Now hold a meeting that is closed to the public, pursuant to the Municipal Act…

3:15:44of the municipal act regarding a proposed

3:15:47or pending acquisition or disposition of land

3:15:50by the municipality or local board,

3:15:52advice that is subject to solicitor client privilege,

3:15:55including communications necessary for that purpose

3:15:58and a position, plan, procedure, criteria

3:16:01or instruction to be applied to any negotiations carried on

3:16:06or to be carried on by or on behalf of the municipality

3:16:10or the local board.

3:16:13That's correct for the clerks, okay.

3:16:16And if I could have someone move to go in camera

3:16:19about the house or would be okay and boost the till.

3:16:22Okay, thank you.

3:16:24Anything further about that before I call the vote?

3:16:29No, okay.

3:16:30So I'll call the vote.

3:16:31Is anyone against moving in camera on these items,

3:16:34on this item, sorry.

3:16:37Nobody, that's unanimous.

3:16:38So I said earlier, I'm thinking about a half an hour.

3:16:45I think we will try for that as best as that we can.

3:16:49And I will, we will come out as soon as we are done, okay.

3:16:54Thank you.

4:01:31Okay, everyone, thank you so much for waiting for us.

4:01:35Apologize for the lateness of this meeting

4:01:41and how it's going and people are waiting around.

4:01:43So we acknowledge that.

4:01:45So thank you very much.

4:01:49So yeah, we'll call the meeting back to order out here.

4:01:52Just before we get right into the item,

4:01:54we did, as you know, move into a closed session

4:01:57just before we came back out here.

4:01:59And so as I normally do with the high level,

4:02:02sort of summary, we did receive legal advice

4:02:06and the other advice that we required,

4:02:07that we went in camera for,

4:02:09that we voted on before we went in camera.

4:02:11But we just received advice.

4:02:14We did not do any direction at all on any item,

4:02:18on that item, okay.

4:02:20So we just received advice.

4:02:22So with that summary out of the way,

4:02:26we are going to start then with this decision report.

4:02:32For the Southeast parcel of Nisga lands.

4:02:35And we're going to kick things off

4:02:37with a presentation from our staff.

4:02:40And then we have a few members that have signed up

4:02:42in advance from the public for our delegations.

4:02:46So William is here.

4:02:49William is from the city of Guelph

4:02:51for people who don't know, is our staff member here.

4:02:53William, thank you very much for waiting around yourself

4:02:56and getting ready to do your presentation.

4:02:59So we'll turn it over to you

4:03:01and walk us through this, okay.

4:03:03Thank you.

4:03:04Good afternoon, almost evening now.

4:03:07Mayor, members of council and members of the public.

4:03:11My name is William Turman.

4:03:12I am a planner to policy in planning and building services.

4:03:17And I'm here to present a recommendation report

4:03:19regarding the city initiated OPA and ZBA,

4:03:23official plan amendment and zoning bylaw amendment

4:03:25for the Southeast parcel of the Nisga lands.

4:03:29This meeting will serve as the statutory public meeting

4:03:31and decision meeting as required under section 17

4:03:35and 34 of the planning act.

4:03:40This presentation is broken into six sections.

4:03:43First, we'll discuss the specifics of the subject lands.

4:03:48Second will be a brief overview of the history

4:03:50of the subject lands,

4:03:52followed by a description of the city initiated OPA and ZBA.

4:03:58Next, I'll introduce Chris DeWauke,

4:03:59who will provide a summary of the public comments

4:04:01her previously related to the subject lands

4:04:04and give an overview of the planning considerations

4:04:06for the proposed OPA and ZBA.

4:04:09And finally, we will provide our professional recommendation.

4:04:15Sorry, meant to change this.

4:04:23At the February 10, 2026 council planning meeting,

4:04:28council approved a motion directing staff

4:04:30to report back to council with a city initiated amendment

4:04:34to the city's official plan and zoning bylaw.

4:04:37Pursuant to section 17 and 34 of the planning act

4:04:40to redesignate the parcel of land

4:04:43and to open towards open space and parkland.

4:04:50The subject lands for the official plan amendment

4:04:53and zoning bylaw amendment currently being considered

4:04:56are the approximately eight hectares of land

4:04:59shown in this aerial image.

4:05:02The lands are used for agricultural purposes

4:05:04and have been for at least the past 70 years.

4:05:08Even during the time when the Court Right Waterfowl Park

4:05:11was in operation,

4:05:12the subject lands were not open to the public.

4:05:15The subject lands are part of a larger land assembly,

4:05:18commonly known as the Niska lands or the Niska land holdings.

4:05:23And the Niska land holdings are currently owned

4:05:28by the Grand River Conservation Authority,

4:05:30also known as the GRCA.

4:05:35This slide, this aerial image shows the entirety

4:05:38of the GRCA's Niska land holdings.

4:05:42The GRCA acquired approximately 18 hectares of land

4:05:45on Niska Road in Guelph in 1971

4:05:49and an additional 47 hectares

4:05:52from the Ontario Waterfowl Research Foundation in 1977.

4:06:01Much of the information on the following slides

4:06:03is available on the GRCA's webpage

4:06:06for the Niska land holdings

4:06:08and also on the city's webpage related to the site.

4:06:12The chronology has been included here in this presentation

4:06:14to help understand how the lands came

4:06:16to have the current designation.

4:06:23In the early 1960s, the agency that is now known as the GRCA

4:06:28was considering the area for a reservoir for water control

4:06:32and in the 1970s began acquiring lands,

4:06:35making two separate purchases,

4:06:3717.4 hectares on Niska Road in 1971

4:06:41and the remaining 47 hectares in 1977,

4:06:45which were purchased from the Niska Wildlife Foundation,

4:06:47which operated what became the Corporate Waterfowl Park.

4:06:52Around this time, the GRCA was also contemplating a plan

4:06:56to establish a fee for use conservation area

4:06:59alongside the recommendation to construct a reservoir.

4:07:03The plans for a conservation area were revised several times

4:07:06and were not approved or funded by the province.

4:07:10The master plan for the Hanlon Creek Conservation Area,

4:07:13as it was proposed in 1982, did not include the subject lands.

4:07:19The recommendation to create a reservoir

4:07:22was removed around the same time

4:07:23that the plans for a conservation area did not proceed.

4:07:27The Corporate Waterfowl Park closed its doors

4:07:29to the public in 2005.

4:07:32The GRCA has remained the owner of the subject

4:07:35and surrounding lands of the Niska land holdings

4:07:38and has done some work to remove unsafe buildings

4:07:41that could not be maintained.

4:07:47According to public panflip maps

4:07:50from the Corporate Waterfowl Park in 1980,

4:07:53the subject lands were not open to the public.

4:07:56The portions that were open to the public

4:07:58were west of Pioneer Trail,

4:07:59which included a nature trail and parking area,

4:08:02which we can see on the bottom portion of the image on the left.

4:08:06And the main part of the former Corporate Waterfowl Park

4:08:09was located north of Niska Road

4:08:11and directly to the east of the Speed River,

4:08:13which we can see in the northern part,

4:08:14on the top part of that image on the left-hand side.

4:08:19The entire area of the former Corporate Waterfowl Park

4:08:22is included in the agreement with the GRCA

4:08:24to transfer 51 hectares of the Niska lands

4:08:27to the city of Guelph.

4:08:35The city's process to establish the current designation

4:08:38and zoning on the subject lands began in 2007

4:08:42with the commencement of a municipal comprehensive review,

4:08:45which would result in OPA's 39,

4:08:48that's Official Plan Amendment 39,

4:08:50which is 42 and 48.

4:08:53In 2009, Council adopted OPA 39,

4:08:57and the province approved it.

4:08:59OPA 39 amended the Official Plan

4:09:02to conform to the Ontario Growth Plan,

4:09:05which required municipalities to designate all lands

4:09:07within the settlement area boundary,

4:09:09which is the municipal boundary of the city of Guelph,

4:09:13as either a built-up area or a greenfield area.

4:09:16The subject lands were identified as a greenfield area.

4:09:20Official Plan Amendment 48

4:09:22completed the city's comprehensive review

4:09:24and conformity exercise,

4:09:26which through population growth forecasts

4:09:28and a land needs assessment,

4:09:31determined that the subject lands were suitable

4:09:34and required to accommodate the city's residential growth

4:09:37through to the planning horizon.

4:09:40This redesignation followed all practices

4:09:42for consultation with the public

4:09:44and with the GRCA,

4:09:45the property owner of the subject lands.

4:09:48OPA 48 was adopted by Council

4:09:50and approved by the province.

4:09:54Subsequently, Official Plan Amendment 48

4:09:56was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, OMB,

4:09:59which is now what we refer to

4:10:01as the Ontario Land Tribunal or OLT,

4:10:05and it was appealed specific

4:10:07to the designation of the subject lands.

4:10:10In 2018, those appeals were withdrawn

4:10:13through a minutes of settlement,

4:10:15which stated the settlement, quote,

4:10:17resolves all issues with respect to the subject site,

4:10:20end quote, which kept the land use designation

4:10:23as residential as it is today.

4:10:28Between the years 2020 and 2022,

4:10:31the city undertook another comprehensive review

4:10:34for growth management,

4:10:35completing another land needs assessment.

4:10:37Again, the subject lands were included

4:10:42in the residential land supply,

4:10:44which is needed to meet population projections

4:10:47to 2051.

4:10:49This amendment, known as Official Plan Amendment 80,

4:10:52OPA 80, was approved by the province and by the city.

4:11:05The direction received from Council

4:11:08was to redesignate the lands

4:11:09from medium and low density residential

4:11:11to open space and park.

4:11:13The current residential designations

4:11:15generally permits townhouses and apartments

4:11:18with detached, semi-detached and duplex dwellings

4:11:21permitted only in the low density residential designation.

4:11:25The maximum height is six stories

4:11:27in the medium density residential designation

4:11:28and four stories in the low density residential designation.

4:11:32The proposed open space and park designation

4:11:35generally permits recreation uses in facilities,

4:11:38parks and conservation lands.

4:11:44The existing zoning versus the proposed zoning

4:11:47on the slide here,

4:11:49the direction from Council to re-zone the lands

4:11:53would result in a corresponding, sorry,

4:11:56the direction to re-designate the lands

4:11:57would result in a corresponding zoning amendment

4:12:00from RM6 and RL4,

4:12:03which is medium density residential six

4:12:06and low density residential four to open space zone.

4:12:11Both existing residential zones

4:12:13permit apartment buildings and townhouses.

4:12:16The maximum building height for RM6 is six stories

4:12:20and the maximum height of RL4 is three stories.

4:12:25The proposed open space zone

4:12:28permits conservation uses,

4:12:30stormwater management facilities and trails.

4:12:33The agricultural use would be permitted

4:12:36as a legal non-conforming use.

4:12:39Now I will turn it over to Krista Wachee.

4:12:48Thank you, William.

4:12:50As Council is aware,

4:12:52we have received a large number of emails

4:12:54and other correspondence on this file.

4:13:01In advance of the February 10th meeting

4:13:03where this item was originally discussed,

4:13:06Council and staff received about 500 emails

4:13:09regarding the designation and zoning of the NISCA lands,

4:13:12the emails were submitted through Get Involved Guelph

4:13:15and Email Petition Campaign.

4:13:17There were also 13 delegations registered to speak

4:13:20at the February 10th Council meeting

4:13:21regarding the subject lands

4:13:23and there has been a revised email campaign

4:13:27with this application coming forward tonight.

4:13:42Staff have responded to the key themes in the report,

4:13:45it's an attachment nine

4:13:47and several of the key themes we heard

4:13:49were regarding the current designation on the lands

4:13:53that William just reviewed.

4:13:55We heard that the public concerns of that process

4:13:58to designate the lands was not done correctly.

4:14:01As stated before, the process in 27 to 2012

4:14:06was completed according to provincial requirements

4:14:08in a transparent manner with drafts

4:14:10showing the current designation available

4:14:12to the public as early as April 2010.

4:14:14The designation was adopted by Council,

4:14:17approved by the province and then affirmed

4:14:20by the OMB in 2018.

4:14:24We've also had a number of comments

4:14:26regarding protecting the former court right waterfowl park.

4:14:31Members of the public are concerned

4:14:32that the residential designation

4:14:34will impact that former park lands.

4:14:37The subject lands that we're talking about tonight

4:14:40were not open to the public,

4:14:41were not part of the original court right waterfowl park

4:14:44and have been under cultivation for at least 70 years.

4:14:48Historical plans for the Hanlon Creek Conservation Authority,

4:14:52Hanlon Creek Conservation Area were contemplated

4:14:55and developed in the 70s and 80s

4:14:57but were never approved or funded.

4:15:00The city's financial contribution has also been raised

4:15:04and based on information,

4:15:05the GRCA purchased the lands in 1971

4:15:08as William indicated,

4:15:10without assistance from the city,

4:15:12the city contribute 30% of the funds to the 47 hectares

4:15:17from the Ontario Waterfowl Research Foundation in 1977

4:15:22and the GRCA has maintained sole ownership of those lands.

4:15:26There was no easements or covenants

4:15:28tied to that financial contribution.

4:15:32We agree, there are not enough parks in the city of Guelph.

4:15:37There is a parkland deficit in the city of Guelph.

4:15:40This land will not contribute to parkland

4:15:43as long as it's in the GRCA's ownership

4:15:46and is still maintained as agriculture,

4:15:48it is not a park and does not guarantee

4:15:50that it will be a park.

4:15:53We do value natural space in the city.

4:15:57The parcel is owned by the GRCA

4:15:59and they're not obligated to open this up.

4:16:07In developing a recommendation

4:16:09for the proposed Official Plan Amendment

4:16:11and Zoning By-law Amendment that you have before you tonight,

4:16:14city staff evaluated the proposed Official Plan Amendment

4:16:17through existing city's plans, policies and strategies,

4:16:20as well as the historical process,

4:16:22including the zoning that came into effect

4:16:25and the OMB minutes of settlement.

4:16:31The comprehensive review of the Official Plan,

4:16:34OPA 48, 80, both had a land needs assessment.

4:16:39These lands were not subject to change

4:16:41through those processes.

4:16:49The current Official Plan contains criteria

4:16:52when considering planning applications

4:16:53to amend the Official Plan.

4:16:55It enables the city to plan for growth to 2051.

4:16:58It sets out our vision goals of objectives for land use

4:17:01in which our amendments must be evaluated against.

4:17:05The overall interest of the city is very broad

4:17:07and most directly identified the city

4:17:09as having an interest in providing sufficient parkland

4:17:13as well as sufficient residential land.

4:17:16This would remain in the GRCA's land.

4:17:19OPA 80, our most recent update was approved

4:17:22by this council and by the province.

4:17:37So our summary of considerations

4:17:41is there is not enough justification

4:17:43to support an Official Plan Amendment

4:17:45or Zoning By-law Amendment.

4:17:46Our existing Council approved studies,

4:17:48plan strategies and priorities were considered.

4:17:51There is no strong rationale in existing city plans

4:17:55for this change.

4:17:57Additionally, the owner of the land

4:17:59has not supported the city initiated amendments.

4:18:02There is correspondence in the council package this evening.

4:18:05The current residential designation was litigated

4:18:10which was OLT Now, then it was the OMB.

4:18:13And the decision of the litigation

4:18:15is found on the city webpage for the Niskelians.

4:18:19And one of those delegates is going to be here this evening

4:18:21who had been party to that OMB decision.

4:18:26Within the middle of the settlement,

4:18:28the appellant withdrew the appeal

4:18:31for the designation to residential.

4:18:33This is when the rezoning occurred.

4:18:35It was not a mistake, it was litigated

4:18:38and the zoning is in place.

4:18:43So with that, our recommendation is that the report be received

4:18:47and that the redesignation be refused.

4:18:50And I will turn it over to CAO Baker.

4:18:57Thanks, Krista.

4:18:59I'm just gonna pause one moment here.

4:19:02Clers are just gonna bring up one final map.

4:19:07And I just wanted to speak before we move on

4:19:11into the decision-making process here

4:19:13about the other transaction that's occurring

4:19:19related to these lands.

4:19:22And some of the comments that have been made

4:19:25as Krista had mentioned.

4:19:26And so we've really carefully considered the recommendation

4:19:29that factors in our professional understanding

4:19:31of the property, its history

4:19:33and the planning best practices.

4:19:35It's important to stick to the facts.

4:19:37And the facts here is that there's good sound work

4:19:40that was done prior to and through

4:19:42the official plan amendment 48 and 2012.

4:19:45Work that has been tested by appeals to the OMB.

4:19:49Additionally, good work in this space

4:19:51has continued through the establishment

4:19:54and the processes underway with the GRCA

4:19:56that we're working our way through securing the lands

4:19:59of the former court right, Waterfowl Park.

4:20:03On the screen before you, on the left is the diagram

4:20:05from 1980 of the Waterfowl Park,

4:20:08including the space south of Nisgaroad

4:20:10that was the Waterfowl Park's parking lot and nature trail.

4:20:13Shifting to the right, you can see

4:20:16that the city is in the process

4:20:18of buying everything outlined in yellow,

4:20:21a total of 126 acres of land

4:20:24that will be in a future state park land,

4:20:28which encompasses the entirety of the Waterfowl Park.

4:20:33We recognize the historical significance of these lands

4:20:36and council has already actioned the preservation

4:20:40of this history in Guelph.

4:20:43The land outlined in red is the parcel

4:20:45that is on the agenda for rezoning today.

4:20:48It is a 20 acre field with no historical significance

4:20:51to Guelph and the staff's recommendation

4:20:53to council remains in line with the stance

4:20:57that the city's held for over a decade,

4:20:59a stance that was already tested through the tribunal,

4:21:03the property is zoned appropriately

4:21:05and it does not have environmental features.

4:21:08Given that we are reporting here today

4:21:11within a legislative planning at process,

4:21:14the staff report reflects that purpose

4:21:17and the staff report does not offer

4:21:19the implications of an alternative direction or options.

4:21:25And so I just really wanted to make my final comments here

4:21:28to respond to a number of the questions the staff received

4:21:31regarding the risks of an alternative direction

4:21:33to the staff motion or to the staff recommendation.

4:21:38And so I just wanted to say out loud

4:21:41that the financial risk of this type of decision

4:21:45is very significant to the city.

4:21:48This is a budget decision

4:21:52that is outside of the budget process

4:21:55and there's a real risk to the budget implications here

4:21:58in an alternative direction to the staff recommendation.

4:22:04These 20 acres of prime developable land

4:22:08are financially valuable to the land owner.

4:22:11And I can't speculate on what that value is

4:22:14but it's a material figure.

4:22:16There are legal repercussions of an unjustified decision

4:22:20to down zone or devalue these lands

4:22:22that extend beyond the OLT.

4:22:26And so I just want to quote and I'll draw your attention

4:22:29to the last sentence of the GRCA's legal correspondence

4:22:32that's on the open agenda,

4:22:34that if the city of Guelph proceeds with redesignating

4:22:37and rezoning the parcel contrary to the staff report,

4:22:41contrary to any land use planning rationale,

4:22:43contrary to provincial initiatives,

4:22:46contrary to the minutes of settlement

4:22:47and the tribunal decision

4:22:49and contrary to the GRCA's request,

4:22:52the GRCA of course reserves its rights

4:22:55to address any such action by all legal means

4:22:58at its disposal.

4:23:01And so I just want to say that the legal system

4:23:06in Ontario and more broadly in Canada

4:23:08is set up to protect the rights of property owners.

4:23:11Municipal governments don't have like an unchecked authority

4:23:14to make decisions.

4:23:17And so there are mechanisms through civil court

4:23:21that fall into the category of by all legal means

4:23:24at its disposal.

4:23:26And I believe based on the language in that letter

4:23:29and the magnitude of the financial impact

4:23:32that there is risk to the city and to financially

4:23:35for the city that would follow in a decision

4:23:40alternative to the staff's recommendation.

4:23:44And so I just in closing,

4:23:46I just wanted to say that also in that letter

4:23:51from the GRCA, there is mention

4:23:53and of a more constructive approach for council

4:23:57if you want to protect this land, if it's a priority

4:24:00and you do have a pathway,

4:24:02it's just that this rezoning pathway

4:24:04is not set up the right way to achieve that outcome.

4:24:08And so if you do want to protect this parcel of land

4:24:13in probably a more simple and cost effective way,

4:24:19you can purchase this land.

4:24:21It would then be within your ownership

4:24:23and then you would have the ability as the landowner

4:24:26to change the zoning as you wish.

4:24:29And so those are comments, they're in the public letter

4:24:34and so I just wanted to take this moment

4:24:36to point that out before we get into the rest

4:24:40of the meeting and I just really appreciate the opportunity

4:24:42to be able to speak here.

4:24:45This is an OPA and ZBA decision tonight

4:24:48with a much different risk profile than we typically see.

4:24:52And so just really want you to weigh the magnitude

4:24:55of those legal relationship and budgetary implications

4:24:59as you move forward tonight.

4:25:00Thank you.

4:25:03Great, thank you very much to our CAO and to staff as well.

4:25:09And I was told earlier that William,

4:25:12that was your first time in front of council,

4:25:16am I correct on that?

4:25:18Yes you are.

4:25:20Yeah, are you gonna stick around any longer?

4:25:22That was a big one, eh?

4:25:25I might.

4:25:26Yeah, yeah, good.

4:25:27I just want to recognize that that was your first time

4:25:29in front of us, you did a great job.

4:25:31So thank you very much for that presentation

4:25:33and wishing you all the best here.

4:25:36We have delegations that are signed up here in advance.

4:25:41We have five that have done so

4:25:43and each person would have,

4:25:51good, up to 10 minutes.

4:25:54And so you'll hear a chime at the nine minute 30 second mark

4:26:00which gives you the warning that there's only 30 seconds left

4:26:04and the microphone will get turned off

4:26:07at the 10 minute mark and nobody wants that.

4:26:10So just you listen to the chime and get ready to wrap up.

4:26:15If you, we fully respect and recognize

4:26:19that people have prepared a delegation.

4:26:23You have up to 10 minutes.

4:26:25However, if the person in front of you

4:26:29like says a lot of what you just wanted to say,

4:26:32we also accept Ditto.

4:26:33You can say Ditto at the microphone too.

4:26:36We recognize that too,

4:26:38just so that we can get through the meeting

4:26:40and get to the point where we have to sort of make decisions

4:26:42which is an important part as well.

4:26:46And then of course we can open it up

4:26:49to see if there's anybody further too.

4:26:52With that, I will turn it over to Cameron Shelley

4:26:56who I believe is here in person.

4:26:58That's what it says.

4:26:59Oh yeah, okay.

4:27:02And then in the wings, I have Ken Kiesmat is Ken here.

4:27:06All right, thank you, Ken.

4:27:08You're gonna be up next.

4:27:12And Cameron, welcome.

4:27:15I like your name.

4:27:17Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

4:27:18So do I.

4:27:19Yeah, yeah.

4:27:20I appreciate that.

4:27:21You go ahead.

4:27:22Excellent, thank you.

4:27:23Mr. Mayor, members of the council,

4:27:25I wish to point out an incorrect claim

4:27:29in the Niska Land Holdings Management Plan

4:27:31published by the Grand River Conservation Authority

4:27:34which pertains to the upcoming meeting of council

4:27:37which we're now in regarding the disposition

4:27:40of the former Corite Waterfellow Park.

4:27:43The management plan states that the property

4:27:45is acquired by the GRCA to quote,

4:27:47support the Hesbler Reservoir as a flood control project

4:27:51which occurs on page four of the Treasury Board report

4:27:54that's referred to.

4:27:56The statement is true but misleadingly incomplete.

4:27:59The report that the GRCA refers to

4:28:02in support of the statement is the review, quote,

4:28:04review of planning for the Grand River Watershed

4:28:09published by the Treasury Board of the Province of Ontario

4:28:12in 1971.

4:28:13On the matter of the Hesbler Reservoir,

4:28:15the review recommends against construction of a dam

4:28:18in Hesbler due to concerns about algae buildup

4:28:22because of being downstream

4:28:23of the Guelph Sewage Treatment Plant.

4:28:26It goes on to state that, quote,

4:28:29a flood retardation dam is a possibility in this location.

4:28:33Although no water would be stored for long,

4:28:36long periods behind the dam,

4:28:38recreation benefits would be gained

4:28:40from the large undeveloped area of land reserved

4:28:42for the flood waters, unquote, that's from page 17.

4:28:46In other words, the review does not recommend

4:28:48that upstream areas be reserved for flood control

4:28:50relating to a Hesbler Reservoir.

4:28:53Quite the opposite, it envisions those areas

4:28:55as being appropriate for recreational use.

4:28:59It's also worth noting that the preliminary report

4:29:02on Hanlon's Creek Basin from 1968,

4:29:06which was prepared by the Kilbourne Engineering Company

4:29:09at the request of the GRCA,

4:29:11addresses the Waterfowl Park explicitly.

4:29:15It states that, quote, with full development of the basin

4:29:18and with the Hesbler Reservoir in existence,

4:29:21the economics of investing funds

4:29:23for the survival of a waterfowl station reduced in size

4:29:26would require serious consideration.

4:29:29However, the operations in this park could be modified

4:29:31from being a purely waterfowl park

4:29:33to a general nature or zoological park.

4:29:37Those operations could be associated with operations

4:29:39in the larger conservation zone proposed

4:29:42in the central portion of the basin.

4:29:45This would provide the city of Guelph

4:29:47and its suburbs with excellent facilities for recreation

4:29:50and the appreciation of nature, end quote, from page 39.

4:29:54In other words, the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park

4:29:56would comprise part of an excellent park system

4:29:58within the GRCA's larger lands for Hesbler Reservoir.

4:30:02Should that come to pass, which it does not.

4:30:05The Hanlon Creek Conservation Area Master Plan,

4:30:08published by the GRCA in 1978 and revised in 1982,

4:30:13states in its introduction that further development

4:30:16of the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park

4:30:19and other resources in the area

4:30:21will undoubtedly promote visitation

4:30:23from the most densely populated areas of Ontario,

4:30:27which are within a two hour driving distance, page four,

4:30:31where development in this case refers to tourist attractions

4:30:34rather than housing.

4:30:36This statement expressly recommends

4:30:38recreational use of the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park.

4:30:41In its discussion of the park, the Master Plan states that,

4:30:45while continuation of waterfowl research in the site

4:30:47is not sustainable, a zoological park,

4:30:50as recommended in the preliminary report,

4:30:52should be considered.

4:30:54Quote, the concept envisioned is one of a zoological park,

4:30:57the city of wealth may or may not see a zoo

4:30:59as part of their recreational and cultural activities.

4:31:03However, if the proposal is adopted in principle,

4:31:05the zoological park idea should be maintained

4:31:09and limited to species that are relatively native to Ontario,

4:31:13those from pages 86 and 87.

4:31:16In other words, the Master Plan expressly contemplates

4:31:18recreational use of the lands.

4:31:22I'll conclude with the point that this concept

4:31:24regarding the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park

4:31:26was confirmed by the GRCA officials in this era.

4:31:30In the Guelph Mercury of February 2nd, 1977,

4:31:33Matt Coutts, the GRCA general manager, stated that,

4:31:36quote, for the GRCA, the purchase of the Quarrel Lake

4:31:39Waterfowl Park increases the size of its Hanlon Creek

4:31:42conservation area to 547 hectares, sorry, acres.

4:31:48Eventually, it hopes to have 800 acres along the creek

4:31:51to protect wetlands from encroaching housing developments.

4:31:54It will also provide parkland and open space

4:31:57for future residents of the area.

4:31:59In other words, the GRCA saw acquisition

4:32:02of the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park as part of its plan

4:32:04for the establishment of parkland in Hanlon Creek.

4:32:08So the intimation, sorry, in the GRCA's

4:32:12Nisqa Land Holdings Management Plan

4:32:14that the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park was acquired only

4:32:17for establishment of a Hesbara reservoir is not factual.

4:32:22It inaccurately makes it seem as though

4:32:23the zoning of the area for recreational use

4:32:25will be contrary to the GRCA's original plan.

4:32:29And this is simply untrue.

4:32:30Recreational use has always been an option,

4:32:33indeed an expectation for the ultimate disposition

4:32:36of the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park.

4:32:38So I urge the council, without delay,

4:32:41and in the most expeditious way possible,

4:32:43to secure the entirety of the Quarrel Lake Waterfowl Park

4:32:47as a public amenity, as was always the objective

4:32:50of its sale to the GRCA.

4:32:52And thank you for your attention.

4:32:54All right, thank you very much.

4:32:56And is there any questions for the delegate

4:32:57before we go on?

4:32:59There is none, thank you very much.

4:33:03And Ken, you're coming on up, and Susan Watson,

4:33:06you are here and in the wings next, okay?

4:33:10Welcome, Ken, good to see you,

4:33:11and go right ahead whenever you're ready.

4:33:14Great, well first I just wanted to take a personal moment

4:33:16and extend my gratitude to the planning department

4:33:18and our CAO for all the hard work they're doing

4:33:22on our behalf, and I'm glad I'm standing here

4:33:24instead of in the chairs.

4:33:26Dear Mayor and City Councils,

4:33:28I represent seniors for climate action now, Guelph.

4:33:31As seniors, we understand the responsibility

4:33:34we all hold for future generations.

4:33:36During our lifetimes, we have witnessed

4:33:38dramatic environmental change, disappearing wetlands,

4:33:41declining biodiversity, intensifying storms,

4:33:43and increasingly dangerous heat events like today.

4:33:47We also understand that the decisions governments make today

4:33:50will shape the safety, health, and livability

4:33:52of communities for decades to come.

4:33:55We join the many Ontarians concerned with Ontario government's

4:33:58weakening of conservation authorities,

4:34:00and this undermining means municipalities like Guelph

4:34:03have an even greater responsibility

4:34:06to protect local ecosystems.

4:34:08Open space reduces urban heat through shading

4:34:11and evapotranspiration, and acts as a carbon sink

4:34:15while managing stormwater.

4:34:17Designating the 20-acre parcel of Niska lands

4:34:20as open space parkland will protect an important

4:34:23ecological area for future generations,

4:34:27demonstrate leadership and environmental stewardship,

4:34:30preserve public green space for recreation,

4:34:33education, and wellness, and send a clear message

4:34:37that Guelph values long-term ecological sustainability.

4:34:43We ask Council to ensure the designation

4:34:46of the 20-acre parcel of Niska lands

4:34:48as open space parkland, reject any planning arguments

4:34:52that would permit ecological degradation of these lands,

4:34:55and publicly reform the City of Guelph's commitment

4:34:58to environmental stewardship and climate responsibility,

4:35:02as mentioned in our territorial acknowledgement today.

4:35:06Thank you very much.

4:35:07Great, thank you, Kent.

4:35:08And any follow-up for Kent?

4:35:11There isn't, and thank you again for sticking around,

4:35:13I saw you sitting there for a while, so thank you.

4:35:16Susan Watson is up next.

4:35:18And then is Ann Moore here?

4:35:22Okay, you're in the wings, okay, Ann?

4:35:24And go ahead, Susan, whenever you're ready.

4:35:26Just wanna see if you can stop the clock for a second.

4:35:28I just wanna figure out that this works forward

4:35:31and backwards, or this one is forward.

4:35:39What is this, not working?

4:35:47Yeah, and then if I wanna take me back.

4:35:52Okay, okay, thanks, I'll just leave it on that slide.

4:35:54Thank you.

4:35:56Can you start the clock for me now, Mayor Guthrie?

4:35:59Can you restart the clock for me, please?

4:36:00Yeah, I'm gonna start.

4:36:01Okay.

4:36:03Mayor Guthrie and members of council,

4:36:05I'm here to ask you to follow through

4:36:06on your unanimous commitment of February 10th

4:36:10to restore the designation of 20 acres

4:36:12of the former Court Right Waterfall Park conservation land

4:36:15back to Open Space and Parkland.

4:36:18I'm going to set aside my original presentation

4:36:20for the moment to address an issue

4:36:22which has come to light in the past couple of days.

4:36:25The circumstances around the change

4:36:27of the 20 acres of Court Right lands

4:36:29from Open Space and Parkland to housing

4:36:31as part of OPH 48 has always been murky, to say the least.

4:36:36No one seems to clearly understand

4:36:38how or why the change happened.

4:36:41Staff asserts that no error was made

4:36:43and that the change was part of a comprehensive review

4:36:45that included a public consultation process.

4:36:48However, Hugh Whiteley and Laura Muir have always contended

4:36:51that there was no staff justification report

4:36:54related to the 20 acre parcel.

4:36:56And if I misquoted them,

4:36:57they can make a correction when they're at the podium.

4:37:01I decided to do some fact checking myself.

4:37:03So I asked my 26 year old now engineer son who works with AI

4:37:07to run an AI scan of the 588 pages

4:37:10of the Envision Wealth document

4:37:12to look for any text that provided justification

4:37:15for changing the designation of these lands

4:37:17from Open Space and Parkland to housing.

4:37:20And when he ran that scan, nothing came up.

4:37:23He said, mom, I don't know,

4:37:24like you're gonna have to read the document.

4:37:27I wasn't up for 588 pages,

4:37:29so I reached out to Mr. Terman in planning

4:37:32and asked if he could share any text

4:37:35in the OPA documents related to staff's justification

4:37:39for this designation change.

4:37:40And Mr. Terman wrote back that quote,

4:37:43there are two documents related to public comments

4:37:47where the subject lands are raised.

4:37:50Staff provided rationale for their decision in response.

4:37:55Loram, you are submitted those comments in 2010 and 2012.

4:37:59In each case, the staff comments relating

4:38:01to the subject lands comprise one paragraph.

4:38:05So are those two paragraphs,

4:38:08the sum total of staff's rationale

4:38:11for the change to housing back in the day?

4:38:14It appears that the original staff generated materials

4:38:18for OPA 48 did not contain any mention

4:38:22of the 20 acres of Nisga Court-Wright land.

4:38:25And the only reason that there's anything

4:38:27in the materials in the comments section

4:38:29is because Loram your happened to catch designation

4:38:33on the map and understood what it meant.

4:38:37So even if I had sat down to read the more than 500 pages

4:38:40of this document as part of the public consultation process,

4:38:44there is no way that I or other citizens

4:38:47and even members of council could have known

4:38:50that these lands were proposed

4:38:51to have their designation changed

4:38:53unless they understood what the map meant

4:38:56and what the property was that was in question.

4:38:59In her comments, Ms. Muir refers to the lands

4:39:01of the Nisga lands and so did staff.

4:39:03So again, there was no way for any reader

4:39:07to understand that the lands in question

4:39:09were part of the former Court-Wright Waterfowl Park.

4:39:14Because this designation change appears

4:39:19to have been just a change on a map as part of an OPA,

4:39:23not a separate planning process,

4:39:25there was no context provided to council

4:39:27or members of the public for this parcel of land.

4:39:30There was no acquisition history.

4:39:32There was no identification or discussion

4:39:34of the existing zoning.

4:39:36There was no analysis or discussion of its potential role

4:39:40or in future parkland needs.

4:39:42There were no technical studies.

4:39:44Staff and citizens were not informed

4:39:46that the lands were part of a Hamlin Creek

4:39:48conservation area master plan

4:39:50approved by a previous council.

4:39:52In their exchange, Ms. Muir and staff

4:39:54used the word greenfield,

4:39:57but there appears to be no written reference

4:39:59in any material throughout thousands of pages

4:40:03of the OPA process that the existing designation

4:40:06of the 20 acres at that time was parkland and open space

4:40:11and that a loss of parkland and open space

4:40:13was at stake.

4:40:16The Canadian Institute of Planners Code of Conduct

4:40:19in regard to the public interest

4:40:21requires that planners provide opportunities

4:40:24for meaningful participation and education

4:40:28in planning processes to all interested parties.

4:40:32In my opinion, these criteria were not met

4:40:35in regard to the Court-Wright Property Designation Change

4:40:38in 2012.

4:40:40Don't insult Guelph citizens by lecturing us

4:40:44that a comprehensive public consultation process took place

4:40:49when it was nothing of the sort.

4:40:51Staff materials didn't even mention the property in question

4:40:56and it was just a fluke that one individual noticed

4:41:00a change on a map and made a comment.

4:41:03To pretend that this was a valid public consultation process

4:41:07is a sick joke.

4:41:10And now here's where the facts of the matter

4:41:12become even more disturbing.

4:41:15On page two of the letter from the GRCA's lawyer,

4:41:18Mr. Johnson states,

4:41:20to be clear, the redesignation of the parcel

4:41:23was done at the initiative of the city of Guelph,

4:41:25not the GRCA.

4:41:27However, schedule eight of the city staff reports

4:41:30says quote,

4:41:32the current residential designation of the lands

4:41:35in 2012 was determined in collaboration with the GRCA.

4:41:43In collaboration with the GRCA.

4:41:46This is the first mention I have ever heard

4:41:49of any involvement of the GRCA in this designation change.

4:41:53Clearly something was going on behind the scenes

4:41:56according to this statement,

4:41:57but there is no record of this collaboration

4:41:59between city staff and the GRCA in the public domain.

4:42:04Apparently the GRCA was operating in the background,

4:42:07but they were spared the hassle and publicity

4:42:10of having to come before the city of Guelph

4:42:11as a proponent to request a designation change

4:42:14of conservation land to housing.

4:42:17Riddle me this, for OPA 48, the health unit,

4:42:21the school board, Bell Canada,

4:42:24and the University of Guelph all weighed in

4:42:25with public comments,

4:42:27as is common for local institutions in OP updates.

4:42:30But as a property owner of lands

4:42:34for which the designation was about to change,

4:42:37why are there no public records,

4:42:39no comments on the public record from the GRCA?

4:42:42Why did they stay silent?

4:42:45Did they not want to draw attention

4:42:46to the fact that this parcel of land

4:42:48was about to have its designation changed?

4:42:51It looks to me like we had a situation

4:42:53where the GRCA knew full well that the designation change

4:42:57for the 20 acres of caught right land

4:42:59was in the works as part of OPA 48.

4:43:02But Guelph citizens, members of council,

4:43:05and even apparently some senior staff had no idea.

4:43:09I'm not sure what you call this in a planning context,

4:43:12but in a court of law,

4:43:13I would call this a miscarriage of justice.

4:43:16Councillor Busuttil talked earlier in the meeting

4:43:18about a need for transparency with citizens.

4:43:21But as far as the subject lands are concerned,

4:43:24the OPA 48 process was completely opaque.

4:43:29And now I'm gobsmacked that in the staff report,

4:43:32city staff is now parroting the false narrative

4:43:35put forward by the GRCA around the acquisition of these lands.

4:43:40And I don't blame Mr. Terman because he's just arrived.

4:43:43But Hugh Whiteley, Laura Muir, and myself

4:43:46have been sharing archival documents, FOIs,

4:43:50everything we've dug up with the GRCA,

4:43:53with council and with staff.

4:43:55And the historical research work, Professor Shelley

4:44:00has done is available online.

4:44:03The consolidated agenda for today contains a GRCA briefing,

4:44:07document to archival news clippings,

4:44:09the results of my FOI, including the letter

4:44:12from Minister Bernier, a planning study from Hugh Whiteley

4:44:15and a hyperlink to the treasury board report,

4:44:17cherry picked by the GRCA, court of see of Professor Shelley.

4:44:21A number of you in this room have personally

4:44:25heard the oral history of these lands directly

4:44:28from Ken and Eileen Hamill themselves.

4:44:31And three months ago, members of the Hamill family

4:44:34stood before you.

4:44:36Everyone knows the GRCA has been dealing in half truths.

4:44:40And half truths are worse than outright lies

4:44:42because they are more deceptive.

4:44:44If you read Professor Whiteley's presentation,

4:44:47you would have learned that the Hesbler Reservoir was

4:44:50delisted as a future project of the GRCA in 1975.

4:44:55That was two years before the purchase of the court right

4:44:58Waterfowl Park.

4:44:59But the GRCA needed a narrative that the lands were no longer

4:45:03needed so that they could sell them off.

4:45:07Because no one could make the argument today

4:45:10that there is a surplus of recreation lands.

4:45:14The GRCA has never actually provided decision makers

4:45:17with any source documents to substantiate their claims.

4:45:21And after Professor Pammerin's presentation,

4:45:23I now understand why.

4:45:25Like, where are the minutes from the meeting?

4:45:27They're an organization that keeps minutes.

4:45:29Where were the minutes directing the purchase

4:45:31for the Hesbler Reservoir?

4:45:33So there are a couple of things I want to highlight

4:45:36for, especially for Mr. Johnson before my clock runs out.

4:45:41And that's my letter from the FOI.

4:45:45Sorry, I have to go back.

4:45:46The FOI letter from the Ministry of Natural Resources.

4:45:51And if you look at the underlined place,

4:45:53it said that this money was allocated for Valleyland

4:45:57Acquisition, Hanlon Creek Conservation Area.

4:46:01It was not allocated for the Hesbler Reservoir.

4:46:07OK, thank you very much, Susan, for your delegation.

4:46:10Is there any follow-up questions at this time?

4:46:14Seeing and hearing none, thank you very much.

4:46:16Mr. Mayor, could I just want to?

4:46:20Yeah, just one second.

4:46:20I'm just going to just wait for the delegate to leave.

4:46:22And then I'll come to you.

4:46:25There's no questions, Susan.

4:46:26Thank you very much.

4:46:32Sorry, did you want to?

4:46:34Yeah, I just wanted to respond because there

4:46:36were a number of pretty significant accusations

4:46:40in that delegation, especially of previous staff

4:46:43and professional misconduct of previous staff.

4:46:46And I just can't stand for that.

4:46:48And so I just want to say aloud that that's

4:46:51completely inappropriate.

4:46:53And none of that is true.

4:46:57And this, again, has been already tried and tested in court.

4:47:02OK, thank you very much.

4:47:04Thank you.

4:47:09Anne Moore from the Friends of the Courtey Waterfall Park

4:47:12Lands is coming up, is here, sorry.

4:47:16And then Hugh Whiteley is going to be joining us

4:47:19after by video conference.

4:47:22So Anne, welcome.

4:47:23And I'll turn it over to you.

4:47:26Thank you so much.

4:47:27Thank you, Mayor Guthrie and counselors,

4:47:29for the opportunity to speak today

4:47:31about the Courtey Waterfall Park,

4:47:33and specifically about the 20 acres south of Nisga Road.

4:47:37My name is Anne Moore.

4:47:38I've been a citizen of Guelph for a long time.

4:47:40I am also a member of Friends of the Courtey Waterfall

4:47:43Park Lands.

4:47:45We have a following of 430 members on Facebook

4:47:48and counting.

4:47:49I can attest to the fact that many people in the city care

4:47:52deeply about this land and are watching closely

4:47:55to see the outcome of the meeting today.

4:47:57These people will be voting in the next election.

4:48:01February 10 was indeed a glorious day here at council.

4:48:04I was here where council voted unanimously

4:48:07in favor of protecting all of the court-right lands.

4:48:10We celebrated the good people in our community who

4:48:13helped to make this happen.

4:48:14And of course, we recognize the Hamill family themselves

4:48:17and the good work done by Ken and Eileen Hamill.

4:48:20It seemed for a moment that democracy actually worked

4:48:23and that the city government was here

4:48:25to uphold the will of the people.

4:48:27I can't tell you how many people reached out

4:48:29to congratulate the organizations that were involved.

4:48:33Friends of court-right get involved Guelph, water watchers,

4:48:36and environmental defense.

4:48:39Now, four months later, here we are back with a report

4:48:42from city staff recommending that council

4:48:44reverse its unanimous vote.

4:48:47Coincidentally, we have also learned

4:48:48that should council ignore the staff report and move ahead

4:48:52its original with its original decision,

4:48:56the city will be threatened with a tribunal and or legal action

4:48:59by the GRCA.

4:49:00So we hear that.

4:49:02What is this about?

4:49:03Well, my first point was about this is not about a dam.

4:49:08And so I'll say ditto to Cameron Shelley.

4:49:12He covered it well.

4:49:16What is this about?

4:49:18My perspective of the 36 conservation

4:49:21authorities in Ontario, the Grand River Conservation

4:49:24Authority is the only one that undertook

4:49:26an inventory of its lands for disposition under Bill Ford's

4:49:32Bill 23.

4:49:35I actually spoke to members of a couple other conservation

4:49:38authorities who told me that the boards adamantly said

4:49:41no to selling off what was deemed excess land.

4:49:46The 20 acre parcel at Courtwright Park

4:49:48is under contention now partly because of Ford's Bill 23

4:49:53and the will of the GRCA, which was revealed in the legal letter

4:49:57that was shared this week.

4:49:59All of this invites many questions from the public.

4:50:03Why is the GRCA so happy to sell off land?

4:50:07How long has the GRCA been dreaming of the money

4:50:10it could make on this land?

4:50:12Is there a developer waiting in the wings?

4:50:14Has this been the plan all along?

4:50:17Ironically, the GRCA will cease to exist in 2027.

4:50:21So why are they in such a rush to gain money from the land?

4:50:27Where will the profits from the land

4:50:29sell go if GRCA no longer exists?

4:50:32What are the chances that that money

4:50:34will be spent on local infrastructure as they promise?

4:50:38I ask you, the public does not.

4:50:41I ask you, the public, does this

4:50:44pass the smell test?

4:50:46I am not sure.

4:50:48Is it any wonder that citizens feel

4:50:50a little cynical about politics?

4:50:53Here is my take.

4:50:54I would argue that the city needs to follow

4:50:56through on their unanimous decision from February

4:50:59to redesignate the land.

4:51:02Why should the city go to bat for 20 acres of farmland?

4:51:06Because it is conservation land, public land,

4:51:09purchased with public money to protect in perpetuity

4:51:14for the people of Guelph as urban park.

4:51:17The staff report says that the land has no environmental value.

4:51:21Clearly, the land could be reforested.

4:51:23The 20-acre land parcel looks like a small piece

4:51:26of forgotten farmland now, but imagine what it could be.

4:51:30It is prime park land located in the Speed River watershed,

4:51:34a trailhead, potential recreation area, and sports

4:51:38fields for the citizens to enjoy,

4:51:41for habitat to thrive at a natural recharge

4:51:43for the watershed.

4:51:46The staff report states that there's

4:51:48a shortage of open space parkland in the south end of Guelph.

4:51:53Here's some parkland.

4:51:55Our focus should be on climate change mitigation right now.

4:51:58Protecting green space is an easy win.

4:52:01As well, people clearly need spaces of respite

4:52:03in these troubled times.

4:52:07Is more land needed for housing?

4:52:09I was told by a developer and others in the know

4:52:12that there's enough land presently set aside

4:52:15to keep builders busy for the next two decades in Guelph.

4:52:19So finally, why should council move to protect this land?

4:52:23Because city council wants to do the right thing

4:52:25for the people of Guelph.

4:52:28Is it not the role of city council

4:52:30to have a long-term vision of our city that

4:52:32benefits the people?

4:52:34Let's not make history by having our valued conservation land

4:52:37sold out from under us under pressure from the province.

4:52:41It's time to stand up Guelph once the land is gone,

4:52:44it's gone forever.

4:52:47The citizens of Guelph do not stand by idly

4:52:50while public lands are being sold off.

4:52:52That is clear.

4:52:53I want to thank all the citizens of Guelph

4:52:55who made their voices heard on this issue

4:52:57through letters, petitions, and delegations.

4:53:00Now we need our city council to hear us once again

4:53:03and move to defend the lands.

4:53:05In closing, I urge council to reject the staff report

4:53:09and instead support the proposed official plan

4:53:11amendment and zoning change for the 20-acre parcel.

4:53:15To you, Mayor Guthrie, I will ask,

4:53:17will you be a strong mayor and stand by council's February

4:53:2110th decision?

4:53:22If you do, we will stand with you.

4:53:26Let's build a legacy together in Guelph.

4:53:29Thanks for your time today.

4:53:32Thank you.

4:53:32Is there any questions for this delegate?

4:53:36I have one.

4:53:37Yep.

4:53:37What did you mean?

4:53:39What did you mean there at the end when you said that to me?

4:53:42What did I mean?

4:53:42What did you mean?

4:53:44What do you mean by me being a strong mayor?

4:53:46What do you mean by that?

4:53:48I was referencing the strong mayoral powers.

4:53:55And I was playing on that notion of strong mayoral powers.

4:54:00And so, I mean, on February 10th, we

4:54:03had a very clear open discussion together.

4:54:06And you were very, very strongly in support

4:54:09of the redesignation of this land.

4:54:11We celebrated.

4:54:13And I see that council, all of you,

4:54:18are up against a really difficult time now

4:54:21with the GRC, a legal letter.

4:54:25But I guess I'm challenging you, all of you,

4:54:29to make a difference here.

4:54:31So it was not intended to be disrespectful.

4:54:36No, it's OK.

4:54:37I want a clarity.

4:54:37That's why I asked the question.

4:54:39But I'm just going to give a little bit of clarity back to you.

4:54:42The motion that was passed was to do a process of a city

4:54:46initiated rezoning.

4:54:50It wasn't to do it.

4:54:52So I just wanted to make sure that everyone is in this room

4:54:54tonight that understands that there

4:54:56was a unanimous decision of council on February 10th

4:55:01to actually do this process.

4:55:03It wasn't to do an actual rezoning.

4:55:07So I just want to make sure that you understand that.

4:55:10All right, and everyone else that's

4:55:11maybe coming up to the microphone too.

4:55:13So any other questions?

4:55:16OK, Nunn, thank you very much.

4:55:18Hugh Whiteley is going to now join us by video.

4:55:25And we'll just wait for him to pop on.

4:55:27I see you're joining us.

4:55:29Oh, camera on, camera off.

4:55:40Oh, there you go.

4:55:41Now you just have to unmute.

4:55:47I'll do it again.

4:55:49We can both see and hear you now.

4:55:51That's perfect.

4:55:52So thank you very much for joining us.

4:55:54And we'll turn the microphone over to you.

4:55:57Go right ahead.

4:55:59Greetings, Mayor Guthrie, counselors, and members

4:56:01of the public.

4:56:03I am delegating this afternoon, this evening,

4:56:06to urge city council to approve the city initiated official plan

4:56:10amendment and zoning bylaw for the 8-hectare subject property

4:56:15on Desker Road in order to restore this 8-hectare property

4:56:20to its long-established intended use as an urban parkland.

4:56:27At the February 10, 2026 city council meeting,

4:56:31council recognized the need to correct the error made

4:56:35in 2012 in the decision to pave over 8 hectares of urban parkland

4:56:42through resed designation of this property to residential.

4:56:48This 8-hectare parcel of urban parkland,

4:56:52this is very important, was purchased by the GRCA in 1977

4:57:00at the direction of the city of Guelph using city funds

4:57:08under the ages of the Guelph Valley Land Project.

4:57:13The intended use was to form a permanent part of the urban parkland

4:57:19portfolio of the city.

4:57:22There was nothing about Pesplar in that decision.

4:57:28Nothing.

4:57:30The story that the GRCA is selling,

4:57:35that this land was purchased for the Pesplar reservoir,

4:57:39is a complete fictional makeup story and part of the scam

4:57:45that they're trying to run.

4:57:50The error in planning procedure for the 8-hectare parcel

4:57:54that council has recognized and is moving to correct

4:57:59was initiated by an undetected error in mapping made in OPA 39

4:58:06under places to grow legislation.

4:58:08The city was required to provide the province with information

4:58:13on which portions of the city had decisions on final designation

4:58:18and zoning completed and were thus developed.

4:58:23This was the built up area.

4:58:26All of the GRCA owned land on both sides of Nisca Road

4:58:31had permanent designation as open space and zoning as P1

4:58:37conservation and were thus part of the built up area.

4:58:42This is an undisputed fact.

4:58:46The error made was that the city erroneously

4:58:49informed the province that while the portion of the GRCA

4:58:54land north of Nisca Road was completed in designation

4:59:01and zoning and thus developed, and part of the built up area

4:59:07for that reason, the portion of the GRCA owned land

4:59:11south of Nisca Road lacked final designation and zoning

4:59:17and were thus greenfield.

4:59:20This error in classification of the subject property

4:59:23as greenfield led staff directly to formulate a proposal

4:59:28to redesignate the subject property from open space, parkland,

4:59:34to residential as part of the land use changes

4:59:38proposed in OPA 48.

4:59:41And Susan Watson has done a very good job

4:59:44of outlining the absence of proper planning procedures

4:59:48on OPA 48 change.

4:59:52The subject property of the eight hectares

4:59:54is a very large piece of parkland.

4:59:58Any proposal to reduce the city's parkland portfolio

5:00:03by switching land to residential development

5:00:06is highly contentious since urban parkland is in short supply

5:00:11as we have heard, and the province has severely

5:00:15restricted the city's ability to acquire additional urban

5:00:19parkland.

5:00:21The city has recently considered redesignating portions

5:00:25of Sleiman Park and Hugh C Guthrie Park for housing.

5:00:29Consideration of this proposal was made public,

5:00:33and the immediate negative response from the community

5:00:36led the proposal to being deferred until a holistic inventory

5:00:41of all city-owned or city-controlled land

5:00:45was completed to guide proper decision-making

5:00:50about open space.

5:00:52In contrast to this, proper notification and consultation,

5:00:58the 2012 OPA 48 proposal to build housing on eight hectares

5:01:05of parkland, scheduled by the way, I'll say more

5:01:11about the master plan.

5:01:12But the master plan was adopted by the city in 1979

5:01:18after three years of joint work between the city and the GRCA

5:01:24in developing the plan.

5:01:26And this plan called for the land that we're

5:01:29dealing with tonight to be part of a wildlife viewing

5:01:33zoological park.

5:01:37The change of this housing was instituted

5:01:41by one planning member suggestion, no public announcements,

5:01:47no consultation, no planning justification report,

5:01:51as Susan has documented.

5:01:53The council decision on February 10, 2026

5:01:58was that the unjustified transfer of urban parkland

5:02:02to housing made an OPA 48 was a mistake

5:02:07and that the original designation and zoning

5:02:09should be restored.

5:02:11The motion before council today is not

5:02:14to propose a new use for this eight hectare parcel.

5:02:19It is to restore the original designation and zoning

5:02:23to ensure that any future changes in designation and zoning

5:02:27for the property would only be made

5:02:30with the necessary planning studies, consultation,

5:02:33and public notification required by the Planning Act.

5:02:38It is very important to note that contrary to the staff

5:02:42report, there is a planning justification report

5:02:46provided for the proposed restoration of designation

5:02:52and zoning.

5:02:53And that's because the original designation and zoning

5:02:58were based on all the proper documentation.

5:03:02In particular, the planning justification aspect

5:03:06is covered by the Southview District 8 Plan, which

5:03:11made the decision to designate this parcel open space

5:03:17and zone P1.

5:03:19Today's motion is to restore the original destinations

5:03:24that were supported by all the needed planning reports

5:03:28at the time.

5:03:30Not only the District 8 Southview Plan that I've mentioned,

5:03:34but the 1968 watershed infrastructure plan

5:03:38and the 1972 Hanlon Creek Ecological Study.

5:03:43The staff report on this matter has several major defects,

5:03:47the most constrictious of which are, first,

5:03:51the absence of any mention of the Guelph Valley Land Project

5:03:55under which the subject property and all of the Nesca lands

5:04:01were acquired to be owned by the GRCA

5:04:05and managed by the city as an urban parkland under management

5:04:11agreement.

5:04:13The Guelph Valley Land Project was a great success.

5:04:18The city acquired altogether 776 acres of urban parkland

5:04:25at a cost that was 1 third of the market cost,

5:04:30the city was getting this parkland at $775 per acre.

5:04:36And to leave that out of the history of land under discussion

5:04:42is a remarkable error.

5:04:47The second in the staff report is the continued parroting

5:04:53of the GRCA deliberately false statements

5:04:58that the subject property was purchased

5:05:00for the intended construction of the Hespeler Reservoir.

5:05:04Not only was it not purchased for that basis,

5:05:09there are resolutions authorizing

5:05:14purchase for both parts of the Nesca lands,

5:05:17both say unequivocally it was purchased for the Guelph Valley

5:05:22Land Project.

5:05:24But what's really remarkable is that in the second case,

5:05:29the GRCA had authorization to buy land for the Guelph

5:05:37or the Hespeler Dam and deliberately did not institute it.

5:05:47And to finish off, there's now a new bit of myth

5:05:53in the staff report, the plan adopted by the city.

5:06:02Hugh, Mr. Whitley, it's Cam.

5:06:07I am so sorry, your 10 minutes is up.

5:06:11So please just stay on the call and video with us

5:06:15just in case there is a follow-up question.

5:06:17And let me just look to see if there is.

5:06:19Do my colleagues have a follow-up question?

5:06:21Councillor Billings.

5:06:23Councillor Billings does.

5:06:24Go right ahead.

5:06:26Through you, Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to ask you,

5:06:29when you were involved with that OMB appeal a number of years

5:06:34ago, did you agree to the statement of facts by the GRCA,

5:06:38i.e. the Hespeler Reservoir Statement?

5:06:47Yeah, Hugh, we're waiting with bated breath

5:06:51to see what your answer is to that,

5:06:52but you're muted right now.

5:06:55Could you just unmute and then answer the question again?

5:07:08It's OK.

5:07:09We're just waiting for you here to just unmute

5:07:11if you can find that button to unmute.

5:07:15I had to get the screen back.

5:07:17OK.

5:07:18Yeah, you're good.

5:07:19We can hear and see you.

5:07:20So go ahead and answer that question to Councillor Billings.

5:07:24The answer is yes.

5:07:25And the reason was I believe the GRCA would not

5:07:31lie when they said they had a document that

5:07:34showed that this was purchased for the Hespeler Reservoir.

5:07:40And through you, Mr. Billings.

5:07:41That was a completely false statement.

5:07:45Of which you found out later?

5:07:48Yeah.

5:07:50Well, and the second reason that I signed

5:07:53is that the process required the GRCA

5:07:58to do a full investigation of the purpose

5:08:04that the land was acquired for.

5:08:07And so if I was wrong and the GRCA didn't

5:08:12and were lying about it, it would come out in that.

5:08:17And the fact is it did come out, but the GRCA just said,

5:08:22we're not going to pay any attention to the fact we're lying.

5:08:27OK.

5:08:28Through you, Mr. Mout.

5:08:30At the very end of your delegation,

5:08:33I was just wondering, would you be

5:08:35able just to read that last sentence,

5:08:36because you were cut off?

5:08:39Well, it was that.

5:08:43Your point, your last point.

5:08:45Yeah.

5:08:45OK.

5:08:46What I had written was supporting the removal of eight

5:08:50hectares of parkland from the city's portfolio

5:08:53with no specific consultation, no planning justification

5:08:57study, which is what Susan Watson covered.

5:09:01OK.

5:09:02Thank you.

5:09:06Thank you.

5:09:06And Councillor Downer has a question.

5:09:08Yeah.

5:09:08Through you, Mr. Mayor.

5:09:09Sorry.

5:09:10I just want us to be, I want us to take a breath.

5:09:18Some of the, I'm a big freedom of speech guy, big time.

5:09:22But I just don't want to disparage other people.

5:09:27I, and whether that's a corporation or a person

5:09:32or another entity, I just want us to be careful around the language

5:09:40around scams and lying.

5:09:43And I mean, that is an opinion, which I'm a freedom of speech

5:09:47guy.

5:09:47I mean, that's an opinion.

5:09:49But in the decorum of the setting that we are in today,

5:09:54I would just appreciate us all being mindful

5:09:57of the professionalism of our staff,

5:09:59the integrity of our staff, and the relationships

5:10:03that we have with other entities and their professionalism

5:10:06to just, you're still allowed to definitely disagree 1,000%.

5:10:13No problem.

5:10:14But if we could just be careful with our language as best

5:10:16as we can, I would appreciate that,

5:10:19just as the chair, as we go on with the rest of the meeting.

5:10:22OK.

5:10:23So I just, sorry I interrupted you.

5:10:26I said all that because I was really afraid of what

5:10:28you were going to say.

5:10:29I know.

5:10:30I'm known for that bad language.

5:10:34I better say it now before Councillor Downer gets the microphone.

5:10:37I have a reputation.

5:10:38Yeah, yeah.

5:10:39Only when you're talking about me, right?

5:10:41That's right.

5:10:42All right, so.

5:10:42OK, through you, Mr. Mayor, though, to Mr. Whitely,

5:10:45and Mr. Whitely, being mindful of what the mayor has just

5:10:48said about how we just sort of respect the process

5:10:52and other institutions and people, why did you settle then

5:10:57to, given what you said, why did you settle in the OMB

5:11:02appeal to agree to this land being zoned residential?

5:11:07Well, there were two reasons, three reasons, really.

5:11:12I had spent by that time about $80,000 in OMB appeals.

5:11:18And I was feeling a bit financially stressed.

5:11:24So that's one reason.

5:11:27The second was that my council said,

5:11:33you'll get a chance to have the truth come out in the hearing

5:11:42that the GRCA is going to conduct on the purchase of the land

5:11:48and making it available for other uses.

5:11:52And so with the and I had not studied the GRCA minutes

5:11:59and knew what the actual decision base was.

5:12:04So given that the GRCA said that it

5:12:07had been purchased for the Hesbler Reservoir

5:12:11and that if that was wrong, it will come out in the hearing,

5:12:16I agreed to settle.

5:12:22OK, thank you.

5:12:27Thank you.

5:12:27Just a clarity question for myself, Hugh, is you just

5:12:31said appeals when you were talking

5:12:35about the financial contributions you made to that.

5:12:38You're not indicating that the financial cost was just

5:12:41in regards to this matter.

5:12:43You're probably talking about all the appeals you've

5:12:46done over the years at that time.

5:12:48Correct.

5:12:49OK.

5:12:50There's a sum of about five OMB decisions.

5:12:56I remember on council when you were doing that.

5:13:00So thank you for that clarity.

5:13:02OK.

5:13:04I see nothing further.

5:13:06And thank you very much, Hugh.

5:13:08Thank you for joining us.

5:13:11OK.

5:13:12So there is going to be a that's all of the registered.

5:13:16Now this is the moment when I'm going

5:13:18to put a phone number up on the screen

5:13:20and or ask anybody in the room if they too

5:13:22would like to delegate.

5:13:24And so if I could have the number come up

5:13:28and just a reminder to anybody either online that

5:13:31wants to call in or anybody here in the room.

5:13:34Again, if you wish to speak, no problem.

5:13:37Just please do remember, though, that if what has been stated

5:13:44before, whatever, please still come up.

5:13:46But ditto or just get to something new.

5:13:49Maybe we haven't heard or something like that.

5:13:51That would be great.

5:13:52But here's the number 5198375603.

5:13:58And we'll just wait like four or five minutes

5:14:01to see if anyone calls in.

5:14:03And while we do that, can I just see a show of hands

5:14:08of anybody and if anybody else that wishes to speak.

5:14:10And I'll just kind of walk across the room, OK?

5:14:13On this.

5:14:14So just give me, first of all, I've got to put my glasses on.

5:14:17OK.

5:14:18Oh, OK.

5:14:18This is a first.

5:14:19So our clerk is going to come and introduce himself.

5:14:29Shake his hand.

5:14:30Tell him he looks great.

5:14:31And then give him your name and then I can have the list

5:14:35when it comes up to me, OK?

5:14:38And again, please just remember our timing

5:14:40that we have here as well.

5:14:41I'm sure you want us to try to get to the discussion part

5:14:45and debate, too.

5:14:46So please go ahead and grab all the names

5:14:49that you need to grab, OK?

5:14:51OK.

5:14:52I'll call the meeting back to order, please.

5:22:36OK.

5:22:37Thank you very much for that little break.

5:22:52OK.

5:22:52Thank you very much for that little break.

5:22:57And we have more delegations that want to speak to this.

5:23:02And I am just going to respectfully just say we would

5:23:09really like to try our best to get to the discussion

5:23:12and debate.

5:23:13We also understand that the process allows this.

5:23:16So please don't ever take what I'm saying with the,

5:23:20like, trying to stop anything.

5:23:21But we have probably two and a half hours now of delegates,

5:23:28OK?

5:23:29And then we're going to have to try to get

5:23:31to discussion and debate.

5:23:34If you've heard some of the things that your friends

5:23:38or other supporters have said at the microphone,

5:23:41please know that the ditto works.

5:23:44But we also fully respect that if you've prepared time,

5:23:47you have it, OK?

5:23:50But please know that we're here to listen and engage

5:23:54as best that we can.

5:23:55Once you're done with your delegation,

5:23:58please stick around because I will

5:23:59ask to see if any of my colleagues or myself

5:24:01have any follow-up questions, OK?

5:24:04If there isn't, we'll just keep going to the next one.

5:24:07Most of the people that are going to speak are in the room,

5:24:09and we've got a couple that are online by phone, OK?

5:24:13So I'm going to try to read my clerk friend's handwriting.

5:24:18Did a pretty good job.

5:24:20So please forgive me if I say your name wrong.

5:24:22Leslie Work.

5:24:24Did I say that right?

5:24:26All right.

5:24:28Come on down.

5:24:30And then I have Rebecca at, is it Andam?

5:24:33Or oh, it's Adams.

5:24:36Sorry.

5:24:38Is Rebecca here?

5:24:39I see a hand.

5:24:41Rebecca, you're in the wings.

5:24:43So Leslie, over to you.

5:24:46Go right ahead.

5:24:48Guthrie and city counselors and stuff.

5:24:52For the opportunity to speak today about the Niskelands,

5:24:55specifically the 20-acre parcel south of Niske Road.

5:25:00I'm here today to add my voice to those

5:25:02who support the redesignation of this parcel

5:25:04to open space and parkland.

5:25:07I'm here to support you, Mayor Guthrie and counselors,

5:25:11in your efforts to protect all of Niskelands,

5:25:13including the eight-hectare parcel.

5:25:17My name is Leslie Work.

5:25:18I'm a citizen of Guelph with a passion for nature

5:25:21and a keen interest in the fates of natural and agricultural

5:25:25lands in Guelph.

5:25:27I'm also a mother of two adult children, who, like many,

5:25:32if not most, young adults, are faced with the real possibility

5:25:36that they may never be able to purchase their own homes,

5:25:40but who are painfully aware of the pressure cooker

5:25:44we are in with respect to a litany of environmental crises.

5:25:48Climate change, mass extinction, pollution,

5:25:50we all know the refrain.

5:25:52How curious that over this small eight-hectare parcel of land,

5:25:57a conservation authority is threatening legal action

5:26:02against the city, with the conservation authority wanting

5:26:06the land to remain zoned residential,

5:26:09and the city proposing the land be

5:26:11redesignated to its original open space parkland.

5:26:15I greatly appreciate how challenging

5:26:17their position must be.

5:26:19As the people who have been chosen to lead our community,

5:26:22you are tasked with making really difficult land use

5:26:26decisions, in this instance involving polar opposites,

5:26:31residential housing, or open space and parkland.

5:26:34In the case of this particular parcel of land,

5:26:37I propose that open space parkland trumps

5:26:41low and medium-density housing.

5:26:44Why?

5:26:45Because this small parcel is in close proximity

5:26:47to the Speed River, because it can be restored to forest,

5:26:51the parcel will obviously increase the total nisco land

5:26:55area, but will also very importantly change its shape.

5:27:00Shape matters when considering forest areas.

5:27:04For instance, a 64-hectare long thin slice of forest

5:27:08will provide no interior forest habitat,

5:27:11whereas a 64-hectare forest that is a circle or a square

5:27:15or approximating that sort of shape

5:27:20will provide interior forest habitat.

5:27:23Interior forest is more resilient

5:27:28and has more capacity to regulate and cool climate,

5:27:32mitigate noise and other forms of pollution,

5:27:35and provide a refuge for wildlife and for us.

5:27:38Why not residential?

5:27:40I question to what degree low to medium-density housing

5:27:43on an eight-hectare parcel of land.

5:27:46Will meaningfully address our housing crisis?

5:27:49Low to medium-density housing on this piece

5:27:51of agricultural land is more urban sprawl, which

5:27:55is widely recognized as having severe impacts

5:27:58on infrastructure costs, public health, and the environment.

5:28:03Residential development on agricultural land

5:28:06significantly drives climate change

5:28:08by destroying natural carbon sinks,

5:28:10increasing energy-intensive suburban infrastructure,

5:28:13and generating higher transportation emissions.

5:28:16Converting farmland to housing permanently

5:28:19releases stored carbon in the soil

5:28:22while replacing permeable land with concrete asphalt,

5:28:25negatively impacting water quality of the speed river,

5:28:28and contributing to the urban heat island effect.

5:28:32Low and medium-density housing will

5:28:34provide housing for those with substantial financial resources,

5:28:38not the types of higher-density, affordable starter homes

5:28:41that we so desperately need.

5:28:43I'll add here that given the land was originally

5:28:45purchased with taxpayer dollars, it

5:28:47seems to me that if low and medium-density homes are

5:28:51eventually built here, then taxpayers

5:28:54would have subsidized these low and medium-density homes.

5:28:58Conversely, restoring this eight-hectare parcel to forest

5:29:01will add to the existing Niska natural area,

5:29:06and via step toward improving biodiversity, water quality,

5:29:09citizens' access to nature.

5:29:12Low and medium-density housing will worsen these things

5:29:16and not meaningfully address the housing crisis.

5:29:20As a frequent visitor to all of our natural areas,

5:29:22I have observed that they are quite heavily impacted

5:29:26and are becoming degraded.

5:29:28I have watched as buckthorn and other exotics

5:29:30edge out native vegetation, trails grow in width and in number,

5:29:35trees such as ash and beech suffer and die

5:29:38from disease and insect pressure, snakes and small mammals

5:29:42get squished by bicycle traffic, off-leash dogs charge

5:29:46through forest understory and leave behind copious waste,

5:29:50numbers of insects and other invertebrates decline,

5:29:53and car traffic noise becomes more prevalent.

5:29:57I have also rejoiced with birders from all walks of life

5:30:00as they flock to, for example, the arboretum

5:30:03to experience the presence of a cerulean warbler

5:30:06or to preservation park to catch glimpses of the many migratory

5:30:11birds that pass through our natural areas.

5:30:14I've seen expressions of awe and wonder as we gualfights

5:30:19visit our natural areas for recreation and relaxation

5:30:22and to encounter various beings with whom we share this land.

5:30:26All natural areas offer restorative experiences,

5:30:30but one could argue that forests are the most restorative.

5:30:34With increasing population, our cherished natural areas

5:30:38will suffer ever greater impacts.

5:30:40We need more forested lands, not less.

5:30:43To conclude, I would like to say that I think

5:30:48with this small eight-hectare parcel of land,

5:30:51the city of Guelph and the Grand River Conservation Authority

5:30:55have a precedent-setting opportunity.

5:30:58With this decision, together, the city and the GRCA

5:31:03could recognize how deeply people and non-human beings

5:31:06need forests and nature.

5:31:09The GRCA could back down from its threat

5:31:12to take legal action against the city,

5:31:15and the city could go ahead with its initial instincts

5:31:19and redesignate the land to open space parkland.

5:31:23The needs of Guelph citizens would be best acknowledged,

5:31:27excuse me, would best be acknowledged

5:31:29by peacefully resolving this dispute.

5:31:33The eight-hectare parcel could be added to the rest of the Niskelands,

5:31:37and a cutting-edge citizen-led forest restoration project

5:31:40could be initiated.

5:31:42The choice could be made for more meaningful solutions

5:31:44to the housing crisis, such as appropriately located

5:31:48higher-density infill housing,

5:31:50which I know is already an initiative, and I appreciate that.

5:31:55Higher-density infill housing, not urban sprawl on land,

5:31:59such as this parcel, in such close proximity to the Speed River

5:32:03and the existing natural area.

5:32:07These actions would serve as a great example

5:32:09to other municipalities as the right course of action

5:32:12at a time, such as the present, with myriad soul-crushing,

5:32:16social, and environmental pressures.

5:32:19There is much evidence to suggest that the climate crisis

5:32:22is the defining existential threat of our time.

5:32:25I submit that land-use decisions,

5:32:28even those concerning a mere eight hectares,

5:32:31are precedent-setting and extremely important,

5:32:35as climate change worsens people and non-human beings

5:32:39that live in cities and those who migrate through need more

5:32:43and larger areas of forest.

5:32:45So I ask you, GRCA, please drop your threat of a lawsuit.

5:32:51I don't know if any GRCA members are here,

5:32:54but please do drop your threat of a lawsuit

5:32:57and find funds some other way.

5:33:01I know that is not easy in this climate.

5:33:04And city councilors in Marigathe,

5:33:06please redesignate the eight hectare parcel

5:33:09and please consider restoring it to a beautiful forest.

5:33:13Thank you.

5:33:13All right, Leslie, thank you very much.

5:33:15Just let me make sure there's no questions.

5:33:18Are there any questions for Leslie?

5:33:21There's not, keep walking.

5:33:23All right, Rebecca Adams and then Cheryl Moore.

5:33:28Is Cheryl here still?

5:33:30Okay, you're in the wings.

5:33:33And I'm just gonna say this

5:33:34because I'm just looking at the list.

5:33:37Just a heads up, I see a couple names here

5:33:41that might be candidates.

5:33:44And I just wanna make sure that this space

5:33:47is an election-free zones, okay?

5:33:49So just making sure that we're on the same page for that.

5:33:53Over to you, you have up to 10 minutes if you need it.

5:33:55Corey, go ahead.

5:33:56It'll be quick.

5:33:57My name is Rebecca Adams

5:33:58and I actually live, my backyard fence looks on

5:34:02to this space that we're talking about.

5:34:04I wasn't planning on speaking today,

5:34:06but no one's mentioned something

5:34:07that I think is the biggest issue

5:34:10and whatever you decide today is what you decide,

5:34:13but this issue on either vote needs to be considered.

5:34:17I was here a year ago actually talking about the hunting

5:34:20in my direct backyard.

5:34:23For years I have been fighting this.

5:34:25I've talked to everyone and their mother

5:34:27and no one can deal with this.

5:34:30City of Guelph doesn't have jurisdiction,

5:34:32OPP, Guelph-Felice, it's in private property

5:34:35and it is what it is.

5:34:36I have two young kids, I'm a mother.

5:34:38My two young kids have friends over,

5:34:40everyone on tarmac and place together.

5:34:42The kids are like, let's go for a walk on the cornfield,

5:34:44how can we go back there?

5:34:45And the parents say no.

5:34:47The reason why we say no,

5:34:49they cannot walk on that cornfield

5:34:51is because we find arrows five feet from our fence line

5:34:56from bow and arrows of duck hunting.

5:34:59So my concern here is safety.

5:35:03If we have no control over the airspace

5:35:07of what we're talking about, we don't.

5:35:09Many of you in this room, Stinger has told me that

5:35:12in emails when I've been fighting it, there's no control.

5:35:14It's private property, they're allowed to do these things.

5:35:17If we have no control of it over it

5:35:19and magically you're not going to get control over it,

5:35:22I assume if we put houses there,

5:35:24how are we now gonna put houses with children in that area?

5:35:29When we know arrows can hit them.

5:35:32It's just something that I don't understand.

5:35:35It's something I'd like you all to consider.

5:35:37No matter what you decide,

5:35:39we do not have control over the hunting over that area.

5:35:43It is unsafe for children to be there.

5:35:47That's everything.

5:35:47Thank you.

5:35:48Any questions then for the delegate?

5:35:51No, thank you very much.

5:35:52Appreciate it.

5:35:53And Cheryl Moore is coming up next.

5:35:57And Lynn Grist, are you here Lynn?

5:36:02Yes, I see you now.

5:36:03Thank you.

5:36:04You're next.

5:36:04Hello, Cheryl.

5:36:05Hi.

5:36:06Go right ahead.

5:36:07I have a couple of questions.

5:36:08Mayor Guthrie and Councillors.

5:36:09The recent amendments to the Conservation Authority

5:36:12and the Executive Committee of the City of Ontario

5:36:15restrict certain activities during what the province

5:36:18is calling a transition window.

5:36:20My understanding is that there are restrictions

5:36:22on the sale and investiture of land.

5:36:26Can you please describe how the proposal

5:36:27addresses this restriction?

5:36:29Lastly, has a recent environmental impact study

5:36:32been completed for the proposed changes

5:36:34in policy that supports this development?

5:36:36Can you describe how these measures recommended

5:36:38by the EIS have and will be implemented

5:36:42in any development of these lands?

5:36:44Thank you.

5:36:45OK, thank you for at least stating those questions out loud.

5:36:50Just as a reminder, the first question

5:36:53would be to the GRCA as the landowner.

5:36:56And the second one is there is no development application.

5:37:00This is rezoning.

5:37:02So any of the sort of studies and technical studies

5:37:05for any type of a development would

5:37:07have to come forward as you rightly outlined,

5:37:09if something like that were ever happened in the future.

5:37:12But thank you for stating those, especially

5:37:15if you want to follow up with the GRCA as the owner

5:37:17on the first one.

5:37:18I'll do that.

5:37:19OK, yeah, thank you.

5:37:21And Lynn, Grist is up next.

5:37:25And then Ron, you're in the wings.

5:37:27I see you there.

5:37:33And just a reminder, everybody, just

5:37:35trying to make sure that we are here under the Planning Act.

5:37:41The planning justification yes or no

5:37:45in regards to the report that's in front of us

5:37:48is what we need to be speaking about.

5:37:50So let's try to make sure we're focused on the actual report

5:37:55and the yes or no kind of opinions you have on that.

5:38:00And welcome, Lynn.

5:38:02Thank you.

5:38:02And turn it over to you whenever you're ready.

5:38:05If you just give me a minute.

5:38:06I'm slow.

5:38:07I'm almost 80.

5:38:11Can I put this thing down?

5:38:17Is that all right?

5:38:22Yeah, that'd be nice.

5:38:24Oh, god.

5:38:25No, never mind.

5:38:26It's too much trouble.

5:38:28OK, sorry about that.

5:38:30OK, so well, thank you.

5:38:33I've been here since 2 o'clock this afternoon,

5:38:35so it's lovely to be able to speak to you.

5:38:39Mayor Guthrie, councillors, and fellow residents,

5:38:41thank you for the opportunity to speak on this matter again.

5:38:46I delegated at the council meeting on February 10th,

5:38:49which counsel unanimously passed a resolution with respect

5:38:55to a process for the redesignation

5:38:58to open space parkland purposes of the 8-hectapastel

5:39:02of land with the legal description of part lot 13,

5:39:07concession 5, Puslinch, PT1.

5:39:12I am, like most people in Guelph, not a planner.

5:39:17So to be clear, and for the public record,

5:39:20I'm going to refer to the piece of land

5:39:22I'm speaking about as part of the Courtright Waterfowl Park,

5:39:27as it has been known since around 1948 when it was first

5:39:31gifted to the people of Guelph by the family who owned the land.

5:39:36The piece of land is about 20 acres

5:39:39and backs onto a lovely conservation area

5:39:43and on the other side to the Speed River.

5:39:46I'm not going to speak to the history of the Courtright

5:39:49Waterfowl Park.

5:39:50Council is already very aware of the details

5:39:52of this particular piece of publicly owned land,

5:39:56supported one way or another by the public purse

5:40:00since around 1948.

5:40:02Not necessarily Guelph, maybe the province,

5:40:05but certainly the public purse.

5:40:08It is currently rented out by the GRCA to tenant farmers who

5:40:12are actually going to crash cogs in a time of shrinking

5:40:16farmland available in southern Ontario.

5:40:20Actually, that by itself is pretty important.

5:40:22Oh, and by the way, the GRCA does reserve rental income

5:40:28for that.

5:40:30I've read and considered the recommendations

5:40:32which the planning staff have made to Council

5:40:35as their report back to Council on the second quarter

5:40:38as outlined in the February 10th resolution on this matter.

5:40:43I want to respectfully disagree with the position of staff

5:40:47on this matter for the following reasons.

5:40:51The first is designation and zoning

5:40:53approved through a comprehensive public process.

5:40:57I have to say, after listening to both staff

5:41:00and to presentations today, it's an awful lot more complicated

5:41:05than I ever could have imagined.

5:41:08So I'm not going to comment on today.

5:41:10I mean, I leave that to you to think back to 2012

5:41:14and all the other things.

5:41:15It seems it's a bit murkier than we really thought.

5:41:19What I can say is that it is only recently

5:41:27that GRCA's across the province have

5:41:31been encouraged to sell off land to developers, surplus land.

5:41:35We call it.

5:41:36Only one of the 37 current conservation authorities,

5:41:41and I know there's going to be a lot less pretty soon,

5:41:44has taken the province up on this suggestion.

5:41:47It is the GRCA.

5:41:49Nobody else has.

5:41:51The second piece was official policies,

5:41:55sorry, plan policies regarding re-designation

5:41:59are not complied with.

5:42:04And there is no strong planning rationale or justification

5:42:09for the proposed amendments.

5:42:12I'm not a planner, as you know.

5:42:14And staff have not indicated which

5:42:17of the official planning policies

5:42:19has not been complied with.

5:42:21However, I would suggest that there

5:42:25are a number of issues which are top of mind

5:42:28for the residents of wealth.

5:42:29You know we're the folks who pay the freight for everybody.

5:42:32And one of which is the crisis in affordable housing.

5:42:37While this is an issue for many cities across the country,

5:42:40I would remind council that in 2025, sadly,

5:42:45wealth was the eighth most expensive city in Canada,

5:42:49both for rental and purchase units.

5:42:53I am aware that there is some discussion

5:42:55that this 20 acres could be used for housing to be clear.

5:43:00It is far from walking distance to services and public transit

5:43:04options, so definitely not affordable housing.

5:43:09We already have 5,900 slots on the books

5:43:13for new housing in wealth.

5:43:14And I would encourage council and the planning staff

5:43:18to work with developers to get some of those started.

5:43:22Apart from much needed affordable housing,

5:43:25they could bring new jobs to wealth too.

5:43:28Number three, no city interest or objective

5:43:32identified in strategies or policies at this time

5:43:36to support the proposed OBA and ZBA.

5:43:41In addition to the crisis in affordable housing,

5:43:45there is also the issue of our growing parkland deficit.

5:43:48Wealth, as you know, is the cities to grow.

5:43:52And as it grows, it will need even more parkland in the future.

5:43:56And that means additional land designated as open space

5:44:01for public use.

5:44:03We already have a parkland deficit,

5:44:06and I think actually someone from the staff mentioned

5:44:08that that was absolutely the case.

5:44:11So it's essential that this council and future councils

5:44:14protect what we have to ensure that no other open spaces are

5:44:18lost.

5:44:20And the last one was no request or involvement

5:44:23of the landowner.

5:44:25I haven't seen anything from the GRCA,

5:44:29but I did hear today that maybe they wrote to you.

5:44:32I'm not sure about that.

5:44:34So I'm just going to comment on what I actually know.

5:44:37I cannot comment why the current chair of the GRCA,

5:44:41Mr. John Chalano, or his staff have chosen not

5:44:45to publicly comment to council or to staff,

5:44:48or maybe they have, or to the people for wealth for that matter.

5:44:50They certainly haven't for the people of wealth.

5:44:53Prior to becoming GRCA chair, Mr. Chalano

5:44:56was a councillor in Milton and a communications consultant

5:44:59for Nestle.

5:45:00So I'm sure he is aware of the options that

5:45:03are open to the GRCA in terms of public comments,

5:45:06although we haven't heard any.

5:45:08In addition, we have two members of council

5:45:12who are actually on the board of the GRCA,

5:45:14and they have not spoken publicly on the matter

5:45:17since February 10th meeting, to my knowledge.

5:45:19I mean, perhaps they have.

5:45:21But as a member of the public, I have not heard any of that.

5:45:25I am therefore encouraging council

5:45:28to keep its unanimous commitment of February 10th,

5:45:31to keep the land in public hands, as it has been since 1948,

5:45:35and direct the staff to immediately initiate a process

5:45:39for a site-specific council initiated land use amendment.

5:45:44This specific action is within the remit of council,

5:45:48and I am very aware of what our current CAO talked

5:45:52about, the legal ramifications for that.

5:45:56But sometimes you just have to stand up and do the right thing,

5:46:01and I would really encourage council to do that.

5:46:05Thank you.

5:46:06OK, thank you very much, Lynn.

5:46:08And is there a follow-up question for Lynn at all?

5:46:12There is not, but thank you again.

5:46:14You're welcome.

5:46:16And your other half, I was almost going to say your better half,

5:46:20but I know you're the better half.

5:46:22Ron is going to come up.

5:46:25Yeah, yeah.

5:46:28Ron, come on up.

5:46:29Save me, Ron, save me.

5:46:32And then Madeline Tessalyn, am I saying that right?

5:46:36OK, front row, you're in the wings.

5:46:41And go right ahead whenever you're ready.

5:47:08Can I say?

5:47:09Your time started 30 seconds ago.

5:47:11No, I'm just kidding.

5:47:14Oh, I can see what I'm speaking of.

5:47:16OK, so thank you very much for the opportunity

5:47:22to talk to you this evening about the Court Right Waterfowl

5:47:27Park.

5:47:30I'd just like to mention before I

5:47:32start that in looking at the map that was shown earlier

5:47:37by staff with the red part of the parcel of land,

5:47:45when you look at the whole thing, including

5:47:48the rest of the park, actually that parcel of land

5:47:53is an integral part of the whole park when you really look at it.

5:47:59So I think it's really important to understand

5:48:02that it's not somehow a separate field that

5:48:06has no connection to the rest of the park.

5:48:09It actually is a really important part of the overall park.

5:48:16OK, so Mayor Guthrie and councillors and fellow Guelph residents,

5:48:25I want to thank you for having the opportunity to speak.

5:48:33My focus is on the future.

5:48:38And the kind of city I want Guelph to be, not for me.

5:48:43I'm old at this point.

5:48:47But for my children, my grandchildren,

5:48:50and for everyone's grandchildren as well,

5:48:58I'm aware that there is a crisis in affordable housing

5:49:01in Guelph as there is in many cities across the country.

5:49:05And Guelph, we have a huge deficit also in parkland.

5:49:13Those openly publicly owned spaces that everyone,

5:49:17regardless of their income or their status, is free to use.

5:49:23Go to any of our existing parks and witness just how busy they are

5:49:29and how many individuals and families make use of them

5:49:33to play sports, to have family picnics, to play on playgrounds,

5:49:38to sit and talk, to celebrate festive occasions,

5:49:42or, as I and my better half do, just walk.

5:49:49Guelph, as it grows, will need even more parkland in the future.

5:49:54So it is essential that this council and hopefully future councils

5:50:01protect both what we have and ensure that no other open spaces are lost.

5:50:10So to this parcel of land, the Courtright Waterfowl Park,

5:50:15it is currently being used by tenant farmers to grow crops.

5:50:22And that's important.

5:50:26But I'm aware that there is, in some discussion of this 20 acres,

5:50:32it could be used for housing.

5:50:36To be clear, it's far from walking distance to services or public transit options.

5:50:44So it's obviously not going to be affordable housing.

5:50:48What we're talking about is luxury housing.

5:50:52And we all know that luxury housing never pays for itself in property taxes.

5:51:01So it is perpetually subsidized.

5:51:06We already have, as has been mentioned, 5,900 slots on the books for new housing in Guelph.

5:51:14And I would encourage council to work with developers to get some of that started.

5:51:23Apart from much needed affordable housing, they would bring new jobs to Guelph as well.

5:51:30I note that council has already made a recommendation on how to protect those 20 acres, those 8 hectares.

5:51:41I must admit that I'm very concerned by the current recommendation of staff.

5:51:50I attended the meeting on February 10th and witnessed the enthusiastic support of the mayor

5:51:59and every member of council to designate this parcel of land as parkland.

5:52:07And the unanimous vote in favor of that resolution.

5:52:12So it's my understanding that such a commitment by council is a clear directive

5:52:20to develop a plan of action to carry out council's wishes.

5:52:27But instead, what we seem to have before us is a direct contradiction of that directive.

5:52:37So I ask that council now strengthen their directive of February 10th

5:52:45so that this open space is protected by revising its recommendation

5:52:52to maintain its unanimous commitment of February 10th to keep the land in public hands

5:53:00as it has been since 1948 and direct the staff to immediately initiate a process for spaces.

5:53:10Sorry. Oops. Do you have this problem?

5:53:21Yes. The pages stick together.

5:53:23So to keep it as a site specific council initiated land use amendment for the redesignation

5:53:33to open space parkland purposes for the eight hectare parcel of land with the legal description

5:53:40of part law 13 concession five Puslinch PT one.

5:53:48This specific action is within the remit of this council.

5:53:53Please exercise that remit. Thank you.

5:53:59And thank you very much. Is there any follow up questions?

5:54:04There is not. Thank you, Ron.

5:54:08And Madeline Tessalon is coming up.

5:54:10And then next in the wings is Cindy Della Croce.

5:54:16Croce. Croce. I'm sorry.

5:54:21Okay. Thank you.

5:54:23Thank you. So Madeline, thank you for coming up.

5:54:26It's over to you.

5:54:27Beautiful. Good evening.

5:54:29Thank you, Mayor Guthrie and counselors for allowing me to be here to speak to you today

5:54:33about the 20 acres of land south of Nisgaro.

5:54:36It's an honor to stand here and speak on behalf of this place that I feel a deep calling to defend

5:54:41for what it can be and what it was always intended to be kept as.

5:54:45Mayor Kim, I don't expect you to remember me, but we met at Piatto and I served you and your wife dessert,

5:54:49which led us to chatting about music to which you then came to our house and bought two records from the Excuse Me Boys.

5:54:58So this to me has been incredible because Guelph is the first city I ever voted in and the first city I chose

5:55:05to call home when coming here for school and the city I chose to stay in.

5:55:10And I just, it's the only place in Ontario I can imagine raising a family.

5:55:15So I have no idea what Guelph will look like without you in it because it's all I've known since 2018.

5:55:21But I know that you are not running again and I know that you can leave behind a legacy of integrity and green.

5:55:26Guelph is a city with a great potential for developing a future that considers and respects both human and natural environments.

5:55:32What's the fuss over 20 acres when it could all be said and done and easy?

5:55:35Why bother having to think about what it could be and needing everyone to agree on it and then actually doing it?

5:55:41Well, my reasons are simple.

5:55:44I want to emphasize that this 20 acres of land is the reason I booked a red-eye flight and came in from Calgary this morning on my trip to the Rockies.

5:55:53So I stood outside this year in negative 25 to protect this land because no matter where I live in Guelph,

5:55:58I've lived all over the ward, college area, coal road.

5:56:04The Nisga Lands and Court Ride Waterfowl Park is where I bring people for solace, nature connection, reflection, adventure and the heritage sunset view.

5:56:15The things alive I have witnessed here and there have kept me both sane and hopeful when I moved there in 2020 during the pandemic and just so happened that I found this park.

5:56:25If anything, this 20 acres of land has the opportunity to create a positive impact on the collective health of the people of Guelph and those who visit by bringing them into such a beautiful natural space.

5:56:36Having a buffer zone for people to use a space would also help reduce a negative impact on the sensitive riverbank ecosystem.

5:56:43We love the speed.

5:56:45Under threat of legal action from the GRCA, I ask that you, mayor and counselors, fight the good fight with us civilians.

5:56:52To honor the unanimous vote made on February 10th, 2026, to redesignate those acres back to open space parkland.

5:57:01I wholeheartedly and with confidence will stand by this council and city in hopes of a green, healthy and whole future that I know Guelph fosters naturally.

5:57:09Let's explore what happens if this land were to get developed, considering there's no official environmental assessment for this 20 acre parcel.

5:57:16Being as close as it is to the riverbank, there's no doubt that increased disturbances will have irreversible damage on all surrounding habitat.

5:57:24There's no such thing as land that is not environmentally valuable.

5:57:29Over the years, land gets severed, sold, fragmented, changing paths of migrating species big and small, often making it impossible for them to adapt to and resulting in death.

5:57:40I can name two very large snapping turtles around there, an abundance of garter snakes who act as our natural pest control, birds, federally protected bats, and fish that would certainly feel a change in the area if there were to be increased traffic, habitat loss, heavy machinery, or light and noise pollution.

5:57:56I'm here to give voice to the life that I bear witness to in these woods and along the river, and I would like to keep it that way, and that is why I am here.

5:58:03So thank you for hearing me and giving me the opportunity to use my civic power in a city I care so much about.

5:58:10Great. Thank you, Madeline. Thank you for reminding me who you were.

5:58:15You're welcome.

5:58:16I didn't hear you. Which records did I buy?

5:58:18You bought the light and the self-titled, excuse me, vinyl.

5:58:22Ah, yes.

5:58:23Yes, in right off Garibaldian Empire there.

5:58:26Okay, yes. Thank you.

5:58:28You're welcome.

5:58:29For reminding me. I appreciate that. It's nice to see you again.

5:58:32Is there any questions at all?

5:58:35There isn't, and this is your first time here, then I guess, right?

5:58:38Yes.

5:58:39So thank you very much.

5:58:40You're very welcome.

5:58:41All right.

5:58:42And Cindy, you're on your way up. And is Laura here?

5:58:46Okay, Laura, I see you. Great. You're in the wings.

5:58:49Good evening, everyone.

5:58:54I didn't have a formal plan to speak tonight,

5:58:57but after being here for the day and listening to the delegations,

5:59:02I am an observer and I feel I must say a few things.

5:59:08When I arrived here today, there were kids playing in the fountain outside,

5:59:14outside, away from technology, iPads, phones, laughing, playing together.

5:59:21It was magical.

5:59:23I was here at two o'clock when the land acknowledgement was spoken

5:59:28and a couple of the things struck me as we were here to delegate.

5:59:33The responsibility to protect and care for this land now and for generations to come

5:59:41are some words I observed.

5:59:44I read in social media today that some high school students,

5:59:49I believe from St. James, were here in this chamber on a class visit

5:59:54to learn all about democracy and municipal politics,

6:00:00how decisions are made in this city and the decisions are made for all the citizens

6:00:08and they're not all financial.

6:00:12I observe that Guelph elected Mike Schreiner.

6:00:19He's from the Green Party and he has been a tremendous voice,

6:00:26not only in Guelph but on the provincial forum all about environment

6:00:32and all things green and wonderful.

6:00:37One of the things he stands for is people before politics and I love that about him.

6:00:45I noticed that there are two elementary schools right here where we're talking about

6:00:52in this very neighborhood in walking distance to the land that we are talking about

6:00:58and yet we bust kids all the way across town to the Guelph Lake

6:01:05to learn all about ecosystems and little critters and all the things.

6:01:10We have class picnics that we bust kids to at Riverside Park,

6:01:18all the little kindergarten graduations, can you tell I'm a teacher,

6:01:22all the little kindergarten graduations.

6:01:25When we have this treasure right in our neighborhood,

6:01:30this land is a treasure. It's absolutely beautiful.

6:01:35It's got trails and river and birds and turtles and trees

6:01:40and I could go on and on and on.

6:01:43And it was a beautiful generous gift to the Guelph citizens to experience and enjoy nature.

6:01:52There's plenty of growth in this city in appropriate places, appropriate places.

6:02:03This land has been held hostage for far too long.

6:02:09I think that gigantic no trespassing sign has been there about, I don't know, 20 years.

6:02:17It's been there forever.

6:02:19Unless I have my reading glasses on, I sometimes can't see it.

6:02:24Please, please, please preserve and respect this land

6:02:30as you take all of this and then make your vote tonight. Thank you.

6:02:35Great. Thank you very much.

6:02:37And no questions, anybody just want to make sure.

6:02:40Okay. You're good to keep walking. Thank you.

6:02:43Laura is on her way up and then is Nora Chandler here?

6:02:48Oh, there's Nora.

6:02:51Great. So Nora, you're going to be in the wings and Laura, you go right ahead.

6:02:56Thank you.

6:02:57I'm sorry for the opportunity to speak. I've been before council many times.

6:03:02And I just wanted to say that I did all the archival research at the University of Waterloo on these lands.

6:03:09And I found it very interesting that when the lands, when they were threatened with development pressure,

6:03:16that both the GRCA and the city partnered to buy the lands and the city put in 40%,

6:03:21but they didn't want to manage the land.

6:03:23They gave over the management to the Grand River and they became the landowners.

6:03:28But unfortunately, the land has been neglected for many, many years.

6:03:32The park closed in 20 years ago, but the neglect started long before that.

6:03:38And as the landlord, the GRCA had the ability under the lease to go in and make sure that all the structures were maintained in good condition,

6:03:45including a viewing tower, an outdoor amphitheater, boardwalks,

6:03:50all of which fell into rack and ruin, including all the buildings which could have been used for a nature center.

6:03:56So I think, you know, I wonder what happened with the city's part of all of this,

6:04:00why the city never stepped forward and talked to the GRCA about what was going on here,

6:04:06and why were the 28 hectares could have been, if we had put in, started planting forests and putting in other things,

6:04:13we could have had a wonderful forested area in a city whose tree canopy is shrinking every year.

6:04:19And tree canopy is mature trees.

6:04:22The trees that you plant is part of a development proposal when you cut down a lot of mature trees.

6:04:27There are just these 12-foot sticks that will not provide canopy probably for 15 or 20 years, and that's if they survive.

6:04:35So I think that there's been some neglect both on the part of the GRCA and also of the city to take action on these lands

6:04:42and do something for the benefit of the whole city.

6:04:46And so there's some other issues that go on here.

6:04:52Like for instance, we're paying for lands that have been neglected, and the GRCA says,

6:04:56well, we're going to give you $365,000 money to help rehabilitate the land and build trails.

6:05:03This is a pittance, a pittance of what will be required to restore the damage that has occurred from the neglect over the last 20 years

6:05:11and indeed before that even.

6:05:14And then there's the issue of water, which has not been brought up by anyone.

6:05:18The June 2025 Grand River Water Area Assessment Report, Chapter 2,

6:05:25Water Budget and Risk Assessment indicates that the city of Guelph may not be able to meet the needs of the by 2031,

6:05:36there will be water demands that will be needed.

6:05:39Even if all the wells are pumped to a maximum, that means that the, they indicate that the,

6:05:45I'm having a senior moment here, one of the wells will have to be, the Queen's Day well will have to be shut down.

6:05:52And if there is a drought and we have to stop pumping water from the Aramasa River to recharge the Arco Springgrounds,

6:06:00what happens then? What will happen to our water supply?

6:06:03It's already happening in Kitchener and Waterloo where they've got so much growth that they are now reducing the water needs of the people in Wilmont Township, for example.

6:06:13So anyway, the report also indicates that pumping at maximum may decrease the groundwater discharge to our cold water streams and wetlands,

6:06:23of which we've been so proud.

6:06:25The brook trout in the Hannah Creek was the indicator species and we, in 1994, we passed the Hannah Creek conservation,

6:06:34or the Hannah Creek watershed plan in order to protect those fish because we're probably one of the only cities left in southern Ontario that has brook trout inside their city limits.

6:06:44So if, if they do have to pump to a maximum, they indicate that, that the Torrance Creek will drop by 40, the discharge to the creek, the Torrance Creek will drop by 40%.

6:06:56The Hannah Creek cells will be 31% reduced. The Hannah Creek at the Water Shell, Shell Park will drop by 19%.

6:07:04And the Hannah Creek at Highway 6 will drop at 11%. There goes the cold water fisheries.

6:07:11The 20 acres that are before you tonight are identified on the mapping as a high risk of groundwater reduction if they're developed.

6:07:21There's no runoff from this land. All of the rainfall events are discharged into the ground. There's no water should study in this area,

6:07:29but the river never freezes in the parts of the Speed River below this land.

6:07:34And we know that the carrying capacity of the river is, is, is getting worse with the discharges from a bigger city.

6:07:42We have, we're a very large city on a, on a small river. So what happens then?

6:07:48We, you know, that's one of the reasons why this land should be protected because it is providing groundwater recharge to the river.

6:07:56And how do we, how do we compensate for the lack of capacity in the river to, to dilute the sewage flow?

6:08:03We owe it to other downstream communities. And also the tree canopy. If we planted these up, we would have,

6:08:14we might be able to meet our goal sooner than we just reduced the length of time that we need to, to increase our tree canopy to 40%

6:08:22if we can ever make it to that mount. And so why not reforest these lands?

6:08:27Why didn't the city ever go to the GRC and say, look, our tree canopy is shrinking. Please help us and reforest the fields on both the north and the south side of Niska.

6:08:38This was never done. In 2016, for example, we knew that we were going to be short of parkland act, parkland.

6:08:45So why did the official plan come forward to redesignate these lands for development when there was 20 acres already there that was, that was open space parkland?

6:08:57So these are some reasons why this land is still important beyond its ecological value. There are other reasons to protect it.

6:09:04And I think that the GRC and their management plan, I went to the GRC and I delegated on the management plan and I brought points forward before the management plan was finalized.

6:09:15None of them were ever put into the management plan. So I think that, you know, I think there's been some, a lot of neglect and some misinformation.

6:09:24And you owe it to the public now to protect this land. There's reasons to protect it that were never brought forward by the GRC or the city when they decided to change the OPA to make it into developable land.

6:09:39And I think it's time now to re, to look at this again and say, you know, we made a mistake and we need the land for these reasons.

6:09:47And they're very valid reasons. Water, water, trees, all the other reasons. Parkland. We already know we're going to have these problems.

6:09:55And yet in two weeks you're going to come forward with your new parkland acquisition public, public open house and ask the public how they want to get more parkland.

6:10:04Well, what are you going to tell them? Well, at our meeting on the ninth, we decided that, yeah, we're not going to go back and protect the 20 acres that we could have protected.

6:10:13And it's going to cost us as taxpayers to buy land because we know the province has reduced the amount of parkland that we can request in new development.

6:10:22So, you know, I think that, I think there's some very serious problems with, with what's gone on in the past.

6:10:30And I think you have the chance tonight to rectify those problems by voting to go back to the original zoning of the land for its original intent to protect it for ours and future generations.

6:10:40And this is a legacy that you can leave behind for all the children because it's the children who are going to suffer if there's not enough open space.

6:10:49There's been 161 birds, species of birds located in this area on iBird. Just go and look. And the reason they're there is because it's such a wonderful place.

6:10:59The GRCA lands there, they're very ecologically diverse. There's marshes, there's fens, there's all kinds of different, different EASLs as they call them.

6:11:10And I think those things might disappear if you start paving over the areas that provide recharge for them.

6:11:16So, you know, I think that, that, you know, I'm just really sad that this has come to this point because I did all the arch, I did all the archival research at the, at the University of Waterloo.

6:11:28And I've been to council many times. And the other issue was is when they had an, you had an opportunity to move these, all the river, all the lands owned by the Conservation Authority into the urban river designation of the Greenbelt City staff recommended against it.

6:11:45And we could, they could have already been protected. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.

6:11:50Thank you very much, Laura. And let me see if there's a question for you. There is not. Thank you very much.

6:11:58Nora Schandler, you're coming up next. And then Michelle Bowman, you're going to be in the wings. Okay.

6:12:30Good evening. I didn't come with anything prepared. I came to listen.

6:12:36But I have two, two particular comments I want to add. Excuse me. My throat is just crooked yet at 86. It just happens.

6:12:45I came to Guelph with my husband, Richard in 1966. The first person who welcomed me to Guelph was Eileen Hamel because we bought their house.

6:12:58I had a baby on my hip and she said, you're going to love Guelph.

6:13:03My family has just contributed to wonderful Courtright Waterfile Park for Guelph and this little fellow will be able to go out there and learn all about the connections to nature and maybe his children, grandchildren will too.

6:13:19I had no idea what she was talking about. I was in my early 20s at the time.

6:13:25But through the years, I have been impressed with Eileen's commitment to nature.

6:13:31The other thing that you've got to consider is the fact that we are not leaving enough space for species, other species.

6:13:43And we have a lot of these zoonotic diseases like COVID, like HIV.

6:13:49We've had many pandemics actually in the last 50 years.

6:13:54We've got to make room for other species.

6:13:58And you may think it has nothing to do with the species that we have around here, but it does because they're all interrelated and their numbers are all coming down.

6:14:08And that should disturb all of us with regard to healthy communities going forward.

6:14:13So the final thing I will say is this GRCA problem is a problem with the provincial government.

6:14:26They want to sell land because they need money, but they need money because of the cutbacks that they're getting from the province.

6:14:34They shouldn't be, it's like the man who gets bitten by the dog goes and kicks the cat.

6:14:40I don't quite understand why the GRCA does not see the big picture.

6:14:46It's not what the GRCA used to be about.

6:14:49Anyway, I hope you will do the right thing.

6:14:52I think it's imperative on all of us to protect whatever nature we have in this city.

6:14:59Thank you for your time.

6:15:01Thank you very much for your time as well.

6:15:05Is there any questions?

6:15:06This is a follow up for Nora because she's already left.

6:15:10So no, okay, good.

6:15:11Michelle Bowman, you're on your way down.

6:15:14And then I have, is it Renata Meyers?

6:15:18Renata Meyers?

6:15:20I'm sorry, I don't have my glasses on.

6:15:24Is Renata here?

6:15:25Okay.

6:15:26Sorry.

6:15:27Thank you.

6:15:28Did I say your name right?

6:15:29Perfect.

6:15:30Thank you for coming, Michelle.

6:15:32It's over to you.

6:15:33Thank you.

6:15:34Thanks.

6:15:35It's great to be able to come speak to you today.

6:15:39I'll just read an open letter that I wrote to the city of Guelph City Council and on

6:15:46Teria voters just this morning.

6:15:48Sorry, it wasn't earlier.

6:15:50And it's about three options for the 20 acre parcel of the Nisga land holdings.

6:15:56I'd like to start by thanking Hugh Whiteley, Laura Muir, Susan Watson, environmental

6:16:02defense and all have delegated as well as the city council for giving us a really

6:16:07fulsome understanding of the history of the current GRCA Nisga lands.

6:16:13Here I highlight pros and cons as I mentioned for three options of the southeast parcel

6:16:20of the land.

6:16:22I won't read it, but in the letter I copied two quotes just for some background information

6:16:29for people that were reading it for the first time.

6:16:33First, the staff report that describes the January 23 announcement of the transfer of

6:16:39the lands.

6:16:40And secondly, a piece written by Mike Marcolongo entitled a victory for protecting conservation

6:16:45authority lands in perpetuity.

6:16:49So as you know, option one, city council follows staff recommendations and refuses to read

6:16:57the recommendation.

6:17:00The GRCA's recent pushback obviously throws a wrench in things and will likely result

6:17:10in legal challenge.

6:17:12I didn't know how big that legal challenge or consequential that legal challenge would

6:17:20be when I wrote this letter.

6:17:23So wherever I say designate, obviously there's also the option to buy as well.

6:17:32This would obviously strain the relationship with the GRCA and the transfer of the remainder

6:17:37of the Nisga lands.

6:17:40The existing agreement means that 96% of the 116 acres of the Hamel property would be

6:17:47transferred and also that I haven't heard tonight an additional 44 acres.

6:17:53So some people might think that the 44 acres is already protected.

6:17:57It's not important in the sense that it has low monetary value, but it has high value

6:18:04for conservation and recreation.

6:18:08And we know from lots of studies that when people are able to enjoy conservation lands,

6:18:14they're also motivated to protect them.

6:18:19Option two is to redesignate the land, which I think everyone here is asking for.

6:18:26There's much conflicting documentation on the historical intended use of the 20 acres,

6:18:34but it's clear that the Hamel family intended it to be used for open space and park.

6:18:41I'm questioning the use of Boomer generation now, but there's lots of people from that

6:18:48generation that really care about the future and are now considering whether or not to

6:18:55donate or transfer land for conservation.

6:18:59And if we don't uphold the Hamel's wishes, then they're really going to question and

6:19:06that's going to affect their decision to leave conservation land.

6:19:12I've worked with many conservation authorities in southern Ontario and I'm surprised yet

6:19:19not surprised that the GRCA is only one of 36 considering selling land holdings for

6:19:28private development.

6:19:30Public land is gold.

6:19:32It's inherently valuable and it's really shocking that this is coming from a conservation authority.

6:19:39So I talked about three options and you're probably wondering what I'm talking about,

6:19:45but I think there's a fairly straightforward third option that you may want to consider

6:19:51and that is redesignating and refusing to redesignate the medium density portion of the 20 acres,

6:20:00but going ahead and redesignating or buying the low density residential portion of the open

6:20:08space park lands.

6:20:12This option would demonstrate goodwill to the Hamel family, the public and the GCRA.

6:20:20A retiring lawyer said something to me years ago that has always stuck and that is to quote him,

6:20:29I know it's a good settlement when neither party is satisfied with the outcome.

6:20:35So although I've said that, I think and I believe that there's merit in all three options.

6:20:42I wholeheartedly ask council to choose option two and either redesignate or buy the 20 acres of open space and park.

6:20:54Guelph must show integrity and leadership by honoring the intention of the original land transfer,

6:21:01as well as standing up to the province and saying our public lands are not for sale.

6:21:08When decisions are irreversible, I also think it's important for council to err on the side of caution.

6:21:15Whatever the issue of the day, I hear Guelphites concerned about the future of our city.

6:21:21An affordable and desirable place to live doesn't disappear overnight.

6:21:27It disappears with many small compromises such as this one.

6:21:32Thank you.

6:21:34Great. Thank you very much.

6:21:36Michelle, we appreciate you coming down here as well.

6:21:39And is there any follow up for Michelle?

6:21:42There isn't. Again, thanks for sticking around.

6:21:46And we need to come on down and then Mike Marco Longo.

6:21:50I know you're here. You've been hanging out for a while too.

6:21:53So you're in the wings and you can feel free to start whenever you wish. Thank you.

6:21:58Thank you so much.

6:22:00Thank you to the council, the mayor, the city staff and my neighbors.

6:22:05This is the second time I'm delegating.

6:22:07I delegated February 10th and I really appreciate for giving us this opportunity.

6:22:12My name is Renata Meyers.

6:22:14I'm a first generation Canadian and have lived in Guelph since 1996.

6:22:18And I'm also a healthcare professional.

6:22:20And I'm bringing to you three communities that you can't see behind me.

6:22:25So yes, there are actual community members here,

6:22:28but I'm actually bringing to you folks who are, I'm engaging with and representing one being the indigenous community here in Guelph and Wellington region.

6:22:38Because I collaborate on indigenous health equity projects.

6:22:42I'm bringing to you their voice, reminding our decision makers about the truth and reconciliation efforts.

6:22:50And Guelph's promise to protecting the natural ecosystem.

6:22:54And I really do believe that Guelph demonstrate that value through our decision makers and our leaders.

6:23:01And we also know the definition of cognitive dissonance.

6:23:05Okay, cognitive dissonance means that we say one thing, but then we do something else.

6:23:11And so I just want to keep that in mind.

6:23:14The second group of individuals that are supporting me and building capacity in me are the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, the Ontario chapter.

6:23:23And as I mentioned in February, there are for the past five years, 20,000, over 20,000 licensed professionals like doctors and nurses and allied health professionals

6:23:37across Canada, prescribing parks as a way to bring 1.5 million Canadians direct health benefits that is mental, that is physical, that is spiritual, countering loneliness and anxiety from our screens.

6:23:54And so according to the evidence, right, nature heals.

6:23:58It prevents physical and mental harms and it allows people to age well for the long term and protect the planet.

6:24:07Cognitive dissonance, saying the thing and doing the thing.

6:24:11Natural health infrastructure is a public health infrastructure.

6:24:16And Guelph, this tiny little land may not seem like a lot, but it is living medicine.

6:24:23Okay.

6:24:24In the most effective ways, it counters urban heat islands, filters air pollution and offer measurable mental health benefits.

6:24:33And I've mentioned that, so I just wanted to reiterate.

6:24:36According to the Guelph Public Library, the second most library of things outside of books and DVDs is free day use Ontario Park vehicle permits.

6:24:49People want parks and they can't get them.

6:24:52Right?

6:24:53Well, they can't get them in the Wellington region and Guelph region because they're packed because Toronto is coming here.

6:24:58And so the first was mobile hotspots that was branded.

6:25:02And so Guelphites have pride in the nature and the green space and I grew up here and I learned that from this community.

6:25:10And so urban sprawl is not the answer.

6:25:13Yes.

6:25:14Yes.

6:25:15We need housing.

6:25:16But we also need healthy, livable communities where nature is treated as an essential public health infrastructure, not an afterthought.

6:25:26And so the third group of people that are supporting me that I bring here to you are my family who migrated here, my late father who does have a bench along the Speed River,

6:25:37and also my nephews who are 13 and 14 who I mentioned that they worry about the climate.

6:25:42They asked me about climate crisis and what am I doing coming here on a very late night talking to you is the only small thing I can do at this moment for this decision.

6:25:54So I want them to see this.

6:25:56They're worried about the loneliness epidemic.

6:25:59They don't know how to put down their phone.

6:26:01Give them a chance to put down their phone.

6:26:03This might be it.

6:26:05Once we build into farmland, wetland conservation will go with it.

6:26:11And so decision makers choose the long term health over the short term pressures, respecting historical plans for the lands as we're intended, even when it's difficult.

6:26:30And so I pause there and I thank you so much for your hard work and for demonstrating examples of making tough decisions because I am learning through all of you.

6:26:42So thank you.

6:26:44Thank you, Renata.

6:26:45We appreciate you waiting around too.

6:26:47So thank you for your delegation.

6:26:48Is there any questions for her?

6:26:51There isn't.

6:26:52Thank you again.

6:26:54And Mike, come on up.

6:26:56And then after Mike, we have two more and they're on phone.

6:27:00Okay, so Mike, go right ahead.

6:27:03Thank you for waiting.

6:27:04Thank you.

6:27:05I'm going to endeavor to be brief here.

6:27:07Mayor and council, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this evening.

6:27:10I'm representing myself as a resident of Guelph and not here representing an organization.

6:27:16I'm also not here to re litigate the facts on whether the lands and questions were purchased by the city, the province and your CA for the Hesbore Dam or for the handling Creek conservation area, or to push back on the number of unfortunate erroneous assertions made in the staff report.

6:27:31As you know, I'm someone who's been advocating to redesign this kind of lands from residential to open space park land.

6:27:37And I will be unequivocal about one point tonight.

6:27:40That is your decision tonight is to move forward with the redestination is and it is not about a planning rationale.

6:27:47It was and has always been about the public interest these lands.

6:27:51It's really a political decision to zero in on the GRC CA's council letter and in particular.

6:27:59In regards to Trenton Johnson's last paragraph as the CEO did earlier, proceeding with the redesignating this parcel will be contrary to the staff report will be contrary to the land use planning rationale that moved to redesignate this parcel will be contrary to the minutes of settlement from the OMB hearing.

6:28:17And yes, will be contrary to the GRC's request and could result in legal action.

6:28:24There is no disputing these facts.

6:28:28Because redesignating this parcel is in fact a political decision, not a planning one.

6:28:34This evening, you're making decision in the public's interest.

6:28:37It really is a political decision, a decision that is consistent with the history of the core right waterfall park and the legacy of the Hamill family.

6:28:45A decision that you do not support the Ontario government's bill 23 that mandated that conservation authorities inventory and dispose of conservation land for housing.

6:28:56And that's back in 2022.

6:29:00It's a decision that recognizes that the GRCA as you heard earlier is the lone conservation authority of 36 conservation authorities across Ontario that is using bill 23 and the regulation provided under that bill.

6:29:13It's also a decision that you do not want to join the GRC in speculating on this parcel of land and that the GRCA's councils remarks that were included in the package that this publicly owned conservation land could quote,

6:29:26generate an estimated 17 million in development charges and estimated 2 million annual property taxes for the city of Guelph is frankly inappropriate.

6:29:35And a decision that participating in privatizing conservation lands sets a precedent that is not in the public's interest.

6:29:43Again, redesignating this parcel is a political not a planning decision.

6:29:48And redesignating this parcel is certainly within your purview. This is why we elected you because you represent residents in the public's interest.

6:29:57Residents in Guelph and all across the province of Ontario are watching tonight the outcome of this meeting.

6:30:04In the last few days you've heard from hundreds of residents from across this community in the province of Ontario, the public has got your back and then some.

6:30:13So even if the GRCA went through legal means, the GRCA will certainly lose in the court of public opinion.

6:30:22And so what if you are then compelled by the courts to redesign that parcel back to residential zoning.

6:30:30I'm also going to I'm going to finish up here with a question for the GRCA. Where is the GRCA?

6:30:39Why aren't they participating in this public meeting? Maybe they're on the phone. Hopefully it the saga feels a little bit like the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz.

6:30:50Is the GRCA a powerful omnipotent ruler? Or do we simply need to pull back the curtain on February 10th you voted unanimously as council to move forward with redesignation.

6:31:03The conservation line from residential back to open space park land. Yes, there are headwinds, but now is the time to stay the course for this council to leave a legacy.

6:31:12Let's pull back the curtain. Be like total council. Be like total. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

6:31:21Great. Thank you, Mike. We appreciate you coming down as well. And is there any questions as a follow up for for Mike tonight?

6:31:28There is not. Thank you, Mike. Thank you so much. And then on the phone, we're going to jump to Phil Potham, I believe.

6:31:36And Phil, I don't know if you can hear me. It's a mayor Guthrie here and just make sure that you unmute by hitting star six.

6:31:47Hello.

6:31:48Hi, Phil. It's a cam. Yeah, we I can hear you. We can hear you. So you're coming through very clear. Go right ahead. Okay.

6:31:56Good evening, council. As you know from our website more homes faster.da I lead our environmental defense is research and advocacy on the causes and solutions of Ontario housing shortage.

6:32:08But I'm here tonight as the lawyer and in particular, as a land use and planning and environmental.

6:32:16I've been asked to correct all of the fence supporters and wealth.

6:32:19Been demanding that you vote in favor of the draft amendments to remove residential zoning and official plan designation.

6:32:27And I've been asked here to correct for dangerous legal and technical misunderstanding that my friend and fellow planning lawyer, Mr Johnson has done a very impressive job of terrifying you with.

6:32:38I'm going to speed run through them in point form before I dig in because they're all very important. And I don't want anyone of them to be missed because of time.

6:32:56Firstly, the proposed amendment would be very much defensible at an Ontario land tribunal hearing, because the residential zoning is now in light of the change housing market and change legal context, substantially bad planning.

6:33:14The settlement with Mr Whiteley did not test and does not constrain wealth ability to voluntarily result, which is what's being proposed here, because wealth was the proponent.

6:33:27And so that whole line of argument, suggesting that anything about this decision is settled by that litigation just doesn't hold a thirdly stat and this is very important.

6:33:40The characterization of financial risk is profoundly raw, because the proposed rezoning would not sterilize the land, which is the prerequisite for compensation.

6:33:52It would leave a perfectly reasonable existing legal non conforming you agriculture that avoids the planning harms that residential cause is consistent with the reasons for protection.

6:34:04And so that's the basis for a risk of financial damage. Secondly, will be unreasonable for the city of wealth to maintain the current zoning on the trust that will be given other GRCA land in exchange, because the GRCA is now legally prohibited by this maze binding ministerial

6:34:26end of such a bargain.

6:34:30The GRCA is going to cease to exist before that direction ceases to bind it cannot do what it is widely and specifically promising to do.

6:34:41Thirdly, the coming about very little reason and even less reason now than even a few months ago, the hope that wealth taxpayers will benefit meaningfully for any proceeds of fail, even in terms of their contribution to the GRCA.

6:34:59Fourth, that's because of the plan to malignation and fourthly, the GRCA is current support for sale and residential development of this land is premised on the idea that wealth want this land develop a housing.

6:35:14That's why council is acting on that direction because they believe that you want this, and therefore the current direction of wealth is to go ahead and defend it. There's no reason to expect that these elected officials who are actually the GRCA not staff, not outside

6:35:32council, because these elected officials in election year will vote to force a trial development upon an unwilling member municipality by authorizing an OLT appeal, or that they as individual politicians will allow themselves to be framed as supporters of fire sales

6:35:51and conservation, which is what exactly is going to happen if they voted to appeal against your rezoning that can only speak to and defend the existing position of the GRCA that's understandable.

6:36:04And this and as a former private bar planning litigation council, I can see the same goes.

6:36:11I wouldn't tell you anything about how they will respond when you do rezone, and when they know that the premise of their position was false. So firstly, just going to the details the current residential official plan designation for this site is bad planning and changing it would be defensible.

6:36:31And if we say it was a mistake, we're saying it was the family of guidance, not some kind of pure active. Even if this were private farmland, without all this extraordinary history and character being located where it is, it's the right choice for housing to remove the residential

6:36:47zoning, because this is precisely the kind of development site that results in citywide and regional wide reductions in housing output. We know that much better now than we did at the time that this land was loaned with housing and that the justification for changing the zoning and removing the residential use it.

6:37:06This isn't some pocket of land that's surrounded by residential fabric. It's on the margins of the city.

6:37:13Removing residential zoning is the right choice for transit and pedestrian mode share because this land would have a lock score of just 30 out of 100. It's not a reasonable place.

6:37:22Given the official plans other priorities and the planning for visual planning statements priorities around transit.

6:37:30Even if you didn't think it was an awful idea to go in this land at residential before the circumstances of change so that is unreasonable to maintain that zoning now.

6:37:41The risk is higher reasons that you've heard.

6:37:45And it's also there are much better alternatives that are now proven to deliver family size homes and infill that didn't exist or weren't proven at the time that this zoning is passed and so that the good justification.

6:37:57Second the council is not bound by any settlement between Mr. Whiteley and wealth because wealth is the proposal. They've wealth in the GRTA were not opposed and interested that hearing.

6:38:12The settlement is in any way binding on wealth. It was a settlement so it wasn't tested. And the fact that wealth wasn't forced to abandon its old policy more than a decade ago doesn't mean that it is prohibited doing so voluntarily because it knows better now.

6:38:28And again the financial risk. There is no sterilization. That is the legal requirement in order to expose yourself to damages that doesn't exist here because there's legal nonconforming use agricultural.

6:38:42The quick pro quo I think I've explained it's very clear direction that wealth that the GRC cannot carry through on any implicit commitment it may have made now.

6:38:52That has changed since that original and now you do a explicit and finding direction from the minister.

6:39:03And that won't go away until the GRCA sees the two exist in which case there's even less reasons to trust that this successor agency would carry through on any problem.

6:39:14And remember that even if they're worse at the quick pro quo, it wouldn't be giving the GRCA anything that it shouldn't just demand through political pressure and this is not some independent third party the political organization in which you are represented, and which you on which you can make the man.

6:39:32And certainly, wealth would not benefit from the proceeds. There is even less reason now to think that even wealth contribution to the conservation authority would be meaningfully affected by the proceeds of the sale, because wealth already accounts for just 16.5% of the GRCA is

6:39:51the president and that would go down with this much larger amalgamated agency and conservation.

6:39:59And for this is very important. Nothing you've heard tonight.

6:40:03None of the information that legal staff use to give you in camera advice. None of the information offered by council in support of the GRCA current.

6:40:14None of that is a reason to assume that the elected municipal counselors who are the GRCA, they're the majority of the GRCA not staff, not their current council will vote to try and force the town.

6:40:27It's a port conservation authority land to sprawl housing over the.

6:40:35Well, once well has clearly said it oppose.

6:40:42Given that environmental defense has been made it clear to all GRCA members that we will be identifying opposition and refusal to sell up conservation authority land as a litmus test in the next election.

6:40:55This is a politically toxic thing to do.

6:40:58It doesn't make the premise of the GRCA current position has always been that wealth wants this plan to become housing that keeps coming up as the GRCA meeting.

6:41:11By removing this though by making clear that you don't want this plan to become housing, you're removing the whole premise for the GRCA deciding to dispose of this land.

6:41:23And therefore you'll get a new set of instructions for their council.

6:41:28The GRCA is paying the pain to say that it never wanted or requested the zoning.

6:41:35One of the key objectives to removing this residential zoning today is to alter that position of the GRCA.

6:41:44What we would be utterly non sense the very pervert. If the GRCA persist in trying to sell off this land on the premise that that's what Gwelf wants.

6:41:56That's what Gwelf wants to develop that residential and wealth persist in refusing to rezone this land because the GR.

6:42:07Alright, Phil it's Mayor Guthrie. I'm sorry to interrupt you but that is your full 10 minute delegation time.

6:42:15I want to thank you very much for calling in but please stay with me as I just asked to see if there's a follow up question from my colleagues.

6:42:22Is there anyone has a follow up question for Phil?

6:42:27Sorry, did someone say something?

6:42:30Yes, Councillor Kate and go right ahead. Thanks everybody.

6:42:35Thank you. Through you, Mr. Mayor. I was just wondering, Mr. Pothin, how many times have you been to the OLT and represented someone there?

6:42:52And Phil it's Mayor Guthrie again. Just make sure you get star six to unmute. Okay.

6:42:59Thank you. Sorry. Many times I was in practice private practice for quite a few years. I represented the crowd before the OLT for years before that and I've been representing environmental defense on occasion ever since I went in house.

6:43:15I couldn't tell you the exact number but I've been a practicing planning and environmental lawyer since a little after 2010.

6:43:26Thank you.

6:43:27Thank you and Phil that was all the questions that we had as a follow up. So thank you again for calling in.

6:43:35Thank you.

6:43:37And our last is William Thomas who also is going to be calling him by phone.

6:43:49And again William if you can hear me it's Mayor Guthrie and you just need to hit star six.

6:43:55And William again it's Mayor Guthrie and if you can hear me just try talking but make sure you hit star six.

6:44:09Okay try again there William. Again keep trying.

6:44:29I am speaking from a landline and I am star six.

6:44:36Yep we can hear you William. Your landline is working perfectly.

6:44:42Okay.

6:44:43So you go right ahead and give us your thoughts.

6:44:46So thank you very much for this opportunity to address the Mayor and Council.

6:44:56I have been online since two o'clock and whatever you're going through I'm with you to take your advice.

6:45:10So to all of the preceding comments from the citizens who are with you I urge you as Councilors to reject the staff

6:45:26recommendation and direct proceed with redefining this land as conservation land.

6:45:43This is my first point. My second point is that I have been a resident of Guelph from the mid 60s to the mid 70s when I was head of geography at the GCVI.

6:46:03And also a resident during the 80s when I was rector St. David in St. Patrick's Church.

6:46:15And I am now in my 80s as a resident of Guelph again since 2019.

6:46:28I have been in this age in seeing what wealth has become.

6:46:52Conservation City offended to have a political decision to make.

6:47:11I urge you to reject this nation that you continue with this residential zoning.

6:47:29My call was initiated by the fact the acrimony between the staffs of Council and the GRCA.

6:47:54I would ask you to reflect on how many of those staffs in the beginning in 1948 when the heritage of this land was determined by a sale.

6:48:17There is a single person amongst the staff of organizations that remembers the history and the argument.

6:48:33You need to find out who is behind the written reports and what their values. That is it.

6:48:51Meeting any longer and I await your decision.

6:48:59Thank you so much William. We appreciate you calling in. I am glad you were able to figure that out so we could hear you.

6:49:05I am looking around to see if there are any questions. There is not.

6:49:11Thank you so much William.

6:49:20We got through everybody there. I think that was a record. I might frame this list for a lot of people that put their hand up afterwards to speak.

6:49:33Thank you very much. We will take a five minute break. That is good for everybody.

6:49:39We will walk around and talk amongst yourselves. We will take a five minute break.

6:49:45It is 8.39. Let's pretend it is 8.40. Come back at 8.45.

6:49:518.45.

6:49:53This is your 30 second warning.

6:58:3330 seconds.

6:58:35Okay everyone. Thank you.

6:59:08Okay.

6:59:13We have any questions of staff at all?

6:59:21Sorry. Yeah. Go ahead.

6:59:23I think it is a point of order that we need to move to go beyond 9 o'clock.

6:59:28No. That is under committee of the whole. I believe. Not planning.

6:59:35Yeah. Am I right on that one?

6:59:40Through you Mr. Brown. That is specific to committee of the whole. We are considered a council meeting now.

6:59:46The timeline is 11.

6:59:50Did you want to move a motion to go past 11?

6:59:53What do you say?

6:59:56I think we are on the right.

6:59:59Are there any questions of staff?

7:00:02If there is not.

7:00:05Councillor Gibson.

7:00:08Yes. Thank you. We all sat through the delegations. I know staff did as well.

7:00:13I felt uncomfortable at times. Some of the things were being said.

7:00:17I felt it was important for everyone to be able to express themselves.

7:00:21We are not going to be able to respond to any specific comments they heard.

7:00:25Are there any comments that are changing their opinions or changing the recommendations to council?

7:00:36Through the mayor to the Councillor, thank you for asking.

7:00:39We did listen and we certainly understand what was framed as the political decision that is being made.

7:00:45We absolutely stand by our planning recommendation and the planning recommendation before you we still fully support.

7:00:55I don't want to burden council with time.

7:00:59We have all been briefed on legal risk.

7:01:03That was part of our closed meeting earlier tonight.

7:01:06Has any information come to light that would change your recommendation on legal risk to council?

7:01:13I am sorry. I just could have called legal to come down.

7:01:26I think that is best instead of Christa.

7:01:41I would respectfully decline to elaborate on legal risks which are the subject of the matter of solicitor client privilege other than to say that council has sought and obtained such advice as we think is appropriate.

7:02:01Thank you.

7:02:03I will receive that answer as nothing has changed in staff size.

7:02:07I appreciate that.

7:02:09No more questions of staff.

7:02:11Thank you.

7:02:13Thank you.

7:02:15Just one second. I do have you now. Councillor Goller on my list.

7:02:19I just want to go over here to I think I had I think I was going down the row here I believe.

7:02:25I think I was going down or busitil.

7:02:29I have one question.

7:02:33Yes, we heard a lot about the financial and legal risk around this.

7:02:39The other one I wanted to just confirm that what I am reading in this letter from the GRCA2 is that there is a risk to the deal with the 126 acres that we have negotiated.

7:02:52So we negotiated for the original waterfowl park.

7:02:57We have negotiated for the field on the north side and we have negotiated for the sense of property by the river between the river and the road on the south side.

7:03:08I am sorry there is a field on the north side.

7:03:11In their letter they are saying there for an in specific reliance on the parcel continuing to be zoned residential the GRCA enter into discussions they entered into discussions with the city of Guelph.

7:03:24So highlighting that like I am just wondering like is it clear in their correspondence that that deal is at risk as well?

7:03:34So through the medical council general comment on that because that is a land transaction that then will be coming through parks and so it is difficult for me to comment on behalf of another organization.

7:03:43But the fact that they have stated that in their letter and that that transaction has not been finalized I am concerned.

7:03:51I think the other things are certainly on behalf of the parks department that entirety of that parcel those parcels that you have just mentioned and that existing transaction that has been agreed to is really important to us from a park land point of view

7:04:06and from honoring I think the history.

7:04:09I can't give you a promise that that couldn't be in jeopardy and certainly seeing that line in the letter in their open correspondence I think has given us pause that there is risk.

7:04:20So that hasn't been finalized and so we would hate to see that be put in jeopardy.

7:04:29Councillor Busuttil please.

7:04:31That was my question as well. Thank you.

7:04:35And Councillor Hauser.

7:04:37I'm hearing ditto from my own councillors now.

7:04:40All right. I'm just going to go to Councillor Goller and then over to you Councillor Caron.

7:04:45Thank you through your work to staff.

7:04:48First of all thank you for taking this from council when we give direction for a return to initiate the process.

7:04:55I appreciate you doing all the work in the research.

7:04:58I understand that it is your professional opinion that the planning rationale is not present to go through with that process and we have heard from many of the delegates mentioned that this is a political decision to be made.

7:05:09So if we were to make a political decision in spite of your recommendation, council doesn't actually do things.

7:05:17We ask staff to do things but if staff is telling us that professionally you're not able to do it, what would that look like if we were to say respectfully we disagree go ahead and go ahead with the land change designation.

7:05:31What would that look like seeing as our staff is not able to do it?

7:05:36Through the mayor to the councillor so we have put our recommendations forward.

7:05:43Council does not have to support them.

7:05:46They can make whatever decisions they want so you could change it to that the official plan amendment, the redesignation from residential to open space and same with the zoning that it be approved.

7:06:00And then direct staff to bring back the implementing bylaw at the next planning meeting.

7:06:05Would you be able to do that or would we have to hire someone else to do it?

7:06:10How would that actually work?

7:06:15Through the mayor to the councillor so if you're making the recommendation then that's on council and if you're asking us just to bring forward the implementing bylaw we would bring forward the implementing bylaw.

7:06:24There would be no associated report with it.

7:06:27Okay.

7:06:28Okay.

7:06:29I appreciate it.

7:06:31Yeah, no that that that is helpful for me to understand.

7:06:35You know.

7:06:37Yeah, thank you. Thank you worship. Thank you.

7:06:40Coran and then alt please.

7:06:42Thank you. Mr. Mayor. I don't ever recall a planning application or planning meeting where the owner of the property wasn't here.

7:06:51So I just want to ensure that the GRCA knew about this meeting other than the letter being received.

7:06:56They would have known about this meeting today.

7:06:59Through the mayor to the council I can confirm. Yes, they did not vote the meeting. Okay.

7:07:05And council role. Did you still want to do a follow up?

7:07:10Yes. Thank you very much because my question was actually the same as councillor Caron's. I have to express disappointment that they're not here. This is the first is highly unusual.

7:07:19We've never had a situation where we've dealt with something of this magnitude without the land owner present.

7:07:25So we are in in some senses making a decision in absencia of any other perspective.

7:07:32And I think the public has the right to to appreciate the significance of that.

7:07:38Okay. Thank you.

7:07:41Excuse me.

7:07:44I have no further questions. Oh, sorry, councillor give me the G. J. Have a question.

7:07:48Yeah, I thank you. Mr. Mayor. If you don't mind, I just want to follow up on councillor Goller's question to staff.

7:07:54If we, we vote to, I guess, approve the zoning bylaw amendment.

7:08:05And you're brought in your toll and you're instructed to bring back the bylaw that has has changed the zoning.

7:08:11If there is a challenge at the OLT.

7:08:15Is it my understanding that staff could not represent.

7:08:18Council's position that we would have to find outside outside support to defend that decision because it is not the recommendation of our staff.

7:08:29Through the mayor to the councillor. Yes.

7:08:33Council would have to retain their own legal and planning staff. If this was appealed to the OLT.

7:08:39We would not know that until the notice of passing in the 20 days has passed.

7:08:44That's right. I just think that's an important.

7:08:47An important factor for everyone to understand that if, if staff bring forward a recommendation on a planning issue that council does not agree with.

7:08:56And we vote against the city staff's recommendation. If a challenge does take end up taking us to the OLT.

7:09:03We are not, we are not privy to our own staff resources on that. We have to go out and hire our own resources as a council to defend our position.

7:09:13Thanks for clarifying that.

7:09:16Thank you. And I'm just going to go to councillor Billings. But just before I go to her, you could just keep it down just a little bit for us. Everybody that'd be awesome. Thank you.

7:09:27Council Billings.

7:09:29Through you, your worship to deputy CLC.

7:09:32The properties that we are trying to acquire.

7:09:39I can't state anything because I dealt with it enclosed. However, I can ask you with respect to the naturalized areas. Has there been any pushback from the GRCA staff moving forward with that acquisition?

7:09:57Is the file still moving along through the mayor to the counselor? No direct pushback. I would say, perhaps what feels like a bit of slow progress for us.

7:10:11Thanks, Colleen.

7:10:16Okay. I just have one question. I kind of wish I'd asked this, like, before the meeting. So my apologies, but here I am now. How many times has an official plan come before council, councils, between like 2000 and, sorry, when was this done? 12?

7:10:36When was OP 848 done? 2012?

7:10:41Before I was the mayor. Okay. So how many times has an OP come forward for change between that time and like today? It's got to be roughly, I don't know, seven times, eight times?

7:10:56To the mayor, I don't know off the top exactly, but there's certainly been area wide or city wide amendments. 106 downtown, 105 for the CPS, 80. There's been many area specific ones. And there's certainly the site specific OP's, but there's definitely been a handful of city wide or area wide official plan amendments.

7:11:30Like the normal sort of that four or five year cycle, you know, where it's always updating. That's happened several times. So maybe my seven or eight number is wrong, but four times maybe or something like that.

7:11:41Okay. And so have you ever received any correspondence, any passion that we are hearing here tonight or seeing out in the public for this piece of land ever for any other of the official plan times that it's ever come forward to council since 2012?

7:12:03I cannot recall through the mayor. So I've only been here since 2020, but I can't recall anything coming forward other than in February when we brought forward the phase one of the most recent set of official plan amendments.

7:12:21Yeah, I can't remember either. Okay. Okay.

7:12:29That's the only question that I had then on this. So I, oh, I'm sorry. Thanks. Councillor Chew, please.

7:12:42Thank you through you, Mr. Mayor. You kind of peeked my imagination a little bit when you talked to OP 48 and just that process years back.

7:12:52Can staff confirm whether through this process and the study that you've taken away, if you found any new planning environmental or legal information that wasn't available during the the original OPA process?

7:13:07Like, is there any new information that we found out now that would inform our decision?

7:13:17Yeah, through the marriage of the council. So when we did our research for this file, we also looked at even plans and studies that have been completed since such as the cultural heritage action plan and other plans and studies that had been completed since.

7:13:33And we certainly went back in the archives that looked at the files from OPA 39, even before 48 to see when we originally looked at started this process and OPA 42, which was the environmental specific official plan amendment.

7:13:46So we did a lot of background research for this.

7:13:50And just to follow up because I'm really trying to understand the planning rationale and what some of the delegates are are putting forward today and can can you just clarify whether you've identified flaws, deficiencies or errors and the process that led to the residential designation back then?

7:14:11Through the marriage to the counselor. So staff did recommend the residential the time we had responded it to some of the questions that were raised by certainly one of the delegates this evening in the response chart that is available publicly online.

7:14:25And it was tested at the OMB. So if this this matter was was litigated and the result is the residential lands that are in place today.

7:14:37And just as a conclusion to that, I appreciate that by the way, do you think in your professional planning opinion that there is a compelling planning rationale to designate these lands to open space in park?

7:14:51Through the marriage to the counselor. No, I do not.

7:14:59Okay. Yeah, just your professional opinion. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. No, that's good. I just need to clarify that. Thank you.

7:15:06Okay. Thank you, counselor.

7:15:08Okay. So we have three, I'm sorry. We have two recommendations to from the staff report that are on this agenda. Would some of you will need to move those two recommendations for me please?

7:15:22Okay. Thank you, counselor. Bousatil and I need a seconder. Sorry, counselor. Okay, counselor Gibson. The two that are on the agenda. Sorry. Yes.

7:15:36The first one is to receive and the second one that is now on the floor is to be refused. Okay. Now I was, yes, I'm going to ask, sorry counselor Bousatil. I heard you ask for separation. So thank you so much.

7:15:51So how about I just call the vote at least on number one is just to receive the report. Okay. Can I do that everybody? Yes. Okay. Is there anyone against just receiving the report?

7:16:04Okay. That's nobody. So that's unanimous. And on the second one, I just have a question to my colleagues. I had sent around a potential deferral motion on this. Is there anyone willing to table that?

7:16:22Okay. Gibson and Billings and I'll have the clerks pull that up on the screen then. And just to remind everyone there's no debate, no discussion or whatever just so we can see this moved and seconded if it's still applicable.

7:16:47And then I'll have to just go right to call the vote. Okay. So that the decision on the existing zoning for the property known as the southeast parcel of Nisga land legally described as part 13 concession five bushlands part one, six, one, or one, four, eight, three be deferred until discussions have concluded with the province of Ontario as council recognizes the

7:17:06significant community interest for these lands to be developed into parkland and to discuss the historical financial contributions made by the city to the province for these lands. Councillor Gibson, Billings, you're okay with that still? Okay. So with that, I will call the vote. Is there anyone against the deferral?

7:17:24Okay. So we have Richardson and Gawler and alt and downer and busitil and howzer and Kate in. So I believe that is seven. Yeah. Okay. So that that fails.

7:17:44So thank you. And moving right along. I'll just turn the microphone over to Councillor Downer, please.

7:17:55Can I have motion two and three put up that was circulated earlier?

7:18:04Yes. So we have clause two.

7:18:07Okay.

7:18:08Okay.

7:18:09Technically on the floor right now, which is to refuse.

7:18:12So that was okay. So why don't you so if we just maybe just could we pull your.

7:18:21Yeah, your motion up.

7:18:25For a moment.

7:18:34Mr. Mayor need to admit.

7:18:35Oh, sorry. Yeah, sorry to you. We'll pull up what I think is being requested now and put it up on screen. But I just want to clarify for everyone participating today that this is not currently what's on the floor.

7:18:45Clause two from the staff recommendation is currently moved in second in. We're just pulling this up for reference.

7:18:51Yes. So I'm just wondering if to the clerk, if you wouldn't mind just helping hold my hand here for a moment.

7:19:01If with yeah, thank you. If perhaps number two is easiest to have withdrawn right because number one has been settled. It's received second was technically on the floor.

7:19:15I can go back to the original mover and second or to remove number two. And then we can consider our counselor downers. I think that might be the cleanest. Mr. Mayor to you and through you.

7:19:24I would, I would agree that that is an option for council. Okay. All right. Thank you. Could you please remind me or can my council colleagues remind me? I'm sorry of who originally moved the original staff recommendations.

7:19:40Mayor to you. I have cancer busital and cancer Gibson.

7:19:43Okay. Great. So I have to go through my rigmarole here. So councillor busital. Are you okay to withdraw number two and councillor Gibson? Are you okay to withdraw number two?

7:19:53I'm just, I'm only withdrawing number two with in the understanding that it could be retabled based on the based on the outcome of any motion brought forward by council downers. That correct?

7:20:05Yes, it is.

7:20:06Okay. Yeah, that's fine.

7:20:08And is anyone else on council want to challenge that? No. Okay. Great. So clerks, you're clear. We have nothing on the floor now at this time. We'll go back over to councillor downer. Okay. Maybe you can throw those up and I can turn the microphone over to her.

7:20:23So this is two and three and this is actually a motion to withdraw the application that we're dealing with tonight to have it completely withdrawn and closed.

7:20:42And that the third motion is that council acknowledges the expression of community interest for these lands with efforts to be developed into parkland and directs that staff along with the mayor send a letter to the minister of municipal

7:20:57affairs and housing to convey the public delegations and the historical financial contributions made by the city to the province and for their consideration and that council invite the province to meet with community advocates to explore a provincial

7:21:14rezoning the decision for these lands.

7:21:19Would someone be willing to second that? Okay. Busatil, thank you.

7:21:24So maybe I'll speak to this. Yeah, go ahead. So I want to say first, I appreciate the court right waterfowl park. I spent

7:21:33many, many hours there with my children. We had birthday parties there.

7:21:38I just I have vivid memories of walking through the waterfowl park itself.

7:21:46Like I said, it was it was a great place to for families to go.

7:21:52Today we're dealing with the land use planning issue with the field on the south side, which you know, I we never could walk through or had access to as as a public, though I I know that you know, it was part of the whole parcel.

7:22:13So I want to acknowledge that and and yes, it would be nice and there's a lot of history here, but today we're dealing with a land use

7:22:23decision that doesn't include the history of all of the things we've been talking about here because that that's not into consideration. And if this was appealed to the old LLT, it would be not part of their consideration.

7:22:37They would be looking at planning rationale and there is not and and if if anybody's been following the old LLT lately, there's a significant risk that we would lose that completely so that and and so there's there's that risk and then there's we've heard and you know and staff when as far as they could

7:23:03in saying and outlying what we heard in camera but sort of out here as well that there's a significant financial risk beyond the old LLT for the city that this council has to consider.

7:23:18We also have the risk of losing the 126 acres of the original water, which includes the original waterfowl park and the protected lands on the south side and the field that could be playing playing fields.

7:23:36To me that is too significant a risk for this 20 acres on the other side at this point at the same time. I agree with Nora Chalner. This is a situation that the province has put into into the situation. I wasn't around in 2012 so I don't know what led to those those decisions but that that's the reality of what happened at that time.

7:24:06But this is this is something that the province and the province can consider all those other things that consider the financial contribution of the city. The province can consider the the historic issues that have gone along with this property.

7:24:21Those types of discussions can have along with the province and hopefully the GRCA as well and the city in those discussions and the mayor and staff would be part of those discussions. It sounds like

7:24:32So that's where I want to take this to. I think there's from a to deal with it from a zoning issue here in the city. I think is is significantly risky in a lot of ways for our corporation and sure we are.

7:24:47Yeah let's call their bluff. Well I'm not prepared to do that. I'm sorry for that risk that are involved. And hopefully we'll get somewhere with the province with the mayor and his connections there. But anyway that's the motion I have on the floor and hopefully that we can go that route.

7:25:07Great. Okay thank you Councillor Downer. Any comments on on this particular one I got alt and then and then I'll go to the screen. OK I'll go to Gibson and Kate and then to. OK.

7:25:22Thank you very much Mayor Guthrie. I will support Councillor Downer's motion because I do believe it is incumbent upon us to protect the most significant portion of the land which is 126 acres which I knew both as a child and as a parent as a court right

7:25:37Waterfall Park again like Councillor Downer I have many memories from that. I acknowledge that we could lose the key element of this whole proposal if we were to put the whole thing before the OLT or or perhaps even other legal action.

7:25:55I'm not certain what the GRCA was suggesting. I want to be clear that if we want it all we must do this in two parts. As a councillor it's incumbent on me to do what I think is in the best interest of Guelph and if in this circumstance I must do it slowly so be it and let's try to get more

7:26:13Park line for Guelph not just the original court right but also the piece of land that has been under discussion tonight.

7:26:21Thank you so to Gibson, Kate and then to.

7:26:25Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Mr Mayor. It's just it's a time where all of council I think it understands.

7:26:34Councillor Downer you don't have to stand alone and I appreciate your your thoughts and comments on this but I completely agree with you.

7:26:41There's a risk associated with countering staffs recommendation and all of us have sworn oath and a fiduciary responsibility to ensure the the corporation is not walked into legal issues.

7:26:55And so I just wanted to.

7:26:57I wanted to acknowledge everyone who's delegated tonight.

7:27:00I don't think any of us take your comments.

7:27:05Lightly, I think we understand that the desire of the community.

7:27:09Looking back to 2012 I hope and wish that most of us look back and wish that they were different than what they are but they are what they are.

7:27:16So, I think it's important that there's a different channel for this for this advocacy. I'm hopeful that we can make our way with the province.

7:27:26I do appreciate the position councils and I'll be voting to support staff recommendation.

7:27:33When you say vote to support you mean the Councillor Downer's motion.

7:27:37Apologies. Yes, Councillor.

7:27:39Okay, just want to make sure.

7:27:41Kate and then to and then I'm going to go to Quran after that.

7:27:45Thank you to you, Mr Mayor.

7:27:48I'm in full agreement with Councillor's Gibson and Downer. It's, it's a really hard place to be in.

7:27:55And I know it doesn't feel satisfying. I am really cognizant of all the passion and the history and the community support for this.

7:28:08When we weigh out the risks and the potential outcomes of those risks and like including potentially losing the vast majority of the parkland that has a lot of ecological background and impact and contains that original waterfowl park.

7:28:25It's, it's too big of a risk to, to follow through and from everything we've heard from staff.

7:28:35There is just not the planning justification to back it up.

7:28:38And I think that this is the best path forward.

7:28:44Even if it's not a complete win, it is a huge win. This is a great amount of space that we're going to be able to get. And I think that we have to look at the positive side of this. Thank you.

7:28:58Thank you. And to Councillor Chew, please.

7:29:05Thank you. And through you, Mr. Mayor, I just really appreciate my council colleagues here and just for the eyes wide open moment tonight.

7:29:14And just the unity amongst the horseshoe to evaluate the facts and the fact pattern and weigh that against the passion in our community. And I know for me personally, this has been a very difficult file to navigate not only as a GRCA representative, but also as a ward 6 representative first and foremost.

7:29:31And I just have to reiterate for those in the audience tonight. No one on council is voting against conservation.

7:29:39No one on council is voting against parks and known and suggesting that wealth needs less protected natural space.

7:29:47I know these lands are important to all of us and I know they're very important to many of my constituents.

7:29:52Who I visit all the time in the Coray Hills neighborhood.

7:29:55And over these past four years, I spent a lot of time reviewing the planning history, chronology reports, and the legal record associated with these land.

7:30:05And I've even gone graduate and undergraduate students out to these lands to study what the history of these lands were back in the day.

7:30:14And I cannot in good conscience support rezoning this.

7:30:20Based off of the evidence our staff have provided us, we've in good faith.

7:30:26Asked them to take a thorough look at this within their professional purview. And there's no evidence out there that precludes that this rezoning and OPA process back 10 years ago was flawed.

7:30:42We all respect the, the passion and the candor in the audience tonight, but we must govern based on what is not what if.

7:30:50And what we have before us today is an eight hectare agricultural field. That's table land that's under cultivation for many decades.

7:30:58And it was not part of that.

7:31:00Right.

7:31:01Waterfall Park.

7:31:02So just with these facts and also I just want to acknowledge too for my colleagues at the conservation authority.

7:31:11They amongst other member member conservation authorities.

7:31:17Have to govern based off of their legal mandate.

7:31:21And there is regular dispositions that take place. This isn't new to any conservation authorities across Ontario.

7:31:29And it's pre it predates the for government as well. If you want to look at the politics of it.

7:31:35So, like this, this map, this matters. I understand the politics around it as well. But understanding having that eyes wide moment of clarity is important. I just want to thank my council colleagues just for standing firm on this today.

7:31:53Okay, thank you so much.

7:31:57Councillor Caron and then boost until please.

7:32:01Yeah, this this issue is extremely frustrating for me that the going back to 2012.

7:32:09I definitely would have made a different decision. We were under pressure under the greater golden horseshoe growth plan to identify green fields to meet our growth targets and our population targets and this became wrapped up in a again another provincial mandate that was put on municipalities and and we can't go back 14 years and

7:32:30correct that we have to deal with what we have today.

7:32:33And what we have today and I appreciate the delegation from environmental defense is that is that conservation authorities are being forced to sell off conservation lands.

7:32:43Again, from a provincial mandate, this is not something that we as as residents of Guelph would have would have initiated that sale, regardless of the zoning.

7:32:54This is something that is being being pressured from another level of government.

7:33:00I want to thank the delegations because, you know, I think we all in our hearts would love to put this whole parcel together and have more open space and have more park parkland.

7:33:13I do think that the withdrawal is not a message that this can't be put back on the table because there's still work to be done and I think clause three speaks to that because there's still more conversations to be had.

7:33:27Part of my frustration as well and I'll be I'll be blunt about it is that GRCA isn't here other than a letter with threat of legal action.

7:33:37I would really like to have those conversations and have them at the table and have them meet with the residents.

7:33:44And I think that clause three can can help to open that up so that we can have that larger visionary conversation and potentially have a different outcome.

7:33:58I know as well as with clause three there was a time I think it was the Nestle water taking permit where we actually sent video of the meeting so that the minister could hear the residents delegations.

7:34:13And I know it's not embedded in clause three and whether you want direction, Mr. Mayor, but I do think the minister before any conversations happen with the minister minister needs to hear the arguments that were made tonight by the delegations.

7:34:26I think I'm happy to make that as an amendment to clause three if you think you need that direction or if you're not if you were going to do that anyway.

7:34:35I think we need to we can't turn back the time to 2012 but we need the GRCA table to get solid answers.

7:34:44So I think the withdrawal and then the additional clause three allows us to get conversations started so that we can address some of the concerns that we've heard tonight from our delegations.

7:34:58Great. Thank you. And just to answer your question, I can absolutely do that. Not only the link to the video of the meeting, but the correspondence as well.

7:35:10I'm making sure that there is a link with the correspondence, everything embedded in any correspondence that goes to the minister or to the province in general.

7:35:20I can make sure that's done. Thank you for that. Before any meetings take place because I really do think the minister needs to hear that passion in our community.

7:35:27And everyone will.

7:35:29I will make sure that the letter is obviously sent to all of you, but I'll put it on the information reports.

7:35:38So that way it's public.

7:35:40The GRCA board.

7:35:42People can see it as well. Okay.

7:35:44And if you wouldn't mind sending that to the GRCA board members as well.

7:35:47Yep. Not a problem.

7:35:50I'm so sorry. I needed to go to Councillor Poussatel. I believe was next.

7:35:54Yes. Thank you. And through the mirror, just to reiterate what my colleague Councillor Caton said, I echo those sentiments and that this is a win in keeping the lands that we're negotiating right now.

7:36:06I also agree with Councillor Gibson. I really wanted to recognize and acknowledge the work that Councillor Downer did in contacting all of us as individual councillors and staff and really mapping out another way to achieve the outcome so that this isn't lost.

7:36:23This is moving on to a different level. So I just wanted to acknowledge that.

7:36:29Great. Thank you. Is there anything further before I have some comments and then call the vote?

7:36:36Okay. So just a couple of things that kind of came at me that I just trying to, that I remembered from some of the delegations tonight.

7:36:44Just first of all, I'm going to use the word ditto to what my colleagues said.

7:36:50But the fact that I'm going to support this motion from Councillor Downer with the focus on the word withdrawal.

7:37:05If there's anybody here, you know, that doesn't have a political argument to make on this, it's me.

7:37:15So what I'm trying to say is, is that I'm not running again.

7:37:19So if this was literally a no nothing issue, then I would vote against the staff recommendation because like who cares? I'm not running again.

7:37:29So the fact that I'm in support of the withdrawal proves all the stuff that our staff and my colleagues have said tonight that the withdrawal is the right thing to do.

7:37:44Because what do I have to lose? There's nothing political about my decision at all.

7:37:50So it means that there was a heck of a lot of justification, I guess that's the word I would look for in the fact that we're landing, I'm landing on this on the withdrawal support.

7:38:07I think I'd like to echo what Councillor Caron said.

7:38:14I think many colleagues here, whether that you were on or not, if we had the ability to go back in time a little bit, maybe, yeah, maybe we would have made some different decisions in regards to that.

7:38:28But I just, I'm just so surprised still with my only kind of questions that I had with staff about, I just, where did all of this come from all of a sudden?

7:38:38There was so many official plan opportunities over and over and over again for many years.

7:38:44You know, my door and my email was open for 12 years as the mayor to talk about this issue at any time, even if there wasn't an official plan issue.

7:38:54I just didn't hear the outcry on this issue until recently.

7:39:00And I mean, maybe it's because of the Conservation Authority, mergers and land sell.

7:39:05So I can definitely understand that part as well.

7:39:09And then, you know, I just, I heard from a few people the word integrity and it's just like, I don't know, it's kind of rubbed me the wrong way.

7:39:19Personally, just going to give you my opinion here, that's why I'm here, is that you can have integrity about making a decision because of the reasons that are outlined.

7:39:29You don't have, I don't believe I have a lack of integrity because I'm not maybe voting the way some of the delegates want me to vote.

7:39:38I have to go home and look in the mirror tonight by myself and hope that I have the integrity.

7:39:44And I believe that when I do that tonight, I do have the integrity behind why I'm going to vote for that further withdrawal motion.

7:39:52So it's a tough one. Don't get me wrong. Like at all, please don't get me wrong. It's a tough one.

7:39:58And I actually kind of thought in February that we were, I felt kind of hopeful, like many of you had stated in February, that we were moving towards something of an outcome that would be different.

7:40:11But each one of these people around here, like I'm telling you, they are some of the most open-minded people, and I hope that I am too, when new information comes forward.

7:40:24Our job as elected officials is to accept and to dive into and dissect and try to understand new information.

7:40:34And between February and today, there has been new information. There has been a professional staff report. There has been legal advice.

7:40:45There has been all of these things. And as elected officials, we then have to weigh that new information.

7:40:51And it sometimes just is not as easy as, you know, things are sometimes made out to be.

7:40:58And I know that when I vote yes here, that I will have that integrity with full knowledge that I had new information and I'm doing what is best for the fiduciary duty and for the residents of the city of Guelph.

7:41:12And that will be, some people will say you're not leaving a legacy, Mayor Guthrie.

7:41:17I'm going to say that I am leaving a legacy by actually fulfilling my duty in voting the way that I am tonight on this issue.

7:41:25It's a tough one, but that's where I'm landing.

7:41:29With that, I will go, Councillor Billings, sorry, you'll bring us home. Go ahead.

7:41:34I just had a question for you. So in the clause that has yes, you'll send the letter.

7:41:40The second part is just that and that Council invite the province to meet with community advocates to explore for venture rezoning decision for these lands.

7:41:50So does that mean that you will cease and not ask in the summertime and speak with the with the province about this issue?

7:41:59No, no, I will definitely speak to I mean once the letter is sent that is sort of the opening of the door of the opera.

7:42:06I mean, I would reference the letter obviously I would reference the correspondence in the video I reference what's happened here.

7:42:12It enables me the letter is sort of the opening of the door to conversations.

7:42:17So you will still try them for the provincial rezoning.

7:42:22I will talk to the province about everything that is embedded in that motion that Council is about to vote on.

7:42:27That's my role. Absolutely. And including I think the language was the historical financial contribution as well.

7:42:35I look as much as I've said I'm not running I'm working my butt off as the mayor every freaking day and I will continue to do that until the very last day I'm here and I will take this direction and I will do absolutely everything I'm supposed to do with my colleagues with staff in regards to the direction that's given by Council.

7:42:55Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

7:42:58Okay, I'm going to call the vote is anyone not in favor. Okay, it's unanimous. Thank you everybody.

7:43:09We're going to now go to the bylaws and Councillor Caron. I think you just wanted to make sure that you stated a conflict potentially on the bylaws.