By-laws (2024)-21005, (2024)-21012 and (2024)-21017 be approved subject to Section 284.11 (4) of the Municipal Act.

1:24:05have to make an application to the Interior Energy Board to accept clauses addressing this

1:24:12proposed legislation. And from our experience, the Interior Energy Board would not even recognize

1:24:19speculative legislation. So they wouldn't act on speculative legislation. They act on legislation

1:24:29or directions from the minister, but anything speculative, they do not act on. So they wouldn't

1:24:36do anything with a recommendation to add clauses talking about proposed legislation.

1:24:43As far as recovery of municipal franchise fees, if they were ever passed as accepted,

1:24:53the Interior Energy Board has the practice, as Mr. Costello said earlier, to approve the recovery of

1:25:00permit fees or other costs that are incurred by Enbridge gas to provide service through rates.

1:25:07So they would be, the Interior Energy Board, in all likelihood would allow recovery of prudently

1:25:14incurred franchise fees through the rates charged to the rate payers and the citizens of the city of

1:25:20Guelph. So it's not something we would not recommend to change the Board's long-standing policy of

1:25:28recovering costs and rates because the benefit rates follow the benefits. So if the taxpayers of

1:25:37the city of Guelph are benefiting from a franchise fee, that's who should be paying for the benefit.

1:25:43And so that's the long-standing policy of the Interior Energy Board and that's what we would

1:25:48continue to pursue. Thank you for that. Thanks, Councillor Billings. Over to Councillor Allt, please.

1:25:56Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie. Through you to the delegates, I apologize. I don't know why

1:26:01my thing is dingy. I've got it on silent. That was my wife. The question that I have for you,

1:26:09I didn't come up until I heard a couple of the other Councillors ask questions.

1:26:13I'm struggling with an issue of transparency and equity. One of the things that strikes me about

1:26:19this that's good, whether the costs are passed on to the consumers or not, is that there's very

1:26:24clear transparency that this is part of the cost of using natural gas, which I think is important.

1:26:31I do believe in transparency. The other one is equity. It strikes me as well that consumers and

1:26:38residents of Guelph or any other community who are not using gas but are perhaps using electricity

1:26:45or maybe in the odd case, completely off the grid, are actually being charged through our taxes

1:26:52inadvertently for Enbridge essentially using city property. Am I correct in that?

1:27:02So I'll take through, Mayor, to Councillor Allt. No, I wouldn't see it that way. I'd say go back

1:27:09to the fact that we are paying a million dollars to the City of Guelph in property taxes for every

1:27:15meter of pipe. I'm sorry, just one second. I'll give you your time. To those in the audience,

1:27:21I would appreciate the respect that we gave you as much as you should give the respect to the

1:27:26next delegates that are speaking right now. Is that fair? Because we do it for you? It is.

1:27:32So thank you very much. Back to you. Thank you. So we do pay property taxes for each meter of pipe

1:27:42that we do have in the ground. We are passive. We are not looking for a lot of the services

1:27:48that the municipality that prepares. We do believe that natural gas has been an economic

1:27:56driver for this community and many other communities across Ontario. With regards to the transparency

1:28:04issue, with my hydro, I see the distribution fees from electorates. I see everything up front.

1:28:13What I'm wondering is because some of this is actually not within the fees that I see

1:28:19for my natural gas, is there a transparency issue here as well? And again, apologies for my phone.

1:28:24I've actually got it. Do not disturb. Through you, Mr. Mayor, if you could just clarify what you mean

1:28:34by what you're not seeing on the bill from Cambridge. Yes, I believe that there is a

1:28:39essentially a transportation fee as a consequence of the lines in Guelph's and within Guelph's land.

1:28:48We'll put it that way. And consequently, I don't see 100% of the cost in my gas bill,

1:28:55because I do use gas. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I've completely got the whole equation backwards.

1:29:01Through you, Mr. Mayor. The rates are designed to recover the total revenue of carbon of

1:29:07ember gas. And we charge uniform rates to anyone that uses it in the city of Guelph.

1:29:16And the costs are allocated among the different classes of customers on a system basis. So

1:29:26there may be uniform rates, but recovering all the costs that we incur. So all the costs that

1:29:33we incur are recovered through the rates. It's not itemized. You don't see a line item that says

1:29:42property taxes or things like that. They're all rolled up into O&M costs or capital related costs

1:29:50and rolled into the revenue requirement. Then the revenue requirements is divided by

1:29:54the cubic meters that we sell to come up with an average rate for a distribution charge

1:29:59or a transportation charge. So that's how it's divided out. You don't see an individual line

1:30:05item. You'll see it for taxes, carbon tax or HST. But you won't see individual cost items. They're

1:30:13rolled up in aggregate. And then the Interior Engine Board determines what the rate structure will be

1:30:19on how those costs are put in aggregate. And those are the fees that we end up putting on the bill.

1:30:25Okay. Perhaps the carbon tax should be part of the aggregate. The issue that I then have though

1:30:32is do, and I'll put it a different way, do taxpayers in Guelph who are not using natural gas at all,

1:30:43do they experience any cost as a consequence of lines within Guelph? Just a simple yes or no,

1:30:50really? No. Okay. Thanks. That's all I needed to know. Thank you.

1:31:01Just turn off your mic there. It looks like I got one more from Councillor Gibson.

1:31:07Thank you, through you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much for coming to Delegate today.

1:31:12I just wanted to give you an opportunity. There's been a lot of talk about average revenue and the

1:31:16jump it's taken in the last few years. And I tried to bring some transparency to this,

1:31:21but I was just wondering if you could elaborate a little bit on revenue and how that's related to

1:31:26your collection of the federal carbon tax and what that's meant to not profits, but revenues for

1:31:33Enbridge. I know that it's broken down a little bit on your website, but if you could just take

1:31:36a minute to help us understand that. I'll be a start and so through you, Mayor, to Councillor Gibson.

1:31:43So just maybe a couple of comments on Enbridge overall. And I have heard some figures from the

1:31:48last meeting and this meeting. Enbridge is North America's largest energy infrastructure company.

1:31:56If you look, we're probably half in Canada, half in the United States. If you look at the gas

1:32:00distribution side total, we might be a quarter of that pie. If you look at us here in Ontario,

1:32:07you might have to take that again in half. So you need to put that into perspective when

1:32:11you're talking about Enbridge overall and you're talking about the parent company and some of the

1:32:15financial numbers that people are referencing, they're referencing the overall piece versus what

1:32:21is what's happening here in Ontario. So I thought I'd just give that for a bit of context from the

1:32:25overall company perspective and maybe you can talk a bit about the other piece. Yeah. So the

1:32:30franchise agreement we're talking about is the regulated distribution utility here in Ontario.

1:32:37And we are regulated by the Interior Energy Board and they restrict what our profit will be at any

1:32:44one time. The federal carbon tax is in and out. Like it just gets put on the bill, we recover it,

1:32:50we submit it. We don't earn anything on that. The return is capped at a certain amount. If we

1:32:59happen to earn in any particular year a little bit more than that, we have to share it with the

1:33:05ratepayers and give them, if we had a super efficient year and saved money somewhere and bumped up

1:33:14our return beyond a certain threshold above our regulated return, we would end up sharing the

1:33:21benefit with the ratepayers. So when you're talking about revenues and returns for the regulated utility,

1:33:28it is very regulated and restricted as to how much we can actually earn. So the numbers that

1:33:35are often mentioned when you're talking about a billion dollars or whatever that as Mr. Costello

1:33:40was saying is the total corporation, North American Corporation, not the regulated Ontario

1:33:47utility. Thank you. And one last question. As a regulated company, you're regulated in terms of

1:33:56your rate of return. The way you grow your business then therefore would be to increase your customer

1:34:00base, not necessarily increasing pricing on your ratepayers. Is that correct?

1:34:08Similar to any kind of energy distribution company that's regulated.

1:34:11Right. Through you Mr. Meredith. The Ontario Energy Board regulates where we can be spending

1:34:19money on assets and expanding our system. We have requirements at the Ontario Energy Board to

1:34:26provide them with proposed projects for system expansion and where to have you.

1:34:30They determine whether a system expansion is in the public interest and we'll only move forward

1:34:36with projects like that to expand our system if the Ontario Energy Board approves it in advance.

1:34:48Okay. Is that good? Okay. Great. Hey, thanks for coming. We really appreciate it and in your

1:34:55perspective. So thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Thank you again. Okay. Next up we have

1:35:02Henry Moran and is it, is it Gyrus? Am I saying that right? Thank you Gyrus. Sorry.

1:35:11Valeriot from the Youth Climate, Anxiety and Action coming up to the microphone next.

1:35:34Welcome to you both. Appreciate it. And you're going to share your time too?

1:35:38Yep. Perfect. Okay. Well, you can start whenever you're ready. Thank you.

1:35:53Good evening everyone. My name is Gyrus Valeriot. It's both nice and utterly nerve-wracking to be

1:36:03back here again. But thank you for having me, or us, and giving us the time to speak in front of you

1:36:12all. Change and consequence. Whether positive or negative, there will never be a change

1:36:24if there's no consequence. Today I am asking you to be on the side of change that leads to a positive

1:36:34consequence so that the youth of today and tomorrow will have a fighting chance in this amazing town

1:36:40that in the 16 years of my life I have come to love and call my home. If Guelph continues to subsidize

1:36:47Enbridge and let them get away from the problems that they have caused on our dime, I fear that

1:36:56when it's time for me to start my own family, unfortunately, this will no longer be the place

1:37:04to do so. That really upsets me because I like living here. It's a fun place. Now, I understand

1:37:18that Enbridge is a company and their main goal is to make money.

1:37:25But they are causing too many problems environmentally and within our community.

1:37:33And I also understand that changes are especially a big change that will, after 20 years,

1:37:51of pretty much being the norm. But that's what makes change so rewarding. The feeling of doing

1:37:58something that gives a positive impact is a great feeling. But hey, the easy way or the easy option

1:38:12would just be to do nothing. But that isn't overly rewarding. And this doesn't leave any

1:38:23good feelings. I hope that you all lead us down the path of a positive change. And thank you for

1:38:47letting me speak and giving me your ears for three minutes. My name is Henry Moran and I am

1:38:58still a kid. And even though I'm still a kid, I've come to delegate here today because the climate

1:39:03crisis is a major problem that affects my generation. When I grow up, I don't want to have to worry

1:39:10about whether the air I'm breathing, the water I'm drinking, or the food I'm eating is clean or not.

1:39:15But I may have to because of the events going on right now. By subsidizing Enbridge, you're giving

1:39:21money to a company that may be part of making those nightmares a reality. Did you know that natural gas

1:39:27is one of Ontario's worst climate change contributors? It is responsible for a whole third of Ontario's

1:39:34greenhouse gas emissions. That may not sound like a lot, but consider that Ontario had 157

1:39:40megatons of carbon emissions back in 2022. That means companies like Enbridge are responsible for

1:39:48around 53 megatons of carbon emissions themselves. Are you sure you want to keep giving money to a

1:39:54company by deteriorating our air quality? And relating that to what I said earlier, adolescents

1:40:00around my age are going into depression and becoming incredibly anxious, worrying about the future.

1:40:06Do you think we want to live in a world where we have to feel like we're overheating in both the

1:40:11summer and the winter? These problems are part of why 16% or more of adolescents are going into

1:40:18depression all around the world. And just like me, I'm guessing you aren't happy to hear those numbers.

1:40:24So you see, because we are giving money to the people indirectly causing mental illnesses in

1:40:29young people all around the world, who are the future might I add, we're just helping further

1:40:35the extent of the climate crisis. I'm not saying everything would be changed if we stopped subsidizing

1:40:41Enbridge, but it would help. Thank you for your time. And thank you both for your presentation.

1:40:48Thanks for coming down again. Let me see if there's a question as a follow up.

1:40:53There isn't, but again, thank you very much for coming. Okay, let's see here who's next. Gabby.

1:41:01Calla push is going to join us by video from the clean air partnership.

1:41:10There. Can you hear me? Okay. Yes, we can both see, see you and hear you. And thank you very

1:41:17much for joining us. You have up to five minutes. Okay. And I'll let you let you go and you'll

1:41:24will hopefully you don't get to the five minutes because I don't want your mic to get cut off.

1:41:27Okay. So thank you so much. Well, good evening there council members staff and residents and

1:41:32thank you for allowing me the time to speak on your busy agenda. My name is Gabby Calla push and

1:41:39I'm the cleaner work at the cleaner partnership and wanted to speak to clean air partnership

1:41:43support for the city of Guelph. Hopefully leadership and addressing an unfair fossil fuel

1:41:48subsidy forced upon municipalities in Ontario. Clean air partnership is a charitable environmental

1:41:53organization whose modus operandi is to work with municipalities and their partners to make

1:41:58progress on the significant gap between climate commitments and climate action implementation.

1:42:04In one of many examples of how life is not fair, it is the truth that municipal budgets are extremely

1:42:10vulnerable to significant costs from climate change, especially as it relates to the risk of

1:42:15infrastructure or residents resulting from extreme weather. Municipal budgets are also extremely

1:42:20limited in their revenue sources with property taxes being their only or main recourse for revenue

1:42:26generation. This is a significant challenge for municipal budgets as I'm sure you all know and

1:42:32how we are how are we going to secure the needed resources to invest in the climate commitments

1:42:37and respond to the costs related to the impacts of extreme weather and climate change. It's a

1:42:41question that we're all asking ourselves. It is also true that over 95% of Guelph's greenhouse

1:42:47gas emissions comes from the use of fossil fuels. I get that the franchise agreement is not an

1:42:52exciting thing to dig into, but how utilities use the municipal right-of-way and shining light on

1:42:57the very unequal playing field between how Ontario's fossil fuel system is paid for, how low carbon

1:43:04energy systems are paid for, and how our electricity is paid for is one of the key critical things we

1:43:10need to address to create a level playing field on energy choices for Ontarians. It continually

1:43:17amazes me that we make low carbon energy systems compete on their own against a fossil fuel system

1:43:23that receives significant fossil fuel subsidies. Be these fossil fuel subsidies from taxation

1:43:28relief or subsidizing all infrastructure costs off the provincial fossil fuel rate base or not

1:43:35having to pay their carbon price for electricity generated via fossil fuels. All these are examples

1:43:41of fossil fuel subsidies that Enbridge, which is a private company, benefits from. Provincial

1:43:47rules now allowing municipalities to charge Enbridge for use of the right-of-way for pipelines is

1:43:52an example of a fossil fuel subsidy that is forced upon municipalities. Municipalities need to draw

1:43:58attention to these issues to get this on the provincial agenda. The province certainly won't

1:44:03address these issues without municipalities asking them to. Municipalities also need to address their

1:44:09limited revenue tools for their climate commitments implementation. Municipalities in other provinces

1:44:14can charge utilities for use of the right-of-way for their infrastructure. So why not Ontario

1:44:18municipalities? In addition, being able to charge Enbridge will help level the playing field between

1:44:23fossil fuel and low carbon energy utilities. The fossil fuel subsidy forced upon Ontario

1:44:28municipalities doesn't end to the free use of the municipal right-of-way. Enbridge also has

1:44:34been given the authority to abandon its infrastructure in the municipal right-of-way.

1:44:38And while this may not have reared its head as yet a problem, but as we move away from fossil

1:44:43fuels in the energy transition, this will start to become a municipal issue. Why should they have

1:44:48the right to abandon their infrastructure and leave it to municipalities to deal with? I'm very

1:44:52confused by that. Municipal leadership and calling out these unfair practices being forced upon

1:44:58municipalities is critical to driving provincial engagement on this topic. Change won't happen

1:45:03without municipal leadership. And unless municipalities like wealth carry a whole awful lot,

1:45:08Ontario's energy system is not going to ensure a more level playing field between our fossil fuel

1:45:12system of the past and the low carbon energy systems of the future and present. Ontario Canada

1:45:18needs to be a participant in that low energy transformation and removing fossil fuel subsidies

1:45:23such as free access to the right-of-way and the right to abandon infrastructure is part of that

1:45:27needed change. These subsidies are not fair. It's really not. Thank you so much for your time.

1:45:33And I'd be loved to have answered any questions that you may have.

1:45:37Thank you, Gabby, for your presentation. We appreciate that. And let me see if there's any

1:45:42follow-up for you. Councillor Allt has a question for you. Thank you, Mayor Guthrie. I now see

1:45:46where I got my confused understanding. Through you to the delegate, I was wondering if you could

1:45:52outline what is Bill 165 and what is its apparent impact on new housing development costs?

1:46:02Thank you so much. And through the chair, Bill 165 was a bill passed by the province of Ontario

1:46:08after the Ontario Energy Board ruled that Enbridge should not be making the rate-based

1:46:13subsidize the cost of new infrastructure, in particular to low-rise development. So this is

1:46:19really geared towards how the fossil fuel infrastructure costs are paid for to new developments.

1:46:25And what the Ontario Energy Board said is that it's not fair for the Ontario rate-based

1:46:30to subsidize these infrastructure costs. And there should be the cost being put on to

1:46:38development should pay for the cost of development. It's very much similar along the lines of most

1:46:42development charges in that approach, that it should infrastructure costs should be allocated to

1:46:48those that are in creating the infrastructure costs in the first place, and it should be added to

1:46:52the development costs as a whole, and that the rate they should not subsidize that. So what ended

1:46:57up happening is the province of Ontario passed Bill 165 to maintain that fossil fuel subsidy

1:47:03in new developments. And right now we have it where, you know, we have to pay for electricity

1:47:09allocations, but we don't have to pay for fossil fuel infrastructure costs being brought to new

1:47:14development. It creates an unequal playing field between how electricity system is costed out and

1:47:19how the fossil fuel system is costed out. One last question, America 3. So then my original

1:47:27understanding that non-gas consumers are actually subsidizing gas lines into subdivisions, is that

1:47:36correct? Non-gas users would not be subsidizing the cost of new infrastructure to new developments

1:47:46because they're not an Enbridge customer, but all Enbridge customers are subsidizing the cost

1:47:51associated with bringing the fossil fuel infrastructure to new developments. One of the big concerns

1:47:57that the Ontario Energy Board kind of raises is the risk of stranded assets. And one of the key

1:48:02kind of issues for why this does increase the risk of stranded assets is because, for example,

1:48:08it takes approximately 40 years. Let's use that as an example for the rate-based user, the customer,

1:48:16to pay back the rate base for that infrastructure investment. However, if you're bringing new

1:48:23infrastructure to a new development and they're on the fossil fuel, we know that they're going to be

1:48:28on fossil fuels for at least 15 years while their fossil fuel furnace is functioning. However, when

1:48:33they're next kind of, when that fossil fuel furnace comes to its end of life, there is a good likelihood

1:48:39that that customer will actually move over to a heat pump and then that way move or move themselves

1:48:44for the Enbridge as an Enbridge customer, in which case the overall rate base would be the one who

1:48:49has to subsidize that infrastructure cost. Enbridge is guaranteed, I think it's a 9% rate of return

1:48:55on all of their investments, and then they make additional profits by selling fossil fuels to

1:49:01Enbridge, Ontario's Enbridge system. So there's the Enbridge Canadian company, but then there's

1:49:07the Enbridge Ontario company. Enbridge Canada company makes its money off the sale of fossil

1:49:12fuels and Enbridge Ontario company makes its money off the bringing, paying, getting delivery,

1:49:19getting recouping the cost of the infrastructure. And if we have the risk of stranded assets,

1:49:25it increases the risk that those who can't leave the fossil fuel system are going to be creating,

1:49:31are going to be unfairly burdened with stranded asset costs that have to be recouped because

1:49:37Enbridge is guaranteed its 9% rate of return. Thank you. I've learned something today.

1:49:47Oh, Councillor Caron, please. Thank you, and thank you for an excellent presentation. And one of the

1:49:52things that you highlighted that was significant for me is that change is coming. It's the end of

1:49:59the carbon economy. We're moving to a low carbon economy or no carbon economy and that the transition

1:50:04to heat pumps needs to be incentivized and creating the level playing field is a way to make that

1:50:10happen. We heard in the presentation earlier, and I don't know if you were listening online,

1:50:14but we heard in the earlier presentation from Enbridge that they are investing millions into

1:50:21conservation and new technologies. And it was my understanding that the Canada Greener Homes

1:50:29Initiative is actually the delivery, Enbridge is only the delivery agent for a federal program.

1:50:36So the reason it is relevant here is if we want to incentivize by having the OEB

1:50:42change the way municipalities can gain revenue and incentivize low energy economy,

1:50:49we have to acknowledge that these grants aren't being delivered by our fossil gas supplier.

1:50:58They're coming from public tax dollars. Can you shed some light on that structure?

1:51:05Yeah, I should actually mention that Enbridge actually was delivering the greener homes. I will

1:51:10give Enbridge credit. They did a better job of delivering the greener homes from a customer

1:51:14perspective than greener homes was doing. So I will give them credit. They streamlined the

1:51:18process. They made it a better experience for people participating in the greener homes program.

1:51:24They were simply the administrators of it. I'm sure they made a certain amount of money as

1:51:28administering the program on behalf of greener homes, but I will give them a shout out for that.

1:51:33They did do improvement in terms of customer service delivery on that one. I will also say

1:51:38that's not Enbridge money. That is taxpayer money. We're all Canadian citizens. We're all paying for

1:51:43that kind of that's coming from all of us. I should also mention that their DSM money,

1:51:48their demand side management money is also not Enbridge money. It's rate payer money. So all

1:51:53of these services, when we kind of talk about incentives, it's not Enbridge giving us that

1:51:57incentive. Yes, they are the delivery for that incentive, but ultimately it's either the taxpayer

1:52:02or the rate payer who's paying for it. So yes, we need more incentives, but yes, we also need to

1:52:09move away from incentives. We need to kind of creating a level playing field for people to have

1:52:14a more equal choice. Would I choose as a new customer if I had to pay $5,000 for bringing

1:52:20fossil fuels or would I go all electric in my building if I didn't have to kind of pay that

1:52:25kind of thing? But it's forced upon me as a new homeowner. I'm guaranteed to get those pipelines

1:52:31brought into it. Why? Because it's all subsidized and the developer doesn't pay for it. So they want

1:52:36Enbridge to come in because they don't actually take on those costs and additional electricity

1:52:40allocation. So I did want to kind of highlight all of these things are all incentives that we,

1:52:45as either taxpayers or rate payers, are paying for. They're not coming from the companies.

1:52:50And I should also mention one more thing on this one. We have to move away from the incentives.

1:52:55I'm a fan of incentives, but like let's face it, we all want incentives and nobody wants to pay for

1:53:01these incentives, but they have to be paid for. So we really got to move towards financing and we

1:53:07have to move towards a level playing field because the incentives and scaling up of these actions

1:53:12that we all need to get scaled up, we can't afford to do it via incentive model. We have to do it by

1:53:18creating a level playing field in our energy system and providing real choices for consumers to

1:53:24choose from. But that choice will only be possible if we create a level playing field.

1:53:32Okay. So there are no more questions, but I am still genuinely curious. So I'm going to be your

1:53:40final question, Gabby. Thank you. You mentioned the other provinces. Now it's different. Fair enough,

1:53:47we all agree with that. But it is the rate payer then that will end up paying square that for me.

1:53:58Yeah. The rate payer will probably pay it because Ontario Energy Board will have to,

1:54:03there's only one pot of money that needs to come into it. And Ontario Energy Board,

1:54:08like like Enbridge is going to get its 9%. If Enbridge is truly worried about affordability,

1:54:13maybe they should take it off their profit margins. I'm just saying, they never talk about,

1:54:17they always talk about affordability and adding rate basis, but they never talk about it from

1:54:21kind of like, oh, let's do a little bit of rate based sharing in terms of like that, you know,

1:54:26that kind of mentioning about saving on the distribution system. I would kind of be very

1:54:30curious myself to see what kind of sharing, profit sharing has taken place on that one between the

1:54:34rate payers and Enbridge. But ultimately when it comes down to it, we're all paying for these choices,

1:54:40whether we know it or not, whether we're paying for it at present or whether we're paying for it

1:54:45in the future. And I think one of the key things that this is, that's why the level playing field

1:54:50is so important is providing real choices to Ontarians is the goal on this one.

1:54:56We know we do not have a level playing field. We know we give free infrastructure to new

1:55:01developments. We know that we don't charge franchise agreements in many of like other

1:55:06different provinces. We know that there's cost associated with, because the reason this issue

1:55:11came to our attention at Clean Air Partnership is because we found that some municipalities

1:55:15were actually charging their low carbon utilities for use of the right of way. And when we asked,

1:55:20wait a sec, why are you charging your low carbon utilities for access to the right of way? And

1:55:24why not Enbridge? They informed us that it's not their choice. They are not allowed to charge Enbridge,

1:55:29but they say that they have real charges and real costs associated with infrastructure in the right

1:55:35of way. It could be something as simple as like you can't go with a truck because it's like you

1:55:38got to go in and with a hand person and dig it out. And we've been asking municipalities to try and

1:55:44calculate those costs. Not easy to do, unfortunately, but ultimately what it comes down to is we have

1:55:50to find a more level playing field and create more transparency in our energy system for who pays for

1:55:55what and correct the subsidies that are in place in order to provide real choices to Ontarians

1:56:02and reduce the cost associated with the rate base as a whole as well. Because that's a different one.

1:56:08There's another topic that we can go into. No problem. No, no, no problem. You did answer

1:56:14the question, so I do appreciate that. And with that, I'm just looking around one more time. There

1:56:19is no more questions, but Gaby, thank you so much for joining us and thank you for your presentation

1:56:23tonight. Okay. Thank you very much for allowing me the time on your agenda. I really appreciate it.

1:56:27Have a good evening. Yes, you as well. Take care. Thank you. Okay. Gina, Gina Lamel is here from the

1:56:35Seniors for Climate Action Now, front row, Akina. Thank you for coming and waiting. And then Evan,

1:56:41I saw you walk in. You're in the wings. Okay, you're going to close us off tonight. So, Gina,

1:56:45thanks for waiting and I'll turn it over to you. Okay, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Mayor,

1:56:49members of Council and city staff. Good evening. To refresh your memory, I'm a lifelong resident

1:56:55of Guelph and I am the chair of the Guelph chapter of Seniors for Climate Action Now. We are the

1:57:00Canadian group of older adults acting to address the climate emergency and protect the planet for

1:57:05future generations. Last fall, while driving in my car with my 19-year-old son, we heard yet

1:57:14another news report of an out of control wildfire. I asked him what he thought about the climate

1:57:19crisis. He's a very optimistic, positive young man, but his reply was, we are doomed. He and many

1:57:29others, but especially youth like the youth who are here this evening, believe that we are on a

1:57:34trajectory to an unsustainable planet and so do I. This is why we at SCAN are very grateful for the

1:57:42first step you have taken against fossil fuel giant Enbridge. Today, we're asking you to take

1:57:48another bold step and approve all of the recommendations concerning the Enbridge franchise agreement.

1:57:55Approval would be staying true to your publicly stated priorities. In 2022, Mayor Guthrie was

1:58:02appointed, as we've all heard, to the Board of Directors of the Global Covenant of Mayors

1:58:09for Climate and Energy. And here is what that website says. In his role as a GCOM board member,

1:58:16Mayor Guthrie will serve as an ambassador for urban climate action at local, national, and global

1:58:22levels and represent the region of North America, helping guide North America towards ambitious

1:58:29emissions, reduction goals, and helping national governments meet the highest ambitions of the

1:58:35Paris Agreement. It also says the City of Guelph has implemented multiple initiatives to cut emissions,

1:58:42earning a reputation for environmental and energy leadership in Canada. The city is replacing its

1:58:50diesel transit fleet with electric buses, developing the first circular food economy in

1:58:55Canada, banning single-use plastics, and is committed to becoming a net zero community.

1:59:03Mr. Mayor and Council, I challenge you to recommit yourself to these ambitious

1:59:09emissions, reduction goals, and climate initiatives. Be an example and guide communities in Ontario

1:59:16and across North America to do the same. Be the climate leaders that GCOM says that you are.

1:59:23The city's website also affirms that the city is committed to the United Nations Race to Zero

1:59:28and has set targets for the whole community to reduce carbon emissions by 63% and by 2030,

1:59:36and to work together to become a net zero carbon community by 2050. Proposing significant cuts

1:59:43to environmental investments as are proposed in the 2025 budget is not consistent with these

1:59:48commitments. Although the city continues to invest in transit and active transportation

1:59:54initiatives, the overall reduction in funding will slow down progress and electrification

1:59:59and other essential environmental projects. Without significant change like the change that

2:00:04that young man spoke about, Guelph is on the trajectory to climate doom. Guelph's community,

2:00:11greenhouse gas emissions are up 8% compared to 2021. Guelph needs climate leadership,

2:00:19like that touted on the GCOM webpage. We need bold decisions, radical shifts, and we need

2:00:25every one of the environmental initiatives that you are planning to defer or reduce,

2:00:29and we need them now. The GCOM website says that Guelph has a reputation for environmental and

2:00:36energy leadership, but that was in 2022. We want and need that kind of leadership again,

2:00:42and we need that now. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

2:00:48states that there's a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a livable and sustainable

2:00:53future for all of us, and the choices and actions implemented in the next five years will have

2:00:58impacts now and will reverberate for hundreds, even thousands of years. COP28 concluded with an

2:01:06urgent message emphasizing this need for a radical shift. COP29 just ended and is calling for us to

2:01:14bolster climate action. Climate action requires public financing, no doubt, but there's at least

2:01:21one way to minimize the burden on the public purse, and that's renegotiate our deal with Enbridge.

2:01:26Today, you can all be ambassadors for radical urban climate action. Vote in favor of all of

2:01:31the recommendations concerning the Enbridge Franchise Agreement. Vote against big oil and gas,

2:01:37and vote for bold climate action. Be the international climate leaders that GCOM says you are.

2:01:44We only have five years until 2030. For any chance?

2:01:50Great. Thank you. Sorry you were cut off there. I'm sure you practiced, and he's got cut off,

2:01:56so but we appreciate it. Is there any follow-up questions to the delegate at this time?

2:02:00There isn't, but thank you very much. Okay. Thank you for your presentation. Evan, you're closing us off.

2:02:08Come on down. Thank you, Evan. Thank you for coming. You know the drill, so I'll turn it over to you.

2:02:25Great. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of Council. I'd just like to apologize for my bit of laughter

2:02:31earlier in the evening. It was disrespectful of Council and the delegates, and I apologize for that.

2:02:36The proposed motion that before you is a step to end a perverse fossil fuel subsidy paid by

2:02:44municipal taxpayers. As you know, the motion would ask the province to allow municipalities to charge

2:02:50fees to use our city-owned roadways for gas pipelines. It would also instruct city staff

2:02:57not to enter into an agreement that would lock us into providing free access for 20 years.

2:03:03It's completely illogical that we're forced to provide free use of public lands to this gas company.

2:03:08First, we're missing out on significant revenue based on fees charged in other provinces. We

2:03:13estimate that Guelph would be earning $8.8 million per year. Second, by not receiving those fees,

2:03:20we are providing a major hidden subsidy to the methane gas system in Ontario. Burning methane

2:03:27gas contributes about one-third of Ontario's greenhouse gas emissions. Taxpayers should not

2:03:33be subsidizing this climate-destroying gas by giving this company free use of our public lands.

2:03:40Enbridge will tell you that they pay municipal taxes, and somehow that makes them good corporate

2:03:46citizens. Anyone that owns property in Guelph pays taxes. Paying your municipal taxes is very

2:03:54different from paying for the use of public lands. Like many members of council here tonight,

2:04:00our household pays municipal taxes. But that doesn't allow me or any of you to build infrastructure

2:04:08for free on public lands. Taxes and land-based fees for the use of public property are entirely

2:04:15different. The agreement Enbridge wants Guelph to sign would also force us to pay a significant

2:04:21portion of the cost of moving gas pipelines that conflict with our municipal infrastructure,

2:04:26like sewers. This means that we could pay, potentially, millions of dollars when there

2:04:32is a conflict with gas pipelines that are paying nothing to use these lands. This is not fair,

2:04:37and has been a major infrastructure problem for other projects, including in the City of Toronto,

2:04:43where the city had to pay up $14 million for the movement of certain infrastructure

2:04:50projects throughout the city. This agreement is totally unfair by allowing free access for gas

2:04:56lines to these public lands, and potentially charging taxpayers when these conflicts arise.

2:05:01If we want to truly reduce energy poverty, we shouldn't do that by subsidizing fossil fuels,

2:05:07and should instead help residents install electric heat pumps, which are the cheapest

2:05:14way to heat homes. The city could use some of that revenue to increase the low-income grants

2:05:21for heat pumps that the city already provides for low-income people through the wonderful Guelph-Greener

2:05:27Homes program. Then there's the city budget. We first became aware of this Enbridge franchise

2:05:33agreement when we heard that the mayor had decided to cut the city budget by $15 million,

2:05:38with almost every environmental program that the city funds on the chopping block.

2:05:43By passing this motion, Guelph would be joining municipalities who are also asking for the end

2:05:48of to this subsidy, like the City of Toronto and the City of Ottawa. As the climate crisis continues

2:05:53to worsen, let's be on the right side of history with this one small step forward.

2:06:00And to put a finer point on it, Guelph climate emissions jumped so much in 2022 that it amounted

2:06:06to overshooting the city's target by 17 percent, and emissions continued to rise.

2:06:15Emissions rising, cutting environmental budgets, giving subsidies to a multinational

2:06:22fossil fuel company that made a profit of $1.3 billion in the last quarter.

2:06:30When thinking about this motion this evening and final decisions on the budget,

2:06:34I would really like you to contemplate about all of the children and young people in the city.

2:06:41In 20 years, will you be able to look them in the eye and say that you did everything you could

2:06:46to stop runaway climate change? Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

2:06:51Thank you for your presentation. Thanks, Evan, for coming. Let me see if there's a follow-up

2:06:56question for you. It doesn't look like it. Again, thank you for coming. Oh, is there one?

2:07:02I'm sorry. Who is it? Sorry. I'm so sorry, Councillor Keaton. My apologies. I thought you

2:07:09were swatting that big dragonfly behind you. So over to you. No worries. Thank you. Through you

2:07:16to the delegate. I was wondering if you could speak a little bit about how you feel about

2:07:22Enbridge versus Renewables. Well, I think it's a very good business decision on the part of

2:07:30just about every fossil fuel company has been investing in renewables.

2:07:34Some would call it greenwashing, but let's make no mistake that it sounds like an awful

2:07:40lot of money that they've invested in it, but it amounts to just a very small amount of their total

2:07:45revenue and their total capital investment. By the same token, the concept of RNG as they call it,

2:07:52renewable natural gas, isn't scalable to the extent that we would need to fight climate change to

2:07:59any way, shape, or form. It's a feel good, warm, and fuzzy thing that they're offering to customers.

2:08:07And just based on the constrictions or the constraints around trying to actually make

2:08:13renewable natural gas work at scale, make it an extremely difficult thing to do. So I would argue

2:08:20that it's great public relations for them. It's nice that they're adding something to the renewable

2:08:26energy side of things, but frankly, their business is burning stuff. And I don't see that ending in

2:08:34the foreseeable future. Thank you very much. Thank you. And for real this time, there's no more

2:08:43questions, Evan. So sorry about that. Thank you very much for your presentation. Okay,

2:08:50council, it's back to us. I think it would be appropriate that Councillor Kerron move the

2:08:55recommendations. Okay. Seconded by, let's go Colosson. Is there any questions? Only questions,

2:09:04and I do see Gibson's hand. Go for it. Thank you, through you, Mr. Mayor. I'm just wondering if I

2:09:09could see the motions on the screen. I'm not decided whether or not I'm going to ask to

2:09:13break them apart. I have a feeling I'd like to support some, but perhaps not all.

2:09:18Could I just perhaps separate? Oh boy, there's a lot here.

2:09:28Yeah, would it be easier if we just broke them all apart?

2:09:30Please, if you don't mind, and one at a time. Thank you.

2:09:33Oh, that's fine. That's fine. Yeah. Okay. Anything else before I call the vote at all?

2:09:41Seeing none. Just if you don't mind showing the motion before we vote.

2:09:44Yeah, I just wanted to make sure there was nothing more before I went to all the votes.

2:09:48Thank you. Sorry, I do need to say a comment. I'm sorry. I'm very, very quick. So sorry,

2:09:54everybody. Just before I go through each one. So I just want to say that you probably think

2:10:05I'm making this up, but I'm not. I had such a good meeting at the, I think it was a couple of G-COM

2:10:11meetings ago where the ambassador for under under G-COM is the former mayor of Vancouver.

2:10:20So Gregor. Okay. And Gregor is, you know, we've become, you know, acquainted with each other

2:10:26now because we're on this, this thing together. And if I hadn't met him, I probably wouldn't

2:10:32have changed my mind a lot on a lot of this stuff. So it's a positive thing. So thank you to Gregor

2:10:37for this. But he, it's interesting out in Vancouver, he was the former mayor of Vancouver. Sorry,

2:10:44I should have said that. He was telling me how they just, when I was with them, the new mayor

2:10:54of Vancouver has just changed things back to allowing for gas to go to all new subdivisions.

2:11:01Okay. Like if you look it up, they just, they just changed it. And, but when Gregor was the mayor,

2:11:07they had actually done heat pumps and they made it, and the rules, the rules out there kind of

2:11:12allowed municipalities to do that very different from Ontario. Okay. And so anyways,

2:11:19they had made, it was more like a statement position. It was more like a statement position

2:11:24of their council at the time under Gregor. And it, it was just a real acknowledgement that we

2:11:33got to start to move things off of the fossil fuels. And like, I'm a big free market guy,

2:11:40everyone knows that. Like, it's not, I'm not actually putting down an bridge by any, I'm not

2:11:45like that. But it's, it's about the shift. And in a free market sort of position that I'm always in

2:11:55sort of a libertarian type of guy is that it should be more free and more of a choice that's on the

2:12:03same level for the non fossil fuel companies to be able to enter this space. And so I get that

2:12:14these motions in front of us here, you know, might not be like exact at how they are. Some of them

2:12:21are a bit unknown, like the one about MPP Shriners legislation. We don't really know about that.

2:12:27And, you know, we don't know if the rate payer is going to pay or whatever, but I just, I just want

2:12:31to basically pick up on what councillor Allt said, which is, which is similar to what I heard from

2:12:39Gregor out in Vancouver. And that was that the people that aren't on the fossil fuel pipes

2:12:51won't end up paying in their rates, because they're not paying it and the rates anymore because

2:12:56they're off it. And in a way, you know, we can argue, I'm not wanting to argue this, but, you know,

2:13:04the carbon tax is there to sort of start to nudge people. It's a nudge. It's a nudge to try

2:13:11and help people understand that there's other choices to be made that you don't have to continue

2:13:18down the same road, no pun intended, for some of the things that are happening with fossil fuels.

2:13:25And so I what I'm trying to get at is that it might not be like perfect here, but it's more

2:13:31like a statement that's being made that we do need to level the playing field. And

2:13:41and that, you know, councillor Caron, I think if there's one thing out of her motion that is

2:13:47relevant to me anyways, it is this sort of 20 year contract is like to me that just, I can't

2:13:57square that, that we would be bound, even though there might be seven year or 14 year type of

2:14:04kind of motions or availability to kind of wiggle room on some stuff. But I just, I think that,

2:14:12I think that we need to send a message and it's a respectful message. It's not, I'm not,

2:14:18I'm not being disrespectful, but a message to me by approving this, it's a message to proclaim

2:14:25choice, choice in the fact that there are other ways of eating and cooling your home.

2:14:33There are other ways of doing things. And I think that's where I'm landing on this,

2:14:40to make sure that that choice is sort of promoted very clearly for people, that it's not just the

2:14:46status quo that we're in today. Anyways, I thought I would just mention that just because

2:14:52it is something that is very different in other provinces, which doesn't, it's not afforded here

2:14:57in Ontario, where it is a little bit in other provinces. So, thank you. Sorry, with that,

2:15:04can I call the vote one by one? Is that okay? Okay, can I, can I have it up on the screen for me?

2:15:13All right, so the first one is just to receive, receive for information. Can I call the vote

2:15:18on that one? I think so. Is anyone against that receiving it? No, so that's unanimous.

2:15:25The second one is that councils requesting the province of Ontario to amend section 9

2:15:30of Regulation 584.06 under the Municipal Act 2001 to permit municipalities to charge fair fees

2:15:37for for-profit gas utilities for their use of public property, as municipalities do in most

2:15:42other provinces. Okay, I'll call the vote on that. Is anyone against number two? Okay, one, Gibson.

2:15:50No, two, Billings. Do I hear three? No, it's getting. Okay, two. Number three, that council

2:15:58directs, I'm not going too fast clerks, are you good? No, okay. Number three, that council directs

2:16:03staff to the satisfaction of the deputy CEO of IDE to negotiate a franchise agreement with the

2:16:09gas distribution company that A will allow the city of Guelph to charge, sorry, Councillor Gibson,

2:16:14do you need me to split out A, B and C or can I have it all as one? All as one. No, but I do,

2:16:21I do have comments if you don't mind on this one. Okay, go ahead. Joris, I'll turn my mic off. Go ahead.

2:16:28I think that there's a lot of, if I may, Mr. Mayor, through you, I think there's a lot of

2:16:33platitudes in this motion that speak to trying to protect the rate payer, especially in this

2:16:38clause where we know definitively, I mean, we've even had the Clean Air Alliance member state that

2:16:44the rate payers will pay for this. So $8 million, if that's what's being charged to Enbridge, they'll

2:16:49simply put that into reserve fund, go back to the OEB at their next rate review and pass that on to

2:16:54the rate payers. We are already experiencing energy poverty like never before in our province,

2:17:02in our country. We've seen G rates go up by almost 40% because of the carbon tax.

2:17:06I'm not looking to contribute to the energy poverty rates, especially for those people

2:17:10in marginalized housing or in housing insecurity. So I don't believe words and placation in some

2:17:18of these clauses do anything more than just try and put people's minds at ease. They won't work.

2:17:24This will be borne out by the rates and I'm not going to be contributing to that today. So

2:17:31those are just my thoughts. Thank you. Okay, no problem. And Councillor Caron

2:17:34just wants to also bring comments to this one as well and then I'll call the vote.

2:17:38Yes, thank you. And these clauses are aspirational. I think we all recognize that,

2:17:41but change is coming. It has to. We're in an energy transformation. And by stating that this is our

2:17:49aspirational goal, we're saying to the negotiate to the province and to the OEB and to our

2:17:57fossil gas supplier that we want to see change. The transfer of that, let's just say $8 million

2:18:04because that's the figure that that roundly we're talking about may indeed go to ratepayers for

2:18:12gas customers. But that $8 million will also be revenue to the city. And then all members of the

2:18:20city aren't paying to subsidize the energy industry. And that $8 million can go to home

2:18:26energy loans, retrofits, utility bills, subsidies for low income families. There's a way to redistribute

2:18:36that money that benefits the people of Guelph rather than putting it on all of us equally through

2:18:41subsidization. Okay, thank you. So I will call number three then if we could have a backup on

2:18:48the screen in its entirety. So number three ABC is there anyone against that? Okay,

2:18:57two, it looks like Gibson and Billings again. Oh, and two, sorry, I see a wave in there too.

2:19:04Sorry about that. And then number four will be that the city Guelph supports in principle bill

2:19:10219 no free ride fossil fuels act 2024 table November 4th 2024 by 12 MPP Mike Shreiner is

2:19:19anyone against number four? Okay, Gibson and Billings. And then number five that the above

2:19:29referenced motions and a letter of support for bill 219 be circulated to MPP Mike Shreiner,

2:19:36Premier Doug Ford, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Paul Calandra, Stephen Leche,

2:19:41Minister of Energy and Electrification and the Ontario Big City mayors, the Associate

2:19:45and Municipalities of Ontario and its member municipalities. Is anyone against that number five?

2:19:52Just sending a letter. Letters plural. Okay, nobody's against that. Okay, sorry. Councillor

2:20:06Alt will personally drive it around for everybody. Yeah, in his electric car might I add? Okay,

2:20:13all right, that finishes that off that that item is now done. Thank you very much, everybody.

2:20:17We're privileged, I'm sorry. We're privileged. Yeah, yeah. So Councillor Gibson made an assertion

2:20:24that what is driving the cost of electricity and of utilities is the carbon tax. We have no evidence

2:20:30of that. And in fact, we're aware that a lot of the utilities are investing heavily in distribution

2:20:35because we know that we're going to need more electricity. So I just like to state that I as

2:20:41a Councillor, I think this body should not accept that as a fact. Yeah, okay, I think that would be

2:20:49up to each of us to determine whether or not we accept it without a, you know, emotion and a

2:20:55my goodness, a deep dive debate on that issue. So you've made your point clear. We got lots of

2:21:00points of consideration around the table. That's that's fine. I think we should just move on.