- Welcome to my office.
- Thank you.
- My phone's checked from council chambers.
Mr. Chima, can you hear remotely?
- Yes. - Okay.
- Thank you very much.
- Okay, if everyone grabs their spots,
we're about to start.
- Hey, welcome.
This is the third meeting of audit committee.
The city of London is situated on the traditional
lands
of the Nashback, Haudenosaunee, Lenapawak,
and Anawandran.
We honor and respect the history, languages,
and culture, the diverse indigenous people
who call this territory home.
The city of London is currently home
to many First Nation, Métis, and Inuit today.
As representatives of the people of the city
of London, we are grateful to have the
opportunity
to work and live in this territory.
The City of London is committed to making every
effort
to provide alternate formats and communications
reports
for meetings upon request.
To make a request specific to this meeting,
please contact accessibility@london.ca or 519-661
-2489
extension 2425.
Everyone's information, I'm joined in chambers
by Councillor Cuddy and Stevenson.
Councillor Pribble will not be joining us today.
and Member Chima will need to leave around 1.1.30
.
With that in mind, Member Chima,
there is a matter for a confidential session.
Do you have a preference if you want to change of
order
to deal with that before your departure?
- But preferably if it's going to be a permit to
you.
- No, it will have quorum for all of it
as long as Councillor Cuddy and Stevenson stay
with me.
I have chuckles, I assume that means yes.
So it was just respecting that you're the one off
site
and you have a time constraint.
Would you prefer the agenda as it's laid out
or confidential first.
- Adult purpose, whatever works best as we have
planned.
- Okay, I'll proceed with agenda as it's laid out
then
as we will have quorum.
Okay, looking to committee members
for disclosures of security interest.
I have none in chambers, I've seen none online.
Consent, we have none, scheduled items we have
none.
Takes us to items for direction.
Up first, we have the 2025 financial audit.
It would have a staff or review,
the presentation from 15 to 20 minutes,
and then the findings.
Could I have a mover to get this on the floor,
and then we'll start with the staff presentations
.
Moved by Councillor Cuddy,
seconded by Councillor Stevenson.
I will go to City staff to frame it up for us,
and then Ms. Danbock, as always,
the five minutes does not work,
so you will have 15 to 20,
and I see no objections from committee.
So when it comes to your turn,
you can grieve between sentences
unlike before what I've done to you.
City staff, Mr. Collins, Ms. Berbone, all yours.
- Thank you, Chair, through the committee,
or through the Chair to the committee,
just wanna quickly highlight what was contained
in the package related to the 2025 Financial
Presentations
in 4.1A.
And consistent with years prior,
the overview of the 2025 Financial Statements
provides why we're presenting it.
And in accordance with section 2941 of the
Municipal Act,
we also break down the statements contained
within our consolidated financial statements,
recognizing that our financial statements
represent the consolidated entity of the city of
London,
which includes our 14 boards and commissions,
three proportionately consolidated entities
and three government business entities.
So 561 binder or a PDF document that you have
received
is very full, some containing a number of the
boards
and commissions of the city of London.
Just wanted to highlight in our slide deck
what comprises our statement of financial
positions,
our financial assets in 2025 increased by 281.2
million
related to predominantly for an increase
in our portfolio investments,
as well as long-term receivables
related to development charge deferral
and alternative payment arrangements
in regards to development charges.
On that note, our financial liability is also
increased
by 47.3 million.
Nor will be due to deferred revenue increases
from development charges, deferral,
and alternative payment arrangements,
as well as long-term debt that we issued in 2025.
Overall, from a financial position,
our net financial assets increased $233.9 million
.
The non-financial assets,
which is predominantly the city's infrastructure,
our tangible capital assets,
increased by $252.6 million.
At the end of the year,
the city had an accumulated surplus
486.6 million in accordance with Public Sector
Accounting Standards.
One of the items that we like to highlight for
Audit Committee and for Council is some of the
notable capital projects that were recognized in
2025 or were capitalized onto the city's
financial
statements. So just to highlight some of those
major items, we had the East London Link and
Municipal Improvements Phase 3C at Library Avenue
capitalized at 25.9 million. We rebuilt the
incinerator at Greenway, recognized 22.8 million
capitalized. There was work done on Colonel
Tablet Road, the East London Link Phase 3A West,
Dundas Street, 11.4 million, and work
on Oxford Street West, Gideon Drive, intersection
improvement, 7.5 million. What we always tend
to highlight are the assets that the city assumes
based on subdivision agreements coming
through from developers. So we'll be at line 61.9
million dollars of work that were capitalized
onto the city's books, comprising of increased
roadways,
sidewalks, street lights, and the underground
infrastructure
such as water pipes, sanitary pipes, and storm
sewers.
Moving off from the financial statement,
we go to the statement of operations.
And in 2025, our revenues increased $185 million
over 2024.
That's predominantly attributed to municipal
taxation.
we had an 8.5% tax levy increase,
tax 7.3% from rates,
but we also took an additional funding
from other levels of government,
as well as development charges revenue earned.
We also had an increase in our expenditures
related to accounting for non-vested sick leave,
impacting general government,
increases evident in protection to persons and
property,
as well as environmental services,
such as the number of winter events
that the city underwent in 2025.
That left us with an accounting surplus of 45.7
million
over the prior year increase.
We also look at taking an opportunity
to revise how we reconcile back to the multi-year
budget,
particularly the 2025 year.
And we recognize that there are main differences
related to amortization and how we account for
reserve funds.
The reason why we had a surplus in 2025
was an increase in investment income recognized,
transfer payments from other levels of government
,
development charge revenue realized
exceeding prior experience,
and then that was offset with some,
or also contributed to it,
was lower anticipated expenses in general
government,
protection to persons and property,
and social and family services lower expenditures
.
We go on to identify within our financial
highlights,
Some of the indicators that we look at,
and I've just highlighted one about seven
indicators
where we look at our amount of tax rears
that we have outstanding.
The total amount of long-term debt,
our debt principal payments,
our tangible capital asset additions,
our annual surplus and assessment growth,
we compare that to our five-year average.
Following that, as mentioned earlier,
we do a comparison to the 2025 multi-year budget
with the public sector accounting standards
budget
that you see in the financial statements,
highlighting amortization, debt principal
payments,
capital reserve funds and what have you.
And then we do a reconciliation that goes back
to the year-end monitoring report
that council would have received back on April 20
th, 2026,
where there was reported $24.5 million surplus,
which was then allocated based on council's
surplus deficit policy.
We then look to add back items to make it an
alignment
with the public sector accounting standards
to get to the $463.7 million surplus that's
outlined
in the city's consolidated financial statements.
And finally, where do we go from here?
From city's finances end, we truly want to
acknowledge
that the way that we were able to complete
your 2025 financial statements
reflects a strong collaboration
between the number of boards and commissions
that we have at the city,
as well as a lot of our internal parties,
such as legal, human resources, ITS,
as well as all the service areas who contribute
to compiling this information in accordance
with public sector accounting standards.
I also want to take to the opportunity to
recognize
that there are opportunities for continuous
improvement.
KPMG will highlight two audit committee,
some of their audit findings,
and financial services recognizes that there's
additional
training and awareness required within financial
services
to ensure that public sector accounting standards
are understood, and the timing of information
corresponds with the correct fiscal year.
So with that, I'd like to turn it over to KPMG
to present their audit findings report.
And from that, we hope that this will go to
council
to approve the consolidated financial statements
so that we can make the final version available
to the public in July, end of July,
once we receive sign off.
Thank you.
- Thank you to committee members
and visiting councilor Troso.
If you have questions, just hold them on top of
the presentation and if you note page number or
whatnot, just take note of that as some of the
information and back documents are extensive.
I'll also note that on some items that were
coming up. There are delegation requests from Mr.
Wallace who is enjoying our company for the full
day.
So I do take note of that and thank you for
staying with us. Ms. Danbach, the floor is yours
when you're ready.
There's a presentation going on screen, so just
toggle at will so you can see it.
Thank you very much for having us here.
And through to you, Madam Chair,
we'd like to walk you through the highlights
of our audit findings report.
We do appreciate the extra time that you've given
us
and we'll try to be succinct and focusing
on the things we think are most important for you
to hear.
Just before we get started,
I wanna make sure everyone is following along
with the right version of our report.
So you will see in the agenda at 4.1.B
was our initial findings report as of May 29th
that had some procedures.
We were still working on at that time and in
performing our procedures over the consolidation
of the boards and commissions into the city's
financial statements.
We did identify further audit differences that we
were required to communicate with you. So that's
where you will see we have provided an amended
report as of June 10 thought has been included as
item 4.1 point B a.
This is the most up-to-date version, and this is
what we'll be walking through with you
today. And I believe it starts on page 615 of
your amended package. So I just wanted to make
that clear and also to say that as we walk
through the page numbers that we will be
referring to
are the ones in our report at the bottom right
hand side, just so everyone's clear. So with that
,
just want to briefly remind everyone this report
contains everything that we are required to
to communicate with you in your governance roles
over the external audit process.
So the required communications
under Canadian auditing standards,
as well as other items that we feel
you should be aware of in that role.
We've included some highlights here about Melissa
and Emily are gonna go through those
in a little bit more detail.
So I won't touch on them on this slide
specifically.
But I did also wanna mention the status of the
audit.
So our audit is substantially complete
with a few procedures remaining.
As of the date of this report,
we actually have a few more we can cross off
today,
including grant revenue, deferred revenue,
and the procedures over the consolidation work
book.
And then other than that,
we have a few remaining procedures
over investments to TCA, legal and journal entry
testing,
as well as final reviews and sign-offs of our
file,
having our conversations with the committee here
today
and obtaining evidence of council's approval
of the financial statements.
And at that point, we will issue
our standard management representation letter
and we'll be able to finalize our work
and anticipate issuing a clean
or an unmodified auditor's report.
- Okay, so the next few pages focus on areas
that we wanted to highlight from the audit.
So beginning on page six,
this highlights prepaid expenses.
So for the end of the year, December 31st, 2025,
total prepaid expenses are around 45 million.
We did not identify any risks of material
misstatement relating to prepaid expenses.
However, given that it is material quantitatively
,
we do perform procedures over this caption.
And during our testing over prepaids,
it was noted that a payment for one of the items
picked up for testing did not occur until January
2026 and
did not relate to 2025. And as a result, the
prepaid expenses
and accounts payable and accrued liabilities were
overstated by
approximately 2 million. This was left uncorrect
ed in the
consolidated financial statements and further
information on
this can be seen further down in the uncorrected
misstatement
and on page 13. Moving on to page 7 for loans and
long-term receivable at the
end of 2025 the total amount of loans and long-
term receivables were around
132 million for the consolidated entity and this
is primarily made up of three
items so loans receivable deferred development
charges and alternate
payment arrangements and mortgages receivables.
We did identify risks of
the material misstatement for these,
which are noted on this slide,
but based on the procedures performed,
we don't have any matters to report here.
However, we did want to bring this to your
attention
relating to the Bill 17 amendments that took
place,
impacting development charges.
There were changes enacted for long-term care
homes
effective in June of 2025,
and for other development charges effective in
November of 2025.
The long-term care homes became exempt
from development charges,
which resulted in amounts outstanding at June
2025
of approximately 5.5 million being removed
from the loans and long-term receivable,
balance and deferred revenue.
However, the more significant change was in
November,
in which interest can no longer be charged
on these long-term receivables,
which are payable over the course of six years.
In November 2025, starting at that point,
the impact of the measurement has been considered
to be appropriate, and we don't have any other
matters
to report with respect to this area.
Page nine, there's not really too much
on our other financial reporting matters.
The presentation and disclosure
of the consultant financial statements
have been determined in accordance
with the required standards,
and there's no other items to report here.
- We provide additional detail
on the uncorrected misstatements on page 11,
but on page 10 this summarizes the total impact
of these,
just noting that these are not considered to be
material
to the financial statements and have no effect
on our auditor's report.
Moving down to page 11,
this first item was discussed in detail by Emily.
So the next two items relate to consolidation
adjustments.
The first relates to audit adjustments
made to the financial information of the
component.
after preliminary information had been provided
to the city.
And then the other adjustment relates
to an error identified by management
relating to the prior period,
which was corrected through 2025.
So the statement of financial position
and accumulated surplus are correct at your end.
This is just the income impact
from the out of period adjustment.
On page 12, this provides information
on what is considered a controlled efficiency
or would elevate to a significant deficiency.
On page 13, we noted some control deficiencies.
In terms of the first item,
there was a lack of clarity surrounding
revenue treatment for government transfers,
which led to an overstatement of revenue
and an understatement of deferred revenue
in the current period.
However, we do note that this error was less
than our audit misstatement posting threshold,
but could be to further errors
have left unaddressed in future years.
For the second item,
newer staff in the payroll department lacking
training
in year-end cut-off procedures.
This led to an overstatement of the prepaid
expenses
and accounts payable and accrued liabilities,
the statement that Emily had noted,
and again, if left unaddressed,
could lead to further errors.
Management has developed plans
to address these deficiencies,
as has been noted on this page.
The next few pages discuss our commitment to
quality
and how we deliver it.
So I'm going to skip to page 17.
During our presentation of the audit planning
report,
We noted certain indicators of audit quality
that we would report back on.
So these have been included on this page
and noting nothing to report
or that has come up as a result of these items.
On page 18, this is just to confirm
that we are independent of the city,
which then brings us to our appendices.
These include our required communications,
the draft auditor's report,
an engagement letter amendment
and the management representation letter,
just noting that the engagement letter amendment
was to address additional communication
requirements
due to a new auditing standard that came up this
year.
And then the management representation letter
includes the uncorrected misstatements discussed
earlier
in our report.
And that concludes our presentation.
- Thank you, Ms. Demok.
Anything to add on before we proceed?
- No. - Okay.
- I'll note that we're also joined online by Coun
cillor Frank.
items moved and on the floor looking to see if
there's a speaker's list of questions.
Member Chima, if at any point you have a question
, just raise your hand. I'm watching my screen
and I will prioritize you as you're on your tight
time frame. So, I will start my speaker's
list with Member Chima. Thank you, Member Chima.
So, just a quick question on the deficiency. So,
great financial progress overall. And just
clearly on this, is it? I turn over vacancy issue
.
with both of those controlled efficiencies
related to training and origin of your staff.
I will start with the City of London staff and
then anyone else.
Through the chair to committee, with respect to
the finding related to the cut off issue with
respect to payroll, it has to do with newer staff
.
The issue came about on December 24th in their
ace to get a payment in.
they brought it down and when it was realized
that was brought down it looked to be a prepaid
expense so we wanted to account for it correctly
however it was for a payment that would have been
due in January of 2026 so it should have been
recognized in 2026 not as a prepaid expense in
2025
so we are looking to hone our training material
particularly with payroll as they make a number
of remittances to other levels of government like
CRA and whatnot. So it is
training and we are looking and are addressing it
. Thank you. Mr. Chiba.
We should that this of all and this this mark on
I just curious in terms of the
budgeting and resource allegation to the finance
department because yeah there's
There's not a question just to comment, it's not
more, it's not the individual specifics.
It's more of if we have the right resources, the
right skill set in some of those union
roles and if there's any key person risks that
are coming out of these kind of things.
Mr. Collins or Ms. Brabant to respond.
Through the chair to committee, this one
deficiency related to payroll is the first time
that
we've experienced it or have been flagged.
And it was mainly attributed to a turnover
with some of the more experienced staff
taking on other new opportunities within the city
and bringing on new staff within our payroll area
,
which may not have been as fluent on accounting
practices
versus their subject matter expertise being
payroll,
which is different in processing pay
from processing and accounting for things
in accordance with public sector accounting
standards.
So we've taken note and we will be enhancing our
training.
Thank you.
- Thank you, Mr. Chima.
- Appreciate that, thank you.
- Councillor Stevenson.
- Thank you for that.
And that answered part of my question.
In here it sounded like the entry went
from prepaid to liability,
which seems, you know, for those of us who know
that's not good, but now it was clarified there
that that was a subsequent reallocation.
So that makes a lot more sense.
My question is a general one around reviewing
entries
and stuff like that, so not specifically
even around new people, but what is the general
practice
around review and authorizing of entries?
- Thank you, just to stop.
- Through the chair to committee,
when it comes to journal entries,
there are about three checkpoints.
There is the producer of the journal entry
based on supported documentation
that is required to accompany the journal entries
when it comes down to forefloor and finance.
It is then signed off by someone at a higher
level,
either a manager or supervisor who has that
signing authority.
From there, that journal entry is then taken down
to forefloor
where it's reviewed for posting
to ensure that there's adequate supporting
documentation
with that that's no different if it's during a
journal entry
from providing a payment to be paid through AP,
where there is about a couple of sets of eyes
looking at it
before we sign off on a journal entry,
and those types of processes are reviewed
through the walkthrough by the external auditor
on an annual basis to validate that we have the
controls
and the segregation of duty in place
to make any changes or make any financial
transactions.
- Councilor?
- Okay, thank you for that.
Under prepaid expenses, it says that prepaid
expenses
is primarily comprised of prepaid program
and employee benefit costs.
I'm just wondering what prepaid program is.
- Staff, thank you, through the chair.
That would be primarily social assistance.
Chex are issued at the end of the month
and are come out of the bank account,
but they're not actually due or not for the
following month.
So that would be a large component of what
programs
would be that are issued in advance.
There are primarily benefits to participants.
- Counselor?
- Okay, thank you for that.
With the uncorrected misstatements,
I was just wondering on the second one,
it talks about overstatement of prepaid expenses
and social housing expense.
So I just wanted to confirm that even though
we're uncorrected in the misstatements,
and this will probably be for staff,
but is it impacting any reporting of funding
provincially or federally to staff?
- Through the chair to committee,
there's a lot of considerations when it comes
to looking at the statement.
One is, A, this is a consolidated report for some
consolidated.
The other aim that needs to be taken into
consideration
is that for those provincial programs,
they have their separate reviews that are
undertaken periodically
to ensure that the funding aligns with the
expenditures
that are occurred.
So there are a number of checks and balances in
place,
particularly when we're dealing with other levels
of government funding.
And that's why we have a lot of special audits
that our auditors assist with to report out to
the province.
Thank you.
- Councilor.
- Thank you.
So I'm hearing that there's no concern
that there's a misstatement on one of those.
Okay, perfect.
And then I think I was just curious
what the period correction was,
the prior year error from Covent Garden
Marketplace
'cause it's 1.5 million.
- Okay, to staff or KPMG?
- So this related to something that was
identified
by management in the current year
when they were doing the consolidation
adjustments
for one of the boards and commissions,
where they noted that last year,
one of the eliminating entries was not,
was incorrect by 1.5 million.
So this entry was made to correct for the
adjustment
that should have been made in the prior year.
So it's strictly related to one of the
eliminating entries
for this board and commission.
Councillor.
- Okay, thanks.
But that's one of those journal entries
with the three reviews, right?
staff.
>> Through the Chair Committee know that that
would be part of the consolidation process
that happens during the audit upon the city
taking receipt of the financial statements
coming from the boards and commissions.
So there's a process where we have to wait until
the boards and commissions conduct their
audit and they're reviewed to provide us the
numbers so that we can understand what
the elimination entries would be.
So it depends on the timing when we receive it
and how we interpret it.
And we were recognizing that our audits are
complicated, not just for the city, but for
the boards and commissions.
So timing really impacts it and the ability for
us to incorporate boards and commissions
finances into ours and then eliminate, so we're
not double counting, at times can become
complicated when you're looking at various cost
sharing arrangements and whatnot.
And in this case, this is one where at the time
of producing the 2024 financial statements,
we missed it.
caught it through the remainder of 2025, we made
a correction, and through the due diligence
of KPMT, they identified that we correct it, but
it should have been in 2024.
Thank you.
It sounds like the trickle down effect of
correcting things in its year-over year.
Yeah.
I can only imagine that consolidation.
And then just a question.
It talks about lack of clarity surrounding
revenue treatment for government transfers.
Was there a change in policy or like it talks
about PS3410?
Was there something new or is this maybe just,
yeah, just like further clarification there.
Stop.
- Through the church committee,
this scenario came in with a revenue amount
that came in from the province to the city
in the month of November.
And the details behind that revenue amount
was not as clear in order for finance
to make a determination whether it related
current event in 2025 or an event to have
occurred in 2026. So it was booked in 2025
and it should have been booked as deferred to
recognize the expense as per
PS3410 to recognize it when the expenditure was
occurred in 2020 or to
be occurred in 2026. So we're of the mindset that
given that this has
per this one time we are going to ensure that we
go over PS3410 and as the public sector
accounting standards provide a decision tree to
ensure that as revenue comes in from other
levels of government that the producer of those
journal entries walks through those steps to
make sure do they know what this is for and if
there's any ambiguity then put into deferred
revenue until we can source out what that
ambiguity may or may not be. In this case there
was
ambiguity they booked it to 2025 should have been
2026 so now we're going to
overreach and make sure that a lot of our
financial business administrators are
aware and informed of what they need to take into
consideration and it could
just be a refresher but that's the process that
we propose that we are
going to take as a result of what was identified.
Thank you. Okay thanks that's
the continuous improvement right all the way
through just a general question I
I didn't see the financial statements in here
which I thought were all had like I've got all
the letters and the misstatements
But the consolidated financial statement was that
part of this did I just miss it stuff
The consolidated financial statements is was part
of the audit committee agenda. It's about
561 pages so electronically it is available to
the audit committee and to counselors as well as
we have binders that
Prior to distribution we had done asked what
counselors would take receipt of the hard copy
binders the 561 pages
comes in a white binder
Previously was a black minor, so it may have been
looking for something differently, but it
outlines all
Required reporting via the notes of the financial
s that help inform understanding
the statement of operations the financial
statements as well as it includes all the
consolidated
information from our boards and commissions such
as
The BIAs, Middlesex London Health Unit, LMCH, all
14 entities, and the three business entities
that we consolidate with along with London Hydro.
Thank you.
Due to past concussion issues, I was unbudget
friendly and opted for the printed copy myself.
It is, in my office, you're welcome to it to per
use it or copy, I will.
I wish I had time for that, but I said no to the
paper copy this time.
What I was looking for was I thought in previous
years we just had the few pages, right, the
income statement balance sheet statement changes,
is that in here and I just missed it?
Staff.
And thank you for the chair.
It's item 4.1 on the agenda.
It's part of the package.
It's maybe just not in my paper package, so I'll
look at it later.
But thanks.
I'll note there's a regular plus-added agenda
based on which package we're sorting through.
on line to see if there's any questions from I
don't know that Councilor Pribble has joined
us as well online. So looking online to see if
there's questions. I don't have anything
further on this item in chambers. So kind of a
last call on that. Okay. So there's no
further questions. It's been moved and seconded.
All in favor? By a show of hands? Thank you
to KPMG for that. This will move us along to item
4.2. I'll note that 4.2 to 4.5 is
MMP, they can come and have some seat at the
table. I'll note as well that there'll be those
added
delegation requests. In my understanding as we go
through these, I'll obviously do them
individually.
I will let MMP as well reach out and state what
they're looking for in terms of feedback and
scope
as we review each of these items from them.
Welcome and thank you for being with us in person
.
This is 4.2, the summary update from internal
audit MNP. I'll do a mover and seconder to get
it on the floor. Moved by Councillor Cuddy,
seconded by Councillor Stevenson. I'll turn the
floor to MNP for this one first and then I will
go to Mr. Chima first so if he has any questions,
just I know he's on the timeline. So Mr. Racco,
the floor is yours.
- Thank you. Through you, Madam Chair. So before
you is the summary update from
from internal audit, a couple of things I'd just
like to point out to committee first.
As part of the memo, we provide an update on the
internal audit plan of where it's sitting
as far as a status, something I'd just like to
note is there was a change to the timing
of the Privacy Act, now reporting in the October
2026 timeframe and the continuous improvement
audit, effectively those have switched, and this
was as a request of the audit committee
previously.
The other item I would like to point forward
because it is a slight departure on process
that we've done before is that you will notice
that there is the request or the opportunity
we're putting forward for the committee to
provide comment on both the scoping for the
privacy audit as well as the continuous
improvement audit.
Usually we look to ask for it in the item
proceeding or the meeting proceeding however
given the timing of the October and then the
December they follow quite quickly with the
the schedule for this year.
So we're just putting that forward to the
committee
that we would appreciate any feedback
on either of those audit scope items,
whether they be here or via other means.
And then the last item I would just like to note
and it actually ties into the following item,
which is the follow-up activities that we have.
But we did incorporate the resolution
at the direction of municipal council
with regards to the select follow-up items
for specifically for the London housing
development projects.
and the homelessness audit.
So I just wanted to bring those to the attention
of the committee, thank you.
- Thank you.
So on page 55, you'll see the high level scope
for the privacy and continuous improvement audit.
So if we have feedback today, we can provide it
where you can reach out individually.
Mr. Chima, any comments on this one to start us
off?
Okay, looking to members of the committee in
chambers
or online, I will start with Councillor Stevenson
.
- Thank you, just a couple of things.
Could you talk a little bit more about the high-
level scope
for the privacy in terms of Amphipas specifically
,
how, what we'll be looked at in terms of those?
Mr. Racco?
- Thank you, through you Madam Chair,
to committee and to the Councillor.
So yeah, I appreciate that.
So for background, so Amphipa is going through
several legislative amendments,
specifically as a result of Bill 194 and Bill 97.
And there's an implementation,
a phased implementation of that from 2025 through
to 2027.
So what we are specifically looking to understand
and appreciate and provide feedback to the city
as well as to the committee and to council
is how the city is effectively responding
to those limits to the requirements
and those legislative changes,
making them into process and making sure
that we are remaining compliant
given the changes that are taking place.
So we're gonna have a broader program, a few of
things,
but with a specific focus considering those
changes
to Amphipa.
- Councilor Stevenson.
- Thank you.
So my concern around the Amphipas is the red
actions
that I'm seeing.
So will that be looked at?
Like I understand there's like an appeal process
on that,
but just from whatever kind of audit this is,
is that something that could be incorporated, Mr.
Rocco?
- Can I, sorry, can I just ask for a
clarification?
- Absolutely.
- Can I just ask for a clarification, like
reaction,
I'm just curious if you can extrapolate on that,
'cause we, through you, Madam Chair,
that can be considered in baked-in,
if there's further clarity
that you can provide about the specific item.
- Councilor.
- Okay, perfect, and I can do that through email,
but basically, we've been, counselors have to
file
an MFAPA to see the contracts for the homeless
providers
and various levels of the budgets from complete
to partial
have the budgets redacted.
So I'll follow up on that by email.
And the other part is I just wanna confirm
because it says on here regarding the homeless
value
for many audit that these items will remain at
the status
until the tenant transition plan is communicated
to council.
And I just wanna be clear and maybe it's through
you,
Chair to staff, but there was a Council-approved
motion
to have it come to, I believe, governance working
group.
Then I had a subsequent one where it came
to Council via email, and I just want to confirm
with staff that that is still coming through
the original one to a governance working group
or whatever committee it was that that was coming
to.
- Thank you, Mr. Dickens.
- Thank you, through you, Chair.
There are sort of two reports tied to this.
So one is the tenant placement policy,
which was different than a tenant transition plan
.
So the tenant placement policy
was what was circulated to all of council.
The tenant transition plan is to report
that Mr. May, there's this team brought forward
related to 122 baseline that just recently went
to CAPS
and will be considered at council.
- Councilor?
- Okay, thanks.
I'll look back at that and get clarity.
That's all for now, thanks.
- Okay, looking for further questions or comments
.
- Hey, if a member, Pribble has anything,
you put a screen online.
In the meantime, I'll go to Councilor Tristan.
- Thank you, thank you very much.
This is my first audit committee,
and I'm not a member of the committee,
but I'm very interested in the field of privacy.
And the thing with the field of privacy is,
sometimes there's an effort to comply
with privacy obligations and not get privacy
complaints,
an overly protective view of privacy is taken,
which is fine in so far as privacy goes.
But the problem with privacy policy is if you
over protect privacy, that comes at the
cost of under protecting access to information.
So I think it's very difficult to do a privacy
audit in the normal sense of the idea of an
audit when you want to be careful, you want to
err on the side of not having privacy violations.
My question is how will this audit ensure that in
trying to vigorously protect privacy
rights, which is important, they're not over-
protected such as to inhibit access to information
.
And I hope that's clear because the trade-off
between--
Mr. Rocco?
Yeah, if you're going to answer the answer.
Through you, Madam Chair, so I appreciate the
question.
Privacy is not directly my field of practice.
When we do audits like this, we bring in subject
matter experts, but what I would say is that
Anytime we look at something, any type of topic,
we always try to understand that balance
because anytime we talk about risk,
it's not necessarily about minimizing or
maximizing risk,
but optimizing it, right?
There has to be a balance between the one side
and the other, the begin and the yang, if you
will.
So what we would want to do,
and again, as we're working through
to scope this out and execute on the audit,
we want to understand what are the things
that the city must do from a compliance
perspective,
And quite frankly, those can be fairly objective.
So we want to make sure that programs, processes,
protocols, all the things that we have in place
are meeting at a minimum those standards.
And then we have to appreciate where
there is opportunity.
Because again, openness and transparency,
particularly
in government, I think, has to be something
that we look towards.
So at the end of the day, there definitely
is the balance piece.
But I do appreciate, in particular,
as there is changes in the regime coming through
with MPAPA being updated, it is exceptionally
important
from at least my perspective, that the city makes
sure
that everything that you are doing from a program
,
from a process from a controls perspective,
is meeting those minimum standards.
And they are quite explicit in the changes
that are being put forward in those two bills.
So that's gonna be our first priority.
And if there are other things that we can advise
upon,
we will look to do so.
- Thank you, Councilor Troso.
- Yes, I'm still concerned that in taking,
a prudent risk management approach to making sure
you meet the minimum standards, you may
overshoot them a little bit. And in the case of
the provincial privacy regime, it's the
same commissioner's office that deals with the
access to information requests. Whereas
in the federal system, there's different offices.
So it's often the case where you're
in the provincial jurisdiction that in, for
example, taking an overly broad objection
to an information request on the grounds that it
protects privacy could get you out of potential
privacy violation, but that same action sets up
an access to information problem.
So the problem I have with an overall framing of
a privacy, what it is, is that the right
to access to information, it's not a
constitutional right, but courts have often
characterized
it as a quasi-constitutional right.
So you have to be very careful that in protecting
privacy, you don't over protect privacy.
Thank you, Councillor.
say that this plan before us has already been
approved by the audit committee and budgeted
for. So just to keep your, yeah, just talk about
scope. If you had something you wanted
to flag, which he already said he'd bring an
independent.
Yes, thank you for the chair for me. Yes, what I
want to flag is that in, in, in
satisfying your scope here, you may be creating
other problems later. And I'm, I'm hoping
that you have experts not just on privacy as such
, but on the interface between our privacy
and access to information regimes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Looking for further comments online or in
chambers, is this is a motion to receive?
This report of 4.2 calling the question by hand,
all in favor of receiving report?
Motion carries.
Thank you, 4.3.
This would also be a motion to receive.
This is the internal audit follow-up activities
dashboard, also by MNP, commencing on page
I would just like to highlight for the committee
was again based on that direction from council,
there was that adjustment that we made with
regards to several items and we noted them that
are have been put on for on track for completion,
that would have been in a previous iteration for
and based on that direction from Council,
there was that adjustment that we made
with regards to several items.
And we noted them that have been put on
for on track for completion.
That would have been in a previous iteration
for last cycle been noted as completed,
but again, we factored in that direction.
So thank you.
- Thank you.
Look to Mr. Chima online.
If you had any questions to start us off, that is
a no.
So open to others for questions or comments on
item 4.2.
Sir, actually it's 4.3 at this point.
I'll start with Councillor Stevenson.
- Thank you, I just wanna go back
to that tenant transition plan.
And the dates aren't on here,
but I think it goes back to the initial audit
of 122 baseline.
And out of that, it was identified
that the tenant mix had changed from the initial
plans
when the building was being proposed and built,
and that the tenant profile that was used
to put people into that building
was not exactly, but one third homeless,
one third mentally ill and addicted,
and one third women and children fleeing domestic
violence.
It was raised in the audit
that this was a change that had impacted the
building.
The recommendation, as I recall,
was to harden the building and increase the
budget.
But this committee referred to governance working
group
around that change, how that change happened.
It happened that I couldn't see
where there was a council direction for that.
It was internally all done through the city.
So I guess I just wanna ask through you chair to
staff.
Does staff believe that the tenant transition
plan
that was presented to caps in June addresses the
issues
and has a pathway that will change that tenant
mix?
And I believe there's a report coming back again
later in the year.
But I just wanted to confirm through you to staff
, do they feel that the tenant transition
plan that was received in June is enough to take
this off of this list?
Or how do they feel about leaving this until
December when we actually see and follow this
through to the end?
The ideal thing being that we have a better mix
of tenants in that building to provide
better health and safety and lives for the people
who live there and people who
live around us.
You're on page 57 that first the first one. Okay
so page 57 number one to
staff realizing thought it's in front of us and
if the method's taken if you
believe it addresses the concerns raised in the
could be multiple
departments. I'll just I'll just speak firstly
through the chair I'll just
firstly speak to the June report that we just
brought forward to the to the
the CAHPS committee.
So through that, of course, you can't change
an attendant mix overnight.
There's processes you need to go through
to ensure that that continues to move.
As mentioned by the counselor,
we have committed to annual reports
to provide more information.
So there will be a report later this year
highlighting many changes in that mix.
We are confident working with LMCH
that they have the same goals as we do
to be able to ensure that the people that are in
that housing are people that are stable
and can continue to be in that space and be able
to meet all of the commitments they need
to be able to live in that housing.
So from that perspective, we do have that
confidence as far as whether this should come
off the list or not, that's usually something
that would be assessed by the auditor themselves.
But we do feel that LMCH is very committed to be
to making these changes and to support
of that transition over time of the tenant mix.
- Councilor Stevenson.
- Yeah, I guess I'm just thinking we had this
stay on
until that was done.
I think I'm okay with leaving it now,
but there is that, like, that we achieved the
objective
to which we set out, right?
That we had it on here for a reason.
We delayed it, had it on here to ensure,
and the point was to be sure that we were being
effective
in what we were choosing to do.
So thank you.
- Thank you for their questions on item 4.3
as it's a motion to receive.
Seeing none online, none in chambers, a show of
hands.
- Motion carries.
- Thank you, that brings us on to 4.4.
This is the subdivision review process audit.
It's gonna be a motion to receive moved by Coun
cillor
Stevenson, seconded by Councillor Cuddy.
Also looking for a motion to approve our
delegation
requests from Mr. Walz at this time.
Okay, so that's part of it, same mover and second
er.
I'll go to MNP for a brief introduction,
and then Mr. Wallace can have the floor,
and then I will also, after that,
go to Mr. Chairman if he's still with us
to start us off on questions, or do you have any?
Mr. Racco.
- Thank you, through you, Madam Chair.
So before you is the final report
for the subdivision review process audit,
a couple of things just to note for the committee
as you had digested this information.
So a slight that we,
there was an addition to this that we did
in order to gather additional information for the
city,
which you'll see in there is a jurisdictional
scan,
specifically factoring in information
that we were able to gather from the cities
of Kingston, Kitchener, and Hamilton
in order to look at the way that they also
go through this process.
So that was factored in and you would have seen
it
through some of our observations,
and there is an appendix in there
that would have highlighted some of the high
level
observations that we had from there for your
interests.
I think that if I was to look to summarize the
findings
and the recommendations, they're mainly
around that phrase of streamlining.
There are opportunities with which the city goes
through the subdivision review process.
That allows for us to get to point A to point B,
but there are sometimes loopbacks
as there would happen with any process like this
when there is review cycles that need to go
through.
And in going through and looking at that,
there is some opportunities to stream like that
and avoid some fragmentation.
So I'll just leave it at that.
And then I'll pass it back to you, Madam Chair.
- Thank you.
If we can have the Michael Live bottom corner
on the side for Mr. Wallace.
- We're on, thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you for approving my delegation today.
And this is my first as Councillor Troso
first in seven years presentation committee
and I think it might be my last.
But as I'm leaving in a little while,
so appreciate the audit.
We have three things we'd like to say.
First of all, staff, the city staff,
have been working with the industry
on the subdivision issue over the last number of
years
and have made significant progress.
Your staff are doing a great job
with the leadership under Scott and his team
that we are looking at different items.
On page one, however, under the scope,
and I'm not throwing the consultants under the
bus on this,
it goes to the direction that you have to give
them,
which was just discussed on the other piece.
Under State Colders interviews, it says it was
all staff.
Well, we have a number of organizations within
London,
particularly the London Development Institute,
which I represent, who are proactively working
with staff.
It would have been great if the consultant,
in this case, interviewed us.
We may have had some information on how,
since we are the stakeholder
of the sort of vision process that did not happen
.
My understanding, we certainly offered and never
happened.
In addition to that, we may have helped
with where other cities you could scan,
which because everyone in my members works in
other communities and maybe we could steer
them to where they could look at where other
communities are doing well or not as well
as us.
And you know, we would help with making sure the
facts were accurate.
As was mentioned in the appendix, it talks about
requirements of developers in those
three other communities and the first line is
about participate in mandatory subdivision
That's against the law has changed.
There is no such thing as mandatory pre-consult
ation.
And so that happens here.
Most of my members do participate
in the pre-consultation process,
but it doesn't always happen.
So we are making progress here.
And I think the good news out of this audit,
this program audit, remember these are program
audits
or operational audits, they're not financial
audits,
which you've just dealt with earlier in the
meeting.
So the good news, everything's in that,
what the definition from the consultant
is that what medium risk is.
I would say from our perspective,
the communication lines for us,
not just in the subdivisions,
but in other development application issues,
have been clearly open,
and then we have very proactive,
productive discussions on how to improve things,
and on the subdivision piece,
just for comfort level for you folks on the
committee side,
and the city side is that we are making progress.
And I don't think this audit reflects how well
that department is doing and try to make change
and make improvements.
Thank you.
- Thank you.
Looking to Mr. Chima, if you have any comments
on this to start us off, I see a no.
Looking to other visiting members
and member of committee,
I will start with members of the committee,
Councillor Stevenson.
- Thank you.
Yeah, the subdivision one was an interesting one
and it does confirm a lot of things
that I've been hearing over the last couple of
years,
whether the developers are big or small
or the complaints seem to be the same.
And they are confirmed here.
So glad to hear we're making progress.
It makes me a little concerned about where we
began,
but so just through you to staff,
well, actually could we get a little bit of just
a summary
from the auditors on this one.
I'd be interested to just hear some of the key
things
that you want us to hear about this report.
- Yeah, below, beyond Canada, a few more details.
- Sure, through you, Madam Chair.
So a couple of things to step back on.
I do think an echoing the commentary that's been
even Councillor, you just provided there.
are, there is great improvements that the city
makes
in all of its programs and this would be,
this would be one of them as well to kind of see
the progress that's being made.
I think that the other important factor in
general,
but from my understanding and from our
understanding
of the subdivision review process in particular,
is that the operating environment
and the regulatory environment continue to evolve
, right?
And that is specifically relevant,
particularly in the last five years.
within any infrastructure review process.
So I think that has to be taken into account.
I do think that, again, if you were to look to
section six
of the report that summarized some of the
strengths there,
highlighting, again, the continuous improvement
efforts,
I think is an important piece,
as well as working to make sure
that there is centralized information and data
available.
When we get into the summary of observations,
a couple things as we looked to kind of capture
within there.
And again, to highlight there was nothing
that was a glaring high finding.
But going back to my very short preface
before as we introduced the item,
I really do think there is the theme
that we can kind of take away from this process
is--
or this review is optimization of the process.
And I realize that is the most very broad concept
to kind of look towards.
But it goes back to that strength
that we identified in section six of continuous
improvement.
So as we go through and as we have the
opportunity
to make sure that we have as item one highlights,
clarification of those requirements at the outset
so that we can avoid resubmissions further
clarification.
Having opportunities where we can have maybe
as item four would highlight multi-department
circulation,
can we actually coordinate that a little bit more
?
So again, I think I go back to the opportunities
of,
Can we streamline to create a quicker way
we can go from A to B?
I think, again, is the essence of what we're
trying
to highlight within the audit itself.
- Councillor Stu, that's it?
- Okay, thank you for that.
I would like to know, so on page 76,
when it talks about the clarification
of submission requirements to reduce resub
missions,
Civic Administration is talking about bringing a
report
back in Q3 2027, you know, given the need for
housing
and how we hear it slow and Minister Flax is all
the time.
It's the problem with housing.
It's too expensive and it takes too long.
So can I just ask why it's gonna take so long
on something that's so urgent
and especially subdivisions
when we're talking about a lot of units?
- I don't know.
City staff wants to start us off on this one, Mr.
Phoenix.
- Absolutely through the chair.
So that's absolutely why it has that timing
and I'll give you a little bit of a fact on that.
So as part of when we brought from the council
brought forward the housing pledge in 2023.
We established a reference group.
That reference group is the customer service
and process improvement group.
Since May of 2023, we've met 31 times
and that's we always have our friends from LDI
at those meetings and that's the time that we
speak to
and look at specifically at anything
that the industry is looking to make some
improvements to
and we have an opportunity to share what we hear
from council be able to have an opportunity to
share
what we can do to improve.
So over that period of time, we've, as I
mentioned,
had 31 meetings.
We've completed 39 different improvements.
And currently we have about 18 improvements
on our working list.
And we always prioritize a few of those items.
So we have three items that are the priorities.
Those priorities are determined through our
conversations.
It's not just the city unilaterally saying,
is what we're gonna do next.
We have a group conversation.
We have over 30 members of the development
community
that regularly attend the meeting
and we identify what the priorities are.
So as our last meeting was in May,
we did this effort.
So as soon as we complete one of our targeted
items,
we add any item.
And when we did that in the last meeting,
we highlighted subdivision process review
as a possible item that would be
that we could add to that list.
It was decided through that group
that that wasn't a priority for them at this time
.
And part of that reason is that
the subdivision activity has dipped a bit,
but there's other components that are part of
that process
that they'd like to focus in on
rather than have just an overall process review.
So that's what we've decided to do
is move forward with a component of that
and focus on what is really seen from the
industry
and from our work with them
as being what the priorities are.
So this is still important and absolutely,
we think we should be looking at the subdivision
process
over the long term, but it's not something
that was highlighted as a specific priority
to work on over the next six months.
But we do want to ensure that it's completed.
So that's why we provided that timing of 2027.
- Councilor Stevenson.
- Okay, thanks.
- I'll also note Councilor Pribble
and Chima who both left the meeting.
So quorum is us three, so you're all with me.
- Okay, thank you.
And no pressure.
And thank you, that explanation really helps.
The other one was around technology.
And it's got a target of Q1, 2027.
Can you just give me an update on the technology?
I can't remember if there was a multi-year
business case
and we didn't fund it, or did you get it?
And how is that going, Mr. Mathers?
- Absolutely.
There was a business case that we brought forward
to council
and that was approved.
And we've been diligently working through that.
There are certain items that we've actually
brought forward.
And there is that due date of being able to have
that complete.
And that's our anticipated timeline.
We do provide updates as part of our annual
development
report or any other opportunity that we
be able to provide some more details of it.
But it's well underway.
And it's an exciting thing that's
going to be able to provide a lot more
streamlined information,
both internally and also providing that
information
to applicants as well.
Thank you, Elsa.
Thank you.
That is good.
Can you just give me a very high-level view
of what we can have to look forward to
by Q1 2027 when it's working for staff?
- Absolutely.
So it's actually going to allow more information
to be available both through the citizen portal,
the business portal that we have.
So people, applicants can be able to see
where their application is in throughout that
process.
It's going to apply to those pre-applications
that we were talking about, official plan
amendments,
still wanting amendments, removal of holding
provisions
will be more streamlined to be able to look
through
that process and as well it also,
there's a lot of back-end work that's taken place
to ensure that documents are easily being able
to be shared and cataloged within the city's
working areas and that was actually another item
that was highlighted in the report is being able
to share information between different areas
and this is gonna make things a lot easier
to be through our internal processes as well.
- I'll sorry.
Thank you.
I noticed in the jurisdictional review,
which I found really useful.
So thank you.
Under Kingston, it referred at least to their
processes
as end-to-end digital workflow.
Is that where we're gonna end up, Q1, 2027 staff?
- Absolutely, that is what we're looking for.
And that's what we're gonna have by that time
period.
We've spent a lot of time working on different
processes
over the years, our site plan process is
exceptional
and we've been able to be tops in Canada
as far as our processes from that perspective.
But we've had a lot of work to do
on our subdivision process
and this is gonna be very helpful moving forward
and very beneficial to the city
and the applicants as well.
- Councilor.
- Yeah, just a kitchener said
that they have a highly structured and sequential
process
that reduces downstream surprises and rework.
So I'll just leave that out there,
that I hear that request a lot.
And then the last one for the Kitchener,
it said a strong customer service mindset
underpins coordination with staff,
often providing detailed guidance
to help applicants correct deficiencies.
And I just wondered if there's a culture piece
as far as London is concerned too,
and if there's anything staff can share that way.
- Mr. Mathers.
- Yeah, absolutely.
And I was always happy to learn
from other municipalities in and around us.
It's something I've been really driving forward
through my team, is that cultural change?
And I'm hoping from what you heard from Mr.
Wallace today
is that you're hearing that that's happening.
We've made a lot of improvements since that 2023
and before timeframe that prior to me being in
the role.
And I think that's exceptionally important,
because we're not here just to be a regulator.
We're here to be a facilitator and to help both
the applicants
and anyone else from the city of London
to be able to get through those processes.
And that is a mental shift.
And some folks, it's more difficult.
But I very much feel that through our great
directors,
Heather McNeely and Alan Shaw, that they've
been really driving that forward with their teams
as well.
but it's exceptionally important
to have that cultural shift as well.
- Just a quick thanks, knowing that housing
has been under the spotlight for this entire term
of council
with all kinds of pressure and changes and things
happening.
So thanks for trying to move London forward.
- Thank you, I would say that was long-term
progress.
Mr. Mathers and his team working diligently on
this,
somewhat who's seen the evolution of two terms of
council.
And I know that when things aren't going well,
the industry lets us know it.
So if they've been quieter, I know you're making
good progress.
I'm getting good feedback as well behind the
scenes.
So thank you for that as we continue continuous
improvement
and looking to others that we could learn off of.
I have no hands up online.
I'm having none in chambers.
This is a motion to receive this report by a show
of hands.
- Motion carries.
- That moves us on to 4.5.
This is the Climate Emergency Action Plan audit
by MNP.
This would be a motion to receive.
I have a mover and encounter Cudi, a seconder in
myself,
moving at the same time. Mr. Wallace's delegation
request with the same mover
and seconder. Mr. Racco if you want to queue it
up and then once again I'll go
to Mr. Wallace and then we'll come back down for
follow-up. Thank you
through you Madam Chair. So before you is the
report for the climate emergency
action plan. A couple things to just highlight on
this and it's actually
similar to some of the commentary I provided on
the previous item. It is
important and I think contextually the committee
and others will appreciate this is that much
has changed since the CEAP, the plan itself, was
originally established. And I think that
that has to be an underlying tone and context
throughout this report. Not only has the
operating
environment has changed, but again, the
regulatory environment is also just generally
expectations
from the public have changed from the time that
the plan was put together to where we
are now.
I think that it's also an interesting timing and
opportunity and it was very good to have
the collaborative conversation with civic
administration as we were going through this
audit to recognize how ambitious the plan was as
it was formed as well as the opportunity
this is in front of the city given the fact that
we're going to be moving into a new cycle.
There will be a new multi-year plan developed
from a budget and strategic perspective and
that how there can be lessons learned from the
efficacy of the current client emergency
action plan that can be baked into its next
iteration, which we've tried to capture in
and I realize there are several recommendations
and we can go through them as the committee
would look towards. But it really is an opportune
time to bake these pieces in and I think if you
look at civic administration's responses, they
are cognizant of that opportunity that sits
before us
for the next iteration given the timing that's
going to be happening next year. Thank you.
Thank you for technology. I'll go to the upper
lower mic as well. Mr. Wallace, the floor is
yours.
Thank you, Madam Chair and thank you again,
committee for approving my delegation. First,
I want to actually start why I think Council
should
congratulate yourselves and staff on the work
that's been done that's highlighted in this
report.
As I think, I can remember standing,
I think we were in committee room five
and we were giving presentations.
And I think I was there representing the only
business
community of a portion of the business community
and making a presentation there on the CV.
and we were supportive of most of the components
of the CEAP.
And I think staff and the city in terms of,
if you look at the five or six bullet points
that are on the first number of pages,
whether it's with planning, building retrofits,
community business engagement and infrastructure,
the addition of green carts.
You've done a tremendous job in that short period
of time
on tackling some of the objectives
that you put out in that report.
So I thought it was, when I saw this,
I thought it was an opportunity to come
and congratulate you on this.
I'm not crazy about how things are categorized,
high, medium and low, and based on,
and the definition of that is significant control
weakness,
it might be a standard way of doing a program
audit
in terms of how it's defined.
But as mentioned by the consultants,
like the environment has changed quite a bit,
not a physical environment,
the environment in which you are working in,
in terms of these issues.
And there are some things that, you know,
is it a high weakness?
If the, it's, I think they call it a high
weakness of control.
But if it's provincial legislation, you have no
control.
So is that a weakness?
I'm not sure if that's a weakness of the city.
But so I read through the summary of observations
and I read the summary of the staff responses
and I thought they were excellent and on the
right track.
So we just wanted to be, we are on the record,
the beginning, we're on the record for the review
that we think the program has had a positive
impact
on London and from our perspective on the
development process.
And I think maybe it is time to have a review
of where we're going and what needs to be changed
in that.
And you're not gonna do that before the next
election in October.
So we look forward to working with you as an
industry
on the next version of this plan in the coming
years.
Thank you.
- Thank you.
Looking to members of the committee
or those online for questions or comments.
I'll start with Councillor Stevenson.
- Thank you, and thank you for the audit report.
There's a lot in here again.
I think what I wanted to focus on was,
well, in the summary of observations,
it talks about the seep being descriptive and not
directive.
And I think that's a good feedback in terms of,
'cause it says it does not shape priority
sequencing
or resource allocation.
So it really leaves it as this sort of nebulous
thing
that we refer to all the time.
It also talks about activity-based indicators
overstating progress that on track
and complete designations frequently reflect
administrative milestones, not measurable
outcomes.
And that's been one of the reasons why
I've been not receiving the strategic plan
'cause we do that there as well.
Number 12, it talks about external legislative
changes
have eliminated key regulatory delivery pathways.
Bill 17, Bill 98, and the federal carbon price
removal
require a fundamental rethink of several seep
actions.
And, you know, I found it interesting that
Calgary
just repealed their climate emergency on May 27th
of this year, passed in a vote of 12 to three.
Now, they said they're still super committed
to all kinds of doing great things for the
environment,
they were repealing the emergency.
And so I wonder when it says require a
fundamental rethink
of several SEAP actions, it does give council the
opportunity
to rethink the principles behind it as well.
Many actions-- here, there's a couple of places
here--
said no systemic process exists to confirm
that the indicators chosen for each SEAP are
valid proxies
for the outcome the action is intended to achieve
.
In several cases, indicators measure inputs
or process completion rather than the change in
behavior,
infrastructural or emissions that the action was
designed
to drive.
And again, this is something I see the way
that we do our reporting.
Are we just saying we're 84% complete, we're 97%
complete,
we have 187 actions.
And we did 175, but we might have missed the ones
that
actually moved the needle, right?
This means that even consistently tracked
indicators
may not be measuring what SEAP is actually
trying to accomplish.
The problem is not only that progress is over
stated,
but that the measurement framework may not be
capable
of detecting whether real world outcomes
are being achieved at all.
I know a lot of time and effort and energy goes
into all
the tracking and monitoring and that kind of
thing.
And I think these are some things that we get to
really
listened to, especially at a time when, again,
taxpayers
are concerned about their finances.
How much are we spending if we're not
getting the results that are desired for the
environment?
Says, tying the expected results more explicitly
to actions is a recommendation of staff labeling
and distinguishing between activity metrics and
outcome
metrics.
Huge, huge if we're committed to actually making
things
better in our city and in this world.
So I just wanted to highlight a couple of things
that were in this report.
And just put out there that this is a lot of work
.
And it may be as time was done by a previous
council.
I think a rethink of it in general would be good.
Again, it just continually talks about reflecting
on process activity rather than outcomes.
It says the absence of 20, 30 baselines
and quantitative targets for most expected
results
makes it difficult to contextualize reported
progress.
I think this is really helpful for this
or the next council to really look
at the efficiency of what it is that we're doing.
The last thing I'll just say, it's on page 30.
It talks about bill 17 and bill 98 prohibiting
municipalities
from imposing local green building standards
and that the federal carbon price removal in
April 2025
eliminates a key financial incentive underpin
underpinning
building retrofit and EV adoption actions.
If I can just ask through you to staff,
if they have any comments around that,
it says it necessitates a reassessment.
So I'd love to hear from staff.
- Thank you, staff.
- Through the chair, absolutely.
So there has been, as mentioned,
like very significant changes from a regulatory
perspective.
So the ability to actually have what would be
originally
term as those building standards has been removed
through legislation.
And there's been a couple recent bills
that have dealt with that.
So we actually will be bringing to the next
committee
of planning and environment committee a report
that speaks to looking at green development
guidelines.
But those would be, I have to,
those are all voluntary and would provide an
opportunity
to be able to celebrate some of those
really great developments that are moving forward
and try to provide a little bit more awareness
of those developments, but from the perspective
of actually having a more like a rigid standards
approach,
that's not an option that's available to us
anymore.
- Councilor, you have 10 seconds.
- Thank you, it was about the reshaping
what we can realistically be required
of development and reassessments.
So just if, is there anything else to share there
?
They may not be.
- Seeing as some nose, but Mr. May, there's
officially?
- Yep, through the chair.
So there isn't an opportunity for us to do that.
So the only way that we can provide something
that's similar to that would be through like a
guideline,
but it would be voluntary.
- I have a comment to make,
but I'll go to others first.
Councillor Trissa, go ahead.
- Yes, thank you.
My first question is directed to the consultant.
How is it determined who you interview in these
exercises?
- For the climate change one that's before us, Mr
. Repham?
- Yeah, through you, Madam Chair,
thank you for the question.
So as we go through, so stepping back,
we work with, we work to develop the broader
items
that we look to touch on that's included
within the internal audit plan.
Then we get through the scoping exercise,
which involves us taking a look at the risks
associated
with the topic and what we want to focus in on
in order to be both cognizant of the time
available,
as well as the outcomes that we're looking to go
through
and provide good feedback to and recommendations
to civic administration as well as to committee
and council
on how the city is either what risks we're
exposed to
and how we're managing them.
And then what flows through to that is we work
with civic administration to understand and
appreciate
who we can touch base with, understand who has
availability
in order to gather information.
So it's through some conversation that we have
with civic administration once the scope is
figured out,
as well as, quite frankly, upon our own judgment
of who we want to touch base with and go forward.
Going back to the previous item,
we had looked to expand our understanding
through a jurisdictional scan,
and we sought out like-minded organizations
in order to do so.
So it's through collaboration,
as well as through our own judgment.
- Okay, well, if it's based through the chair,
if it's based on collaboration,
why we're sitting counselors,
why were we not brought into this,
not to direct it, but given the chance to be
interviewed,
I really would have appreciated being interviewed
,
and I think I would have had some insights
that would have helped your study,
and I'd like to know why counselors
were not given the opportunity to be interviewed.
- Mr. Racco.
- Through you, Madam Chair, I think that is a
fair comment,
and we can take that back in order to consider
for our processes going forward.
There was not, it was not a conscious choice, I
would say,
to not include counselors or members of the
committee,
but it was just not considered considering
for this particular audit.
So I will take the feedback and we can look
forward
to that for future scopes in order to understand
and factor that in.
- Councilor.
- Yeah, and that doesn't really help me.
'Cause quite frankly, I think a fundamental flaw
of this entire exercise,
to mention the way we've implemented this
directive of the last council is what was the
understanding of the new counselors in 2022,
especially when you consider eight of us were new
,
about what we were expected to do here, and more
specifically what legislative authority we have.
Much has just been said about the regulatory
environment changing, but we have to go back
to the fundamental jurisdictional point in the
municipal act that says we have the right to make
bylaws about "economic, social, and environmental
well-being of the municipality." And I do not
really remember getting a good orientation as a
counselor on this question. Now, I happen to know
a little bit about this because I've read the
case law over the years, but I don't think that
this
counsel was put in a position where we could have
succeeded because we never really understood
what was in our jurisdiction to do? Could you
comment on that?
I'm going to caution here that Mr. Racco is not
privileged and part of the council on boarding
and his job is into the health of legislative
responsibilities outside of the Miss Flax,
which we're already advised on. Councilor, if you
just keep your questions
tight to the scope, I'm not going to allow the
last one. Well, the scope is why we haven't made
as much progress on the environmental file as
many of us had hoped. And I think that's a broad
scope.
And I think this is a major, I think it's a major
issue,
that you can't have a city council,
not be part of the ongoing process.
And yes, that does begin with a much better
onboarding.
The other thing I'd wanna ask is,
one of the points that you make,
and I forget which recommendation it was,
it's the responsibility for implementing this
seems to be scattered.
It seems to be scattered, and this is a function
of an often stated criticism of our civic
administration,
not in terms of the people in the civic
administration,
but the structure of our civic administration.
And that's that we have departments,
divisions, cubicles, silos.
And it's never really clear who's talking to who.
When environmental issues put across
the different cubicles, silos, departments, and
divisions.
And one of the things I really liked about the
discussion
that we just had about the rat infestation
is we started to do that.
So I guess my question is, how is civic
administration
and ultimately this council or the next council
going to take the learning from your report here?
And despite my criticisms here,
there's quite a bit of very good learning here.
How are we going to implement this
so we could be making better environmental
decisions
given the broad general nature
of our jurisdiction over environmental matters.
- Thank you, I'm going to share for this one.
- Thank you, Madam Chair.
If you'll indulge me in a little bit of history
as to how this plan is organized,
the team that supports it in climate change in my
area
is quite small,
but is meant to be a bit of a boutique service
to provide consulting support almost internally
to actions that are owned by directors
throughout the organization.
Those actions are specifically assigned
to various directors, and the reason it's
decentralized
is because they're very different in each area.
There's work to be done in planning,
in fleet, in facilities, in finance,
lesser perhaps in perhaps neighborhood
and community-wide services, but not entirely
none.
So each director is accountable
for those particular actions assigned to them,
and then there is a consolidation and reporting
that happens centralized through environment
and infrastructure.
I suspect that we will always be looking
at some sort of decentralized model
unless there was a direction from council
future multi-year budget to build a very large
centralized team with expertise and everything
from fleet to green building standards. We will
however be looking at how we're reporting out
and how we are providing the opportunity to
connect with the owners of each action as part of
a new
iteration of the plan. So my next question I
guess to make sure is how can counselors better
support this work? How can counselors better
become involved in this and understand where they
are
in this organizational structure and how we fit
into it and how we can participate.
I guess how counselors can be as it pertains to
the audit report that's in front of us please.
Thank you Madam Chair. We find a lot of rules for
council with respect to providing input from
community priorities particularly as you're
developing or the next council develops their
strategic plan as well as through the
consideration of the multi-year budget process
that would decide
what are the priorities related to this file
related to the many other important files
I think my last question through the chair, my
last question through the chair I guess is when I
look at the role of the planning committee and
when I look at the role of the infrastructure and
civic works committee, and when I look at the
role of which the other one I'm on that when the
community
services committee. I see that they all have
jurisdiction over pieces here and
there of the environmental puzzle and I guess it
's always the prerogative. 20
seconds. It's always the prerogative of the clerk
. I'm sorry if I'm taking too
much time but I think I've sat here for four
years and haven't seen a lot of
progress. Okay, particularly Councillor, I've sat
here for eight and I'm the chair
of the committee. If you have a question you have
20 seconds remaining if you
would like to ask it. Yeah, I'd like to know how
we can rationalize better the
assignment to different committees when even the
committee
members aren't really sure what's within their
jurisdiction.
Because again, it keeps changing.
And all of these standing committees
all have a piece of this environmental puzzle.
How can we improve that?
Thank you.
I would really question of order.
As we counsel keeps changing, it's us
that's changing the committee format and what
goes where
as legislation changes, that's an us thing.
Ms. Stater's Bear, if you want to answer briefly.
No, OK.
- Well, it's hard for a counselor to try to think
about
how to improve this situation.
If an ultimate question like that is ruled out of
order.
And with that, I'll just take this up someplace
else.
Thank you very much.
- Thank you.
The city clerk has also available to go over
the delegation of topic matters to each committee
and how to address a change if one would like.
I've met with him in the past and was very useful
.
Councilor Frank, there you are.
you're on screen. We're on, I believe you know,
the 4.5
permit emergency action audit that's before us. I
assume you're
here to speak to that one first. The floor is
yours.
Thank you. Yes. And I just had a couple questions
through you to
staff. I appreciate the work and the results that
we received
from this audit. I can't say I was surprised
because I had been
hearing and seeing some of the themes that
emerged from these
recommendations. So through you to staff, I just
want to confirm that given the, the high priority
that a sufficient amount of these items has
received, if this is going to be, um, you know,
expedited or prioritized in the next year, given
the high risk nature that MMP has identified
these
risks at. Thank you. Miss Chambers, do you want
to start this one? Okay. Thank you through the
chair
And it's an excellent question.
Yeah, we've already started work on looking at
the current
SEAP and how we can be modifying it to be ready
basically
for the next strategic plan and the next multi-
year budget
because we do see changes that have happened
legislatively in society as well.
And we want the plan to be very relevant.
And this audit we feel has helped us because
there's a lot
of items in there that we agree with and that we
had already
started to speak with internally.
So as we've laid out in the response,
We are in the next year going to be very heavily
looking at revitalizing the plan.
Just yesterday, we brought forward the adaptation
strategy funding agreement with FCM.
That's going to be integral to shaping the next
plan as well.
So the answer is yes.
We're definitely going to be prioritizing this
to be ready for future decisions for Council.
Councilor Frank.
- Thank you.
I appreciate that in the reference to the
adaptation plan.
I'm looking forward to that one as well.
some recent polling shows that over 30% of
Canadians are now being personally impacted
by extreme weather events like heat waves, floods
and fires. So I think it's becoming
more and more top of mind. Additionally, another
polling data app of this data shows that 50%
feel their government is not currently doing
enough on climate change. So I feel like it's
an opportune time for us to buckle down and try
to make some movement on these areas.
And I just want to also check because again, as
outlined in the audit, it indicates that,
you know, staff asked for about $45 million over
four years.
We gave them about $882,000 a year, just triple
checking that in the next multi-year budget.
Staff will come back with a new costed portion of
the updated climate plan.
You see some nods, but let's get a verbal for you
, Ms. Chambers.
Thank you.
And through the chair, yes, the plan is to
develop the strategy, which will also include
Budget asks part and parcel.
We don't want to develop a strategy
and not have any dollars attached to it.
So we will certainly bring those forward
for a council decision.
- Councilor Frank.
- Thank you, I appreciate that.
We know the saying goes that if you want
to see city's priorities, you look in the budget.
So I'm hopeful that next term of council,
we see some movement there as well.
Thank you very much to MNP and to staff
who helped bring this forward.
- Thank you.
Councilor Karykast, or I procedurally,
Councilor Stevenson, would you take the chair
for a moment and make comment as a vice chair?
- Yes, thank you.
the chair and you are next.
- I'm sorry, thank you, just Councillor Cuddy,
looked at me first, so I was gonna make him do it
.
Just thank you to staff on this one,
I know it might speak to some other people's
comments,
it's different reiterations, it evolves.
We've certainly seen different council priorities
based on what we're seeing locally at the time,
the composition of council changes.
Staff can always bring the best laid-in research
plan forward
and then it's up to council to endorse or not
are funded or not, or re-prioritize things as we
go.
I like that one of the points is alignment
of the next climate change plan with the
strategic planning
has already been identified by Civic
Administration
as a priority and great to see under another
target
that Civic Administration is currently pursuing
as a member of the Canada's Municipal Net Zero
Action
Research Partnership information and funding
to bring back from the next MYB, which I think is
going to be the priority that it really is up
to council for the implementation of
implementation and funding. And I know that we've
seen goal
post changed, reduced or completely emerged,
removed based on even in the council that was
prior.
If we felt the goals were achievable or not or
too hard to reach. So looking forward to
the report coming back with the next MYB with a
fresh term a council on different
different perspectives especially since resident
engagement will always
flow with the as staff go out and do that.
Looking forward to see how it comes back
and any legislative changes as well as these
report come back with our audits.
So just do my comments there that I know we're
not always where we want to be on something.
but that's a decision of a collective we in these
seats so I'm grateful for the audit to
highlight these and I'm sure it will be part of
the budget too that will have the information so
the next time we do look at the NYB's and strat
plans and these indicators that there actually is
an
audit as information from a third party to go
back and review and highlights for informational
pieces as well. Councillor Stevenson that's my
comments. Thank you and I'll return the chair.
looking for other speakers online or in chambers.
Okay, this was a motion to receive this report
already moved and seconded a show of hands
of all those in favor.
Motion carries.
Thank you.
Our presenters today are welcome to stay or go.
That's your official presentations.
4.6 is a request that the city's oversight
of housing cooperative services providers
is a letter submitted by Councillor Frank
on page 123 of your original packages.
Councilor Frank as a visiting member committee
you know you cannot move or second it but I will
go
to you first to at least tell us briefly about
what it is and then I will look to see if there's
someone in chambers. Do you want us to move
receipt for now just to get it on the floor?
So Councilor Frank we're not going to move
anything at the time I will let you briefly
speak to it of what you're looking for as we have
not spoken beforehand so I just can't
guide that conversation so I'll go to you briefly
first. Sure happy to and I kind of outlined the
The rationale is to why it's ending up at audit
committee.
But this came about when we had a discussion
regards to the toll puddle housing cooperative.
When that came forward, I believe it was at CPSC.
And we had some discussion at committee
and then at council looking at the oversight
of our housing cooperative services.
We have had some audits done in the past
as our reference of 403 Thompson and 122 baseline
and those projects as well as other housing
related programs.
But we haven't really specifically drilled down
and looked at the housing cooperative service
providers
and the relationship that they hold with staff
and with the city service manager,
as well as the complex governance that that
requires.
And so this is a motion to have this be evaluated
underneath of our internal audit plan
to look at housing cooperative service providers
and the process in which we supervise and work
with them
and the governance, the town placement,
the asset management and the oversight processes.
Really focusing at solutions just because we had
seen
some issues with the toll puddle housing
cooperative
and I'm hoping that we can figure out
what those issues are and move forward.
- Thank you.
So-- - Sure, I'm gonna move that for Councilor
Frank.
- Sorry, I could put my mic on for you to
actually hear me.
So just looking to see if you're moving receipt
of the letter or if you're moving that this be
requested
to be an internal audit plan.
- I don't know, Councillor Frank,
what would you like me to do?
- She can't speak to it.
I'll note that as always audit goes to council
for a final vote and anything can be changed
there.
- Chair, ma'am.
So I'd like to move, do you want to move
something?
So no, I'll move a new second and then you can,
okay.
Sorry chair.
So I'll move the receipt of the letter,
but also, I think, Councillor Stevenson,
who's my seconder, has an amendment to make two.
- So, a nod of, we're gonna put it on the floor
to receive, moved by Councillor Cudi,
a nod from Councillor Stevenson, yes.
Okay, so it's on the floor, Councillor Stevenson.
- And then, as an amendment, can we talk,
well, no, I wanna talk about it first,
and then I think I'll have an amendment in terms
of just,
I just wanna make sure the wording of the motion
is right before we start messing around with it.
- Okay, so I'll pause you there.
So I had to have a conversation with staff in
advance.
We can certainly go to staff
to see what your questions might be about timing,
how many co-ops we're actually talking about,
if they're actually under city purview
or we have access to all their books,
is some of them are mandated by us
but versus provincial and federal mandates
so they might be governed under, yeah.
- Well, I think if I can just narrow the scope of
that,
'cause I'm sure it'll be interesting,
but it's, my understanding, and I haven't talked
to Councillor Frank, is it talks about the city's
oversight
of it, so we're talking about the city's piece of
this,
rather than the complexities of all the others,
right?
But there's a city piece to this, okay.
- It depends if a person is interpreting
as the city's funders of it, or the city also has
like inspection stuff going on at site,
or we're supporting some residents on site.
If staff could high-level speak to how they would
interpret
realizing where we're at in the conversation and
what you've heard of if
you have any numbers of how many co-ops or how
you would review this?
Yeah, through the through the chair there's a
couple of questions there so the
way that I read it and feel free if there's
someone has different
interpretation is that it is very much focused on
as our responsibility as part
of our role as the service manager for the
service area. So currently there's 16
co-ops within our service area 15 of those are in
London and then one would be in
Middlesex County. So again would have been
helpful I suppose if we chatted
before but the way I see this is the situation
that happened at a toll
pedal. I as a counselor would like to know what
we're doing and because what
happened was that came out through media again
right but the thing is if
what is the role as service manager to ensure
that we've got safe housing out
there we're funding it so we want to know that it
's safe out there and that
that we can as council can help the situation and
so I support some kind of
review over what is currently being done because
what I saw didn't work so if
staff could help us that way help us help you. So
I'll go to Mr. Mathers for the
answer. I'm going to highlight this can always be
something we just passed receipt of a committee
and work on well-worded amendments with staff
outside of this. Just mindful that this could
take an extended period of time, not knowing the
intent of the person who submitted the
letter to us and staff's answers behind the
scenes in addition to audit questions themselves
and not knowing that list of 16 co-ops
that would actually perhaps may or may not
have more interest in than others.
Mr. Mathers.
- Yeah, through the chair.
So I think some of the things that we hear
as significant concerns, and I agree with as well
,
are covered within this piece.
So the tenant placement, the asset management,
I think that's a really important piece as well.
And then also the governance,
there's of course a difference between how co-op
is governed
and many of the typical other housing providers
are governed.
So I think those would be really important things
to consider as part of an audit.
- Hey, and just realizing it also is like a
future audit.
We already have our audits queued up
for this term in contract that's coming back.
Just timing-wise, are we anticipating this would
be
the next round of things we contract
out post this term in council?
Ms. Barbone, just timing and just trying to
understand.
- Thank you through the chairs.
So right now, we have the audits that are set
before until the end of council.
In 2027, there would be a revised risk assessment
and a revised audit plan.
So we don't have a project plan for 2027.
So what I would suggest is that if there is an
interest in the committee to have this
looked at, that it be referred to the 2027 or the
development of the new internal audit
plan that would take place as part of the 2027
review.
So that would be subject to the audit committee
and then would be part of the development.
Because depending on the risk assessment, the
audit committee at the time may or may not,
in terms of what the timing would be on this,
would be best put forward as the audit committee
is looking at the revised risk assessment to see
where that fits in terms of priority
and with respect to timing.
There wouldn't be any other capacity to put any
audits in for this year, so that would
my recommendation is to have that forwarded for
the review that will take place in 27 and then
the audit committee can determine and forward
that to the auditors as part of that review.
Thank you. So that sounds good. In practice are
we then just changing the wording so instead of
being requested to add to the internal audit plan
we're requesting to include in the review of the
the 2027 audit plan, or to consider, to consider?
- I think, Councillor, we could just,
we're receiving it, we could forward it to that
timeline
that Ms. Barbone lined out.
And then at that time, whoever is on audit can
consider
the things Councillor Frank laid out
as potential scope items, being governance,
property management, and get advice from the
auditor
at the time of how much those are actually
identifiable
that they could bring back a report looking at
that.
When you say forward, are you talking about a
referral?
- Yeah, we received the letter
and we refer it to the future audit committee
to review with that risk assessment plan
that Ms. Barbara laid out,
'cause there's not capacity left
with the audits in this term account.
- Yeah, no, and I get it.
The only concern I have is that then staff
aren't including it in the initial one,
so then it would come with staff's audit plan, I
'm assuming,
and then we'd have to try to squeeze it in.
We are the next council.
Mr. Schultz says it could be referred to civic
administration for them to put that into the plan
Consideration wasn't comes back miss barbone
procedurally to you. How would your team if we
are interested in having this considered
collective we of the next term of we?
procedurally, how would your team do it if we
referred it to where you said
Thank you through the chair. So one of the first
things that would occur in I'm assuming there
would be a February
audit committee that this be referred to the
audit committee that in
2027 to be considered as part of the risk
assessment and development of the revised
internal audit plan because the very first step
will be
the auditors will be meeting with the
New audit committee at that time and that risk
assessment would begin and then there would be a
process for the internal audit
to then develop what that draft audit plan would
be
for the audit committee's consideration.
So it'll be subject to the audit committee's
approval
as part of the plan, but if you refer it to
consideration
of the risk assessment and internal audit plan,
then it can be appropriately scoped and reviewed
as part of where that level of risk might be
and where the timing might fall
in terms of developing that internal audit plan.
If that's helpful.
- Okay.
Mr. Shultez wrote down some nice things.
said he will massage it out of the wording's
exact
to a smart phone, had laid out for that first
audit
community and can have that information
when it is scheduled for the next term of counsel
.
Councillor Steeveson, the floor was yours.
- Okay, I'm just gonna ask one question
and then I'm gonna move whatever is drafted there
.
But I just wanna, through you to MNP,
I just wanna ask, is it even a possibility
for this committee, or anything's possible,
but do you know what I mean?
feasible to for us to put this in the December
one.
I'm assuming that that's just not good timing,
but I just gonna ask so that we know for sure
that we prioritize it as fast as we could.
- This December, 2026 December?
- Yeah, because that one isn't, yes.
Mr. Racco.
- Through you, Madam Chair, and thank you for the
question.
The one caution I would considering some of the
information
was provided there with regards to the scale, the
number of co-ops, everything like that.
I do feel that considering the significance of
this, the committee as well as everybody
would want to make sure that there is appropriate
scoping of this one to make sure that this
one is right.
And again, considering timing and whatnot, I
would feel, again, anything is possible.
I do not necessarily feel it would lead to the
best outcomes.
Thank you. I thought that was going to be the
answer, but there's a lot of desperate eyes on
this
And so I just wanted them to know as well that
they're really we're not just putting this off
that it really is impractical to do in
2026, so I'm happy to move the draft did referral
social as we read out roughly ish what it is
we heard that there was
16 co-ops in one and middle sex do we want the
middle sex one two or just the one and ones staff
for clarification
- When you said 16 were London, Mr. Mathers?
Ms. Datersphere?
Sorry, I was looking for clarification from Mr. M
athers
that the 16 co-ops, 16 were in London
and one was outside of London, 15 in London,
which--
- Through the chair, 15 in London
and one outside of London for a total of 16.
- Okay, we'll stay in London.
- Just the London ones, okay, so the 15 co-ops in
London.
- I'll second that chair, I think.
- Okay, Mr. Shultez, do you want to read up-ish
what it is, realizing Ms. Bourbon will add in her
timelines
and a wording of things as they word them.
certainly through the chair to avoid over
specificity
after the communication from Council Frank dated
May 27th,
2026 be referred to future meeting of audit
committee
in Q1, 2027 for consideration as part of risk
assessment.
- Yeah, I think civic administration was gonna
touch it
first to see where it can fit to come in that
first meeting.
Okay, and then just for clarification,
that will be officially typed up with timelines
in our council package from the audit meeting
so we can finish verifying wording at that point
just 'cause we don't use e-scribe today.
- Okay, perfect.
And so it's civic administration and audit
committee?
- Yeah, they'll get it first to put in a report
and then that report will come to the first
meeting of audit
when the new council sits and the new committee
sits.
Okay, so Councilor Stevenson was fine with the
rough wording
that will be massaged out.
Councilor Cuddy was the seconder on that.
Okay, it is on the floor for the referral
attorney's committee members first.
Councilor Stevenson?
- I just think Councillor Frank for this,
I appreciate the attention to it.
On behalf of the toll puddle residents,
I've talked to some of them
and they were appreciative of this.
So thank you.
- Thank you, Councillor Frank,
knowing that we did something slightly different
based on audit committee plans
and ways to accommodate what this could look like
.
Would you like to speak next to it?
- Sure, yeah.
I'm just happy it is moving forward.
I am but a leaf in a river of bureaucracy.
And if this is where the river goes,
and I shall follow and appreciate that it will be
reviewed
in a future committee's consideration package.
Thanks.
- Thank you, Councillor Truss,
so you had your hand up patiently.
- Yes, so my thinking on this,
if I may address what's on the floor,
is I think it's important that we don't over
order
a lot of different small audits.
And wait, what I need to have a better
understanding of,
and I'll work on this,
is what's the proper size for an audit?
because my concern about the way this is worded,
and it's better now,
but this shouldn't be about what happened at toll
puddle.
This should be about a broader operational issue
about how the service manager deals with co-ops,
or perhaps even more broadly how the service
manager
deals with, you know, RGI units and other
affordable units.
And I think that before we order another,
Before we set the scope for another audit,
we need to think very carefully
about what we want the scope of that audit to be.
'Cause one thing I've learned today
is at the end of the discussion,
you're gonna be limited to discussing
what was in the scope of the audit.
And it might be that we need to look at some
broader issues
in terms of how the service manager deals
with a for low-income housing.
Maybe it should just be targeted to telephoto,
but I think the problem with targeting it too
narrowly
to one building is then it becomes a question of
what was done wrong in this
building and I think for for service review for
audit purposes we should
looking we should be looking at broader process
and policy questions so I was
not going to be able to support the way it was
originally drafted this is better
but I think it's still is going to need some more
work and I will address that
further at council thank you sir if you could
take the chair I'll make a brief
comment? Okay, thank you. I've got the chair. Go
ahead. Thank you. I'll be interested in this
one when it comes back. I'm not sure who will be
in these chairs when it comes back to the next
round of audit next term of council. I was
appreciating Councillor Frank's last three words
of the solution orientated focus. For me, it
really is about best practices and ways to align
what people can expect across the housing coops
just in the
standards based on what building they built move
into
realizing something might move around our pet
experience in
different ones that we can build best practices
for their
communities governance and board in governance
and board
training I know we've already done some some work
towards those
things and and we talked about the RGI's and
other things that
at Mr. Mather's department, Mr. Felberg's working
on
in different training.
I think this could also be,
as much as we've learned from some past things,
a good story about ways we're changing going
forward
in the communities being strong amongst
themselves as well.
And I'm proud of where they're living in some
cases.
I think that's also a story that sometimes gets
overlooked
to really looking forward to when this comes back
of what actually is the recommended scope based
in the letter and what actually is possible,
realizing some information not might not be
available
across the board or some might just not have
to not tracking in certain ways.
So, interest in that, I'll leave my comments
there.
Councillor Stevenson.
- Thank you, I'll return the chair to you
and I would just like to make a couple of final
comments.
- Okay, I'll call it closing comments, Councillor
Stevenson.
- Okay, thanks.
Yeah, I think for sure there's lots of,
with toll pedal, they have,
and I don't know if it's more unique
and some of the other ones, but it's a very high
RGI unit count.
I can't remember exactly, but it's almost all of
them.
They have very little control over who goes into
those units.
They've had the same problems that were happening
at 122 baseline.
They don't have access to hardening the building
and increasing the budgets.
And we've got co-ops out there, run by members
who are doing the best that they can.
Some maybe need help, some maybe are doing what
they can,
but this has been a cry for help.
- Councilor, just on the referral, keep it tight,
please.
- And so I appreciate the referral
and I appreciate that an audit might be able
to contribute solution oriented stuff.
How can we help what is needed in order to ensure
that we're getting what we all want?
I know everyone here wants to provide safe,
affordable housing and it's at risk.
It is very much at risk right now.
And so this extra tool through Councillor Frank's
motion here
is something that the next council
might be able to put into action.
- Thank you.
I have no comments online, none.
Chambers, this is for a receipt of the
correspondence
from Councillor Frank
and referring to civic administration
for they can bring it back with the risk
management stuff
for audit come the next term of council.
Show of hands of all in favor.
- Motion carries.
- Thank you, that just poses of our items for
direction
deferred matters additional business.
There is none, confidential session.
We do have one item as it's outlined on the
public agenda
for personal matters, identify individuals,
being 6.1, I will need a motion to go in close,
moved by Councillor Cuddy, second by myself,
show of hands of all in favor of confidential
session.
- Motion carries.
- Okay, one moment as we switch from chairs
around.
Thank you, we're now back in the open session.
If I can turn it over to Councillor Stevenson
to report out on IM 6.1, for which we want in
camera.
- Thank you, yes, I've got that on the
recommendation
of the deputy city manager finance supports
with the concurrence of the city manager,
the following actions be taken
with respect to the appointment of an outsourced
internal auditor
for a quest for proposal, RFP 2026-062 internal
audit services.
A, the firm of MNP LLP be appointed as the
preferred firm
for the provision of internal audit services
for a period of four years beginning January 1st,
2027,
plus the option to renew for one additional one-
year term.
B, the civic administration be authorized
to undertake all the administrative acts that are
necessary
in connection with this contract.
C, approval hereby given be conditional
upon the corporation entering into a formal
contract,
relating to the subject matter of this approval.
And D, the mayor and city clerk be authorized
to execute the agreement in C above.
- Mr. Stevenson, you're moving that as you read
it?
- I am moving that.
- Seconder, Councillor Cutty, any debate?
- No, thank you to all those who applied.
- So they, hey, call on the question then.
All in favor by a show of hands.
- Motion carries.
- Thank you, that concludes the formal agenda.
bringing us to a German, a motion to a German
would be moved by
Councillor Cuddy seconded by Councillor Stevenson
and show a
hands motion carries. Thank you. We're adjourned.