF UT HAS BEEN REALLY LUCKY IN TERMS OF COVID AND THE PANDEMIC AND HAVING BEEN ABLE TO SURVIVE, BUT THERE WILL COME A TIME WHEN WE WILL STRUGGLE AND THAT LITTLE BIT OF FUNDING THAT WE DO HAVE FROM THE TAX RATE WILL HELP US OUT. THERE ARE THINGS COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE AS COUNCILOR CONNER HAS SAID. WE NEED TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WELL. IT'LL BE GREAT TO GIVE PEOPLE A LITTLE BIT OF A BOOST, BUT WE DO ALSO HAVE TO RECOGNIZE THAT AS THE CITY, WE ALWAYS HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE FAILING. WE ALWAYS HAVE SOMETHING THAT GOING TO POP UP AND THAT FUNDING, WE ARE GOING TO NEED IT. AGAIN, WHEN WE DELIBERATED, IT WAS EITHER GO REALLY HIGH, GO REALLY LOW AND WE DECIDED TO PLAY SAFE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. I WOULD LIKE TO STAY THE COURSE. >> THANK YOU. WE ACTUALLY DELIBERATED ON SIX OPTIONS, I WAS JUST TRYING TO FIND IF WE COULD CIRCULATE THAT ONE AGAIN BECAUSE OPTION ONE WAS IF WE RECEIVE ALL THE FUNDING, BUT WE JUST DO THE SMALLER TRANSFERRED TO CAPITAL THEN THE TAX RATE WAS GOING TO BE 0.89 PERCENT. THEN OPTION 6 WAS THAT WE RECEIVE ALL THE FUNDING, BUT WE WOULD DO A LARGER TRANSFER TO CAPITAL AND THAT GAVE US THE 2.5 PERCENT. FOLKS HAVE TALKED ABOUT A FEW OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS, BUT BOTH ARE POINTING AT 0.89 PERCENT AND THE 2.5 PERCENT WERE WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE WERE GOING TO GET ALL THE FUNDING, THE COVID FUNDING, THE MANDATE FUNDING, AND THE STREET OUTREACH FUNDING. NEXT ON THE LIST, I HAVE COUNCILOR PAYNE. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. I'LL BE SUPPORTING IT AS ADMINISTRATION HAS PUT IT FORWARD. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH STACIE AND WITH NIELS ON THIS. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF SPENDING THIS UPCOMING YEAR AND THE YEAR AFTER AND PROBABLY FOR THE NEXT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF MONEY PUT ASIDE IN THE LITTLE SOCK DRAWER IS, IN MY MIND, A SMART THING TO DO. IF WE HAVE A REALLY LOW TAX INCREASE THIS YEAR, THEN WE'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE THESE BIGGER TAX INCREASES AS THE YEARS GO BY, SO 2.5 NOW IS PRETTY MANAGEABLE. I DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE HAPPY WITH A FIVE, OR SIX, OR SEVEN. I'M HAPPY WITH THE WAY IT IS AND I'LL BE STICKING WITH WHAT WE AND ALL VOTED ON ORIGINALLY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. COUNCILLOR MUFADZAEDZA. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR WORSHIP. I TOO WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT PRESENTED BEFORE US BECAUSE WHEN WE DID DELIBERATE, LIKE MAYOR ALTY MENTIONED, WE DID WORK WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE WOULD BE GETTING THE FUNDING AND THAT WAS WHAT WE VOTED ON. I PRETTY MUCH WOULD STAND WITH MY VOTE ON GOING WITH THE CURRENT RATE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, SO I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE AMENDMENT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS BEFORE I'LL SPEAK AND THEN COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS? >> FOR MYSELF TOO, I'LL BE CONTINUING TO SUPPORT THE 2.5 PERCENT. TO KNOW WE DID GET EXTRA FUNDING, BUT AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE ALLOCATED IT TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS. THAT WAS TO SUPPORT BUSINESS ENHANCEMENTS, TO EXTEND THE WASHROOMS TILL DECEMBER, TO HAVE THAT EXTRA COMMUNICATIONS AND POLICY SUPPORT. IF WE WANTED TO REDUCE THIS YEAR'S TAXES, WE SHOULD HAVE USED THAT FUNDING AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING MORE PROJECTS ON OUR WORK LIST. TO REITERATE, THE MAIN REASON I SUPPORTED THE 2.5 PERCENT IN DECEMBER IS BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A BALANCE BETWEEN OUR SHORT-TERM NEEDS AND LONG-TERM NEEDS: THE NEED TO MAINTAIN OUR ASSETS, THE SOLID WASTE FACILITY, THE WATER, AND SEWER ACIDS, ALL OF OUR CORE SERVICES. OUR 10-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN FORECASTS SOME MAJOR SPENDING IN ALL OF OUR CORE SERVICES. IN FACT, SINCE OUR DISCUSSION IN DECEMBER, IT'S GROWN EVEN MORE BECAUSE WE KNOW NOW THAT IT WILL COST AT LEAST 3.2 MILLION TO EXPAND AND RENOVATE THE FIRE HALL AND THAT EXPENSE WASN'T THERE IN DECEMBER. IF WE THOUGHT THAT OUR CAPITAL NEEDS OVER [00:25:03] THE NEXT 10 YEARS WERE HIGH IN DECEMBER, IT'S GROWN SINCE. THE ASSET MANAGEMENT WORK, WE'VE DISCUSSED A LOT THIS MONTH, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A FEW MORE OF THOSE SKELETONS COMING OUT OF THE CLOSET OF, DIDN'T REALIZE, BUT WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO INVEST MORE IN X, Y, AND Z AND ASSETS. I REMAIN SUPPORTIVE OF THE RATE THAT'S PRESENTED. IT'S A MODEST INCREASE THAT WILL HELP ENSURE THAT WE CONTINUE TO DELIVER OUR CORE SERVICES THIS YEAR AND CAN HELP DECREASE THE NEED TO HAVE A BIG SPIKE IN TAXES IN THE COMING YEARS AS WE NEED TO MAINTAIN AND UPGRADE OUR CORE SERVICES. WITH THAT, COUNCILLOR WILLIAMS, TO CLOSE. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS THAT COUNCILLORS HAD. TO COUNCILLOR MORGAN, WHERE SHE HAD ASKED ABOUT WHETHER I THOUGHT THIS GIVEN OR GRANTED THE ADMINISTRATION ENOUGH TIME. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WAS UNDER THE MISUNDERSTANDING` OF HOW UNHAPPY I WAS AROUND BUDGET TIME ABOUT THE DECISION THAT WE CAME TO. AT THE TIME MADAM CHAIR HAD BROUGHT UP THAT IF I WANTED TO BRING UP MY CONCERNS THAT THIS WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT. I'VE MARKED MY CALENDAR AND HERE I AM. APOLOGIES IF THAT'S NOT IN THE TIME THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD LIKE, BUT I'M UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT COMES BEFORE COUNCIL AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SECOND READING. THAT IS THE OPPORTUNITY THAT COUNCILLORS HAVE TO EXPRESS THEIR DISAGREEMENT WITH SAID MOTION AND I'M SORRY I DIDN'T SIGNAL SUCH DISSATISFACTION FOR THE LAST SIX MONTHS. I GUESS I'D MAYBE GOTTEN OVER IT AND KNEW THAT THIS DAY WOULD COME, SO I WOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS MY THOUGHTS, AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE. I HOPE THAT THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. A LOT OF DISCUSSION WAS ABOUT RAINY DAYS SAVING. I IMAGINED A LITTLE PIGGY BANK AND CUTELY THROWING DOLLAR IN. I THINK THAT'S FINE FOR PEOPLE'S HOMES AND HOW THEY RUN THEIR OWN PERSONAL LIVES, BUT I'M NOT SO SURE THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY THAT A GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO BE RUN. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WE STILL ARE A GOVERNMENT THAT IS ACCOUNTABLE TO PEOPLE AT THE END OF THE DAY. IF COUNCIL SINCERELY WANTED TO SAVE FOR AN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT FOR A RAINY DAY, WE HAVE THAT MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE FUND OR BUDGET TIME, I'D ALSO BROUGHT IT UP AND I'D SAID, "HEY, IF WE WANTED TO TAKE THE ADDITIONAL $300,000 AND SAVE IT FOR A RAINY DAY, THEN LET'S BE ACCOUNTABLE AS GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, PUT A SPECIFIC GOAL, ATTACH IT TO THAT FUNDING, AND THEN PUT IT AS PART OF OUR PLAN." THIS WHOLE IDEA OF JUST EXTRA DOLLARS SLOSHING AROUND FOR UNKNOWN RAINY DAYS OR UNALLOCATED PROJECTS IS SOMETHING I'M NEVER GOING TO SUPPORT. IF IT COMES DOWN TO IT THIS BUDGET TIME, AGAIN, IT'S TO US TO MAKE DECISIONS ON SPECIFIC DOLLARS THAT WE TAKE FROM THE PUBLIC AND ATTACH THEM TO PROJECTS OR SERVICES THAT WE DELIVER TO THOSE PEOPLE. AGAIN, THAT RAINY DAY THING. FURTHER TO THE RAINY DAY, WE ALWAYS, AND I'M GLAD MY COLLEAGUE, COUNCILOR KONGE, CALLED OUT THE POOL AND ACTUALLY SAID IT BY NAME. I WAS ACTUALLY SURPRISED BECAUSE I'M, AS A COUNCILOR RIGHT NOW, UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE POOL DECISION IS GOING TO NEED FUNDING, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO BORROW. THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING OUT FOR A REFERENDUM. AGAIN, THIS IDEA OF SOMEHOW TAKING 2020 TAX REVENUE OR 2021 TAX REVENUE AND PUTTING AWAY IN THE KITTY SO THAT THE FINANCIAL ASK TO THE TAXPAYER IN 2020, MAYBE IT'S 2021, MAYBE IT'S 2022, MAYBE IT'S 2023, THAT EVENTUALLY HAS TO TAKE ON THE BURDEN OF THE POOL, THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PRESENTING THEM WITH THE ACTUAL DECISION IN FRONT OF THEM. A $52 MILLION POOL, IF IT'S GOING TO COST $52 MILLION, LET'S HAVE A COST $52 MILLION AND LET'S TAKE IT TO A VOTE. THIS IDEA OF HAVING EXTRA FUNDS TO COVER THESE COSTS WITHOUT HAVING THE PEOPLE SAY WHETHER OR NOT THEY EVEN WANT SAID FACILITY SEEMS LIKE CART BEFORE PONIES IN THE BIGGEST WAY POSSIBLE. I THINK IT'S TOTALLY DISRESPECTFUL TO THOSE THAT MAY NOT BE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH A LARGE EXPENDITURE USING THEIR TAX DOLLARS. [00:30:02] I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE RESPECTFUL FOR THAT. I HEARD, AGAIN, THE LATE IN THE GAME COMMENT FROM MS. BASSI-KELLETT, SORRY, I DON'T CONTROL WHEN THE MOTION COMMENTS AND I DON'T CONTROL WHEN THE SLIPS ARE PREPARED. I'VE SIMPLY BEEN ELECTED AS A COUNCILOR AND TODAY IS 2ND READING, SO I'VE DECIDED TO SHARE MY THOUGHTS WITH MY FELLOW COUNCILORS AT 2ND READING. IT APPEARS IT'S GOING TO FAIL, BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME OUT AND I WILL SEE YOU-ALL AT BUDGET 2020. >> PERFECT. THANK YOU. JUST TO NOTE, IT'S NOT FUNDS IN A SLUSH FUND. ALL THE FUNDS HAS BEEN HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED TO SPECIFIC THINGS. IT'S A TRANSFER TO CAPITAL, SO IT GOES TO THE CAPITAL FUND, WHICH THEN SUPPORTS OUR 10-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN. IT'S TRUE THAT THE DOLLARS AREN'T SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SUBMARINE INTAKE LINE OR THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT'S CELL, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT IT'S NOT UNRESTRICTED. IT'S A CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAPITAL FUND. WITH THAT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT? OPPOSED? THAT'S DEFEATED WITH COUNCILORS WILLIAMS, MORGAN, AND SILVERIO IN FAVOR. TO THE 2ND READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5037, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILOR WILLIAMS AND SILVERIO OPPOSED. COUNCILOR SMITH, 3RD READING PLEASE. >> I MOVE 3RD READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5037. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? COUNCILOR PAYNE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? COUNCILOR SILVERIO, IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED? >> OPPOSED. >> THAT CARRIES WITH COUNCILOR WILLIAMS AND SILVERIO OPPOSED. [Items 21 - 23] BYLAW NUMBER 5038 IS THE 2021 SCHOOL TAX BYLAW. IT'S PRESENTED FOR A 2ND AND 3RD READING. COUNCILOR SMITH. >> I MOVED 2ND READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5038. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? COUNCILOR PAYNE. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILOR SMITH. >> I MOVE 3RD READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5038. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? COUNCILOR MUFANDAEDZA. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. BYLAW NUMBER 5039 IS A BYLAW TO AMEND FEES AND CHARGES [Items 24 - 26 & 28 (Part 1 of 2)] BYLAW NUMBER 4436 AS AMENDED BY AMENDING PARTS 1, 4, AND 12 OF SCHEDULE B TO REFLECT COMMUNITY SERVICES USER FEE CHANGES APPROVED IN BUDGET 2021, AND IMPLEMENTING MINOR FEE ADJUSTMENTS TO REFLECT CURRENT SERVICES. IT'S PRESENTED FOR 1ST, 2ND, AND 3RD READING. COUNCILOR SMITH, 1ST READING, PLEASE. >> I MOVE FIRST READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5039. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? [INAUDIBLE] ON THE FLOOR? [LAUGHTER] COUNCILOR PAYNE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. TO 2ND READING PLEASE. >> I MOVE 2ND READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5039. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? COUNCILOR SILVERIO, ANY COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILOR MORSE, YOU WERE IN FAVOR, RIGHT? YEAH. BYLAW NUMBER 5023 BE PRESENTED FOR 3RD READING. COUNCILOR SMITH? [27. Councillor Smith moves, Councillor ____________ seconds, That By‐law No. 5023 be presented for Third Reading.] >> I MOVE THAT BYLAW NUMBER 5023 BE PRESENTED FOR 3RD READING. >> THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECONDER? COUNCILOR SILVERIO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? SORRY. COUNCILOR WILLIAMS, YOU'RE IN FAVOR? YEAH. CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. TO 3RD READING, PLEASE. [Items 24, 25, & 28 (Part 2 of 2)] >> I MOVE 3RD READING OF BYLAW NUMBER 5039. >> THANK YOU. SECONDER? COUNCILOR KONGE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? [00:35:09] THAT CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THERE WAS NO DEFERRED BUSINESS AND THERE WERE NO TABLED ITEMS FOR THE AGENDA. IS THERE ANY DEFERRED BUSINESS OR ARE THERE ANY TABLED ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WAS NO OLD BUSINESS FOR THE AGENDA. IS THERE ANY OLD BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WERE NO NOTICES OF MOTION FOR THE AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY NOTICE OF MOTION FROM THE FLOOR? THERE WERE NO DELEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. THERE WERE NO ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRIES FOR THE AGENDA. ARE THERE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE INQUIRIES FROM THE FLOOR? SEEING NONE, IF I CAN GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOVED BY COUNCILOR SMITH, SECONDED BY COUNCILOR SILVERIO. ANYBODY OPPOSED? SEEING NONE, SEE EVERYBODY NOT NEXT MONDAY. IT'S THE 5TH MONDAY OF THE MONTH. THE 1ST MONDAY OF JUNE. HAVE A GOOD WEEK, EVERYBODY. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.