Awkward comes to mind; out of order business, a resident being denied an opportunity to speak, motions/notices of motion, belabouring points, apologies and then the usual time wasters like passing the gavel and stating a question was already answered when someone else asked it.
Another time-waster, kudos. Compliments from Mayor Prue for admin being almost up to date with the minutes; Councillor Crain thanked and commended staff for a 50,000 surplus being used for future maintenance projects at the Libro; Councillor McArthur didn’t want to throw staff under the bus – they spent a lot of time crafting that new procedural bylaw.
During the Duffy’s discussion, when Mayor Prue noticed a raised hand in the audience, he stated that council changed the procedural bylaw and that generally does not allow for this; council would now have to unanimously vote to hear Mr. Amlin.
Is it ironic that the August 1 memo to council was titled, Procedural By-law Renewal for Greater Civic Participation and Engagement?
Deputy Mayor Gibb opined they cannot give an opportunity to people who are physically in the room that they aren’t giving to people who are watching from home for whatever reason, be it you know, physically not being able to be here. He said he was sorry but he wasn’t going to support it. He felt it was a question of equity between those who can physically be here and those who can’t.
Mayor Prue stated he didn’t have to go any further, it wasn’t unanimous; he also apologized and advised Mr. Amlin they couldn’t hear him.
Councillor McArthur wanted to back up Gibb as he didn’t want to leave him hanging out on a limb. He stated they’ve all received emails that it’s unfair to people who can’t be present in the room and to have people in the gallery come up and speak. You know, that’s one reason. And the second reason is he didn’t want to throw staff under the bus. They spent a lot of time crafting that new procedural bylaw to address what they perceive were deficiencies that could potentially allow meetings to go off the rails. He mentioned as a former journalist, he loved it but doesn’t anymore; it sends a bad message to staff. They unanimously supported that procedural Bylaw and he also apologized to Mr. Amlin.
At one point Prue stated they had a motion duly moved and seconded, then stated he thought they did then they did.
Councillor Pouget inquired about correspondence from North Star. The clerk advised it did not come in time for the agenda submission so it would be on a future agenda. Pouget said time was of the essence and she understood that she could bring it up under new business. Mayor Prue stated it was her prerogative to raise it under new business that can be dealt with at this meeting just not now.
Moving on to 18.1 Economic Development Advisory Committee minutes. Gibb commented on the request to ‘consider’ and then noted he meant that for the next item.
Next item, 19.1, Co-An Park Advisory Committee minutes and Prue acknowledged Gibb had a question or something. Gibb mentioned the accessibility advisory committee meeting to ‘consider’ an item. The clerk mentioned Co-An park and Gibb clarified he was speaking to 19.2 as thought they had dealt with 19.1 and the discussion continued.
Next, 19.2, Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes. Gibb’s question was about the committee calling on the town and the developer to build a sidewalk along Pickering drive; he asked if this is something to debate in budget or if they were going to get some kind of recommendation from staff.
Related: AAAC Discussed New LCBO At Length.
Since McArthur made the motion at the committee meeting, he provided a background.
Prue acknowledged the Deputy CAO, who stated no, they can not compel the developer to put the sidewalk in; it would be a town expense. She would suggest that if Council wishes to move in that direction, it may be appropriate for the director of infrastructure services to provide a report first, because current policies around the types of roads that Pickering is does not require a sidewalk on both sides. So should Council elect to put a sidewalk on both sides they will probably need to ensure that they’re not setting any precedents that all collector roads throughout the town then require sidewalks on both sides.
The discussion continued about the location of the sidewalk, whether it would be a portion to the first driveway or all the way to the sidewalk on Pickering.
Prue passed the gavel to comment about the LCBO. He said it’s one of the smallest he’s seen anywhere and it has a sidewalk and a ramp; what is being proposed is less than we have now. He mentioned how the town would have to pay; the Ontario government took away the authority of this municipality and council to insist that this be built. He ended by saying he just finds this horrendous and then took the gavel back.
Then there was a question of whether it would be possible to seek funding and the answer was probably not.
McArthur moved a two part motion that carried for 1. that administration approach the developer to see if a creative solution can be found to address this issue and provide access for all people, which seems redundant, considering the advice the developer cannot be compelled and discussion has already taken place, and 2. if that goes nowhere, that administration come back with a report in time for the 2024 budget with options to put a sidewalk there.
Next item but they had to revisit 19.2 for the third part of the AAAC motion.
Drainage Board minutes, unfinished business and next item Notice of Motion 22; no, go back to 21. New Business which will be in an upcoming post.
the burg watch 
