Special Council Meeting

10:53All right, good evening everybody.

10:55It is Thursday, May the 15th, 2025.

10:58It is six o'clock and welcome.

11:00We have a special meeting tonight

11:05and it's actually council acting as a tribunal.

11:13And it's for a hearing under section 20

11:16of the Development Charges Act 1997.

11:20So I'm going to, I do have some prepared remarks

11:23just to kind of set the stage

11:25and to make sure that everything is captured appropriately.

11:27There is a process to this, it's kind of a back and forth

11:31and there's equal weight and balance

11:34as we move through this hearing.

11:37And so forgive me and give me a bit of grace

11:41if I'm going back and forth a little bit

11:43with some of my notes here,

11:44but I wanna thank everyone for joining us tonight.

11:47So the first thing is that this is a hearing

11:52by city council, by the city council of a complaint

11:57that was dated March the 31st, 2025.

12:01It was made under section 20

12:03of the Development Charges Act 1997

12:06by Joe Hoffman of Goodman's LLP,

12:09which is council for six o' one Scottsdale GP Inc.,

12:12which is the complaint.

12:14And it's regarding the property of six o one Scottsdale drive

12:20and wealth on the basis that there was an error

12:25in the application of the Development Charges bylaw.

12:30So council's role tonight as a tribunal

12:33will be to give the complaint and the respondent,

12:37which is the city in this case,

12:39an opportunity to equally make representations.

12:42And after hearing the evidence and the submissions,

12:47council sitting as the tribunal may dismiss the complaint

12:51or rectify any incorrect determination or error

12:54that was the subject of the complaint.

12:59Now, before we continue, there is a procedural matter

13:03which must be completed here.

13:05And I'm gonna just state this out loud.

13:07It's also gonna go up on the screens for everybody.

13:11As per section four one of the statutory powers

13:15and procedures act, city council sitting as a tribunal

13:19consents to waive the 14 day notice provision

13:24under section 20 in brackets five

13:27of the Development Charges Act.

13:29And I also want to just acknowledge

13:31that both the complaint and the respondent

13:35provided their consent to waive the notice

13:38of the provision in writing prior to this meeting.

13:42And so this will be captured in the minutes

13:44as well as we move forward for the record.

13:48I do wanna encourage members of the tribunal

13:52to please take notes throughout this hearing

13:57that might aid later on in any decision making

13:59that's happening.

14:01And to have an open mind,

14:03that's why we're here as a tribunal

14:05as we equally hear what the parties have to say.

14:09And so with that, I wanna recognize

14:11that on the respondent side,

14:14we have members in the room here.

14:17Maybe you could just put your microphone,

14:18each one of you on just to introduce yourself

14:21and then I'll go to the complaint.

14:23Good evening, thank you Mayor Guthrie.

14:25My name is Peter Gross.

14:26I am a partner with Gowling WLG in Toronto

14:29and I represent the respondent in this matter.

14:35My name is Graham Reeder.

14:36I'm an associate of Mr. Gross.

14:41Jennifer Charles, general manager

14:43of legal and court services and city solicitor.

14:46Okay, thank you.

14:47And I see Joe Hoffman on the screen.

14:50So thank you for joining us.

14:53Joe, if you wanted to introduce yourself.

14:55Can you hear me?

14:56Yes, you're coming through great.

14:58Great, Joe Hoffman, I'm a partner at Goodman's LLP

15:01and I'm a proponent.

15:03I'm counsel for the proponent

15:04in this development charge complaint.

15:06I would just like to mention,

15:08I do apologize, my intention tonight

15:10was to be there in person.

15:11We were actually in the car

15:13on the way to the city of Guelph

15:14and there were two accidents on the gardener,

15:16sorry, one accident on the gardener

15:18and one on the 401 and we were gonna be late

15:20to the hearing as a result.

15:21So we made the decision to turn around

15:22and do it virtually.

15:24I hope this council reads nothing

15:26into my attendance today virtually.

15:28We really did mean to and intend to come in person today.

15:32I know that I can speak on behalf of everyone here.

15:34Do not sweat it at all.

15:36Okay. Thank you.

15:37Sincerely, don't worry about it.

15:39There's a joke for a tunnel under the 401 there

15:41but I'll leave it alone.

15:42All right.

15:45So with that, I just wanna thank everyone for coming here

15:48and now as a tribunal, just to encourage everyone,

15:51let's focus now and be willing to listen to both sides

15:55as we continue through this process, okay?

15:58So I'm gonna start with you, Joe,

16:02the Complaintance Representative

16:05to make submissions on behalf of your client

16:08and just before we continue, I just wanna ask,

16:11is there, do you know how long you have

16:14sort of to make your remarks, Joe?

16:17I just wanna make sure I'm trying to be equal and balanced.

16:19My understanding is I have 10 minutes to make my remarks

16:23and I have therefore accounted for that 10 minutes.

16:25Okay. That's great.

16:26I just wanna make sure that that's all appropriate

16:28for everyone so it's equal time

16:29and that's what I was expecting too.

16:31So, Joe, I will go right to you

16:33and thank you for joining us.

16:36Start whenever you're ready.

16:37Thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

16:40I'm gonna start my submissions by just a high level overview

16:45which is this is a student residence

16:48for the exclusive use of University of Guelph students.

16:52And as a result, there are a number of exemptions

16:54that apply so the development charges

16:56do not apply to the project.

16:58And to demonstrate that the project is exempt

17:00from development charges,

17:02I'm gonna focus my submissions on three categories.

17:05I'm gonna first present to you the facts.

17:08I'm then gonna speak to the exemptions.

17:10And lastly, thirdly, I'm gonna speak to the intent

17:13and purpose of the exemption

17:15and why it's in the public interest

17:17for the exemption to apply.

17:19So with respect to the facts

17:21and we had prepared a slide deck,

17:23I'm not sure if it's possible to share it on the screen.

17:26If it isn't, it's no big deal.

17:28I can speak to it, although it may be helpful

17:32because it visualizes some of what I'm about to say.

17:35But with respect to the facts,

17:37the student residence is for University of Guelph students.

17:41The student residence is on lands owned by the university

17:45and it's secured through a long-term lease.

17:48It's for the exclusive use of University of Guelph students.

17:52And this is important because that term

17:54is unequivocally secured in the lease.

17:58The university also has approval rights over building design

18:02to ensure that their appropriate unit sizes,

18:04floor layouts, appropriate amenity

18:08so that University of Guelph students

18:10can live in the student residence

18:13that will meet their needs.

18:15This is also phase two.

18:18Phase one was completed in 2023

18:22and a similar structure where the developer

18:25entered into a long-term lease with the university

18:28to build a student residence

18:30for the exclusive use of University students

18:33was the same structure that applied to phase one

18:37as it did to phase two.

18:39And what's important to note is in phase one,

18:42the city determined that development charges

18:45did not apply to the project.

18:48And I'm gonna speak to that further

18:49in my submissions momentarily.

18:53The student residence is part

18:54of the university student housing strategy

18:57and it's intended to address

18:58the University of Guelph student housing shortage.

19:01And I'm gonna turn to our document book

19:04and in particular tab six and seven.

19:07And in tab six, you'll see there's a letter

19:09from the office of the vice president of the university.

19:13And I'm gonna speak to two quotes.

19:17The first quote in that letter,

19:18forum asset management is committed

19:20to addressing the pressing need for student housing

19:23and has provided some alleviation

19:25to the ongoing housing challenges faced by our students.

19:29The second quote in that letter,

19:31the student residence building

19:32contribute to a sense of community

19:34and belonging for our students

19:35and assist them with developing socially and academically.

19:40Tab seven, there's another letter by the university.

19:43The student housing provided at 601 Scottsdale Drive

19:47supports the provision of student housing accommodation

19:50to University of Guelph students in the city of Guelph.

19:56Now I'm gonna turn to the exemptions.

20:00And while there are a number of exemptions that apply,

20:03and we say that in all cases and all of the exemptions,

20:07you should find that development charges should be exempt.

20:10I'm gonna focus my submission

20:11on just one of the exemptions tonight.

20:14And that's the exemption under the University of Guelph Act.

20:18And in reading the submissions,

20:21and I think my friends in reply will agree,

20:24there really is only one singular issue

20:27for you to be addressed tonight and for you to decide on.

20:31And that is, is the student residence

20:34to be used and occupied for the purposes of the university,

20:39for the purposes of the university?

20:42And if you find the answer to this question as yes,

20:45development charges must be exempt, full stop.

20:50Now it's clear the student residence is being used

20:52and occupied for a university purpose.

20:55This is clear from the quotations in the letter,

20:58from the university I read to you moments ago.

21:01It's also clear from the facts on the ground,

21:04the buildings to be constructed on university owned land,

21:07and through a leasehold arrangement,

21:09the university has secured a requirement

21:12for our client to lease to university students only.

21:15This is a significant, it's a significant covenant.

21:18It limits our client's ability to lease the project to market,

21:22and it is only being secured by the university

21:24to further its purposes for the advancement of its students.

21:28And in fact, and I mentioned this earlier,

21:31the city already decided that the exemption applies

21:34to phase one.

21:35And at the time of phase one,

21:37the city found that development charges do not apply

21:40based on the exemption and its bylaw.

21:42And that was the 2019 bylaw.

21:45And I concede that bylaw has been superseded

21:48and the test in the bylaw has changed.

21:51But this exact same exemption in the 2019 bylaw

21:58continues to apply by operation of the University of Guelphact.

22:03And I wanna turn your attention to that right now.

22:07And this was on slide four of the slide deck that I prepared,

22:14but there's essentially three components to the test

22:16under the University of Guelphact.

22:18The property must be vested in the university.

22:22I don't think that's a debate here.

22:23The property is owned by the university.

22:26They're the freehold owner.

22:28I think my friend would also agree that test,

22:31that part of the test has been met.

22:33This University of Guelphact exemption

22:36speaks to no liability for taxation.

22:39Development charges are a form of municipal tax.

22:42It has been confirmed by the highest courts in Ontario.

22:45And again, my friends responding submissions

22:48also confirm this to be the case.

22:51So the last part of the test,

22:53the only part of the test in debate is,

22:56was this project actually used and occupied

23:00for the purposes of the university?

23:03Now, when you turn to the 2019 bylaw

23:07that applied to phase one,

23:09where the city found that development charges

23:11did not apply.

23:12And again, this is on page five of the slide deck

23:15that we've provided.

23:16The same test is replicated.

23:18Land buildings or structures owned directly

23:21or indirectly by the university check.

23:24Those shall be exempt from development charges

23:26if they're developed or occupied

23:28for university related purposes.

23:31University related purposes are defined in the bylaw.

23:34And the definition refers back to the purposes

23:37in the University of Guelphact.

23:39In my respectful submission,

23:40the 2019 exemption mirrored the University of Guelphact

23:46exemption and that was intentional.

23:48It wasn't by accident.

23:50So if you found, if the city found that the phase one

23:54met the exemption found in the city's DC bylaw,

23:57in my respectful submission,

23:59it necessarily follows that phase two

24:01must also be exempt from development charges.

24:05And it's not fair, reasonable or unjust

24:08to find that development charges apply to phase two

24:11when they didn't apply to phase one.

24:15I'm now gonna turn to the intent and purpose

24:18of the exemption.

24:23The intent and purpose of the exemption

24:24is to help facilitate the advancement

24:26of university purposes and which includes student housing.

24:31And this is an important purpose.

24:33As this council may well be aware,

24:36student housing is critically undersupplied

24:38in the city of Guelph.

24:39For the 2024 academic school year,

24:42the university had a 1300 student residence wait list.

24:47And finding that the exemption applies

24:49will allow this project to go forward,

24:50which is the very purpose of the exemption.

24:56If development charges apply to phase two,

24:59the project isn't viable, full stop.

25:02The project doesn't proceed.

25:04And this makes sense.

25:07And forum relied on the city's determination

25:09that phase one was exempt from development charges

25:11in advancing phase two.

25:13It formed their decision-making process.

25:15It formed the deal terms with the university.

25:17It formed the structure.

25:19And now a change in city position has a very impactful,

25:24impactful consequence on the viability of the project.

25:29Now, in response to these submissions,

25:31what I anticipate you'll hear from the respondent

25:33is that the student residence is being built

25:35and operated by a private developer, not the university.

25:39And finding development charges do not apply

25:42what amount to a windfall to the developer.

25:45First, this is not the test for the exemption.

25:49The test is whether the project is on lands

25:51owned by the university to be used

25:54and occupied for a university purpose.

25:57Second, this position ignores a host

25:59of relevant considerations.

26:01It ignores the fact that the city made a determination

26:04about the application or the non-application

26:06of development charges for phase one.

26:08And it unnecessarily puts restraints

26:10on how the university conducts its affairs.

26:13The university should have flexibility

26:16on how to advance the purposes of the university

26:18as it sees fit, as it best sees fit.

26:23Now, before you today is the corporate structure

26:26where both the university and my client thought best

26:30to facilitate the realization

26:33of this critical student residence project.

26:36There are multiple benefits to this business structure,

26:39less risk for the university,

26:41less capital expenditure for the university,

26:44less operational management expenditure,

26:47construction overseen by an experienced developer

26:51who has experience in this very type of development

26:54being student housing.

26:56It's not a windfall.

26:58Development charges not applying was taken into account

27:01when the structure was created.

27:02It's the reason this project was going ahead.

27:06It was built into the leasehold arrangement.

27:09And through the exemption, the university benefits.

27:14Now, in conclusion, I'm gonna ask you to find

27:18that development charges don't apply.

27:21And my focus was on that particular exemption.

27:26But I wanna, in summary, in a very high level,

27:30list and summarize the reasons why we submit

27:33development charges aren't applicable to this project.

27:37First, the land is owned by the university.

27:40This is not a case where this mechanism,

27:42this structure can easily be replicated.

27:45Another developer can't just open up shop

27:47and say the exemption applies to me

27:49because it's not on university owned land.

27:51The building design must be approved by the university.

27:55It shows that it's fulfilling a university purpose.

27:58The plans have clearly been designed

28:00to house university students.

28:01This is a student residence.

28:04The lease only permits a student residence use.

28:08The student residence is to be used and occupied

28:10for the exclusive use of university students.

28:14This is not a market building.

28:16It cannot be open to the public.

28:20The student residence is implementing

28:22the University of Guelph student housing strategy.

28:24And you heard from the letters that I quoted

28:27directly from the university.

28:30It's in the public interest for the project to proceed.

28:33And lastly, the city has already found

28:34that the same exemption applied through phase one.

28:38And in that case, development charges did not apply.

28:42In my respectful submission,

28:43it's clear that the student residence is to be used

28:46and occupied for the university.

28:48The purposes of the university, sorry.

28:51And I asked this council to find as a result

28:54that the exemption applies

28:56and no development charges are payable.

28:58So this critical project for the university,

29:01for students of the university can proceed.

29:04Thank you.

29:05Those are my submissions.

29:07Subject to any questions council may have of me

29:09if now is the appropriate time to answer those questions.

29:13Well, thank you very much for your presentation.

29:16We appreciate that.

29:18And I will open it up to the tribunal here.

29:21Is there any members that have any questions

29:25for clarification at all to, okay.

29:30I'm gonna start with councillor Ault

29:32and then I'll go Katen and Gibson, okay.

29:36Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie.

29:39Through you to the complain advocate for the project.

29:45Appreciate your presentation.

29:47I have three questions and they might be naive

29:50and I do apologize if they are.

29:54I'm struggling with the,

29:55to differentiate the notion of long-term lease from purchase.

30:01In your opinion, if the land had been purchased,

30:04would development charges apply?

30:06I'm through you, Mr. Chair.

30:08If our client had purchased the land,

30:11I don't think development charges would apply

30:13because the land must be vested in the university.

30:17So it's this structure where the university

30:19continues to own the land,

30:21but we have a leasehold interest to develop

30:24and manage the student residents on behalf of the university.

30:27That's what allows this exemption to apply.

30:31So then what you're stating to me is that your client

30:37is for all intents and purposes,

30:40building on behalf of the university

30:42and then ceding responsibility back to the university?

30:47So through you, Mr. Chair,

30:49our client is building a student resident

30:51for the university of 12 students,

30:55but it will not be succeeding operational control

30:59of the building back to the university.

31:01The intent is for my client to develop the project

31:04and manage the project.

31:06And that's intentional, I think,

31:07because it takes operational risk,

31:10operational oversight away from the university

31:13and puts it into an experienced developer

31:17with particular experience

31:18with student residents buildings across Canada.

31:23Thank you.

31:24And that's part of what I'm struggling with right now.

31:26With regards to that,

31:29so what I then can infer is that the university

31:35will not be reviewing nor approving those

31:39who will become residents in this particular building.

31:45Mr. Chair, there is a requirement in the lease

31:50and it's explicit that the only people

31:54that our client can tenant the building to

31:58are University of Guelph students.

32:00So in that respect,

32:01the university has determined through the leasehold arrangement

32:06who can and cannot be a tenant in the building as a result.

32:11And finally, the last question,

32:12which is a nuance on that,

32:15and I hear your answer, but I just want to clarify it.

32:17So if students attending the community college

32:23were to apply, they would not be eligible

32:26to live in this particular building.

32:29Through you, Mr. Chair,

32:30the lease specifically speaks to students

32:33of the University of Guelph.

32:35Right, thank you very much.

32:36The community of Canada is eligible.

32:38Thank you, Kate and then Gibson.

32:41Thank you, through you.

32:44So, Councillor, I'll ask my question

32:46about only U of G students.

32:49How are the students verified?

32:56You, Mr. Chair, I don't have the exact process

33:00for which they're verified.

33:01I can return to you with that information,

33:03but clearly if we are going to rent any of the units,

33:07we need to have proof of their current attendance

33:10at the university.

33:11And so I'm sure there is a very specific process

33:14where as part of anybody seeking to lease a unit

33:18in the building or a bed in the building, in fact,

33:20because they are leased on a bed, not unit basis.

33:22You'll see the floor plans contain some rooms

33:26with more than one bed.

33:28There will be a process for which we have to verify

33:31their attendance at the university.

33:35Thank you, through you.

33:36So, would that go over summer

33:38or is there a different plan for summer?

33:40Is there anything gonna be like Airbnb

33:42or anything like that?

33:44No, we can only rent to university of Guelph students

33:50and my understanding they will be year-long leases.

33:54Thank you.

33:57Through you, Mr. Mayor, what type of rental agreements

34:01would be required of the students?

34:03Would they be similar to commercial rentals?

34:05Like what do they have to,

34:07what sort of requirements would they be asked for?

34:14Through you, Mr. Chair,

34:16I think they would be standard tenor landlord arrangements.

34:22I mean, I think universities who operate

34:25their own student residents directly

34:27have rental agreements that are to enter into.

34:29I don't think the terms would vary much

34:31between any type of student residents.

34:36It's a rental agreement where the secure spot

34:40in the building for a monthly rent.

34:44Thank you.

34:51Okay, you're done, Councillor Katen, thumbs up.

34:54Okay, Gibson Richardson, Downer.

34:58Thank you, through you, Chair.

35:01Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Hoffman.

35:03Sympathize with the traffic.

35:05I was in the same traffic jam today on the way out of Toronto.

35:08The, I can remember years back when we,

35:12Council moved a motion to exempt U of G

35:14from development charges.

35:14I remember voting against it, but here we are.

35:19The questions that preceded me have helped a fair bit.

35:22I've just had one last one.

35:24So I'll go through my thought process here,

35:26directly or indirectly used for the purposes of U of G.

35:28You've clarified that.

35:31Phase one exemption I'm gonna come back to,

35:34you've talked about the controls that are in place,

35:36guaranteeing only student residents.

35:39The fact that you just mentioned that there's only,

35:41you're renting by the bed, not necessarily the room,

35:43is another sort of an explicit use for student rentals.

35:49Can you talk to me a little bit more

35:50about the relationship with the university

35:52and their understanding of the project?

35:53I understand they're leasing the land to you

35:55with the express expectation that you're gonna be building.

35:58Is there a contract?

35:59Is there, the lease, I guess, is the contract determining

36:02that you will be using it for this purpose

36:04and only this purpose?

36:06Through you, Mr. Chair, that's correct.

36:08The arrangement has been structured through the lease.

36:12And as you know, as you likely may appreciate,

36:15there are a number of confidential pieces of information

36:19in that lease, but confidentially,

36:20we have submitted the entirety of the lease unredacted

36:24to the city for transparency.

36:27Okay, thank you very much.

36:29My last question, phase one exemption

36:31that's already taken place, same commercial terms,

36:35same commercial lease that is in place for phase one,

36:38you're simply looking to roll it over into phase two.

36:41Through you, Mr. Chair, that's correct.

36:43But no changes to commercial terms or anything?

36:47I can't speak to the exact business terms.

36:52I just don't know that off the top of my hand,

36:54but it's the exact same structure.

36:56Okay, I really appreciate it.

36:57Thank you.

36:58Thank you.

37:00Okay, thank you.

37:02Richardson and then Downer.

37:05I'm thank you through you, Mr. Chair.

37:06I just have a couple of questions

37:07and Councillor Gibson sort of hit on my first one,

37:11is who has operational oversight over phase one?

37:16Through you, Mr. Chair, that my client has,

37:20it's the exact same structure.

37:21So they have operational oversight over phase one,

37:24like they will for phase two.

37:25And again, that's very much intentional.

37:28Okay, great.

37:29And again, through you, Mr. Chair,

37:31you mentioned it's a one-year lease.

37:33So if a student drops out

37:34or is not able to finish their year,

37:38they still get to stay for the rest of the remainder

37:40of their one-year lease?

37:42Yeah, through you, Mr. Chair,

37:44I think when you sign a lease,

37:49whether it's through this type of student residence

37:51or student residence with the university,

37:54it's difficult to get a student out

37:57before that lease term expires.

37:59But I will say, I understand that some may question,

38:03well, what happens if you've got a student

38:05at the end of their lease who doesn't wanna leave?

38:08Like, doesn't the Residential Tendencies Act

38:10allow that student to continue indefinitely?

38:12And I would represent to you

38:16that that's not the case at all.

38:17When you look at the test

38:19under the Residential Tendencies Act,

38:21it specifically allows for an expiry of a lease of interest

38:28when you are operating a student residence

38:31on behalf of the university.

38:33And my respectful submission,

38:34that's exactly what's occurring here.

38:37And if it helps,

38:39I can bring counsel to the exact provision of the RTA.

38:43It's section 37.6.

38:46And so it specifically exempts this project from,

38:50for example, only being able to have a tenant

38:54have a lease terminated,

38:56or if, for example, you're demolishing the building

38:59or repairing the building or an owner's moving in,

39:01there are other, those provisions are exempt

39:05because of this particular structure

39:07and this particular use.

39:10Thank you.

39:10And my last question through you, Mr. Chair,

39:12you mentioned that it's rental by the bed, not the unit.

39:17So is, what's the price compared to a university dorm

39:22or residence rent?

39:26Through you, Mr. Chair,

39:28I think it's very standard that you would rent

39:31in a university setting by the bed and not the unit.

39:34I don't have that detail in front of me.

39:36I don't know what the rent will be for phase two

39:39and I don't know what the average rent

39:41for a comparable unit in the city of Guelph

39:45or a comparable bed, I should say,

39:47in the city of Guelph should be,

39:48I can inquire to get that,

39:49but I'd be lying to you or leading with my chin

39:52if I suggested otherwise.

39:55Okay, thank you.

39:57Downer than Boussatil.

40:00Thank you, through you, Mr. Mayor.

40:03You talk about a project being on behalf

40:06of the University of Guelph.

40:10So did the University of Guelph,

40:12I just wanna make sure I'm clear on that,

40:13did they put out for tenders or RFPs

40:17for student residences to be built on their land,

40:21on their behalf?

40:27Or is there something that,

40:29like Alma, your company initiated themselves?

40:35Joe, just to, you're muted, just to unmute there for us.

40:38There you go.

40:38Sorry, I don't know how that happened,

40:41but I caught that as well.

40:46Through you, Mr. Chair,

40:47when I say on behalf of the University,

40:50I mean, this was a very deliberate move by the University.

40:54They had land and they wanted to see

40:57student resident housing built.

40:59And so they looked for an experienced developer

41:04to build that student residence.

41:05And my client is an experienced student housing

41:09operator and developer.

41:10It's the biggest student housing developer

41:11in all of Canada.

41:13I don't know whether we reached out to them

41:16or they reached out to us,

41:17but the end result was a leasehold arrangement

41:21where we agreed to build and operate a building

41:25that can only be rented for the exclusive use

41:28of University of Guelph students.

41:30And when you look at the letters I pointed this council to

41:33as part of my opening submissions,

41:35you'll see we're achieving that purpose.

41:37Those letters were written well before this DC complaint

41:41was ever envisioned.

41:43They weren't written in the context of this hearing.

41:47They were written before and we're fulfilling the purpose

41:50to address student housing in the city of Guelph.

41:52I think that's clear from those letters.

41:54Yeah, I hear that, but there was nothing,

41:59I'm still struggling with the on behalf of that.

42:03It makes it sound like the University sought

42:07a specific company through some kind of a formal process

42:11to build on their behalf,

42:14which then implies to me that they would have

42:19some say around operation fees,

42:23who gets to rent and those types of things.

42:25So, but you've clarified that you don't know

42:28who, whether they did or not reach out

42:31and whether that's actually a formal on behalf

42:34or a regular tenant agreement were part of the agreement

42:41is that it has to be for University of Guelph students.

42:44I just think that the key is for me on the word behalf,

42:48the word behalf that you keep using.

42:50Yeah, and through you, Mr. Chair,

42:52I would say that that isn't,

42:54I think it's important to note

42:56that isn't the test under the exemption.

42:58The exemption is used and occupied for university purposes.

43:03So whether we're conducting on behalf of

43:05or not on behalf of the university

43:07in my respectful submission, I think it's clear

43:10this is for the university purpose.

43:16Thank you, Bousatil.

43:19Thank you, and through you, Mayor, thank you, Mr. Hoffman.

43:22I'm struggling with just what you said now,

43:25used and occupied for university purposes.

43:27My question is, and I haven't gone through yet,

43:30you said you provided the detailed lease,

43:34whether this is in perpetuity for university students,

43:38regardless of market conditions, changes and so on.

43:41And I noticed in the letter that was submitted on March 31st,

43:46that it talks about that the property may not be used

43:49for any other purpose whatsoever.

43:51And then it says, without the prior written approval

43:54of the landlord.

43:55So I'm wondering whether or not,

43:56immediately right now, it's used and occupied

44:00for university purposes, but given the way

44:03that the world changes and so on,

44:06is there not a caveat in there, if you can speak to it,

44:09that there is a potential with approval for other purposes?

44:23Sorry, I was, for whatever reason,

44:25automatically muted again.

44:29Through you, Mr. Chair, I would say that it's the requirement

44:34for the exclusive use of university students

44:37is pretty unequivocal, it's unilateral.

44:39It is not up to my client to say in the future,

44:43this no longer works for us.

44:45We're no longer gonna rent to university of wealth students.

44:48That's not something we can do.

44:50It's solely in the discretion of the university.

44:53And I would compare that to a university run residence.

44:57If the university is running a residence in the future,

44:59and all of a sudden it no longer makes sense to it,

45:0140, 50, 60 years from now, well then it can stop,

45:06and stop that development.

45:09And in the same situation,

45:10development charges would not have applied.

45:13We are building a student residence here,

45:15and but for a university decision,

45:18which I don't anticipate,

45:20because student housing is in desperate need

45:22in the city of Guelph,

45:23and phase one has been a very successful project.

45:27This will be a student residence

45:29for the exclusive use of university of wealth students.

45:32And it is a long-term lease,

45:35so I believe the lease is 90 years.

45:37And at that time, the land would revert back to,

45:40the lease of interest would be over,

45:42and it would revert back to the university.

45:45Thank you.

45:45If I could just follow up through the mayor.

45:48You know, phase one, you've referred to it operationally

45:51a couple of times,

45:52and just having gone through tax season,

45:55university students who are on the university campus

45:57do not pay taxes.

45:59So when we file their taxes,

46:01the rent that they pay for student residence

46:04is not something that they can claim.

46:07Phase one, is that, is it treated as university?

46:12So the amounts that I see on the website

46:15that students are paying for a bed,

46:16is that something that they can claim on their taxes

46:19as rent currently in phase one?

46:24Through you, Mr. Chair,

46:25I don't propose to be a tax expert.

46:29I'm not a tax lawyer, I'm municipal counsel,

46:31and I wouldn't know the details of what taxes they could

46:35or couldn't claim through this arrangement.

46:39Thank you, it's about property taxes, thank you.

46:48Yeah, okay, thank you.

46:51Okay, so I just have one,

46:52I think I have one question,

46:55because I think everybody else has asked my question.

46:59Oh, did you have a question, Councillor Chu?

47:01Yeah, check.

47:02All right, you go first.

47:03No, no, save the mayor to last.

47:05You go ahead.

47:07Thank you, through you, Mr. Mayor.

47:08I'm just curious, I know your client here

47:14has other, works on other campuses.

47:19Can you, oh, can you hear me?

47:23Sorry.

47:25I know your client has done other projects

47:28and other campuses.

47:30If you can maybe speak to how this lease structure

47:34may be similar to the other projects

47:36that your client has done,

47:38I'm just curious as to what kind of precedent

47:41and this, your client has, I guess, done work on

47:48if you can explain that for me.

47:52Yeah, absolutely, through you, Mr. Chair.

47:54I can say with absolute certainty

47:57because I'm involved in the file

47:59that at the University of York,

48:02our client has entered into a very similar arrangement

48:06where the University of York owns the lands

48:09and our client has entered into a long-term lease

48:12to develop and manage the building.

48:14And in that case, development charges do not apply.

48:19Okay, and just a follow-up question.

48:22I acknowledge as well that this is considered

48:24off-campus living, but is there any specific provisions

48:30in which you guys are supporting

48:33the university's housing strategy?

48:36And can you kind of explain that

48:38and kind of your premise for your oral argument?

48:43Yes, through you, Mr. Chair.

48:45So it's on land zoned by the university.

48:48I understand it's about a five-minute bus

48:52or a 15, sorry, a 15-minute commute.

48:57So it's relatively close to the university

48:59and what we're doing is providing housing.

49:03That's what this project does

49:06and that's an important purpose of the university.

49:09And so we're achieving that purpose

49:10by providing this housing on land zoned

49:13by the university near the university.

49:15And this will be housing that university students

49:20can easily access their studies,

49:23University of Guelph amenities.

49:25And I think we've shown to be successful through phase one,

49:27which is in the same location.

49:29Phase two is just next door.

49:31And can you just speak to the role the university played

49:35in providing design input throughout the course

49:38of phase one and into phase two as well?

49:42Through you, Mr. Chair.

49:47I'm stopping because I'm not typically used

49:49to being the witness.

49:51I'm usually the person asking the witnesses

49:53all of the questions.

49:54So this is a bit of a different role,

49:55but I'm happy to take it.

49:58The design is subject to final approval by the university.

50:06So I don't know off the top of my head,

50:09the particulars of what that back and forth looked like,

50:12but it is subject to their final approval

50:14and there's no caveat in the lease for that.

50:16We have worked long and hard also with city staff

50:19and I think everybody's very happy

50:21with the design of the building.

50:24If you look at the plans,

50:25the units are very much student residence units.

50:29They're designed that way.

50:30And the amenity in the building is designed that way.

50:33There's a communal dining area.

50:35There's a communal workout area.

50:37There's a meeting space in the lobby.

50:39When you look at the renderings,

50:40this screams student residence.

50:42So we're doing all of this

50:43with a very particular purpose in mind.

50:46And this is all subject to University of Guelph approval

50:49as secured in the lease.

50:51And there are excerpts of the lease

50:52that are part of the public record.

50:54And again, you have a full copy for your review as well.

50:58Yeah, thanks for that.

50:59And just the final question,

51:01beyond just the compliance with the DC bylaw,

51:04does Forum and the city have any ancillary agreements

51:11like MOUs to kind of secure the notion

51:14that this, the principle and notion

51:15that this is indeed for the private,

51:17a public interest and for the university students.

51:22Through you, Mr. Chair.

51:24It's the contractual arrangement is the lease.

51:28That's what requires our client to build the residence

51:33and that's what requires our client

51:35to only lease beds to University of Guelph students.

51:39And it's that document or contract

51:42that also requires the university to have approval rights

51:45over building design.

51:46That's the primary structure.

51:51And just one more.

51:53I promise this is the last one.

51:55Would you characterize this project

51:57to be a pretty traditional P3

51:59or public private partnership?

52:02And like I just asked that because I think in the city,

52:05it's not quite common that we enter

52:07into these kinds of arrangements.

52:09And I think it needs a little bit of this demystifying

52:12here tonight in order for folks to be comfortable

52:14with how we proceed and our deliberations.

52:19You Mr. Chair, I think the answer to that question is yes.

52:23I mean, what we're seeing in the market today

52:25is public entities reaching out to the private sector

52:29to better deliver a public purpose.

52:32It's common in not just student residence housing

52:35but all other types of industries.

52:38And candidly, it's proven quite effective.

52:40And this arrangement, as I mentioned earlier

52:43and answering one of the earlier questions

52:44isn't unique to the city of Guelph.

52:47Our clients doing it at York University campus, for example,

52:50it's proven to be very effective.

52:53In my submissions, I provided a list of reasons

52:55for why a university may want to do this.

52:58Less capital expenditure gets to rely

53:01on an experienced developer.

53:03Developers oversight of construction management.

53:06These are all really helpful structures

53:09to build student housing.

53:11And if you look at what a typical student housing operation

53:15may look like, this isn't that different.

53:19A student residence traditionally built and operated

53:24by students, by a university, they're

53:26hiring outside service providers.

53:30They may be hiring operational management.

53:32They may be hiring a caterer.

53:34They may be hiring cleaning service.

53:36There is a whole host of functions

53:38that they may contract out to third parties.

53:41What this is is a one-stop shop for all.

53:43You have a developer who has experience in student housing

53:47who's going to deliver all of this in one place.

53:49And they've got a track record to prove

53:51that they can do it well.

53:52That track record is a long history of projects,

53:55but it's also phase one, just look next door.

53:58So yes, to answer your question, I

54:00think this is becoming much and much more common in Ontario

54:04and even Canada-wide.

54:06Thank you.

54:10All right, thanks.

54:11Thank you so much.

54:12I just have one question that, because all my other ones

54:16have been asked, one of the things

54:20that you didn't bring up in your submission

54:23and in any of your answers was that our DC bylaw changed.

54:30So you kept saying that phase one was exempt.

54:35And I'm not even going to argue that.

54:38But between phase one and now, our DC bylaw changed.

54:43But you never brought that up.

54:45So can you try to answer the tribunal here about,

54:52do you acknowledge that our DC bylaw changed?

54:57Mr. Chair, so that's a very, very good question.

55:00And I think it's a very important question

55:02and a critical question that needs to be answered.

55:04And I tried to do that in my original submission.

55:07So if I wasn't clear, I'm going to hopefully provide

55:11some more clarity now.

55:13The CITES 2019 bylaw exempted the phase one project.

55:17That bylaw is no longer in effect.

55:20And the exemption in the current bylaw is different.

55:23That's not debatable.

55:25That is a fact.

55:27There is a new exemption in the current DC bylaw.

55:30That is different than the exemption that applied in 2019.

55:33However, same exemption continues to apply by operation

55:39of the University of Guelph Act.

55:41Because the language in the 2019 bylaw

55:45is almost identical to the University of Guelph Act

55:48exemption.

55:50And so regardless of what the DC bylaw says,

55:55if the University of Guelph Act exemption applies,

56:00this project is exempt from development charges.

56:03And that's the reason why I've been referring back

56:07to phase one and the 2019 bylaw.

56:10Because even though that bylaw has been superseded

56:13and the exemption has changed, because of the University

56:16of Guelph Act, it's still my view that the phase one exemption

56:22is very relevant for phase two.

56:25OK.

56:26My apologies.

56:27You did say all of that.

56:28But I guess I needed to hear it twice.

56:30So I appreciate you saying it twice for me.

56:33Thank you.

56:34I did say that was my last question.

56:36But you brought up York University,

56:38so I am going to finish on this question.

56:41I'm curious about that.

56:42I think us as a tribunal is maybe curious a little bit.

56:47When was the timing of that project?

56:49Is that coming up?

56:51Has it been up for 10 years?

56:55You're trying to equate sort of what's happening here to York.

56:58So I just want to know how close are those projects in timing?

57:03How close are those projects in, I would imagine,

57:05different DC bylaws from different cities?

57:10Or is everything mirroring each other?

57:15Through you, Mr. Chair, all of this

57:16is part of the public record, so I'm happy to speak to it.

57:19There are three phases at York University.

57:21The first two phases are already constructed.

57:23The first phase was approved in 2015.

57:26There's a third phase that's currently under construction.

57:29All of those phases has exempted from development charges.

57:32And all of those phases have been structured

57:34where the university owns the lands.

57:36And they're subject to a long-term lease

57:38for the exclusive use of University of York students,

57:42and I think, University students at Seneca College as well.

57:46And so that's an example where a very similar structure

57:50was imposed and development charges did not apply.

57:53And so we're mimicking a similar structure here

57:56with the expectation that development charges would

57:58similarly not apply.

58:00My intention isn't, I brought York University up

58:02in response to a question.

58:04My intention wasn't to say because York did it,

58:07and it was found right that you necessarily have to do it,

58:10but I would say that what happens in York University

58:12is an example of them getting it right.

58:17All right, I really appreciate that answer.

58:18Thank you very much.

58:20I'm circling back to Councillor Ault for one last question.

58:24Thank you very much, Mayor Guthrie.

58:25The question that you raised about York University,

58:27I think, is quite appropriate, and it raised, in my mind,

58:30another concern.

58:32Was it that York University was required to waive the DCs

58:36or that they determined to waive the DCs

58:40in the interest of the student and the public interest,

58:43and that nuance is extremely important.

58:47Yeah, through you, Mr. Chair, it's a very good question.

58:50York has no ability to waive development charges or not.

58:53It's not their decision to make because the development

58:56charges aren't going to the university.

58:59They're going to the city of Toronto.

59:01So it's the city of Toronto who would make a decision

59:05about whether or not development charges apply,

59:07and in that case, it was found that development charges

59:09do not apply, and they did not apply by operation

59:13of the exemptions now found in the Ministry of Colleges

59:18and Trainings Act as well as the York University Act.

59:21There's a similar exemption in the York University Act

59:23as there is in the University of Welford.

59:25My apologies.

59:26I knew it was the city.

59:27But with regards to that, so just for clarification,

59:31there was no application for an exemption.

59:35The exemption was given de facto by the York University Act

59:40is what you're saying.

59:41Oh, you, Mr. Chair, that's right.

59:43There was no need to make an application

59:45because it was found that the exemption applied.

59:51All right, Joe, thank you so much.

59:53Please, obviously, stick around.

59:56We're moving on to the next part of this process here.

59:59And so now I would like to ask the respondent

1:00:02and the representatives for the respondent

1:00:05to make their submissions again,

1:00:07just as the complaintant representative did,

1:00:11just if you could try to stick to the same 10-minute limit,

1:00:14we would appreciate that.

1:00:15And so I'll turn it over to you

1:00:16whenever you're ready, go ahead.

1:00:21Thank you, Your Worship,

1:00:22and good evening again to yourself and to Council.

1:00:27As Council knows, the overarching purpose of the DC Act

1:00:31is to provide a funding mechanism for municipalities

1:00:34to ensure that a new development or redevelopment

1:00:38pays its fair share towards new municipal infrastructure

1:00:42required to serve the new development.

1:00:45In this manner, existing municipal taxpayers

1:00:48are protected from being unfairly burdened

1:00:51with funding the new development,

1:00:53except in very rare circumstances

1:00:56where either the DC Act

1:00:59or other applicable legislation provides

1:01:01an explicit and clear exemption to the DC charges.

1:01:06In this regard, I submit to you

1:01:09that municipalities must be deliberate,

1:01:11they must be cautious,

1:01:13and they must carefully consider

1:01:15whether a proposed development

1:01:17seeking to benefit an exemption

1:01:20legitimately qualifies for development charge relief.

1:01:25Forum affiliated entities have entered

1:01:27into a lease agreement with the University of Guelph,

1:01:30as you know, to redevelop 601 Scottsdale Drive

1:01:34as a privately owned and operated for-profit

1:01:38student residential complex in two phases.

1:01:43Phase one involved the redevelopment

1:01:45of a former hotel on the subject property.

1:01:48Phase one is built and occupied

1:01:50and was determined by the city, as noted by my friend,

1:01:54to be exempt from the payment of development charges

1:01:56under the city's then enforced

1:01:582019 development charge by law.

1:02:02I want to stress, phase two,

1:02:04of the subject property development.

1:02:07It is a separate development,

1:02:09it is a separate development application,

1:02:11and it is for a new purpose built rental building.

1:02:15It is not a reconfiguration of a hotel,

1:02:18the facts on the ground are different,

1:02:20this is a different application,

1:02:22and council is encouraged to make

1:02:25an independent decision based on this application

1:02:28on the facts applicable to phase two, not phase one.

1:02:34Forum has entered into a 99 year lease with the University,

1:02:39and phase two, I submit,

1:02:40should be subject to development charges.

1:02:42The only issue that is to be determined

1:02:45by council this evening, I agree with my friend,

1:02:48is whether phase two is intended to be occupied

1:02:50and used for university purposes.

1:02:54My submissions this evening are going to focus

1:02:56on four reasons why the city council

1:02:58should dismiss the complaint.

1:03:00First, the lease between the university and forum,

1:03:04make it clear that it is forum,

1:03:07who will use and occupy the subject property

1:03:10and the buildings over the next 99 years.

1:03:14Second, phase one was a distinct project from phase two,

1:03:18has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not

1:03:21phase two is exempt.

1:03:24Third, providing an exemption for a private development

1:03:27of above market rental units with high turnover

1:03:33for the predominant purpose of investor returns,

1:03:36is contrary to the objects and purpose

1:03:39of the DC Act and the city's policy goals.

1:03:43Exemption of this development will result

1:03:45in a 16 to 20 million dollar windfall

1:03:49to a private developer and its investors

1:03:52at the expense of the city's existing taxpayers.

1:03:56This is against the public interest

1:03:58and it is against the overarching purpose

1:04:01of the statutory exemption.

1:04:05Finally, the phase two development is contrary

1:04:08to the university's purpose of providing affordable

1:04:11and inclusive housing options for its students

1:04:15in order to contribute to the university's

1:04:18intellectual, social, moral, and physical development

1:04:20of their students or the betterment of society.

1:04:24The university's own housing study

1:04:26has found that it is university operated,

1:04:29not privately operated housing,

1:04:31that is needed to meet student residents' demand.

1:04:39A November 13, 2024 staff report to city council

1:04:43supporting forums proposed official plan

1:04:46and zoning by law amendment reported

1:04:48the estimate development charge revenue

1:04:51would be between 15,586,000

1:04:55and 20,655,000.

1:04:59Forum has alleged that if its DC complaint

1:05:04is not heard and decided by the end of April, 2025,

1:05:07that was last month,

1:05:08phase two would not be ready for occupancy

1:05:11by September, 2027.

1:05:14That is the reason this matters before you now

1:05:17as opposed to when the development charges

1:05:19would be payable.

1:05:21Forum has also stated that if phase two is not exempt,

1:05:25it will not proceed at all.

1:05:29However, on April 8, an article in Guelph today

1:05:32reported that Sydney McDougal,

1:05:35the associate director of real estate marketing

1:05:37and communications for forest, excuse me,

1:05:40forum asset management, stated via email that, quote,

1:05:45"'Unfortunately, we have now missed the window

1:05:48to complete the project in time

1:05:50for the September 2027 school year."

1:05:54Based on forum's own statements,

1:05:56regardless of council's decision regarding the DC complaint,

1:05:59phase two will not be ready for students in 2027.

1:06:04Therefore, the outcome of the proceeding this evening

1:06:06will have no impact on the timing of phase two.

1:06:10Even if forum were to appeal council's decision tonight

1:06:12if it was not in their favor,

1:06:15the Ontario Land Tribunal will have ample time

1:06:18to review and consider the merits of any such appeal

1:06:23and render its decision without compromising occupancy

1:06:26for the 2028 academic year.

1:06:31Again, the only issue to be determined by council

1:06:33is whether the development is actually going to be occupied

1:06:36and used for the purposes of the university.

1:06:40This is a factual determination that depends

1:06:42on the terms of the lease,

1:06:44as well as the control and management of the property

1:06:47and the identified purposes that are fulfilled,

1:06:50supported or advanced.

1:06:53The determination tonight council cannot depend

1:06:56on whether or not the project goes forward

1:06:59if development charges are applied.

1:07:01That issue is completely irrelevant to council's decision.

1:07:08The lease specifies that the permitted use

1:07:11of the subject property is for student residents

1:07:14and uncillary uses operated by the tenant

1:07:18for the sole benefit of the students of the landlord.

1:07:21Subject property is to be used, operated and maintained

1:07:24by the tenant, that is forum, that is not the university.

1:07:30The lease goes to great lengths to emphasize

1:07:33that the university has not partnered with

1:07:35or entered into a joint venture with forum

1:07:38for this development and it is strictly a landlord,

1:07:41nothing more.

1:07:44The lease assigns responsibility

1:07:46for the development to form.

1:07:49The university has no assigned responsibility

1:07:52and only maintains rights to review the development plans.

1:07:59By the terms of the lease, the university will not occupy

1:08:02or use the buildings, collect or send rents,

1:08:06set the rents, determine tenants periods,

1:08:09address tenants issues or complaints,

1:08:12provide university services such as resident advisors

1:08:16or teaching and research facilities,

1:08:18nor will they administer the operation

1:08:20of the phase two building directly or indirectly.

1:08:24Forum will not undertake any of these activities

1:08:28on the university's behalf.

1:08:35Phase two development is distinct from phase one

1:08:37in several important ways.

1:08:39Again, in my view, it doesn't have any relevance

1:08:42to tonight's deliberation, but for council's information,

1:08:45the first phase of the development, as I mentioned,

1:08:48was a redevelopment of an unused hotel

1:08:50into a student residence versus a phase two development

1:08:54which is entirely new.

1:08:56New development requires significantly greater investment

1:08:59in municipal infrastructure and services than redevelopment

1:09:03and is subject to greater development as a result.

1:09:08Extending the exemption to forum, as I've mentioned,

1:09:11is contrary to the purpose of the DC Act

1:09:13and the city's policy goals.

1:09:17The increased capital costs, if they are exempt,

1:09:20will be borne by your taxpayers.

1:09:22The basic principle is that the cost of servicing

1:09:25new development is borne by the developer

1:09:27and not by the existing taxpayers,

1:09:29and I know the council is very familiar with that principle.

1:09:33While there has been public debate about

1:09:35whether this principle should stay

1:09:37as part of the Development Charges Act,

1:09:40it is still part of the Development Charges Act

1:09:42and it is still its foundation.

1:09:46Public disclosures made by forum state

1:09:48that the naturally elevated turnover rate

1:09:51in purpose-built student accommodations

1:09:54ensure higher expected rental yields.

1:09:5798% of forums portfolio is focused

1:10:01on high turnover rental housing,

1:10:03allowing investors to benefit from the long-term shortfalls

1:10:07in supply in the Canadian housing market.

1:10:11Rent hikes on turnover units accounted for more than 40%

1:10:16of overall rent increases in Canada in 2024,

1:10:19and higher rents make it both harder

1:10:21for new renters to enter the market

1:10:24and limit mobility for existing tenants.

1:10:28Forum is seeking to minimize its financial risk

1:10:31to itself and its stakeholders

1:10:34and generate elevated profits from phase two

1:10:37by unfairly shifting the cost of public services

1:10:39and infrastructure required by the development

1:10:42to the city's taxpayers.

1:10:45The shifting of the DC charge burden

1:10:47of $16 to $20 million results in a subsidy

1:10:51to a private developer and is heaped

1:10:54on the tax-paying public of the city of Guelph.

1:10:57As such, it is our submission that this council should find

1:11:00that the DC exemption does not apply to this development.

1:11:06Thank you, sir, subject any questions?

1:11:08Those are my submissions.

1:11:09Yeah, great, thank you very much.

1:11:12No surprise, Councillor Altskine go first.

1:11:15Thank you very much.

1:11:16There is privilege to having a last name

1:11:19that starts with A, I guess.

1:11:22I think I only have two questions for you,

1:11:23but I think that they are important.

1:11:26Reference was made by one of my colleagues

1:11:28to the notion of a public-private partnership.

1:11:32In your opinion, and we heard from the complainant

1:11:35that this is AP3.

1:11:36In your opinion, is this AP3 in the character

1:11:40of hospitals and other P3s with which we might be familiar?

1:11:45Through you, your worship.

1:11:47No, sir, it is not.

1:11:49The lease goes to extreme pains to make it clear

1:11:53that this is anything but a partnership.

1:11:56I have the excerpts of the lease in front of me,

1:11:58but they are also in our materials that we submitted,

1:12:01and I'm mindful of the time, so I'm going to avoid

1:12:04boring you with those details,

1:12:05but you have them in the document book that we submitted.

1:12:08Those are the things that show

1:12:10this is not a partnership of that nature.

1:12:12I look forward to some scintillating reading, thank you.

1:12:15My next question is probably my last,

1:12:18and since I presume that you are familiar

1:12:20with the Municipal Act and my obligations,

1:12:23what are my legal and my fiscal obligations?

1:12:29Am I obliged to uphold the development charges bylaw

1:12:34and let the complainant test it perhaps at a higher level,

1:12:38and do I have as I said,

1:12:39illegal and perhaps an ethical obligation

1:12:42to the taxpayers of the city?

1:12:44And maybe that's a question for back there.

1:12:46Sir, I'm just going to say that there is,

1:12:48I believe-

1:12:49That's out of scope completely.

1:12:51We as individual elected officials,

1:12:52we have to make that determination ourselves.

1:12:55Okay.

1:12:57Christine Billings, Councillor Billings, please.

1:13:03I just wanted to go back to the purpose and intent

1:13:06of section 6.11 of the Act,

1:13:09which provides this potentially significant DC exemption.

1:13:14So my question is, in this section,

1:13:19specifically references a publicly assisted university

1:13:22being provided with this DC exemption,

1:13:27presumably to assist a publicly assisted university

1:13:32to provide student housing.

1:13:35So Mr. Goes, would you not agree with that?

1:13:44Thank you.

1:13:45Through you, Mr. Chair,

1:13:49I think what speaks the loudest

1:13:51are the letters from the university.

1:13:54The university is well aware of what the requirement is

1:13:58in order for this to be considered a university purpose.

1:14:00Like if I'm not answering the right question,

1:14:02please forgive me,

1:14:02but I think what you're getting at is,

1:14:05aren't they doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing?

1:14:07Is that a fair characterization?

1:14:09Correct, because it, well,

1:14:11this exemption is specifically

1:14:14for a publicly assisted university

1:14:19to presumably assist a publicly assisted university.

1:14:24That's why I'm saying,

1:14:25would you at least agree with that statement?

1:14:28If I may, before I answer that,

1:14:30I know lawyers, they don't answer questions directly,

1:14:33but I try.

1:14:34I think you're referring,

1:14:35we're under the exemption in the University of Guelphac.

1:14:39That's the applicable exemption.

1:14:41And I think what you may be quoting,

1:14:42I don't have it in front of me,

1:14:43is the DC bylaw, if I'm not mistaken,

1:14:48the DC bylaw, I think.

1:14:50And so I just want to direct your attention

1:14:52to the correct provision,

1:14:54which is actually a different act.

1:14:56But to answer your question,

1:14:58I don't think that's exactly what they're doing at all.

1:15:00If the university thought

1:15:02that's what they were exactly doing,

1:15:03the university would have written a very different letter

1:15:06twice and they didn't.

1:15:08That's the best answer I can give you.

1:15:09In my view, respectful view,

1:15:11I don't think that's what they're doing.

1:15:13Okay.

1:15:15I believe I was under the Ministry of the University Act.

1:15:18You brought up through Mr. Chair,

1:15:22under the purposes, I think it was your point three,

1:15:26dealing with the private development

1:15:28and the investor returns.

1:15:31So again, under the act, I'm just asking you,

1:15:36therefore considering the purpose

1:15:38and the intent of the legislation,

1:15:41it could or possibly could be an unintended

1:15:44or absurd consequence of this significant DC exemption

1:15:49if instead a private for-profit company

1:15:53use this exemption to get out of paying millions

1:15:56of dollars to the city.

1:15:57So question is, could it be an unintended

1:16:01or absurd consequence of the act?

1:16:08Through you, Mr. Chair.

1:16:13I can say for sure.

1:16:14What I can say is that I don't believe

1:16:17any legislative action was intending

1:16:21that a private for-profit developer

1:16:24get a windfall of $20 million on the backs of the taxpayers.

1:16:28So I don't think that's the intention.

1:16:31I think we need to be true to the intention of the exemption.

1:16:34And there were a myriad of ways they could have structured

1:16:38their agreement with the university

1:16:41if they wanted to be sure that they had a way out

1:16:44of the DC charges.

1:16:46So then what I'm hearing is it could be

1:16:49an unintended consequence of the act.

1:16:52It could be.

1:16:55Respectfully, anything is possible.

1:16:57I don't think that's the case

1:16:59and I don't think that was the intention.

1:17:01And an unintended loophole, as one might call it,

1:17:07doesn't necessarily have to be granted

1:17:10as a windfall to the developer.

1:17:13Okay, thank you.

1:17:18Thank you.

1:17:19I'm not seeing any.

1:17:20Yep, I am.

1:17:21Councillor Chu.

1:17:25Thank you through you, Mr. Mayor.

1:17:27I'm just referencing the letter that you cited

1:17:33through the university assessment

1:17:36and just under the assessment of purpose-built student housing.

1:17:41I'm just curious why you don't see

1:17:45the forum's development as something that's collaborative

1:17:50and assisting the university's off-campus housing options.

1:17:55I don't think the question is whether this is

1:17:59the university's principal use

1:18:03because they have campuses on campus

1:18:06that they have more direct oversight on.

1:18:08But there is a desire right now in the market

1:18:12to expand off-campus housing options

1:18:16and university has clearly indicated

1:18:18that they want to support that.

1:18:20And do you not see forum as being a partner in that?

1:18:26Through you, Mr. Chair, the question is not

1:18:28whether they're partners.

1:18:31The question is whether it is actually used

1:18:33and occupied for university purposes.

1:18:37My submission is that the university

1:18:39who wrote this letter, the individual,

1:18:41would have been very familiar

1:18:43with the language that needed to be in here

1:18:45if that's what they wanted to trigger was a DC exemption.

1:18:49And we don't see the university here this evening.

1:18:53We don't see any correspondence from the university

1:18:55who I'm sure is well aware of what's going on.

1:18:58And if they wanted to throw something out to help forum,

1:19:02all they had to do was submit a letter

1:19:04saying it was for the university's purpose.

1:19:06And I submit to you that the glaring silence

1:19:09is that the university doesn't necessarily agree.

1:19:12And just to follow up, you said that forum essentially

1:19:17will use this, is the one that's to use the subject property,

1:19:20like form the entity.

1:19:23What do you mean by that?

1:19:25And like who do you categorize as forum?

1:19:28Is it the staff that's working under the corporation,

1:19:33the shareholders?

1:19:34Like what do you mean by forum?

1:19:36We'll use the subject property.

1:19:39So as you know, it's a 99 year lease.

1:19:43It's a long time.

1:19:45And forum will control as in forums, employees,

1:19:51or I suppose it could be forums, subcontractors,

1:19:55but those who are responsible to forum

1:19:57or forum themselves will cater the place.

1:20:02They will provide supervision.

1:20:04There will be no university staff working

1:20:07in that establishment.

1:20:10They will operate it as they see fit.

1:20:12The university can come in and say,

1:20:14we would like them to go to bed earlier

1:20:16because they're not studying enough.

1:20:17No, the university is not going to collect

1:20:20a single dollar of revenue, except through the lease.

1:20:26They are not gonna collect money for the beds.

1:20:28The university doesn't care if they are full,

1:20:30if they are empty.

1:20:31The university has no control whatsoever,

1:20:34except to see the architectural plans and bless them.

1:20:39That's it.

1:20:39That's where it ends.

1:20:41And the only time that the universities

1:20:42are gonna have any other say in this,

1:20:44as far as I understand it, is if some time

1:20:46between now and the year 3025,

1:20:52the developer decides, hey, we don't wanna run

1:20:55a student residence anymore.

1:20:58They can go to forum, sorry, they can go to the university

1:21:02and they can say to the university,

1:21:03hey, this isn't really working out for us.

1:21:05We wanna do something different.

1:21:07It could happen tomorrow.

1:21:09It can happen a month from now.

1:21:11And the university, it is within their discretion

1:21:14to say, yep, go ahead, excuse me, I'm sorry, go ahead.

1:21:19Why don't you make this above market rental for anybody?

1:21:23And we won't have any students living here

1:21:24because students are too noisy.

1:21:26And that's allowed.

1:21:31So I'm confused by that because I thought

1:21:36that the 99 year lease and the lease agreement

1:21:40also captures that this is intended solely

1:21:43for the university's eases.

1:21:45So, can you explain to me?

1:21:48Yes, there is a clause in the lease

1:21:52that allows forum to request of the university

1:21:58that no longer be a student residence

1:22:02and the university has the discretion

1:22:06to allow that to happen.

1:22:08It is written into the lease.

1:22:09It is not 100% guaranteed that this will be

1:22:13a student residence for the next 99 years

1:22:16or even the next 99 days.

1:22:20Okay, thank you.

1:22:23Gibson, did you have a question as well?

1:22:25Yeah, thank you.

1:22:27Through you, Mr. Chair.

1:22:29So I'm doing a little bit of history here myself.

1:22:31I'm digging through some old council's files.

1:22:34In 2015, council supported the exemption

1:22:38of DCs for the university.

1:22:41I think at the time it was quoted,

1:22:42it would cost about $200,000 a year

1:22:44and lost development charges.

1:22:45That's obviously a long time ago,

1:22:47but in 2019, just speaking to,

1:22:50I sensing a little bit of,

1:22:53I'm not, it's just a word, it's nothing personal,

1:22:55but I sensing a little bit of a cynical angle

1:22:57on the relationship that the university

1:23:00is not portraying here today.

1:23:02But in 2019, council had an opportunity

1:23:06to revisit that exemption.

1:23:08And based on the fact that,

1:23:11the university cited all the economic development

1:23:13that it does to all the economic drivers that it brings

1:23:17and also the other Crown corporation,

1:23:18the college town that is also exempt

1:23:21from development charges.

1:23:22It really convinced council the time

1:23:23to maintain the exemption.

1:23:25And council did vote to maintain the exemption in 2019.

1:23:28So it's not whether or not

1:23:30the university's activities are exempt in this case,

1:23:33they are, it's just what you're citing is

1:23:36the relationship between the university and forum

1:23:40is not explicitly stated,

1:23:43that it's the university's purpose.

1:23:45Is that what I'm surmising?

1:23:47And that there's a piece of missing evidence

1:23:49that you're suggesting should be in place

1:23:52in order to sort of grant the exemption here,

1:23:54because I don't see a reason not to other than,

1:23:56as you describe it,

1:23:58there's a missing language in the relationship.

1:24:04That's correct, sir.

1:24:05If the language were there

1:24:07and it was clean and unequivocal,

1:24:11sorry, that's exactly right, sir.

1:24:13But it is the burden of the developer to show us that.

1:24:18And I don't see that, sir.

1:24:20I commit, I will follow up.

1:24:21If there's a follow up in this proceedings,

1:24:23Mr. Mayor, I will follow up with that question

1:24:25to the forum delegate.

1:24:27If I may, one more thing I didn't answer.

1:24:29So you asked about the DC exemption from 2019,

1:24:32and it did change, sir.

1:24:33The language is different in the 2024 DC bylaw,

1:24:36but as my friend has explained,

1:24:38there's also the University of Guelph Act,

1:24:42and the language did change in 2024.

1:24:50Thank you.

1:24:57I'm struggling a little bit with

1:25:02your point, sir, about the purpose of.

1:25:09So I'm just trying to dumb it down for me.

1:25:11But if someone has a 99 year lease,

1:25:16specifically for building student residents,

1:25:21and they can only lease two University of Guelph students,

1:25:27how is that not the purpose of what they're doing?

1:25:38I would submit to you, Mr. Mayor,

1:25:40thank you for the question.

1:25:43University's purpose is to educate students,

1:25:47and the University runs some student residences,

1:25:52and there are vehicles that the city has proposed

1:25:56to this developer if they wanna provide affordable housing

1:26:00to the students on the same, essentially,

1:26:03what would be the same playing field as the ones

1:26:07that are run by the University?

1:26:11And those are clearly for University purpose.

1:26:13They're below market rent,

1:26:15and to me, this is simply not sufficiently

1:26:21University purpose.

1:26:22If it were, there would be some University use

1:26:27actually occupying and using it.

1:26:30I don't see, sir, how the University is occupying

1:26:34and using it.

1:26:36Maybe that's a better answer to your question, sir.

1:26:40Where's the occupying use by the University?

1:26:43Okay, thank you.

1:26:46And in your kind of opening remarks,

1:26:50excuse me, I heard you say,

1:26:54you gotta try to put the blinders on

1:26:56between phase one and phase two.

1:26:59You were very adamant in saying the words,

1:27:02phase two is just a rental building.

1:27:09But the way I'm viewing it so far,

1:27:11I'm still having an open mind,

1:27:12but the way I'm doing it so far is it's student rental.

1:27:17But you went out of the way to make sure

1:27:19that you didn't say the word student rental.

1:27:21You say it's just a rental,

1:27:23but I mean, I've been in their buildings.

1:27:27I've taken a tour of them.

1:27:30The amenity space, the way it's set up,

1:27:32like the operations, the onboarding, outboarding.

1:27:37It is student rental.

1:27:38Do you not agree that it is literally

1:27:43a purpose-built student rental project?

1:27:48Thank you for the question, Mr. Mayor.

1:27:51If I left out the word student residence,

1:27:53it was less deliberate than it may have seemed.

1:27:55I don't quibble with, and nor is it the test

1:27:58whether or not this is a student residence.

1:28:02I don't think that's what this turns on, sir,

1:28:03but thank you for drawing that to my attention.

1:28:05It was merely an oversight in my drafting.

1:28:08Thank you.

1:28:09That's fair.

1:28:10Thank you.

1:28:16You also went out of your way.

1:28:17I felt to talk about a for-profit,

1:28:25and that's fine, but is the real heart of the question, though,

1:28:40is that just something that just shouldn't matter?

1:28:45Like, if someone's renting it for a dollar,

1:28:47or if someone's renting a room for $1,000,

1:28:51to me, is that not irrelevant to the question

1:28:54that we're trying to actually answer here today?

1:28:59The reason it came up, I think, is universities

1:29:05don't run on profit, and they don't run on,

1:29:12I think their mission is different

1:29:13when it's a university purpose.

1:29:16They are not looking to the public sector

1:29:18and to the taxpayers of this city

1:29:21to use what one of your counselors

1:29:23may have correctly termed possibly as a loophole

1:29:26to fund what is a REIT, essentially, is my understanding.

1:29:32And all of that information came out of their own disclosures,

1:29:36the elevated rents, the high turnover, the profits.

1:29:41So if it is brought in because I think

1:29:46a university purpose gets some context

1:29:51from whether or not you're pocketing $20 million

1:29:53of public money as an exemption,

1:29:56and that's not what universities do.

1:30:01Okay, thank you.

1:30:03And I think you answered my last question there

1:30:08and just what you stated.

1:30:09So thank you very much, I appreciate you answering those.

1:30:15So thank you, Tribunal members.

1:30:17I'm gonna move on to the next portion here for everybody.

1:30:21So I would just ask now that,

1:30:29just one second, I'm just gonna follow my,

1:30:40okay, thank you for that pause.

1:30:42I'm just gonna go back now to the complainant,

1:30:45so representative to you, Joe,

1:30:47and I'd like you to take your time

1:30:51to make any submissions in response to what you've heard.

1:30:57After that, it goes back balanced and fair

1:31:03to the other side to make any final remarks as well.

1:31:09I'm just gonna look here, just a hold on.

1:31:11Should have put my glasses on.

1:31:17Oh yeah, it's just to the complainant.

1:31:19Yeah, my apologies.

1:31:20So the mayor will invite the complainant

1:31:24to make submissions in response, so we're at that.

1:31:27And then following that, we can ask questions.

1:31:31I'm so sorry, we can ask questions back,

1:31:33and then it will end after that.

1:31:35So Joe, sorry for that time for me to bring clarity.

1:31:39It's over to you.

1:31:40Thank you, Mayor Guthrie.

1:31:43Because this is reply, I'm not going to reiterate

1:31:46my submissions in my opening.

1:31:50I'm very much just going to focus on a response

1:31:53to the submissions I heard by my friend.

1:31:55And I'm gonna start by saying that Mr. Gross was asked

1:32:00whether this is a student residence,

1:32:01and his answer was yes.

1:32:05There, if this is a student residence,

1:32:07how is it not being delivered for the purpose

1:32:12of the university?

1:32:13How is it not being occupied and used

1:32:15for the purpose of the university?

1:32:17There was also a question about,

1:32:21or I guess there was an answer that the university

1:32:23isn't here, and there was speculation

1:32:26about what that means.

1:32:28And Mr. Gross went so far to say,

1:32:31reading between the lines, the university may not agree

1:32:35that the project is exempt from development charges.

1:32:40I think we need to be very careful about our language.

1:32:43This is a critical infrastructure project,

1:32:46and this council needs to make its decision

1:32:49based on the facts.

1:32:52The fact is that the university

1:32:56provided those letters well in advance

1:32:59with no contemplation of this DC hearing.

1:33:02So Mr. Gross is suggesting that the letters

1:33:04are missing something.

1:33:05They would have said something different.

1:33:06No, they're a true indication of the purpose

1:33:10of this development,

1:33:11because they weren't created in the context

1:33:14of this DC complaint hearing.

1:33:16They were done separate from this,

1:33:19which I think speaks to their truth and sincerity.

1:33:23And the university has a process

1:33:26to participate in these proceedings.

1:33:28The university has to take everything to the board.

1:33:31There was a long process.

1:33:33And so we're here today,

1:33:35saying the exemption should apply

1:33:38because the university isn't in a position to yet.

1:33:41So to speak and suggest that the university

1:33:45doesn't think that the project should be exempt

1:33:48is large speculation.

1:33:50And I very much plead with this council

1:33:54not to agree to that statement.

1:33:56Phase one was exempt.

1:33:58The university didn't say anything

1:33:59because I think it found that the right decision was made

1:34:03to somehow suggest that the university thinks

1:34:05phase two shouldn't be exempt.

1:34:08I don't think it's a fair categorization.

1:34:11There was also a lot of discussion

1:34:13about there being no guarantee

1:34:15for the student residents to continue.

1:34:17And it was said it could be 90 years.

1:34:19It could be 99 days.

1:34:21I think we need to very much stick with reality.

1:34:25There is no chance that this is not a student residence

1:34:29in 99 days.

1:34:31We are developing an entire floor plan,

1:34:34an entire building that only really works

1:34:38and caters to university of Gwelf students.

1:34:42Look at the floor plans, look at the amenity space,

1:34:45look at phase one.

1:34:47And we have no unilateral ability to change the use.

1:34:52It is a student residence unless the university says otherwise.

1:34:56So in 20 years from now, in 50 years from now,

1:34:59if we go to the university and say,

1:35:01we don't wanna do a student residence anymore,

1:35:03the university can respond and say, too bad, so sad.

1:35:08And we are continuing to operate

1:35:11and manage the student residence.

1:35:15There was a lot of discussion about distinguishing phase one

1:35:19from phase two.

1:35:19And my understanding was that the key reason

1:35:23for the distinguishing, for the difference

1:35:26was because phase one was converting an existing hotel

1:35:31to student residences.

1:35:34I don't follow candidly logic.

1:35:37How that impacts the application of the exemption.

1:35:41Either phase one and phase two are being occupied

1:35:46and used for the purposes of the university

1:35:49or they're not.

1:35:50End of story.

1:35:52Doesn't matter if phase one was a conversion

1:35:55to a more desirable use

1:35:57and whether phase two is a new building.

1:36:00The exemption applies or it doesn't.

1:36:05You know, there was a lot of discussion about,

1:36:09you know, this isn't a partnership,

1:36:10they're hands off.

1:36:12Again, I can't let that statement go without a response.

1:36:18You know, since my submissions,

1:36:20I do have some more information.

1:36:23And as part of the lease,

1:36:24each student has a traditional lease agreement, 12 months,

1:36:28and they have to fill out a further portion

1:36:30with their department and university student ID card.

1:36:33So there is a checking requirement.

1:36:36The university has reviewed all our drawings

1:36:38right down to our construction drawings

1:36:40where the university hired a peer review architect to review.

1:36:44They have to review and sign all of our planning applications

1:36:47and supporting docs and reports.

1:36:51Now it's important to somehow suggest

1:36:54that there's just this one handshake

1:36:58and there's been no communication since.

1:37:01It's not right.

1:37:03The facts are what I just told you.

1:37:05And all of that is very, very intentional.

1:37:11There was a lot of discussion about the purpose of the DC Act

1:37:15and how the DC Act is a funding mechanism.

1:37:18So growth pays for its share fair of growth.

1:37:22And that's absolutely correct.

1:37:25But what my friend failed to mention

1:37:29is there's also explicit exemptions

1:37:32in the University of Guelphat

1:37:35and in other pieces of legislation,

1:37:37even your own bylaw,

1:37:39where certain classes of development

1:37:41aren't subject to development charges.

1:37:44There's a purpose behind that.

1:37:46It's so critical projects can proceed like this one.

1:37:51If development charges apply, this project stops.

1:37:55And there was also a suggestion

1:37:57that this falls on the taxpayer base.

1:38:00I don't think that's 100% accurate either.

1:38:03Growth plays for growth.

1:38:05So where does the city make up its development charges?

1:38:10I think there's a whole host of mechanisms,

1:38:11but one of those mechanisms are other developers

1:38:15paying development charges.

1:38:17And that's a conscious,

1:38:18a conscious structure in the Development Charges Act

1:38:22and your DC bylaw.

1:38:25And there was also a comment made that it's a windfall

1:38:29that my client shouldn't be able to charge

1:38:36market rents and in fact, the University,

1:38:39they operate at a loss.

1:38:41Well, I would say I don't first know

1:38:43if the University student residents operate at a loss,

1:38:46but if they do, if they do,

1:38:50that further supports the position

1:38:52that we should find that this exemption applies.

1:38:56Operating at a loss isn't sustainable.

1:38:58If anything, that falls on the taxpayer base.

1:39:01So governments then subsidize universities.

1:39:05And the way to decrease rents for students

1:39:11isn't to block student residents' projects.

1:39:14Supply and demand is a real thing.

1:39:17More supply in the market means less rents

1:39:20and these are the exact type of projects

1:39:23that I respectfully submit we need to support

1:39:26and that were intended to be caught by the exemption

1:39:29in the University of Guelph Act.

1:39:34I just have a couple more comments

1:39:41and I'm just checking my notes.

1:39:47There was a comment that not only is this project

1:39:53not meeting the purposes of the University

1:39:56and I think I've explained at length why it's my submission

1:39:59that that isn't the case, but actually it's contrary

1:40:01to the University purpose.

1:40:04That can't be right.

1:40:06It can't be that you enter into a long-hold lease arrangement

1:40:11with a university on university-owned land

1:40:15for the exclusive use of University of Guelph students

1:40:20where there's a procedure in place to identify students

1:40:22that will rent the beds in the building

1:40:25where the university has been hands-on

1:40:27through the entire construction process,

1:40:29where there has been an intentional structure

1:40:32that meets the interests of the university

1:40:35to provide housing and somehow that's contrary

1:40:39to the university's purposes.

1:40:45Lastly, there was a question about whether or not

1:40:50at the end of Mr. Gross's submissions

1:40:53that whether the project meets the intent of,

1:40:59sorry, meets the purposes of the university

1:41:02and I think Mr. Gross's response was no.

1:41:04It's not occupied and used by the university.

1:41:08And I think again, it's very important to note

1:41:12that is not the test.

1:41:15The test is more broad.

1:41:16It's not occupied and used by the university.

1:41:20It's occupied and used for the purposes of the university

1:41:28and that is different.

1:41:30That's a different test to be met.

1:41:33The test in your bylaw is more narrow.

1:41:36The test in the University of Guelph Act is more broad.

1:41:40It can't be that they mean the same

1:41:42and so you need to in making a decision on this matter,

1:41:46look to the University of Guelph exemption

1:41:49to determine whether or not the project should be exempt

1:41:51from development charges.

1:41:53Just a couple more notes.

1:41:59Yeah, if you could just wrap it up for us, Joe.

1:42:01It's been 10 minutes now.

1:42:02I'll give you the time just very quickly

1:42:05to wrap up there, okay?

1:42:06I understood.

1:42:07I'll just quickly say two things.

1:42:08There was a comment that if it's not heard by April,

1:42:12that the project is gonna be delayed

1:42:14and so no need to make a quick decision today.

1:42:18We can appeal it to the OLT and then have them decide.

1:42:21I don't think that's a fair categorization as well.

1:42:24The project is clearly in jeopardy today,

1:42:26but what we are looking at in the background

1:42:28is making this work even with delay.

1:42:32We're looking to see how we can advance construction timelines,

1:42:35how we may be able to alter things

1:42:36to still make the academic school year.

1:42:39We're doing everything we can.

1:42:41A decision today refusing the application

1:42:43throws that out of the water.

1:42:45A decision today, we still have some hope.

1:42:48So I don't want you to leave today thinking,

1:42:52our decision doesn't matter.

1:42:53The project's already been delayed.

1:42:55That is not the case.

1:42:58Understanding my time constraints,

1:42:59that's the totality of my response.

1:43:02Okay, thank you very much, Joe.

1:43:05And now at this time,

1:43:07there's just, if there's any follow-up to Joe

1:43:10and his delegation to us there in response,

1:43:14please let me know.

1:43:17Okay, Councillor Caten, please.

1:43:21Thank you, Chair.

1:43:23So I looked up the lease agreements

1:43:27and I just found out that the University of Guelph

1:43:29does not use the Landlord Tenant Board lease

1:43:32because those types of rentals

1:43:36are not covered by the Residential Tenancy Act.

1:43:39So is your building gonna be covered

1:43:41by the Residential Tenancy Act?

1:43:44So through you, Mr. Chair,

1:43:47I spoke about this earlier.

1:43:51There are exemptions in the Residential Tenancies Act

1:43:54for this type of development, certain exemptions.

1:43:58And one of those exemptions is to ensure

1:44:01that only, for example, students take occupancy

1:44:04in the building and stay in the building.

1:44:06So I pointed to section, I believe it was 37.6,

1:44:11and I'll quote that.

1:44:12It says that the clauses that deal with your ability

1:44:16to terminate a lease do not apply to rental units

1:44:20occupied by students of one or more

1:44:22post-secondary educational institutions

1:44:25in a residential complex owned, operated,

1:44:29and administered by or on behalf

1:44:30of the post-secondary education institution.

1:44:32So operated or administered by or on behalf

1:44:36of the post-secondary education institution.

1:44:38So in my submission, I do think

1:44:39the Residential Tenancies Act would apply.

1:44:41I'm not gonna suggest otherwise,

1:44:43but I do think there are exemptions

1:44:45in the Residential Tenancies Act

1:44:47that allow for this project to very much operate

1:44:50like your typical student residence building,

1:44:52and we will not find ourselves in a situation

1:44:55where there are tenants in long-term relationship,

1:44:58long-term tendencies who are not students

1:45:02at the university living in the building.

1:45:06Through the chair.

1:45:08So if you are, as you just said, probably covered by that,

1:45:13then how do you not think that that would happen?

1:45:18So through you, Mr. Chair, we would enter into a lease,

1:45:21and it would be a 12-year lease,

1:45:23and we would be able to say at the end of the 12 months,

1:45:26sorry, not 12 years, that would be a very long time

1:45:28for any student, I misspoke, a 12-month lease.

1:45:32And at the end of that 12 years,

1:45:34you, the student would be obligated to leave,

1:45:36or if they're still a student, they could decide to resign.

1:45:40Thank you.

1:45:44Great, thank you.

1:45:46There isn't any further questions, Joe.

1:45:48So thank you very much for your submissions

1:45:52and sticking around to both the complaint

1:45:55and to yourself and to the respondents.

1:45:58Thank you very much.

1:46:00We appreciate that.

1:46:04Just one second.

1:46:09So right now, what we're gonna do is

1:46:12we're going to withdraw from the open session here

1:46:15into a closed session to deliberate.

1:46:18And I'm gonna have something just come up on the screen here

1:46:20that I'll read out loud.

1:46:23It's, excuse me, as per section 911B of,

1:46:29I'm talking slow, so it comes up on, there we go,

1:46:33of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act

1:46:36for intimate financial or personal matters

1:46:39or other matters maybe disclosed at the hearing

1:46:41of such a nature having regard to the circumstances,

1:46:45that the desirability of avoiding disclosure thereof

1:46:47in the interests of any person affected

1:46:49or in the public interest outweighs the desirability

1:46:52of hearing to the principal

1:46:54that hearings be open to the public.

1:46:58And so we will revert into closed session for that.

1:47:04And just so that people know,

1:47:07there's some, maybe some people,

1:47:08thank you for coming in the audience.

1:47:10Maybe there's people online like to just state two things.

1:47:15One, Councillor Keran gave not only regrets,

1:47:22but also did disclose a canary interest in this matter.

1:47:26And so I just wanna make sure

1:47:27that that was on the public record.

1:47:30We also have formal regrets from Colossin

1:47:35and also from obviously O'Rourke, who's not here anymore.

1:47:41A caller is not here either,

1:47:43and I think there was some regrets from him as well,

1:47:45but I just wanna make sure that was on the record.

1:47:49The second thing, just second I'm gonna cough,

1:47:56the second thing is that when we go and deliberate,

1:48:01that may take a while.

1:48:03And whenever we come up with a final decision,

1:48:08it is sort of our right,

1:48:09we could come out and actually announce the decision

1:48:11if we wanted to.

1:48:12However, we also have the right to make the decision

1:48:18in writing within a certain amount of days.

1:48:21I think it's basically the end of the month, I believe it is.

1:48:24Close to the end of the month.

1:48:25So I just wanted to state that out loud

1:48:28just for people that are in the room

1:48:29and for people that might be watching.

1:48:33We could be a while.

1:48:34And if we come out, we also may determine

1:48:37as a tribunal that we don't even want to state

1:48:39the decision at this time,

1:48:40that it may come in writing later.

1:48:42So I just wanted to make sure I've stated

1:48:44that it allowed us to be respectful

1:48:45of people's times tonight as well.

1:48:48Guelph.ca slash live will still run,

1:48:50and the conclusion of this meeting will still be there

1:48:54for later and archived.

1:48:57So with that, I believe I've covered everything off.

1:49:02Let me just confer with the clerks for a moment.

1:49:11Okay, so with that, again, thank you very much

1:49:13for all the presentations.

1:49:14We respectfully want to say that we appreciate your work

1:49:18and what you've delegated to us tonight on,

1:49:21and we will now deliberate further.

1:49:24And thank you again.

1:49:25So to the tribunal, just maybe a five minute break

1:49:30just between now and going to there, okay?

1:49:34It is 7.39, I'm gonna give us a six minute break.

1:49:37So we'll see everybody in camera at 7.45, okay?

1:49:41Thank you.

2:54:05All right, thank you, thank you everyone.

2:54:07We're just coming back into the open session here

2:54:09after the tribunal has deliberated.

2:54:12And so I'm just gonna have a statement

2:54:14come up on the screen right now.

2:54:19So that it's shown and I'll read it as well.

2:54:21So council sitting as the tribunal,

2:54:24we deliberated in closed session.

2:54:26We have made a decision which will be rendered in writing

2:54:30as per the deadlines in the Development Charges Act,

2:54:33section 21.

2:54:34So just wanna make sure that you Joe

2:54:36and the respondent and everyone knew,

2:54:39yes, a decision has been made

2:54:40and you'll get that in writing in due course, okay?

2:54:45With that to you Joe and to anyone else

2:54:48from the city side or anyone else,

2:54:51thank you very much for being here.

2:54:53And at that I'll just ask for an adjournment.

2:54:56Richardson and Busatil will do that for us

2:55:00and is anyone against adjournment?

2:55:03Nobody? Okay, that's it.

2:55:04We're adjourned and thank you very much

2:55:07and have a good rest of the night.

2:55:08Thanks everybody for your time.

2:55:10Thanks Joe.