The Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin
Central Elgin Regular/Planning Meeting Of Council On Monday, September 23rd, 2019
Roll Call - All present.
Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof - None disclosed.
Adoption of Minutes
Minutes from the Regular/Planning Meeting of Council dated August 26 and the Regular
Meeting of Council dated September 9, 2019 were adopted.
1. Fernie Street
Mary Paterson was in attendance to discuss Fernie Street.
Disposition of Fernie Street
My name is Mary Paterson and I live at 165 Brayside Street, Port Stanley. I am speaking
tonight on behalf of my husband Bruce and my family with regards to the disposition
of Fernie Street. We sincerely regret how desperate this situation has become. As
Mr. Trevenna clearly points out in his letter from 2015, "This is not or has never
been a question of gaining an upper hand against the Taras to prevent them from
getting what they want. This is simply about protecting environmentally sensitive
land that has been zoned both natural heritage and 'natural hazard' land and allowing
us to maintain access to the eastern portion of our property for enjoyment and maintenance.
For the benefit of Councillors who were not on Council in 2015 we have submitted
two presentations made to Council by Ken and Melissa Trevenna of 141 Brayside St.
that dispute many of the claims Lori and Dana Taras make in their July 17th, 2019
letter. The letters also state clearly what transpired back in 2015. We would like
to address Council's decision to proceed with Option 1, regarding the disposal of
Fernie St., by providing conveyances solely to the Trevenna's and the Taras'. We
respectfully disagree with Councils conclusion and ask Council to take into account
the concerns and objections outlined below before proceeding further.
After Council received a letter from the Taras' back on July 17th, 2019 a decision
was made to close and sell part of Fernie St. To the best of our knowledge none
of the interested parties apparently other than the Taras were aware that the matter
was coming up for consideration on July 22nd. The reason the Taras' were aware of
the situation regarding the resolution on the disposition of Fernie Street was because
it was a direct result of a complaint lodged by the Taras' against the Trevenna's
who were doing some landscaping work on the western portion of their property abutting
Fernie Street. There was no consideration given to the change of ownership of one
of the abutting parcels and no notice, not even a telephone call, given to the abutting
property owners at 165, 151 and 157 Brayside that Council was bringing up a matter
that was last heard at Council in 2015.
For Council and Municipal staff to make a decision based on a letter from Laurie
and Dana Taras that contains inaccurate statements is not a fair, equitable or responsible
manner to proceed. A few of the inaccurate statements from the Taras letter dated
July 17th are listed here.
Contrary to the Taras letter that stated there were no objections from officials
at Kettle Creek Conservation Authority with respect to building a roadway across
the ravine. The fact is Kettle Creek Conservation Authority made it clear, that
the land in question was designated 'natural heritage' and 'natural hazard' land,
making it unsuitable for use as an access roadway and building sites without myriad
of studies by qualified professionals.
We have provided an elevation photo that shows a severe topography of the land that
the Taras' want to build a roadway through.
Mr. Joe Gordon from Kettle Creek Conservation Authority in an email to Lori Taras
"I do express caution regarding any potential proposal to build a future home upon
the property and an application for consent to sever the land for the creation of
a new building lot would be discouraged. "
Mr. Gordon went on to say: "Generally the provincial policy requires new development
to be directed to areas outside of erosion hazards. Several provincial natural heritage
and natural hazard policies would have to be addressed through studies prepared
by qualiﬁed professionals in order to consider an application to sever the property."
The Taras' also state in their letter that they had discussions with Central Elgin
Municipal staff and there were "no objections" to their plan to build the laneway
and the subsequent construction of structures on the north side of the ravine. We
requested that Central Elgin staff identify which officials arrived at that opinion
but we received no response to our request. We would like the Taras' to identify
the staff member or members at Central Elgin that had "no objections" to their plan,
in order to validate the claim in their letter and allow us to consider and debate
the rational which appears to be contrary to both Central Elgin's and the County
of Elgin's Official Plan and now the applicable Forestry retention by-laws.
Central Elgin Staff and undoubtedly some members of Council will remember the plans
of Mr. Houghton, the Taras' immediate predecessor in title for the subject Taras
Lands. We submitted a sketch of Mr. Houghton's property from 2004 showing the Taras
property as a potential development title Orchard Beach Heights outlining 20 possible
units or lots on this land. We understood at the time one of the many obstacles
Houghton faced with his plan as would any development by the Taras' or even ourselves
on our ravine lands was the absence of sufficient road access to Brayside which
the proposed Taras portion of Fernie St would address and provide, as to Taras'
lands and not our ravine lands.
There is also mention in the letter of requisite approvals having been obtained
by the Taras' from an engineering survey which supported the fact that a laneway
could be built. We ask that the Taras' supply the documentation which confirm these
conclusions for the benefit of fair, knowledgeable, Council consideration.
Council was urged by Staff to consider "access" and "need" by the Taras's for access.
It needs to be pointed out that the Taras' already have access to their property,
by 20 feet off Brayside and 21 feet running along the northerly limits behind the
Dunn's property at 149 Brayside St. This land is sufficient enough for them to provide
"access need" and thereafter construct a small art studio for their Mother in-law
as per their claim in the July 17th letter to Council.
Our submission and the view of the vast majority of residents on Brayside Street
is simple that Council request the Taras' to provide studies and analysis by qualified
professionals to confirm, for the benefit of Council, that indeed there is even
a legitimate and viable way to construct an access roadway across the lands and
ravine without affecting, encroaching or trespassing on the abutting properties
of the Trevenna’s, Paterson's and Van Torres. If the Taras' can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of all parties involved that when constructing a roadway through the
ravine, there will be no negative impacts to the natural features and/or functions
for which the land is designated. Council at that time can make an educated decision
on the disposition of Fernie Street. Until that point in time we respectively request
If the determination is that it is not feasible or permissible to build such access
roadway, then it would logically follow that the Taras' "need", which has been the
cornerstone of their requirement and apparent support of staff, is not a cogent
and valid basis for proceeding in a fair, equitable non historical manner of division
of a closed road allowance. It would be giving the the Taras' an extraordinary unfair
parcel of land, half of Fernie Street, resulting in an increase of their landholding,
an argument the Taras advanced against us, and repeated by Staff, against the "usual
division" back in 2015.
Losing our access through Fernie Street would also result in us not being able to
access the east portion of our property, which due to the topography, is the only
viable access we have to our lands in the ravine.
We are currently able to take our children and our grandchildren to a perch on the
eastern side our property, only accessible off of Fernie Street and enjoy the view
of the wildlife and the peaceful and serene setting in the ravine. If we lose our
Fernie Street access we totally lose the use and enjoyment of the eastern portion
of our property as well as losing the ability to maintain that portion.
We have the same "need" that the Taras submit, yet our "need" was not addressed
by Staff nor Council in its deliberations. In the future if an access driveway and/or
residences or cottages are built on the ravine lands we would have lost our access
via the Fernie Street road allowance to Brayside, by Councils decision. We apologize
for our ignorance but don't understand how a by-law can pass that takes away our
access to the eastern portion of our property.
In conclusion, if Council feels it is necessary to put this matter to an end before
obtaining all the expert analysis and studies prepared by qualified professionals,
we simply ask Council to agree to the historical manner of division which is to
divide the closed road amongst the abutting_property owners in a fair and equitable
manner. This would result in a three way split of Fernie St. between 165 Brayside
to the west, 151 Brayside to the east and 141 Brayside to the north. Contrary to
the Taras letter we supported the three way split option in 2015 and feel this is
the best solution moving forward.
The three way split of Fernie Street will allow us continued access to the eastern
portion of our land for enjoyment and maintenance of our property, it will allow
the Trevenna’s to have control over their driveway and it won't prevent the Taras
from constructing a small art studio for their Mother on the northern portion of
their land. It's a win, win, win solution.
In conclusion, the disposition of land by a municipality, for a nominal sum, must
be done in an open, fair and informed manner. We believe that we have provided options
that are fair and equitable to all the parties involved. The equal disposition to
abutting property owners is a formula and precedent that has been used in other
road closures and we respectively submit that formula/solution is the fair and equitable
method to be followed.
2. Fernie Street
Lori Taras was in attendance to discuss Fernie Street.
Closure and Disposal of Unopened Part Fernie Street Road Allowance
We would like to start by thanking you and the Central Elgin Staff for your continued
diligence regarding the disposal of the Fernie Street Road Allowance. As you can
appreciate the resolution of this matter has been extremely difficult. Many considerations
have been made on what we may intend to do with our property should you confirm
the disposition of the Fernie Street Road Allowance expressed in proposed By-law
I can assure everyone here tonight that we have not made any firm decision on any
changes with respect to our property. There have been no public representations
other than a desire for lane access and the potential of building a new single dwelling.
But none of that has been translated into anything formal for either Council or
the public to consider, nor has any of those possibilities relevant or mandated
at law to determine the sale of surplus lands.
We have read many of the submissions of parties interested in the disposition. They
have raised many points for consideration, however those concerns and questions
are appropriate in the formal process as defined by law when and if applied to the
Municipality to consent for a variance, or other permit procedures.
Any attempt to confuse or to introduce matters relevant in those processes to the
consideration of the will first expressed on July 22nd, 2019 are inconsistent and
again non-applicable. We have chosen not to address those in this forum. Going forward
I know that we and Central Elgin will have an opportunity to reveal, amend, discuss
and debate along with the public should any application trigger the required notice
and consultations stipulated under Provincial Legislation and Central Elgin By-laws.
But all that is contingent upon our formal submission of applications and the regulatory
regimes that govern them.
That has not happen to date and we appreciate that the officers of the Municipality
and Staff have introduced no supplementary report or rational that dispositions
proposed by By-law 2412 has changed or become untenable in the last 61 days.
I again wish to express my families appreciation for Councils consideration of the
issue before us tonight. The disposition of surplus lands according to the process
and procedures stipulated both under the Municipal Act By-law 972 of Central Elgin.
Once both Delegations were finished with their presentations Mayor Martyn asked
Central Elgin Planner what would be involved in trying to develop on Natural Hazard
or Natural Heritage Land. Mr. McClure replied that prior to any development studies
would have to be done to find out if what's proposed can occur on those lands. Mr.
McClure also gave a very detailed explanation of all the types of studies that would
apply to the Natural Hazard or Natural Heritage designated lands. Mayor Martyn also
discussed the ways the Fernie Street Road Allowance could be split and then asked
if there were anymore questions concerning this property.
Mr. Leith Coghlin commented that he was agent for the Taras. In respect to the comments
from your planner, I can appreciate his elucidation on the various components at
play in respect to a development. But that is not material, the issue at hand before
Council today. Where there's going to be or the potential for development that is
triggered by process. That process manifests in an application, and there is a whole
bunch of stipulations within the regulatory regime of that process that have to
be adhered to and followed. So all of the items of professional review of studies,
of confirmed technical reports and support of any proposal for development are secondary
to the issue before you. This disposition of land does not include a proposal for
development. It is simply disposition of surplus lands as the By-law currently reads
unless Council expresses the will to amend that. But all of those concerns enumerated
by the other parties. The Taras don't take any definitive position as to whether
they are of merit or whether they are deficient. They are simply submitting to Council
this evening that they are not applicable with respect to this matter, and that
there do exist further forms and outlets that when the Taras have taken the decision
that they wish to change any use of their lands. If they wish to erect a structure
or structures, they will have to submit to the regime and the stipulations Mr. McCoomb
outlines. But that is not material to the matter that is before you today. So the
application for the supposition that any of those requirements, studies, analysis,
approvals, third-party reviews such as from the Kettle Creek Conservation Authority
or the County of Elgin, or any Provincial oversight or agencies with respect to
Natural Hazard, Natural Heritage or any of those other elements are not material.
And so I would encourage Council to defer to that reality and acknowledge that all
the enumerated concerns are still relevant, are still in play, and can still be
debated when and if the Taras with respect to their property wish to engage in that
process. Furthermore any of the other parties that are enjoined in this By-law decided
that they wish to do anything such as a parallel process timeline and stipulations
exist that have to be followed there as well.
So I think that is important clarification to offer with respect to the condition
of the lands, slope stability, and all of those other items. There valid, but there
are not material for the disposition of surplus land.
Mayor Martyn commented that the Taras did make it known that they needed the land
for access to their property.
Mr. Coghlin replied that he took no dispute with whether or not they made a statement
that they may have had a need however that alone in isolation is not necessarily
something that a Council can contemplate with respect to this By-law. If your going
contemplate a needs based test for anything to do with development that is subject
to stipulations under the Planning Act, and under your development By-Laws. And
the Taras will have to submit to that, and they are not taking issue with that,
but with the disposition of the surplus lands. That's what's before you and that
is part one of a larger process and a larger issue. Council needs an application
before it to consider all studies, all of the inputs, etc.
Discussion continued for sometime on what to do next as the By-law prepared for tonight
was agreed upon at the previous meeting in July and was for a two-way split of
the property, and now that Council was leaning toward a three-way split. So the motion
on the prepared two-way split was defeated and a new three-way split motion was
presented and passed that from east to west gave the Trevenna's 20 feet, the Taras
25 feet, and the Paterson's 5 feet.
3. First Street
Lisa Finch-Harrison was in attendance to discuss purchase of First Street.
Lisa Finch-Harrison stated that she accepted the terms of purchase as provided, and
would it be possible to obtain a copy of the survey. She would also like to confirm
the timing on the relocation of the items mentioned in the email from Mr. Perrin,
and would like to make arrangements for payment as soon as possible. Staff indicated
that a digital copy of the reference plan would be forwarded and the agreement of
purchase and sale will be processed as soon as our lawyer gets to it. The road work
and relocation of the fire hydrant should be completed by the end of October.
1. 2020 ROMA Conference
Registration/Hotel Information for 2020 ROMA Conference - Sunday, January 19 to
Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at Sheridan Centre, Toronto
A Motion by Councillor Fehr and Seconded by Deputy Mayor Marks that the Council of
the Corporation of the Municipality of Central Elgin approves any member of Council
or staff to attend the 2020 ROMA Conference being held from Sunday, January 19 to
Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at the Sheridan Centre in Toronto. Carried.
2. Preserving Rail Corridors and Expanding Rail Usage
Copy of letter sent from the Town of Aylmer to Karen Vecchio, MP, Elgin-Middlesex-London
respecting preserving rail corridors and expanding rail usage.
Moved by Deputy Mayor Marks and seconded by Councillor Fehr that Council receive
correspondence from the Town of Aylmer for the preservation rail corridors and expanding
rail usage be endorsed. Carried.
Correspondence (for Council's Information)
A Motion by Councillor Crevits and Seconded by Councillor Roberts that Correspondence
for Council's Information Items #1 - #13 excluding #6, and #8 be received as information
and filed. Carried.
Items #6, and #8 were taken, endorsed and Carried separately.
1. Community Benefit Charges (C.B.C.) and changes to Development Charges Act (D.C.A.)
Copy of letters to the Province on C.B.C. and D.C. - Review and Commentary by Watson
& Associates Economists Ltd.
Correspondence received from MPAC announcing new MPAC Board Chair
3. Southwest Health
Copy of End of Summer Update from thehealthline.ca
4. Port Stanley BIA Board of Management
Copy of Minutes from BIA Board of Management meeting dated July 17th, 2019.
5. Catfish Creek Conservation Authority
Copy of minutes of CCCA meeting dated June 13, 2019.
6. Electronic Delegations
Correspondence received from Larder Lake seeking support to allow for electronic
delegations with Ministers or the Premier.
7. County Fire Training Officer
Correspondence received from the County of Elgin in response to Central Elgin's
resolution to the County respecting recruitment of County Fire Training Officer.
8. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA)
Copy of correspondence received from Upper Thames River Conservation Authority respecting
winding-down of mandatory and non-mandatory programs.
9. Celebrate Central Elgin
Copy of minutes from Celebrate Central Elgin meeting dated August 15, 2019.
Correspondence received from the County of Elgin respecting Phraghmites Management
11. Enbridge Gas Inc.
Communication from Enbridge Gas Inc. regarding Application for Certificates of Public
Convenience and Necessity.
Correspondence received from CUPW respecting Canada Post and 2019 Federal Election.
13. County of Elgin Land Division Committee
Notice of Decisions for County of Elgin Land Division Committee Maccorone, E47/19
& Sanderson, E50/19
Central Elgin Planning Office
1. CEP 60-19 Application for Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval - Craigholme Estates
Limited, Phase 6
A Motion by Councillor Roberts and Seconded by Councillor Fehr that Report CEP 60-19
be received as information; And that Council support, in principle,the proposed
Draft Plan of Subdivision, File No. 34T-CE1902, on lands owned by Craigholme Estates
Limited, which lands may be legally described as Part of Lot 2, Concession 7, also
described as Part 1 on Plan 33R-8653, Former Village of Belmont, now Municipality
of Central Elgin; And that the CAO-Clerk be directed to prepare draft comments on
behalf of the Municipality respecting technical, financial and administrative matters
relative to Draft Plan of Subdivision 34T—CE1902; And further that a date for a
public meeting be scheduled for Monday October 28th, 2019 at 7:00 pm in accordance
with Ontario Regulation 545/06 as amended. The Motion was Carried.
2. CEP 61-19 Application to Amend the Village of Belmont Zoning By-law 91-21 - Belmont
Estates Phase 6 - Craigholme Estates Limited
A Motion by Councillor Roberts and Seconded by Councillor Row that Report CEP 61-19
be received as information; And that direction be given by Council to prepare draft
amendments to the Zoning By-law to permit the Phase 6 of the Belmont Estates Draft
Plan of Subdivision (File No. 34T-CE1902) on lands that may be legally described
as Concession 7 North, Part of Lot 1, Registered Plan 33R8653, Former Village of
Belmont, now Municipality of Central Elgin; And further that a date for a public
meeting be scheduled for Monday October 28th, 2019 at 7:00 pm in accordance with
Ontario Regulation 545/06 as amended. The Motion was Carried.
Chief Administrative Officer
1. CAO 50-19 August 2019 Monthly Building Report
Permit value for August 2019 - $2,916,608.00
Permit value for August 2018 - $1,510,000.00
Permit value for year to date (2019) - $38,805,632.00
Permit value for previous year (2018) - $43,603,786.00
Total permits for present year (2019) to date 286
Total permits for previous year (2018) to date 333
Total New Homes for present year (2019) to date 203
Total New Homes for previous year (2018) to date 222
A Motion moved by Councillor Fehr and seconded by Deputy Mayor Marks that Council
receive Report CAO 50-19 - August 2019 Monthly Building Report be received as information.
The Motion was Carried.
Director of Infrastructure & Community Services
1. ICS 04-19 Front Street Slope Stability RFP
Background: - The Municipality called for proposals for the Front Street
Slope Stability & Road Reconstruction Contract Administration and Design project
which closed at 2 pm on September 4, 2019. Three proposals were received. One consultant
was disqualified based on a lack of project understanding causing an imbalanced
financial submission. Of the two remaining consultant proposals, lBl Group is the
recommended consultant based on the Municipalities' RFP evaluation template.
The predetermined budget for this project is $150,000. According to Section 3.7
of the Purchasing Policy, Council approval is required for differences greater than
The difference in proposal price to budget price is that this project requires a
Schedule "B" Environmental Assessment to gain Environmental Compliance Approval
from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Due to environmental
concerns, existing storm outlets may not be able to be utilized which triggers a
Schedule "B" EA.
The work contained in this proposal is projected to be completed in November of
2020 with construction considered for Spring in 2021 or 2022. Any delay in awarding
the project will push the construction portion further into 2022 or 2023. Noting
the scope of the project is to protect Front Street from further slope degradation,
it is recommended that the IBI Group proposal be awarded and the project move forward.
The budgeting short fall of approximately $60,000 plus an additional $40,000 for
legal survey fees, staff time and miscellaneous expenditures can be offset directly
from the surplus budget of 2019 capital projects that have been constructed under
budget. For example, the Municipality benefited from an aggressive tender bid for
the Old Lynhurst Road Improvements — Phase 2 project and will be approximately $400,000
A Motion moved by Deputy Mayor Marks and seconded by Councillor Fehr that Council
of the Municipality of Central Elgin award CERFP-002-19, Front Street Slope Stability
& Road Reconstruction Contract Administration and Design, to IBI Group for the proposed
price of $210,239.00 excluding HST. And that Council direct staff to reallocated
$100,000 from the surplus funds from the Old Lynhurst Road Improvements - Phase
2 capital budget to offset the budget shortfall on this project as per Report ICS
04-19. The Motion was Carried.
2. ICS 05-19 Garbage Bag Tag Program 2020
Background: - The Municipality of Central Elgin has been utilizing "Bag Tags"
for its Solid Waste Collection services since February 2007. Between 2007 and 2009
residential properties were provide 104 tags (2 per week).
The Solid Waste Management Plan adopted by Council recommends that Central Elgin
continue with utilizing bag tags to assist in imposing bag limits to residences
while still providing flexibility for the number of bags that can be placed curb-side.
Staff would also note that the use of "Bag Tags" is considered a best management
practice by Waste Diversion Ontario and Stewardship Ontario as it encourages recycling
and diversion from landfill.
Staff are seeking Council's confirmation that it wishes to continue with the utilization
of Bag Tags again for 2020 as well as direction with respect to the number of tags
to be provided by the municipality as a standard level of service. in previous years
Council has decreased the amount of bag tags by 5%. For the year of 2020 staff seek
approval to decrease bag tags to 61 for residential, 140 for commercial and 29 for
Staff would respectfully suggest that depots held in Belmont and Port Stanley in
the past have been very well attended. These days have been held at the arenas typically
for 4 hours during a week night as well as a 7 hour shift on a Saturday. Staff would
suggest that distribution centers be held on two evenings in Port Stanley and in
Belmont and the Saturdays in these arenas.
A Motion moved by Councillor Row and seconded by Councillor Roberts that Council
of the Municipality of Central Elgin confirm that it wishes to proceed with garbage
bag tags for solid waste for 2020. And that council confirm for 2020 residential
properties be provided 61 tags, commercial properties be provided 140 tags and that
farm be provided 29 tags. And that direction be given with respect to the distribution
of bag tags for 2020. The Motion was Carried.
3. ICS 06-19 Solid Waste Collection Schedule
Background: - As of the beginning of June 2019, the Municipality implemented
a two year pilot project to have solid waste collection done with its own staff.
Currently solid waste is collected on a five day - Monday to Friday weekly rotation.
There are five solid waste employees, with a rotating lead hand, two side loading
trucks and a rear packer truck. The project to date has been successful with less
service interruption and cost savings compared to the prior contracted services.
Staff is proposing to change from a five day to a four day collection schedule Tuesday
to Friday. The reason for the change is to avoid the weekend work required to accommodate
statutory holidays and disruption to the entire collection schedule.
Mr. Leitch commented that if garbage pickup for Port Stanley changes from Monday
to Tuesday and people put out their garbage on Sunday night that this would be considered
a By-law infraction.
A Motion moved by Deputy Mayor Marks and seconded by Councillor Crevits that Council
direct staff to proceed with the implementation of a four day per week garbage and
recycling collection schedule from the current five day schedule as per Report ICS
06-19. The Motion was Carried with only Councillor Cook opposed.
4. ICS 07-19 Heritage Central Elgin - Edith Cavell Sign
Background: - Heritage Central Elgin has designed a heritage sign explaining
the significance of the name Edith Cavell Boulevard. The design of the sign is attached
to this report. In the past, the Municipality has supported these signs by providing
the resources necessary to install these signs. If Council wishes to proceed with
the request from Heritage Central Elgin, staff will work with the group to select
an appropriate area to install the sign. The cost to the Municipality would be roughly
$300 and could be funded from the Parks and Recreation Maintenance Budget.
A Motion moved by Councillor Fehr and seconded by Councillor Row that Council direct
staff to install a Heritage Central Elgin sign respecting Edith Cavell along the
Edith Cavell Boulevard near the William Street intersection Wynot Park as per Report
ICS 07-19. The Motion was Carried.
Director of Financial Services/Treasurer
Director of Fire Rescue Services/Fire Chief
1. FS 12-19
Monthly Alarm Activities Report (August/19)
A Motion Moved by Councillor Fehr and Seconded by Deputy Mayor Marks that Report
FS 12-19 Monthly Alarm Activities Report August 2019 be received as information.
The Motion was Carried.
Director of Asset Management & Development Services
A Motion moved by Councillor Crevits and seconded by Councillor Roberts that By-laws
2410, and 2411 be taken collectively. The Motions were read 1st, 2nd, and 3rd time
and finally passed collectively.
1. By-law 2410 - Confirmatory By-law
2. By-law 2411 - Being a By-law to Establish Pay Schedule for Employees covered by
the Job Evaluation Scale
3. By-law 2412 - Being a By-law to Close and Sell Part of Fernie Street
Airbnb regulations could be on the horizon!
Closed Session - Council went into Closed Session at 9:05 P.M.
1. CS1 Closed Session Minutes
2. CS2 Personal Matters about an Identifiable Individual (s.239(2)(b)) - 2019 Central
Elgin Citizen Awards - Nominees
3. CS3 Solicitor-Client Privilege (s.239(2)(f)) - Edward Street
4. CS4 Litigation or Potential Litigation (s.(239(2)(e)) - Norton LPAT