(white noise)All right. Good afternoon, everyone. Eh, call the regular meeting of Township Council for Monday, June 29th to order. Now, of course, I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples, and in particular, our valued relationships with the Katzie, Quatman, Musqueam, and Semiahmoo First Nations. I'm gonna move the agenda amended to add a late delegation request, delegation C3 from Mr. Parker. Is there a seconder to moving the agenda? Seconded by Councilor Rent. Is there any discussion on A1 as amended? Council Bailey. Yes, I, I, I see that, and, uh, he is a declared candidate for the election, and, uh, I would request in the future, you know, when it first came up, that rule has been applied against myself, and that rule has also been applied against, uh, Russia Sabti. Uh, but, uh, staff has said that, uh, according to the charter that a submission is, uh, is allowed. So I would request in the future a definition of a submission would be, um, would be in order. Uh, I could interpret that as a submission would be a written submission. So I have no objection, uh, this time because it is unclear, but I think I would ask in the future, staff, that, eh, if you could, uh, also get clarification on what a submission is. Uh, you know, it could, uh, if it could be oral and/or written, but, uh, it's unclear this time. So I, uh ... I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not going to, uh, challenge a, a legal opinion of staff who are trained better than I am. All right. Council Barnes. Thank you. Um, I'm just wondering if I can through the chair to staff if, um, they could provide, um, clarification on what submission is intended to mean. Yep. No, they did that earlier today in an email to all of council that, uh, this delegation is in order due to the fact that it's specifically outlined in the community charter that councils are expected to receive the opportunity to ask questions under agenda item E1. So that was already clarified for you in an email today. Okay. I, I just, for the people listening today, that's why I was wondering if there could be further clarification provided. Yep. No, this is a council meeting. However, it's, it's, we're conducting council business, and you were already informed of that earlier today. So I'll call the question on A1 as amended. Ms. Power? Yep. Here we are. Thank you. That carries unanimously. Get a motion to adopt the agend- sorry, to adopt the minutes of June 15 moved by Council Ferguson, seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any questions or discussion? Nope. Call the question on B1. That carries unanimously. Get a motion to adopt the public hearing meeting minutes of June 15th moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Rin. See no discussion, call the question on B2. That carries unanimously. Our first delegation today is from Daniel Collins and Stephen Poiondi. Did I get that correct? Excellent. Please come forward, from the Inclusion Housing Coalition, and thank you for coming today, of course, and thank you for providing a copy of the presentation in advance, so please go ahead. Okay, there we go. Good afternoon, Mayor and council. Uh, my name is Dan Collins, as, uh, you said, and I'm with Stephen Poiondi today. Uh, some of you may recognize my face, I'm the sort of retired, uh, CEO of the Inclusion Langley Society, but, uh, never fully can break away from the, the goals and the vision and the mission of the organization that's been a part of who I am for most of my life. Stephen is a, a dad, and, um, has two sons who are in need of, uh- Three. Three. In- ... Uh, two in need of, uh, inclusive housing, and we're represented today by some of our friends and family and, uh, representatives from the coalition. It's made up of, um, um, families and concerned citizens who have an interest in inclusive housing for folks with disability, and for seniors. And so members of the Langley Seniors Action Table are here, and our friends from Roncare Society. And so probably the last two years, we've been in a process of, um, education and dialogue and awareness and information-gathering and, uh, and data-gathering to understand what the needs are of citizens in our community who live with a disability or who are aging and, uh, are in need of, uh, inclusive housing. There's lots of myths about what inclusive housing is, and so, um, it won't surprise you to hear we spent a little bit of time trying to, you know, come to a common understanding of what it, it meant for us, uh, and, and we have sort of landed that little bit of a, a definition. Oh, now this is not moving forward. (laughs) Of course we're going to have, uh... Can you see how we move it forward, Stephen? No. IT. (laughs) Technical help, uh, would be... I, I, I'll keep talking as you move the, uh... M- move it. They said a, a right click. Uh, you can just use the scroll. Okay. Just scroll. Beautiful. Okay. I'll use the scroll, thanks. Uh, i- inclusive housing, for us, meant safe- ... affordable, and we're gonna come back to that word, 'cause that's one of the challenging, uh, concepts that we struggled with. Accessible homes where people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and seniors with low income, can live by choice, choice being the operative word here, in dispersed mixed-income neighborhoods with the supports that they need to participate fully in community life. It's really important that we place an emphasis on the notion of dispersed and mixed income. Um, you know, we have, uh, generations of adults who were excluded from community, and we've spent the last 50 years in our community very successfully welcoming people back to community. Living in, in neighborhoods and in mixed housing is a really critical part, uh, of that, uh, reality. I'll scroll the right way. But there's some barriers for folks, and we have had a lot of conversation about this notion of an affordability gap. So, uh, for folks with intellectual disability who, uh, rely on income assistance, or persons with disability pension, it's $1,483 a month today, 500 of which is considered shelter. I might add that that's an increase in the last couple of years, uh, from 375 to 500, so, uh, it w- it isn't hard to do the math and to recognize how deeply complicated and improbable it is that a person living, uh, with a disability, uh, uh, and a, a, a person's disability pension can find and, uh, afford housing, not dissimilar for seniors, uh, uh, with fixed income, with, uh, old-age security and guaranteed income supplements of only 1850. So, the reality is that that massive gap of, uh, what we calculated, that $1,114, is what we need to make up to be able to ensure that, uh, people have access to, um, to housing. Next. Thank you. Uh, we worked with, uh, Inclusion British Columbia, one of our provincial organizations, and SPARK BC, and, uh, did an, uh, an examination of the 20 w- 2021 census data for Langley, and I wanted to, to draw your attention to the first two, uh, columns here. That's 9% of the population of Langley live with an income that's under $35,000 a year. Uh, uh, I think when I last looked, the population of Langley was slightly higher than 160,000. So, just in this small category, we're probably looking at 1500 people who are in core housing need in our community. Uh, so that's, that's a significant number of people, uh, who aren't able to access the housing, um, that, uh, that they require. Uh. So, uh, we have a couple of really sort of simple, uh, very complex and big asks. (laughs) The, the first of which is, uh, uh, a, a request to, to this council that we find ways to collaborate with, uh, local nonprofits and people with lived experience to deepen your understanding of the need that exists within our community, the growing number of citizens who, uh, by default live with families, um, and live with families well into their adulthood because there just isn't the affordability, uh, to move. There isn't the options. There isn't the housing that's available. And to look at the creating an inclusive housing strategy, the operative word being inclusive, not affordable, uh, that really gears rent, uh, to, uh, income. That's a sort of critical way that we look at what's possible, uh, and probable for people, and to begin to think about setting targets for increased housing stock for folks in our community. I'm, uh, delighted to answer any questions you may have. Yeah. Uh- Five minutes goes very fast. I appreciate that today, and, uh, I'll move a motion that we refer your, these three asks. It's really great to have them itemized for that, and I'll move a motion to refer those to staff to get the process started once we've concluded your delegation with questions. Councilor Kinz, go ahead. Yeah. Thank you, um, Dan, for, for coming here. Um, thank you for putting faces and numbers to, to this issue. Um, and it's also w- I think helped, um, helped me and others that we hear these personal stories, um, because sometimes you just, you know, if you don't hear it, you just, it, you know, passes over and, you know, you don't, we don't do anything with it. Um, so I guess I have a question. Um, what would you say is currently available, um, in this regard for the type of housing that, you know, we need right now for, for people in our community? You talked about 1500. And, um, what kind of housing do we have available? You know, there's a very modest amount of specialized housing that the society has developed over the years, but it's for very specific and more acute need. Um, for years, we've had, uh, a number of, uh, portable rental supplement initiatives with BC Housing. There's the Safer program for seniors and a specialized, um, supplement for adults with intellectual disability. We received about 15 rental subsidies about 15 years ago, and 40 asks later, it's still at 15. And more recently, BC Housing has made a decision to sort of shift away from the notion of rental supplement, so I, that's probably not a, a, a, you know, a viable option. So, really, there's no options- Hmm. ... at the present moment for folks other than to continue to live with parents or, or a family. There's a small number of adults who are able to secure employment that enables them to earn enough income, uh, that they can afford market rent, uh, despite the sort of increasing, you know, challenge there. And in reality, uh, post-COVID, we've seen a decline in, uh, employment rates for vulnerable citizens, broadly speaking. Pan-Canadian, only 17.3% of adults with intellectual disabilities are reporting income, and... ... the majority of those at less than $5,000 a year, so it's hardly sustainable, you know, income. So, would you say the provincial government is sort of walking back on supports? Well, in the last six months or eight months, their announcements would certainly suggest they've been walking back. I, I, I think it temporary, given the sort of current economic climate. Right. In, in principle, I think that the province is interested in working with communities, with councils, and with nonprofits, uh, for sure, but we need to come together to be able to do that. Yeah. Uh, but I, I think that that, uh, will continue to be a priority. Okay. You know, notwithstanding this little, uh, this little glitch where they seem to be looking more at the, the market than the nonprofit sector. Right. Well, thank you- That's a- that's another presentation. (laughs) Can I add to this? Yeah. So, like, my, my wife and I, we got three adopted kids, all with special needs. The twins just turned 22. A year and a half ago, when we started the Inclusive Housing Coalition, it was all about the fact we went to a meeting with Dan's team at the time, as well as, uh, Community Living BC, uh, looking at what the future looks like for them for independent living. 'Cause they got, uh, autism, high functioning, they need a little bit of support, but- Yeah. ... they want housing. Yeah. There was nothing available. Hmm. Uh, so we had to provide it for them ourselves. Wow. But that's what started this whole thing off in the first place. And one of the things we discovered when we started looking at other communities that had been doing it over the years, and there's some that have do- been doing it for 20 years now. The key that we've... One of the keys that we have identified is, you need to get a stock. Right. Uh, and it takes time. No one's asking for, "Go out, spend billions of dollars, buy a whole pile of properties and make it available." But you need to start in small stages and build up an inventory over time, and then the problem starts diminishing. It's not an easy fix. It's gonna take a long time, but we are basically saying that we're looking for the long term to start addressing a, a problem that's been around. We know that it can't be fixed overnight, but we do wanna see over time that it is gonna start getting resolved. So, in how I'm imagining this is interspersed within other types of housing. It's not just housing for special needs kids with supports. You want it to beat, like- Yeah. ... y- yeah. Or seniors, for that matter. Absolutely. Right. I mean, we, we, you know, uh, we have a, a long history of deinstitutionalization. Yeah. Uh, the very model that created segregation and separation from community. That is not what we're looking for at all. Yeah, okay. We're looking for, you know, mixed, mixed neighborhoods, uh, completely. Yeah. Great. Uh, just as another little point too, the last count I saw, Inclusion Langley, as an example, was serving almost 25,000 children, 2,500 children. Sorry. (laughs) So, so um- Big difference. ... we have a lot of folks that are gonna come, you know- Yeah. ... become adults. Yeah. 'Cause children do that, um- (laughs) ... and so the numbers are only going to increase, and the worry and the concern and the challenge is only going to exasperate if we don't start somewhere. Well, keep coming to council. Right. And keep reminding us what we need to do to help, so. Appreciate that, yeah. Yeah, I just got a question. You, we touched on it here, did that conversation a bit in regards to, um, supports. Is there something, like, along the lines of cluster housing that might be helpful? Is that something that your group has looked at? Yeah. We're absolutely open to, you know, a range of, of models, 'cause we support a range of citizens with unique and, and, and, and differing needs. Uh, we are pretty successful as collectives at bringing the support. It's the housing itself that's often the challenge. So, a cluster model is another way that we can offset, uh, or, you know, keep costs and supports, um, reasonable. Um. Okay. So, I'll- Yeah. ... I'll ask the staff to- Yeah. ... make a note of that comment. Yeah, yeah. And maybe that can be included in, in the referral. Yes. All right. Councilor Martins? Y- thank you, and thank you for coming in today to delegate. Um, so f- interesting fact, um, two careers ago, I, I was, um helping with, uh, providing income assistance to people- (laughs) ... with the BC government, in the PWD, before that designation even came. And, uh, it was 375- Yeah. ... a month for rent. That was, um, '93. Yep. So, I'm glad to hear there's been some movement on that number, 'cause I think it stayed that way- Woo! ... for a very long time. Yeah. Um, yeah. So, I, my question is, um, around... I, I really like the idea of disbursing, like you're talking about. How does that work for service delivery for supports? And, um, have the, the supports been reduced as well by, um, the BC government? Or, I think you talked about Community Living BC. Yeah. If you could speak a little bit to how that would look. Yeah, yeah. Uh, well, you know, there's, there's obviously some challenge. Um, uh, Community Living BC is currently, uh, supporting in excess of 30,000 adults with intellectual and developmental disability. But it only provides supports and sort of housing-focused support to about 6,000. So, the, the other 24,000 live with mom and dad, or aunts and uncles, or grandparents. Um, that's, that's the, the, the reality. W- that said, I think we've been really successful at putting an array of supports around people when they secure housing. Mm-hmm. Um, you know, there's an interesting, um, debate in government about who is responsible for housing. And so we've been caught in the middle of that over the years, where they'll say, "It's, oh, it's CLBC's responsibility to provide support." Or, "It's, you know, another entity's responsibility to provide support to seniors. BC Housing should provide the housing." But the sort of separation doesn't really work. Um, there needs to be an integrated one-government approach, uh, for sure, to, um, to support. I think we can garnish that support for sure if we, uh, I- i- i- you know, you've heard it before. "If we build it, they will come." And I think they will come with supports because there's such a, a growing need.... in our community. Yeah. Well, thank you both for being here. And- Oh. Go ahead. I'll just add to that, 'cause my wife and I are just going through this, for the supports for our two kids that are still in our home. We built an entire legal suite just for them to give them some independence. Hm. That was part of my retirement fund. Uh... (laughs) Wow. But the interesting thing is, when we were talking for the supports for them, it, it, the, uh, issue was the, the funds are there, the supports are there, but, uh, as long as they're living in the home, basically, we'll just wait until they're actually out of the home type of idea. Uh, so we are pro- continuing to provide the supports even though they're "semi-independent" at this point. Mm-hmm. Um, but we've been told that it's not a problem. As soon as they have their own place, that supports will be there the minute they move out the door. Okay. All right. No, I appreciate that information, and I thank you both for being here. And I look forward to the, um, the mayor's motion on, uh, next steps for this. So, thank you. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate your time. Uh, yes. Oh, okay. Thank you. Oh. Yeah. (laughs) Yeah. (laughs) I just wanted to go back and, uh, go over some of the numbers. Yeah. Uh, they're actually very eye-opening. So you're saying right now, we've got 1,500, uh, people in, uh, need for- In core housing need. In core need. Yes. And that's, that's based on 2021 census data. Okay. And, uh, is that in both the Langleys or mainly in the township? Well, township only. This is township only. Yeah. Township only. Okay. And you also mentioned that we've got 2,500 children that are in need as well, and they will grow. Yeah. Quite right. (laughs) So that's like a lifelong commitment. Yeah. What do you anticipate a growth rate to be going forward? 'Cause Langely continues to expand its population, right? Provincially, we're seeing a growth rate of 5 to 6% a year. Uh, you know, I think it's interesting. If I was here 25 years ago, I would have argued that we're going to see a decline in disability rates, you know, um, because of, uh, uh, technology and modern reproductive technology. We're seeing the, uh, the opposite, in fact, uh, alarming increase, uh, in the rates of vulnerable, you know, children a- and youth, uh, who, as you say become adults. So I, I think 5 to 6% a year. It's probably, uh, larger... That's a provincial. Uh, probably larger in Langley by virtue of the growth that Langley's been experiencing. Yeah. And we do have a younger overall population. Certainly on the children's... You know, in terms of children, it's been, it's been explosive. Um, we can't beat... You know, the, the, the society hasn't begun to meet the need. There's hundreds and hundreds of children at any given time waiting- Wow. ... for early intervention services or child development supports. So the 2,500 children that you referenced, are they in Langley Township as well too? Uh, probably a 70/30 split. 70/30 split. 70/30, 80/20. Well, that's still... Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And, uh, you mentioned key communities that are doing this well. Yeah. Yeah. Who are your top two role models? Yeah. Go ahead. Well, yeah, probably Richmond's done some really good work, uh, as a council. Um, and more recently, Surrey, um, you know, after some, some struggles. I think Burnaby is done. Yeah. And Nanaimo. Awesome. Um, yeah. Yeah. Oh, okay. Where there's been good partnership, you know, good, good collaboration between all levels of government and, and the nonprofit community. One of the challenges that Langley faces as well, you know, I look at other, um, jurisdictions in metro, um, you know, M- Metro Vancouver is an example, uh, who, um, surprises many that here has a housing division, but not one asset in the township of Langley city or the township of Langley, um- Mm-hmm. ... which is intriguing. Um, and, uh, someone who pays taxes and ultimately, you know, uh, contributes to Metro Vancouver, maybe they should be also looking at housing, uh, vulnerable citizens here i- in our community, or at least directing funds, uh, uh, for that. Uh, what the larger Vancouver, uh, Burnaby, and New West have is, um, a variety of housing societies, and they are exclusively focused on housing and not necessarily exclusively focused on the populations they serve, other than vulnerable, uh, citizens. And there are thousands of subsidized units that exist, uh, in those communities. You know, I've, I tried in my career to encourage some of those larger housing providers to sort of make their way south of the Fraser, um, 'cause they have the infrastructure, the skills, the, the, the history with, with navigating, you know, construction and development and ongoing operation. Uh, so I, I think that that might be another key too, to be exploring where we can increase the number of nonprofit housing providers with those skills into our, our community. Yeah. Well, you've certainly raised the need for advocacy- Yeah. ... at the provincial level. Yeah. And I agree with you, a one provider system makes a whole lot of sense or a whole lot more sense. Yeah. I also agree with your comments about Metro. Yeah. Is there really a need for us to be duplicating what they do so well- Yeah. ... if we can provide things like land for them to come here and do it? Or land for other local nonprofits to- Yeah. Yeah. ... to do the work. Yeah. Okay. Um, I'm gonna support the referral motion. Yes? I just want to add to that. We've been talking to churches and n- not just here, but elsewhere, but, and many of them are taking their land and building. Mm-hmm. And some of them, when we talk to them about the idea of, of introducing rent geared income to their, uh, community, the first thing that comes to mind is they're, they're scared, because these are individuals with disabilities. Mm-hmm. But then once they realize that these individuals come with supports, it really changes the narrative. Oh, okay. Uh, so there's a lot more...... forward-thinking, and positivity toward the concept. But right now, there's a lack of understanding that these individuals that we're talking about, depending on where they fall in the spectrum, uh, whether they can live on their own with minor supports, or they're fully disabled, they need 24/7 support. Those are, like, two different levels- Mm-hmm. ... or the whole scale. Yeah. And it makes a big difference once the conversations start. One of the growing population of folks who, uh, are, um, experiencing homelessness is seniors. Um- So, we have to concern ourselves with that as well, that there's too many, you know, who are not able to have secure and safe housing. So, you know, that's part of the reason that we aligned 'cause really, uh, i- it's about vulnerable citizens, uh, and not really about labeling. And so, those who- Yeah. ... um, don't have the income to be able to live in, uh, safe, inclusive housing need to be supported to do that. And we think that, you know- (coughs) ... you can play a really strong role in shaping, uh, and influencing that. And I know you've dipped your toe in, uh, of late, with, um, BC Builds. Um, eh, sometimes it's a little b- bit of a struggle for me because the public perception me- may be that, "Well, that's, you know, that's creating affordable housing at 20% below, below market." But when you think about the affordability gap that we, uh, we identified, it just doesn't, um, meet the need of the constituency of people that we're, uh, talking about today. Thank you. Yeah. You've made some excellent points today. Good. Thank you. Counselor Sprunk. Yeah. Thank you, Your Worship, and thanks very much for the, the delegation. Obviously, Inclusion Langley in, in the time that you were there has done a lot of great work in the community. So, thank you both for being here today. Um, and I'm glad you mentioned at the end there, the BC Builds program- Yeah. ... and, uh, and the Langley Housing Trust. And so, the model, uh, that, of housing, the type of housing that you're looking at, is there any type of housing that isn't useful for, for what you're looking for? Or is it kind of across the spectrum from single-family homes all the way up to, to apartment buildings? Yes. And, and, and it's probably at this point, the greater need is multi, uh, multiunit development for sure. Mm-hmm. Uh, and, you know, no objections to BC Builds and their mandate at all, um, but I, I wished it actually had been more laudable, uh, and that they'd also considered some of those resources going to folks who need a deeper, what we, what we refer to as deep subsidy- Mm-hmm. ... and who need much more financial support to be able to, to live- Yeah, I agree with you completely. ... uh, yeah. And the nice thing is, with the, the Housing Trust owned and operated by the township, that- Perfect. ... that level of affordability is just a start- Yes. ... 'cause we can go even deeper and, and- That's what we like to hear. ... get towards the program that you need. And so- Beautiful. ... that's some of those things that's long term- Yeah. ... we can absolutely work on, and I'm looking forward to hopefully being in the report. We'd be happy to collaborate with you on that. Yeah, likewise. A- and I hope that our, you know, communities and our connections, uh, will enable resources to come into community to support that. Yeah, fantastic. Yeah. Thank you very much for your advocacy. Thanks. Really appreciate it. Yeah. So, thanks again for coming. I appreciate it. Uh, it's good to touch on the BC Builds program because, you know, it certainly is not designed for what you've identified as the need that you wanna advocate for- Yeah. ... which I think is valuable. The interesting thing about BC Builds is that it's, a lot of people may be in units that could go to people with, uh, eligibility for subsidy but can't find a unit. Yeah. And so, if they m- some people that maybe don't need to be in that unit anymore can't find something else on the spectrum of housing that the BC Builds program is designed to provide. So, and, and, you know, and s- there is a version of BC Builds when you analyze it that it does in fact help out with the need that you've identified by creating more housing further up the spectrum for people to move on to. Yeah. And so, I think there's lots of options here in the future, uh, assuming the Langley Housing Trust has a future. Thank you very much. (laughs) Thank you. All right. S- yeah. Thank you. So, I'll just deal with that now. I'll refer s- Delegation C1 to staff for a report. Second. Seconded by Councilor Ferguson. So, any discussion on that? Councilor Ferguson? Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I did run into Dan over the years, uh, with Inclusion Langley. We actually have a member of Inclusion Langley on one of our committees. I have a question, if I may, through, uh, the chair to, uh, Manager, uh, Janzen, Aubrey Janzen, regarding our survey we're doing with the Seniors Committee and whether something like this could be added in the questionnaire, if I may? Uh, through Your Worship to Councilor Ferguson, we can, uh, advise Council at the next meeting. I believe Mr. Janzen's not, uh, here to answer that question. Oh, okay. So, he is here. I saw him right now. (laughs) Yes. Through the, through the mayor, uh, to Councilor Ferguson, yes, that is something that we could consider adding to the, to the question and then informing the committee of the question as well. So, to be clear, I, I, I think the proponent and, uh, the s- the members and a lot of people here supporting your cause should be aware that we in... one of our committees is actually doing a survey, a questionnaire to the community about needs and other things, and this may indeed fit in. So, uh, even over and above what the mayor is proposing as well, we'll wanna work together to make this thing more important and to move forward. So, that's what we're doing. That's what Mr. Janzen indicated. We can move that in our particular survey. Yes. I, I really want to make sure that, uh, we look at possibilities of, uh, doing some joint advocacy with, uh, organizations like this, uh, dealing with, uh, the funding. The last provincial budget, uh, pulled some funding that we were looking at for exactly this kind of housing. Uh, and, uh, I think it would be, uh, a, a much more powerful lobby if we could, um, join in with these advocacy, uh, uh, efforts and, uh, draw attention. Especially, I'm thinking about the, uh, seniors, and there are other populations that are-... are at risk with this, too. So, uh, I would really hope that the staff will, uh, consider opportunities where we can join with non-profits who are advocating in this area, uh, to reinstate some of the programs that were previously in the, uh, budgets. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on that referral of the delegation. That carries unanimously. Second delegation, this delegation C2, is from Mr. Baines. Mr. Baines, please come forward. Ms. Bauer, do we know if Mr. Baines is present or did he let us know he wouldn't be making it today? No, no? No word? Okay. So we'll move on to, uh, de- delegation C3 from Mr. Parker. Please come forward. Oh, hello Mayor and council. Thank you so much for having me. My name is Mike Parker. I'm a resident of Willoughby. I'm here today to talk about the 2025 audited financial statements. Gonna start in three sections. So first is a little bit about, uh, education, then a little bit about application, then I've got two questions to follow-up based off of that. So to start, I wanna talk about a concept in accounting called the Public Sector Accounting Standards or PSAS for short. These are the accounting standards by which we need to complete our financial reporting in the township, and this is dictated by Section 167 of the community charter, and if you look in the notes to the financial statements, how we've completed them so far. Inside of PSAS are a series of different chapters about different accounting principles. The one I wanna talk about today is PSAS 3390, Contractual Obligations. So a contractual obligation is an obligation, um, that, uh, hasn't yet happened, so it's a future liability that we haven't met the liability recognition standard for. Very common example would be if we were to build a road, um, but the road isn't completed by year end and we still owe the builder of s- said road money in the future. Um, PSAS talks about why it's important to talk about contractual obligations in the financial statements, because it provides information about the nature and extent to which a public sector... or a public sector entity's resources are already committed. It says in the PSAS, there are three things that need to be disclosed: a description, the extent, so the dollar figure, and the timing of any future obligations. Now let's talk about application of this, and this is about the Township of Langley Housing Trust Society. This is a society, as you know, it's creating housing in the township and it is a fully-owned subsidiary of the township. Note one of the financial statements, the Housing Trust Society is fully consolidated. So that means, um, contractual obligations of the Housing Trust Society are contractual obligations of the Township of Langley for financial reporting purposes. Um, now this Housing Trust Society, for the public, is a bit of a black box based off of its nature. We don't know a whole ton about it, but we can take a couple guesses based off of what we see inside of BC Builds as well as what has been disclosed. So what we know based off of BC Builds is it's, um, um, a society, like the Housing Trust will partner with a developer and in the case of the Housing Trust, it's Caliber. Um, the developer will take out loans from BC Housing as the prog- as the, um, development progresses, and then when it's completed, there'll be a takeout loan that the Housing Trust Society takes and that, at that point, we recognize the liability as well as the asset on our balance sheet. This kind of matches the ty- um, what we see today in the financial statements, because we see a small liability for some pre-construction and it matches a, uh, a question Councilor Richter asked last week where she said, "Hey, why isn't this on the financial statements?" And the answer was, "Well, it's coming. It's gonna be next year. It's a timing issue." So again, I don't have all the details because I can't see them, but we know roughly May of 2025, uh, agreement was signed with Caliber to construct some housing, um, inside the Housing Trust. And that was for the, um, fire hall as well as the Aldergrove sites, and again, I don't have the exact numbers, but we saw in the, um, capital budget was $177 million of debt for this. Two-thirds is about $100 million of liabilities or future contractual, um, commitments. Now, on our financial statements right now, we actually do have a disclosure. I'm not gonna read out the full thing, but just to give a, um, a quick heads-up, it says, uh, under note 14C, "The township has significant future contractual commitments for capital acquisitions and completion of capital construction projects in progress. The township records capital costs incurred to the end of the year as tangible capital assets." What you'll notice is the PS 3390 says we should include a description of the nature, the extent, and the timing of those expenditures. But that's not in our financial statements. So I've got two questions. First, can staff release their analysis and rationale as to why is there no contractual obligations in the financial statements? 'Cause these amounts, to me, would be material to understand the financial position of the township. Secondly, accounting standards are not black and white. They're shades of gray. When we are interpreting PSAS rules, are we erring on the side of non-disclosure or a faithful representation? Thank you so much. Are there any questions? Yeah. Thanks, Mike. Um, nice to see you in the flesh. Thank you. Usually I see you popping up on my phone with- Yeah. ... you know, financial information. (laughs) (laughs) Um, so I just had one question actually, um, 'cause I've only been a councilor here in the township, what... Can you compare other municipalities' financial statements and how, how they're presented? Um-Yeah, so I looked at our three neighbors, uh, the City of Abbotsford, the City of Surrey, as well as the City of Langley. Um, the City of Surrey, they've got a disclosure as the total amount of futural- uh, future, um, contractual obligations, as well as they say between one and ten years. Abbotsford has a really nice disclosure because they also break it down by, um, departments. So you can see Waterworks has this contractual obligation, Roads has this one. City of Langley doesn't have anything, but that might be because they just simply don't have any. They're quite small, and I'm not aware of any contractual obligations that might exist at year end for them. Okay. Thank you. All right, thank you very much for your delegation. Thank you. All right, was Cal Baines here? Just wanted to have him come more times before we move on. Nope, not seeing Cal Baines here. Ms. Bauer, you let him know he's welcome to refile for the next meeting of Council. Thank you. Uh, moving on to item E1, I'll move the recommendation. Is there a seconder? Seconded by Councilor Rintjens. Any discussion or questions on items E1? Councilor Richter. Um, yeah, I had a question, and I think it kind of ties in with the delegation we just had. Uh, it's on page 64 in the actual report, and I just need to turn there. It's, uh, the note 23C, uh, liquidity risk, and the last line of the note says, "There is an additional risk exposure due to the increased net debt position from the prior period." Now, that's right in this, these statements. My question, through you, to staff is, what does this mean, and is this something we need to be addressing now, or is this something that will be addressed in the next budget? Through your worship, to Councilor Richter, um, with respect to the consolidated financial statement, there's specific notes to the consolidated financial statements, so every single financial statement does have a section where it does state the financial risk management, and generally speaking, um, that sentence is there that any additional risks due to increased net debt, uh, position from the prior period, that's a statement that's there, uh, that will address also, be addressed in the next budget, and it's ongoing. Okay, well, I guess my concern stems... I mean, I went back and looked at the 2024, uh, annual report, and in there, the note says, "There have been no significant changes to the risk exposure related to financial instruments from the prior period." But this year, there sa- it says there is an additional risk exposure. So, uh, I'd just like to know what exactly that means. W- through your worship, to Councilor Richter, e- each year it's assessed and reviewed by our auditors, and we review it on an ongoing basis, so any additional debt that's taken on does, um, inherently increase the risk. So we review it every year with respect to rates and repayments. Okay. Uh, I'm not disputing in any way, shape, or form the job that the auditors have done. I'm just trying to understand what exactly that line means. Okay, thank you very much. Yes, thank you. Um, I had a cou- a couple of questions, um, that are on the, uh, page 39 of the report, consolidated statement of operations. Uh, question, uh, through your worship to staff. Um, when I look at the consolidated statement of operations, I look in, in the revenue category, and I'm just wanting some clarification. I noticed, um, uh, we have disposable of a- disposal, sorry, of assets, and there was no, um, budget for it. It was, it was... There was a, a line there instead of a, a n- a number, and it ended up at 35 million. I'm just wondering if you could clarify what the... Or identify what the 35 million, uh, was in disposable, disposal, sorry, of assets. Uh, through your worship, to Councilor Whitmarsh, uh, with respect to that question, the gain on any disposable assets is, um, essentially any land that has been disposed of, uh, wi- for the Township of Langley, so there... That would indicate that in 2025, there was, uh, a disposition of land and revenue associated with it. Sorry, could you just repeat that? I, sorry, I missed that. Uh, there was a disposition of land, and, and there was revenue associated with that disposition. Okay. So that, that... Is that, uh, in different pieces of land, or is that one piece of land, or can you recall? Uh, through your worship, to Councilor Whitmarsh, we would have to just look at the specific line items, how many dispositions there was, whether it was one or multiple. I, I believe, off the top of my head, it might have been just one or two dispositions that occurred that year in 2025. Okay. All right, thank you. On the ex- on the, um, expenses down below, um, there's, uh, just a, a couple I was wondering about, um, uh, in terms of them, a couple of them went up, um, a fair bit, and I'm just wondering if there's just a further explanation of what those things were. For example, recreation and culture had a 20%, uh, increase over and above budget. Um, transportation had a 40% increase over and above budget. Um, general government was only 10%. I'm just, I guess, wanted to know about those. And then police protection, um, actually, um, experienced, um, about a 20% decrease in budget, uh, compared to budget, and I'm wondering if that is just the a- inability to hire, um, RCMP police officers, uh, in to, in line with our budget. So there's four areas I'm wondering about, if there's some explanation as to the fairly significant increases or a decrease in the one case. Uh, to Your Worship, to Councilor Whitmarsh, um, some of the expenses are specified in categories. There's the stormwater, water, sewer, solid waste, transportation. Uh, some of the increases may relate to just, uh, inflation cost measures. There might be additional staffing costs as well, um, and that, uh, due to, um, maintaining service levels. Uh, with respect to police protection, we would have to just review that specific one to ensure that, uh, i- it's not in relation to reduced number of members, or s- specifically in 2025, related to, uh, de-integration as well. Um... Okay, so we don't have specifics on that. How, how would I be able to get specifics on, on those, um, increases in, for example, transportation, a 40% increase g- compared to budget? Uh, through- Is there a way to get those specifics? Through Your Worship to, uh, Councilor Whitmarsh, if, if you're seeking a- ev- every single item's, uh, increase and the rationale for the increase, or why that increase occurs, we would, staff would have to actually, uh, provide council with a memo and, uh, go through the items, uh, specifically. Okay. Well, I wasn't looking for all items. I was looking for those specifically, but okay. Um, I'll think about that. Um, all right, my, my, my, uh, my final question right now is, is maybe not so much, uh, to staff. It might be a, a to yourself, uh, Mayor Woodward. Um, just a question I had. The reason I'm, I'm wondering about it is 'cause last meeting, I asked a, a question about, uh, net debt, and, um, I noticed, um, in our net debt, we, in 2024 was negative eight million. Today is negative 131 million. I went back through a couple of the, um, financial re- uh, the annual reports over the last couple years. They actually don't include a net debt, um, item in it because we didn't have any net debt, um, prior to that, so there wasn't a, a, that wasn't listed. Last week, uh, last meeting, so I asked the question to staff about, should we be concerned about the net debt? And at the time, um, staff indicated, I think Mr. Kuhner, um, indicated that that wasn't really, uh, a question to be asked of staff, and it was more of a question for council to consider that. And I think your response to me at the time was that you wouldn't have an answer for that. So I'm wondering if we might get an answer about that today, or when you expect to give us an answer- Yeah. ... about the increase in net debt. Yeah, no, certainly something I think I said I'd take it under invest- under advisement, still, uh, still working on it. Okay. Well, that would be helpful. Um, I guess my, my, I guess my last point then, kind of related to that, is, um, back in, in, um, uh, March, uh, we, uh, passed a motion, I think it was the 23rd of March, we passed a, a motion that went through a number of amendments. Um, I had brought forward a, a motion on long-term, uh, fiscal abil- uh, fiscal responsibility and having a plan for it. At the time, we went through five different amendments that were all passed by council, uh, to have a plan. And so I guess my question is to staff, uh, when, when would we expect to see, uh, that plan? It's now been three months, um, and there was a number of items there that we, that we put together. When do we expect to see a plan about fiscal responsibility that this council did pass, asking for a report from staff? Just wondering when the timing would be. Uh, to Your Worship, to Councilor Whitmarsh, um, with respect to that motion, there was several other competing priorities, uh, in relation to year-end, uh, ensuring the annual report and the consolidated financial statements were completed. So, uh, staff will review, um, the remaining competing priorities and be able to advise council probably at the next meeting, uh, the timeline in relation to that, and whether we have the internal staffing resource, uh, to, to have that, uh, report done prior to the summer break or not. So staff will be in a better position, um, to provide the specific information at the next, uh, meeting. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Richter? Um, yes, I want to go back 'cause the motion that's on the table is the one that's actually in our agenda, correct? Where we're looking not just at the audited financial statements, uh, so the annual report per se, but it's also this report that's in our package that includes the 2025 statement of financial information, uh, which i- includes a number of different things like employees making over $75,000, it's contractors making over, is it $25,000? So, um, we're actually approving everything that's in the report, is that correct? Um, to Your Worship, to Councilor Richter, uh, before council today is two separate resolutions. Uh, the first resolution is approving the 2025 annual report along with now the 2025 audited financial statements. Um, and then the second resolution is specifically approving the 2025 statement of financial information, which the, is, we refer to as the SOFI, uh-Okay. Um, I think I want to move division on that, because I do have some questions about this SOFI report. I'd like to start with the question, um, it says that this year, uh, because the threshold of the 75,000, so that's basically any employee making over 75,000 in the township has to be listed in the report. Um, and the number of employees with remuneration greater than twen- 75,000 this year is 611. Now, what percentage of our total workforce does this represent? Through Your Worship to Councilor Richter, I believe the total workforce figures are, I think it would estimate about 50% roughly. I may have to get back to you on that. I believe the total, I might have to just defer to finance on that, if they have that figure. Do we know how many people work for the township? Uh, through Your Worship to Councilor, I believe the rough estimate would be approximately 14 to 1500, um, but we can get back to you on that, the specifics. Okay. And, um, the report that we approved in 2022, I don't have that one in front of me, but perhaps staff could advise me, what was the number in 2022? Of employees making over 75,000? Through Your Worship to Councilor Richter, I believe Stafford is pulling that report up and can advise shortly. Okay. All right. Well, while they're doing that, I have another question pertaining to page 31, and this is the schedule of payments to suppliers of goods and services. And I see a line in here about two thirds of the way down, McConchie Law Corporations, sev- $72,299.34. Um, what did McConchie Law Corporation provide services for or about? Uh, through Your Worship to Councilor Richter, with respect to the law firms, those, uh, we would have to review those and see if those items are foreclosed as their potential to be covered under solicitor client, uh, privilege as well on specifics of what was paid for and what the invoice was for. So, we don't know the specific topic areas that we're paying for? Or l- like, that this covers? Through Your Worship to Councilor Richter, these are general, the total payments made for the year. Uh, we don't break it down into specific matters, as those would be considered, uh, potentially legal. And we don't disclose specific matters, so, uh, specifics would then, we would refer to, uh, be discussed in a closed meeting. Okay. So that 72,000 would cover a 12 months period, presumably, if it's for a year? Th- that, that is correct. It would be whatever period is stated at a, um, in the, uh, financial information. Okay. That would be the period it's covered. All right. Um, I think that I would like to move division of the motion, uh, before we vote on it. Would you like me to move division now? You can go ahead now. Okay. I'd like to move division of the motion. Is there a seconder to division? Seconded by Councilor Martins, yeah. Do you wish to speak to division, or we just call the question? Um, yes. I, I don't dispute the jobs that the auditors have done. Um, I've certainly got some concern about that note in particular, that 23C note, about the debt, or the risk from the debt. Uh, but I, uh, believe that the, uh, the numbers as presented, uh, have been, it's a clean audit opinion, basically. So I'm in favor of approving that. But the SOFI numbers, I'm, I'm concerned about, and I think we need more time. So, I'm, I, I don't care to approve that second one today. All right. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on division. Division is defeated. Councilor Bailey, Councilor Ferguson, Councilor Pratt, Councilor Rent, Mayor Woodward opposed. Is there any other discussion on E1? Seeing none, call the question on E1. That carries unanimously. Item E2, the accessibility plan, I'll move the recommendation on the agenda. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any questions or discussion on E2? Nope, seeing none, I'm gonna move deferral of item E2 to July 13th, seconded by Councilor Rent. Is there any questions on deferral? Yeah, seeing none, call the question on deferral of E2. That carries. Councilor Richter, opposed. On to item E3, on street truck parking pilot program updates. Anybody wish to move that? Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Bailey. Is there any discussion on E3? Councilor Kovest? Um, at what point does a pilot just become not a pilot anymore and just something that we're gonna do for the long term?Dear Worship, to Councilor ... Good question. Um, so historically, Council, we brought, um, a, a, I believe, a report forward seeking Council's endorsement of the pilot program. And I believe as a part of that, uh, report, we advised that we would do phases, and once we complete all the phases, then we would be in a better position to, um, consider how, uh, to implement this potentially long term or not. So staff's general position is that, uh, we, um, continue going through the phase process and then, uh, continue with some of the community engagement implementation and then report back to Council. Uh, and then at that time, Council can consider whether the pilot program was successful or not and implement it, uh, f- for the long term or not proceed any further. Okay, thanks. That's helpful. Mr. Rint. Yeah, I'm really s- uh, glad to see this going forward because I have spoken to a number of people out in the area and, and this program is definitely being used and, uh, especially when you're looking at, uh, better receptacles and washroom facilities. Uh, they're greatly needed by these truckers and, uh, people that are using them now. So I'm very glad to see this, uh, going forward. Great. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on E3. And that carries unanimously. Item E4, Highway 13, potential pedestrian improvements. I'll move the recommendation, and seconded by Councilor Ferguson. Is there any discussion on E4? Councilor Whitmers. Yes, thank you. Um, so I, I, I like the idea of us, uh, doing this, uh, here, and I like the conceptual plan that we've put into place. I guess my question was, um, around the cost item. It... When I read through, uh, the document, page three, it, it sort of clearly lays out what we're thinking of doing as a, as a, as a community in this area and as a, as a council. Talks about the conceptual plan, talks about sidewalks and deline- delineator posts, uh, streetlights, and so on. Um, does mention there that we need to then meet with, um, MOTI to talk about what that would look like because it's a... Highway 13 is a provincial road. But then it says that if we wanted to continue and actually design it, it's another $190,000. And that seemed, w- when we sort of already know what we want to do, it seemed like a lot to then add another $190,000 for drawings. I just wanted to clarify if I'm understanding this correctly and if 190,000 is truly an accurate number for something that we kind of know we already have a plan for. Question through to staff. Thank you. Uh, yes, through your Worship, to Councilor Whitmars. Um, specifically, we provided concepts that are, um, attached as attachment A, B, and C, I believe. So these are just general high-level concepts. Uh, in the event we, Council does want to proceed, uh, with potentially approving the project subject to, um, mote, uh, approval, then we would need detailed designs. The, this, these designs or concepts we've attached would not be considered detailed design, which would then proceed to, um, tendering and, uh, uh, allow, um, contractors to actually bid on them. So that, that would require, um, some funding, and 190,000 is, uh, uh, quite a conservative estimate to, um, to essentially be able to, uh, proceed with the detailed designs of Highway 13 from 28 Avenue to tw- 3200 block, um, to ensure that we have that. Okay, thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, I'm gonna move deferral of that to July 13th, seconded by Councilor Rint. Is there any discussion on E4 deferral? Ms. Richter. Yeah, why are we deferring this? I'd like to review it with staff and then potentially, uh, come back with another recommendation. And we're deferring it to... July 13th. July 3rd. Uh, July 13th, thank you. All right, call the question on deferral of E4. That carries. Councilor Richter opposed. We move on to E5, development permit application number 101497. Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Bailey. Is there any discussion on E5? Council Martins. Yeah, um, I... Questions through staff, if... T- through the chair to staff, if I can. Um, this property, if I'm understanding it correctly, falls within the Aldergrove Downtown Core. It's, uh, I think, a block off of, uh, Fraser Highway. Um, is there currently any structures on the site? There is a structure on the site. Uh, through your Worship, to Councilor Martins, uh, yes, there is currently a structure on the site. Uh, okay, um, is this, um, a residence and is th- is there any heritage value that's been acknowledged with this particular structure? I believe there's a... Res- there's a resident. Um, the residence itself i- is not registered with any heritage, um, registry within the Township of Langley. Okay, so, um, I understand, if I'm looking correctly at the Aldergrove Community Plan, um, this particular area is for, uh, low-rise residential, um, up to, I think, five or six units, I believe. Is that correct? Uh, through your Worship, to Councilor Martins, uh, the subject site is, uh, designated, uh, l- low density residential in the Aldergrove Community Plan, so it's within the Aldergrove Core Land Use Plan. Uh, however, the, the site itself is zoned already community commercial C2 zoning.Okay. Um, and if I could ask, um, o- as far as, um, retaining the form and character of the neighborhood, um, of the Aldergrove core, and, um, giving a nod to the heritage aspects, um, and I- I'm bringing this up as we were just on the heritage tour, the township Languley heritage tour, and we were focused on Aldergrove and we actually did a walking tour through downtown, um, learning about the different properties. Um, and I'm just wondering in what way is this, um, in keeping with the form and character of that, um, community? Uh, through your worship, to Councilor Martins, even though it is zoned "community commercial C2", it's still subject to, um, a development permit. So within the development permit, um, area D, there's certain guidelines to ensure that the form, setting, and character is compliant. So the ... Essentially, there's certain elements that ensure that, uh, the, um, overall form, setting, character of that downtown Aldergrove community core i- is maintained, and that's, uh, um, processed, uh, um, as a part of the development permit. Okay, and if I could, um, just a follow-up to that, ask, um, so in this particular instance, um, what are the characteristics there, um, that are in keeping with that, um, character? Uh, through your worship, to, to Councilor Martins, to supplement, uh, Minister De Poon's comments, so the, um, intent and overview of the ... the guidelines go reference a contemporary interpretation of traditional building forms and architectural features and details is encouraged. And that's sort of representative in the, the subject application through masa- uh, facade modulation, repeating middle patterns, uh, changes in the roof line, uh, provision of colors and materials. So those types of items, of those you mentioned, reflective of some of the traditional small-town character of, uh, the downtown are meant to be, uh, provided in a contemporary manner, which is, uh, represented in the application in front of council today. Thank you. Counselor Ricker? Yeah, um, I- I just wanted to go, uh, a- along with the comments that, uh, the questions that Councilor Martins raised relative to form and character. I know the rezoning's already been done. There's another, uh, rezoning that's been done in there that's a CD, and this is not about resi- uh, rezoning, it's about, uh, form and character. But, uh, is the bringing of commercial a- along this street, 'cause it seems to me it's proceeding westward, is, how does that fit in with form and character? Through your worship, Councilor Ricker, as, uh, Mr. De Poon pointed out, the property already has an existing C2 zoning, uh, entitlement to it. So the C2 zoning allows for commercial uses on the ground floor with residential uses above. Okay. So in this case, the proponent has, uh, has provided for a daycare use on the ground floor, proposed a daycare use on the ground floor with, uh, five residential units above on the second and third stories, your worship. Okay. Thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, call the question on E5. That carries, with Councilor Martins opposed. F1, bylaws first and second reading, official community plan amendment, rezoning application number 100301, bylaw number 61916192. Does anybody wish to move the recommendation? Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Brent. Is there any discussion on F1? Councilor Pratt. Yeah, thank you, your worship. Uh, again, another application coming on in Smith East there that I'm excited to see kinda complete a little bit of the road network into that neighborhood, as well as take advantage of the clause in the neighborhood plan that allowed for, uh, a few more units in exchange for some commercial or daycare space. So we're seeing a lo- a, a few more daycare options come into the neighborhood, and, uh, I think that's, uh, a completely net positive, so excited to see this one proceed. Councilor Ricker? Um, yeah, I had a question about waiving this, uh, section 11.2.1, which e- essentially deals with securing a joint school and park site. I'm just wondering why we're, we're waiving it. Uh, am I on the wrong one here? I didn't think I was. This is F1, isn't it? Your worship, to Councilor Ricker, the, I believe there's specific, uh, direction from council on that, and the item has been satisfied. It has been satisfied. Okay, so we are going ... I mean, i- this, uh, we got a letter from the school board that's coming up later on the agenda. We can talk more about that there, but I'm quite concerned that, um, they've identified in that letter that they need six school sites, and five of those are in Willoughby. So waiving the joint park site didn't seem to make sense, but it is going to public hearing, so let's let it go. Thank you. Seeing no discussion, call the question on F1. Carries unanimously. Bylaws for first, second, third reading, highway closure, dedication, removal of bylaw number 61326133. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Ricker. Any discussion on G1? Seeing none, call the question on G1. Councilor Pratt. That carries unanimously. Item G2, highway closure, delegation removal, bylaw number 6220. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Rinn. Any discussion on G2? Call the question on G2. That carries unanimously. Item G3, small-scale multiunit housing. Bylaw number 6233, moved by Councilor Rent, seconded by Councilor Bailey. Any discussion on G3? Seeing none. I'll call the question on G3. That carries unanimously. Item G4, MetroWest Inter Municipal Business License Bylaw, License Agreement Bylaw, bylaw number 62366237. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Ferguson. Any discussion on G4? See none. I'll call the question on G4. Carries anonymously. 2027 item G5, 2027 permissive tax exemptions bylaw number 6245. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Rent. Any discussion on G5? Seeing none. I'll call the question on G5. That carries anonymously. Item H1, rezoning application number 100733. May I hold that? Yeah, I'll come to you in a second, Councilor Richter. Bylaw number 5899. That is back on the floor since it was a deferral. Councilor Richter, go ahead. Yes, I have a conflict of interest that I must declare. Thank you. Thank you. Pecuniary or not pe- ... It is pecuniary, but it's indirect. Thank you. All right. It's back on the floor. Is there any discussion on H1? Councilor Whitmarsh. Yeah, um, I, uh, will support this, um, application. Um, I think, you know, we, we had lots of information has come over the last, uh, or prior to the public hearing and, of course, the public hearing. Um, this is supported by the ALC. It's supported by the rural and agricultural base as, as a, as this is a support to local farming. They've clearly met all of the requirements that have been asked of them. In fact, uh, they probably exceeded those requirements and because of that, um, I would be supporting it. O- okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a quick qu- question, if I may, through the chair to the staff. Um, we, as you know, we get our agenda packages on Thursday and, uh, all of the councilors are quick to, uh, contact staff regarding information. The information from West Qu- Heart Creek Farm's flood management plan and the other plans were submitted to council, if I may. Did council and staff have enough time, if I may, to Mr. Kuhner, to review all the information regarding Westcreek? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Ferguson, um, staff have provided a memo attached as M7, uh, to to- today's agenda. The, the memo itself provides the, um, the reports that were requested by council that was primarily the floodplain management plan, the noise mitigation plan, dust management plan. A majority of these reports were provided around June 8th, 12th, and 16th. Uh, they are before council, but staff have not done a in-depth analysis or review of these items yet, um, but they are, uh, we're continuing to internally review them or externally if required. Uh, thank you, Mr. Kuhner. M- Mr. Mayor, I do have a referral motion. I'll wait and see if there's any other further discussion. Yeah, come back to you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, yeah, if I can ask a question to staff through the chair. Um, a point of clarification, I guess, on what I'm looking at here. So, uh, the second page of the, um, uh, report, uh, the, the bylaw, um, I noticed the final point that doesn't have a date on it yet before the adoption date. It's received the approval of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. So am I understanding correctly that because we're a regulated community, there's one final step after it passes through council, um, before this bylaw is approved? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Martins, that is correct. Okay. So there'll be a final set of eyes looking at this, um, and I, I just... I, I'll be supporting this. Um, I- the, um, the proponents have gone, um, to great lengths to, um, satisfy all of the requirements. And I think typically on a, an application like this, it would pass third. Now there's still a final reading available, if there's some further analysis by staff. So, um, those are my thoughts on this. Yes. Um, so I understand there's a referral motion, so, um, but I guess I, since others have spoken, um, Westcreek has been operating since 1986. They are not only a longstanding local business, but a key supplier to greenhouse operations and nurseries across Langley and BC. They were deemed an essential service during COVID, and as witnessed by the hundreds of emails, speakers, and people in attendance at the public hearing, they obviously still are. I've been to the site, and I've also now read through the mem- memorandum under M7 with updated information, and it appears they've submitted submissions on the five items, um, of the re- resolution from Ap- April 15. So I understand maybe staff have not had enough time. Um, hopefully they can, um, you know, look at that, but, um, at this point I am in voting in favor, but, um, it so- sounds like we have another referral motion, so, um-Those are my comments. ... person? With it? Oh, first of all, thank you, Councilor Koontz, I appreciate those comments. Um, Mr. Mayor, my referral motion is that staff, that per, that council refer the June 8th to 12th and 16th, 2026 submissions from West Creek Farms Limited respecting file number 5899 back to staff to complete a fulsome review of the materials, including the flood plain management plan, noise mitigation plan, dust management plan, odor management plan, to prospective restrictive covenants, the containment options report, and the qualified environmental professional setback confirmation and site plan commentary. And the staff report back to council with results prior, review prior to council's further consideration of third reading of bylaw number 5899. To a move? I move. Second by Councilor Rinn. Wish to speak to it? Uh, no, thank you. Nance Ward. We have a long one. I think you have that, right? You put that up for (...) council. This is on the floor, does anybody have any questions or discussion? Yeah, I like this referral. If the staff hasn't gone into it, this has been, uh, back and forth significantly with, uh, a lot of, uh, very valid points on both sides. And, uh, I want to get as much information as I can, and if the staff hasn't had a, a very deep look at this, uh, I support, uh, them coming back with every bit of information that I can possibly get to make this, uh, decision. Yes, um, you know, certainly, um, I am supportive. If tho- if people honestly feel they need more time, and of course staff has indicated they would need more time to assess it, so I'm fine. I'm wondering if there is a date here. Most of our referrals have a, have a date, and refer it to a specific meeting. We, after this meeting, we have two meetings left of this council, and I'm wondering if we could, uh, have an amendment that actually asks for a date on this prior to the end of this council term. Sure thing. That amendment would be ordered to come back to you. Sure. Okay. Want to... Councilor Kirkster? Yeah, actually I was just gonna ask about that as well, a date. Thank you. Yes, um, I, just looking at the council referral in front of me on the screen, um, I believe Councilor, um, Ferguson actually mentioned three dates of submissions, and I see the report does show three dates, um. And just a minor technicality, but, um, I hope we can look at all of their submissions at once. Yes, I believe that that's, that's obviously the intention, is not to omit, uh, any of the submissions. Yep. Um, I'll move an amendment to change the dates, as Ms. Bauer is doing right now. Ms. Bauer, do you have the dates? And then maybe all submissions, not limited to or something, we'd just make that amendment right now to make that clear. Certainly fine. Miss, Mr. Koohner, does that cover what's required? Great. So I'll move that amendment. Is there a seconder? Seconded by Councilor Rinn. Can we just do a show of hands, all in favor of that amendment? That carries unanimously. All right, uh, Councilor Martins, go ahead. Nope, that was it. Councilor Martins, you wish to make a motion? Yeah, I, I'd like to make an amendment, uh, to the July 13th meeting. Um, the, um, staff has had, uh, these reports for between two and three weeks, uh, up to this point. This would be another two weeks, and, uh, that would be our second last meeting of this, of this council. So, like to move it to July 13th. Is there a second to that? Sorry about this (...) Any discussion on item H1 with the referral on the table? Seeing none, call the question on that referral. Same thing, councilor, yep. That carries unanimously with Councilor Richter absent. Could we get Councilor Richter back, please? All right. So we're on to bylaws for final adoption. I1, small scale multiunit housing residential complex on bylaw number 6233. I'll move final reading. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Any discussion on I1? Seeing none, call the question on I1. That carries unanimously. Item I2, council procedure bylaw housekeeping amendments. Conflict, Miss Sayer. Bylaw number 6234. Councilor Richter, go ahead. I have a conflict, and I'm declaring it. It's pecuniary. All right. Councilor Martins? Yes, I too have to declare a conflict of interest. All right. All right. On a I too, so we wish to move that. Moved by Councilor Rent, seconded by Council Ferguson. Any discussion on I too? Councilor Whitmarsh. Yeah, um, you know, I think I expressed the concerns about this, uh, meeting a couple of meetings ago. I hold the same position. I don't think there's any need to, to, uh, change the, uh, schedule of the way that we treat, um, all members of council. All members of tr- council should be treated equally and fairly, and I think this is in, uh, opposition to that, so I will not be supporting it. Councilor Thanks? Uh, same. I, um, spoke to this last time, and, um, my position hasn't changed and, um, do not think this is necessary at this time. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks for those opinions. Totally appreciate that. I think that, uh, you know, it's interesting that, uh, where this has came from and where we are, there's obviously more information that, that, uh, some of you have that you're not mentioning, and we're not going to mention. But, uh, you know, I think it's interesting that some of the framing that's gone on, it's appropriate to potentially respond to it. You know, there's... The only person here that's voted to censure a member of council a month before an election is Councilor Whitmarsh. And so, I think it's a bit unfortunate to see and hear some of the commentary, but you know, that's what, uh, that's what happens, and we're looking forward to, um, getting on with the campaign after governing is complete. So with that, I'm going to call the question on I2. And that carries. Councilor Coons, Councilor Whitmarsh opposed. So with that, we can get back Councilors Richter and Martin's... All right, so we carry on with item I3, Willoughby community and neighborhood plan updates, fees and charges amendment bylaw number 6226. Seconded... I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any discussion on I3? Seeing none, call the question on I3. That carries unanimously. Uh, anybody wish to make a mayor and council report? I'm just going to congratulate Canada on an amazing victory, but also what an amazing job. I believe the LEC staff and our corporate event staff have done putting on these community events at Willoughby Community Park. I think it's been fabulous to be a spectator and, uh, you know, watch the work of putting on those events, which I think has been great to see. It's amazing to see that screen when it's got direct sunlight on it as well. And I'm beginning to see some of the opportunities that obviously exist, uh, to further develop that space, uh, for programming such as that in the future. So I want to commend everyone for putting those on. Certainly looking forward to the game on Saturday morning at 10:00 AM. Uh, Councilor Bailey, go ahead. Yeah, busy couple weeks. I attended the White Cliff graduation. It's always a, a pleasure to see, um, the White Cliff, uh, alternative learning. Uh, it's a very interesting and, uh, much more personalized, uh, graduation. Heritage, uh, um, community tour was, was very informative, especially for someone who has not grown up in the Aldergrove area. Uh, the watch parties were great. I saw, uh, everyone, uh, getting larger and larger. And what I really appreciate about that is sometimes people say that you're building a specific, uh, facility for a specific use. While this is a soccer, uh, a soccer field that wasn't used for soccer. It was used for a, an incredible, uh, community event with tons of families. I attended the LEP's AGM, uh, I was on the Zoom for the healthcare professional recruit, uh, yesterday morning at 6:30. I went down to, uh, the Fern Ridge Nature Park for a bio blitz. And it was, uh, in, very informative wa- walking around with some, uh, the people that are, uh, professionals in the environmental field. Uh, Many Voices in Salishan was, um, was (laughs) an incredible use of that new facility. I, I'm going to vary just a little bit here. Um, I have my niece from out of town, uh, visiting. She's from Ontario. And the reason she's visiting, unfortunately, is a memorial. Now she's, uh, in, in the range, I'm not going to identify exactly how old because I don't know if she had appropriate, uh, uh, see it as appropriate. But a dear friend of hers, uh, was killed, and it was on a scooter with no helmet, uh, and, uh, that just goes to, uh, show to me and to many others that, uh, someone in the range of about 50 years old, uh, can die because of those, uh, scooters and, uh, improper usage and, uh, protection. Uh, everyone can, especially children. And then, uh, the last thing I want to bring up is, uh, unfortunately up in, uh, Fort Simpson in Northwest Territories, uh, three firefighters, uh, three people involved with, uh, firefighting, wild land firefighting, uh, died on Wednesday, and they are called, uh, the Bird Dogs. And it's especially close to me because a, uh, a family friend and, um... ... a fellow that I also played junior hockey with, uh, was a bird dog and used to tell us about the dangers of, of those guys for what they do is they, they fly in and then they direct the, uh, the firefighting, the aerial firefighting, uh, efforts. So it is, uh, a very dangerous thing as it proved unfortunately in Fort Simpson. So, uh, our thoughts and, and that go out to, um, to everyone affected, especially the families. Yeah, thank you. I just wanna share a few highlights from the cou- past couple weeks. It's been a very busy time for all of us. Uh, I had the opportunity to take part in the Township of Langley Heritage Tour, uh, focused on Aldergrove this year, and it was a great reminder of the importance of knowing and sharing our local stories. I also attended the RE Mountain Secondary graduation ceremony. Um, more than 600 students crossed the stage at the LEC there. Um, what r- really stood out to me, eh, despite that number, was a real strong sense of belonging among the students, and, uh, kudos to the staff there that have done a tremendous job by bringing everybody in when you're talking about sheer numbers. Um, and I have to say, uh, Principal, uh, Paul Trottle, um, personally moved the tassel on every single graduate's hat, um, which was quite the workout. And this past weekend, I attended Salishan Place by the River for the opening of the exhibit, Many Voices Shared Places exhibit. It was wonderful to be in that space. Um, we haven't had much opportunity yet to spend time there, um, and to see how it brings together our community culture and shared stories, and another excellent event put on by our township staff, so kudos to our staff. Finally, I attended the CLA Church pre-Canada Day service, uh, yesterday, um, where prayers were offered for dignitaries and emergency responders along with encouragement for those serving the community, and a special touch with, uh, Langley RCMP members, uh, who attended in red serge and led the procession of dignitaries. Uh, these are just a few highlights, and I'm grateful for the many people and organizations who continue to build community across the township. Yes, thank you. Um, yeah, I had the opportunity to attend a number of high school graduations, uh, this past, uh, couple weeks, the Langley Fundamental High School, uh, the Aldergrove Community Secondary School, and the Walnut Grove Secondary School. And, uh, I'm always amazed at the accomplishment of the students in our community, and, uh, when you watch them walk across the stage and hear the things they're doing and the places they're gonna go in terms of, uh, other universities or other programs, um, it's very impressive and, uh, puts our community in a good place. Um, certainly excited about the Canada Day celebrations coming up. It did start off, uh, this weekend at CLA, as, as been mentioned, uh, by Councilor Martins. It was great to see many levels of, of government there, including many members of our own council, who attended that event. Um, and, uh, and we know that upcoming on the first Canada Day, we have, in our community, the Fort Langley Farm Museum has a special Canada Day event, uh, encourage people to go there, Aldergrove Canada Day celebrations, and then follow it up with our Canada Day celebrations at MacLeod Park. So a lot of great things, uh, happening there, um, uh, coming up. I also was able to attend the Many Voices Shared Places, uh, eh, um, exhibition at the new es- at the, uh, museum, the Shelton Place, and really thankful to staff and all the great work they did. I was just really impressed with the, with the e- exhibit. Um, it was great to be able to be part of that. And, uh, final thing was to be able to go on the Township In Bloom farm tour this year. The focus was on, um, floriculture, and, uh, so being able to attend that and see, uh, what, uh, people are doing in our community in terms of, uh, of farming, but also, you know, of course, we know farming is, is economic and it's business. And, uh, hearing around their challenges, um, and successes as they venture into floriculture and try to grow their business in our community, so that was really, uh, helpful. So a great couple of weeks, and I know we've got lots of things like that coming forward, so thank you. Yeah, I also went on the Heritage Ad- Advisory Tour. Um, our tour guide, Tami Quiring, did an excellent job of highlighting all of the places that used to be, um, much to her chagrin (laughs). I also attended the agriculture, uh, advisory tour, uh, Community In Bloom, and that was also, um, very informative. It was great to see the passion that, um, some of our, our residents have for growing flowers and some of the challenges as well. Um, I attended the LCS, the Langley Christian School grad, and I was, uh, able to give, um, the township, uh, scholarship to, um, a student. I also, um, wanted to acknowledge the s- the work staff did at Bell Park, and, um, we had a grand opening, and, and most members of council were there, and it's just wonderful to see, um, this, this park, uh, now a very accessible park, uh, for kids who are, um, you know, are in the neighborhood who, who actually have, uh, wheelchairs and are able now to go to the park and, and just have a really good time. I also, uh, attended the CLA, uh, Canada Day service, and it was great to see, um, you know, lo- all kinds of levels of government. And I, I do wanna note that, um, Pastor Derek Comrie was, um, asking about where Tim Bailey was. Just kidding. Just kidding. Counselor Ferguson? Bad, bad joke. (laughs) I can, I can tell you where he was. I was watching my grandson's last lacrosse game and-Your grandson takes priority over everything else. I like to tease you, Tim, you know that. (laughs) I like to brag about my grandson. (laughs) I was waiting for that, if I may. Thank you, M- Mr. Mayor. Um, of course, I was at C- uh, CLA yesterday, and saw a lot of familiar faces. My wife Denice and I were married there 30 years ago, and we're celebrating that b- that anniversary coming up. Um, I also wanted to thank the LEC staff for the stadium there, the viewings there. It was exciting. Canada winning, yay. And 3,000 people were there, so it was a lot of preparation work and a lot of excited people and happy crowd. RE Mountain graduation ceremony, I know a teacher there, and he's still teaching there, of course, and it is probably one of the most exciting events I've been to in a while, not just because the 600 students had graduated there, but because what partnership we've been able to achieve with the Langley School District, our staff, and our, uh, former MLAs, where that building was built on a surface area that is not made for secondary schools. They are using a number of our park area, our sports fields, our gymnasiums, our LEC, and they have a great facility there because people sat down and worked together to build one of the best high schools in the province. And I think you could look anywhere in the province, what they have done is next to impossible, and I really, really happy. My hair stands on end, because it is a very, very positive school, and I think the next steps will be, in the future, when we build the school, the high school and the middle school up in yo- up there in Yorkton, will be there for 3,000 students with 20 plus acres around it. So it's an exciting time for partnerships between the school district and the township of Langley. Thank you. All right, seeing no, we'll move on to items for information. Um, M1 through 10, I have an item, we'll just take care of that right away, related to... Which item was that? Item M2. Ms. Bower, if you could bring that up for me, please. Yeah. So I'll move that council authorize 145,000 from the facilities renewal reserve for the purchase of temporary fabric structure and associated site improvements as outlined within memo to council dated June, June 29th, 2026. Seconded by Council Rents. Any discussion on that? Council Martins. Yeah, thank you. Um, I, I support this motion. I just, uh, question, uh, if I can, through, um, mayor to staff. Um, for anything that we do temporary, is that covered under our insurance policy? Through your worship, to Council Martins, it depends on the policy, but generally speaking, specific to this one, I believe, um, the insurance have indicated that we can utilize any funding for either permanent or temporary, um, measures. Okay, but there's a cap on the coverage, is that what I'm guessing? And then we can allocate it as we see fit? To your worship, Council Martins, generally speaking, yes. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Meertens. Yeah, I just had a question. The, um, the temporary fabric structure, what happens to it after the replacement facility is built? What will it be used for? Uh, through your worship, we don't have any immediate plans for it after its use, but we would own it, and we could look for options. So we could- But it would be taken down. We would take it down. Correct. We wouldn't reuse it, but could we sell it? That's always a potential. Okay. All right, thank you. Councilor Withers. Yeah, um, my question was just around the, the, the cost here, and does it include, um, things like the, the perimeter fencing and other measures taken to sort of avoid, or I shouldn't say avoid, that's... to reduce the chances of vandalism occurring. Is that part of this cost, um, the 145? Uh, through your worship, yes, that, uh, it does include a perimeter fence that we would put around the temporary structure. We'd also reuse the cinder block structure that would be within the perimeter fence as a secure lockup. Okay, great, thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on funding re- resolution that was just on the screen. That carries unanimously. Does anybody have anything items M1 through 10? Councilor Martins. Thank you. Uh, yeah, I just, um, want to, um, acknowledge M5, the Murrayville Cemetery cenotaph, um, the report from staff. I know that, uh, the Heritage Advisory Committee won't be meeting through the summer months, but I'm wondering if there's any way to get that report to them, just for their information only. I know they, there are several people on that committee that had quite a keen interest in this item. Through your worship, Council Martins, yeah, staff will just send the, um, a memo as it's publicly available to members of the committee. Thank you. Councilor Meertens. Uh, yes, I'd like to, um, bring up M10, please. Okay, so the letter we received from the school board is pretty specific, uh, and that apparently, under legislation, uh, council has to respond within 60 days. Otherwise, the government, uh, the legislation states that we will be, we will- ... have been deemed to accept the proposal. Uh, is there any reason why we can't a- approve it today? Although, I would like some more information on where exactly the Willoughby school sites are gonna because it's quite clear in that report on page four that, uh, five of the six needed sites that they've identified, uh, need to be in Willoughby. So, with the changes we're proposing in Willoughby, through increased density for the 200th Street corridor, et cetera, are we, um, pleased with the arrangements that have been made? I mean, have arrangements been made, or are we gonna have s- five sites for them? Your Worship, to Councilor Richter, um, the letter itself add- addressed to myself was dated June 17th. It does state, as you've articulated, that local governments have 60 days to pass a resolution or res- respond in writing or if no response, it would be deemed accepted. Um, there is an option that we can defer this a- another meeting, and then su- review some of the information, uh, with respect to the eligible school sites proposal, um, specifically the questions you have asked. Yeah, about the location. Um, that being the case and not wanting to hold the School Board up for 60 days, uh, I'd like to make a deferral then of this to the next meeting. Maybe you would want to have it, you would want to have it back on the agenda for the next meeting? Because right now, there's no motion on the floor to refer or defer. I'm just making the motion to- To refer it. ... to refer it. Would it be a referral to the July 13 meeting? No, y- yeah, meaning I want a report back and a decision made at July 13th. Could you perhaps- Do, do- ... could you clarify this process? Yes. So there's, to Your Worship, to Councilor Richter, there's potentially two options. You can just defer it to the next meeting, and the item for information will automatically then, if the deferral motion is carried by Council, be on the next meeting. If it's specific information, you can refer it back to staff, uh, and cite the specific information, and the staff can bring that information forward at the date you choose for that meeting w- alongside the, um, letter as well from the school district, so there's potentially- Okay. ... two options available. So to clarify then, I'm referring this to staff for a report to come back to Council on July 13th... regarding Willoughby locations. Yes, Mr. Cooners, that would mean you would have to be completed by the end of this week. Is that realistic? Uh, to Your Worship, I'd have to review that to just see if we already have the information, or we still would have to coordinate with the school district and look at that. I, off the top of my head, I don't know if we have that information available yet, but we can, we'll have to review it. Okay, but the motion I've proposed, refer to staff for a report back by July 13th, I can put that motion forward? Yes. Is there a seconder to that? Seconded by Councilor Wittmers, yeah, go ahead. No, I think the motion clarifies what it is we need to do. We need to get on with this and get the School Board a- an answer, and let's not make them wait 60 days to get them. Council Pratt? Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. Uh, just a question through yourself to the mover if, if possible. In the report itself, it highlights which neighborhoods the proposed school sites would be located in. Uh, I heard mention about the Willoughby transit corridor. I see one here for Southwest Latter Sport Field, but that, that already is, is in township possession, and the school site is already secured, so I'm just wondering which locations the mover is looking for, further clarification on. A- a- all, all five of them that are listed on page four. And so in our neighborhood plans where it, it showcases the designated properties where school sites are, for example, in Williams, and just- I just want assurances that we have locations. Uh, we may not have them secure yet, but we have them identified, and that we can respond to the School Board at the, by the next meeting. Yes, we agree. Okay, perfect. Thank you. All right, seeing no other discussion, we call the question on that item. That carries, so that Councilor Bailey, Councilor Ferguson, Councilor Went, Mayor Woodward opposed. Uh, is there any other items for information M1 through 10? Okay, seeing none. Councilor Kunz, go ahead. Item 01. Okay, thank you. Um, first I, I want to apologize to my colleague, Tim. He didn't actually ask for you. (laughs) Uh, okay. Um, so I brought this forward because I, I learned about this, uh, opportunity through a councilor from, uh, Coquitlam, and, um, she connected me to somebody. So before I wanted to, you know, I'll just explain how it all works. Um, they have this, uh, in, uh- Make the motion. Oh yeah, sorry. Yeah, thank you. Um, so yeah, if I could, uh, I would like to move, um, 01. Great. I'll second it. Go ahead. Thank you. Um, so it works... This is how it works. Sports equipment lockers are installed in parks. Um, instead of having to bring your own basketball, soccer ball, uh- ... pickleball paddles, what have you. Um, residents can then download the free Equipment Sport app. Uh, they unlock the locker, and after you're finished with it, you return the equipment. It's really, really simple. Who pays for it? Actually, one of the, um, m- the reasons municipalities are interested in this model is that Canadian Tire Jumpstart, uh, Charities funds the program in partcher- partnership with EquipSport. Um, so, um, I, I'm bringing this forward because I believe it's worth exploring opportunities that encourage people of all ages to get outside, be active, and make better use of our parks and recreation spaces. Um, so it's not asking council to approve the program. I'm simply just asking staff to review the proposal and report back on how the program works, and if it's something that the township, um, that would be worthwhile for us to consider. Thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on 01. That carries unanimously. Councilor Bailey, go ahead. Yes, uh, and I'd like to move this motion. Go ahead. Moving into second, second by Councilor Thomson. Yeah, the, the reason I'm bringing this forward is there, um, balcony fires are a special hazard and concern to the fire, uh, community, uh, mainly due to increased loads, fire loads that are going onto them now. Uh, people are utilizing these balconies as we're condensing people more and more. They're utilizing it, especially in the summer, for alternative ways of cooking. An example, a very dangerous example is, uh, those little cook units that you can put a pot on. Uh, if people do it like a deep-fried turkey or something that is basically a grease fire, uh, when the sprinklers on the balconies that are sprinklered hit the grease fires, it, uh, it accelerates the fire very significantly, and it becomes what they call lapping. So it goes up and, and it spreads very quickly and very dangerously. So with the, um, increased load, fire loads on the balconies and that, I have been getting some, uh, requests for people to, to find a, uh, find out more about what's going on. Uh, a part of this, and I don't want a, a, a big detailed report, uh, more of a memo form, is one is an awareness. So the fire department can disperse, uh, information on what currently is going on to protect balconies and, uh, and their usage, and also, um, and look at, a big part is, let's have a look at our neighboring, uh, communities and jurisdictions that may have some very creative, um, uh, solutions to this, because they are very dangerous, and also what they do is they eliminate one, uh, one avenue of, uh, getting people out in, in, uh, fires. And when you now look at a lot of the fires are starting with, uh, e-bikes and that, and mainly at the front doors, uh, when you're coming into, uh, uh, townhouses and that, uh, you don't wanna block or have any possibility of, of a second, uh, second means of egress, uh, being blocked. So, uh, this is just a report, find out what we are doing, what's in place. It can be a great awareness tool for the people out there that are living i- in these, uh, situations with balconies, and also to see if we can get some, uh, very, uh, progressive comparables. Right, seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on 02. Carries unanimously. Councilor Patterson. So moved, move the motion. I'll second it, go ahead. Now Mr. Mayor, uh, Mr. Mayor, it's the BMX track improvements in Brookswood, and the motion is self-explanatory, and they did point out to me, it's not in the motion, but they are heading off next week to a meet in Australia, and hopefully one day we'll have international meets right there in Brookswood. Thank you. That's good. Councilor Thomson? Yeah, this is in my backyard, and I've, uh, been up to the track many times, and I know that the BMX Association has done a lot of their own fundraising, a lot of parent involvement, a lot of volunteers, and, um, so yeah, I'm happy to support anything we can do to help, uh, the kids that are, um, running around on the B- BMX track. Thank you. Yeah, this is another example of, uh, a facility that is built for a purpose, but, um, is used for, uh, lots of different purposes. I, uh, I frequent, uh, George Preston and the outdoor, uh, arena quite often, and, uh, very often you see an awful lot of kids, not in an organized manner, but they're benefiting from being able to ride on this track, which is an incredible track. And, uh, when you go over, 'cause I am a nosy person, uh, you go over there and, and talk to them, uh, a lot of these people, uh, it's the only place these kids can get on their bikes and, uh, and give it a shot. So, uh, I are fully in support of this, and, uh, God, Councilor Kunst, if you think I'm getting sensitive, I'm, I'm slipping, okay? (laughs) (laughs) All right, seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question on 03. That carries unanimously. Is there any other business? Name of the business? Nope? Does anybody wish to add an item to closed? Councilor Kunst, go ahead. Yeah, I have a legal item. Okay. And Councilor Martins? Yes, I have a labor relations item.All right. With those additions, I'll res-- mo- move that we resolve in a special closed. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. All those in favor? Anyone opposed? ... (inaudible) favor. I just would like (...). Okay. Can I get a motion to terminate? Seconded by... I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Bilyard. All those in favor? Opposed? And that's carried. Thank you.